User talk:TadejM/Archive 1

From Wikimedia Commons, the free media repository
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Archive This page is an archive. Please do not edit the contents of this page. Direct any additional comments to this page.

Dobrodošli! Welcome! Bienvenue! Wilkommen! Bienvenuti! Namaste! Velkommen! Tervetuloa! Velkominn! Karibu! Sveiki! Witam! Bienvenuti! Hosgeldiniz! Mingalaba! Yangshok! Welkom! Bienvenidos!


You can leave messages here in English, Slovene, German or French.

Noncommercial materials not permitted on Commons

I left you a message on en, but you keep uploading prohibited materials so I'm leaving it here too in hopes that you see it soon.

I noticed you uploaded this picture and say it's free for noncommercial use. Noncommercial materials are not permitted on commons; see this. Since you checked the box on the upload screen (which states I affirm that the copyright holder of this file agrees to release it under the terms of a free license as defined in Commons:Licensing) you need to rectify this by either changing the license or having it deleted. Cheers. CryptoDerk 19:21, May 2, 2005 (UTC)

Also, in an unrelated note, I see you're using the {{GFDL}} for images you have the copyright on. You can use {{GFDL-self}} if it's your image. CryptoDerk 19:24, May 2, 2005 (UTC)

Admin

You are now an admin here on Commons. Congratulations! villy ♦ ✎ 09:18, 12 August 2005 (UTC)

Thanks. --Eleassar my talk 13:36, 17 August 2005 (UTC)

Brisanje slike

Zdravo, Eleassar! Lahko, prosim, zbrišeš Image:Coloana fara starsit.jpg? Hvala. --Romanm 19:24, 3 October 2005 (UTC)

Congratulations

File:Party.gif

Hi there, yeah you're welcome. Congratulations on becoming an administrator btw :-) regards.. Gryffindor 13:41, 10 October 2005 (UTC) ps: if you are interested and need help, take a look at Esperanza maybe you're interested..

Slika dneva

Ali morda veš (in znaš popraviti) zakaj se pri sliki dneva če je stran v slovenščini (tudi na tvoji predstavitveni strani je tako) izpiše namesto imena (opisa) slike oznake tempate? --Janeznovak 11:01, 6 November 2005 (UTC)

Ni posebnega problema. Na srečo to niso moderne umetniške slike in se takoj vidi kaj je prikazano. --Janeznovak 12:57, 10 November 2005 (UTC)

image:Green check.png

Beg?

Pozdravljen kolega. Kam, če te smem pobarati, in zakaj bežiš s slovenske Wikipedije? | Tcie 16:34, 14 June 2006 (UTC)

Odgovor si lahko prebereš tukaj. --Eleassar my talk 19:08, 14 June 2006 (UTC)

Commons-l subscription

Hello TadejM/Archive 1,

as per Commons talk:Administrators, I am asking all admins to subscribe to commons-l, a mailing list for Wikimedia Commons policy and project discussion. Since many admins are only on Commons infrequently, this is a good way to alert people about important happenings. The mailing list is nominally multilingual, but predominantly English.

If you are already subscribed to commons-l, I apologize for bothering you, and you are free to ignore this message. If you don't want to use your regular e-mail account, feel free to leave me a message, and I can send you a GMail invite. Traffic on the mailing list is relatively low, and we do not expect admins to read all messages to the list, but it would be nice if you could check on it at least every few weeks. Thanks for your time,--Eloquence 22:51, 4 July 2006 (UTC)

Nesubstituirane predloge

Zdravo, Eleassar! Na Commons:Featured_picture_candidates se je razpasla navada uporabe nesubstituiranih predlog {{oppose}}, {{contra}}, ipd. Saj veš: tistih, ki tako zelo obremenjujejo strežnike! Morda bi kot administrator tudi tukaj naredil Red, kot si ga tako lepo v slovenski Wikipediji (samo predlog...)? --romanm (talk) 21:54, 22 July 2006 (UTC)


Image Tagging Image:Socrates blue.png

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 may be deleted.

Thanks for uploading Image:Socrates blue.png. I notice the image page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you have not created this media yourself then you need to argue that we have the right to use the media on Wikimedia Commons (see copyright tagging below). If you have not created the media yourself then you should also specify where you found it, i.e., in most cases link to the website where you got it, and the terms of use for content from that page.

If the media also doesn't have a copyright tag, then you must also add one. If you created/took the picture, audio, or video then you can use {{Cc-by-sa-2.5}} to release it under the Creative Commons or {{PD-self}} to release it into the public domain. See Commons:Copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

Note that any unsourced and untagged images will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have uploaded other media, please check that you have specified their source and copyright tagged them, too. You can find all your uploads using the Gallery tool. Thank you. Wikipeder 08:42, 26 July 2006 (UTC)

Admin news

Hello,

If you consent for statistics to be published about your actions as an administrator, please sign here: Commons:Administrator permission for statistics. (I expect that most people will not have a problem with it unless you are especially concerned with privacy.)

Also, please be aware that we now have a Commons:Administrators' noticeboard. Please put it on your watchlist, if you haven't already!

cheers, pfctdayelise (translate?) 05:33, 7 September 2006 (UTC)

Something went wrong

I'm running from Firefox on a windows system. I removed an image and didn't do anything else. How can I possibly be more careful? Cary "Bastiq▼e" Bass demandez 00:09, 15 September 2006 (UTC)

Admin news

Hello,

If you consent for statistics to be published about your actions as an administrator, please sign here: Commons:Administrator permission for statistics. (I expect that most people will not have a problem with it unless you are especially concerned with privacy.)

Also, please be aware that we now have a Commons:Administrators' noticeboard. Please put it on your watchlist, if you haven't already!

cheers, pfctdayelise (translate?) 05:33, 7 September 2006 (UTC) P.S.: Pardon if this is a repeat (bot debugging...)


Image:Double preferences.JPG

Pay attention to copyright Image:Double preferences.JPG has been marked as a copyright violation. The Wikimedia Commons only accepts free content, that is, images and other media files that can be used by anyone, for any purpose. For details on what is acceptable, please read Commons:Licensing. You can ask questions about Commons policies in Commons:Help desk.

The file you added will soon be deleted. If you believe this image is not a copyright violation, please explain why on the image description page.

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 ∙ +/−

Loco085 02:35, 22 November 2006 (UTC)

Vagina image

Hi! This is Wikimachine from Wikipedia! I commented on your vagina image's talk page. Could you reply? (69.245.43.115 17:11, 31 December 2006 (UTC))


Hello, why do you upload small logo ? Is it need ? I dont understand why ? Thanks a lot. ~ bayo or talk 12:39, 25 January 2007 (UTC)

I uploaded them to be used as part of a wikipediasister-type template in Slovenian Wikipedia (actually sl:Predloga:Sorodni projekti). They originate from the English WP, but there they are uploaded locally for protection against vandalism. --Eleassar (t/p) 13:14, 25 January 2007 (UTC)

Image:GoldenEagle1.jpg

Hi, I tagged this image {{Nsd}}, while awaiting confirmation here. The problem is that I expect the permission to be something like You can use this image under the GNU license for use on Wikipedia, which would be invalid as there is no such thing as the GNU license and because it might be unfree, depending on the wording of the permission. -- Bryan (talk to me) 13:47, 25 January 2007 (UTC)

Logo thumbnails

Hi, sorry for bugging you again, but why do you upload small logos such as Image:Wikimedia-logo-35px.png? You can easily use the bigger version using [[Image:Wikimedia-logo.svg|35px]] . -- Bryan (talk to me) 13:53, 25 January 2007 (UTC)

Well, I think the images used were specially-compressed 35px images, which saved several KB from the Main Page size. Also the PNGs in question were derived directly from this bigger versions and optimized specifically for use in the template (with the blank border removed).
If you don't agree I suggest that you ask on en:template talk:WikipediaSister for further explanation as I'm just updating Slovenian templates from en: (or I'll ask). --Eleassar (t/p) 14:28, 25 January 2007 (UTC)

Redundant image

You could have saved yourself a bit of trouble on Image:Gulf toadfish.jpg by checking the scientific name Opsanus beta - the image has been on commons for awhile already. Stan Shebs 18:14, 31 January 2007 (UTC)

Commons:Geocoding

Could you please invite users of Slovenian Wikipedia into participation in this project? Thank you. --EugeneZelenko 14:53, 8 June 2007 (UTC)

✓ Done. --Eleassar (t/p) 12:41, 14 June 2007 (UTC)

Image:Padlock-silver.svg

Hi, thank your for uploading so nice graphics. We would need an unlocked Padlock for the German Wikipedia. Could you help us? Thanks in andvance -129.27.12.8 17:06, 19 September 2007 (UTC)

slika dneva

Zanima me, kako tukaj nominirati sliko za sliko dneva oz ali je to sploh mogoče. hvaležna bom za odgovor.Inki 00:28, 8 October 2007 (UTC)

Postopek je popolnoma odprt. Sliko dneva lahko na strani Commons:Slika dneva izbere kateri koli uporabnik. Če ima dobre razloge, lahko tudi zamenja že izbrano sliko. Vendar je to treba storiti nekaj dni pred uporabo slike, da imajo sodelavci dovolj časa za prevod opisa (in za pogovor o izbiri v primeru nasprotovanj). --Eleassar (t/p) 09:44, 8 October 2007 (UTC)

Problem with the licence

Hi :) My name is Milan. I’m a user on the serbian wiki. I want to upload some pictures from the website www.myexit.org. It’s about a music festival EXIT in Novi Sad, Serbia. This website have a licence CC-BY-SA-NC , and it’s not compatible with GFDL (because of NC). But we on the serbian wiki have a special permission to upload and use all pictures and text from this website. Is it possible to upload these pictures on the Wikimedia Commons. I don’t want someone erase them because of this licences incomatibility. I’m sorry if my english is not very good. Please answer here. Thank you!


Image Tagging Image:Fran levstik.jpeg

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 may be deleted.

Thanks for uploading Image:Fran levstik.jpeg. I notice the image page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you have not created this media yourself then you need to argue that we have the right to use the media on Wikimedia Commons (see copyright tagging below). If you have not created the media yourself then you should also specify where you found it, i.e., in most cases link to the website where you got it, and the terms of use for content from that page. If the content is a derivative of a copyrighted work, you need to supply the names and a licence of the original authors as well.

