User talk:Sten

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

File:2008 07 Botanical Garden Meran 71340R0350.jpg|[edit]

Hello Sten,

Indented line

I am a graphic designer in the USA and would like to use one of your Acai Berry photographs (Lycium-barbarum-fruits) in a package design I am creating for the Stash Tea Company here in Portland, Oregon. Please reply to me at my email address: gh@acmegd.com to discuss. Thanks. –Greg Holly / Acme Graphic Design Hi Sten, thanks for quick reaction.
I've added info accordingly in en and de and the the link to wikispieces.
Just inform me about further changes on my discussion page and I will adapt the respective files.
Best wishes for the new year --Lord Koxinga (talk) 20:29, 12 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Sten,
Thanks a lot again for your very fast reaction on my upload (according the history of a file I've checked in and edited it was about 2 minutes). Since I'm a civil engineer (thats about nature too, but not in that way) I've categorized all those uploads under unknown plants to make sure, that someone is catching them.
My intention is to provide whatever I have on my harddisks – and is not private – to everybody.
So whenever you find some stuff to edit, just do it. It will go the right way sooner or later.
Best wishes and appreciating your collaboration in wikimedia. --Lord Koxinga (talk) 21:25, 13 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Archives[edit]

See Archive 1 (contents until 15 July 2009)

Valg af licens[edit]

Hej Sten! Commons er i gang med at skifte licens og i den forbinelse skal der tages stilling til en række billeder. Fx File:Aesculus-hippocastanum.JPG. Jeg tænkte på, at hvis du valgte den licens, du bedst kan lide, så kunne den måske sættes på alle eksisterende billeder i Category:Images by User:Sten from da.wikipedia med bot? --MGA73 (talk) 15:34, 15 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hej MGA73, Jeg foretrækker den licens, som hedder: "Multi-license with CC-BY-SA-3.0 and GFDL". Det er stor sindet af dig at rette licensen på alle mine billeder, så de bliver bragt i overensstemmelse med både mit ønske og de nyeste licenser. Tak for det!--Sten Porse (talk) 21:41, 17 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Hej Steen, ja det er lettere, hvis licensen er ens på alle billederne. Men inden jeg retter, så er det denne her du mener? {{self|CC-BY-SA-3.0|GFDL}}? Man kan også bruge fx {{self|Cc-by-sa-all|GFDL}}. Der bør nok også indsættes en "author=Sten" ind i skabelonerne for at undgå misforståelser fordi det er min bot, der har overført mange af billederne. --MGA73 (talk) 06:53, 18 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Jeg tror det bedste er {{self|cc-by-sa-3.0|GFDL|author=[[User:Sten|Sten Porse]]|migration=redundant}}. Parameteren migration=redundant burde forhindre andre mere eller mindre fejlbehæftede botter i at lave yderligere ændringer (f.eks. foreslå at udgive TO gange under cc-by-sa-3.0). Tjekker botten i øvrigt om der er flere (næsten) ens licensskabeloner på samme side, f.eks. en {{self|GFDL}} og også en {{GFDL}}. Jeg har observeret at andre botter ikke har styr på dette, f.eks. [1] (se ikke kun diffen, men hele kilden, hvor det fremgår at brugeren på korrekt vis har foretaget opt out). {{Cc-by-sa-all}} er vist lettere omstridt - der er delte meninger hvad den egentlig skal dække over, så det er nok bedste at undgå den - evt. til fordel for {{Cc-by-sa-3.0,2.5,2.0,1.0}}. Nillerdk (talk) 07:22, 19 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Jeg har lige fået at vide, at man ikke bør fjerne fx en 2.0 og erstatte med en 3.0 så en "all" eller "3.0,2.5,2.0,1.0" er nok det bedste. --MGA73 (talk) 13:46, 19 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Hej MGA73 og Nillerdk. Jeg kan ikke gennemskue de teknikaliteter, I diskuterer, men jeg er benovet over, at I orker at gøre alt det for mig! Mvh. --Sten Porse (talk) 07:26, 20 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Så skulle de meget gerne være rettet alle sammen. Jeg fandt endda 3 helt uden licens (File:Maquis in Turkey.jpg, File:Maquis and garrigue in Corsica6.jpg og File:Maquis and garrigue in Corsica5.jpg). Håber alt er ok nu. Fremadrettet skal du bare give billederne den licens du foretrækker. --MGA73 (talk) 22:16, 30 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Mange tak!--Sten Porse (talk) 08:56, 1 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hi[edit]

