User talk:Edelseider/Archive 6

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

Humor humanitasque

Hello Edelseider, I just wanted to compliment you for your humo[u]r and the sensibility of your replies at Commons:Village_pump#Hard_cocks - you're a mensch. SebastianHelm (talk) 07:08, 11 August 2017 (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 ∙ 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, JuTa 14:30, 20 August 2017 (UTC)

Category:Compagnie_des_transports_strasbourgeois

Category discussion warning

Compagnie des transports strasbourgeois 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 ∙ +/−

   FDMS  4    20:21, 13 September 2017 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion
Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Haus des Reichs - Treppenhaus Beleuchtung 2014.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. --Ermell 21:28, 12 September 2017 (UTC)

--QICbot (talk) 22:36, 14 September 2017 (UTC)

Stop, ça suffit.

Bonjour Gzen92. Je suis ravi de voir à quel point tu t'investis dans les fichiers de Colmar. Mais tu en fais trop, beaucoup trop. Tu crées des tas de catégories inutiles, tu déplaces quotidiennement des fichiers dans un sens puis dans l'autre... "Art Nouveau", en anglais, prend une majuscule à "Nouveau" et c'est la graphie en vigueur sur Commons. Tu devrais "lâcher" un peu Colmar, j'ai l'impression que tu te fatigues beaucoup pour pas grand chose. Après tout, il n'y a que 10 479 fichiers portant le nom de Colmar ( et ça inclut Colmars et Colmar-Berg, qui ne sont pas Colmar ). Il y a 46 678 fichiers portant le nom de Strasbourg et 668 312 fichiers portant le nom de Paris ! Ça remet les choses en perspective ! Cordialement, --Edelseider (talk) 08:58, 7 October 2017 (UTC)

Bonjour. Ok pour "Art nouveau" je me suis effectivement trompé. La catégorie Colmar était quand même assez bordélique avant que je ne m'attèle au classement des fichiers, même si je fais des erreurs (je te remercie de repasser derrière moi), je ne pense pas m'arrêter avant d'avoir fait le tour, chacun son truc. Cordialement, Gzen92 [discuter] 13:11, 7 October 2017 (UTC)
@Gzen92: Évite quand même de déplacer sans arrêt les fichiers et les catégories comme tu l'as fait pour le musée Unterlinden. Il faut aussi savoir s'arrêter. --Edelseider (talk) 13:40, 7 October 2017 (UTC)
J'ai tendance à indiquer (trop souvent) le terme "Colmar" ça évite de se tromper de catégorie à l'import, c'est sûr que c'est plus utile pour les noms de rues que pour les musées Unterlinden et Bartholdi qui sont "uniques". Pour ce qui est du classement j'ai catégorisé au maximum, je parcours actuellement l'arborescence, quelques renommages pour la cohérence (j'essaierai de ne pas faire d'excès), j'indique le libellé en français et puis se sera bon pour moi. Gzen92 [discuter] 13:51, 7 October 2017 (UTC)

NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOON

Cher Gzen92. Tu t'es encore trompé par excès de zèle. Quand arrêteras-tu de déplacer des fichiers à tort et à travers ? ? ? En anglais, une catégorie "Paintings of the musée Bartholdi" ne signifie pas "Peintures contenues dans le musée Bartholdi" mais "Peintures représentant le musée Bartholdi". S'il te plaît, arrête de faire n'importe quoi. Je vais finir par demander qu'on intervienne pour t'empêcher de foutre encore davantage le bordel que tu ne le fais déjà !--Edelseider (talk) 16:19, 13 October 2017 (UTC)

Ok, je trouvais bizarre que l'on utilise "of the" et que l'on suive avec un mot en français, mais je ne suis pas doué en anglais. Peut-être que "Paintings of the museum Bartholdi" irait mieux. C'est vrai que tu suis les catégories de ce musée ainsi que d'Unterlinden, donc effectivement ce n'est plus la peine que j'y touche je suppose. Gzen92 [discuter] 16:27, 13 October 2017 (UTC)

File:Uprka, Fête villageoise.jpg

File:Uprka, Fête villageoise.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） ∙ +/−

88.146.210.193 17:13, 30 October 2017 (UTC)

Danke für die Teilnahme bei WikiDaheim 2017 in Österreich!

Hallo Edelseider!

Vielen Dank für Deine Teilnahme am Wettbewerb zu WikiDaheim! Von Ende Juli bis Anfang Oktober wurden so insgesamt mehr als 7.000 Bilder hochgeladen und viele Ort in Österreich in der Wikipedia und anderen Projekten mit neuen Bildern versehen, was nur dank der vielen Beiträge wie Deinem möglich war.

