User:D-Kuru/archiv/2007

This page is an archive! You aren't allowed to edit this page. If you want to talk to me use my dicussion page.

Move UserD-Kuru/upload

Hi, I've moved your page into your userspace as I think that is what you meant to do. You can find it here User:D-Kuru/upload. Thanks for contributing to Commons! Deadstar 00:39, 25 March 2007 (UTC)

Thanks to you for moving. You're right, that page was exactly ehat I wanted. --D-Kuru 00:55, 25 March 2007 (UTC)

Speedy deletion requests

Your speedy deletion requests are incorrect, please use COM:DEL instead where the entire community can decided. Lcarsdata 20:19, 10 May 2007 (UTC)

In relation to you revert-reason "not an excuse to delete":
Is it OK, when I set {{delete|image=.... --~~~~}} instead of {{speedy}}? Or is this not a good reason at all?
--D-Kuru 20:48, 10 May 2007 (UTC)

Please use Commons:Deletion requests, details of how to use it are outlined on that page. Lcarsdata 20:50, 10 May 2007 (UTC)

I've read the german deletion guidelines, but I don't know if they are uptodate.

However, is it now a correct deletion request?

--D-Kuru 21:12, 10 May 2007 (UTC)

Yes, that is correct usage. Thanks. Lcarsdata 06:16, 11 May 2007 (UTC)

Adminship?

Apply for adminship, I will vote for it. Greudin 12:25, 18 May 2007 (UTC)

I'll have a try... ^^

--D-Kuru 13:01, 18 May 2007 (UTC)

VLVC icons

Hi, I saw you tagged some VLVC icons for speedy deletion. However, these icons are derivatives work of the VLC logo which is itself (likely) to be GPL, and as such, the VLVC icon also should be GPL. On their site they claim copyright, but it is unclear whether they claim the site to be licensed under a free license such as the GPL, or that they claim "all rights reserved". I have retagged the images GPL, but I am not sure. Any thoughts about this? -- Bryan (talk to me) 19:39, 18 May 2007 (UTC)

For me as such it is not important if there is this logo or not. The only reason why I set {{speedy}} is that the rules say that it is not allowed to upload commercial used or copyrighted logos.

Even this logo is not used commercially, it is a copyrighted logo. However, you said that the VCL logo is GPL. So your interpretation could also be right.

We could leave it at that, because it is not only a copyrighted logo.

For example: The premission would be {{self|GPL|copyrighted}} (1) I know that there is no licence "copyrighted" (because it's a redirect to {{copyvio}}), but there is no alternative. 2) I know that "I, the author of this work,[...]" isn't true. the reason why I set {{self|}} is "You may select the license of your choice.")

So if somebody can choose GPL or the copyrighted version, he'll take the GPL licence. That means that there is noe use of the copyrighted licence which means that you don't need to put it into the premission box.

SO we only need to delete it if somebody complains about it (that's what I think)

--D-Kuru 21:01, 18 May 2007 (UTC)

Well, deleting when somebody complains sounds very bad to me (although we implement it in more borderline cases, such as FOP). We should, as much as possible provide free content.

I think you are a little confused by copyright. Copyleft and free licenses do not contradict copyright, in fact, it is impossible to license something under a free license, such as the GPL, without owning the copyright on the image. However standard in copyright is all rights reserved, and that is what you are referring to, and is not allowed on Commons. That's also why I'm so confused by the "copyright" at the bottom of the VLVC website.

I've a better idea than this guessing; I'll write an email to the VLVC guys and ask them for clarification. -- Bryan (talk to me) 21:09, 18 May 2007 (UTC)

For me it's a little bit difficult to describe what I think, so I may've used the wrong words.

However, an email is a good idea

--D-Kuru 21:24, 18 May 2007 (UTC)

Yes, and now they changed their copyright line to "2005-2007 All rights reserved to the VideoLAN VideoConference team". I think they did not understand their email :( Perhaps somebody should write them an email in French. -- Bryan (talk to me) 19:31, 5 June 2007 (UTC)

I wrote a mail to Steyr Mannlicher to get some Mails. I didn't get an answer since I added "I wrote 3 Mails before that Mail, but I think they got lost in the work or in the uninterested mood that Steyr Mannlicher has towards public."

I know that that wasn't very kind anyway, but it is the success thgat counts :)

Maybe you should try something like that.

--D-Kuru 19:44, 5 June 2007 (UTC)

For sure I've read it, but there was no time left to find out how that system works.

Until the 14^th of june there wont be so much time (I'm still asking myself why I have the time to contribute to commons ^^). After that day it shouldn't be any problem at all

--D-Kuru 23:41, 31 May 2007 (UTC)

Great. Please let me know if you need some additional pointers on where to score the most likely license and source problem. I appear to have a nose for them... If oyu ever hang out on IRC: please approach me there and we can exchange information a bit more interactively. Hope that whatever you need the time off from Commons for will succeed. Cheers! Siebrand 23:58, 31 May 2007 (UTC)

Falsche Verwendung des FP Promotion Templates

Du hast bei Ram-Man ein FP Promoted Template verwendet um ihn darauf hinzuweisen, dass du ein ein Bild nominiert hast. Das Template ist aber dazu da um jemand mitzuteilen, dass sein Bild zum Featured Picture gewählt wurde. Also "Promoted" und nicht "Nominated"!!! --Simonizer 11:28, 22 May 2007 (UTC)

Hoppala

Hab ich wohl an "promoten" in deutsch gedacht

Gibt's eigentlich eine Vorlage, mit nominated?

--D-Kuru 11:33, 22 May 2007 (UTC)

Meier

The procedure is too complicate for me. I was tsting the "mass deletion" procedure I was suggested to use, but it's too complicated. I cancel my request, and shall use a regular procedure, picture by picture. Thank you for your advice anyway. --User:G.dallorto 19:58, 22 May 2007 (UTC)

Image:Sm album2.JPG

Hi, this picture and others uploaded by User:Hbk33 have a permission logged with OTRS so there's no need for {{Nsd}}. Yonatan ^talk 20:30, 22 May 2007 (UTC)

Opt in

dummy edit --D-Kuru 12:13, 24 May 2007 (UTC)

Image:MOABAFAM.JPG

Hi, I actually explained my reason for the change here. I was reviewing images on en.wiki tagged for speedy deletion as now on commons. It seems to me that the {{PD-self}} tag gives the impression that the image was released into the public domain by the commons uploader, which is why we have clearer tags such as {{PD-user-en}}, {{PD-user-de}} etc to reference specific uploaders on other projects. I hadn't seen that you included the upload date in the summary details, but usually a copy of the original upload log from the source wiki is given (not so important in this case I agree but good practice and necessary if there is more than one entry in the log). I was happier deleting the original on en.wiki having ensured that all the info was clearly available on the Commons copy. I hope that explains things. WjBscribe 16:03, 24 May 2007 (UTC)

Congratulations, Dear Administrator!

