User talk:Sapfan

From Wikimedia Commons, the free media repository
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Welcome to the Commons, Sapfan!
Afrikaans | Alemannisch | asturianu | azərbaycanca | Bahasa Banjar | català | čeština | Cymraeg | dansk | Deutsch | Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ | English | español | Esperanto | euskara | estremeñu | français | Frysk | galego | hrvatski | Bahasa Indonesia | interlingua | Interlingue | íslenska | italiano | Kiswahili | Kurdî | Latina | lietuvių | magyar | Bahasa Melayu | Mirandés | Nederlands | norsk bokmål | occitan | Plattdüütsch | polski | português | português do Brasil | română | rumantsch | Scots | shqip | sicilianu | slovenčina | slovenščina | Basa Sunda | suomi | svenska | Tagalog | Türkçe | vèneto | Tiếng Việt | Zazaki | Ελληνικά | беларуская | беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ | български | Ирон | македонски | нохчийн | русский | српски / srpski | тоҷикӣ | українська | ქართული | Հայերեն | नेपाली | भोजपुरी | मराठी | हिन्दी | অসমীয়া | বাংলা | தமிழ் | മലയാളം | සිංහල | ไทย | ၽႃႇသႃႇတႆး  | မြန်မာဘာသာ | 한국어 | 日本語 | 中文 | 中文(台灣)‎ | 中文(简体)‎ | 中文(繁體)‎ | 粵語 | עברית | اردو | العربية | تۆرکجه | سنڌي | فارسی | +/−
First steps tutorial

Our first steps help file and our FAQ will help you a lot after registration. They explain how to customize the interface (for example the language), how to upload files and our basic licensing policy. You don't need technical skills in order to contribute here. Be bold contributing here and assume good faith for the intentions of others. This is a wiki - it is really easy.

Getting help

More information is available at the Community Portal. You may ask questions at the Help desk, Village Pump or on IRC channel #wikimedia-commons. You can also contact an administrator on their talk page. If you have a specific copyright question, ask at Commons talk:Licensing.

Goodies, tips and tricks
  • Put Babel boxes on your user page so others know what languages you can speak.
  • All your uploads are stored in your personal Gallery
  • Please sign your name on Talk pages by typing ~~~~
  • Use the CommonSense tool to find good categories for your files (then other people can find them too!)
  • To link to an image page, write this: [[:Image:Foo.jpg]], it makes this: Image:Foo.jpg
  • If you're copying files from another project, be sure to use the CommonsHelper
Made a mistake?
  • Did you want to rename or move a file? Simply upload the file again and mark the old one like this: {{bad name|Correct name}}
  • For more information read the full Deletion guidelines
(P.S. Would you like to provide feedback on this message?)


العربية  беларуская беларуская (тарашкевіца)  ပအိုဝ်ႏဘာႏသာႏ  বাংলা  català  čeština  dansk  Deutsch  Deutsch (Sie-Form)  Ελληνικά  English  español  euskara  فارسی  suomi  français  galego  עברית  hrvatski  magyar  հայերեն  italiano  日本語  ಕನ್ನಡ  한국어  lietuvių  latviešu  македонски  മലയാളം  मराठी  မြန်မာဘာသာ  norsk bokmål  Plattdüütsch  Nederlands  norsk  polski  português  română  русский  sicilianu  slovenčina  slovenščina  српски / srpski  svenska  ไทย  Türkçe  українська  اردو  Tiếng Việt  中文(简体)  中文(繁體)  +/−

Warning sign
This media may be deleted.

Thanks for uploading Image:ARES_stary_mistenka.JPG. This image is missing permission information. A source is given, but there is no proof that the author or copyright holder agreed to license the file under the given license. Please provide a link to an appropriate webpage with license information, or send an email with copy of a written permission to OTRS (permissions-commons@wikimedia.org).

