User talk:Gerardus/Archief 2

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

Image:Kirkeby Groningen 01.JPG[edit]

Image deletion warning Image:Kirkeby Groningen 01.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 If the file is up for deletion because it has been superseded by a superior derivative of your work, consider the notion that although the file may be deleted, your hard work (which we all greatly appreciate) lives on in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 ∙ +/−

Fingalo 07:16, 2 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Kirkeby Groningen 02.JPG[edit]

Image deletion warning Image:Kirkeby Groningen 02.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 If the file is up for deletion because it has been superseded by a superior derivative of your work, consider the notion that although the file may be deleted, your hard work (which we all greatly appreciate) lives on in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 ∙ +/−

--Fingalo 11:21, 2 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Kirkeby Groningen 03.JPG[edit]

Image deletion warning Image:Kirkeby Groningen 03.JPG has been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether it should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry.

If you created this 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 ∙ +/−

--Fingalo 11:22, 2 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Kirkeby Groningen 04.JPG[edit]

Image deletion warning Image:Kirkeby Groningen 04.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 ∙ +/−

--Fingalo 11:22, 2 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Per Kirkeby.JPG[edit]

Image deletion warning Image:Per Kirkeby.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 ∙ +/−

--Fingalo 11:40, 2 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Art. 85.-(1) The provisions of this Act concerning copyright shall apply to 1. works of persons who are nationals of or who have their habitual residence in a country within the European Economic Area; (2) works first published in a country within the European Economic Area, or first published simultaneously in a country within the European Economic Area and in another country. Fingalo 13:26, 2 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Stadsmarkering[edit]

Hallo Gerardus, ik zal binnenkort als het goed weer is eens foto's maken van de joker en de schoorsteen (A7 en Friesestraatweg). De spiraal aan het spoor naar Assen/Hoogezand is helaas niet toegankelijk. Aan beide kanten waar vroeger de weg liep staat nu een hek. Als je nog specifieke beelden hebt waar je foto's van wilt moet je het maar laten weten, dan zal ik eens een rondje stad maken :) Groet, Sander 12:13, 2 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hallo Gerardus, ik kom regelmatig op het Zerniketerrein dus ik kan daar inderdaad wel eens beginnen :) ik zal ook kijken of ik nog wat foto's heb liggen. Groet, ZanderZ 15:34, 3 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Mooi weer, weinig bladeren, ik dacht: het is de moeite waard om te proberen! Dichterbij dan dit kun je niet komen, dus een betere foto zal lastig te maken zijn. ZanderZ 16:09, 20 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Winschoten_01.JPG[edit]

català ∙ čeština ∙ dansk ∙ Deutsch ∙ English ∙ español ∙ Esperanto ∙ français ∙ galego ∙ italiano ∙ lietuvių ∙ magyar ∙ Nederlands ∙ norsk bokmål ∙ português ∙ polski ∙ sicilianu ∙ slovenčina ∙ slovenščina ∙ suomi ∙ Tiếng Việt ∙ Ελληνικά ∙ македонски ∙ русский ∙ українська ∙ հայերեն ∙ 한국어 ∙ 日本語 ∙ 中文（简体） ∙ 中文（繁體） ∙ עברית ∙ فارسی ∙ +/−

Hello, and thank your for sharing your files with Commons. There seems to be a problem regarding the description and/or licensing of this particular file. Please remember that all uploads require source, author and license information. Could you please resolve these problems, which are described on the page linked in above? Thank you. Siebrand 14:08, 3 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
This message was placed by an automated process. Please go to Commons:Help desk if you need help.

