User talk:Paul Hermans

From Wikimedia Commons, the free media repository
Jump to: navigation, search
Welcome to Wikimedia Commons, Paul Hermans!
Afrikaans | Alemannisch | العربية | Asturianu | Azərbaycanca | Беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ | Български | বাংলা | Català | Čeština | Dansk | Deutsch | Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ | Zazaki | Ελληνικά | English | Esperanto | Español | Euskara | Estremeñu | فارسی | Suomi | Français | Frysk | Galego | עברית | हिन्दी | Hrvatski | Magyar | Հայերեն | Interlingua | Bahasa Indonesia | Italiano | 日本語 | ქართული | 한국어 | Latina | Lietuvių | Македонски | മലയാളം | मराठी | Bahasa Melayu | Plattdüütsch | नेपाली | Nederlands | Norsk bokmål | Occitan | Polski | Português | Português do Brasil | Română | Русский | Scots | Slovenčina | Slovenščina | Shqip | Српски / srpski | Svenska | Kiswahili | தமிழ் | ไทย | Türkçe | Українська | Vèneto | Tiếng Việt | 中文 | 中文(简体)‎ | 中文(繁體)‎ | 中文(台灣)‎ | +/−

Hallo Donderwolk! Ich schreibe mal auf Deutsch. Ich glaube es ist beim Hochladen der Bilder etwas schief gelaufen. Versuche die Bilder einfach noch einmal unter dem gleichen Namen hochzuladen. Gruß von --W.wolny 16:07, 4 Feb 2005 (UTC)


Hi - several of the images you uploaded are listed on Commons:Untagged_images#D, because they have no license info. Please add the appropriate Commons:Copyright tags to the images description pages, as images without license info will have to be deleted. Please also add the author, source and date of creation if applicable. Thanks! -- Duesentrieb 13:15, 10 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Image:De_Bonte_Os.jpg[edit]

català | čeština | dansk | Deutsch | Ελληνικά | English | Esperanto | español | français | galego | עברית | italiano | 日本語 | 한국어 | lietuvių | Nederlands | norsk bokmål | polski | português | русский | slovenčina | 中文(简体)‎ | 中文(繁體)‎ | +/− Hello, and thank your for sharing your files with Commons. There seems to be a problem regarding the description and or licensing of this particular file. Could you please resolve these problems, which are described on the page linked in above? Thank you. --Orgullomoore 13:47, 27 February 2007 (UTC)

thanks, problem resolved. Donderwolk 14:12, 27 February 2007 (UTC)

Image:Interieurbasiliekscherpenheuvel_27-03-2007_15-14-41.jpg[edit]

català | čeština | dansk | Deutsch | Ελληνικά | English | Esperanto | español | français | galego | עברית | italiano | 日本語 | 한국어 | lietuvių | Nederlands | norsk bokmål | polski | português | русский | slovenčina | 中文(简体)‎ | 中文(繁體)‎ | +/− Hello, and thank your for sharing your files with Commons. There seems to be a problem regarding the description and/or licensing of this particular file. Could you please resolve these problems, which are described on the page linked in above? Thank you. --Orgullomoore 20:17, 27 March 2007 (UTC)

ok, once more: problem resolved Donderwolk 20:44, 27 March 2007 (UTC)

Hernoemen[edit]

Hoi Paul, wil je ook hier je gebruikersnaam gewijzigd zien? Groet, Siebrand 11:31, 16 July 2007 (UTC)

Zie hier. Vergeet niet gebruikerspagina en overlegpagina te hernoemen. Siebrand 11:42, 18 July 2007 (UTC)

Steun?[edit]

Steun?[edit]

Beste Paul, een buitenlandse gebruiker zonder kennis dreigt alles op commons ivm België zomaar dooreen te gooien. Kan ik op je steun rekenen op Commons:Deletion_requests/2007/07/30#Category:Flemish_Region om deze onzinnige en vooral onhandelbare opsplitsing te verwijderen? --Teeceematiek 11:24, 30 July 2007 (UTC)

Category:Castles in the Flemish Region[edit]

Dag Paul (Donderwolk I presume),

Er zijn al vele discussies geweest betreffende diepere (sub-)categories in België (vooral rond kerken en kastelen). Er is al gepoogd per provincie, per regio en per communiteit (taal) te klasseren. Er is een soort van consensus gegroeid:

