User talk:Jed

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

Pictures[edit]

Could you not have warned me that the pictures were to be deleted. It would have given me the chance to have said which ones should have been deleted. As it is you deleted the better picture in at least two cases. Thanks. I find your actions rather uncivil. CambridgeBayWeather (Talk) 22:19, 4 May 2006 (UTC)

I'm sorry, but i just followed the redundant template, which was added by Denniss at the end of march. A lot of time for you. And as far i can see, the best images still are there. Of course you can revert, if this is not your point of view. --jed 22:37, 4 May 2006 (UTC)

Please check usage[edit]

Cross.png Please image check usage before uploading any "cross" image. These images need to be replaced at the various wikimedia projects. The cross is done to indicate to any projects that are not included that the template needs to be replaced. I noticed you replaced Image:Gaim.png which is still in use at a great number of projects. Cary "Bastique" Bass parler voir 19:45, 9 May 2006 (UTC)

I had checked this, but the image is only used on talk and user pages, which the users are self responsible (as far, as i know). --jed 19:55, 9 May 2006 (UTC)

That one image somehow slipped by. Feel free to re-edit it. Cary "Bastique" Bass parler voir 04:05, 10 May 2006 (UTC)

Delete Book[edit]

I had work hard on a book on http://de.wikisource.org/wiki/Die_Mode%3B_Menschen_und_Mode_im_neunzehnten_Jahrhundert:II But every time one build, another person spoil.

For which reason you spoil this book? User:haabet 20:58, 10 May 2006 (UTC)

The image was marked as redundant and i replaced by the other version. Thats all. --jed 22:36, 10 May 2006 (UTC)

Haabet, Image:1819Therepository.jpg is a lousy image which is technically inferior to Image:Morning-dress-Ackermanns-ca1820.png (derived from the same ultimate source) in every single respect except sheer raw pixel dimensions. It's big, but it's a big piece of crapola. Why not just link to Image:Morning-dress-Ackermanns-ca1820.png from your book? Churchh 07:33, 11 May 2006 (UTC)

ichtus[edit]

please do not replace good png's with unusable and incredibly ugly ones. thank you! Zanaq 08:42, 21 May 2006 (UTC)

Sorry, but i can't see what you mean. I replaced a png by a svg and the svg is fine. Whats your problem? --jed 10:37, 21 May 2006 (UTC)
The problem was probably a software error, because I see now you uploaded a red cross: when I looked it was a badly distorted fish. That was my biggest problem, and the reason I came down hard on you. sorry. The second problem I have is that .SVG's are generally rendered in lower quality than PNG's mainly because the anti-aliasing is vastly inferior, which is apparent at low resolutions: I know a lot of people who don't see the difference, but that's no reason to delete the png's. Zanaq 10:59, 22 May 2006 (UTC)
Ok, as you have noticed i put it on Deletion requests. We will see what the result of the discussion will be. --jed 21:35, 22 May 2006 (UTC)

Orphaning images before/after crossing[edit]

Hi Jed, your name appeared on my radar checking the w:nl:Commons Ticker on nl:wp. My guess is that you cross out an image and afterwards check usage and change links. I think that triggers CommonsTicker. You may have chosen this method deliberately, but it may also be by accident. If by accident, could you please consider orphaning the images before crossing out the image and then waiting for, say, 30 minutes (as synchronisation of the databases to the toolserver is notoriously laggy), before crossing out the image? I think that may save a lot of unneeded commons alerts on your account... Thanks. Siebrand 21:46, 16 June 2006 (UTC) Oh, on a second note: could you please use the summary field on the (Dutch) wikipedia(s) so that it is more clear why you made a change? Something like 'fix commons duplicate' should work well. Siebrand 21:49, 16 June 2006 (UTC)

