User talk:Avatar - Wikimedia Commons

CopyrightedFreeUse[edit]

Please write {{CopyrightedFreeUse}} on images which are free for any use which come from sxh.hu instead of a dual-cc and GFDL licence. --Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason 22:59, 26 Dec 2004 (UTC)

In my opinion a dual-license with cc and gfdl is better for wikipedia. Because the photo has no usage restrictions, I "re-licensed" it for commons. But of course I also gave the source-adress - so anyone is also able to take the 'original' photo and use it under the {{CopyrightedFreeUse}}-terms. --Avatar 02:10, 28 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Unfortunately these images are not without usage restrictions. See Image_talk:Placa_de_asiento.jpg. They will have to be deleted :(. ed g2s • talk 03:08, 3 Jan 2005 (UTC)

Yes, thanks for your note - sad but true, I also saw it. There was a similar problem in the german wikipedia with Images from 'pixelquelle.de'. :-( --Avatar 06:54, 3 Jan 2005 (UTC)

Hallo Avatar, kannst Du bitte noch die Quellenangaben zu den Fotos von Matthew Bowden ergänzen? Danke --:Bdk: 03:20, 29 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Danke für den Hinweis. Mache ich sobald wie möglich. (Es sind stock.xchange Fotos mit entsprechend klarer lizenz - leider ist scx gerade down.) --Avatar 11:12, 29 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Done. --Avatar 00:44, 4 Apr 2005 (UTC)

{{CopyrightedFreeUse}}[edit]

As already asked above, I'd like you to put a {{CopyrightedFreeUse}} on the sxc.hu material instead of {{PD}}. Strictly speaking, all the pictures are copyrighted indeed - but generally offered to free usage. It would be extremely nice to change those tags on your previous uploads. Thank you! villy 09:23, 7 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Hi villy. I still thought about that, when I saw other people use this tag. To be honest - I still don't really get the difference. I thought if someone says take it if you want, without restriction, the file could be declared as PD. But hey, IANAL :-). I will change the tags in the next few minutes. Thanks for mentioning it to me. --Avatar 17:43, 7 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Done. (All, but the ones by vxdigital, who explicitly licensed the pics under cc-by-2.0) --Avatar 17:57, 7 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Thanks a lot Avatar. Main difference between {{CopyrightedFreeUse}} and {{PD}} is that in civil law countries (contrary to common law countries like UK or US), as an author, you just can't give up on your moral right which is perpetual, inalienable and imprescriptible. Because of that, strictly speaking, you just can't decide to put something in the public domain. So that, in order to have a common solution to both system of laws, it is better to choose {{CopyrightedFreeUse}} : it does no harm for common law people and is more exact for the others :) villy 21:16, 11 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Admin[edit]

You are now an admin here on Commons. Congratulations! villy ♦ ✎ 12:41, 6 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you! --Avatar 22:23, 6 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]

eine kleine geschichte[edit]

das bild Image:Wikinews-trans 135px ohne text.png ist seit letztem jahr veraltet und wird auf meta (Logo) überhaupt nicht mehr erwähnt. und wenn du mal alle wikinews-seiten durchblätterst, wirst du links oben nie das sehen, was ich durch die hintertür löschen wollte. genutzt wird es z.z. nur noch auf der deutschsprachigen 'pedia, überall sonst brauch man die entweder nciht, oder es werden andere von den zig versionen dieses logos verwendet. womit ich schon beim nächsten punkt wäre. ich bin schon seit längerer zeit dabei, die namen aller logos zu standarisieren. der erste teil beinhaltet das project, der zweite teil ist die art, entweder banner, logo, animation, danach folgt der language code, der die sprache repräsentiert. bei textlosen versionen soll das wegbleiben. ein beispiel: das wikipedia logo für die arabischsprachige 'pedia: Image:Wikipedia-logo-ar.png, das logo ohne text für wikinews: Image:wikinews-logo.png. beim nächsten punkt kommst du ins spiel. ich will, das alle projekte nur diese versionen, von denen es keine duplikate o.ä. mehr geben soll, benutzen. als einziges hilfsmittel dabei bietet sich die zusammenarbeit der woche an. leider hab ich davon recht wenig ahnung, sodass ich an dich dachte. Schaengel89 @me 19:07, 30 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Wikinews-trans 135px ohne text.png wird benutzt in: en (3x), de (50+x), fr (2x), pl (9x), es (3x), de.wikibooks (2x), de.wikiquote (2x), species (1x), meta (4x), wikisource (1x) und vermutlich noch in Projekten mit weniger als 10k Beiträgen (und nicht zu vergessen: 2x in den commons). In de.wikiquote und den commons ist es auf der Hauptseite eingebunden. Und du willst jetzt diese Datei schnelllöschen und überall Image not founds hinterlassen. An der Zusammenarbeit der Woche habe ich mich bisher nicht beteiligt. --Avatar 20:47, 30 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]

jaja, das ding bleibt erst mal. es geht ja nicht darum, ob du dich daran beteiligen willst, sondern ob du das für vernüftig hälst. Schaengel89 @me 14:09, 31 May 2005 (UTC) übrignes, dein check-usage ist super! Schaengel89 @me 14:16, 31 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Grundsätzlich halte ich eine Vereinheitlichung der Logonamen für sinnvoll. Die Zusammenarbeit der Woche ist dafür vermutlich weniger geeignet (aber wie gesagt, mit der kenne ich mich nicht aus) - das müsste man nach kurzer Diskussion an entsprechnder Stelle (village pump?) alleine oder mit Hilfe eines Bots durchziehen. --Avatar 14:57, 31 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Betr.: Image:Paulskirchefrankfurt.jpg[edit]

Hi, ich achte es hoch, dass nicht so mir nichts dir nichts Bilder gelöscht werden. Aber hier mein Problem und warum ich es vorschlug: Ich hatte das Bild von der deutschen Wiki bearbeitet (Ausschnitt kleiner gemacht, damit es besser in den Artikel zur Geschichte Frankfurts passt) und dann HIER hochgeladen. Als ich es einbaute , stellte ich fest, dass der Artikel nur das alte Bild zeigt, da ich versäumt hatte , ihm einen anderen Namen zuzuordnen. Also lud ich das Bild (völlig identisch ) nochmal unter anderem Namen hoch Image:PaulskircheFFM1.jpg. Beide sind gleich. Meinetwegen können auch beide behalten werden, ich wollte lediglich Doppeltes entfernen. Aber bitte, jetzt NICHT das FFM1 Bild löschen, sonst erscheint wieder das Bild mit dem Hochhaus im Hintergrund auf der Frankfurter Geschichtsseite. Lieben Gruß --Peng 12:00, 1 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Hi Peng, ja - da Bilderlöschungen nicht rückgängig gemacht werden können, sollte man da vorsichtig sein. Also... es gibt in den Commons die Bilder Image:Paulskirchefrankfurt.jpg und Image:PaulskircheFFM1.jpg. Diese sind gleich. Das erste wird in vielen Wikipedia-Projekten benutzt, das letzte nur in de:Geschichte von Frankfurt am Main. Und dann gibt es noch lokal in der deutschen WP de:Bild:Paulskirchefrankfurt.jpg - dieses zeigt einen größeren Ausschnitt. Mein Vorschlag: ich uploade de:Bild:Paulskirchefrankfurt.jpg in die Commons als Image:Paulskirchefrankfurt_2.jpg und sorge dafür, dass es in de-wp gelöscht wird. Dann ändere ich in de:Geschichte von Frankfurt am Main das Bild auf Image:Paulskirchefrankfurt.jpg. Und dann lösche ich Image:PaulskircheFFM1.jpg. Kompliziert? Aber wenn ich nix übersehen habe, klingt das sinnvoll :-). Deine Meinung? --Avatar 15:34, 1 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Nach 2 1/2 maligem Lesen habe auch ich es verstanden. Ja, eine gute Idee. Sag , wenn ich dir dabei irgendwie behilflich sein kann. Achtung: Zur großen Verwirrung : Es gibt noch Image:Paulskirche1.jpg ;-) Gruß. --Peng 10:01, 2 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Oh Gott... :-). Erledigt. --Avatar 20:03, 2 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Danke --Peng 14:42, 4 Jun 2005 (UTC)

About COM:DEL#Image:GreatBarrierReef-EO_001.JPG[edit]

Hi Avatar, Just a newbie question. In the above mentioned deletion request (that you deleted), the OP claimed that the image is not used anywhere. My question is, how can one be sure whether an image is not used anywhere, since commons images are used on all wikiprojects? Of course I havent seen the image, just read the comment and it didnt make sense to me, so I am asking.

Btw, the word Avatar means "incarnation" in sanskrit. Any connection? --Spundun 18:39, 3 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Ah, nevermind about the first question, I just say the link in that post, linking to some utility of yours. --Spundun 18:40, 3 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Yes. But notice that it is still possible that a picture is used. My Check-Usage doesn't check all available wikimedia projects (at the moment it is able to check all language wp's with more than 10.000 articles and some projects like wikinews, wikispecies). So you can't be 100 percent sure - but of course it's a much better situation than before. --Avatar 19:26, 3 Jun 2005 (UTC)

I forgot answering your last question. No, I learned there are many definitions of Avatar. I got my nickname several years ago (in the era of bulletin board systems - the www wasn't invented) from the computer game series Ultima. There, the Avatar is the main person - the hero. After the Internet growed so much, it is not the very best nick to have - out there are many Avatars. But I am the wikipedia and demoscene Avatar :-) --Avatar 19:33, 6 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Der Stein rollt....[edit]

... und zwar hier Schaengel89 @me 19:26, 6 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Thumbnails[edit]

Hi Avatar,

You wrote: Please do not upload thumbnailed pictures from other wikimedia-projects,...

