User talk:Gandvik/Archive2020

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

Autopatrol given

Hello. I just wanted to let you know that I have granted autopatrol rights to your account; the reason for this is that I believe you are sufficiently trustworthy and experienced to have your contributions automatically marked as "reviewed". This has no effect on your editing, it is simply intended to make it easier for users that are monitoring Recent changes or Recent uploads to find unproductive edits amidst the productive ones like yours. In addition, the Flickr upload feature and an increased number of batch-uploads in UploadWizard, uploading of freely licensed MP3 files, overwriting files uploaded by others and an increased limit for page renames per minute are now available to you. Thank you. INeverCry 19:03, 14 April 2013 (UTC)

Категории марок

Добрый день, пришла из-за этой правки. Не нужно просто так вынимать файлы из этой категории, она помогает легко найти, на каких марках есть города Беларуси, если вы создаёте отдельную категорию для конкретного города, то пусть тогда в "марки по городам" будет включена эта категория целиком. Ну и слово stamps в названиях подобных категорий традиционно для унификации пишется с маленькой буквы. Поэтому я создала новую категорию с уточнёнными включениями, а ваша станет перенаправлением или можете выставить её к удалению. В любом случае спасибо за помощь с категоризацией марок, если что, обращайтесь.--Хомелка (talk) 05:48, 11 October 2013 (UTC)

Да, только что заметила, что и в случае с "Орша в искусстве" у вас та же проблема. art нужно с маленькой буквы, и вы не учитываете, что у категории вида "Что-то в чём-то" должно быть 2 категории: "что-то" и "чём-то". Т. е., например "Минск на марках" включаем в "Минск в искусстве" и в "Города Беларуси на марках", а "Минск в искусстве" включаем в "Минск" и в "Города Беларуси в искусстве" и т. д. Это же делается не для раздробления категорий как такового, а для лучшего поиска и для тех, кто интересуется Минском, и для тех, кто интересуется искусством. В общем, я сейчас смотрю ваш вклад и попробую поисправлять немного, но и вы, пожалуйста, сделайте то же или по крайней мере, учтите на будущее. Потому что я в своё время приложила огромные усилия, чтобы вытянуть эти марки к общим категориям, а вы их снова топите в частных новообразованиях с неверными названиями.--Хомелка (talk) 05:55, 11 October 2013 (UTC)
Аналогично здесь и здесь, но думаю, что ход моих мыслей уже должен быть понятен.--Хомелка (talk) 06:05, 11 October 2013 (UTC)
Спасибо за обучение. В качестве извинения и оправдания приведу известное выражение "Не ошибается только тот, кто ничего не делает." Стал делать - пошли в т.ч. и ошибки. В любом случае - спасибо за ценные замечания. --Gandvik (talk) 16:48, 11 October 2013 (UTC)
Я тоже приношу свои извинения за резкий тон, к сожалению я увидела ваши правки до утреннего кофе. После тёплой чашки я увидела всё другими глазами и ваш вклад несомненно очень полезен. И спасибо вам за него огромное. Если будут сомнения, не стесняйтесь спрашивать :).--Хомелка (talk) 18:37, 11 October 2013 (UTC)

Планы замков

сравните здесь и здесь названия категорий, пожалуйста. Видите разницу? А между тем весьма желательно создавать в подобных случаях однотипные названия, как для унификации, так и для удобства пользования гаджетами быстрой перекатегоризации, например хоткатом. В любом случае, слово plans должно бы быть с маленькой буквы, ибо так грамотнее. Прошу вас переделать эти категории (нужно просто создать новую, а в старой сделать редирект, бот придёт и сам перенесёт файлы), и в следующий раз уточнять предварительно типовой вид названия категории, желательно по нескольким странам, чтобы не напороться на чужую ошибку.--Хомелка (talk) 06:52, 11 October 2013 (UTC)

Спасибо. Учту. --Gandvik (talk) 16:43, 11 October 2013 (UTC)
Исправил. --Gandvik (talk) 18:40, 11 October 2013 (UTC)
Красота :). Спасибо.--Хомелка (talk) 08:37, 12 October 2013 (UTC)