Thanks, that you are so attentive, but i had first checked the usage and changed the links and afterwards a crossed the image: e.g. Image:President Reagan and Soviet General Secretary Gorbachev at the first Summit in Geneva 1985.jpg. I replaced the image in nl:Michail Gorbatsjov at 23:15, 15 June 2006; and in nl:Sjabloon:GeschiedenisAVDW 41 at 23:15, 15 June 2006 too. And then i crossed the image on commons at 23:20, 15 June 2006. So that is not the reason for the problem. Maybe the problem is the lag of the database on the toolserver but the delay is current more the one day and to wait a half an hour is not a proper solution (and after a half hour i have forgotten to cross the image). --jed 07:08, 17 June 2006 (UTC)
OK, great. Long lag at the toolserver is indeed the problem then. Too bad... Thanks for your contributions. Siebrand 07:20, 17 June 2006 (UTC)

the crossing method[edit]

I really don't understand it and I don't think it works... wikinews:WN:CT shows that Zirland deleted a bunch of so-called "deleted duplicates" that WN was using. That is, we screwed up their articles for no good reason (the only good reason is: copyright). At least one (Image:Flag of the United Nations.png) was "crossed" by you. What is wrong with just tagging as supersededSVG and letting sleeping dogs lie... pfctdayelise (translate?) 13:11, 30 June 2006 (UTC)

That doesn't make sense to me. Why marking a image as superseded and then don't do anything? If you have a image, that is superseded, you have to delete it (otherwise it will be used again and again). --jed 13:57, 30 June 2006 (UTC)

Deleted image (Image:Coat_of_Arms,_Salamanca.gif) and Image:Escudo de Salamanca.svg[edit]

Hi, I saw you put the last image in on nl:. I had already removed the deleted image after the CommonsTicker report and decided not to put the "replacement" in because its the COA for the city of Salamanca, not the province. Just so you know. It's better to have no image than a wrong one don't you think? Grüsse, NielsF 14:52, 3 July 2006 (UTC)

Ok, you are right. I didn't attend to this point. Thanks for informing me. --jed 15:03, 3 July 2006 (UTC)

SVG ist nicht immer besser[edit]

Hi - bitte schau dir mal diese Diskussion an. Es gibt keinen guten Grund, Pixelversionen zu löschen wenn's ein SVG gibt - bei bitmaps behalten wir "alte versionen" ja auch. Ausserdem... lass die Leute in den einzelnen Projekten doch selbst entscheiden, was sie verwenden wollen. Schau dir auch bitte mal Commons:Deletion guidelines an, die wurde neulich auf den neusten Stand gebracht. -- Duesentrieb(?!) 00:19, 12 July 2006 (UTC)

