User talk:Michael Romanov/Archive2

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

Новые изображения[edit]

Михаил, я загрузил новую пачку изображений. Это стандарты СССР, первая цифра в названии файла - это номер стандарта. Будьте любезны, оприходуйте их, а то у меня проблемы с категориями.--Agent001 (talk) 15:33, 17 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Хорошо, разберусь на досуге. По-моему там какие-то марки уже были, надо будет посмотреть. --Michael Romanov (talk) 23:17, 17 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
✓ Done. Готово. Я бы сделал быстрее, если бы Вы сразу прописывали русские названия сюжетов на марках по каталогу. А то мне пришлось самому в каталог залазить и сверять название каждого номера. Пожалуйста, если не трудно, сразу вместе с кат. номером и художником добавляйте название. --Michael Romanov (talk) 08:28, 20 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

gif files[edit]

I found many moldava stamps images in format GIF, as you can see with Marta Colvin, the resolution of tinny exemplar are no very well, as JPG ones, I would like reload these are jpg-files, it is OK? --Penarc (talk) 03:49, 18 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Please DON'T do that. We downloaded already ALL stamps of Moldova in the JPG format. See the discussion topic above under Молдавия. You can find ALL stamps of Moldova in the category Category:Stamps of Moldova and subcategories "Stamps of Moldova, (year)". Thank you! --Michael Romanov (talk) 03:45, 19 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I am sorry, I did not understand you at once. Now I see that you mean the current gif files for Moldova that could be replaced with the jpg ones. OK, I don't have any objections to do this. If you have time, you could do that. But be careful with descriptions, categories and licensing tags: copy them from gif files and insert into your jpg files. We don't need to loose this information from gif files to be deleted after all. --Michael Romanov (talk) 22:14, 22 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
If you want to do gif-jpg replacement, please also use the templates {{Duplicate}} and {{Universal replace}}. Thank you. --Michael Romanov (talk) 22:22, 22 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
If you can upload jpg files, don't upload gif files, please. Otherwise, we have too much work on deleting gif duplicates. Thanks. --Michael Romanov (talk) 18:25, 23 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Марки и карточки[edit]

Откуда это стремление вычленить Советский Союз из истории России?--Berillium (talk) 18:37, 2 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Легион Триколор[edit]

Миш, посмотри на мою стр. обсуждения. Там дело не в самих этих марках, а в том, что если принять логику удалятора, вообще все марки с шаблоном насчёт лонг-дефункт гавернмент можно будет выбрасывать - поскольку ни в одном случае нет подтверждения, что эти правительства являлись именно копирайт-холдерами, а не просто так распространяли нарисованные марки. Чувак, видимо, решил, что концепция копирайта дана нам в Нагорной проповеди кусочком с рождения. Миш, отпиши удаляторам, пожалуйста, развёрнуто, что то, что удалятор пытается делать - это доведение до абсурда. Я не могу и не должен давать им копию договора между нефункционирующим правительством и художником Гандоном насчёт того, кто из них копирайт-холдер. И опционально приведи примеры файлов под такой же лицензией, покажи абсурд. Вот: Батум, Мемель, Фиуме, Катангу и т.д. У марки Катанги наверняка есть художник и он жив-здоров. Но за Катангу не отвечает ни одно правительство. Nickpo (talk) 21:26, 15 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Йоу, а, может, без этой головной боли обойтись? А то начнем ему ссылки давать, и он прямо по ссылкам будет идти и всё подряд зачищать? Оно нам надо? Коль, перенеси эту картинку тихонько в РВП - и все дела. --Michael Romanov (talk) 16:26, 18 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Please help replace this outdated license[edit]

Hello!

Thank you for donating images to the Wikimedia Commons. You have uploaded some images in the past with the license {{PD}}. While this was a license acceptable in the early days of Wikimedia, since January 2006, this license has been deprecated and since October 2008 no new uploads with this license was allowed.

The license on older images should be replaced with a better and more specific license/permissions and you can help by checking the images and adding {{PD-self}} if you are the author or one of the other templates that you can see in the template on the image page.

Thank you for your help. If you need help feel free to ask at Commons talk:Licensing or contact User:Zscout370.

The images we would like you to check are:

BotMultichillT 20:53, 8 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

История почты и почтовых марок Азербайджана‎[edit]

