User talk:Kürschner

From Wikimedia Commons, the free media repository
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Kopfzeile[edit]
Wenn ich hier auf meiner Diskussionsseite angesprochen werde, antworte ich auch hier. 
Spreche ich Dich bei Dir an, kannst Du auch dort antworten.
Filing cabinet icon.svg
SpBot archives all sections tagged with {{Section resolved|1=~~~~}} after 7 days. For the archive overview, see archive.

Hallo Kürschner!

Thank you for doing stuff like this. The translation work is appreciated! -- Slaunger (talk) 19:34, 11 November 2008 (UTC)

It is a very fine picture, gratulation!--Kürschner (talk) 19:50, 11 November 2008 (UTC)
Well, thank you! It was an impressive sight, difficult to completely capture on a photo. -- Slaunger (talk) 20:48, 11 November 2008 (UTC)
Checkmark This section is resolved and can be archived. If you disagree, replace this template with your comment. Kürschner (talk) 05:58, 3 April 2013 (UTC)

Thanks[edit]

Hi, Thanks for the interaction. Let me know if you want any help regarding stuff's relation to en:Tamil, en:Indian wildlife. --Karthickbala (talk) 18:19, 28 May 2009 (UTC)


Category:Seafair Indian Days Pow Wow[edit]

Judging by your edit at File:Seafair Indian Days Pow Wow 2010 - 042.jpg, you know a lot more of the relevant terminology than I do. If at any point you would be willing to make a pass through Category:Seafair Indian Days Pow Wow and its subcategories, I bet you could add a lot of useful categories to images. - Jmabel ! talk 02:08, 20 July 2010 (UTC)

Thank you for placing your confidence in my faculities. But I am only a specialist for furs. They do not have much fur in their costumes - and the little bit I found yesterday evening (German time) I could not really recognize - the fur pieces are to small, I just guessed ;-). I will look again, not hopefull. Regards from the furrier, in German called the --Kürschner (talk) 06:38, 20 July 2010 (UTC)
I did my best.--Kürschner (talk) 08:42, 20 July 2010 (UTC)
  • Thanks. I will keep my eyes out for fur-related materials in Seattle, but these days few Seattlites at all often wear fur. I can't even think where there is a furrier in town any more. Of course, a century or so ago, they were still trapping locally, so I may run across something archival when doing historical research. - Jmabel ! talk 16:22, 23 July 2010 (UTC)
If I can do anything else for you, let me know. Fur is naturally beautyful ;-)

Fur sellers in Seattle --Kürschner (talk) 16:28, 23 July 2010 (UTC)

Manhattan furs[edit]

Look in the 28th Street category Beyond My Ken (talk) 08:21, 13 December 2010 (UTC)

Sorry, it's not 28th Street, it's 30th Street, there's one more there. Beyond My Ken (talk) 08:23, 13 December 2010 (UTC)
There are still a few remnants of the fur district -- there's a couple of shops on 30th Street near 7th Avenue, although one may have moved recently -- I saw that the building was being renovated. My wife works nearby, so the next time I'm up there I'll take a more specific look and see what I can see. Beyond My Ken (talk) 08:28, 13 December 2010 (UTC)
Great - give her your camera ;). I have been there around 1996, we visited a last fur supply shop, and saw some old writings on the walls. Sad for a furrier to see. I would be glad, if you can get some pictures. Here you can see a part of the collection (only the furrier's part, there is a large fur part too) till today: http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Category:Furriers_by_city
Have a nice day, 9h45 in Germany --Kürschner (talk) 08:49, 13 December 2010 (UTC)


Muzeum Łowiectwa i Jeździectwa[edit]

Na, das ging ja rasend fix mit der Kategorisierung. Da schaue ich gerade mal nach, ob es die Kat schon gibt oder ich eine neue anlegen muss - als ich sie fand, dachte ich spontan, Donnerwetter, jemand hat die gleichen Fotos wie ich gemacht .... Danke und Gruss --Wistula (talk) 20:01, 22 May 2011 (UTC)

Danke für die schönen Fotos! Jetzt wüsste ich ja gern noch genau, was das für Katzenfelle da an der Wand sind. Habe übrigens auch etwas gebraucht, bis ich raus hatte, ob es die Kategorie schon gibt, polnisch müsste man können. Aber da Du so vorbildlich die Schilder fotografiert hast, kein Problem.--Kürschner (talk) 20:12, 22 May 2011 (UTC)
Wegen der Tierarten-Bestimmung werde ich nicht helfen koennen, die mitgenommene Info-Broschuere weist sie nicht im Einzelnen aus. Musst Du wohl mal nach Warschau kommen, sie hatten alle ihre Schildchen, Gruss --Wistula (talk) 20:30, 22 May 2011 (UTC)
Ja, ja, die Schildchen sah ich wohl, die Brille ist nicht gut genug. Warschau wäre nicht schlecht. Jetzt erst mal Potsdam. --Kürschner (talk) 21:03, 22 May 2011 (UTC)

Fritz Writzka[edit]

Hallo, kennst Du noch einen Fritz Writzka oder Writczka, Leipziger Pelzhändler/Kürschner um 1946? --LutzBruno (talk) 15:14, 8 October 2011 (UTC)