If the media also doesn't have a copyright tag, then you must also add one. If you created/took the picture, audio, or video then you can use {{self|GFDL|cc-by-sa-all}} to release it under the multilicense GFDL plus Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike All-version license or {{PD-self}} to release it into the public domain. See Commons:Copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

Note that any unsourced and untagged images will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have uploaded other media, please check that you have specified their source and copyright tagged them, too. You can find all your uploads using the Gallery tool. Thank you. RedCoat 16:32, 12 November 2007 (UTC)

Slovenian localisation

Hi Eleassar. I see you have done some localisation work for Slovenian here on Commons. I was wondering if you knew about the MediaWiki localisation project Betawiki. This wiki allows you to translate (into any supported language) the complete interface of MediaWiki and its extensions. If you like translating and want to help make MediaWiki more usable for your language, please stop by and help. Cheers! Siebrand 18:57, 15 February 2008 (UTC)

let's try again. You may have missed the above message due to the template below... Siebrand 09:35, 30 September 2008 (UTC)

Image:Tanja Ribic.JPG

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 informations 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 Filbot, if you need some help about it, ask its master or go to the Commons:Help desk. --Filnik 13:29, 13 March 2008 (UTC)

Help

can you please help me?

oj

Zdravo. Ker si tu admin, lahko zbrišeš mojo osebno stran? Delam čistko in preusmeritve. Hvala, lp. --Tone 19:18, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

Ok. --Eleassar (t/p) 16:37, 9 April 2008 (UTC)

MediaWiki in Slovenščina

Hi Eleassar. As I was cleaning up UI messages in the MediaWiki: namespace, I came across your name as editor of those pages for /sl quite often. I also checked if you had a presence on Betawiki, the MediaWiki localisation project. And guess what: you have! It just appears that you have not been active there since mid-2006. I *huge lot* has happended there since then. Unfortunately no one is maintaining the 'sl' localisation yet[1]. I do hope we will see you there so you can do a lot for the MediaWiki users that natively speak Slovenščina. My advise if to try and get more users in than only you: it improves quality and lowers the individual workload. I do hope to see you there soon. Cheers! Siebrand 20:03, 16 May 2008 (UTC)


Category:Roads in Yugoslavia

Image deletion warning Category:Roads in Yugoslavia 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.
In all cases, please do not take the deletion request personally. It is never intended as such. 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 ∙ +/−

--Veliki Kategorizator 18:10, 27 May 2008 (UTC)

Category:Highways in Yugoslavia

Image deletion warning Category:Highways in Yugoslavia 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.
In all cases, please do not take the deletion request personally. It is never intended as such. 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 ∙ +/−

--Veliki Kategorizator 18:10, 27 May 2008 (UTC)

Vprašanje

Nate se obračam z vprašanjem - zakaj je moja kategorija Files by User:Amazone7, prešla pod skrite kategorije, torej hidden categories? Meni to namreč ni najbolj všeč. --Inki 12:49, 6 June 2008 (UTC)

S tem se nisem ukvarjal, tako da pravzaprav ne vem. Vprašaj na commons:Village pump, lahko pa si tudi nastaviš te kategorije kot vidne na Special:Preferences (Misc). --Eleassar (t/p) 16:45, 6 June 2008 (UTC)

Piran Portoroz Peninsula map

Hi there! At 07:56, 13 June 2008 you deleted my photo "Image:Piran Portoroz Peninsula.jpg" ‎ (Copyright violation: Photography of a copyrighted 2D map). This is a photograph of 2D map displayed on public tourist information billboards in the streets of Portoroz. I photographed it in the street, just as I would photograph any other billboard. I would regard it as being in the public domain. Please re-consider your decision that this is a copyrighted map. If you agree with my view, please leave a note on Zlerman and I will upload the image again. Thank you, --Zlerman (talk) 09:04, 13 June 2008 (UTC)

This 2D work is not in the public domain even if displayed on public billboards. Publishing a photo of it under the PD tag without the consent of the copyright owner means copyright violation. --Eleassar (t/p) 10:23, 13 June 2008 (UTC)

Mermaid

Hello Eleassar. The Danish law says that photos are not allowed if the artwork is the central motif of the image. Jeancaffou's photo was the statue itself, head-on, so prohibited under that law. The two images we have show the statue quite remotely (especially the second), and so they could be -borderline maybe- accepted as a no-violation. these images weren't proposed for deletion before, I guess since the others were deleted and these left they should be OK, but a DR could start so that there is discussion - Badseed talk 19:17, 7 August 2008 (UTC)

Prošnja za pomoč

Nekdo me je opozoril, da ima Image:Krka pri Kostanjecici.JPG napačen naslov. Sem se zatipkal pri nalaganju. Pred približno enim mesecem sem zaprosil s predlogo rename za preimenovanje pa ni nič. Ko sem še enkrat pogledal sem ugotovil da mora nek pooblaščeni uporabnik dati svoje mnenje k preimenovanju. Kor administrator to (kolikor vem) si. Prosim naredi kar je treba in lahko. Hvala. --Janeznovak (talk) 13:33, 8 August 2008 (UTC)


Image:Padlock.svg

Image deletion warning Image:Padlock.svg has been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether it should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry.

If you created this 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.
In all cases, please do not take the deletion request personally. It is never intended as such. 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 ∙ +/−

88.253.125.67 14:09, 26 October 2008 (UTC)


File:Christmas crib.jpg

Hi Eleassar,
do you remember where you did take this File:Christmas crib.jpg image? Is it typical of your home country? I'm asking because I'm trying to sort all the nativity scene images. --Túrelio (talk) 08:59, 2 January 2009 (UTC)


File tagging File:Sardischer_Gebirgsmolch.jpg

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:Sardischer_Gebirgsmolch.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:Sardischer_Gebirgsmolch.jpg]]) and the above demanded information in your request.

See also my comment on User_talk:Martina_Nolte#Dateibeschreibung_File:Sardischer_Gebirgsmolch.jpg--Martina Nolte (talk) 12:48, 15 February 2009 (UTC)

Template:Own

Ker si administrator tu bi te prosil da popraviš "slovenski" prevod v tej zaklenjeni predlogi, ker je precej amatersko (da ne rečem kaj manj politično korektnega) da piše "Sopstveno delo" ko izbere človek slovenski vmesnik. Hvala. --Yerpo (talk) 12:47, 27 February 2009 (UTC)

Some uploads by Lanfra (talk · contribs)

Hi! Some of Lanfra (talk · contribs)'s uploads seem to be portraits of people like you and me (see for instance File:Jug Simona.jpg, File:Janja Kisilak.jpg or File:Farič Katja.jpg), all in category:Prekmurje. They seem out of scope to me. Can you please check them and ask the user what they are about? Thanks in advance, Jastrow (Λέγετε) 11:32, 8 March 2009 (UTC)

De-adminship warning

Deutsch | Español

Dear TadejM/Archive 1. I am writing to you to inform you that you are in danger of losing your adminship on Commons because of inactivity.

If you want to keep your adminship, you need both to sign at Commons:Administrators/Inactivity section within 30 days of today's date, and also to make at least five further admin actions in the following six months. Anyone who does not do so will automatically lose administrator rights.

You can read the de-admin policy at Commons:Administrators/De-adminship.

Thank you

Tip: Categorizing images

Afrikaans ∙ العربية ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца) ∙ বাংলা ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ dansk ∙ Deutsch ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form) ∙ Ελληνικά ∙ English ∙ Esperanto ∙ español ∙ فارسی ∙ suomi ∙ français ∙ galego ∙ עברית ∙ magyar ∙ íslenska ∙ italiano ∙ 日本語 ∙ ქართული ∙ 한국어 ∙ македонски ∙ മലയാളം ∙ norsk bokmål ∙ Plattdüütsch ∙ Nederlands ∙ norsk ∙ polski ∙ português ∙ português do Brasil ∙ română ∙ русский ∙ sicilianu ∙ slovenčina ∙ slovenščina ∙ српски / srpski ∙ svenska ∙ Türkçe ∙ українська ∙ Tiếng Việt ∙ 中文（简体）‎ ∙ 中文（繁體）‎ ∙ +/−

Hello, TadejM!
Tip: Add categories to your files
Tip: Add categories to your files

Thanks a lot for contributing to the Wikimedia Commons! Here's a tip to make your uploads more useful: Why not add some categories to describe them? This will help more people to find and use them.

Here's how:

1) If you're using the UploadWizard, you can add categories to each file when you describe it. Just click "more options" for the file and add the categories which make sense:

2) You can also pick the file from your list of uploads, edit the file description page, and manually add the category code at the end of the page.

[[Category:Category name]]

For example, if you are uploading a diagram showing the orbits of comets, you add the following code:

[[Category:Astronomical diagrams]]
[[Category:Comets]]

This will make the diagram show up in the categories "Astronomical diagrams" and "Comets".

When picking categories, try to choose a specific category ("Astronomical diagrams") over a generic one ("Illustrations").

Thanks again for your uploads! More information about categorization can be found in Commons:Categories, and don't hesitate to leave a note on the help desk.

BotMultichillT 12:09, 7 September 2009 (UTC)

File:Dali Dandaline.jpg

Usually for recent work of art, we request an OTRS authorization, which here was requested and never sent. --Eusebius (talk) 15:57, 11 October 2009 (UTC)

If you know the copyright holder personally, you have the ability to make her secure an OTRS permission. Instead, you chose to ignore the fact that an OTRS permission had been requested by another admin a while ago and restored the image without grounding your action on an OTRS ticket or on an undeletion request. I'm astonished with the ease with which you admit making exceptions to the rules (exceptions involving sysop actions) in personal cases. Please make Ines Zgonc "clean" the situation through OTRS. --Eusebius (talk) 20:50, 11 October 2009 (UTC)
I don't think that's actually needed. You may verify at this or this page that the username 'Amazone75' or 'Amazone7' belongs to Ines Zgonc. Her other works are available here. Stop being so pedantic where that's of no use. Thanks. --Eleassar (t/p) 09:38, 12 October 2009 (UTC)
So you just don't understand at all why OTRS authorizations have been introduced by the WMF? --Eusebius (talk) 09:48, 12 October 2009 (UTC)
That's what you say. --Eleassar (t/p) 09:53, 12 October 2009 (UTC)


File tagging File:Flag_of_Belgrade.png

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 may be deleted.
Thanks for uploading File:Flag_of_Belgrade.png. 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).

Warning: unless the permission information is given, the file may be deleted after seven days. Thank you.

-Nard the Bard 06:09, 17 October 2009 (UTC)

hello

why did you block it for

What? Whom? --Eleassar (t/p) 09:31, 7 November 2009 (UTC)

Check licence

Hi. Could you check the licence for File:Perko Lojze-Grozde 99.jpg? It says that the person who took a photograph released the image to PD but what about the author of the paining? I think the licence is improper. --Tone (talk) 12:44, 30 June 2010 (UTC)

You're right. The information about the painting is lacking. There should also be an OTRS confirmation of the right to use the image (which was created by the uploader's brother). --Eleassar (t/p) 12:24, 21 July 2010 (UTC)

inactivity

Hello,

I'm sorry to inform you but I made a request for removal of your administrator rights here on Commons. Today started the new inactivity run and you where listed, because you where listed as inactive last run also the policy says your rights need to be removed.

