44Pinguine

Welcome to Wikimedia Commons, 44Pinguine!

First steps tutorial Our first steps tour and our frequently asked questions 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 (Wikimedia Commons only accepts free content). You don't need technical skills in order to contribute here. Be bold when contributing and assume good faith when interacting with others. This is a wiki. 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 (webchat). You can also contact an administrator on their talk page. If you have a specific copyright question, ask at the copyright village pump.

Goodies, tips, and tricks Put Babel boxes on your user page so others know what languages you can speak and indicate your graphic abilities. You can find the files you have uploaded in your Uploads. Please sign your name on Talk pages by typing ~~~~. To link to an image page without embedding the image, type: [[:File:Foo.jpg]], which produces: File:Foo.jpg. You may enable gadgets (custom features) for your account. There are several tools to upload files. Have you edited Wikipedia before? This guide might be useful. Made a mistake? Do you want to have a file renamed or moved? Use the move link and wait for an authorized user to rename it. Do you want to have your recently uploaded picture removed? Tag it as {{speedy|reason here}}. For more information read the deletion guidelines.

Archives no archives yet (create)

-- Wikimedia Commons Welcome (talk) 14:33, 13 April 2013 (UTC)

Copyright status: File:Tür Congresszentrum KM-Stadt 1966-1968 -2.png

 Done. --44Pinguine (talk) 11:29, 27 September 2013 (UTC)

The photo came to my own during the work on the article Fittkau and Kunstschmiede Weißensee. It was taken by an old fellow from the firm Fittkau (M. Wieszies) which has great interest to illustrate the work list. He is 85 yera old and does not use computers. --44Pinguine (talk) 17:55, 25 September 2013 (UTC)

PS: You can say, it ist nearly from myself. --44Pinguine (talk) 17:58, 25 September 2013 (UTC)

I have described it as permission now.--44Pinguine (talk) 11:29, 27 September 2013 (UTC)

This section is resolved and can be archived. If you disagree, replace this template with your comment. 44Pinguine (talk) 17:05, 23 November 2014 (UTC)

Copyright status: File:Tor Zentralfriedhof Dessau um 1983.png

 Done--44Pinguine (talk) 11:29, 27 September 2013 (UTC)

The photo came to my own during the work on the article Fittkau and Kunstschmiede Weißensee. It was taken by an old fellow from the firm Fittkau (M. Wieszies) which has great interest to illustrate the work list. He is 85 years old and does not use computers. --44Pinguine (talk) 17:56, 25 September 2013 (UTC)

I have described it as permission now.--44Pinguine (talk) 11:29, 27 September 2013 (UTC)

Sorry, aber da muss schon eine Lizenzvorlage rein, siehe Commons:Copyright tags. Und da die Bilder nicht von Dir selbst geschossen wurden, werde ich sie nun als "no permission" kennzeichnen. Versuche bitte den "Anweisungen" auf Commons:OTRS zu folgen um die Freigabe zu dokumentieren. Gruß --JuTa 15:39, 27 September 2013 (UTC)

Wenn frau der englischen Sprache nicht so mächtig ist, habt ihr da ganz dolle Hürden aufgebaut. Bitte warte mit weiteren Schritten, habe gerade eine e-mail dazu abgeschickt. --44Pinguine (talk) 18:09, 1 October 2013 (UTC)

Hallo, ich hab' jetzt das "no permission" durch {{OTRS pending}} ersetzt. Das hält die Löschung i.d.R. für einem Monat auf, oder bis de Fall vom OTRS als valid oder invali entschieden wurde. PS: die OTRS-Seite gibt es auch in deutsch: COM:OTRS/de. Hatte ich oben vergessen zu erwähnen, sorry. --JuTa 03:55, 3 October 2013 (UTC)

This section is resolved and can be archived. If you disagree, replace this template with your comment. 44Pinguine (talk) 17:05, 23 November 2014 (UTC)

File tagging File:Tür Congresszentrum KM-Stadt 1966-1968 -2.png

 Done, siehe OTRS ticket--44Pinguine (talk) 09:02, 5 October 2013 (UTC)

This section is resolved and can be archived. If you disagree, replace this template with your comment. 44Pinguine (talk) 17:05, 23 November 2014 (UTC)

File tagging File:Tor Zentralfriedhof Dessau um 1983.png

 Done, siehe OTRS ticket--44Pinguine (talk) 09:02, 5 October 2013 (UTC)