If you are dealing with categories here you may find "hotcat" of interest. My Preferences -> Gadgets. Thanks & regards --Herby talk thyme 17:12, 18 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for making me aware of your "hotcat". As a matter of fact I do use it, when I categorize my own pictures. Adding categories to pictures that are already uploaded is a different matter, though, so I'm doing it manually.--Sten Porse (talk) 17:18, 18 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
No problem & thanks for your work, regards --Herby talk thyme 17:33, 18 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Tip: Categorizing images[edit]

Afrikaans ∙ العربية ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца) ∙ বাংলা ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ dansk ∙ Deutsch ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form) ∙ Ελληνικά ∙ English ∙ Esperanto ∙ español ∙ فارسی ∙ suomi ∙ français ∙ galego ∙ עברית ∙ magyar ∙ íslenska ∙ italiano ∙ 日本語 ∙ ქართული ∙ 한국어 ∙ македонски ∙ മലയാളം ∙ norsk bokmål ∙ Plattdüütsch ∙ Nederlands ∙ norsk ∙ polski ∙ português ∙ português do Brasil ∙ română ∙ русский ∙ sicilianu ∙ slovenčina ∙ slovenščina ∙ српски / srpski ∙ svenska ∙ Türkçe ∙ українська ∙ Tiếng Việt ∙ 中文（简体）‎ ∙ 中文（繁體）‎ ∙ +/−

Hello, Sten!
Tip: Add categories to your files
Tip: Add categories to your files

Thanks a lot for contributing to the Wikimedia Commons! Here's a tip to make your uploads more useful: Why not add some categories to describe them? This will help more people to find and use them.

Here's how:

1) If you're using the UploadWizard, you can add categories to each file when you describe it. Just click "more options" for the file and add the categories which make sense:

2) You can also pick the file from your list of uploads, edit the file description page, and manually add the category code at the end of the page.

[[Category:Category name]]

For example, if you are uploading a diagram showing the orbits of comets, you add the following code:

[[Category:Astronomical diagrams]]
[[Category:Comets]]

This will make the diagram show up in the categories "Astronomical diagrams" and "Comets".

When picking categories, try to choose a specific category ("Astronomical diagrams") over a generic one ("Illustrations").

Thanks again for your uploads! More information about categorization can be found in Commons:Categories, and don't hesitate to leave a note on the help desk.

BotMultichillT 02:29, 8 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I have checked, corrected and supplemented. All seems to be Ok now?--Sten Porse (talk) 09:08, 8 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I answer for Multichill. Hej Sten! Du skal ikke regne med at Multichill svarer selv - han har nok at gøre med at svare på sure opstød! Jeg glæder mig over, at det nu er blevet lettere at finde disse 20-30 af dine flotte fotografier. Du har efter min overbevisning kategoriseret helt korrekt. Endnu engang tak for dine værdifulde bidrag. Nillerdk (talk) 10:29, 8 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Ingen årsag. Det er min glæde og stolthed at være med her. Derfor ser jeg også en ære i, at andre bemærker, kritiserer og retter "mine" ting. Tak for din positive måde at svare på! Mvh. --Sten Porse (talk) 11:01, 8 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

File tagging File:Vaccinium-spp.JPG[edit]

العربية ∙ беларуская ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца) ∙ ပအိုဝ်ႏဘာႏသာႏ ∙ বাংলা ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ dansk ∙ Deutsch ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form) ∙ Ελληνικά ∙ English ∙ español ∙ euskara ∙ فارسی ∙ suomi ∙ français ∙ galego ∙ עברית ∙ hrvatski ∙ magyar ∙ հայերեն ∙ italiano ∙ 日本語 ∙ ಕನ್ನಡ ∙ 한국어 ∙ lietuvių ∙ latviešu ∙ македонски ∙ മലയാളം ∙ मराठी ∙ မြန်မာဘာသာ ∙ norsk bokmål ∙ Plattdüütsch ∙ Nederlands ∙ norsk ∙ polski ∙ português ∙ română ∙ русский ∙ sicilianu ∙ slovenčina ∙ slovenščina ∙ српски / srpski ∙ svenska ∙ ไทย ∙ Türkçe ∙ українська ∙ اردو ∙ Tiếng Việt ∙ 中文（简体） ∙ 中文（繁體） ∙ +/−
Warning sign
This media may be deleted.
Thanks for uploading File:Vaccinium-spp.JPG. This media is missing permission information. A source is given, but there is no proof that the author or copyright holder agreed to license the file under the given license. Please provide a link to an appropriate webpage with license information, or ask the author or copyright holder to send an email with copy of a written permission to VRT (permissions-commons@wikimedia.org). You may still be required to go through this procedure even if you are the author yourself; please see Commons:But it's my own work! for more details. After you emailed permission, you may replace the {{No permission since}} tag with {{subst:PP}} on file description page. Alternatively, you may click on "Challenge speedy deletion" below the tag if you wish to provide an argument why evidence of permission is not necessary in this case.