Просьба

[1] Здравствуйте. Просьба: 1. Не обрезать оригинальные исторические невоспроизводимые фотографии. 2. Давать ссылку на исходник (источник), которая открывается (попробуйте открыть). 3. Не изменять расширение файла (он изначально джипег, вы лучше его никак не сделаете), чтобы его можно было перезагрузить. 4. Переносить полное описание и все категории. 5. Просьба переносить все лицензии - они не просто так стоят, ПД-олд недостаточно, могут удалить (если фотограф умер после 1943 года). Большое спасибо. --Vizu (talk) 17:41, 29 December 2013 (UTC)

PD-Art tags

Hello, Gandvik. When you want to identify an image as over 100 years old, please use the tag "PD-old-100" instead of "PD-Old-100" (note the difference in capitalization) to ensure proper categorization. Thanks. --R'n'B (talk) 15:04, 5 February 2014 (UTC)

Ok. Thanks. --Gandvik (talk) 16:41, 5 February 2014 (UTC)

Picture of the Year 2013 R2 Announcement

Round 2 of Picture of the Year 2013 is open!

2012 Picture of the Year: A pair of European Bee-eaters in Ariège, France.

Dear Wikimedians,

Wikimedia Commons is happy to announce that the second round of the 2013 Picture of the Year competition is now open. This year will be the eighth edition of the annual Wikimedia Commons photo competition, which recognizes exceptional contributions by users on Wikimedia Commons. Wikimedia users are invited to vote for their favorite images featured on Commons during the last year (2013) to produce a single Picture of the Year.

Hundreds of images that have been rated Featured Pictures by the international Wikimedia Commons community in the past year were entered in this competition. These images include professional animal and plant shots, breathtaking panoramas and skylines, restorations of historical images, photographs portraying the world's best architecture, impressive human portraits, and so much more.

There are two total rounds of voting. In the first round, you voted for as many images as you liked. The top 30 overall and the most popular image in each category have continued to the final. In the final round, you may vote for just one image to become the Picture of the Year.

Round 2 will end on 7 March 2014. https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Special:MyLanguage/Commons:Picture_of_the_Year/2013/Introduction/en Click here to learn more and vote »]

Thanks,
the Wikimedia Commons Picture of the Year committee

You are receiving this message because you voted in the 2013 Picture of the Year contest.

This Picture of the Year vote notification was delivered by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 19:22, 22 February 2014 (UTC)

Picture of the Year 2013 Results Announcement

Picture of the Year 2013 Results

The 2013 Picture of the Year. View all results »

Dear Gandvik,

The 2013 Picture of the Year competition has ended and we are pleased to announce the results: We shattered participation records this year — more people voted in Picture of the Year 2013 than ever before. In both rounds, 4070 different people voted for their favorite images. Additionally, there were more image candidates (featured pictures) in the contest than ever before (962 images total).

  • In the first round, 2852 people voted for all 962 files
  • In the second round, 2919 people voted for the 50 finalists (the top 30 overall and top 2 in each category)

We congratulate the winners of the contest and thank them for creating these beautiful images and sharing them as freely licensed content:

  1. 157 people voted for the winner, an image of a lightbulb with the tungsten filament smoking and burning.
  2. In second place, 155 people voted for an image of "Sviati Hory" (Holy Mountains) National Park in Donetsk Oblast, Ukraine.
  3. In third place, 131 people voted for an image of a swallow flying and drinking.

Click here to view the top images »

We also sincerely thank to all 4070 voters for participating and we hope you will return for next year's contest in early 2015. We invite you to continue to participate in the Commons community by sharing your work.

Thanks,
the Picture of the Year committee

You are receiving this message because you voted in the 2013 Picture of the Year contest.