Sorry, I didn't get it... can you please tell me which image I uploaded as thumbnail? Daran kann ich mich nicht erinneren... Danke! --Mschlindwein 18:49, 13 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Schau mal hier zum Beispiel (weitere Beispiele in der History deiner Image-Seite). Das passiert, wenn man in einer Wikipedia ist, auf die Bilderseite geht und Bild speichern sagt, obwohl man noch nicht die Originalgröße des Bildes sieht, sondern nur ein Thumbnail. Entweder muss man nochmal auf das Bild klicken oder man sagt 'Speichere Link', anstatt 'Speichere Bild'. Man erkennt dies immer an der vorangestellten Zeichenkette "123px-" vor dem eigentlichen Namen. --Avatar 19:30, 13 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Ok, sorry. Ich wußte's, aber ich habe wahrscheinlich nicht immer aufgepaßt. Danke für den Hinweis, das wird nicht mehr passieren. MfG, Mschlindwein 00:40, 14 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Deletion requests[edit]

Hi Avatar. I propose to remove listings from Template:Deletion requests that have already been deleted. Since you often delete images and leave a comment "Deleted", I thought I should get your opinion first. Is there any reason to keep obsolete nominations there? Will you mind if I remove them? Thanks, dbenbenn | talk 21:47, 14 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Hi, thanks for asking. I suggest keeping them about 2-4 days for easy documentation reasons. So if there are any problems with a deletion, someone can easily add comments or stuff. But afterwards they can be deleted IMHO. --Avatar 22:04, 14 Jun 2005 (UTC)

del Request[edit]

can you del this pic i'd like to replace it with a pic that is a PD. Matanya 12:59, 23 Jun 2005 (UTC)

thanks. Matanya 13:11, 23 Jun 2005 (UTC)

I deleted it. But you are able to upload another versions under the same name, even if it isn't deleted. Please replace it soon, because the picture is/was used in french wikipedia. Thanks. --Avatar 13:16, 23 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Image:Gulag map.png[edit]

Hi,

the image "Image:Gulag map.png" was apparently deleted from Commons, and you removed it from ГУЛАГ. I removed it from the article pt:Gulag today. Could you please tell me why the image was removed? Could you also tell me the link to the "Deletion log" in Commons, please? Thank you. --Mschlindwein 00:00, 25 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Hi. You can always find the deletion log in every wikimedia-installation under "Special Pages", "Logs". In Common the direct link is [1]. I removed the picture on 11:00, 10 May 2005 because it was tagged as copyright violation. The source page stated "© НИПЦ "Мемориал", при содействии фонда Фельтринелли и кафедры картографии географического факультета МГУ" which most probably means "not PD", even if I can't read russian. Meanwhile (since about 25 May?) it's possible to check the usage of pics with Check-Usage - and this should be done prior to deleting media from commons. Back on 10 May there wasn't this possibility so I didn't know that it was used in pt. --Avatar 08:16, 25 Jun 2005 (UTC)

SPUI[edit]

I'd like to know why you blocked SPUI? You wrote that he was adding pron but I see none. I also see no vandalism. Am I missing somthing? SPUI is a well regarded user on en. BrokenSegue 27 June 2005 16:55 (UTC)

He uploaded an autofellatio picture without stating the source (most probably a copyvio I think) under the name Image:Ducks swimming.jpg with the description "Ducks swimming". --Avatar 27 June 2005 17:03 (UTC)

Explains why I didn't see the pron, it was deleted of course. Anyways, I am going to reverse the block and replace it with a warning of some kind. He is quite an unusual person (see his en user page) and probably thought this was funny. BrokenSegue 27 June 2005 17:09 (UTC)

I can live with that, if he accepts that this is not very funny and he'll omit this in future. --Avatar 27 June 2005 17:13 (UTC)

Sadly en is locked so I'll have to wait to give the warning. BrokenSegue 27 June 2005 17:18 (UTC)

Eh? I know I did not upload that. As a non-admin, I can't see exactly what happened, but I was sleeping for the past 10 hours or so. Was it possibly a fake like User:SPUl? --SPUI 27 June 2005 22:05 (UTC)

It was a fake - User:ЅPUI (check the URL - the S is different). --SPUI 27 June 2005 22:17 (UTC)

Thanks for the info and sorry about my fault. Lesson for me: only cut'n'paste in future. I'll block the user right now. Sorry. --Avatar 27 June 2005 23:29 (UTC)

Not a problem - didn't affect me as I was sleeping. --SPUI 28 June 2005 00:26 (UTC)

Check-usage source code[edit]

Hi Avatar. Could I have to Check-Usage source code, please? You could email it to me, or perhaps even post it at User:Avatar/Check-Usage. Thanks a lot, dbenbenn | talk 17:54, 21 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I feared someone would ask this... At the moment the code is very akward, painfull and bad bad bad (and undocumented). I planned an object oriented, documented, well written rewrite but because the lack of free time, this won't happen in the next month. I send it via mail, but I warned you. --Avatar 22:08, 21 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

CheckUsage for Wiktionary[edit]

Would it be possible to add all the Wiktionary sites to the CheckUsage tool? There has been a series of logo deletions, which may be in part due to not being able to check if Wiktionary is using the files. - Amgine 22:58, 6 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

de-admining user comments[edit]

I'm just wondering if it is normal Commons practice to remove user comments and discussion, and replace it with what appears to me to be a fairly biased set of comments (note I do not dispute the veracity, merely the condescension.) - Amgine 09:05, 9 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, I really tried my best to do what I thought was most peoples wish - perhaps I was wrong. I already re-instated the request but think the place is extremly bad for discussing this subject - this should be done on a wider base. And I really wouldn't sound biased. This is a wiki, so please revert me. I won't be displeased. --Avatar 09:13, 9 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I feel the commentary, as you suggest, is probably not in the best place. But removing it while adding a top-post introduction was less than neutral. While the conversation there has been distracted from the issue - whether Paddy has abused his admin privileges - it is still more relevant than saying someone disagreed with your closing the vote without either consensus or a policy stricture. - Amgine 09:21, 9 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

It was not my intention beeing not neutral. FYI: I added a comments link below the request after you removed the paragraph. --Avatar 09:32, 9 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Orangutan Image[edit]

Hello Avatar You're most welcome and thank you very much for the compliment. I too really love this shot! His expression is totally serene and peaceful. Perhaps I can offer his image as a model of the spiritual/behavioral state my country's present government should aspire to attain (as opposed to it's continual visage of a Tasmanian Devil).Peace--Kabir 13:23, 13 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

RE: Image:Boxer shorts.png[edit]

Sorry about the delay on adding information to that image. I prefer to add information after I've uploaded, so I may preview it. If this is in violation of Commons policy, sorry, I won't do it again. Thanks! Michael 07:35, 22 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Michael, no problem. I didn't wanted to chevy you. --Avatar 07:42, 22 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Bilder[edit]

Hallo! Ich hatte einige Bilder von vor 1900 hochgeladen ohne irgendwelche Angaben, leider! Jetzt suche ich sie (die Angaben) gerade zusammen und habe schon ein Problem. Bei Alexander von Humboldt hatte ich erst wohl fälschlichlerweise wie auch bei anderen Bildern direkt bei wikipedia hochgeladen. Dann erst habe ich von nem Freund gehört, daß man das besser bei wikicommons machen solle. Jetzt sind bei Humboldt vier Bilder von mir und nur eins mit Beschreibung. Kannst Du bitte die anderen von mir hochgeladenen löschen und mir sagen, ob meine Angaben zu dem mit Beschreibung ausreichen!? Habe Datum, Fotograf, Internetadresse und Museum, wo es zu finden ist, angegeben. Wie kann ich das jetzt noch bei Wikipedia einbinden, oder ist das nicht mehr nötig? Hatte es da ja fälschlicherweise direkt hochgeladen. Danke! --Haduloa 22:11, 25 August 2005 (UTC)Haduloa

Hi Haduloa. Bei dem Humboldt-Bild von dem du vermutlich sprichst, ist irgendetwas schief gelaufen. Zwar steht in der History deine Beschreibung, aber momentan steht als Bild beschreibung nur "Public Domain". Ich habe das jetzt mal verbessert. Die Daten die dort stehen sind soweit in Ordnung - du kannst diesen Aufbau ruhig als Vorlage für die anderen Bilder nehmen. Klicke einfach auf 'edit' und kopier dir den Block raus und füge ihn angepasst bei den anderen Bildern ein. In der Wikipedia kannst du das Bild wie gehabt direkt mit [[Image:Bildname.jpg|thumb|Beschreibung]] einbinden. Wenn du noch Fragen hast, frag einfach nach. PS: Eine automatische Unterschrift kannst du mit --~~~~ erzeugen. --Avatar 01:46, 4 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

private gallery in commons?[edit]

hi there! on the "latest file" page i discovered the following gallery: Category:OG28-08-2005 those images are not (yet) used on any wikipedia, and they seem pretty much like a private gallery. thought you might want to know... -- Mnolf 09:50, 30 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, thanks for noticing. Perhaps it's best to ask the user himself. I looked at the photos and because of the Wikipedia banner I think it's a "Wikipedia-Stammtisch" (meeting). --Avatar 01:33, 4 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Admin help needed[edit]

Image:Budapest Parliament 4604.JPG: I mistakenly added lots of versions (due to a JPG vs. jpg problem). There are five versions now. Could you please remove the three in the middle, such that only the first and last one remains? Would be nice if you could do that for me. Thanks. Second: Please remove completely Image:Budapest Parliament 4604.jpg. --Dirk 11:27, 4 October 2005 (UTC)

BTW: Why not forbiding JPG and only allow jpg? It only confuses. ;-) --Dirk

Image:Mohamed ElBaradei.jpg[edit]

Thank you for information. Probably, deletion will be unavoidable.Searobin 10:01, 7 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Perhaps yes, but probably not :-). The license is almost free, but not PD (something like CC-BY). I'll talk with a few wise people and then we can hopefully put it under a correct license. --Avatar 10:12, 7 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Check-usage[edit]

Hi, thanks for the wonderful tool of Check-usage. Would it be possible to add Norwegian (nynorsk), code nn, to the list of languages? Now it only checks no:, which is actually Norwegian (bokmål). We have had a lot of images disappearing without warning, maybe this might help. -- Ranveig 09:48, 15 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I just added it to the list. Please note that there will be a new check-usage (mainly written by Duesentrieb) in the very near future, using direct database access which will be MUCH faster. And it will contain all projects. --Avatar 19:03, 15 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! A new and improved version certainly doesn't sound like something to complain about. -- Ranveig 17:09, 16 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Ubisoft ![edit]

Hii, can u translate the Ubisoft message ? are-they accept "Redistribution, derivative work, commercial use." ? If its true, thats a very nice thing good job :D ! Else, pictures cant be put on Commons. ~ bayo or talk 17:51, 8 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, they do. I'll try to translate it soon. (My english is rather bad.) --Avatar 18:40, 8 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Well, ok. I haven't translated it, but edited the page a bit, make the situation clearer and put almost the whole German thread online. --Avatar 19:20, 8 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I tell it to Teofolo, a french guy, good in de:deutsch. Maybe if he agree, i will translate. ~ bayo or talk 22:07, 8 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry for this message here ! i dont know why i post it here, i thinking i am on your talk page ! :/ ~ bayo or talk 22:10, 8 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

So I moved it :-). Teofolo is welcome to translate it of course. --Avatar 22:48, 8 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Halo Avatar!

