User talk:Ziegelbrenner/Archiv

Greetings Kgberger. You description to Image:Deutscher Bund.png confused me a little so for a moment I thought this was an image from the 1965 book. Is it correct that you drew this map yourself? I've fixed the description page, to avoid further confusion.

Btw, I found three small problems with the image. 1) Flensburg is located further south. It is just southeast of the "G" in its name. 2) Lauenburg was Danish (in a personal union, same status as Holstein) 1815-1864 so I don't quite understand why you've added Prussia's blue colour around it. 3) You've added a town in Holstein just west of Hamburg but not named it. Its name is Altona. Except for this; a nice map. Regards. Valentinian ^(talk) 21:49, 24 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Greetings Valentinian. Thank you very much for your accolade and your help. Yes, I drawed the map by myself. Changes: 1) Flensburg now at the right place, 2) Name of Altona adjoined. 3) If you take a look at the description below, you can see, that Lauenburg first was danish (until 1864), than (since 1865) belongs to prussia - the same as Fürstentum Lichtenberg (1834 added to prussia) in the southwest of germany. Therefore I added Prussia’s blue around it. Kgberger 14:59, 26 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for updating the image. I didn't know Lauenburg became Prussian already in 1865 so I had always assumed it was in 1866 following the Austro-Prussian War (like Schleswig and Holstein). Thanks for the information. Happy editing and welcome to Wikipedia. Valentinian ^(talk) 08:59, 29 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Image:HolyRomanEmpire 1618.png

I found a small error in this map: There is no town or village named "Biberach" between Stuttgart and Nördlingen. It is located further down south, approximately halfway between Ulm and Lake Constance, where it correctly appears a second time on the map. The other town "Biberach" may in reality be Schwäbisch Gmünd.

Another small thing is the town of Aalen, which was mostly protestant at the time (1618), but does not appear in the catholic area of Fürstprobstei Ellwangen. Aalen, as "Freie Reichsstadt", was not under the reign of Ellwangen.

Image:Hessen-Kassel.png

català ∙ čeština ∙ dansk ∙ Deutsch ∙ English ∙ español ∙ Esperanto ∙ français ∙ galego ∙ italiano ∙ lietuvių ∙ magyar ∙ Nederlands ∙ norsk bokmål ∙ português ∙ polski ∙ sicilianu ∙ slovenčina ∙ slovenščina ∙ suomi ∙ Tiếng Việt ∙ Ελληνικά ∙ македонски ∙ русский ∙ українська ∙ հայերեն ∙ 한국어 ∙ 日本語 ∙ 中文（简体） ∙ 中文（繁體） ∙ עברית ∙ فارسی ∙ +/− 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. Could you please resolve these problems, which are described on the page linked in above? Thank you. --Orgullomoore 17:04, 28 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

català ∙ čeština ∙ dansk ∙ Deutsch ∙ English ∙ español ∙ Esperanto ∙ français ∙ galego ∙ italiano ∙ lietuvių ∙ magyar ∙ Nederlands ∙ norsk bokmål ∙ português ∙ polski ∙ sicilianu ∙ slovenčina ∙ slovenščina ∙ suomi ∙ Tiếng Việt ∙ Ελληνικά ∙ македонски ∙ русский ∙ українська ∙ հայերեն ∙ 한국어 ∙ 日本語 ∙ 中文（简体） ∙ 中文（繁體） ∙ עברית ∙ فارسی ∙ +/− Sorry, I forgot the licensing and the source of Information. Kgberger 09:38, 29 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Image:GDR.png