Михаил, здравствуйте. Хотел поинтересоваться по поводу этой статьи. Я честно говоря далёк от филателии (за всю жизнь только одно бумажное письмо отправил), но статья вызывает у меня приятное впечатление. Как вы считаете могла бы она в нынешнем виде получить статус хорошей? Если нет, то как можно доработать. И ещё, в карточке, первой маркой независимого Азербайджана указана file:Stamp of Azerbaijan 160.jpg, но на самом деле первая вот эта file:Stamp of Azerbaijan 159.jpg, возможно в карточке имелось в виду что то другое. Я пишу вам здесь, что бы не вызвать к статье нездорового интереса со стороны других участников.--фрашкард (talk) 18:15, 27 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Спасибо, Фрашкард. Я понимаю про нездоровый интерес. :) И вот как раз он меня-то и беспокоит, если статья будет номинирована. К сожалению, мы имеем весьма печальный опыт по последним номинациям подобных статей, когда завязывалась многомесячная дискуссия вокруг вообще всех статей с таким названием, и это практически парализовывало работу всего филпроекта, как отмечали наблюдатели :). А в данном случае еще и карабахская тема может вызвать горячие споры, как несложно предположить. Поэтому я бы не стал выдвигать эту статью в хорошие. Попробуйте попросить своих коллег в азербайджанском проекте, чтобы перевести статью с русского и выдвинуть ее в хорошие в азербайджанском разделе. Всего наилучшего. С уважением, --Michael Romanov (talk) 01:12, 28 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Обидно, надо будет что то придумать. Интересно, если статья будет хорошей в других языковых разделах это как то повлияет на твердолобов РУ Вики =), спасибо за разъяснения (и за статью).--фрашкард (talk) 06:23, 28 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Сомневаюсь. Последняя "война" переименований и разделений статей как раз с этого и начиналась: нашу статью по США перевели и сделали хорошей в украинском разделе, мы подумали, что пора тоже самое сделать в русском проекте. "И тут такое началось!" (c) :) --Michael Romanov (talk) 19:46, 28 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]


File:US franking mark17.jpg[edit]

File:US franking mark17.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!
Afrikaans ∙ Bahasa Indonesia ∙ bosanski ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ dansk ∙ Deutsch ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ ∙ eesti ∙ English ∙ español ∙ Esperanto ∙ français ∙ galego ∙ hrvatski ∙ íslenska ∙ italiano ∙ magyar ∙ Nederlands ∙ norsk bokmål ∙ norsk nynorsk ∙ occitan ∙ Plattdüütsch ∙ polski ∙ português ∙ português do Brasil ∙ română ∙ shqip ∙ sicilianu ∙ slovenčina ∙ slovenščina ∙ suomi ∙ svenska ∙ Tiếng Việt ∙ Türkçe ∙ Zazaki ∙ Ελληνικά ∙ беларуская ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ ∙ български ∙ македонски ∙ русский ∙ српски / srpski ∙ українська ∙ հայերեն ∙ বাংলা ∙ മലയാളം ∙ ပအိုဝ်ႏဘာႏသာႏ ∙ မြန်မာဘာသာ ∙ ไทย ∙ 조선말 ∙ 한국어 ∙ 日本語 ∙ 简体中文‎ ∙ 繁體中文‎ ∙ עברית ∙ العربية ∙ پښتو ∙ فارسی ∙ ދިވެހިބަސް ∙ +/−


Hello, Michael Romanov. You have new messages at Gwillhickers's talk page.
You may remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

asturianu ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца) ∙ български ∙ বাংলা ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ Deutsch ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form) ∙ English ∙ español ∙ suomi ∙ français ∙ galego ∙ हिन्दी ∙ hrvatski ∙ magyar ∙ italiano ∙ 日本語 ∙ ქართული ∙ македонски ∙ മലയാളം ∙ Plattdüütsch ∙ Nederlands ∙ português ∙ română ∙ русский ∙ sicilianu ∙ slovenščina ∙ svenska ∙ Tagalog ∙ Türkçe ∙ 简体中文 ∙ 繁體中文 ∙ +/−

Postage Stamp of Salizhan Sharipov[edit]

Could you please kindly upload the postage stamp of Cosmonaut Salizhan Sharipov issued in 2005 by the Kyrgyz Republic?. If possible, I would like to add it on his biography page. An image of the stamp is available at [1] but I do not know the correct license to use. Thank you very much. Kurun (talk) 08:06, 15 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The image is already available as File:Stamp of Kyrgyzstan sharipov.jpg. It was uploaded by another user. Regards, --Michael Romanov (talk) 17:28, 15 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]


Category:Vatican City[edit]

Category discussion notification Category:Vatican City 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!

čeština ∙ Deutsch ∙ English ∙ español ∙ français ∙ italiano ∙ magyar ∙ Nederlands ∙ português ∙ polski ∙ sicilianu ∙ slovenščina ∙ Tiếng Việt ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца) ∙ македонски ∙ русский ∙ українська ∙ ತುಳು ∙ ಕನ್ನಡ ∙ ไทย ∙ עברית ∙ 日本語 ∙ 中文 ∙ +/−

--Teofilo (talk) 13:27, 17 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Modern US stamps[edit]

Sorry Michael but I have nominated these four files File:US letter 2007 01.jpg, File:US letter 2007 10.jpg, File:US letter 2007 13.jpg and File:US letter 2008 17.jpg that you uploaded for speedy deletion as copyright violations because all post-1978 stamps are still copyright per Commons:Stamps/Public domain#United States. Cheers Ww2censor (talk) 21:29, 26 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

No problem, I understand it. Hopefully, they are not used in any wikipedias. Regards, --Michael Romanov (talk) 05:07, 27 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

File:The_Netherlands_priority_letter_2007.jpg[edit]

Pay attention to copyright
File:The_Netherlands_priority_letter_2007.jpg has been marked as a possible copyright violation. Wikimedia Commons only accepts free content—that is, images and other media files that can be used by anyone, for any purpose. Traditional copyright law does not grant these freedoms, and unless noted otherwise, everything you find on the web is copyrighted and not permitted here. For details on what is acceptable, please read Commons:Licensing. You may also find Commons:Copyright rules useful, or you can ask questions about Commons policies at the Commons:Help desk. If you are the copyright holder and the creator of the file, please read Commons:But it's my own work! for tips on how to provide evidence of that.

