User talk:Jwh/Archive 1

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

Tip: Categorizing images

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


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

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

Here's how:

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

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

[[Category:Category name]]

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

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

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

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

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

BotMultichillT 06:10, 24 February 2009 (UTC)

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

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

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

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

Tryphon 23:25, 21 September 2010 (UTC)

Du hast natürlich recht; da ist mir wohl ein Zahlensturz passiert. Ich hab´s auch gleich in Beschreibung und Kategorie geändert. Jedenfalls vielen Dank für den Hinweis --Xenophon (talk) 16:51, 18 May 2011 (UTC)

I wonder why you deleted 15 correct links here while updating only 2 others? I just hope it's not your link "update" policy. — Bjung (talk) 01:37, 31 October 2011 (UTC)

Hi! Shouldn't categories be linked with categories only? --Jwh (talk) 20:01, 1 November 2011 (UTC)
Apparently there's still no hard rule about that but it's generally accepted that categories should be linked to categories if they exist, to articles otherwise. Thinking about it that's just common sense: people will be happy to find WP links in their language(s), even if only to articles. Besides, it's safe to say that, while having articles on WP, many subjects (in some or all languages) will never have any categories on WP in the near future. That's how I see it. Cheers! — Bjung (talk) 17:20, 2 November 2011 (UTC)
Hi Bjung! Wouldn't this Template:On Wikipedia solve the problem? --Jwh (talk) 20:14, 28 November 2011 (UTC)
Hi! After a long thought about the subject, I'll give my clear-cut opinion here.
I think there's no problem to solve about WP links: it doesn't matter if the link is to an article or to a category as long as the subject matches (though a category could be preferred because it contains more information about the subject and/or it's faster to access). So I don't agree at all with using Template:On Wikipedia as a replacement of the native interwikis menu bar: it's bulky, very bad aesthetics (one-line instead of a clean column, ugly language codes, useless article titles including their disambiguation parts), a pain to use for users (imagine 200 links there), a big problem for bots that update links, and not least a pain to add manually. It just can't replace native WP links.
What's more, the objectives of that template are not clear at all. The documentation says it doesn't replace nor duplicates native interwikis, which is very contradictory since it often ends up doing one of those two, as it's used now. It recommends using categories for the side bar and articles for the template, which doesn't make sense since it forces users to scan two very different lists for their language; also, that recommendation pushes a specific use (category-only) of the WP menu bar that is absolutely not consensual. Lastly, the documentation is very confused about Template:Translation table which is first used to translate text, not to link to WP, a big difference that the designers don't seem to understand.
You wrote on my discussion page:
Hi, as I understand that interwiki menus on Commons are supposed to contain categories, not articles.
No, interwikis menus are not supposed to only contain categories, otherwise you could not link to any subjects with no categories at all or only some categories in some languages without using templates that replace native MediaWiki mechanisms. Native linking is there for a reason, and being able to link to articles is certainly one of them. A Commons category just groups files about a subject, and a WP article or category groups encyclopedic information about a subject, so it's only natural to link the two using native tools. What's more, we don't have any problems linking from WP articles to Commons categories, so why should the opposite be a problem?
Such I use {{On Wikipedia}} which is described as: For linking to multiple Wikipedia articles. This should not be used in place of or in duplication of interwiki links (in the sidebar). In categories, take the local Wikipedia's equivalent categories for the sidebar, and the related main articles for this box. --Jwh (talk) 21:03, 3 June 2012 (UTC)
The problem is: many times you use the template, you're just violating the recommendation you cite by replacing the side bar links, and more so when there are no categories (empty bar). An empty side bar at the same time as ugly On Wikipedia stuff on a page is certainly not right. That's another proof that the template objectives are not right and its designer(s) confused, or possibly that the documentation doesn't reflect the real objectives at all.
So, for me, Template:On Wikipedia is a very bad solution, and an aesthetic catastrophe, to a problem that doesn't exist. So I certainly will continue putting all the links I can in side bars. I agree to not remove On Wikipedia templates for now, as long as they don't match the side bar links exactly, i.e. when there's at least one WP category linked to. What do you think? — Bjung (talk) 06:07, 4 June 2012 (UTC)

Good morning,

Sorry, can't tell you what I think, as I don't get what you mean by I agree to not remove On Wikipedia templates for now, as long as they don't match the side bar links exactly, i.e. when there's at least one WP category linked to. --Jwh (talk) 07:34, 4 June 2012 (UTC)

