User talk:Gerd Leibrock

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

Contents

File:Dora Várkonyi, 0052.jpg[edit]

Commons-emblem-issue.svg File:Dora Várkonyi, 0052.jpg has been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether it should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry.

If you created this file, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with it, such as a copyright issue.
Please remember to respond to and – if appropriate – contradict the arguments supporting deletion. Arguments which focus on the nominator will not affect the result of the nomination. Thank you!


Afrikaans | العربية | Български | বাংলা | Беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ | Català | Čeština | Dansk | Deutsch | Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ | Zazaki | Ελληνικά | English | Esperanto | Español | Eesti | فارسی | Suomi | Français | Galego | עברית | Magyar | Bahasa Indonesia | Íslenska | Italiano | 日本語 | 한국어 | Македонски | മലയാളം | Plattdüütsch | Nederlands | Norsk nynorsk | Norsk bokmål | Occitan | Polski | Português | Português do Brasil | Română | Русский | Slovenčina | Slovenščina | Shqip | Српски / srpski | Svenska | Türkçe | українська | Tiếng Việt | 中文 | 中文(简体)‎ | 中文(繁體)‎ | +/−

This applies to:

--JuTa 23:44, 9 June 2013 (UTC)

Copyright status: File:Leibfriedscher Garten, 040.jpg[edit]

беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ | български | català | čeština | dansk | Deutsch | Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ | English | فارسی | suomi | français | magyar | italiano | македонски | മലയാളം | Bahasa Melayu | 日本語 | norsk | polski | português | română | slovenščina | svenska | українська | 中文(简体)‎ | 中文(繁體)‎ | +/−

Warning sign
This media may be deleted.
Thanks for uploading File:Leibfriedscher Garten, 040.jpg. I notice that the file page either doesn't contain enough information about the license or it contains contradictory information about the license, so the copyright status is unclear.

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

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

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

Yours sincerely, Jarekt (talk) 18:35, 13 September 2013 (UTC)

Copyright status: File:Schloss Rosenstein, 051.jpg[edit]

беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ | български | català | čeština | dansk | Deutsch | Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ | English | فارسی | suomi | français | magyar | italiano | македонски | മലയാളം | Bahasa Melayu | 日本語 | norsk | polski | português | română | slovenščina | svenska | українська | 中文(简体)‎ | 中文(繁體)‎ | +/−

Warning sign
This media may be deleted.
Thanks for uploading File:Schloss Rosenstein, 051.jpg. I notice that the file page either doesn't contain enough information about the license or it contains contradictory information about the license, so the copyright status is unclear.

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

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

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

And also:

No required license templates were detected at this file page. Please correct it, or if you have any questions please contact me on my talk page. Yours sincerely, Jarekt (talk) 19:33, 7 January 2014 (UTC)

Copyright status: File:Königstor (Stuttgart), 010.jpg[edit]

беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ | български | català | čeština | dansk | Deutsch | Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ | English | فارسی | suomi | français | magyar | italiano | македонски | മലയാളം | Bahasa Melayu | 日本語 | norsk | polski | português | română | slovenščina | svenska | українська | 中文(简体)‎ | 中文(繁體)‎ | +/−

Warning sign
This media may be deleted.
Thanks for uploading File:Königstor (Stuttgart), 010.jpg. I notice that the file page either doesn't contain enough information about the license or it contains contradictory information about the license, so the copyright status is unclear.

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

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

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

Steinsplitter (talk) 17:34, 6 May 2014 (UTC)

delete it, has been replaced by File:Königstor (Stuttgart), 012.jpg

File tagging File:Arno Votteler, 0001.jpg[edit]

Беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ | Català | Čeština | Dansk | Deutsch | Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ | Ελληνικά | English | Español | فارسی | Suomi | Français | Galego | עברית | Hrvatski | Magyar | Հայերեն | Italiano | 日本語 | 한국어 | Lietuvių | Македонски | മലയാളം | Plattdüütsch | Nederlands | Norsk bokmål | Polski | Português | Română | Русский | Sicilianu | Slovenčina | Slovenščina | Svenska | Türkçe | Українська | اردو | Tiếng Việt | 中文(简体)‎ | 中文(繁體)‎ | +/−
Warning sign
This media was probably deleted.
Thanks for uploading File:Arno Votteler, 0001.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 send an email with copy of a written permission to OTRS (permissions-commons@wikimedia.org). This also applies if you are the author yourself.

Please see this page for more information on how to confirm permission, and Commons:Permission if you would like to understand why we ask for permission when uploading work that is not 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 OTRS-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:Arno Votteler, 0001.jpg]]) and the above demanded information in your request.

Rosenzweig τ 16:25, 28 May 2014 (UTC)

Permission folgt in ca. 14 Tagen.--Gerd Leibrock (talk) 17:57, 28 May 2014 (UTC)

Copyright status: File:Josef Zeitler, 032.jpg[edit]

беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ | български | català | čeština | dansk | Deutsch | Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ | English | فارسی | suomi | français | magyar | italiano | македонски | മലയാളം | Bahasa Melayu | 日本語 | norsk | polski | português | română | slovenščina | svenska | українська | 中文(简体)‎ | 中文(繁體)‎ | +/−

Warning sign
This media may be deleted.
Thanks for uploading File:Josef Zeitler, 032.jpg. I notice that the file page either doesn't contain enough information about the license or it contains contradictory information about the license, so the copyright status is unclear.

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

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

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

And also:

No required license templates were detected at this file page. Please correct it, or if you have any questions please check my FAQ or contact me on my talk page. Yours sincerely, Jarekt (talk) 04:06, 1 October 2014 (UTC)

I do not understand what you want. I have corrected all license templates where I only had forgotten a "}".--Gerd Leibrock (talk) 18:40, 1 October 2014 (UTC)

Copyright status: File:Josef Zeitler, 040.jpg[edit]

беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ | български | català | čeština | dansk | Deutsch | Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ | English | فارسی | suomi | français | magyar | italiano | македонски | മലയാളം | Bahasa Melayu | 日本語 | norsk | polski | português | română | slovenščina | svenska | українська | 中文(简体)‎ | 中文(繁體)‎ | +/−

Warning sign
This media may be deleted.
Thanks for uploading File:Josef Zeitler, 040.jpg. I notice that the file page either doesn't contain enough information about the license or it contains contradictory information about the license, so the copyright status is unclear.

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

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

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

No required license templates were detected at this file page. Please correct it, or if you have any questions please check my FAQ or contact me on my talk page. Yours sincerely, Jarekt (talk) 12:21, 1 October 2014 (UTC)

File:Albert Güldenstein, Nymphenbrunnen im Rosengarten der Villa Berg.jpg[edit]

Commons-emblem-issue.svg File:Albert Güldenstein, Nymphenbrunnen im Rosengarten der Villa Berg.jpg has been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether it should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry.

If you created this file, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with it, such as a copyright issue.
Please remember to respond to and – if appropriate – contradict the arguments supporting deletion. Arguments which focus on the nominator will not affect the result of the nomination. Thank you!