Unless the permission information is given, the image may be speedy deleted after seven days. Thank you. Siebrand 06:56, 16 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

- - Changed copyright tag to PD-Ineligible (it is an object of daily use - train ticket. Sapfan 22:25, 18 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

العربية  беларуская беларуская (тарашкевіца)  ပအိုဝ်ႏဘာႏသာႏ  বাংলা  català  čeština  dansk  Deutsch  Deutsch (Sie-Form)  Ελληνικά  English  español  euskara  فارسی  suomi  français  galego  עברית  hrvatski  magyar  հայերեն  italiano  日本語  ಕನ್ನಡ  한국어  lietuvių  latviešu  македонски  മലയാളം  मराठी  မြန်မာဘာသာ  norsk bokmål  Plattdüütsch  Nederlands  norsk  polski  português  română  русский  sicilianu  slovenčina  slovenščina  српски / srpski  svenska  ไทย  Türkçe  українська  اردو  Tiếng Việt  中文(简体)  中文(繁體)  +/−

Warning sign
This media may be deleted.

Thanks for uploading Image:ARES_stary_jizdenka.JPG. This image is missing permission information. A source is given, but there is no proof that the author or copyright holder agreed to license the file under the given license. Please provide a link to an appropriate webpage with license information, or send an email with copy of a written permission to OTRS (permissions-commons@wikimedia.org).

Unless the permission information is given, the image may be speedy deleted after seven days. Thank you. Siebrand 06:56, 16 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]


- - Changed copyright tag to PD-Ineligible (it is an object of daily use - train ticket. Sorry for the incorrect info in the first place. Sapfan 22:25, 18 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Objects for daily use does not mean you can declare it to be PD-Ineligible. Permission for a free license is required by the copyright holder. Cheers! Siebrand 08:00, 19 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

dansk  italiano  sicilianu  Deutsch  català  magyar  čeština  português do Brasil  Esperanto  español  português  English  hrvatski  français  Nederlands  Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎  norsk nynorsk  polski  galego  íslenska  slovenščina  suomi  svenska  Türkçe  Ελληνικά  беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎  български  македонски  русский  українська  മലയാളം  日本語  中文(简体)‎  中文(繁體)‎  فارسی  +/−


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 17:38, 4 May 2009 (UTC)

OK, I marked this picture for deletion (duplciate version of a previously existing one, uploaded by mistake) so this may perhaps speed up the process. Thanks & sorry for this extra work. --Sapfan (talk) 18:20, 4 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

dansk  italiano  sicilianu  Deutsch  català  magyar  čeština  português do Brasil  Esperanto  español  português  English  hrvatski  français  Nederlands  Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎  norsk nynorsk  polski  galego  íslenska  slovenščina  suomi  svenska  Türkçe  Ελληνικά  беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎  български  македонски  русский  українська  മലയാളം  日本語  中文(简体)‎  中文(繁體)‎  فارسی  +/−


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 19:19, 5 May 2009 (UTC)

Sorry again, not sure how I missed the licence tag. Added now. --Sapfan (talk) 19:53, 7 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Date[edit]

Please do make a difference between a date of taken and date of publication of a photo. The field "date" in {{Information}} template means primarily the date of taken. The entry "published on October 12, 1888" cannot be replaced by "1888-10-12", but may be by "published on {{Date|1888|10|12}}". --ŠJů (talk) 23:47, 6 July 2009 (UTC) (Asi jsem ti to raději měl napsat česky, než abych se pokoušel o angličtinu, ale snad tomu lze rozumět.)[reply]

Thank you & diky - o te sablone jsem nevedel, a budu ji pouzivat. Zmenu formatu jsem delal proto, aby se datum zobrazovalo v prislusnem jazyce, ale je pravda, ze to muze byt matouci (fotka ci obraz mohly byt vytvoreny daleko driv). Diky, --Sapfan (talk) 18:49, 7 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

dansk  italiano  sicilianu  Deutsch  català  magyar  čeština  português do Brasil  Esperanto  español  português  English  hrvatski  français  Nederlands  Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎  norsk nynorsk  polski  galego  íslenska  slovenščina  suomi  svenska  Türkçe  Ελληνικά  беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎  български  македонски  русский  українська  മലയാളം  日本語  中文(简体)‎  中文(繁體)‎  فارسی  +/−


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 08:01, 25 July 2009 (UTC)