I want to thank you for your hard work here on Commons and please come back when you have more time for the beautiful project, Huib talk Abigor @ meta 08:25, 10 August 2010 (UTC)

File:Polynesia.png

File:Polynesia.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!
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 ∙ +/−

– Kwj2772 (msg) 10:20, 17 October 2010 (UTC)


File source is not properly indicated: File:Horse in field.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 may be deleted.
A file that you have uploaded to Wikimedia Commons, File:Horse in field.jpg, is missing information about where it comes from or who created it, which is needed to verify its copyright status. Please edit the file description and add the missing information, or the file may be deleted.

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!

Dana boomer (talk) 21:53, 13 November 2010 (UTC)

I'm not sure what you mean by "under the GFDL license". Do you mean where it says "Contributed by en:User:fir0002"? If so, how do you know this user actually took this photo? Many times inexperienced users upload photos that they haven't actually taken - just because someone added the photo doesn't mean that they took it. And I don't see any other user's name on the page. Also, where was this transferred from on en.wp? There is no history (deleted or otherwise) under this filename there. Dana boomer (talk) 23:54, 13 November 2010 (UTC)
Thank you for the links. The link on the image page was incorrect and so was taking me to a red link with no history at en.wp. I have fixed this. Also, the history at en.wp does say that the image was taken by fir0002; I have tweaked the commons image so that it specifies this. Dana boomer (talk) 13:52, 14 November 2010 (UTC)

Deletion

Please, delete wrong version (photo):

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/archive/8/8d/20110317110131!Darja_Kap%C5%A1.jpg

Thanks! --Andrejj (talk) 11:06, 17 March 2011 (UTC)

Please contact someone else - I am not active enough here so my adminship has been revoked. --Eleassar (t/p) 21:26, 18 March 2011 (UTC)

File tagging File:Osteitis fibrosa cystica tibiae X-ray.jpg

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 may be deleted.
Thanks for uploading File:Osteitis fibrosa cystica tibiae X-ray.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).

Warning: unless the permission information is given, the file may be deleted after seven days. Thank you.

Magog the Ogre (talk) 11:34, 20 May 2011 (UTC)

The license was valid (see User talk:Magog the Ogre). --Eleassar (t/p) 11:56, 20 May 2011 (UTC)

Welcome, Dear Filemover!

Hi TadejM/Archive 1, you're now a filemover. When moving files please respect the following advice:

  • Use the CommonsDelinker link in the {{Rename}} template to order a bot to replace all ocurrences of the old title with the new one.
  • Please do not tag redirects as {{Speedy}}. Other projects, like InstantCommons, might be using the file even though they don't show up in the global usage. Deleting the redirects would break their file references.
  • Please know and follow the file rename guidelines.

Morning Sunshine (talk) 14:07, 16 March 2012 (UTC)

Thank you. --Eleassar (t/p) 14:17, 16 March 2012 (UTC)

Nominate for deletion translation

Re your question elsewhere: to translate "nominate for deletion" (and the gadget that produces it), we need MediaWiki:Gadget-AjaxQuickDelete.js/sl.js, like MediaWiki:Gadget-AjaxQuickDelete.js/de.js. (The original English is near the bottom of MediaWiki:Gadget-AjaxQuickDelete.js.) You can't create this page directly, but you can make User:Eleassar/Gadget-AjaxQuickDelete.js/sl.js and ask an admin to move it. If you have any questions, ask me or go to MediaWiki talk:Gadget-AjaxQuickDelete.js. cheers, Rd232 (talk) 17:12, 31 March 2012 (UTC)

Template:Spomenik

Template:Spomenik should be renamed, as Spomenik means monument in several languages, and this template is related only to Slovenian monuments. --WhiteWriter speaks 20:37, 1 April 2012 (UTC)

I've moved it to Template:SpomenikSVN, per ISO 3166-1 alpha-3 for Slovenia. --Eleassar (t/p) 21:21, 1 April 2012 (UTC)

Protestantism in Slovenia

File:AtlBalkrelig.jpg: OK, I'll do tomorrow,--Spiridon Ion Cepleanu (talk) 14:04, 18 May 2012 (UTC)

File:AtlBalkrelig.jpg

Hi, Spiridon! This map is great, but I'd like to point out that in en:Prekmurje, Slovenia, the Protestant religion is predominant in some municipalities. See e.g. [1] (pg. 72, karta 22, in green). This has a great significance in this otherwise Catholic country. Can you please correct this? Thanks in advance. --Eleassar (t/p) 17:31, 11 May 2012 (UTC)

Done. Wishes, --Spiridon Ion Cepleanu (talk) 17:09, 1 June 2012 (UTC)

File:Valvasor Ljubljana coat of arms.png

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 23:21, 18 June 2012 (UTC)

File:Emonski zid 1913 razglednica.jpg

File:Emonski zid 1913 razglednica.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 ∙ +/−

Sreejith K (talk) 06:59, 19 June 2012 (UTC)

File:Iapetus mosaic color.jpg

File:Iapetus mosaic color.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 ∙ +/−

50.36.97.24 12:02, 26 June 2012 (UTC)

Neznani avtorji in dlib

Tvoja interpretacija, da dlib ne objavlja fotografij (kljub tisti publikaciji (za katero pa ne piše, da je kakšno pravilo ustanove ali da se sploh upošteva)) neznanih avtorjev je PMM napačna. Ne vidim razloga, da bi pri delu slik avtorja objavili, pri delu pa ne (če je znan), saj je to vendarle neka ugledna ustanova, avtor pa je eden najpomembnejših podatkov. Ob tem pri nekaterih celo piše v opombah, da je avtor neznan.[2] --Sporti (talk) 10:43, 2 July 2012 (UTC)

Potem mi pa povej, zakaj nekje piše, da je avtor neznan, drugje pa ne. Dosledno bi bilo, da bi pisalo, da je avtor neznan, povsod, ne samo pri nekaterih slikah. Da so bibliografski podatki v dlib nepopolni, je bilo tudi že izpostavljeno. Da je avtor res neznan, je mogoče dokazati samo pri tistih slikah, kjer je to izrecno omenjeno. --Eleassar (t/p) 05:02, 3 July 2012 (UTC)
Nikjer ni navedeno samo, da je avtor neznan, ampak je v nekaterih opombah to omenjeno v sicer daljši opombi. Sicer pa tam "piše", da je avtor neznan, kjer ni naveden. Če dlibu zaupamo za podatke o tem kdo je avtor, kdaj je bilo posneto in ostalo, potem ne vidim razloga, da ne bi tudi o tem, da je avtor neznan. Tale publikacija (DLIB.SI PLUS: MODELI RAZČIŠČEVANJA AVTORSKIH PRAVIC ZA IZBRANE SKUPINE AVTORSKIH DEL ZA DIGITALIZACIJO IN/ALI OBJAVO NA DLIB.SI), na katero se sklicuješ, pa ima datum 29. september 2010, torej za tem, ko so že naložili gradivo in torej ne more veljati za nazaj. --Sporti (talk) 05:27, 3 July 2012 (UTC)
Kje na portalu piše, da je "avtor neznan, kjer ni naveden"? Publikacija sicer ni predpis, temveč študija, ki opozarja, da dLib avtorskopravno ni popolnoma varen (gl. Cilji študije) in želi biti recept za identifikacijo imetnikov avtorskih pravic (na istem mestu) - očitno se s tem do tedaj torej niso natančneje ukvarjali. --Eleassar (t/p) 07:57, 3 July 2012 (UTC)
Kje na portalu piše, da je "avtor neznan, kjer ni naveden" - verjetno nikjer (ker je to jasno po zdravi pameti), toda nekako se lahko od ugledne ustanove pričakuje, da so navedli avtorja, kjer je znan, drugje pa niso, ker ni znan. Praktično vse fotografije so iz Zbirke upodobitev znanih Slovencev NUK. Prav tako nikjer ne piše, da je leto neznano, kjer ni navedeno, ali da založnik ni znan, kjer ni naveden, itd. --Sporti (talk) 08:43, 3 July 2012 (UTC)

Kako je pa z audio in video posnetki, v tisti publikaciji je npr. navedeno: "Na podlagi prevladujoče doktrine in sodne prakse je tako mogoče zaključiti, da izvajalci za izvedbe, izvedene pred 28. aprilom 1990 ne uživajo varstva" (npr)? --Sporti (talk) 08:18, 6 July 2012 (UTC)

Pmm pripadajo avtorske pravice avtorju besedila, avtorju notnega zapisa oz. melodije in izvajalcu. V kolikor sta melodija in besedilo v javni domeni, so izvedbe, posnete pred 28. aprilom 1990, proste. --Eleassar (t/p) 09:29, 6 July 2012 (UTC)
Veliko od teh je ljudskih, potem je samo vprašanje avtorja melodije, če je posneto ob spremljavi. --Sporti (talk) 09:37, 6 July 2012 (UTC)

Zgled slike brez navedbe znanega avtorja

Zgled slike, kjer je avtor znan, ni pa naveden na portalu dlib, je [3]. Avtor dela je Božidar Jakac,[4] mislim, da je njegov slog zelo očiten, in še celo podpisan je v levem spodnjem kotu. Ta slika torej zanika istovetenje nenavedenega avtorja z neznanim avtorjem oz. dokazuje, da nenavedba avtorja ne implicira ničesar. Tako je treba tudi obravnavati slike iz Zbirke upodobitev znanih Slovencev. --Eleassar (t/p) 10:41, 19 October 2012 (UTC)

Saj piše pod opombami "Razglednica po originalu B. Jakca", avtor razglednice pa očitno ni znan. --Sporti (talk) 13:31, 19 October 2012 (UTC)
Ok, v redu. Hvala. --Eleassar (t/p) 14:08, 19 October 2012 (UTC)

Copyvio

Zakaj je ljubljanski zmaj copyvio ? Avtor zmaja je umrl več kot 70 let nazaj. Malo obrazloži, sama etiketa ne bo dovolj. --Mile (talk) 15:01, 20 July 2012 (UTC)

Avtor zmaja je umrl leta 1946. Glej Commons:FOP#Slovenia in Commons:Deletion_requests/File:Ljubljana_dragon.JPG. --Eleassar (t/p) 15:24, 20 July 2012 (UTC)

Ljubljana cathedral

Are you happy with your nomination? By the way, here on the European map, Slovenia is green colored - meaning no problems with this country.--MrPanyGoff 07:45, 2 August 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for pointing this out. I've left a request for update at Template talk:Map-FoP-Europe. --Eleassar (t/p) 07:51, 2 August 2012 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion
Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Jezersko-solčavska ovca Molička planina 1.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates.