Since you uploaded this image I'm assuming that you created it. You might wanna use {{GFDL-self}} instead of {{GFDL}} Thanks, Yonatanh 12:47, 8 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, first I don’t understand. But now … Kgberger 16:45, 12 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Ziegelbrenner. Someone suggested a name change of your file GDR.png. I agree that a more descriptive name would be better but as GDR stands for Gross Deutsches Reich, I guess you would like a German name better than an English translation. Please have a look and give your permission or remove or alter the rename template. - Wikiklaas (talk) 11:31, 9 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Image:BRD.png

català ∙ čeština ∙ dansk ∙ Deutsch ∙ English ∙ español ∙ Esperanto ∙ français ∙ galego ∙ italiano ∙ lietuvių ∙ magyar ∙ Nederlands ∙ norsk bokmål ∙ português ∙ polski ∙ sicilianu ∙ slovenčina ∙ slovenščina ∙ suomi ∙ Tiếng Việt ∙ Ελληνικά ∙ македонски ∙ русский ∙ українська ∙ հայերեն ∙ 한국어 ∙ 日本語 ∙ 中文（简体） ∙ 中文（繁體） ∙ עברית ∙ فارسی ∙ +/−

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 10:40, 17 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
This message was placed by an automated process. Please go to Commons:Help desk if you need help.

Oops, sorry forgot the licensing. Kgberger 13:21, 17 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Image:FFM.png

català ∙ čeština ∙ dansk ∙ Deutsch ∙ English ∙ español ∙ Esperanto ∙ français ∙ galego ∙ italiano ∙ lietuvių ∙ magyar ∙ Nederlands ∙ norsk bokmål ∙ português ∙ polski ∙ sicilianu ∙ slovenčina ∙ slovenščina ∙ suomi ∙ Tiếng Việt ∙ Ελληνικά ∙ македонски ∙ русский ∙ українська ∙ հայերեն ∙ 한국어 ∙ 日本語 ∙ 中文（简体） ∙ 中文（繁體） ∙ עברית ∙ فارسی ∙ +/−

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 13:29, 27 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
This message was placed by an automated process. Please go to Commons:Help desk if you need help.

Image:Tatoo.jpg

Image deletion warning

Image:Tatoo.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 image, 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. If the file is up for deletion because it has been superseded by a superior derivative of your work, consider the notion that although the file may be deleted, your hard work (which we all greatly appreciate) lives on in the new file.
In all cases, please do not take the deletion request personally. It is never intended as such. Thank you!

Afrikaans ∙ Bahasa Indonesia ∙ Bahasa Melayu ∙ bosanski ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ dansk ∙ Deutsch ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ ∙ eesti ∙ English ∙ español ∙ Esperanto ∙ français ∙ galego ∙ hrvatski ∙ íslenska ∙ italiano ∙ magyar ∙ Nederlands ∙ norsk bokmål ∙ norsk nynorsk ∙ occitan ∙ Plattdüütsch ∙ polski ∙ português ∙ português do Brasil ∙ română ∙ shqip ∙ sicilianu ∙ slovenčina ∙ slovenščina ∙ suomi ∙ svenska ∙ Tiếng Việt ∙ Türkçe ∙ Zazaki ∙ Ελληνικά ∙ беларуская ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ ∙ български ∙ македонски ∙ русский ∙ српски / srpski ∙ українська ∙ հայերեն ∙ বাংলা ∙ മലയാളം ∙ ပအိုဝ်ႏဘာႏသာႏ ∙ မြန်မာဘာသာ ∙ ไทย ∙ 조선말 ∙ 한국어 ∙ 日本語 ∙ 简体中文‎ ∙ 繁體中文‎ ∙ עברית ∙ العربية ∙ پښتو ∙ فارسی ∙ ދިވެހިބަސް ∙ +/−

Kgberger 13:44, 2 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Maps of Germany

Greetings Kgberger. Your historical maps seem to be very nice work, but would you mind considering updating the base map you use for them? The upper portion (Denmark and south Sweden) is unfortunately flawed. Most importantly, the map of Denmark has Jutland missing the en:Djursland peninsula, en:Hindsholm is missing from Funen, Zealand's Isefjord is incorrectly shaped, and large chunks of North Zealand and the Kullaberg peninsula in Sweden are missing. If you need inspiration, the map on da:Herred is rather good as a main outline, except for the portion showing Nordfriesland in modern Schleswig-Holstein, since that particular coastline changed dramatically later. Zealand's Isefjord also changed shape later, to the shape shown at Image:Map DK.PNG / Image:Map DK.svg. Image:La2-demis-scania.png seems to be a decent map of southern Sweden.