An offering for our new administrator from your comrades...

D-Kuru/archiv/2007, congratulations! You now have the rights of administrator on Commons. Please take a moment to read the Commons:Administrators page and watchlist related pages (in particular Commons:Administrators' noticeboard and Commons:Deletion requests), before launching yourself into page deletions, page protections, account blockings or modifications of protected pages. The majority of the actions of administrators can be reversed by the other admins, except for history merges which must thus be treated with particular care.

Please feel free to join us on IRC: #wikimedia-commons @ irc.freenode.net.

EugeneZelenko 14:43, 25 May 2007 (UTC)

Congratulations! WjBscribe 16:08, 25 May 2007 (UTC)

Second life

I think the owner of the avatar is in fact the copyright holder. That is what is explictly stated in the press release from Linden Labs, that is linked on the template. -- Bryan (talk to me) 21:28, 25 May 2007 (UTC)

Image:Arc lamp souter lighthouse.jpg

Image deletion warning

Image:Arc lamp souter lighthouse.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!

This is an automated message from User:DRBot. 14:31, 25 May 2007 (UTC)

Image:HondaK20Z3.jpg

Hi!

I imported this image from english wiki ("Variable valve timing") for french wiki ("Distribution variable"). So, there's no problem for licence. The problem is that Wiki is not easy-use for me and I don't know how to "edit" the image and modify its status.

wiki-freundlich,

Van Rijn 13:29, 29 May 2007 (UTC).

There is a little button "edit" above all. If you click on it you can edit the page, but I think you know that anyway.

I must confess that I pressed the wrong button on my adminpage.

above the "lo licence" button there is the "no source" button and that was the one I wnated to push.

Have a look at the page know and edit the information which isn't there yet.

A link would may be a good idea for Source. If you don't know the author put the uploaders name in there with the information "uploaded by".

If you need help, ask me!

--D-Kuru 16:44, 29 May 2007 (UTC)

-Danke sehr!

Van Rijn 02:05, 30 May 2007 (UTC)

Thanks

for this correction. Paulo Juntas 07:50, 30 May 2007 (UTC)

Archive

Hi, I've moved your archive from the main space into your userspace by changing the name from Benutzer:D-Kuru/archiv to User:D-Kuru/archiv as I think that is what you meant to do (and changed the link at the top of the page). Kind regards, Deadstar 07:47, 31 May 2007 (UTC)

Thank you very much! That was exactly that what I wanted to...^^

--D-Kuru 08:14, 31 May 2007 (UTC)

Deletion of Images

I would like these 2 images deleted:

• Image:Bryoria trichodes.jpg
• Image:Bryoria trichodes-1.jpg

Thank you. Ed Uebel 16:48, 31 May 2007 (UTC)

 Done --D-Kuru 17:09, 31 May 2007 (UTC)

Patrolling using Commons:Welcome log

Hi. I come across edits you made quite frequently and I was wondering if you knew about Commons:Welcome log. Here you can find a list of very recent (and on older pages less recent) newbie users that you can patrol in an organised way. Maybe you can check it out. I find it very helpful. Cheers! Siebrand 21:45, 29 May 2007 (UTC)

Not sure if you've read this and if you have possibly looked at it. So I'll try and lure you into using yet another handy tool: UntaggedImages. Have fun and please not more than 1,000 edits/day :-) Siebrand 23:36, 31 May 2007 (UTC)

Re: Images may be deleted

Those images have been sent to OTRS from the presumed owner and author. I cannot place a "self" because I didn't make the photos, I only uploaded them according to the OTRS ticket. Those are the informations I have, those are the information I can give, nothing more. If you want, delete, I will upload them on it.wikinews database, it's commons' problem, not mine. Thanks for "german copyviols" on commons. Bye. --Tooby 08:28, 2 June 2007 (UTC)

If there is an ORTS ticket (or will ever be) please write that there will be an ORTS ticket. Without writing that there will be an ORTS ticket I can't know that this image will have an ORTS ticket.

It's no problem at all, that you uploaded that files, but (for the next uploads) please write that there is an ORTS ticket.

--D-Kuru 11:34, 2 June 2007 (UTC)

Images'wrong name

Thank you for your kindness. As we say in Italy: "making mistakes, you learn more". Bye Luccaro 07:28, 2 June 2007 (UTC)

You're welcome --D-Kuru 11:31, 2 June 2007 (UTC)

Duplicate deletion while used: please don't

Hi, it appears that you deleted with reason duplicate while an image was still being used. Please don't do that. (Image:Mundo FIBA.png used at ca.wp in a template). Use User:Orgullobot/commands with universal replace to completely orphan an image before deleting it... Cheers! Siebrand 12:37, 2 June 2007 (UTC)

Like That?

--D-Kuru 12:47, 2 June 2007 (UTC)

No, see User:Orgullobot/commands/documentation for the syntax of universal replace. Commands should be issued on User:Orgullobot/commands only. Siebrand 13:19, 2 June 2007 (UTC)

Now correct?

--D-Kuru 13:51, 2 June 2007 (UTC)

No, commands should be issued on User:Orgullobot/commands only. 10 minutes or so after issuing the command, you should check with CheckUsage if the file has been replaced. If so, you can delete it. Siebrand 15:18, 2 June 2007 (UTC)

I don't know what's up, but it seems that it doesn't work. Or did a make a mistake again?

--D-Kuru 16:10, 2 June 2007 (UTC)

Bromatan (Image:Bromatan.gif)

Wenn die von dir gezeichnete Struktur richtig ist (meine hab ich nur aus google rausgefischt), dann lösche ich die gerne. Was ist denn deine Quelle? L3nnox

Also quelle würde ich das nicht unbedingt nennen, da Hoffmeier den Löschantrag gestellt hat.

Er hat aber auch eine deutsche Benutzerseite (Hoffmeier) wo du ihn fragen kannst, was jetzt so falsch daran ist, dass er {{speedy}} gesetzt hat.

--D-Kuru 22:51, 2 June 2007 (UTC)

Image:Luc Viatour Disney Paris avenue by night.jpg

Hi, everything is copyrigted on this photo : lights and buildings. Architects from Eurodysney can't be dead since 70 years, even if i don't no who they are. In France the architect of a notable building owns copyright over the representations of that building. I see we have lots of recent french building on commons, for exemple : Grande Arche in La Défense... We have to make a big clean up. Petrusbarbygere 06:32, 3 June 2007 (UTC)

Re: Image:Karl Urban 05.jpg

This image was originally uploaded to flickr under a cc-by-sa-2.0 license. The licensing was reviewed and confirmed by User:GeorgHH on March 30. Flickr users are notorious for changing available licensing as they see fit, but they have a legal obligation to honor the original license. ˉ^anetode╦╩ 03:36, 4 June 2007 (UTC)

Dein Revert

Hallo Kuru, ich beziehe mich auf das hier. Dass ich den Duplicate-Baustein gerade bei dem von dir gelöschten Bild einsetzte, hatte einen guten Grund: Das Bild, das ich gelöscht haben wollte, wird bei Ansicht der Kategorie fehlerhaft dargestellt. Dieses Problem kommt immer mal wieder vor und die einzige Abhilfe besteht eben im Hochladen unter einem anderen Dateinamen. Ich bitte dich deshalb, das gelöschte Bild wiederherzustellen und das fehlerhafte 717.jpg wiederum zu entsorgen. Danke. Geisterbanker 20:38, 4 June 2007 (UTC)

So wie du das sagst stimmt das nicht ganz...

