ich habe die Übersetzung des polnischen Artikels mal begonnen, sie aber noch nicht fertig gestellt. Brauchst Du die noch? Wenn ja setzte ich mich die Tage dran, um sie fertig zu machen. Grüße --Wladyslaw (talk) 09:36, 31 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Hätte durchaus noch Interesse daran. Ist nämlich extrem schwierig auch nur irgendwelche Quellen zu finden die bei WP erlaubt wären. --Niabot (talk) 09:48, 31 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Even if I am not familiar with art and certainly not with modern (that's why I do not comment on valued images), I can see that the technical images are accurately, vivid, descriptive, have a high resolution - are solid, excellent work.
Again, your work is appreciated even if you can't see it every time.
If you don't mind, I can add a few CSS styles to your user page in order make it rendering on webkit browsers (Chrome, Chromium, Safari) in the same manner than on Firefox.
Do not comment on the editor but only the contributions. Calling an editor a diva is not on, next time you call someone names or suggesting they "squealed" will see you blocked. Bidgee (talk) 10:19, 14 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I don't care if Commons has fallen so much. I could publish my illustrations elsewhere under an NC or ND license, but i like the idea behind commons. But seeing such a behavior makes me more and more belief that i shouldn't contribute anymore to a sinking ship, while the captains do nothing but watch. Did you read the last voting comments? Seriously? --Niabot (talk) 10:32, 14 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
You have been blocked for a duration of 3 days[edit]
You have been blocked from editing Commons for a duration of 3 days for the following reason: Since I had already recently warned you about this behaviour [1], I am now blocking you for continuing the personal attacks (see Bidgee's message above)..
If you wish to make useful contributions, you may do so after the block expires. If you believe this block is unjustified, you may add {{unblock|(enter your reason here) ~~~~}} below this message explaining clearly why you should be unblocked. See also the block log. For more information, see Appealing a block.
"Self made shit" clearly refers to current circumstance. You blocked me for a personal attack. I don't see any. Who did i attack with this comment? --Niabot (talk) 00:28, 15 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
No, that is not clear. I believe you were making a veiled reference to a user, and that is why I warned you at that time that personal attacks would not be tolerated. As explained in the block log, the following block occurred because of this diff [2]. Calling someone a "diva" is an unacceptable personal attack. Your response to Bidgee above when he pointed it out does not indicate even a hint of remorse. Finally, the fact that you were already under a warning for personal attacks means it deserves an instant block. Apparently, even your best behaviour is not civil enough at the moment, so you need time to cool off. --99of9 (talk) 00:56, 15 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
How should someone be able to cool down if accounts with barely or even less then 50 edits are used to manipulate votings? For example: [3]. A pun on anime hair color? [4] Or could you explain how a user can be so blind to oversee at least four clear statements that this image displays two variants of futanari? [5] It's mentioned on the description page of the image, inside the nomination page as first info-comment, inside the linked Futanari article at WP:EN and again inside the image description of the article.
Calling someone a "diva" isn't a hard accusation, at least in my german understanding of this term. On the other hand we have clearly provocative votes directed at myself. Do you really think that anything will get better if you block me and let such things go on? --Niabot (talk) 01:09, 15 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Calling someone a "diva" on Commons like the way you have done is derogatory. I suggest that you make more derogatory comments or you will find yourself blocked again! Bidgee (talk) 03:40, 15 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
You should be carefull. Calling yourself a "diva" might block you for 3 days. Try to use "dick head" and write "{{o}} ''unrelated comment / obviously false comment'' --~~~~" everywhere you find it suitable. Its price is only 24 hours. ^^ --Today I am a dick head (苦情処理係) 09:13, 15 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I already told User:Citron that futanari "exists" with and without testicles. Now he claims that it would impossible to release sperm without testicles and that he can only read french, while writing comments in english.[6] Could some make it clear to him, that futanari are able to release sperm even if they don't have testicles? Actually they can release a lot of it. It's a fictional topic and Citron's wording is strongly provocative.
The user Cleanupcrew has less then 50 edits and is not allowed to vote on FPC (read the itroduction from COM:FPC). But Admin Bidgee missuses his rights to keep this vote intact. [7], [8], [9]
I left a note next to it. It is not up to you as you're the creator of the image and nominator of the FPC. If your not going to use your talkpage for an unblock request and using it to throw allegations about people, then you could see an Admin removing the rights for you to make comments while blocked. I will consider unblocking you as long as you agree to stop the attacks and allegations. Bidgee (talk) 11:49, 15 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I can keep myself under control that isn't a problem. But whats about the vote? You should know that the vote is counted despite the note. Evaluation is done by a bot that is no interested in comments. --Today I am a dick head (苦情処理係) 11:54, 15 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I'm never going to have people happy about decisions we make, I've used {{tld}} on {{Oppose}} tag. I'm not satisfied nor convinced that you will keep yourself under control, mostly due to your inappropriate signature as well as the comments you're making on the talk page. Bidgee (talk) 12:01, 15 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
You proposed a deal. I have no objections to follow along. If you see any PA you have the right to block me much longer if you like. At least allow me to correct the false statement from Citron (Topic above). --Niabot (苦情処理係) 12:06, 15 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I have unblocked you. If you return back to the behaviour that you were blocked for you will be blocked for a longer period of time. Bidgee (talk) 13:57, 15 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
"What?" I reminded him that he voted on the image and I asked him a simple question out of pure interest. He left no comment on the image or to his decision. Is it now forbidden to ask him for his reason? I don't question or deny his vote. Would you not like to know what you did wrong as the author of an image? How can this be considered offensive by you? Do you have objections against me? Did i offend him with my question? Please let me know. --／人◕ ‿‿ ◕人＼苦情処理係09:45, 17 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Niabot. Would you mind sharing the stitching errors of the above file that you reviewed at QIC, other than the sky which I forgot to fix? You can put annotations, that would be nice. Thanks, --ZooFari13:54, 16 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
ich habe die Karte nun fertig und hochgeladen. Zwei Sachen passen noch nicht: das Programm speichert offenbar immer die ganze Seite mit ab, so dass über und unter der Karte noch unterwünschte weiße Flächen zu sehen sind. Beim png-Export kann man einen Rahmen definieren innerhalb dessen er das Bild nur abspeichern soll. Beim svg-Format finde ich das nicht. Dazu: die Grenzen der schraffierten Flächen, die an den Landkreis-Außengrenzen liegen sind irgendwie dünner. Aber das bekam ich trotz "Bild hoch", "Bild runter" nicht gut hin. Vielleicht kannst Du da ja nochmal kurz drüber schauen. Für Dich sicher eine Kleinigkeit. Danke schon mal und Grüße. --Today I am a diva (talk) 09:35, 17 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Du kannst dies bei den Dokumenteneinstellungen festlegen. D.h. die Blattgröße ändern. Du findest sie entweder im "Datei"-Menu oder in der obersten Toolbar ganz rechts. Es könnte sein das sich dadurch der Inhalt "verschiebt". Willst du ihn danach zentrieren, selektierst du einfach alles, erstellst daraus eine Gruppe und öffnest den Ausrichtungsdialog (Strg + Shift + A). Beide Dialoge sollten selbsterklärend sein. --／人◕ ‿‿ ◕人＼苦情処理係09:52, 17 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Am einfachsten lässt es sich bearbeiten, wenn man Beschriftung, Flüsse, Grenzen, Schrafierungen und Füllungen (in der Reihenfolge von oben nach unten) als einzelne Ebenen verwendet. Dann kann man sich die einzelnen Dinge auf Bedarf ausblenden und kommt auch nicht mit der Reihenfolge durcheinander. Ich werde mir heute Abend oder eben morgen, die Karte noch einmal genauer ansehen und diese Trennung vornehmen. Dann sollte es auch für dich einfacher sein. --／人◕ ‿‿ ◕人＼苦情処理係10:08, 17 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I removed a personal attack from an IP and blocked the IP address. I'm happy to remove this section and hide revisions if you want. --99of9 (talk) 13:06, 18 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
