User talk:Ziegelbrenner

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

User talk:Ziegelbrenner/Archiv

Rheinbund[edit]

Hallo, die Karten zum Rheinbund sind etwas verunfallt in der aktuellen Version. Die Auflösung ist nur noch ein Bruchteil der Vorgängerversionen, was die Karten annähernd nutzlos macht, weil fast unlesbar. Insofern sind die neuen Versionen etwas eine Verschlimmbesserung. Kannst du die Auflösung korrigieren? --Hansbaer (talk) 08:01, 1 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Aha, okay. Ist mir gar nicht aufgefallen. Kann ich erst am Montag im Büro machen. Grüße --Ziegelbrenner (talk) 16:43, 1 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
✓ Done --Ziegelbrenner (talk) 13:51, 3 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Super, danke! --Hansbaer (talk) 08:03, 5 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Holy Roman Empire[edit]

Hello. Please, if you have any .psd or .svg versions of these images (1, 2, 3), send them to me by email (eternal.laka@gmail.com). Thanks--SHOTHA (talk) 11:42, 20 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Schreibfehler in der Karte File:GermanenAD50.png[edit]

Das römische Heerlager Quintana befindet sich heute im niederbayerischen Ort Künzing. In der Kate fehlt das 'n' - derzeit steht 'Künzig' drin, was falsch ist. Dieser Fehler pflanzte sich übrigens schon in der italienischen Version der Karte fort. Also sollte auch dort nachgebessert werden.

✓ Done Bitte svg.-Karte benutzen. Grüße Ziegelbrenner (talk) 14:38, 28 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

File:Deutsches Reich1.svg[edit]

Commons-emblem-issue.svg
File:Deutsches Reich1.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 see Commons:But it's my own work! for a guide on how to address these issues.

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!

Gabriel Haute Maurienne (talk) 11:41, 6 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Artikel doof – da löschen wir doch schnell die karte – geht’s noch? --Ziegelbrenner (talk) 12:35, 6 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

File:Hessen-HG-flag.jpg[edit]

Commons-emblem-issue.svg
File:Hessen-HG-flag.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 see Commons:But it's my own work! for a guide on how to address these issues.

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!

User: Perhelion (Commons: = crap?) 12:26, 8 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

File:Hessen-KS-flag.jpg[edit]

Commons-emblem-issue.svg
File:Hessen-KS-flag.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 see Commons:But it's my own work! for a guide on how to address these issues.

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!

User: Perhelion (Commons: = crap?) 12:29, 8 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Copyright status: File:Felddienstzeichen (Hesse) 1840 - ribbon bar.png[edit]

català  čeština  dansk  Deutsch  Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎  English  español  français  galego  hrvatski  italiano  magyar  Bahasa Melayu  norsk  norsk bokmål  norsk nynorsk  polski  português  português do Brasil  română  sicilianu  slovenčina  slovenščina  suomi  svenska  беларуская‎  беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎  български  македонски  русский  українська  ಕನ್ನಡ  ತುಳು  മലയാളം  한국어  日本語  עברית  العربيَّة  فارسی  中文  +/−
Warning sign
This media may be deleted.
Thanks for uploading File:Felddienstzeichen (Hesse) 1840 - ribbon bar.png. 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 VRT 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 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) 12:20, 3 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I simply forgot the license. Sorry. --Ziegelbrenner (talk) 14:27, 3 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Karte der niederländischen Departements[edit]

Hallo, Ziegelbrenner kleine Beanstandung an deiner Karte der "Franzosenzeit" in den Niederlanden: zum Departement Meuse Inferieure gehörten nicht die erst nach 1815 zur Provinz Limburg gekommenen Gebiete des Oberquartiers Geldern. Gemerkt habe ich's nur, weil mir die Grenze zu exakt dem Verlauf der "Kanonenschußentfernung" vom Ufer der Maas entspricht, die ja erst 1815 festgelegt wurde. Liebe Grüße, --Hvs50 (talk) 09:23, 4 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

File:HRR 1789.png[edit]

Hallo, kannst du bitte bei der Legende noch "FL = Fürstentum Lippe" hinzufügen? Danke! --Magnus (talk) 10:13, 29 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

✓ Done --Ziegelbrenner (talk) 17:17, 16 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Limes-Karten[edit]

Limes

Hallo Ziegelbrenner, beim Straßennetz auf File:Limes2.png, File:Limes2-it.png und File:Limes2-fi.png ist mir eine bestimmte Abweichung vom Wissenstand aufgefallen, wie er etwa im Historischen Atlas Baden-Württemberg 1 2 oder anderen für Lehrzwecke verwendeten Karten dokumentiert ist (z. B. Karte aus [1]). Zwischen Baden-Baden und Pforzheim – ich habe nur diesen Raum betrachtet – fehlt die Straße, die von Pforzheim WNW nach Ettlingen verläuft. Diese gilt aufgrund aufgefundener Leugensteine als nachgewiesen. Für die eingezeichnete Direktverbindung von Baden-Baden nach Pforzheim durch den Schwarzwald gibt es dagegen keinen Nachweis, sie wurde daher z. B. von Rolf Nierhaus verworfen. Wäre es dir möglich, die Straße Pforzheim-Ettlingen nachzutragen? Mit etwas Probieren würde ich das wahrscheinlich auch hinbekommen, aber du weißt sicher besser, welche Einstellungen und Werkzeuge du verwendet hast. Gruß, --Sitacuisses (talk) 10:44, 20 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