Delivered by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:59, 26 March 2014 (UTC)

Добрый день! не подскажете, что это за форма у вел. кн. на фотографии? Эти, из царской семьи, постоянно в такой позируют. Вот ведь она же? это какие-то гусары? может, подскажете, какой полк, и тогда сразу туда их запихивать можно... --Shakko (talk) 08:52, 19 December 2014 (UTC)

Мундиры - гуссарские (на первом изображении видно ташку). Судя по внешнему виду - лейб-гвардии гусарские. (В мундирах обычных частей члены императорской фамилии, насколько я знаю, вообще не рисовались. Им по статусу - только мундиры гвардейских частей.) Лейб-гвардии гусарских полков было два: Гродненский лейб-гвардии гусарский (зелёный цвет доломана и ментика) и Лейб-гвардии Гусарский Его Величества (красный цвет доломана и ментика(белый ментик?)). Первое изображение чёрно-белое и цвет на нем не определить. Синий цвет на втором изображении меня озадачил. Видимо Вам стоит обратиться к специалистам по униформе этого периода, каковым я не являюсь. --Gandvik (talk) 09:34, 19 December 2014 (UTC)
спасибо. На самом деле это зеленый. Значит, первый. И другие вел.князья тоже все время в этом. Shakko (talk) 10:43, 19 December 2014 (UTC)
В статье Лейб-гвардии Гусарский Его Величества полк. В разделе "Изменения в форме и вооружении" под катом цветные литографии разных лет. В середине XIX века фигурируют в том числе и синие мундиры (как повседневная форма).--Gandvik (talk) 11:29, 19 December 2014 (UTC)
Вот изображение командира этого полка в мундире опять же синего цвета.--Gandvik (talk) 11:51, 19 December 2014 (UTC)
нехорошие люди. Видимо, надо тупо смотреть по послужному списку моделей.--Shakko (talk) 13:07, 20 December 2014 (UTC)
короче их миллион и все разные. Есть даже Елизаветградские и Ахтырские. Положила всех сюда, вдруг пригодится Category:Russian hussars uniform (Romanovs). --Shakko (talk) 10:35, 24 December 2014 (UTC)

Category:Ivan Hrechinjuk

Hello Gandvik,

Please dont remove the category Category:Ivan Hrechinjuk witout discussion. -- Geagea (talk) 14:01, 30 December 2014 (UTC)

Ok. --Gandvik (talk) 15:04, 30 December 2014 (UTC)
Category:Khadzhibey Cemeteries 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 category, 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.

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!

Yuriy Kvach (talk) 19:41, 30 December 2014 (UTC)

Category discussion warning

Category:Khadzhibey Cemeteries has been listed at Commons:Categories for discussion so that the community can discuss ways in which it should be changed. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry.

If you created this category, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for discussion 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. If the category is up for deletion because it has been superseded, consider the notion that although the category may be deleted, your hard work (which we all greatly appreciate) lives on in the new category.

In all cases, please do not take the category discussion personally. It is never intended as such. Thank you!


DLindsley Need something? 20:14, 30 December 2014 (UTC)

File:Museum-reserve "Malaya zemlya" Monument.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!

Well-Informed Optimist (talk) 06:35, 9 February 2015 (UTC)

Churchill Crocodile

The tank is outside the D-Day museum in Southsea Portsmouth. It is right next to this tank.Geni (talk) 08:31, 11 February 2015 (UTC)

Sanks. --Gandvik (talk) 08:32, 11 February 2015 (UTC)

File source is not properly indicated: File:Aliaga.jpg

العربية  asturianu  беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎  বাংলা  català  čeština  dansk  Deutsch  Ελληνικά  English  español  euskara  فارسی  suomi  français  galego  עברית  hrvatski  magyar  italiano  日本語  한국어  македонски  മലയാളം  norsk bokmål  Plattdüütsch  Nederlands  norsk nynorsk  norsk  polski  português  português do Brasil  русский  sicilianu  slovenčina  slovenščina  svenska  ไทย  Türkçe  українська  Tiếng Việt  简体中文‎  繁體中文‎  +/−
Warning sign
This media was probably deleted.
A file that you have uploaded to Wikimedia Commons, File:Aliaga.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:Aliaga.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. Warning: Wikimedia Commons takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing.

