User talk:Conti

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

Nice work on the foxes. As this is a multilingual project, would it not be better to have the files in the Latin binomial (or trinomial) names? This is, afterall, the purpose of the scientific names - international understanding. --[[User:OldakQuill|Oldak Quill]] 21:59, 10 Sep 2004 (UTC)

Hmm, true. I'm having a bit of a problem with finding a proper name for the images in general, but I'll try. :-) --Conti| 22:15, 10 Sep 2004 (UTC)

Moving the lions[edit]

Hi, thanks for letting me know! -- Ranveig 00:22, 26 Jan 2005 (UTC)

Danke[edit]

Hallo,

Ja, ich hatte bemerkt, meine Foto stand nicht in der richtige Ort. Ich habe es auf die richtige Seite gestellt.

Auf wiedersehen,

Benoit --Mbcmf217 09:26, 26 Jan 2005 (UTC)

Commons admin[edit]

Congratulations! You are now administrator on Commons. villy 14:53, 4 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Death e.[edit]

I replied to you on the votes for deletion. —Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason 22:33, 9 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Also, why are you saying these are unknown status - "Public Domain" is explicitly stated on the image. WHy is this less valid than {{pd}}?--Oldak Quill 23:01, 9 Feb 2005 (UTC)

User:Willy_on_Wheels[edit]

Thanks Conti, much appreciated :) villy 00:31, 12 Feb 2005 (UTC)

No problem. :-) --Conti| 01:29, 12 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Wie redirectet man auf kategorien?[edit]

hallihallo! wunder dich nicht, ich kenn dich auch nciht. hab dich grade per zufallsprinzip ausgewählt, weil du ein admin und hoffentlich auch programmierer bist. gibt es eine möglichkeit, auf kategorien zu redirecten? wie du hier sehen kannst, ist mein versuch, einen redirect auf die neu geschaffene deutsche schnelllöschkandidaten-kategorie (ist in arbeit, dass die einträge auch angezeigt werden). es muss ein link auf eine nicht-kategorie sein, denn andernfalls wird oben bei den sprachauswahlmöglichkeiten (z.B.:Template:Lang-speed) nix angezeigt. könntest du auf die oben genannte seite einen redirect setzten? wäre sehr nett --Schaengel89 @me 21:14, 20 Feb 2005 (UTC)

ich gebe mir die antwort selber. vor dem wort Category einen Dopfelpunkt machen. [[:Category:Denk Dir was aus]]. somit ist auch das redirecten auf cats möglich. mehr wollt ich nicht sagen... schönen sonntag noch Schaengel89 @me 08:10, 27 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Bitte Software konfigurieren[edit]

moin conti. könntest du deine kontakte spielen lassen, und den deutsch-sprechenden commons-mitarbeitern einen gefallen tun? es geht um diese zwei Kategorien: Category:Löschanträge und Category:Kandidaten für Schnellöschung. wie du siehst, wird dort nix angezeigt. kannst du die wikimedia-software so knfigurieren (lassen), dass alle dateien/seiten mit den entsprechenden tags ({{Deletionrequest}}, bzw. {{Delete}}) auch auf den deutschsprachigen kategorien angezeigt werden? wäre echt super, weil sonst war meine übersetzungsarbeit völlig umsonst. Schaengel89 @me 08:41, 26 Feb 2005 (UTC)

erledigt von Darkone (¿!) Schaengel89 @me 11:36, 26 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Fox[edit]

You seem to love fox, so I just want ask you a confirmation of something.
I had read , long time before, than some one raised many fox. And after (around) 8 generations, the new fox seems to be "doggyfied" : the new fox lost their bad smell, became more friendly with human, and they ears down (like dogs).

That's true or just a legend ? Yug talk 11:25, 8 Jun 2005 (UTC)

I'm interresting but I'm a little afraid too by this project. I seen somewhere than tame dogs, which are come from wolf, have a brain 2 times smaller than their ancestor (wolf). I know than have a big trouble too for some tame and "selective" species, which haven't a big population, so they become fragile (weak).
For me, all the good point of fox is to still be "naturaly smart" and still have a good instinct, and to don't have a selected blood seem to be better. I'm curious and sceptic of what are the effects of a quick tame (50 years), which I suppose to be with a tiny population of ancestor.
Anyway, If one day you find around 10~20 pages about it : I interresting to read it.
Yug talk 18:16, 14 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Yug talk 19:16, 14 Jun 2005 (UTC)

I already set up a little section on en:Fox, but I think this topic need an independant article en:Tame silver fox. Using http://reactor-core.org/taming-foxes.html I'm writting a little bit it, the first section of this website is wikified. :)

Yug talk 20:02, 14 Jun 2005 (UTC)


Image deletion warning Image:Vulpes vulpes laying in snow.jpg has been listed at Commons:Deletion requests. If you feel that this image should not be deleted, please go there to voice your opinion.