Die 561 besten Bilder wurden in den letzten Wochen von einer Vorjury ausgesucht, die Du dir hier anschauen kannst - vielleicht sind auch Bilder von Dir dabei! :-) Eine Jury wird nun bis Mitte November die zehn besten Bilder aussuchen, die Preisträger werden danach von uns verständigt.

Nochmals vielen Dank für Deine Beiträge. Wir würden uns freuen, wenn Du auch in Zukunft die Wikimedia-Projekte bebilderst! Im 2. Halbjahr 2018 wird WikiDaheim wahrscheinlich wieder stattfinden - wir würden uns freuen, wenn du dann wieder dabei wärst :-) Solltest Du Fragen haben, so kannst Du Dich gerne an wikidaheim@wikimedia.at wenden.

(Braveheart für das Team von WikiDaheim, 11:47, 2. Nov 2017 (UTC))

Your account has been blocked

Ceci n'est pas acceptable. Merci de respecter les contributeurs. La prochaine fois, ça sera plus long. Cordialement, Yann (talk) 08:43, 29 November 2017 (UTC)

@Yann: Seulement une semaine de blocage pour avoir posé une question ? Tu aurais dû me bloquer un mois, que dis-je, une année, voire pour toujours ! Quelle timidité ! ( Tu noteras que je ne sais toujours pas ce que fait Tomi Ungerer sur la photo sur laquelle il met sa main dans sa poche intérieure, mais le photographe, qui aurait pu nous le dire, préfère se voiler dans le mystère... c'est tellement plus attrayant... ) --Edelseider (talk) 10:15, 29 November 2017 (UTC)
(Edit conflict) Yann, this block is a mystery. The message promises "The reason for the block is available in the block log", but that is not the case; it has a vague comment "(Intimidation/harassment)", but does not say what the user actually did. The diff gives an error because it points to a deleted page. Since I'm not an administrator on Commons, I have no way to see the history of that page. Nothing in the blocked user's contributions gives any reason for concern. Apparently, there has been no prior discussion or warning; neither the blocked user's talk page or the blocking admin's contributions give me any hint.
This becomes even more mysterious when the user is thanked for his respect ("Merci de respecter les contributeurs"). Some people write the opposite of what they mean and call it "irony", but that is less likely here, given that this page is on my watchlist precisely because I recently complimented Edelseider for his respect to a user he disagreed with. All I can see is the title of the deleted file, "Tomi Ungerer par Claude Truong-Ngoc novembre 2017.jpg". This sounds like a cartoon of Tomi Ungerer, so I can imagine that the cartoon might have been disrespectful of Mr. Ungerer. Since Mr. Ungerer is known for his "satire virulente" (as characterized in the lede of our French article; the English article has a similar characterization in its lede), it is conceivable and not inappropriate that a cartoon showing Mr. Ungerer might be virulently satirical, as well. If that was the reason for the block, then I request the block to be annulled. SebastianHelm (talk) 10:37, 29 November 2017 (UTC)
@SebastianHelm: The reason for the blocking is very simple. On the photo of Tomi Ungerer, Mr. Ungerer is seen sticking a hand inside the pocket of his coat. On the talk page, I asked what he was doing and what had happened right before and right after the photographer pressed the button of his camera. As expected, I got no serious, informative answer but only a flippant comment by Ctruongngoc (talk · contribs), who is notorious for being skin-thinned and touchy and has a history of accusing other people of malice and worse whenever he's mildly criticized (I am quite like him, I must admit). So I replied sarcastically that I did expect that he wouldn't answer, being the diva that he sometimes is (bless him and his leather pants http://ctruongngoc.canalblog.com/archives/2009/05/05/13655491.html; File:Knopflatz Lederhose01.jpg). And since he had answered that Mr. Ungerer had reached for his gun to shoot him, I have replied that I would do so myself seeing how he refuses to answer a straight question. Of course, Yann (talk · contribs) had to block me for this, because Claude would have been quite unhappy if he/she hadn't! He may have had to answer a simple question in a non-petulant way instead! Now that I have officially "intimidated" and "threatened" him and that history has been rewritten by the deletion of the page, all is well in Claude's and Yann's world. All the best --Edelseider (talk) 11:54, 29 November 2017 (UTC)
Thank you for your explanation, which appears coherent to me. In a case like this, blocking without warning seems like a gross overreaction. Of course, such a threat should not be allowed to stand, but one has to assume quite a dose of bad faith not to see it simply as a bad joke.
Yann, what works for me in cases like this is to remove the offending post (or sentence, if the post contained other meaningful content). This usually works pretty well: At the moment, the offender feels like their wrists got slapped - a little shocked (because it violates something like a taboo) and often somewhat embarrassed. And in the long run, they are rather relieved because their slip-up has been purged from the text. SebastianHelm (talk) 13:53, 29 November 2017 (UTC)
It seems you don't get it. We don't accept this kind of bad jokes here. The very minimum you must do is to apologize to Claude. Regards, Yann (talk) 20:54, 29 November 2017 (UTC)
@Yann: I get it very well: petulance and bad jokes are allowed when they are made by your friends in real life. Si ça te fait jouir de me bloquer pour faire plaisir à ton ami, tant mieux pour toi ! Chacun sa libido ! --Edelseider (talk) 07:50, 30 November 2017 (UTC)
Find another hobby until next month. Then you can think how to apologize, or you will block indefinitely. Regards, Yann (talk) 16:35, 30 November 2017 (UTC)