Bei der Gallerie kommt es zu solchen "Anzeigefehlern" immer wieder, allerdings besteht im neuhochladen keine Option der Garantie der Darstellung. Heißt nix anderes als dass es dir bei einem Bild 100 Mal hintereinander auch passieren kann und ich glaube kaum, dass du das Bild wirklich 100 mal neu hochladen willst

Des Rätsels Lösung ist so einfach wie stupide: Zeit. Einfach warten, dann taucht das Bild schon auf.

Das gleiche Problem hatte ich mit Image:Harpoon-block-II-launch.jpg. Es wurde über eine ganze Woche lang nicht angezeigt und eines Tages war es auf einmal da.

Ein echter Anzeigefehler besteht nur, wenn man statt der Vorschau eine graue box mit "Dieses Bild kann nicht angezeigt werden" drin sieht.

Das ich gerade dieses Bild gelöscht hatte, hatte auch einen Sinn. Wie man aus dem CheckUse rauslesen kann wird diese Bild in der rusischen Wikipedia verwendet wohingegen das andere nirgendswo benutzt wird. Siebrand hat mir ein bisschen weiter oben auf meiner Benutzerseite gesagt, dass ich bei duplicate Löschanträgen erst schauen muss, ob die Bilder benutzt werden.

--D-Kuru 21:17, 4 June 2007 (UTC)

Hallo D-Kuru, das Bild 717.jpg wird bei der russischen Wikipedia NICHT verwendet, da ich es gerade heute von dorthin übertragen habe und dort einen NC-Baustein gesetzt habe. Deine Abfrage muss also veraltet sein.

Ich bitte dich demnach, meine Anregung doch noch zu berücksichtigen. Es erscheint mir sehr viel einfacher, je einmal den Wiederherstell- und den Löschknopf zu betätigen, als tage- und wochenlang zu warten und zu hoffen, dass das Bild richtig angezeigt wird. Das andere Bild WIRD aber richtig angezeigt, das hatte ich nach dem Neuhochladen extra nachgeprüft. Gruß Geisterbanker 21:26, 4 June 2007 (UTC)

testpic

Die Abfrage wird in dem Moment erstellt in dem du auf den CheckUse-Button klickst. Somit startest du, wenn du auf den Button (bzw. auf den Link klickst) eine neue Abfrage die höchstens ein paar Sekunden alt sein kann.

Das ein Bild in einer anderen Wikipedia verwendet aber zugleich nicht verwendet wird liegt meistens daran, dass die Bilder den gleichen Name haben, allerdings unterschiedlichen Inhaltes sind.

Soweit ich weiß bist dui ein Admin auf de.wikipedia. Wenn du den Wortlaut der Hilfe "Wie füge ich ein Bild ein" noch so umgefärt weißt, dann weißt du auch, dass dort steht, dass zuerst geschaut wird ob das Bild in der jeweiligen Wikipedia vorhanden ist. Sollte so ein Bild nicht vorhanden sein greift es automatisch auf Commons zurück.

"und zu hoffen, dass das Bild richtig angezeigt wird". Es ist kein Hoffen sondern es wird auftauchen. Meistens taucht es eh nach einem oder zwei Tagen auf.

Genaugenommen ist es aber auch ziehmlich egal, ob das Bild jetzt wirklich angezeigt wird oder nicht. Wie man sieht kann man es verwenden. Ob das Bild in der Kategorie jetzt für zwei Tage angezeigt wird oder nicht wird auch keinen Unterschied machen. Sollte sich jemand unbedingt alle Bilder ansehen wollen wird diejenige Person es wohl aushalten das eine Bild zu laden.

--D-Kuru 21:52, 4 June 2007 (UTC)

Da ich bei deiner Argumentation leider nicht viel mehr als Bahnhof verstehe und zugleich im russischen Artikel wegen des von dir gelöschten Bildes immer noch eine Lücke klafft, werde ich dann halt einen anderen Admin bzgl. der Wiederherstellung kontaktieren. Dir vielen Dank noch für die nette Hilfe und frohes Schaffen weiterhin, Geisterbanker 22:04, 4 June 2007 (UTC)

Also ich bin mir nicht so sicher ob das jetzt wirklich Sinn macht.

Ich hab das jetzt in der russischen Wikipedia wieder umgeändert, weil es doch wirklich keinen Sinn macht da lang rumzupfuschen. Da es am 4. Juni (also gestern) geändert wurde macht es überhaupt keinen Sinn da jetzt lang drum rum zu reden. Das Bild Image:Vagon-717.jpg ist nicht mehr in Verwendung und bedarf keiner Wiederherstellung. Das was der Admin den du fragen wirst vermutlich machen wird ist einen Auftrag an einen Bot zu versenden alle Bilder auf das jetzt bestehende Bild zu verändern.

Wieso es zu diesem "veralteten" CheckUse Daten kommt weiß ich nicht. Es wird das gleiche sein wie bei der User gallery, die sich auch nur alle 2 Stunden aktualisiert.

--D-Kuru 22:13, 4 June 2007 (UTC)

Image:BrickWall.jpg

Hallo, ich habe das Bild vor 3 Jahren aus dem Web (free license) hochgeladen, und habe keine bessere Auflösung. Sorry, Chris. See also Category:Bricks -- Chris 73 21:29, 5 June 2007 (UTC)

Schade :-(

Hatt mich interessiert, weil es geheißen hat es sei zu klein.

Trotzdem danke fürs antworten --D-Kuru 22:01, 5 June 2007 (UTC)

Your deletion request for Image:Inkscapesplash.png

See the deletion request page for my comment. Husky ^{(talk to me)} 17:34, 6 June 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for the Information

--D-Kuru 19:42, 6 June 2007 (UTC)

Talent Scout Barnstar

Na weil du ein gutes Gespür für Bilder hast die in der FP Liste immer gut abschneiden. Ein guter Talent Scout halt! Dafür die Amerkennung! Freu dich wenigstens ein bischen ;) --Makro Freak 23:43, 6 June 2007 (UTC)

Ich freu mich ja eh nur wenn ich nicht weiß worüber ich mich freuen soll ist das ein bisschen schwer... ;-)

--D-Kuru 23:51, 6 June 2007 (UTC)

:) :) --Makro Freak 00:12, 7 June 2007 (UTC)

Saturn images

Quote= ""jerk off"ability is not a deletion criteria. We have plenty of pictures of genitals on commons."
From my point of view that's something different, because those pictures of genitals are showing adults genitals. Of course you don't see the genitals in the wikipe-tan lolicon picture, because if you could see them they would get as fast deleted as the pictures of children pornography some days ago.
Yug wrote "Wikipe-tan being a cute and curious girl about ten years old". May you understand why I don't want to wont support those immages. I don't like the idea of some people jerking off over a picture of wikipe-tan.
--D-Kuru 00:15, 7 June 2007 (UTC)

I do not like the idea of anyone jerking off at any image on commons. Our likes and dislikes shouldn't be a deletion rationale. I understand your point of view and am more than sympathetic with it personally however as far as "deletion" goes my position stands. Image is fine on commons copyright-wise and project scope-wise. -- Cat ^chi? 00:24, 7 June 2007 (UTC)

I've closed the deletion request, because it got deleted by Jimbo Wales.