It does not insult me. It's a very typical reaction. It can stay there as a reference for further attacks. This one was to weak. It had no depth or point. --／人◕ ‿‿ ◕人＼苦情処理係13:11, 18 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
And learn english if you're going to use it. Fucking retard. Please, just remove yourself and save the world the pain. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.245.36.123 (talk • contribs)
Hab ihm dort geantwortet. Wie so oft kann es an vielen Dingen liegen, die ich jetzt direkt nicht reproduzieren konnte. Ich habe dir zudem eine neue Variante der obigen Karte hochgeladen. Keine Ahnung ob es dir so gefällt oder nicht. Ich fand jedenfalls den schwarzen Text auf dunklem Rot eher ungeeignet. --／人◕ ‿‿ ◕人＼苦情処理係09:18, 19 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Danke. Es wirkt etwas gefälliger und auch die stärkere Reduktion auf die Landkreisfläche wirkt sich positiv aus. Muss da noch einen Fehler in der Legende berichtigen. Hast du wegen der Grenze schon was rausfinden können? --Wladyslaw (talk) 09:25, 19 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Das mit dem Grenzen ist folgendermaßen: Eine Kontur (irgendein Pfad) ist durch seine Innenfläche definiert. D.h. die Umrandung ist immer zur Hälfte innen und außen. Beim Clipping wird nur der innere Bereich berücksichtigt. Deshalb habe ich nun Füllung und Grenzen voneinander getrennt. D.h. erst die Füllung, dann die damit exakt abschließende Schraffur und oben drüber die Grenze, die dann einen Teil (die angesprochene Hälfte der Umrandung) der Füllung und Scharfur wieder verdeckt. Wüsste jetzt nicht wo da der Fehler noch sein soll. Falls er noch da ist, markier ihn mal mit dem Annotator. --／人◕ ‿‿ ◕人＼苦情処理係09:32, 19 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
There seems to be a problem regarding the description and/or licensing of this particular file. It has been found that you've added in the image's description only a Template that's not a license and although it provides useful information about the image, it's not a valid license. Could you please resolve this problem, adding the license in the image linked above? You can edit the description page and change the text. Uploading a new version of the file does not change the description of the file. This page may give you more hints on which license to choose. Thank you.
This message was added automatically by Nikbot, if you need some help about it please read the text above again and follow the links in it, if you still need help ask at the →Commons:Help desk in any language you like to use. --Nikbot
In the discussion about the suicide bag image I saw that you wrote "Arguments inside deletion discussions usually don't count for JCB" and I thought I should come and recommend that you change your approach. While what you're saying may, in fact, be supported by the evidence (I haven't looked to see) by describing it in this way you risk turning the issue into a personal battle. It leaves the recipient of your comments in a defensive position and from that position it's difficult to learn from their mistakes. The comment appears to make an assumption about his values which you really can't be sure of— even if he often decides opposite to the arguments that doesn't mean he disregards them or doesn't care. For example, someone who had a mistaken understanding of the scope of commons might mean well, and care about arguments, but discount the wrong ones due to the misunderstanding. If you've offended them and left them on the defensive about their level-of-care you might not get a chance to correct the root misunderstanding. They're more likely to write you off as some belligerent person who hates them.
It's also the case that these kinds of personally accusatory comment reduce the value of your statement in the eyes of third parties— people may assume that there is some emotional battle going on between the users rather than listening to the substance of your concern. "Is this something I should care about or is this person just bent because an image they uploaded was deleted as part of the normal process?" It takes work to sort that out, so people form their impressions of your comment based on indirect but readily available information like the tone of your comments.
One thing to keep in mind is that _every_ regular commons contributor cares a lot about the project. We may have different ideas about what is best for commons, we each have our own biases, we all make mistakes. No doubt, at least a few of us are complete idiots and a couple of us are probably more trouble than we're worth. But all of the contributors care— the work here is too unrewarding if you don't. When I'm having a dispute with someone and it seems hard to understand the dispute in terms of honest people trying their best to do the best, I try to keep this fact in mind and sometimes it helps me see things another way. Cheers. --Gmaxwell (talk) 17:32, 10 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I basically meant a decisions like this one. Closed with "keept" without any further explanation. Shortly after he got a message on his discussion page, he changed it's mind 180 degrees. In the result, we have now an undeletion request, with many more people involved then in this particular issue. --／人◕ ‿‿ ◕人＼苦情処理係18:02, 10 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
You're maybe right but an UR is the wrong place to discuss whether one user makes a lot of wrong decisions. Everyone contributing here can form his/her own opinion. Furthermore, I would welcome if we can improve the climate and mood here on commons.
Processing DRs, speedies and no-permission-files is a task, I'll never like to do because there won't be consensus — never. Therefore I respect the users doing this.
BTW, you know that media without a license-category will be deleted after 7 days without further prompting? Stupidly asked: If someone performs your "precondition", what type of license he has to choose? Can he provide the image under CC-By-SA to others or are the same conditions required? :) Sincerely -- RE rillkequestions?20:42, 10 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The same conditions are required. But this image is as well a "CC-BY-SA-3.0 + Custom additions" as this image (or any other from Wolfgang). Either both belong to a category or not. Putting this images in the category "CC-BY-SA-3.0" would be wrong. --／人◕ ‿‿ ◕人＼苦情処理係20:49, 10 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
A very well done edit, quite beautiful :-). The trouble is it doesn't really make the image particularly useful in the context of talking about the museum of Eschers works, or the Palace itself. Perhaps something from Category:M. C. Escher-like, File:MCEscherParvusz.jpg would be a good candidate (might use that myself :-). But this is just a note to say that I found File:Escher Museum.jpg, that probably satisfies most uses.
Although you write on your user page, that Commons is censored, I think todays POTD at least shows that there are exceptions to this general perception of yours . So just a thumbs up to continue your nice (art)work here. --Slaunger (talk) 15:40, 16 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Hmm after having noticed a user with global staff flag had attempted to change it without discussion I understand it is not without struggle :-( --Slaunger (talk) 15:46, 16 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you. The discussion is still going on. [11] At least the title of the image proved to be very correct. Lets see at the end of the day, if we decide for the free world version of Commons or not. --／人◕ ‿‿ ◕人＼苦情処理係15:52, 16 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
It has a longer history. It started as one of my cats showed one odd behavior. Unlike other cats she decided to sit on the outside of any window. She could have sit inside, since she was also able to go inside the rooms. But she always preferred to sit outside and to look inside the rooms. It was obvious that she monitored everything inside, being a little bit obsessed that nothing changes. That means, she started to meow and making big eyes if you just moved a chair, put another cloth on the table and so on. The same thing happened if we got visitors, which was always an topic to talk about. Despite that she was a nice cat. Not very big but very attached and active. She died at natural age shortly before i started to upload images to Commons. As an homage to her somewhat unique appearance i included her into the pictures, and made also a little pun about it. I guess she wouldn't mind to continue her lovely everyday practice. --／人◕ ‿‿ ◕人＼苦情処理係09:43, 18 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
She's very cute I really like your paintings and illustrations, may I suggest you please also make some educational works such as videos like this one for your other works. ■ MMXX talk15:22, 20 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Scharf oder unscharf - das ist hier die Frage[edit]
I want to congratulate you for this picture I like very much.