User:dbenbenn 01:44, 11 February 2006 (UTC)

Image[edit]

Hi. I asked to Snowdog if the description is right or is spam. When he answers me, I say you and if is spam I delete the photo for copyviol. --RED DEVIL 666 20:30, 7 March 2006 (UTC)

Moving featured pictures removal candidates pages[edit]

Heya, I've noticed you moved the FPRC-pages to the Commons-namespace. I don't really oppose that move, but wouldn't it make sense to move Template:Featured pictures candidates as well for consistency? I created the FPRC-pages in the Template-namespace just because the FPC-pages were there, too, actually. --Conti| 21:14, 9 March 2006 (UTC)

Yeah, I think that would make sense. User:dbenbenn 21:19, 9 March 2006 (UTC)
Moving the hundreds of subpages won't be fun, tho. ;-) --Conti| 21:34, 9 March 2006 (UTC)
That's why I didn't move Template:Featured pictures candidates. User:dbenbenn 21:35, 9 March 2006 (UTC)

Commons-l subscription[edit]

Hello Conti,

as per Commons talk:Administrators, I am asking all admins to subscribe to commons-l, a mailing list for Wikimedia Commons policy and project discussion. Since many admins are only on Commons infrequently, this is a good way to alert people about important happenings. The mailing list is nominally multilingual, but predominantly English.

If you are already subscribed to commons-l, I apologize for bothering you, and you are free to ignore this message. If you don't want to use your regular e-mail account, feel free to leave me a message, and I can send you a GMail invite. Traffic on the mailing list is relatively low, and we do not expect admins to read all messages to the list, but it would be nice if you could check on it at least every few weeks. Thanks for your time,--Eloquence 22:52, 4 July 2006 (UTC)

Admin news[edit]

Hello,

If you consent for statistics to be published about your actions as an administrator, please sign here: Commons:Administrator permission for statistics. (I expect that most people will not have a problem with it unless you are especially concerned with privacy.)

Also, please be aware that we now have a Commons:Administrators' noticeboard. Please put it on your watchlist, if you haven't already!

cheers, pfctdayelise (translate?) 05:33, 7 September 2006 (UTC)


Image:Vulpes zerda dozing.jpg[edit]

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

If you created this image, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with it, such as a copyright issue. If the file is up for deletion because it has been superseded by a superior derivative of your work, consider the notion that although the file may be deleted, your hard work (which we all greatly appreciate) lives on in the new file.
In all cases, please do not take the deletion request personally. It is never intended as such. Thank you!

Afrikaans | العربية | বাংলা | Беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ | Català | Čeština | Dansk | Deutsch | Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ | Zazaki | Ελληνικά | English | Esperanto | Español | Eesti | فارسی | Suomi | Français | Galego | עברית | Magyar | Bahasa Indonesia | Íslenska | Italiano | 日本語 | 한국어 | Македонски | മലയാളം | Plattdüütsch | Nederlands | Norsk nynorsk | Norsk bokmål | Occitan | Polski | Português | Português do Brasil | Română | Русский | Slovenčina | Slovenščina | Српски / srpski | Svenska | Türkçe | українська | Tiếng Việt | 中文 | 中文(简体)‎ | 中文(繁體)‎ | +/−

Opera icon[edit]

You deleted Image:Nuvola apps opera.png with the reason "fair use image" - If it actually is a Nuvola icon, it's under LGPL, not fair use, so could you explain the reasoning behind that? --Random832 05:26, 4 February 2007 (UTC)