  • een uniform twee niveau systeem (land en gemeente/stad) is de standaard manier om iets te adresseren (met de post bijvoorbeeld) en dus door iedereen gekend met een minimum aan fouten
  • voor buitenlanders vraagt het systeem een minimum aan lokale kennis en kunnen ze dus gemakkelijker klasseren (probeer maar even te klasseren in Frankrijk: tegen dat je het juiste departement en/of district gevonden hebt ben je al heel wat tijd kwijt)
  • een systeem waar sommige items op twee niveaus (vb scholen, gemeentehuizen) en andere met bijkomende niveaus (vb kastelen per regio (Vlaams/Waals + Brussel), kerken per provincie, scholen/dichters per communiteit) geklasseerd worden schept vooral verwarring en conflicten. Bovendien zijn er veel items die zich uitstrekken over verschillende regios/provincies (kanalen, rivieren, domeinen, wegen, ...), hetgeen de zaak nog compliceert.
  • en misschien het belangrijkste element: iedere verdere subcategorie exporteert onze Belgisch problemen en complexiteit naar de wiki

Het is waar dat sommige categoriën wat overvol zitten, maar een splitsing in regios (factor 3) of provincies (factor 10) lost het probleem niet echt definitief op. Aan de snelheid waarop de foto's binnenkomen zal iedere opsplitsing hoedanook op relatief korte termijn weer overlopen. Dit is een globaal probleem voor de wiki, en ik denk dat sommige wikilayouts daarvoor moeten aangepast worden.

Eerlijk gezegd ben ik aangenaam verrast dat wij nog zo weinig Vlaams/Brussels/Waals problemen gehad hebben en ik sta niet meteen te springen om mijn tijd daarme te verliezen. Ik hoop dus dat je ons daarin volgt.

Beste groet. --Foroa 08:26, 19 March 2008 (UTC)

Beste medewikipedianen, het is helemaal niet mijn bedoeling om hier onrust te stoken of de boel op stelten te zetten. Ik zag gewoon dat er cats op lager niveau bestonden en heb daarom de kastelen in de bestaande weliswaar lege categorie ondergebracht in de overtuiging dat ik daarmee goed werk leverde. Ik volg de discussies hier niet. Als de gemeenschap niet wil dat die categorieën gebruikt worden, waarom deze niet verwijderen of kan dat technisch niet? Graag antwoord op mijn overlegpagina hoe we de dingen oplossen Paul Hermans 08:36, 19 March 2008 (UTC)
Bedankt Paul, het is ook een beetje onze fout om die redirected categorie te laten rondslingeren. Maar deletion is hier niet altijd eenvoudig. Normaal gezien gaat een bot dit de komende dagen terug rechtzetten. Beste groet. --Foroa 08:54, 19 March 2008 (UTC)
OK :-), no hard feelings... Paul Hermans 13:02, 19 March 2008 (UTC)


Image:Claes_en_de_witte.jpg[edit]

Image deletion warning Image:Claes_en_de_witte.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.
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)‎ | +/−

Brbbl (talk) 09:55, 13 September 2008 (UTC)


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

Brbbl (talk) 12:12, 12 January 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, Paul Hermans!

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.

BotMultichillT 06:28, 25 February 2009 (UTC)

- categories added Paul Hermans (talk) 09:24, 13 April 2009 (UTC)

Belgisch erfgoed en historie[edit]

Dag Paul Hermans, gezien je interesse in Belgisch erfgoed en geschiedenis, mag ik je ook even een vraagje stellen omtrent wat gedoe op de Nederlandstalige wikipedia ??

Het gaat over artikelen over twee scholen. Eentje nl:Ter Poorten uit Lissewege met een een stuk dorpsgeschiedenis sinds 1828, en waarvan de onderwijzerswoning ook enige tijd voormalig gemeentehuis was. En eentje in Roeselare nl:Stedelijke Basisschool 1 Roeselare, eveneens > 100 jaar oud, en in 1995 nog opengesteld op de Open Monumentendag.