The file you added has been deleted. If you have written permission from the copyright holder, please have them send us a free license release via COM:VRT. If you believe that the deletion was not in accordance with policy, you may request undeletion. (It is not necessary to request undeletion if using VRT; the file will be automatically restored at the conclusion of the process.)

Warning: Wikimedia Commons takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing.

Afrikaans ∙ asturianu ∙ azərbaycanca ∙ Bahasa Indonesia ∙ Bahasa Melayu ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ dansk ∙ Deutsch ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ ∙ English ∙ español ∙ euskara ∙ français ∙ galego ∙ hrvatski ∙ italiano ∙ Lëtzebuergesch ∙ magyar ∙ Malti ∙ Nederlands ∙ norsk bokmål ∙ norsk nynorsk ∙ oʻzbekcha / ўзбекча ∙ Plattdüütsch ∙ polski ∙ português ∙ português do Brasil ∙ română ∙ sicilianu ∙ slovenčina ∙ slovenščina ∙ suomi ∙ svenska ∙ Türkçe ∙ Tiếng Việt ∙ Zazaki ∙ Ελληνικά ∙ беларуская ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ ∙ български ∙ македонски ∙ русский ∙ српски / srpski ∙ тоҷикӣ ∙ українська ∙ հայերեն ∙ मराठी ∙ বাংলা ∙ മലയാളം ∙ ပအိုဝ်ႏဘာႏသာႏ ∙ မြန်မာဘာသာ ∙ ไทย ∙ 한국어 ∙ 日本語 ∙ 中文（简体）‎ ∙ 中文（繁體）‎ ∙ עברית ∙ العربية ∙ فارسی ∙ +/−

Sorry Michael, another one. Ww2censor (talk) 16:26, 4 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

That's fine. It's not used anyway. --Michael Romanov (talk) 16:43, 4 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
BTW, I'm not just picking on your uploads. Ww2censor (talk) 02:34, 6 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
No problem. I know that some of my older uploads might be problematic. --Michael Romanov (talk) 15:40, 7 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

TUSC token e578be0c071f984b33387fd88cba9e23[edit]

I am now proud owner of a TUSC account!

TUSC token 575d926d07c5d0c205b9cd3ab6738848[edit]

I am now proud owner of a TUSC account!

Talkback[edit]

Hello, Michael Romanov. You have new messages at ww2censor's talk page.
You may remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

asturianu ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца) ∙ български ∙ বাংলা ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ Deutsch ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form) ∙ English ∙ español ∙ suomi ∙ français ∙ galego ∙ हिन्दी ∙ hrvatski ∙ magyar ∙ italiano ∙ 日本語 ∙ ქართული ∙ македонски ∙ മലയാളം ∙ Plattdüütsch ∙ Nederlands ∙ português ∙ română ∙ русский ∙ sicilianu ∙ slovenščina ∙ svenska ∙ Tagalog ∙ Türkçe ∙ 简体中文 ∙ 繁體中文 ∙ +/−

Commercial sources[edit]

Hi Michael, sometimes I have to look to commercial sources to find the best image possible. When I upload the image and describe the source I am assuming that WP does not want the URL's of commercial vendors listed in the summaries of WP image files. Also, are you sure someone can restrict the use of a stamp that is already in the public domain simply because they possess the photo on their website? How does someone restrict the use of something that is in the public domain? Since the vendor is not the author or creator, and is just another holder of a PD image, can a vendor restrict use, duplication, etc (i.e. of a US stamp image)?. In any event, some of the images I uploaded are from commercial sources like Ebay or from other vendors. Some are from places like the National Postal Museum. Most are from my collection. Gwillhickers (talk) 10:24, 25 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Gwillhickers, thank you very much for asking these questions. We can discuss that on w:Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Philately page to hear more opinions about that, if you want. My understanding is that commercial sites are not always and not necessarily banned on Wikipedia. For instance, there is a lot of Wikipedia articles devoted to commercial companies, like w:eBay, that refer to their website links. So, you not only can provide these links but also should indicate the exact source of your images including URLs. That is the major requirement for the files you upload on Commons and Wikipedia. As for the PD issues, I can still imagine the situation when a commercial vendor may allow use of its website content, if only you properly refer to it. And in the 'worst case scenario', it might forbid use and copy of any content on its website, without differentiating what is in PD and what is not. Anyway, providing an appropriate link and vendor name would not hurt and is required by Wikimedia and Wikipedia policies and guidelines. So, please do so. Without proper source indication and description, files can be deleted on Commons by admins. If you say just "unidentified commercial website", this is definitely a red flag for admins because they require a verification of the file information. Without source name and URL they cannot verify it and can just delete the problematic files you upload. I know many examples of implementation of this strict policy. --Michael Romanov (talk) 14:06, 25 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I have no problem including ULR's in source info, am just concerned about commercial address becoming obsolete in the near future. See my message on this in Wikipedia talk: 'New development' :. Gwillhickers (talk) 00:11, 26 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
If a site is not in the spam blacklist, there is no problem to provide a link if even it's becoming broken soon. We do this all the time. --Michael Romanov (talk) 02:01, 26 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Post boxes & mailboxes[edit]