Do you think that a protection is necessary?

--D-Kuru 14:14, 8 June 2007 (UTC)

I'll protect it in the time being, I am discussing this with Jimbo Wales via email. -- Cat ^chi? 14:17, 8 June 2007 (UTC)

OK

PS: You can answer on your talk page. I see when you edit it ;)

--D-Kuru 14:19, 8 June 2007 (UTC)

Image:Lolicon example.jpg

Looks like a duplicate of Image:Final Solution-chan.jpg
--D-Kuru 01:06, 7 June 2007 (UTC)

Yes. I was asked to rename since "Final Solution-chan" was trollsih according to that user. Since the former filename was bad anyway I reuploaded it. I am waiting for replag to settle to delete Image:Final Solution-chan.jpg -- Cat ^chi? 01:34, 7 June 2007 (UTC)

Nadar

Cher ami, tu a detruit Image:Greffulhe, comtesse Henry.jpg. Je crois c'est une photo de Nadar. Et Nadar est mort en 1910. Don ca doit avoir l'imege libre donc assez vieille pour toutes les limites do copyrights. --Alexius Manfelt 17:39, 7 June 2007 (UTC)

Sorry; I don't speak French ^^'

I'm able to speak German, English and a little bit Italian.

Because it's always the same thing people ask me I think you're asking me why I have deleted that Image. It is a photo of "Nadar" (or taken by?). I think "est mort en 1910" means "s/he died in 1910"

Bryan set {{copyvio}}, because "Author died in 1939.". So I think that this picture was taken in 1910. Because the author died in 1939 this image isn't {{PD-old}} until 2010.

Is that what you wanted to say?

PS: If you upload that file in 2010 again, please use {{PD-old}} and not {{GFDL}}.

Thanks --D-Kuru 18:30, 7 June 2007 (UTC)

City Park of Dresden

Have many thanks for correct this page. --Kay Körner 14:27, 8 June 2007 (UTC)

You're welcome ;-)

I only commonsied it

--D-Kuru

Carassius carassius?

You changed the description into "A wild goldfish". I don't think that this is a wild goldfish. My teacher (who is a biology teacher) said that this is a crucian carp. If I have a look at Image:DSCN3568.JPG I wouldn't say that they are the same fish race.
edit: WTF? I don't understand what you want to tell me.
--D-Kuru 01:40, 10 June 2007 (UTC)

• • If you look at the black membrane between the eggs and the fishbones you'll notice it is black. This is also typical of goldfish.

If you compare the picture of the wild goldfish Image:Giebel_Goudvis.JPG you will see the head and body shape are identical. The other picture shows C. a. gibelio in a typical dutch wild type (probably a gynogenetic clone). In fact typical wild crucian carp will be very different from the goldfish types. In body shape many more gills along the lateral line, colour, body shape (flatter and rounder, rounded fins) and head shape, and if you would cut them open you wouldn't see a black membrane. The different forms of gibelio are more variable, maybe because they are more or less wild goldfish C. a.. And C gibelio. In fact the 'wild' goldfish is an eastern subspecies of gibelio and there has also been a lot of domestication and subsequent release in the wild. So I think Image:DSCN3568.JPG is a picture of a typical wild western gibelio and Image:Giebel_Goudvis.JPG and your picture are in fact wild colored goldfish. DNA-research could clarify this matter, but it is clear that they are not Carassius carassius. It is a pity that C. carassius has become somewhat rare in the Netherlands so I had to post pictures of juvenile fish, which are to small (2 cm( to be a good reference picture. Searching the internet will also give you lots of misnamed fish. These pictures show C. carassius:[1], [2] and [3] (beautiful adult C. c.). This site also shows nice gibelio pictures [4]. Because the species cucian carp and wild goldfish haven't been recognized as seperate species in old literature they are still very often misnamed, but I hope that if you take a look at the pictures and the head shape of C. carassius you will see that it is very distinct. Sorry I changed the name of the picture myself, but I posted a comment some time ago to which you didn't respond and because I try to maintain the quality of the wiki pictures because they are often used as a reference I changed it myself. Thanks for posting the pictures however, because they are the only pictures of fish anatomy on wiki so far and are very usable (copied from my discussion page) Viridiflavus 05:50, 10 June 2007 (UTC)

I'm not sure if I understand you.

Please tell me in one sentence what you want to say (I hate reading long texts in every languages) ^^

If I understand you right, you wanted to say that [[:Image:Crucian carp-intact.JPG is a wild goldfish, because it looks like a wild goldish. Image:Crucian carp-bowels 2.JPG shows also a goldfish, because there is that black membrane. Right so far?

I don't know what exactly my teacher said, but he said that this is a crucian carp and he bought it from a fish farmer. I don't know more than this, but if I see him, I'll ask him some more facts.

--D-Kuru 21:29, 10 June 2007 (UTC)

Oscar Nunez image

I got permission from the author, just like all of my images I have uploaded so far, and have posted their permissions on the talk page of each image. I have included a statement in the summary section that says look at the talk page for author's permission. I don't think that they tend to change the license on Flickr itself, but I got written permission through e-mail saying that they are willing to put this image under use of GFDL. You can see it at Image talk:Oscarnunez.jpg. Let me know if you need any further clarification. --Nehrams2020 04:18, 10 June 2007 (UTC)

Thank you. I think that I was too tired yesterday to notice that there is a imagetalkpage ^^

--D-Kuru 10:42, 10 June 2007 (UTC)

I'm sorry, but can you please translate what you wrote on my talk page for your second comment. I haven't studied German since middle school, and even then, wasn't too advanced! Thanks. --Nehrams2020 22:14, 10 June 2007 (UTC)

Category:Requested moves

Hi D-Kuru. I'm writing you this message to ask for attention on a backlog. As you are active already on User:CommonsDelinker/commands already, you may be able to help in processing the 300+ category move requests that are waiting for attenion on Category:Requested moves. As always, any help is appreciated. Please let me know if you require any information. Cheers! Siebrand 22:08, 10 July 2007 (UTC)

I'm afraid, I'm not sure if I really know what you want to say.