Sorry for this omission. Now corrected. Thanks for letting me know. --Sapfan (talk) 08:20, 25 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

dansk  italiano  sicilianu  Deutsch  català  magyar  čeština  português do Brasil  Esperanto  español  português  English  hrvatski  français  Nederlands  Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎  norsk nynorsk  polski  galego  íslenska  slovenščina  suomi  svenska  Türkçe  Ελληνικά  беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎  български  македонски  русский  українська  മലയാളം  日本語  中文(简体)‎  中文(繁體)‎  فارسی  +/−


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 22:02, 25 July 2009 (UTC)

Sorry, not sure how this keeps happening. Now corrected. --Sapfan (talk) 07:54, 26 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Zdravím, kolego, toto foto má asi špatný popisek a kategorii, podle zdroje autorem není Fiedler, ale Mulač. Gumruch (talk) 21:49, 31 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Diky za upozorneni! Hned jsem opravil. --Sapfan (talk) 22:22, 31 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

dansk  italiano  sicilianu  Deutsch  català  magyar  čeština  português do Brasil  Esperanto  español  português  English  hrvatski  français  Nederlands  Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎  norsk nynorsk  polski  galego  íslenska  slovenščina  suomi  svenska  Türkçe  Ελληνικά  беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎  български  македонски  русский  українська  മലയാളം  日本語  中文(简体)‎  中文(繁體)‎  فارسی  +/−


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 22:42, 5 August 2009 (UTC)

Sorry, licence now added. Thanks. --Sapfan (talk) 22:50, 5 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]


File:Karel_Plischke_1899_ZlPha.jpg has been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether it should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry.

If you created this file, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with it, such as a copyright issue. Please see Commons:But it's my own work! for a guide on how to address these issues.

Please remember to respond to and – if appropriate – contradict the arguments supporting deletion. Arguments which focus on the nominator will not affect the result of the nomination. Thank you!

Martin H. (talk) 23:56, 20 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

    • Hi Martin H., thank you for your comment and for a careful inspection of images. I am the uploader of the picture. The signature inside is of Mr. Jan Vilím who lived 1856 - 1923 according to National Library of Prague, therefore if he is the author then the picture is surely in public domain. However, I am not sure if he really took the picture - most likely, he just prepared it for printing. There are many pictures in Czech magazines of the late 19th century with this signature, but attributed to different authors (e.g., see File:Jan Antos 1899 Mulac.jpg or File:Jan Koula 1895 Langhans.png) or published anonymously. We can include him as an author but this is something what even the original magazine editors did not do. Tell me what to do - there is always an element of risk with anonymous works younger than 140 years but I believe, together with German Wikipedia, that for works older than 100 years (in this case, 110 years) it should be acceptable.
File:Vojtech_Mayerhofer_1899.jpg has been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether it should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry.

If you created this file, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with it, such as a copyright issue. Please see Commons:But it's my own work! for a guide on how to address these issues.

Please remember to respond to and – if appropriate – contradict the arguments supporting deletion. Arguments which focus on the nominator will not affect the result of the nomination. Thank you!

Martin H. (talk) 23:59, 20 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

    • Hi Martin H., thank you for your comment and for a careful inspection of images. I am the uploader of the picture. The signature inside is of Mr. Jan Vilím who lived 1856 - 1923 according to National Library of Prague, therefore if he is the author then the picture is surely in public domain. However, I am not sure if he really took the picture - most likely, he just prepared it for printing. There are many pictures in Czech magazines of the late 19th century with this signature, but attributed to different authors (e.g., see File:Jan Antos 1899 Mulac.jpg or File:Jan Koula 1895 Langhans.png) or published anonymously. We can include him as an author but this is something what even the original magazine editors did not do. Tell me what to do - there is always an element of risk with anonymous works younger than 140 years but I believe, together with German Wikipedia, that for works older than 100 years (in this case, 110 years) it should be acceptable.--Sapfan (talk) 12:35, 21 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]


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

If you created this file, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with it, such as a copyright issue. Please see Commons:But it's my own work! for a guide on how to address these issues.

Please remember to respond to and – if appropriate – contradict the arguments supporting deletion. Arguments which focus on the nominator will not affect the result of the nomination. Thank you!