Optical effect and explanations (with the other versions on the file page) are very nice and interesting.
I'm absolutely not interested by manga style and following controversies , but I find the other parts of your work very good and useful !!
I'm a fan of (almost) all your inventive ideas.
Grüsse aus Paris, --Jebulon (talk) 17:53, 21 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
No problem. But sometimes it is really annoying to read that "Wikipedia is controlled by anime nerds" and so on. In fact it seams to be the opposite to me. We have a lot of haters. (Pokemon articles on EN as a reason?)
The biggest misunderstanding is, that it is neither a genre nor a style. It has typical elements, but none of them have to apply. So we have a general problem: There is no specimen. It means, that even if we had a picture drawn by a well known Japanese artist, it wouldn't be more representable, just because of the great variety. Having only "one good example" would be even worse, since it could fail the median by far. Just compare the style from Nobuyuki Fukumoto (e.g. Kaiji) with that from Itaru Hinoue (eg. Clannad) or Mizuki Kawashita (eg. Hatsukoi Limited). We would need dozens, even more for the elements/character types/... But we have none. --／人◕ ‿‿ ◕人＼苦情処理係19:13, 21 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
"stupid things like the gendergap project, which outcome is very doubtful" - Lol - Leave they alone, they are our suffragists, our brassiere burners, Commons without them would be much less interesting. However, from the reaction to your Fallen Madonna With the Big Boobies as POTD, they actually seem to be manufacturing brassieres, instead of burning them. :S --DarwinAhoy!18:52, 21 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Niabot, ich habe bei meinem Trauerbienenbild auf den FPC den Blaukanal ein wenig angepasst. Du hattest recht, das Bild war noch ein bisschen zu warm. Aber wie ich da schon schrob würde ich nicht weitergehen da mir das dann doch zu kalt aussieht. Also Danke für den Hinweiß und Gruß mathiasK09:42, 23 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Sie legen links eine Haufen hin und sie legen rechts einen Haufen hin. Danach schauen sie sich die Kacke an und stellen fest das die eine ein natürliches braun hat und die andere eines ohne Farbprofil. Bleibt man da pragmatisch, dann müsste man sie zu einem Geschmackstest einladen, welche Farbe nun natülicher schmeckt, nachdem man einen weiteren Haufen als Referenz daneben gelegt hat. --／人◕ ‿‿ ◕人＼苦情処理係21:20, 23 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry if I ofended you, be sure that wasn't my intention. Without doubt I didn't understood the full meaning of this word as you called me the same here above. Sting (talk) 19:24, 24 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I didn't called you "Kacke". That is a wrong reading of the text above. Infact it isn't related to you or any other user. It is a pun like comparing apples with pears without having a melon as reference. You completely misunderstood the content. --／人◕ ‿‿ ◕人＼苦情処理係19:35, 24 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
(edition conflict) Oops!! Yes, really a misreading mine. Reading again the sentence made me see my mistake: I was reading "...schauen sie sich wie die Kacke" and understanding it something like "the owner of the truth". Sorry. Sting (talk) 19:37, 24 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
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:
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.
Es ist halt so, das alles was auch nur in die Richtung Erotik tendiert hier knallhart als Pornographie abgestempelt wird und alles was nicht schon hundert Jahre alt ist, ein Objekt (Gebäude, Landschaft, Waffe) oder ein Lebewesen (prominente Person, Getier) ist als Kunst ohne Wert hingestellt wird. Eine solche Dummheit ist zu bedauern, aber wohl auch nicht vermeidbar, wenn ich mir die Pseudoargumente in manch einer Diskussion ansehe. Gibt ja immerhin genug Menschen die an den Weltuntergang glauben, selbst wenn er vom Clown Divas persöhnlich herbeigepredigt wird.
PS: Um das Ganze zu ertragen muss man es wohl so nehmen wie Kyubee: [12]
Direkt verwunderlich, dass die Bilder von User:Circusdivas noch nicht gelöscht wurden, astreine Kunst, sexuell angehaucht. Übrigens finde ich die Bilder klasse und auch sehr gut bei Wikipedia-Metadiskussionen einsetzbar. --Wladyslaw (talk) 13:12, 27 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
File:Isis, Slave Girl Defies Death.jpg Es sind Rendergrafiken von menschlichen Charakteren die teilweise mit Photographien kombiniert wurden. Dadurch das sie so klein sind, fällt das nicht weiter auf. Am deutlichsten wird es aber wohl beim Schatten des nebenstehenden Bildes. Für Metadiskussionen empfinde sich aber dennoch überaus passend. --／人◕ ‿‿ ◕人＼苦情処理係13:26, 27 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Mit meinem Hinweis im admin board habe ich offenbar des Übels Kern getroffen. Und offenbar ist User:Florent Pécassou (selber ein Admin) der Urheber des SP-Missbrauchst. Habe die dort ausufernde Diskussion nur grob überflogen. Gibt es keine Regel was man mit dem SP-Spieler zu tun hat oder warum editiert Florent Pécassou weiterhin und ist dazu immer noch Admin? --Wladyslaw (talk) 13:10, 31 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Keine wirkliche Ahnung. Er sollte dazu erst einmal Stellung nehmen, hat aber bis auf ein paar stammelige Ausflüchte in Englisch nichts hervorgebracht. Was nun aus ihm wird, weiß da offensichtlich auch keiner, bzw. kann sich keiner zu einer Entscheidung durchringen. Stattdessen lenkt man die ganze Zeit von dem Fall ab und nutzt die Show um dafür den Konflikt Penis oder kein Penis als Schuldigen hinzustellen. Auf DE währe der Admin wohl geteert und gefedert worden, aber hier scheint das alles nicht so wichtig zu sein. Hauptsache es können mit Trivialbegründungen Bilder gelöscht werden die einigen Moralaposteln nicht gefallen. --／人◕ ‿‿ ◕人＼苦情処理係13:58, 31 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Dafür gibt es auch ein einfaches Mittel: ich stelle einen Antrag zum De-Admin von Florent Pécassou plus einmonatigem Sperrantrag wegen offensichtlichem Missbrauch. Dort gibt es keine Veranlassung über Penisbilder zu schwafeln. --Wladyslaw (talk) 14:01, 31 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Fügt man etwas Flickr Kitsch hinzu, dann dürfte es ihnen gefallen, wobei da beim Weißkanal durchaus noch ein klein wenig Luft nach oben ist: [13] --／人◕ ‿‿ ◕人＼苦情処理係08:22, 1 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Gefällt mir gut, wobei man den Schlagschatten (der hier aber wirklich nicht stört) auch nicht wegbekommt. Wenn Du magst kannst Du es drüber laden. Florent Pécassou wurde übrigens auf seinen Wunsch hin de-administriert. --Wladyslaw (talk) 08:28, 1 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
You are acting in an uncivil manner. Please remain civil and don't resort to making personal attacks or instigate edit wars. If your behaviour is not moderated, you may be blocked from further editing.
Schön, wenn man sich zuvor anhören darf, dass einige Leute (direkte Anspielung auf einen selbst) einem stupid "Censorship" club angehören, was aber offensichtlich niemanden interessiert. Ach haben wir uns wieder alle lieb und sind auch noch so unparteiisch. --／人◕ ‿‿ ◕人＼苦情処理係19:07, 29 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Es wird Zeit, diese Abmahnszene aus der Wikipedia herauszuwerfen. Wer sich für eine semiprofessionellen Fotografen hält, soll seine Bilder gefälligst auf seiner eigenen Website anbieten.