Hallo, beziehst du dich auf die ganzen merge-arrows? Ich bin der Meinung, dass sie durch die SVG-Versionen ersetzt werden könnten. Da es leider nicht möglich ist, die Images als SupersededSVG zu markieren (schau dir mal die History von Image:Merge-arrow.gif oder Image:Merge-arrows.gif an), habe ich die Bilder halt direkt auf deletion requests gesetzt, damit darüber diskutiert werden kann. Was habe ich deiner Meinung nach falsch gemacht?
Und natürlich hat es einen Vorteil nur eine Version z.B. von einer Flagge zu haben: Pflege, heute z.B. Image:Flag of Panama.svg. Dagegen sehe ich keinen Sinn in der Existenz dreier weiterer Versionen derselben Flagge: Image:Flag of Panama.png, Image:Panama flag large.png oder auch Image:Panama flag 300.png. Du vielleicht? --jed 06:57, 12 July 2006 (UTC)
Erstaml: {{vector version available}} ist besser als {{SupersededSVG}} - wie du an dem Edit-War erkennen kannst, teilt nicht jeder deine Meinung, welches der Bilder besser ist - solange es irgend einen Unterschied gibt, sollte man den Menschen die Wahl lassen; Wenn das SVG das PNG 100% abbildet (was ziemlich schwierig zu erreichen ist), brauchen wird das PNG immernoch, um die Historie der Graphik nachvollziehen zu können. Ich finde es gut, die Benutzung des PNGs zum empfehlen, sehe aber keinen Sinn darin, eine Löschung zu betreiben wenn es dagegen wiederstand gibt.
Es gab in der Vergangenheit immer wieder Proteste wegen ungefragter Ersetzungen von Pixelgraphiken durch (zum Teil deutlich schlechtere oder abweichende) SVGs in diversen "fremden" Projekten. Das Schadet Commons enorm, es gab diverse Diskussionen auf der Village Pump in denen aus ausgebreitet wurde - ganz Projekte haben gedroht, Commons die Unterstützung zu entziehen.
Im Fall der Panama-Flagge: die Bilder sind nicht identisch - unterschiedliche Farben, Ränder, usw. Welches "richtig" ist, kann ich nicht entscheiden. Wenn du meinst eines sei den anderen überlegen, kannst du ja in anderen Projekten empfehlen, dieses zu verwenden, und das Bild entsprechend markieren.
Nutzlose Bilder können gelöscht werden - wenn sie keiner mehr verwenden will, und sie nicht als Historie anderer Bilder gebraucht werden. Wenn es Leute gibt, die lieber die Pixelversion verwenden - lass sie doch. Im Gegensatz zu Bildern, die das Urheberrrecht oder die Policy von Commons verletzen, ist das löschen von "überflüssigen" Bildern nicht so wichtig. Es wäre übrigens schön, wenn du zur aktuellen Diskussion auf der Pump kurz was sagen könntest. -- Duesentrieb(?!) 10:36, 12 July 2006 (UTC)
OK, stellt sich die Frage wer die Bilder noch verwenden will. Schau doch mal in die History von en:Template:Merge und du wirst sehen, daß sehr viele Leute versucht haben, das GIF-Bild durch ein PNG oder SVG zu ersetzten. Jede Änderung wird jedoch durch David Levy/Lifeisunfair revertiert. Das hat nichts mit guten oder schlechten Bildern zu tun, sondern die GIF-Bilder sind halt seine Bilder und somit in seinen Augen die Besten.
Und noch was zur Panama-Flaggen: es kann doch nicht dein Ernst sein, daß du wirklich vier verschiedene Versionen ein und derselben Flagge in Commons haben willst? Und der Vorteil von SVG ist doch gerade, daß man relativ leicht Änderungen vornehmen kann. Also ist doch der Gedanke naheliegend: alle benutzen die SVG-Version und sollte bei der was nicht stimmen, verbessert man sie halt. --jed 14:58, 12 July 2006 (UTC)
Warum er die gifs verwenden will ist mir eigentlich wurscht - solange sie jemand nützlich findet, sehe ich keinen grund, sie zu löschen. Und selbst wenn nicht, was soll's?
Das mit den etlichen Versionen einer flagge ist schon blöder - wie soll man da wissen, welche richtig ist? Da ist es schon sinnvoll, nur eine, oder zumindest recht wenige versionen zu haben. Allerdings: bei komplexen wappen und flaggen (Mexico z.B.) ist das SVG im oft wesentlich schlechter - und das ist auch nicht so einfach zu beheben. Also: nicht alles über einen Kamm scheren... -- Duesentrieb(?!) 16:28, 12 July 2006 (UTC)
Naja, es wäre schon schön, wenn alle dasselbe Bild verwenden würden. Aber was solls, bleiben sie halt. Und zu den Flaggen: man könnte sich vielleicht am CIA World Factbook orientieren [1]. Ich weiß nicht, wie es bei den Flaggen ist, aber zumindestens in der Heraldik ist die Beschreibung (Blasonierung) verbindlich. Was dann der ausführende Künstler daraus macht, ist sein Problem (und so er sich an die Beschreibung hält, auch immer richtig). Aber wenn man sich an CIA WFB hält, kann man denen ja immer die Schuld geben :) --jed 17:30, 12 July 2006 (UTC)
Die heraldische Definition ist sehr ungenau - meist definiert die Regierung ihr Wappen und ihre Flagge wesentlich genauser, bzw es gibt eine offizielle grafik. Die CIA nimmt's da übrigens nicht so genau. Mit SVG sind komplexe wappen halt recht schwer exakt nachzubilden - zwar sicherlich heralidisch kompatibel, aber eben nicht offiziell korrekt. -- Duesentrieb(?!) 18:09, 12 July 2006 (UTC)
Ja, da hast du sicherlich recht. Ich gehe irgendwie immer von der dt. Flagge aus und die ist im Grundgesetz festgelegt (sowie in einer Anordnung, wie ich gerade gelesen habe). Bei komplexeren Strukturen ist sicherlich ein anderes Format von Vorteil. --jed 22:14, 13 July 2006 (UTC)
Im GG steht nur: Die Bundesflagge ist schwarz-rot-gold - da hat man eine Menge Freiheiten :) -- Duesentrieb(?!) 22:46, 13 July 2006 (UTC)
Der Teufel steckt im Detail und bei den Gesetzen in den Ausführungsbestimmungen: so in der Anordnung über die deutschen Flaggen und tatsächlich liegt dem eine Flaggentafel bei, in der die Flaggen "in echt" gezeichnet sind. --jed 04:37, 14 July 2006 (UTC)