--–Krinkletalk 23:16, 28 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Josef Šolín[edit]

Díky moc za Šolína! Jen bych Tě prosil: png z webu je podle mého názoru dobré trochu zmenšit a uptravit kontrast a jas. Zdraví --Gampe (talk) 15:35, 30 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Ahoj Gampe, sorry za opozdenou odpoved. Vidim, ze jsi fotku uz opravil, tak se nebudu pokouset o nic dalsiho (stejne nemam na PC nic jineho nez MS Paint a MS Office Picture Manager, a s tim se zazraky delat nedaji). Diky za napsani clanku! --Sapfan (talk) 16:33, 3 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

No já taky nejsem žádnej obrazovej kouzelník, ale pokud ACDSee nebo Paint Shop Pro něco zmůže, rád pomůžu. Zdraví --Gampe (talk) 17:34, 3 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

dansk  italiano  sicilianu  Deutsch  català  magyar  čeština  português do Brasil  Esperanto  español  português  English  hrvatski  français  Nederlands  Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎  norsk nynorsk  polski  galego  íslenska  slovenščina  suomi  svenska  Türkçe  Ελληνικά  беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎  български  македонски  русский  українська  മലയാളം  日本語  中文(简体)‎  中文(繁體)‎  فارسی  +/−


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 12:55, 31 October 2010 (UTC)

Corrected, thank you.--Sapfan (talk) 13:03, 31 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

dansk  italiano  sicilianu  Deutsch  català  magyar  čeština  português do Brasil  Esperanto  español  português  English  hrvatski  français  Nederlands  Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎  norsk nynorsk  polski  galego  íslenska  slovenščina  suomi  svenska  Türkçe  Ελληνικά  беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎  български  македонски  русский  українська  മലയാളം  日本語  中文(简体)‎  中文(繁體)‎  فارسی  +/−


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 11:19, 22 January 2011 (UTC)

This is correct. The file is a duplicate of File:Louis Leger 1895 Eckert.png, it was loaded mistakenly with a wrong name and deleting all info (except "Bad name" template) is a way to speed up its deletion. Sorry for any trouble.--Sapfan (talk) 12:43, 22 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

dansk  italiano  sicilianu  Deutsch  català  magyar  čeština  português do Brasil  Esperanto  español  português  English  hrvatski  français  Nederlands  Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎  norsk nynorsk  polski  galego  íslenska  slovenščina  suomi  svenska  Türkçe  Ελληνικά  беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎  български  македонски  русский  українська  മലയാളം  日本語  中文(简体)‎  中文(繁體)‎  فارسی  +/−


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 please read the text above again and follow the links in it, if you still need help ask at the ? Commons:Help desk in any language you like to use. --Nikbot

Sorry, just added. --Sapfan (talk) 12:21, 12 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

dansk  italiano  sicilianu  Deutsch  català  magyar  čeština  português do Brasil  Esperanto  español  português  English  hrvatski  français  Nederlands  Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎  norsk nynorsk  polski  galego  íslenska  slovenščina  suomi  svenska  Türkçe  Ελληνικά  беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎  български  македонски  русский  українська  മലയാളം  日本語  中文(简体)‎  中文(繁體)‎  فارسی  +/−


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 please read the text above again and follow the links in it, if you still need help ask at the ? Commons:Help desk in any language you like to use. --Nikbot

Sorry, I have mistakenly pushed the wrong button and saved it too quickly. Now fixed. --Sapfan (talk) 06:38, 10 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Tip: Categorizing images[edit]

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


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

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

Here's how:

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

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

[[Category:Category name]]

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

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

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

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

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

CategorizationBot (talk) 20:12, 6 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

dansk  italiano  sicilianu  Deutsch  català  magyar  čeština  português do Brasil  Esperanto  español  português  English  hrvatski  français  Nederlands  Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎  norsk nynorsk  polski  galego  íslenska  slovenščina  suomi  svenska  Türkçe  Ελληνικά  беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎  български  македонски  русский  українська  മലയാളം  日本語  中文(简体)‎  中文(繁體)‎  فارسی  +/−