This section is resolved and can be archived. If you disagree, replace this template with your comment. 44Pinguine (talk) 17:05, 23 November 2014 (UTC)

File tagging File:Armilllarsphäre 3.JPG

siehe OTRS-ticket #2013100410004141 f.  Done --44Pinguine (talk) 17:53, 2 December 2013 (UTC)

This section is resolved and can be archived. If you disagree, replace this template with your comment. 44Pinguine (talk) 17:05, 23 November 2014 (UTC)

Saint Petersburg Population Graph

Check the file's revision history. It was updated and messed up by user Алексей Шиянов. Dgies (talk) 15:26, 26 November 2013 (UTC)

Ok, I saw it now. Allright. --44Pinguine (talk) 17:56, 2 December 2013 (UTC)

This section is resolved and can be archived. If you disagree, replace this template with your comment. 44Pinguine (talk) 17:05, 23 November 2014 (UTC)

Kategorisieren der Straßenfotos

Hallo 44Pinguine,

bitte beim Kategorisieren der Straßen, den Straßennamens mit Ortsteil angeben. So lassen sich doppelte Straßennamen leichter unterscheiden und die Bilder schneller zuordnen. Sollte der Ortsteil nicht genau bekannt sein, bitte die Kategorie Straßennamen weglassen (Manchmal ändert sich der Ortsteil mit der Hausnummer). Danke und Grüße OTFW (talk) 01:30, 22 April 2014 (UTC)

Ok, weiß ich. Habe eigentlich nur dort, wo es in Berlin keine zweite solche straße gibt, entweder nix oder nur Berlin hinzugefügt. Aber: no problem, das nächste mal gern. Grüße zurück --44Pinguine (talk) 13:47, 22 April 2014 (UTC)

This section is resolved and can be archived. If you disagree, replace this template with your comment. 44Pinguine (talk) 17:05, 23 November 2014 (UTC)

Copyright status: File:Jagdschloss Pfaffroda 2011-11-14 ama fec.jpg

Magog the Ogre (talk) (contribs) 02:48, 21 February 2015 (UTC)  Done, Lizenz nachgetragen; danke.--44Pinguine (talk) 13:52, 21 February 2015 (UTC)

Copyright status: File:Georg Erbkam - aus dem Nachruf in der ZS f Bauwesen, 1876 (gemeinfrei).jpg

This media may be deleted.

Thanks for uploading File:Georg Erbkam - aus dem Nachruf in der ZS f Bauwesen, 1876 (gemeinfrei).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) 22:22, 24 April 2015 (UTC)

Wunschgemäß URL nachgetragen, ich hoffe das ist ausreichend. --44Pinguine (talk) 16:53, 27 April 2015 (UTC)

Copyright status: File:Paul-Gerhardt-Stift auf einer AK aus den 1930er Jahren.jpg

This media may be deleted.

Thanks for uploading File:Paul-Gerhardt-Stift auf einer AK aus den 1930er Jahren.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) 03:38, 11 April 2016 (UTC)

Habe verstanden. Ich dachte, wenn weder ein Fotograf noch ein Verlag der karte angegeben sind und 70 Jahre verstrichen, seien solche Sachen prinzipiell "free". Die gewünschten Angaben kann ich aber erst in den nächsten Tagen an OTRS einriechen.44Pinguine (talk) 09:30, 14 April 2016 (UTC)

Copyright status: File:UCI Kinowelt am Eastgate marzahn 2016-07-05 ama fec (4).jpg

This media may be deleted.

Thanks for uploading File:UCI Kinowelt am Eastgate marzahn 2016-07-05 ama fec (4).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.

Josve05a (talk) 19:44, 29 July 2016 (UTC)

 Done 44Pinguine (talk) 07:55, 25 May 2017 (UTC)

Brücke mit Namen Minna-Todenhagen-Brücke

Moin verehrte Kollegin, da die Brücke ja inzwischen einen ganz offiziellen Namen bekommen hat sollte die Commonscat auch auf diesen Namen verschoben werden? Deine Meining? Liebe Grüße -- Biberbaer (talk) 15:57, 28 November 2017 (UTC)

Copyright status: File:Endobär Ch'bg - 2013-02-23 ama fec 6.JPG

Copyright status: File:Endobär Ch'bg - 2013-02-23 ama fec 6.JPG

This media may be deleted.

