User talk:Csanády/arc –2013-09-29

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

Classement

[edit]

Hi, thanks for your images - just one thing: could you make sure that you add the pics you upload to at least one category? It makes things a lot easier for everybody (there are less 'orphan' pictures to hunt down). I added the pic image:Erzsebet kiralyne photo 1867.jpg to the category 'Hungarian people', it's the closest I can think of since I don't know who she is. --Lumijaguaari (моє обговорення) 11:15, 3 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]


Image Tagging Image:Nagy Istvan Baja.jpg

[edit]

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:Nagy Istvan Baja.jpg. 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 {{GFDL-self}} to release it under the GFDL 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. Rüdiger Wölk 07:33, 19 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Category

[edit]

Thanks for categoring pics of Békéscsaba! --Beyond silence 12:08, 7 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Szívesen! :) --Csanády 16:09, 7 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Varga I.

[edit]

Szia! Látom, hogy nagyapa szobraival népesítetted be a Commonst, és oda vagyok a boldogságtól, másfél éve szeretném megírni rendesen őt. :) Róla van fotóm, amit közkinccsé tudok tenni, de a művek nehéz ügy lettek volna. Esetleg lapul még a birtokodban ilyen jogtiszta saját fotó róluk? Főleg a Dohány utcai holokausztemlékműről kéne, mert az fontos és szép, és még egy titkos kívánságom volna, a gobelinjeiről, de hát az nehezebb ügy. Érthető okokból a huwikin nem reklámoznám a dolgot. :) V79benno 15:24, 2 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Szia! :) A feltöltötteken kívül még három siófoki és egy budapesti művéről (Professzor, Esernyősök, Mementó a II. magyar hadseregért, ill. Károlyi Mihály emlékmű) van képem. Örülök, hogy érdekel valakit... bár megvolt az oka, hogy nem kerültek fel elsőre, de már töltöm is őket. – A Dohány utcában sajnos nem jártam fényképezővel. Azon vagyok, hogy bővüljön az anyag, de egyelőre sajnos csak ennyi. Szia! --Csanády 06:32, 4 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Image Tagging Image:Abaliget_Polgármesteri_Hivatal.jpg

[edit]

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:Abaliget_Polgármesteri_Hivatal.jpg. 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|cc-by-sa-3.0}} to release it under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 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.

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 14:45, 29 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Pictures uploaded by You in Hungarian Wikipedia

[edit]

Szia, I have written an article of István Széchenyi in Finnish Wikipedia. I found some images uploaded by You in Hungarian Wikipedia, and I´d like to use them but they are not in Commons. Is it possible that You will upload them to Commons? The pictures I am talking about are:

  • Kép:Szechenyi felajanlasa litografia.jpg
  • Kép:Crescence.jpg
  • Kép:Széchenyi Döblingben.jpg

Köszönöm szépen! vejarva 11:50, 11 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Lotz.jpg

[edit]

Image:Lotz.jpg, ezt a képet innen törölni kellene, mert nem Lotz Károly festette, hanem Vágó Pál, Vágó Pálhoz már fel is vittem, valaki tévesen Lotz Károlynak tulajdonította. Nem jut eszembe, mit kell a képre írni, hogy töröljék, segíts, légy szí.--Pataki Márta (talk) 11:58, 3 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Kedves Csanády! Rendben van már a dolog régen, valakitől megkérdeztem, hogy mit kell ráírni, hogy töröljék, köszi:-)))--Pataki Márta (talk) 01:43, 22 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Köszönet!

[edit]

Köszönöm! Láttam, hogy van még olyan általad bevitt kép, ami nem szerepel a szócikkben, akkor abból még felteszek oda. Köszönöm! Szia! --Teroses 07:17, 3 December 2008 (UTC)

TUSC token 7659908b8b58f964fcbcd042f0e21d2a

[edit]

I am now proud owner of a TUSC account!

File:Solt Vécsey kastély park.JPG

[edit]

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

There seems to be a problem regarding the description and/or licensing of this particular file. It has been found that you've added in the image's description only a Template that's not a license and although it provides useful 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 (Filnik) or go to the Commons:Help desk. --Filnik 20:36, 17 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

[1]--Csanády (talk) 06:53, 18 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

File:Dobsa Lajos Ellinger.jpg

[edit]

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

There seems to be a problem regarding the description and/or licensing of this particular file. It has been found that you've added in the image's description only a Template that's not a license and although it provides useful 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 Nikbot, if you need some help about it, ask its master (Nikbot (talk)) or go to the Commons:Help desk. --Nikbot (talk) 17:10, 1 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

ABC-be rakás

[edit]

Kedves Csanády! Nézd meg légyszíves a „Category:Graphic designers from Hungary“ kategóriát és a „Category:Painters from Hungary“ kategóriát, hogy az újonnan beszúrt grafikus festők ABC-be kerüljenek. (Kopasz Márta, Conrad Gyula, Vadász Miklós stb.) Ezt hogy lehet elérni, hogy ne a keresztnevük alatt sorolódjanak be? Köszönöm. --Teroses 08:09, 9 April 2009 (UTC)

Válasz--Csanády (talk) 18:44, 9 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Köszönöm!! Ezentúl így csinálom. Szia! --Teroses 10:01, 10 April 2009 (UTC)

File:Henneber Károly sír.jpg

[edit]

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

There seems to be a problem regarding the description and/or licensing of this particular file. It has been found that you've added in the image's description only a Template that's not a license and although it provides useful 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 Nikbot, if you need some help about it, ask its master (Filnik) or go to the Commons:Help desk. --Filnik 17:02, 11 April 2009 (UTC)