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 please read the text above again and follow the links in it, if you still need help ask at the ? Commons:Help desk in any language you like to use. --Nikbot 21:25, 3 December 2011 (UTC)

Hello[edit]

Hello Honza! Miło, że też jesteś Wikipedystą! :) Zdravim - Witek. MOs810 (talk) 17:38, 27 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Czesc Witek! Rowniez gratuluje k twoim fotografiam i artykulam - jest ich duzo i bardzo ciekawe! --Sapfan (talk) 21:21, 29 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Watermarks[edit]

Hi Sapfan, please understand that there are serious reasons not to upload watermarked images. -- Ies (talk) 17:01, 1 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Ies, thank you for letting me know about this issue. The watermark in the pictures comes directly from the camera and shows the day (of month) and time of taking the picture. There is no copyright in them (date + time is just too trivial to be protected). I made a mistake as a digital photography newbie in 2003 to switch it on - and now most of my pictures from this period are damaged in this way. Thanks for pointing me to the site with instructions on how to remove it, I will try it on my next pictures. But anyway, most of such pictures are historic and non-repeatable (many depicted railways have been dismantled or are unpassable by now, and pl.wiki articles dedicated to them are often without illustrations), so I think they can provide value to visitors even if they are far from "quality images". What do you think? --Sapfan (talk) 17:23, 1 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
File:Station Yerevan.JPG has been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether it should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry.

If you created this file, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with it, such as a copyright issue. Please see Commons:But it's my own work! for a guide on how to address these issues.

Please remember to respond to and – if appropriate – contradict the arguments supporting deletion. Arguments which focus on the nominator will not affect the result of the nomination. Thank you!

Takabeg (talk) 08:37, 16 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Images from ANNO[edit]

Hello Sapfan, for uploading new images from ANNO I recommand to store the original size of the page of the newspaper. You find the symbol "ORIG" in the top-right corner. So you get a better quality and a higher resolutions of the images. See my new uploadings for Leopold and Sigmund Natzler. Best wishes, Walter Anton (talk) 02:34, 3 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Walter, thanks for the tip - the updated pictures look much better! Btw, how did you remove the redundant objects from the background? What software did you use for it? (I used brightness/contrast and eraser in GIMP but your result is much better - how did you do it?) Best regards, --Sapfan (talk) 18:24, 4 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Hello Sapfan, for black and white prints and drawings, e.g. from historical journals, it is often sufficient to copy with IrfanView pure white spots on the dirty sections. Sometimes I also use the eraser of Windows Paint for simple work. In special cases, such as the settings for brightness and contrast, I use my old version of Adobe Photoshop 6.0. Best regards, Walter Anton (talk) 22:16, 5 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

File:Opalenica 20001014.jpg[edit]

Hi! I've found the following picture: File:Opalenica 20001014.jpg. I'd like to ask you if you know the number of the locomotive shown on this picutre? Bests regards. Pawel Niemczuk (talk) 12:30, 9 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Pawel, I am sorry I do not know it - I never put it down, and the picture is unfortunately with a very low resolution. Przykro mi. --Sapfan (talk) 17:18, 9 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
File:Dajti Tower with cablecar.JPG has been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether it should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry.

If you created this file, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with it, such as a copyright issue. Please see Commons:But it's my own work! for a guide on how to address these issues.

Please remember to respond to and – if appropriate – contradict the arguments supporting deletion. Arguments which focus on the nominator will not affect the result of the nomination. Thank you!

Glorious 93 (talk) 22:24, 22 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Koláž českých šachistů v Humoristických listech[edit]