Leider nicht, DDR und Nachkriegsjahr, da habe ich leider wenig, überhaupt keine DDR-Adressen. --Kürschner (talk) 15:33, 8 October 2011 (UTC)
Trotzdem Danke...--LutzBruno (talk) 15:04, 9 October 2011 (UTC)

File:Bundesarchiv Bild 102-05402, Berlin, Hindenburg auf der Grünen Woche.jpg[edit]

geklaute Bilder[edit]

Hallo, die zu den Seiten geführten Links habe ich deswegen eingefügt weil ich der Jenige bin dessen Account auf der Deviantartseite ist. Ich bin greasysalvador, Salvador Schulten, habe alle hier hochgeladenen Fotos selber gemacht, besitze alle diese Felle selber, sammel seit Jahren Fuchsfelle, und beschäftige mich mit der Zucht und den verschiedenen Zuchtrassen und Farbschlägen. Das meiste was ich darüber weiß, weiß ich von Leuten aus den USA die selber diese Felle sammeln und auch in Kontakt mit Züchtern stehen. Hier in Deutschland geht vieles drunter und drüber wie ich sehe. Vieles wird falsch deklariert und so, und ich habe viele andere Freunde in Deutschland, die auch Felle kaufen uns so, und die fragen mich immer, denn die sind total verwirrt. Durch eine Freundin bis ich über den Misstand auf der Pelzarten-Seite überhaupt aufmerksam geworden. Wenn du sicher gehen willst das die Bilder mir gehören, melde dich doch einfach auf deviantart.com an und schreib mir eine note, dann wirst du sehen das ich dir antworte. Ich hoffe nicht das die Bilder hier gelöscht werden. Mein Beitrag über Arcticmarblefuchsfelle wurde ja leider gelöscht. Dabei habe ich mir jede auf dem Markt bekannte Marblefuchs-Rasse sehr genau beschrieben und was den Marblefuchs generell von den anderen Zuchtrassen unterscheidet. --unsignierter Beitrag von 00:09, 5. Apr. 2012‎ User:Marblefox

Ist schon längst geschehen, habe bei einem Deiner Bilder eine Nachricht hinterlassen, bevor ich mich bei Dir gemeldet habe. War vielleicht nicht der direkte Weg. - Hast Du den Marblefuchs-Beitrag noch? Stelle ihn bei Dir auf eine Unterseite:
http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Benutzer:Marblefox/Arbeitsseite und gib mir Bescheid. Dann versuchen wir gemeinsam, den Artikel wikipediareif zu machen.
Bitte immer alle Diskussionsbeiträge unterschreiben, und zwar so: --~~~~ . Den Rest macht Wikipedia von allein. Du kannst immer dort antworten, wo Du angesprochen wirst, also auf Deiner Diskussionsseite reicht auch. Aber jetzt gehe ich endgültig schlafen! --Kürschner (talk) 22:23, 4 April 2012 (UTC)

Ich find das hier total kompliziert sorry, mein gehirn funktioniert leider nicht immer so wie es soll, wo man hier eine mail schreibt, auf der linken seite stehen viele andere sachen aber nichts was mich zum link mail schreiben oder so führt. Vielleicht bin ich auch einfach nur zu blöde, manche dinge sind zu hoch für mich, ich bin Autist. Ich kann mir alle Fuchsrassen beim aussehen und mit namen merken und die auch noch zeichnen aber wenn es an so manche banalen dinge geht scheitere ich.

@Marblefox: gerade am Anfang ist es für alle hier gar nicht so einfach, sich zurecht zu finden - ich kann mich noch sehr gut an meine eigenen Anfänge erinnern. Aber: man kann es wirklich lernen, Schritt für Schritt, mit ein wenig Geduld. Und es findet sich nach meiner Erfahrung immer jemand, der helfen kann, wenn man selbst nicht weiter kommt.
Informationen, wie Du hier interne Mails verschicken kannst, findest Du unter anderem hier. Hast Du denn Deine Mail-Adresse unter Deinen Benutzereinstellungen schon hinterlegt? Ohne die geht es nämlich nicht.
Hier eine "Kurzanleitung":
als erstes gehst Du oben rechts am Bildschirm auf den Reiter "Einstellungen", dann auf "Benutzerdaten". Unten auf der Seite findest Du "E-Mail Optionen". Dort trägst Du Deine E-Mail-Adresse ein. Bitte auf jeden Fall Haken setzen bei " E-Mail-Empfang von anderen Benutzern ermöglichen". Wichtig: danach auf "Einstellungen speichern" drücken.
Letzter Schritt - passiert außerhalb von Commons: ruf bitte Deine Mails ab. Da findest Du eine E-Mail von Commons Wikimedia. Klicke auf den entsprechenden Link um Deine E-Mail-Adresse, die Du auf Commons eingetragen hast, zu bestätigen. Dann ist es geschafft!
Unter Einstellungen / Benutzerdaten findest Du danach den Hinweis "E-Mail-Bestätigung: Deine E-Mail-Adresse wurde am .... um .... Uhr bestätigt." Und auf der linken Seite unter Werkzeuge erscheint, immer wenn Du auf einer Benutzerdiskussionsseite wie z. B. hier beim Kürschner bist "E-Mail an diesen Benutzer". Dort draufklicken und los gehts. :-) Viel Spaß!
Ich hoffe, ich konnte, da Kürschner gerade nicht online ist, ein bischen weiterhelfen. Herzliche Grüße, --4028mdk09 (talk) 05:06, 6 April 2012 (UTC)
Danke für die Hilfe, die meine führte wirklich in die Irre. Auf die Idee, dass er sich mit seiner Mailadresse erst einmal anmelden muss, bin ich nicht gekommen. Entschuldigung und noch mal danke! --Kürschner (talk) 06:41, 6 April 2012 (UTC)

kannst du mir bitte mal folgende änderung erklären...[edit]