Afrikaans | العربية | Български | বাংলা | Беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ | Català | Čeština | Dansk | Deutsch | Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ | Zazaki | Ελληνικά | English | Esperanto | Español | Eesti | فارسی | Suomi | Français | Galego | עברית | Magyar | Bahasa Indonesia | Íslenska | Italiano | 日本語 | 한국어 | Македонски | മലയാളം | Plattdüütsch | Nederlands | Norsk nynorsk | Norsk bokmål | Occitan | Polski | Português | Português do Brasil | Română | Русский | Slovenčina | Slovenščina | Shqip | Српски / srpski | Svenska | Türkçe | українська | Tiếng Việt | 中文 | 中文(简体)‎ | 中文(繁體)‎ | +/−

Rosenzweig τ 18:42, 13 December 2014 (UTC)

File:Otto Baum, 031.jpg[edit]

Commons-emblem-issue.svg File:Otto Baum, 031.jpg has been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether it should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry.

If you created this file, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with it, such as a copyright issue.
Please remember to respond to and – if appropriate – contradict the arguments supporting deletion. Arguments which focus on the nominator will not affect the result of the nomination. Thank you!


Afrikaans | العربية | Български | বাংলা | Беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ | Català | Čeština | Dansk | Deutsch | Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ | Zazaki | Ελληνικά | English | Esperanto | Español | Eesti | فارسی | Suomi | Français | Galego | עברית | Magyar | Bahasa Indonesia | Íslenska | Italiano | 日本語 | 한국어 | Македонски | മലയാളം | Plattdüütsch | Nederlands | Norsk nynorsk | Norsk bokmål | Occitan | Polski | Português | Português do Brasil | Română | Русский | Slovenčina | Slovenščina | Shqip | Српски / srpski | Svenska | Türkçe | українська | Tiếng Việt | 中文 | 中文(简体)‎ | 中文(繁體)‎ | +/−

93.221.236.13 19:09, 21 February 2015 (UTC)

Copyright status: File:Bruno Frank, 006.jpg[edit]

беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ | български | català | čeština | dansk | Deutsch | Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ | English | فارسی | suomi | français | magyar | italiano | македонски | മലയാളം | Bahasa Melayu | 日本語 | norsk | polski | português | română | slovenščina | svenska | українська | 中文(简体)‎ | 中文(繁體)‎ | +/−

Warning sign
This media may be deleted.
Thanks for uploading File:Bruno Frank, 006.jpg. I notice that the file page either doesn't contain enough information about the license or it contains contradictory information about the license, so the copyright status is unclear.

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

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

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

Magog the Ogre (talk) (contribs) 16:07, 10 May 2015 (UTC)

File:Skulpturen in Stuttgart, 0095.jpg[edit]

Pay attention to copyright
File:Skulpturen in Stuttgart, 0095.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.

The file you added has been deleted. If you believe that the deletion was not in accordance with policy, you may request undeletion.

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


Afrikaans | العربية | Asturianu | Azərbaycanca | Беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ | Български | বাংলা‎ | Català | Čeština | Dansk | Deutsch | Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ | Zazaki | Ελληνικά | English | Español | فارسی | Suomi | Français | Galego | עברית | Magyar | Հայերեն | Bahasa Indonesia | Italiano | 日本語 | 한국어 | Luxembourgish | Македонски | മലയാളം | Bahasa Melayu | Malti | မြန်မာဘာသာ | Plattdüütsch | Nederlands | Norsk nynorsk | Norsk bokmål | Polski | Português | Português do Brasil | Română | Русский | Slovenčina | Slovenščina | Svenska | ไทย | Türkçe | Українська | Tiếng Việt | 中文(简体)‎ | 中文(繁體)‎ | +/−

Veggies (talk) 17:46, 2 August 2015 (UTC)

File:Friedrich Distelbarth, Briefkonkordanz.pdf[edit]

Commons-emblem-issue.svg File:Friedrich Distelbarth, Briefkonkordanz.pdf has been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether it should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry.

If you created this file, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with it, such as a copyright issue.
Please remember to respond to and – if appropriate – contradict the arguments supporting deletion. Arguments which focus on the nominator will not affect the result of the nomination. Thank you!


Afrikaans | العربية | Български | বাংলা | Беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ | Català | Čeština | Dansk | Deutsch | Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ | Zazaki | Ελληνικά | English | Esperanto | Español | Eesti | فارسی | Suomi | Français | Galego | עברית | Magyar | Bahasa Indonesia | Íslenska | Italiano | 日本語 | 한국어 | Македонски | മലയാളം | Plattdüütsch | Nederlands | Norsk nynorsk | Norsk bokmål | Occitan | Polski | Português | Português do Brasil | Română | Русский | Slovenčina | Slovenščina | Shqip | Српски / srpski | Svenska | Türkçe | українська | Tiếng Việt | 中文 | 中文(简体)‎ | 中文(繁體)‎ | +/−

Basvb (talk) 22:07, 10 November 2015 (UTC)

File:Albert von Hauber, Porträt.jpg und File:Gustav von Duvernoy, Porträt.jpg[edit]

Hallo Gerd, die beiden oben genannten Dateien, die du hochgeladen hast, zeigen das gleiche Porträt, ordnen es aber zwei verschiedenen Personen zu. Welche ist die richtig? -- Robert Weemeyer (talk) 10:13, 13 November 2015 (UTC)

Danke, Robert, Fehler korrigiert.--Gerd Leibrock (talk) 07:05, 14 November 2015 (UTC)

File:Trude Berliner, 004.jpg[edit]

Commons-emblem-issue.svg File:Trude Berliner, 004.jpg has been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether it should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry.

If you created this file, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with it, such as a copyright issue.
Please remember to respond to and – if appropriate – contradict the arguments supporting deletion. Arguments which focus on the nominator will not affect the result of the nomination. Thank you!


Afrikaans | العربية | Български | বাংলা | Беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ | Català | Čeština | Dansk | Deutsch | Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ | Zazaki | Ελληνικά | English | Esperanto | Español | Eesti | فارسی | Suomi | Français | Galego | עברית | Magyar | Bahasa Indonesia | Íslenska | Italiano | 日本語 | 한국어 | Македонски | മലയാളം | Plattdüütsch | Nederlands | Norsk nynorsk | Norsk bokmål | Occitan | Polski | Português | Português do Brasil | Română | Русский | Slovenčina | Slovenščina | Shqip | Српски / srpski | Svenska | Türkçe | українська | Tiếng Việt | 中文 | 中文(简体)‎ | 中文(繁體)‎ | +/−

.     Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 17:31, 17 November 2015 (UTC)

File:Hedi Schoop, 037.jpg[edit]

Commons-emblem-issue.svg File:Hedi Schoop, 037.jpg has been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether it should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry.

If you created this file, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with it, such as a copyright issue.
Please remember to respond to and – if appropriate – contradict the arguments supporting deletion. Arguments which focus on the nominator will not affect the result of the nomination. Thank you!


Afrikaans | العربية | Български | বাংলা | Беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ | Català | Čeština | Dansk | Deutsch | Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ | Zazaki | Ελληνικά | English | Esperanto | Español | Eesti | فارسی | Suomi | Français | Galego | עברית | Magyar | Bahasa Indonesia | Íslenska | Italiano | 日本語 | 한국어 | Македонски | മലയാളം | Plattdüütsch | Nederlands | Norsk nynorsk | Norsk bokmål | Occitan | Polski | Português | Português do Brasil | Română | Русский | Slovenčina | Slovenščina | Shqip | Српски / srpski | Svenska | Türkçe | українська | Tiếng Việt | 中文 | 中文(简体)‎ | 中文(繁體)‎ | +/−

.     Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 17:35, 17 November 2015 (UTC)

File:Sylvester Schäffer, 001.jpg[edit]

Commons-emblem-issue.svg File:Sylvester Schäffer, 001.jpg has been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether it should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry.