Verschieben von Daten von de.Wikipedia nach Commons[edit]

Hallo Gerardus, wenn du Dateien von Wikipedia nach Wikimedia Commons "verschiebst", also Dateien von Wikipedia auch hier hochlädst, dann versehe doch die Bilder auf Wikipedia mit der Vorlage {{subst:NC|neuer_dateiname.jpg}} oder, wenn die Datei auf Commons den gleichen Namen trägt, einfach nur {{subst:NC}}. Somit verhinderst du unnütze Belegung von Speicherplatz. Vielen Dank, ← Körnerbrötchen <✉> 17:39, 8 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

no problem. Everyone makes mistakes. I do them, too. But with this message I try to inform agnostic user. Groet, ← Körnerbrötchen <✉> 12:49, 9 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Bianco del Mare[edit]

Hallo Gerardus, Ik ben heel benieuwd waar je de foto van de Bianco del Mare van Wladimir de Vries hebt gemaakt. De laatste keer dat ik het beeld zag, stond het bij de Oosterpoort, maar gezien de achtergrond staat 'ie nu ergens anders?! Ronn

Beste Ronn, leuk dat iemand het merkt. Het beeld bevindt zich met een aantal andere mij onbekende sculpturen achter het depot Dienst Stadsontwikkeling aan den Gotenburgerweg. Voor het gebouw licht trouwens ook een bekend werk: Ulrich Rückriem's

sculptuur, ook vna de Oosterpoort (?) afkomstig. Groetjes--Gerardus 06:01, 15 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]


Image:NGA02.jpg[edit]

Image deletion warning Image:NGA02.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 ∙ +/−

--Davepape 03:14, 26 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Typewriter Eraser.jpg[edit]

Image deletion warning Image:Typewriter Eraser.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 ∙ +/−

--User:G.dallorto 03:35, 30 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Your cat-change[edit]

Hi Gerardus,
I don't understand that edit[1] of yours. The "Category:Skulpturenmeile Hannover" is subsub-cat of "Category:Hanover". According to the rules the most specific cat should be used. -- Túrelio 09:47, 2 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Image Tagging Image:Bellingwolde vdHeijden.JPG[edit]

العربية ∙ asturianu ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ ∙ বাংলা ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ dansk ∙ Deutsch ∙ Ελληνικά ∙ English ∙ español ∙ euskara ∙ فارسی ∙ suomi ∙ français ∙ galego ∙ עברית ∙ hrvatski ∙ magyar ∙ italiano ∙ 日本語 ∙ 한국어 ∙ македонски ∙ മലയാളം ∙ norsk bokmål ∙ Plattdüütsch ∙ Nederlands ∙ norsk nynorsk ∙ norsk ∙ polski ∙ português ∙ português do Brasil ∙ русский ∙ sicilianu ∙ slovenčina ∙ slovenščina ∙ svenska ∙ ไทย ∙ Türkçe ∙ українська ∙ Tiếng Việt ∙ 简体中文‎ ∙ 繁體中文‎ ∙ +/−

Warning sign
This media may be deleted.

Thanks for uploading Image:Bellingwolde vdHeijden.JPG. I notice the image page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you have not created this media yourself then you need to argue that we have the right to use the media on Wikimedia Commons (see copyright tagging below). If you have not created the media yourself then you should also specify where you found it, i.e., in most cases link to the website where you got it, and the terms of use for content from that page. If the content is a derivative of a copyrighted work, you need to supply the names and a licence of the original authors as well.

If the media also doesn't have a copyright tag, then you must also add one. If you created/took the picture, audio, or video then you can use {{self|cc-by-sa-3.0}} to release it under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike license or {{PD-self}} to release it into the public domain. See Commons:Copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

Note that any unsourced and untagged images will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have uploaded other media, please check that you have specified their source and copyright tagged them, too. You can find all your uploads using the Gallery tool. Thank you.

This message was added automatically by Filbot, if you need some help about it, ask its master or go to the Commons:Help desk. --Filnik 16:36, 4 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]


Image:Calder-flamingo.jpg[edit]

Image deletion warning Image:Calder-flamingo.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 ∙ +/−

JeremyA 05:07, 9 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]


Image:Oldenburg_Barcelona.jpg[edit]

Image deletion warning Image:Oldenburg_Barcelona.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 ∙ +/−

William Avery 19:13, 10 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Nagasaki Statues[edit]

Hi Gerardus,

Thanks for your interest in the photographs of statues I uploaded, for example, Image:Nagasaki Statue IMG 1866.jpg. It's easy to understand why you added them to Category:Nagasaki Statue, but I'm curious about why you removed them from Category:Peace Park of Nagasaki. It seems natural for them to be in both categories. Can you tell me the reason?