Good morning!
I'll explain another way. I'll only delete On Wikipedia if no WP categories at all exist for the subject: in that case there can't be any good reason to use On Wikipedia for any article link that one normally puts in the side bar.
By the way, I've read the documentation again and it seems that the only way it makes sense is if the template is used for additional links only. That means that you can put an article link in the side bar but also that you don't put it in the template. If category links are preferred over article links (when the two are possible) in the side bar, then the template of course can't have categories, so its only use would be for links to articles that you can't put in the side bar because there are links there already for the corresponding languages. So, to summarize, the template could only be used for a language when at least two WP links (e.g. category and article) are possible for that language; that's not the same as you do now. Makes sense? — Bjung (talk) 06:50, 6 June 2012 (UTC)
Hi, a clear explanation in the template's documentation would do good... Guess, I got now what you meant
  • continue to mix categories and articles on the side bar - the reason I used the template was just to avoid this
  • not to put the same link in the side bar and in the template, that's obvious
  • within the same language, the category is put in the side bar, the article in the template - wow! If that's the sole reason of this template it should be mentioned in red with a blinking code on the documentation

--Jwh (talk) 07:47, 7 June 2012 (UTC)

Streams & Creeks

Salut Jwh,

Ech hu gesinn du hues en etlech Baache bei Streams of Luxembourg getässelt. Zu Lëtzebuerg gëtt et keng Stréim. All Land huet där séier wéineg. Stréim sinn nëmme Flëss déi an e Mier lafen. --Les Meloures (talk) 12:51, 13 December 2011 (UTC)

E schéine gudden,
Jo ech sinn Hënt iwwer déi Baache-Biller an der Kategorie "Cities and Villages in Luxembourg" gefall a well ech net wosst wat ech mat deenen aus der Belsch sollt maachen hunn ech e bëssen dorëmmer gesicht.
Do schéngt et mir wéi wa se mat "streams" net "Stréim", mä Baache mengen. Bach, ruisseau weisen och géigesäiteg op stream. Eis Stréim schéngen da Main stems ze sinn, den Interwiki ass do op Strom, fleuve.
  • Creeks
Wann ech da Category:Streams by country kucke sinn do 62 Länner. An der Category:Creeks sinn haaptsächlech nordamerikanesch Baachen, an an der Category:Creeks by country sinn nëmme 6 Länner, woubäi opfält dass d'Belsch do staark vertrueden ass, awer z.B. d'USA och ganz feelen. Wann ech dann den Artikel stream richteg interpretéiere wier "Creek" ee vun ville lokale Synonymer fir "Stream".
Dofir mengen ech datt eis Baachen an d'"Streams" gehéieren an och net an d'"Creeks". --Jwh (talk) 20:53, 13 December 2011 (UTC)
Moien du hues net ganz onrecht.
Wéi et schéngt géif et dann op Commons guer keng Kategorie fir Stréim/Fleuves also Main stems ginn an an de Streams stéing da bal alles dran war net River ass. Mat e bësselche Chance gesinn ech mar ee vun deenen hiren Adminnen. Ech kucken emol fir dat mat deem unzepaken. Ech halen dech dann um Lafenden. -- Les Meloures (talk) 21:24, 13 December 2011 (UTC)
Ma da sinn ech gespaant. Soss musse mir hinnen esou eng Kategorie maachen - et ginn der jo awer genuch däer Stréim. Ee friddlechen nach. --Jwh (talk) 22:13, 13 December 2011 (UTC)
العربية  беларуская беларуская (тарашкевіца)  ပအိုဝ်ႏဘာႏသာႏ  বাংলা  català  čeština  dansk  Deutsch  Deutsch (Sie-Form)  Ελληνικά  English  español  euskara  فارسی  suomi  français  galego  עברית  hrvatski  magyar  հայերեն  italiano  日本語  ಕನ್ನಡ  한국어  lietuvių  latviešu  македонски  മലയാളം  मराठी  မြန်မာဘာသာ  norsk bokmål  Plattdüütsch  Nederlands  norsk  polski  português  română  русский  sicilianu  slovenčina  slovenščina  српски / srpski  svenska  ไทย  Türkçe  українська  اردو  Tiếng Việt  中文(简体)  中文(繁體)  +/−
Warning sign
This media was probably deleted.
Thanks for uploading File:Theves Georges.JPG. This media is missing permission information. A source is given, but there is no proof that the author or copyright holder agreed to license the file under the given license. Please provide a link to an appropriate webpage with license information, or ask the author or copyright holder to send an email with copy of a written permission to VRT (permissions-commons@wikimedia.org). You may still be required to go through this procedure even if you are the author yourself; please see Commons:But it's my own work! for more details. After you emailed permission, you may replace the {{No permission since}} tag with {{subst:PP}} on file description page. Alternatively, you may click on "Challenge speedy deletion" below the tag if you wish to provide an argument why evidence of permission is not necessary in this case.

Please see this page for more information on how to confirm permission, or if you would like to understand why we ask for permission when uploading work that is not your own, or work which has been previously published (regardless of whether it is your own).

The file probably has been deleted. If you sent a permission, try to send it again after 14 days. Do not re-upload. When the VRT-member processes your mail, the file can be undeleted. Additionally you can request undeletion here, providing a link to the File-page on Commons where it was uploaded ([[:File:Theves Georges.JPG]]) and the above demanded information in your request.

Saibo (Δ) 01:08, 21 June 2012 (UTC)

File:Monument aux morts Diddeleng 20-03-2011 14-14-20.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!