Beispiel für die Geschäftsidee: „Welche Risiken und Schwierigkeiten ergeben sich? (...) die GFDL könnte seitens der FreeSoftwareFoundation gelockert werden, dass die Pflicht zur Beilage der GFDL bei Printpublikationen entfällt, z.B. bei geringfügiger Nutzung.“[15]
Beispiel aus dem Fotoworkshop: „Bildrechte - wie vorgehen bei Entdeckung eines Verstoßes. Referat eines Fachanwaltes mit anschließender Diskussionsmöglichkeit. Zwei Benutzer haben auch Neues zu berichten, was dieses Thema angeht.“[16]
Beispiel, wie die Gebühren schon skizziert werden: „Im Falle eines Verstoßes gegen die Lizenzbedingungen erlöschen die eingeräumten Nutzungsrechte automatisch. In diesem Fall behalte ich mir vor, Unterlassungs- und Schadenersatzforderungen (gemäß MFM-Honorarempfehlungen in ihrer jeweils aktuellen Fassung) geltend zu machen. Jede der Bedingungen kann - mit Einwilligung des Rechteinhabers - aufgehoben werden. Wenn Sie Fragen haben oder andere Nutzungsbedingungen oder eine höhere Auflösung wünschen, kontaktieren Sie mich bitte über: eMail via Wikipedia oder meine Diskussionsseite.“[17]
Beispiel für Rückzieher: Und plötzlich war einiges nicht Lizenzkonformes hinfort [18]
Mehr ergibt sich vielleicht auch noch auf der Seite Sperrprüfung.
hier gebe ich Dir gerne Recht. Ein Klick vom Bild entfernt finde ich akzeptabel. Vielleicht habe ich den LA auch mit der allgemeinen Schelte verwechselt, die gerade auf de.wikipedia läuft und von Eynbein = Simplicius, Brummfuss & Co mal wieder aufs schmierigste aufgeführt wird. Wenn ein Webseitenbetreiber (wie z.B. erst jüngst eine FDP-Politikerin meine Bilder ohne Namensnennung verwendet) bekommst sie ohne mit der Wimper zu zucken ein Brief von meinem RA. Dazu stehe ich denn: geistiger Diebstahl hat nichts damit zu tun, dass man seine Bilder hier zur freien Verfügung stellt. Mit juristischen Spitzfindigkeiten hat das auch wenig zu tun. --Wladyslaw (talk) 08:18, 6 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Das ist schon klar. Aber ich akzeptiere es nicht, wenn wir hier Bilder anbieten die mit einem CC-BY-SA Baustein versehen sind und zugleich unten drunter steht, dass die CC-BY-SA nur eingeschränkt gelte. Daraus ergibt sich eine klassische Abmahnfalle, die insbesondere Betreiber trifft die die Vorlagen/Kategorien auswerten. Die Bilder von Wolfgang stehen nämlich nicht unter CC-BY-SA. Das hat er selbst mehrfach bekräftigt und so ist auch die Bildbeschreibung zu lesen. Die CC-BY-SA ist nämlich keine CC-BY-SA mehr, wenn dem Nachnutzer gewährte Rechte wieder aufgehoben werden.
Wie du selbst auf Verstöße reagierst, dass sei dir überlassen. Jedoch sollten wir hier nicht die Möglichkeit anbieten WP/COM als Geldfarm missbrauchen zu können, wobei selbst es ehrlich meinende Nachnutzer aufgrund Sonderregel 129 a) Abschnitt 6 abgemahnt werden können. Daher würde ich ganz klar darauf plädieren, dass solche Abänderung von Lizenzen zu unterlassen sind. Ebenso finde ich es bereits zum k**zen das einige Nutzer hier Bilder unter einer freien Lizenz stellen, aber obendrüber sich am besten zehn noncomercial/nonderivative Lizenzen stapeln, aufdass man die richtige erst gar nicht finde. --／人◕ ‿‿ ◕人＼苦情処理係08:34, 6 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Sei mir nicht böse. Ich mag deine Bilder. Daher auch das "Danke". Aber für KEB selbst habe ich nicht mehr übrig. Bevor du hier noch auf seltsame Gedanken kommst. Das hat mit der Lizenzdebatte rein gar nichts zu tun, sondern mit dem Verhalten auf KEB in der letzten Zeit. Da empfinde ich es noch am freundlichsten mich beim Uploader zu bedanken. --／人◕ ‿‿ ◕人＼苦情処理係14:48, 6 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Ich finde die Qualität der Argumente und das Diskussionsniveau einiger dort ebenfalls ziemlich unterirdisch. Und ein genereller Boykott solange sich dort die üblichen Vögel tummeln könnte die Sache bereinigen und falls nicht ist es auch nicht schlimm, es gibt ohnehin nur wenige andersprachige Bilder-Exzellenz-Seiten (die deutschsprachige ist noch die aktivste). Aber diese pauschale Störaktion, denn nichts anderes ist es, finde ich Scheiße von Dir und keinen Deut besser als das Trollaktionen manch anderer. --Wladyslaw (talk) 14:54, 6 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Was will man denn sonst machen? Weiter mit dem Strom schwimmen, "Ja" und "Ahmen" sagen, egal wie sinnlos und unqualifiziert es einem insgesamt erscheint? --／人◕ ‿‿ ◕人＼苦情処理係14:59, 6 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
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!
This is ad personam. The deleting admin itself. He cited multiple times overruled law cases as the actual truth, He cited from WP itself, ignoring the following paragraphs inside the article, which state the opposite meaning. That all despite the fact that he should know better. That's my opinion about his decision, since otherwise i would not know how to explain his behavior / false claims inside the closing comment of the DR. --／人◕ ‿‿ ◕人＼苦情処理係22:53, 28 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Niabot, your thoughts about other people's motives are not a matter to speculate about openly here at Wikimedia Commons as such speculations tend to poison the discussions. This is particularly true for an undeletion request whose purpose is to discuss why a file can be safely restored and which do not serve as forum to complain about the deleting admin or any other participant. Regards, AFBorchert (talk) 23:42, 28 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
This is my critique on his decision. He based it upon false or revised facts. That means that he either didn't read the discussion at all and did not know what he was doing, or he ignored them willingly to make a point. He based his rather short argumentation on the OLG Köln decision from 2000, which was overruled by the BGH in 2003. I strongly doubt that he did not know about the BGH decision. Which gives me the strong assumption that he did in fact not act neutral or misused his power as an admin to include his personal view at no basis at all. That Túrelio blows into the same horn and dislikes me should be clear by now. Additional he threatens me with a block if i openly state my critiques. That is a mafia like behavior, that i can't accept. --／人◕ ‿‿ ◕人＼苦情処理係09:09, 29 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I followed the entire discussion with interest and I can understand H-stt's position. This particular case is not clear-cut given the inconsistent German case law and in doubt it is quite reasonable to be on the safe side. It is, BTW, also interesting to see this case from the US law (to which we should abide as well) and there is no equivalent to that of § 24 UrhG. Instead the fair use clause of 17 U.S.C. § 107 has to be taken advantage of (which includes criticism) to publish such derived works without permission of the copyright holder of the original work — but fair use is not permitted at Commons. Independent from this, you should still take care of your words, i.e. mafia like behavior is in no way helpful nor warranted. Ad personam attacks and wild accusations will cloud your arguments and not help to bring forward your points. Commons is in this very much different to de-wp. Civility is a strict requirement at Commons and we do not follow a “Dies ist hier kein Mädchenpensionat” approach as in de-wp. You are free and very much invited to voice your concerns but disruptions (and incivilities count as such) won't be tolerated. --AFBorchert (talk) 13:19, 29 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I criticized his behavior of doing only one-sided citing (nothing an admin should do at a closure, since he should take the neutral point, which he did obviously not). Is this something bad, or to guess why? --／人◕ ‿‿ ◕人＼苦情処理係13:25, 29 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
