User talk:ChristophRoser

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

Please feel free to leave comments. Thanks, ChristophRoser (talk) 19:14, 20 March 2016 (UTC)

png --> svg[edit]

Hi, I noticed that you created and uploaded File:PDCA-Multi-Loop.png. I would like to easily translate it to Swedish, which is much easier if the file is in the SVG format. Is it possible for you to upload a svg version of the file? thanks //Knuckles (talk) 07:35, 23 May 2017 (UTC)

Hi Knuckles, i created the slides using PowerPoint, and there seems to be no easy way to convert it to SVG. Sorry. Would the PPT slide help? I can send it to you (under the same license as the png file). -- ChristophRoser (talk) 09:59, 26 May 2017 (UTC)

Different Thread Types.jpg[edit]

Hallo, ich wollte einfach nur Danke sagen für das super Bild: Different Thread Types.jpg

Different Thread Types.jpg

Klasse Bild, so viele Schmerzen :-) Gibt es so eine Gegenüberstellung auch von BSP, BSPP, NPT etc? --Username1204 (talk) 01:34, 14 February 2020 (UTC)

Habe nur bestimmte Gewinde. Habe aber gerade eben ein Update hochgeladen mit noch 2 Bildern File:Different Thread Types Update.jpg. Das ist alles, was ich bis jetzt habe. Rohrgewinde hat es meines wissens üblicherweise keine solchen Schrauben, da diese kegelig sind. ChristophRoser (talk) 07:18, 14 February 2020 (UTC)

File:Industry 4.0.png[edit]

Commons-emblem-issue.svg
File:Industry 4.0.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.

If you created this file, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with it, such as a copyright issue.

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

Beland (talk) 20:29, 10 March 2021 (UTC)

(Copied my response from the deletion page) As the author of this image I disagree with this request. I am an expert in the field, including manufacturing history (Professor of production management, Author of "Faster, Better, Cheaper in the History of Manufacturing", expert on manufacturing optimization with an active blog AllAboutLean.com , ...). In one part you are correct. There is no scientific agreement on how to number the industrial revolutions (except the first one, and even there some disagree). For example, the European Parliament in 2007 decreed green energy to be the fourth industrial revolution, other sources count up to seven (supposedly nanotechnology). However, the goal of this image is not to show the unequivocal truth on the numbering (because there is none), but the numbering commonly used for Industry 4.0. As such, it is very relevant, as Industry 4.0 is a very relevant topic. The image is also my most-downloaded one on Wikipedia, and you can find it all over the web. Other Wikipedians made foreign language translations and variations of my work. Hence, I strongly oppose this deletion request. ChristophRoser (talk) 07:11, 11 March 2021 (UTC)