[edit]
bahasa melayu ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ dansk ∙ deutsch (Sie-Form) ∙ deutsch ∙ english ∙ español ∙ français ∙ galego ∙ hrvatski ∙ italiano ∙ magyar ∙ nederlands ∙ norsk ∙ norsk bokmål ∙ norsk nynorsk ∙ português ∙ polski ∙ português do Brasil ∙ română ∙ sicilianu ∙ slovenčina ∙ slovenščina ∙ suomi ∙ svenska ∙ türkçe ∙ беларуская ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца) ∙ български ∙ македонски ∙ русский ∙ українська ∙ हिन्दी ∙ ಕನ್ನಡ ∙ ತುಳು ∙ മലയാളം ∙ 한국어 ∙ 日本語 ∙ 中文（简体） ∙ 中文（繁體） ∙ עברית ∙ العربيَّة ∙ فارسی ∙ +/−
Warning sign
This media may be deleted.
Thanks for uploading Image:EEK 20 1932 obverse.jpg. I notice that the file page either doesn't contain enough information about the license or it contains contradictory information about the license, so the copyright status is unclear.

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

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

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

Quibik (talk) 01:00, 4 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]
bahasa melayu ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ dansk ∙ deutsch (Sie-Form) ∙ deutsch ∙ english ∙ español ∙ français ∙ galego ∙ hrvatski ∙ italiano ∙ magyar ∙ nederlands ∙ norsk ∙ norsk bokmål ∙ norsk nynorsk ∙ português ∙ polski ∙ português do Brasil ∙ română ∙ sicilianu ∙ slovenčina ∙ slovenščina ∙ suomi ∙ svenska ∙ türkçe ∙ беларуская ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца) ∙ български ∙ македонски ∙ русский ∙ українська ∙ हिन्दी ∙ ಕನ್ನಡ ∙ ತುಳು ∙ മലയാളം ∙ 한국어 ∙ 日本語 ∙ 中文（简体） ∙ 中文（繁體） ∙ עברית ∙ العربيَّة ∙ فارسی ∙ +/−
Warning sign
This media may be deleted.
Thanks for uploading Image:EEM 1000 1922 obverse.jpg. I notice that the file page either doesn't contain enough information about the license or it contains contradictory information about the license, so the copyright status is unclear.

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

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

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

Quibik (talk) 01:00, 4 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]


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

[edit]
العربية ∙ asturianu ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ ∙ বাংলা ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ dansk ∙ Deutsch ∙ Ελληνικά ∙ English ∙ español ∙ euskara ∙ فارسی ∙ suomi ∙ français ∙ galego ∙ עברית ∙ hrvatski ∙ magyar ∙ italiano ∙ 日本語 ∙ 한국어 ∙ македонски ∙ മലയാളം ∙ norsk bokmål ∙ Plattdüütsch ∙ Nederlands ∙ norsk nynorsk ∙ norsk ∙ polski ∙ português ∙ português do Brasil ∙ русский ∙ sicilianu ∙ slovenčina ∙ slovenščina ∙ svenska ∙ ไทย ∙ Türkçe ∙ українська ∙ Tiếng Việt ∙ 简体中文‎ ∙ 繁體中文‎ ∙ +/−
Warning sign
This media was probably deleted.
A file that you have uploaded to Wikimedia Commons, File:Vanswieten.jpg, was missing information about where it comes from or who created it, which is needed to verify its copyright status. The file probably has been deleted. If you've got all required information, request undeletion providing this information and the link to the concerned file ([[:File:Vanswieten.jpg]]).

If you created the content yourself, enter {{Own}} as the source. If you did not add a licensing template, you must add one. You may use, for example, {{self|GFDL|cc-by-sa-all}} or {{Cc-zero}} to release certain rights to your work.

If someone else created the content, or if it is based on someone else's work, the source should be the address to the web page where you found it, the name and ISBN of the book you scanned it from, or similar. You should also name the author, provide verifiable information to show that the content is in the public domain or has been published under a free license by its author, and add an appropriate template identifying the public domain or licensing status, if you have not already done so. Warning: Wikimedia Commons takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing.

Please add the required information for this and other files you have uploaded before adding more files. If you need assistance, please ask at the help desk. Thank you!

Cecil (talk) 02:07, 5 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Bibó István sírja

[edit]

Kedves Csanády! Elrontottam az általad felvitt lapot, mert világosítani ill. átszínezni akartam egy kicsit a képedet és úgy feltenni az óbudai temető huwiki cikkébe. Légy szíves tedd rendbe utánam, és ne haragudj! Köszönöm! :-)) --•Terosesje t'écoute 07:45, 29 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Nem, hanem az átszínezett változatot érvényesíteni, de valaki már megtette. És ha lehetne, a rengeteg újabb felvitelt eltűntettetni, de szerintem talán ez utóbbi nem fog menni. Nagyon lassú a gépem úgy látszik vagy én vagyok türelmetlen (és a kapcsolat is újabban csapnivaló a Commonsszal), de nem reagálnak itt a dolgok nekem rendesen és ezért sokszor viszek fel duplán vagy rosszul. Bocs még egyszer. És köszönöm a válaszodat! Szia! :-)) --•Terosesje t'écoute 11:36, 30 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hungarian Revolution of 1848

[edit]

Hello Csanády, please excuse my writing in English.

Myelf and User:Monkap have been adding the battles of the Hungarian Revolution of 1848 to English Wikipedia, she is a native Hungarian, I do not speak Hungarian well, but together I think we have made a good job of the translation. I have moved some of your battle work to Commons and have made versions with the names of places in English (e.g. Bécs to Vienna and so on). I have credited yours as mine being the derivative work.

