User talk:Rolf B/Archive1
Image Tagging Image:Otterhall Gbg.jpg
[edit]
Thanks for uploading Image:Otterhall Gbg.jpg. I notice the image page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you have not created this media yourself then you need to argue that we have the right to use the media on Wikimedia Commons (see copyright tagging below). If you have not created the media yourself then you should also specify where you found it, i.e., in most cases link to the website where you got it, and the terms of use for content from that page. If the content is a derivative of a copyrighted work, you need to supply the names and a licence of the original authors as well.
If the media also doesn't have a copyright tag, then you must also add one. If you created/took the picture, audio, or video then you can use {{self|cc-by-sa-2.5}} to release it under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike license or {{PD-self}} to release it into the public domain. See Commons:Copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.
Note that any unsourced and untagged images will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have uploaded other media, please check that you have specified their source and copyright tagged them, too. You can find all your uploads using the Gallery tool. Thank you. —xyzzyn 15:37, 8 April 2007 (UTC)
- I am sorry I forgot the licensing, but I have now licensed my image under GFDL. The 'no license' template is still there. I suppose you should remove it rather than me. Best regards. /Rolf B 18:14, 8 April 2007 (UTC)
- Thanks for adding the tag. I think it doesn’t really matter who removes the template once the information has been added; I’ve done that now. —xyzzyn 19:24, 8 April 2007 (UTC)
Hello, and thank your for sharing your files with Commons. There seems to be a problem regarding the description and/or licensing of this particular file. Please remember that all uploads require source, author and license information. Could you please resolve these problems, which are described on the page linked in above? Thank you. --Siebrand 21:34, 29 June 2007 (UTC)
- Hello! Sorry, I forgot the licensing, but it is added now. /Rolf B 21:48, 30 June 2007 (UTC)
Tip: Categorizing images
[edit]
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.CategorizationBot (talk) 19:01, 28 September 2011 (UTC)
- Image:Domkyrkobrunnen Gbg inskription.jpg was uncategorized on 27 September 2011 CategorizationBot (talk) 19:01, 28 September 2011 (UTC)
- Image:Tyska kyrkan Gbg fran Korsgatan.jpg was uncategorized on 27 September 2011 CategorizationBot (talk) 19:01, 28 September 2011 (UTC)
-
- Thanks, dear CategorizationBot! But you must have missed that I made a massive categorization effort three hours before your comment. Among the nearly 80 images that got new categories were also the two that you reminded me of. The reason why all these images had only 2 categories before, is that I uploaded them with a special wizard, supplied for the "Wiki loves monuments" drive, and it did not ask for categories. It was more rational to fix the categories as a batch afterwards. /Rolf B (talk) 21:27, 28 September 2011 (UTC)
File:Diskussion_-_Nanna_Ullman.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. |
178.232.124.8 11:02, 9 October 2011 (UTC)
- Resolved 9 October 2011 (Kept, thanks to Per LX.) /Rolf B (talk) 23:14, 15 October 2011 (UTC)
File:Athletics_WM_sculpture_in_Gbg.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. |
178.232.124.8 11:17, 9 October 2011 (UTC)
- Resolved 9 October 2011 (Kept, thanks to Per LX.) /Rolf B (talk) 23:14, 15 October 2011 (UTC)
File:Athletics_WM_sculpture_in_Gbg.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. |
178.232.124.8 11:20, 9 October 2011 (UTC)
- Resolved 9 October 2011 (Kept, thanks to Per LX.) /Rolf B (talk) 23:14, 15 October 2011 (UTC)