Zdravím. Všiml jsem si, že jste sem dal podobiznu File:Karel Bohus Kober.jpg s uvedením autorství Antonína Königa. Já jsem před pár dny připravil ze stejné koláže připravil (pro potřeby cs.wikisource) podobiznu Josefa Pospíšila, ale údaj o autorovi jsem nenašel; zadal jsem tedy "licenci" {{PD-anon-70-EU}}. Máte prosím nějaký doklad o Königově autorství, abych mohl licenci opravit? A dodatečný dotaz: Tušíte, zda je König také autorem doprovodného textu na následující straně? --Shlomo (talk) 07:56, 17 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Také zdravím. Spolehlivou informaci o autorství nemám - vycházel jsem z podpisu v levém dolním rohu obrázku a informace o A. Königovi v NK ČR, podle níž byl malíř a šachista. Víc by nám o něm mohla říci např. Kartotéka Jaroslava Kunce, ale kvůli tradičním výpadkům na serveru Národního archivu to bohužel asi dnes nepůjde. Co se týče textu na další straně, předpokládám, že je autorem Jan Neruda - viz přehled spolupracovníků HumL, popř. Nerudův vlastní medailon s dalšími odkazy v rámečku. Jisté to samozřejmě není, nejsem historik, ale takto mi to připadá důvěryhodné. Jinak blahopřeji k zajímavým textům, které jste vložil do Wikizdrojů, i k množství úprav ve Wikipedii. Přeji hodně zdaru - a dejte vědět, když budete potřebovat další informace. --Sapfan (talk) 08:32, 17 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Jé, já jsem slepejš... Podpis na obrázku jsem samozřejmě hledal - ale nenašel. No, sice to není zcela neprůstřelný důkaz (König není až tak ojedinělé jméno...), ale myslím, že v daném kontextu se vaše identifikace dá považovat za spolehlivou. Díky, opravím licenci a příležitostně vyextrahuji i zbývající rytíře 64 polí.--Shlomo (talk) 08:52, 17 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Category discussion warning

Raimund Wichera has been listed at Commons:Categories for discussion so that the community can discuss ways in which it should be changed. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry.

If you created this category, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for discussion 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. If the category is up for deletion because it has been superseded, consider the notion that although the category may be deleted, your hard work (which we all greatly appreciate) lives on in the new category.

In all cases, please do not take the category discussion personally. It is never intended as such. Thank you!


Szczebrzeszynski (talk) 05:07, 11 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Answer inserted - the category should be deleted. Thanks for noticing and reporting it. --Sapfan (talk) 12:32, 11 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Share your experience and feedback as a Wikimedian in this global survey[edit]

  1. This survey is primarily meant to get feedback on the Wikimedia Foundation's current work, not long-term strategy.
  2. Legal stuff: No purchase necessary. Must be the age of majority to participate. Sponsored by the Wikimedia Foundation located at 149 New Montgomery, San Francisco, CA, USA, 94105. Ends January 31, 2017. Void where prohibited. Click here for contest rules.

Your feedback matters: Final reminder to take the global Wikimedia survey[edit]

(Sorry to write in Engilsh)

It's clear that this is Mikhail Nikolaevich Andronikov, but not Mikhail Mikhailovich Andronikov. Hunu (talk) 07:26, 14 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Ludwig Eisenberg[edit]

Da du schreibst, dass du auch in de:Dortmund arbeitest, unterstelle ich, dass du auch Deutsch lesen kannst, und ich bin jetzt zu faul, dir das Folgende ins Englische zu übersetzen, du kannst mir aber auch in Englisch antworten, I'll get that. Du hast mehrere historische Fotos von Sängern hochgeladen, zum Beispiel dieses: c:File:Anton Passy Cornet 1895 Vilimek.jpg. Warum hast du das Bild als c:Category:Ludwig Eisenberg kategorisiert? Was hat Ludwig Eisenberg mit dem Foto, was hat Ludwig Eisenberg mit dem Sänger zu tun? In der Category:Ludwig Eisenberg finden sich zur Zeit 140 Objekte, ich weiß nicht, wieviele von dir sind. Eigentlich sollten dort nur Objekte zu finden sein, die ... Wenn du eine Sub-Category Category:Singers mentioned in Ludwig Eisenbergs Lexikon 1903 anlegen würdest, wäre das zwar ziemlicher Unsinn, aber es wäre systemanalytisch halbwegs korrekt. Vielleicht verfolgst du andere Ideen, then carry on et bonne chance... --Goesseln (talk) 16:40, 14 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hallo Goesseln. Danke für Deine Nachricht. Die Kategorie Ludwig Eisenberg war eine Idee vom Kollege Jack User (damals Informationswiedergutmachung). Ich zweifelde ein bißchen, aber zum Schluß hatte ich nichts dagegen (siehe de:Benutzer Diskussion:Sapfan#Meine Artikel). Ich stimme jedoch zu, dass es nicht ganz logisch ist. So wenn es ein Konsenz gibt, dass es dort nicht gehört, dann wird ich dagegen nicht kämpfen. Viele Grüße --Sapfan (talk) 19:59, 14 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]
@Goesseln: Ich hatte mir auch gerade Gedanken darüber gemacht. Meine Idee war folgender Aufbau:
In Category:Großes Biographisches Lexikon der Deutschen Bühne im XIX. Jahrhundert wäre also zunächst nur die Unterkategorie People featured in Eisenberg’s Großes Biographisches Lexikon, und in letzterer die ganzen Personenbilder oder -kategorien. "Singers" wäre nicht so gut, denn es geht um Schauspieler/Sänger. --Sitacuisses (talk) 22:12, 14 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Ich habe damit kein Problem. Das kann eine Lösung sein. --Sapfan (talk) 08:54, 15 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Přihlaste své fotky do Czech Wiki Photo 2020![edit]