... [1] - also nicht "warum?" - sondern wie du das gefunden hast? schaust du dir jedes bild nach kürschnern an oder kanntest du den kürschner und hast danach gesucht? viele grüße --Z thomas 06:33, 19 April 2012 (UTC)

Schöne Frage :). Ich gucke „alle“ Bilder nach Pelzen durch, weil ich über das Thema bei Wiki schreibe. Das mit den Kürschnern ist ein zusätzliches Hobby, ich habe einen Riecher dafür, wie ein Pelzgeschäft aussieht... In diesem Fall war es jedoch anders, als ich gesehen habe, dass jemand Bilder aus Dresden hochlädt, habe ich gegoogelt, wo dort die Kürschner sind. Und dann mal nachgesehen, ob es ein Bild gibt. In Dresden ist übrigens mindestens noch ein Kürschner ....????? Mit Kürschnergruß, Schweif hoch vom --Kürschner (talk) 06:47, 19 April 2012 (UTC)
oh danke, ich hab mir bei dieser frage extra mühe gegeben. dein kürschnerwissen hab ich ja hier shcon mitbekommen :-)
jedes bild anschauen ist praktisch, denn dann brauchst du nicht verreisen, da du's ja schon gesehen hast.
na dann werd ich mal in dresden die augen offen halten, ob mir das "eine weitere" kürschnergeschäft vor die linse kommt. normalen unpelzigen gruß --Z thomas 14:39, 19 April 2012 (UTC)
Witzig. Habe gerade eine Mail bekommen, von jemand der über den Brühl schreibt und von mir ein Bild möchte. --- Google mal "Pelze Dresden", ist nur gerecht, wenn ich im Gegenzug noch ein Kürschnerfoto bekomme. Gruß --Kürschner (talk) 16:06, 19 April 2012 (UTC)
gibt es wünsche? :-) --Z thomas 18:45, 23 April 2012 (UTC)
Immer ;). Für den Brühl jedoch noch nicht, kurioserweise wohnt der Interessent bei mir um die Ecke, habe ihn eingeladen vorbei zu kommen. Aber wenn Du mal was Pelziges siehst... --Kürschner (talk) 19:17, 23 April 2012 (UTC)
also mein angebot war nicht auf den brühl bezogen sondern auf dresden. ABER ich versprech dir, ich halt auf jeden fall die augen auf. hab vor ein paar jahren mal die tochter eines kürschners in leipzig getroffen. da gibt's ja auch nicht so viel mehr in leipzig (also kürschner nicht töchter) :-) --Z thomas 20:32, 23 April 2012 (UTC)

Luchs? Hermelin?[edit]

Könnten Sie bitte dieses Bild anschauen und den Pelz bestimmen? Schönen Dank im voraus. --Jdsteakley (talk) 12:30, 4 November 2013 (UTC)

Luchs war doch prima getippt. Danke für den Hinweis.--Kürschner (talk) 13:05, 4 November 2013 (UTC)
Nachdem Sie Luchs bestätigt haben, habe ich meine anderen Neuzugänge angeschaut, und ich glaube, dass es sich auch hier um Luchs statt Ermelin handeln könnte, zumal der Abgebildete "nur" ein Baron war und kein Landesfürst. (Ich glaube, Ermelin war ausschließlich für Fürsten vorbehalten, oder?) Ihre Kategorie habe ich dahingehend abgeändert. Was meinen Sie dazu? --Jdsteakley (talk) 20:38, 4 November 2013 (UTC)
Ich habe es mal in Wildkatze geändert. Wer Hermelin tragen durfte, dafür lässt sich nur schwer eine Regel aufstellen. Das ist regional und nach der Zeitepoche unterschiedlich. Unter Außerachtlassung der künstlerischen Freiheit oder der mangelnden Tierkunde des jeweiligen Malers: Hier, in diesem Fall, ist das Haar zu kurz für Luchs. Die Tupfen beim Hermelin entstehen durch die aufgesetzten, dünnen Schweife, das gibt ein besonderes Bild, meist sind sie auch gleichmäßig angeordnet. Diese drei Fellarten plus Feh sind die hauptsächlich für Honoratioren und Geistliche infrage kommenden Pelz-Standesinsignien. Dazu käme noch der Zobel, aber der ist kaum vom Marder zu unterscheiden, deshalb werfe ich alles was der zoologischen Familie der Marder angehört, aber nicht näher zu bestimmen ist, in die Kategorie Marten (clothing). Aber machen Sie es sich einfach, packen Sie mir im Zweifelsfall einen Link hierher, mich freut's. --Kürschner (talk) 21:01, 4 November 2013 (UTC)
Das finde ich wirklich sehr interessant. Könnten Sie bitte einen Blick auf diese Zieten-Bilder (1, 2 und 3) werfen? In der Armee Friedrichs des Großen war er eine einmalige Erscheinung. --Jdsteakley (talk) 02:02, 5 November 2013 (UTC)
Tatsächlich, da haben Sie drei spannende Bilder herausgepickt. Hilfreich wäre es, wenn man jedes Mal wüsste, ob der Maler das Fell nach dem tatsächlichen Kleidungsstück gemalt hat, was nur selten der Fall sein dürfte. Oder ob er seine Fantasie hat walten lassen. Interessant auch, dass von Zieten gleich mit drei verschiedenen Fellarten abgebildet wurde.
Könnte man davon ausgehen, dass er das Teil nach der Natur gemalt hat, wäre das erste vielleicht sogar eher ein Nebelparder als ein Leopard, der ist nun aber extrem selten, und letztlich stimmt es doch nicht. Es ist kein Jaguar, die Flecken sind anders. Aber sehr gut, fast noch besser als Leopard, wäre das auch recht seltene Schneeleopard...
Das mittlere dürfte wieder Luchs sein, das kommt recht gut hin
Aber das letzte ist schon ausgefallen, echt spannend. Vielleicht Tüpfelbeutelmarder?: Aus den Fellen wurden hauptsächlich Innenfutter gearbeitet, die unter der Bezeichnung „Chickerickfutter“ verkauft wurden. Heute ist der Tüpfelbeutelmarder geschützt. Können wir ja mal so einsortieren, bis mir etwas besseres einfällt. Womöglich muss ich dafür eine neue Kategorie einrichten...
Weiter so. --Kürschner (talk) 08:56, 5 November 2013 (UTC)
Hier steht ein weiteres Zieten-Bild, allerdings recht schemenhaft. Und - wie ist es denn mit seinem Hut? Der ist doch auch aus Fell, nicht wahr? --Jdsteakley (talk) 16:10, 5 November 2013 (UTC)
Genau - erledigt. --Kürschner (talk) 17:20, 5 November 2013 (UTC)