Did you ever notice this discussion which seems to have died out but has not been resolved? I was recategorising some post boxes but saw that many official post boxes are in the mailboxes by country categories but that is wrong and should be fixed. Ww2censor (talk) 14:03, 2 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, I saw that discussion. My friend Leonid Dzhepko tried to recategorize some of those images, but prehaps, we need more recategorization. If I recently assigned wrong categories to three files ([2], [3], [4]), just undo them. I will probably contact Leonid regarding this issue. Thank you for noticing that. --Michael Romanov (talk) 14:33, 2 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I talked to Leonid, and we think that it would be great if you, he and I divide the load of recategorization between three of us. In Category:Mailboxes by country, if we exclude 2 upper subcategories and 7 empty ones, we have 56 by-country subcategories. Would you mind checking the subcategories from Argentina to Indonesia? Then, Leonid will look in the subcategories from Ireland to Portugal. I will do the rest. Additionally, I will reassign subcategories from the 2 upper subcategories (Letter boxes by country, Post boxes by country), where appropriate, so that we will not have empty by-country Mailboxes subcategories. How about that plan? --Michael Romanov (talk) 15:14, 2 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Sounds good to me. I have made a start on A-Indonesia. BTW your recats above look fine. Cheers Ww2censor (talk) 01:44, 3 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I completed my part of job. Where necessary, I created additional categories Post boxes in X or Letter boxes in X. Also, I added by-color categories, if needed. Regards, --Michael Romanov (talk) 21:39, 6 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Стоячий почтовый ящик[edit]

Михаил, я полагаю, что у этой статьи нужно поменять название. Во-первых "стоячий" (калька с английского Pillar?) это неэнциклопедичное слово (может, "стоЯщий?"). Во-вторых, стоячий — избыточное определение (ака значит остальные "лежачие"?). По крайней мере любой ПЯ который установлен на земле (на опорах или без) можно назвать "стоячим". Предлагаю такие варианты названия: "Британский почтовый ящик" или "Английский почтовый ящик". --Agent001 (talk) 11:54, 9 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

День добрый! Знаете, я думал, как назвать эту статью, смотрел источники. Во всех словарях Pillar box переводится на русский язык как "Стоячий почтовый ящик", ссылки приведены в статье. Мы не можем придумывать другое название поверх того, что дано в АИ. Это будет орисс. Такие дела. Удачи! --Michael Romanov (talk) 01:40, 10 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Просьбы[edit]

Добрый вечер! Нельзя ли вкратце перевести, что написали про статую "Шахтёр и колхозница" и про здание детского вокзала, оба в Харькове? Спасибо! --Vizu (talk) 17:13, 28 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Айн момент. Значит, у "Шахтёра и колхозницы" просят чуть обрезать правый край (там какая-то фигушка выглядывает). А к зданию претензии по размеру картинку (еле дотягивает до минимума?), пересвечена белая колонна, и надо откорректировать перспективу. Но там другие говорили, что всё нормально с размером и пересвечиванием, и даже перспективу подкорректировали. --Michael Romanov (talk) 18:35, 28 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Спасибо! А с той колхозницей/шахтером, которая на одну перед описанной? (красная рамка). --Vizu (talk) 09:52, 29 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Первый сказал: пересвеченное небо, размер. Второй: ерунда, был туман, мол, тут как раз тот редкий случай, когда пересвечивание не повредит, а размер - более 7 MP, какие проблемы? Однако, есть претензии по перспективе, и правый край чересчур обрезан - не позволяет откорректировать перспективу и наклон камеры. --Michael Romanov (talk) 13:40, 29 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Верхний край близко обрезан. --Michael Romanov (talk) 21:49, 2 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

File:UK_Royal_Mail_letter_2007_01_back.jpg[edit]