Ich habe User:Avatar/Ubisoft/OTRS thread gelesen und versuche zuerst eine kleine Zusammenfassung auf Französisch zu schreiben. Darf ich dir einige fragen stellen? Ich fahre auf Englisch fort, damit Bayo auch verstehen kann.

A) What did Ubisoft answer to question Nr 1) (Only "lock on pictures taken by one user", "lock on" pictures taken by all users, or all pictures form all Ubisoft games taken by anyone) ?

B) What do you mean by « (Hinweis auf abwertendes Bild -> Löschung » ?

Thanks --Teofilo 12:45, 9 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Teofilo, A) they answered "User dürfen generell gerne Bilder von unseren Spielen machen und einstellen." (Users are allowed to take screenshots of our games and use them). B) If they point us to a picture which has the solely purpose to discredit a game (or if we spot one ourself), we will delete it because of our NPOV directive. --Avatar 13:07, 9 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Maybe I'll have other questions later. But this is enough for me to complete my summary. Thank you ! --Teofilo 19:08, 9 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, we talk a lot about this agreement ; i realy think it can't be use on Wikimedia Commons because images are not realy free ; however its a very nice thing for Wikipedia. Have you already talk to it on the village pump ? It would be well to be sure image are on the right project, because then it will have certainly a screenshot rush :D ~ bayo or talk 23:21, 9 December 2005 (UTC) In fact, it is complicated to translate without making error, we prefers to wait your own english translation. Good work :D ~ bayo or talk 23:37, 9 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I think my english is not good enough to make an own correct translation - but I will add a note to the village pump - there should be enough good german/english speakers. --Avatar 11:05, 12 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

All Ubisoft games?[edit]

Hi Avatar,

I've read the Ubisoft emails several times and it's great news, but I'm still wondering a bit: does this permission cover all Ubisoft games? Ubisoft develops games, but also publishes many games that were developed by other game developers. If Ubisoft only has the publishing rights for some parts of the world for those games, do they have the right to give us permission to use screenshots of those games world wide? --Kam Solusar 14:22, 10 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Ubisoft wrote "User dürfen generell gerne Bilder von unseren Spielen machen und einstellen." This means in english "Users are generally allowed to take pictures (screenshots) of our games." So they gave us their permission. IANAL, so I don't know if your concerns are valid. If there are still points which are unclear, I propose to collect these questions and I will post a follow-up mail to Ubisoft. --Avatar 11:02, 12 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

komische Löschregeln..[edit]

Hallo Tim, hab mich grad gewundert, dass die beiden Bilder Image:Two women in red dresses.jpg und Image:2 women outside in a city 01.jpg doch nicht gelöscht wurden. Hab im Archiv dazu die Einträge mal rausgesucht: archiv. Versteht da einer nicht was das Recht am eigenen Bild heißt, oder warum wurden die Bilder behalten? Steig da nicht durch, die LK-Abarbeiter-Entscheidung wurde ja nicht schriftlich festgehalten... Grüße --BLueFiSH ?! 20:19, 14 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Interessant. Ich hab mich zugegebenermassen nicht mehr drum gekümmert (und muss gestehen, dass ich das auch in absehbarer Zukunft nicht zu tun gedenken, aus Zeitmangel).

a) Ich hätte die Fotos von mir aus niemals vorgeschlagen. Als IANAL-Privatperson und wenn ich nicht irgendwelche Gesetzte kennen/berücksichtigen würde, hätte ich überhaupt keine Probleme mit diesen Bildern und finde sie vollkommen ok.
b) Jemand anderes (der Löschantragsteller) hat augenscheinlich ein Problem damit - aus diesem Grund - und weil ich vom Recht am eigenen Bild weiss - habe ich also beim Fotografen nachgefragt und der gibt auf die Frage an, ob die fotografierte Personen ihre Erlaubnis gegeben hat, dass dies nicht der Fall ist. Meiner Einschätzung nach müssten die Bilder damit also leider gelöscht werden, wie ich auch in der Löschdiskusion anklingen liess. Dieser Meinung bin ich immer noch.

Vielleicht schreibst du am besten noch mal den abarbeitenden Admin an. --Avatar 20:43, 14 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

hm, tja, scheint sich nicht umstimmen zu lassen... und nun so lassen und warten bis die Girls mal in ein paar Monaten/Jahren mitkriegen, dass wir hier Bilder von ihnen hosten? Grüße --BLueFiSH ?! 00:49, 16 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

SLA?[edit]

wie bitte schreib' ich einen SLA für Commons? (eigenen Bildschrott ausmisten) delete inzwischen gefunden
ich hab' das Bild image:Peg Solitaire e edited.jpg hochgeladen, das ich überarbeitet habe. Kannst Du mir bitte an dem Muster zeigen, was in der Beschreibung stehen soll (anhand Deiner Änderungen werd' ich fürs nächste Mal vielleicht sicherer).
ich bin in einen Clinch geraten, siehe de:Wikipedia:Vermittlungsausschuss/Bearbeitung von WP-Bildertutorial, Elian vs IP, falls Du die Zeit hast, meine hauptsächlich betroffende Seite de:Benutzer:W./Bildertutorial/1 anzuschauen und hier oder per Mail Deine Meinung zu äußern, danke. Derzeit arbeite ich an den anderen Tutorial-Seiten weiter, d.h. wenn dir dazu was einfällt, es ist einiger verdeckter Text mit Anmerkungen auf S. 3 (Kategorisieren und Galerien) Danke. Wolfgang 01:22, 21 February 2006 (UTC)
Neu: Image:Picture-Upload Decision Y or N.gif Bis gegen heute 15:00 möchte ich Update-Versionen hochladen, damit wir nicht über "Schnee von gestern" reden. Ich bin hier EOD, Diskussion bitte bis auf weiteres auf de:Wikipedia Diskussion:Bildertutorial/1#Entscheidungsbaum-Grafik Danke, mit Gruß, WolfgangW. 08:11, 25 February 2006 (UTC)

Logo der Hannover-Messe[edit]

Guten Abend Avatar, hast Du Dir auch schon die zugehörige Diskussion zum Logo angesehen? Ich habe dort den Schriftwechsel mit der Hannover-Messegesellschaft AG eingestellt und der Inhalt sollte als Erlaubnis eigentlich ausreichend sein. Zudem habe ich diesen Schriftwechsel auch noch an Wikimedia zwecks Ticketerteilung weiter geleitet. Ich denke, das sollte fürs erste reichen, da den Pressestellen der Unternehmen der Inhalt und die Konsequenzen der GFDL durchaus bekannt sind. --Markus Schweiss 18:29, 28 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Markus, sorry, wir haben uns im Chat knapp verpasst. Ich hatte die entprechende Mail im OTRS gesehen und war deshalb darauf gestossen. Nach all unseren bisherigen Entscheidungen reicht eine Aussage wie von der Messe erteilt (und auch deine Anfrage) nicht aus um etwas GFDL zu lizenzieren - mich ärgert ein wenig, dass die Lizenzierungsnachfragen in letzter Zeit eingerissen sind - es kann (wie die Erfahrung in der Vergangenheit gezeigt hat) nicht davon ausgegangen werden, dass die Pressestellen wissen, was wir unter einer freien Lizenz verstehen, geschweige denn, was die GFDL ist und welche Implikationen sie nach sich zieht. "Unsere Juristen" haben mehrfach darauf hingewiesen, dass wir eigentlich einen Satz in der Art "Ich gebe dies und das unter der GFDL frei." vom Rechteinhaber benötigen - trotzdem nehmen wir auch Sachen an, bei denen in der Anfrage explizit nach einer GFDL-Lizenzierung gefragt wurde und grob erläutert wurde, was das genau ist und als Antwort nur ein "Sie können folgendes Bild haben." o.ä. zurückkommt. Aus der Anfrage und Antwort im vorliegenden Fall geht bis auf "frei" überhaupt nicht hervor, von welcher Lizenz die Rede ist - dies ist aber unbedingt notwendig um überhaupt wissentlich etwas lizenzieren zu können. Das Problem bei einer nicht genannten Lizenz tritt ja schon dabei auf, dass es verschiedenste Auffassungen von Freiheit gibt - wobei z.B. unsere nicht mit dem häufigen Gebrauch in der Allgemeinheit (wir schliessen z.B. kommerzielle Nutzung als Muss mit ein) übereinstimmt.