MGA73 (talk) 14:12, 26 July 2012 (UTC)

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 21:40, 14 October 2012 (UTC)


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 21:43, 14 October 2012 (UTC)

File:Dafsteen Diddeleng.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!

Túrelio (talk) 06:57, 18 October 2012 (UTC)

Bild vum Werner

En ausdréckleche Merci fir Deng Beméiungen, eng zeguttstert Foto vun Wernesch Pier ze fannen an heihi gesat ze kréien.--Zinneke (talk) 12:52, 22 October 2012 (UTC)

Ma wéi si hei géingen soen, wa se net grad Fotoë läschen, "it was entirely my pleasure" --Jwh (talk) 13:44, 2 November 2012 (UTC)

Category:Pigeon protection on buildings

Hallo Jwh, you created Category:Pigeon protection on buildings, a subcat of Category:Pigeon repellents. I'd like to move its files to this parent. Are you ok with this? My understanding is that pigeon repellents are to protect buildings from roosting and nesting pigeons. Thank you. --PigeonIP (talk) 17:00, 3 December 2012 (UTC)

File:Stenay Monument 1914 1918.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!

Bob247 (talk) 02:57, 5 December 2012 (UTC)

Pay attention to copyright
File:Dominique Urbany 1972 MOW.jpg has been marked as a possible copyright violation. Wikimedia Commons only accepts free content—that is, images and other media files that can be used by anyone, for any purpose. Traditional copyright law does not grant these freedoms, and unless noted otherwise, everything you find on the web is copyrighted and not permitted here. For details on what is acceptable, please read Commons:Licensing. You may also find Commons:Copyright rules useful, or you can ask questions about Commons policies at the Commons:Help desk. If you are the copyright holder and the creator of the file, please read Commons:But it's my own work! for tips on how to provide evidence of that.

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

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

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

Túrelio (talk) 22:26, 15 December 2012 (UTC)

Pay attention to copyright
File:Dominique Urbany 1972 MOW-001.jpg has been marked as a possible copyright violation. Wikimedia Commons only accepts free content—that is, images and other media files that can be used by anyone, for any purpose. Traditional copyright law does not grant these freedoms, and unless noted otherwise, everything you find on the web is copyrighted and not permitted here. For details on what is acceptable, please read Commons:Licensing. You may also find Commons:Copyright rules useful, or you can ask questions about Commons policies at the Commons:Help desk. If you are the copyright holder and the creator of the file, please read Commons:But it's my own work! for tips on how to provide evidence of that.

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

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

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

Túrelio (talk) 22:28, 15 December 2012 (UTC)

File:Dominique Urbany 1972 MOW-002.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!

Túrelio (talk) 22:29, 15 December 2012 (UTC)

Hi Jwh, how in the world can the photographer of a digital photography from August 2012 be unknown? And even in case that would be true, why does the EXIF data say photographer is "Norbert Berens"? If he is not the photographer, such a claim would be illegal per copyright law in must juridictions, including Luxemburg. This needs clarification, also because any re-user has to credit the photographer for any use of this image. --Túrelio (talk) 08:47, 16 December 2012 (UTC)

Copied to File_talk:Norbert_Berens_2012_g.JPG --Jwh (talk) 11:08, 16 December 2012 (UTC)

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 12:46, 13 January 2013 (UTC)

Ooops...--Jwh (talk) 12:53, 13 January 2013 (UTC)

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


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

This message was added automatically by Nikbot, if you need some help about it please read the text above again and follow the links in it, if you still need help ask at the ? Commons:Help desk in any language you like to use. --Nikbot 23:56, 13 January 2013 (UTC)

Not my day today... --Jwh (talk) 00:40, 14 January 2013 (UTC)

Re:

Hi, thanks for your message. The pics were mass imported, and I too don't understand why it would add that category (it's the Flickr importer tool which does it, maybe there was a similar tag on the site). If you want, please do remove the category from all those pics. I am pretty sure there is a tool to do this, but don't remember it anymore... let me know. thanks! --Elitre (talk) 20:13, 10 April 2013 (UTC)

re:Statues of unidentified Christian saints in Luxembourg

You're welcome! I'm an expert on the Christian iconography. Best regards, --Paterm (talk) 11:24, 3 September 2013 (UTC)

bahasa melayu  català  čeština  dansk  deutsch (Sie-Form)  deutsch  english  español  français  galego  hrvatski  italiano  magyar  nederlands  norsk  norsk bokmål  norsk nynorsk  português  polski  português do Brasil  română  sicilianu  slovenčina  slovenščina  suomi  svenska  türkçe  беларуская  беларуская (тарашкевіца)  български  македонски  русский  українська  ಕನ್ನಡ  ತುಳು  മലയാളം  한국어  日本語  中文(简体)  中文(繁體)  עברית  العربيَّة  فارسی  +/−
Warning sign
This media may be deleted.
Thanks for uploading File:Weekräiz Simmer.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.