Hmm, if I remember correctly, the image was deleted because it depicted the Opera logo, not because it was a Nuvola icon. See Commons:Licensing#Acceptable licenses which explicitly states that "Copyrighted symbols, logos" are not allowed. --Conti| 17:10, 4 February 2007 (UTC)
Except, it's not the opera logo. The only similarity is that it's a red "O" casting a shadow - it's a completely different typeface and a different angle for the shadow. It's not clear how it's _more_ of a "copyrighted symbols, logos" violation than Image:Noia 64 apps opera.png. --Random832 21:40, 4 February 2007 (UTC)
The image was deleted before image undeletion became possible, so I can't compare the image to the real opera logo right now. Do you have a link to that image? If it is different enough, I think it could be reuploaded, but it might be best to ask other users who are more knowledgeable in logo/copyright related questions than me first. --Conti| 22:43, 4 February 2007 (UTC)
I'm going to assume that this is it (possibly different size). Yes, it's similar to the logo, but so's the noia one, and there are half a dozen icons that are on here that use visual elements that are based on the windows logo or the acrobat logo etc etc - but I really think that those are trademark issues rather than copyright ones, and isn't the policy not to delete images for trademark issues? from what I've read of archived discussion it looked like it was nominated in the belief that it really _was_ the actual logo, and by the time that someone pointed out that it wasn't, there was already a consensus to delete it. --Random832 01:18, 5 February 2007 (UTC)
Hmm, it's not exactly the same logo, but it's certainly quite similar. I think there have been lots of discussions on how we should deal with trademark issues, and I'm not sure there has been any consensus on this. So it might be best if you'd leave a message on the village pump and (hopefully) get some replies from people who are more up to date on this topic than I am. --Conti| 16:34, 5 February 2007 (UTC)

Image:Vulpes_zerda_dozing.jpg[edit]

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

If you created this image, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with it, such as a copyright issue. If the file is up for deletion because it has been superseded by a superior derivative of your work, consider the notion that although the file may be deleted, your hard work (which we all greatly appreciate) lives on in the new file.
In all cases, please do not take the deletion request personally. It is never intended as such. Thank you!

Afrikaans | العربية | বাংলা | Беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ | Català | Čeština | Dansk | Deutsch | Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ | Zazaki | Ελληνικά | English | Esperanto | Español | Eesti | فارسی | Suomi | Français | Galego | עברית | Magyar | Bahasa Indonesia | Íslenska | Italiano | 日本語 | 한국어 | Македонски | മലയാളം | Plattdüütsch | Nederlands | Norsk nynorsk | Norsk bokmål | Occitan | Polski | Português | Português do Brasil | Română | Русский | Slovenčina | Slovenščina | Српски / srpski | Svenska | Türkçe | українська | Tiếng Việt | 中文 | 中文(简体)‎ | 中文(繁體)‎ | +/−

Siebrand 08:14, 5 February 2007 (UTC)

template:Taxonavigation[edit]

Hallo, Conti, ich habe mit Interesse und Freude Deine weitere Vereinfachung der Taxonavigation gesehen. Ich bin ein eifriger Benutzer der Taxonav, da sie neben der Information der Taxonomie auch eine sehr schnelle Navigation ermöglicht. Ich habe nun versucht, auf meinem Monitor 1280 x 1024 die von Dir angegebenen Taxostufen einzugeben. Mehr als 9 habe ich nicht geschafft. Auf einem zweiten Rechner mit 1024 x 768 hat es mit 10 Stufen geklappt und auch der Zeilenumbruch war ok. In der template:taxonav ist es erforderlich am Ende der Aktion einen Befehl zum Weiterleiten in die nächste Zeile einzugeben, da sonst auf den verschiedenen Browsern und Monitoreinstellungen der Text übereinander geschrieben wird. Bei Deiner neuen Software hatte ich beim ersten Testen das Problem nicht. Hast Du diesen Endbefehl schon mit eingearbeitet? Nach meiner persönlichen Erfahrung und Meinung sind 10 Stufen in der Navigation ausreichend. Als Experten möchte ich nun noch eine Bitte an Dich richten. Es gibt ja bisher schon 2 verschiedene Versionen der taxonav. Die erste war sehr kompliziert zu schreiben, hatte aber die Möglichkeit, in der Taxonomie ab Genus abwärts nach den nomenklatorischen Regeln den Namen in Kursivschrift zu setzen. Die zweite Variante, die ich z.Z. verwende, bietet diese Möglichkeit nicht. Könntest Du in Deiner neuen Taxonavigation - Version dies software-mäßig einbauen? Ich werde Deine Version weiter testen. Viele Grüße Orchi 21:08, 19 February 2007 (UTC)

Hallo, Conti, vielen Dank für Deine Antwort. Ich habe auch nochmal einige Tests gemacht und konnte ein Ineinander-Schreiben bisher nicht feststellen. Die Fehler in der "taxonav" ohne "<br style="clear:both">" konnte ich noch nicht wiederholen. Wenn Deine "Taxonavigation" ohne diese Zeile funktioniert, umso besser. Es spart auch noch etwas Platz auf den Seiten.

