User talk:Zoupan

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


Welcome to Wikimedia Commons, Zoupan!

TUSC token 3684ff274607d3fbd12fe6516f3faf95[edit]

I am now proud owner of a TUSC account!

Deletion requests[edit]

Copyright status: File:Lazarevac Goran Necin July 7, 2012.jpg[edit]

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

Warning sign
This media may be deleted.
Thanks for uploading File:Lazarevac Goran Necin July 7, 2012.jpg. I notice that the file page either doesn't contain enough information about the license or it contains contradictory information about the license, so the copyright status is unclear.

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

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

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

Yours sincerely, JuTa 20:05, 13 December 2014 (UTC)

Kumanovski ustanak[edit]

Hm, a da li imaš neki izvor koji bih mogao koristiti za crtanje mape tog ustanka? Mapu iz nekog atlasa ili sa nekog sajta? PANONIAN (talk) 10:21, 19 December 2014 (UTC)

File renaming[edit]

Please do not put my username into filenames. Thank you. PANONIAN (talk) 08:46, 17 January 2015 (UTC)

Category:Fictional coats of arms from modern literature‎[edit]

Why did you add a pointless non-existent category? Are you going to fix this? AnonMoos (talk) 10:08, 11 February 2015 (UTC)

File:Serbian people.JPG[edit]

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

Sfan00 IMG (talk) 13:38, 11 February 2015 (UTC)

Posedi despota[edit]

Znam za tu mapu. To je iz Geokartinog istorijskog atlasa. E sad, što mi to pokazuješ? Da li misliš da treba da nacrtam takvu mapu? Ja sam već nacrtao jednu koja pokazuje posede despota u Vojvodini: https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Despotski_posedi.png Mislim da je od mnogo manjeg značaja prikazati ove posede na područjima izvan našeg današnjeg državnog prostora. U svakom slučaju, nije ni ovakvu mapu problem nacrtati, ali trenutno imam gomilu svakakvih obaveza, pa nemam vremena za to. Ako nađem vremena, možda to nacrtam. PANONIAN (talk) 09:58, 1 March 2015 (UTC)

rename[edit]

Hi Zoupan,

Please rename back the Coat_of_arms_of_Serbia,_Fojnica_Armorial,_reconstruction.svg to the original name because it was an unwanted renaming. My almost all images have standardized filename. In the future I want to standardize all so your work wasn't good for me. Thank for your attention,

Bye, Madboy74 (talk) 16:38, 14 March 2015 (UTC)

File renaming[edit]

Please stop renaming files. We are discussing your behavior at [1], please join in. Pleclown (talk) 08:11, 24 March 2015 (UTC)

And please add a reason when moving files (see COM:RENAME) Thanks! --Steinsplitter (talk) 12:36, 24 March 2015 (UTC)
I will. Thank you.--Zoupan (talk) 14:42, 24 March 2015 (UTC)

Not good renaming[edit]

[2] The name "Map of the Serb population, 1862, H. Thiers.png" is not good choice of the name, although the original map's name is "Carte des populations serbes".
The original title is very biased. This was an ordered work, for the greaterserbianists' "scientific" coverage for their expansionistic claims.
I suggest the name like "Greater Serbia. Map of H. Thiers, 1862" or something like that.
You must react on this, otherwise sooner or later You'll have negative reactions. Kubura (talk) 04:38, 29 March 2015 (UTC)

"Greater Serbia" is the most biased name for that file. There is no any base in that file which can lead to coclusion that this file shows "Greater Serbia". It is just personal opinion of file uploader. Where is your evidence that "this was an ordered work for the greaterserbianists"? PANONIAN (talk) 07:31, 29 March 2015 (UTC)
Also note that original uploader of that file was blocked as sockpuppet: https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/Imbris PANONIAN (talk) 07:35, 29 March 2015 (UTC)
@Kubura: It is a romantic map of the assumed "Serbian Empire", in reality showing the extent of South Slavs. I am not the author of the map. If it should be used in the context of Greater Serbia it needs to be proved that it was an "ordered work".--Zoupan (talk) 02:50, 6 April 2015 (UTC)

Removal of File mover right[edit]

Since you still not comply with the COM:RENAME guideline, I've removed your filemover bit. Pleclown (talk) 11:50, 2 April 2015 (UTC)

I've open a section on the admin noticeboard. Pleclown (talk) 11:53, 2 April 2015 (UTC)

Banatski ustanak[edit]

Na kakve administrativne granice misliš? Hoćeš da na mapu stavim granice osmanskih pašaluka ili tako nešto? PANONIAN (talk) 09:17, 7 May 2015 (UTC)

U stvari, čini mi se i da nemam izvor vezan za granice osmanskih provincija baš u toj godini.