File:UK_Royal_Mail_letter_2007_01_back.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!
Afrikaans ∙ Bahasa Indonesia ∙ bosanski ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ dansk ∙ Deutsch ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ ∙ eesti ∙ English ∙ español ∙ Esperanto ∙ français ∙ galego ∙ hrvatski ∙ íslenska ∙ italiano ∙ magyar ∙ Nederlands ∙ norsk bokmål ∙ norsk nynorsk ∙ occitan ∙ Plattdüütsch ∙ polski ∙ português ∙ português do Brasil ∙ română ∙ shqip ∙ sicilianu ∙ slovenčina ∙ slovenščina ∙ suomi ∙ svenska ∙ Tiếng Việt ∙ Türkçe ∙ Zazaki ∙ Ελληνικά ∙ беларуская ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ ∙ български ∙ македонски ∙ русский ∙ српски / srpski ∙ українська ∙ հայերեն ∙ বাংলা ∙ മലയാളം ∙ ပအိုဝ်ႏဘာႏသာႏ ∙ မြန်မာဘာသာ ∙ ไทย ∙ 조선말 ∙ 한국어 ∙ 日本語 ∙ 简体中文‎ ∙ 繁體中文‎ ∙ עברית ∙ العربية ∙ پښتو ∙ فارسی ∙ ދިވެހިބަސް ∙ +/−

Maidonian (talk) 11:11, 1 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

File:UK_Royal_Mail_letter_2007_01.jpg[edit]

File:UK_Royal_Mail_letter_2007_01.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!
Afrikaans ∙ Bahasa Indonesia ∙ bosanski ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ dansk ∙ Deutsch ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ ∙ eesti ∙ English ∙ español ∙ Esperanto ∙ français ∙ galego ∙ hrvatski ∙ íslenska ∙ italiano ∙ magyar ∙ Nederlands ∙ norsk bokmål ∙ norsk nynorsk ∙ occitan ∙ Plattdüütsch ∙ polski ∙ português ∙ português do Brasil ∙ română ∙ shqip ∙ sicilianu ∙ slovenčina ∙ slovenščina ∙ suomi ∙ svenska ∙ Tiếng Việt ∙ Türkçe ∙ Zazaki ∙ Ελληνικά ∙ беларуская ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ ∙ български ∙ македонски ∙ русский ∙ српски / srpski ∙ українська ∙ հայերեն ∙ বাংলা ∙ മലയാളം ∙ ပအိုဝ်ႏဘာႏသာႏ ∙ မြန်မာဘာသာ ∙ ไทย ∙ 조선말 ∙ 한국어 ∙ 日本語 ∙ 简体中文‎ ∙ 繁體中文‎ ∙ עברית ∙ العربية ∙ پښتو ∙ فارسی ∙ ދިވެހިބަސް ∙ +/−

Maidonian (talk) 11:12, 1 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

File:UK_Royal_Mail_letter_2007_02.jpg[edit]

File:UK_Royal_Mail_letter_2007_02.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!
Afrikaans ∙ Bahasa Indonesia ∙ bosanski ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ dansk ∙ Deutsch ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ ∙ eesti ∙ English ∙ español ∙ Esperanto ∙ français ∙ galego ∙ hrvatski ∙ íslenska ∙ italiano ∙ magyar ∙ Nederlands ∙ norsk bokmål ∙ norsk nynorsk ∙ occitan ∙ Plattdüütsch ∙ polski ∙ português ∙ português do Brasil ∙ română ∙ shqip ∙ sicilianu ∙ slovenčina ∙ slovenščina ∙ suomi ∙ svenska ∙ Tiếng Việt ∙ Türkçe ∙ Zazaki ∙ Ελληνικά ∙ беларуская ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ ∙ български ∙ македонски ∙ русский ∙ српски / srpski ∙ українська ∙ հայերեն ∙ বাংলা ∙ മലയാളം ∙ ပအိုဝ်ႏဘာႏသာႏ ∙ မြန်မာဘာသာ ∙ ไทย ∙ 조선말 ∙ 한국어 ∙ 日本語 ∙ 简体中文‎ ∙ 繁體中文‎ ∙ עברית ∙ العربية ∙ پښتو ∙ فارسی ∙ ދިވެހިބަސް ∙ +/−

Maidonian (talk) 11:13, 1 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Michael, as far as I can see all these files contain two copyright designs. The logo is certainly copyright and the stylised service indicator in the corner probably as well. Thanks. Maidonian (talk) 16:10, 1 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

OK, no problem. I suspected that those elements might cause copyright problems. So, no complaints to delete the files. --Michael Romanov (talk) 16:23, 1 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I think Maidonian is being overly critical with these three covers. All the elements on these cover are common simple graphic shapes and text so cannot be copyright. The only copyright element is the crown in the Royal Mail logo and that is most likely an old design that is in the public domain. Ww2censor (talk) 03:51, 3 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
So, would it be OK, if I use {{PD-shape}} and {{PD-UKGov}}? --Michael Romanov (talk) 04:03, 3 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I've asked Skier Dude to have a look and comment as he is very knowledgeable on image copyright issues. Ww2censor (talk) 02:22, 4 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you. --Michael Romanov (talk) 03:11, 4 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Since the images are from 2007, the "Royal mail" w/image in the upper left hand corner is still probably under the crown copyright, so {{PD-UKGov}} (pre-1960) wouldn't be appropriate (still in use - [5]). Is it de minimis - debatable, but I'd side on "no" as being the only non-text there. The top centre image is just Pd-shape. The 'Royal Mail 1 Postage paid GB Edinburgh 170' is a bit odd - could it be considered as a UK postage stamp? An imprint, sure; but I don't think it would really be considered a postage stamp. A quick search at [6] didn't come up with anything helpful :( So, I guess it would come down to a question if the upper left hand image is de minimis or not. Skier Dude (talk) 04:50, 4 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I think its the combination of elements in both items that make them copyrightable. Even if a design include simple elements, if you combine them in a particular way using specific typefaces, sizes and colours then you have something unique. Maidonian (talk) 09:31, 4 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Коротич[edit]