Toch vinden enkelen het blijkbaar nodig oogkleppen op te zetten, en deze dingen te nomineren voor verwijdering nl:Wikipedia:Te_verwijderen_pagina's/Toegevoegd_20090406#Toegevoegd_06.2F04:_Deel_3b_-_onderwijs. Waarom, omdat het niet in Nederland ligt? Vooringenomenheid? Niet verstandelijk in staat de artikelen te lezen ? Als jaar en dag staan historische bouwwerken in wikipedia, zelfs niet-historische prullen, zoals dit hollandse nl:Gemaal Van Sasse zijn zonder nadenken OK? Nochtans hebben vele artikelen , zoals dat laatste, zoveel minder om het lijf, en je hoeft het heus niet ver te zoeken tussen de artikelen met hollandse bouwwerken. Maar 2 historische Belgische gebouwen en scholen zouden dat niet zijn ? Dat gaat er bij mij niet in alleszins. Gezien je sterke interesse over onze lokale dorps- en stadsgeschiedenissen : Mocht je er aldaar een idee over hebben, je vindt de weg wel zeker naar de nl-talige wikipedia voor opmerkingen ? ;-) Groeten --LimoWreck (talk) 14:50, 7 April 2009 (UTC)

Ohja, nu we toch bezig zijn, op nl:Wikipedia:Te_verwijderen_sjablonen/Toegevoegd_2009_week_13#Toegevoegd_woensdag_25.2F03.2C_te_verwijderen_vanaf_08.2F04 zijn er nog een paar hollanders die een Belgisch sjabloontje denken te moeten verwijderen - terwijl Nederlandse voormalige gemeenten eveneens hun eigen sjabloon hebben (dat is blijkbaar weer geen probleem). (verwijdering is niet eens nodig, mocht de gemeenschap het willen, kan men gewoon het sjabloon intern aanpassen) Mocht je daar nog geïnteresseerd zijn in een ruggensteuntje, je ziet maar ;-) --LimoWreck (talk) 15:02, 7 April 2009 (UTC)
Limowreck, ik begrijp je redenering en ook je standpunt en ik ben het met je eens dat beide artikels hun plaats hebben op wikipedia als je hun kwaliteit afweegt tegen die van vele andere artikels die hier niet verwijderd worden. Maar op zichzelf vind ik dat niet voldoende. Ik wil over die dingen zelfs niet meer nadenken omdat je in deze gemeenschap van wikipedianen met totaal verschillende attitude al vlug verzeilt in een discussie van hij/zij tegen mij of zij tegen ons en waarbij een meerderheid met soms, naar mijn idee, een slechter standpunt, gelijk krijgt. Ik kom hier zelden of nooit mensen tegen die van mening kunnen veranderen (kan ik dat zelf wel en ben ik ook niet iemand die graag gelijk krijgt?) en dus, mijn motto indachtig, hou ik me liever afzijdig. Groet Paul Hermans (talk) 09:02, 13 April 2009 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion[edit]

Schelderomolen 14-04-2009 16-51-18.JPG
Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Schelderomolen 14-04-2009 16-51-18.JPG, which was produced or nominated by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates.

Quality Image Promotion[edit]

Schachtbokkenhouthalen 20-03-2009 16-41-30.JPG
Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Schachtbokkenhouthalen 20-03-2009 16-41-30.JPG, which was produced or nominated by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates.

Quality Image Promotion[edit]

Schelderomolen 14-04-2009 16-49-35.JPG
Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Schelderomolen 14-04-2009 16-49-35.JPG, which was produced or nominated by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates.

File:Erica multiflora 15-05-2009 15-26-38 (2).JPG[edit]

Dag Paul,

Deze foto is duidelijk niet van een Erica multiflora, maar van een Erica terminalis. Vergelijk met File:Erica terminalis000.jpg - momenteel bloeiend in mijn tuin - die ik juist opgeloaded heb.

Erica multiflora, heeft klokvormige bloemen met uitstekende meeldraden op lange stelen.