As a courtesy I just wanted to let you know. Ideally I would like to make an SVG version.

It's probably best to reply on my English page, en:User:SimonTrew. I am sorry to write this in English, my Hungarian is not good enough yet – I know how to say "battle" and "cannon" and stuff, but not "yes" or "no"! A peculiar way to learn a language.

My best wishes and again apologies for the

angol

. SimonTrew (talk) 10:32, 12 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]


File:Lu Xun Kiskőrös.JPG

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

bankjegyek törlése

[edit]

Szia! Kérlek segíts nekem. Commons:Deletion requests/Category:Banknotes of Croatia, kuna, 1994, Commons:Deletion requests/Category:Banknotes of Estonia ezeket kellene törölni, de már vagy egy hónapja senki nem tett semmit. Egyszer már törölve volt a horvát kategória, de valaki újra feltöltötte. Nem lehet valamit beleírni, hogy jogsértő a bankjegyek képei és ne töltsék fel, mert törölve lesznek. Várom a válaszod! 05:57, 16 June 2010 (UTC)

Szia! Sajnálom, de nem szoktam követni az itteni törlési megbeszéléseket és a törlési eljárás szabályait sem ismerem. Ha feltetted törlésre, akkor előbb-utóbb csak fog történni valami :). Egyébként szerintem nagy sietségre nincsen ok, mert a képek licencén olvashatóak a jogi tudnivalók. (Sürgős tennivaló szerintem csak a hamis/téves licencű képekkel van) – Üzeneted vétele után gyorsan végigbogarásztam az adminisztrátorok listáját, és egy magyar nyelvet ismerőt sem találtam közöttük. Szerintem a Te problémádhoz hasonló eseteket is könnyebben lehetne kezelni, ha ez megváltozna. Megfelelő jelöltet keresni a huwiki kocsmafalára feltűzött felhívással lehetne... :) Üdvözlettel --Csanády (talk) 07:08, 16 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

File:Mánfa templombelső.JPG

[edit]

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

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

This message was added automatically by Nikbot, if you need some help about it, ask its master (Filnik) or go to the Commons:Help desk. --Filnik 06:00, 22 June 2010 (UTC)

Ráday Pál (politikus)

[edit]

Ráday Pál (politikus), II. Rákóczi Ferenc kancellárja miért nem lehet a "People of Rákóczi's War for Independence" kategóriában? Talán , mert később csatlakozott?Pe-Jo (talk) 05:24, 2 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Szia! Benne van. Gondolom ezt a szerkesztésemet kifogásolod. Véleményem szerint egy Ráday Pált ábrázoló festmény Ráday Pállal kapcsolatos és nem közvetlenül a szabadságharccal, így Ráday Pál kategóriájába kerül. Ráday Pál személye kapcsolatba hozható a szabadságharccal, ezért szerepel is a Szabadságharc fontosabb alakjai kategóriában. Nyilván, ha nem lenne Ráday Pál kategória, akkor a festmény közvetlenül szerepelhetne a szabadságharc kategóriájában, így viszont csak felesleges zsúfoltságot okozna, de a szabadságharccal kapcsolatban nem adna semmi plusz információt. Természetesen érdekel a Te véleményed is a kérdésről, és köszönöm, hogy előbb kérdeztél... :) Szép napot! --Csanády (talk) 05:51, 2 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Szia!Köszönöm a választ. Most már rendben. Én voltam túlbuzgó.....Én sem szeretném, ha túl zsúfoltak lennének a kategóriák. További sikeres szerkesztést!Pe-Jo (talk) 06:33, 2 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Cat:Szabadtéri Néprajzi Múzeum-Cat:Szentendrei Szabadtéri Néprajzi Múzeum

[edit]

Szervusz! Ha lenne időd megnézni: a Category:Szabadtéri Néprajzi Múzeum kategóriát meg kellene szüntetni (ami ott volt az a Category:Szentendrei Néprajzi Múzeum-ba tettem, mert mind Szentendréről volt, azt viszont talán át lehetne nevezni Category:Szentendrei Szabadtéri Néprajzi Múzeum -má). Minden jót Pe-Jo (talk) 10:02, 9 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Szia! A Category:Szabadtéri Néprajzi Múzeum-ot feltettem törlésre. Az átmozgatás szerintem csak úgy lehetséges, hogy az összes érintett képet és kategóriát áttesszük az új kategóriába, és a kiürült kategóriát feltesszük törlésre. Nem tudom ebben az esetben érdemes-e ezt megtenni. (pl. az iw mutatja a pontos megnevezést, ill. nekem úgy tűnik, hogy a Commonson a kategórianeveknél nem feltétlenül a pontos/hivatalos neveket szokták használni, elegendő, ha a cím félreérthetetlenül definiálja a tartalmat) Ha ebben, vagy más ügyben keresnél: elutazás előtti percekben vagyok kb. egy hét múlva leszek. Minden jót neked is! :) --Csanády (talk) 10:44, 9 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Tanács kéretik: ki az igazi szerző?

