User talk:Ratzer

Welcome to the Commons, Ratzer!

First steps tutorial Our first steps help file and our FAQ will help you a lot after registration. They explain how to customize the interface (for example the language), how to upload files and our basic licensing policy. You don't need technical skills in order to contribute here. Be bold contributing here and assume good faith for the intentions of others. This is a wiki - it is really easy. Getting help More information is available at the Community Portal. You may ask questions at the Help desk, Village Pump or on IRC channel #wikimedia-commons. You can also contact an administrator on their talk page. If you have a specific copyright question, ask at Commons talk:Licensing.		Goodies, tips and tricks Put Babel boxes on your user page so others know what languages you can speak and indicate your Graphics abilities. All your uploads are stored in your personal Gallery Please sign your name on Talk pages by typing ~~~~ Use the CommonSense tool to find good categories for your files (then other people can find them too!) To link to an image page, write this: `[[:Image:Foo.jpg]]`, it makes this: `Image:Foo.jpg` If you're copying files from another project, be sure to use the CommonsHelper Made a mistake? Did you want to rename or move a file? Simply upload the file again and mark the old one like this: `{{bad name\|Correct name}}` For more information read the full Deletion guidelines
(P.S. Would you like to provide feedback on this message?)

Image Tagging Image:Cocos(keeling)_76.jpg edit

Latest comment: 17 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion

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

This media may be deleted.

Thanks for uploading Image:Cocos(keeling)_76.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 {{Cc-by-sa-2.5}} to release it under the Creative Commons 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. Nilfanion 21:39, 5 October 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I disagree that the copyright status is unclear, since I specified it as U.S. government work. But I interpret your communication as wanting further information. The image was created by the Central Intelligence Agency and published in the Indian Ocean Atlas (by Central Intelligence Agency), no year or ISBN given. Obviously the image is a scan from the bottom of page 61 of said atlas.Ratzer1 16:16, 6 October 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Image:Monaco3.jpg edit

Latest comment: 17 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion

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 18:23, 6 October 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hello, I tried to give more information and clarify the copyright status on the particular image page.Ratzer1 20:09, 6 October 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Image:Cocos.jpg edit

Latest comment: 17 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

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 22:14, 12 October 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Image Tagging Image:Seroog001.jpg edit

Latest comment: 17 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

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

This media may be deleted.

Thanks for uploading Image:Seroog001.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 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. Matt314 09:13, 13 October 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]

deine Lizenzfrage edit

Latest comment: 17 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Hallo Ratzer, es klingt so, als ob die Fotos unter {{Attribution}} fallen würden. Unter den Baustein solltest du dann noch hinzufügen, in welcher Form die Namensnennung erwünscht wird (also wie in der mail angegeben). Falls du den Eindruck hast, dass der der Absender nicht verstanden hat, dass damit jeder sein(e) Bild(er) unter diesen Bedingungen (also auch durch Dritte ohne erneut nachzufragen) nutzen kann, ggfs. nochmals darauf hinweisen. Viele Grüße und ein frohes Neues! --Matt314 19:01, 1 January 2007 (UTC) PS: Falls du das per E-mail bekommen hast, am besten auch an COM:OTRS weiterleiten.Reply[reply]

Image:Apotres.jpg edit

Latest comment: 16 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Image deletion warning

Image:Apotres.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 ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ dansk ∙ Deutsch ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ ∙ eesti ∙ English ∙ español ∙ Esperanto ∙ français ∙ galego ∙ hrvatski ∙ íslenska ∙ italiano ∙ magyar ∙ Nederlands ∙ norsk ∙ 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 ∙ ไทย ∙ ပအိုဝ်ႏဘာႏသာႏ ∙ မြန်မာဘာသာ ∙ 조선말 ∙ 한국어 ∙ 日本語 ∙ 中文 ∙ 中文（简体）‎ ∙ 中文（繁體）‎ ∙ עברית ∙ العربية ∙ پښتو ∙ فارسی ∙ ދިވެހިބަސް ∙ +/−

--Gmaxwell 20:27, 1 February 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Image Tagging Image:Lake_Vanda.jpg edit

Latest comment: 16 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

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

Dieses Medium könnte gelöscht werden.

Vielen Dank, dass du Image:Lake_Vanda.jpg hochgeladen hast. Leider gibt die Beschreibungsseite nicht an, wer den Inhalt erstellt hat, daher ist der Urheberrechts-Status unklar. Falls du den Inhalt selbst erstellt hast, vermerke dies bitte auf der Beschreibungsseite (siehe Lizenzbausteine weiter unten). Falls der Inhalt nicht von dir selbst stammt, musst du begründen, warum er auf den Commons verwendet werden darf, und angeben, woher die Datei stammt, z. B. mit einem Link zur Ursprungsseite und zu den Nutzungsbedingungen dort. Falls es sich um eine Bearbeitung handelt, musst du die Namen und eine Lizenz der ursprünglichen Autoren mit angeben.

Falls das Medium nicht mit einem Lizenzbaustein ausgezeichnet ist, musst du unbedingt einen hinzufügen. Wenn du das Bild, die Audiodatei oder das Video selbst erstellt hast, kannst du den Baustein {{self|cc-by-sa-2.5}} für die Creative Commons Lizenz oder {{PD-self}} für Gemeinfreiheit setzen. Siehe Commons:Lizenzvorlagen für die komplette Liste der nutzbaren Lizenzen und den dazugehörigen Lizenzbausteinen.

Bitte beachte, dass alle Bilder ohne Quellen- und/oder Lizenzangaben eine Woche nach dem Hochladen gelöscht werden. Dies kannst du auf der Seite Richtlinien zum Löschen nachlesen. Falls du noch andere Dateien hochgeladen hast, überprüfe bitte auch, ob dort Quellen- und Urheberinformationen angegeben sind. Du kannst alle von dir hochgeladenen Bilder mit dem Galerie-Tool ansehen. Vielen Dank. Yonatanh 21:18, 7 February 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Samoa edit

Latest comment: 16 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Can you give me a website other than Wikipedia that has this official numbering? --Golbez 08:07, 26 February 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Image:219695199 368348ec96 o.jpg edit

Latest comment: 16 years ago5 comments3 people in discussion

The original sourse of this image is not Flickr, and the it meets the criteria for speedy deletion.--Vaya 09:22, 4 March 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

What is a sourse? And how do you know? Would be helpful if you documented your findings a little bit.--Ratzer1 18:03, 4 March 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hello,

I'm surprised that when I'm asking a question back to Vaya, I get an answer from Yann. Is this the same user with two different ID's? Whatever, the point is obviously valid and the image should be deleted. Sorry.--Ratzer1 20:36, 4 March 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

No, I am another user, just Yann repied earlier then I did, and I see nothing bad bout it.--Vaya 22:01, 4 March 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Sources edit

Latest comment: 16 years ago8 comments3 people in discussion

Hello,

Please give the real source of the images or they will be deleted. Google is not a valid source. Regards, Yann 18:00, 4 March 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Can you be specific?--Ratzer1 18:04, 4 March 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hello,

I am talking about Image:Rocas.jpg. Regards, Yann 18:14, 4 March 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

This is a NASA Image no matter on what web page it is presented. I could not locate a NASA web source where the same image is prevented, but that does not change anything in the authorship, does it?--Ratzer1 20:39, 4 March 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

This site states: "Copyright © 1992-2007 UNESCO World Heritage Centre, All Rights Reserved". So there should be some proof that this image is really from NASA.--Vaya 22:04, 4 March 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

On page [3], from which I took the image, it is headed with this caption: "Water visibility during good weather conditions is greater than 20 m. A good visibility is evidenced in the TM/LANDSAT image (Figure 2), where, in the blue channel, it is possible to identify bottom features in depths up to 30 m." It is general knowledge that TM/LANDSAT images are by NASA (e.g.[4]).--Ratzer1 06:23, 5 March 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

So give this [5] link on the image page as a source, and add a description that this image was taken by TM/LANDSAT which belongs to NASA or something like that, to prevent further misunderstandings.--Vaya 15:08, 5 March 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

And remove no source template.--Vaya 15:09, 5 March 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Image:Baxter-Campbell-Island.jpg edit

Latest comment: 16 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Pay attention to copyright

Image:Baxter-Campbell-Island.jpg has been marked as a copyright violation. The Wikimedia Commons only accepts free content, that is, images and other media files that can be used by anyone, for any purpose. For details on what is acceptable, please read Commons:Licensing. You can ask questions about Commons policies in Commons:Help desk.

The file you added will soon be deleted. If you believe this image is not a copyright violation, please explain why on the image description page.

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

GeorgHH 15:12, 11 March 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Image:Benares_Shoals_Sat.png edit

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. --Siebrand

Image:Macclesfield.png edit

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. --Siebrand

Image Tagging Image:Port Royal Cays.png edit

Latest comment: 16 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

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

This media may be deleted.

Thanks for uploading Image:Port Royal Cays.png. 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. Magnus Manske 08:33, 1 August 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Image Tagging Image:Nanumanga.png edit

Latest comment: 16 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

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

This media may be deleted.