What do you mean with neutral point at a deletion request? This is not comparable to a deletion request of an article at de-wp. If a closing admin is convinced that a file is not free or constitutes a copyright violation or is in conflict with our policies then he/she is free to delete that file even if nearly all participants of the DR discussion wanted to keep it. Majorities do not count here. Please take a moment to read the introduction of COM:DEL which makes this clear. And, if there is significant doubt that a file is not free or a violation etc. the file can be deleted as well per our precautionary principle. Hence, H-stt used his best knowledge and discretion to close this DR in the interest of this project. If you can prove that this file can be safely kept at Commons in conformance to our policies at COM:UDEL, this would be welcomed (even if I have my doubts in this particular case). However, to express unfounded assumptions that the closing admin had some hidden motives in closing a DR in a particular way just because you happen to have a different opinion is incivil. If you would indeed encounter a misuse of admin actions, these have to be filed in a wellfounded statement at COM:AN/U and not on pages like COM:UDEL which focus on undeletions, not on admins that are involved with a former deletion. --AFBorchert (talk) 13:49, 29 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
You don't need to tell me how it works. But in such a case an admin has the job to put valid arguments on the table, which he did not. He could as well have written: "The sky is red, thats why it must be deleted". This is surely not the way it works. He ignored in its conclusion all other arguments, picking only the ones that aren't even valid anymore. (e.g. LDG Köln 2000 instead of BGH 2003, which made LDG Köln 2000 obsolete) How should i agree with such an decision if he knows about this facts? This has to be pointed out, even in a undeletion request. --／人◕ ‿‿ ◕人＼苦情処理係13:56, 29 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Fine but then you shouldn't ask for neutrality in the judgement of deletion requests. H-stt's summarizing decision focuses on the most important point why he thinks that this file ought to be deleted. Such a reasoning does not need to be a fully blown juristical dissertation which touches all the current case law which could possibly apply. It is ok to question the judgement in the COM:UDEL discussion by refering to relevant case law but I guess that you've already read H-stt's comment why he prefered not to discuss the Gies-Adler decision in the closing summary. There is nothing wrong with that. And, H-stt refered not to a red sky but to de:Bearbeitung (Urheberrecht) which in turn refers to §§ 23,24 UrhG. Again: Please focus at the COM:UDEL discussion at reasons to restore that file, not on anything else. --AFBorchert (talk) 14:32, 29 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
If you don't have a good argument: Use it!
I said it already multiple times (this will be the last time), that §24 applies to this image. You can read the reasons inside COM:UDEL, to which h-sst never responded. The same arguments were present inside the DR, which also got ignored. If you want to make a good "judgement" then you have to state why this arguments do not apply. On the other hand i don't see any sufficient argumentation why §24 does not apply in this case. This is why i talk about a "red sky". Why does he think that the sky is red and not blue was never answered. In short he said: "§24 does not apply in this case." And that is all and very unsufficient in this case.
@Niabot, ich habe deinen Kommentar komplett entfernt. Du solltest in der Lage sein, Kritik zu äussern ohne persönliche Angriffe und Unterstellungen gegen die Person, die zudem im Fall H-stt völlig daneben sind, was für den Tatbestand PA aber irrelevant ist. Nach der internen und externen Schlammschlacht in der ursprünglichen DR ist mein Toleranzlevel für solches Verhalten bei Null. D.h., Wiederholung -> Sperre. --Túrelio (talk) 05:56, 29 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Tatsachenverdrehung ist hier also gewünscht und das benennen jeniger ist unerwünscht. Dazu kommt noch die Androhung einer Sperre. Tickt ihr noch ganz richtig? --／人◕ ‿‿ ◕人＼苦情処理係06:53, 29 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Ich fürchte, dass Túrelios Sorge um persönliche Angriffe stärker ausgeprägt ist als seine Kenntnis darüber was einen solchen wirklich ausmacht. Ich habe Niabots Beiträge danach abgesucht, aber keine finden können. Es liegt wohl auch an der Natur der Sache, dass der viel strapazierte Begriff des persönlichen Angriffs mit Kritik verwechselt wird, die angeblich geäußert werden darf. --Wladyslaw (talk) 08:39, 29 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Ja so ist es halt wenn sich eine Lobby zusammenfindet und ihre Adminrechte missbraucht um Druck auszuüben und im Alleingang wider jeglicher Vernunft ihre Ziele durchboxt, wider jeglicher Argumente. Im Endeffekt geht es doch nur darum sich einen Spezialfall herauszusuchen, einen Löschantrag stellen zu lassen und dann einem der Lobby zuzuordnenden Admin den Antrag schnell beenden zu lassen. Dabei kann man dann gerne in der Argumentation wesentliche Fakten übersehen. Sollte es zu Kritik (UDEL) kommen, dann werden wild irgendwelche Nebensächlichkeiten eingestreut um das ganze undurchsichtig zu machen und Drohungen gegen Benutzer ausgesprochen die so ein "Teamwork" kritisieren. Sollten sich die Kritiker nicht beruhigen lassen, dann werden sie eben gesperrt und damit mundtot gemacht. An welche Regierungsformen der Welt erinnert mich das nur?
Auf jeden Fall bin ich kein Sympathisant des Diddl-Clubs, wenngleich ich sagen muss, dass ein Großteil der eigentlichen Kritik, die sich hinter plumpen Attacken verbirgt, leider Gottes wahr zu sein scheint. Dieser Fall kann mich jedenfalls nicht vom Gegenteil überzeugen. Was am Ende bleibt ist Intransparenz, da ja solche Absprachen natürlich nicht öffentlich getätigt werden. Auffällig ist es dennoch, wenn man sich keine Scheuklappen aufsetzt und diesen Schwachsinn akzeptiert. --／人◕ ‿‿ ◕人＼苦情処理係09:18, 29 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Wenigstens kann man Túrelio nicht vorwerfen Scheuklappen zu haben. Denn ganz detektivisch hat er nach meiner obigen Bemerkung meine Edits nach "verwertbarem Material" durchsucht, um mir auf den Sack zu gehen. Wenn etwas nicht genau geregelt ist aber genug Diskussionspotential birgt dann wird es "öffentlich thematisiert" (vulgo: aufgebauscht). --Wladyslaw (talk) 14:16, 29 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Deswegen beschließt man so was lieber hinter geschlossenen Türen oder wird zur Sockennutzung getrieben, da man sonst seinen Kopf riskiert wenn man die Wahrheit so ausspricht wie sie ist. Auf jeden Fall mal wieder eine große Adminstalkerleistung ;-) --／人◕ ‿‿ ◕人＼苦情処理係14:27, 29 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Warum sollte es unrechtmäßig sein, die persönlichen Interessen eines Menschen zu hinterfragen? Jede Handlung und Entscheidung eines Menschen ist abhängig von seiner persönlichen Einstellung und seinen Interessen. Das ist doch nun nach aktuellem Kenntnisstand wirklich ein alter Hut. Neutralität mag ein viel beschworenes Ziel sein, aber es gibt sie definitiv nicht. Man sollte in allen Bereichen, besonders auch in der Politik, viel öfter nach den Hintergründen des jeweils Handelnden fragen und darauf drängen, dass dieser sich nicht hinter Formalismen versteckt. Leider sehe ich die Fortschritte bei solchen Problemen allerdings mittlerweile sehr pessimistisch. -- 84.157.73.15822:31, 29 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
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!