✓ Done --Ziegelbrenner (talk) 17:17, 16 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Deutscher Bund.svg with editable text?[edit]

Hello ziegelbrenner, I am considering translating your Deutscher Bund.svg to Spanish but I have realized the text in the map is not editable text but a path. I was wondering if you may have kept a copy of the map with editable text as that would make my translating job much easier. Thank you in advance.--Rowanwindwhistler (talk) 20:20, 7 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

If you send me an E-mail-adress I can give you the original Illustrator file. greetings --Ziegelbrenner (talk) 17:16, 16 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

File:Limes4-en.png[edit]

Hello! I am unsure of how good your english is, so I will be putting a German version under it.

Hallo! Ich bin nicht sicher, wie gut Ihr Englisch ist, also werde ich eine deutsche Version darunter setzen.


I am Iazyges. I am currently in the process of trying to get the article Iazyges through A-class at MILHIST. I am looking for a reference for it (preferably a book). I have looked for the sources you cite, but have either not found them, or have not been able to access them. Would you happen to either know a book and page number that I can reference, or else the page number(s) of one or more of the sources? Thanks. Iazyges Consermonor Opus meum 18:37, 7 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Ich bin Iazyges. Ich bin derzeit dabei, den Artikel Iazyges durch A-Klasse bei MILHIST zu bekommen. Ich suche eine Referenz für sie (vorzugsweise ein Buch). Ich habe nach den Quellen gesucht, die Sie zitieren, haben aber entweder nicht gefunden, oder haben nicht in der Lage, auf sie zugreifen. Würden Sie entweder wissen, ein Buch und eine Seitennummer, die ich verweisen kann, oder die Seitennummer (n) von einer oder mehreren der Quellen? Vielen Dank. Iazyges Consermonor Opus meum 18:37, 7 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Siehe ungarische und deutsche Literatur der letzten 40 Jahre! Das ist eine große Menge und hier im einzelnen nicht aufzulisten. Aber einmal das wichtigste:
  • Martin Eggers: Sarmaten. In: Reallexikon der Germanischen Altertumskunde. Bd. 26. de Gruyter, Berlin 2004, ISBN 3-11-017734-X, S. 505
  • Marcelo Tilman Schmitt: Die römische Außenpolitik des 2. Jahrhunderts n. Chr. Steiner, Stuttgart 1997, ISBN 3-515-07106-7
  • Sándor Soproni: Eine spätrömische Militärstation auf sarmatischem Gebiet. In: Actes du Congrès International d'Etudes sur les Frontières Romaines 8. 1969
  • Sándor Soproni: Limes Sarmatiae. In: A Móra Ferenc Múzeum Évkönyve 2/1969. Szeged, 1969
  • Sándor Soproni: Der spätrömische Limes zwischen Esztergom und Szentendre. Das Verteidigungssystem der Provinz Valeria im 4. Jh. Akadémiai Kiadó, Budapest 1978.
  • Zsolt Visy: Der pannonische Limes in Ungarn. Theiss, Stuttgart 1988, ISBN 3806204888
  • Zsolt Visy: The ripa Pannonica in Hungary. Akadémiai Kiadó, Budapest 2003. ISBN 9630579804
  • Sándor Soproni, Éva Garam, Pál von Patay: Sarmatisches Wallsystem im Karpatenbecken, In: Régészeti Füzetek Ser. II. No. 23., Ungarisches Nationalmuseum, Budapest, 1983, 2003
  • Éva Garam: Angaben zur Stratigraphie der Längswälle der Tiefebene. In: A Móra Ferenc Múzeum Évkönyve 2/1969.Szeged 1969. S. 113–116
  • Pál von Patay: Neuere Ergebnisse in der topographischen Untersuchung der Erdwälle in der ungarischen Tiefebene. In: A Móra Ferenc Múzeum Évkönyve 2/1969. Szeged, 1969, S. 105–112
  • Zsolt Mráv: Archäologische Forschungen 2000–2001 im Gebiet der spätrömischen Festung von Göd-Bócsaújtelep (Vorbericht) 2002. In: Communicationes archeologicae Hungariae 2003. Népművelési Propaganda Iroda. Budapest 2003. S. 83–114
  • Zsolt Mráv: Castellum contra Tautantum. Zur Identifizierung einer spätrömischen Festung. In: Ádám Szabó, Endre Tóth: Bölcske. Römische Inschriften und Funde – In memoriam Sándor Soproni (1926-1995). Ungarisches Nationalmuseum, Budapest 2003, (Libelli archaeologici Ser. Nov. No. II), ISBN 963-9046-83-9 Invalid ISBN
  • Zsolt Mráv: Römische Militäranlagen im Barbaricum. In: Von Augustus bis Attila. Konrad Theiss Verlag, Stuttgart 2000. ISBN 3806215413. S. 51.