Eine angemessene Anfrage findet sich bspw. hier bzw. hier. --Avatar 05:28, 29 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Guten Morgen Avatar, Danke erst einmal für Deine ausführlichen Erläuterungen. Ich werde gleich einmal bei der Messe in Hannover anrufen und mit meiner Ansprechpartnerin den weiteren Gang der Dinge besprechen. --Markus Schweiss 07:28, 29 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

PS: Du hattest übrigens Recht, was das Wissen um die GFDL in diesem konkreten Falle angeht. Die zuständige Mitarbeiterin ist aus allen Wolken gefallen, als ich sie auf die Konsequenzen unserer Lizenzierung hinwies. Trotzdem ist man bei der Hannover-Messe AG durchaus entschlossen, eine lizenzkonforme Darstellung beizustellen; diesbezügliche Zusagen hat man mir am Telefon gemacht. --Markus Schweiss 16:53, 29 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hihi :-). Danke für deine Mühe! Wäre schön, wenn wir das Logo nutzen könnten. --Avatar 18:46, 29 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Kölsch[edit]

Wo trinkst Du Dein Kölsch? Die schale Brühe kannste doch keinem Esel ines Ohr schütten! Gruß und nichts für ungut…

Wenn du den Kranz meinst - der stammt von einer Aufnahme aus der alten 'Station Bar' - da hat es mich aber nachdem die renoviert haben auch nicht mehr hingezogen. --Avatar 22:57, 1 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Lordi-screen.jpg[edit]

Hi Avatar, an anonymous user listed this photo at Commons:Deletion requests. Thuresson 00:10, 22 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for notifying me. Sad but true, perhaps we have to delete it. Let's see. (I also sent a mail to Sony BMG Finland asking for a free license photo). --Avatar 00:24, 22 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Egyptian Museum[edit]

Someone had placed this in Category:Museums by country, therefore, subjecting it to the my moving the category to Category:Museums in Egypt. By all rights everything in the category belongs in Category:Egyptian Museum except the one image of the Egyptian Museum. I will fix this. Cary "Bastique" Bass ^parler _voir 15:32, 19 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Great, thanks a lot. --Avatar 15:34, 19 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Deletion warning: Beach volleyball-Huntington Beach-California 1.jpg[edit]

Image:Beach volleyball-Huntington Beach-California 1.jpg[edit]

Image deletion warning

Image:Beach volleyball-Huntington Beach-California 1.jpg has been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether it should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry.

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

Afrikaans ∙ Bahasa Indonesia ∙ bosanski ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ dansk ∙ Deutsch ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ ∙ eesti ∙ English ∙ español ∙ Esperanto ∙ français ∙ galego ∙ hrvatski ∙ íslenska ∙ italiano ∙ magyar ∙ Nederlands ∙ norsk bokmål ∙ norsk nynorsk ∙ occitan ∙ Plattdüütsch ∙ polski ∙ português ∙ português do Brasil ∙ română ∙ shqip ∙ sicilianu ∙ slovenčina ∙ slovenščina ∙ suomi ∙ svenska ∙ Tiếng Việt ∙ Türkçe ∙ Zazaki ∙ Ελληνικά ∙ беларуская ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ ∙ български ∙ македонски ∙ русский ∙ српски / srpski ∙ українська ∙ հայերեն ∙ বাংলা ∙ മലയാളം ∙ ပအိုဝ်ႏဘာႏသာႏ ∙ မြန်မာဘာသာ ∙ ไทย ∙ 조선말 ∙ 한국어 ∙ 日本語 ∙ 简体中文‎ ∙ 繁體中文‎ ∙ עברית ∙ العربية ∙ پښتو ∙ فارسی ∙ ދިވެހިބަސް ∙ +/−

Pjacobi 08:07, 26 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

URVler[edit]

User:Neoneo13 bzw. de:Benutzer:Neoneo13 scheint kein rechtes Urheberrechtsbewusstsein zu haben. Gruß --Steschke 23:02, 2 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Danke für den Hinweis, ich kümmer mich drum. --Avatar 08:28, 3 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Commons-l subscription[edit]

Hello Avatar,

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

If you are already subscribed to commons-l, I apologize for bothering you, and you are free to ignore this message. If you don't want to use your regular e-mail account, feel free to leave me a message, and I can send you a GMail invite. Traffic on the mailing list is relatively low, and we do not expect admins to read all messages to the list, but it would be nice if you could check on it at least every few weeks. Thanks for your time,--Eloquence 22:53, 4 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I'm the mailinglist admin ;) --Avatar 07:41, 5 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hmm, you need to post more so I remember that for next time. ;-)--Eloquence 10:32, 5 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Logo[edit]

Hi, könntest du bitte kurz Image:EBay Logo.svg wieder herstellen und in deWP uploaden? Dann kann es wieder weg. Danke. --Steschke 08:02, 7 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Entschuldige die späte Antwort. Nein, das möchte ich nicht machen. Ich - obwohl ich zugegebenermaßen rechtlich nicht sehr bewandert bin - halte es so, wie wir es früher gehalten haben. Nach meiner Auffassung, die entgegengesetzt zu bspw. der Auffassung von Histo ist, stellt das Logo eine URV dar. Ich will nicht dafür verantwortlich sein, es in die de-WP zu uploaden. Wenn du möchtest, kann ich es dir aber gerne per Mail zusenden. --Avatar 00:34, 9 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

OK, können wir so machen. --Steschke 15:21, 9 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Anja Juliette Laval.jpg und Image:Anja Juliette Laval 2.jpg[edit]

Hallo Avatar, wie ist das denn mit diesen beiden Bildern gelaufen? Mir war die Löschung auch aufgefallen, und ich hatte den löschenden Admin Szwedzki sowohl hier als auch in der polnischen WP angesprochen und gebeten, zu erklären, warum das URVs sein sollen, Löschdiskussion habe ich nämlich keine gefunden. Es gab absolut keine Reaktion; für einen Admin ein nicht akzeptables Verhalten, und ich finde, Szwedzki sollte doch mal überdenken, ob er als Admin geeignet ist. Wie bist du auf die Löschung aufmerksam geworden? Danke auch für die Wiederherstellung. --Rosenzweig 11:47, 9 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Ich war darauf aufmerksam geworden, weil ich damals die Bilder in der deutschsprachigen WP ebenfalls für URVs gehalten habe, bis die Erklärung des Uploaders kam. Aus diesem Grund hatte ich die Seite noch auf meiner Beobachtungsliste. Die Begründung wurde allerdings beim Übertragen der Bilder in die Commons nicht kopiert - die Löschung war somit halbwegs gerechtfertigt, weil die Lizenz nicht sonderlich glaubhaft gemacht war. Ich habe die Begründung jetzt mal nachgetragen, nachdem ich die Bilder undeleted und die jeweiligen Artikel wiederhergestellt habe. Eine Antwort von Szwedzki wäre natürlich schön, aber er hat in den Commons nachdem du ihn auf seiner Disku angesprochen hast, keine Edits mehr durchgeführt - es ist also durchaus anzunehmen, dass er dir noch antwortet. --Avatar 16:11, 9 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Danke für die Antwort. Szwedzki hatte ich explizit auch in der polnischen WP angesprochen, und da gab es danach durchaus Edits. Zumindest ein "Hab's gesehen, Antwort kommt später" hätte ich schon erwartet. Aber das ist natürlich nichts, womit ich deine Diskussionsseite weiter belästigen werde. Viele Grüße --Rosenzweig 20:35, 11 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Vandalismus[edit]

Das betraf nur Bilder von mir und scheint mir ein Racheakt gewesen zu sein. Was meinst du? --Steschke 14:57, 15 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Schwierige Frage. Das kann natürlich durchaus sein - allerdings ist genau so denkbar, dass die IP über ein Bild von dir gestolpert ist, und (assume good faith) ihre Änderung für korrekt hielt. In diesem Fall ist es auch durchaus möglich, dass sie die anderen Contributions angesehen und dementsprechend geändert hat. Allerdings sagt man mir nach, Optimist zu sein. --Avatar 08:58, 17 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Ich werde mal Histo fragen, denn in einigen Fällen könnte das sogar stimmen. Gruß --Steschke 14:13, 17 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Anja Juliette Laval.jpg and Image:Anja Juliette Laval 2.jpg[edit]

Avatar, die Erklärung kann genausogut frei erfunden gewesen sein, und der Hochlader hat trotz mehrfacher Nachfrage nie einen Beweis vorlegt, z.B. in Form einer höheren Auflösung. Diese Bildform sieht sehr verdächtig aus. Respektiere das Ergebnis des Löschantrags und lösche die Bilder wieder. Ich habe schon die wirklich haarsträubendsten Behauptungen bei Bildern erlebt, wo trotz offensichtlicher Beweise für eine Copyrightverletzung ganz einfach nur gelogen wurde, dass sich die Balken bogen (das ging so weit, dass jemand sogar, als die Ursprungs-URL angegeben wurde, noch steif und fest behauptet hatte, es sei sein eigenes Foto, nur vom gleichen Motiv, obwohl die Dateien bitweise identisch waren...). Ich glaube niemandem mehr, der mir nicht stichhaltig seine Urheberschaft demonstriert. --Rtc 03:59, 23 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Ich hätte die Bilder nicht undeleten sollen - das war ein Fehler von mir, weil ich mich aufgeregt habe. Ich halte also fest: Wenn der Uploader das Motiv in höherer Auflösung liefert (ans OTRS), dann reicht das als entsprechender Nachweis. Ich kümmer mich drum und werde die Bilder spätestens in sieben Tagen ab heute wieder löschen, sofern ich bis dahin keinen Nachweis habe. Einverstanden? --Avatar 07:30, 23 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Wie oben: Eine zweifach bessere Auflösung (welche von damaligen Kameras angeboten, die von halbwegs professionelen Fotografen benutzt wurden) wäre ein Beweis. Die Bilder und die vergebliche Suche nach den Beweis haben schon längere Geschichte hinter sich. Shaqspeare 08:53, 23 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Nachweis war nicht möglich (Uploader nicht zu erreichen). Ich lösche diese Bilder nun. --Avatar 11:58, 6 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Bitte...[edit]

mal löschen: Image:Image:Preymann III. Eisen (6. Aufl.) Taf. 10.png und Template:Preymann III. Eisen (6. Aufl.). Danke --Steschke 21:04, 24 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

erledigt. --Avatar 16:37, 25 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Danke, leider gleich noch mehr Fehler von mir: Image:Preymann III. Eisen (6. Aufl.) Taf. 12.png und Image:Preymann III. Eisen (6. Aufl.) Taf. 10.png - der Typ heißt Breymann... peinlich, ich weiß :-) --Steschke 19:54, 25 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Kein Problem :-). Sind weg. --Avatar 21:29, 25 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Eins folgt noch, ich muss es aber noch unter neuem Namen hochladen. Herzlichen Dank. --Steschke 06:35, 26 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Canon powershot a95.jpg[edit]

