User talk:Frinck51

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

Carte de la Belgique de 1843[edit]

Merci pour la remarque. Aurais tu des références et surtout des dates afin que je précise la légende de cette ainsi que celle des Pays Bas dans la même série. --Dlebouc 15:11, 25 November 2007 (UTC)

Eupen[edit]

Hi Frinck51. I like your pictures on Eupen, I am currently switching the one on the page en:Eupen to one of yours. However, it would be helpful if you would elaborate a bit more in the caption of the picture what it is we're looking at! It makes it much easier to use them. Thanks & keep up the good work! --The Minister of War(Peace) 12:55, 7 November 2005 (UTC)

Skordatur[edit]

Hallo, bezüglich des Bildes der Scordatur bei Biber (Mysteriensonaten) http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Image:Biber_mysterien.jpg. Ich habe eine solche Form der Sc. noch nie gesehen, meines Wissens wurden die Saiten nur entsprechend anders gestimmt, aber nicht übers Kreuz gelegt. Woher kommt diese Information? user:soare 23.06.06

Hallo Soare; Für diese eine Sonate ist dies in allen Anleitungen deutlich beschrieben. Es erlaubt den schnellen Wechsel der Saiten, da man sie nicht herauszunehmen braucht. Ausserdem hat das Kreuz eine sinnbildiche Bedeutung. Gruß Frinck51 12:57, 26 March 2006 (UTC)


Hallo Frink51, ich habe dein Printenform-Bild File:Printenform Soldat.jpg in die aufrechte Position gedreht und leicht retouchiert. Wenn du Bedenken hast, kannst du es gerne auf die Erstversion zurücksetzen. --Túrelio (talk) 17:20, 19 December 2009 (UTC)

Bartolomeo Campagnoli[edit]

Hallo Frink51, ich kann nicht mit Gewissheit sagen, ob die abgebildete Person wirklich Campagnoli ist. Es gibt zwar noch eine colorierte Version dieses Bildes [1], bei der ebenfalls sein Name angegeben wird. Aber es gibt auch einen Kupferstich mit seinem Namen (allerdings mit weißer Perücke) [2] der nur beschränkte Ähnlichkeit mit der ersten Abbildung hat. DALIBRI (talk) 16:10, 16 February 2010 (UTC)

TUSC token dafd891a7d0d8e8f9563b5d6eca014d9[edit]

I am now proud owner of a TUSC account!

Fagott um 1870 von W. Steiniger Berlin, Bassoon ± 1870 Berlin (Heckel Systhem)[edit]

Hallo Frinck51! Ich hab eine Frage wegen dem Fagott. Wo, an welchem Ort, wurde das Fagott fotografiert? Ich kenne jemand in Berlin, der lange Jahre ein baugleiches Fagott spielte und es ca. 1965 an das Musikinstrumentenmuseeum in Berlin als Ausstellungsstück gab. Daher interessiert es mich, ob es dasselbe Instrument ist oder wo es heute noch gleiche Instrumente zu finden gibt. Vielen Dank für die Antwort. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.193.11.16 (talk • contribs) 17. Oktober 2011, 01:23 Uhr (UTC)

Von mir fotografiert, mein Großvater spielte es etwa zwischen 1885 und 1910 als Amateur. Der Name des Herstellers ist eingraviert -- Frinck51 (talk) 10:05, 25 October 2011 (UTC)

Drehung von File:Viola d'Amore Raphael Möst 1643.jpg[edit]

Hallo Frinck51, ich habe deine Drehanfrage für File:Viola d'Amore Raphael Möst 1643.jpg korrigiert. Oder siehst du das nicht so? Wenn man sich das Foto in groß ansieht, dann steht sie auch aufrecht. Viele Grüße --Saibo (Δ) 02:35, 20 December 2011 (UTC)

Löwenkopf[edit]

Bist du sicher, dass das ein Stainer-Löwenkopf ist? Der sieht aus wie ein ziemlich typischer Jais. 15:49, 4 March 2012 (UTC)

Ich folgte den Aussagen von Experten wie Werro, Senn und Roy, sowie den Angaben des Auktionators Bongartz. Leider hatte ich nicht die Zeit ein ordentliches Foto zu machen, da ich die Geige unerwartet am darauffolgenden Morgen zurück geben mußte. Aber wer kann schon mit letzter Sicherheit sagen, was die Geigenbauer vom 18.-20. Jahrhundert alles ersetzt, getauscht oder zugeordnet haben. --Frinck51 (talk) 11:19, 5 March 2012 (UTC)

File:Eupen018.jpg[edit]

Commons-emblem-issue.svg File:Eupen018.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 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)‎ | +/−

81.244.133.250 12:46, 7 March 2013 (UTC)

File:Eupen BRF.jpg[edit]

Commons-emblem-issue.svg File:Eupen BRF.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 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)‎ | +/−

81.244.133.250 12:48, 7 March 2013 (UTC)

Copyright status: File:Diskant Baryton.jpg[edit]

български | català | čeština | dansk | Deutsch | Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ | English | فارسی | suomi | français | magyar | italiano | македонски | മലയാളം | Bahasa Melayu | 日本語 | norsk bokmål | polski | português | română | slovenščina | svenska | 中文(繁體)‎ | +/−

Warning sign
This media may be deleted.
Thanks for uploading File:Diskant Baryton.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 OTRS 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 speedy deletion. If you have uploaded other files, please confirm that you have provided the proper information for those files, too. (You can get a list of all your uploaded files using the Gallery tool.) Thank you.

Denniss (talk) 06:09, 3 June 2013 (UTC)

ups, erledigt --Frinck51 (talk) 18:40, 6 June 2013 (UTC)

Copyright status: File:Wetzlarschule-Eupen.jpg[edit]

български | català | čeština | dansk | Deutsch | Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ | English | فارسی | suomi | français | magyar | italiano | македонски | മലയാളം | Bahasa Melayu | 日本語 | norsk bokmål | polski | português | română | slovenščina | svenska | 中文(繁體)‎ | +/−

Warning sign
This media may be deleted.
Thanks for uploading File:Wetzlarschule-Eupen.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 OTRS 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 speedy deletion. If you have uploaded other files, please confirm that you have provided the proper information for those files, too. (You can get a list of all your uploaded files using the Gallery tool.) Thank you.

Yours sincerely, JuTa 19:59, 26 October 2013 (UTC)