User talk:De728631/2014

Archives 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018

Category:CY-51_Fruitful_Bough_(ship,_1996)

CY-51 Fruitful Bough (ship, 1996) 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 If the category is up for deletion because it has been superseded, consider the notion that although the category may be deleted, your hard work (which we all greatly appreciate) lives on in the new category.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!

Nick (talk) 22:52, 2 January 2014 (UTC)

File:Infanteria Ejercito de Chile.jpg

Please do not delete. The Chilean Army (Ejército de Chile) shares its graphic work. See please page http://www.ejercito.cl/galeria.php and in the bottom "Todos los derechos reservados bajo una licencia Creative Commons No Comercial - sin derivadas 2.0 Chile". Thanks!

Drosophila images

Hi I am User:Josiasseb

One FlyBase guy and I agreed on the license terms as well as text labels for these images. I send e-mails we got to permissions-commons@wikimedia.org. Do I need to provide something more? Maybe the CC license we agreed on is not the right one?

Flybase.org, or flybase.bio.indiana.edu, is a USA academic database partly funded by NIH. Some of these images were published in 1943/1944. Those should not have copyright anymore, right?

mashleymorgan images

Hi, I see that you've uploaded at least one image (File:ARH Tiger Hellfire trial flight 2005.jpg) which was posted to Flickr by mashleymorgan. Unfortunately this guy is a serial copyright violator who uploads images which are under Australian Government copyright as being CC. The metadata for the images shows that it is actually the property of the Australian Department of Defence, which does not use CC. I'd suggest that you nominate these any any other mashleymorgan images for deletion. Regards, Nick-D (talk) 11:08, 20 January 2014 (UTC)

Doh. Thanks for pointing this out to me. I've now filed Commons:Deletion requests/File:ARH Tiger Hellfire trial flight 2005.jpg. De728631 (talk) 16:40, 20 January 2014 (UTC)

Familienwappen Bruhin etc.

Sie haben vorgeschlagen, dass die Grafiken der Familienwappen, Bruhin, Hunger, Hüppin etc. zu löschen, weil sie gegen Urheberrechtsbestimmungen verstossen. Ich bitte Sie darum diesen Löschungsantrag zu wiederrufen. Ich kannte Pater Heim sehr gut. Er unterrichtete am gleichen Gymnasium, wo ich einen Lehrauftrag habe. Das Buch "kleine Geschichte der March" hat er in seinem eigenen Verlag verlegt. Er konnte den Siegeszug des Internets leider nicht mehr erleben da er in den 80er Jahren starb. Die Verwendung der Wappen. in diesem Zusammenhang, hätte er sicher gebilligt und er wäre sehr stolz, dass seine Arbeit auch im Internet seinen Nachhall findet. Das Buch ist zudem vergriffen und die Grafiken wären hier auf Wikipedia an einem "sicheren" Ort, wo sie die Zeit überleben. Ich bitte Sie daher eindringlich, die verwendeten Bilder nicht zu löschen. Ich entschuldige mich, dass ich mich so umständlich an Sie wende. Bin ein "Neuling" im Wikipediaeinträge schaffen.

Liebe(r) Tumini, Ihre Bekanntschaft mit Pater Heim in all Ehren, aber die gesetzlichen Bestimmungen sind hier leider eindeutig. Wenn keine Erlaubnis durch den Inhaber der Rechte vorliegt (in diesem Fall wohl Pater Heims Erben), dann können solche Werke nicht verwendet werden, und auch nur der Rechteinhaber darf Lizenzen zur weiteren Verwendung vergeben. Außerdem entscheide nicht ich über die endgültige Löschung der Grafiken, sondern ein Administrator der Wikimedia Commons, der den Löschantrag auswertet. Abgesehen davon können Wappenschilde jederzeit neu gezeichnet und unter einer freien Lizenz veröffentlicht werden, da der Blason, also die heraldische Beschreibung der Wappen im Allgemeinen nicht geschützt ist. Was allerdings das Urheberrecht auf den Plan ruft, ist die individuelle Darstellung der Elemente. De728631 (talk) 23:26, 31 January 2014 (UTC)

IMO numbers

I reverted your contribution on the Vietnam ship, as it was not in line with all other IMO categories. The category was intended to group the information for an individual ship and we find the IMO number category only where the shipyard is involved. Ships built on a certain shipyard are preferrably represented by the IMO number. Clicking on the IMO category results in all the names of the ships. --Stunteltje (talk) 19:13, 31 March 2014 (UTC)

Well, facts like the country of the shipbuilder, year of build and such are not unique to the individual ship named MV John Doe but to the hull registered with a certain IMO number. In case of Category:Song Duong (ship, 1979), the ship has been renamed and the same basic data applies to Category:Phuong Mai Star (ship, 1979). That's why I think we should simply show the year of build, "Ships built in" etc. with the IMO category. The IMO category represents the hull that gets built somewhere someday and gets scrapped in the end or is lost at sea. The type of ship may change during the lifetime of a hull when its gets converted to another use but some general data should better be represented by the IMO category. De728631 (talk) 19:24, 31 March 2014 (UTC)