Arrows[edit]

Ups, I'm still "new" to Commons. Sorry for this, and thanks for your help. --kb 12:43, 23 August 2006 (UTC)

ar.wiki[edit]

hi Jed, are you runing an IP image linking bot on arabic wiki.--Tarawneh 21:31, 5 September 2006 (UTC)

No, i don't run a but. I try to orphan some superseded images, among other on ar, but its all done by hand. --jed 21:37, 5 September 2006 (UTC)
Can you create an account. This way we will now it is you ;P . Some of us though it was a bot, and demanded blocking the IP's used --Tarawneh 22:44, 5 September 2006 (UTC)
Done. --jed 05:38, 6 September 2006 (UTC)

Image:Baarn flag.png deletion[edit]

Hi, regarding this request. There is a slight difference in the dimensions of the bottom part of the cross. the SVG is slightly longer. Also, the SVG horizontal lines on the cross seem slightly fuzzy, on the PNG they are sharper. Please improve the SVG more if appropriate. thanks, pfctdayelise (translate?) 03:00, 13 September 2006 (UTC)

Hi, i reduced the horizontal beam of the cross. But i can't see the second point, for me there are only good straight lines. --jed 05:33, 13 September 2006 (UTC)
The dimensions are still slightly different, but eh.
BTW: Please notify uploaders when you nominate their images for deletion. You didn't appear to do this for Image:Auto racing faster car approaching flag light blue with diagonal orange stripe stripe.png. pfctdayelise (translate?) 08:17, 13 September 2006 (UTC)

Duplicates[edit]

Image:Zar.jpg is an example of a superseded image. I think in terms of the edit summary it may be best to leave it phrased like that as different file types are not identical; and a careful phrasing within the edit summary of that may be tricky. If I see a dupe tagged image which is clearly the same format and scaled-down I will delete it. Any suggestions on how to efficiently rephrase the ES to be more sensible?--Nilfanion 07:56, 17 September 2006 (UTC)

Image:Zar.jpg is a scaled-down version of Image:Panoramazarpopr.jpg (that comprised that Zar.jpg is superdeded by Panoramazarpopr.jpg). So the duplicate template is the right choice. Please read the text in this template. --jed 08:35, 17 September 2006 (UTC)
For these images duplicate is not appropriate. The "Scaled-down" refers to indentical images at a different resolution, for instance in the case of a 35x35 and a 100x100 image the larger image is preferred. With these two images, Panoramazarpopr is a crop of Zar. Zar is 4357x1376 and Panoramazarpopr is 3971x1376; so Zar is in fact the larger image. These images are not duplicates.--Nilfanion 13:24, 17 September 2006 (UTC)
Sorry, i did not consider that. I compared only the file size and not the resolution. So you are right. --jed 17:34, 17 September 2006 (UTC)

Deleting bitmap flags[edit]

Hi jed. I have ended up voting against deleting loads of the bitmap flag images you have nominated. The reason is that I believe bitmap (flag) images still have some use after they have been superseded by an SVG, often indirectly. For example, an SVG replacement sometimes has different shades of color or different dimensions, and it is often unclear which one is most correct (quick example: Image:Flaga gminachojnow.jpg and Image:POL gmina Chojnów flag.svg). By keeping the bitmaps, future contributors can compare them to the vector version to see different approaches to colors and shapes and maybe be encouraged to research official/more correct specifications.