Warum soll dieses Bild gelöscht werden? --Jarlhelm 02:33, 19 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Das fragst du mich? Welchen Unterschied siehst du zwischen diesem Bild und Image:3D-red-and-yellow.jpg? --Avatar 01:35, 20 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Das Red and Yellow Bild war eindeutig urheberrechtlich geschützt (das kann man problemlos unter de:Wikipedia:Bildrechte nachlesen). Das trifft im Übrigen auch auf Barbie-Puppen, jede Art von Merchandising-Artikeln und, soweit ich das sehe, auch auf die Pringels-Verpackungen zu, da ich nicht denke, dass man bei den agebildeten Figuren mit Logos argumentieren kann (und Logos in den Commons zudem nicht geduldet werden) --Jarlhelm 17:08, 21 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Warum glaubst du, dass eine Verpackung urheberrechtlich geschützt ist, nicht aber das Produkt-Design einer Kamera? Argumentierst du, dass das Design der Kamera keine Schöpfungshöhe hat? --Avatar 07:41, 23 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Mit Dingen wie Produkt-Design kenne ich mich (noch nicht) so gut aus, daher hoffte ich, du könntest mir das sagen und stellte diese Frage (ich machte den Fehler, deinen Satz auf meiner Diskussionsseite ernst zu nehmen). Bei den Zeichnungen auf der Verpackung denke ich, dass sie geschützt sind wie jede andere Comicfigur. --Jarlhelm 20:36, 23 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Ich finde es interessant, dass die (einfache) Zeichnung des Gesichtes auf der Pringles-Packung als schützenswert angesehen wird, während im gleichen Atemzug (nicht von dir) bei aufwendigen Logos die Schöpfungshöhe verneint wird und Löschanträge deswegen abgelehnt werden. --Avatar 22:17, 24 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Danke fur das foto[edit]

Hallo, Eine von dein foto ist im dieses seite : fr:Domestication, der ist ein qwalität seite ! Astirmays 21:42, 22 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Wie schön. Dank für den Hinweis! --Avatar 07:35, 23 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hummelbienchen[edit]

Hallo Avatar, habe da was gefunden, was auch im Original keine Biene ist *g* Zu schön, deshalb auch hierhin transportiert :-) Liebe Grüße --Überraschungsbilder 22:15, 22 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Ach, eine Hummel war es :-). Danke für die Korrektur. --Avatar 07:36, 23 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Admin news[edit]

Hello,

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

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

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

Socrates[edit]

The images at the archive is a link to http://web.archive.org/web/19970616165038/www.nd.edu/StudentLinks/akoehl/Socrates.html we can't know if the image is from noaa or from nd.edu. The source and license can't be verified, we must delete the image. Sanbec ✉ 10:48, 14 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Ubisoft[edit]

Hello, bonjour,

Considering new upload like :

(some big commercial games) and considering we use a realy free license, body can use this screenshot to release a commercial book, poster, cover... i realy think its important to request for a new agreement, to prevent Wikimedia of any problem. It will nice to sending a mail in english. What do you think about doing somethink like that ? ~ bayo or talk 01:51, 21 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Well, i dont realy know if you read. I create {{Attribution-Ubisoft}} and i update your page User:Avatar/Ubisoft, because the template « free screenshot » display a bad comment (not copyrighted content...) and the template « attribution » dont display Ubisoft. I will update all image with it. If you have comment we can talk. ~ bayo or talk 18:33, 8 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

You did the totally right thing. Thanks :-) --Avatar 06:07, 22 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Missing permission[edit]

Image Tagging Image:D-Sailors The-Devil-stole-my-Saxophon.ogg[edit]

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） ∙ +/−

This media may be deleted.

Thanks for uploading Image:D-Sailors The-Devil-stole-my-Saxophon.ogg. 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. — Timi chal 19:09, 4 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Spaghetti[edit]

Hello - I'm writing about Spaghetti on the English Wikipedia, and using the picture Image:Spaghetti.jpg. Is the picture of fresh (uncooked) spaghetti, or is it cooked spaghetti? Many thanks --H2g2bob 00:37, 15 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Cooked. Uncooked Spaghetti are long hard and unbended. --Avatar 06:07, 22 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Bestätigung Image:4Busse.jpg[edit]

Hallo Avatar! Da du einen OTRS-Account hast, könntest Du bitte Image:4Busse.jpg bestätigen? Danke und lG -- Andreas Garger 19:55, 12 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Credit-cards.jpg[edit]

Image deletion warning

Image:Credit-cards.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.

--Szczepan talk  15:43, 10 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hot sauce bottles[edit]

Hello. I was wondering if you created the photos on the labels of Image:Hot Sauce-Garlic Style.jpg and Image:Hot Sauce-Jamaican Style.jpg? I am concerned that thes might be derivative work if not, so I wanted to ask you. Thank you, -- Infrogmation 20:23, 16 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I have tagged those images as derivative copyright problems, as per http://www.painisgood.com/pains.asp they seem to be copyrighted and I see no evidence of free licence release. -- Infrogmation 14:44, 30 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Ubisoft permission for using it's screenshots under the free license[edit]

Is the same thing with Ubisoft's games's screenshots on any wikipedia or just here, on commons? Is there any more video game developers which gave this kind of permission? How can game developer give you a permission? -- Dvorsky _{my talk}

Whole Wikipedia Universe. This wasn't decided by a developer, but by the Head of PR. --Avatar 21:06, 14 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Would it be possible to recontact them to confirm what the deal is with this? See Commons:Deletion requests/Template:Attribution-Ubisoft 2. giggy _(:O) 08:36, 7 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Sigh*. Will do. --Avatar 08:44, 7 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Very much obliged. giggy _(:O) 09:47, 7 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Already the mere act of asking them is misleading them, because it is so ridiculous that they won't dare to understand it the way it's meant. It's like asking the British royal family to donate their crown jewels to the public. Of course they would assume that you mean something different. Please stop being so ridiculously naive. --rtc 12:58, 9 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Please leave your FUD elsewhere, but not on my talk page, thx. --Avatar 13:05, 9 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Can we please delete the template now? --rtc 20:06, 16 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Use the standard way and file a deletion request. --84.187.224.196 05:07, 17 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

In fact, I did that two times already. --rtc 19:54, 17 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

rtc, please, wait for Avatar to hear back from them. Once we have a definite comment from them, a final DR (if required) should clarify everything. But please, be patient. giggy _(:O) 00:50, 18 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I consider it as improper to even ask them. Considering the possibility of a valid and positive answer (that is, a statement signed by a member of their executive board in France who is authorized to represent them; not some clueless employee answering the general questions email address) is simply as naive as expecting an email to the Vatican to induce the Pope to abolish celibacy. My point has absolutely nothing to do with FUD. It's called realism. The issues are real. To expect such a release to possibly exist is purely illusionary and wishful thinking. --rtc 09:17, 18 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It's irritating that you don't have noticed that the NRW SPD parliamentary fraction has released all of it's pictures published on their website as PD after beeing asked by Wikipedians. Or if you want an example were the release affects directly the IP/money making part of a business: most images of the suicide girls are published under a free license. Most likely they depend more on the images than the game industry - you need more than just images to create an own game. We are in discussion with other big organizations about publishing their image archives under a free license. But of course all off this was purely illusionary and wishful thinking once. But like I said, I'm not interested about discussing this topic on my talk page, because I know that you don't share my view and we won't find a shared one on this topic. --Avatar 10:45, 18 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

All of this is actually illusionary and wishful thinking. An appropriate check of the described cases will reveal that the alleged licenses are all null and void. Trying to get licenses via the "kleine Dienstweg" is doomed to failure; they will never be valid. A written and signed permission by a qualified person authorized to represent the copyright holder is necessary. I claim that any alleged "agreement" that has been reached is based on the agreeing person being at least one of a) not being qualified, b) not being an authorized representative, c) undestanding terms such as "PD" differently than you. For example, at http://www.spd-fraktion.landtag.nrw.de/spdinternet/www/startseite/Impressum/index.jsp we read "Alle Texte und Fotos dieser Website sind zur weiteren Verwendung freigeben. Hinweis für Wikipediaeinträge: Alle Texte, Fotos/Bilder und Videos dieser Website unterliegen der Lizenz 'public domain'". At De:Benutzer:Rtc/Checkliste you can easily read that such a "Public Domain" release is never a sufficient statement. I do not criticize your optimism towards releases, I criticize your non-critical attitude towards that optimism. --rtc 11:34, 23 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image Tagging Image:StepMania-ingame.jpg[edit]

This media may be deleted.