[edit]
Magyar: (missing text)

Szervusz, mint kategorizálásban tapasztaltabb szerkesztőt kereslek meg. Sokadszor futok bele, hogy egy képnek két szerzője van:

  • fényképész + aki metszette;
  • rajzoló + aki metszette;

Jómagam csak sejtem, hogy mit jelent a "metszés" folyamata, emiatt némileg bizonytalan vagyok abban, hogy egy metszetnek ki a valódi szerzője: Pollák vagy Haske? Mit javasolsz, hová érdemes kategorizálni egy ilyen képet? Köszönettel: --Beroesz (talk) 22:22, 18 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Szia! Előrebocsájtva, hogy magam is a tapasztalatszerzés elején tartok: az ilyen képeket szerintem szerepeltetni kellene a rajzoló/festő/fényképész ill. a metsző kategóriájában is. Ez néha (pl. itt) sikerül, néha meg nem. Haske Ferencnek azért nem foglaltam kategóriát, mert fogalmam sincs, hogy ki volt ő, azon kívül, hogy a Vasárnapi Ujságnak (nem a Vasárnapi Újságnak!!!) rajzolgatott. (A Pollák Zsigmond kategóriában is annyi csúsztatás van, hogy valójában a Pollák testvérek foglalkoztak metszéssel és a Pollak/Pollák aláírásról lehetetlen megállapítani, hogy melyikük is metszette.) Többször előfordul az is, hogy pl. a rajzoló 1942-ben, a metsző pedig 1937-ben halt meg. Ilyenkor a jámbor feltöltő megpróbálja a metsző személyét előtérbe tolni... (Persze én erről csak hallottam, lehet, hogy egy szó sem igaz belőle. :) ) Tehát van itt gond elég, de ha többen foglalkozunk a megoldásukkal, akkor az eredmény is vélhetően jobb lesz. Üdvözlettel: --Csanády (talk) 07:13, 19 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Nem problémaként vetettem fel Haske Ferencet. A hozzá hasonló "egyképes kategóriák" gyártásába mindössze azért megyek bele, mert nem szeretem, ha mindenféle nyugati adminisztrátorok kotnyeleskednek bele mindenbe. A részben a téma komolyságának nyomatékosítása miatt írok cikket a Wikipédiában a Commonsos-kategória mögé, részben pedig azért, mert ennyivel tartozunk a rég halott szerzőnek, aki volt szíves minket képekkel ellátni. A századfordulós képek szerzőivel azért is kezdtem foglalkozni, mert itt van a szekrényemben az Az Én Újságom című gyereklap 1899-1900-as évfolyama bekötve, benne csupa olyan képpel, amelyeknél az itt megismert szerzők képjegye szerepel. Szeretném az igényesebb képeket digitalizálni és feltölteni. Kettő szerző nélkülit (1; 2) már kísérletként fellőttem, nem bántották őket. Ha még egy ideig nyugtuk lesz, akkor jöhet a többi.

A Vasárnapi Ujság esete megoldható, ha a wikipédián sikerül keresztülnyomni a nevének megváltoztatását. Még nem néztem meg a vitalapját, hogy volt-e erre kísérlet az elmúlt időben. --Beroesz (talk) 11:10, 19 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Több Haske képünk van már (pl. ez), de majd egyszer ez is megoldódik. – Szerintem nem fogják bántani, mert ismeretlen szerzőnél az első publikálás éve számít. Nagyon hasznosnak tartom a szkennelt képek feltöltését, mert ezzel általában a világháló más részein nem fellelhető tartalom kerül a Commonsra. (Egyébként is szerintem fájdalmasan kevés magyar vonatkozású kép van itt) – Hát majd valaki keresztülnyomja. Feltehetően nem én leszek az. – Kellemes időtöltést, jó munkát kívánok! :) --Csanády (talk) 10:52, 22 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

File:Orfű Vízfő forrás.JPG

[edit]

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

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

This message was added automatically by Nikbot, if you need some help about it, ask its master (Filnik) or go to the Commons:Help desk. --Filnik 16:19, 28 August 2010 (UTC)

TUSC token 71c1abbaa2c7d49afd58cf5c2d11daba

[edit]

I am now proud owner of a TUSC account!

Are you Anka Margit?

[edit]

If you are, please make that clearer on the description page. Or did you just photograph File:Ráckeve Mária Krisztina Anka.JPG? If you just photographed it, why do you think this work of 1998 is free from copyright? It seems to be indoors somewhere. --AndreasPraefcke (talk) 12:45, 17 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Igazad van. Feltettem törlésre. --Csanády (talk) 15:37, 21 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

File:EEK_20_1932_obverse.jpg

[edit]
File:EEK_20_1932_obverse.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 ∙ العربية ∙ беларуская ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца) ∙ български ∙ ပအိုဝ်ႏဘာႏသာႏ ∙ বাংলা ∙ bosanski ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ dansk ∙ Deutsch ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form) ∙ Zazaki ∙ ދިވެހިބަސް ∙ Ελληνικά ∙ English ∙ Esperanto ∙ español ∙ eesti ∙ فارسی ∙ suomi ∙ français ∙ galego ∙ עברית ∙ hrvatski ∙ magyar ∙ հայերեն ∙ Bahasa Indonesia ∙ íslenska ∙ italiano ∙ 日本語 ∙ 한국어 ∙ 조선말 ∙ македонски ∙ മലയാളം ∙ Bahasa Melayu ∙ မြန်မာဘာသာ ∙ norsk bokmål ∙ Plattdüütsch ∙ Nederlands ∙ norsk nynorsk ∙ norsk ∙ occitan ∙ polski ∙ پښتو ∙ português ∙ português do Brasil ∙ română ∙ русский ∙ sicilianu ∙ slovenčina ∙ slovenščina ∙ shqip ∙ српски / srpski ∙ svenska ∙ ไทย ∙ Türkçe ∙ українська ∙ Tiếng Việt ∙ 中文 ∙ 中文（简体） ∙ 中文（繁體） ∙ +/−

Dinamik (talk) 13:17, 21 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

File:Kisúbánya N. János Bakó.JPG

[edit]

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

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

This message was added automatically by Nikbot, if you need some help about it please read the text above again and follow the links in it, if you still need help ask at the ? → Commons:Help desk in any language you like to use. --Nikbot 11:54, 14 October 2011 (UTC) 

[2]--Csanády (talk) 11:59, 14 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

rossz név

[edit]

Szia! [3] egy hibára szeretném felhívni a figyelmedet. Kérlek javítsd minél előbb! Baráti üdvözlettel :D Szajci pošta 11:14, 5 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Szia! Jogos. Köszönöm! A leírást és a kategóriát javítottam, a fájlnevet meg kell majd keresnem, hogy hogyan kell javítani. Baráti üdvözlettel :) --Csanády (talk) 11:51, 5 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

A barnstar for you!