Beste groeten, --Réginald (To reply) 09:12, 22 June 2009 (UTC)

Deletion requests[edit]

Hello. I found two deletion requests of yours where you said you would upload better photos - for File:Onbekend 21-04-2009 12-01-32.JPG and File:Onbekend 21-04-2009 12-00-57.JPG. Did you upload replacements? Can you mention those on the deletion pages? Thanks. Wknight94 talk 20:22, 18 August 2009 (UTC)


Vlaams Mijnmuseum[edit]

Hi Paul, I need your assistance regarding some images you uploaded in Category:Beringen. Could you please tell me which of your images (Steenkoolmijnberingen...jpg) actually belong to the Vlaams Mijnmuseum? I'm asking because this museum is an anchor point of the European Route of Industrial Heritage I'm working on. Greetings, -- Ies (talk) 11:16, 11 October 2009 (UTC)

File:Belgie scherpenheuvel basiliek02.jpg[edit]

Hallo - ik zag dat je een "betere" versie over een oude foto van User:Walter had geladen, was hier een bepaalde reden voor? Het lijkt me dat beide fotos waarde hebben. Ook een vraagje waarom een kleinere versie over de grote versie was gezet? Hoe groter hoe beter lijkt me :) Alvast bedankt. -- Deadstar (msg) 13:06, 8 December 2009 (UTC)

Excuses - Ik zie nu pas dat het orginele bestand een transwiki van nl: was, gedaan door Walter, maar het bestand was gemaakt door uzelf. Desalniettemin nog steeds de vraag of het niet beter is het oude bestand te behouden als aparte afbeelding, want het is toch de moeite waard. Met vriendelijke groeten, -- Deadstar (msg) 14:12, 14 December 2009 (UTC)

CS3[edit]

Hallo Paul, Photoshop CS3 ist auf jeden Fall super (ich selber habe nur CS2) und wenn du Raw-Bilder verwendest, dann hast du ja noch viel Spielraum für veränderungen. Ich kann ja nicht beurteilen, wie gut du dich damit auskennst, aber falls du noch wenig erfahrung im Schärfen von Bildern hast: einfach mal "sharpening cs3" googeln. Es gibt sehr viele verschiedene Techniken, manche versuchen viele kleine Details hervorzuheben (Gefahr: zu viel macht das Bild "körnig"), andere betonen besonders Konturen (z.B. http://www.photoshopsupport.com/tutorials/sharpen-an-image/photo-sharpening.html) (Gefahr: zu viel gibt dem Bild leuchtende Konturen). Auf jeden Fall solltest du immer in 100% Ansicht Vorher und Nachher genaustens vergleichen, um zu sehen, welche Technik beim jeweiligen Bild am besten passt. Allerdings muss man ehrlicherweise sagen, dass "richtiges" Schärfen letztlich Ansichtssache ist, allen kann man es selten recht machnen... Gruß und viel Erfolg! Nikopol (talk) 01:28, 15 January 2010 (UTC)

  • Hi Paul, ich wollte dir noch kurz etwas zum Unterschied von Tiefenschärfe und Schärfen in Fotoshop schreiben. Falls du das schon weißt, dann ignoriere es einfach ;). Du hast bei der neuen Version von deinem Bild geschrieben, du hättest die Tiefenschärfe (DOF) verbessert. Statt dessen hatte ich den Eindruck, du hättest das Bild geschärft (ich denke, man kann nach der Aufname die Tiefenschärfe gar nicht mehr verändern, auch mit Raw nicht). Auch hast du einmal gemeint "The aperture f9, already sharpens the picture" (tut sie nicht wirklich, sie vergrößert nur den Bereich im Raum, der auf dem Foto scharf abgebildet wird, also die Tiefenschärfe). Verstehst du den unterschied zu "Schärfen"? Beim Schärfen verstärkt Photoshop die Kontraste zwischen hellen und dunklen Stellen, wodurch ein Foto scharf erscheint. Die Tiefenschärfe verändert sich dadurch aber nicht mehr. Du kannst bei zu geringer Tiefenschärfe zwar versuchen, mittels Schärfen den Eindruck größerer Tiefenschärfe zu erzielen. Das ist aber sehr schwierig bzw. unmöglich:
  • 1) Du kannst dazu nicht einfach in Fotoshop einen Schärfen-Filter benutzen, der das ganze Bild bearbeitet, weil du ja einen Pixelbereich (Radius) definieren musst. Wenn du hier einen kleinen Bereich wählst, dann werden die scharfen Bereiche im Fokus weiter geschärft, die unscharfen bereiche hingegen sind zu weiträumig und werden nicht mehr ganz erfasst (statt dessen wird das Bild körnig). Wenn du hingegen einen großen Radius wählst, dann werden die unscharfen Bereiche erfasst und geschärft (und auch das nur in Grenzen! Unscharf ist eben unscharf). Dafür ist der Radius dann für die scharfen Bereiche aber zu groß und das Bild wird in diesem Bereich unansehlich. Du müsstest also selektiv schärfen (für scharfe Bereiche mit kleinem Radius, für unscharfe mit großem Radius), was schon anspruchsvollere Bildbearbeitung ist.
  • 2) Bildinformation die nicht da ist kommt auch durch Schärfen nicht zurück. Im unscharfen Bereich fehlt die Information.
  • Das Schärfen braucht generell nahezu jedes Foto (auch mit großem DOF), falls die Kamera es nicht automatisch getan hat. Im Forum wird dir aber jeder raten, die kamerainterne Schärfung gering zu halten und das lieber selbst in Fotoshop zu erledigen, denn so bekommst du meist bessere Ergebnisse. Als Faustregel kannst du nehmen: Schärfen in Fotoshop perfektionniert scharf fokussierte Bilder, unscharfe Bilder sind nicht zu retten. Deshalb ist es am besten, von jedem Motiv immer mehrere Aufnamen zu machen und die schlechten anschließend zu löschen. Ich hoffe ich habe dir jetzt nicht nur bereits Bekanntes geschrieben, aber auf jeden Fall noch viel Erfolg! Nikopol (talk) 01:21, 18 January 2010 (UTC)

