User talk:Maximilian Schönherr/Archive 2

From Wikimedia Commons, the free media repository
Jump to navigation Jump to search
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:Price Water House Cooper Attn. Marius Kohl 2010 Luxembourg-Leaks.gif. 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:Price Water House Cooper Attn. Marius Kohl 2010 Luxembourg-Leaks.gif]]) and the above demanded information in your request.

太刻薄 (talk) 11:39, 9 November 2014 (UTC)

das ist mir zu viel aufwand. laut [1] liegen diese dateien in der public domain. entscheidet selbst. Maximilian (talk) 18:25, 9 November 2014 (UTC)
File:Price Water House Cooper Attn. Marius Kohl 2010 Luxembourg-Leaks.gif 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) 20:27, 9 November 2014 (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:Katrin Degenhardt Sprecherarbeit Deutschlandfunk Regie Maximilian Schönherr.ogg. 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.

No required license templates were detected at this file page. Please correct it, or if you have any questions please check my FAQ or contact me on my talk page. Yours sincerely, Jarekt (talk) 13:58, 25 February 2015 (UTC)

i have entered the tag self|GFDL|cc-by-sa-all as advised – without actually knowing in detail what it means. one thing for sure: i am the one and only author, and this is no photo, no movie, it's audio only. best, Maximilian (talk) 16:16, 25 February 2015 (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 14:44, 25 February 2015 (UTC)

A cheeseburger for you!

Thanks for a new version of InFocus_Mobile_M330_20141106.jpg. ~User:OnionBulb (talk) 14:16, 15 May 2015 (UTC)
welcome! Maximilian (talk) 17:46, 16 May 2015 (UTC)
File:New York Times - faked Spoonerisms 1928.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!

RJaguar3 (talk) 16:04, 6 June 2015 (UTC)

File:RIAS-Enten - Neues Deutschland - 1950.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!

h-stt !? 17:09, 6 November 2015 (UTC)

Videos

File:Stuffed Walrus using computer (2302981002).jpg Freundliche Wikimedianer Award
Hallo Maximilian Schönherr, gute Arbeit! :-) Nur kurz zu Video-uploads: Sehr bequem fand ich den Download von Youtube-videos als commonskompatible Videodatei .webm via http://keepvid.com/ oder https://savedeo.com/ (siehe Commons:YouTube files und Help:Converting video). Beispiel: File:Manypedia - Comparing Language Points of View of Wikipedia Communities (screencast).webm Gruss Atlasowa (talk) 16:54, 31 December 2015 (UTC)
David Klavins stimmt sein Una Corda Klavier

danke, danke! ich hab den tipp sofort beherzigt und bin erstaunt über die akzeptable video- und soundqualität des konverters. Maximilian (talk) 13:40, 2 January 2016 (UTC)

Hallo Maximilian,

könntest du mir die verwendeten Daten zuschicken oder sie verlinken?

Viele Grüße, Kopiersperre (talk) 11:22, 21 January 2016 (UTC)

das könnte ich schon, aber ich müsste erst mühsam zurückrecherchieren. vermutlich stammen die zahlen aus dem artikel über verkehrunfälle. die grafik habe ich ja schon vor einigen jahren erstellt. heute ist sie eh nicht mehr von bedeutung, weil die statistik ja 2010 aufhört. wenn Deine nachfrage eine eventuelle löschung bedeutet, nur zu! Maximilian (talk) 19:25, 21 January 2016 (UTC)
ich sehe gerade, ich war damals bei der bundesanstalt für das straßenwesen BASt. wenn Du die statistik brauchst und nicht online findest, sprich die presseabteilung an. Maximilian (talk) 20:28, 21 January 2016 (UTC)
File:SWR2 Archivradio - Schriftzug.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!

Jcb (talk) 23:32, 13 October 2017 (UTC)

Copyright status: File:Archivalien im Depot der Stasiunterlagenbehörde 2 – 360° Foto.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:Archivalien im Depot der Stasiunterlagenbehörde 2 – 360° Foto.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.