Again, maps like Image:GDR.png are very fine work, but they would benefit from giving the Scandinavian sections a level of detail similar to the one given to Holland and France. Thanks in advance and happy editing. Valentinian ^{T / C} 10:08, 27 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Valentinian, Thanks four your advice, I will use these images to make the maps better, but I need a little bit time, cause it’s christmas time and I have a lot of work. Kgberger 10:39, 29 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I know the feeling :) Anytime will be great. Valentinian ^{T / C} 17:14, 5 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Hessen-Homburg.svg

català ∙ čeština ∙ dansk ∙ Deutsch ∙ English ∙ español ∙ Esperanto ∙ français ∙ galego ∙ italiano ∙ lietuvių ∙ magyar ∙ Nederlands ∙ norsk bokmål ∙ português ∙ polski ∙ sicilianu ∙ slovenčina ∙ slovenščina ∙ suomi ∙ Tiếng Việt ∙ Ελληνικά ∙ македонски ∙ русский ∙ українська ∙ հայերեն ∙ 한국어 ∙ 日本語 ∙ 中文（简体） ∙ 中文（繁體） ∙ עברית ∙ فارسی ∙ +/−

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? 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 information may be missing. Thank you.

This message was added automatically by Filbot, if you need some help about it, ask its master or go to the Commons:Help desk. --Fil nik 14:34, 15 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, forgot the license. Kgberger 17:25, 15 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image:DR1919-1937.svg

català ∙ čeština ∙ dansk ∙ Deutsch ∙ English ∙ español ∙ Esperanto ∙ français ∙ galego ∙ italiano ∙ lietuvių ∙ magyar ∙ Nederlands ∙ norsk bokmål ∙ português ∙ polski ∙ sicilianu ∙ slovenčina ∙ slovenščina ∙ suomi ∙ Tiếng Việt ∙ Ελληνικά ∙ македонски ∙ русский ∙ українська ∙ հայերեն ∙ 한국어 ∙ 日本語 ∙ 中文（简体） ∙ 中文（繁體） ∙ עברית ∙ فارسی ∙ +/−

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? 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 information may be missing. Thank you.

This message was added automatically by Filbot, if you need some help about it, ask its master or go to the Commons:Help desk. --Fil nik 12:46, 18 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image:HRR.png

Image deletion warning

Image:HRR.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 image, 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.
In all cases, please do not take the deletion request personally. It is never intended as such. Thank you!

Afrikaans ∙ Bahasa Indonesia ∙ Bahasa Melayu ∙ bosanski ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ dansk ∙ Deutsch ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ ∙ eesti ∙ English ∙ español ∙ Esperanto ∙ français ∙ galego ∙ hrvatski ∙ íslenska ∙ italiano ∙ magyar ∙ Nederlands ∙ norsk bokmål ∙ norsk nynorsk ∙ occitan ∙ Plattdüütsch ∙ polski ∙ português ∙ português do Brasil ∙ română ∙ shqip ∙ sicilianu ∙ slovenčina ∙ slovenščina ∙ suomi ∙ svenska ∙ Tiếng Việt ∙ Türkçe ∙ Zazaki ∙ Ελληνικά ∙ беларуская ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ ∙ български ∙ македонски ∙ русский ∙ српски / srpski ∙ українська ∙ հայերեն ∙ বাংলা ∙ മലയാളം ∙ ပအိုဝ်ႏဘာႏသာႏ ∙ မြန်မာဘာသာ ∙ ไทย ∙ 조선말 ∙ 한국어 ∙ 日本語 ∙ 简体中文‎ ∙ 繁體中文‎ ∙ עברית ∙ العربية ∙ پښتو ∙ فارسی ∙ ދިވެހިބަސް ∙ +/−

Kgberger 12:17, 11 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Kgberger, your map "Deutscher Bund, 1815-1866" [[1]] is excellent, and I would like to adapt it to use to help illustrate a Master's thesis that I am writing. (It will not be published.) However, I am unable to download the SVG version [[2]]. It gives me an error message I do not understand. Would you mind helping me to access the SVG version? Thank you. (Sie dürfen auf Deutsch antworten. Ich werde verstehen.)