My problem is, that I categorised already thousands of ships the way that only the shipyard is categorised in the IMO category. Categorising the way you suggest complicates that way of categorising. It is not wrong, but not clear for not-specialised users. Those users expect the categories of yard-country, flag-country and use-categories together with the ship-by-name-categories. Besides, have a check yourself and you will find how much work is involved in recategorising all ships the way you suggest. --Stunteltje (talk) 19:37, 31 March 2014 (UTC)

If it's just about the workload we could get a bot to do the work. And then there is also {{IMOcat}} that tells people where to look for more information about the individual ship. I like what it says there in small print ;) I think I'm going to suggest this type of recategorisation at Category talk:Ships by IMO number or somewhere else where it gets more attention. De728631 (talk) 19:52, 31 March 2014 (UTC)

I slept a night over it and now I don't think its a good idea. Please realise that only ships built in the last thirty years have IMO numbers. To make a difference in presenting category information in different ways for older and newer ships does not help the common(s) user. --Stunteltje (talk) 05:39, 1 April 2014 (UTC)

You've got a point there. Perhaps we should just continue like before. De728631 (talk) 14:06, 1 April 2014 (UTC)

My preference. Unless someone has another and useful idea. --Stunteltje (talk) 14:19, 1 April 2014 (UTC)

File:Leipziger Verkehrsbetriebe 30.10.2009 netzplan.jpg

Then delete it speedily, thanks a lot.--辛庚己戊 (talk) 14:06, 6 April 2014 (UTC)

I appreciated your explanation.--辛庚己戊 (talk) 14:12, 6 April 2014 (UTC)

ArchiveBot

Hi, I noticed you have set up User:MiszaBot to archive your talk page. Unfortunately, the bot has stopped working, and given how its operator is inactive, it is unclear when/if this will fixed. For the time being, I have volunteered to operate a MiszaBot clone (running the exact same code). With that said, your input would be appreciated at Commons:Bots/Requests/ArchiveBot 1. Regards, FASTILY 07:40, 20 April 2014 (UTC)

Thanks for the note but now it seems like you've already been granted the job of botmaster. Thanks a lot for continuing the task. De728631 (talk) 19:58, 25 April 2014 (UTC)

Hi

Hi... I no speak English. My ask is: for what delete my picture... ¡¿I used the correct license?! Please don't delete mys pictures ups! ByeShe Look So Perfect... (talk) 22:48, 10 August 2014 (UTC)

Hi... Please help me for pictures up good, ¿yes?

I need u help...

Thank u. She Look So Perfect... (talk) 23:09, 10 August 2014 (UTC)

¡A cupcake for you!

Hi, this cupcake is for u... ¡I NEED U HELP! Help me! She Look So Perfect... (talk) 23:11, 10 August 2014 (UTC)

Well, there's nothing much I can do now that you've been blocked. I don't speak Spanish but I've left you a prefabricated note to explain why uploading fair use images from Wikipedias is a bad idea at Commons. De728631 (talk) 22:54, 11 August 2014 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Copyright Watcher Barnstar
	For help in identifying licensing issues and warn of future wrongdoing by myself Wilfredo R. Rodríguez H. (talk) 18:36, 18 September 2014 (UTC)

Heh, thank you! :) De728631 (talk) 18:37, 18 September 2014 (UTC)

Notification about possible deletion

Some contents have been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether they should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at their entry. If you created these pages, please note that the fact that they have been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with them, such as a copyright issue. Please see Commons:But it's my own work! for a guide on how to address these issues. Please remember to respond to and – if appropriate – contradict the arguments supporting deletion. Arguments which focus on the nominator will not affect the result of the nomination. Thank you!

Affected:

• File:Pièce de 2€ commémorative Allemagne.png

Yours sincerely, Stefan4 (talk) 21:46, 25 October 2014 (UTC)

Ships by shipyard

I found you (removed Category:Ships built at Cheoy Lee Shipyard, Hong Kong) at the IMO category. But I think it is better to use the yard in de IMO category than in the category by shipname. Ships can change names, the IMO number does not change. Have a look at Category:Ships built at Sietas Werft. Thanks for the name of the tug. --Stunteltje (talk) 09:35, 26 October 2014 (UTC)

Yes, I was first thinking along that line, too, but then I found some other name categories where IMO and shipyard were on the same level of hierarchy. That's why I put the shipyard back to the name cat. But I'm going to restore my first version. De728631 (talk) 15:25, 26 October 2014 (UTC)

Thanks. I spend sometimes energy in changing these categories, but there are many more to do. By the way, it is useful to add {{IMO|xxxxxxx}} to chese IMO categories. It sorts the files automatically. You see the results in the other two numbers of the category. Sorted by the number, not under the I. --Stunteltje (talk) 16:34, 26 October 2014 (UTC)

Oh, good. I didn't know that {{IMO}} had this autocat function. I use to add sort keys when adding categories but this time I must have forgotten to do it. De728631 (talk) 19:12, 29 October 2014 (UTC)