Please see this page for more information on how to confirm permission, or if you would like to understand why we ask for permission when uploading work that is not your own, or work which has been previously published (regardless of whether it is your own).

Warning: unless the permission information is given, the file may be deleted after seven days. Thank you.

Gruznov (talk) 12:16, 10 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Permission given by the author, Sten Porse (see description)--Sten Porse (talk) 15:20, 10 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

File:Bible-translation-se.png[edit]

Det är just den typen av arbete vi håller på med på Wikisource! :)

Se s:sv:Sida:Bibelöversättningarna av år 1536 band I 050.jpg

När alla sidor är transkriberade, sätter vi sedan ihop det till en hel bok! -- Lavallen (talk) 20:52, 24 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

File:Aegilops-speltoides-habit.jpg[edit]

bin hocherfreut über dein Süßgras aus Alyki und frage mich, ob du da noch mehr dergleichen auf Thasos gefunden und fotographiert haben könntest? Wäre fein für eine ausführlichere Beschreibung der dortigen Vegetation. -- Haubi (talk) 15:04, 9 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Danke für deinen Hinweis. Die Fotos hatte ich bereits angesehen, jedoch nicht soweit angeklickt, dass ich auf deinen Namen gekommen wäre. Bist du mit meiner deutschen Beschreibung von Aegilops zufrieden? Was ich besonders suche, ist Bewuchs an den Magerstandorten, wie z.B. des Aegilops. Mehr über "mein" Thasos findest du im deutschen Wikipedia unter Thasos. Danke und Gruß -- Haubi (talk) 11:28, 10 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Die deutsche Beschreibung findet sich unter deinem Foto in "Category:Flora of Thasos". Bitte erkläre mir kurz dein System der Einordnung deiner Fotos in "Egology of Thasos" oder "Flora of Thasos". -- Haubi (talk) 06:58, 11 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Phrygana auf Thasos[edit]

Hallo Sten, wärst du einverstanden, wenn ich unter der Kategorie Thasos, Unterk. Ecology of Thasos, Phrygana, einige der von dir erwähnten Pflanzenarten einsetzen würde? -- Haubi (talk) 21:10, 12 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Bild File:Trifolium-campestre-flowering.jpg[edit]

Lieber Sten,

Ich habe Ihr Bild File:Trifolium-campestre-flowering.jpg in Medicago lupulina umbenannt, da es offensichtlich zu dieser Art gehört (sehr kurze Blütenstiele, Blüten fallen am Ende der Blütenzeit aus, typische Früchte). Mit freundlichen Grüßen, -- Robert Flogaus-Faust (talk) 21:10, 4 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Das Bild File:Trifolium-campestre-flower-head.jpg habe ich soeben in gleicher Weise zu Medicago lupulina gesteckt. -- Robert Flogaus-Faust (talk) 19:30, 5 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Prunus serrula[edit]

Hallo Sten,

auf Deinem Foto von Prunus serrula File:Prunus-serrula.jpg sind im Vordergrund Blätter zu sehen, die meiner Meinung nach nicht zu dieser Art gehören. Sie hat schmalere Blätter, typische Kirschblätter. Der Stamm, der zu sehen ist, ist aber relativ sicher Prunus serrula. Falls Du wieder in den Botanischen Garten gehst, könntest Du den Baum nochmal ansehen? Viele Grüße, --Don Manfredo (talk) 21:51, 4 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Bestimmung von Image:Geranium-molle-flowers.JPG[edit]