File:Hentai - yuuree-redraw.jpg,
Hallo Niabot, aus welchem Hentai-Film ist dieses Bild? Gruß Björn
Das Bild ist aus keinem Film. Es entstand auf der Grundlage einer Zeichnung von Yūrē, der dies zuvor auf Pixiv (benötigt Anmeldung) veröffentlicht hatte und auf Nachfrage unter einer freien Lizenz stellte. --／人◕ ‿‿ ◕人＼苦情処理係01:16, 14 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Ah, OK. Ich danke dir für die schnelle Info, sonst hätte ich mir nämlich wahrscheinlich gleich diesen Film besorgt wenn es diesen denn gegeben hätte, hehe.
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!
[19] Yes I do ! The girl is clearly drawn with a Japanese school uniform, which is not a coincidence (it's a common fetichism) and I don't know if the artist wanted to draw semen of vaginal secretion but it clearly shows an orgasm... --TwoWings * to talk or not to talk...17:44, 23 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
It doesn't show an orgasm. An orgasm would look very different in this kind of art. An huge amount of vaginal secretion and pre-ejaculate is very typical for this kind of drawings. It doesn't indicate an orgasm. --／人◕ ‿‿ ◕人＼苦情処理係17:51, 23 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Man wird doch wohl seine eigenen Werke vollenden dürfen. Zudem dürfte wohl Protest noch erlaubt sein. Willst du mir vorwerfen das ich damit böse Absichten verfolge? --／人◕ ‿‿ ◕人＼苦情処理係13:26, 12 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Túrelio vertritt auch die Ansicht, dass wachsweiche Regeln einer Lizenz höherwertiger seien als das BGB und Urheberrechtsverletzungen von anderen Benutzern grundsätzlich zu erlauben sind. Da wunderst Du dich noch? --Wladyslaw (talk) 13:29, 12 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Mal ehrlich, von "vollenden" kann man nicht reden, wenn man ein dickes Banner drüberklatscht. Da musst Du Dir schon was subtileres ausdenken. Die Artikel in denen das Bild genutzt wird und deren Autoren können ja auch nichts dafür, dass es bei den WMF Entscheidungsträgern immer mehr Pappnasen gibt oder dass Umfragen so angelegt werden, dass ein bestimmtes Ergebnis gezielt erwirkt wird, indem man z.B. nicht auf die Entwicklungs- oder Servermehrkosten hinweist. -- RE rillkequestions?15:08, 12 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Na doch. Im Sinne der WMF - also zumindest so wie sie sich derzeit anstellt - wäre das in diesen Fällen das vollendete Werk. Da dachte ich mir, ich sei etwas cleverer, und würde im Vorauseilendem Gehorsam der WMF etwas unter die Arme greifen, bis sie dann den Bildfilter einschaltet und so richtig einschaltet (es sei denn lokale Provider war schneller). Ansonsten sehe ich da die Artikel als Passanten, denen ich bisher bereits selbst unter die Arme gegriffen hatte, die sich ja auch nicht gegen Demonstrationen und evtl. Nebenwirkungen wehren können und dürfen. --／人◕ ‿‿ ◕人＼苦情処理係16:24, 12 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I already read it and commented on it. It's quite the opposite to WP:NOTCENSORED, but not any better regarding the argumentation.
"We are not censored. Lets put it up!" VS "I might be offensive to some. Lets remove it!"
Both argumentations ignore the value of the image for the article. None is better as the other, and the image filter idea just moves the argumentation away from the topic, making things even more worse. --／人◕ ‿‿ ◕人＼苦情処理係17:54, 29 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
When are you going to get rid of that censor image? And I thought that that "personal filter" was optional, not mandatory. 18:22, 13 November 2011 (UTC)
Cannot understand your words. Could you please help me to find the places you think are over-saturated and over-exposed? If you speak about over-exposed belltower, I'd say this is natural with daily sunlight. Thank you.--PereslavlFoto (talk) 01:40, 29 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I uploaded you a picture in which i marked the overexposed parts with a green color and the overly saturated parts with a purple color. The edges might be a bit jagged. Mostly because of artifacts from the JPEG compression of the original. I hope that this illustration is useful for you. --／人◕ ‿‿ ◕人＼苦情処理係08:58, 29 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you very much, this is very useful and helpful. Now I need a method to achieve the goal . About overexposed parts: how can I show those places were overexposed in real situation of the bright day? If I make them darker, it will be less natural. About overly saturated: how can I check this mistake, what tool shows me the problem? Thanks again.--PereslavlFoto (talk) 13:48, 29 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
An oversaturated imageCorresponding color distribution in RGB space. Note the "clipped planes" at the edges of the cube, which are the same as the spikes in a histogram.
Basically you can use any image viewer or graphic program that has a histogram functionality. If you notice a sharp spike at the bright end or very close to it (the bright end is usually at the right side), then it is very often the indication for overexposed parts inside the image. Same goes a spike at the other end, which would be underexposure. The histogram tools often provide also often the functionality to switch to the R, G and B channel. If you see the same phenomenon in one of this channels well, then you most likely have oversaturated parts. --／人◕ ‿‿ ◕人＼苦情処理係14:45, 29 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I rescaled your image to 2 Megapixels. Do you think that this is sharp, detailed and not noisy? That is the background for my decision, because at 100% some images might look more blurred then others but are much larger. Therefore i scale them down to roughly 2 MP and look then after the details. An good image, at this scale, would be very sharp and not showing that much noise. Thats simply how i decided to do it. Maybe someone else wants to overrule and correct me if I'm wrong. --／人◕ ‿‿ ◕人＼苦情処理係13:04, 29 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Niabot, I just wanted to say thanks for your clustering proposal, and for you putting it up at m:Controversial_content/Brainstorming. I think this sort of thing would make search much, much better. And that matters to me partly because I'm increasingly concerned that Commons isn't very effective at organising its massive media collection in a way that's really easy to use for end users - so a good search engine would really help users actually find things. Of course, it also solves the "controversial content" issue for searching, and hopefully the fact that it does might make it more likely that the WMF will put some resources into implementing it on a useful timescale. Depending on response from WMF and other editors, maybe we could at some point try and organise a big poll to demonstrate community support; that might help a little. Anyway, thanks again, I think it's a great idea, even "beautiful" in the mathematical sense of being elegant and simple. Rd232 (talk) 00:39, 4 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
If you want to take Matt's trolling as inspiration for a new, serious suggestion for some kind of action in relation to Wikipedia Review or its contributors, fine. Make a new section then. Restoring the trolling is not acceptable. Rd232 (talk) 10:25, 15 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I don't see it as trolling. It is the result of the current practice by people from WR to discriminate, attack and accuse other users without any real evidence. --／人◕ ‿‿ ◕人＼苦情処理係10:29, 15 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
"I don't see it as trolling." - then read it more carefully. The first respondent called it "sarcastic" for a reason. Rd232 (talk) 10:32, 15 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I'll give you ONE revert without a block because you maintain it is "serious". It plainly isn't, read it until you realise that. Any more restorations, I will block you. If you want a serious proposal, make one. Rd232 (talk) 10:34, 15 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Compare it to the witch hunt that currently takes place. You don't have the guts to block users that accuse other to be pedophiles or enablers (which is a legal threat!), but you strike with force against any criticism. --／人◕ ‿‿ ◕人＼苦情処理係10:37, 15 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
(i) COM:VP is not a place for satire. A userspace essay is. (ii) Of course it's a problem. But the first has enough evidence to back it in this case, and I don't actually know of the second accusation onwiki in this case (in so much discussion, I may have missed it). Rd232 (talk) 10:53, 15 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Is it supposed to be a pair of breasts? Without any authority whatsoever, I wonder if you might consider changing it. I don't think a pair of breasts is useful in identifying you, and by most people's standards it's rather unnecessarily rude and jarring. I think Commons might be a more pleasant environment for everyone if you used a more conventional signature. Werdna (talk) 12:38, 18 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Oh my pony ! Yes it's obviously naked breasts, i can even see the nipples... and the Chantilly cream. This is so pornographic... please think about the children and the server kitties !!! --Lilyu (talk) 16:18, 18 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