Vielleicht gefällt Ihnen die Verwendung Ihres Fotos?

Gehpelz --Kürschner (talk) 07:53, 13 November 2013 (UTC)

Ausnahmsweise[edit]

mal kein Löschantrag von einem hirnamputierten Copyrightparanoiker, sondern eine Frage: Was ist das denn schönes? Und außerdem: frohes neues Jahr! --AndreasPraefcke (talk) 14:52, 9 January 2014 (UTC)

Hochinteressant. Habe mich erst noch mal schlau gemacht, wann Südamerika entdeckt wurde ;) - könnte Bergozelot sein. Die Abbildung ist ganz offensichtlich nach einem Original verfertigt, die Zusammensetznähte sind deutlich zu sehen. Fehlen tun für ein so akkurates Bild die Aufhellungen in den Längsflecken, die aber in der Verkleinerung der Fellabbildungen auch nicht mehr zu erkennen sind. - Deinen obskuren Löschantrag hatte ich gesehen, vermutete zurecht, das regelt sich von selbst. Ganz großen Dank! --Kürschner (talk) 16:39, 9 January 2014 (UTC)

Jetzt kann ich vor allem sehen, wie schwierig es ist, in einem Stich Feinheiten genau darzustellen. Das waren wirklich Künstler. Noch mal danke. --Kürschner (talk) 21:24, 9 January 2014 (UTC)

Kleiner Pelzwitz --AndreasPraefcke (talk) 07:53, 17 January 2014 (UTC)

Ein Papst aus dem heißen Südamerika ist für Kürschner schwer geschäftsschädigend. Kaltes Polen oder Bayern war echt besser. --Kürschner (talk) 10:11, 17 January 2014 (UTC)

Danke mal wieder fürs Nachkategorisieren der Fasnetbilder. "Furs are such a bother" --AndreasPraefcke (talk) 09:58, 12 February 2014 (UTC)

Gern geschehen und danke - erinnere mich bitte in 7 Jahren noch mal an den Link. --Kürschner (talk) 13:15, 12 February 2014 (UTC)

Über http://www.theparisreview.org/blog/2011/01/04/the-coats-of-edward-gorey/ stolperte ich heute zufällig bei TumblR. --AndreasPraefcke (talk) 20:28, 23 February 2014 (UTC)

Oh, was für eine schöne Geschichte, kannte ich noch nicht. Schade, wir hatten bis vor einigen Jahren eine humoristische Fachzeitschrift, "Die Pelzmotte" - das wäre DER Artikel dafür gewesen. Besten großen Dank! --Kürschner (talk) 20:49, 23 February 2014 (UTC)

Jetzt mäkeln die Spinner sogar schon an der Fasnet herum: [2] Nur weil eine Katze "süß" ist? Gegen Lederschuhe habe ich solche Aktionen jedenfalls noch nie gehört. --AndreasPraefcke (talk) 09:54, 6 March 2014 (UTC)

Ich könnte Bücher darüber schreiben - wenn ich nicht jedes Mal einen dicken Hals dabei bekommen würde. Danke für den Hinweis. --Kürschner (talk) 10:30, 6 March 2014 (UTC)

Was ist denn das schönes? File:Porträtbuch Ratsherren Regensburg 007r.jpg --Narrenmarsch (talk) 14:38, 24 March 2014 (UTC)

Hochinteressant. Ohne Deinen Hinweis hätte ich das sich gar nicht als Pelz erkannt. Hiesiges Eichhörnchen, Köpfe mit Ohren. Der dritte, mittlere Fleck ist mir unklar. --Kürschner (talk) 15:31, 24 March 2014 (UTC)