Hallo Sten,

Ich habe das von Ihnen als Geranium molle bestimmte Foto Image:Geranium-molle-flowers.JPG zu Category:Geranium pyrenaicum verschoben und die Beschreibung entsprechend verändert, und zwar wegen folgender Merkmale: Die Blütenbätter der Pflanze sind viel länger (etwa doppelt so lang) wie der Kelch. Die Blattlappen sind sehr breit und die Blüten überragen ihre Tragblätter weit. Mit freundlichen Grüßen Robert Flogaus-Faust (talk) 17:47, 11 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

A faint resemblance[edit]

Hi! Concerning this, are you aware of Kachkars (Armenian stone-crosses)? Sardur (talk) 11:00, 1 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Pleasure! Sardur (talk) 22:11, 2 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

File:Prunus-avium.JPG[edit]

Hi, this image (File:Prunus-avium.JPG) is missing a source. Would you mind adding the info-template? Thanks, Amada44  talk to me 16:08, 25 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Done!--Sten Porse (talk) 15:05, 26 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
great! Thanks! Amada44  talk to me 15:17, 26 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Image use[edit]

Hi

We are writing a book on spices and herbs.

The title is “Krydderleksikon med urter og smakstilsetninger” (Encyclopedia of spices and herbs). Print run is 5000 copies and the book will be published in May this year. It will be illustrated with photos of all the plants.

Most of the photos are already provided for but we still miss some picture.

We have found your photo of Vitex agnus castus on the Internet and we wonder if you kindly will let us use the photo in our book.

http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Vitex-agnus-castus-foliage.JPG

For more information about us and the book please contact us on: post(a)vegaforlag.no - www.vegaforlag.no

Best regards Gitte

Translation help[edit]

Thank you.[2] Walter Siegmund (talk) 17:10, 10 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

File:Sten-Porse-2008.jpg[edit]

File:Sten-Porse-2008.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!
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 ∙ +/−

– Adrignola talk 20:58, 4 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

That's quite all right (this photo has been exchanged with a more updated one)!--Sten Porse (talk) 19:15, 7 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

File:Astragalus-glycyphyllos-foliage-flowers.jpg[edit]

Hi Sten,

I moved your image File:Astragalus-glycyphyllos-foliage-flowers.jpg tentatively to Category:Vicia sepium, because Astragalus glycyphyllos has never got red flowers. The location where the image was taken (Botanical Garden!) and the rather wide leaves might leave some doubt, but the species is extremely common, rather variable and the flower look exactly right. I also changed the description. I hope that I got the Danish part of it right. Best regards --Robert Flogaus-Faust (talk) 20:09, 28 September 2011 (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!
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 ∙ +/−

Affected:


{{MldAs there is no Freedom of panorama in France. Yours sincerely Jean-Fred (talk) 00:16, 25 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

As can be seen, my only action was the turning of the picture. Consequently I have no relationship neither with the subject shown in the picture nor with the fact that the picture was taken. So please go on: remove the picture! Sten Porse 2011-11-26 18:29.

your picture[edit]

Please turn your picture: Coastal Pinus brutia forest on the east coast of Thasos. Thanks -- Haubi (talk) 10:23, 17 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Why should I turn that picture? I mean: the picture is showing horizontal water, while the boles of the trees are perpendicular - quite as the situation was at the time, when the picture was taken. The layers of marble on the coast, however, are tilted, but that is the result of some very old, geological processes. So explain your wish, please.--Sten Porse (talk) 21:09, 20 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

File:Humor.jpg[edit]

File:Humor.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!
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 ∙ +/−

Ices2Csharp (talk) 10:59, 27 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

AUTHORIZATION FOR PUBLICATION[edit]

Hi!

My name is Edoardo Bit, I am an architect and also a “young researcher” of the University of Ferarra (Italy).

I am writing a book on the “green walls technologies” and I have found very interesting some photos in your page. So, I would kindly ask you if I can use them in my book.

Obviously, if you gently decide to grant me the permission, your name (or your nickname) and the link of the pictures will be correctly cited in the credits of my publication.


The 2 photos which I would use are:

http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Actinidia-arguta-foliage.jpg

http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Vitis-coignetiae.JPG


Thank you very much! I hope you will attend my request…

My e-mail is: edoardo.bit@gmail.com


Bye,

Edoardo

Asking about a Picture[edit]

Hello! I saw a photo from you and would ask for some more informationen (if it possible!) about the plants are showing on the picture. I'm very interestes in the determination of plants, but I really don't know what is it for a plant in the top right corner? (There are some more specimens in the pic).

