User talk:Hellerhoff

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

Tuberous sclerosis[edit]

Thank you for uploading some excellent scans of tuberous sclerosis. I see from your WP talkpage that you are a radiologist. It would be a great help if you could expand the image description to fully name the pathalogical signs, the describe how they appear on MRI and identify them on the image. Some MRI images have red circles round the points-of-interest but perhaps on others you could just describe where.

For example: File:Tuberoese Sklerose 1J T2 axial2.png it would help to know which bits are the cortical tubers (which white smudges are pathalogical and which are expected). Are the subependymal nodules distinctly visible on this picture? (they are clearer on the others).

Another example: File:Angiomyolipome TubSklerose cor.jpg The description mentions both angiomyolipomas and lymphangioleiomyomatosis (I'm guessing, I can't read German) but the lungs don't appear. It would help to point out where the kidneys are in the picture and what the pathalogical indications are.

Although I have seen several such images before, I'm no expert. I'd love to include such helpful information (condensed perhaps) in the caption or body text of a WP article. But I'd be much more confident if an expert had done this. Too much information is better than too little!

Thanks again for donating the pictures. Sorry for this being in English. (BTW: I'm Colin on en:wikipedia too). -- Colin (talk) 19:44, 27 March 2010 (UTC)

Hi Colin! I was thinking of uploading two versions of the images, one with and one without annotations. But my time is limited and my english is not so fluently. File:Angiomyolipome TubSklerose cor.jpg shows a patient, in whose kidneys we found angiomyolipomas on both sides (seen in this image) and changes of the lung (File:Lymphangioleiomyomatose CT.jpg) wich match perfectly to the diagnosis lymphangioleimyomatosis. The combination leads to the very strong suspicion of Tuberous sclerosis. This is, what the german description says. Unfortunately we could not perform an MRI of the brain... File:Angiomyolipome TubSklerose cor.jpg, File:Angiomyolipome TubSklerose cor2.jpg and File:Angiomyolipome TubSklerose cor3.jpg belong to same case. Maybe you can add an english description in an approriate phrasing? I would be very thankfull!--Hellerhoff (talk) 11:17, 28 March 2010 (UTC)
Thanks. I would be happy to try to add some extra text. But I would really like to know (for sure) what it is you are looking for as a radiologist. I'm guessing the dark splodges on kidneys are the angiomyolipomas. Can you confirm this? What size do you think they are? Similarly, I don't know what is abnormal about the lung picture. If you find it hard to say in English, you could give a detailed description in German using non-technical words, and I'll try to Google-translate it.
The version with annotations would be great if you can find time. Wikipedia is very fortunate when experts like yourself donate images. I hope to take the Tuberous sclerosis article to Featured Article later this year so good images would be treasured. Colin (talk) 18:41, 28 March 2010 (UTC)


Hallo Hellerhoff,
meinst du nicht, dass ein "cheek bone crushed" eine Fraktur darstellt? --Túrelio (talk) 22:01, 14 May 2010 (UTC)

Hallo Túrelio! Ja, doch. Aber ich hab mich gefragt, ob dieses Bild in dieser Kategorie wirklich richtig ist, zumal man ja nicht so sehr viel von der Fraktur selber sieht, abgesehen vom Blut. Ich versuche immer ein bischen in den Kats der Medizin (soweit ich mich da auskenne) aufzuräumen. Aber wenn Du meinst, kann die Kat bei dem Bild auch wieder rein. Ich fürchte bloss, dass diese Kategorie bei dem Bild niemandem hilft. Was meinst Du? Viele Grüße!--Hellerhoff (talk) 22:09, 14 May 2010 (UTC)
Ok, irgendwo hast du auch Recht. Nein, ich bestehe da nicht unbedingt drauf. --Túrelio (talk) 22:13, 14 May 2010 (UTC)

Vielen Dank![edit]

Hallo Hellerhoff!