File:Ланская худ Макаров 1849.jpg[edit]

Hello, Kürschner! Can you help us with this image of Pushkin's wife - what fur is there? Shakko (talk) 17:04, 2 February 2014 (UTC)

No, sorry. Maybe, if you send me the original ;). Maybe. It can be a kind of marten (for example sable), but also something other. I wonder you see, it is fur... Sorry once more, --Kürschner (talk) 18:45, 2 February 2014 (UTC)
alas, no high res. But we have this one File:N.N. Lanskaya by I.Makarov after V.Hau (circa 1880, All-Russian Pushkin museum, SPb).jpg - same person same painter. Maybe same clothing. Shakko (talk) 19:01, 2 February 2014 (UTC)
I would say, squirrel backs again, see the text above. Evan Makarov painted the furs not very detailed. Funny, I am just writing about squirrel fur. Around 1880 squirrel was not very expensive, in Germany they made children's clothing from this. That suggest against my presumption, but Russian squirrel was most of time the fur of the low aristocracy. --Kürschner (talk) 21:40, 2 February 2014 (UTC)
her second husband was quite poor, it match.... Thanks, my dear expert! Did you see, I'm uploading high res files for Category:Romanov Anniversary Ball (1903) - Album (1904, Peterburg)? many "fresh meat" for you. --Shakko (talk) 20:25, 4 February 2014 (UTC)
I am two days not online, trying to tell the hunters at their fair that they must use the red fox furs, not threw them away after shooting, it's a sin. - I saw your uploads the days before, fine. I had categorizes the Romanow Ball under "Sable (clothing)", it is ok for nearly all photos with fur there. And the second uploads are often categorized double in this category before I categorized the whole Ball there. Good night, a little bit tired after the first hunting fair day. --Kürschner (talk) 20:39, 4 February 2014 (UTC)

witgchoura[edit]

You cited "When the Austro-Italien war brought Bonaparte's troops in contact with the Russian regiments, commanded by field-marshal Suworow, who had introducted the witgchoura, the fashion soon spread to Paris"... Is there some more details about this fasion? Can't guess... The only Russian word to look like is "wichoura" (вычура). It means "something incredible fashionable" or obsolete term "fancy embroidery". "A la Souvarov" there was moustache, hats and bootfortes. --Shakko (talk) 09:46, 11 February 2014 (UTC)

This fur lined cloak, alledgedly seal skins were used for this purpose, became the rage of society. --- Sorry, I should give this information too. --Kürschner (talk) 10:05, 11 February 2014 (UTC)
so it is leather cloak from fake seal? --Shakko (talk) 10:21, 11 February 2014 (UTC)
Not faked, really seal skins, I think with hair. But I want to find out more, and more sources?! Thank you till here! --Kürschner (talk) 10:26, 11 February 2014 (UTC)
we have found it! with a little help from my friends. A witchoura was a women's warm, ankle-length winter coat, fur trimmed and lined, and based upon the Polish wilczura coat. They were worn over lightweight dresses during the first third of the 19th century from about 1808 until 1830.source picture. But we can't the Russian word at all for it. The original it seems to be only Polish wilczura. --Shakko (talk) 12:04, 27 February 2014 (UTC)
you will be laughing. It seems to be simply Slavish evolution of German word "Wilkschur"[3]. Simply big coat from wolf.Shakko (talk) 12:13, 27 February 2014 (UTC)
I am lauhing, I wrote this (Wildschur): http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wildschur. Thank you very much for now, just before a have walk to the Rhine. I have to think a some longer about your surprising information, your dress looks a "little bit" different to my Wildschur ;-). --Kürschner (talk) 14:04, 27 February 2014 (UTC)
heh. Add to your article interwiki to my fresh one ru:Вилчура :) See notes there to french and english books.
As I understand, 1. at first it was simply Russian Wilkschur. They found 18th-century drawings for me[4][5] with frozen Frenchmen. Whole fur. But when Western Europe adopted it, it was converted in 2. female witchoura (like redingote, salope, mantle), mainly from textile. We, in Russia, didn't know 2nd fashion. Shakko (talk) 14:51, 27 February 2014 (UTC)
Thank you - and your friends - for the perfect investigation. I think and hope, I had described it correctly at the German Wikipedia. It is linked now to Russian. Have a nice day, sunshine here. --Kürschner (talk) 08:06, 25 March 2014 (UTC)

@Shakko:, @Kürschner:. Hello. Pardon me for intruding, but I found this discussion quite illuminating (and entertaining) as I have long wondered what this term really meant. You can find an example of an 1815 London fashion plate featuring a "Witzchoura Mantle" at File:Fashion Plate (Britania Witzchoura Walking Dress) LACMA M.86.266.207.jpg. The description for this plate reads, in part:

The Witzchoura mantle and spenser which is worn with this dress, is composed of blue twilled sarsnet, lined with white satin, and trimmed with Mrs. Bell's new invented pearl silk trimming; the spenser is made of white satin to correspond with the mantle. We cannot refer our readers to the Print for the form of the Witzchoura, because it would only convey an inadequate idea of this most tasteful and elegant mantle; nor shall we attempt to describe the manner in which it is made, because we are convinced that our fair readers cannot form a judgment of it without seeing it. We must, in justice to Mrs. Bell, to whose elegant taste the public is indebted for the improved Witzchoura, observe, that it is the most tasteful and becoming mantle we have ever seen: its form is extremely simple, and when properly put on, it falls in such easy graceful folds that even a tolerably pretty figure must be irresistible in a Witzchoura. The materials of this mantle are generally sarsnet, but satin or French silk are in estimation with some elegantes. The spenser and the lining are uniformly white, and the former is always composed of satin, but blue, light-green, and the most delicate shade of the wild rose shot with white, are most prevalent. French bonnet made of pearl silk to correspond with the mantle; white kid gloves, and pale-blue slippers.