Thanks for uploading File:Endobär Ch'bg - 2013-02-23 ama fec 6.JPG. I notice that the file page either doesn't contain enough information about the license or it contains contradictory information about the license, so the copyright status is unclear. If you created this file yourself, then you must provide a valid copyright tag. For example, you can tag it with {{self|GFDL|cc-by-sa-all}} to release it under the multi-license GFDL plus Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike All-version license or you can tag it with {{PD-self}} to release it into the public domain. (See Commons:Copyright tags for the full list of license tags that you can use.) If you did not create the file yourself or if it is a derivative of another work that is possibly subject to copyright protection, then you must specify where you found it (e.g. usually a link to the web page where you got it), you must provide proof that it has a license that is acceptable for Commons (e.g. usually a link to the terms of use for content from that page), and you must add an appropriate license tag. If you did not create the file yourself and the specific source and license information is not available on the web, you must obtain permission through the VRT system and follow the procedure described there. Note that any unsourced or improperly licensed files will be deleted one week after they have been marked as lacking proper information, as described in criteria for deletion. If you have uploaded other files, please confirm that you have provided the proper information for those files, too. If you have any questions about licenses please ask at Commons:Village pump/Copyright or see our help pages. Thank you.

Jcb (talk) 12:24, 19 August 2018 (UTC)

 Done44Pinguine (talk) 09:17, 18 May 2020 (UTC)

Notification about possible deletion

Some contents have been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether they should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at their entry. If you created these pages, please note that the fact that they have been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with them, such as a copyright issue. Please see Commons:But it's my own work! for a guide on how to address these issues. Please remember to respond to and – if appropriate – contradict the arguments supporting deletion. Arguments which focus on the nominator will not affect the result of the nomination. Thank you!

Affected:

• File:Buddy bear vor Kirgisischer Botschaft 2014-09-13 ama fec.jpg

Yours sincerely, Ymblanter (talk) 15:47, 14 October 2019 (UTC) Hier gilt die

The photographical reproduction of this work is covered under the article § 59 of the German copyright law, which states that "It shall be permissible to reproduce, by painting, drawing, photography or cinematography, works which are permanently located on public ways, streets or places and to distribute and publicly communicate such copies. For works of architecture, this provision shall be applicable only to the external appearance." As with all other “limits of copyright by legally permitted uses”, no changes to the actual work are permitted under § 62 of the German copyright law (UrhG). See Commons:Copyright rules by territory/Germany#Freedom of panorama for more information.

! 44Pinguine (talk) 09:07, 18 May 2020 (UTC)

Copyright status: File:Aue, Bockauer Talstr 22, KD, 2019-10-12 ama fec (1).JPG

Copyright status: File:Aue, Bockauer Talstr 22, KD, 2019-10-12 ama fec (1).JPG

This media may be deleted.

Thanks for uploading File:Aue, Bockauer Talstr 22, KD, 2019-10-12 ama fec (1).JPG. I notice that the file page either doesn't contain enough information about the license or it contains contradictory information about the license, so the copyright status is unclear. If you created this file yourself, then you must provide a valid copyright tag. For example, you can tag it with {{self|GFDL|cc-by-sa-all}} to release it under the multi-license GFDL plus Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike All-version license or you can tag it with {{PD-self}} to release it into the public domain. (See Commons:Copyright tags for the full list of license tags that you can use.) If you did not create the file yourself or if it is a derivative of another work that is possibly subject to copyright protection, then you must specify where you found it (e.g. usually a link to the web page where you got it), you must provide proof that it has a license that is acceptable for Commons (e.g. usually a link to the terms of use for content from that page), and you must add an appropriate license tag. If you did not create the file yourself and the specific source and license information is not available on the web, you must obtain permission through the VRT system and follow the procedure described there. Note that any unsourced or improperly licensed files will be deleted one week after they have been marked as lacking proper information, as described in criteria for deletion. If you have uploaded other files, please confirm that you have provided the proper information for those files, too. If you have any questions about licenses please ask at Commons:Village pump/Copyright or see our help pages. Thank you.

Magog the Ogre (talk) (contribs) 22:32, 16 October 2019 (UTC)

 Done 44Pinguine (talk) 09:16, 18 May 2020 (UTC)

File:Petruskirche Neu-Ulm, Kirchenhauptschiff von der Empore aus, 2019-05-23, ama fec.jpg

File:Petruskirche Neu-Ulm, Kirchenhauptschiff von der Empore aus, 2019-05-23, ama fec.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!