Ich bin froh, dass sich jemand vom Fach freiwillig für die Überarbeitung der Medizin-Kategorien zur Verfügung stellt! Ich hoffe du verlierst nicht den Mut. Viel Durchhaltevermögen und Spass beim Editieren!

Apropos: Bist du an Autopatroller-Rechten interessiert? Wenn ja, hinterlasse mir eine Nachricht auf meiner Diskussionsseite. Grüße, High Contrast (talk) 17:47, 18 July 2010 (UTC)

Du bist jetzt Autopatroller. Viel Spaß beim Editieren! Gruß, High Contrast (talk) 11:20, 23 July 2010 (UTC)

Template:Imagestack[edit]

Bist Du immer noch am arbeiten oder kann die Nachricht raus? Grüße. -- RE rillke questions? 23:08, 13 November 2011 (UTC)

Also im Moment komm ich zu nix... eigentlich wollte ich noch eine Steuerung für Tablets einbauen, aber wie gesagt... Vielleicht erstmal den Hinweis raus. Es scheint ja auch kein ganz schlimmer Bug mehr drin zu sein, oder? Grüße! --Hellerhoff (talk) 18:36, 15 November 2011 (UTC)

Esophageal web[edit]

Hi Hellerhoff and thanks for the kind message. I enjoyed the scrollable fluoro images of the esophageal web on your user page. Best regards -- Samir (talk) 04:24, 23 January 2012 (UTC)

Translation: More images of this case[edit]

Hi, Hellerhoff

I would translate it as: "Bu vakanın diğer görüntüleri." if it is only to be used in medical context.

or

"Bu serinin devamı" a more general usage such as "more of this series".

Regards, --Nevit Dilmen (talk) 19:13, 3 April 2012 (UTC)

I made the template for medical cases. So I put the first translation in. Thank You! --Hellerhoff (talk) 15:28, 4 April 2012 (UTC)

File:Feltre - Innenstadt 01.jpg[edit]

Hallo, das Bild hat Deine Kamera schon richtig markiert: Bessere Digitalkameras erkennen, wenn man im Hochformat photographiert und fügen automatisch einen Exif-Tag hinzu, speichert es aber physikalisch wie ein Querformatbild. Dieser Exif-Tag wird von vielen Programmen, besonders unter UNIX/LINUX (Microsoft ignoriert solche Standards gerne) verstanden. Auch von MediaWiki. Aber von den meisten Browsern nicht. Das führt dazu, dass die volle Auflösung (wenn man auf das Bild auf der Bildbeschreibungsseite klickt) falsch gedreht erscheint aber in der Vorschau richtig. In diesen Fällen ist die Dehnung um 0° zu verwenden (Du musst 0 in das Kästchen eintragen, in dem vorher 123 stand): Rotatebot wird dann das Bild physikalisch so drehen, dass es auch im Browser richtig erscheint und den entsprechenden Exif-Tag zurücksetzen, damit dann nicht plötzlich die Vorschau falsch gedreht angezeigt wird. Grüße -- Rillke(q?) 11:05, 6 September 2012 (UTC)

Ok. Ich glaube ich hab's verstanden. Danke! --Hellerhoff (talk) 06:52, 7 September 2012 (UTC)

Images on Onsurg[edit]

Hello Hellerhoff,

I am with OnSurg.com, a free online resource for Surgeons, Residents and students around the world. We love your radiology images and would like to feature them on our site with comments from our founder, a practicing general surgeon. Would this be OK with you? We will of course credit you. Thanks very much,

Rob Froetscher OnSurg Publications Development rfroetscher@onsurg.com www.onsurg.com www.facebook.com/onsurg

  • Hello Rob, I'm glad to see You find my radiology images usefull. You may use them for Your website and I'm happy if You do so. Please include a note like "from hellerhoff - commons.wikimedia.org" or similar and have fun! If You find a good way to use my image series (like Category:Anaplastic ependymoma - MRI - case 001, You are encouraged to do so, too. Best wishes! --Hellerhoff (talk) 13:40, 14 October 2012 (UTC)

Permission[edit]