[edit]
The Original Barnstar
Folyamatos, precíz munkád elismeréseként! Üdvözlettel: Tamba52 (talk) 08:40, 5 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Köszönöm szépen! :) Üdvözlettel: --Csanády (talk) 09:09, 5 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Battle of Posada - Medieval book editions

[edit]

Hi! I tried to add more information to File:Viennese Illuminated Chronicle Posada.jpg and its related versions File:Chronicon Pictum P0146 A posadai csata2.JPG and File:Chronicon Pictum P0143 A posadai csata1.JPG. The drawings are similar, but with distinct elements. They appear to be from different medieval books editions. Do you know which ones and where are they at this time (museums etc?). I added to each image the related ones in the Other versions section. Would love to clarify this. Thanks and regards--Codrin.B (talk) 18:42, 9 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Found a fourth version! File:Battle1330.jpg.--Codrin.B (talk) 19:13, 9 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hi! All picture are in the Chronicon Pictum. At this time (since 1932) it is in the National Széchényi Library. (accession number: 404) Inexplicable, there are two miniature of battle of Posada in this codex: on page 143 and page 146 (it is the last page). The two miniature are similar, but with distinct elements. – Execuse me, my English is very poor... Best regards: --Csanády (talk) 07:27, 10 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for the detail about the location and accession. I added them to the two images from you, but not to the other two since I don't know yet where are they from. It is strange that File:Chronicon Pictum P0146 A posadai csata2.JPG and File:Chronicon Pictum P0143 A posadai csata1.JPG are from the same book. The seem to depict the same event but with different graphics. Maybe different stages?! But if you look at File:Viennese Illuminated Chronicle Posada.jpg it is even different. To me, the likely explanation is that there are multiple medieval editions. The question is where? The en:Chronica Hungarorum talks about different variants! I found a copy myself at the National Museum of the Union in Alba Iulia last fall. But that doesn't look like a medieval copy. Your English is great! --Codrin.B (talk) 22:37, 10 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I think things start to be clearer for why we have so many versions of the pictures. The en:Chronica Hungarorum talks about en:Chronicon Pictum (1358–1370, ed. S. Ladislaus Endlicher 1827), en:Buda Chronicle (1473, with eleven(!) surviving copies out of which one is at en:National Széchényi Library - the one that you probably used - and one at en:Eötvös Loránd University Library; don't know about the other nine!), and also Johannes de Thurocz's Chronica Hungarorum. From so many copies and variants, it is possible then that page 143 and page 146 are from different copies of the en:Buda Chronicle, while the other two images from other editions of it.--Codrin.B (talk) 22:53, 10 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hi! You can see the two picture here p. 143 and p. 146. I have got a facsimile edition of the Chronicon Pictum and I can see in this PDF (and ~all electronic reproductions of Chronicon Pictum) the colours of the pictures is incorrect, because of (I think) too much gold is on them. Example (I think) this and this pictures are from the same codex, but the first have more incorrect colours. – On this picture: it is a modern copy. – To my knowledge, the Chronicon Pictum hasn't got medieval copy (The Thurocz's Chronicle has many different medieval versions, but it were not taken over anything from Chronicon Pictum). The Chronica Hungarorum not a codex, it is the title of several works treating the early Hungarian history. I hope I helped you a little... :) --Csanády (talk) 08:51, 11 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for the full book! Very helpful. Do you happen to know about an English translation? The PDF you sent certainly clarifies the two pages (143 and 146) situation. File:Viennese Illuminated Chronicle Posada.jpg and File:Chronicon Pictum P0146 A posadai csata2.JPG seem very similar, however, if you compare and contrast the faces of the people in the top upper corner and the faces of the riders at the bottom right, some are quite different. Someone dropped me a note saying that there are some versions with modern retouching. I just don't know by whom, when, what copy etc. The one at the National Museum of the Union indeed look like modern copy. But what about this statement from en:Buda Chronicle: A popular chronicle partly based on the Chronicon Pictum (entitled just Chronica Hungarorum) was circulated in a printed form. It is also known as the Buda Chronicle. It was produced in 1473 by András Hess and is the first incunabulum ever printed in Hungary (Buda, András Hess, 1473, 70 fol., 2º.) It relates the history of Hungary from the earliest times to the coronation of King Matthias. Eleven copies of the chronicle are known to survive, two of them in Hungary: one in the National Széchényi Library and another in the Budapest University Library? This means that National Széchényi Library doesn't have the original and that there are many copies/versions out there. --Codrin.B (talk) 14:18, 11 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