Манхоул ковер[edit]

Такой вопрос: тут тут и тут какой из люков лучше, чисто визуально? Спасибо за ответ. --Vizu (talk) 18:50, 28 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Чисто визуально - первый. А вообще - там же разные нижние надписи везде. :) --Michael Romanov (talk) 21:06, 28 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Да нет, из этих трёх люков каждый имеет версию вспышки и версию без вспышки. Версии загружены одна поверх другой. Так внутри одной фотографии какие лучше? --Vizu (talk) 21:10, 28 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
По-моему, оригиналы везде чуточку лучше смотрятся. --Michael Romanov (talk) 19:19, 29 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
На твой вкус: в трёх изображениях сделай кнопкой ту версию, какая лучше для проекта! Спасибо. --Vizu (talk) 19:20, 29 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • Ну как люкофилией меня Леонид заразил) Наверное, на расстояние передаётся)) Правда, он загрузил всего три канализационных и один телефонный, но лиха беда начало!. Нужны срочно люки русской Калифорнии!) --Vizu (talk) 19:18, 29 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Попадались интересные, например, отлитые в Индии (ближний свет - в Штаты транспортировать!). Но мне теперь туда не скоро попасть. --Michael Romanov (talk) 19:21, 29 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
А! Так ты в Россию) Ура. А Миттал же задёшево люки льёт, рабсила бесплатная.. --Vizu (talk) 19:22, 29 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hawaiian stamps[edit]

Aloha. Do you know if you could upload a stamp for Princess Victoria Kamamalu aka Kaahumanu IV, Kalakaua, Lunalilo, Kamehameha IV, Queen Kapiolani, Mataio Kekuanaoa, Prince Kuhio, Prince Leleiohoku?--KAVEBEAR (talk) 04:15, 21 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, I am busy now with something else. Would you mind uploading the stamp images by yourself? The source is here. Just click all sub-pages on the left-side menu. There are all Hawaiian stamps, with descriptions, and more. Good luck. --Michael Romanov (talk) 02:30, 22 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

UN template[edit]

A discussion was started here about the {{PD-UN}} template that you added to Commons:Stamps/Public domain templates a few years ago. Do you remember where you got the info that UN stamps are PD? I don't know if it is correct. Cheers Ww2censor (talk) 02:50, 24 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

С праздником Победы над нацистской Германией![edit]

Поздравляю с Днём Победы!--Vizu (talk) 08:50, 9 May 2011 (UTC)

Спасибо! Взаимно! --Michael Romanov (talk) 12:56, 9 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Ernst_Krenkel[edit]

Category discussion notification Category:Ernst_Krenkel 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!

čeština ∙ Deutsch ∙ English ∙ español ∙ français ∙ italiano ∙ magyar ∙ Nederlands ∙ português ∙ polski ∙ sicilianu ∙ slovenščina ∙ Tiếng Việt ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца) ∙ македонски ∙ русский ∙ українська ∙ ತುಳು ∙ ಕನ್ನಡ ∙ ไทย ∙ עברית ∙ 日本語 ∙ 中文 ∙ +/−

KVK2005 (talk) 19:58, 7 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

RfC[edit]

You might be interested in knowing about this Rfc: en:Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Gwillhickers. Ww2censor (talk) 17:13, 9 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

File:Stamp GDR Olympics 25Pf.jpg[edit]

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

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

This message was added automatically by Nikbot, if you need some help about it please read the text above again and follow the links in it, if you still need help ask at the ? → Commons:Help desk in any language you like to use. --Nikbot 05:18, 18 July 2011 (UTC)


File:Stamp GDR Olympics 20+10Pf.jpg[edit]

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

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

This message was added automatically by Nikbot, if you need some help about it please read the text above again and follow the links in it, if you still need help ask at the ? → Commons:Help desk in any language you like to use. --Nikbot 05:19, 18 July 2011 (UTC)


File:Stamp GDR Olympics 5Pf.jpg[edit]

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

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

This message was added automatically by Nikbot, if you need some help about it please read the text above again and follow the links in it, if you still need help ask at the ? → Commons:Help desk in any language you like to use. --Nikbot 05:20, 18 July 2011 (UTC)

File:US_franking_mark26.jpg[edit]