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments Good quality and illustrative. --Vassil 09:32, 31 August 2012 (UTC)

Proposal for deletion: NUK-maketa.JPG

Affected: 

Eleassar (t/p) 17:46, 18 September 2012 (UTC)

Proposal for deletion: NUK1.jpg

Affected: 

Eleassar (t/p) 17:46, 18 September 2012 (UTC)

Proposal for deletion: Plečnik Zapornica na Lj-2.JPG

Affected: 

Eleassar (t/p) 12:36, 23 September 2012 (UTC)

Photos of Ivo Josipović and Josip Broz Tito

Why you will delete my photos?! I have all references and all that's necessary!Cromen (talk) 17:58, 23 September 2012 (UTC)

I've stated the reason at the deletion request. You are invited to express your opinion against it there. --Eleassar (t/p) 18:02, 23 September 2012 (UTC)

Do you speak English? / ¿Habla Inglés

Dear sir! Whole section of my user talk page is devoted only to you and your contributions (follow this link). Please leave your comments in the frame of that section and continue your stub-list. It is much more transparent when data is sorted in a list, rather than spread around the talk page with several redundant templates. Thank you! Žiga (talk) 18:54, 23 September 2012 (UTC)

You seem to be very upset. Of course I'm trying to keep your talk page tidy and up to date.. --Eleassar (t/p) 19:01, 23 September 2012 (UTC)

File:IJS logotype.svg

Ok, razumem, zakaj smo morali pobrisati kup slovenskih logotipov, ne razumem pa, zakaj je sedem krogov, razporejenih v tabeli 3x4, avtorsko zaščiteno delo. Če mi uspeš obrazložiti in me prepričati, bom z veseljem pisal na IJS za dovoljenje OTRS. --Domen (talk) 19:53, 25 September 2012 (UTC)

Menim, da izpolnjuje merila za avtorsko delo: stvaritev, individualnost, intelektualnost oz. duhovnost, izraženost in izhajanje s področja znanosti, umetnosti ali književnosti. To pomeni:
  • je človekova stvaritev in ne rezultat naprave (stvaritev)
  • vsebuje osebno noto avtorja (individualnost)
  • nastalo v avtorjevem "duhu" (duhovnost - intelektualni produkt človekovega ustvarjanja)
  • zaznavno s človekovimi čuti (izraženost)
  • izhaja s področja grafičnega oblikovanja (področje umetnosti)
--Eleassar (t/p) 20:17, 25 September 2012 (UTC)
Ok, na njihovi strani [5] piše, da gre za črke IJS v 5-bitni kodi na teleprinterskem luknjanem traku. --Eleassar (t/p) 20:41, 25 September 2012 (UTC)

Dragon bridge

Do you know if there are any FOP issues with File:Ljubljana Drachenbrücke 03.jpg? A user just uploaded a fair use copy to English Wikipedia: en:File:Ljubljana Drachenbrücke 03 on English Wikipedia.jpg. --Stefan4 (talk) 14:29, 1 October 2012 (UTC)

This bridge is most probably (unless there was a special provision for architecture in pre-1995 Yugoslav laws) still protected by copyright. Its author, sl:Jurij Zaninović, died in 1946. See COM:FOP#Slovenia. --Eleassar (t/p) 21:29, 1 October 2012 (UTC)
OK. I've adjusted the file information page on Wikipedia. I guess that the Commons file should be deleted. --Stefan4 (talk) 21:42, 1 October 2012 (UTC)
I'll try to get the pre-1995 acts to verify for sure, but if nothing particular regarding the architecture (i.e. shorter than 70-year term for it in contrast to other works) is found, most of the files in the Category:Dragon bridge (Ljubljana) should be deleted. Images of architecture can be uploaded to the English Wikipedia with the en:Template:FoP-USonly tag. --Eleassar (t/p) 21:52, 1 October 2012 (UTC)
Yes, and this one is also permitted as en:Template:PD-ineligible-USonly and en:Template:PD-US-1923-abroad. Bridges are not copyrightable in the United States (see COM:FOP#United States). Are they copyrightable in Slovenia? --Stefan4 (talk) 21:56, 1 October 2012 (UTC)
The modern copyright act does not explicitely mention them, but places architectural works among copyrighted works.(Article 5) An article on copyright in architecture in Slovenia mentions them as protected.(pg. 63) The same author explicitely mentioned the Triple Bridge as covered by Article 55 of this act (non-commercial FOP only) in her diploma thesis.[6] I therefore assume they are. --Eleassar (t/p) 22:46, 1 October 2012 (UTC)

Slike činov SV

Pri slikah činov Slovenske vojske si spremenil končnico spletne strani .htm v .hmt (npr. [7]). Namerno ali si se zatipkal? --Domen (talk) 13:52, 2 October 2012 (UTC)

Za nalašč seveda ne. Urejeno. Hvala. --Eleassar (t/p) 15:03, 2 October 2012 (UTC)

Protection of architecture according to the Austrian act of 1895

A discussion you were involved in has been moved to Commons:Village pump/Copyright. Please continue the discussion there. Thank you. Rd232 (talk) 14:07, 5 October 2012 (UTC)

Notification about possible deletion

Affected: 

Eleassar (t/p) 10:26, 11 October 2012 (UTC)

Re: File source is not properly indicated: File:Europe countries.svg

Source: Original file; Author: Júlio Reis (that’s me). What’s missing? – Tintazul talk 15:48, 17 October 2012 (UTC)

What's missing is the source of data that you used to draw this map. Which map did you use to draw this one? --Eleassar (t/p) 16:59, 17 October 2012 (UTC)
There are a lot of free sources (e.g. World Wind, STRM, use Google to find them) online; I cannot find which one I used back in 2003, sorry. I hope you find my work useful—I know others do. Be well. – Tintazul talk 10:01, 18 October 2012 (UTC)
I do find it very useful, but the criteria regarding the citation of sources have to be the same for everyone. I wish you all luck too. --Eleassar (t/p) 10:07, 18 October 2012 (UTC)

Fotografija Navje

Živjo,

mojo fotografijo z ljubljanskih Navij ste označili za brisanje zaradi kršitev slovenske zakonodaje o avtorskih pravicah (fotografije arhitekture Spinčiča in Plečnika).

Dejstvo pa je, da so arkade, ki so na fotografiji, obstajale že kot del starega pokopališča!

Citiram: Tudi Navje je med drugimi del načrtov Jožeta Plečnika V letih 1936 do 1938 so nekatere najstarejše grobove oziroma nagrobnike premestili na vzhodni del pokopališča in po načrtih Jožeta Plečnika, Iva Spinčiča ter vrtnarja Antona Laha ob OHRANJENIH arkadah uredili pokopališki park, ki je dobil ime Navje. (http://www.rtvslo.si/tureavanture/podobe-slovenije/navje-spominski-park-slovenske-zgodovine/200628)

Oba arhitekta sta zaslužna predvsem za vhodni portal na južni strani parka, za pot jug-sever in stopnice, ki s te poti vodijo na nižje ležečo trato, ter stebre na severnem robu parka, ki jih je Plečnik prestavil izpred Glasbene matice na Vegovi šele po 2. svetovni vojni. Teh elementov pa se na moji fotografiji sploh ne vidi!

Kako so arkade izgledale pred njuno ureditvijo žal ne vem, ker nisem našel nobene starejše fotografije. Zaslužna ste predvsem za vgraditev nagrobnikov v arkade, npr. nagrobnika Društva slovenskih pisateljev itd.

Zato mislim, da glede na opisana dejstva, moja fotografija ne krši na žalost zelo restriktivne slovenske zakonodaje, ki ne pozna FOP izjem.

Če bi morali odstraniti to fotografijo, bi morali odstraniti npr. tudi čisto vse fotografije posnete na Kongresnem trgu, ker ga je tlakoval Plečnik.

LP, Franc Solina (Jadralec)

Hvala za obvestilo. Se strinjam, če so te arkade obstajale že prej, potem je treba predvsem ugotoviti arhitekta. Če je arhitekt umrl pred letom 1945, potem brisanje ne pride v poštev. Bom poskusil izbrskati še kak vir v zvezi s tem, vam pa predlagam, da svoje sporočilo objavite tudi na strani predloga (Commons:Deletion requests/Files in Category:Navje). Glede Kongresnega trga: kjer ureditev trga ni v prvem planu, sicer zaradi pravila 'de minimis' izbris slik ni potreben, prav tako ne tam, kjer se ureditve trga ne vidi, v primeru, da pa je poudarek na izvedbi trga, pa bo slike prav tako treba izbrisati, če gre za Plečnikovo delo. --Eleassar (t/p) 13:38, 18 October 2012 (UTC)

Glede fotografije Navje-pozimi mi sedaj ni čisto jasno, nekje pišete da je zahteva za zbris umaknjena, nekje pa da ne in da je izbris umaknjen le za poletno fotografijo arkad v Navjah? Jaz sem namreč naložil zimsko sliko. Sliki sta takorekoč identični, le da ima zimska več ospredja. Konkretno dva nagrobnika, ki sta tam stala bodisi že na starem pokopališču ali pa so jih tja prestavili ko so oblikovali Navje. Visoki nagrobni obelisk levo spredaj je npr. nagrobnik dr. Janeza Bleiweisa, viteza Trsteniškega. Po moje jih je potrebno obravnavati enako kot nagrobnike, ki so novo mesto našli pod arkadami. Tudi link na informacijo v zvezi s časom nastanka arkad se mi zdi napačen, kaže namreč na gledališče v Idriji?

LP, Jadralec

Aha, ok. Relevantno je tisto, kar piše na »uradni« strani predloga za brisanje (Deletion request). se pravi, da naj bo zimska slika izbrisana, letna pa naj ostane. Menim, da je sama ureditev parka – razporeditev stavb, nagrobnikov, dreves in drugih elementov – avtorsko delo (glej [8], str. 64). Link ni napačen, vsebuje namreč stavek: »nekoliko spominja na osrednji rizalit arkad nekdanjega pokopališča sv. Krištofa v Ljubljani, zgrajenih okoli leta 1865.« Lp. --Eleassar (t/p) 16:59, 18 October 2012 (UTC)

Dovolite, da se ne strinjam z zgornjo argumentacijo glede vključitve poletne verzije fotografije Navij in izključitve zimske slike. Po vašem je razlika v tem, ker se na zimski fotografiji vidi več parkovne ureditve in še dva nagrobnika. Če sta nagrobnika res bila prestavljena med ureditvijo Navij, je to prestavitev potrebno obravnavati podobno kot prestavitev nagrobnikov pod arkade, to je intervencijo, ki ste jo nekako že dovolili (I don't think this makes any new copyright for him, but if it does, I consider it 'de minimis'.) Glede same parkovne ureditve pa se mi zdi bistvena naslednja misel iz reference, ki jo navajate (glej [9], str. 64): "Mnogi avtorji poudarjajo, da se mora arhitekturno delo povzdigovati nad množico vsakdanjih prostorskih rešitev, če želi doseči status avtorskega dela [Cornish, 2003: 396]." Po katerih kvalitetah se torej vidi, da je parkovna zasaditev Navij značilna za Plečnika? Ve čem se razlikuje od neke povsem anonimne zasaditve? Če bi posneli fotografijo, ki bi kazala le zasaditev, ali bi kakšen Plečnikov poznavalec to sploh lahko prepoznal kot Plečnikovo delo? Glede na razpoložljive podatke je za zasaditev Navij tako ali tako bil zaslužen vrtnar Anton Lah. Če bi smer razmišljanja torej nadaljevali v to smer, bi prišli do absurda, da katerokoli posamezno drevo, ki ga zasadi arhitekt, postane avtorsko delo, ker je pač arhitekt izbral vrsto drevesa in mesto zasaditve. Če pa je po vašem zasaditev Navij avtorska, ali se to da razbrati iz obravnavane fotografije? Sami pravite za primer Kongresnega trga, da kjer ureditev ni v prvem planu, je slika OK. V prvem planu obravnavane fotografije pa so ohranjene arkade! Vsekakor pa mislim, da je Plečnikovo ime upravičeno in zasluženo povezan z Navjem! Vendar predvsem zato, ker je po njegovi zaslugi sploh ohranjen ta del starega pokopališča in številni nagrobniki zaslužnih ljudi. Če pa ima ta njegova zasluga tudi avtorsko zaščito, pa močno dvomim!