I have unblocked your account per Commons:Administrators'_noticeboard/User_problems#Misuse_of_administrative_tools_by_user:Yann. For the future, please try not to use jokes and sarcasm at Commons. How they will be interpreted is, as you have seen, completely unpredictable. Jcb (talk) 08:28, 22 December 2017 (UTC)

Paintings from Italy in France

Thanks for your message and for filling those new categories! I will take into consideration later on as I have some fresh images to upload from the museum of Lille. --Sailko (talk) 15:48, 14 February 2018 (UTC)

@Sailko: Great! I have gone through absolutely all relevant categories and all the existing files are now categorized. I am sure that the musée Fesch in Ajaccio especially contains much more paintings from Italy than those that are available on Commons. As a matter of fact, I have also seen paintings from Italy in the musée d'art Roger-Quillot in Clermont-Ferrand and in the the musée Jacquemart-André of Paris that are missing here, too. I uploaded a few pictures from the Strasbourg collection recently, maybe you saw them? All the best, --Edelseider (talk) 16:04, 14 February 2018 (UTC)
I know there are many many museums with Italian paintings in their collections. When I can, I'll shot them for Commons! Thank you --Sailko (talk) 17:33, 14 February 2018 (UTC)
There are many museums I would like to visit in France.. one day I will plan a long road trip ;) --Sailko (talk) 12:03, 21 March 2018 (UTC)

File source is not properly indicated: File:Tintoret, Scipione Venerio Bemberg.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:Tintoret, Scipione Venerio Bemberg.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!

Sebastian Wallroth (talk) 19:48, 2 April 2018 (UTC)

File source is not properly indicated: File:Tintoret, Sophonisbe Bemberg.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:Tintoret, Sophonisbe Bemberg.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!

Sebastian Wallroth (talk) 19:48, 2 April 2018 (UTC)

Image without license

File:Musée Vodou - Ancien château d'eau (36804847334).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 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 MifterBot (Talk • Contribs • Owner), 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. --MifterBot (Talk • Contribs • Owner) 11:35, 22 April 2018 (UTC)

Bonjour

A message for you. Regards, --Bohème (talk) 04:50, 2 June 2018 (UTC)

Image without license

File:22 Rue Oberlin (33375892785).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 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 MifterBot (Talk • Contribs • Owner), 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. --MifterBot (Talk • Contribs • Owner) 16:42, 23 June 2018 (UTC)


File:Rue de l'outre (32480869142).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 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 MifterBot (Talk • Contribs • Owner), 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. --MifterBot (Talk • Contribs • Owner) 16:43, 23 June 2018 (UTC)

Maisons de l'impasse Léopold

Bonjour,

En regardant les catégories Category:Maison, 6 impasse Léopold (Neuwiller-lès-Saverne)‎ et Category:Maison, 8 impasse Léopold (Neuwiller-lès-Saverne)‎, je me demande si tout est bien correct. Les deux fiches sont liés chacune à deux notice Mérimée qui ont des adresses différentes (6 et 105 ainsi que 8 et 104), bizarre mais une re-numérotation n'est pas quelque chose d'inhabituel (à vérifier pour avoir une certitude, notamment pour vérifier que les numéros actuels sont bien les 6 et 8 afin d'harmoniser les titres sur Commons, Wikipédia et Wikidata). Par contre, j'ai l'impression qu'il y a eu inversion avec les deux notices Wikidata. Pourrais-tu regarder et confirmer mes deux hypothèses ?