File:US_franking_mark26.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!
Afrikaans ∙ Bahasa Indonesia ∙ bosanski ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ dansk ∙ Deutsch ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ ∙ eesti ∙ English ∙ español ∙ Esperanto ∙ français ∙ galego ∙ hrvatski ∙ íslenska ∙ italiano ∙ magyar ∙ Nederlands ∙ norsk bokmål ∙ norsk nynorsk ∙ occitan ∙ Plattdüütsch ∙ polski ∙ português ∙ português do Brasil ∙ română ∙ shqip ∙ sicilianu ∙ slovenčina ∙ slovenščina ∙ suomi ∙ svenska ∙ Tiếng Việt ∙ Türkçe ∙ Zazaki ∙ Ελληνικά ∙ беларуская ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ ∙ български ∙ македонски ∙ русский ∙ српски / srpski ∙ українська ∙ հայերեն ∙ বাংলা ∙ മലയാളം ∙ ပအိုဝ်ႏဘာႏသာႏ ∙ မြန်မာဘာသာ ∙ ไทย ∙ 조선말 ∙ 한국어 ∙ 日本語 ∙ 简体中文‎ ∙ 繁體中文‎ ∙ עברית ∙ العربية ∙ پښتو ∙ فارسی ∙ ދިވެހިބަސް ∙ +/−

SV1XV (talk) 22:57, 7 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Category:International Stamp Day[edit]

Здравствуйте. Это неправильно имя Category:International Stamp Day. Это просто не празднование в этот день, только сами марки. Поздравляю.Tanja5 (talk) 23:29, 19 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Sto DomingoChurch 1808[edit]

As You know Chilean stamps are not copyright pieces, This file is used on Chile page in Wikipedia in Russian, --186.10.87.151 02:51, 8 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Copyright status: File:British North Borneo Postal Order 1909 6d.jpg[edit]

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:British North Borneo Postal Order 1909 6d.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.

Cwbm (commons) (talk) 12:50, 27 September 2011 (UTC)

You are absolutely right. And I am sorry, of course, it should be {{PD-UKGov}}. Thank you. --Michael Romanov (talk) 14:56, 27 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

File:Cover Austria 1938-650px.jpg[edit]

File:Cover Austria 1938-650px.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!
Afrikaans ∙ Bahasa Indonesia ∙ bosanski ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ dansk ∙ Deutsch ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ ∙ eesti ∙ English ∙ español ∙ Esperanto ∙ français ∙ galego ∙ hrvatski ∙ íslenska ∙ italiano ∙ magyar ∙ Nederlands ∙ norsk bokmål ∙ norsk nynorsk ∙ occitan ∙ Plattdüütsch ∙ polski ∙ português ∙ português do Brasil ∙ română ∙ shqip ∙ sicilianu ∙ slovenčina ∙ slovenščina ∙ suomi ∙ svenska ∙ Tiếng Việt ∙ Türkçe ∙ Zazaki ∙ Ελληνικά ∙ беларуская ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ ∙ български ∙ македонски ∙ русский ∙ српски / srpski ∙ українська ∙ հայերեն ∙ বাংলা ∙ മലയാളം ∙ ပအိုဝ်ႏဘာႏသာႏ ∙ မြန်မာဘာသာ ∙ ไทย ∙ 조선말 ∙ 한국어 ∙ 日本語 ∙ 简体中文‎ ∙ 繁體中文‎ ∙ עברית ∙ العربية ∙ پښتو ∙ فارسی ∙ ދިވެހިބަސް ∙ +/−

Rd232 (talk) 15:19, 31 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Covers_of_Britain[edit]

Category discussion warning

Category:Covers_of_Britain 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!

čeština ∙ Deutsch ∙ English ∙ español ∙ français ∙ italiano ∙ magyar ∙ Nederlands ∙ português ∙ polski ∙ sicilianu ∙ slovenščina ∙ Tiếng Việt ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца) ∙ македонски ∙ русский ∙ українська ∙ ತುಳು ∙ ಕನ್ನಡ ∙ ไทย ∙ עברית ∙ 日本語 ∙ 中文 ∙ +/−

Ww2censor (talk) 15:41, 13 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

File:US letter 2007 02.jpg[edit]

File:US letter 2007 02.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!
Afrikaans ∙ Bahasa Indonesia ∙ bosanski ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ dansk ∙ Deutsch ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ ∙ eesti ∙ English ∙ español ∙ Esperanto ∙ français ∙ galego ∙ hrvatski ∙ íslenska ∙ italiano ∙ magyar ∙ Nederlands ∙ norsk bokmål ∙ norsk nynorsk ∙ occitan ∙ Plattdüütsch ∙ polski ∙ português ∙ português do Brasil ∙ română ∙ shqip ∙ sicilianu ∙ slovenčina ∙ slovenščina ∙ suomi ∙ svenska ∙ Tiếng Việt ∙ Türkçe ∙ Zazaki ∙ Ελληνικά ∙ беларуская ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ ∙ български ∙ македонски ∙ русский ∙ српски / srpski ∙ українська ∙ հայերեն ∙ বাংলা ∙ മലയാളം ∙ ပအိုဝ်ႏဘာႏသာႏ ∙ မြန်မာဘာသာ ∙ ไทย ∙ 조선말 ∙ 한국어 ∙ 日本語 ∙ 简体中文‎ ∙ 繁體中文‎ ∙ עברית ∙ العربية ∙ پښتو ∙ فارسی ∙ ދިވެހިބަސް ∙ +/−