Jcb (talk) 15:35, 19 October 2018 (UTC)

i think this notification is obsolete now. the file has proper CC permissions now. and of course, if that is a matter of concern, i had the license to photograph in that archive. Maximilian (talk) 19:44, 18 November 2018 (UTC)
File:WeTransfer Logo.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!

Nielsen219 (talk) 10:03, 4 January 2019 (UTC)

File:WeTransfer Logo.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!

76.90.71.21 20:23, 4 March 2019 (UTC)

Copyright status: File:Köln - Jüdisches Museum - MiQua - Baustelle - April 2019 - Little Planet.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:Köln - Jüdisches Museum - MiQua - Baustelle - April 2019 - Little Planet.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.

Abzeronow (talk) 15:22, 9 April 2019 (UTC)

we (that is my humble self and other wikipedians like raymond who flew the wikicommons photo drone at the same time at the same location) had not only the permission, but also the request by the city of cologne to photograph this construction site. no license necessary. this image is my work, and it was photographed explicitly for wikicommons. Maximilian (talk) 19:33, 18 January 2021 (UTC)

Copyright status: File:Köln Jüdisches Museum MiQua - April 2019 - Panorama 360° von oben.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:Köln Jüdisches Museum MiQua - April 2019 - Panorama 360° von oben.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.

Abzeronow (talk) 15:23, 9 April 2019 (UTC)

we (that is my humble self and other wikipedians who flew the wikicommons photo drone at the same time at the same location) had not only the permission, but also the request by the city of cologne to photograph this construction site. no license necessary. this image is my work, and it was photographed explicitly for wikicommons. Maximilian (talk) 19:34, 18 January 2021 (UTC)
File:WeTransfer Logo.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!

Nielsen219 (talk) 14:07, 11 April 2019 (UTC)

File:Spion Clemens Laby - NeuesDeutschland 1953.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!

Tohma (talk) 10:38, 24 October 2019 (UTC)

File:Manuskript Schwarzer Kanal vom 11. April 1960.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!

Tohma (talk) 17:41, 24 October 2019 (UTC)

Copyright status: File:Das Magazin (Zeitschrift), Oktober 1933.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:Das Magazin (Zeitschrift), Oktober 1933.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.

Didym (talk) 12:38, 22 November 2020 (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:Das Magazin (Zeitschrift), Oktober 1933.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:Das Magazin (Zeitschrift), Oktober 1933.jpg]]) and the above demanded information in your request.

JuTa 16:21, 22 November 2020 (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:Berliner Zeitung – Erstausgabe 1945.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:Berliner Zeitung – Erstausgabe 1945.jpg]]) and the above demanded information in your request.

A1Cafel (talk) 12:46, 3 January 2021 (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:Beiderseits vom Schienenweg – 3 Covers.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:Beiderseits vom Schienenweg – 3 Covers.jpg]]) and the above demanded information in your request.

A1Cafel (talk) 12:52, 3 January 2021 (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:Dame Stephanie Shirley at 11.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:Dame Stephanie Shirley at 11.jpg]]) and the above demanded information in your request.

A1Cafel (talk) 12:52, 3 January 2021 (UTC)

hello, the permission is on its way. i just sent an email to dame stephanie shirely. best, Maximilian (talk) 19:26, 18 January 2021 (UTC)
File:Harry Waibel (2015).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!

Also, there is a problem with your user talk page: I see that it is becoming quite long at over 64,000 bytes; it is rather difficult to navigate & edit; and MediaWiki can't handle displaying it, such that templates are not working at the bottom and it is in Category:User talk pages where template include size is exceeded. Some old browsers may have problems editing pages approaching or longer than 32kb. Please archive it in accordance with the guidelines laid out here. You can do this automatically with MiszaBot, and to quickly use a standard setup for MiszaBot, simply place {{subst:User:MiszaBot/usertalksetup}} at the top of your user talk page. If you don't setup archiving, someone will. Alternatively, you can add it to Category:Talk page trimmer to have it trimmed automatically. Thank you.   — Jeff G. please ping or talk to me 04:44, 6 April 2021 (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:Harry Waibel (2015).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:Harry Waibel (2015).jpg]]) and the above demanded information in your request.