Sincerly, Genesis12 (talk) 18:20, 13 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

PS: Thank your for that great work!

Copyright status: File:Deschampsia-cespitosa-tufts.JPG[edit]

bahasa melayu ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ dansk ∙ deutsch (Sie-Form) ∙ deutsch ∙ english ∙ español ∙ français ∙ galego ∙ hrvatski ∙ italiano ∙ magyar ∙ nederlands ∙ norsk ∙ norsk bokmål ∙ norsk nynorsk ∙ português ∙ polski ∙ português do Brasil ∙ română ∙ sicilianu ∙ slovenčina ∙ slovenščina ∙ suomi ∙ svenska ∙ türkçe ∙ беларуская ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца) ∙ български ∙ македонски ∙ русский ∙ українська ∙ ಕನ್ನಡ ∙ ತುಳು ∙ മലയാളം ∙ 한국어 ∙ 日本語 ∙ 中文（简体） ∙ 中文（繁體） ∙ עברית ∙ العربيَّة ∙ فارسی ∙ +/−
Warning sign
This media may be deleted.
Thanks for uploading File:Deschampsia-cespitosa-tufts.JPG. I notice that the file page either doesn't contain enough information about the license or it contains contradictory information about the license, so the copyright status is unclear.

If you created this file yourself, then you must provide a valid copyright tag. For example, you can tag it with {{self|GFDL|cc-by-sa-all}} to release it under the multi-license GFDL plus Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike All-version license or you can tag it with {{PD-self}} to release it into the public domain. (See Commons:Copyright tags for the full list of license tags that you can use.)

If you did not create the file yourself or if it is a derivative of another work that is possibly subject to copyright protection, then you must specify where you found it (e.g. usually a link to the web page where you got it), you must provide proof that it has a license that is acceptable for Commons (e.g. usually a link to the terms of use for content from that page), and you must add an appropriate license tag. If you did not create the file yourself and the specific source and license information is not available on the web, you must obtain permission through the VRT system and follow the procedure described there.

Note that any unsourced or improperly licensed files will be deleted one week after they have been marked as lacking proper information, as described in criteria for deletion. If you have uploaded other files, please confirm that you have provided the proper information for those files, too. If you have any questions about licenses please ask at Commons:Village pump/Copyright or see our help pages. Thank you.

Denniss (talk) 23:16, 2 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

File:Sten-Porse.JPG[edit]

File:Sten-Porse.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!
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 ∙ +/−

heb [T C E] 10:05, 16 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Copyright status: File:Prosartes-hookeri-habitus.JPG[edit]

bahasa melayu ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ dansk ∙ deutsch (Sie-Form) ∙ deutsch ∙ english ∙ español ∙ français ∙ galego ∙ hrvatski ∙ italiano ∙ magyar ∙ nederlands ∙ norsk ∙ norsk bokmål ∙ norsk nynorsk ∙ português ∙ polski ∙ português do Brasil ∙ română ∙ sicilianu ∙ slovenčina ∙ slovenščina ∙ suomi ∙ svenska ∙ türkçe ∙ беларуская ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца) ∙ български ∙ македонски ∙ русский ∙ українська ∙ ಕನ್ನಡ ∙ ತುಳು ∙ മലയാളം ∙ 한국어 ∙ 日本語 ∙ 中文（简体） ∙ 中文（繁體） ∙ עברית ∙ العربيَّة ∙ فارسی ∙ +/−
Warning sign
This media may be deleted.
Thanks for uploading File:Prosartes-hookeri-habitus.JPG. I notice that the file page either doesn't contain enough information about the license or it contains contradictory information about the license, so the copyright status is unclear.

If you created this file yourself, then you must provide a valid copyright tag. For example, you can tag it with {{self|GFDL|cc-by-sa-all}} to release it under the multi-license GFDL plus Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike All-version license or you can tag it with {{PD-self}} to release it into the public domain. (See Commons:Copyright tags for the full list of license tags that you can use.)