Deine Musterseite vom "Orca" habe ich betrachtet: Also Orcinus.

Die richtige Nomenklatur mit dem Genus in kursiv hatte ich ungefähr so gemeint:

PhylumChordata • ClassisMammalia • OrdoArtiodactyla • FamiliaCervidae • GenusCervus

(Besser schaffe ich die Darstellung "softwaremäßig" nicht) Grüße. Orchi 00:00, 21 February 2007 (UTC)

Hallo, Conti, das klappt ja hervorragend! Ich werde diese Version unterstützen. Viele Grüße Orchi 10:10, 21 February 2007 (UTC)
Hallo, Conti, schau mal nach. Die dritte Position in der taxonavigation wird zweimal gebracht (s.o. und Vulpes zerda). Die Schlusszeile "<br style="clear:both">" solltest Du vielleicht doch noch integrieren. Vorhin hatte ich wieder einen Fehler. Grüße Orchi 22:50, 21 February 2007 (UTC)

.... Du bist ja blitzschnell. Gruß Orchi 23:23, 21 February 2007 (UTC)

Image:Vulpes_zerda_in_Heidelberg_zoo.jpg[edit]

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

If you created this image, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with it, such as a copyright issue. If the file is up for deletion because it has been superseded by a superior derivative of your work, consider the notion that although the file may be deleted, your hard work (which we all greatly appreciate) lives on in the new file.
In all cases, please do not take the deletion request personally. It is never intended as such. Thank you!

Afrikaans | العربية | বাংলা | Беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ | Català | Čeština | Dansk | Deutsch | Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ | Zazaki | Ελληνικά | English | Esperanto | Español | Eesti | فارسی | Suomi | Français | Galego | עברית | Magyar | Bahasa Indonesia | Íslenska | Italiano | 日本語 | 한국어 | Македонски | മലയാളം | Plattdüütsch | Nederlands | Norsk nynorsk | Norsk bokmål | Occitan | Polski | Português | Português do Brasil | Română | Русский | Slovenčina | Slovenščina | Српски / srpski | Svenska | Türkçe | українська | Tiếng Việt | 中文 | 中文(简体)‎ | 中文(繁體)‎ | +/−

Siebrand 14:40, 26 February 2007 (UTC)

New template to link to Wikispecies[edit]

Hi, Conti! I copy a template from Wikispecies and make a changes; is to link with Wikispecies, but more compact than the current template . The template is here, and a sample here. Please, look at her and her improve everything what you could, I dont know of templates and boxes... For example: I dont know delete the box. Regards, --Pristigaster 15:59, 8 March 2007 (UTC)

OK, thank you! --Pristigaster 02:04, 24 March 2007 (UTC)

Re: OTRS and Flickr[edit]

Hi Conti,

If you check the image history page, you will notice that the OTRS template was added by Bastique (in the days before flickrreview). He has an OTRS account so without even checking the case I think this is sufficient to say it's OK. :) cheers, pfctdayelise (说什么?) 09:53, 4 April 2007 (UTC)

Just curious...[edit]

What does "license reviewed, includes no derivate works" mean here? -- SatyrTN 05:12, 20 April 2007 (UTC)

Ich brauche deiner hilfe[edit]

Jemand hat meine bilder zerissen, obwohl ich die erlaubnis zu uploaden habe. Ich kenne mich nicht so gut aus mit die licencen whansinn. Er (E-mail in albanerische sprache) auch nicht. Aber ich habe den besitzer gefragt ob es were O.K fur ihm, when wir seine bilder unter dem wikiedia ubliche licencen in unseren projekt verwenden. Er sagte so lange ihr erwent woher der original stamtm, is O.K. Also wieviel ich es verstanden habe, er benasprucht nur das recht das der autor (der besitzer der autoren rechte) erwent wird. Das is do erlaubt here oder? Falls ja, denn bitte ich dich das du mir hilfst zu dieser zwei bilder Image:Ne Udhetim 132.jpg und Image:Radio Television Kosova RTK.jpg. Auserderm jemand hat meiner selbst gemachte bild zerissen ('). Falls nein, den mussen wir ale bilder von User:Hipi Zhdripi, zereissen.--Hipi Zhdripi 23:35, 23 May 2007 (UTC)

Administrative notice[edit]

Deutsch

Hi. This message is sent out to you because you are an administrator on Commons, and you made little use (or no use) of the admin tools lately: less than 5 times in the last five months.