--D-Kuru 22:25, 10 July 2007 (UTC)

I want you to help out processing category move requests that are located on Category:Requested moves using User:CommonsDelinker/commands. Cheers! Siebrand 07:17, 11 July 2007 (UTC)

Commons:Deletion requests/Image:Braun logo.jpg

Da ich nicht weiss unter welcher Lizens das Braun-Logo einzuordnen ist, habe ich es erstmal aus dem Artikel genommen, würde es aber gerne wieder einfügen, da ich es für illustrativ halte. Sage mir bitte wie ein Logo lizensiert wird--Holger.Ellgaard 21:19, 18 June 2007 (UTC)

Es gibt jetzt 2 Möglichkeiten:

1) {{PD-ineligible}} (Das was in der deutschen Wikipedia als "keine Schöpfungshöhe" bekannt ist (ACHTUNG: Heißt hier nicht das selbe, da auf Commons logogs generell verboten sind, außer

2) {{PD-textlogo}}

Ich würde es als {{PD-textlogo}} einstufen. Allerdings weiß ich nicht, ob durch die spezielle Form des A in BRAUN nicht jemand etwas dagegen haben könnte.

Was bei der Diskussion (nach allgemeiner Erfahrung) rauskommen wird ist {{PD-ineligible}} also brauchst du dir keine Sorgen machen.

--D-Kuru 21:26, 18 June 2007 (UTC)

Category:Sony cameras

Hello, i revert your deletion of this category. As we can see it is not empty, and i dont think it exists a problem with it. ~ bayo or talk 11:35, 19 June 2007 (UTC)

Well...

Don't ask me why I deleted it.

I think it was an empty page related to Category:Sony cameras that I wanted to delete, but I deleted Category:Sony cameras by an accident.

However, thank you --D-Kuru 07:16, 22 June 2007 (UTC)

Image:Map_at_flachau_(salzburg).png

Hallo, D-Kuru!

Wie ich gesehen habe, hast Du das Bild Image:Map_at_flachau_(salzburg).png aufgrund eines Schnellöschantrags von User:Mapandguidefrompartyhead gelöscht, in dem er angegeben hatte, daß es nicht mehr gebraucht würde, weil es nun durch die Infobox erzeugt würde. Nun trifft das zwar für die Wikipedia zu, nicht aber für die Wikinews. (Dort war es in dem Artikel Erste Top-Platzierung des Deutschen Ski-Verbandes seit 14 Jahren eingebunden, bevor es der CommonsDelinker gestern „rausgeworfen“ hat.) Wäre es evtl. möglich, das Bild wiederherzustellen? Viele Grüße --Angela H. 07:53, 20 June 2007 (UTC)

 Done --D-Kuru 09:01, 20 June 2007 (UTC)

Danke! :-) Viele Grüße --Angela H. 09:18, 20 June 2007 (UTC)

verwaiste Verweise

Hallo D-Kuru! Laut Lösch-Logbuch hast Du heute/ gestern Image:DSC 1425-p01-co-ronchamp-01.jpg gelöscht. Könntest Du noch die zahlreichen Verweise auf das Bild korrigieren? Danke, Ibn Battuta 22:13, 21 June 2007 (UTC)

Falls du damit meisnt, dass ich die Einbindungen in allen anderen Wikipedias korregieren soll, dann kann ich dir sagen, dass das schon vor dem löschen passiert ist (das CheckUse tool hängt aus undeffinierbaren gründen immer hinterher

--D-Kuru 07:10, 22 June 2007 (UTC)

Image:roy zimmerman.jpg

Hallo. Du hattest eine Warnung für das o.g. Bild gesetzt, weil angeblich die Urheberrechte nicht geklärt sind. Ich habe dieses Bild von der darauf abgebildeten Person erhalten, mit der ausdrücklichen Erlaubnis, es für de.wikipedia zu verwenden. Leider wurde es jetzt gelöscht. Wie soll ich das denn noch kennzeichnen? Ich hatte diese Berechtigung in der Beschreibung genannt. --Betaamylase 20:59, 22 June 2007 (UTC)

Wenn du als Source "roy zimmerman" angibst, dann hört es sich sehr stark nach einer urheberechtsverletztung an.

Das nächste Problem liegt in "autorized for wikimedia". Bilder die nur für die Wikipedia freigegeben sind werden auch gelöscht, weil sie dann unter umständen nicht komerziell nutzbar sind.

Der dritte Punkt ist der, dass Roy Zimmerman vermutlich nicht der Autor dieses Bildes ist somit bräuchtest du eine Bestätigung vom Autor, dass dieses Bild frei genutzt werden darf.

Wenn du dem Autor eine Mail schreibst und er sich dazu bereit erklär das Bild frei zur Verfügung zu stellen und unter Umständen auch zur komerziellen nutzung freizugeben, dann kannst du es wieder hochladen bzw. ich kann es undeleten.

--D-Kuru 08:15, 7 July 2007 (UTC)

Commons delinker

Hi. I think that Commonsdelinker ignores requests where the initial file is a png and the final one a svg. Sorry /Lokal_Profil 00:42, 5 August 2007 (UTC)

I know :<

But if I have a look at the duplicates I think it would be a quite good idea to change that (just for a wile)

However, the delinker could change the x.jpg -> y.jpg files (beyond the .svg.png files)

--D-Kuru 00:47, 5 August 2007 (UTC)

@ commands/documentation:

To replace one image with another

Well,... Maybe it will work...

--D-Kuru 00:50, 5 August 2007 (UTC)

Well we'll find out one way or another. But if it doesn't work it might be worth making a temporary exception for this batch. /Lokal_Profil 01:43, 5 August 2007 (UTC)

Seems that it doesn't work :-(

--D-Kuru 11:20, 6 August 2007 (UTC)

Re:Sparrow

Hi D-Kuru,
Thanks for your message; however, as I've made clear to a few people, they day wikimedia introduces a NC license is the day I'll be uploading 8MP files. I also view this rule of commons FPC rather contemptuously and have lost respect of a commons FP. People demand these sizes, yet they rarely look beyond the thumbnail size and consequently the list of FP (and here I quote some of the more recent FP's) becomes filled with images with easily removable noise, blurry images (another example of a blurry image), images which are blurry, noisy and full of artefacts (I'm actually quite surprised that got featured, the very bad colour and blown highlights are visible even at thumbnail size). To the respective authors of these images: I hope no offence is taken by my comments, apologies if there is People just click on a image on the thumbnail, have a look at it on the image description page, see it's nice there, note that it is larger than 2000 pix and support without ever looking at it full res. For these reasons the 2MP limit is just stupid --Fir0002 www 07:09, 7 August 2007 (UTC)

• • People just click on a image on the thumbnail, have a look at it on the image description page, see it's nice there, note that it is larger than 2000 pix and support without ever looking at it full res - that is a quite comtemptuous comment and a wild extrapolation about people behaviour - Alvesgaspar 22:57, 9 August 2007 (UTC)

• • Agree with Joaquim. That is an unjust generalization of the commons users. Regards --Simonizer 07:17, 10 August 2007 (UTC)

It's right that that what Fir said is a generalisation and not true for many Commons contribters. But for some it is true.