If you created this file, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with it, such as a copyright issue.
Please remember to respond to and – if appropriate – contradict the arguments supporting deletion. Arguments which focus on the nominator will not affect the result of the nomination. Thank you!


Afrikaans | العربية | Български | বাংলা | Беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ | Català | Čeština | Dansk | Deutsch | Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ | Zazaki | Ελληνικά | English | Esperanto | Español | Eesti | فارسی | Suomi | Français | Galego | עברית | Magyar | Bahasa Indonesia | Íslenska | Italiano | 日本語 | 한국어 | Македонски | മലയാളം | Plattdüütsch | Nederlands | Norsk nynorsk | Norsk bokmål | Occitan | Polski | Português | Português do Brasil | Română | Русский | Slovenčina | Slovenščina | Shqip | Српски / srpski | Svenska | Türkçe | українська | Tiếng Việt | 中文 | 中文(简体)‎ | 中文(繁體)‎ | +/−

.     Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 17:38, 17 November 2015 (UTC)

File:Hans Kafka, 006.jpg[edit]

Commons-emblem-issue.svg File:Hans Kafka, 006.jpg has been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether it should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry.

If you created this file, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with it, such as a copyright issue.
Please remember to respond to and – if appropriate – contradict the arguments supporting deletion. Arguments which focus on the nominator will not affect the result of the nomination. Thank you!


Afrikaans | العربية | Български | বাংলা | Беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ | Català | Čeština | Dansk | Deutsch | Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ | Zazaki | Ελληνικά | English | Esperanto | Español | Eesti | فارسی | Suomi | Français | Galego | עברית | Magyar | Bahasa Indonesia | Íslenska | Italiano | 日本語 | 한국어 | Македонски | മലയാളം | Plattdüütsch | Nederlands | Norsk nynorsk | Norsk bokmål | Occitan | Polski | Português | Português do Brasil | Română | Русский | Slovenčina | Slovenščina | Shqip | Српски / srpski | Svenska | Türkçe | українська | Tiếng Việt | 中文 | 中文(简体)‎ | 中文(繁體)‎ | +/−

.     Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 17:43, 17 November 2015 (UTC)

Notification about possible deletion[edit]

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

If you created these pages, please note that the fact that they have been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with them.
Please remember to respond to and – if appropriate – contradict the arguments supporting deletion. Arguments which focus on the nominator will not affect the result of the nomination. Thank you!


Afrikaans | العربية | Български | বাংলা | Беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ | Català | Čeština | Dansk | Deutsch | Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ | Zazaki | Ελληνικά | English | Esperanto | Español | Eesti | فارسی | Suomi | Français | Galego | עברית | Magyar | Bahasa Indonesia | Íslenska | Italiano | 日本語 | 한국어 | Македонски | മലയാളം | Plattdüütsch | Nederlands | Norsk nynorsk | Norsk bokmål | Occitan | Polski | Português | Português do Brasil | Română | Русский | Slovenčina | Slovenščina | Shqip | Српски / srpski | Svenska | Türkçe | українська | Tiếng Việt | 中文 | 中文(简体)‎ | 中文(繁體)‎ | +/−

Affected:

And also:

Yours sincerely, .     Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 17:44, 17 November 2015 (UTC)

File:Elaines Monica doll.jpg[edit]

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

If you created this file, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with it, such as a copyright issue.
Please remember to respond to and – if appropriate – contradict the arguments supporting deletion. Arguments which focus on the nominator will not affect the result of the nomination. Thank you!


Afrikaans | العربية | Български | বাংলা | Беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ | Català | Čeština | Dansk | Deutsch | Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ | Zazaki | Ελληνικά | English | Esperanto | Español | Eesti | فارسی | Suomi | Français | Galego | עברית | Magyar | Bahasa Indonesia | Íslenska | Italiano | 日本語 | 한국어 | Македонски | മലയാളം | Plattdüütsch | Nederlands | Norsk nynorsk | Norsk bokmål | Occitan | Polski | Português | Português do Brasil | Română | Русский | Slovenčina | Slovenščina | Shqip | Српски / srpski | Svenska | Türkçe | українська | Tiếng Việt | 中文 | 中文(简体)‎ | 中文(繁體)‎ | +/−

.     Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 17:48, 17 November 2015 (UTC)

File:Hans Kafka, 003.jpg[edit]

Commons-emblem-issue.svg File:Hans Kafka, 003.jpg has been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether it should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry.

If you created this file, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with it, such as a copyright issue.
Please remember to respond to and – if appropriate – contradict the arguments supporting deletion. Arguments which focus on the nominator will not affect the result of the nomination. Thank you!


Afrikaans | العربية | Български | বাংলা | Беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ | Català | Čeština | Dansk | Deutsch | Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ | Zazaki | Ελληνικά | English | Esperanto | Español | Eesti | فارسی | Suomi | Français | Galego | עברית | Magyar | Bahasa Indonesia | Íslenska | Italiano | 日本語 | 한국어 | Македонски | മലയാളം | Plattdüütsch | Nederlands | Norsk nynorsk | Norsk bokmål | Occitan | Polski | Português | Português do Brasil | Română | Русский | Slovenčina | Slovenščina | Shqip | Српски / srpski | Svenska | Türkçe | українська | Tiếng Việt | 中文 | 中文(简体)‎ | 中文(繁體)‎ | +/−

.     Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 17:50, 17 November 2015 (UTC)

File:Hans Kafka, 008.jpg[edit]

Commons-emblem-issue.svg File:Hans Kafka, 008.jpg has been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether it should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry.

If you created this file, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with it, such as a copyright issue.
Please remember to respond to and – if appropriate – contradict the arguments supporting deletion. Arguments which focus on the nominator will not affect the result of the nomination. Thank you!


Afrikaans | العربية | Български | বাংলা | Беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ | Català | Čeština | Dansk | Deutsch | Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ | Zazaki | Ελληνικά | English | Esperanto | Español | Eesti | فارسی | Suomi | Français | Galego | עברית | Magyar | Bahasa Indonesia | Íslenska | Italiano | 日本語 | 한국어 | Македонски | മലയാളം | Plattdüütsch | Nederlands | Norsk nynorsk | Norsk bokmål | Occitan | Polski | Português | Português do Brasil | Română | Русский | Slovenčina | Slovenščina | Shqip | Српски / srpski | Svenska | Türkçe | українська | Tiếng Việt | 中文 | 中文(简体)‎ | 中文(繁體)‎ | +/−

.     Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 17:51, 17 November 2015 (UTC)

File:Hans Kafka, 009.jpg[edit]

Commons-emblem-issue.svg File:Hans Kafka, 009.jpg has been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether it should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry.

If you created this file, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with it, such as a copyright issue.
Please remember to respond to and – if appropriate – contradict the arguments supporting deletion. Arguments which focus on the nominator will not affect the result of the nomination. Thank you!