Commons has a new policy on admin activity, Commons:Administrators/De-adminship, taken into use on June 13, 2007 (after a poll among users). According to that policy, admins who use their tools infrequently will be asked whether they still need their adminship, and if they do not respond or require them the removal of the tools will be requested.

If you feel you still need your admin tools, please sign at Commons:Administrators/Inactivity section within 30 days from the date this message was sent out. However, if you then don't make 5 admin actions in the following 5 months, you will lose the adminship without any notice.

This is not a comment on the considerable help you have given to the project in the past but reflects the wish of the community to see active administrators and to ensure that possible security breaches are minimized.

This message is sent out by bot. If you want to give feedback on it, you can do so here — 08:50, 30 July 2007 (UTC)

Taxonavigation[edit]

Hello Conti
We have two small problems with {{Taxonavigation}}:

  • There is a word wrap problem (see Limnodynastes dumerilii and Pseudacris maculata)
  • There is a carriage return problem after the Taxonavigation (for one line Taxonavigation there is no CR, for multiple lines Taxonavigation there is 1 CR after the Taxonavigation)

I don't know if those problems are old, or recently introduced (by me?). Could you help me on that?
Thanks a lot. Cheers Liné1 16:17, 7 November 2007 (UTC)

First point has been corrected by User:Xhienne
Thx Liné1 19:29, 7 November 2007 (UTC)


Image:Secret_Maryo_Chronicles_Screenshot.png[edit]

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

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


Afrikaans | العربية | বাংলা | Беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ | Català | Čeština | Dansk | Deutsch | Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ | Zazaki | Ελληνικά | English | Esperanto | Español | Eesti | فارسی | Suomi | Français | Galego | עברית | Magyar | Bahasa Indonesia | Íslenska | Italiano | 日本語 | 한국어 | Македонски | മലയാളം | Plattdüütsch | Nederlands | Norsk nynorsk | Norsk bokmål | Occitan | Polski | Português | Português do Brasil | Română | Русский | Slovenčina | Slovenščina | Српски / srpski | Svenska | Türkçe | українська | Tiếng Việt | 中文 | 中文(简体)‎ | 中文(繁體)‎ | +/−

sугсго 10:02, 22 November 2008 (UTC)


File:Vulpes macrotis standing.jpg[edit]

Pay attention to copyright
File:Vulpes macrotis standing.jpg has been marked as a possible copyright violation. Wikimedia Commons only accepts free content—that is, images and other media files that can be used by anyone, for any purpose. Traditional copyright law does not grant these freedoms, and unless noted otherwise, everything you find on the web is copyrighted and not permitted here. For details on what is acceptable, please read Commons:Licensing. You may find Commons:Copyright rules useful. You can ask questions about Commons policies in Commons:Help desk.

The file you added has been deleted. If you believe that the deletion was not in accordance with policy, you may request undeletion.

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


Afrikaans | العربية | Asturianu | Azərbaycanca | Беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ | Български | Català | Čeština | Dansk | Deutsch | Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ | Zazaki | Ελληνικά | English | Español | فارسی | Suomi | Français | Galego | עברית | Magyar | Հայերեն | Italiano | 日本語 | 한국어 | Македонски | മലയാളം | Malti | Plattdüütsch | Nederlands | Norsk nynorsk | Norsk bokmål | Polski | Português | Português do Brasil | Română | Русский | Slovenčina | Slovenščina | Svenska | ไทย | Türkçe | Tiếng Việt | 中文(简体)‎ | 中文(繁體)‎ | +/−

--Admrboltz (talk) 19:39, 11 September 2009 (UTC)

Tip: Categorizing images[edit]

Afrikaans | العربية | беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ | 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 | Plattdüütsch | Nederlands | norsk bokmål | polski | português | português do Brasil | română | русский | slovenčina | slovenščina | српски / srpski | svenska | українська | Tiếng Việt | 中文 | 中文(简体)‎ | 中文(繁體)‎ | +/−


Hello, Conti!

Tip: Add categories to your images

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:

Uploadwizard-categories.png

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"). Pro-tip: The CommonSense tool can help you find the best category for your image.