LP, Jadralec

Predlagam, da svoje razmišljanje objavite v angleščini na strani predloga pod mojim komentarjem, potem pa naj še kdo drug izrazi svoje mnenje. Če se bodo drugi uporabniki strinjali z vami, bo slika ohranjena. --Eleassar (t/p) 09:45, 21 October 2012 (UTC)

File:Karte Traisen (Fluss).svg

Hi! According to Commons:Derivative_works#Maps facts like place names and geographic/topographic features like outlines aren't copyrightable. I don't know the source anymore, most of the time I use different maps, showing all the same facts. But at all my other maps (Maps of St. Pölten, Highway maps of Austria, Maps of highways in Turkey, Road maps of Andorra, Maps of highways in Portugal, SVG maps of Lower Austria, SVG maps of Carinthia, SVG maps of Salzburg, SVG maps of Styria‎, SVG maps of the Burgenland‎, SVG maps of Tyrol‎, SVG maps of Upper Austria‎, SVG maps of Vorarlberg, NUTS maps of Austria, ...) there never seemed to be a problem. I can't deliver the really used sources anymore, as I said above: all maps should show the same outlines for countries etc. and this facts are not copyrightable in my opinion. If there is a problem now with this files you have to let them delete... Greets --AleXXw 04:57, 19 October 2012 (UTC)

Places names, geographic/topographic features etc. aren't copyrightable per se, but their specific selection and arrangment is copyrightable, and if it was derived from a copyrighted map, the file is not free. --Eleassar (t/p) 07:07, 19 October 2012 (UTC)
The map was created under usage of any standard map, ie OSM, NÖAtlas or Österreichischer Schulatlas. Do you think the selection of 3 self-drawn layers (district-outlines, waterrbodys and points for the municipialitys) is copyrightable? That are just facts, the river just runs that way and the towns are there... But OK, if you think it's copyrightable we'll need to delete all my maps, I'm not able to stop you... Greets --AleXXw 13:40, 19 October 2012 (UTC)
You may remove the tag when you cite these sources at the description page of the file. --Eleassar (t/p) 13:42, 19 October 2012 (UTC)
As I wrote above: I don't know what I used 4 years ago. ANY politacal map of lower Austria will show you the district outlines and the location of the towns, ANY topographical map will show you the run of the traisen, so I see nothing to cite... Greets --AleXXw 13:47, 19 October 2012 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

The Rosetta Barnstar
For your valuable translation efforts at Wikimedia Commons, I herby award you the Rosetta Stone Barnstar. Rillke(q?) 18:29, 19 October 2012 (UTC)

Thank you very much for my first barnstar here. --Eleassar (t/p) 18:30, 19 October 2012 (UTC)

File:Stara_Ljubljana.JPG

http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Stara_Ljubljana.JPG

Derivate work of ... ? — Preceding unsigned comment added by PetarM (talk • contribs)

Architecture is copyrighted in Slovenia and you can't take photos of buildings and publish them on Commons, except if they are out of copyright. For this case, I found out later that the façade depicted in this image was completed in the 18th century and have withdrawn the nomination. See here. Please, sign yourself using four tildes(~~~~). Thanks. --Eleassar (t/p) 08:57, 21 October 2012 (UTC)

Deletion request for the photo of Jakob Aljaž

I left you a message at the deletion page. Please use common sense before trying to delete an image. --Gcsaba2 (talk) 09:36, 20 October 2012 (UTC)

I've replied there. --Eleassar (t/p) 16:35, 20 October 2012 (UTC)

File:Mesarski most - Prometej.JPG

Pay attention to copyright
File:Mesarski most - Prometej.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 ∙ +/−

And also:

Hi, i get this message today, but still didnt get answer for Derivate work deletation atempt !? Do You know what are you doing ?

--Mile (talk) 08:52, 21 October 2012 (UTC)

That's the tag used on your image yesterday, because the sculpture is a copyrighted work by Mirsad Begić (born 1953) and there's no commercial freedom of panorama in Slovenia. This means that in Slovenia, you can't make photos of copyrighted sculptures and architecture and use them for economic gain. Therefore, they're ineligible for Commons (see COM:FOP#Slovenia). As for File:Stara Ljubljana.JPG, if you perhaps haven't spotted, I've found out that the façade depicted in this image was completed in the 18th century and have withdrawn the nomination. See here. --Eleassar (t/p) 08:57, 21 October 2012 (UTC)

/* File:Regnum Carantanum.PNG */ comment

Prosim,če preveriš komentar na strani predlogov za izbris. Tale zemlejvid po mojem ni sporen, sem pa na tisti pogovorni strani navedel nekaj bolj spornih zemljevidov- še najbolj sporen je tisti o celjskih grofih, kjer avtorsko varovani zemljevidi kot viri absolutno prevladajo. --Bostjan46 (talk) 12:43, 21 October 2012 (UTC)

In še: Slovanske knezevine v Vzhodnih Alpah.PNG . To bi bilo to.--Bostjan46 (talk) 12:55, 21 October 2012 (UTC)
Če prav razumem, je problem v tem, da so »lastna dela« nekaterih avtorjev glede na nek common sence v resnici nastala na predlogah, npr. na določenih programih za izdelavo topografskih in hidrografskih kart.
Verjetno so problem npr. moje poslovenjene karte kot so: File: Kajkavstina.png in File: Cakavstina-slo.PNG , saj je izvirnik morda izdelan z avtorsko zaščitenim programom ali na osnovi kakega avtorsko zaščitenega lingvističnega zemljevida.Če pogledam še pri drugih, so sporne tudi karte kot so File: Pannonia01.png, saj sploh ne navajajo podlage za oblikovanje kart. Zanimiva je npr. karta File: Roman_Empire_125.svg, na podlagi katere je izdelanih kar nekaj drugih kart, in ki je očitno bila izdelana v 3DEM, SRTM ali v čem podobnem.
Čez kake pol leta se nameravam vrniti k poenostavljenemu izdelovanju določenih zemljevidkov, zato bi se rad prepričal, da bo zadoščeno potrebam po avtorskih pravicah. Da se v bodoče izognem nevšečnostim, te prosim, če mi potrdiš ali razmišljam v pravi smeri. --Bostjan46 (talk) 14:09, 21 October 2012 (UTC)
Da. Uporaba samega programa ni sporna, problem se pojavi, če ni jasno, ali zemljevid ni nastal na osnovi drugega, avtorsko zaščitenega, zemljevida. Predlagam ti, da spremljaš predloge za izbris v zvezi s tem, tam bo sčasoma postalo bolj jasno, kaj je kršitev avtorskih pravic. V osnovi pa si izberi katerega od zemljevidov na osnovi prostih del, pri katerih je to tudi navedeno. --Eleassar (t/p) 14:17, 21 October 2012 (UTC)

Proposals for deletion: Hrenov križ

Affected: 

Eleassar (t/p) 15:33, 21 October 2012 (UTC)

Barnstar

The Copyright inspector Barnstar
In appreciation of the extensive work you've done tagging copyvios. INeverCry 01:50, 25 October 2012 (UTC)

Thank you. It's not something that makes one popular, but it's necessary to keep the project inside its tracks. --Eleassar (t/p) 08:34, 25 October 2012 (UTC)

File:Posmrtna maska Ivana Cankarja.jpg

Kako je odtis obraza umetniško delo? --Sporti (talk) 11:32, 25 October 2012 (UTC)

Hvala za vprašanje/opozorilo. Kako je s tem, sem vprašal na Commons:Village pump/Copyright#Death masks. --Eleassar (t/p) 11:52, 25 October 2012 (UTC)

Dovoljenje

Želim vprašati zaradi slik o spomenikih na prostem: če bi morda prosili dovoljenje od občine, kjer je aktualen spomenik, možno je spet dodati sliko? Doncsecz (talk) 10:24, 26 October 2012 (UTC)

Treba je ugotoviti, kdo je imetnik avtorskih pravic (to je največkrat avtor, razen če jih je prenesel na občino). Potem je treba slediti navodilom na strani Commons:OTRS. Na občini lahko najbrž dobiš podatke o avtorju spomenika in ga kontaktiraš (oz. njegove dediče, če je že umrl). --Eleassar (t/p) 10:30, 26 October 2012 (UTC)

1 Mislil sem, da sva to že razpravljala. Doncsecz (talk) 12:00, 12 February 2013 (UTC)

Kateri Anton Trstenjak?

Anton Trstenjak, ki se je srečal z Borovnjakom, je umrl leta 1917. http://sl.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anton_Trstenjak_(zgodovinar) Poglej. Tisti, ki si ga pokazal ni enak s tem Trstenjakom. Doncsecz (talk) 14:53, 27 October 2012 (UTC)

Dobro, potem ni problema. Napiši na strani predloga za brisanje. --Eleassar (t/p) 14:54, 27 October 2012 (UTC)

Klekl

Pazi, ker nekaj slik je iz Dliba. Doncsecz (talk) 16:03, 27 October 2012 (UTC)

Potem to napiši pri teh slikah in na strani predloga za brisanje. --Eleassar (t/p) 16:06, 27 October 2012 (UTC)

In npr. obcestni križ iz 19. stoletja je svobodna datoteka? Doncsecz (talk) 16:50, 27 October 2012 (UTC)

Največkrat da. --Eleassar (t/p) 16:51, 27 October 2012 (UTC)

Deletions

Hey there, I've just stumbled by chance upon several warnings created by you that some files might get deleted unless I … I haven't been an active member of Wikipedia for a long time exactly because of this. Constant pestering by admins (or whomever) about missing/formating/sourcing of this and that. It's been a long time since I created those maps and the metadata clearly states that I created them by myself. Until now, it has been clear to anyone. I created those files to help Wikipedia and I believe I stuck to all guidelines valid at that time concerning authoring etc. I don't see what the problem is and I'm not going look into it. This is just bureaucracy. If you feel the info about me creating the files should be formated differently DO CORRECT IT YOURSELF instead of being a bureaucrat. If you feel you actually help Wikipedia by deleting them, do so. I'm not gonna update everything I created for Wikipedia for all my life because of ever-changing rules and admin whims.