Thanks for uploading Image:Nanumanga.png. 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. Magnus Manske 08:34, 1 August 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Chesterfield Islands edit

Hi there, looking forward to your article, map corrected, regards User:Hobe 2008-03-19

B V Islands edit

Hi there, you can get all area data over the BVI on the swedish page, every island is acounted for and even if you dont understand swedish the area is given under "Geografi" in km², the data is collected from variuos sources mostly found under "Externa länkar" User:Hobe 2008-03-19

Image:Onyx_River_at_Lake_Vanda.jpg edit

Latest comment: 15 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion

Image deletion warning

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

Afrikaans ∙ Bahasa Indonesia ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ dansk ∙ Deutsch ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ ∙ eesti ∙ English ∙ español ∙ Esperanto ∙ français ∙ galego ∙ hrvatski ∙ íslenska ∙ italiano ∙ magyar ∙ Nederlands ∙ norsk ∙ 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 ∙ ไทย ∙ ပအိုဝ်ႏဘာႏသာႏ ∙ မြန်မာဘာသာ ∙ 조선말 ∙ 한국어 ∙ 日本語 ∙ 中文 ∙ 中文（简体）‎ ∙ 中文（繁體）‎ ∙ עברית ∙ العربية ∙ پښتو ∙ فارسی ∙ ދިވެހިބަސް ∙ +/−

Kam Solusar (talk) 16:08, 17 July 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Sorry, I overlooked the external credit on the USGS page. However, I found another photo of Onyx River on page http://wy.water.usgs.gov/projects/antarctica/htms/journal.htm, without any external credit. Once this one is deleted, I'll upload the replacement within short time, under the same name as the old/deleted one, such that the links do not be removed from the articles (please no automatic delinker).--Ratzer1 (talk) 07:56, 18 July 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Please link images edit

Latest comment: 14 years ago4 comments2 people in discussion

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 Ratzer!

Thank you for providing images to Wikimedia Commons. Please keep in mind that images uploaded to Commons should be useful to all users of Wikimedia projects. This is possible only if the images can be found by other people.

To allow others to find the images you uploaded here, the images should be in some place that can be found by navigating the category structure. This means that you should put the images into appropriate topic pages, categories, optionally galleries, or both of them (see Commons:Categories). To find good categories for your images, the CommonSense tool may help.

You can find a convenient overview of your uploaded files in this gallery.

The important point is that the images should be placed in the general structure somewhere. There are a large number of completely unsorted images on Commons right now. If you would like to help to place some of those images where they can be found, please do!

Thank you. BotMultichillT (talk) 10:12, 28 November 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Image:Ocean island.jpg is uncategorized since 27 November 2008. BotMultichillT (talk) 10:12, 28 November 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Image:Gauacloseupmap2.png is uncategorized since 24 December 2008. BotMultichillT (talk) 06:10, 25 December 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Sorry, I shall pay more attention to categories in the future. However, I've noticed that when adding categories during the uploading process, only the last category entered stays, the previously entered categories seem to get overwritten. Perhaps I'm doing something wrong.--Ratzer1 (talk) 11:31, 4 January 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

TUSC token bdfa67044527ebbbd924de53ac177261 edit

I am now proud owner of a TUSC account!

File:Geographic Atolls of the Maldives1.jpg edit

Latest comment: 14 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

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, ask its master (Filnik) or go to the Commons:Help desk. --Filnik 12:55, 2 May 2009 (UTC)

Mohunu put it in public domain on the en-WP. There it says under Licensing:

I, the copyright holder of this work, release this work into the public domain. This applies worldwide.
In some countries this may not be legally possible; if so:
I grant anyone the right to use this work for any purpose, without any conditions, unless such conditions are required by law.

--Ratzer1 (talk) 19:22, 2 May 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

File:MinseA.jpg may be deleted edit

Latest comment: 14 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion

català ∙ čeština ∙ Deutsch ∙ English ∙ español ∙ magyar ∙ português do Brasil ∙ Nederlands ∙ português ∙ français ∙ македонски ∙ slovenščina ∙ русский ∙ suomi ∙ 日本語 ∙ +/−

MinseA.jpg which you uploaded has been tagged with {{OTRS pending}} for more than 30 days. This tag indicates that an email setting out permission to use the file was sent to the Volunteer Response Team. Unfortunately, we cannot find any record that such an email has been received, and accordingly the file remains without permission. Unless the Volunteer Response Team receives evidence that permission has been granted within 15 days of today's date, the file will be deleted. If you have already sent the permission, please re-send it to permissions-commons@wikimedia.org now. Please quote the file name ("MinseA.jpg") in your email. At the same time, please leave a message at the VRT noticeboard so that a volunteer can follow this up or contact a VRT member directly.

HersfoldOTRSBot^{(talk/opt out)} 16:57, 1 September 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Permissions mail forwareded 2009-09-02 09:41 CEDT--Ratzer1 (talk) 07:59, 2 September 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

File:Seroog001.jpg may be deleted edit

Latest comment: 14 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion

català ∙ čeština ∙ Deutsch ∙ English ∙ español ∙ magyar ∙ português do Brasil ∙ Nederlands ∙ português ∙ français ∙ македонски ∙ slovenščina ∙ русский ∙ suomi ∙ 日本語 ∙ +/−

Seroog001.jpg which you uploaded has been tagged with {{OTRS pending}} for more than 30 days. This tag indicates that an email setting out permission to use the file was sent to the Volunteer Response Team. Unfortunately, we cannot find any record that such an email has been received, and accordingly the file remains without permission. Unless the Volunteer Response Team receives evidence that permission has been granted within 15 days of today's date, the file will be deleted. If you have already sent the permission, please re-send it to permissions-commons@wikimedia.org now. Please quote the file name ("Seroog001.jpg") in your email. At the same time, please leave a message at the VRT noticeboard so that a volunteer can follow this up or contact a VRT member directly.

HersfoldOTRSBot^{(talk/opt out)} 16:59, 1 September 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Permissions mail forwareded 2009-09-02 09:41 CEDT--Ratzer1 (talk) 08:00, 2 September 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Ratzer1 -> Ratzer edit

Latest comment: 14 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

I have been uploading material as Ratzer1 for almost three years now. Shortly before starting this in September 2006, I had created the account User:Ratzer, but lost the password, was locked out and was never able to use it again. Anyone doubting this can see that nothing was ever uploaded under that account name, and stewards might be able to verify that the account had not been accessed since September 2006 at the latest. Ratzer is my global name, in use in the de- en- es- fr- and other WPs, and it would be nice to be Ratzer on commons also, and move all my Ratzer1 work to this account name.--Ratzer1 (talk) 11:52, 11 September 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

File:E-Werik Dingolfing nah.jpg edit

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 ∙ +/−

Thank you for providing images to Wikimedia Commons. Please keep in mind that images and other files on Commons must be under a free license and should be useful to the Wikimedia projects. To allow others to use your files, some additional information must be given on the description page. Most importantly:

Describe what it is about in a short sentence. (What does the image show?)
State the author and the date of creation. If you made it yourself, say so explicitly. If it is from another Wikimedia user, link to the person's local user page. Best to use CommonsHelper.
If you did not create the file yourself, state the source you got it from.
Add a copyright tag - images without an appropriate license tag will be deleted.
Add the image to one or more gallery pages and/or appropriate categories, so it can be found by others. To find out where an image belongs, you can use CommonsSense.

If you copied the file from another wiki, please copy all information given there and say who uploaded it to that wiki. Use CommonsHelper.

It is recommended to use Template:Information to put that information on the description page. Have a look at Template talk:Information for details of the use of this template.

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.

Please add as much information as possible. If there is not sufficient information, the file may have to be deleted. For more information, follow the Commons:First steps guide. If you need help or have questions, please ask at the Help desk.

Thank you.

This message was added automatically by Nikbot, if you need some help about it, ask its master (Filnik) or go to the Commons:Help desk. --Filnik 16:57, 3 October 2009 (UTC)

File:Hinterkaifeck-Hof.jpg edit

Latest comment: 14 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

File:Hinterkaifeck-Hof.jpg has been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether it should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry.

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

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

Afrikaans ∙ Bahasa Indonesia ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ dansk ∙ Deutsch ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ ∙ eesti ∙ English ∙ español ∙ Esperanto ∙ français ∙ galego ∙ hrvatski ∙ íslenska ∙ italiano ∙ magyar ∙ Nederlands ∙ norsk ∙ 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 ∙ ไทย ∙ ပအိုဝ်ႏဘာႏသာႏ ∙ မြန်မာဘာသာ ∙ 조선말 ∙ 한국어 ∙ 日本語 ∙ 中文 ∙ 中文（简体）‎ ∙ 中文（繁體）‎ ∙ עברית ∙ العربية ∙ پښتو ∙ فارسی ∙ ދިވެހިބަސް ∙ +/−

--Arschimedes (talk) 09:39, 23 December 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

What gives you the right to upload materials from external websites without permission?

I'm the webmaster of www.theater-nandlstadt.de and i don't permit to uplaod any picture from that site!!!!!!!

File:Totoya.jpg edit

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, ask its master (Filnik) or go to the Commons:Help desk. --Filnik 11:01, 4 February 2010 (UTC)

TUSC token d35e4e7a5812b7ccd4f5881ac34486a9 edit

I am now proud owner of a TUSC account!

Better source request for Image:Alacran ESC large ISS006 ISS006-E-52094.JPG edit

Latest comment: 13 years ago3 comments2 people in discussion

Thanks for uploading Image:Alacran ESC large ISS006 ISS006-E-52094.JPG. You provided a source, but it is difficult for other users to examine the copyright status of the image because the source is incomplete. Please consider clarifying the exact source so that the copyright status may be checked more easily. It is best to specify the exact web page where you found the image, rather than only giving the source domain or the URL of the image file itself. Please update the image description with a URL that will be more helpful to other users in determining the copyright status.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have specified their source in a complete manner. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following this link. If you have any questions please ask them at the help desk or me at my talkpage. Thank you. High Contrast (talk) 18:35, 10 July 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Bitte als Quelle nie den Direktlink auf die jpg-Datei angeben, sondern die Seite, auf der das Bild zu sehen ist. Bitte ausbessern, ansonsten besten Dank fürs Editieren! Gruß, High Contrast (talk) 18:36, 10 July 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Sorry, it should be fixed now.--Ratzer1 (talk) 21:24, 10 July 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Montserrat edit

Latest comment: 13 years ago4 comments2 people in discussion

Dear Ratzer, thank you for your advice, I will translate map as soon as I have time. I'm busy at the moment with my studies. But, I will find time sonn. Best regards :-)Ivan25 (talk) 12:04, 13 July 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Done:-) And about parishes and boundaries - well this is topographic map and it's not so god for any other lines except relief, roads and places... I can do that, but it will be ugly and illegible :-( Tschüss...Ivan25 (talk) 19:41, 13 July 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Bitte, bitte, jederzeit :-) Знаш ли ти то српски? Do you speak Serbian? Ich spreche Deutsch, aber nicht so gut... :-) Ivan25 (talk) 17:36, 16 July 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Nein, leider nicht... but sometimes I use the help of Google translate ;-) --Ratzer1 (talk) 07:44, 17 July 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]

File:Cheradi_san_paolo.jpg edit

Latest comment: 13 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

File:Cheradi_san_paolo.jpg has been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether it should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry.