Missvain (talk) 21:54, 26 May 2021 (UTC)

File:US Coins 20th Century.webm 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!

PoundTales (talk) 23:52, 31 January 2022 (UTC)

Hello. It's nice to see you're still an active member on Wikimedia Commons. Much of the contributions, here, were made by users who have disappeared years ago. It appears that you may have taken this nomination personally. Please don't. I assumed this was a good faith contribution and, as I said, I've tried to give it the benefit of the doubt before nominating it. I am taking the time to reply to you personally as a demonstration of my own good faith, and to try to help you understand my perspective and concerns. I want to encourage you to continue to make useful contributions, while trying to help you understand just what, exactly, is useful and what is not.
As for your comment about the number of images in the Category:Coins structure, you are correct. There are a large number of them. There are some 200 countries in the world, and assuming that each country has issued at least 5 coins each, that alone brings you to a thousand. Most coins have images of both sides. So yes, there are literally thousands of images that need to be sorted through and organized. How many of them are educational? I would say most are, but clearly not all. The reason for this is, in part, because the category structure has clearly not been consistently maintained, expanded and standardized, a task which I've embarked upon. By improving the category structure, it will become substantially easier to locate and evaluate similar images of a particular coin.
To be honest, I'm not sure any video of this nature is useful in the context of Wikipedia. I struggle to understand what value the video format adds to this presentation. If I want to present a series of current coins of a country, a series of the different designs of one particular denomination of coin, or a series of coins of a particular metal, I can easily create a gallery of still pictures which fills my requirements, and it can be easily maintained when better images of particular coins become available. This is not so with the video presentation. The selection of coins has been made by the creator, and is not editable. This strongly limits its usefulness. For every additional coin that is presented, the longer the video becomes, which quickly exceeds the attention span of the viewer. I really have a hard time seeing how a video presentation of this kind adds any real value over a gallery of stills. I do see a strong advantage for the gallery format in this case.
That said, I am not saying that that all videos are of little value. Clearly, there are many videos that do add value. An example that I recently ran across, though not of a coin, is this: File:Kronkorken.gif It demonstrates the opening of an old-style bottle cap ... something that has become somewhat of a rarity in this day and age of plastic bottles with screw caps. Some coin-related examples that I can think of where a video could add value is a demonstration of Category:Coin flipping or tossing. I suspect there are many ways of doing a coin toss and it may be amusing, at least, to see a variety of techniques. I am quite surprised, in fact, not to find one video in this category. Another example is spinning a coin like a top and letting it wobble. The sound differences between larger and smaller coins, coins of different metals, and of different edges (reeded versus plain) may well be of interest. Also, the use of different surfaces on which the coin is spun, e.g., wood versus ceramic tile, etc. could be another theme. This is a case where a video, as opposed to a audio-only file, is beneficial, as with a video, you can relate the changes in the sound produced to the degree of the coin's falling over. Surprisingly, I also found no videos of that type. I have found some audio-only files at Category:Sounds of coins, and find them generally unuseful for that very reason. The only one in actual use is File:English coins.ogg, which is used on the Polish Wiktionary's entry for brzęk (clink). Video versions of these sound effects would clearly be more useful. The one video I could find is: File:Russian nickel coin spinning.gif. It's very simple, demonstrating the 3D nature of a coin. The lighting and contrast are poor, which greatly reduces the quality of this video, but being the only one of its kind, it will have to remain until a better video can be produced. When a better video does appear, it may be time to decide if that one should be kept or not, particularly if the new video is also of the same coin, a Russian 5 kopeck.
I should add that video (or audio) files should be as concise as possible, and contain a single demonstration per file. It is far more useful to have 20 files of 20 distinct demonstrations than to have one long file of 20 demonstrations. The short files can be selected from to demonstrate a particular theme ... such as different sizes of coin, different metals, different surfaces, etc. A single file that tosses them all with the kitchen sink will be lengthy and contain much that is irrelevant to the point being demonstrated. That will, in turn, greatly reduce the usefulness of the file. Much of my concerns over the sound files center on that very issue. Please remember, the purpose of these files is to serve as illustrations to Wikipedia articles or other Wiki projects. We are not making a TV show. The user's attention will be focused on the text of the article. Videos attached will be seen as potentially useful sidebars to the article, if brief and tightly related to the subject being discussed. If long and largely irrelevant, they will be seen as useless annoyances. Understanding your audience and their perspective should help you create more genuinely useful contributions.