(pour info, ceci est une copie du message laissé à Ralph Hammann il y a plusieurs semaines mais resté sans réponse)

Cdlt, VIGNERON (talk) 13:52, 29 June 2018 (UTC)

Bonjour @VIGNERON: , je ne sais pas quoi répondre sinon que la date de classement ( le 21 avril 1934 ) est identique sur toutes les fiches. Je pense qu'il y a effectivement eu une renumérotation des maison de cette rue, l'impasse Léopold étant de toute façon bien trop courte pour accueillir plus de cinquante maisons de part et d'autre ! Tout compte fait, je pense que tout est correct. Cdtl, Edelseider (talk) 14:35, 29 June 2018 (UTC)
Il y a quand même un petit problème : le 104 correspond-il au 6 ou au 8 ? (idem pour le 105)
Actuellement Category:Maison, 8 impasse Léopold (Neuwiller-lès-Saverne) est lié à la notice Mérimée PA00084826 qui dit 104 et à l'élément Wikidata d:Q15952156 qui dit 105... (lui-même lié à PA00084827 qui dit 105 mais qui est relié au 6 sur Commons).
Cdlt, VIGNERON (talk) 14:59, 29 June 2018 (UTC)
Je pense qu'il faudrait se renseigner directement auprès du ministère de la culture. Désolé de ne pas pouvoir t'aider plus que ça ! Cdtl, Edelseider (talk) 19:38, 30 June 2018 (UTC)

Image without license

File:Haus der Wirtschaft Baden-Württemberg (39158073921).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 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 MifterBot (Talk • Contribs • Owner), 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. --MifterBot (Talk • Contribs • Owner) 10:11, 18 July 2018 (UTC)

Category:Images by Gerd Eichmann/Frankreich/Elsass

Hallo Edelseider, das finde ich nicht gut, dass du die Kategorie, die ich zur Bewahrung der Übersicht mir angelegt habe, so destruktiv "gepflegt" hast. Was stört dich an meiner "Buchhaltung"? Gerd Eichmann (talk) 13:01, 27 July 2018 (UTC)

@Gerd Eichmann: Ich war lediglich ein wenig übereifrig. Viele Grüße, --Edelseider (talk) 18:51, 30 July 2018 (UTC)

Your Photo of Strasbourg Notre Dame

Hello, I just want to inform you that I have used your good photo in my video/ vlog. I make vlog as a hobby. You can watch in youtube hirlxbYRGbY Thank you kindly for sharing your photo.

Best Regards, S. Toha Stef Toha (talk) 05:55, 12 August 2018 (UTC)

Image without license

File:Strandhotel Sassnitz (147315329).jpeg

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 MifterBot (Talk • Contribs • Owner), 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. --MifterBot (Talk • Contribs • Owner) 17:35, 14 October 2018 (UTC)

License

Hi. The license CCO (CC0 1.0 Universal) for photograph File:Strasbourg-Koenigshoffen, Second-Century Mithraic Relief, Reconstruction ca. 140 CE–ca. 160 CE.jpg appears under the photograph with the title "License" [1] पाटलिपुत्र (talk) 10:34, 15 October 2018 (UTC)

You are right. I looked at the bottom of the page. Sorry. --Edelseider (talk) 10:47, 15 October 2018 (UTC)
No problem. Thanks for your vigilance. पाटलिपुत्र (talk) 10:55, 15 October 2018 (UTC)

Catégories sur File:Rayon_vert_2018.jpg

Bonjour. Je viens de voir que tu as modifié les catégories sur l’image que j’ai mise en ligne pour ma participation à Wiki loves monuments 2018. Merci pour les corrections. En revanche je ne comprends pas pourquoi tu as retiré la notice Palissy qui permettait d’associer la photo au monument représenté. Tu peux m’éclairer (pas besoin de sortir une lumière verte pour ça ;-)) ? Alexandre Franke (talk)

Bonjour @Afranke: , c'est très simple : le bandeau Palissy se trouve déjà dans la catégorie-mère Pulpit of Notre-Dame de Strasbourg. Nul besoin de le mettre partout. Cordialement, --Edelseider (talk) 16:46, 29 October 2018 (UTC)

File:Cloud Gate Chicago United States Travel Photography (112991669).jpeg

File:Cloud Gate Chicago United States Travel Photography (112991669).jpeg 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） ∙ +/−

SecretName101 (talk) 15:41, 12 November 2018 (UTC)

Category:Marckolsheim

Hallo Edelseider. Es gibt nun die zwei Unterkategorien Category:Town hall of Marckolsheim‎ und Category:Mairie de Marckolsheim‎. Wie kann das Problem gelöst werden? gruss Rauenstein (talk) 19:42, 26 December 2018 (UTC)

Image without license

File:Cité potasse Alsace 05 (217002334).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 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 MifterBot (Talk • Contribs • Owner), 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. --MifterBot (Talk • Contribs • Owner) 14:32, 4 February 2019 (UTC)


File:Cité potasse Alsace 05 (217002605).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 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 MifterBot (Talk • Contribs • Owner), 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. --MifterBot (Talk • Contribs • Owner) 14:32, 4 February 2019 (UTC)


File:Cité potasse Alsace 04 (217002673).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 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 MifterBot (Talk • Contribs • Owner), 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. --MifterBot (Talk • Contribs • Owner) 14:33, 4 February 2019 (UTC)