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

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

Afrikaans ∙ Bahasa Indonesia ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ dansk ∙ Deutsch ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ ∙ eesti ∙ English ∙ español ∙ Esperanto ∙ français ∙ galego ∙ hrvatski ∙ íslenska ∙ italiano ∙ magyar ∙ Nederlands ∙ norsk ∙ 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 ∙ ไทย ∙ ပအိုဝ်ႏဘာႏသာႏ ∙ မြန်မာဘာသာ ∙ 조선말 ∙ 한국어 ∙ 日本語 ∙ 中文 ∙ 中文（简体）‎ ∙ 中文（繁體）‎ ∙ עברית ∙ العربية ∙ پښتو ∙ فارسی ∙ ދިވެހިބަސް ∙ +/−

Leyo 11:26, 13 October 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]

File source is not properly indicated: File:Cocos.jpg edit

Latest comment: 12 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion

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

This media may be deleted.

A file that you have uploaded to Wikimedia Commons, File:Cocos.jpg, is missing information about where it comes from or who created it, which is needed to verify its copyright status. Please edit the file description and add the missing information, or the file may be deleted.

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

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

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

■ MMXX ^talk 00:24, 27 August 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Fixed.--Ratzer (talk) 13:50, 16 October 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]

File:Morant Bank map.jpg edit

Latest comment: 12 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

File:Morant Bank map.jpg has been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether it should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry.

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

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

Afrikaans ∙ Bahasa Indonesia ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ dansk ∙ Deutsch ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ ∙ eesti ∙ English ∙ español ∙ Esperanto ∙ français ∙ galego ∙ hrvatski ∙ íslenska ∙ italiano ∙ magyar ∙ Nederlands ∙ norsk ∙ 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 ∙ ไทย ∙ ပအိုဝ်ႏဘာႏသာႏ ∙ မြန်မာဘာသာ ∙ 조선말 ∙ 한국어 ∙ 日本語 ∙ 中文 ∙ 中文（简体）‎ ∙ 中文（繁體）‎ ∙ עברית ∙ العربية ∙ پښتو ∙ فارسی ∙ ދިވެހިބަސް ∙ +/−

Ju Ta 00:48, 16 October 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Alte Karte von Rurutu edit

Latest comment: 11 years ago4 comments2 people in discussion

Hallo Ratzer, Du hast ja einige Karten der Perry-Castaneda-Bibliothek hochgeladen, leider habe ich nun eine gefunden, die nicht PD sein dürfte: File:Rurutu-map.jpg. Der Autor ist nicht seit mind. 70 Jahren tot, wie von Dir per Lizenz gesetzt, sondern der Geologe Lawrence John Chubb starb 1971, ist also "erst" 40 Jahre tot. Leider ist auch das Journal nicht PD, da Werke der Geological Society of London keine Werke der britischen Regierung sind :-( Von daher wüsste ich nicht was hier für "public domain" sprechen sollte. Falls Du nicht noch ein Behaltens-Argument hast, kommen wir wohl um einen SLA nicht herum :-( Gruß, --Telim tor (talk) 11:44, 23 January 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Gleiches gilt auch für File:Rapa.jpg. --Telim tor (talk) 12:07, 23 January 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hallo Telim tor, wenn tatsächlich Lawrence John Chubb Urheber dieser Karte(n) ist und 1971 verstarb, dann haben die Karten die falsche Lizenz, dann habe ich geschlampt. Dass die Karten jedoch Public Domain sind, steht außer Frage, siehe hier. Ein SLA dürfte damit nicht notwendig sein, soviel Zeit muss sein, um die richtige Lizenz zu finden, notfalls per Mail-Anfrage an die Perry-Castañeda Library Map Collection.--Ratzer (talk) 06:37, 24 January 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Klar, so viel Zeit sollte sein. Gut, die PCL kennzeichnet also offenbar urheberrechtlich geschützte Karten gesondert - was hier dann nicht der Fall ist. Fehlt also nur noch der passende Lizenzbaustein, möglicherweise {{PD-because|reason}}, falls die "Reason" mit "bei PCL nicht als der urheberrechtlich geschützt markiert" ausreicht. Gruß, --Telim tor (talk) 06:48, 24 January 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Bayerische Vermessungsverwaltung edit

Latest comment: 11 years ago3 comments2 people in discussion

Gute Quelle, aber bitte die richtige Lizenz wählen (cc-by-3.0-de, nicht cc-by-3.0). Für die Namensnennung hat der Rechteinhaber eine bestimmte Form vorgegeben. --Martin H. (talk) 23:10, 26 January 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Ganz schön kompliziert, dieser Lizenzzirkus. Mir wäre nicht aufgefallen, dass eine eigene Lizenz cc-by-3.0-de in der Auswahlliste angeboten worden wäre (ebensowenig, dass der Rechteinhaber genau diese Lizenz vorschreibt), aber vielleicht habe ich ja etwas übersehen. Und dass der Rechteinhaber eine bestimmte Form der Namensänderung verlangt, glaube ich Dir gerne, aber entweder bin ich blind oder der Hinweis ist versteckt. Beim nächsten upload werde ich aber verstärkt nach diesen Dingen Ausschau halten.--Ratzer (talk) 20:28, 27 January 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Ich hab jetzt nochmal hingeschaut und die verlangte Namensnennung gefunden. Die habe ich bei den uploads unter "Autor=..." ersetzt. Dass es eine spezielle *-de-Lizenz gab bei cc-by-3.0 ist mir einfach nicht aufgefallen. Jetzt aber weiß ich es, danke.--Ratzer (talk) 20:42, 27 January 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]

File:Hintersee Topo Karte.jpg edit

Latest comment: 11 years ago3 comments2 people in discussion

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

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

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

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

Noch schlimmer, die DTK50 gehört nicht zu den CC-BY-SA-3.0-Karten. Die darf nur für private Zwecke genutzt werden. NNW (talk) 21:42, 7 February 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Doch, siehe hier, ganz unten auf der Seite.--Ratzer (talk) 22:01, 7 February 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Sorry, ich habe mich geirrt. Das kam daher, dass oben auf dieser Seite steht Nachfolgende Geodatensätze und -dienste der Bayerischen Vermessungsverwaltung stehen unter einer Creative Commons Namensnennung 3.0 Deutschland Lizenz. Nachfolgend steht auch die Digitale Topographische Karte 1:50000, aber eben mit der relativierenden Zwischenüberschrift drüber, die ich übersehen hatte. Eine irreführende Aufmachung des Rechteinhabers ist das m.E. allemal, umso mehr als die TK50 ja auch im Bayernviewer verfügbar ist, dessen Inhalte ja auch privat genutzt werden dürfen. Wozu also das Angebot der TK50 unter der Seite "opendata", wenn es doch nicht zu "opendata" gehört.--Ratzer (talk) 11:28, 8 February 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]

File:Hintersee Topo Karte.jpg edit

Latest comment: 11 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

File:Hintersee Topo Karte.jpg has been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether it should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry.

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

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

Afrikaans ∙ Bahasa Indonesia ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ dansk ∙ Deutsch ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ ∙ eesti ∙ English ∙ español ∙ Esperanto ∙ français ∙ galego ∙ hrvatski ∙ íslenska ∙ italiano ∙ magyar ∙ Nederlands ∙ norsk ∙ 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 ∙ ไทย ∙ ပအိုဝ်ႏဘာႏသာႏ ∙ မြန်မာဘာသာ ∙ 조선말 ∙ 한국어 ∙ 日本語 ∙ 中文 ∙ 中文（简体）‎ ∙ 中文（繁體）‎ ∙ עברית ∙ العربية ∙ پښتو ∙ فارسی ∙ ދިވެހިބަސް ∙ +/−

Túrelio (talk) 09:11, 8 February 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]

File:Lienzing Orthofoto.jpg edit

Latest comment: 11 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

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

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

This message was added automatically by Nikbot, if you need some help about it please read the text above again and follow the links in it, if you still need help ask at the → Commons:Help desk in any language you like to use. --Nikbot 21:40, 18 March 2012 (UTC)

Sorry, the license had been obviously overlooked. The license is cc-by-3.0-de in the Open Data project of Survey Bavaria.--Ratzer (talk) 06:38, 19 March 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Wandgemälde Kreuzgang Konstanzer Insel edit

Latest comment: 11 years ago4 comments2 people in discussion

Hallo Ratzer

Sah gerade, daß Sie ein Bild eines Ausschnitts von einem der Wandgemälde im Kreuzgang des ehemaligen Dominikanerklosters auf der Konstanzer Insel eingestellt haben, weshalb ich Sie nun fragen wollte, ob Sie mir möglicherweise bei etwas, das mir anläßlich eines Besuches dort aufgefallen war, weiterhelfen könnten:

Teilweise scheinen bei den Wandbildern zwei "verschiedene Stile" angewandt worden zu sein – keine Ahnung, wie das treffend zu beschreiben wäre, aber gewisse Bereich wirkten gröber, weniger ausgearbeitet, fast irgendwie leicht "impressionistischer", mit größerer Betonung auf Eindruck / Stimmung denn auf hohem Detailgrad. Was das Ganze besonders seltsam macht, ist die Tatsache, daß diese zwei Herangehensweisen mitunter in einem Motiv desselben Bildes in fließendem Übergang ineinander umgesetzt wurden: bis zu einer Figur hin wurde in stärker "naturalistischer" Manier gemalt, unmittelbar darauf folgt dann aber eine Person und ein daran anschließender Bereich in "impressionistischerer" Art (verzeihen Sie bitte die Ausdrücke in Anführungszeichen, aber es mangelt mir schlicht an der entsprechenden Terminologie), wobei sich aber alles in einer zusammenhängen Szene abspielt.