@ Fir: If you think that some pictures are too bad to be featured pictures you've never seen the Paver Blocks image

However, it's a pity that you don't have a larger version (even I read twhat you've written)

--D-Kuru 09:31, 10 August 2007 (UTC)

• • • • and what about FP not from Coomons, but from Wikipedia. Please look at that image,which was a picture of the day just few days ago. Only look at the edges! What a bad, bad image it is in any resolution.--Mbz1 16:44, 10 August 2007 (UTC)Mbz1

French books

Hello,

Why did you move the category "French books" to "Books of France". This is about the language, not the country. So "French books" can be both. If anything, it should be moved to "Books in French", not "Books of France". And there are already categories "Books from France" and "Scanned French texts". Regards, Yann 18:21, 10 August 2007 (UTC)

I moved the category, because it's content was"{{move|Category:Books of France|Standard form is '''Books of LOCATION'''.}}"

I don't know that standard, but (as I learned on Commons several times) that does not mean that it doesn't exist...

I moved the category, because Juiced lemon {{move|...}} and because the standard seemed good to me.

If there are other categories a similar but not the same content we could summerise it under Category:Lyrics of France (or something like that)

--D-Kuru 19:23, 10 August 2007 (UTC)

Books of France is even wrong as many books were printed outside of French to avoid censure. See f.e. Image:VOLTAIRE Lettres sur les Anglois Titel-3.jpg, which was printed in Amsterdam. Yann 10:54, 26 August 2007 (UTC)

Image:DPedroII VMeirelles.jpg

Please, do not delete duplicate pictures that are yet in use, as you did to Image:DPedroII VMeirelles.jpg. Thanks, Dantadd✉ 00:02, 22 August 2007 (UTC)

Well...

I know how to deal with pictures which are used in other wiki projects since User talk:D-Kuru#Commons delinker...

I used the commons delinker as you can see on http://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=User:CommonsDelinker/commands&oldid=7150438

I don't know why it doesn't work, but after some time commons delinker said Removing images being processed

I don't know why this image is still used. I'll try to use commons delinker again...

edit:

I used it, but nothing happened...

Delinker on strike?

--D-Kuru 00:54, 22 August 2007 (UTC)

--D-Kuru 00:47, 22 August 2007 (UTC)

I know you know...that's why I was a little bit surprised. Well... Dantadd✉ 02:36, 22 August 2007 (UTC)

Raytheon RIM-161 Standard SM-3

Hi! D-Kuru No, of course it's not the same missile. Raytheon RIM-161 Standard SM-3 it's not only a new generation missile than RIM-66, this is even different kind of missile. RIM-161 SM-3 is not air defense - this is antibalistic Aegis BMD missile.

Thanks and regard, --Matrek 21:00, 23 August 2007 (UTC)

OK, thanks for the Information

hf --D-Kuru 21:42, 23 August 2007 (UTC)

Antwort

Vielleicht hast du die Antwort auf meiner Diskussionsseite übersehen. Ich hab da noch Fragen. Gruß --GrummelJS 10:02, 24 August 2007 (UTC)

Image:Kusagakure Symbol.svg

They probably are, specially Image:Logo_Alpha_Centauri_TV_show.gif. The image by itself doesn't seem copyrightable. But seeing en:Image:NarutoMap.gif they have a more {{logo}} meaning than expected. Maybe a nfd would be appropiate. Platonides 13:48, 25 September 2007 (UTC)

OK, thanks for the info...

--D-Kuru 14:02, 25 September 2007 (UTC)

Great Wall images

Greetings:

I have further annotated the images to specify location. - Thanks for the note, Leonard G. 16:01, 14 October 2007 (UTC)

hello

These were at Simatai..

• Image:Dam and great wall china.jpg
• Image:Pollution over the great wall.jpg

--F3rn4nd0 20:55, 14 October 2007 (UTC)

•  Done --D-Kuru 21:57, 16 October 2007 (UTC)

Fanghong's Great Wall images

All of them from Badaling, I will add the information. Thanks for reminding me!--Fanghong 01:32, 15 October 2007 (UTC)

•  Done --D-Kuru 21:57, 16 October 2007 (UTC)

Tillea's Great Wall image

Image:GreatWallNearBeijingWinter.jpg unfortunately I can not really help here: I was on a conference in Beijing and took part in a daytrip to a part of the Great Wall nearby. I did some more (not WikiMedia relevant) pictures at this place which can probably be helpfull for a knowledged person to identify the spot. Have a look at this page. Andreas Tille 05:43, 15 October 2007 (UTC)

Great Wall Images

I'm about 90% certain that my pictures are from Badaling, but I can't totally guarantee that. We were on a Chinese tour bus from Beijing with a Chinese tour guide speaking Chinese, so we kind of missed out on the background information :). I do have video tape I shot the same day, so I'll check and see if there's a specific mention of the location on one of the signs or anywhere else. Mark Grant 17:16, 15 October 2007 (UTC)

Finally found something on the tape that matches a photo from Badaling, so I've updated the locations! Mark Grant 17:39, 22 November 2007 (UTC)

Thanks a lot for helping :-)

--D-Kuru 17:43, 22 November 2007 (UTC)

 Done

D-Kuru 17:44, 22 November 2007 (UTC)

Confirmacion

Si, dale, borra la imagen.Yes, the image "Pablo2995" is a mistake.La subi por error pero no se como borrarla.Please...

Greatwall12.jpg

From memory, the image was taken in Mutianyu.

Oliverdl

•  Done --D-Kuru 13:40, 17 October 2007 (UTC)

Image:Chinese Wall.jpg

Hi D-Kuru. In response to your question on my talk page at the Hebrew Wikipedia, my friends told me they took the picture at Badaling. דולב 19:03, 17 October 2007 (UTC)

•  Done --D-Kuru 22:11, 17 October 2007 (UTC)

Duplicates

You delete Image:Saporischja-oblast.COA.png as duplicate Image:Coat of Arms of Zaporizhzhya Oblast.gif, but this images are different --Butko 06:38, 18 October 2007 (UTC)

Image:HondaK20Z3.jpg

Hi!

I found Image:HondaK20Z3.jpg on the english wikipedia and all was right until I load it for french wikipedia (threat of deletion). Why ?

Schuss !

Image:Great Wall of China may 2007.JPG

Hi,

you've asked me where is this picture from. I'm sorry - I don't know...

Gveret Tered 09:40, 22 October 2007 (UTC)

Danke schön!...

Van Rijn.