Afrikaans | العربية | Български | বাংলা | Беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ | Català | Čeština | Dansk | Deutsch | Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ | Zazaki | Ελληνικά | English | Esperanto | Español | Eesti | فارسی | Suomi | Français | Galego | עברית | Magyar | Bahasa Indonesia | Íslenska | Italiano | 日本語 | 한국어 | Македонски | മലയാളം | Plattdüütsch | Nederlands | Norsk nynorsk | Norsk bokmål | Occitan | Polski | Português | Português do Brasil | Română | Русский | Slovenčina | Slovenščina | Shqip | Српски / srpski | Svenska | Türkçe | українська | Tiếng Việt | 中文 | 中文(简体)‎ | 中文(繁體)‎ | +/−

.     Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 17:54, 17 November 2015 (UTC)

File tagging File:Hedi Schoop, 025.jpg[edit]

Беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ | Català | Čeština | Dansk | Deutsch | Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ | Ελληνικά | English | Español | فارسی | Suomi | Français | Galego | עברית | Hrvatski | Magyar | Հայերեն | Italiano | 日本語 | 한국어 | Lietuvių | Македонски | മലയാളം | Plattdüütsch | Nederlands | Norsk bokmål | Polski | Português | Română | Русский | Sicilianu | Slovenčina | Slovenščina | Svenska | Türkçe | Українська | اردو | Tiếng Việt | 中文(简体)‎ | 中文(繁體)‎ | +/−
Warning sign
This media may be deleted.
Thanks for uploading File:Hedi Schoop, 025.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 send an email with copy of a written permission to OTRS (permissions-commons@wikimedia.org). This also applies if you are the author yourself.

Please see this page for more information on how to confirm permission, and Commons:Permission if you would like to understand why we ask for permission when uploading work that is not your own.

Unless the permission information is given, the image may be deleted after seven days. Thank you.

Martin Sg. (talk) 10:24, 24 November 2015 (UTC)

Anthony Verebes sent the following email with the permissions:

Von: Anthony Verebes [1] Gesendet: Samstag, 21. November 2015 18:53 An: Gerd Leibrock Betreff: Re: Permission to Wikimedia


permissions-commons@wikimedia.org

Sent from my iPhone

On Nov 17, 2015, at 8:05 AM, Gerd Leibrock <gerd.leibrock@gmx.de> wrote:


Dear Mr Verebes,

please send this email to Wikimedia: permissions-commons@wikimedia.org and a copy to myself.


Yours sincerefully,

Gerd Leibrock

Birkenwaldstr. 109a 70191 Stuttgart Germany



I hereby affirm that I am the rightholder of the attached images:


Hedi Schoop, 023.jpg

Hedi Schoop, 024.jpg

Hedi Schoop, 025.jpg

Hedi Schoop, 026.jpg

Hedi Schoop, 027.jpg

Hedi Schoop, 028.jpg

Hedi Schoop, 029.jpg

Hedi Schoop, 030.jpg

Hedi Schoop, 031.jpg

Hedi Schoop, 032.jpg

Hedi Schoop, 033.jpg



I agree to publish the above-mentioned content under the free license: Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported and GNU Free Documentation License (unversioned, with no invariant sections, front-cover texts, or back-cover texts).


I acknowledge that by doing so I grant anyone the right to use the work in a commercial product or otherwise, and to modify it according to their needs, provided that they abide by the terms of the license and any other applicable laws.


I am aware that this agreement is not limited to Wikipedia or related sites.


I am aware that I always retain copyright of my work, and retain the right to be attributed in accordance with the license chosen. Modifications others make to the work will not be claimed to have been made by me.


I acknowledge that I cannot withdraw this agreement, and that the content may or may not be kept permanently on a Wikimedia project. --Gerd Leibrock (talk) 13:32, 24 November 2015 (UTC)

File:Hedi Schoop, 032.jpg[edit]

Pay attention to copyright
File:Hedi Schoop, 032.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.

The file you added may soon be deleted. If you believe this file is not a copyright violation, please explain why on the file's talk page.


Afrikaans | العربية | Asturianu | Azərbaycanca | Беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ | Български | বাংলা‎ | Català | Čeština | Dansk | Deutsch | Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ | Zazaki | Ελληνικά | English | Español | فارسی | Suomi | Français | Galego | עברית | Magyar | Հայերեն | Bahasa Indonesia | Italiano | 日本語 | 한국어 | Luxembourgish | Македонски | മലയാളം | Bahasa Melayu | Malti | မြန်မာဘာသာ | Plattdüütsch | Nederlands | Norsk nynorsk | Norsk bokmål | Polski | Português | Português do Brasil | Română | Русский | Slovenčina | Slovenščina | Svenska | ไทย | Türkçe | Українська | Tiếng Việt | 中文(简体)‎ | 中文(繁體)‎ | +/−

Martin Sg. (talk) 10:25, 24 November 2015 (UTC)

Was soll das?
Anthony Verebes sent the following email with the permissions:

Von: Anthony Verebes [2] Gesendet: Samstag, 21. November 2015 18:53 An: Gerd Leibrock Betreff: Re: Permission to Wikimedia


permissions-commons@wikimedia.org

Sent from my iPhone

On Nov 17, 2015, at 8:05 AM, Gerd Leibrock <gerd.leibrock@gmx.de> wrote:


Dear Mr Verebes,

please send this email to Wikimedia: permissions-commons@wikimedia.org and a copy to myself.


Yours sincerefully,

Gerd Leibrock

Birkenwaldstr. 109a 70191 Stuttgart Germany



I hereby affirm that I am the rightholder of the attached images:


Hedi Schoop, 023.jpg

Hedi Schoop, 024.jpg

Hedi Schoop, 025.jpg

Hedi Schoop, 026.jpg

Hedi Schoop, 027.jpg

Hedi Schoop, 028.jpg

Hedi Schoop, 029.jpg

Hedi Schoop, 030.jpg

Hedi Schoop, 031.jpg

Hedi Schoop, 032.jpg

Hedi Schoop, 033.jpg



I agree to publish the above-mentioned content under the free license: Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported and GNU Free Documentation License (unversioned, with no invariant sections, front-cover texts, or back-cover texts).


I acknowledge that by doing so I grant anyone the right to use the work in a commercial product or otherwise, and to modify it according to their needs, provided that they abide by the terms of the license and any other applicable laws.


I am aware that this agreement is not limited to Wikipedia or related sites.


I am aware that I always retain copyright of my work, and retain the right to be attributed in accordance with the license chosen. Modifications others make to the work will not be claimed to have been made by me.


I acknowledge that I cannot withdraw this agreement, and that the content may or may not be kept permanently on a Wikimedia project. --Gerd Leibrock (talk) 13:32, 24 November 2015 (UTC)

File tagging File:Hedi Schoop, 033.jpg[edit]

Беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ | Català | Čeština | Dansk | Deutsch | Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ | Ελληνικά | English | Español | فارسی | Suomi | Français | Galego | עברית | Hrvatski | Magyar | Հայերեն | Italiano | 日本語 | 한국어 | Lietuvių | Македонски | മലയാളം | Plattdüütsch | Nederlands | Norsk bokmål | Polski | Português | Română | Русский | Sicilianu | Slovenčina | Slovenščina | Svenska | Türkçe | Українська | اردو | Tiếng Việt | 中文(简体)‎ | 中文(繁體)‎ | +/−
Warning sign
This media may be deleted.
Thanks for uploading File:Hedi Schoop, 033.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 send an email with copy of a written permission to OTRS (permissions-commons@wikimedia.org). This also applies if you are the author yourself.

Please see this page for more information on how to confirm permission, and Commons:Permission if you would like to understand why we ask for permission when uploading work that is not your own.

Unless the permission information is given, the image may be deleted after seven days. Thank you.

Martin Sg. (talk) 10:27, 24 November 2015 (UTC)Was soll das?