Wurde der Maler einfach nicht fertig und der "Stilbruch" ist auf ein Nebeneinander von Vollendetem und Unvollendetem oder "Skizzenhaftem" (noch zu Übermalendem) zurückzuführen? Oder hat er bewußt "abgewechselt"? Oder waren gar zwei [oder mehr] verschiedene Maler am Werk? Oder ist die Erklärung eine ganz andere?

Wenn Sie etwas darüber wissen, würde mich über eine kurze Erläuterung sehr freuen.

Besten Dank – ὁ οἶστρος (talk) 14:14, 25 March 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hallo ὁ οἶστρος, leider habe ich keine weiteren Informationen zu diesem Wandgemälde. Ich nahm es in den Artikel auf, weil ich es bei meinen Recherchen zufällig gefunden hatte und weil es urheberrechts frei war (und natürlich weil es inhaltlich in den Artikel passte). Aber ich glaube mit etwas Googeln müsste man schon noch weitere Infos dazu finden können. Hast Du schon gesehen, was der Original-Hoster des Bildes hier zum gesamten Bilderzyklus schreibt? Gruß,--Ratzer (talk) 18:46, 25 March 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Entschuldigung, ich bin in der Wikipedia kein "Sie" gewohnt, deshalb ist mir mein "Du" erst gar nicht aufgefallen... Wir sind sonst (fallst) alle untereinander per Du. Gruß,--Ratzer (talk) 18:48, 25 March 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Besten Dank für die schnelle Rückmeldung. Leider stand unter dem angegebenen Link nichts zur merkwürdigen Diskrepanz der beiden "Stile" (das, was dort beschrieben wird, trifft auf die "naturalistischere Variante" zu), aber interessant war es trotzdem. Könnte ja eigentlich das Hotel anschreiben, denn die müßten das doch eigentlich wissen. 'mal schauen.

(Ob Du oder Sie spielt mir [hier] keine Rolle, da sich 'mal jemand siezend an mich gewandt hatte, dachte ich einfach, um auf der "sicheren Seite" zu sein, mach' ich 's genauso.)

Nochmals danke und

Gruß – ὁ οἶστρος (talk) 20:44, 25 March 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Luftbild drehen edit

Latest comment: 11 years ago12 comments2 people in discussion

Hallo Ratzer, ich habe zu dem Luftbild, welches du gedreht haben möchstest, eine wichtige Information hinzugefügt. Oder brauchst du es gar nicht gedreht? Bedenke, dass Luftbilder manchmal schräg aufgenommen sind und deswegen eine gedrehte Version befremdlich aussieht. Viele Grüße --Saibo (Δ ∇) 16:09, 26 June 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Durch die beantragte Drehung wollte ich das Satbild norden (Nord = oben). Vielleicht schaut das Ergebnis besser aus, wenn man die dann auf den Spitzen stehenden Seiten etwas bescheidet? Gruß,--Ratzer (talk) 20:26, 26 June 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Das dachte ich mir, dass du das machen wolltest, weil es eben unsere gewohnt Sicht ist. Es wird mangels genug Meer außenherum aber bei leeren Bereichen nach der Drehung bleiben.

Habe ich nun hochgeladen. Ich bin von deinem 55°-Vorschlag um 1,8° abgewichen - es war wahrscheinlich nur grob geschätzt, oder? Ich habe anhand von OSM verglichen. Viele Grüße --Saibo (Δ ∇) 00:22, 28 June 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Letztere Lösung ist perfekt. Die 55° waren in der Tat nach Augenmaß geschätzt. Vielen Dank! Grüße,--Ratzer (talk) 06:23, 28 June 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Alles klar, freut mich. Man muss halt nur aufpassen, wann es sinnvoll ist, dass man anmerkt, dass die Ecken nicht echt sind. Ich habe es absichtlich nicht so modifiziert, dass man es auf dem Bild nicht erkennt (das wäre mit ein wenig mehr Aufwand möglich gewesen). Wer weiß - vielleicht liegen in den Bereichen ja noch kleine Inseln?! In die Bildbeschreibung habe ich es nun noch nachträglich deutlich hineingeschrieben – eventuell sollte man das in der Bildunterschrift im Artikel erwähnen. Wie siehst du das? Mit blauer Farbe sieht es aber halt wesentlich besser aus, als mit Weiß. Viele Grüße --Saibo (Δ ∇) 11:20, 28 June 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Nach meiner Erfahrung ist es unüblich, solche Bearbeitungsdetails in der Bildunterschrift zu erwähnen. In der Bildbeschreibung auf commons natürlich schon. Im vorliegenden Fall liegen in den blau aufgefüllten Ecken ganz sicher keine Inseln oder auch nur oberflächennahe Riffe, ich kenne die Gegend gut von detailliertem Kartenmaterial. Grüße,--Ratzer (talk) 18:13, 28 June 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hier sieht man auch, dass alles im grünen (bzw. blauen) Bereich ist und keine kleinen Inseln geflutet wurden :-).--Ratzer (talk) 18:23, 28 June 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Ach, noch was, das kleine Bild vorher (File:Nikunau Kiribati.jpg) bekam wohl vom Bearbeiter einen (nicht vermerkten) Weißabgleich und Helligkeitsanpassung. Das überlegte ich auch zu machen (habe es aber dann gelassen) - das Meer wird dann halt dunkler. Deine Meinung? Viele Grüße --Saibo (Δ ∇) 11:39, 28 June 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Dazu kann ich leider keine qualifizierte Meinung abgeben, ich habe nur wenig Erfahrung mit Bildbearbeitung. Ich versuche nur hin und wieder eine vorsichtige Aufhellung oder Kontrasterhöhung, und wenn das Ergebnis dann optisch nicht deutlich besser ist, dann lasse ich es lieber (bzw. überlasse die Bearbeitung den Profis). Grüße,--Ratzer (talk) 18:13, 28 June 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Gut,gut, wenn wirklich nur Meer da ist, dann muss man das den Artikel-Lesern wohl nicht mitteilen, dass das Bild etwas manipuliert ist.

Eine Farbänderung lasse ich dann der Einfachheit auch mal. Viele Grüße --Saibo (Δ ∇) 01:45, 29 June 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hallo Ratzer, da bin ich mal wieder. :-)
Ich habe diese Drehung revertiert. Bitte beachte, dass das Bild schon uralt ist - Wikipediaseiten oder andere Webseiten/Wikis, die das Bild verwenden könnten sich auf die alte Ausrichtung in der Beschreibung / im Text beziehen. Das wäre unschön, wenn dann plötzlich das Bild gedreht ist. Du kannst dir die gedrehte Version speichern und unter neuem Namen hochladen und dann beide Bilder verlinken. Viele Grüße --Saibo (Δ ∇) 22:37, 6 July 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hallo Saibo, das geht natürlich in Ordnung, danke für den Hinweis. 90 Grad ist auch nicht genau Norden, aber näher an Norden als die alte Ausrichtung, und 90-Grad-Drehungen sind anscheinend technisch einfacher und verlustfrei (lossless coordinate transformation). Schönen Gruß,--Ratzer (talk) 13:38, 7 July 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Formigas and Vila do Porto edit

Latest comment: 11 years ago2 comments1 person in discussion

Actually, it would be wrong to show the Formigas as an administrative unit of the civil parish of Vila do Porto (the locator map you indicated), since the Formigas are not considered a constituent part of that civil parish. If anything, although I have not seen it written anywhere recently, the Formigas fall within the "administration" of the municipality of Vila do Porto, an entity that governs the island of Santa Maria in its totality. I have seen some maps that group the Formigas with Santa Maria. But, still, the Regional Government of the Azores has final authority over these islands, and not the local authority. If you could provide some supporting documentation, I would be happy to revise the design. Ruben JC (Zeorymer) (talk) 07:49, 5 October 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]

While the Captainia (Captaincy) of Vila do Porto may administrate these islands, they are not part of the local authority; they are not a territorial unit of the civil parish of Vila do Porto. The Captaincy is not a political entity. I should also note that the Formigas, falls within the Autonomous Region of the Azores, and political/administrative institutions are managed by the regional government. Therefore, it is responsible for defining or managing the territorial integrity of its territory, including the creation and dissolution of parishes, municipalities and constituent parts. This is a driving force in the current autonomous government's reluctancy to adopt the white paper on local authority simplification, since it holds to its right to manage its territorial rights. Ruben JC (Zeorymer) (talk) 10:10, 5 October 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]

File:Rapa.jpg edit

Latest comment: 10 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

File:Rapa.jpg has been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether it should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry.

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

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

Afrikaans ∙ Bahasa Indonesia ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ dansk ∙ Deutsch ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ ∙ eesti ∙ English ∙ español ∙ Esperanto ∙ français ∙ galego ∙ hrvatski ∙ íslenska ∙ italiano ∙ magyar ∙ Nederlands ∙ norsk ∙ 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 ∙ ไทย ∙ ပအိုဝ်ႏဘာႏသာႏ ∙ မြန်မာဘာသာ ∙ 조선말 ∙ 한국어 ∙ 日本語 ∙ 中文 ∙ 中文（简体）‎ ∙ 中文（繁體）‎ ∙ עברית ∙ العربية ∙ پښتو ∙ فارسی ∙ ދިވެހިބަސް ∙ +/−

Ju Ta 20:07, 19 July 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]

San Blas exact location edit

Latest comment: 10 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

I poked around a bit, and couldn't find any hints as to which island it might be, sorry - Princess didn't say at the time, and I don't have any pics with a label or sign of any sort. (Before digital photography, I tended to ration the shots...) Stan Shebs (talk) 20:38, 2 October 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]

العربية ∙ català ∙ Deutsch ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form) ∙ English ∙ español ∙ eesti ∙ français ∙ galego ∙ magyar ∙ italiano ∙ Nederlands ∙ polski ∙ română ∙ svenska ∙ ไทย ∙ українська ∙ +/−

Thank you for participating in Wiki Loves Monuments 2013! Please help with this survey.