Martin Sg. (talk) 17:06, 16 May 2020 (UTC)

Sorry, ich sehe hier KEINE begründung. Es ist eine tagsüber jederzeit öffentlich zugängige Kirche und hat für mich damit den Status von

The photographical reproduction of this work is covered under the article § 59 of the German copyright law, which states that "It shall be permissible to reproduce, by painting, drawing, photography or cinematography, works which are permanently located on public ways, streets or places and to distribute and publicly communicate such copies. For works of architecture, this provision shall be applicable only to the external appearance." As with all other “limits of copyright by legally permitted uses”, no changes to the actual work are permitted under § 62 of the German copyright law (UrhG). See Commons:Copyright rules by territory/Germany#Freedom of panorama for more information.

, da es kein kunstdetail hervorhebt. Deshalb: bitte nicht löschen! 44Pinguine (talk) 17:27, 16 May 2020 (UTC)

Begründung steht im Löschantrag. Weiteres siehe unten. Für die Kreuzscheibe auf de minimis zu beanspruchen – dafür ist sie zu prominent im Bild. --Martin Sg. (talk) 14:11, 18 May 2020 (UTC) P. S. Im übrigen zitierst Du ja hier selber „Bei Bauwerken erstrecken sich diese Befugnisse nur auf die äußere Ansicht.“

File:Petruskirche Neu-Ul, St. Petrus-Fenster, 2019-05-23, ama fec.JPG

File:Petruskirche Neu-Ul, St. Petrus-Fenster, 2019-05-23, ama fec.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!

Martin Sg. (talk) 17:13, 16 May 2020 (UTC)

Begründung?? 44Pinguine (talk) 17:29, 16 May 2020 (UTC)

Begründung steht im Löschantrag. Weiteres siehe unten. --Martin Sg. (talk) 14:08, 18 May 2020 (UTC)

File:Petruskirche Neu-Ulm, Infotafel zum Abendmahlsfenster, 2019-05-23, ama fec.jpg

File:Petruskirche Neu-Ulm, Infotafel zum Abendmahlsfenster, 2019-05-23, ama fec.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!

Martin Sg. (talk) 17:17, 16 May 2020 (UTC)

Begründung?? Für eine Infotafel?? Wo ist da der Urheberschutz, wenn darauf eine mehr als 100 Jahre alte Urkunde abgebildet ist?? 44Pinguine (talk) 17:30, 16 May 2020 (UTC)

. Ist keine 100jährige Urkunde! die Rechte am Text sind nicht freigegeben, und die Rechte am abgebildeten Ausschnitt aus einer zeitgen. Glasmalerei ebensowenig. --Martin Sg. (talk) 13:47, 18 May 2020 (UTC)

File:Petruskirche Neu-Ulm, Vorraum mit Heiligenfenstern, altem Kruzifix und Urkunde zur Grundsteinlegung, 2019-05-23, ama fec.jpg

File:Petruskirche Neu-Ulm, Vorraum mit Heiligenfenstern, altem Kruzifix und Urkunde zur Grundsteinlegung, 2019-05-23, ama fec.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!

Martin Sg. (talk) 17:25, 16 May 2020 (UTC)

Begründung? Es ist wohl eher eine allgemeine übersicht....44Pinguine (talk)

Begründung steht im Löschantrag. Weiteres siehe unten. Fenster gehen bestimmt nicht unter de minimis. --Martin Sg. (talk) 14:07, 18 May 2020 (UTC)

File:Petruskirche Neu-Ulm, Vorraum mit Heiligenfenstern, altem Kruzifix und Urkunde zur Grundsteinlegung, 2019-05-23, ama fec.jpg

File:Petruskirche Neu-Ulm, Vorraum mit Heiligenfenstern, altem Kruzifix und Urkunde zur Grundsteinlegung, 2019-05-23, ama fec.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!

Martin Sg. (talk) 17:33, 16 May 2020 (UTC)

Wie schon weiter oben gesagt: die Kirche ist rund 10 stunden am tag öffentlich zugängig und gehört damit zur Category Panoramafreiheit. Außerdem ist die Urkunde mehr als 100 Jahre alt und damit "gemeinfrei". 44Pinguine (talk) 08:56, 18 May 2020 (UTC)

File:Petruskirche Neu-Ulm, Tauffenster, 2019-05-23, ama fec.jpg

File:Petruskirche Neu-Ulm, Tauffenster, 2019-05-23, ama fec.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!