File:2018-09-16-10-17-29 Les FT vallée de la Zorn (29907116197).jpg

File:2018-09-16-10-17-29 Les FT vallée de la Zorn (29907116197).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） ∙ +/−

Túrelio (talk) 09:17, 5 March 2019 (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 ∙ 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:


Yours sincerely, ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 10:31, 11 March 2019 (UTC)

Category:Synagogue of Obernai

Bonjour, j'ai justement consulté la fiche Mérimée : déjà l'adresse indiquée est "43 rue du Général-Gouraud", qui correspond bien à l'emplacement d'une ancienne synagogue (cd [2]) et en plus la description correspond assez bien à ce bâtiment : "Façades sur cour", "dans le passage de l'entrée". Pour moi il ne s'agit pas de la synagogue de cette catégorie. Qu'en penses-tu ? Cordialement, Gzen92 [discuter] 06:51, 15 April 2019 (UTC)

Bonjour @Gzen92: j'en pense que, dans le doute, c'est ce bâtiment-ci qui est protégé par transfert de statut. Ce genre de cas est relativement fréquent, par exemple à Buhl dans le Haut-Rhin : l'église Saint-Jean-Baptiste a été classée en 1863, puis entièrement démolie et reconstruite à partir de 1868, pourtant ce changement ( alors qu'il ne s'agit plus du même édifice ) n'a pas entraîné de modification du statut. Voilà... Cordialement, Edelseider (talk) 07:03, 15 April 2019 (UTC)
Ok merci pour ta réponse. Je vais demander d'autres avis sur le projets MH de Wikipédia. Cordialement, Gzen92 [discuter] 07:29, 15 April 2019 (UTC)

Category:Pictures_of_Strasbourg_to_be_categorized

Category discussion warning

Category:Pictures_of_Strasbourg_to_be_categorized 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 ∙ +/−

Themightyquill (talk) 12:08, 25 April 2019 (UTC)

File:Gustave Adolphe at Breitenfeld

User talk (Commons):2.247.240.154
'File:Gustave Adolphe at Breitenfeld-Johann Walter-f3706497.jpg'

Hi Number, please leave that file alone, your efforts are appreciated but not needed. All the best, Edelseider (talk) 07:24, 10 May 2019 (UTC)

Hi Edelseider, what is the problem here?
I tried to add that category, as it was already part of the file description (as a link within the "title" field) a day ago, before I started contributing there. Please be nice and adher to WP:OWN, WP:DNB, etc.
As it stands now your comment is neither appreciated nor needed. 2.247.242.92 10:38, 10 May 2019 (UTC)
@2.247.242.92: The file is already in a category, which itself belongs to another category, and that covers all our collective needs. I suggest you dedicate your efforts to categorize uncategorized files, there are plenty of them. Files without any category and in need of some. --Edelseider (talk) 10:43, 10 May 2019 (UTC)
Just tried to restore the previous state regarding categories. Don't care much for those, anyway. I just thought: "A one-item category?! Who would need that?", and thus totally agree with your position.
Keep up the good work (and perhaps explain rather than tell people that their "efforts are not needed"). 2.247.242.92 10:52, 10 May 2019 (UTC)
@2.247.242.92: Thank you, and welcome to Wikimedia, where anybody can participate! I was referring to your specific efforts on a specific file and not the general efforts you could or may make. This particular painting has become rather famous thanks to Yuval Noah Harari, and I suppose that it was his book that attracted you to it? Have a nice day (or evening) --Edelseider (talk) 10:58, 10 May 2019 (UTC)
No, I'm just generally interested in the Thirty Years' War period. Sometimes I like to to do a little online research and improve upon articles and file descriptions. By the way, I find it sad that there's nothing online about this painting from the Strasbourg museum that apparently keeps it. 2.247.242.92 11:10, 10 May 2019 (UTC)

File source is not properly indicated: File:StMauriceSoultz.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:StMauriceSoultz.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!

JuTa 06:02, 12 May 2019 (UTC)

Please do not remove deletion requests

Bahasa Indonesia ∙ বাংলা ∙ Deutsch ∙ English ∙ español ∙ français ∙ magyar ∙ Nederlands ∙ Nederlands (informeel)‎ ∙ Plattdüütsch ∙ polski ∙ português ∙ svenska ∙ Türkçe ∙ suomi ∙ македонски ∙ русский ∙ українська ∙ മലയാളം ∙ 日本語 ∙ עברית ∙ فارسی ∙ +/−

Please do not remove deletion request tags from images before an administrator has closed the debate. If you do not agree that the image should be deleted, you can express your opinion on the deletion request page. You can find this page via a link in the deletion request tag or at Commons:Deletion requests. Thank you.