—Explanation of the Prints of Fashion for April 1815 printed in the March 1815 issue of La Belle Assemblée, p. 129.


The London fashion plates for 1814-15 were full of names like the "Platoff Cap" and "Blücher Bonnet" which may or may not have had anything to do with the actual personages for which they were named, most of whom visited London for the "Victory Summer" celebrations of the Allies in 1814. You can see some of them by perusing the categories associated with the above file, if you are interested (they are sorted by date). It seems that in the case of the Witzchoura, in any event, Mrs. Bell's "improvements" resulted in a garment not much related to its namesake. I hope you found this as entertaining as I did. Cheers! Laura1822 (talk) 21:08, 25 August 2014 (UTC)

Here's another, this one French from 1813: File:Costume Parisien 1290 - Chapeau de Satin à Raies de Velours. Witz-chouras de Reps. 1813..jpg Laura1822 (talk) 21:54, 25 August 2014 (UTC)

Greatǃ And the Chapeau de Satin à Raies de Velours is with fur, very probably Russian squirrel (that's my topic). Continued here soon?? I love Wiki ;-) -- Kürschner (talk) 07:28, 26 August 2014 (UTC)

Barnstar[edit]

Restorationist's Barnstar.png The Historical Media Barnstar
Please accept this barnstar for your help cataloguing the recent Rijksmuseum uploads. It's much appreciated. :-) (talk) 14:54, 30 July 2014 (UTC)
Bedanktǃ --Kürschner (talk) 14:57, 30 July 2014 (UTC)

Happy St-Gummarus![edit]

File:Saint Gummarus inter2.JPG

More where they come from! Carolus (talk) 14:01, 12 October 2014 (UTC)

Fine picture! -- Kürschner (talk) 09:38, 23 October 2014 (UTC)

File:Russian embassy (1576 engraving) hats 01 by shakko.jpg[edit]

Maybe you'll need it?

And this one? --Shakko (talk) 19:58, 27 November 2014 (UTC)

Fine, thank you. I know them and I saw your uploads. But they are much better then the one I uploaded, and above all, they are complete! Thank you very much! -- Kürschner (talk) 20:18, 27 November 2014 (UTC)
See one here: Sable skins. -- Kürschner (talk) 20:25, 27 November 2014 (UTC)
and here (fine collection!): fur caps. -- Kürschner (talk) 21:26, 27 November 2014 (UTC)
the hats had differents sub-names but I didn't find the source for it yet. Murmolka and etc. Shakko (talk) 07:39, 28 November 2014 (UTC)
here you can see the way to transpotting the pack of 40 sables in textile cover (gift for your emperor from our tsar, I hope he liked it :). And in Gothic inscription in German the author speaks about it. --Shakko (talk) 07:43, 28 November 2014 (UTC)
Not my, the German Emperor - for the Austrian one. This part of the picture is sometimes shown in fur literature. Have a nice day! -- Kürschner (talk) 07:58, 28 November 2014 (UTC)

Wellcome Images Barnstar[edit]

Wellcome barnstar.gif Wellcome Images volunteer barnstar
Thank you for helping to categorise the Wellcome Image library uploads. You are in our project hall of fame for your work! :-) -- (talk) 13:10, 30 November 2014 (UTC)

Furriers in Barcelona[edit]

I have found no more photos. But I'll follow this topic in the future! --Jordiferrer (talk) 09:14, 8 January 2015 (UTC)

This is, what I hoped, great. Thank you! -- Kürschner (talk) 09:26, 8 January 2015 (UTC)

Fur fashion in 1414[edit]

I don't understand the meaning of this category : how could you say this is the "fashion" of 1414 ? but not 1413 ? 1412 ? 1416 ? or 1410 ? because nobody can say the Limbourg Brothers copy a clothing of years before ? Do you have historical sources that can assert this ? At least, a category by decades could be eligible for this period but not by year ! this categorization need also to be explain : why this year but not another one ? Thanks for your explanations. Mel22 (talk) 08:24, 18 August 2015 (UTC)

You're right, an additional category for decades would make it more correct. And then we need a category for centurys, maybe better for half centurys too. And later back in the time for milleniums. But I am glad, to have a template for the years, most newer pictures have the specificated year. And it is not very funny, to put each year in the category of the decade, the decade in the half century and so on. There are now several thousend images in the year's categories, who shall manage this? I think, this is not perfect, but a very good help for people who want to look which fashion was in that time. For individuell, correct information they have to look the information at the image. I do my best, to make it as accurate as possible. With thousends of pictures in some weeks nevertheless surely with a high quote of mistakes. --- And thank for asking, your question is legitime! -- Kürschner (talk) 09:28, 18 August 2015 (UTC)
I didn't know that fur fashion change every year at the begining of the 15th cent : can you show me the catalogs ? Several categories are sorted by year, by decade and by century and nobody says it is to hard to manage. And I still don't know why you put this cat on this image... Mel22 (talk) 17:37, 18 August 2015 (UTC)
I started it in the present time. In principle I agree with you, if you make me the templates for decades etc., I will use them in future too. Thank you. --Kürschner (talk) 17:44, 18 August 2015 (UTC)