Martin Sg. (talk) 21:12, 17 May 2020 (UTC)

Begründung? 44Pinguine (talk) 08:59, 18 May 2020 (UTC)

Begründung steht im Löschantrag. Weiteres siehe unten. --Martin Sg. (talk) 14:05, 18 May 2020 (UTC)

File:Petruskirche Neu-Ulm, Infotafel zum Tauffenster, 2019-05-23, ama fec.jpg

File:Petruskirche Neu-Ulm, Infotafel zum Tauffenster, 2019-05-23, ama fec.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!

Martin Sg. (talk) 21:14, 17 May 2020 (UTC)

Wie schon weiter oben gesagt: die Kirche ist rund 10 stunden am tag öffentlich zugängig und gehört damit zur Category Panoramafreiheit. Außerdem ist es eine Infotafel, seit wann benötigt man dafür eine lizenz?. 44Pinguine (talk) 08:58, 18 May 2020 (UTC)

Siehe unten. --Martin Sg. (talk) 14:05, 18 May 2020 (UTC)

File:Petruskirche Neu-Ulm, Altarinsel mit Kruzifix, Altartisch, Kanzel und Ambo, 2019-05-23, ama fec.jpg

File:Petruskirche Neu-Ulm, Altarinsel mit Kruzifix, Altartisch, Kanzel und Ambo, 2019-05-23, ama fec.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!

Martin Sg. (talk) 21:15, 17 May 2020 (UTC)

Wie schon weiter oben gesagt: die Kirche ist rund 10 stunden am tag öffentlich zugängig und gehört damit zur Category Panoramafreiheit. Außerdem zeigt das foto keine kunstdetails! 44Pinguine (talk) 08:59, 18 May 2020 (UTC)

Siehe unten, Und hier auf De minimis zu plädieren ist doch sehr gewagt. --Martin Sg. (talk) 14:04, 18 May 2020 (UTC)

File:Wandmosaik beim ASB in Falkensee, 2020-03-10 ama fec.jpg

File:Wandmosaik beim ASB in Falkensee, 2020-03-10 ama fec.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!

Martin Sg. (talk) 21:19, 17 May 2020 (UTC)

Das Mosaik ist ein Kulturdenkmal; der noch lebende Künstler (die Frau ist verstorben) ist 85 Jahre alt (arbeitzet nicht mit Computern!) und hat seine mündliche Zustimmung zur Veröffentlichung gegeben. - Im kommenden Monat treffe ich ihn persönlich und dann wird es auch eine Biografie geben. 44Pinguine (talk) 09:02, 18 May 2020 (UTC)

Eine Freigabe für Commons ist nur gültig, wenn sie gemäss und mittels OTRS erfolgt, auf alles andere ist rechtlich kein Verlass. --Martin Sg. (talk) 13:48, 18 May 2020 (UTC)

File:KD Wandmosaik Falkensee 2020-03-10 ama fec (2).JPG

File:KD Wandmosaik Falkensee 2020-03-10 ama fec (2).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!

Martin Sg. (talk) 21:20, 17 May 2020 (UTC)

Das Mosaik ist ein Kulturdenkmal; der noch lebende Künstler (die Frau ist verstorben) ist 85 Jahre alt (arbeitzet nicht mit Computern!) und hat seine mündliche Zustimmung zur Veröffentlichung gegeben. - Im kommenden Monat treffe ich ihn persönlich und dann wird es auch eine Biografie geben. 44Pinguine (talk) 09:03, 18 May 2020 (UTC)

Es liegt inzwischen ein OTRS für das Foto, direkt vom Künstler erteilt, vor. -->  Done 44Pinguine (talk) 09:33, 12 April 2021 (UTC)

File:Petruskirche Neu-Ulm, Abendmahlsfenster, 2019-05-23, ama fec.jpg

File:Petruskirche Neu-Ulm, Abendmahlsfenster, 2019-05-23, ama fec.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!

Martin Sg. (talk) 21:38, 17 May 2020 (UTC)

File:Kloster, Inselkirche, 'Jona, der kleine Prophet', Jo Harbort; ama fec.jpg

File:Kloster, Inselkirche, 'Jona, der kleine Prophet', Jo Harbort; ama fec.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!