Source of derivative work is not properly indicated: File:Relief map of Slovenia.png

Well, actually, it is not a dericative work. I made this map from elevation files which are available on web through ASTER mission. Then I made DEM and Hillshade which are on the map. Borders of countries are vectorized from my data base (of former SFRY countries and their neighbours) and Adriatic sea as well. So, what is derivative here? --Geologicharka (talk) 20:38, 30 October 2012 (UTC)

Well, if this is so, you should add this info to the file and remove the tag. --Eleassar (t/p) 20:39, 30 October 2012 (UTC)
Ok, I'll do this. --Geologicharka (talk) 21:14, 30 October 2012 (UTC)

Lanfra

I am not sure about the guidelines, but as per sl:Wikipedija:Pod_lipo/Arhiv-2012-02-05#Lanfra user has passed away so I think it is inappropriate to post on his talk page. --Miha (talk) 20:59, 3 November 2012 (UTC)

This is true. --Eleassar (t/p) 21:02, 3 November 2012 (UTC)
Glede na to, da bodo sicer slike neupraviceno izbrisanje (ker nihce nima casa iti skozi celotno zgodovino tvojih predlogov za brisanje in podati kontraargumentov, ki ustavijo proces), preveri prosim sam za katera (doslej predlagana ali celo ze izbrisana) dela so avtorji sploh znani, kajti za dala katerih avtorji niso znani velja 11. oz. 61. clen ZASP. --Miha (talk) 23:38, 7 December 2012 (UTC)
Argument ne vzdrži resne presoje, ampak kljub temu za vse velja  I withdraw my nomination. --Eleassar (t/p) 23:40, 7 December 2012 (UTC)
Drzi, vendar je tukaj ravno zato, ker ni moc pricakovati, da bo kdo opazil in opozoril na morebitne nedoslednosti, potrebno najprej preveriti stanje. Sicer se lahko kljub dobronamernosti hitro ocita skodovanje Zbirki.
Glede objavljanja pa sicer nisem mislil, da naknadno razveljavljas urejanja. Veljalo bi povprasati razvijalce, ce recimo lahko namesto avtomaticnega obvestila na uporabnikovo stran (v kolikor se na njem nahaja pasica o preminulosti) nalepi na stran skupnosti. To bi po mojem vsaj deloma resilo problem glede doseganja peer review-ja v tovrstnih primerih. Problem je, da nas je premalo in potem vse skupaj ne deluje transparentno, kljub dobrim nastavkom. --Miha (talk) 23:52, 7 December 2012 (UTC)

Proposal for deletion: Čevljarski most

Affected: 

Eleassar (t/p) 08:11, 6 November 2012 (UTC)

Fair point

Fair point that there is more than one sculpture visible in File:Kostanjevica-grad-samostan-3.JPG. However, the fact that I had to look a second time convinces me that the others were very de minimis, if there is such a phrase (or else I am unobservant, as my wife is apt to tell me)--Sphilbrick (talk) 20:45, 9 November 2012 (UTC)

Category:Zlatorog Arena

Hi, Eleassar. What is the right interpretation of this Section IV, Article 55 of the Slovenian copyright law: works permanently placed in parks, streets, squares, or other generally accessible premises may be used freely. Can you, please, provide at least guideline that this building does not fall into this category (of ... [other generally accessible premises]). It lies in public accessible sporting area. If images would not be deleted, should also this info be put in image info? Thank you. Also to mention, this category was created in Commons ad hoc. I believe it should be included in more broader category, which should be determined not by hand. It might be called park or something likethat. --xJaM (talk) 05:32, 14 November 2012 (UTC)

This is a work of architecture. Per Article 3 of the Slovene Copyright and Related Rights Act:[10]
As copyright works are considered in particular:
9. works of architecture such as sketches, plans, and built structures in the field of architecture, urban planning, and landscape architecture
Per Article 55
1) Works permanently placed in parks, streets, squares, or other generally accessible premises may be used freely.
2) Works mentioned in the foregoing paragraph may not be reproduced in a threedimensional form, used for the same purpose as the original work, or used for economic gain. [emphasis mine]
You may read the same interpretation for example in this scholarly source.[11] (pg. 67, lines 3-5).
Per Commons:Licensing, Wikimedia Commons accepts only free content that may be used for any purpose, including economic gain. Please note that you may freely move this content to the English Wikipedia with the en:Template:FoP-USonly tag or to other projects that accept the EDP content in the scope of the relevant conditions (see e.g. en:Wikipedia:Non-free content criteria).
Best regards, --Eleassar (t/p) 09:22, 14 November 2012 (UTC)

Löschung eines historisches Faktum

Warum soll ein historisch korrektes Faktum gelöscht werden? Oder sollen auch Personen - mit problematischen Charakteren wie Stalin, Hitler und Tito -ausgelöscht werden? Die Untersteiermark/Stajerska ist heute ein Teil Sloweniens und war vorher ein Teil der österreichischen Steiermark. So einfach ist das und nichts ist daran falsch! Diese Karte ist korrekt und soll so in Wikipedia bleiben. Wer anderes will, dem könnte man unkorrekte Intentionen unterstellen oder Uninformiertheit. Beides sollte doch lieber nicht sein, wenn man ordnungsgemäß von Wikipedia informiert sein will. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 77.117.246.121 (talk • contribs)

Entschuldige, aber ich weiss nicht welche Datei meinst du. --Eleassar (t/p) 20:19, 14 November 2012 (UTC)

Deletion requests

Hello,

Please use the proper gadgets for creating Deletion requests. All DRs you created on November 8, 2012, are not properly formated, which cause more work for the closing admins. Thanks, Yann (talk) 15:01, 15 November 2012 (UTC)

The gadget VisualFileChange.js is among the gadgets available in the Preferences and has the option "nominate for deletion". This makes it completely "proper". I think you should contact its developer if you think there's some problem with it. --Eleassar (t/p) 15:04, 15 November 2012 (UTC)

Commons:Deletion requests/File:Frančiškanska cerkev in Tiskarna Slovenije 1938.jpg

Please don't toy with deletion requests. Apart from being actually sure whether the request is consistent or less, please don't alter the tags and let an admin to close it. If you want to whitdraw a request simply write "withdraw" and let an admin do their job. If you alter the tags you give extra work to the admin that must close the RfD in either way. Once opened a RfD , closing it is no longer users' business but admins'. Please don't make our work more difficult. -- SERGIO (aka the Blackcat) 10:29, 16 November 2012 (UTC)

Hi, what's the problem? It was not to make a point. I think I have every right to propose any image for deletion again if I think so. Does any policy say otherwise? The gadget VisualFileChange.js is among the gadgets available in the Preferences and has the option "nominate for deletion". I think you should contact its developer if you think there's some problem with it, because it removes some tags or something. In any case, I'd like to see the diff of the edit you're referring to. How can I even defend myself if I'm not sure what you're accusing me of? --Eleassar (t/p) 12:16, 16 November 2012 (UTC)
  1. As it was clear when I wrote my note, the point is not «I have the right to propose any file for deletion». Of course you have. The point is that is highly adviceable that you (well, anyone, actually, not only you) check carefully before proposing it, first to avoid wasting both yours and someone else's time, second to prevent from exposing a file possibly properly licenced and suitable for Commons to a deletion hazard;
  2. I'm not accusing you of anything. But I had to close manually all the RfDs that you (and not anyone else) opened, and it's not a matter of VisualFileChange.js. It's because edits like this: please don't touch the tags in the RfDs , otherwise the closing admin loses the automated procedure for closing and has to close it manually, wasting time for a simple (and otherwise automated) procedure. -- SERGIO (aka the Blackcat) 14:27, 16 November 2012 (UTC)
Thank you for the explanation. I've read it, but will look at it more closely later. --Eleassar (t/p) 14:46, 16 November 2012 (UTC)
Ok, thanks -- SERGIO (aka the Blackcat) 17:07, 16 November 2012 (UTC)
Ok, I've had a look at it. I agree, but still don't know what tags have I removed/altered.[12] --Eleassar (t/p) 17:10, 16 November 2012 (UTC)

Commons:Deletion requests/File:Emblem of SFR Yugoslavia.svg

Hello,

Since you opened it the first time, I don't think you reopening again is a good thing. Thanks, Yann (talk) 19:06, 17 November 2012 (UTC)

I saw it appropriate due to new information about the author and year of creation. --Eleassar (t/p) 19:07, 17 November 2012 (UTC)
No. Once a DR is closed, I think it is inappropriate that the same user reopen it, with exactly the same argument. Don't do that. Yann (talk) 08:41, 18 November 2012 (UTC)
No, I had reopened it legitimately, because new information appeared. The original argument was: "There's no evidence that Yugoslav banknotes are not copyrighted anymore." The new argument was: "No reliable source indicating that this work by Đorđe Andrejević-Kun (1904-1964) would be public domain." So please, don't do that. Don't accuse people of what is not true. --Eleassar (t/p) 08:45, 18 November 2012 (UTC)

Urheberrecht Jugoslawien

Ich bin ja auch dran, das Problem mit dem jugoslawischen Urheberrechtsproblem zu lösen, denn das taucht hier desöfteren auf. Das jugoslawische Urheberrechtsgestz gibt es hier. Ich weiß jetzt nicht ob du als Slowene den serbokroatischen Text gut genug verstehst. Artikel 50 könnte relevant sein.--Antemister (talk) 12:05, 18 November 2012 (UTC)

Danke schön. Ich habe es sehr gesucht aber nicht gefunden. Ich verstehe serbokroatisches gut genug und werde es ansehen. --Eleassar (t/p) 12:08, 18 November 2012 (UTC)
Was sagt denn das Gesetz dazu? Sind offizielle Dokumente urheberrechtsfrei?--Antemister (talk) 18:28, 18 November 2012 (UTC)
Ja, offizielle Dokumente sind urheberrechtsfrei (siehe Art. 4); also Volksliteratur und Volkskunst und Geritschentscheidungen; aber nicht seine Sammlunge wenn sie sind schöpferische Werke. --Eleassar (t/p) 19:59, 18 November 2012 (UTC)
OK, gut bzw. hier liegt das Problem. Es heißt, offizielle Dokumente sind urheberrechtsfrei (das ist fast überall auf der Welt so). Auf offiziellen Dokumenten findet man das Wappen. Jetzt stellt sich die Frage, ist damit das Wappen auch frei. In Deutschland ist das so, in sehr vielen anderen europäischen Staaten auch, aber gilt das weltweit. Wir wissen es nicht. Aber trotzdem laden wir Wappen hoch, weil wir davon ausgehen das es so ist. Bzgl. Jugoslawien kann auch niemand mehr ein Urheberrecht beanspruchen. Was heißt denn der entsprechende Satz auf englisch?--Antemister (talk) 20:03, 18 November 2012 (UTC)
Ok dann. Danke für die Deutung. Welche entsprechende Satz? --Eleassar (t/p) 20:10, 18 November 2012 (UTC)