It tried a download like you and it doesnt work also. But I don’t know what’s the mistake is. There exists a version as .png too. Maybe you can use this. Or, if you give me an e-mail-adress, I can send you the original version (it's Adobe Illustrator CS2 (Version 12) - 2005 (Mac OS X, Windows), or a .jpg. If it will not be published, I think it is no problem. I wish you all the best for your thesis. Sorry for the late answer. Kgberger 21:28, 1 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your help. As it turns out, I have found other historical (out of copyright) maps that I will be using instead. I still think your maps are the clearest and most accurate I have found, but my professors are reluctant for me to use any sources from Wikipedia in my thesis.

Image:DR1919-1937.svg

Hallo und zunächst erstmal: sehr schöne historische Karten. Einen kleinen Fehler habe ich auf den Karten Image:Deutsches Reich1.svg und Image:DR1919-1937.svg entdeckt: Dessau liegt innerhalb Anhalts an der Mulde. Wäre toll, wenn Du das noch korrigieren könntest. Auf den anderen Karten schauts auf den ersten Blick richtig aus. Viele Grüße, --Alexrk 20:59, 4 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image:HRR 1648.png

Hi, Karlsruhe (Baden) didn't existed in 1648, it was founded 1715.--Julez A. (talk) 23:23, 14 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Oops, changed. Kgberger (talk) 14:49, 16 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

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, Ziegelbrenner!

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 06:01, 21 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Kohortenkastell Pfünz.svg was uncategorized on 30 September 2011 CategorizationBot (talk) 13:37, 3 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

File source is not properly indicated: File:Limes8.png

العربية ∙ asturianu ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ ∙ বাংলা ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ dansk ∙ Deutsch ∙ Ελληνικά ∙ English ∙ español ∙ euskara ∙ فارسی ∙ suomi ∙ français ∙ galego ∙ עברית ∙ hrvatski ∙ magyar ∙ italiano ∙ 日本語 ∙ 한국어 ∙ македонски ∙ മലയാളം ∙ norsk bokmål ∙ Plattdüütsch ∙ Nederlands ∙ norsk nynorsk ∙ norsk ∙ polski ∙ português ∙ português do Brasil ∙ русский ∙ sicilianu ∙ slovenčina ∙ slovenščina ∙ svenska ∙ ไทย ∙ Türkçe ∙ українська ∙ Tiếng Việt ∙ 简体中文‎ ∙ 繁體中文‎ ∙ +/−

This media was probably deleted.

A file that you have uploaded to Wikimedia Commons, File:Limes8.png, was missing information about where it comes from or who created it, which is needed to verify its copyright status. The file probably has been deleted. If you've got all required information, request undeletion providing this information and the link to the concerned file ([[:File:Limes8.png]]).

If you created the content yourself, enter {{Own}} as the source. If you did not add a licensing template, you must add one. You may use, for example, {{self|GFDL|cc-by-sa-all}} or {{Cc-zero}} to release certain rights to your work.

If someone else created the content, or if it is based on someone else's work, the source should be the address to the web page where you found it, the name and ISBN of the book you scanned it from, or similar. You should also name the author, provide verifiable information to show that the content is in the public domain or has been published under a free license by its author, and add an appropriate template identifying the public domain or licensing status, if you have not already done so. Warning: Wikimedia Commons takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing.

Please add the required information for this and other files you have uploaded before adding more files. If you need assistance, please ask at the help desk. Thank you!