You can hear and read the text of Chronicon Pictum in English here. – To my knowledge: The writer of the Buda Chronicle didn't use the Chronicon Pictum for source (and cannot see the pictures of Chronicon Pictum). The reason of the similar text is that the source of the two chronicle is partly same. You can see the family tree (which used which for source) of medieval Hungarian chronicles here. You can see: the Chronicon Pictum (hu:Képes Krónika) is in the end of tree. I think the above cited text: partly based on the Chronicon Pictum is incorrect. – The Buda Chronicle have many medieval versions (you can see one version here) and it is possible one is in the National Széchényi Library and another in the Budapest University Library, but the Chronicon Pictum has one version and it is in the National Széchényi Library. At least I think... :) Best regards:--Csanády (talk) 15:34, 11 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Excellent info! Thanks so much. That brings further clarity. Would be great to have that "book family tree" also in English, on Commons. I found also this.--Codrin.B (talk) 16:34, 11 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

It would be great... I don't speak English well to translate it. I hope somebody will do it. I wish you good work --Csanády (talk) 16:45, 11 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

User:VinceB szerkesztései

[edit]

Szervusz, megkérlek, hogy nézd meg User:VinceB szerkesztéseit, pl. File:Ács honvédemlékmű.JPG , sorra törli a "Historical coats of arms of Hungary" kategóriákat, talán elfogult vagyok, mivel sok címert én kategorizáltam, de a képeken rajta vannak a címerek is. Ne haragudj, ha zavartalak --Pe-Jo (talk) 12:14, 8 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Szia! Nem zavarsz. Azért vannak a vitalapok, hogy egyeztessünk a problémákról. – Nagyon nehéz a kategorizálással kapcsolatban általános irányelveket megfogalmazni. Egy képről általában eldönthető, hogy mit ábrázol, és ennek alapján besorolható egy vagy két kategóriába, de hogy azon kívül még hová, az általában nagyon is ízlés kérdése. Pl. a File:Gödöllői Grassalkovich-kastély.jpg kép a triviális kategórián kívül besorolható lenne még a következőkhöz: Doors in Hungary, Windows in Hungary, Balkonies in Hungary, Flags of Hungary, Trees of Hungary, Statues in Hungary, Reliefs in Hungary, History of Hungary, Winter in Hungary ... stb. Szerintem a képen látható részletek önmagukban egyáltalán nem különlegesek, ezért ha a képet bármelyik fenti kategóriába felvennénk, ott csak a zsúfoltság növekedne, de semmilyen új információ nem jelenne meg. Hasonlóan gondolom ezt a címerről is. Ha például a Grassalkovich-címer lenne a homlokzaton, akkor persze más lenne a helyzet. Ugyanezt gondolom az ácsi emlékműről is. Esetleg mindkét említett képet fel lehetne venni a Reliefs of coats of arms in Hungary kategóriába, de túl kicsi és egyáltalán nem különleges részletekről van szó. – Fenti természetesen az én véleményem és ettől lényegesen különbözőt is el tudok képzelni. Remélem nem okoztam csalódást. Szerintem vesd fel a kocsmafalon a kérdést, legalább egyéb szempontokat is megismerhetünk. Szép napot és további kellemes szerkesztést kívánok. :) Üdvözlettel: --Csanády (talk) 16:35, 8 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Köszönöm, hogy kifejtetted a véleményedet, én is gondoltam ezekre a dolgokra (pl. Reliefs of coat....). Semmi esetre sem okoztál csalódást. További sikeres szerkesztést.Pe-Jo (talk) 08:45, 9 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Segítenél?

[edit]

Már 2008-ban is kértem egy képfájl átnevezését, de a füle botját sem mozdította senki. Sajnos én nem tudok angolul, így nem vagyok biztos abban, hogy most is jól adtam-e meg a kép átnevezési kérésemet. A történet az volt, hogy feltettem az unokám képét a felhasználói lapomra Fájl:Melinda.jpg. Másnap azt tapasztaltam, hogy egy skót terrier képe néz vissza rám, mert nem a fajtanevét adta meg a feltöltője, hanem File:Melinda.jpg néven töltötte fel. Kérlek nézd meg, hogy érthető voltam-e a kép törlé, vagy átnevezése ügyében. Segítségedet előre is megköszönöm. KeFe * Talk 06:24, 29 March 2012 (UTC)

Szia! Bizonyosan én hibázok valahol, de nem sikerült az általad leírtakat a laptörténetekből rekonstruálnom. A File:Melinda.jpg képet User:Rolandoquenta töltötte fel és a kép azóta nem változott, tehát a felhasználói lapodon sem változhatott meg. (A kép egyébként nem teljesíti az azonnali törlés kritériumait, ezért szerintem a törlést kérő sablont törölnöd kellene) A problémát úgy oldhatod meg a legegyszerűbben, ha képedet új (még nem foglalt) néven töltöd fel. – File átnevezést a Template:Rename sablon elhelyezésével lehet kérni. A sablon leírásánál – részben magyarul – olvashatsz a paraméterezésről. Második paraméterként a Commons:File renaming lapon felsorolt átnevezési kritérium sorszámát kell feltüntetni. Ha jól értem az ott leírtakat, az általad leírt indok alapján nem lehet átnevezést kérni. Üdvözlettel: --Csanády (talk) 07:02, 29 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Köszönöm a mindenre kiterjedő oktatást, de egyrészt valaki már átnevezte az általam megadott névre, másrészt nem szeretném az angol WP kezelését megtanulni - ahoz én már öreg vagyok.
Valamit biztosan rosszul magyaráztam el, ezért nem érted a problémámat: 2008-ban feltöltöttem a magyar WP felhasználói lapomra az unokám fényképét, akit történetesen Melindának hívnak. A kép meg is jelent a lapomon, de néhány nap után ez a skót terrier volt a helyén látható. Ekkor a vitalapon jeleztem a kutya átnevezését, de eredménye a mai napig nem volt. Közben persze az unokám képét kellett törölnöm, mert nem akartam más néven feltölteni a képét.
A Melinda egy női név és bár hívhatja valaki a kutyáját is ezen a néven, de egy több száz enciklopédia képtárába nem a kutya nevét, hanem a fajtanevét kell a képnek adni. Ezért indokolt a kép átnevezése, függetlenül az én problémámtól. Bár nem néztem meg ki nevezte át, azért ezúton is megköszönöm és neked is, hogy foglalkoztál vele. További jó szerkesztést kívánok neked Üdv. KeFe * Talk 18:29, 29 March 2012 (UTC)