Czech Wiki Photo
Czech Wiki Photo

Milí fotografové a editoři projektů Wikimedia,

každý rok společně nahrajete na Commons tisíce svobodných fotografií. Chceme vám všem poděkovat a také vás ocenit. Vyberte ty nejlepší z vašich fotek a přihlaste je do 30. 10. 2020 do soutěže Czech Wiki Photo 2020! Soutěž je otevřená i úplným nováčkům. Autoři tří nejlepších fotek si odnesou vouchery do Foto Škoda a speciální wiki-odznaky. Přihlášené fotky bude hodnotit i Honza Rybář, držitel Czech Press Photo.

Baví vás focení pro Commons i mimo soutěže? Staňte se fotografem Wikimedie, půjčujeme fototechniku a proplácíme cesty - více na Fotíme Česko.

Těšíme se na vaše snímky!
Za spolek Wikimedia Česká republika
Jakub Holzer
jakub.holzer@wikimedia.cz -- MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 11:06, 24 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Copyright status: File:Bohuslav Hak Matrika N 1873.jpg

bahasa melayu  català  čeština  dansk  deutsch (Sie-Form)  deutsch  english  español  français  galego  hrvatski  italiano  magyar  nederlands  norsk  norsk bokmål  norsk nynorsk  português  polski  português do Brasil  română  sicilianu  slovenčina  slovenščina  suomi  svenska  türkçe  беларуская  беларуская (тарашкевіца)  български  македонски  русский  українська  ಕನ್ನಡ  ತುಳು  മലയാളം  한국어  日本語  中文(简体)  中文(繁體)  עברית  العربيَّة  فارسی  +/−
Warning sign
This media may be deleted.
Thanks for uploading File:Bohuslav Hak Matrika N 1873.jpg. I notice that the file page either doesn't contain enough information about the license or it contains contradictory information about the license, so the copyright status is unclear.

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

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

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

This action was performed automatically by AntiCompositeBot (talk) (FAQ) 20:05, 21 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the info. There was an typo in the copyright tag. Now corrected and template removed. --Sapfan (talk) 20:11, 21 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
File:Varadero airport constitutional referendum ad.jpg has been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether it should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry.

If you created this file, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with it, such as a copyright issue. Please see Commons:But it's my own work! for a guide on how to address these issues.

Please remember to respond to and – if appropriate – contradict the arguments supporting deletion. Arguments which focus on the nominator will not affect the result of the nomination. Thank you!

A1Cafel (talk) 17:04, 31 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Notification about possible deletion[edit]

Some contents have been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether they should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at their entry.

If you created these pages, please note that the fact that they have been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with them, such as a copyright issue. Please see Commons:But it's my own work! for a guide on how to address these issues.

Please remember to respond to and – if appropriate – contradict the arguments supporting deletion. Arguments which focus on the nominator will not affect the result of the nomination. Thank you!

Affected:


Yours sincerely, Notrealname1234 (talk) 01:00, 23 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]