Hello, Hellerhof. The American Society of Radiologic Technologists publishes continuing education articles in our journals. We will publish an article about primary bone tumors in adults in the spring 2013 issue of Radiation Therapist and would like to use your image of multiple meloma in the forearm. We want to give you credit in any way that you wish. Please let us know if you agree. Katherine Ott Senior Editor American Society of Radiologic Technologists Albuquerque, New Mexico, United States kott@asrt.org

  • Hello Katherine, as You can read in earlier posts I'm glad to see someone find my radiology images usefull. Sure You may use them for Your needs, too and I'm happy if You do so. Please include a note like "from hellerhoff - commons.wikimedia.org" or similar and have fun! But please write my name with double-f :-) Best wishes from munich! --Hellerhoff (talk) 20:28, 23 October 2012 (UTC)

Bild in Artikel Magnetresonanztomographie[edit]

Hallo Hellerhoff,

auf der Seite "http://de.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Magnetresonanztomographie" wird folg. Bild referenziert: "T2 tse sag 4mm rst flowrec bionerd.jpg", es scheint aber nicht gefunden zu werden.

Verfügen Sie über dieses Bild und könnten Sie die Seite entspr. "repararieren"?

viele Grüße daperata

  • Hallo daperata, das Bild ist nicht von mir, aber ich hab mir das mal angesehen. Offenbar wurde das Bild aus Commons gelöscht, wobei als Begründung "No permission" angegeben ist. Ich hab keine Ahnung, was da war, habe aber im Artikel das Bild erstmal ebenfalls entfernt. Meinst Du, da muss ein entsprechendes Bild wieder hin? Es gibt ja genügend... Viele Grüße --Hellerhoff (talk) 06:18, 28 February 2013 (UTC)

Mentioned you[edit]

See Commons:Requests for comment/Xrays. I mentioned you should be blocked. In jest of course. Perhaps you could comment on the copyright situation from your experience. The amateur lawyers are trying to get x-rays deleted from Commons. Colin (talk) 14:20, 27 September 2013 (UTC)

No one asked for all x-rays deleted from Commons; I voted for keeping the file in question because Commons is ignoring the concerning paragraph in several laws anyway and because Wikimedia Germany is actively lobbying against this paragraph. See Wahlprüfsteine -- § 72 is also the one that is claimed to be responsible for protection of x-ray images. -- Rillke(q?) 20:37, 28 September 2013 (UTC)
They haven't done so because they are chicken. But taking potshots in your pyjamas is more fun. Plus Hellerhoff's work makes a huge target. Hellerhoff -- we really could use your professional opinion in this debate. Colin (talk) 06:58, 29 September 2013 (UTC)

My 'professional opinion' is not one from a lawyer's point of view but from a radiologist's one. But I have one Question: When Christo wraps a building in fabric he obviously doesn't do this himself but he 'only' gives the instructions to do it and perhaps how to do it. What is the difference to a radiologist who instructs a radiographer to produce radiological images? In my opinion the crucial point is, that the image would not exist (at least not in this special form as it exists), if the radiologist had not given the instructions do produce it and had not determined the individual parameters for that examination. So I don't understand that discussion about who pushed the button. --Hellerhoff (talk) 18:54, 29 September 2013 (UTC)