If you did not create the file yourself or if it is a derivative of another work that is possibly subject to copyright protection, then you must specify where you found it (e.g. usually a link to the web page where you got it), you must provide proof that it has a license that is acceptable for Commons (e.g. usually a link to the terms of use for content from that page), and you must add an appropriate license tag. If you did not create the file yourself and the specific source and license information is not available on the web, you must obtain permission through the VRT system and follow the procedure described there.

Note that any unsourced or improperly licensed files will be deleted one week after they have been marked as lacking proper information, as described in criteria for deletion. If you have uploaded other files, please confirm that you have provided the proper information for those files, too. If you have any questions about licenses please ask at Commons:Village pump/Copyright or see our help pages. Thank you.

JuTa 23:52, 20 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Copyright status: File:Prosartes-hookeri-flowers.JPG[edit]

bahasa melayu ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ dansk ∙ deutsch (Sie-Form) ∙ deutsch ∙ english ∙ español ∙ français ∙ galego ∙ hrvatski ∙ italiano ∙ magyar ∙ nederlands ∙ norsk ∙ norsk bokmål ∙ norsk nynorsk ∙ português ∙ polski ∙ português do Brasil ∙ română ∙ sicilianu ∙ slovenčina ∙ slovenščina ∙ suomi ∙ svenska ∙ türkçe ∙ беларуская ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца) ∙ български ∙ македонски ∙ русский ∙ українська ∙ ಕನ್ನಡ ∙ ತುಳು ∙ മലയാളം ∙ 한국어 ∙ 日本語 ∙ 中文（简体） ∙ 中文（繁體） ∙ עברית ∙ العربيَّة ∙ فارسی ∙ +/−
Warning sign
This media may be deleted.
Thanks for uploading File:Prosartes-hookeri-flowers.JPG. I notice that the file page either doesn't contain enough information about the license or it contains contradictory information about the license, so the copyright status is unclear.

If you created this file yourself, then you must provide a valid copyright tag. For example, you can tag it with {{self|GFDL|cc-by-sa-all}} to release it under the multi-license GFDL plus Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike All-version license or you can tag it with {{PD-self}} to release it into the public domain. (See Commons:Copyright tags for the full list of license tags that you can use.)

If you did not create the file yourself or if it is a derivative of another work that is possibly subject to copyright protection, then you must specify where you found it (e.g. usually a link to the web page where you got it), you must provide proof that it has a license that is acceptable for Commons (e.g. usually a link to the terms of use for content from that page), and you must add an appropriate license tag. If you did not create the file yourself and the specific source and license information is not available on the web, you must obtain permission through the VRT system and follow the procedure described there.

Note that any unsourced or improperly licensed files will be deleted one week after they have been marked as lacking proper information, as described in criteria for deletion. If you have uploaded other files, please confirm that you have provided the proper information for those files, too. If you have any questions about licenses please ask at Commons:Village pump/Copyright or see our help pages. Thank you.

JuTa 23:53, 20 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Symphytum[edit]

Hallo Sten! Die beiden Fotos File:Symphytum-caucasicum-flowers.jpg und File:Symphytum-caucasicum-flower-close.JPG zeigen ganz klar Symphytum asperum. Bei Symphytum caucasicum müsste der Kelch insgesamt länger und deutlich weniger als auf die Hälfte seiner Länge geteilt sein. Ein Bild, das dieses Merkmal schön zeigt, ist beispielsweise das folgende: File:Blue comfrey - geograph.org.uk - 1279031.jpg. Zur weiteren Information auch die Bearbeitung der Gattung Symphytum in der Flora of the U.S.S.R.. Grüße --Franz Xaver (talk) 12:59, 20 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hallo Franz Xaver,
Vielen Dank für deine Berichtigung. Ich habe das nicht gewusst!

Grüsse --Sten Porse (talk) 12:57, 21 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

File:Luzula-sylvatica.JPG[edit]

File:Luzula-sylvatica.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!
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 ∙ +/−

Acather96 (talk) 18:02, 9 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hvordan kommer man igennem med et spørgsmål?[edit]

Godt du støtter wikipedia
Jeg ville gøre opmærksom på en overvejende typografisk fejl i Ugens artikel om Sisimiut. Jeg kan SLET ikke finde en vej ind og HELT umuligt at oploade nogle screenshots, jeg havde lavet af situatonen. Nu er det endt med en kommentar midt i teksten, som jeg i hvert fald selv kan læse, når jeg finder Sisimiut frem. Hvordan SKULLE jeg have gort? Morten Svensson svensson@dadnet.dk Morten Svensson (talk) 13:15, 8 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Round 2 of Picture of the Year 2015 is open![edit]

You are receiving this message because you voted in R1 of the 2015 Picture of the Year contest.