Thanks for uploading Image:StepMania-ingame.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. -N 17:58, 21 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Credit-cards.jpg[edit]

Image deletion warning

--_→AzaToth 15:52, 7 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Diskriminierung von Administrator[edit]

"User:Polarlys" tut mir meine Seite hier ständig löschen, obwohl ich da einen Text von mir da Hereingeschrieben hab. Dann habe ich eine Liste mit Links eingefügt und der kommt mir Kopiergeschützte Werke an, um mit dieser Seite Unfug anzustellen. Der hat die geschützt, obwohl ich da 'reingeschrieben habe, dass ich selber jeder hier editieren darf. Dann habe ich den aufgefrordert das rückgängig zu machen und der hat es nicht gemacht. Das ist Vandalismus! Ich habe gegen keine Regel verstoßen. Nun hat der mich gauf meiner eigenen Benutzerseite gesperrt, obwohl ich nur meinen eigenen Text da hereingeschrieben habe!!!--The User 09:07, 20 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Der Nutzer, der hier in der Vergangenheit übrigens hunderte Urheberrechtsverletzungen reingestellt hat, aufgrund von „hate speech“, persönlichen Angriffen und ideologisch verbrämter Arbeitsweise auf en.wikipedia.org und de.wikipedia.org wiederholt gesperrt wurde (mit einer ganzen Armada von Sockenpuppen), der TU und SLUB Dresden mehrere Abuse-Meldungen eingebracht hat, hat Texte von ard.de kopiert und war zudem mal wieder in seiner „In-der-BRD-wird-gedopt-während-unsere-heldenhaften-DDR-Athleten-inklusive-die-Schwimmerinnen-mit-den-Bärten-ihre-Medaillien-ohne Doping-gewonnen-haben“-Mission unterwegs. Das steht in krassem Widerspruch zu COM:SCOPE. --Polarlys 11:45, 20 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hey Polaris. Ich hatte mir nach der Nachricht die gelöschten Beiträge und die Disku des Nutzers angeschaut und war zur Überzeugung gekommen, dass eine Antwort/Reaktion von mir nicht notwendig sei. Sorry, hätte ich dir gegenüber vielleicht deutlich machen sollen. --Avatar 19:41, 20 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Ubisoft[edit]

Hallo Avatar; unter User talk:Avatar/Ubisoft/OTRS thread war seit Oktober eine Google-Übersetzung von User:Avatar/Ubisoft/OTRS thread ins Englische abgelegt, die durch ihre Fehlerhaftigkeit zwar ziemlich lustig, aber nicht besonders hilfreich war. Ich habe mir nun mal die Mühe gemacht und das alles selbst ins Englische übersetzt und dort abgelegt, da die Sache ja immer wieder zu Diskussionen führt. Persönlich bin ich immer noch der Ansicht, dass aus der Korrespondenz hervorgeht, dass die antwortende Ubisoft-Person von falschen Annahmen ausging (sie glaubte, es ginge nur um die Verwendung in der Wikipedia und nicht um eine ausdrückliche Freigabe zur Verwendung für jeden Zweck, wie im Template gesagt wird; siehe auch User_talk:Giggy#Ubisoft_template), aber auch dann, wenn alles so bleibt, ist es sicher gut, wenn auch Leute, die des Deutschen nicht mächtig sind, die Korrespondenz verstehen können. Gestumblindi 00:00, 8 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Um ehrlich zu sein, erfahre ich jetzt zum ersten mal von dieser Übersetzung. Ich hab auf meiner Todo-Liste stehen, mal wieder bei Ubisoft nachzuhaken. --Avatar 06:32, 8 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Schon im Voraus herzlichen Dank für's Nachhaken. Meiner Meinung nach müsste man beim Nachhaken Ubisoft unbedingt noch stärker betonen, dass es um das Erteilen einer freien Lizenz für jegliche Verwendung durch jedermann, nicht nur in der Wikipedia oder in Wikimedia-Projekten geht. Das scheint der Ubisoft-Vertreter in der letzten Korrespondenz nicht wirklich begriffen zu haben. Gestumblindi 11:09, 8 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Avatar, könntest du bei weiterem Kontakt mit Ubisoft auch nachfragen, auf welche Spiele sich die Freigabe bezieht? Ubisoft vertreibt ja nicht nur eigene Spiele, sondern auch viele Spiele von anderen Entwicklern. Ich weiß nicht, ob Ubisoft da wirkliche die Rechte hat, alle Texturen, Grafiken, Figuren, etc.. in fremden Spielen freizugeben. --Kam Solusar 02:18, 30 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

FedCon XVII[edit]

Hm, offenbar hab ich mich lange nicht auf Commons eingeloggt, sonst hätte ich sicher längst geantwortet... Solltest du nächstes Jahr wieder hingehen, meld dich vorher einfach mal. Zumindest treffen könnte man sich ja mal. --Dapete ばか 18:17, 12 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Music Uploads.[edit]

Thanks, for uploading certain music files...

Do you have any sourcing information on them?

One file is being considered for WikI Campus Radio's playlist and it would be nice to approach the original artist/composer for permission.

ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 14:38, 26 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Tell me which music file and I'll give you the information - otherwise they should be found on the according media page. --Avatar (talk) 09:51, 27 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Commons:Deletion requests/Image:PoP2008 Environment Bright.jpg[edit]

Hello Avatar. I just request a deletion of some content from Ufisoft, that why i remember we are waiting a confirmation of the agreement? Is there any new thing about that? Thanks a lot. ~ bayo or talk 16:37, 28 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Haiti-wappen.png[edit]

Image deletion warning

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

Reisio (talk) 21:54, 2 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Administrative notice[edit]

Deutsch

Dear Avatar. I am writing to you to inform you that because of inactivity, you may lose your adminship on Commons.

Commons has a new policy on admin activity, Commons:Administrators/De-adminship, taken into use on June 13, 2007 (after a two-week poll on the proposed policy's talk page).

If you want to keep your adminship, you have to sign at Commons:Administrators/Inactivity section within 30 days. Note that if you don't make 5 admin actions in the following 5 months, you will then lose the adminship anyways.

Thank you — Mike.lifeguard 16:51, 15 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

File:Icons-mini-application firefox.gif[edit]

File:Icons-mini-application firefox.gif 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!

--ViperSnake151 (talk) 19:52, 4 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Videogame developers permission[edit]

Hi Avtar, I just noticed you ARE THE MAN who got permission from Ubisoft. That was great for us gamers. I myself try to get permission from lots of developers but I didn'tsucceed. I don't know if it is just because I'm brazilian or what. So I'd like to know if you could try with others. I can get some companies' e-mails and adresses if you agree tryuing it. Just tell me if you are up to. Cheers! And thanks for your good work. Mizunoryu 大熊猫❤小熊猫 (talk) 16:07, 5 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think the fact that you're bazilian is important - the problem is that most companies a) don't have no knowledge at all about free licenses and b) are very restrictive to use them. Typically because they laywer tell them to not do so. Sad but true I really don't have any time left to follow up this topic :-( --Avatar (talk) 06:29, 7 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Offenbach am Main[edit]

Hallo Avatar,

ich habe angefangen Galerieseiten für Offenbach am Main zu erstellen. Dabei ist mir aufgefallen, daß da eine unsinnige Weiterleitung von Offenbach am Main auf Offenbach besteht. Unsinnig deswegen, weil die Stadt nunmal Offenbach am Main heißt und nicht Offenbach und weil es etliche Links gibt die richtig auf Offenbach am Main linken und dann überflüssigerweise auf die falsche Bezeichnung weiter geleitet werden.

Sinnvoll wäre es höchstens andersrum: Ein Redirect von Offenbach auf Offenbach am Main!

Verschieben geht nicht weil die Seite ja schon besteht, daher möchte ich dich bitten den Redirect Offenbach am Main zu löschen um dann Offenbach dorthin zu verschieben. Mhhh... ich hoffe, daß kommt jetzt noch einigermaßen verständlich rüber ;-)

LG Lady Whistler (talk) 14:17, 6 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Kein Problem, schon erledigt. --Avatar (talk) 06:28, 7 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

OTRS invitation[edit]

The OTRS system is looking for trusted volunteers to help staff our German-language image submission queue. I would like to invite you to look over what OTRS involves and consider signing up at the volunteering page. Thank you. MBisanz ^talk 00:11, 24 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hehe, that's pretty nice from you, but please be aware that I was one of the persons who build up the German OTRS-Team from the start ;) --Avatar (talk) 06:55, 25 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

File tagging Image:Ruhrviadukt Witten um 1900.jpg[edit]

This media was probably deleted.

Thanks for uploading Image:Ruhrviadukt Witten um 1900.jpg. This media 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 ask the author or copyright holder to send an email with copy of a written permission to VRT (permissions-commons@wikimedia.org). You may still be required to go through this procedure even if you are the author yourself; please see Commons:But it's my own work! for more details. After you emailed permission, you may replace the {{No permission since}} tag with {{subst:PP}} on file description page. Alternatively, you may click on "Challenge speedy deletion" below the tag if you wish to provide an argument why evidence of permission is not necessary in this case.

Please see this page for more information on how to confirm permission, or if you would like to understand why we ask for permission when uploading work that is not your own, or work which has been previously published (regardless of whether it is your own).

The file probably has been deleted. If you sent a permission, try to send it again after 14 days. Do not re-upload. When the VRT-member processes your mail, the file can be undeleted. Additionally you can request undeletion here, providing a link to the File-page on Commons where it was uploaded ([[:Image:Ruhrviadukt Witten um 1900.jpg]]) and the above demanded information in your request.

Jodo (talk) 23:20, 16 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Ubisoft[edit]

Hi Avatar, could you have a look at User talk:Bayo#Purge Ubisoft, le retour? Thank you, Multichill (talk) 21:43, 24 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Discussion about the Ubi license[edit]

Hey Avatar, recently some discussion about the attribution-ubisoft license has sprung up again (e.g. [2]) and we were wondering if you could get back in contact with the original sender of the email. We're not disputing the validity, but there's some question as to whether it extends to all Ubi-published games as well as developed, and if it applies to official/press images in addition to user-generated. It's somewhat murky on these grounds in the original email. --David Fuchs (talk) 17:30, 30 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Kategorisierung "Lennestadt-Hachen"[edit]

Guten Tag Aminiostrator Avatar, ich habe kürzlich das für einen Artikel verwendete Bild: Hachen-Lennestadt.jpg hochgeladen und unter "Hachen-Lennestadt" kategorisiert. Ich möchte (analog zu anderen Ortsteilbildern von Lennestadt), daß die Kategorie "Lennestadt - Hachen" auch als Subkategorie der Kateg. "Districts of Lennestadt" erscheint und das genannte Bild auch hierüber auffindbar ist.Kannst Du mir behilflich sein - möchte weitere Fehlversuche vermeiden. Danke--Hawiech (talk) 14:34, 7 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

N A C H T R A G: Die Anfrage hat sich erledigt - Problem gelöst--Hawiech (talk) 13:30, 9 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

De-adminship warning[edit]

Deutsch | Español

Dear Avatar. I am writing to you to inform you that you are in danger of losing your adminship on Commons because of inactivity.