und den hier nicht vergessen: Ammianus Marcellinus Mediatus (talk) 17:28, 16 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Fehler entdeckt[edit]

Die Karte von Kurhessen enthält einen Fehler! Vgl.: File talk:Electorate of Hesse.png auf Commons. Kannst Du Abhilfe schaffen? LG -- Reinhard Dietrich (talk) 17:50, 22 January 2017 (UTC) ✓ Done --Ziegelbrenner (talk) 11:19, 23 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Excel Tabelle[edit]

Guten Tag,

für eine Recherche suche ich Daten zur Konfessionsverteilung in der Schweiz und in Deutschland in 17. Jahrhundert, wie etwa auf der "Karte der Konfessionen in Mitteleuropa, 1618", https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/0/0f/HolyRomanEmpire_1618.png dargestellt, aber ich brauche die Daten am besten als eine Excel-Tabelle.

Können Sie mir vielleicht dabei helfen und hinweisen, wo ich die Daten finden könnte?

Vielen Dank vorab,

mit besten Grüßen Katerina Yurinskaya katerina.yurinskaya at gmail.com — Preceding unsigned comment was added by 87.79.12.40 (talk) 09:57, 7 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Es tut mir leid. Aber dazu habe ich nichts. Gruß --Ziegelbrenner (talk) 10:13, 7 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

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, such as a copyright issue. Please see Commons:But it's my own work! for a guide on how to address these issues.

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!

Affected:


Yours sincerely, - Alexis Jazz 14:28, 23 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

File:Apices du moyen-âge.PNG[edit]

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

If you created this file, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with it, such as a copyright issue. Please see Commons:But it's my own work! for a guide on how to address these issues.

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!

Dan Harkless (talk) 08:33, 10 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

It’s none of my business. Regards. --Ziegelbrenner (talk) 10:15, 10 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Copyright status: File:Stolperstein Hostatostraße 9 Georg Horn.jpg[edit]

Copyright status: File:Stolperstein Hostatostraße 9 Georg Horn.jpg

català  čeština  dansk  Deutsch  Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎  English  español  français  galego  hrvatski  italiano  magyar  Bahasa Melayu  norsk  norsk bokmål  norsk nynorsk  polski  português  português do Brasil  română  sicilianu  slovenčina  slovenščina  suomi  svenska  беларуская‎  беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎  български  македонски  русский  українська  ಕನ್ನಡ  ತುಳು  മലയാളം  한국어  日本語  עברית  العربيَّة  فارسی  中文  +/−
Warning sign
This media may be deleted.
Thanks for uploading File:Stolperstein Hostatostraße 9 Georg Horn.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 VRT 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 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.

Jcb (talk) 23:38, 18 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, ja. Danke. --Ziegelbrenner (talk) 09:17, 19 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Image without license[edit]

File:Ortswappen Vinningen.svg[edit]

dansk  italiano  sicilianu  Deutsch  català  magyar  čeština  português do Brasil  Esperanto  español  português  English  hrvatski  français  Nederlands  Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎  norsk nynorsk  polski  galego  íslenska  slovenščina  suomi  svenska  Ελληνικά  беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎  български  македонски  русский  українська  മലയാളം  日本語  中文(简体)‎  中文(繁體)‎  فارسی  +/−


There seems to be a problem regarding the description and/or licensing of this particular file. It has been found that you've added in the image's description only a Template that's not a license and although it provides useful information about the image, it's not a valid license. Could you please resolve this problem, adding the license in the image linked above? You can edit the description page and change the text. Uploading a new version of the file does not change the description of the file. This page may give you more hints on which license to choose. Thank you.

This message was added automatically by MifterBot (TalkContribsOwner), if you need some help about it please read the text above again and follow the links in it, if you still need help ask at the ? Commons:Help desk in any language you like to use. --MifterBot (TalkContribsOwner) 14:03, 26 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Farbwahl https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:HRR_1648.png[edit]

Hallo, schöne Karte - leider gehöre ich zu den ca.5-10% der Männer mit Rot-Sehschwäche (Erbfehler x-Chromosom). Das Lila für die geistlichen Gebiete ist für mich sehr schwer, erst nach starker Vergrößerung, von den anderen Blautönen unterscheidbar.

Wieviel Aufwand wäre es, die Farbe zu ersetzen oder z.B. mit Schraffur, Punktmuster o.ä. besser erkennbar zu machen?

vielen Dank. Jschreiber (talk) 20:48, 26 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, das tut mir leid. Das habe ich nicht bedacht. Im Moment kann ich da leider gar nichts machen. Ich habe Homeoffice und komme an die Dateien nicht ran. Gruß --Ziegelbrenner (talk) 09:27, 27 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

File:Wappen Pfalz-Neuburg.svg[edit]

Hallo, Ziegelbrenner! Die Wecken in File:Wappen Pfalz-Neuburg.svg gefallen nicht. File:Pfalz-Neuburg.png zeigt sie rautenförmiger. Das svg-Wappen sieht für mich verzerrt aus, das png-Wappen durch die Verbreiterung richtig. --Pp.paul.4 (talk) 17:43, 30 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]