Dear Ratzer,
Thank you for contributing to Wiki Loves Monuments 2013, and for sharing your pictures with the whole world! We would like to ask again a few minutes of your time.

Thanks to the participation of people like you, the contest gathered more than 365,000 pictures of cultural heritage objects from more than 50 countries around the world, becoming the largest photography competition to have ever taken place.

You can find all your pictures in your upload log, and are of course very welcome to keep uploading images and help develop Wikimedia Commons, even though you will not be able to win more prizes (just yet).

If you'd like to start editing relevant Wikipedia articles and share your knowledge with other people, please go to the Wikipedia Welcome page for more information, guidance, and help.

To make future contests even more successful than this year, we would like to invite you to share your experiences with us in a short survey. Please fill in this short survey in your own language, and help us learn what you liked and didn't like about Wiki Loves Monuments 2013.

Kind regards,

the Wiki Loves Monuments team

Thank you for taking part in the Wiki Loves Monuments participants' survey!

Dear Ratzer,

Thank you for taking part in the Wiki Loves Monuments participants' survey. Your answers will help us improve the organization of future photo contests!

In case you haven't filled in the questionnaire yet, you can still do so during the next 7 days.

And by the way: the winning pictures of this year's international contest have been announced. Enjoy!

Kind regards,

the Wiki Loves Monuments team

File:Landgericht Dingolfing-Apian 1568 von Tafeln 11 und 15.jpg edit

Latest comment: 9 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion

Hi Ratzer, please specify in the file's description from which other file this has been derived from. Thanks and kind regards, AFBorchert (talk) 22:11, 6 January 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Done. Greetings,--Ratzer (talk) 11:59, 7 January 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Copyright status: File:Punta de Tarifa.jpg edit

Latest comment: 9 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion

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 ∙ +/−

This media may be deleted.

Thanks for uploading File:Punta de Tarifa.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.

No required license templates were detected at this file page. Please correct it, or if you have any questions please contact me on my talk page. Yours sincerely, Jarekt (talk) 19:20, 5 May 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Corrected. The user Pwig had put the file in Public Domain on the German Wikipedia.--Ratzer (talk) 14:07, 6 May 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Re: Administrative division of Egypt edit

Latest comment: 9 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Hello Ratzer. Thank you for the information. I updated the map.
It is really difficult to find references about the new shape of the boundaries: except the links you give there are very few maps on the Web with the updated boundaries. Even the GADM shows the old shape. Googling for a while I didn't find any textual reference about the modification of the shape of the Governorates. Greetings. Sting (talk) 20:19, 13 June 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Re: Big lake in the in the southeast of Costa Rica? edit

Latest comment: 9 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

You're right, looks like the Vmap-0 data isn't very much accurate. Thanx for pointing my attention on this point. I'm already preparing a new version. Sting (talk) 13:29, 14 June 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Wiki Loves Monuments 2014 startet in Kürze edit

Hallo Ratzer,

in Kürze ist es wieder soweit. Der nun schon traditionelle Fotowettbewerb Wiki Loves Monuments wird im September zum vierten Mal stattfinden. In ähnlicher Form hatte unlängst der Wettbewerb "Wiki Loves Earth" eine erfolgreiche Premiere. Zu allen bisherigen vier Wettbewerben haben seit 2011 gut 3000 unterschiedliche Teilnehmer (User) ihren Beitrag geleistet. Du warst dabei, und bist auch herzlich eingeladen, am bevorstehenden WLM-Wettbewerb wieder dabei zu sein.

Allein in Deutschland wurden in den letzten drei Jahren im Rahmen von WLM rund 100.000 Fotos zu den insgesamt ca. 850.000 Kulturdenkmalen bundesweit hochgeladen. Jährlich haben sich mehrere Hundert Wiki-Fotographen daran beteiligt. Auch im kommenden Denkmalmonat wird dies gewiss wieder der Fall sein. Der Tag des offenen Denkmals am 14. September bietet bundesweit vielfältige Möglichkeiten, Denkmale nicht nur von außen, sondern auch von innen zu fotografieren. Denkmallisten sind dabei ein wichtiger Orientierungspunkt und zugleich auch Ziel der Einbindung der Fotos. Auch in diesem Jahr sind wieder neue Denkmallisten hinzugekommen, die hilfreich bei der Planung von individuellen oder Gruppen-Fototouren sind und auf eine Bebilderung warten, wie z.B. zu Görlitz oder Zittau. Unter den Landeshauptstädten fehlt nur noch Stuttgart. Aber auch hier ist Licht in Sicht.

In der Mitte Deutschlands hat die Denkmallandschaft der thüringischen Landeshauptstadt Erfurt nun das Licht der Wikipedia-Welt entdeckt. Mehr als 50 Tabellen enthalten 3.700 Denkmale. Allein die wunderschön restaurierte Altstadt umfasst 1.800 Denkmale. Eine von WMDE geförderte WLM-Fototour nach Erfurt am Wochenende vom 29. – 31. August lädt herzlich ein, diese einzigartige Kulturlandschaft zu dokumentieren. Mehr Informationen findest Du auf der Projektseite.

Wir freuen uns auf Deine weiteren Beiträge für Wikimedia-Projekte.

Viel Spaß beim größten Fotowettbewerb der Wiki(m/p)edia wünscht Dir das Orga-Team.

( Bernd Gross, 16. August 2014)

Copyright status: File:Bahnstrecke Landau-Arnstorf.PNG edit

Latest comment: 9 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion

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 ∙ +/−

This media may be deleted.

Thanks for uploading File:Bahnstrecke Landau-Arnstorf.PNG. 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.

Yours sincerely, Ju Ta 20:36, 25 August 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]

The thing is public domain, if you look at the original page where it's from. It couldn't be clearer. Its fuckingly complicated to use public domain tags here, I gave up on that. You just don't offer a normal public domain tag for cases when a user releases all rights and puts his work public domain.--Ratzer (talk) 20:56, 25 August 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]

File:Menorca map 1780.jpg edit

Latest comment: 9 years ago6 comments2 people in discussion

Hallo Ratzer - welchen Mehrwert erbringt die Vergrößerung der Datei auf das Fünffache? Warum musste dieser Bogen mit dem Archivvermerk beschnitten werden? -- Maxxl² - talk 22:27, 4 September 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hallo Maxx12, also hier kommen zwei verschiedene Dinge zusammen:

--Ich habe die eigentliche Karte einschl. Rand ausgeschnitten, das weitere Drumherum mit dem Archivvermerk der Bibliothek war meinem Verständnis nach nicht Teil der Karte, und nutzloser white space der die ganze Karte nur aufbläht.

--Durch das Beschneiden reduzierte sich die Größe der Karte von 7,744 × 5,830 auf 5,256 × 4,884, mithin auf 57 Prozent der Originalgröße. Dass die dadurch erzeugte neue jpg-Datei fast fünf mal so groß ist wie die vorherige, habe ich erstens gar nicht bemerkt, begreife ich zweitens nicht, und verschlägt mir drittens die Sprache. Ich habe vom internen Code des jpg-Formats keinerlei Ahnung, aber so etwas habe ich absolut nicht erwartet. Aber wahrscheinlich weißt du viel mehr zu Graphikformaten und kannst mich ein bisschen aufklären. Es muss doch möglich sein, dass man white space wegschneiden kann, ohne den Speicherbedarf der Datei zu erhöhen. Vielleicht funktioniert das mit lossless-Formaten wie png besser, aber die brauchen von Haus aus wesentlich mehr Platz.

Grüße,--Ratzer (talk) 12:02, 7 September 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hallo Maxxl, wenn Du einen Weg findest, die beiden neueren Versionen der Datei löschen zu lassen, tu es. Ich werde dann versuchen, ausgehend von der Originaldatei mit einen loss-free jpg cropping platzsparender ans Ziel zu kommen. Danke nochmals für den Hinweis. Gruß,--Ratzer (talk) 21:50, 5 September 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Reicht es nicht deine Version zu revertieren? In der von mir erstellten Version kann man noch deutlich erkennen, dass es sich um eine Lithografie auf Büttenpapier handelt. Das sind Qualitätsaspekte, die bei einer weiteren Beschneidung verloren gehen. -- Maxxl² - talk 13:40, 7 September 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Der Revert funktioniert bei mir nicht. Die Nachricht lautet "It appers this revert has been done already" oder so ähnlich. Versuche es gern selber, ich werde ich jetzt langsam für zwei Wochen urlaubsbedingt weitgehend aus der WP verabschieden.. Grüße,--Ratzer (talk) 19:50, 7 September 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Done -- Maxxl² - talk 20:01, 7 September 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Notification about possible deletion edit

Latest comment: 9 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Some contents have been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether they should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at their entry.

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

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

Afrikaans ∙ Bahasa Indonesia ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ dansk ∙ Deutsch ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ ∙ eesti ∙ English ∙ español ∙ Esperanto ∙ français ∙ galego ∙ hrvatski ∙ íslenska ∙ italiano ∙ magyar ∙ Nederlands ∙ norsk ∙ 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 ∙ ไทย ∙ ပအိုဝ်ႏဘာႏသာႏ ∙ မြန်မာဘာသာ ∙ 조선말 ∙ 한국어 ∙ 日本語 ∙ 中文 ∙ 中文（简体）‎ ∙ 中文（繁體）‎ ∙ עברית ∙ العربية ∙ پښتو ∙ فارسی ∙ ދިވެހިބަސް ∙ +/−

Archer90 (talk) 22:41, 29 October 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]

File:Garnix.jpg edit

Latest comment: 8 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

File:Garnix.jpg has been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether it should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry.