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

CategorizationBot (talk) 10:39, 21 December 2010 (UTC)

Ja das sollten wir.[edit]

Ja bei so was ist Vorsicht geboten. Dennoch sollten wir erst einmal von Unschuld ausgehen, selbst wenn es der erste Upload des Benutzers ist. In diesem Falle war es schnell zu klären das der Verdacht zutraf. Dem ist jedoch nicht immer so und die Idee Bilder auf Verdacht zu löschen behagt mir nicht so. --/人 ‿‿ 人\ 署名の宣言 14:46, 25 May 2012 (UTC)

Prinzipiell gebe ich dir recht, jedoch fände ich es bei ab-18 Bildern äußerst sinnvoll strikt auf detaillierte Quellenangaben zu bestehen, wenn sie von brandneuen Accounts hochgeladen werden. Ich entdecke immer wieder offensichtliche Copyvios von neuen Accounts die teils über Jahre auf Commons lagern, weil ein schlichtes "PD-Self" Template oder ähnliches angefügt wurde. Nur mal als zufälliges Beispiel: Special:Contributions/Misoel. Glaubst du ernsthaft, diese drei Bilder von drei verschiedenen Personen sind von der selben Person erstellt worden? Anons laden hier regelmäßig entsprechenden Kram hoch, und ich bleibe weiterhin erstaunt darüber, dass dies zugelassen wird. --Conti| 15:55, 25 May 2012 (UTC)
Durchaus verständlich. Ich meinte eben nur das wir nicht alle über den gleichen Kamm scheren sollten. Sonst geht es auch denen an den Kragen die es ehrlich meinen. --/人 ‿‿ 人\ 署名の宣言 19:28, 25 May 2012 (UTC)
Stimmt, das sollten wir natürlich nicht tun. Aber wenn es um ab-18 Bilder geht sollten wir Vorsicht walten lassen. Bilder wiederherstellen wenn sich der Uploader als tatsächlicher Urheber herausstellt kann man immer noch. Aber mal ehrlich: Wenn ich die o.g. Bilder von Misoel hier zur Löschung vorschlagen würde, würde ich damit durchkommen? --Conti| 19:48, 25 May 2012 (UTC)

Help desk[edit]

Sorry, I didn't notice your response and apparently neither did anyone else. Please see response at Commons:Help_desk#Quick_question_about_EXIF_data. - Jmabel ! talk 16:42, 11 December 2012 (UTC)

Your misunderstanding with Fæ[edit]

Aren't you involved or interested in the furry community? I'm not sure what your view on furry sexuality is, but you can probably clear up this misunderstanding fairly quickly if you tell him that you aren't against non-mainstream sexuality. --Michaeldsuarez (talk) 02:31, 22 December 2012 (UTC)

I did say that I don't care if anyone's gay or hetero or whatever, and hoped that this would be clear enough. I was trying not to make this about sexuality, so I figured bringing in my own to the discussion wouldn't help in that regard. --Conti| 10:47, 22 December 2012 (UTC)

Hi Conti, you may find it useful to be aware that earlier this year, Michaeldsuarez created a public attack page about me on Encyclopedia Dramatica where I am labeled a homosexual deviant and a faggot against my full legal name, which ensures it is the top Google search against my name, and has consequently caused me considerable personal distress and professional damage. Thanks -- (talk) 12:05, 22 December 2012 (UTC)

I'm aware of that. That's why I did not want to steer things in that direction. I did not want to make the impression that any of that had anything to do with my nomination. --Conti| 12:33, 22 December 2012 (UTC)
I don't have anything against homosexuals. The article in its original state didn't mention Fæ's homosexuality. Conti knows about ED and me. We both worked on the enwiki's article on ED and participated on its talk page. I just figured that the best and fastest way to stop you two from arguing about the image's homoerotic-ness was for Conti to explain that he or she isn't against homosexuality or any of the other stuff that Fæ is in to. --Michaeldsuarez (talk) 13:27, 22 December 2012 (UTC)

Could you please be more careful...[edit]

Could you please be more careful?

You wrote: “But people have argued to keep this file long before this [renaming the image] became an option.”

I was the person who suggested renaming the image, when I voiced my “keep” opinion. Mine was the first “keep” opinion. Earlier “keep” opinions are from individuals who changed their mind after considering the renaming option. No one suggested keeping the image, prior to the suggestion we could address the privacy concerns by renaming the image. Geo Swan (talk) 21:29, 29 December 2012 (UTC)