Jarekt (talk) 16:59, 3 September 2013 (UTC)

bahasa melayu  català  čeština  dansk  deutsch (Sie-Form)  deutsch  english  español  français  galego  hrvatski  italiano  magyar  nederlands  norsk  norsk bokmål  norsk nynorsk  português  polski  português do Brasil  română  sicilianu  slovenčina  slovenščina  suomi  svenska  türkçe  беларуская  беларуская (тарашкевіца)  български  македонски  русский  українська  ಕನ್ನಡ  ತುಳು  മലയാളം  한국어  日本語  中文(简体)  中文(繁體)  עברית  العربيَّة  فارسی  +/−
Warning sign
This media may be deleted.
Thanks for uploading File:Weekapell Simmer.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.

Jarekt (talk) 16:59, 3 September 2013 (UTC)

bahasa melayu  català  čeština  dansk  deutsch (Sie-Form)  deutsch  english  español  français  galego  hrvatski  italiano  magyar  nederlands  norsk  norsk bokmål  norsk nynorsk  português  polski  português do Brasil  română  sicilianu  slovenčina  slovenščina  suomi  svenska  türkçe  беларуская  беларуская (тарашкевіца)  български  македонски  русский  українська  ಕನ್ನಡ  ತುಳು  മലയാളം  한국어  日本語  中文(简体)  中文(繁體)  עברית  العربيَّة  فارسی  +/−
Warning sign
This media may be deleted.
Thanks for uploading File:Um Wäschbuer Simmer.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.

Jarekt (talk) 17:00, 3 September 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for telling me --Jwh (talk) 17:09, 3 September 2013 (UTC)


File:Luxexpo Vakanz 2013-001.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!

Wdwd (talk) 16:07, 8 September 2013 (UTC)


File:Luxair Hal Findel.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!

Wdwd (talk) 18:13, 9 September 2013 (UTC)


File:LuxAirport Aérogare.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!

Wdwd (talk) 18:13, 9 September 2013 (UTC)


File:Luxairport Fernheizung.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!

Wdwd (talk) 18:14, 9 September 2013 (UTC)


File:LuxAirport.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!

Wdwd (talk) 18:14, 9 September 2013 (UTC)


File:Sandweiler Radar an Hangar.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!

Wdwd (talk) 18:14, 9 September 2013 (UTC)


File:Tower Findel.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!

Wdwd (talk) 18:15, 9 September 2013 (UTC)

Rumm

Moien, a merci fir d'Nosichen. Ech wosst net genee wou do d'Grenz verleeft. Bescht Gréiss, --Zinneke (talk) 10:52, 14 September 2013 (UTC)

File:Lift st esprit-002.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!

Túrelio (talk) 14:33, 18 October 2013 (UTC)

Nimm

Moien, ech hunn dem Spang säi Buch. Do ass hannen e Regëschter (deem ech awer net 100% trauen). Du kanns also weider eroplueden ënner dem Numm vun deemools, ech setzen dann den haitegen Numm derb!ai (hun das scho bei deem engen oder anere gemaach, mee ginn elo e bëssen eraus vun deem profitéieren, no där den Dag vun haut genannt ass, den Owend fueren ech virun). Bei deene puer Uertschften, wou ee sech net sécher ass, kann een dann de Stamminee zu Rot froen.

Merci nach eng Kéier fir d'Erauskopéieren an d'Beaarbechten!

Schéine Sonnden,

--Zinneke (talk) 11:54, 2 February 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 07:41, 20 April 2014 (UTC)

Thanks for the information --Jwh (talk) 10:15, 20 April 2014 (UTC)

Eng Fro...

Salut, hunn däi Commentaire elo erréicht gesinn. Mengs du mat de Redirecten zum Beispill: https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Ettelbruck&redirect=no ?

Déi hunn echg gemaach, well d'Säit eidel war, an een esou direct op d'Säit 'Ettelbruck' gefouert gëtt, wann een dat an der Such-Funktioun antippt. Dat gëtt et och bei villen anere Säiten (net nëmme Stied).--Bdx (talk) 20:46, 16 May 2014 (UTC)

@Bdx: Salut, jo wat war dat...? Also ech hat do eng Diskussioun wéinst sou engem Redirect deen op eng eidel Galerie goung, an du sot deen "Ätschbätsch do sinn der lauter..." an huet op Saache vun Dir higewisen. Dunn hunn ech mir d'Fro gestallt.
Ech denken datt sou iwwerflësseg ass, well e "Search" no Eppes wat eng Kategorie huet, hei automatesch op Category:Eppes geet. Also net seet esou eng Säit gëtt et net. Wann et bei der Ufro eng Säit, also hei eng "Gallery", gëtt da geet en dorop. Sou z.B "Search:Dudelange" zack op Category:Dudelange, well et gëtt keng Säit. Also bei "Ettelbruck" géing en och ouni de redirect op d'Category sprangen.
Ech mengen dat huet dunn deen Admin do an där laanger, a fir mech komplett onnéideger Diskussioun och sou entscheet.
Ech wënschen nach eng friddlech Hënt. --Jwh (talk) 21:18, 16 May 2014 (UTC)
Du hues Recht, ech maachen et elo och net méi. Ech mengen, ech hat dat ugefaangen fir dat bei verschiddene Stied mat engem méi komplizéierten Numm de Lemma an der Auto-Search-Funktioun uewe riets ugewise gëtt. Merci awer, datts du mech drop higewisen hues :) --Bdx (talk) 06:52, 17 May 2014 (UTC)
@Bdx: Wees De, 't frësst kee Brout... --Jwh (talk) 08:22, 17 May 2014 (UTC)