--Patrick Rogel (talk) 20:45, 17 August 2019 (UTC)

File:Karen Melchior MEP (48306127612).jpg

File:Karen Melchior MEP (48306127612).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） ∙ +/−

Patrick Rogel (talk) 20:46, 17 August 2019 (UTC)

Source of derivative work is not properly indicated: File:Publicités pour Odyssey, la première console de jeu (Pixel Museum, Schiltigheim) (48379617472).jpg

العربية ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ Deutsch ∙ English ∙ español ∙ hrvatski ∙ italiano ∙ slovenščina ∙ Tiếng Việt ∙ беларуская‎ ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ ∙ русский ∙ ไทย ∙ မြန်မာဘာသာ ∙ ပအိုဝ်ႏဘာႏသာႏ ∙ 日本語 ∙ 中文（简体）‎ ∙ 中文（繁體）‎ ∙ فارسی ∙ +/−
Warning sign
This file may be deleted.
A file that you have uploaded to Wikimedia Commons, File:Publicités pour Odyssey, la première console de jeu (Pixel Museum, Schiltigheim) (48379617472).jpg, is a derivative work, containing an "image within an image". Examples of such works would include a photograph of a sculpture, a scan of a magazine cover, or a map that has been altered from the original. In each of these cases, the rights of the creator of the original must be considered, as well as those of the creator of the derivative work.

While the description page states who made this derivative work, it currently doesn't specify who created the original work, so the overall copyright status is unclear. If you did not create the original work depicted in this image, you will need to specify the owner of the copyright.

Please edit the file description and add the missing information, or the file may be deleted. If you created the original content yourself, enter this information as the source. If someone else created the content, 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. 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!

Patrick Rogel (talk) 10:50, 18 August 2019 (UTC)

An unfree Flickr license was found on File:Karen Melchior MEP (48306127612).jpg

Deutsch ∙ English ∙ español ∙ فارسی ∙ français ∙ hrvatski ∙ italiano ∙ 日本語 ∙ മലയാളം ∙ Nederlands ∙ sicilianu ∙ Tiếng Việt ∙ +/−

A file that you uploaded to Wikimedia Commons from Flickr, File:Karen Melchior MEP (48306127612).jpg, was found available on Flickr by an administrator or reviewer under the license Noncommercial (NC), No derivative works (ND), or All Rights Reserved (Copyright), which isn't compatible with Wikimedia Commons, per the licensing policy. The file has been deleted. Commons:Flickr files/Appeal for license change has information about sending the Flickr user an appeal asking for the license to be changed. Only Flickr images tagged as BY (CC BY), BY SA (CC BY-SA), CC0 (CC0) and PDM (PDM) are allowed on Wikimedia Commons. If the Flickr user has changed the license of the Flickr image, feel free to ask an administrator to restore the file, or start an undeletion request.

--Patrick Rogel (talk) 11:14, 18 August 2019 (UTC)

This image was originally posted to Flickr by karmel80 at https://flickr.com/photos/86185290@N00/48306127612. It was reviewed on 17 August 2019 by FlickreviewR 2 and was confirmed to be licensed under the terms of the cc-by-2.0.
Patrick Rogel (talk · contribs) I am going to ask a background check on you because you are obviously trolling me for no reason at all. --Edelseider (talk) 11:17, 18 August 2019 (UTC)

Wiki Loves Monuments 2019


Hallo Edelseider,

bald ist es soweit: Vom 1. bis zum 30. September 2019 findet zum neunten Mal der internationale Wettbewerb Wiki Loves Monuments statt. Dabei können Bau- und Kulturdenkmale fotografiert und die Fotos hochgeladen werden. Du hast an einem der vergangenen Fotowettbewerbe teilgenommen. Deshalb laden wir dich ein, dieses Jahr wieder mitzumachen. Wir freuen uns auf deine Fotos!

Es sind viele spannende Motive überall in Deutschland zu fotografieren. Neben beeindruckenden märchenhaften Schlössern, Burgen und Kirchen können auch andere Kulturdenkmale wie Brücken, Industrieruinen, Bauernhöfe oder Parks fotografiert werden, um sie unter anderem in der Wikipedia zu dokumentieren. In den letzten Jahren sind zahlreiche neue Denkmallisten entstanden, die sich über Fotos freuen. Für die Suche nach Motiven gibt es bei Wikipedia zahlreiche Listen und Karten. Als Einstieg hilft diese Übersichtsseite. Weitere Informationen erhältst du auf der Mitmach-Seite.

Du bist interessiert, am Wettbewerb mitzuwirken, dir fehlt aber die richtige Technik? Dann wirf doch mal einen Blick in den Technikpool und das Technikleihportal von Wikimedia Deutschland! Dort findest du Kameras, Objektive und Zubehör verschiedenster Art. Sollte noch Technik fehlen, die aber in Zukunft unbedingt benötigt wird, dann freut sich Wikimedia Deutschland über dein Feedback zum Technikpool.