Anthony Verebes sent the following email with the permissions:

Von: Anthony Verebes [3] Gesendet: Samstag, 21. November 2015 18:53 An: Gerd Leibrock Betreff: Re: Permission to Wikimedia


permissions-commons@wikimedia.org

Sent from my iPhone

On Nov 17, 2015, at 8:05 AM, Gerd Leibrock <gerd.leibrock@gmx.de> wrote:


Dear Mr Verebes,

please send this email to Wikimedia: permissions-commons@wikimedia.org and a copy to myself.


Yours sincerefully,

Gerd Leibrock

Birkenwaldstr. 109a 70191 Stuttgart Germany



I hereby affirm that I am the rightholder of the attached images:


Hedi Schoop, 023.jpg

Hedi Schoop, 024.jpg

Hedi Schoop, 025.jpg

Hedi Schoop, 026.jpg

Hedi Schoop, 027.jpg

Hedi Schoop, 028.jpg

Hedi Schoop, 029.jpg

Hedi Schoop, 030.jpg

Hedi Schoop, 031.jpg

Hedi Schoop, 032.jpg

Hedi Schoop, 033.jpg



I agree to publish the above-mentioned content under the free license: Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported and GNU Free Documentation License (unversioned, with no invariant sections, front-cover texts, or back-cover texts).


I acknowledge that by doing so I grant anyone the right to use the work in a commercial product or otherwise, and to modify it according to their needs, provided that they abide by the terms of the license and any other applicable laws.


I am aware that this agreement is not limited to Wikipedia or related sites.


I am aware that I always retain copyright of my work, and retain the right to be attributed in accordance with the license chosen. Modifications others make to the work will not be claimed to have been made by me.


I acknowledge that I cannot withdraw this agreement, and that the content may or may not be kept permanently on a Wikimedia project. --Gerd Leibrock (talk) 13:33, 24 November 2015 (UTC)

File tagging File:Ursula Stock, 525.jpg[edit]

Беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ | Català | Čeština | Dansk | Deutsch | Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ | Ελληνικά | English | Español | فارسی | Suomi | Français | Galego | עברית | Hrvatski | Magyar | Հայերեն | Italiano | 日本語 | 한국어 | Lietuvių | Македонски | മലയാളം | Plattdüütsch | Nederlands | Norsk bokmål | Polski | Português | Română | Русский | Sicilianu | Slovenčina | Slovenščina | Svenska | Türkçe | Українська | اردو | Tiếng Việt | 中文(简体)‎ | 中文(繁體)‎ | +/−
Warning sign
This media may be deleted.
Thanks for uploading File:Ursula Stock, 525.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 send an email with copy of a written permission to OTRS (permissions-commons@wikimedia.org). This also applies if you are the author yourself.

Please see this page for more information on how to confirm permission, and Commons:Permission if you would like to understand why we ask for permission when uploading work that is not your own.

Unless the permission information is given, the image may be deleted after seven days. Thank you.

Jean11 (talk) 22:42, 14 December 2015 (UTC)

Notification about possible deletion[edit]

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

If you created these pages, please note that the fact that they have been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with them.
Please remember to respond to and – if appropriate – contradict the arguments supporting deletion. Arguments which focus on the nominator will not affect the result of the nomination. Thank you!


Afrikaans | العربية | Български | বাংলা | Беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ | Català | Čeština | Dansk | Deutsch | Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ | Zazaki | Ελληνικά | English | Esperanto | Español | Eesti | فارسی | Suomi | Français | Galego | עברית | Magyar | Bahasa Indonesia | Íslenska | Italiano | 日本語 | 한국어 | Македонски | മലയാളം | Plattdüütsch | Nederlands | Norsk nynorsk | Norsk bokmål | Occitan | Polski | Português | Português do Brasil | Română | Русский | Slovenčina | Slovenščina | Shqip | Српски / srpski | Svenska | Türkçe | українська | Tiếng Việt | 中文 | 中文(简体)‎ | 中文(繁體)‎ | +/−

Affected:

And also:

Yours sincerely, .     Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 19:37, 9 February 2016 (UTC)

permission follows in a few days--Gerd Leibrock (talk) 06:04, 10 February 2016 (UTC)
Ursula Stock says, she has sent an email with the permissions.--Gerd Leibrock (talk) 09:11, 10 February 2016 (UTC)

File:Bruno Frank, 110.jpg[edit]

Commons-emblem-issue.svg File:Bruno Frank, 110.jpg has been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether it should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry.

If you created this file, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with it, such as a copyright issue.
Please remember to respond to and – if appropriate – contradict the arguments supporting deletion. Arguments which focus on the nominator will not affect the result of the nomination. Thank you!


Afrikaans | العربية | Български | বাংলা | Беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ | Català | Čeština | Dansk | Deutsch | Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ | Zazaki | Ελληνικά | English | Esperanto | Español | Eesti | فارسی | Suomi | Français | Galego | עברית | Magyar | Bahasa Indonesia | Íslenska | Italiano | 日本語 | 한국어 | Македонски | മലയാളം | Plattdüütsch | Nederlands | Norsk nynorsk | Norsk bokmål | Occitan | Polski | Português | Português do Brasil | Română | Русский | Slovenčina | Slovenščina | Shqip | Српски / srpski | Svenska | Türkçe | українська | Tiếng Việt | 中文 | 中文(简体)‎ | 中文(繁體)‎ | +/−

.     Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 19:42, 9 February 2016 (UTC)

File tagging File:Württembergische Landesbibliothek, 005.jpg[edit]

Беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ | Català | Čeština | Dansk | Deutsch | Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ | Ελληνικά | English | Español | فارسی | Suomi | Français | Galego | עברית | Hrvatski | Magyar | Հայերեն | Italiano | 日本語 | 한국어 | Lietuvių | Македонски | മലയാളം | Plattdüütsch | Nederlands | Norsk bokmål | Polski | Português | Română | Русский | Sicilianu | Slovenčina | Slovenščina | Svenska | Türkçe | Українська | اردو | Tiếng Việt | 中文(简体)‎ | 中文(繁體)‎ | +/−
Warning sign
This media was probably deleted.
Thanks for uploading File:Württembergische Landesbibliothek, 005.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 send an email with copy of a written permission to OTRS (permissions-commons@wikimedia.org). This also applies if you are the author yourself.

Please see this page for more information on how to confirm permission, and Commons:Permission if you would like to understand why we ask for permission when uploading work that is not 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 OTRS-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:Württembergische Landesbibliothek, 005.jpg]]) and the above demanded information in your request.

Rosenzweig τ 17:04, 7 April 2016 (UTC)

Genügt es nach Deiner Meinung, die Genehmigung der Württembergischen Landesbibliothek einzuholen?--Gerd Leibrock (talk) 17:57, 7 April 2016 (UTC)

Bitte auf OTRS-pending setzen. Ich habe mit dem Rechteinhaber Kontakt aufgenommen.--Gerd Leibrock (talk) 12:47, 11 April 2016 (UTC)

File tagging File:Württembergische Landesbibliothek, 006.jpg[edit]

Беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ | Català | Čeština | Dansk | Deutsch | Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ | Ελληνικά | English | Español | فارسی | Suomi | Français | Galego | עברית | Hrvatski | Magyar | Հայերեն | Italiano | 日本語 | 한국어 | Lietuvių | Македонски | മലയാളം | Plattdüütsch | Nederlands | Norsk bokmål | Polski | Português | Română | Русский | Sicilianu | Slovenčina | Slovenščina | Svenska | Türkçe | Українська | اردو | Tiếng Việt | 中文(简体)‎ | 中文(繁體)‎ | +/−
Warning sign
This media may be deleted.
Thanks for uploading File:Württembergische Landesbibliothek, 006.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 send an email with copy of a written permission to OTRS (permissions-commons@wikimedia.org). This also applies if you are the author yourself.