Best regards,

Fg2 21:33, 14 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

[I answered on my Talk page but I might as well answer here too.]

Hi Gerardus,
Thanks for the information. Now I see the idea. Earlier I thought of "Nagasaki Statue" as a general term for all the statues in Nagasaki (I've posted many photos of statues in Nagasaki that are not in Peace Park) but you've made it clear that you mean that individual statue 平和祈念像 in Peace Park. It makes good sense for that category to be in Category:Peace Park of Nagasaki.
Separately, I view categories as collections of large numbers of media (in this case, photos), designed to let a user select from a variety of approaches. I provided a lot of photos from different angles, or with different sizes, or with the statue placed in various parts of the frame. For an encyclopedia article on the statue, an editor might want a shot in which the statue fills the frame. Someone illustrating a Wikibook on Nagasaki might prefer one with the statue in a corner, and room for type against the blue sky. Other projects might have uses I haven't even anticipated. There are so many projects in addition to the Wikipedias! My intent was to provide lots of pictures for lots of uses.
Collecting them in a separate category as you are doing can be useful if it solves problems such as the one you described (frightening people who see too many). I never imagined people would have that reaction, but human nature always surprises me with its variety. As long as there's some category with all the shots, and some other category with the best ones, I'm quite happy.
Once again, thanks for the explanation.
Best regards, Fg2 08:45, 15 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Geen dank[edit]

Hoi Gerardus,

Geen dank. Ik zag je naam al veelvuldig langskomen binnen de sectie beeldhouwerken! Ik zal zo nog even een tweede foto van hetzelfde beeld uploaden maar dan met de gehele pilaar (van COR-TEN-STAAL) er op. In Den Helder kom ik niet vaak, maar wie weet. In Heerhugowaard stond tot voor kort een Cor-ten-staal object van Evert Strobos maar sinds de school waar deze stond is afgebroken weet ik niet wat er mee gebeurt is. Daarnaast heb ik nog een zeer verwaarloosd cor-ten-staal object bij een school in Kollum (dichter bij jouw), die foto kan ik wel uploaden, dat heb ik tot nu toe gelaten omdat ik geen maker kon achterhalen, maar misschien weet jij weer meer.

De collectie beeldhouwwerken op commons breidt zich in ieder geval lekker uit!

PS, ik ben meer van de jaren twintig bouwbeeldhouwkunst... Brbbl 06:55, 20 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Keunstwurk?[edit]

Ik zweer het je, toen ik de foto maakte stond deze nog niet vermeld op Keunstwurk.nl. Daar heb je de maker vandaan toch? Ik ben in december weer even in Kollum, dan zal ik (als het weer het toelaat) ook het transformatorhuisje fotograferen. Deze was mij al wel opgevallen, maar je moet niet alles willen fotograferen. Ik zag dat deze man overigens ook in Zoetermeer en Joure een beeld moet hebben staan. Geboren in 1938 in Den Haag, thans woonachtig in Noardburgum.Brbbl 07:21, 22 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Modern sculptures[edit]

Thank you for your opinion and comment. Unfortunately, it is not true that "most" images about modern sculptures come from FOP countries: most Wikipedians, simply, do not know which are the FOP countries in the first place, so they innocently upload anything they like. This is why strong warnings are necessary: people even upload images of living artists they shot at an exhibition! I myself uploaded scores of images about Italian modern artists that were on public display, wrongly assuming Italy was among FOP countries, before learning the truth and being compelled to ask myself for their deletion...

Simply, the images that you see in WikiCommons now are "mostly" from FOP countries because the others have been, little by little, paintakingly deleted... but at the beginning they were, owerwhelmingly, from NON-FOP countries. Now some people (including me) learned how to behave, and things are getting better, but in the past, anything happened...