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!

rubin16 (talk) 16:20, 26 April 2015 (UTC)

العربية  беларуская беларуская (тарашкевіца)  ပအိုဝ်ႏဘာႏသာႏ  বাংলা  català  čeština  dansk  Deutsch  Deutsch (Sie-Form)  Ελληνικά  English  español  euskara  فارسی  suomi  français  galego  עברית  hrvatski  magyar  հայերեն  italiano  日本語  ಕನ್ನಡ  한국어  lietuvių  latviešu  македонски  മലയാളം  मराठी  မြန်မာဘာသာ  norsk bokmål  Plattdüütsch  Nederlands  norsk  polski  português  română  русский  sicilianu  slovenčina  slovenščina  српски / srpski  svenska  ไทย  Türkçe  українська  اردو  Tiếng Việt  中文(简体)  中文(繁體)  +/−
Warning sign
This media was probably deleted.
Thanks for uploading File:Katanga-1-avers.jpg. This media is missing permission information. A source is given, but there is no proof that the author or copyright holder agreed to license the file under the given license. Please provide a link to an appropriate webpage with license information, or ask the author or copyright holder to send an email with copy of a written permission to VRT (permissions-commons@wikimedia.org). You may still be required to go through this procedure even if you are the author yourself; please see Commons:But it's my own work! for more details. After you emailed permission, you may replace the {{No permission since}} tag with {{subst:PP}} on file description page. Alternatively, you may click on "Challenge speedy deletion" below the tag if you wish to provide an argument why evidence of permission is not necessary in this case.

Please see this page for more information on how to confirm permission, or if you would like to understand why we ask for permission when uploading work that is not your own, or work which has been previously published (regardless of whether it is your own).

The file probably has been deleted. If you sent a permission, try to send it again after 14 days. Do not re-upload. When the VRT-member processes your mail, the file can be undeleted. Additionally you can request undeletion here, providing a link to the File-page on Commons where it was uploaded ([[:File:Katanga-1-avers.jpg]]) and the above demanded information in your request.

And also:

Yours sincerely, Well-Informed Optimist (talk) 08:32, 14 May 2015 (UTC)

File:Arlou Uladzimer.JPG

Why did you remove the category from the file? There is a nice photo of St. Sophia church in Polotsk in the background. The is no other photo of this church like this in commons. --37.17.115.23 18:15, 26 May 2015 (UTC)

Copyright status: File:Bez-Kornilovich.jpg

bahasa melayu  català  čeština  dansk  deutsch (Sie-Form)  deutsch  english  español  français  galego  hrvatski  italiano  magyar  nederlands  norsk  norsk bokmål  norsk nynorsk  português  polski  português do Brasil  română  sicilianu  slovenčina  slovenščina  suomi  svenska  türkçe  беларуская  беларуская (тарашкевіца)  български  македонски  русский  українська  ಕನ್ನಡ  ತುಳು  മലയാളം  한국어  日本語  中文(简体)  中文(繁體)  עברית  العربيَّة  فارسی  +/−
Warning sign
This media may be deleted.
Thanks for uploading File:Bez-Kornilovich.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.

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) 03:51, 16 August 2015 (UTC)

bahasa melayu  català  čeština  dansk  deutsch (Sie-Form)  deutsch  english  español  français  galego  hrvatski  italiano  magyar  nederlands  norsk  norsk bokmål  norsk nynorsk  português  polski  português do Brasil  română  sicilianu  slovenčina  slovenščina  suomi  svenska  türkçe  беларуская  беларуская (тарашкевіца)  български  македонски  русский  українська  ಕನ್ನಡ  ತುಳು  മലയാളം  한국어  日本語  中文(简体)  中文(繁體)  עברית  العربيَّة  فارسی  +/−
Warning sign
This media may be deleted.
Thanks for uploading File:Tsesarevich Postcard.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.

Magog the Ogre (talk) (contribs) 04:44, 1 October 2015 (UTC)

File:Ivan Aleksandrovsky 2.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!

Максим Підліснюк (talk) 17:09, 6 November 2015 (UTC)

File:Ivan Aleksandrovsky.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!