File:Márton Áron Székelyudvarhely.JPG

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

Cezarika1 (talk) 07:27, 11 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

File:Márton Áron Kézdivásárhely.jpg

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

Cezarika1 (talk) 07:28, 11 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Salamon király - magyar

[edit]

Szia, épp meg akartalak dícsérni, de a Salamon király kategorizálásánál megakadtam. Árpád-házi magyar király I. András magyar király utóda nem lehet a "magyar férfiak" (Category:Men of Hungary in art) között annak ellenére, hogy az anyja nem volt magyar? --Pe-Jo (talk) 07:10, 16 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Szia! Reméltem, hogy észreveszed és írsz nekem... :) – A dolognak nem Salamon mamájához van köze. A Category:Men of Hungary in art kategória (pontosabb fordítása: Magyar férfiak a képzőművészetben) csak magyar férfiakhoz köthető képzőművészeti alkotásokat, illetve ezzel kapcsolatos kategóriákat tartalmazhat. Mivel Salamon nem képzőművészeti alkotás, hanem egy személy, ezért nincs helye ebben a kategóriában. Ennek akkor is így kell lennie, ha történetesen a Salamon kategória pillanatnyilag csak képzőművészeti alkotásokat tartalmaz, ui. a jövőben ez nem feltétlenül lesz így. Pl. a Category:Béla I of Hungary kategóriát is felvetted a Category:Men of Hungary in art kategóriába, holott Béla kategóriájában már most sem csak képzőművészeti alkotások szerepelnek. Ha ezek után nincs ellenedre kivenném őt is és a többi uralkodót is a Men of Hungary in art-ból. A Category:Men of Hungary kategóriába persze fel kellene venni a magyar uralkodókat. – Remélem nincs harag :) Szép napot: --Csanády (talk) 11:43, 16 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Szia!Dehogy is . Én is a két kategória között gondolkodtam....Igazad van. Valahogy én is így gondoltam, hogy ide feltenni: Category:Men of Hungary, az "art"-ot majd meg lehet oldani, látom sok személynél már Te meg is oldottad. A dicséret megillet a szorgalmadért. További sikeres szerkesztést.--Pe-Jo (talk) 09:36, 17 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Köszönöm! Neked is :) --Csanády (talk) 09:40, 17 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]
bahasa melayu ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ dansk ∙ deutsch (Sie-Form) ∙ deutsch ∙ english ∙ español ∙ français ∙ galego ∙ hrvatski ∙ italiano ∙ magyar ∙ nederlands ∙ norsk ∙ norsk bokmål ∙ norsk nynorsk ∙ português ∙ polski ∙ português do Brasil ∙ română ∙ sicilianu ∙ slovenčina ∙ slovenščina ∙ suomi ∙ svenska ∙ türkçe ∙ беларуская ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца) ∙ български ∙ македонски ∙ русский ∙ українська ∙ हिन्दी ∙ ಕನ್ನಡ ∙ ತುಳು ∙ മലയാളം ∙ 한국어 ∙ 日本語 ∙ 中文（简体） ∙ 中文（繁體） ∙ עברית ∙ العربيَّة ∙ فارسی ∙ +/−
Warning sign
This media may be deleted.
Thanks for uploading File:Barabás Spring near the Church in Hodritsch 1874.jpg. I notice that the file page either doesn't contain enough information about the license or it contains contradictory information about the license, so the copyright status is unclear.

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

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

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

Saibo (Δ∇) 02:16, 23 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

fixed. --Saibo (Δ∇) 02:18, 23 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]
bahasa melayu ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ dansk ∙ deutsch (Sie-Form) ∙ deutsch ∙ english ∙ español ∙ français ∙ galego ∙ hrvatski ∙ italiano ∙ magyar ∙ nederlands ∙ norsk ∙ norsk bokmål ∙ norsk nynorsk ∙ português ∙ polski ∙ português do Brasil ∙ română ∙ sicilianu ∙ slovenčina ∙ slovenščina ∙ suomi ∙ svenska ∙ türkçe ∙ беларуская ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца) ∙ български ∙ македонски ∙ русский ∙ українська ∙ हिन्दी ∙ ಕನ್ನಡ ∙ ತುಳು ∙ മലയാളം ∙ 한국어 ∙ 日本語 ∙ 中文（简体） ∙ 中文（繁體） ∙ עברית ∙ العربيَّة ∙ فارسی ∙ +/−
Warning sign
This media may be deleted.
Thanks for uploading File:Rohn Portrait of Riza Kempelen 1857.jpg. I notice that the file page either doesn't contain enough information about the license or it contains contradictory information about the license, so the copyright status is unclear.