Imam za ove granice iz 1568-1571: https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Ottoman_vojvodina01.png

I ove polovinom 17. veka: https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Elayet_of_temesvar.png

Takođe sam primetio i jednu nelogičnost. Prema ovom članku Lugoški i karansebeški Banat je bio deo Transilvanije do 17. veka: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Banate_of_Lugos_and_Karánsebes Suprotno tome, Geokartin istorijski atlas pokazuje da je to područje 1594. bilo zahvaćeno Banatskim ustankom. Uglavnom, tu kartu Banatskog ustanka sam uradio prema Geokartinom atlasu i sad baš ne znam kako to uklopiti sa podacima iz članka o Lugoškom i karansebeškom banatu (pretpostavljajući da je taj članak na vikipediji uopšte tačan). PANONIAN (talk) 09:27, 7 May 2015 (UTC)

Sada sam pogledao i knjigu o istoriji Vršca gde se kaže da je Vršac 1590-91. godine pripadao Temišvarskom pašaluku. Znači ako je Lugoški i karansebeški Banat tada i postojao nije imao ovakve granice kao 1568-1571: https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Ottoman_vojvodina01.png Drugim rečima, čini mi se da ipak ne mogu dodati te administrativne granice jer ne znam kako su one tačno izgledale 1594. godine. Ako pronađem neku referencu koja to pokazuje onda ću to uraditi. PANONIAN (talk) 09:37, 7 May 2015 (UTC)

Paganija i dr...[edit]

To sam video da je ubacio svoju verziju, na šta ima pravo po pravilima commons-a. Jedino je pitanje ovde koja će mapa stajati na kojoj vikipediji, ali to nije stvar koja se tiče commons-a već svake vikipedije posebno. PANONIAN (talk) 06:17, 10 May 2015 (UTC)

Vilajet[edit]

Mapa je rađena tačno prema izvorima koje sam koristio. Istina je da je Novopazarski sandžak tada bio pod okupacijom Austrougarske, ali je on i dalje nominalno bio deo Osmanskog carstva i deo ovog vilajeta. Pored toga, Austrougarska okupacija je trajala do 1908, kada je Novopazarski sandžak vraćen pod upravu Osmanskog carstva. Znači, tehnički je moguće obojiti okupirani Sandžak drugom bojom, ali to onda ne bi pokrivalo ceo period postojanja ovog vilajeta, odnosno ne bi se odnosilo na period 1908-1912. Mislim da bi ova mapa trebalo da ostane ovakva kakva jeste, a mogu eventualno nacrtati drugu verziju mape sa prikazanim Sandžakom i ubaciti je na commons pod drugim imenom (to jest ako ti je takva mapa sa Sandžakom baš bitna). Međutim, trenutno imam i nekih drugih ideja za mape, a nedovoljno slobodnog vremena da ih realizujem, pa to mogu uraditi tek za dve-tri nedelje (ako nađem vremena, možda i ranije). PANONIAN (talk) 11:06, 13 May 2015 (UTC)

Hm, u stvari, ako pogledaš mapu detaljnije, videćeš da sam na njoj u stvari prikazao stanje iz 1908. - u legendi ima opis "independent states (in 1908)". Znači te godine je Sandžak i formalno i faktički bio u Osmanskom carstvu, s tim što je naznačeno da je vilajet (formalno) imao takve granice i u dužem periodu. PANONIAN (talk) 11:17, 13 May 2015 (UTC)

Sources for images[edit]

Which images ? --Čeha (talk) 23:14, 16 May 2015 (UTC)

@Ceha: File:Pagania Zahumlje Travunia Duklja.png, File:Bih poddijalekti.png), File:Turske i post turske migracije.png. The last one should explain which time period, and the fact that it shows migrations only from Bosnia and Croatia (and for some reason neglecting those from Serbia?).--Zoupan (talk) 00:05, 17 May 2015 (UTC)
Ok, for 1. given, for 2. also, 3. added time period (15-17. century), also given sources. It only speaks about dialects and speaches of Croatian origin (linguist mentioned studied only them...).

a heads-up[edit]

I informed Pleclown that your recent nomination concerned me. Geo Swan (talk) 12:28, 20 May 2015 (UTC)