Deine Scans der Jubiläumsschrift 50 Jahre C. Louis Weber ...[edit]

Lieber Kürschner, vielen Dank für Deine hochaufgelösten und vollumfänglichen Scans, mit denen Du auch Menschen mit anderen Interessen Dienste geleistet hast. Zur Vorbereitung eines eigenständigen Wikipedia-Artikels über C. Louis Weber habe ich mir erlaubt, Bildausschnitte aus dem Buch zu fertigen, die dann den noch zu schreibenden Artikel illustrieren sollen. Sicher im Namen auch anderer Nutznießer Deiner ehrenamtlichen Arbeiten sende ich Dir Gruß und Dank. --Bernd Schwabe in Hannover (talk) 13:35, 26 August 2015 (UTC)

Freut mich, bin gespannt auf den Artikel. -- Kürschner (talk) 15:08, 26 August 2015 (UTC)


Fur[edit]

It clearly only interests fur scientists. The subcategories in Cornelis de Vos have to do with his various genres. We are also not going to add subcategories on 'Paintings of de Vos with hats' or 'shoes' etc., that would make this completely chaotic. That is why it should be a category inside the file not a sub-category of the Cornelis de Vos category. Caravaggista (talk)

Hallo Caravaggista, I cannot agree with you. If you think so, a lot of subcategories would be nonsense. "Facing right" or left and thousends more. Maybe this is not so often in artist's categories, I don't know. But I think, if the name of the artist is in the category name, it should appear there. Two opinions - what shall we do?-- Kürschner (talk)

little gift :)[edit]

File:Maria Alexandrova's coronation mantle (1856, Kremlin) by shakko 05.JPG and more here. --Shakko (talk) 16:48, 10 January 2016 (UTC)

Really great :-O thank you!!! -- Kürschner (talk) 17:01, 10 January 2016 (UTC)

festplatte bereinigt :-)[edit]

Kürschner in der Langen Erfurt 26 in Erfurt

Hallo Kürschner, vor Jahren hab ich den Laden gesehen und für dich aufgenommen, jetzt auf der festplatte wiederentdeckt :-) hoffe, du freust dich ein bisschen... viele grüße --Z thomas 18:10, 19 April 2016 (UTC)

Hoho, hoho, nicht nur ein bisschen. Thomas, der Tag ist gerettet, DANKE! -- Kürschner (talk) 18:18, 19 April 2016 (UTC)
sehr schön, dann halte ich mal weiter die augen auf :-) --Z thomas 18:37, 19 April 2016 (UTC)
Oh Thomas - ich werde schon nervös. Viel Erfolg und toi toi toi! Kürschner (talk) 18:43, 19 April 2016 (UTC)

Eine Postkarte meines Ururgroßvaters Ambros Pospischek.[edit]

Die Kürschnerei wurde weiter geführt von seinem Sohn Rudolf Pospischek, danach von dessen Söhnen Emil Rudolf Pospischek und Gerbert Pospischek und zuletzt von Emil Rudolf Pospischeks Sohn, Edlef Holger Pospischek. Der letztgenannte ist mein Vater. {{unsignedIP2|02:51, 28 August 2016|176.0.89.23}

File:Sam Jones Mayor of Barnsley (2).JPG[edit]

Please do not categorise this as fur fashion of the date of the photograph. British mayors represent the ancient tradition of their city when they wear traditional ceremonial robes. It is not about fashion.

In the case of Barnsley mayors, their robe was presented to the town in the 1870s. Successive mayors continued to wear it on formal occasions, whether they liked it or not, into the 20th century. This type of robe imitates medieval and renaissance fashion, that is, Court fashion of the years before about 1600. It is worn for tradition. Storye book (talk) 10:41, 12 November 2017 (UTC)