RE: Image:Rorschach1.jpg

I am sorry it has taken me so long to get around to this, but I have not logged in for several months. I am responding to a message you left on my talk page from June. It is inappropriate for Wikimedia Commons to use the image of a Rorschach card. The image is not in the public domain, for the International Rorschach Society retains copyright on the images. Second, displaying the cards diminishes the validity of the assessment as the Rorschach is still used by clinicians. As a member of the American Psychological Association, I am ethically obligated to inform whomever it may concern that use of the cards outside of a psychological setting damages the validity of the Rorschach Inkblot Test and is a violation of copyright. I hope this answers your question, and you may not care anymore. However, I thought I should follow up. Take care, Psy guy 00:43, 23 October 2007 (UTC)

About Image:Trireme_cut.png

Hi. I see you took out the Duplicate banner I put on Image:Trireme_cut.png. Please deleted this image as it is really a duplicate of Image:Trireme_cut-fr.svg. The latest, as a SVG file can really be easily modified for translation or for a blank version, so Image:Trireme_cut.png is really now useless. Thanks. Sting 16:26, 31 October 2007 (UTC)

 Done

Next time use {{Speedy}}, because {{Duplicate}} is if it's "an exact duplicate".

hf --D-Kuru 16:32, 31 October 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for the tip. Sting 16:13, 1 November 2007 (UTC)

Image:Military of Serbia.PNG

Hi. Since it may be that I missed a part of directions and the introduction, I'd like to have a conversation about the image I mentioned above. How are "image duplicates" defined here?--Michael { ^ta_lk _} 18:01, 1 November 2007 (UTC)

Image:Military of Serbia.PNG looks nearly the same as Image:Emblem of Serbian Armed Forces.jpg which is the duplicate. I know that looks nearly the same sounds as if I don't know thats {{Duplicate}} is for an exact duplicate. But if you have a look at both pictures you will see that only the yellow in the crown and the swords, the red in the shield and the size aren't the same. So they are duplicates, because they look the same.

May you want to know why Military of Serbia.PNG will get deleted and not Emblem of Serbian Armed Forces.jpg. Emblem of Serbian Armed Forces.jpg is of bigger size and because they are no svg files (which are infinite scalable) the smaller one gets deleted. From Commons:Project scope: "The quality of files should be as high as possible"

I hope that I could give you the information you want.

hf --D-Kuru 10:16, 2 November 2007 (UTC)

Havoc wreaked

I'm writing to both you and OsamaK because sometimes what happens around here is a succession of errors. First Image:Calendário Asteca.jpg got tagged because it had no source, and then it got deleted because the omission had not been fixed. Fortunately, Image:Calendario Axteca.png already existed.

Do you realize that the image Image:Calendário Asteca.jpg was used on hundreds of pages on more than 20 wikis? Do you realize that Aztec sun stone has a variety of similar images all based on the calendar?

Okay, Jic was notified that the image had no source, but really. That was a problem that could have been more easily fixed - and in much less time than it took me today to go and fix the problem across all the wikis. Next time, please stop and think about the effect that deleting an image may have - especially one like this one? Cheers.Evrik 17:56, 9 November 2007 (UTC)

First I have to thank you that you have replaced all the images around all wikipedian projects.

But next time do this: Write on my userpage a short note that Image:Foo is still used, but should be replaced by Image:Bar. Or you set the same text on User talk:CommonsDelinker/commands. This user is a bot which does the same as you did, but whitout that you have to do such a alot of work.

Because I have a look at my page at least once a day it is easy to fix such problems.

Note the following: I told CommonsDelinker to replace Calendário Asteca.jpg with Calendario Axteca.png so it shouldn't be used anywhere (even "check use" tells you so. It needs some time to update it)

To useage:

It was used in a template which was used very often so "was used on hundreds of pages" isn't really exactly (depending on how you interpret it).

In general:

Please not that it's impossible to keep files without a source or/and free licence! You can't keep fair use files because they are used somewhere.

Please also note that Calendário Asteca.jpg was uploaded on 2005-04-08 and hand no source infromation since it got uploaded. On {{No source since}} you can read that the media file, which was tagged with {{No source since}}, "is missing essential source information" and "the file can be speedily deleted seven days after this template was added' and the uploader was notified". As you can see on Jic's talk page he was notified. The template was added on 2007-10-14 by OsamaK. I deleted it on 2007-10-31. So it got deleted 17 days after {{No source since}} was added which is twice as much of the time as it should be kept. Not mentioned that there was no source for two and a half year!

I don't know why Jic didn't add a source, which could be just a webside or something like that. Even on en.wikipedia you need a source for fair use pictures. I think that it is not so difficult to add a simple webside or whatever to a page which can be edited by everyone, anytime within two and a half years.

I checked out en.wikipedia for more source information, but it got uploaded to en.wikipedia a half year after it got uploaded to commons. May you find out where it is from.

I hope that you understand why I have to add a deletion request to Calendario Axteca.png

If you don't know:

Source=PNG created from Image:Calendário_Asteca.jpg

Calendário_Asteca.jpg was without source information -> "PNG created from Image:Calendário_Asteca.jpg" is no valid source

hf --D-Kuru 11:16, 10 November 2007 (UTC)

Restoration

Hi! I would like to know if you can restore the image Image:5 abrazo.jpg. It's an historic picture and certainly in the Public Domain. Probably, the uploader didn't pay atention to the formalities needed here at Commons, but the image is very important. If you restore the image, I will provide the source needed for the image. Thanks for your help, B1mbo 20:07, 10 November 2007 (UTC)

 Done

Please add a source as soon as possible!

Please use {{Information}} on the image description page.

--D-Kuru 20:16, 10 November 2007 (UTC)

Image:X-35A 1.jpg & Image:X-35A 2.jpg

Hello. Please restore the old image versions. Deleting old image versions releases no space on harddisk. Thx. --BLueFiSH.as

 Done

Ich hab übrigens auch den {{User de}} aufkleber auf meiner Benutzerseite :-)

PS: Habs nur aus Routine gemacht, weil ichs so mal bei ein paar Admins auf Commons gesehen hab...

--D-Kuru 17:09, 17 November 2007 (UTC)

Achso, gar nicht drauf geachtet. Man kann von doppelten oder allgemein mehrfachen Uploads einige Bilder entfernen, damit es übersichtlicher wird, von jeder verschiedenen Bildversion sollte aber immer 1 Exemplar übrig bleiben, am besten auch eine Bilderversion die einen ordentlichen Uploadeintrag enthält. So ist meine Philosophie. Wenn andere das genauso wie du machen, wundert es mich sehr. Übrigens hättest du es nicht erst löschen und dann alles auf einmal wiederherstellen müssen, lediglich das Bild wiederherstellen geht auch. Gruß --BLueFiSH.as 17:13, 17 November 2007 (UTC)

Ich weiß, aber ich wollt das so schnell als möglich wiederherstellen, damits nicht unter den Tisch fllt...

Kann man eigentlich auch einzelne Versionen der Bildbeschreibungen auch löschen (so wie bei den Bildern)?