Uergel zu Jonglënster

Salut, deng Fro: ...firwat hues du d'Kategorie 'Pipe organs in Luxembourg|Junglinster' eweggeholl? Sorry, dat war en Iertum. Ech hunn en UNDO op meng Läschaktioun gemaach. BG, --Cayambe (talk) 20:39, 25 May 2014 (UTC)

@Cayambe: Ah Ok, hu mech alt gewonnert. Wënschen nach eng schéin Hënt. --Jwh (talk) 22:14, 25 May 2014 (UTC)

Airside access at LUX?

Hi mate, how you doing? Do you have airside access at Luxembourg Airport? Or do you take your photos there from publicly accessible areas only? Cheers, russavia (talk) 02:52, 10 January 2015 (UTC)

@Russavia: Hi you, I'm afraid usually not - at the time I just was lucky to get an invitation for the inaugural Turkish Airlines flight, and I still have a bunch of photos from inside where they handle the luggage, I'll try to upload them "soon".
But I may have good news: Do hope to come with pictures of the Russian Embassy, at least the castle from outside and hopefully inside too - waitin' for a sunny day to fix this.
Take care! --Jwh (talk) 03:09, 10 January 2015 (UTC)

Skuptur oder Relief?

Moien,

Nodeems de eng ganz Rei Biller an d'Kategorie "Sculptures of Crucifixion group" gesat hues hunn ech mer d'Fro gestallt op déi net eigentlech an eng Kategorie wéi "Reliefs of the Crucifixion of Christ" gehéieren oder villäicht a béides? Wat mengs de dozou? --MMFE (talk) 10:59, 24 February 2015 (UTC)

Salut, ech hat vru langer Zäit mir och mol doriwer de Kapp zerbrach... Skulptur schéngt hei eng Aart Iwwerbegrëff ze sinn, wou d'Statuen a Reliefer a wees wees wat nach dra kënnt. Anscheinend sinn déi "Skulputere", wéi un der Escher Gemeng, Reliefer, krut ech gesot (dann hätt ech déi un der Stater Post wuel och missen dra setzen...) Definitiounen déi ech sou dorëmmer fonnt hat, hu mir méi de Kapp verdréit wéi eppes Gescheites bruecht...
Bei de Kräizer sinn ech vläit dovun ausgaang datt dat Ganzt (e Stéck Steen) eng Skulptur (am fräie Raum, an och nach oft soss skulptéiert)) ass - am Géigesaaz da vu deene Reliefen déi un engem Gebai hänken.
In other words Io no sé - vläit mol op de Beaux-Arts nofroen... --Jwh (talk) 14:21, 24 February 2015 (UTC)
Du hues Recht, Skulptur ass en Iwwerbegrëff an e Relief ass eng bestëmmten Zort vu Skulptur. Et wier effektiv och interessant do d'Meenung vu Fachleit ze héieren. Mir kënnen dat och spéider ëmmer nach opdeele wa mer eis eens si wat wouhi gehéiert. --MMFE (talk) 18:34, 24 February 2015 (UTC)
Vir mol eng Kéier net Wikipedia ze benotzen - dat leiten hunn ech deemools eventual font oder dëst --Jwh (talk) 21:37, 24 February 2015 (UTC)
Wikimedia Commons does not accept derivative works of non-free works such as File:Kinnen L envol 1965-003.JPG. It only accepts free content, which is images and other media files that can be used by anyone, for any purpose. Reproductions of copyrighted works are also subject to the same copyright, and therefore this file must unfortunately be considered non-free. For more information, please read Commons:Derivative works and Commons:Freedom of panorama. You can ask questions about Commons policies in Commons:Help desk. The file you added has been deleted. If you believe that this file was not a derivative work of a non-free work, you may request undeletion.

čeština  dansk  Deutsch  English  español  français  galego  hrvatski  italiano  magyar  polski  português  português do Brasil  sicilianu  slovenščina  suomi  svenska  Ελληνικά  беларуская (тарашкевіца)  български  македонски  русский  ไทย  日本語  Tiếng Việt  中文(简体)  中文(繁體)  +/−

And also:

Yours sincerely, Vera (talk) 14:08, 22 March 2015 (UTC)

Wikimedia Commons does not accept derivative works of non-free works such as File:Aktioun Konscht an der Schoul-002.JPG. It only accepts free content, which is images and other media files that can be used by anyone, for any purpose. Reproductions of copyrighted works are also subject to the same copyright, and therefore this file must unfortunately be considered non-free. For more information, please read Commons:Derivative works and Commons:Freedom of panorama. You can ask questions about Commons policies in Commons:Help desk. The file you added has been deleted. If you believe that this file was not a derivative work of a non-free work, you may request undeletion.