Dear Sten,

Wikimedia Commons is happy to announce that the second round of the 2015 Picture of the Year competition is now open. This year will be the tenth edition of the annual Wikimedia Commons photo competition, which recognizes exceptional contributions by users on Wikimedia Commons. Wikimedia users are invited to vote for their favorite images featured on Commons during the last year (2015) to produce a single Picture of the Year.

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

There are two total rounds of voting. In the first round, you voted for as many images as you liked. In Round 1, there were 1322 candidate images. There are 56 finalists in Round 2, comprised of the top 30 overall as well as the top #1 and #2 from each sub-category. In the final round, you may vote for just one or maximal three image to become the Picture of the Year.

Round 2 will end on 28 May 2016, 23:59:59 UTC.

Click here to vote »

Thanks,
-- Wikimedia Commons Picture of the Year committee 09:43, 22 May 2016 (UTC)

Permission of use for image[edit]

Dear Sten,

I work for the “Museum of Man and Nature” in Munich, Germany. I contact you today with a short inquiry concerning one of your wikipedia-images: https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Mimosa-pudica-post.jpg

The “Museum of Man and Nature” is a public institution that presents artefacts and research of the Bavarian Natural History Collections. The museum will be extended in the next few years and we are currently working on a brochure containing information on the construction and the new concept of the museum. The brochure will not be for sale, but will instead be shared with potential project partners and supporters. A PDF version will be available on the museum’s website.

Your image as mentioned above would greatly help to illustrate our ideas and we would hereby like to inquire if you would kindly grant us permission to use the image for this specific purpose. If you agree, we would of course give the copyright notice that you would like us to use. You find the respective image in the attachment.

Further information on the project can be found at: www.namu-bayern.de. We would be very grateful if you could support our project in this way. I look forward to hearing from you on this, of course you can also use my professional email adress: info@namu-bayern.de

Best wishes, Verena Braun Verena Braun (talk) 14:08, 4 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Liebe Verena,
Ich gebe mit Freude dem Museum die von Ihnen erwünschte Erlaubnis!
Mit freundlichen Grüssen
Sten Porse

Thalictrum flavum[edit]

Your picture of the flowers of Thalictrum flavum shows imo Thalictrum foetidum.

greetings Nico — Preceding unsigned comment added by Henderl (talk • contribs) 12:41, 21 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

You may very well be right though I'm not qualified to give you a definitive answer...
Greetings
Sten

Reminder: Round 2 of Picture of the Year 2016 is open![edit]

You are receiving this message because you voted in R1 of the 2016 Picture of the Year contest.

Dear Sten,

Wikimedia Commons is happy to announce that the second round of the 2016 Picture of the Year competition is now open. This year will be the eleventh edition of the annual Wikimedia Commons photo competition, which recognizes exceptional contributions by users on Wikimedia Commons. Wikimedia users are invited to vote for their favorite images featured on Commons during the last year (2016) to produce a single Picture of the Year.

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

There are two total rounds of voting. In the first round, you voted for as many images as you liked. In Round 1, there were 1475 candidate images. There are 58 finalists in Round 2, comprised of the top 30 overall as well as the top #1 and #2 from each sub-category.

In the final round, you may vote for just one or maximal three image to become the Picture of the Year.

Round 2 will end on 20 April 2017, 23:59:59 UTC.

Click here to vote »

Thanks,
--Wikimedia Commons Picture of the Year committee 08:43, 16 April 2017 (UTC)

Acis longifolium is Brimeura fastigiata[edit]

Hi, Looking at the page about Acis, it seems that the picture used to illustrate the species Acis longifolia (https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Leucojum-longifolium1.JPG) (one or two pending flower, white, leave filiform) is in fact a white form of Brimeura fastigiata (flowers upward, in a pseudo umbel, leaves wide with white stripe) — Preceding unsigned comment was added by 88.125.10.30 (talk) 15:50, 10 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

File tagging File:RealdaniaHQ.jpg[edit]