Don't get me wrong, I'm a huge supporter of Wikipedia's move to vector images and have contributed a large number of replacement SVG flags myself. I just don't see the need of deleting perfectly fine bitmap images. It's not like we're running out of disk space here on Commons or anything! ;) --Himasaram 10:58, 19 September 2006 (UTC)

Hi, if there are two or more versions of a flag, the people will use them all. In my opinion that it is not desirable. So it is better to leave one and delete the remains. That the colours differ (because there is no way for a accorate representation of colours on the computer) is a big problem, but the answer is not to have as many versions as possible, but to have one as well as possible. That is the advantage of SVG: it is very easy to adjust the colours at each time and everyone profits from it. --jed 06:12, 20 September 2006 (UTC)

Flaggen[edit]

Hallo jed!

Könntest Du bitte nochmals alle Flaggen auf der Seite Template:Deletion requests/Older Discussion durchgehen? Viele Flaggen weichen ja farblich oder im Seitenverhältnis ab und sollten m.E. nur gelöscht werden, wenn jemand definitiv sagt, welche Flaggenversion richtig ist. Ansonsten plädiere ich für das Behalten beider Versionen. --ALE! ¿…? 11:54, 21 September 2006 (UTC)

Ich schau mir das mal an. Bei unterschiedlichen Größenverhältnissen müßte die richtige Version rauszufinden sein. Aber bei den Farbnuance wird man nicht entscheiden können, welche die richtig ist, da es ja keine Möglichkeit gibt, Farben am Bildschirm exakt darzustellen. Man kann sich sicherlich grob am CIA World Factbook orientieren, aber die kochen auch nur mit Wasser und können keine absolute Autorität sein.
Nach meiner Meinung besteht bei diesem Problem die Lösung nicht darin, möglichs viele Varianten zu behalten, sondern darin eine Variante so gut wie eben technisch möglich zu gestalten. Das schließt stete Verbesserungen, je nach Entwicklung der Technik oder Standardisierung der Farbgebung, mit ein. Und da bietet sich nun einmal SVG an, da man es sehr einfach bearbeiten kann. --jed 17:26, 21 September 2006 (UTC)

Commons:Deletion requests/Image:Banderaamalfi.PNG[edit]

Hallo! ich habe die Wappen schon noch ein Mal hochgeladen. Ich hatte nicht gewusst, dass die Farben waren nicht die gleiche an die zwei Wappen, aber sondern sie haben die. Ich danke dich! bis nächstes mal. Excuse me, my deutsch ist sehr schlect, sorry!!! Aliman5040 15:30, 22 September 2006 (UTC)

NSRW images[edit]

In the future, please rename images from the NSRW that you edit—over at the English Wikisource, we need to have the original pages from the text. I've moved one already (Image:NSRW Woodcock.jpg) and will be working to fix the rest in the near future. Thanks! --Spangineeren ws (háblame) 03:40, 8 October 2006 (UTC)

Thank you[edit]

... fürs ganze Bilderumdrehen :-) --Überraschungsbilder 03:24, 25 October 2006 (UTC) 

Image:Pfarrkirche St. Rupert2.JPG[edit]

Hallo, du hast bei diesem Bild die Nutzungsfreigabe erteilt. Bist du Reinhard? Ich wüsste gerne, ob diese Bilder St. Rupert in Deutschland oder in Österreich zeigen. kannst du helfen? Besten Dank. --Ikiwaner 17:50, 25 October 2006 (UTC)