@Geo Swan: I don't see why this concerned you. The other image is clearly sourced (references section). diff (13:08, 5 February 2015), your comment (diff (12:12, 20 May 2015). Please explain if this is not the source your are looking for?--Zoupan (talk) 23:52, 21 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Every contributor needs to be concerned about vandals. But the project is not only damaged by vandals. Sometimes the project is damaged by good faith contributors who make mistakes. Everyone makes mistakes, sometimes. But when someone makes mistake(s), and doesn't seem receptive to recognizing their fallibility, that can start to become a serious problem.
  • Your nomination seemed to be such a mistake that I looked at your talk page, to see if there were similar mistakes, in the past. Pleclown's note suggested there had been.
  • With regard to "sourcing", as I explained in the deletion discussion, you have completely misunderstood the purpose of the source field. Geo Swan (talk) 04:40, 22 May 2015 (UTC)
I thought you would understand the natural meaning of the word "source". See the discussion.--Zoupan (talk) 18:45, 22 May 2015 (UTC)

Kategorije[edit]

Imam primedbu na neke tvoje izmene u kategorijama. Konkretno ovde: [3]. Pogrešno je izbaciti mapu iz kategorije koja ima reč "Maps" i ubaciti je u kategoriju koja tu reč nema. U ovom slučaju si trebao napraviti jednu međukategoriju kao "Maps of Bosanska Krajina", pa bi onda ona bila podkategorija od kategorija "Bosanska Krajina" i "Maps of regions of Bosnia and Herzegovina" i tek onda bi se mapa mogla ukloniti iz glavne kategorije "Maps of regions of Bosnia and Herzegovina", jer bi i dalje ostala u njenoj podkategoriji. Takođe kategorija "Bosanska Krajina" koja očigledno nema reč "Maps" u sebi ne može da bude podkategorija u kategorijama "Maps of the Balkans by region" i "Maps of regions of Bosnia and Herzegovina". PANONIAN (talk) 04:17, 21 May 2015 (UTC)

Of course, but still, the category only has maps, thus it was not wrong. Thank you for creating the sub-category anyways.--Zoupan (talk) 23:40, 21 May 2015 (UTC)

Londonski ugovor[edit]

Hm, a druge mape ne odgovaraju? Imaš ove dve na ostavi:

Duplicates[edit]

Hi! Please don't nominate duplicates for deletion. Use the duplicate template. Works like this: Put this in the file to be deleted: {{dup|Betterfile.abc}} and save. That's it. And you don't have to wait 2 weeks for the file to be processed. Clin Thanks for all the work you do! --Hedwig in Washington (mail?) 16:23, 4 June 2015 (UTC)

File:Стефан Синджелич в битве на Чегаре.jpg[edit]

Hello! Please don't request deletion for duplicates. Check out Com:Duplicate. Thanks for your work! --Hedwig in Washington (mail?) 06:30, 16 June 2015 (UTC)

Денко Чума[edit]

Here [4] and here [5] you have written that Denko and Chuma are 2 people but it seems this is the name of one man [6] from Младо Нагоричане [7]. So who is the other one and which of the two is Денко Чума? --Алиса Селезньова (talk) 11:22, 27 June 2015 (UTC)

File:Ustasa-saw.jpg[edit]

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

Uwe Martens (talk) 14:33, 4 July 2015 (UTC)

Gjin Bua Shpata[edit]

Naziv nije pogrešan, tako stoji u literaturi koju sam koristio. Da li je ime Bua poreklom iz folklora ja ne znam, ali to ime stoji u literaturi. Takođe, ne volim da koristim engleska imena kao John. Domaća imena su uvek bolja za tu svrhu. PANONIAN (talk) 10:45, 22 July 2015 (UTC)

File source is not properly indicated: File:Yugoslav women's team in London, 1934.jpg[edit]

العربية | asturianu | беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ | català | čeština | dansk | Deutsch | Ελληνικά | English | español | euskara | فارسی | suomi | français | galego | 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 | українська | 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:Yugoslav women's team in London, 1934.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:Yugoslav women's team in London, 1934.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!

Smooth_O (talk) 08:02, 23 July 2015 (UTC)

Sklavinije[edit]

Prije 9.stoljeća, odnosno prije Borne. Zapravo riječ je o "standardnim" granicama sklavinijama u bivšim jugoslavenskim atlasima. To su ti karte slične ovima;

Sklavinija je naziv za (malu) slavensku kneževinu. --Čeha (talk) 13:19, 8 December 2015 (UTC)

Moving from Category:Coats of arms to Category:Coats of arms to be classified[edit]

Hello - you are moving plenty of files. What is the reason of these actions? -- MaxxL - talk 12:19, 15 December 2015 (UTC)