Der Teil des Art. 4, in dem es heißt das offizielle Dokumente urheberrechtsfrei sind. Ich will ihn mit anderen Urheberrechtsgesetzen vergleichen.--Antemister (talk) 20:16, 18 November 2012 (UTC)

Er heißt auf Englisch: "Collections of folk literature and art creations, documents, court decisions, and other similar material, which is by itself not a protected author's work, are also considered author's works if these collections in their selection, layout or the way they are arranged represent independent creations." --Eleassar (t/p) 20:25, 18 November 2012 (UTC)
OK, eine solche Formulierung findet sich in den meisten Gesetzen, meist heißt es dass "official texts of legislative, administrative or judicial character, or translations thereof" nicht geschützt sind. Nach diesem Argument werden die meisten Wappen hier behalten. Das sollte dann auch mit dem jugoslawischen so sein.--Antemister (talk) 22:12, 18 November 2012 (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!
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, Stefan4 (talk) 19:49, 24 November 2012 (UTC)

Do not toy with deletion requests #2

As per User:Blackcat (User_talk:Eleassar#Commons:Deletion_requests.2FFile:Fran.C4.8Di.C5.A1kanska_cerkev_in_Tiskarna_Slovenije_1938.jpg), if you can not be sure wether or not an object depictured is crative work (and not just industrial product (trash), representation of raw data (maps), self-emergent states of reality (events in public life, parialy seen advertisments and/or other prints)) save us (and probably you too) time and do not open unnecessary deletion requests. Thanks for your understanding, --Miha (talk) 18:21, 26 November 2012 (UTC)

I'm not toying. If you disagree with my edits, then take this to the Village pump. --Eleassar (t/p) 20:59, 26 November 2012 (UTC)

Template:PD-ineligible/sl

Template:PD-ineligible/sl 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 template, 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!
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 ∙ +/−

108.52.119.75 00:14, 28 November 2012 (UTC)

Lasko

File:Lasko Slovenian beer.jpg

What was the problem with my own photo? Is prohibited taking a picture on a bottle of Lasko? What about with this? I am waiting for your answer. 194.149.25.1 14:14, 1 December 2012 (UTC)

I don't know for other countries, but for Slovenia, there's no evidence that logos in general and this logo in particular would be public domain. See Commons:Deletion requests/Logos of Slovenia. --Eleassar (t/p) 14:39, 1 December 2012 (UTC)

The photo was not a logo. The logo was on a beer mug. In this case you can't take a photo on any slovenian city if there is a Lasko beer on a table. Or it's logo on a vizor. Or an advertisment on a roof or on a t-shirt. I cant belive it. Dudva (talk) 13:26, 2 December 2012 (UTC)

Italian FOP

Thanks for the encouragement. So far my backbone held. To make sure that what I do is right, I consulted a lawyer first. I do not know if I can help you with Slovene no-FOP because the large number of files in Italy that I have to report, but I hope that soon I'll be able to help you. :)) Raoli ✉ (talk) 15:48, 1 December 2012 (UTC)

We made these images Freedom of panorama protests to protest against the absence of FoP in Italy. If you are interested you can make them for Slovenia. Raoli ✉ (talk) 15:54, 1 December 2012 (UTC)
I've added the whole discussion about this in the Administrators' noticeboard. Raoli ✉ (talk) 00:55, 3 December 2012 (UTC)

Proposal for deletion from Boč

Affected: 

Eleassar (t/p) 20:52, 1 December 2012 (UTC)

Deletion

Your latest RFDs are puzzling and I suspect may have been purely to spite someone. The USHMM images clearly state that they are in the public domain and the Bundesarchiv images are uploaded by the institution itself. [13] -- ◅PRODUCER (TALK) 22:33, 5 December 2012 (UTC)

I'd propose that you assume good faith and comment on the relevant discussion pages. --Eleassar (t/p) 11:52, 7 December 2012 (UTC)

Close the deletion request for the SFR Yugoslavia emblem, it has been over a month and you have failed to gain consensus for deletion

Your deletion request here: [14] has been active since November 17, 2012. It has been over a month, you have gained zero support for your deletion request. You said that you would respect the decision of users on that second deletion request, it has been a month, every user except yourself has rejected the deletion request. Please respect their judgement as you said you would and close down the deletion request as a "Keep".--R-41 (talk) 22:00, 20 December 2012 (UTC)

Closures are done by administrators. In addition, one should not close his own proposal. --Eleassar (t/p) 06:03, 21 December 2012 (UTC)

Hello

Hi, you programmer or graphicer ?by Aguzer 09:20, 27 December 2012 (UTC)

Proposals for deletion from Mirna

Affected: 

Eleassar (t/p) 12:52, 10 January 2013 (UTC)

Proposals for deletion from Sevnica

Affected: 

Eleassar (t/p) 13:12, 10 January 2013 (UTC)

Chauvinism

Ne izbriši kategorije Šovinizem, saj nisi videl teh knjig, avtor namreč hujska proti Slovencem in Slovanom. Doncsecz (talk) 08:04, 22 January 2013 (UTC)

Prestavi potem te slike v Category:Fascism in Hungary ali Category:Xenophobic nationalism. --Eleassar (t/p) 08:19, 22 January 2013 (UTC)

No čakaj, res, da je to šovinistično, vendar madžarski iredentizem ni enak s fašizmom: več organizacij in strank je bilo na Madžarskem, ki so zahtevale revizijo, vendar samo nekaj je bilo fašistična. Sándor Mikola ni bil član niti ene fašistične stranke, kljub temu je bil šovinist. Doncsecz (talk) 09:03, 22 January 2013 (UTC)

No, prav. Kljub temu se mi zdi kategorija Chauvinism preširoka. Predlagam, da ustvariš kategorijo Category:Anti-Slovene discrimination (po zgledu Category:Anti-Irish discrimination) ali kaj podobnega. --Eleassar (t/p) 09:06, 22 January 2013 (UTC)

Tirol

Hallo, Bezüglich der Widerherstellung der LA: Diskussionen über Kategorieverschiebungen sollten nicht in einer Löschdiskussion geführt werden (habe bereis mit einen Admin darüber gesprochen). Danke Dir--Steinsplitter (talk) 18:53, 22 January 2013 (UTC)

Povrsnost

Ze pri prvem predlogu sem opozoril, da obstaja okoli 50 slik z identicnim problemom kot Steiner Alpen.png, pa si zopet ustvaril dva predloga. Ne vem zakaj tako povrsno beres komentarje drugih oz. kategoricno zavracas. Kljub temu, da sam se vedno stojim za svojim prvotnim mnenjem, da v tem primeru brisanje ni potrebno, sem na Commons:Deletion_requests/File:Alps_-_Regions_(Eastern_Alps).png pripravil seznam ostalih datotek, tako da predlagam, da vse nastete datoteke predlagas za brisanje. --Miha (talk) 21:50, 25 January 2013 (UTC)

Zdravo, te datoteke nameravam predlagati za brisanje, ko bo predlog uspešno zaključen pri teh dveh datotekah. Seveda jih lahko sam označiš za brisanje tudi takoj. --Eleassar (t/p) 22:06, 25 January 2013 (UTC)

Brisanje slik

Kaj se ti novi Wiki policaj oz. cenzor ali kaj? Brišeš brez, da bi podal obrazložitve za izbris in da bi o nominaciji za izbris obvestil avtorja, ki bi tako imel čas podati svoje obrazložitve oz. argumente ali dokaze, ki bi pomagali k ohranitvi teh slik. V čem je sploh problem?Ratipok (talk) 20:06, 27 January 2013 (UTC)

Sem kje pozabil obvestiti avtorja? V glavnem kar dosledno obveščam avtorje (in vse ostalo zainteresirano občestvo). Problem je sicer COM:LICENSING: "Wikimedia Commons only accepts free content". V Wikipediji in Zbirki ustvarjamo prosto vsebino, ki jo lahko uporablja vsakdo za kateri koli namen. --Eleassar (t/p) 20:33, 27 January 2013 (UTC)
Sedaj sem videl, da je sporočilo dejansko bilo poslano in sicer na talk page v Wiki Commons, kar je enako kot če bi dobil email v predal za spam pošto (v račun se prijavim le ob nalaganju novih slik). Še vedno ne vem v čem je problem in zakaj so bile izbrisane spodnje slike, katerih avtor sem jaz in katere sem objavil že pred nekaj meseci oz. leti in zakaj so nekatere slike označene za izbris (Ljudski vrt)? Kaj se je spremenilo od takrat, da so v tem trenutku postale problematične? Če je problem, da je večino mojih slik bilo brez licenc (Public domain) bi se preprosto mene lahko kontaktiralo (na moj talk page) in bi se licenca spremenila, da bi bila postala zadovoljiva.

Ratipok (talk) 10:58, 29 January 2013 (UTC)

Zdravo, problem ni v izbiri licence, ampak v slovenski zakonodaji (Zakon o avtorski in sorodnih pravicah, 55. čen), ki za fotografiranje avtorsko zavarovane arhitekture za pridobitni namen (slike v Commons morajo biti na razpolago tudi za pridobitni namen) zahteva soglasje arhitekta oz. avtorja fotografiranega dela. To velja za vso arhitekturo, kipe, informacijske table in druga na javnih mestih dostopna avtorska dela, katerih avtor je umrl leta 1945 ali pozneje. Glej COM:FOP#Slovenia; glej tudi [15]. --Eleassar (t/p) 13:59, 29 January 2013 (UTC)

Lep pozdrav Pred letom dni sem napisal članek Spopad za mejni prehod Rožna Dolina, sedaj sem opazil, da je nekdo pobrisal slike.Vzrok zaradi missing permission as of 11 January 2013. Kaj moram storiti? Že pri nastajanju članka sem pojasnil izvor slik: Tri slike ( foto: Peter Božič )niso bile še nikjer objavljene, posnel jih je Peter Božič, do sedaj jih ni dal nobenemu. Peter nima niti interneta, ne verjamem da bi jih on dal na splet. Tako mi je zagotovil in jaz mu verjamem. Posodil mi je fotografije na papirju in jaz sem jih poskeniral v oktobru lani. Ena fotografija je vzeta iz videoposnetka, posnel ga je Slavko Šuligoj. Jaz sem videokaseto digitaliziral, zajel sliko in jo izročil novinarjem Primorskih novic. Objavljena je bila v Primorskih novicah (PN) št. 235-09, dne 09.10.2008 v članku »Se Lisjak kiti s tujim perjem?«. Lahko bi dal v Wikipedijo tudi sliko vzeto iz videa sekundo prej ali pozneje. Vendar zaradi verodostojnosti sem dal točno to sliko iz PN in jo podnaslovil enako kot so jo v PN. V PN so dodali še rdečo puščico. Sliko sem zato podnaslovil: "Vir: Primorske novice št.235-09, 09.10.2008 Videoposnetek: Slavko Šuligoj". Članek imam v digitalni obliki in ti ga lahko pošljem (če mi izdaš tvoj email). Oba sta mi dovolila uporabo fotografij oz. videa. Video sem odstopil tudi novinarki Alenki Bevčič, uporabljen je bil v oddaji Rožna Dolina 1991: Komu gre zasluga?, Tednik, dne 13. 11. 2008, RTV Slovenija 2008. http://www.rtvslo.si/odprtikop/tednik/13-11-2008/. Kot razumem OTRS, si ti ta oseba, ki imaš to dovoljenje. Prosim za natančna navodila, glede slik.