Hallo, nein ich bin nicht Reinhard. Ich habe die Lizenz nachgetragen, weil es offensichtlich war, dass das Bild Teil einer Serie (Bild Image:Pfarrkirche St. Rupert1.JPG bis Image:Pfarrkirche St. Rupert5.JPG) ist, und die restlichen Fotos sind entsprechend freigegeben (und das gleich doppelt, wie ich gerade sehe: Image:Pfarrkirche StRupert1.JPG bis Image:Pfarrkirche StRupert6.JPG). Die sind in dem Artikel de:Pfarrkirche St. Rupert eingebunden, Kategorie: Kirchengebäude in der Steiermark. --jed 20:47, 25 October 2006 (UTC)
Danke, den Trick mit dem Verwendungsnachweis bin ich nicht gekommen. --Ikiwaner 21:07, 25 October 2006 (UTC)

Image:180px-LinBiao.jpg[edit]

Image deletion warning Image:180px-LinBiao.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 | العربية | 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 | Српски / srpski | Svenska | Türkçe | українська | Tiếng Việt | 中文 | 中文(简体)‎ | 中文(繁體)‎ | +/−

Rtc 11:54, 27 March 2007 (UTC)

Flags[edit]

Hi, the new SUCI and CPN(M) flags in svg looks great. thanks, --Soman 14:47, 17 December 2007 (UTC)

It was just the work of VectorMagic. --jed

Flag of Porto Claro[edit]

Jed, thank you so much for the SVG flag of Porto Claro. Coincidentally, you uploaded on my birthday (Dec.29). It was a very nice gift. :o) Friendly, --Pedro 04:02, 9 February 2008 (UTC)

Image:Flag of the United Nations.png[edit]

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

If you created this 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.
In all cases, please do not take the deletion request personally. It is never intended as such. Thank you!

Afrikaans | العربية | 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 | Српски / srpski | Svenska | Türkçe | українська | Tiếng Việt | 中文 | 中文(简体)‎ | 中文(繁體)‎ | +/−

This is an automated message from DRBot. (Stop bugging me!) 07:00, 9 February 2008 (UTC)

Image:Bandera de Molvízar.svg[edit]

Image deletion warning Image:Bandera de Molvízar.svg 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.
In all cases, please do not take the deletion request personally. It is never intended as such. Thank you!


Afrikaans | العربية | 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 | Српски / srpski | Svenska | Türkçe | українська | Tiếng Việt | 中文 | 中文(简体)‎ | 中文(繁體)‎ | +/−

This is an automated message from DRBot. (Stop bugging me!) 15:45, 19 July 2008 (UTC)

Vexilia Hispanica[edit]

Hi mate! only a question... Why do you use the template Vexilla Hispanica for you creations? for exemple: Image:Flag of El Ejido.svg or Image:Bandera de Molvízar.svg. This template is only for the images that are uploaded from the web www.vexilologia.es. In your creations you must not use this template. I also recommend you that you use the FIAV palette of colors. Regards! --Xavigivax (talk) 07:27, 18 September 2008 (UTC)

Hi, this Images are originally png-files (Image:Flag of El Ejido.png & Image:Bandera de Molvízar.png), which i just converted to svg. I don't changed the description, except normaly i linked the original source. --jed (talk) 13:18, 27 September 2008 (UTC)

Japanese Flag[edit]

Thank you for creating Japanese flag image, File:Flag of Miyazaki Prefecture.svg. But this original source may have copyright. If you think that your flag image is not copyrightable, you can add Template:PD-ineligible at contributor-responsibility. Any untagged images will be deleted.--Knua (talk) 17:38, 17 April 2009 (UTC)

Done. --jed (talk) 20:32, 17 April 2009 (UTC)

Tip: Categorizing images[edit]

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


Hello, Jed!

Tip: Add categories to your images

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

Here's how:

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

Uploadwizard-categories.png

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

[[Category:Category name]]

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

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

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

When picking categories, try to choose a specific category ("Astronomical diagrams") over a generic one ("Illustrations"). Pro-tip: The CommonSense tool can help you find the best category for your image.