čeština  dansk  Deutsch  English  español  français  galego  hrvatski  italiano  magyar  polski  português  português do Brasil  sicilianu  slovenščina  suomi  svenska  Ελληνικά  беларуская (тарашкевіца)  български  македонски  русский  ไทย  日本語  Tiếng Việt  中文(简体)  中文(繁體)  +/−

And also:

Yours sincerely, Vera (talk) 14:10, 22 March 2015 (UTC)

File:Château Ducru-Beaucaillou 1994.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!

Yann (talk) 20:47, 12 May 2015 (UTC)

Oesling Éisléck

Moien,

Ech sinn haut duerch Zoufall op déi Kategorie "Category:Oesling Éisléck" gestouss a fannen datt dat, wat do drann ass, net grad dra passt. Éier ech eppes drunn ännere wollt ech awer deng Meenung wëssen. Ech denken, datt een do all d'Gemengekategorie sollt dra setzen déi am Éisléck leien an net eenzel Biller. Datselwecht kënnt ee bei deenen anere Kategorie maachen déi an de Regioune vu Lëtzebuerg sinn. --MMFE (talk) 11:09, 30 December 2015 (UTC)

Salut, ech wees net sou richteg. Vläit de @Cayambe: mol froen, hien hat se sengerzäit opgemaach.
D'Éisléck ass an der Kategorie Regions of Luxembourg, do hat ech mol "Red Lands" dragesat, mä ech menge just well déi deemools roud war - "Minettsgéigend" géing mir besser gefalen.
Fir déi "regions" komplett ze maachen, misst vläit och nach d'Muselgéigend an den Zentrum dobäi kommen.
Sinn d'Regiounen enzwouch definéiert?
Da stellt sech dann och d'Fro wat lo mat den Distrikter (do hat jo ee mëttlerweil gespaarten User gemengt se alleguerte missen ëmzebenennen). Sollen d'"regions" déi ersetzen? @Zinneke: @Les Meloures: Dat get Knuppefreed... --Jwh (talk) 12:16, 30 December 2015 (UTC)
Moien,
Zum Begrëff Eislek: Et kann een en definéieren entweder als Deel vun den Ardennen (am geologesch-geomorphologesche Sënn) an deemno als Géigesaz zum Guttland - wéi dat jorhonnertelaang gemaach gouf. Zanter 1-2 Jorzéngte ginn et dann och nach weider Andeelungen, déi, mengem Versteestemech no, am Luxembourg Tourist Office "erfonnt" goufen, fir déi verschidde Géigenden an hire Brochuren auserneen ze halen. Nieft dem Eislek sinn dat "Red lands" oder "Terres Rouges" fir de Minett, d'Muselgéigend, de Mëllerdall/Kleng Ltz. Schwäiz an de "Rescht". Dat huet sech esouguer a Päss vun der Serie ±2008-2014 erëmgespijelt, opwuel, wéi de Jwh undeit, dat néieren genee definéiert ass, geschweig iergend enger politescher Realitéit entsprieche géif. Politesch ginn et keng "Regions of Luxembourg" als adminstrativ Ënnerdeelung (an d'Distrikter, wéi et se nach gouf, haten näischt mat deenen Andeelungen uewendriwwer ze dinn). Dofir géif ech d'Eislek just als eng Ennerkategorie vun "Ardennes" a vu "Regions of Luxembourg" definéieren, sou wéi et do steet. --Zinneke (talk) 13:58, 30 December 2015 (UTC)
Dat ass jo alles schéin a gutt, hëlleft awer net wierklech wat fir eng Zort Biller dann elo an déi Kategorie oder an déi vun den anere Regioune gehéieren. Fir mech kann et awer net falsch sinn fir all Gemengen, déi am Éislek leien, och an déi Kategorie ze setzen. Mir kënne jo doriwwer bei eisem nächste Meeting diskutéieren, dat geet besser wéi hei. --MMFE (talk) 09:42, 31 December 2015 (UTC)
Mir kënnt dat och sou wéi eng Erfindung vum ONT vir. Fir hinne Freed ze maache kënne mir jo romantesch(?) Naturfotoe vum Éisleck dra setzen an net ze vergiessen d'Éislecker Hamen... --Jwh (talk) 23:16, 1 January 2016 (UTC)

Fuel pumps in Germany

Hallo Jwh, die beiden kategorisierten Bilder sind fuel pumps in Austria nicht in Germany ;-) --K@rl (talk) 17:51, 12 January 2016 (UTC)

Yeaph, sorry, ich war da wohl etwas zu barsch rangegangen... Danke furs "proof-reading" --Jwh (talk) 22:49, 12 January 2016 (UTC)
kein Problem gruß K@rl (talk) 11:52, 13 January 2016 (UTC)
File:Skulptur Handwierkerschoul Esch.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!