Please see this page for more information on how to confirm permission, and Commons:Permission if you would like to understand why we ask for permission when uploading work that is not your own.

Unless the permission information is given, the image may be deleted after seven days. Thank you.

Rosenzweig τ 17:04, 7 April 2016 (UTC)

Genügt es nach Deiner Meinung, die Genehmigung der Württembergischen Landesbibliothek einzuholen?--Gerd Leibrock (talk) 17:57, 7 April 2016 (UTC)

Bitte auf OTRS-pending setzen. Ich habe mit dem Rechteinhaber Kontakt aufgenommen.--Gerd Leibrock (talk) 12:48, 11 April 2016 (UTC)

File tagging File:Württembergische Landesbibliothek, 004.jpg[edit]

Беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ | Català | Čeština | Dansk | Deutsch | Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ | Ελληνικά | English | Español | فارسی | Suomi | Français | Galego | עברית | Hrvatski | Magyar | Հայերեն | Italiano | 日本語 | 한국어 | Lietuvių | Македонски | മലയാളം | Plattdüütsch | Nederlands | Norsk bokmål | Polski | Português | Română | Русский | Sicilianu | Slovenčina | Slovenščina | Svenska | Türkçe | Українська | اردو | Tiếng Việt | 中文(简体)‎ | 中文(繁體)‎ | +/−
Warning sign
This media was probably deleted.
Thanks for uploading File:Württembergische Landesbibliothek, 004.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 send an email with copy of a written permission to OTRS (permissions-commons@wikimedia.org). This also applies if you are the author yourself.

Please see this page for more information on how to confirm permission, and Commons:Permission if you would like to understand why we ask for permission when uploading work that is not 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 OTRS-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:Württembergische Landesbibliothek, 004.jpg]]) and the above demanded information in your request.

Rosenzweig τ 17:05, 7 April 2016 (UTC)

Genügt es nach Deiner Meinung, die Genehmigung der Württembergischen Landesbibliothek einzuholen?--Gerd Leibrock (talk) 17:58, 7 April 2016 (UTC)

Bitte auf OTRS-pending setzen. Ich habe mit dem Rechteinhaber Kontakt aufgenommen.--Gerd Leibrock (talk) 12:48, 11 April 2016 (UTC)

File tagging File:Württembergische Landesbibliothek, 007.jpg[edit]

Беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ | Català | Čeština | Dansk | Deutsch | Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ | Ελληνικά | English | Español | فارسی | Suomi | Français | Galego | עברית | Hrvatski | Magyar | Հայերեն | Italiano | 日本語 | 한국어 | Lietuvių | Македонски | മലയാളം | Plattdüütsch | Nederlands | Norsk bokmål | Polski | Português | Română | Русский | Sicilianu | Slovenčina | Slovenščina | Svenska | Türkçe | Українська | اردو | Tiếng Việt | 中文(简体)‎ | 中文(繁體)‎ | +/−
Warning sign
This media may be deleted.
Thanks for uploading File:Württembergische Landesbibliothek, 007.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 send an email with copy of a written permission to OTRS (permissions-commons@wikimedia.org). This also applies if you are the author yourself.

Please see this page for more information on how to confirm permission, and Commons:Permission if you would like to understand why we ask for permission when uploading work that is not your own.

Unless the permission information is given, the image may be deleted after seven days. Thank you.

Rosenzweig τ 17:05, 7 April 2016 (UTC)

Genügt es nach Deiner Meinung, die Genehmigung der Württembergischen Landesbibliothek einzuholen?--Gerd Leibrock (talk) 17:58, 7 April 2016 (UTC)

Bitte auf OTRS-pending setzen. Ich habe mit dem Rechteinhaber Kontakt aufgenommen.--Gerd Leibrock (talk) 12:48, 11 April 2016 (UTC)

File tagging File:Josua Reichert, SB 007.jpg[edit]

Беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ | Català | Čeština | Dansk | Deutsch | Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ | Ελληνικά | English | Español | فارسی | Suomi | Français | Galego | עברית | Hrvatski | Magyar | Հայերեն | Italiano | 日本語 | 한국어 | Lietuvių | Македонски | മലയാളം | Plattdüütsch | Nederlands | Norsk bokmål | Polski | Português | Română | Русский | Sicilianu | Slovenčina | Slovenščina | Svenska | Türkçe | Українська | اردو | Tiếng Việt | 中文(简体)‎ | 中文(繁體)‎ | +/−
Warning sign
This media may be deleted.
Thanks for uploading File:Josua Reichert, SB 007.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 send an email with copy of a written permission to OTRS (permissions-commons@wikimedia.org). This also applies if you are the author yourself.

Please see this page for more information on how to confirm permission, and Commons:Permission if you would like to understand why we ask for permission when uploading work that is not your own.

Unless the permission information is given, the image may be deleted after seven days. Thank you.

And also:

Yours sincerely, Rosenzweig τ 17:08, 7 April 2016 (UTC)

Genügt es nach Deiner Meinung, die Genehmigung der Württembergischen Landesbibliothek einzuholen?--Gerd Leibrock (talk) 17:58, 7 April 2016 (UTC)

M. E. nein, in allen Fällen. Das Urheberrecht verbleibt beim Künstler, und dass der Käufer eines Werkes der bildenden Kunst auch explizit, vertraglich geregelt das vollumfängliche Nutzungsrecht an diesem erwirbt (das wäre die Voraussetzung für die Erteilung einer freien Lizenz durch eine andere Person als den Urheber bzw. seine Erben), wäre sehr ungewöhnlich. Das geschieht eher bei Fotografen im Angestelltenverhältnis o. ä. --Rosenzweig τ 21:52, 7 April 2016 (UTC)

Wie beurteilst Du Innenraumfotos von öffentlichen Gebäuden, auf denen urheberrechtlich geschützte Kunstwerke zu sehen sind? Ich hatte mich orientiert an dem Foto File:Württembergische Landesbibliothek hall.jpg, auf dem fünf Schrifttafeln von Josua Reichert zu sehen sind. Alle von Dir beanstandeten Fotos sind nach meiner Meinung ebenfalls nicht als Werkfotos zu betrachten, da sie die Werke in ihrer Umgebung zeigen.--Gerd Leibrock (talk) 06:41, 8 April 2016 (UTC)

Der Fachbegriff ist de:Beiwerk. Das mag man bei dem von dir genannten Foto mit fünf Tafeln gerade noch so annehmen, bei den Fotos, die die Werke zentral in Großaufnahme zeigen, aber definitiv nicht mehr. Ob öffentliches Gebäude oder nicht spielt bzgl. der de:Panoramafreiheit bei Innenraumfotos aus Deutschland keine Rolle, es besteht in Innenräumen keine Panoramafreiheit - anders als in manchen anderen Ländern. Siehe die Übersichtskarte in Commons:Freedom of panorama. --Rosenzweig τ 12:18, 8 April 2016 (UTC)

Danke für den Hinweis auf Beiwerk, werde ich studieren. Die Josua Reichert-Dateien bitte auf keinen Fall löschen. Ich habe mit dem Künstler telefoniert, und er hat mir zugesichert, dass Wikimedia die Genehmigung erhält. Allerdings wird das bestimmt eine Woche dauern, da Josua Reichert keinen PC hat und ich die Sache postalisch abwickeln muss.--Gerd Leibrock (talk) 15:40, 8 April 2016 (UTC)

Ich habe jeweils die Vorlage:OTRS pending eingefügt. Das bewirkt einen Aufschub von 30 Tagen, bevor wieder der Keine-Genehmigung-Zustand eintritt. Das sollte deinen Angaben nach reichen. --Rosenzweig τ 14:56, 9 April 2016 (UTC)

Danke!--Gerd Leibrock (talk) 15:59, 9 April 2016 (UTC)

Freigebe heute abgeschickt an permissions-de@wikimedia.org.--Gerd Leibrock (talk) 15:11, 15 April 2016 (UTC)

File:Städtisches Lapidarium Stuttgart, Nr. A006.jpg[edit]

Buenos días:

Trad: To Cecilia Ploce, woman's liberty.