@MaxxL: The reason is moving files where they could be recategorized, as per Category:Coats of arms to be classified: We would value your expertise to identify these media and find their rightful places in the appropriate category structure. The category of Category:Coats of arms is to general to house such files.--Zoupan (talk) 12:21, 15 December 2015 (UTC)
Why don't you just follow the request and enter the appropriate categories by yourself instead?-- MaxxL - talk 12:44, 15 December 2015 (UTC)
@MaxxL: I can't categorize hundreds of unidentified files by myself. The proper category has a tag, hints on how to identify the content, hence, is the only right categorization. May I ask why you are confused over this? Do you think that the ambiguous categorization is better? --Zoupan (talk) 12:53, 15 December 2015 (UTC)
I was quite satisfied that inexperienced uploaders used the meta category as a first step. From there I detailed some hundred files in the past. Just to let you know how simple a more detailed classification is see this this and that. It doesn't need a move from one pile of mess to another. There is no improvement. The simple categorization as shown by the 2 examples is even feasible for you and any other category experienced user. -- MaxxL - talk 13:33, 15 December 2015 (UTC)
That's the thing, if we have all unidentified coa's at one and the same place, we could much easier recognize coats of arms that are connected.--Zoupan (talk) 14:07, 15 December 2015 (UTC)

Category:Žegligovo_Monastery[edit]

Achim (talk) 13:29, 20 December 2015 (UTC)

Category:Armenian_frescos[edit]

Achim (talk) 16:42, 30 December 2015 (UTC)

Braslav[edit]

Zdravo. Već sam planirao da napravim mape teritorija Braslava, Salana i Žobora (u Slovačkoj) na osnovu te mape rađene po hronici Gesta Hungarorum. Međutim, to će pričekati par meseci, jer sam sada dosta zauzet i nemam vremena za vikipediju. Stignem samo da proverim listu nadgledanja ovde na ostavi, da vidim da mi neko slučajno nije vandalizovao neku mapu. Trebalo bi da rešim neke svoje probleme u toku narednih meseci, pa ću se onda vratiti i crtanju mapa. PANONIAN (talk) 05:59, 4 January 2016 (UTC)

Category:Epic_poetry[edit]

Mercurywoodrose (talk) 02:48, 29 January 2016 (UTC)

Latest renaming requests[edit]

Hello!

I envisaged to process your renaming requests A and B, but was unsure about the rationale. You said that those guns are clearly not a Zastava product, but the image linked as example is too small to be used for identification. Could you write some words about the characteristics that made you say "clearly not Zastava-made"? For now, I'll decline the requests, but I'll be happy to proceed with them with more facts i9n the background. Regards, Grand-Duc (talk) 23:57, 29 January 2016 (UTC)

@Grand-Duc: Please compare them with this or this image. As explained, Notice the handguard and barrel. The Zastava M80 has 460 mm barrel length, while the one in the picture has the standard 415 mm (the length of the metal barrel at the front is noticeably different). The Zastava M80's wooden handguard (the front handle) has three holes, the one in the pictures have two holes (see this image of standard AK). I hope this clarifies it.--Zoupan (talk) 04:39, 30 January 2016 (UTC)

File:View of the weaving factory in Užice, 1932.jpg[edit]

I've renamed this file because I didn't noticed that you have changed the uploader's language. Don't do it!

Look at the File renaming rules, section Which files should not be renamed #2: Files should NOT be renamed only because the filename is not English and/or is not correctly capitalized. Remember, Commons is a multilingual project, so there's no reason to favor English over other languages.
It is better to keep the original uploader's language.
Thanks in advance :-) Wieralee (talk) 19:28, 28 February 2016 (UTC)

File:Tribunal convicts Radovan Karadžić for crimes in Bosnia and Herzegovina.jpg[edit]

Commons-emblem-issue.svg File:Tribunal convicts Radovan Karadžić for crimes in Bosnia and Herzegovina.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 | Shqip | Српски / srpski | Svenska | Türkçe | українська | Tiếng Việt | 中文 | 中文(简体)‎ | 中文(繁體)‎ | +/−

Smooth_O (talk) 08:11, 12 April 2016 (UTC)

File:Marta Savić, Grešnica.jpg[edit]

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

Rodrigolopes (talk) 02:44, 19 July 2016 (UTC)

File:Sinan Sakić, Miko, druže moj.jpg[edit]

Commons-emblem-issue.svg File:Sinan Sakić, Miko, druže moj.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 | Shqip | Српски / srpski | Svenska | Türkçe | українська | Tiếng Việt | 中文 | 中文(简体)‎ | 中文(繁體)‎ | +/−

Rodrigolopes (talk) 01:00, 20 July 2016 (UTC)

File:Sneki.jpg[edit]

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

Rodrigolopes (talk) 01:06, 20 July 2016 (UTC)