Vera (talk) 14:17, 23 June 2016 (UTC)

Winners of Eurovision category

I have no idea why you removed the Winner of Eurovision category from File:Jean-Claude Pascal 1945.pdf, when the person actually won the Eurovision Song Contest. The file is also used on the article at EN:Wiki on the topic of Eurovision Winners, which on the article also uses the Commons Category template to notify viewers there is a "gallery" of images connected to Eurovision Winners here at Wikimedia Commons. Just find it bizarre that you would remove a category that was factually and correctly placed. Wes Mouse  T@lk 07:55, 2 September 2016 (UTC)

Good morning, As I added the "winner category" where it should be, to his main category Category:Jean-Claude Pascal. Guess you got it meanwhile. Enjoy your day. --Jwh (talk) 08:02, 2 September 2016 (UTC)

Street signs in Luxembourg City

Moien, Du lueds regelméisseg Stroosseschëlter aus der Stad erop. Hues du net zoufälleg eng Foto vum Schëld "Grand Rue - Juddegaass"? Et houng bis viru kuerzem um Eck vum Bd Royal, ass awer an der Tëschenzäit ersat ginn duerch "Grand Rue - Groussgaass". Ech wollt et fotograféieren, hat awer keen Teleobjeltiv derbäi an et houng ziumlech héich... Merci GilPe (talk) 08:55, 7 October 2017 (UTC)

Zut! Ech duecht ech hat dat nach vrun engem knappe Mount do gesinn... --Jwh (talk) 19:36, 7 October 2017 (UTC)
File:Greiweldeng VTT.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!

Vera (talk) 16:43, 7 October 2017 (UTC)

File:Stolpersteng HILB-BONEM, 13, rue Enz, Réimech-101.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!

Goesseln (talk) 16:43, 7 February 2018 (UTC)

Rusty objects

Regarding this edit, it was a mistake. The new "Rusty objects by country" is a subcat of "Objects by country" and it looked like that would take care of all the subcats, but it didn't. That was a different thread. Thanks for noticing. --Cart (talk) 08:11, 9 June 2018 (UTC)

Had this feeling... Have a great day! --Jwh (talk) 08:19, 9 June 2018 (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:

And also:

Yours sincerely, Rosenzweig τ 21:32, 14 September 2018 (UTC)

File:Tom Ulveling, Stolpersteng Déifferdeng-002.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!

93.104.176.117 22:51, 6 February 2019 (UTC)

File:Galerie Beaumont, Je suis Charlie-101.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!

B dash (talk) 13:45, 26 February 2019 (UTC)

Category discussion warning

Cimetière de Medingen 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!


2A02:908:D83:E460:216:CBFF:FEAD:FF9 01:05, 4 June 2019 (UTC)

  — Jeff G. please ping or talk to me 22:33, 6 August 2019 (UTC)

Copyright status: File:Canal à Amsterdam, Joseph Kutter-103.jpg

bahasa melayu  català  čeština  dansk  deutsch (Sie-Form)  deutsch  english  español  français  galego  hrvatski  italiano  magyar  nederlands  norsk  norsk bokmål  norsk nynorsk  português  polski  português do Brasil  română  sicilianu  slovenčina  slovenščina  suomi  svenska  türkçe  беларуская  беларуская (тарашкевіца)  български  македонски  русский  українська  ಕನ್ನಡ  ತುಳು  മലയാളം  한국어  日本語  中文(简体)  中文(繁體)  עברית  العربيَّة  فارسی  +/−
Warning sign
This media may be deleted.
Thanks for uploading File:Canal à Amsterdam, Joseph Kutter-103.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.

Magog the Ogre (talk) (contribs) 15:13, 10 August 2019 (UTC)

@Magog the Ogre: Dearest, you'll tell me what's so "unclear with the copyright status" here. Cheers! --Jwh (talk) 21:39, 10 August 2019 (UTC)
@Magog the Ogre: Ok, got it now, the license didn't survive may copy/paste... Thanks --Jwh (talk) 21:46, 10 August 2019 (UTC)

  — Jeff G. please ping or talk to me 15:25, 10 August 2019 (UTC)

Community Insights Survey

RMaung (WMF) 01:16, 10 September 2019 (UTC)

Reminder: Community Insights Survey

RMaung (WMF) 15:25, 20 September 2019 (UTC)

Reminder: Community Insights Survey

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

File:HeinrichKreutz.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!

2A02:A31C:25F:9F00:E154:CC19:619C:BD8B 13:38, 15 November 2019 (UTC)

Source of derivative work is not properly indicated: File:Abarth 500 esseesse, Theaterplaz-102.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:Abarth 500 esseesse, Theaterplaz-102.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!