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

BotMultichillT 16:10, 7 September 2009 (UTC)


File source is not properly indicated: File:Daggers.jpg[edit]

العربية | asturianu | беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ | català | čeština | dansk | Deutsch | Ελληνικά | English | español | euskara | فارسی | suomi | français | עברית | magyar | italiano | 日本語 | 한국어 | македонски | മലയാളം | Plattdüütsch | Nederlands | norsk nynorsk | norsk bokmål | polski | português | português do Brasil | русский | slovenčina | slovenščina | svenska | Türkçe | Tiếng Việt | 中文(简体)‎ | 中文(繁體)‎ | +/−
Warning sign
This media was probably deleted.
A file that you have uploaded to Wikimedia Commons, File:Daggers.jpg, was missing information about where it comes from or who created it, which is needed to verify its copyright status. The file probably has been deleted. If you've got all required information, request undeletion providing this information and the link to the concerned file ([[:File:Daggers.jpg]]).

If you created the content yourself, enter {{own}} as the source. If you did not add a licensing template, you must add one. You may use, for example, {{self|GFDL|cc-by-sa-all}} or {{Cc-zero}} to release certain rights to your work.

If someone else created the content, or if it is based on someone else's work, the source should be the address to the web page where you found it, the name and ISBN of the book you scanned it from, or similar. You should also name the author, provide verifiable information to show that the content is in the public domain or has been published under a free license by its author, and add an appropriate template identifying the public domain or licensing status, if you have not already done so.

Please add the required information for this and other files you have uploaded before adding more files. If you need assistance, please ask at the help desk. Thank you!

--129.215.149.97 13:59, 28 September 2009 (UTC)

File:John Hancock Center from Sears Tower.jpg[edit]

Hi! Can you remember where this file came from? Original was from enwiki but where did your larger/different file come from? Can you help fix the information? The original file was used on enwiki so I moved it to a different name. --MGA73 (talk) 20:38, 18 January 2010 (UTC)

No, i'm sorry, but i can't remember, what i did 4 years ago. --jed (talk) 12:42, 21 January 2010 (UTC)

File:Ottoman1375.svg[edit]

Commons-emblem-issue.svg File:Ottoman1375.svg 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 | 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 | Српски / srpski | Svenska | Türkçe | українська | Tiếng Việt | 中文 | 中文(简体)‎ | 中文(繁體)‎ | +/−

Constantine 10:53, 18 August 2010 (UTC)

File:Administrative_divisions_of_Germany.svg[edit]

Commons-emblem-issue.svg File:Administrative_divisions_of_Germany.svg 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 | 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 | Српски / srpski | Svenska | Türkçe | українська | Tiếng Việt | 中文 | 中文(简体)‎ | 中文(繁體)‎ | +/−

84.61.172.89 19:06, 30 August 2010 (UTC)

File:Meandros flag.svg[edit]

Commons-emblem-issue.svg File:Meandros flag.svg 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 | 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 | Српски / srpski | Svenska | Türkçe | українська | Tiếng Việt | 中文 | 中文(简体)‎ | 中文(繁體)‎ | +/−

84.61.181.19 18:38, 22 May 2012 (UTC)

File:17. Thüringer Montgolfiade - 39.jpg[edit]

Commons-emblem-issue.svg File:17. Thüringer Montgolfiade - 39.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 | 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 | Српски / srpski | Svenska | Türkçe | українська | Tiếng Việt | 中文 | 中文(简体)‎ | 中文(繁體)‎ | +/−

Stefan4 (talk) 21:56, 28 October 2012 (UTC)

File:Syria flag 1946.svg[edit]

Commons-emblem-issue.svg File:Syria flag 1946.svg 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 | 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 | Српски / srpski | Svenska | Türkçe | українська | Tiếng Việt | 中文 | 中文(简体)‎ | 中文(繁體)‎ | +/−

Fry1989 eh? 19:58, 16 May 2013 (UTC)

Good work![edit]

Tireless Contributor Barnstar.gif The Tireless Contributor Barnstar
Good job in spotting all those duplicates! Rehman 05:54, 21 September 2013 (UTC)