Incidentally, I am no administrator. I am simply an art lover who is trying to sort out the dozen thousands of unsorted art images poured into WikiCommons with no categorisation concerning artist and period. This means that I have no power to delete anything myself. I can only nominate. But after dealing with thousands and thousands of images, I learned by heart which ones may stay, and which ones should go, according with the very silly rules governing Commons. Best wishes. --User:G.dallorto 16:02, 5 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

FOP[edit]

Hello Gerardus, you seem to have misunderstood the meaning of the FOP template. It is not derogatory, quite the other way: it meams "do not delete this image, it may stay, since Germany has the FOP provision". As a rule, no sculpture made by an artist who has not been dead for at least 70 years, or who has not given a written publication permission, may be uploaded on Wikicommons. The only exception allowed by the law is under this "freedom of panorama" exemption clause, that allows uploading images that, in its absence, would be forbidden because the work of art is copyrighted.

The artist may have donated the work of art, but please read here http://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Letter_Edged_in_Black_Press%2C_Inc._v._Public_Building_Commission_of_Chicago to understand the problems beneath: even if he donated the work of art, he still owns copyright on it, unless he openly put the work in the Public Domain (as we uploaders are doing, as creators, with our pictures we upload on Commons).

So please do not see the FOP template as an enemy, quite the other way, it is a friend to explain why the image may stay on Commons. Had that image been shot in Italy, where FOP does not apply, the template would have been {{copyvio}} for violation of copyright. So I suggest you should add it yourself when you upload images from countries who allow FOP for sculptures. I hope you understood, now. Best wishes. --User:G.dallorto 18:39, 6 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Giovanni, thank you for your lengthy response. I don't see the FOP template as an enemy, but as totally unnessecarily.

But I accept that some (you for instance) cannot live without it. Soit. The content however of the Fop-template is another question. I had this same discussion in August 2007. It was about two images taken by me in Germany from sculptures made by sculptor/friends of mine. Neither the User who tagged two of my images nor a Dutch admin I happen to know saw my problem and showed me the way to : Commons Talk: Licensing. The action they took and the response they gaven was amazing. The Comment was (I quote): Seems crazy to me, copyright paranoia and overkill to avoid some known problems about images of some French works. I have replaced it on the two images concerned by a new {PD-FOP-DE}. That, Giovanni is what I did to-day: I replaced the FOP template with the PD-FOP-DE template. Result hopefully: you have your template/warning and I have my peace of mind.

Some observations/thoughts about Wkipedia/Wikimedia. I only joined the Community early this year. I have a computer (my first one ever) since December 2006. I have to learn a lot (though I am already 63 years old) and have my good and bad experiences since then. I love the work for the Community and wouldnot dream of being an admin or so. I hate the thought. I am am glad that you excused yourself for not being an admin either. Ranks, stars and stripes doesnot make better persons. Uniforms and things like medals and titles make things even worse. Mij wive asks me on a daily basis why I am doing all this. But my inner voice tells me to go on.

What really amazes me is that in the Wiki community people still think with borders (and I mean real borders). A French User or an Italian one really do think that they represent France or Italy and the interests and laws of those countries. The truth is that they only represent the Frenchspeaking or Italianspeaking Wikipedians. It is about languages not countries. Yes in France and in Italy you have to respect the laws of those countries (FOP or NO-FOP for instance), but you may feel free to put images from sculptures taken in FOP countries from artists on your lists in your Wikipedias. When accepted on Wikimedia the images can be used in all Wikipedias. Have you ever considered that? I noticed a splendid example on the It.wikipedia in the article on Richard Serra (also on the list). Not less than 18 images are added to illustrate this article.