Максим Підліснюк (talk) 17:09, 6 November 2015 (UTC)

Overwritten file

You overwrote the content of File:Female Nikolaevckiy cenobitic monastery in Tashkent47.jpg. At the request of uploader of the original file, I've performed a history split on that file. Your content is now at File:Female Nikolaevckiy cenobitic monastery in Tashkent47 (cropped).jpg. —RP88 (talk) 18:11, 29 November 2015 (UTC)

File:Female Nikolaevckiy cenobitic monastery in Tashkent47 (cropped).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!

Bobyrr (talk) 08:52, 8 February 2016 (UTC)

Hi! Regarding this edit, I think you should upload the coloured version as a separate file, because the version that I uploaded is the photograph of a painting exposed in the museum cited in the description. This painting is in black and white. Your image is another version of the same painting exposed in another museum. --Incola (talk) 15:40, 28 April 2016 (UTC)

File:Rus Stamp-Ivan Fedorov-1964.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!

ScriWi (talk) 16:21, 12 May 2016 (UTC)

العربية  беларуская беларуская (тарашкевіца)  ပအိုဝ်ႏဘာႏသာႏ  বাংলা  català  čeština  dansk  Deutsch  Deutsch (Sie-Form)  Ελληνικά  English  español  euskara  فارسی  suomi  français  galego  עברית  hrvatski  magyar  հայերեն  italiano  日本語  ಕನ್ನಡ  한국어  lietuvių  latviešu  македонски  മലയാളം  मराठी  မြန်မာဘာသာ  norsk bokmål  Plattdüütsch  Nederlands  norsk  polski  português  română  русский  sicilianu  slovenčina  slovenščina  српски / srpski  svenska  ไทย  Türkçe  українська  اردو  Tiếng Việt  中文(简体)  中文(繁體)  +/−
Warning sign
This media was probably deleted.
Thanks for uploading File:Nikolskii skit Diveyevsky monastery.jpg. This media is missing permission information. A source is given, but there is no proof that the author or copyright holder agreed to license the file under the given license. Please provide a link to an appropriate webpage with license information, or ask the author or copyright holder to send an email with copy of a written permission to VRT (permissions-commons@wikimedia.org). You may still be required to go through this procedure even if you are the author yourself; please see Commons:But it's my own work! for more details. After you emailed permission, you may replace the {{No permission since}} tag with {{subst:PP}} on file description page. Alternatively, you may click on "Challenge speedy deletion" below the tag if you wish to provide an argument why evidence of permission is not necessary in this case.

Please see this page for more information on how to confirm permission, or if you would like to understand why we ask for permission when uploading work that is not your own, or work which has been previously published (regardless of whether it is your own).

The file probably has been deleted. If you sent a permission, try to send it again after 14 days. Do not re-upload. When the VRT-member processes your mail, the file can be undeleted. Additionally you can request undeletion here, providing a link to the File-page on Commons where it was uploaded ([[:File:Nikolskii skit Diveyevsky monastery.jpg]]) and the above demanded information in your request.

Sealle (talk) 18:12, 26 June 2016 (UTC)

File:Zentr asii.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!

Dogad75 (talk) 20:32, 21 July 2016 (UTC)

File:Donbass Arena Ball.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!

Dogad75 (talk) 22:00, 21 July 2016 (UTC)

Notification about possible deletion

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, Dogad75 (talk) 21:22, 8 August 2016 (UTC)

File:Mogila Fernandelya-na-Passi.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!

Dogad75 (talk) 04:49, 11 August 2016 (UTC)

File:Dzhokhar Tsarnaev 2.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!

Calliopejen1 (talk) 22:06, 15 May 2017 (UTC)

Category discussion warning

Category:Mens_served_as_Chevalier_Guards has been listed at Commons:Categories for discussion so that the community can discuss ways in which it should be changed. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry.

If you created this category, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for discussion 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. If the category is up for deletion because it has been superseded, consider the notion that although the category may be deleted, your hard work (which we all greatly appreciate) lives on in the new category.

In all cases, please do not take the category discussion personally. It is never intended as such. Thank you!


E4024 (talk) 09:12, 19 March 2018 (UTC)

Добрый день.
Раз Вы бываете в Смоленске, то потрудитесь объяснить, откуда дом 14 (на фото справа) можно было сфотографировать так, чтобы вышло то фото, что показано слева.