Außerdem laden wir Dich ein, ab Mitte September 2019 an der Vorjury teilzunehmen. Diese bewertet die hochgeladenen Bilder und ermittelt so gemeinsam mit der Jury, die im Oktober tagt, die Sieger von Wiki Loves Monuments 2019 in Deutschland. Das Vorjurytool ist hier bald freigeschaltet. Du benötigst dafür nur deinen Benutzernamen und das Passwort.

Für Fragen steht das Organisationsteam gerne auf der Support-Seite zur Verfügung.

Viel Spaß und Erfolg bei größten Fotowettbewerb wünscht dir im Namen des Organisationsteams --Z thomas 14:28, 28 August 2019 (UTC)

File:Gordini 1953 (7030268559).jpg

File:Gordini 1953 (7030268559).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） ∙ +/−

A1AA1A (talk) 20:58, 5 September 2019 (UTC)

Community Insights Survey

Share your experience in this survey

Hi Edelseider/Archive 6,

The Wikimedia Foundation is asking for your feedback in a survey about your experience with Wikimedia Commons and Wikimedia. The purpose of this survey is to learn how well the Foundation is supporting your work on wiki and how we can change or improve things in the future. The opinions you share will directly affect the current and future work of the Wikimedia Foundation.

Please take 15 to 25 minutes to give your feedback through this survey. It is available in various languages.

This survey is hosted by a third-party and governed by this privacy statement (in English).

Find more information about this project. Email us if you have any questions, or if you don't want to receive future messages about taking this survey.

Sincerely,

RMaung (WMF) 01:15, 10 September 2019 (UTC)

Wiki Loves Monuments France 2019

Bonjour,

Le concours Wiki Loves Monuments France est de retour et ouvert jusqu'à 31 septembre ! Déjà 8310 photos ont été importés cette année, vous aussi rejoignez le concours !

Le concours concerne tous les monuments présents dans la base Mérimée (qu'ils soient classés, inscrits ou simplement classés). De l'imposant château aux ruines industrielles, de la chapelle au coin de la rue aux mégalithes en forêt, c'est un impressionnant patrimoine qui attend d'être photographié et documenté. Où que vous soyez il y a des monuments autour de chez vous. Enfin, vous pouvez mettre en ligne autant de photos que vous le souhaitez de ces monuments. Pour information, le règlement est disponible sur le site du concours. Nous attendons vos photos avec impatience !

Les plus belles photos seront sélectionnées par un jury national composé d'amateurs et de professionnels, de contributeurs à Wikimedia Commons et d'acteurs du patrimoine. Un jury international sélectionnera ensuite des meilleures photographies mondiales.

Si vous avez des questions, l'équipe organisatrice se fera un plaisir d'y répondre.

P.S. : vous recevez ce message parce que vous avez participé au concours Wiki Loves Monuments en France les années précédentes. Si vous avez déjà ou si ne pouvez pas participer au concours cette année, faites passer le message autour de vous pour que de nouveaux et nouvelles photographes rejoignent l'aventure !

Bonne journée,

Sarah Krichen WMFr et Nicolas Vigneron, pour l'équipe de Wiki Loves Monuments France, 14:50, 12 September 2019 (UTC)

File:Get the blues (6884153610).jpg

File:Get the blues (6884153610).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） ∙ +/−

A1AA1A (talk) 20:59, 12 September 2019 (UTC)

Reminder: Community Insights Survey

Share your experience in this survey

Hi Edelseider/Archive 6,

A couple of weeks ago, we invited you to take the Community Insights Survey. It is the Wikimedia Foundation’s annual survey of our global communities. We want to learn how well we support your work on wiki. We are 10% towards our goal for participation. If you have not already taken the survey, you can help us reach our goal! Your voice matters to us.

Please take 15 to 25 minutes to give your feedback through this survey. It is available in various languages.

This survey is hosted by a third-party and governed by this privacy statement (in English).

Find more information about this project. Email us if you have any questions, or if you don't want to receive future messages about taking this survey.

Sincerely,

RMaung (WMF) 15:24, 20 September 2019 (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 ∙ 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:


Yours sincerely, Yuraily Lic (talk) 01:46, 21 September 2019 (UTC)

Reminder: Community Insights Survey

Share your experience in this survey

Hi Edelseider/Archive 6,

There are only a few weeks left to take the Community Insights Survey! We are 30% towards our goal for participation. If you have not already taken the survey, you can help us reach our goal! With this poll, the Wikimedia Foundation gathers feedback on how well we support your work on wiki. It only takes 15-25 minutes to complete, and it has a direct impact on the support we provide.

Please take 15 to 25 minutes to give your feedback through this survey. It is available in various languages.