Lately I had some strange experiences with some admin/users: After the summer clean-up by User:Jastrow (you know her) regarding images taken in France of works by Niki de Saint Phalle, an admin (from Spain I believe) deleted all images on Wikimedia from Germany/The Netherlands and Switzerland. Of course they are almost all retraced by me in the meantime and they were undeleted (without FOP templates!!). A few weeks later a Norwegian User (after a clean-up of images from sculpture by Danish sculptors taken in Denmark) launched an attack on all images on Wikimedia Commons by Per Kirkeby. He said he thought that the Danish law overruled the laws of the countries where the images were taken (of course again Germany and my own images in The Netherlands). What a misunderstanding. All is well now and I await the next wrongdoing by admins/users. Also this summer a Belgian User desperately asked me what was wrong with her images taken in Belgium from sculptures. You must know that the nl.wikipedia (not the country Nederland, but the Dutchspeaking (=Nederlands) part of Europe: The Netherlands and the 60% part of Belgium (also called Flanders)) cover 2 countries: one FOP (The Netherlands) and one NO_FOP (Belgium). And honestly I defended the Wikimedia policy on that.

Please do not think that Copyright and licensing problems are not known to me. Those things bother me enormously. But I always ask people : be careful in making and applying rules!! Thank you for reading this nonsense. Greetings--Gerardus 09:15, 7 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I am afraid that from a theoretical point of view we are not allowed, in Italy, to use FOP images, whatever you may think about the matter. Fullstop. The point whether the Italian Wikipedia will be eventually sued or not for using some anyway is another matter; however, the State Art Administration of Florence had a lawyer to send a letter to Wikipedia Italy to have all works of art in their museums removed (which they were from Commons as well).
I understand that, being 63, you may be not be too familiar with the ever-increasing copyright restrictions that the laws created year after year in the last 20 years. When we were both young, the idea that art is also a collective good prevailed, whereas now it is but a merchandise. However, like it or not, this is the law, currently. The proper answer is to campaign to have the law changed, not to break the law, and pretend anyone can or should do it. The cases you quote are cases where the adms were not familiar with the law: it is the German law which applies, not the Danish one, in the case you cite; it is either the Belgian and the Dutch laws that apply case by case since, as it can be easily proven, these are two separate states, not a unique entity, and so on. Since none of us is a professional, including the adms, then errors can happen (and do happen), but the "undelete" process exists quite for that reason.
If you are not happy with Commons, with its limitations and mistakes, perhaps considering the alternative of uploading on "Flickr" should be done by you. On Flickr you do whatever you want, under your personal responsability, of course. If you declare a work of art you photographed is copyright-free, no-one will delete it (unless the owner sues). So please do take into consideration this alternative.
I agree on the fact that Commons has some crazy and silly rules, but, like it or not, these are the rules. Again, if you don't like them, campaign to change them. I have too much to do to undertake the effort myself, thx.
My best wishes. --User:G.dallorto 15:26, 10 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Hello Gerardus, the rule is very simple to learn by heart: FOP applies to countries, not to authors. Therefore, if the sculpture of an Italian sculptor is permanently (i.e. no temporary exhibitions, please!) in public display (i.e. no private collections or galleries, please!) in Germany, then FOP allows publishing his works even if s/he is alive and therefore his works are copyrighted.
On the other hand, if a German sculptor be on display in Italy under the very same conditions and so on, since Italy has no FOP, his works may not be uploaded in WikiCommons.
Works published under the FOP exception may only be published in countries allowing FOP, in the others they remain copyrighted.
This is the reason why it is so important marking as FOP pictures on display in countries where FOP exists, since legislation on this point changes from country to country. For instance, the Usa allow FOP for buildings, but not for statues, so FOP pictures of copyrighted statues on display in the Usa are not allowed in WikiCommons; whereas the UK, Israel of Germany and other countries do allow FOP for statues.
Furthermore, some legislations allow FOP only for non-commercial or no-profit use, and unfortunately WikiCommons wants all works uploaded to be available for ANY use, including a commercial use. Therefore, works on display in such countries, such as Japan, may not be uploaded here (but may be uploaded in the national wikipedias, that usually have less strict rules and allow such things as "fair use" and so on).
You can find a shorthand list for your perusal here. My best regards. --User:G.dallorto 17:00, 10 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Gerardus/Archief_2&oldid=11533295"