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

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

Afrikaans ∙ Bahasa Indonesia ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ dansk ∙ Deutsch ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ ∙ eesti ∙ English ∙ español ∙ Esperanto ∙ français ∙ galego ∙ hrvatski ∙ íslenska ∙ italiano ∙ magyar ∙ Nederlands ∙ norsk ∙ 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 ∙ ไทย ∙ ပအိုဝ်ႏဘာႏသာႏ ∙ မြန်မာဘာသာ ∙ 조선말 ∙ 한국어 ∙ 日本語 ∙ 中文 ∙ 中文（简体）‎ ∙ 中文（繁體）‎ ∙ עברית ∙ العربية ∙ پښتو ∙ فارسی ∙ ދިވެހިބަސް ∙ +/−

El Grafo (talk) 12:52, 16 January 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]

File:Pecher-Kapelle St. Margreth-Zwergern.jpg edit

Latest comment: 8 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

File:Pecher-Kapelle St. Margreth-Zwergern.jpg has been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether it should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry.

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

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

Afrikaans ∙ Bahasa Indonesia ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ dansk ∙ Deutsch ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ ∙ eesti ∙ English ∙ español ∙ Esperanto ∙ français ∙ galego ∙ hrvatski ∙ íslenska ∙ italiano ∙ magyar ∙ Nederlands ∙ norsk ∙ 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 ∙ ไทย ∙ ပအိုဝ်ႏဘာႏသာႏ ∙ မြန်မာဘာသာ ∙ 조선말 ∙ 한국어 ∙ 日本語 ∙ 中文 ∙ 中文（简体）‎ ∙ 中文（繁體）‎ ∙ עברית ∙ العربية ∙ پښتو ∙ فارسی ∙ ދިވެހިބަސް ∙ +/−

Vexillum (talk) 10:03, 1 March 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]

http://www.panoramio.com/photo/40221529 edit

Latest comment: 8 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion

File:Bayerisches Forstamt St. Martin bei Lofer 20.jpg

Hallo Ratzer, lt. Quelle ist das Bild CC-by-nd und daher für WP/Commons schlecht geeignet. Tut leid, ist ein schönes Bild. Magst du vielleicht den Fotografen um Freigabe ersuchen? --Herzi Pinki (talk) 15:15, 14 July 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hallo Pinki, danke für den Hinweis, die nd-Problematik war mir nicht bewusst. Ich las nur von kommerzieller Weiterverwendung, damit war der Fall für mich klar. Aber ja, ich werde den Autor anschreiben. Gruß,--Ratzer (talk) 19:43, 14 July 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Saalforste.jpg edit

Latest comment: 8 years ago6 comments2 people in discussion

Hi Ratzer, die Saalforst-Karte ist fertig. Gruß, MagentaGreen (talk) 18:11, 19 July 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hi @MagentaGreen: , besten Dank, ich bin überwältigt, die Karte ist sehr nützlich. Ich will ja nicht unverschämt sein, aber wäre es noch irgendwie möglich, zumindest die Gemeindegrenzen drauf zu projizieren? Diese sind ja in der OSM-Basisebene vorhanden. Ohne diese tue ich mich nicht leicht abzuschätzen, wie weit mancher Forstdistrikt reicht, ob bis an die Gemeindegrenze oder deutlich darüber hinaus. (Ich gestehe ja zu, dass die Katastralgemeinden schwieriger zu handhaben sind, da eine Karte pro Gemeinde, also können wir die zunächst mal beiseite lassen.) Grüße,--Ratzer (talk) 15:07, 20 July 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]

P.S. Die roten Querstreifen, die Österreich symbolosieren sollen, gefallen mir nicht, aber das ist wohl eine Frage des Geschmacks.--Ratzer (talk) 15:09, 20 July 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hi Ratzer, bitte beachte den "Zoom", ab dem solch detaillierte Informationen sichtbar sind. Ich hatte bereits davon gesprochen, dass die Karte extrem groß werden würde, wollte man das abbilden. Außerdem kann ich das auch aufgrund der Grenzen meines Systems (fehlendes RAM) nicht bearbeiten.

Gruß, MagentaGreen (talk) 07:33, 21 July 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hi @MagentaGreen: , verstehe. Wären diese Probleme (ausufernde Kartengröße, übermäßiger Speicherbedarf) dadurch in den Griff zu kriegen, dass man pro Revier (bei fünf Revieren) eine Karte anlegt? Grüße,--Ratzer (talk) 20:31, 21 July 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Der Gedanke ist völlig richtig, dennoch ist es kaum eine Möglichkeit, denn die Reviere St. Martin/Falleck sind ziemlich groß und überlappend. Wäre es vielleicht möglich hier im Einzelnen auf die OSM-Karten zu verweisen - die wenigsten Benutzer (dich und mich ausgenommen) gehen schließlich so weit ins Detail. Ich habe mir zwischenzeitlich zwar auch Gedanken über eine SVG-Version gemacht, die durch die Verfeinerung der Umrisse rein theoretisch in den Bereich des Machbaren rückt; letztlich wären damit aber wieder andere Verschlechterungen verbunden. Unsere Möglichkeiten sind mit denen der OSM-Software (die viele Einzelbilder zu einem Gesamtbild zusammensetzt) ~~noch~~ nicht vergleichbar. Leider muss ich sagen, dass dies - zumindest für mich und im Augenblick - das Ende der Fahnenstange bedeutet. Vielleicht findet sich ja noch ein Crack, der deine Wünsche erfüllen kann. Ich habe wenigstens deinen Antrag bei den Kartenwünschen nicht für beendet erklärt.

Gruß, MagentaGreen (talk) 21:29, 21 July 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Der WLM-Countdown hat begonnen edit

Hallo Ratzer,

nun ist es wieder soweit. Vom 1. bis zum 30. September findet zum fünften Mal der internationale Wettbewerb Wiki Loves Monuments statt. Im Mittelpunkt steht bekanntlich das Fotografieren von Kulturdenkmalen. Du hast an einem der letzten Fotowettbewerbe teilgenommen und wir freuen uns auf weitere Bildbeiträge von Dir.

Viele interessante Motive, nicht nur Burgen und Schlösser, sondern auch Fachwerkhäuser, Brücken und Brunnen, technische und Industriedenkmale und vieles mehr gibt es noch zu fotografieren, damit sie in der Wikipedia dokumentiert werden können. Nützliche Tipps findest du auf unserer WLM-Projektseite. Du kannst gerne individuell Fototouren durchführen oder aber Dich auch Gruppentouren anschließen. Besonders freuen wir uns auf Fotos, die Lücken in den Denkmallisten der Wikipedia ausfüllen.

Darüber hinaus kannst Du auch an der Arbeit der Jury teilnehmen, die Mitte Oktober die Fotos bewerten und die Gewinner ermitteln wird. Bis zum 15. August kannst du hier Deine Bewerbung einreichen.

Viel Erfolg und Spaß beim größten Fotowettbewerb der Wiki(m/p)edia in den bevorstehenden Wettbewerbswochen wünscht Dir das Orga-Team. Wir freuen uns auf Deine Fotos.

( Bernd Gross, 6. August 2015)

Template:Map edit

Latest comment: 8 years ago3 comments2 people in discussion

Hallo Ratzer, wenn Du Dich öfters mal mit Karten beschäftigst, wäre vielleicht die noch relativ neue Vorlage {{Map}} interessant. Damit lassen sich die wesentlichen Inforamtionen zu einer Karte besser erfassen, sodass man sie später auch mal besser (automatisierbar) auswerten kann. Beispiel hier. --Alexrk2 (talk) 14:37, 5 October 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hallo Alexrk2, danke für den Hinweis. Mit Karten habe ich tatsächlich viel zu tun. Das sieht durchaus nach Arbeit aus, die Parameter dieser Vorlage zu befüllen. Sollen auch rückwirkend Karten in diese Vorlage überführt werden?--Ratzer (talk) 10:44, 6 October 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Wäre sicher gut, wenn möglichst viele Karten über die Vorlage peu á peu versorgt werden. Aber wichtiger wäre denke ich sowieso, dass die Unmengen an Karten auf Commons überhaupt erstmal besser beschrieben und katalogisiert werden. In den meisten Karten-Kategorien sieht es leider ziemlich schlimm aus. Das liegt aber wohl auch daran, dass Commons zu 99% "nur" als Bildspeicher für Wiki-Artikel eingesetzt wird, aber nicht als allgemeines Archiv für Mediendateien. --Alexrk2 (talk) 11:00, 8 October 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Du erhältst einen Orden! edit

Latest comment: 8 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion

	Der Fleißorden
	Danke für deine Nacharbeit File:Bifuss-Obere Alz.jpg, gefällt mir! Grüße aus dem Chiemgau Furchenstein (talk) 21:21, 17 November 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Über diese unerwartete Belohnung freue ich mich natürlich :-) Gruß,--Ratzer (talk) 06:32, 18 November 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Copyright status: File:DIN 55301 Zeichen.jpg edit

Latest comment: 7 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion

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 ∙ +/−

This media may be deleted.

Thanks for uploading File:DIN 55301 Zeichen.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.