If you want to keep your adminship, you need both to sign at Commons:Administrators/Inactivity section within 30 days of today's date, and also to make at least five further admin actions in the following six months. Anyone who does not do so will automatically lose administrator rights.

You can read the de-admin policy at Commons:Administrators/De-adminship.

Thank you

barnstar[edit]

		The Commons Barnstar
		Hello, you have been desysoped because you didn't make enough logactions (5) since the last run. I give you this barnstar for all your hard work at Commons. I hope that you will ask again for admin rights when you have enough time. With deep respect, Huib talk 19:41, 8 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Ouch - that's harsh Abigor. --J.smith (talk) 19:47, 8 August 2009 (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, Avatar!

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.

BotMultichillT 07:43, 7 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Felsen-bei-Sao-Lourenco.jpg was uncategorized on 6 September 2009.

Ubisoft screenshots[edit]

Hello Avatar,

In reference to Commons:Deletion_requests/Call_of_Juarez_media, is Ubisoft's free license claim extended to screenshots of games it published but did not develop? Thanks for your help. —Anonymous Dissident^Talk 00:28, 16 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

There is no such thing as a "free license claim" by Ubisoft; not only not for games it published but did not develop, but not for any game at all! There are merely a few misunderstood statements by a support guy from some German Ubisoft related company (not Ubisoft itself, and not authorized to give any licenses!) who wanted to explain fair use policies for screenshots of Ubisoft games. This was then (deliberately) misunderstood as a "free license" which never existed. Please see Commons:Deletion requests/Template:Attribution-Ubisoft 3 and all the earlier deletion requests. I hope we will eradicate the pictures finally in the current deletion request. If you need such screenshots, use them according to the fair use policy of your local Wikipedia, if it has one. --rtc (talk) 22:40, 5 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

File:Beach volleyball-Huntington Beach-California 1.jpg[edit]

File:Beach volleyball-Huntington Beach-California 1.jpg has been marked as a possible copyright violation. Wikimedia Commons only accepts free content—that is, images and other media files that can be used by anyone, for any purpose. Traditional copyright law does not grant these freedoms, and unless noted otherwise, everything you find on the web is copyrighted and not permitted here. For details on what is acceptable, please read Commons:Licensing. You may also find Commons:Copyright rules useful, or you can ask questions about Commons policies at the Commons:Help desk. If you are the copyright holder and the creator of the file, please read Commons:But it's my own work! for tips on how to provide evidence of that.

The file you added may soon be deleted. If you have written permission from the copyright holder, please replace the copyvio tag with {{subst:OP}} and have them send us a free license release via COM:VRT. If you disagree that the file is a copyright violation for any other reason, please replace the copyvio tag with a regular deletion request.

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

Afrikaans ∙ asturianu ∙ azərbaycanca ∙ Bahasa Indonesia ∙ Bahasa Melayu ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ dansk ∙ Deutsch ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ ∙ English ∙ español ∙ euskara ∙ français ∙ galego ∙ hrvatski ∙ italiano ∙ Lëtzebuergesch ∙ magyar ∙ Malti ∙ Nederlands ∙ norsk bokmål ∙ norsk nynorsk ∙ oʻzbekcha / ўзбекча ∙ Plattdüütsch ∙ polski ∙ português ∙ português do Brasil ∙ română ∙ sicilianu ∙ slovenčina ∙ slovenščina ∙ suomi ∙ svenska ∙ Türkçe ∙ Tiếng Việt ∙ Zazaki ∙ Ελληνικά ∙ беларуская ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ ∙ български ∙ македонски ∙ русский ∙ српски / srpski ∙ тоҷикӣ ∙ українська ∙ հայերեն ∙ मराठी ∙ বাংলা ∙ മലയാളം ∙ ပအိုဝ်ႏဘာႏသာႏ ∙ မြန်မာဘာသာ ∙ ไทย ∙ 한국어 ∙ 日本語 ∙ 中文（简体）‎ ∙ 中文（繁體）‎ ∙ עברית ∙ العربية ∙ فارسی ∙ +/−

--High Contrast (talk) 09:09, 30 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Please help replace this outdated license[edit]

Hello!

Thank you for donating images to the Wikimedia Commons. You have uploaded some images in the past with the license {{PD}}. While this was a license acceptable in the early days of Wikimedia, since January 2006, this license has been deprecated and since October 2008 no new uploads with this license was allowed.

The license on older images should be replaced with a better and more specific license/permissions and you can help by checking the images and adding {{PD-self}} if you are the author or one of the other templates that you can see in the template on the image page.

Thank you for your help. If you need help feel free to ask at Commons talk:Licensing or contact User:Zscout370.

The images we would like you to check are:

File:Juelich-zerstoert-1944.jpg

BotMultichillT 20:13, 8 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Ubisoft[edit]

Hallo Avatar! Ich habe die in deinem BNR abgelegten Freigaben von Ubisoft gelöscht, da wir nun von entsprechender Stelle ein Statement dazu haben (https://secure.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/wiki/Commons:Administrators%27_noticeboard#Finally_an_answer_from_Ubisoft), dass die Nutzung von Ubisoft-Material unter freien Lizenzen nicht erlaubt ist. Viele Grüße, --Polarlys (talk) 13:18, 1 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Electronic musicians[edit]

Category discussion notification

Category:Electronic musicians 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!

čeština ∙ Deutsch ∙ English ∙ español ∙ français ∙ italiano ∙ magyar ∙ Nederlands ∙ português ∙ polski ∙ sicilianu ∙ slovenščina ∙ Tiếng Việt ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца) ∙ македонски ∙ русский ∙ українська ∙ ತುಳು ∙ ಕನ್ನಡ ∙ ไทย ∙ עברית ∙ 日本語 ∙ 中文 ∙ +/−

Hekerui (talk) 16:23, 9 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

File:Scene.org-award-statue.jpg[edit]

File:Scene.org-award-statue.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.

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!

ChrisiPK (Talk|Contribs) 20:17, 15 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

File:Stasi_2.0.png[edit]

Source of derivative work is not properly indicated: File:Stasi 2.0.png[edit]

العربية ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ Deutsch ∙ English ∙ español ∙ hrvatski ∙ italiano ∙ slovenščina ∙ Tiếng Việt ∙ беларуская‎ ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ ∙ русский ∙ ไทย ∙ မြန်မာဘာသာ ∙ ပအိုဝ်ႏဘာႏသာႏ ∙ 日本語 ∙ 中文（简体）‎ ∙ 中文（繁體）‎ ∙ فارسی ∙ +/−

This file may be deleted.

A file that you have uploaded to Wikimedia Commons, File:Stasi 2.0.png, is a derivative work, containing an "image within an image". Examples of such works would include a photograph of a sculpture, a scan of a magazine cover, or a map that has been altered from the original. In each of these cases, the rights of the creator of the original must be considered, as well as those of the creator of the derivative work.

While the description page states who made this derivative work, it currently doesn't specify who created the original work, so the overall copyright status is unclear. If you did not create the original work depicted in this image, you will need to specify the owner of the copyright.

Please edit the file description and add the missing information, or the file may be deleted. If you created the original content yourself, enter this information as the source. If someone else created the content, the source should be the address to the web page where you found it, the name and ISBN of the book you scanned it from, or similar. You should also name the author, provide verifiable information to show that the content is in the public domain or has been published under a free license by its author, and add an appropriate template identifying the public domain or licensing status, if you have not already done so. Please add the required information for this and other files you have uploaded before adding more files. If you need assistance, please ask at the help desk. Thank you!

Please also note this discussion about the source, --Trac3R (talk) 19:04, 29 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Commons:Tools[edit]

Commons:Tools 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 project page, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with it.

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!

189.21.130.210 14:08, 7 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Wiki Loves Monuments 2011 has finished[edit]

Dear Avatar,

Thank you for contributing to Wiki Loves Monuments and sharing your pictures with the whole world. You are very welcome to keep uploading images, even though you can't win prizes any longer. To get started on editing relevant Wikipedia articles, click here for more information and help.
You can find all uploaded pictures in our central media collection Wikimedia Commons. Many photos are already used in Wikipedia. The contest was very successful with more than 165,000 images submitted throughout Europe. To make future contests even more successful, we would like to invite you to share your experiences with us in this survey.

Kind regards,

the Wiki Loves Monuments team

File:Juelich-zerstoert-1944.jpg[edit]

File:Juelich-zerstoert-1944.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.

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!

Liliana-60 (talk) 13:45, 13 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

File:Albertus Magnus-Denkmal.jpg[edit]

File:Albertus Magnus-Denkmal.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.

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!

84.61.186.88 13:34, 11 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. IMHO that's a clear case of FoP-Germany. --Avatar (talk) 16:44, 11 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

File:Application delete.png[edit]

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

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!

70.195.12.223 01:04, 20 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Wiki Loves Monuments 2014 startet in Kürze[edit]

Hallo Avatar,

in Kürze ist es wieder soweit. Der nun schon traditionelle Fotowettbewerb Wiki Loves Monuments wird im September zum vierten Mal stattfinden. In ähnlicher Form hatte unlängst der Wettbewerb "Wiki Loves Earth" eine erfolgreiche Premiere. Zu allen bisherigen vier Wettbewerben haben seit 2011 gut 3000 unterschiedliche Teilnehmer (User) ihren Beitrag geleistet. Du warst dabei, und bist auch herzlich eingeladen, am bevorstehenden WLM-Wettbewerb wieder dabei zu sein.

Allein in Deutschland wurden in den letzten drei Jahren im Rahmen von WLM rund 100.000 Fotos zu den insgesamt ca. 850.000 Kulturdenkmalen bundesweit hochgeladen. Jährlich haben sich mehrere Hundert Wiki-Fotographen daran beteiligt. Auch im kommenden Denkmalmonat wird dies gewiss wieder der Fall sein. Der Tag des offenen Denkmals am 14. September bietet bundesweit vielfältige Möglichkeiten, Denkmale nicht nur von außen, sondern auch von innen zu fotografieren. Denkmallisten sind dabei ein wichtiger Orientierungspunkt und zugleich auch Ziel der Einbindung der Fotos. Auch in diesem Jahr sind wieder neue Denkmallisten hinzugekommen, die hilfreich bei der Planung von individuellen oder Gruppen-Fototouren sind und auf eine Bebilderung warten, wie z.B. zu Görlitz oder Zittau. Unter den Landeshauptstädten fehlt nur noch Stuttgart. Aber auch hier ist Licht in Sicht.