Philafrenzy (talk) 11:28, 13 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

File:150years-Austrian-stamps.jpg[edit]

File:150years-Austrian-stamps.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!
Afrikaans ∙ Bahasa Indonesia ∙ bosanski ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ dansk ∙ Deutsch ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ ∙ eesti ∙ English ∙ español ∙ Esperanto ∙ français ∙ galego ∙ hrvatski ∙ íslenska ∙ italiano ∙ magyar ∙ Nederlands ∙ norsk bokmål ∙ norsk nynorsk ∙ occitan ∙ Plattdüütsch ∙ polski ∙ português ∙ português do Brasil ∙ română ∙ shqip ∙ sicilianu ∙ slovenčina ∙ slovenščina ∙ suomi ∙ svenska ∙ Tiếng Việt ∙ Türkçe ∙ Zazaki ∙ Ελληνικά ∙ беларуская ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ ∙ български ∙ македонски ∙ русский ∙ српски / srpski ∙ українська ∙ հայերեն ∙ বাংলা ∙ മലയാളം ∙ ပအိုဝ်ႏဘာႏသာႏ ∙ မြန်မာဘာသာ ∙ ไทย ∙ 조선말 ∙ 한국어 ∙ 日本語 ∙ 简体中文‎ ∙ 繁體中文‎ ∙ עברית ∙ العربية ∙ پښتو ∙ فارسی ∙ ދިވެހިބަސް ∙ +/−

Sorry Michael but this appear to be copyright. I don't know who sent an email to OTRS but I doubt it was the Austrian post office. Can you confirm at the deletion page? Thanks Ww2censor (talk) 18:27, 29 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

File:150years-Austrian-stamps.jpg[edit]

File:150years-Austrian-stamps.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!
Afrikaans ∙ Bahasa Indonesia ∙ bosanski ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ dansk ∙ Deutsch ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ ∙ eesti ∙ English ∙ español ∙ Esperanto ∙ français ∙ galego ∙ hrvatski ∙ íslenska ∙ italiano ∙ magyar ∙ Nederlands ∙ norsk bokmål ∙ norsk nynorsk ∙ occitan ∙ Plattdüütsch ∙ polski ∙ português ∙ português do Brasil ∙ română ∙ shqip ∙ sicilianu ∙ slovenčina ∙ slovenščina ∙ suomi ∙ svenska ∙ Tiếng Việt ∙ Türkçe ∙ Zazaki ∙ Ελληνικά ∙ беларуская ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ ∙ български ∙ македонски ∙ русский ∙ српски / srpski ∙ українська ∙ հայերեն ∙ বাংলা ∙ മലയാളം ∙ ပအိုဝ်ႏဘာႏသာႏ ∙ မြန်မာဘာသာ ∙ ไทย ∙ 조선말 ∙ 한국어 ∙ 日本語 ∙ 简体中文‎ ∙ 繁體中文‎ ∙ עברית ∙ العربية ∙ پښتو ∙ فارسی ∙ ދިވެހިބަސް ∙ +/−

HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 21:54, 19 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Notification about possible deletion[edit]

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!
Afrikaans ∙ Bahasa Indonesia ∙ bosanski ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ dansk ∙ Deutsch ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ ∙ eesti ∙ English ∙ español ∙ Esperanto ∙ français ∙ galego ∙ hrvatski ∙ íslenska ∙ italiano ∙ magyar ∙ Nederlands ∙ norsk bokmål ∙ norsk nynorsk ∙ occitan ∙ Plattdüütsch ∙ polski ∙ português ∙ português do Brasil ∙ română ∙ shqip ∙ sicilianu ∙ slovenčina ∙ slovenščina ∙ suomi ∙ svenska ∙ Tiếng Việt ∙ Türkçe ∙ Zazaki ∙ Ελληνικά ∙ беларуская ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ ∙ български ∙ македонски ∙ русский ∙ српски / srpski ∙ українська ∙ հայերեն ∙ বাংলা ∙ മലയാളം ∙ ပအိုဝ်ႏဘာႏသာႏ ∙ မြန်မာဘာသာ ∙ ไทย ∙ 조선말 ∙ 한국어 ∙ 日本語 ∙ 简体中文‎ ∙ 繁體中文‎ ∙ עברית ∙ العربية ∙ پښتو ∙ فارسی ∙ ދިވެހިބަސް ∙ +/−

Affected:


Yours sincerely, LGA talkedits 00:57, 26 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Michael_Romanov/Archive2&oldid=193258470"