Martin Sg. (talk) 21:46, 17 May 2020 (UTC)

File tagging File:NSS Malchow, Waldschrat' im Zugangsbereich des hinteren Quergebäudes, 2014-02-18 ama fec.JPG

This media was probably deleted.

Thanks for uploading File:NSS Malchow, Waldschrat' im Zugangsbereich des hinteren Quergebäudes, 2014-02-18 ama fec.JPG. This media is missing permission information. A source is given, but there is no proof that the author or copyright holder agreed to license the file under the given license. Please provide a link to an appropriate webpage with license information, or ask the author or copyright holder to send an email with copy of a written permission to VRT (permissions-commons@wikimedia.org). You may still be required to go through this procedure even if you are the author yourself; please see Commons:But it's my own work! for more details. After you emailed permission, you may replace the {{No permission since}} tag with {{subst:PP}} on file description page. Alternatively, you may click on "Challenge speedy deletion" below the tag if you wish to provide an argument why evidence of permission is not necessary in this case. Please see this page for more information on how to confirm permission, or if you would like to understand why we ask for permission when uploading work that is not your own, or work which has been previously published (regardless of whether it is your own). The file probably has been deleted. If you sent a permission, try to send it again after 14 days. Do not re-upload. When the VRT-member processes your mail, the file can be undeleted. Additionally you can request undeletion here, providing a link to the File-page on Commons where it was uploaded ([[:File:NSS Malchow, Waldschrat' im Zugangsbereich des hinteren Quergebäudes, 2014-02-18 ama fec.JPG]]) and the above demanded information in your request.

 

Martin Sg. (talk) 21:52, 17 May 2020 (UTC)

Das foto zeigt ein schnitzwerk eines unbekannten künstlers, das von außen durch das fenster zu sehen ist, der hof ist öffentlich zugängig. Das foto entstand mit genehmigung der leiterin der naturschutzstation bei einem interview für die Berliner Morgenpost. Im zweifel könnte ich sie bitten, einen genehmigungstext an commons zu senden. 44Pinguine (talk) 09:06, 18 May 2020 (UTC)

File tagging File:Kirche Maria Magdalena N'hausen, Zeichnung eines unbekannten Gemeindemitglieds, um 1955, 2017-04-10 ama fec (5).JPG

This media was probably deleted.

Thanks for uploading File:Kirche Maria Magdalena N'hausen, Zeichnung eines unbekannten Gemeindemitglieds, um 1955, 2017-04-10 ama fec (5).JPG. This media is missing permission information. A source is given, but there is no proof that the author or copyright holder agreed to license the file under the given license. Please provide a link to an appropriate webpage with license information, or ask the author or copyright holder to send an email with copy of a written permission to VRT (permissions-commons@wikimedia.org). You may still be required to go through this procedure even if you are the author yourself; please see Commons:But it's my own work! for more details. After you emailed permission, you may replace the {{No permission since}} tag with {{subst:PP}} on file description page. Alternatively, you may click on "Challenge speedy deletion" below the tag if you wish to provide an argument why evidence of permission is not necessary in this case. Please see this page for more information on how to confirm permission, or if you would like to understand why we ask for permission when uploading work that is not your own, or work which has been previously published (regardless of whether it is your own). The file probably has been deleted. If you sent a permission, try to send it again after 14 days. Do not re-upload. When the VRT-member processes your mail, the file can be undeleted. Additionally you can request undeletion here, providing a link to the File-page on Commons where it was uploaded ([[:File:Kirche Maria Magdalena N'hausen, Zeichnung eines unbekannten Gemeindemitglieds, um 1955, 2017-04-10 ama fec (5).JPG]]) and the above demanded information in your request.

 

Martin Sg. (talk) 22:05, 17 May 2020 (UTC)

Wenn es das werk eines unbekannten gemeindemitglieds ist (vor 75 Jahren erstellt (!)) - dann kann auch kein autor seine zustimmung geben. Der küster der kirche hat das bild eigens aus dem archiv für die kirchendarstellung geholt. - *Den* könnte ich um einen genehmigungstext an commons bitten. 44Pinguine (talk) 09:15, 18 May 2020 (UTC)

Ich wage zu bezweifeln, dass der Küster über die nötigen Rechte zur Freigabe verfügt; auch das Bild eines uns unbekannten Urhebers ist nicht einfach gemeinfrei. --Martin Sg. (talk) 13:50, 18 May 2020 (UTC)

File:St Hedwig-Kh 2016-05-19 ama fec Eingangsbereich Haupthaus.jpg

File:St Hedwig-Kh 2016-05-19 ama fec Eingangsbereich Haupthaus.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!