Yours sincerely, Magog the Ogre (talk) (contribs) 03:32, 24 February 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hallo Ratzer, Template:PD-text dürfte hier passen. --тнояsтеn ⇔ 11:37, 24 February 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Mozzochi edit

Latest comment: 7 years ago3 comments2 people in discussion

Hi, are you in touch with Mozzochi of File:Andrew wiles1.jpg? If so, might be good to get OTRS permission for their images. Their website states, 'You are welcome to view and download these photos. Any reproduction should include the acknowledgement, "copyright C. J. Mozzochi, Princeton N.J"' but does not say 'for any purpose', as the license used in Commons. The photographer might be amenable to such a license or cc-by, but someone should ask. czar 16:15, 24 March 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hi, I have not been in e-mail contact with Professor Mozzochi since June, 2010, but the mails are archived and I can forward them to anyone who likes to see them. I shall not bother Professor Mozzochi again, after he had made it clear enough that he wants this photograph in the Wikipedia.--Ratzer (talk) 20:51, 24 March 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I don't remember the details of this ticket, but please do forward that permission to OTRS if you haven't already so it'll be there if someone needs it. Unwatching this page--please ping if you need me. czar 03:04, 22 November 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Bikini Atoll Map Mistake edit

Latest comment: 7 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion

Wrong ruler.

1 cm on map is not 2000 km, but should be 2000 m--2A02:908:DB18:5180:D04A:2F2E:92F4:E474 10:07, 2 July 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Which map are you referring to? Whichever, a scale bare on an atoll map of this atoll size would certainly be in the order of magnitude 2000 m rather than 2000 km, that is for sure.--Ratzer (talk) 12:02, 5 July 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Welcome, Dear Filemover! edit

Latest comment: 7 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

العربيَّة ∙ Deutsch ∙ español ∙ English ∙ français ∙ português ∙ русский ∙ українська ∙ বাংলা ∙ മലയാളം ∙ 한국어 ∙ 日本語 ∙ Tiếng Việt ∙ 中文（中国大陆）‎ ∙ 中文（台灣）‎ ∙ 中文（简体）‎ ∙ 中文（繁體）‎ ∙ +/−

Hi Ratzer, you're now a filemover. When moving files please respect the following advice:

Use the CommonsDelinker link in the {{Rename}} template to order a bot to replace all ocurrences of the old title with the new one. Or, if there was no rename-request, please use the Move & Replace-tab.
Please leave a redirect behind unless you have a valid reason not to do so. Other projects, including those using InstantCommons, might be using the file even though they don't show up in the global usage. Deleting the redirects would break their file references. Please see this section of the file rename guideline for more information.
Please know and follow the file rename guidelines.

lNeverCry 08:04, 21 November 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Huntingdonshire 1806 map 4.jpg edit

Latest comment: 6 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion

Hi Ratzer, mach das bitte wieder rückgängig, oder wozu glaubst Du, sind Testdateien da? Die letzte Version kann auch auf anderem Weg zugänglich gemacht werden! MagentaGreen (talk) 13:13, 7 February 2017 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Für mich war der Test abgeschlossen, aber bitte sehr.--Ratzer (talk) 13:22, 7 February 2017 (UTC)Reply[reply]

File:Dmitry Yakovlevich Laptev.jpg edit

Latest comment: 6 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

File:Dmitry Yakovlevich Laptev.jpg has been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether it should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry.

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

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

Afrikaans ∙ Bahasa Indonesia ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ dansk ∙ Deutsch ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ ∙ eesti ∙ English ∙ español ∙ Esperanto ∙ français ∙ galego ∙ hrvatski ∙ íslenska ∙ italiano ∙ magyar ∙ Nederlands ∙ norsk ∙ 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 ∙ ไทย ∙ ပအိုဝ်ႏဘာႏသာႏ ∙ မြန်မာဘာသာ ∙ 조선말 ∙ 한국어 ∙ 日本語 ∙ 中文 ∙ 中文（简体）‎ ∙ 中文（繁體）‎ ∙ עברית ∙ العربية ∙ پښتو ∙ فارسی ∙ ދިވެހިބަސް ∙ +/−

Niklitov (talk) 13:34, 31 May 2017 (UTC)Reply[reply]

File:Khariton Prokofievich Laptev.jpg edit

Latest comment: 6 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

File:Khariton Prokofievich Laptev.jpg has been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether it should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry.

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

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

Afrikaans ∙ Bahasa Indonesia ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ dansk ∙ Deutsch ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ ∙ eesti ∙ English ∙ español ∙ Esperanto ∙ français ∙ galego ∙ hrvatski ∙ íslenska ∙ italiano ∙ magyar ∙ Nederlands ∙ norsk ∙ 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 ∙ ไทย ∙ ပအိုဝ်ႏဘာႏသာႏ ∙ မြန်မာဘာသာ ∙ 조선말 ∙ 한국어 ∙ 日本語 ∙ 中文 ∙ 中文（简体）‎ ∙ 中文（繁體）‎ ∙ עברית ∙ العربية ∙ پښتو ∙ فارسی ∙ ދިވެހިބަސް ∙ +/−

Niklitov (talk) 13:41, 31 May 2017 (UTC)Reply[reply]

File:Sawi village - Car Nicobar - 1895.jpg edit

Latest comment: 6 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

File:Sawi village - Car Nicobar - 1895.jpg has been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether it should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry.

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

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

Afrikaans ∙ Bahasa Indonesia ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ dansk ∙ Deutsch ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ ∙ eesti ∙ English ∙ español ∙ Esperanto ∙ français ∙ galego ∙ hrvatski ∙ íslenska ∙ italiano ∙ magyar ∙ Nederlands ∙ norsk ∙ 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 ∙ ไทย ∙ ပအိုဝ်ႏဘာႏသာႏ ∙ မြန်မာဘာသာ ∙ 조선말 ∙ 한국어 ∙ 日本語 ∙ 中文 ∙ 中文（简体）‎ ∙ 中文（繁體）‎ ∙ עברית ∙ العربية ∙ پښتو ∙ فارسی ∙ ދިވެހިބަސް ∙ +/−

DreamLinker (talk) 06:43, 4 July 2017 (UTC)Reply[reply]

File:Work-384745 1920.jpg edit

Latest comment: 6 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

File:Work-384745 1920.jpg has been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether it should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry.

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

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

Afrikaans ∙ Bahasa Indonesia ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ dansk ∙ Deutsch ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ ∙ eesti ∙ English ∙ español ∙ Esperanto ∙ français ∙ galego ∙ hrvatski ∙ íslenska ∙ italiano ∙ magyar ∙ Nederlands ∙ norsk ∙ 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 ∙ ไทย ∙ ပအိုဝ်ႏဘာႏသာႏ ∙ မြန်မာဘာသာ ∙ 조선말 ∙ 한국어 ∙ 日本語 ∙ 中文 ∙ 中文（简体）‎ ∙ 中文（繁體）‎ ∙ עברית ∙ العربية ∙ پښتو ∙ فارسی ∙ ދިވެހިބަސް ∙ +/−

— Jeff G. ツ 13:29, 23 October 2017 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Image without license edit

Latest comment: 6 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

File:Perim Island part plan 1928.png edit

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

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

This message was added automatically by MifterBot ^{(Talk • Contribs • Owner)}, if you need some help about it please read the text above again and follow the links in it, if you still need help ask at the → Commons:Help desk in any language you like to use. --MifterBot ^{(Talk • Contribs • Owner)} 14:33, 21 November 2017 (UTC)Reply[reply]

File:1053273-irma-6-septembre.jpg edit

Latest comment: 5 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

File:1053273-irma-6-septembre.jpg has been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether it should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry.

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

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

Afrikaans ∙ Bahasa Indonesia ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ dansk ∙ Deutsch ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ ∙ eesti ∙ English ∙ español ∙ Esperanto ∙ français ∙ galego ∙ hrvatski ∙ íslenska ∙ italiano ∙ magyar ∙ Nederlands ∙ norsk ∙ 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 ∙ ไทย ∙ ပအိုဝ်ႏဘာႏသာႏ ∙ မြန်မာဘာသာ ∙ 조선말 ∙ 한국어 ∙ 日本語 ∙ 中文 ∙ 中文（简体）‎ ∙ 中文（繁體）‎ ∙ עברית ∙ العربية ∙ پښتو ∙ فارسی ∙ ދިވެހިބަސް ∙ +/−

219.79.96.11 04:25, 24 April 2018 (UTC)Reply[reply]

File:Queensland Parish Directory ed 3 1987.pdf edit

Latest comment: 5 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Hallo Ratzer, ausgehend davon, dass dieses Verzeichnis von https://publications.qld.gov.au/dataset/historical-parish-directoryqueensland stammt, habe ich die Lizenz angepasst. Du hattest dort Cc-by-sa-3.0 eingetragen, aber auf der Website ist {{Cc-by-3.0-au}} angegeben. De728631 (talk) 16:28, 27 April 2018 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Image without license edit

Latest comment: 4 years ago6 comments2 people in discussion

File:Burgdoerfer Foto.jpg edit

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

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

This message was added automatically by MifterBot ^{(Talk • Contribs • Owner)}, if you need some help about it please read the text above again and follow the links in it, if you still need help ask at the → Commons:Help desk in any language you like to use. --MifterBot ^{(Talk • Contribs • Owner)} 14:03, 1 October 2018 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I have now a copy of the mail of Bayerisches Landesamt für Statistik that states that there is no copyright on this image. I shall forward it to permissions to obtain a OTRS tag.--Ratzer (talk) 16:33, 7 January 2019 (UTC)Reply[reply]

File:6789 Solomon Islands Tikopia 12K master.tif edit

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

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

This message was added automatically by MifterBot ^{(Talk • Contribs • Owner)}, if you need some help about it please read the text above again and follow the links in it, if you still need help ask at the → Commons:Help desk in any language you like to use. --MifterBot ^{(Talk • Contribs • Owner)} 15:08, 7 January 2019 (UTC)Reply[reply]

The source page states: Copyright Expired. What is the license tag for this?--Ratzer (talk) 15:13, 7 January 2019 (UTC)Reply[reply]

File:6789 Solomon Islands Tikopia 12K master.jpg edit

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

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

This message was added automatically by MifterBot ^{(Talk • Contribs • Owner)}, if you need some help about it please read the text above again and follow the links in it, if you still need help ask at the → Commons:Help desk in any language you like to use. --MifterBot ^{(Talk • Contribs • Owner)} 15:08, 7 January 2019 (UTC)Reply[reply]

The source page states: Copyright Expired. What is the license tag for this?--Ratzer (talk) 15:14, 7 January 2019 (UTC)Reply[reply]

A sane German-speaking user needed edit

Latest comment: 4 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion

I ask here because Ratzer speaks German, is involved with copyright disputes, and edits frequently. Please, comment on this trash that filenames allegedly constitute a part of license; talk page stalkers are encouraged to intervene as well. Thanks in advance. Incnis Mrsi (talk) 16:31, 17 January 2019 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hi, I'm afraid I don't know enough about this matter, if file names are protected by a license. Greetings,--Ratzer (talk) 14:49, 24 January 2019 (UTC)Reply[reply]

File:RasenBallsport Leipzig logo (2019).jpg edit

Latest comment: 4 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

File:RasenBallsport Leipzig logo (2019).jpg has been marked as a possible copyright violation. Wikimedia Commons only accepts free content—that is, images and other media files that can be used by anyone, for any purpose. Traditional copyright law does not grant these freedoms, and unless noted otherwise, everything you find on the web is copyrighted and not permitted here. For details on what is acceptable, please read Commons:Licensing. You may also find Commons:Copyright rules useful, or you can ask questions about Commons policies at the Commons:Help desk. If you are the copyright holder and the creator of the file, please read Commons:But it's my own work! for tips on how to provide evidence of that.