And also:

Yours sincerely, Jonteemil (talk) 23:57, 21 February 2020 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Multiciplicty Beaumontsgaass.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
 Support Good quality. --MB-one 06:18, 20 February 2020 (UTC)

--QICbot (talk) 05:25, 23 February 2020 (UTC)

File:Ernst Koch, Porträt-Gallerie.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!

5.146.250.208 21:16, 2 March 2020 (UTC)

File:Sticker hal de Bak.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!

A1Cafel (talk) 07:09, 1 February 2021 (UTC)

File:Hiefenech keng Kriis.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!

A1Cafel (talk) 07:10, 1 February 2021 (UTC)

File:Éiter Biltgen déi Lénk.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!

A1Cafel (talk) 07:10, 1 February 2021 (UTC)

File:Société de tir - Luxembourg Cents-004.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!

221.133.172.39 10:40, 9 February 2021 (UTC)

Category discussion warning

Other Christian objects in Luxembourg 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!


Estopedist1 (talk) 08:54, 7 December 2021 (UTC)

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


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

TUSC token b3be31c479ceb7c065b7f1234b705511

I am now proud owner of a TUSC account!

File:General George S. Patton wearing his 4-star service cap.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!

Túrelio (talk) 10:26, 12 March 2022 (UTC)

File:Kou un der Keelbaach zu Téiteng-101.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!

A1Cafel (talk) 09:06, 2 November 2022 (UTC)

File:Kou un der Keelbaach zu Téiteng-102.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!

A1Cafel (talk) 09:06, 2 November 2022 (UTC)

Category discussion warning

Hackerspaces by country of location 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!


Since you created Category:Hackerspaces in Luxembourg. --Ricky81682 (talk) 09:20, 12 January 2023 (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:


Yours sincerely, JWilz12345 (Talk|Contrib's.) 18:45, 21 April 2023 (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:

And also:

Yours sincerely, A1Cafel (talk) 03:04, 15 July 2023 (UTC)

File:D300 André Koch-001.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!

A1Cafel (talk) 03:53, 18 July 2023 (UTC)

File:D300 André Koch.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!

A1Cafel (talk) 03:53, 18 July 2023 (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:

And also:

Yours sincerely, A1Cafel (talk) 03:57, 18 July 2023 (UTC)

File:Monument Émile Mark, Déifferdeng-101.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!

A1Cafel (talk) 03:59, 18 July 2023 (UTC)

File:Monument Émile Mark, Déifferdeng-102.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!

A1Cafel (talk) 03:59, 18 July 2023 (UTC)

File:Konter, Monument aux Morts.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!

A1Cafel (talk) 07:44, 27 July 2023 (UTC)

File:Hl ChristophorusMunneref.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!

A1Cafel (talk) 06:38, 28 July 2023 (UTC)

Template:Idw/layout A1Cafel (talk) 04:01, 1 September 2023 (UTC)

Template:Idw/layout A1Cafel (talk) 04:01, 1 September 2023 (UTC)

Template:Autotranslate A1Cafel ([[User talk:A1Cafel|int:Talkpagelinktext]]) 04:25, 3 September 2023 (UTC)

Template:Autotranslate A1Cafel ([[User talk:A1Cafel|int:Talkpagelinktext]]) 04:25, 3 September 2023 (UTC)

Template:Autotranslate A1Cafel ([[User talk:A1Cafel|int:Talkpagelinktext]]) 07:12, 8 September 2023 (UTC)

Template:Autotranslate A1Cafel ([[User talk:A1Cafel|int:Talkpagelinktext]]) 07:12, 8 September 2023 (UTC)

Template:Autotranslate Affected:


Yours sincerely, A1Cafel ([[User talk:A1Cafel|int:Talkpagelinktext]]) 08:45, 2 October 2023 (UTC)

Template:Autotranslate Affected:

And also:

Yours sincerely, A1Cafel ([[User talk:A1Cafel|int:Talkpagelinktext]]) 02:50, 8 October 2023 (UTC)

Template:Autotranslate Affected:


Yours sincerely, Adamant1 ([[User talk:Adamant1|int:Talkpagelinktext]]) 03:15, 8 October 2023 (UTC)

Template:Autotranslate Affected:

And also:

Yours sincerely, Adamant1 ([[User talk:Adamant1|int:Talkpagelinktext]]) 04:13, 8 October 2023 (UTC)

Template:Autotranslate Affected:

And also:

Yours sincerely, Adamant1 ([[User talk:Adamant1|int:Talkpagelinktext]]) 23:12, 16 October 2023 (UTC)

Template:Autotranslate Affected:

And also:

Yours sincerely, Adamant1 ([[User talk:Adamant1|int:Talkpagelinktext]]) 23:52, 16 October 2023 (UTC)

Template:Autotranslate Affected:


Yours sincerely, Adamant1 ([[User talk:Adamant1|int:Talkpagelinktext]]) 07:36, 17 October 2023 (UTC)