With this in mind, my nomination to delete this video is not meant to be a discussion of the merits of all other images of coins on Wikimedia Commons. This is a discussion of this one file. I wrote the comments above to give you a better understanding of where I'm coming from and why I commented on your video as I did. I encourage you to review Commons:Project scope and Commons:What Commons is not. In particular, Commons:EDUSE and Commons:NOTHOST. Wikimedia Commons cannot host every single image of coins ever made on the face of the Earth. It must be selective, somehow, and these guidelines provide a good means to make such selections. So with all this additional context, let's take a closer look at your video and the criteria.
"Artwork without obvious educational use" The very fact that we're even having this discussion goes a long way to making this point. I have tried long and hard to figure out what possible educational use this submission may have and have failed to come up with any. Your response has also failed to suggest any possible use. You simply mentioned that there are a lot of other images out there and that you don't have many U.S. coins to work with. You haven't addressed this video's potential usefulness or the lack thereof.
"Files that add nothing educationally distinct to the collection of images we already hold covering the same subject, especially if they are of poor or mediocre quality." (Emphasis mine) I have made the point, and you have admitted that the selection of coins in the video is essentially random. While I understand you can only work with the coins you have, that is not the point. The point is that the set of coins displayed is of no special significance. There is no theme or order to the presentation. It is not like the random selection has any importance in its own right. For example, the contents of Abraham Lincoln's pockets the night he was killed may be random, but it does have some interest because of the historical figure and event they're associated with. It is interesting to note, for example, that Lincoln had a Confederate bill in his wallet that tragic night. That said, a random selection of U.S. coins in Maximilian Schönherr's personal collection is not significant in its own right.
Even with the issue of the selection of coins aside, the technical merits of the video limit its value. The length, at nearly a minute, pushes the limits of a viewer's attention span, given the limited contents of the presentation. The timing is odd, with portions seeming to be too slow, while others too fast. The positioning of the camera could be improved. As i noted, significant parts of the silver dollar, and a tiny part of the half have been cut off. The lighting is also an issue, with the contrast shifting in a very distracting way, particularly in connection with the silver dollar. This also limits the video's value. It gives it a very amateurish look, and seems to be more of an experiment in video making rather than a finished production.
Please do not take this nomination personally. It is not a reflection on the fine work you have submitted. I have taken the time to notice that your submission File:Visualisation of the SARS-CoV-2 Omicron Spike Protein.webm is an excellent use of video to demonstrate something that a sequence of stills simply cannot. That said, this video is quite the opposite. A collection of stills, in this case, would be of better value than the video. As you've noted, Wikimedia Commons already has a fine selection of stills of coins ... too many, perhaps. I really struggle with the question of what value this video adds to the existing collection.
So, this is where I'm coming from, and why I've selected this particular video for deletion. I've taken the time to try to be genuinely helpful by pointing out potential areas where videos could be helpful and by trying to explain exactly why I find this video is not. I mean this by way of constructive criticism, and hope this is truly helpful to you in developing better videos and other content for Wikipedia. I tried to give you avenues to consider for future contributions that could indeed be useful, and an improvement to existing content. I hope his has been genuinely helpful. I look forward to seeing your future work.
Sincerely, PoundTales (talk) 02:53, 2 February 2022 (UTC)
hi there. deletion of files here in the commons is significantly different from removing files or text from wikipedia articles. the wikipedia articles have a more or less strict norm about where to place what kind of however relevant media and what kind of text. the main and probably only reasons for the deletion of files here in the commons are
  • copyright infringement (for example a photo of a new book cover),
  • indecency (depending on the culture you're raised in) or
  • aggression (a tele lens photo of the bathroom of your messy neighbour) – not relevance.
side note 1: i've uploaded media since ca. 2007. this does not make me a better person, but a person with some humble knowledge.
side note 2: if you can upload a video of a coin falling over, pls go ahead!
side note 3: we could talk endlessly about how educational a sentence, a video, a still image might be. i don't participate in that airy discussion.
cheers, Maximilian (talk) 15:01, 2 February 2022 (UTC)
File:New York Times - Walter Ziegler verhört Karl Bandelow.png has been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether it should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry.