EDCS = Inscriptions only known by photo [f.e.: EDCS 00001].

Atentamente --scutum (talk) 09:41, 7 June 2016 (UTC)

Category:Jupitergigantensäule_von_Hausen_an_der_Zaber[edit]

Themightyquill (talk) 09:26, 13 June 2016 (UTC)

Copyright status: File:Dionys Pruckner, 002.jpg[edit]

беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ | български | català | čeština | dansk | Deutsch | Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ | English | فارسی | suomi | français | magyar | italiano | македонски | മലയാളം | Bahasa Melayu | 日本語 | norsk | polski | português | română | slovenščina | svenska | українська | 中文(简体)‎ | 中文(繁體)‎ | +/−

Warning sign
This media may be deleted.
Thanks for uploading File:Dionys Pruckner, 002.jpg. I notice that the file page either doesn't contain enough information about the license or it contains contradictory information about the license, so the copyright status is unclear.

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

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

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

Yours sincerely, Magog the Ogre (talk) (contribs) 04:22, 16 August 2016 (UTC)

Was soll das, das stimmt doch gar nicht.--Gerd Leibrock (talk) 07:14, 8 October 2016 (UTC)

Irreführende Dateinamen und Kategorien[edit]

Hallo Gerd Leibrock, eben bin ich auf Bilder römischer Reliefs gestoßen, die du hochgeladen hast. Merkwürdigerweise waren die nicht etwa in Category:Ancient Roman reliefs in Baden-Württemberg enthalten, dafür aber in Category:Simon Studion, die zu einem Menschen gehört, der weit nach der Entstehung der Reliefs gelebt hat. In so einer Personenkategorie würde man ohne weitere Erläuterung allenfalls Werke der Person selbst erwarten und nicht alles, womit sie mal zu tun hatte. Auch die Dateinamen, z. B. File:Simon Studion, 028.jpg, passen zu Simon Studion, aber nicht zum jeweiligen Bildinhalt. Hast du vor, das noch zu korrigieren? Die Dateinamen sollten zunächst den Bildinhalt beschreiben. Kategorien könnten z. B. den Bildinhalt, den aktuellen Aufenthaltsort (Category:Lapidarium (Stuttgart) oder Category:Städtisches Lapidarium Stuttgart - Antikensammlung?) und evtl. den Fundort beschreiben. Die Verbindung zu Simon Studion musst du anders darstellen als über die schlichte Kategorisierung; deine Galerieseiten reichen da eigentlich schon aus. Gruß, --Sitacuisses (talk) 05:49, 8 October 2016 (UTC)

Wenn du nicht antwortest, werte ich das als Zustimmung zu einer Umbenennung. Ich hätte es jedoch besser gefunden, du äußerst dich dazu, weil du mehr Ahnung vom Zusammenhang zwischen Simon Studion und den Römersteinen hast. --Sitacuisses (talk) 19:04, 8 October 2016 (UTC)

Ich teile zwar nicht Deine Meinung, aber ich habe nicht genug Zeit für eine ausführliche Diskussion. Sorry!--Gerd Leibrock (talk) 07:30, 9 October 2016 (UTC)

Mir wiederum fehlt die Zeit, mich in die Geschichte des Simon S. einzuarbeiten, wo ich doch bloß rasch ein paar irreführende und falsche Dinge verbessern möchte. Dass Dateinamen den Bildinhalt beschreiben sollen, ist nicht einfach meine Meinung, sondern Teil der Projektregeln. Mir scheint, du betrachtest die Dateien nur vom Standpunkt eines aktuellen Projekts aus und übergehst die weitergehenden Aspekte. Der Bezug zwischen Simon S. und den römischen Steinen lässt sich mit gutem Willen vermutlich auch in eine Kategorisierung packen, die nicht irreführend ist. Falls er derjenige ist, der die Steine zusammengetragen hat, könnte es etwa eine Category:Collected by Simon Studion geben. Aber da bräuchte es schon etwas Mitarbeit. --Sitacuisses (talk) 08:58, 9 October 2016 (UTC)

Bei dieser Datei hast du offenbar eine falsche Lizenz ausgewählt. Das Foto ist nicht gemeinfrei. --Sitacuisses (talk) 06:13, 10 October 2016 (UTC)

Siehe Summary/Permission: Herkunft/Rechte: Landesmuseum Württemberg, Stuttgart (Foto: O. Harl) [CC BY-SA].--Gerd Leibrock (talk) 06:35, 10 October 2016 (UTC)

Bitte mach es mir nicht so schwer dir zu helfen! Du darfst nicht bei einer Datei, die von ihrem Urheber als [CC BY-SA] gekennzeichnet ist, selber per Lizenzbaustein die Gemeinfreiheit verkünden! Bitte ändere deine Lizenzvorlage entsprechend, ich bin nicht dein Kindermädchen! --Sitacuisses (talk) 07:48, 10 October 2016 (UTC)


Copyright status: File:Weihrelief (Kelten-Weiler) - Landesmuseum Württemberg, Römisches Lapidarium.jpg[edit]

беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ | български | català | čeština | dansk | Deutsch | Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ | English | فارسی | suomi | français | magyar | italiano | македонски | മലയാളം | Bahasa Melayu | 日本語 | norsk | polski | português | română | slovenščina | svenska | українська | 中文(简体)‎ | 中文(繁體)‎ | +/−

Warning sign
This media may be deleted.
Thanks for uploading File:Weihrelief (Kelten-Weiler) - Landesmuseum Württemberg, Römisches Lapidarium.jpg. I notice that the file page either doesn't contain enough information about the license or it contains contradictory information about the license, so the copyright status is unclear.

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

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

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

(Siehe auch Abschnitt darüber.) Sitacuisses (talk) 04:46, 12 October 2016 (UTC)

✓ Lizenz nachgetragen. Gruss, --Hedwig in Washington (mail?) 01:12, 16 October 2016 (UTC)

Vielen Dank, Hedwig!--Gerd Leibrock (talk) 06:20, 17 October 2016 (UTC)

File:First Nationwide Bank logo.jpg[edit]

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

If you created this file, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with it, such as a copyright issue.
Please remember to respond to and – if appropriate – contradict the arguments supporting deletion. Arguments which focus on the nominator will not affect the result of the nomination. Thank you!