Pozdravljen, če želiš v Zbirki (Commons) objaviti slike, katerih avtor nisi sam, moraš poslati dovoljenje avtorja na permissions-commons@wikimedia.org, tako kot je to opisano na strani COM:OTRS/sl. Da bi se izognili nevšečnostim, iskreno priporočam uporabo obrazca, ki je objavljen na omenjeni strani. --Eleassar (t/p) 20:07, 30 January 2013 (UTC)

Brisanje slik: Herman Gvardjančič

Budameat: Vem, da so slike še živečega umetnika, a vzemite na znanje, da sem jih objavil s polnim pooblastilom in vednostjo, tako moralno kot pravno, od umetnika, Hermana Gvardjančiča. Če je potrebno lahko pridobim podpisano pooblastilo od umetnika. LP

V tem primeru vas prosim, da posredujete podpisano pooblastilo umetnika na naslov permissions-commons@wikimedia.org. Sledite navodilom na strani COM:OTRS/sl in uporabite tam navedeni obrazec. --Eleassar (t/p) 13:42, 2 February 2013 (UTC)
Bom. Hvala za navodila. LP

Maps

Hello,

Please create a deletion request for File:Allgaeuer Alpen.png and others. The rationale being the same is not a reason for speedy deletion. Beside, these are heavily used. Thanks, Yann (talk) 22:17, 2 February 2013 (UTC)

Slovene > Carniolan; per reliable sources

When changing pages like Creator:Leopold Layer, from metadata matching wikipadia article to something else, I think it would be good to provide the source. We do have "Reference" field for that. --Jarekt (talk) 16:42, 5 February 2013 (UTC)

No problem. Per this article, he was a Carniolan painter, whose family originated from Tyrol. See also here. --Eleassar (t/p) 17:48, 5 February 2013 (UTC)

Warning

Hello,

Do not edit the FOP page when it is clear you don't know. Thanks, Yann (talk) 19:22, 7 February 2013 (UTC)

I don't need your warnings and also don't see where does your knowledge of the Slovene copyright law originate from. You may present your opinion at the talk page of the FOP page. Thank you. --Eleassar (t/p) 19:55, 7 February 2013 (UTC)

Maybe you should slow down a little?

Hi. I'm not going to make any comment on whether you're right or wrong in any individual case, but the speed and volume of your DR nominations seems to be causing some problems. Perhaps you could nominate test cases and wait to see how they are concluded before nominating more? Nominating lots of groups of images with similar rationales at the same time is likely to lead to inconsistent results and it doesn't hurt much if it takes a week or two longer for something to be deleted. Best, HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 22:36, 7 February 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for the opinion; I appreciate it. However, the case law is rich already (see Category:Slovenian FOP cases). Regards, --Eleassar (t/p) 22:38, 7 February 2013 (UTC)

Da ti ne bo dolgcas

(s precejsnjo mero cinizma)

Cez vikend lahko preucis naslednjo zagato: Recimo, da slikam vzgojenega krizanega tulipana, ki ga je nek vrtnar trajno posadil v prak. ALi se to v Sloveniji obravnava kot krsitev avtorskih pravic 1) botanika in 2) vrtnarja, kot svojevrstnega pokrajinskega arhitekta. In se, kako je z dokazljivostjo, da slika ni bila narejena v neki drugi drzavi, kjer te pravice prizadetima strankama uradno ne bi bile krsene? Se ti ne zdi cudno, da ob vsem common sensu, ki je tako splosen in samoumeven, da je lahko s steani fotografa popolnoma isto delo (recimo se da imata tupipana popolnoma isto fenotipsko sliko) nekje smatrano kot individualna duhovna stvaritev drogje pa ne? --Miha (talk) 23:52, 8 February 2013 (UTC)

Oz. popolnoma zivljenski primer: V Berlinu sem v parku slikal tablo na kateri pise "Grilanje zabranjeno" in recimo, da bi jo nalozil na Zbirko brez navedbe tega podatka. Povsem upraviceno bi lahko nekdo sklepal, da je bila slika narejena na Hrvaskem, ki prav tako kot Slovenija ne pozna FOP. Zakljucek pa je znan (oz. niti ne). --Miha (talk) 00:08, 9 February 2013 (UTC)
Če obstaja večji dvom, sliko brišemo. Breme dokaza je na naložniku. MMG, Hrvaška pozna FOP. --Eleassar (t/p) 00:14, 9 February 2013 (UTC)
Torej naslednja zrtev je: Files in Category:Road signs (with no country given). Kaj pa ves, napis "keep dogs on leash" v arabscini se morda nahaja v blizini islamskega centra v Ljubljani... Please apply common sense when nominating photos for deletion. (Me veseli, od nekod se spomnim da so tudi oni imeli probleme. Sicer pa ne naredi razlike - to isto tablo bi lahko slikal tudi v Bosni.) --Miha (talk) 00:22, 9 February 2013 (UTC)

Fotografije

Kako je zdaj s fotografijami iz Jugoslavije in lahko s tem podatkom dopolniš {{PD-Slovenia}}? --Sporti (talk) 08:43, 11 February 2013 (UTC)

Fotografije, ki so bile objavljene v Jugoslaviji leta 1969 (1995-26) ali prej, so proste, ne glede na to, ali je avtor naveden ali anonimen. Če so bile fotografije objavljene 29. aprila 1995 ali pozneje, so zavarovane s pravicami založnikov (tj. ZASP čl. 140 oz. en:Copyright Duration Directive; [16], str. 15), tudi če so se avtorske pravice že iztekle. --Eleassar (t/p) 09:28, 11 February 2013 (UTC)

Torej je npr. tole v javni lasti? --Sporti (talk) 13:23, 11 February 2013 (UTC)

Če je podatek o datumu objave fotografije (196?) točen, je fotografija v javni lasti (za trajanje ap na fotografskih delih glej tudi [17], str. 38). Ker gre za naslovnico revije, izvirno objavljeno v 1960. letih, zanj tudi ne veljajo pravice založnikov (25 let po objavi), torej je delo primerno za Commons. --Eleassar (t/p) 15:56, 11 February 2013 (UTC)

Za objavo se šteje tudi, če so fotografije razstavljene v muzeju? Npr Fond Vlastje Simončiča iz Muzeja novejše zgodovine, pridobljen leta 1963. Je potem npr. ta slika v javni lasti? --Sporti (talk) 14:12, 13 February 2013 (UTC)

Se strinjam, vendar morajo biti fotografije v muzeju razstavljene, ne zgolj shranjene. Beri: "Vse gradivo je bilo desetletja brez ustreznih fotografij, le v obliki negativov, zato je bilo tudi manj dostopno in izkoriščano. Šele zadnja leta ga digitaliziramo in intenzivneje izkoriščamo to bogato in zanimivo gradivo tako za naše razstave kakor tudi za potrebe strank." To pomeni, da še vedno veljajo založnikove pravice (25 let od objave za prosta dela), kar po [18] pomeni, da niso primerne za Commons. --Eleassar (t/p) 15:07, 13 February 2013 (UTC)
Manj dostopno ni enako kot nedostopno. --Sporti (talk) 15:38, 13 February 2013 (UTC)
Najbrž je bilo dostopno raziskovalcem, ne vem pa, če je bilo kje objavljeno. --Eleassar (t/p) 15:41, 13 February 2013 (UTC)
Kaj pa tole v etnografskem muzeju Veno Pilon (1928) in Rado Kregar (pred 2. sv. v.)?--Sporti (talk) 07:02, 14 February 2013 (UTC)
Za Vena Pilona piše, da so bile njegove fotografije razstavljene leta 1954, leta 1966 in leta 2002. Fotografije, ki so bile razstavljene v letih 1954 in 1966, tako pridejo v poštev; treba je poiskati razstavni katalog iz tega leta. V poštev pridejo tudi fotografije iz kataloga Razstava primorskih likovnih umetnikov članov dslu '76 (COBISS 6465073). Od razstave leta 2002 pa še ni preteklo 25+1 let, tako da tiste, ki so bile takrat prvič razstavljene, še niso primerne za objavo tukaj. Ni podatka o tem, ali je bil album Primorsko dostopen javnosti pred tem, torej obstaja t.i. significant doubt, da so vse slike zdaj že proste.
Pri Radu Kregarju pridejo v poštev fotografije, ki so bile objavljene v delih Naš dom I–III (1934–1937), Naše stavbno gradivo (1946), Naš kmečki dom I-II (1946), Naš kamen I–II (1947) in Naš les I–II (1952, 1956). O preostalih prav tako ni podatka, da bi bile kje objavljene že pred objavo na spletni strani, torej se tudi privzame, da niso proste. --Eleassar (t/p) 08:46, 14 February 2013 (UTC)

Undel req

Hi Eleassar. You might want to take a look at Commons:Undeletion requests/Current requests#File:Visitor's box.jpg, where you're mentioned by name in a pretty negative manner. I've commented there regarding the deletion, which I did, and which was called into question. INeverCry 05:49, 12 February 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for the message. I've explained the reason for my deletion proposal. --Eleassar (t/p) 09:56, 12 February 2013 (UTC)

Warning

Ne predlagaj za brisanje gradiva o katerem clearly nimas pojma. Konqueror je prosta programska oprema in kot tako ne za program, ne za prikazano stran (Wikipedija) ni avtorske zascite razen na logotipu fundacije. --Miha (talk) 11:53, 21 February 2013 (UTC)

Prikazana stran je bil zaslonski posnetek spletnega portala BBC. --Eleassar (t/p) 12:55, 21 February 2013 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:TadejM/Archive_1&oldid=362683480"