This survey is hosted by a third-party and governed by this privacy statement (in English).

Find more information about this project. Email us if you have any questions, or if you don't want to receive future messages about taking this survey.

Sincerely,

RMaung (WMF) 20:04, 3 October 2019 (UTC)

Hochladen durch Überschreiben

Hallo Edelseider, würdest Du bitte die von Dir gefundene Fotografie als neuen Upload hochladen. Bei dem von Dir überschrieben Upload handelt es sich um einen Holzstich, der im Auschnitt nicht dem von Dir hochgeladenen Bild entspricht und irrtümlich(?) auf ein Original von Paul Sinner zugeschrieben wurde. Wir wissen nicht, ob die Zuschreibung falsch ist, oder ob nicht auch eine Fotografie von Paul Sinner vom selben Standpunkt existiert. Der Holzstich sollte also beibehalten werden und mit "other version" sollte auf das neue Bild verwiesen werden. Ich werde Deine Überschreibung deshalb erst einmal rückgängig machen und freue mich auf den neuen Upload. --Wuselig (talk) 10:11, 12 October 2019 (UTC)

Ich werde den neuen Upload machen und danke dir für deine Nachricht. Dennoch bin ich davon überzeugt, das der Holzstich auf einer Grundlage von Eckert beruht. Mir sind horrende Fehler der gleichen Art zum selben Thema begegnet, am Schlimmsten dieser hier: [3]. Viele Grüße, --Edelseider (talk) 13:18, 12 October 2019 (UTC)
Deine Vermutung bezüglich der Vorlage teile ich. Es bleibt aber zunächst Vermutung. Wahrscheinlich hat Hesse in seinem Buch über Sinner auch nur vermutet, aber er hat halt ein zitierbares Buch ververfasst. Ich finde es schön hierdurch auf Eckert aufmerksam geworden zu sein.Sozusagen das badische Pendant zum Schwaben Sinner. Zumal die beiden in ihren Regionen offensichtlich die selben Sujets bearbeitet haben. Danke! --Wuselig (talk) 19:29, 12 October 2019 (UTC)
@Wuselig: - hier findest du eine Goldgrube: [4]. Herzlich, --Edelseider (talk) 08:33, 13 October 2019 (UTC)
Und nur einen einzigen Sinner. Was würdest Du bei diesem Bild machen? Das neue Bild aus dem Straßburger Museum über das bestehende Bild schreiben, oder als neues Bild hochladen. Offensichtlich handelt es sich um die selbe Platte, aber um unterschiedliche Abzüge. Wahrscheinlich befinden sich die Abzüge auch in unterschiedlichen Archiven.--Wuselig (talk) 13:02, 13 October 2019 (UTC)
@Wuselig: Ja, ich würde es definitiv überschreiben, der Abzug ist qualitativ viel besser, insbesondere in der Großansicht: https://images.navigart.fr/1000/3T/00/3T00033.jpg. --Edelseider (talk) 14:20, 13 October 2019 (UTC)
siehst Du, und ich nicht. 1. weil der Crop der beiden Abzüge unterschiedlich ist. D.h. durch das Überschreiben gehen Informationen verloren. Und 2. weil die Abzüge in unterschiedlichen Sammlungen liegen und 3. weil aus den hier vorliegenden Informationen nichts über die Originalplatte hervorgeht. Wir sind als Wikipedianer verpflichtet die Informationen der Welt zu sammeln und zu bewahren, nicht die schönste aller Welten zu schaffen. --Wuselig (talk) 19:02, 13 October 2019 (UTC)
@Wuselig: Dann ist mir nicht klar, warum du mich überhaupt fragst. Meine Absicht ist es nicht, die schönste aller Welten zu schaffen, ich sehe mich aber auch nicht dazu verpflichtet, alle Informationen zu sammeln, sondern nur die Wesentlichen und die Unverzichtbaren. Im Übrigen denke ich, dass wir uns selbst verpflichten und nicht verpflichtet werden. Von wem auch? --Edelseider (talk) 19:09, 13 October 2019 (UTC)
Ja es war eine rhetorische Frage. Nachdem Du schon einen Holzstich mit einem Foto überschrieben hattest, hatte ich befürchtet, dass Du das machen würdest, was Du dann ja, nach meinem Hinweis hier tatsächlich gemacht hast, eine historische Version mit einer anderen historischen Version zu überschreiben. Man kann natürlich niemanden zwingen alle Informationen zu sammeln, aber ich hatte zumindest versucht Dich davon abzuhalten unnötigerweise vorhandene Informationen zu zerstören. Ich habe jetzt beide Versionen des Abzuges dieser Platte hergestellt. --Wuselig (talk) 12:24, 14 October 2019 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Edelseider/Archive_6&oldid=551363227"