Well in my honest opinion there is no creativity or art involved here at all (though skill with all parties). I would expect one radiographer to produce the same image as another one next month, and the only difference be my healed bones -- certainly any differences not due to artistic choices. Similarly I would expect your choice of parameters to be made from evidence-based-medicine rather than because you find one form of x-ray or scan to be aesthetically nicer. But it appears that in Germany we have two laws to contend with. One, copyright, requires creativity and originality, and it is most debatable that x-rays could count for this, though the law isn't much clear. The other lesser protected rights only requires the production of a photograph or similar but could be mechanical like a photo-booth. With this other right, it is the "photographer" who owns the rights. I would suggest this is the radiographer, not the radiologist, but we are not sure. Another analogy: the famous fashion photographer gets the copyright to his photographs, not the editor of Vogue who set him the assignment. It is complex and one could argue all sorts of ways of looking at it.
I would appreciate if you could find out the formal position, perhaps from your medical professional body or your hospital. Have you ever sought permission from the radiographers or from your hospital? Have you published images professionally and been asked to do so? -- Colin (talk) 19:27, 29 September 2013 (UTC)
I'll talk to the lawyer of my hospital. Maybe he can help making things clearer. But in my honest opinion I think this discussion is rather artificial because I don't see anyone to claim a potential copyright concerning 'my' X-rays. --Hellerhoff (talk) 18:16, 1 October 2013 (UTC)
That would be very helpful, thanks. I agree with you that it is all rather academic and I wish it would stay academic. Unfortunately people seem to want to apply invented theoretical laws to Commons, even though nobody in the real world does this. The consequence is that images will be deleted unless we can fix either the image licence / permission or change policy. Colin (talk) 18:27, 1 October 2013 (UTC)
I'm sure that all potentially involved persons in my hospital will give a permission for what I do here if this is really needed. Greetings from munich! --Hellerhoff (talk) 19:02, 1 October 2013 (UTC)

ICD 10-Cats[edit]

Hi Hellerhoff!

I have worked thoroughly on the incorporation of the ICD categories. So I created a set of different templates.

Although I think this is very important, I do not have more time to dedicate. Must be created (as you've seen) a very important amount of categories for each health problem (x-rays, CT images, MRI, gross pathology, histopathology, drawings and diagrams, etc.), and it is a very complex task. It is also advisable to create the correct wikidata links to corresponding articles or categories (for example: Osteochondritis dissecans).

Maybe you continue it?

Thank you for your congratulations!

Jordi.

Endoscopic images[edit]

Hi, Hellerhoff! Thank you for your very valuable work. In general, it is very probable (although not confirmed by a legal scholar) that medical and radiological images are copyrighted in Germany, so we can't host them without a permission by the copyright holder. After the above-mentioned discussion I have begun to review them. Your images are mostly ok, because they're your own work, so no need to worry about them. However, the following three images need a permission by the creator:

As you have stated that you can provide the permission by anyone from the hospital that you work at, I've tagged them with {{OTRS pending}}, which gives you some more than 30 days to provide it. Please use the form and the guidelines at COM:OTRS for this. Thank you very much and regards, --Eleassar (t/p) 19:03, 21 October 2013 (UTC)

OUP : Hires Image & Permission[edit]

Hi,

I am writing to you from Six Red Marbles, the largest development house for learning material in the United States. At Six Red Marbles we are dedicated to bringing the power of natural learning to every classroom, pre-K through adult. The company has developed thousands of creative, effective multi-media educational material for leading publishers including McGraw-Hill, Houghton Mifflin Harcourt, Scholastic and Pearson.

The book we are at present working on is titled IB Biology Study Guide.

We are interested in using the attached photo. We believe this picture is under your copyright and we would be obliged if you could give us a high-res version and the permission to use it in our book.

https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Atlasbogenspalt.jpg

I am sending you the details of the project below:

Book title : IB Biology Study Guide Publisher: Oxford University Press (OUP) Clearance details: World All languages, Print & Electronic. Usage: Interior Duration: 15 years Print Run : 40,000.

Please do let me know if you would need further information to help process our request.

I look forward to hearing from you soon.

Regards, Bhaskar.


Bhaskar Chandra Visual Editor Six Red Marbles 317/318, Unitech Trade Centre, Sushant Lok 01, Gurgaon, Haryana, India, 122002 b.chandra@sixredmarbles.com | www.sixredmarbles.com Tel: +91-124-4496850/55 | Mo: +91-9818970659 Twitter: twitter.com/sixredmarbles Facebook: www.facebook.com/sixredmarbles

sixredmarbles FUN IDEAS. SERIOUS LEARNING.

Think Creativity. See Beauty. Explore Learning. Feel Progress