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

This file is a copyright violation for the following reason: see de:Diskussion:RB_Leipzig#Ohne_Logo

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

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

HerrAdams (talk) 14:29, 27 April 2019 (UTC)Reply[reply]

File:Guaynabo barrios map.gif edit

Latest comment: 4 years ago3 comments2 people in discussion

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

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

This file is a copyright violation for the following reason: https://boricuaonline.com/guaynabo-pr/ is where this file came from.

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

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

The Eloquent Peasant (talk) 03:21, 22 June 2019 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@The Eloquent Peasant: This file lacks en:Threshold_of_originality and cannot be copyright protected. The shapes of the boundaries can only come from U.S. federal census resources. Please undelete.--Ratzer (talk) 10:12, 23 June 2019 (UTC) Look here, for example. That's where all the boundary information originally comes from. Copyright by boricua.com? Ridiculous!--Ratzer (talk) 10:22, 23 June 2019 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Sorry to have made you angry. I can not undelete it as I did not delete it. I nominated it (and five other similar maps) for deletion. Shapes of boundaries can only come from gov't sources, but a human being works it. And I don't think I can go around picking maps off the internet and uploading them and saying they are mine. You should contact the admin who deleted it: user https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Billinghurst if you disagree with the deletion. Also, I noticed you created some maps to represent the barrios of Guaynabo, Puerto Rico. I may be replacing those with something more similar to how [6] the barrios maps were handled with the Ponce, Puerto Rico municipality. So your image (*1 Before) will be replaced with something (**2 After) with the barrio in question filled in with the color red, per map conventions. While I'm no expert in map-making, the way the Ponce barrio maps were made is better than adding numbers to the areas, as you have done. Thank you.

"*1" Before

Numbered barrios

"**2" After

Barrios with names or filled in with a red color, per map conventions is better

--The Eloquent Peasant (talk) 15:44, 23 June 2019 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Important message for file movers edit

Latest comment: 4 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

A community discussion has been closed where the consensus was to grant all file movers the suppressredirect user right. This will allow file movers to not leave behind a redirect when moving files and instead automatically have the original file name deleted. Policy never requires you to suppress the redirect, suppression of redirects is entirely optional.

Possible acceptable uses of this ability:

To move recently uploaded files with an obvious error in the file name where that error would not be a reasonable redirect. For example: moving "Sheep in a tree.jpg" to "Squirrel in a tree.jpg" when the image does in fact depict a squirrel.
To perform file name swaps.
When the original file name contains vandalism. (File renaming criterion #5)

Please note, this ability should be used only in certain circumstances and only if you are absolutely sure that it is not going to break the display of the file on any project. Redirects should never be suppressed if the file is in use on any project. When in doubt, leave a redirect. If you forget to suppress the redirect in case of file name vandalism or you are not fully certain if the original file name is actually vandalism, leave a redirect and tag the redirect for speedy deletion per G2.

The malicious or reckless breaking of file links via the suppressredirect user right is considered an abuse of the file mover right and is grounds for immediate revocation of that right. This message serves as both a notice that you have this right and as an official warning. Questions regarding this right should be directed to administrators. --Majora (talk) 21:36, 7 November 2019 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Copyright status: File:Krautlstein-bridge-4213566.jpg edit

Latest comment: 3 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Copyright status: File:Krautlstein-bridge-4213566.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 ∙ +/−

This media may be deleted.

Thanks for uploading File:Krautlstein-bridge-4213566.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.

This action was performed automatically by AntiCompositeBot (talk) 05:11, 15 June 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

File:1897 administrative map of the Marshall Islands, Pacific Ocean.jpg edit

Latest comment: 3 years ago3 comments2 people in discussion

File:1897 administrative map of the Marshall Islands, Pacific Ocean.jpg has been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether it should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry.

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

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

Afrikaans ∙ Bahasa Indonesia ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ dansk ∙ Deutsch ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ ∙ eesti ∙ English ∙ español ∙ Esperanto ∙ français ∙ galego ∙ hrvatski ∙ íslenska ∙ italiano ∙ magyar ∙ Nederlands ∙ norsk ∙ 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 ∙ ไทย ∙ ပအိုဝ်ႏဘာႏသာႏ ∙ မြန်မာဘာသာ ∙ 조선말 ∙ 한국어 ∙ 日本語 ∙ 中文 ∙ 中文（简体）‎ ∙ 中文（繁體）‎ ∙ עברית ∙ العربية ∙ پښتو ∙ فارسی ∙ ދިވެހިބަސް ∙ +/−

Goesseln (talk) 21:14, 16 June 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

du hast das jetzt von PD-old nach PD-US umgestellt, gut, das ist schon mal ein Fortschritt. Bei PD-US lese ich Works Registered or First Published in the U.S. Der Atlas wurde allerdings nicht in US publiziert, sondern im DR. Was nun? --Goesseln (talk) 21:38, 23 June 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Dann hilft nur löschen. Bitte reaktivieren für den 1. Januar 2023 vormerken. Gruß,--Ratzer (talk) 05:54, 25 June 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Copyright status: File:NYC feingliedrig.jpg edit

Latest comment: 2 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Copyright status: File:NYC feingliedrig.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 ∙ +/−

This media may be deleted.

Thanks for uploading File:NYC feingliedrig.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.

Yours sincerely, Ju Ta 21:39, 14 March 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Bellingshausen Sea maps edit

Latest comment: 2 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

I have uploaded another map showing the Bellingshausen Sea, with the IHO proposed delimitation on it. Hogweard (talk) 22:09, 31 May 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

File:Staffelsee alte Karte.jpg edit

Latest comment: 2 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

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

The file you added may soon be deleted. If you have written permission from the copyright holder, please replace the copyvio tag with {{subst:OP}} and have them send us a free license release via COM:VRT. If you disagree that the file is a copyright violation for any other reason, please replace the copyvio tag with a regular deletion request.

This file is a copyright violation for the following reason: old map of 1921 or 1926 with modern textboxes, additions, explanations and deletions that make it a copyrighted work published in 2014. source=https://www.hoagart.de/buergerblatt-archiv/buergerblatt-juni-2006-bis-maerz-2021/33-34-buergerblatt-09-2014

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

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

User who nominated the file for deletion (Nominator) : Pp.paul.4.

I'm a computer program; please don't ask me questions but ask the user who nominated your file(s) for deletion or at our Help Desk. //Deletion Notification Bot (talk) 12:40, 8 September 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Copyright status: File:Vanuatu Gazetteer.pdf edit

Latest comment: 2 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Copyright status: File:Vanuatu Gazetteer.pdf

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 ∙ +/−

This media may be deleted.

Thanks for uploading File:Vanuatu Gazetteer.pdf. 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.

This action was performed automatically by AntiCompositeBot (talk) (FAQ) 09:05, 26 November 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Copyright status: File:Isar-Mühlbäche Karte Sailer 1931.pdf edit

Latest comment: 1 year ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Copyright status: File:Isar-Mühlbäche Karte Sailer 1931.pdf

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 ∙ +/−

This media may be deleted.

Thanks for uploading File:Isar-Mühlbäche Karte Sailer 1931.pdf. 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.

This action was performed automatically by AntiCompositeBot (talk) (FAQ) 14:05, 21 March 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Copyright status: File:Oede Gründe 1832 im Unterdonaukreis.jpg edit

Latest comment: 10 months ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Copyright status: File:Oede Gründe 1832 im Unterdonaukreis.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 ∙ +/−

This media may be deleted.

Thanks for uploading File:Oede Gründe 1832 im Unterdonaukreis.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.

This action was performed automatically by AntiCompositeBot (talk) (FAQ) 12:05, 15 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Copyright status: File:Nittendorf Gmk Namen.png edit

Latest comment: 8 months ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Copyright status: File:Nittendorf Gmk Namen.png

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 ∙ +/−

This media may be deleted.

Thanks for uploading File:Nittendorf Gmk Namen.png. 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.

This action was performed automatically by AntiCompositeBot (talk) (FAQ) 17:05, 5 April 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Copyright status: File:Baden-Württemberg Gemarkungskarte OD GMBW350.pdf edit

Latest comment: 4 months ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Copyright status: File:Baden-Württemberg Gemarkungskarte OD GMBW350.pdf

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 ∙ +/−

This media may be deleted.

Thanks for uploading File:Baden-Württemberg Gemarkungskarte OD GMBW350.pdf. 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.

This action was performed automatically by AntiCompositeBot (talk) (FAQ) 15:08, 15 August 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Add topic