In der Mitte Deutschlands hat die Denkmallandschaft der thüringischen Landeshauptstadt Erfurt nun das Licht der Wikipedia-Welt entdeckt. Mehr als 50 Tabellen enthalten 3.700 Denkmale. Allein die wunderschön restaurierte Altstadt umfasst 1.800 Denkmale. Eine von WMDE geförderte WLM-Fototour nach Erfurt am Wochenende vom 29. – 31. August lädt herzlich ein, diese einzigartige Kulturlandschaft zu dokumentieren. Mehr Informationen findest Du auf der Projektseite.

Wir freuen uns auf Deine weiteren Beiträge für Wikimedia-Projekte.

Viel Spaß beim größten Fotowettbewerb der Wiki(m/p)edia wünscht Dir das Orga-Team.

( Bernd Gross, 16. August 2014)

File tagging File:Demo PC BlackMaiden Interceptor.jpg[edit]

This media may be deleted.

Thanks for uploading File:Demo PC BlackMaiden Interceptor.jpg. This media 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 ask the author or copyright holder to send an email with copy of a written permission to VRT (permissions-commons@wikimedia.org). You may still be required to go through this procedure even if you are the author yourself; please see Commons:But it's my own work! for more details. After you emailed permission, you may replace the {{No permission since}} tag with {{subst:PP}} on file description page. Alternatively, you may click on "Challenge speedy deletion" below the tag if you wish to provide an argument why evidence of permission is not necessary in this case.

Warning: unless the permission information is given, the file may be deleted after seven days. Thank you.

czar ♔ 18:31, 21 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry to send you a template when you know what you're doing. This file is from 2004 so it might have missed some of the formalities. Could you send an OTRS message to verify the group's permission to make this release? czar ♔ 18:33, 21 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

File:Demo PC BlackMaiden Interceptor.jpg[edit]

File:Demo PC BlackMaiden Interceptor.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.

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!

Ju Ta 19:54, 30 September 2014 (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:

File:Easter-Eggs-1.jpg

And also:

File:Easter-Eggs.jpg

Yours sincerely, Josve05a (talk) 13:10, 11 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

File tagging File:Prof Dr Herbert W Franke.jpg[edit]

This media was probably deleted.

Thanks for uploading File:Prof Dr Herbert W Franke.jpg. This media 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 ask the author or copyright holder to send an email with copy of a written permission to VRT (permissions-commons@wikimedia.org). You may still be required to go through this procedure even if you are the author yourself; please see Commons:But it's my own work! for more details. After you emailed permission, you may replace the {{No permission since}} tag with {{subst:PP}} on file description page. Alternatively, you may click on "Challenge speedy deletion" below the tag if you wish to provide an argument why evidence of permission is not necessary in this case.

The file probably has been deleted. If you sent a permission, try to send it again after 14 days. Do not re-upload. When the VRT-member processes your mail, the file can be undeleted. Additionally you can request undeletion here, providing a link to the File-page on Commons where it was uploaded ([[:File:Prof Dr Herbert W Franke.jpg]]) and the above demanded information in your request.

Dman41689 (talk) 06:22, 15 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Der WLM-Countdown hat begonnen[edit]

Hallo Avatar,

nun ist es wieder soweit. Vom 1. bis zum 30. September findet zum fünften Mal der internationale Wettbewerb Wiki Loves Monuments statt. Im Mittelpunkt steht bekanntlich das Fotografieren von Kulturdenkmalen. Du hast an einem der letzten Fotowettbewerbe teilgenommen und wir freuen uns auf weitere Bildbeiträge von Dir.

Viele interessante Motive, nicht nur Burgen und Schlösser, sondern auch Fachwerkhäuser, Brücken und Brunnen, technische und Industriedenkmale und vieles mehr gibt es noch zu fotografieren, damit sie in der Wikipedia dokumentiert werden können. Nützliche Tipps findest du auf unserer WLM-Projektseite. Du kannst gerne individuell Fototouren durchführen oder aber Dich auch Gruppentouren anschließen. Besonders freuen wir uns auf Fotos, die Lücken in den Denkmallisten der Wikipedia ausfüllen.

Darüber hinaus kannst Du auch an der Arbeit der Jury teilnehmen, die Mitte Oktober die Fotos bewerten und die Gewinner ermitteln wird. Bis zum 15. August kannst du hier Deine Bewerbung einreichen.

Viel Erfolg und Spaß beim größten Fotowettbewerb der Wiki(m/p)edia in den bevorstehenden Wettbewerbswochen wünscht Dir das Orga-Team. Wir freuen uns auf Deine Fotos.

( Bernd Gross, 6. August 2015)

File tagging File:Ulrich-van-Suntum.jpg[edit]

This media was probably deleted.

Thanks for uploading File:Ulrich-van-Suntum.jpg. This media 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 ask the author or copyright holder to send an email with copy of a written permission to VRT (permissions-commons@wikimedia.org). You may still be required to go through this procedure even if you are the author yourself; please see Commons:But it's my own work! for more details. After you emailed permission, you may replace the {{No permission since}} tag with {{subst:PP}} on file description page. Alternatively, you may click on "Challenge speedy deletion" below the tag if you wish to provide an argument why evidence of permission is not necessary in this case.

The file probably has been deleted. If you sent a permission, try to send it again after 14 days. Do not re-upload. When the VRT-member processes your mail, the file can be undeleted. Additionally you can request undeletion here, providing a link to the File-page on Commons where it was uploaded ([[:File:Ulrich-van-Suntum.jpg]]) and the above demanded information in your request.

Code (talk) 12:37, 23 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Credit card[edit]

Credit card 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 gallery, 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.

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!

E4024 (talk) 09:07, 26 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

File:Beach volleyball-Huntington Beach-California 2.jpg[edit]

File:Beach volleyball-Huntington Beach-California 2.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.

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!

B dash (talk) 14:57, 8 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

File:Beach volleyball-Huntington Beach-California 4.jpg[edit]

File:Beach volleyball-Huntington Beach-California 4.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.

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!

B dash (talk) 14:59, 8 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

File tagging File:Speedway Start.jpg[edit]

This media was probably deleted.

Thanks for uploading File:Speedway Start.jpg. This media 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 ask the author or copyright holder to send an email with copy of a written permission to VRT (permissions-commons@wikimedia.org). You may still be required to go through this procedure even if you are the author yourself; please see Commons:But it's my own work! for more details. After you emailed permission, you may replace the {{No permission since}} tag with {{subst:PP}} on file description page. Alternatively, you may click on "Challenge speedy deletion" below the tag if you wish to provide an argument why evidence of permission is not necessary in this case.

The file probably has been deleted. If you sent a permission, try to send it again after 14 days. Do not re-upload. When the VRT-member processes your mail, the file can be undeleted. Additionally you can request undeletion here, providing a link to the File-page on Commons where it was uploaded ([[:File:Speedway Start.jpg]]) and the above demanded information in your request.

Masur (talk) 08:26, 25 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

File tagging File:Speedway am Startband.jpg[edit]

This media was probably deleted.

Thanks for uploading File:Speedway am Startband.jpg. This media 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 ask the author or copyright holder to send an email with copy of a written permission to VRT (permissions-commons@wikimedia.org). You may still be required to go through this procedure even if you are the author yourself; please see Commons:But it's my own work! for more details. After you emailed permission, you may replace the {{No permission since}} tag with {{subst:PP}} on file description page. Alternatively, you may click on "Challenge speedy deletion" below the tag if you wish to provide an argument why evidence of permission is not necessary in this case.

The file probably has been deleted. If you sent a permission, try to send it again after 14 days. Do not re-upload. When the VRT-member processes your mail, the file can be undeleted. Additionally you can request undeletion here, providing a link to the File-page on Commons where it was uploaded ([[:File:Speedway am Startband.jpg]]) and the above demanded information in your request.

Ju Ta 21:16, 5 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

File:Markus-Giesler.jpg[edit]

File:Markus-Giesler.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.

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!

ConsumercultureCCT (talk) 14:24, 13 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

A goat for you![edit]

Goatttt! For your work on the Silk icons. :)

多多123 (talk) 20:53, 7 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

File tagging File:Note.png[edit]

This media may be deleted.

Thanks for uploading File:Note.png. This media 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 ask the author or copyright holder to send an email with copy of a written permission to VRT (permissions-commons@wikimedia.org). You may still be required to go through this procedure even if you are the author yourself; please see Commons:But it's my own work! for more details. After you emailed permission, you may replace the {{No permission since}} tag with {{subst:PP}} on file description page. Alternatively, you may click on "Challenge speedy deletion" below the tag if you wish to provide an argument why evidence of permission is not necessary in this case.

Warning: unless the permission information is given, the file may be deleted after seven days. Thank you.

Q28 (talk) 06:14, 14 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

File tagging File:Icons-mini-calendar.gif[edit]

This media was probably deleted.

Thanks for uploading File:Icons-mini-calendar.gif. This media 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 ask the author or copyright holder to send an email with copy of a written permission to VRT (permissions-commons@wikimedia.org). You may still be required to go through this procedure even if you are the author yourself; please see Commons:But it's my own work! for more details. After you emailed permission, you may replace the {{No permission since}} tag with {{subst:PP}} on file description page. Alternatively, you may click on "Challenge speedy deletion" below the tag if you wish to provide an argument why evidence of permission is not necessary in this case.

The file probably has been deleted. If you sent a permission, try to send it again after 14 days. Do not re-upload. When the VRT-member processes your mail, the file can be undeleted. Additionally you can request undeletion here, providing a link to the File-page on Commons where it was uploaded ([[:File:Icons-mini-calendar.gif]]) and the above demanded information in your request.

Q28 (talk) 08:53, 29 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]