Lupo 13:18, 28 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Ja, weg damit. Ist ein Duplikat von Limes 2.png Kgberger 21:30, 28 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, ist weg. File:Limes2.png ist ja noch da. :-) Lupo 23:55, 28 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

File:Norddeutscher Bund.png

Hallo Ziegelbrenner, ich bin immer wieder fasziniert von Deinen Geschichtskarten -- danke dafür! Beim Betrachten von File:Norddeutscher Bund.png ist mir aufgefallen, daß (nur in der neuesten Version) irgendetwas nicht stimmt: das halbe Herzogtum Braunschweig ist verschwunden. Was ist passiert? :-) Lieben Gruß --Magadan (talk) 21:39, 30 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

In der preußischen Flut untergegangen. Danke Magadan, war im Urlaub und korrigiere es gleich. Ziegelbrenner (talk) 11:42, 18 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Comagena wall

Hallo Ziegelbrenner. Deine 4 Graphics über die Comagena wall sollten wieder aus der Meta Categorie Category:Ancient Roman categories herausgenommen werden. Wie du sicher weisst, in Meta Categories dürfen keine Bilder sein, sondern nur Kategorien. Ich bitte dich also dies zu korrigieren und wieder rückgängig zu machen. Herzlichen Dank! --DenghiùComm (talk) 19:38, 24 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Done Problem selbst gelöst. --DenghiùComm (talk) 23:24, 24 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

File:Deutscher Bund.svg

Die SVG-Datei enthält keine Vektordaten mehr, sondern nur noch eine eingebettete JPG-Darstellung der Grafik. Unsere Server können damit anscheinend nicht umgehen. Ausserdem skaliert das so nicht mehr. Wo sind die Vektordaten geblieben? Lupo 15:37, 30 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Illustrator (mit dem ich überwiegend arbeite) erstellt svg.s die ich hinterher selbst nicht mehr öffnen kann. Das wären also die Vektordatein. Ich bedaure ja auch, das ich auf Grund ständiger Mahnungen für mich nicht mehr editierbare svg.s eingestellt habe, aber wie die regeln auf commons sind, krieg ich die nie mehr gelöscht. Darum habe ich den Umweg über Phototshop und jpg. gewählt und man sieht ja, was bei rausgekommen ist. Wenn du einen Weg weißt, will ich den gerne gehen. Danke + grüße Ziegelbrenner (talk) 21:54, 31 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

File:Limes1.png

Hello Ziegelbrenner,

According to latest archeological findings along Fossa Corbulonis, There is a Classis Augusta fleet station proposed at Naaldwijk, and Flenio/Helenio is identified with Vlaardingen. Perhaps you can incorporate this in a forthcoming update. Hans Erren (talk) 20:34, 2 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Done Ziegelbrenner (talk) 13:49, 13 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Karten Deutscher Bund.png und Deutscher Bund.svg

Hallo Ziegelbrenner, ich hätte kleine Änderungsvorschläge zu Deinen sehr schönen Karten zum Deutschen Bund. Die Vorschläge habe ich auf den Diskussionsseiten eingetragen. Viele Grüße --Furfur (talk) 13:00, 17 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Done Ziegelbrenner

Hallo Ziegelbrenner, ich sehe, dass die Änderungen wohl in der Datei Deutscher Bund.png umgesetzt sind, aber die Datei Deutscher Bund.svg wurde am 4. Dezember 2012 von Hannesfr aufgrund eines svg-Fehlers wieder auf die vorherige Version revertiert (der Fehler tritt beim Öffnen der korrigierten Version auch bei mir auf). Kannst Du Dich der Sache bitte nochmal annehmen? Danke --Furfur (talk) 19:07, 3 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Nö, von svg lass ich die Finger. War schon immer sehr problematisch mit dieser Dateiart. Habe auch schon mal einen Löschantrag für ein wirklich falsches svg gestellt. Aber hier kriegt man nix gelöscht. Grüße --Ziegelbrenner (talk) 17:39, 7 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Ach das ist doch schade. Den Löschantrag kann ich nicht unterstützen, das Bild ist einfach viel zu gut dafür. Das kann verbessert werden. Ich bin leider nicht so in Grafikprogrammen erfahren, dass ich das selber machen könnte. Welche Fehler meinst Du? Mir fallen folgende Dinge auf:

Istrien
Lombardo-Venetien
Savoyen
Neuchâtel
die Insel Alsen fehlt
Grenze zwischen Galizien und Ungarn könnte eingezeichnet sein
Grenze der Adria ist nicht korrekt

Das sind aber alles Dinge, die sich mit vertretbarem Aufwand beheben ließen. Bedenke doch bitte dass es langfristig andere Sprachversionen geben wird, in die das Bild übersetzt werden kann wenn es im svg-Format ist. Vielleicht könnte man das svg-Bild in der Kartenwerkstatt überarbeiten lassen? Grüße --Furfur (talk) 18:44, 7 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

DAS ist nicht das Problem. Ich arbeite in der Kartenwerkstatt mit, und das svg-Problem ist bekannt, aber nicht lösbar. Ich habe soeben versucht aus der Illustrator-Datei "Deutscher Bund" ein svg zu schreiben.

Das ist das Ergebnis: XML-Verarbeitungsfehler: Präfix nicht an einen Namespace gebunden Adresse: file:///private/var/folders/rq/rqJG9kpy2RaUjE+8ZRD7S++++TI/-Tmp-/TemporaryItems/ai13576441212.tmp/ai13576441212.svg Zeile Nr. 3667, Spalte 3: <g id="path9108_1_" sodipodi:nodetypes="csssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssss">----------------^

Ganz großes Kino. Und jeder weiss sofort, was gemeint ist. Ich werde mich trotzdem noch Mal drum kümmern. Grüße --Ziegelbrenner (talk) 11:39, 8 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Mit vielen Verrenkungen und Umwegen hats doch noch geklappt. Grüße --Ziegelbrenner (talk) 14:14, 8 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Super, vielen Dank für die Mühe! Die wikipedia community wird es Dir lohnen :-). SVG kann zwar sehr nervig sein, hat aber eben auch den Vorteil, dass es leicht in andere Sprachen portabel und natürlich als Vektorformat in beliebig guter Auflösung darstellbar ist. Ich habe mich auch schon mehrfach mit svg-Problemen an die Kartenwerkstatt wenden müssen. Eine sehr schöne Vektordatei wird zwar fehlerfrei in Illustrator dargestellt, ist aber fehlerhaft im Browser, so dass sie leider nur als exportiertes png verwendbar ist. Dieses Problem habe ich bisher nicht lösen können. Es ist auch ärgerlich, dass es keinen richtigen svg-Standard gibt: svgs aus Illustrator sehen anders aus als svgs aus Inkscape.
Grüße --Furfur (talk) 22:36, 10 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Die Byzanz-Karte ist von dir!?! Super Arbeit! Ich habe mir Inkscape runtergeladen und die Illustrator-Datei dort dann in svg umgewandelt. Ist zwar ein bißchen von hinten durch die Brust oder wie mein IT-Chef immer sagt: EDV zu Fuß, aber ich weiß jetzt, wie das funktioniert – also auch noch was gelernt. Grüße --Ziegelbrenner (talk) 15:35, 11 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Commons:WikiProject Dacia

Hi! I created the Commons:WikiProject Dacia as a sister project to WP:DACIA

and WP:DACIA

to better organize, categorize and improve the quality of media and galleries related to ancient Dacia. From your contributions, I think you might be interested and maybe you wish to join and support the project. Your input is welcomed! Thanks and best regards!

--Codrin.B (talk) 20:27, 13 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

File:Limes1.png

Hallo Ziegelbrenner, könntest Du evtl. noch die Römerlager Olfen und Beckinghausen mit aufnehmen? Vielen Dank. Viele Grüße --Dusdia (talk) 20:38, 26 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Done --Ziegelbrenner (talk) 17:36, 7 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Deutsches Reich1.png

Hallo Ziegelbrenner, das Posener Gebiet war doch auch eine Provinz Preußens und nicht bloß "Posen" sondern "Provinz Posen". Bitte ebenfalls die Position von Küstrin an der Oder korrigieren. Die Stadt liegt direkt an der Mündung der Warthe in die Oder und nicht so weit entfernt im Norden. Kannst Du bitte auch noch Stolp, Bromberg, Memel und Glogau ergänzen. Danke, --Tiem Borussia 73 (talk) 22:39, 29 January 2013 (UTC) Done --Ziegelbrenner (talk) 10:37, 31 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