--D-Kuru 17:18, 17 November 2007 (UTC)

Nein das kann man nicht, man kann nur alles löschen und ausgewählte Versionen wiederherstellen. --BLueFiSH.as 17:28, 17 November 2007 (UTC)

Schade...

Heist das jetzt dann, dass man die (alten Versionen der) Bilder theoretisch löschen könnte?

--D-Kuru 18:24, 17 November 2007 (UTC)

Jetzt steh ich aufm Schlauch. Du hattest doch 17:18 zu den Bildbeschreibungen gefragt, darauf war die Antwort bezogen. Ich glaub die Frage musste nochmal neu formulieren ;-) --BLueFiSH.as 19:17, 17 November 2007 (UTC)

Na dann versuchs ich mal:

17:18 meinte ich, ob es irgendein (vielleicht von einem Wikipedian programmiertes) tool gibt, womit man wie bei Image:X-35A 2.jpg sagen kann "(Diese Version löschen)", allerdings das nicht bei der Bilddatei, sondern für die Versionsgeschichte der image descrption page - wenn zum Beispiel in einem Beitrag mehrfach vandaliert wurde, dass man die betreffende version rauslöschen kann, dass es wieder etwas aufgeräumter ist.

18:24 meinte ich in Bezug auf "Man kann von doppelten oder allgemein mehrfachen Uploads einige Bilder entfernen, damit es übersichtlicher wird, von jeder verschiedenen Bildversion sollte aber immer 1 Exemplar übrig bleiben, am besten auch eine Bilderversion die einen ordentlichen Uploadeintrag enthält". Heißt das jetzt dass man die alte Version löschen kann, weil sie sich zur neuen nur durch ihre Größe unterscheidet, oder soll man das älteste Bild erst dann löschen, wenn es eine dritte (womöglich andere) versioin gibt.

Hoffe dass es jetzt klarer ist

--D-Kuru 20:24, 17 November 2007 (UTC)

oops.. generell würd ich sagen, dass du im Zweifel lieber nicht löschen solltest. Ich kann nur für de.wp sprechen, wo ich Admin bin, da werden Vandalismusversionen auf jeden Fall nicht gelöscht, schon gar nicht damit die Historie "aufgeräumter" ist. Denn es ist erstens viel zu aufwändig (und nein, es gibt kein Tool), und zweitens unnötig. Versionsgeschichten werden einfach nicht "aufgeräumt". Schon für die Bemerkung würde es in de.wp einen Aufstand geben; Adminklüngelei, Hinterzimmerverabredungen, Sachen-unter-den-Teppich-kehren und anderes solchen Kalibers wären die Vorwürfe.

Zu den Bildern: lass die alten Bildversionen einfach da wo sie sind, es ist nicht nötig sie zu löschen, es spart keinen Speicherplatz, denn die Bilder werden nicht physisch gelöscht. (Vielmehr produziert es Diskussionen wie diese.) Die Fälle, in denen man einzelne Bildversionen löschen könnte, sind äußerst äußerst selten, und auch da ist es meist nicht notwendig.

Wundere mich, dass du mir solche Fragen stellst, bist ja schließlich schon ne Weile Admin hier. Hoffe sowas passiert dir nicht häufiger .. Nichts für Ungut. ;-) Gruß --BLueFiSH.as 21:23, 17 November 2007 (UTC)

Sind ja eher Detailfragen, die man auf Commons nicht stellen kann, weil man keine Antwort drauf bekommt ^^

Als Beispiel: Ich hab gefragt, ob man für {{PD-old}} bzw. {{PD-art}} eine Quelle angeben muss (später ist dazugekommen ob es offensichtlich sein kann, dass etwa {{PD-old}} ist. Das ist dabei rausgekommen. Eine eledns lange Diskussion, die mit einem einfachen "Ja" oder "nein" zu lösen wäre.

Es mag zwar sein, dass das ganz auf de.wikipedia schneller und preszieser geht, allerdings gilt das auf Commons dann wieder nicht... :-/

"sowas" war das ergebnis von 8h Tiberian Sun dauerspielen + ein bisschen Category:Fractals aufräumen. Da hab ich einfach zwei Bilder verwechselt ^^

However, danke für die infos :-)

--D-Kuru 00:34, 18 November 2007 (UTC)

Als Quelle halte ich es bei den beiden Bausteinen so, dass wenn der Autor und seine Lebensdaten bekannt sind, auf eine konkrete Quelle (im Sinne von Buch oder Weblink) verzichten werden kann. Entscheidend ist der Autor + Sterbejahr, alles andere ist nicht wichtig, denn niemand sonst hat ein Copyright an den Bildern.

C&C konnte ich nie leiden, Age of Empire gefällt mir besser =) --BLueFiSH.as 06:32, 18 November 2007 (UTC)

Lucks The_Great_Wall images

Nice to meet you,and Thank you for your advise.
Frankly speaking,I don't know Badaling, Mutianyu..
I am sorry to give you trouble.
Please continue your favors toward me.
From luck-one 18 November 2007

Template:Categorise

Hi! I saw your translation request on the French Bistro. I can help, but I have some questions. Is it a standard layout for notice templates? I think it's the first time I see a notice template with round corners. More importantly, the template can be somewhat shorter and simpler. Something along the lines of "This is a generic category. Pictures should be in the most specific category that is relevant. Please change the category of this file accordingly." should do the trick, don't you think? Jastrow (Λέγετε) 11:23, 19 November 2007 (UTC)

No, it's no standart layout as Template:CC-Layout is.

I've found it once on the german Wikipedia and thought that it would may look good.

Your idea also sounds good. However, I think that it's not important, how it looks like or if there're 24 or 52 words. The message is important. But if you feel like you can change it ;-)

--D-Kuru 13:17, 19 November 2007 (UTC)

Image:Steadicam and operator in front of crowd.jpg

You are correct in thinking I took the photo Image:Steadicam and operator in front of crowd.jpg myself - and I've updated the page to reflect that.

I don't know if you are using a bot to do uploads - if so, it has a bug, as it linked my username to de instead of en! link If you did it manually it's understandable - mistakes are easily made in repetitive tasks!

Thanks, and greetings from England! Mike1024 (t/c) 23:04, 22 November 2007 (UTC)

I agree that *you* cannot apply that tag, but surely *I* can, as I am the creator of the work? But I guess it doesn't make any difference (I only changed it to reflect the fact I now have a commons account) so you can change it if you like! Have a nice christmas! Mike1024 (t/c) 18:17, 20 December 2007 (UTC)

Image:Carracci05.jpg

This image is part of album of the Italian renaissance. See Agostino Carracci's erotic engravings and en:I Modi. Please reverse. --Econt 16:17, 28 November 2007 (UTC)

 Done

Please add a source if possible (for example a webside)

hf --D-Kuru 14:42, 29 November 2007 (UTC)

{{Categorise}}

OK, if you think so, you can cancel it. Yarl ^{Talk • PL} 15:51, 10 December 2007 (UTC)