Incnis Mrsi (talk) 12:22, 21 August 2018 (UTC)

  • Обязательно объясню, как только сам выясню. :) Это разные здания. Адреса их сейчас выясняю. Как только выясню - подправлю. Пока оставил как есть (до выяснения). Ситуация, что называется "в процессе". С уважением --Gandvik (talk) 12:27, 21 August 2018 (UTC)
    • Выяснять видимо придётся на месте. Это займёт по-времени...--Gandvik (talk) 12:42, 21 August 2018 (UTC)
    • Так и есть. Эти два здания, стоящие по-соседству, юридически имеют один адрес. При этом являются двумя разными памятниками архитектуры. Как-то так... --Gandvik (talk) 12:48, 6 September 2018 (UTC)
Category discussion warning

Emelyan Korneev has been listed at Commons:Categories for discussion so that the community can discuss ways in which it should be changed. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry.

If you created this category, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for discussion 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. If the category is up for deletion because it has been superseded, consider the notion that although the category may be deleted, your hard work (which we all greatly appreciate) lives on in the new category.

In all cases, please do not take the category discussion personally. It is never intended as such. Thank you!


SealMan11 (talk) 00:41, 13 January 2019 (UTC)

File:Rus Stamp-Kirov Cruiser-1973.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!

Красный wanna talk? 21:59, 25 August 2019 (UTC)

File:IconPokrov 4.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!

Testus (talk) 14:32, 13 October 2019 (UTC)

Неконсенсусное удаление межвоенных и послевоенных категорий военной техники

Обращаю ваше внимание, что два участника недавно пришли к «консенсусу» об удалении головной категории Military vehicles of the interwar period и решили, что это даёт им право расформировать все её подкатегории без обсуждения, а в дополнение к тому же ещё и категории типа Post-World War II tanks of the Soviet Union. Вы можете высказать своё мнение в обсуждениях COM:ANU#CfD scope? (Military vehicles of the interwar period) и COM:Categories for discussion/2020/01/Category:Interwar tanks in museums. Ain92 (talk) 14:19, 13 January 2020 (UTC)

Tankmonuments in Russia

Hi, Gandvik. It's nice to see you categorize the tankmonuments in Russia. I did the same for the tank monuments in Belgium, The Netherlands and the Benelux. I have tried to map all tankmonuments in the Benelux and listed them on a page in the Dutch language Wikipedia: https://nl.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tankmonument. Just thought I'd say hello. Greetings, Eissink (talk) 15:09, 27 January 2020 (UTC).

Hi. It is not the purpose of the rename template to change filenames to something that you prefer, or to create a new harmonisation without specific purpose, and a general approval. The harmonisation has generally done for football uniforms, flags, rail projects.  — billinghurst sDrewth 09:23, 24 May 2020 (UTC)

Good day. After reading the project rules, I didn't see anywhere that name harmonization should only be used for "for football uniforms, flags, railway projects". These images belong to the same publication, are signed and are numbered in it. In my opinion, it is a good idea to put them in one category, putting them in the correct attribution and, in particular, ordering their names. In addition, this will create conditions for further categorization of these images by the author of the drawing and the engraver (lithographer), as well as for placement as illustrations in a digitized edition in WikiSource (which I plan to do). With respect, --Gandvik (talk) 12:11, 13 July 2020 (UTC)
File:Combat de Pitsunda.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!

Каракорум (talk) 17:34, 20 November 2020 (UTC)

Category discussion warning

Category:Dragons_in_nature has been listed at Commons:Categories for discussion so that the community can discuss ways in which it should be changed. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry.

If you created this category, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for discussion 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. If the category is up for deletion because it has been superseded, consider the notion that although the category may be deleted, your hard work (which we all greatly appreciate) lives on in the new category.

In all cases, please do not take the category discussion personally. It is never intended as such. Thank you!


Prosfilaes (talk) 22:26, 16 December 2020 (UTC)

File:Заслуженный работник сельского хозяйства.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!

Redboston 18:42, 3 January 2021 (UTC)