File:Winslow Homer Sunlight on the Coast.jpg[edit]

Hallo Jed, wenn Du einen duplicate-Löschantrag für ein Bild stellst, mußt Du vorher die Einbindungen in den verschiedenen Wikipedias ändern. Gruß --Botaurus (talk) 01:17, 17 November 2013 (UTC)

Wenn man das Duplikat löscht wird (automatisch) eine Weiterleitung auf die andere Version erstellt. Also brauch man nicht jede Verlinkung zu ändern. Aber ich machs mal trotzdem. Viele Grüße --jed (talk) 01:22, 17 November 2013 (UTC)
Wozu hängst Du die Dopplungen jeweils ein, ist das nicht völlig sinnlos? Die Bilder sind von der Sortierung her doch sowieso zusmmengestellt. --Botaurus (talk) 01:35, 17 November 2013 (UTC)
Du meinst die Verweise auf ähnliche Versionen? Damit man die gleichen Bilder auch auf den ersten Blick sieht bzw. wie viele Duplikate es eigentlich gibt. --jed (talk) 01:42, 17 November 2013 (UTC)
Da hast Du bei Winslow Homer ja viel zu tun. Es gibt ca. 500 Bilder, die Drucke und Zeichnungen nicht mitgrechnet. Aber wer will das wissen? --Botaurus (talk) 01:46, 17 November 2013 (UTC)
Weiss ich nicht so genau, aber es gibt die Zeile other versions also muss das schon zu irgendwas gut sein. --jed (talk) 01:49, 17 November 2013 (UTC)
Ich finde, es verunstaltet die Bildbeschreibung schon sehr. Wie Du sehen kannst, habe ich fast jedes Bild dieser Kategorie beschrieben und referenziert, aber auf solch eine Idee währe ich nie gekommen. Warum stellst Du die Bilder übereinander, und nicht weningstens quer? - es sieht unmöglich aus. Manchmal ist auch noch der Lizenzbaustein dazwischen, das geht optisch schon garnicht. --Botaurus (talk) 02:18, 17 November 2013 (UTC)
Ich benutze die beiden Vorlagen other (bei einem Bild) und otherversion (bei mehreren Bildern) weil die ja dafür da sind. Lizenzbausteine (die ich nicht einfüge) kann man einfach in einen extra Abschnitt packen == {{int:license-header}} == und darunter dann den Baustein. --jed (talk) 02:29, 17 November 2013 (UTC)
Ja, dann benutze bitte lieber die Gallery-Vorlage anstelle dieses Otherzeugs. --Botaurus (talk) 02:38, 17 November 2013 (UTC)
Ich finde das mit der otherversion eigentlich ganz hübsch. --jed (talk) 06:54, 17 November 2013 (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 | 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 | Српски / srpski | Svenska | Türkçe | українська | Tiếng Việt | 中文 | 中文(简体)‎ | 中文(繁體)‎ | +/−

Affected:


Yours sincerely, Ramaksoud2000 (talk) 01:04, 18 December 2013 (UTC)

File:Christina of Sweden.jpg[edit]

Commons-emblem-issue.svg File:Christina of Sweden.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 | 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 | Српски / srpski | Svenska | Türkçe | українська | Tiếng Việt | 中文 | 中文(简体)‎ | 中文(繁體)‎ | +/−

Pierpao.lo (listening) 11:17, 27 March 2014 (UTC)

File:Morgan vehicles - 03.JPG[edit]

Pay attention to copyright
File:Morgan vehicles - 03.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 find Commons:Copyright rules useful. You can ask questions about Commons policies in 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 | Català | Čeština | Dansk | Deutsch | Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ | Zazaki | Ελληνικά | English | Español | فارسی | Suomi | Français | Galego | עברית | Magyar | Հայերեն | Italiano | 日本語 | 한국어 | Luxembourgish | Македонски | മലയാളം | Bahasa Melayu | Malti | 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)‎ | +/−

Fma12 (talk) 17:23, 16 May 2014 (UTC)