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

Please remember to respond to and – if appropriate – contradict the arguments supporting deletion. Arguments which focus on the nominator will not affect the result of the nomination. Thank you!

Tohma (talk) 11:10, 27 February 2022 (UTC)

File:New York Times - Melsheimer re-elected - 13. Januar 1955.png has been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether it should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry.

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

Please remember to respond to and – if appropriate – contradict the arguments supporting deletion. Arguments which focus on the nominator will not affect the result of the nomination. Thank you!

Tohma (talk) 16:00, 27 February 2022 (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

June 2011

File:James Monroe 02.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!

Yourlocallordandsavior (talk) 09:54, 3 January 2023 (UTC)

You've marked this as own work, but the sample is from or generated a Casio product, and thus I would have reasonably considered that the samples and rhythm pattern could potentially be their work?.

It may be that short rythym patterns are not copyrightable, but given that I've encountered situation where short 'sample loops' were considered copyrightable, I felt it wise to seek a clarifcation from you. I suggest carefully looking into this. ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 07:24, 18 August 2023 (UTC)

hi there, you're right, the drum pattern is not my work. how can we transfer it into the public domain? thx! Maximilian (talk) 09:59, 18 August 2023 (UTC)
I suggest asking the copyright Village Pump for guidance. ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 10:38, 18 August 2023 (UTC)
things are sorted out, i think: [2]. Maximilian (talk) 19:47, 21 August 2023 (UTC)

Deine Kassettenvideos

Gefallen mir gut. Tolle "Kamerafahrt", wie machst Du das? Aus der Hand? Wilde Konstruktion mit Servierwagen o.ä.? ;-) Viele Grüße Pittigrilli (talk) 16:51, 13 January 2024 (UTC)

danke! für die kamerafahrten ist der vom lokal k vor so 4 jahren bei der WMDE bestellte dolly von edelkrone zuständig. braucht eine super ebene fläche, um nicht ausm takt zu kommen. ein revival bekam der dolly jetzt durch meine aufgeschraubte test-kamera, osmo pocket 3, weil sie die bewegungsverfolgung gut beherrscht. die kamera schicke ich an amazon zurück. vermutlich bestellt sie die WMDE für ihren gerätepool. hab dazu eine beschaffungsanregung nach berlin geschickt. wenn Du den dolly mal brauchst, frag einfach. grüße, Maximilian (talk) 19:31, 13 January 2024 (UTC)
Sehr cool. Wenn mir was einfällt, komm ich gerne drauf zurück. Viel Spaß weiterhin, Pittigrilli (talk) 20:00, 13 January 2024 (UTC)
—> das ist der dolly. Maximilian (talk) 20:56, 13 January 2024 (UTC)