Afrikaans | العربية | Български | বাংলা | Беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ | Català | Čeština | Dansk | Deutsch | Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ | Zazaki | Ελληνικά | English | Esperanto | Español | Eesti | فارسی | Suomi | Français | Galego | עברית | Magyar | Bahasa Indonesia | Íslenska | Italiano | 日本語 | 한국어 | Македонски | മലയാളം | Plattdüütsch | Nederlands | Norsk nynorsk | Norsk bokmål | Occitan | Polski | Português | Português do Brasil | Română | Русский | Slovenčina | Slovenščina | Shqip | Српски / srpski | Svenska | Türkçe | українська | Tiếng Việt | 中文 | 中文(简体)‎ | 中文(繁體)‎ | +/−

Evalina Generosa (talk) 10:30, 17 October 2016 (UTC)

File tagging File:Ursula Stock, 849.jpg[edit]

Беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ | Català | Čeština | Dansk | Deutsch | Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ | Ελληνικά | English | Español | فارسی | Suomi | Français | Galego | עברית | Hrvatski | Magyar | Հայերեն | Italiano | 日本語 | 한국어 | Lietuvių | Македонски | മലയാളം | Plattdüütsch | Nederlands | Norsk bokmål | Polski | Português | Română | Русский | Sicilianu | Slovenčina | Slovenščina | Svenska | Türkçe | Українська | اردو | Tiếng Việt | 中文(简体)‎ | 中文(繁體)‎ | +/−
Warning sign
This media may be deleted.
Thanks for uploading File:Ursula Stock, 849.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 send an email with copy of a written permission to OTRS (permissions-commons@wikimedia.org). This also applies if you are the author yourself.

Please see this page for more information on how to confirm permission, and Commons:Permission if you would like to understand why we ask for permission when uploading work that is not your own.

Unless the permission information is given, the image may be deleted after seven days. Thank you.

Rosenzweig τ 21:08, 11 November 2016 (UTC)

Category:Aristotle and Phyllis[edit]

I don't understand your edits to that category. Alexander the Great isn't depicted in most of the images in the category. If he's depicted in a few of them, then Alexander the Great categories should be added to those specific images. AnonMoos (talk) 01:57, 4 January 2017 (UTC)

OK.--Gerd Leibrock (talk) 07:07, 4 January 2017 (UTC)

File:Güglinger Palmtuch, 25.jpg[edit]

Pay attention to copyright
File:Güglinger Palmtuch, 25.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.

The file you added has been deleted. If you believe that the deletion was not in accordance with policy, you may request undeletion.

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


Afrikaans | العربية | Asturianu | Azərbaycanca | Беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ | Български | বাংলা‎ | Català | Čeština | Dansk | Deutsch | Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ | Zazaki | Ελληνικά | English | Español | فارسی | Suomi | Français | Galego | עברית | Magyar | Հայերեն | Bahasa Indonesia | Italiano | 日本語 | 한국어 | Luxembourgish | Македонски | മലയാളം | Bahasa Melayu | Malti | မြန်မာဘာသာ | Plattdüütsch | Nederlands | Norsk nynorsk | Norsk bokmål | Polski | Português | Português do Brasil | Română | Русский | Slovenčina | Slovenščina | Svenska | ไทย | Türkçe | Українська | Tiếng Việt | 中文(简体)‎ | 中文(繁體)‎ | +/−

Martin Sg. (talk) 20:48, 19 March 2017 (UTC)

Quellenangabe zu einem hochgeladenen Bild[edit]

Hallo Gerd, auf der Suche nach Kategorisierung sowie Quellen- und Autorenangabe für das Bild Paso de quindiu.jpg fand ich das von dir hochgeladene Bild Christian Friedrich Traugott Duttenhofer, Strasse über den Quindiu.jpg. Mich interessiert dazu, woher Du die Angaben zu Künstler und Herkunft hast – hast Du sie direkt aus dem Werk und das Bild daraus eingescannt? — Speravir – 23:12, 30 March 2017 (UTC)

Hallo Speravir, wenn ich mich recht erinnere, habe ich das Bild direkt aus dem Werk im Besitz der Württembergischen Landesbibliothek eingescannt.--Gerd Leibrock (talk) 06:30, 31 March 2017 (UTC)

… und dann auch direkt aus dem Werk die Angabe übernommen, dass C.F.T. Duttenhofer der Schöpfer des Bildes war? — Speravir – 23:14, 31 March 2017 (UTC)

Tut mir leid, ich weiß es nicht mehr.--Gerd Leibrock (talk) 07:08, 1 April 2017 (UTC)

Trotzdem danke! Einerseits schade, allerdings musst Du es ja fast daher haben. — Speravir – 02:38, 2 April 2017 (UTC)

Kreuzgang der Hospitalkirche, Stuttgart, 1916.jpg[edit]

Hallo Gerd,

das Bild habe ich auf Anfrage gelöscht, da es ein sehr viel kleineres Duplikat von File:Wais 1951, 052.jpg war. Frohes Schaffen noch Hystrix (talk) 12:58, 7 July 2017 (UTC)

File:Arch of Constantine, South face, Rome (8130464285), spandrel.jpg[edit]

Commons-emblem-issue.svg File:Arch of Constantine, South face, Rome (8130464285), spandrel.jpg has been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether it should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry.

If you created this file, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with it, such as a copyright issue.
Please remember to respond to and – if appropriate – contradict the arguments supporting deletion. Arguments which focus on the nominator will not affect the result of the nomination. Thank you!


Afrikaans | العربية | Български | বাংলা | Беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ | Català | Čeština | Dansk | Deutsch | Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ | Zazaki | Ελληνικά | English | Esperanto | Español | Eesti | فارسی | Suomi | Français | Galego | עברית | Magyar | Bahasa Indonesia | Íslenska | Italiano | 日本語 | 한국어 | Македонски | മലയാളം | Plattdüütsch | Nederlands | Norsk nynorsk | Norsk bokmål | Occitan | Polski | Português | Português do Brasil | Română | Русский | Slovenčina | Slovenščina | Shqip | Српски / srpski | Svenska | Türkçe | українська | Tiếng Việt | 中文 | 中文(简体)‎ | 中文(繁體)‎ | +/−

Elisfkc (talk) 16:15, 28 August 2017 (UTC)

Kategorien: Sprache, thematische Einbindung[edit]

Hallo Gerd Leibrock, ich finde leider keine Angaben zu deinen Fremdsprachfähigkeiten. Die wären im Zusammenhang mit neuen Kategorien von Bedeutung. Die sollen nämlich, abgesehen von Namen, englischsprachige Bezeichnungen haben. Das gilt auch für deine Unterkategorien von Category:Neues Schloss, Stuttgart zu architektonischen Elementen des Gebäudes. Diese sollten zudem nicht nur in die Kategorie des Schlosses eingebunden werden, sondern zusätzlich in die thematischen Zweige unter Category:Architectural elements im Allgemeinen und Category:Architectural elements in Baden-Württemberg usw. im Speziellen. Unter Category:Architectural elements könnte man die jeweils passenden englischen Bezeichnungen der Elemente wählen und bliebe dann in der Systematik. Gruß, --Sitacuisses (talk) 22:52, 28 August 2017 (UTC)

Hallo, kannst Du das übernehmen? Meine Englischkenntnisse sind leider unzureichend.--Gerd Leibrock (talk) 04:41, 29 August 2017 (UTC)
Für den Anfang habe ich mal ein wenig kategorisiert. Die Übersetzungen sind nicht immer ganz trivial, weil die Fachbegriffe in verschiedenen Sprachen nicht alle eins zu eins verwendet werden. Wenn dann auch noch Kategoriebeschreibungen fehlen wird es nicht einfacher. Am besten ist es immer, wenn derjenige, der fachlich in der Sache drinsteckt, das Thema gleich passend beschreibt und in die Oberkategorien eingliedert, sonst artet es zur Raterei aus. --Sitacuisses (talk) 08:32, 21 September 2017 (UTC)