العربية ∙ беларуская ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца) ∙ ပအိုဝ်ႏဘာႏသာႏ ∙ বাংলা ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ dansk ∙ Deutsch ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form) ∙ Ελληνικά ∙ English ∙ español ∙ euskara ∙ فارسی ∙ suomi ∙ français ∙ galego ∙ עברית ∙ hrvatski ∙ magyar ∙ հայերեն ∙ italiano ∙ 日本語 ∙ ಕನ್ನಡ ∙ 한국어 ∙ lietuvių ∙ latviešu ∙ македонски ∙ മലയാളം ∙ मराठी ∙ မြန်မာဘာသာ ∙ norsk bokmål ∙ Plattdüütsch ∙ Nederlands ∙ norsk ∙ polski ∙ português ∙ română ∙ русский ∙ sicilianu ∙ slovenčina ∙ slovenščina ∙ српски / srpski ∙ svenska ∙ ไทย ∙ Türkçe ∙ українська ∙ اردو ∙ Tiếng Việt ∙ 中文（简体） ∙ 中文（繁體） ∙ +/−
Warning sign
This media may be deleted.
Thanks for uploading File:RealdaniaHQ.jpg. This media is missing permission information. A source is given, but there is no proof that the author or copyright holder agreed to license the file under the given license. Please provide a link to an appropriate webpage with license information, or ask the author or copyright holder to send an email with copy of a written permission to VRT (permissions-commons@wikimedia.org). You may still be required to go through this procedure even if you are the author yourself; please see Commons:But it's my own work! for more details. After you emailed permission, you may replace the {{No permission since}} tag with {{subst:PP}} on file description page. Alternatively, you may click on "Challenge speedy deletion" below the tag if you wish to provide an argument why evidence of permission is not necessary in this case.

Please see this page for more information on how to confirm permission, or if you would like to understand why we ask for permission when uploading work that is not your own, or work which has been previously published (regardless of whether it is your own).

Warning: unless the permission information is given, the file may be deleted after seven days. Thank you.

--Killarnee (T•1•2) 13:12, 10 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

2 misidentified images[edit]

  • misidentified
    misidentified
  • misidentified
    misidentified
  • Cardamine enneaphyllos
    Cardamine enneaphyllos
  • illustration of Cardamine enneaphyllos
    illustration of Cardamine enneaphyllos

Hi Sten, I just changed the ID of your two misidentified images shown above. These show some kind of Cardamine (subgenus Dentaria), but unfortunately not Cardamine enneaphyllos, because this species has typically a whorl of three leaves with three leaflets each. The leaves of your plants have got too many leaflets. I am not sure about the species shown in your images because these were taken in a botanical garden, where many kinds of species from all over the world may grow (and not always the species mentioned on a plate nearby). With best regards --Robert Flogaus-Faust (talk) 11:00, 27 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Round 1 of Picture of the Year 2022 voting is open![edit]

2022 Picture of the Year: Saint John Church of Sohrol in Iran.

Read this message in your language

Dear Wikimedian,

Wikimedia Commons is happy to announce that the 2022 Picture of the Year competition is now open. This year will be the seventeenth edition of the annual Wikimedia Commons photo competition, which recognizes exceptional contributions by users on Wikimedia Commons. Wikimedia users are invited to vote for their favorite images featured on Commons during the last year (2022) to produce a single Picture of the Year.

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

For your convenience, we have sorted the images into topical categories. Two rounds of voting will be held: In the first round, you may vote for as many images as you like. The top 30 overall and the two most popular images in each category will continue to the final. In the final round, you may vote for just three images to become the Picture of the Year.

Round 1 will end on UTC.

Click here to vote now!

Thanks,
the Wikimedia Commons Picture of the Year committee

You are receiving this message because you voted in the 2021 Picture of the Year contest.

Delivered by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 09:16, 20 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Round 2 of Picture of the Year 2022 voting is open![edit]

Read this message in your language

Dear Wikimedian,

You are receiving this message because we noticed that you voted in Round 1 of the 2022 Picture of the Year contest, but not yet in the second round. Wikimedia users are invited to vote for their favorite images featured on Commons during the last year (2022) to produce a single Picture of the Year.

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

In this second and final round, you may vote for a maximum of three images. The image with the most votes will become the Picture of the Year 2022.

Round 2 will end at UTC.

Click here to vote now!

Thanks,
the Wikimedia Commons Picture of the Year committee

Delivered by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 07:46, 5 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Sten&oldid=759581198"