I probably should have been more precise in my wording. I meant "long before it was implied that the subject would find renaming acceptable". The deletion request stated that the subject wanted the file deleted, not renamed. Given that we don't know the content of the OTRS mail, it is impossible to know whether a simple renaming would have alleviated the privacy concerns, yet some were suggesting just that. If the subject really is fine with renaming, then I'm fine with that, too. --Conti| 21:45, 29 December 2012 (UTC)
The original nomination did not say that the request was for renaming or deletion. But didn't Mattbuck check, and update the discussion with more details from the OTRS ticket, including that she requested either renaming or deletion.
I don't think we know that her concern was privacy. It could just as easily have been vanity. Some actors and actresses (Claudette Colbert for example) famously felt they had a "good side", and called upon directors to film them only from that side. For all we know this young model wanted this bikini image deleted because they didn't think it was as flattering as the bikini images in her professional portfolio. Geo Swan (talk) 02:04, 31 December 2012 (UTC)
That's entirely possible. But until we know for sure, we should err on the side of caution. I'd rather have a picture deleted over vanity reason than a picture kept despite privacy concerns. --Conti| 09:20, 31 December 2012 (UTC)

Commons:Deletion requests/File:Russia can into space.jpg and File:Poland can into Wikipedia.jpg[edit]

In relation to Commons:Deletion requests/File:Russia can into space.jpg and File:Poland can into Wikipedia.jpg can you please follow the procedures as listed at COM:DR and complete the nominations, including notifying the uploaders of files, etc. Thanks, russavia (talk) 08:12, 7 March 2013 (UTC)

Never mind I've done it. russavia (talk) 09:36, 7 March 2013 (UTC)
My bad, and Thank you. I didn't think of it since that's usually done automatically. --Conti| 11:27, 7 March 2013 (UTC)

Commons:Deletion requests/File:Woman in orgasm.jpg[edit]

Hello, recently I found your deletion request of Woman in orgasm.jpg, but I fear that if the image will be deleted due to non-copyright related reason even the subject of the image is hardly identifiable, because the deletion would make extremely difficult to create useful free sexual infomation images. your measure is too restrictive. --Puramyun31 (talk) 20:56, 20 March 2013 (UTC)

No, it's not. Please read COM:PEOPLE. These things matter. The image has to be deleted unless we are absolutely certain that the person depicted in the image is fine with the licensing (and subsequently, the fact that the image is shown to thousands of people every day). Neither the fact that her face is slightly obscured nor the lack of alternatives matter. --Conti| 21:33, 20 March 2013 (UTC)

Hi Conti,[edit]

I removed that last comment from Russavia's talk page as he has made it quite clear that the discussion is over. Like he mentions, 'take it elsewhere'

You can ask me, we can speculate together, maybe this guy in the pink hat has painted the queen of England as well, maybe she loved it, I kind of doubt it though, not the sort of thing to hang in the palace I bet. The corgis would bark at it all night long.

I think the guy who is all over every news program is notorious if not simply notable, and I don't think every person he has painted is entirely happy with it. But some get a laugh out of the attention. Penyulap 13:05, 15 June 2013 (UTC)

He has, in fact, painted the queen of England. Well, he painted himself painting the queen of England, to be precise. Now, assuming there would be no context whatsoever, I would argue to keep the image and video of Jimbo. I think the artist is notable, and if we get a free picture of him, then that's great! But there is a context, and that context is Russavia asking the artist to create a picture and video of Jimbo Wales, someone Russavia doesn't like very much. The image and video are a middle finger of Russavia in Jimbo's direction, and I consider you intelligent enough to know this. And you can call me old fashioned, but I'd argue that such actions are not even worthy of kindergarteners, and have no place here. --Conti| 13:10, 15 June 2013 (UTC)
Painted him painting her, like when there is no further news from a warzone and so reporters interview each other about the previous reports to keep the drama going. Well, I don't know how long this 'artist' will be the flavour of the month, but it is actually exactly in scope, you're intelligent enough to know that for one, and to know that Russavia knows what is perfectly in scope and wanted by the project. So everyone can have a bad day editing and get a little sour and dry in their editing, happens to me, happens to you I would expect, happens to Russavia too I would think, we are all humans after all. Funniest thing I ever saw was Tomas's response to getting so many DR's, and yeah, I can get that, everyone handles stress in a different way, and staying completely and totally within the rules while still expressing a bit of wry dissatisfaction is not out of line. Don't get me wrong, you know my position is as firmly against any kind of bullying, but then what is this project for except to host attack images of all the muslim world and a thousand other offensive categories. There is no policy, there is nothing written into scope, so even if you did get a hoard of believers all saying they have ESP and know Russavias thoughts through their ABF'ing, then you STILL don't fix the problem of the project, the policy, or the scope. all it does is ADD to the hounding ADD to the bullying and ADD to the drama. Is that what you want ? Penyulap 13:24, 15 June 2013 (UTC)
I wouldn't support deletion if I would think that it would make the overall situation worse, obviously, so no, I don't think that's what will happen. And as I said, taken out of context, the image clearly is in scope and all that. But I prefer to use common sense when I can, and call things as they are. There's no need to have ESP to figure out what Russavia was doing. I gave him the benefit of the doubt and asked him, multiple times, if I am wrong. He refused to answer. So I can only assume that he did all this to spite Jimbo, and for no other reason. And I do not want to support such actions, either directly or indirectly. --Conti| 13:33, 15 June 2013 (UTC)
fair enough, you have valid views but as you say it would be 'one of the best'. Makes me wonder what Jimmy would do, would he grit his teeth and close the discussion as keep do you think ? If it was me, I'd have no choice out of integrity. Changing scope or changing the policy is what is needed and I'll help if I can, in the meantime I'll continue to do what I do every night and plot to replace the project with something that doesn't repel editors with such zealously. Penyulap 13:43, 15 June 2013 (UTC)
The ideal situation here would be to contact the artist again and ask him for another picture. Then we could simply use that in the article, and delete the current one as unnecessary. But I have a feeling Russavia would vehemently oppose this idea. --Conti| 13:48, 15 June 2013 (UTC)
Now all we need to figure out is a notable subject who'd look forward to being painted that way :)
I wouldn't care, but then, I have a sense of humour. Penyulap 13:58, 15 June 2013 (UTC)