This entire conversation is phenomenally juvenile, whatever of the images involved. Seriously - just how old are you guys?? O_o - Alison❤08:22, 20 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I don't know what happened in the night and what comments where deleted at this place, but the first comment about my signature is so astounding and embarrassing at the same time; It must be the result of seeing evil sexuality in anything - which is just so sad, that satire seams not to be an adequate response anymore. --／人◕ ‿‿ ◕人＼どこに見てもオッパイばかり10:01, 20 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I've always interpreted Niabot's signature as Cuba/Kyūbē from Mahō Shōjo Madoka Magika, but I guess it's not obvious to people who haven't seen the TV series. It is interesting how Niabot sexualised his signature above by the addition of
Bitte nicht mit etherischen Badekugeln verwechseln.^^ Als ich mir das erste Mal das Zeug geholt habe, war ich ein wenig schockiert. Dort stand etwa: "Bubble tea ungesund sein für Kind unter 5 Jahr. Erstickungsgefahr." Ja, bei uns führen den Laden drei Japaner die der deutschen Sprache nicht mächtig sind. :) alofok09:45, 24 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Bonbonfarbe für enzyklopädische Karte geeignet?[edit]
Hi, I think we should have your clustered search proposal submitted as a Bugzilla bug (based on the meta summary, I suppose). At least it's in the system then, and we might get some developer feedback. You're obviously the best person to submit this bug, but I can do it if you want me to. cheers, Rd232 (talk) 08:09, 4 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Funny as hell. I leveled up from a pair of breasts to a sock. But i must say that the search for evidence is quite "creative". Maybe i should take a group photo of all my socks, wearing a sock as a hat, during the next meetings. ;-) --／人◕ ‿‿ ◕人＼署名の宣言10:11, 14 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Someone suggested that I look at this thread, and I am glad that they did. As I have explained, my question was an innocent one related to alternate accounts and not in any way an accusation of sockpuppetry. I would find it odd that Michaeldsuarez is trying to connect my mistaken impression with what he terms "a fringe group", except that he often does exactly this type of thing. He is both an active member of that "fringe group" and a self-identified admin on Encyclopedia Dramatica. Next time you find yourself salivating, ask yourself who rang the bell. Delicious carbuncle (talk) 18:28, 15 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Please stop making comments (such as this) towards Jayen466. They are nothing to do with the typic at hand and is unhelpful by creatming more drama. Bidgee (talk) 16:00, 15 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Ein HDR ist ohne Tonemapping nicht wirklich auf einem Display darstellbar, da dessen Dynamikumfang, wenn richtig gemacht, wesentlich größer ist als das womit so ein Display angesteuert wird. Entsprechend macht es auch keinen echten Sinn ein HDR ohne Tonemapping als JPEG zu speichern. Da ist nämlich jeder Vorteil direkt dahin, da JPEG eben nur 8 Bit pro Kanal speichert. Nimm also einen Tonemapping-Operator des ein ansehnliches Ergebnis liefert und speichere dann. PS: Hab das Programm nun schon eine Weile nicht benutzt, da ich auch selten Bilder mit der Kamera mache und bei Urlaubsschnappschüssen macht es ja keinen Sinn. ;-) --／人◕ ‿‿ ◕人＼署名の宣言20:21, 20 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Ich meine das Bild, das vor dem Tonemapping angezeigt wird („Original HDR“, 1:39). Ich dachte, dass alles, was auf dem Monitor angezeigt werden kann, auch als JPG gespeichert werden kann. --Leyo21:01, 20 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Das macht recht wenig Sinn. Aber wenn du es wirklich unverändert (ohne Tonemapping) als JPEG haben willst, dann speichere es doch als OpenEXR ab. Das kannst du dann mit einem anderen Grafikprogramm öffnen und dann als JPEG speichern. Etwas umständlich, aber normalerweise verwendet man auch Tonemapping um aus HDR-Bildern LDR-Bilder zu machen. Getonmapte Bilder lassen sich nämlich als JPEG speichern. Ohne Tonemapping ist das Ergebnis nämlich in der Regel alles andere als berauschend. Falls du kein Programm hast das eines der HDR-Formate versteht, dann könntest du dir als Notlösung Blender installieren. Dort kannst du das Bild im UV/Image-Editor öffnen und dann in diversen Formaten, unter anderem auch JPEG abspeichern. PS: Meint der da im Video wirklich das es das nur für Mac gibt? *kopfschüttel*--／人◕ ‿‿ ◕人＼署名の宣言21:52, 20 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Ich habe letztes Wochenende etwas rumgespielt (Foto von Innenraum mit Fenster bei Tag, Aussicht bei Nacht). Dabei hat das „Original HDR“ jeweils besser (in diesem Fall natürlicher) ausgesehen als mit allen Tone-Mapping-Operatoren. Vielleicht sollte ich auch besser Belichtungsfusion benutzen… ;-) --Leyo22:09, 20 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Das ist ja die Grundlage dafür das man Luminance HDR überhaupt richtig nutzen kann. Der erste Schritt ist nämlich die Belichtungsfusion. Sonst nützt einem HDR nichts, da nur ein LDR drin steckt. Der Beitrag ist übrigens Käse, da dort alles durcheinandergeworfen wird. Der Enfuse-Vorgang ist nämlich der erste Schritt hin zu einem HDR. Das was da verglichen wird ist ein HDR mit moderatem Tonemapping und eines mit Tonemapping-Ruinierung. ^^ --／人◕ ‿‿ ◕人＼署名の宣言22:18, 20 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Die Liste gibt es schon länger. Auf dieser sollen eigentlich nur Bilder sein die für Trolling und so weiter missbraucht wurden/werden. Aber so wie es für EN typisch ist hat sich das in Vorauseilendes Gehorsam gewandelt und nun landen so gut wie alle "gefährlichen Bilder" dort auf der Liste. Was als gefährlich angesehen wird dürfte niemanden mehr wirklich überraschen. --／人◕ ‿‿ ◕人＼署名の宣言20:37, 27 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Um das Image des "bösen" oder "schlechten" abzulegen versucht man nun wohl den Eiertanz und das nun "restricted" umzuwandeln, d.h. Bilder nur zu einem bestimmten Zweck. Das finde ich super, denn jedes Bild ist per se nur für eine oder wenige Dinge verwendbar und damit "restricted". Programmieren wir nun einen bot, der alle abermillionen Medien dort reintut? höhö. Siehe: Category talk:Images on English Wikipedia's bad image list. --Wladyslaw (talk) 20:40, 27 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I am not sure of the formal process for notifying you, but I have brought a complaint against you, since we didn't seem to find an agreeable outcome through one-to-one discussion. I hope that you'll simply admit that you were targeting me as a User, rather than happening to find fault with my images, apologize, and we can move on peacefully. -- Thekohser (talk) 15:54, 21 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Niabot, what do you think about this photo -- are there Freedom Of Panorama issues that you might be concerned about? I don't want to bring disrepute to the Commons project. -- Thekohser (talk) 17:01, 22 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
You are already a disgrace compared to the majority of Commons contributers and your uploads have crappy quality, but i don't see any copyright issues with this picture (per Commons:De minimis). --／人◕ ‿‿ ◕人＼署名の宣言17:14, 22 June 2012 (UTC) PS: Happy with the comment? Or do you want to open the next useless headline on my talkpage?[reply]
Look at this crap! No, I have no desire to open another headline on your Talk page. I'll just leave you with this disgracefully uploaded, crappy quality image that I shot with my camera and donated to Commons. Cheers! -- Thekohser (talk) 18:58, 25 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
There is. This questions and comments are only written to spam my discussion page. Any further comment from Thekosher on my talk page will be removed without any answer. --／人◕ ‿‿ ◕人＼署名の宣言19:37, 25 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
It seemed a legitimate enough question, there is no need to call it "spam". However, I'm sure Thekohser can get answers elsewhere in future. Rd232 (talk) 20:23, 25 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
(unindent)That's still no reason. Intentionally trying to rile up someone does not help anyone, and only encourages bad behavior. You could have just as easily expressed your reasons without the personal attack. If this sort of thing would have happened to me, I sure as heck would have filed a full out complaint on you, and I know at least a few admins would have bawled you out for such unprofessional behavior.