Martin Sg. (talk) 22:19, 17 May 2020 (UTC)

Das ist ein Laien-Gemeinschaftswerk - und: tagsüber ist der eingangsbereich öffentlich zugängig! Also Panoramafreiheit. 44Pinguine (talk) 09:12, 18 May 2020 (UTC)

Bin nicht überzeugt, dass das durch die Panoramafreiheit gedeckt bist. Aber sei's drum: Einwände gegen Löschanträge solltest Du jeweils auf der Löschdiskussionsseite geltend machen, damit sie zur Kenntnis genommen werden. Gruß, --Mussklprozz (talk) 13:45, 18 May 2020 (UTC)

Zu Panoramafreiheit s. u. Die Info von wem das Bunte Bild stammt, gehört übrigens auch auf die Dateiseite. zudem: von wem ist die Büste – ist deren Abb. schon rechtefrei? --Martin Sg. (talk) 14:01, 18 May 2020 (UTC)

File:Kirche Maria Magdalena N'hausen, Schmiedeleuchter 2017-04-10 ama fec (13).JPG

Hallo 44Pinguine,

zu diesem Bild haben wir eine Freigabe des Fotografen im Support erhalten. So weit so gut. Es braucht aber auch eine Freigabe der Künstlerin, die das Objekt gestaltet hat; anscheinend eine Verwandte von Dir. Kannst Du sie bitten, eine Freigabe an permissions-de@wikimedia.org zu schicken? Im Betreff möge Sie bitte Ticket#2020051810004979 nennen. Das erleichtert uns die Zuordnung.

Dafür dankbar, --Mussklprozz (talk) 13:41, 18 May 2020 (UTC)

Hat sich geklärt; die Fotografin bist Du. War verwirrt, weil einmal Angelika M. Arnold und einmal Monika Arnold in der Bildbeschreibung steht. Der Künstler hat dankenswerter Weise an den Support geschrieben. Bitte in ähnlich gelagerten Fällen in Zukunft gleich den Namen des Künstlers in der Bildbeschreibung nennen und nicht nur Deinen eigenen.

Gruß, --Mussklprozz (talk) 14:14, 18 May 2020 (UTC)

Panoramafreiheit / Kunstwerke in Kirchen u. a.

Salut 44Pinguine. Ob Kirchen in Deutschland nun zeitweise oder durchgehend offen sind und somit der Innenraum zugänglich, spielt für die Abbildung sich dort befindlicher geschützter Werke keine Rolle.
Siehe hierzu: im Allgemeinen unter Commons:FOP, zur Situation in Deutschland für Abbildungen von Kunstwerken in Kirchen insbesondere bei Panoramafreiheit#Norm (1) und Panoramafreiheit#Kriterium „öffentlich“, Abs. 5.
Wichtig ist zu wissen, dass die Urheberrechte noch 70 Jahre lang nach dem Ableben des betreffenden Künstlers greifen.--Martin Sg. (talk) 13:57, 18 May 2020 (UTC)
P. S. 1: Mir selber geht es einerseits ums Respektieren der Rechte der Künstler an ihren Werken, andererseits auch um rechtlich einwandfreie Publikationen innerhalb des ganzen Projekts, um damit auch dessen Angreifbarkeit zu reduzieren.

Copyright status: File:Dietrich, Relief für Rathaus Nauen (2).JPG

Copyright status: File:Dietrich, Relief für Rathaus Nauen (2).JPG

This media may be deleted.

Thanks for uploading File:Dietrich, Relief für Rathaus Nauen (2).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) 16:07, 27 November 2020 (UTC)

SORRY, ich lade gleich noch weitere Werke von den Dietrichs hoch. Alle zusammen werden dann von ihm gesondert zur Veröffetnlichung lizenziert. Siehe auch [[1]] !! AUSDRÜCKLICH für die Veröffentlichung in Wikimedia erwünscht. Bitte zwei Wochen warten.44Pinguine (talk) 17:51, 27 November 2020 (UTC)

SORRY, I'm uploading more works from the Dietrichs right away. All together will be licensed separately for publication. See also [[2]] !! EXPRESSLY desired for publication in Wikimedia. Please wait 14 days. 44Pinguine (talk) 17:51, 27 November 2020 (UTC)/44penguins

Copyright status: File:Dietrich, Relief für Rathaus Nauen (2).JPG

Copyright status: File:Dietrich, Relief für Rathaus Nauen (2).JPG

This media may be deleted.