Hallo Storye book, thank you for your interesting information, great. But where is the problem? Clothing fashion is, what people wear in that time. Fashion from citicens maybe not the same as the individual clothes of lawyers, bakers, kings and so on. But it is a special fashion of the time. And must be categorized in that year as a help for people, who write about fashion of the time. Alternativ there are categories for fur costumes by year, but this categories I want reserve for real costumes, costumes which represent another time as they were used (actors, carneval, etc.). It is the normal use to describe robes as fashion in the time they are used! --- But - better a cateogory to much, then one less and somebody will not find the image he needs. Regards -- Kürschner (talk) 11:50, 12 November 2017 (UTC)
You say that fashion is "a special fashion of the time." A traditional, ceremonial robe, in the case of British mayors, is usually the exact same single item of clothing, made maybe 100 or more years ago, which is worn by whoever is elected to office for many, many decades. It is usually created in imitation of medieval or renaissance fashion (i.e. up to about 1600.) You could say that the style is medieval/renaissance. Or if you want to define it by when it is worn, then the "time" of the Barnsley mayoral robe is 1873-present - or 19th century, 20th century and 21st century. But it is certainly not a fashion of the 1920s, for example. I agree that costumes can represent the fashion of a previous era. British mayoral robes can fall into the costume category, then, because they are used specifically for parades and display on special occasions. Storye book (talk) 12:09, 12 November 2017 (UTC)
Dear Storye book, that is all fine. But please show me another way to categorize these (and thousends others, which are categorized this way till now, for example military fur clothing, clerics etc.) in the year they were used. I think, we shall let it as it is used till now and do not start dozens (thousends, each year for every sort of robe) of lower or upper categories?! -- Kürschner (talk) 11:00, 13 November 2017 (UTC)
You say "please show me another way to categorize these." I have already done so: I suggest that you categorise them as costume, since that is what they are - at least for the mayors. In the UK, mayors only wear their traditional robes about once or twice a year - normally for their official photograph on accession, and for their annual Mayoral parade. An exception might be a visit to the town by the Queen, or a national-event funeral. At most other official events they just wear the mayoral chain and a normal office suit. If a young child in the UK asked a robed mayor whether he was wearing "fashion", the mayor would laugh kindly, and explain that his/her fashionable dress was the office suit worn under the robe, and that the robe was a costume for parades, representing the dignity of the town. Storye book (talk) 11:31, 13 November 2017 (UTC)
Hello Storye book, ok, I will do this with the images you have uploaded. But please consider, in actual fact I am the only one who serve as specialist these categories. It would be nice, to let them as their are... ;-). Thank you, have a nice week! -- Kürschner (talk) 12:25, 13 November 2017 (UTC)
Thank you, Kurschner. Much appreciated. And thank you for all your had work on the categories. Storye book (talk) 12:35, 13 November 2017 (UTC)

Category:Lanpher Furs North Star Brand Season 1906-7 Lanpher, Skinner & Co, Saint Paul Minnesota[edit]

Hello Kürschner,

I am a PhD student studying the use of Australian native animal furs. I was very excited to discover the Lanpher and Skinner catalogues that you have uploaded. They are wonderful and provide a great resource on the use of such a great variety of different furs.

I would like to reproduce some of the pages from the 1906 catalogue in an academic article in 'History Australia' journal that I am writing on the use of Australian possum, wallaby, koala (wombat) and platypus furs.

The pages that I would like to use are: https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Lanpher_Furs_Automobile_coat_lady_Opossum.jpg (between 25 & 26) https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Lanpher_Furs_page_39.jpg https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Lanpher_Furs_Sheep_lined_ulsters_11_21.jpg https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Lanpher_Furs_Australian_Wombat_Coat_S63.jpg

It would be a very kind favour on your part, as unfortunately I cannot afford to pay you as I am a student and I do not get paid for the article. However I promise to send you a copy of the article.

Can you reply giving me permission to do this?

The journal requires 600dpi quality for reproduction.

I am new to wikicommons but I think that you can email me? Please reply here if not.

Thanks EDownes (talk)

— Preceding unsigned comment added by EDownes (talk • contribs) 01:40, 1 December 2017 (UTC)
Hallo EDownes, I answered you per mail. -- Kürschner (talk) 07:46, 1 December 2017 (UTC)

Hello and I am sorry[edit]

I am sorry I did not answer your request on my Talk page. This is the first time I have logged in since August. My house was destroyed by Hurricane Harvey and I have been very busy! I hope you got the help you needed and that you are well. Laura1822 (talk) 17:25, 13 December 2017 (UTC)

Dear Laura1822, how terrible! I hope, all is as well as possible now! Yes, I found somebody, who could clear my bad English problem. Thank you, with best wishes for the future, regards from Germany, -- Kürschner (talk) 17:48, 13 December 2017 (UTC)
Thank you! It was very bad: every house in our neighborhood and other nearby neighborhoods was destroyed by flood. People are rebuilding though! And no people died. My family and I are safe and as well as we can be. We are still very tired!

not categorized fur![edit]

File:Surikov Alexander Ivanovich Surikov in a winter coat study 1889 Krasnoyarsk.jpg --Shakko (talk) 20:33, 11 October 2018 (UTC)

Fur fashion in 2018 - Trooping[edit]

Also die Fotos wurden 2018 gemacht. Und die Wachen tragen auch Pelz. Aber soweit ich weiß, doch den gleichen, den sie auch letztes Jahr getragen haben und das Jahr davor und wohl auch nächstes Jahr? Ist das also wirklich die optimale Kategorie? --C.Suthorn (talk) 10:39, 30 October 2018 (UTC)

Hallo C.Suthorn, danke für deinen berechtigten Einwand. Sicherlich nicht optimal. Aber ich sehe wenig Sinn darin, weitere, spezielle Kategorien anzulegen, die zeigen, dass in diesem Jahr Bärenfellmützen getragen wurden. Es gäbe alternative Kategorien, "Fur costumes in 2018" oder "Furs in 2018" (in die ich alles mit einsortiere, was aus einer anderen Zeitepoche stammt, aber in diesem Jahr fotografiert wurde - bis eben auf zu der Zeit getragene Kleidung, die ich gern bei der Mode belassen würde). Wie gesagt, wirklich nicht optimal, scheint mir aber noch der beste Kompromiss. -- Kürschner (talk) 10:47, 30 October 2018 (UTC)