File:Rheinbund 1808, political map.png und File:Rheinbund 1812.png

Gerade in dem Gebiet Thueringens, zu dem nun einige selbstrecherchierte laienhafte Anmerkungen folgen, wurde mit seiner Kleinstaaterei und der Kleinteiligkeit in der Erstellung der Karten File:Rheinbund 1808, political map.png und File:Rheinbund 1812.png eine großartige aufwendige Arbeit geleistet. Einige der Bezeichnungen und Einfaerbungen scheinen aber meiner Ansicht nach nicht korrekt zu sein: Sachsen-Coburg hieß in diesem Zeitraum Sachsen-Coburg-Saalfeld und umfasste im wesentlichen Gebiete um die im Namen enthalten Staedte. Damit ist die Einfaerbung des Gebietes um Gotha (westlich von Erfurt) mit derselben Farbe nicht korrekt. Dieses Gebiet gehoerte zu Sachsen-Gotha-Altenburg (Sachsen-Gotha existierte zu diesen Zeitpunkten nicht und sollte daher umbenannt werden) und sollte dieselbe Farbe erhalten wie die korrekt zugeordneten Gebiete um Altenburg und suedoestlich von Jena. Noch weiter westlich des Gothaer Gebietes, also die Gegend um Eisenach (derzeit Sachsen-Gotha zugeordnet) gehoerte damals zu Sachsen-Eisenach (vor 1809 bereits im Besitz von Sachsen-Weimar-Eisenach, wohl aber staatsrechtlich gesondert behandelt) bzw. zu Sachsen-Weimar-Eisenach (ab 1809). Da bliebe somit zu ueberlegen, ob dieser Unterschied auch in den beiden Karten unterschiedlichen Datums beruecksichtigt wird, oder ob grundsaetzlich bereits SWE fuer beide Zeitpunkte und Landesteile verwendet wird. (Einmal ist ein Gebiet derzeit uebrigens als S-W bezeichnet). Darueber hinaus sind eventuell auch die beiden im Norden Thueringens derzeit Sachsen-Coburg zugeordneten Gebiete umzufaerben. Das kleine Gebiet westlich von Schwarzburg-Sondershausen ist vermutlich SGA, oestlich davon Schwarzburg-Rudolstadt. --5.28.108.99 13:37, 1 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

File:Limes3.png

Lieber Ziegelbrenner, ich möchtte dich um eine Korrektur zur Datierung von dem Kastell Schwechat. Derzeit wissenschaftlich gesichert ist das Errichten des Kastells erst Ende des 2. Jhdt., Anfang des 3. jhdt. Bitte daher um korrektur der Farbe auf Rot. Ich fürchte gleiches gilt auch für Äquinoctium (Fischamend). --Wastyn M. (talk) 20:38, 28 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Carl of Sweden

Hello Excuse me for disturbing you, you work the shields in svg.

Could you please do me a favor

Could you please make the coat of arms of Sweden Carl (1 shield at the bottom right of the source)http://www.flickr.com/photos/thecrimsoncomet/3452083678/sizes/o/in/set-72157616966149718/

I can give you the shield base

and the crest of the province

THANK YOU in advance for your kindly help you cordially day--Dunkerqueenflandre (talk) 12:24, 1 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Well, I can make this coat of arms. Which Carl is it? Cause the template/pattern is difficult to recognize and I can search in Google for a better one. Greetings Ziegelbrenner (talk) 12:32, 1 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Carl of Sweden was the son of King Oscar II and Queen Sophia of Nassau

Please look on Article https://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carl_de_Su%C3%A8de

I do research for the following item https://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maison_Bernadotte

thanck you cordially--Dunkerqueenflandre (talk) 12:39, 1 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

But there is the right coat of arms.