File:Kmska Henri de Braekeleer (1840-1888) - De man in de stoel (1876) 28-02-2010 14-24-31.jpg[edit]

Беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ | Български | Català | Čeština | Dansk | Deutsch | Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ | Ελληνικά | English | Esperanto | Español | فارسی | Suomi | Français | Galego | Magyar | Íslenska | Italiano | 日本語 | Македонски | മലയാളം | Nederlands | Norsk nynorsk | Polski | Português | Português do Brasil | Русский | Slovenščina | Svenska | Українська | 中文(简体)‎ | 中文(繁體)‎ | +/−


There seems to be a problem regarding the description and/or licensing of this particular file. It has been found that you've added in the image's description only a Template that's not a license and although it provides useful information about the image, it's not a valid license. Could you please resolve this problem, adding the license in the image linked above? You can edit the description page and change the text. Uploading a new version of the file does not change the description of the file. This page may give you more hints on which license to choose. Thank you.

This message was added automatically by Nikbot, if you need some help about it, ask its master (Filnik) or go to the Commons:Help desk. --Filnik 16:58, 5 March 2010 (UTC)

File:Crécy-en-Ponthieu 24-09-2008 10-41-02.JPG[edit]

Bonjour Paul ! J'ai modifié la mention de la localisation de cette croix. Elle s'élève en fait sur le terroir de la commune d'fr:Estrées-lès-Crécy et non à Crécy-en-Ponthieu même. J'ai eu confirmation de cela :

Amicalement - Marc ROUSSEL - --Markus3 (talk) 16:24, 28 May 2010 (UTC)

Re: Cistercian abbeys[edit]

Hoi Paul, there's a short reply. --:bdk: 20:50, 23 September 2010 (UTC)

File:Kmska_Henry_Van_de_Velde_(1863-1957)_-_Vrouw_bij_het_raam_(1889)_-_28-02-2010_13-12-23.jpg[edit]

Commons-emblem-issue.svg File:Kmska_Henry_Van_de_Velde_(1863-1957)_-_Vrouw_bij_het_raam_(1889)_-_28-02-2010_13-12-23.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)‎ | +/−

FA2010 (talk) 12:19, 24 March 2011 (UTC)

File:Instrumentenmuseum.jpg[edit]

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

Wknight94 talk 14:18, 6 November 2011 (UTC)

File:Caudipteryx_28-12-2007_15-03-03.jpg[edit]

Commons-emblem-issue.svg File:Caudipteryx_28-12-2007_15-03-03.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)‎ | +/−

FunkMonk (talk) 19:33, 20 November 2011 (UTC)

File:Ignacio_Zuloaga_Zabaleta_(1870-1945)_-_Zicht_op_Toledo_-_Madrid_Bellas_Artes_21-03-2010_11-54-27.jpg[edit]