your cat-removals[edit]

I don't understand this and this edit of yours, except if you wanted to completely dissociate these paintings from Jimbo, to which I could agree out of courtesy. The cat:Modified images of Jimmy Wales was choosen and IMO is justified as these paintings aren't true depictings of Jimbo. --Túrelio (talk) 14:28, 24 June 2013 (UTC)

The way I understand the category (and the term "modified"), I would say that it is for images of Jimbo that were (digitally) altered in some ways. Just look at all the other images in the category. A painting of Jimbo (done by whatever means) is, in my opinion, not a "modified" image by any meaning of the word. Or, more generally speaking, a painting is not a modified image. It's a painting. --Conti| 15:37, 24 June 2013 (UTC)
Sure, but cat removal without replacement ... Eventually we should create a new cat Jimbo in art or similar. --Túrelio (talk) 17:40, 24 June 2013 (UTC)
I thought about that, but I did not feel like creating a new category just for these pictures. --Conti| 18:10, 24 June 2013 (UTC)
Luckily it were not just these, so I've created Category:Jimmy Wales in art. --Túrelio (talk) 18:47, 24 June 2013 (UTC)

Template:CopyrightedFreeUsePompeii[edit]

Commons-emblem-issue.svg Template:CopyrightedFreeUsePompeii has been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether it should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry.

If you created this template, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with it, such as a copyright issue.
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 | العربية | বাংলা | Беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ | Català | Čeština | Dansk | Deutsch | Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ | Zazaki | Ελληνικά | English | Esperanto | Español | Eesti | فارسی | Suomi | Français | Galego | עברית | Magyar | Bahasa Indonesia | Íslenska | Italiano | 日本語 | 한국어 | Македонски | മലയാളം | Plattdüütsch | Nederlands | Norsk nynorsk | Norsk bokmål | Occitan | Polski | Português | Português do Brasil | Română | Русский | Slovenčina | Slovenščina | Српски / srpski | Svenska | Türkçe | українська | Tiếng Việt | 中文 | 中文(简体)‎ | 中文(繁體)‎ | +/−

JuTa 23:50, 28 September 2013 (UTC)

Pompeii: The Last Day[edit]

Commons-emblem-issue.svg Pompeii: The Last Day 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 <articlefeedback-table-heading-page>, 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 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 | العربية | বাংলা | Беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ | Català | Čeština | Dansk | Deutsch | Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ | Zazaki | Ελληνικά | English | Esperanto | Español | Eesti | فارسی | Suomi | Français | Galego | עברית | Magyar | Bahasa Indonesia | Íslenska | Italiano | 日本語 | 한국어 | Македонски | മലയാളം | Plattdüütsch | Nederlands | Norsk nynorsk | Norsk bokmål | Occitan | Polski | Português | Português do Brasil | Română | Русский | Slovenčina | Slovenščina | Српски / srpski | Svenska | Türkçe | українська | Tiếng Việt | 中文 | 中文(简体)‎ | 中文(繁體)‎ | +/−

Zhuyifei1999 (talk) 11:10, 27 October 2013 (UTC)