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

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

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

Saibo (Δ∇) 02:27, 23 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

[4] Excuse me! Thank you! --Csanády (talk) 05:22, 23 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks! --Saibo (Δ∇) 14:46, 23 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]
bahasa melayu ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ dansk ∙ deutsch (Sie-Form) ∙ deutsch ∙ english ∙ español ∙ français ∙ galego ∙ hrvatski ∙ italiano ∙ magyar ∙ nederlands ∙ norsk ∙ norsk bokmål ∙ norsk nynorsk ∙ português ∙ polski ∙ português do Brasil ∙ română ∙ sicilianu ∙ slovenčina ∙ slovenščina ∙ suomi ∙ svenska ∙ türkçe ∙ беларуская ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца) ∙ български ∙ македонски ∙ русский ∙ українська ∙ हिन्दी ∙ ಕನ್ನಡ ∙ ತುಳು ∙ മലയാളം ∙ 한국어 ∙ 日本語 ∙ 中文（简体） ∙ 中文（繁體） ∙ עברית ∙ العربيَّة ∙ فارسی ∙ +/−
Warning sign
This media may be deleted.
Thanks for uploading File:Goszleth Károly Gundel and his Wife 1907.jpg. I notice that the file page either doesn't contain enough information about the license or it contains contradictory information about the license, so the copyright status is unclear.

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

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

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

Denniss (talk) 19:40, 5 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Notification about possible deletion

[edit]
Some contents have been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether they should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at their entry.

If you created these pages, please note that the fact that they have been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with them, such as a copyright issue. Please see Commons:But it's my own work! for a guide on how to address these issues.

Please remember to respond to and – if appropriate – contradict the arguments supporting deletion. Arguments which focus on the nominator will not affect the result of the nomination. Thank you!
Afrikaans ∙ العربية ∙ беларуская ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца) ∙ български ∙ ပအိုဝ်ႏဘာႏသာႏ ∙ বাংলা ∙ bosanski ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ dansk ∙ Deutsch ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form) ∙ Zazaki ∙ ދިވެހިބަސް ∙ Ελληνικά ∙ English ∙ Esperanto ∙ español ∙ eesti ∙ فارسی ∙ suomi ∙ français ∙ galego ∙ עברית ∙ hrvatski ∙ magyar ∙ հայերեն ∙ Bahasa Indonesia ∙ íslenska ∙ italiano ∙ 日本語 ∙ 한국어 ∙ 조선말 ∙ македонски ∙ മലയാളം ∙ Bahasa Melayu ∙ မြန်မာဘာသာ ∙ norsk bokmål ∙ Plattdüütsch ∙ Nederlands ∙ norsk nynorsk ∙ norsk ∙ occitan ∙ polski ∙ پښتو ∙ português ∙ português do Brasil ∙ română ∙ русский ∙ sicilianu ∙ slovenčina ∙ slovenščina ∙ shqip ∙ српски / srpski ∙ svenska ∙ ไทย ∙ Türkçe ∙ українська ∙ Tiếng Việt ∙ 中文 ∙ 中文（简体） ∙ 中文（繁體） ∙ +/−

Affected:

And also:

Yours sincerely, Stefan4 (talk) 15:06, 2 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]


Notification about possible deletion

[edit]
Some contents have been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether they should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at their entry.

If you created these pages, please note that the fact that they have been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with them, such as a copyright issue. Please see Commons:But it's my own work! for a guide on how to address these issues.

Please remember to respond to and – if appropriate – contradict the arguments supporting deletion. Arguments which focus on the nominator will not affect the result of the nomination. Thank you!
Afrikaans ∙ العربية ∙ беларуская ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца) ∙ български ∙ ပအိုဝ်ႏဘာႏသာႏ ∙ বাংলা ∙ bosanski ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ dansk ∙ Deutsch ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form) ∙ Zazaki ∙ ދިވެހިބަސް ∙ Ελληνικά ∙ English ∙ Esperanto ∙ español ∙ eesti ∙ فارسی ∙ suomi ∙ français ∙ galego ∙ עברית ∙ hrvatski ∙ magyar ∙ հայերեն ∙ Bahasa Indonesia ∙ íslenska ∙ italiano ∙ 日本語 ∙ 한국어 ∙ 조선말 ∙ македонски ∙ മലയാളം ∙ Bahasa Melayu ∙ မြန်မာဘာသာ ∙ norsk bokmål ∙ Plattdüütsch ∙ Nederlands ∙ norsk nynorsk ∙ norsk ∙ occitan ∙ polski ∙ پښتو ∙ português ∙ português do Brasil ∙ română ∙ русский ∙ sicilianu ∙ slovenčina ∙ slovenščina ∙ shqip ∙ српски / srpski ∙ svenska ∙ ไทย ∙ Türkçe ∙ українська ∙ Tiếng Việt ∙ 中文 ∙ 中文（简体） ∙ 中文（繁體） ∙ +/−

Dcoetzee (talk) 01:19, 13 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

File:Szent Miklós Gyergyószentmiklós.jpg

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

Cezarika1 (talk) 06:24, 8 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

File:Bem József Kézdivásárhely.jpg

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

Cezarika1 (talk) 06:31, 8 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Károly_Szathmáry_Pap

[edit]
Category discussion warning

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

If you created this category, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for discussion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with it. If the category is up for deletion because it has been superseded, consider the notion that although the category may be deleted, your hard work (which we all greatly appreciate) lives on in the new category.

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

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

Maxx (talk) 15:57, 22 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Than Mór: Pulszky Ferenc arcképe

[edit]

Néhány éve te töltötted fel ezt a képet:

Pulszky Ferenc portréja

.

Meg tudnád mondani, hogy honnan származik? A Commons forrásleírása nem ad pontos linket.

Előre is köszi:

--Lalo5555 (talk) 11:02, 30 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thuróczy János krónikájának első két lapja

[edit]

Good day.

Could you please tell me what the origin of the picture is (Thuroczy_elso_lap.jpg)? From a Library book or a Museum ?

I have no intention to use the photo myself.

Thank you very much, John.

Retrieved from "https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Csanády/arc_–2013-09-29&oldid=194640027"