Commons-emblem-issue.svg File:Ignacio_Zuloaga_Zabaleta_(1870-1945)_-_Zicht_op_Toledo_-_Madrid_Bellas_Artes_21-03-2010_11-54-27.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)‎ | +/−

Jan Arkesteijn (talk) 17:51, 4 January 2012 (UTC)

Notification about possible deletion[edit]

Commons-emblem-issue.svg 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 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)‎ | +/−

Affected:


Yours sincerely PierreSelim (talk) 16:18, 16 January 2012 (UTC)

File:Fernando Álvarez de Sotomayor (1875-1960) - Huwellijksmaal - Madrid Bellas Artes 21-03-2010 11-51-38.jpg[edit]

Commons-emblem-issue.svg File:Fernando Álvarez de Sotomayor (1875-1960) - Huwellijksmaal - Madrid Bellas Artes 21-03-2010 11-51-38.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)‎ | +/−

FordPrefect42 (talk) 22:04, 18 February 2012 (UTC)

Picture of the Year voting round 1 open[edit]

Dear Wikimedians,

Wikimedia Commons is happy to announce that the 2012 Picture of the Year competition is now open. We're interested in your opinion as to which images qualify to be the Picture of the Year for 2012. Voting is open to established Wikimedia users who meet the following criteria:

  1. Users must have an account, at any Wikimedia project, which was registered before Tue, 01 Jan 2013 00:00:00 +0000 [UTC].
  2. This user account must have more than 75 edits on any single Wikimedia project before Tue, 01 Jan 2013 00:00:00 +0000 [UTC]. Please check your account eligibility at the POTY 2012 Contest Eligibility tool.
  3. Users must vote with an account meeting the above requirements either on Commons or another SUL-related Wikimedia project (for other Wikimedia projects, the account must be attached to the user's Commons account through SUL).

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. From professional animal and plant shots to breathtaking panoramas and skylines, restorations of historically relevant images, images portraying the world's best architecture, maps, emblems, diagrams created with the most modern technology, and impressive human portraits, Commons features pictures of all flavors.

For your convenience, we have sorted the images into topic categories. Two rounds of voting will be held: In the first round, you can vote for as many images as you like. The first round category winners and the top ten overall will then make it to the final. In the final round, when a limited number of images are left, you must decide on the one image that you want to become the Picture of the Year.

To see the candidate images just go to the POTY 2012 page on Wikimedia Commons

Wikimedia Commons celebrates our featured images of 2012 with this contest. Your votes decide the Picture of the Year, so remember to vote in the first round by January 30, 2013.

Thanks,
the Wikimedia Commons Picture of the Year committee


Delivered by Orbot1 (talk) at 11:15, 19 January 2013 (UTC) - you are receiving this message because you voted last year

File:Kopie van Le goûter van Jean Metzinger, geschilderd door Paul Hermans (wikipediagebruiker) 4-01-2010 13-30-53.JPG[edit]

Commons-emblem-issue.svg File:Kopie van Le goûter van Jean Metzinger, geschilderd door Paul Hermans (wikipediagebruiker) 4-01-2010 13-30-53.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)‎ | +/−

Túrelio (talk) 10:58, 11 February 2013 (UTC)

Ken je die plant nog?[edit]

Dag Paul,

Ken je die plant nog? Momenteel is die weer in bloei in mijn tuin, waar ze op de wortels van een hazelaar woekert.
Hieronder foto's die ik er vandaag van genomen heb.

Beste botanische groeten, --Réginald alias Meneerke bloem (To reply) 10:44, 30 April 2013 (UTC)

File:Dedriegapers 10-03-2009 17-36-38.jpg[edit]

Commons-emblem-issue.svg File:Dedriegapers 10-03-2009 17-36-38.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)‎ | +/−

BrightRaven (talk) 14:36, 22 August 2013 (UTC)

File:Kaal lui lekker en hovaardig.jpg[edit]

Commons-emblem-issue.svg File:Kaal lui lekker en hovaardig.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)‎ | +/−

BrightRaven (talk) 08:35, 5 December 2013 (UTC)

File:AlbertND 28-09-2008 13-15-08.JPG[edit]

Commons-emblem-issue.svg File:AlbertND 28-09-2008 13-15-08.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)‎ | +/−

82.124.24.47 15:32, 16 May 2014 (UTC)