Since you're deleting all comments from this guy, just delete this one, too. You seem like a decent person. But this really, really does make you look bad. Trlkly (talk) 16:06, 8 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Since i see you for the first time on my discussion page, i have to guess from your words that you have no clue what this is about (the background story). Please refrain from commenting on matters that are not your own. --／人◕ ‿‿ ◕人＼署名の宣言16:33, 8 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
File:Maleperineum.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!
Hello,
My name is Duane Hurst and I recently made a free (non-commercial) English web site to share information with people. I added links to your Wikipedia/Wikimedia freeware picture (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Snow_leopard_portrait-2010-07-09.jpg). I also gave credit to you on my web pages for your work. Thank you for sharing with the public. My website is:
I add pictures such as yours to one of the following major sections of my site:
1. World section - contains information and over 10,000 images of every world country and territory. Link at:
http://www.freeenglishsite.com/world/index.htm
3. English section - "Mel and Wes" lessons in conversation format. Stories are located in various USA states and world countries such as China, England, Germany, Japan, Mexico and Thailand. Each lesson has many slang terms and idioms, which I link to my Slang Dictionary. This eventually will have over 5,000 terms. Currently, it has about 3,000 slang and idioms. I regularly add new lessons and slang terms. Link at:
http://www.freeenglishsite.com/english/lessons/index.htm
Slang Dictionary link at:
http://www.freeenglishsite.com/english/slang/Eslang_a.htm
Prior to retirement, I taught English at several private and public universities in the United States.
Please share this free site with your friends. I hope all will enjoy the pictures and find the English information useful. Sincerely,
Duane Hurst in Utah, USA
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!
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!
Hey Niabot, I have moved the old Hot Sex Barnstar from it's name at Erotica Barnstar to Template:Sexuality barnstar. I think this better reflects what it should be. But the image really is an issue to many in the community, including myself. Perhaps we could come up with an image that could replace the current image that is less offensive to many in the community. As you know, I am 100% for Commons having a broad and very inclusive range of sexuality-related content, but I know that if I were to be given this on my talk page, I would delete it. What do you think? russavia (talk) 19:33, 22 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Deletion request for files in Category:Logos of Eurovision that uses the Eurovision heart[edit]
Hello Niabot,
As you have previously participated in a discussion regarding deletion Eurovision Song Contest logos, I would like to direct your attention to Commons:Deletion requests/Files in Category:Logos of Eurovision, where a discussion regarding deletion of 79 logo files are taking place and I would also like to encourage you to participate in said discussion, so we may all benefit from what-ever knowledge and experience, you may have gained during the last discussion. In kind regards, --heb [TCE] 13:34, 12 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
User:Niabot Hi!! Happy to see you active. I saw you've got quite a collection in Commons, and Bravo for it! Sincerely.
Could you upload a video or maybe some animation on how someone could get along with character design in Blender? I got Blender v 2.74. Can you help, perhaps? FindMeLost (talk) 09:36, 18 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Mit gefällt Dein Bild "Bicyle diagramm". Gerne würde ich es in einem Buch über Didaktik verwenden. Es erscheint in einem gewöhnlichen Verlag. So wie ich die Lizenzbedingung "share alike" verstehe, würde ich dafür Deine ausdrückliche Genehmigung benötigen, da das Buch selbst nicht unter einer CC-Lizenz erscheinen wird. Wärst Du bereit, mir für diese Verwendung das Bildung unter "CC by" zu überlassen, ohne "share alike"? — Preceding unsigned comment added by ChristofArn (talk • contribs) 11:13, 21 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I appreciate your work. Please consider keep contributing to wikipedia, The person who didn't want your picture of the day said that was his opinion and not an action as an administrator (I read he said it on his profile history)
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!
Copyright violation for ‘Magnifying glass with focus on paper’ (by someone else, not you)[edit]
I saw the following image on some web page, without proper attribution.
It was only attributed as ‘Wikipedia’ without anything else.
Magnifying glass with focus on paper
The web page is not publicly accessible so I can't give you a link.
I saved a PDF of the web page itself and a page with contact information.
If you wish, I can send you (privately) the PDF so you can contact the
authors of the web page and ask them to properly attribute.
However, I do not have a means of privately sending the PDF.
I'll check this ‘User talk’ page some time later for a response.
Hi, this is probably a long shot to ask, but besides Hadako-tan and Mahuri, do the characters in your works have names? I'm most interested in hearing for the futanari girls, but if you'd like to share more, I'd listen.
That would indeed be a long shot since Niabot hasn't been around these parts for about half a decade. However, perhaps realising this, it seems you coined some unofficial nicknames (and clever ones at that): category:futanari girls_(characters). As a side note, Mahuri's name is a portmanteau of the names of the characters she is a mashup of. Arlo James Barnes13:16, 12 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
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!
File:Futanari.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!
File:Hadako-tan.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!
→ Commons:Help desk in any language you like to use. --Nikbot
. So just a thumbs up to continue your nice (art)work here. --Slaunger (talk) 15:40, 16 May 2011 (UTC)
.jpg)
, but I find the other parts of your work very good and useful !!
.jpg)
Honi soit qui mal y pense: Kyubey -- ／人◕ ‿‿ ◕人＼ 苦情処理係 13:31, 18 March 2012 (UTC)
--Lilyu (talk) 16:18, 18 March 2012 (UTC)
![[2]](https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Commons:Featured_picture_candidates/File:Futanari.png-2&diff=next&oldid=53147510){kind=link}
![[4]](https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Commons:Featured_picture_candidates/File:Futanari.png-2&diff=prev&oldid=53142789){kind=link}
![[5]](https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Commons%3AFeatured_picture_candidates%2FFile%3AFutanari.png-2&action=historysubmit&diff=53166908&oldid=53158511){kind=link}
![[6]](https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Commons%3AFeatured_picture_candidates%2FFile%3AFutanari.png-2&action=historysubmit&diff=53182192&oldid=53181659){kind=link}
![[7]](https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Commons:Featured_picture_candidates/File:Futanari.png-2&diff=prev&oldid=53181659){kind=link}
![[8]](https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Commons:Featured_picture_candidates/File:Futanari.png-2&diff=prev&oldid=53181404){kind=link}
![[9]](https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Commons:Featured_picture_candidates/File:Futanari.png-2&diff=prev&oldid=53181603){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.png){kind=link}
.svg){kind=link}
![[13]](http://www7.pic-upload.de/01.06.11/sf5nyf7j8mz5.jpg){kind=link}
![[17]](https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Datei:Landtag_Niedersachsen_DSCF7715.JPG){kind=link}
![[19]](https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=File:Hentai_-_yuuree-redraw.jpg&curid=15725026&diff=58424662&oldid=58422673){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
Support Good quality. --Andrew J.Kurbiko 00:08, 27 November 2019 (UTC)