Thanks for uploading File:Dietrich, Relief für Rathaus Nauen (2).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) 18:05, 27 November 2020 (UTC)

Copyright status: File:Helios-Klinikum Buch, Buddy Bear, ama fec, 2020-07-15.jpg

Copyright status: File:Helios-Klinikum Buch, Buddy Bear, ama fec, 2020-07-15.jpg

This media may be deleted.

Thanks for uploading File:Helios-Klinikum Buch, Buddy Bear, ama fec, 2020-07-15.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) 18:06, 26 March 2021 (UTC)

Copyright status: File:Buddy Bear in der Vorhalle K.-August-Allee, 2020, ama fec.JPG

Copyright status: File:Buddy Bear in der Vorhalle K.-August-Allee, 2020, ama fec.JPG

This media may be deleted.

Thanks for uploading File:Buddy Bear in der Vorhalle K.-August-Allee, 2020, ama fec.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) 19:05, 9 April 2021 (UTC)

Copyright status: File:Kapelle St. Joseph-Krh Weißensee, 2021, ama fec.JPG

Copyright status: File:Kapelle St. Joseph-Krh Weißensee, 2021, ama fec.JPG

This media may be deleted.

Thanks for uploading File:Kapelle St. Joseph-Krh Weißensee, 2021, ama fec.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.

And also:

• File:Feng-Shui am St. Joseph-Krh Weißensee, 2021, ama fec.JPG
• File:St. Joseph Krankenhaus Weißensee, 2021-02-21 ama fec.jpg
• File:Übersichtsplan St. Joseph Weißensee Stand 2021, ama fec.JPG

This action was performed automatically by AntiCompositeBot (talk) (FAQ) 07:08, 12 May 2021 (UTC)

Notification about possible deletion

Some contents have been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether they should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at their entry. If you created these pages, please note that the fact that they have been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with them, such as a copyright issue. Please see Commons:But it's my own work! for a guide on how to address these issues. Please remember to respond to and – if appropriate – contradict the arguments supporting deletion. Arguments which focus on the nominator will not affect the result of the nomination. Thank you!

Affected:

• File:20200726 Kath Kirche Kühlungsborn, symbolischer Schlussstein.jpg

And also:

• File:Kath Kirche Kühlungsborn - Kreuzwegtafel 1 'Jesus wird zum Tode verurteilt', ama fec.JPG

Yours sincerely, Martin Sg. (talk) 10:58, 5 April 2022 (UTC)

Copyright status: File:Jungunternehmerpreis 2018 aus Aue-Bad-Schlema - Bild für Wikipedia.jpg

Copyright status: File:Jungunternehmerpreis 2018 aus Aue-Bad-Schlema - Bild für Wikipedia.jpg

This media may be deleted.

Thanks for uploading File:Jungunternehmerpreis 2018 aus Aue-Bad-Schlema - Bild für Wikipedia.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) 18:05, 14 November 2022 (UTC)

Direkt vom Besitzer wird die Genehmigung /Lizenz eingeholt. Bitte zwei Wochen Zeit geben.44Pinguine (talk) 19:43, 14 November 2022 (UTC)

Copyright status: File:Klaus-Dieter L Ehmke.jpeg

Copyright status: File:Klaus-Dieter L Ehmke.jpeg

This media may be deleted.

Thanks for uploading File:Klaus-Dieter L Ehmke.jpeg. 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, 12 May 2023 (UTC)

Sorry, I have made a mistake, according to the name of the photograph. But the licence will come from him (Martin Kirchner)./ 44Pinguine (talk) 18:26, 12 May 2023 (UTC)

Copyright status: File:Lichtenberg Baudenkmale Kielblock~ 2 ama fec 2023-09-19 (60).JPG

Copyright status: File:Lichtenberg Baudenkmale Kielblock~ 2 ama fec 2023-09-19 (60).JPG

This media may be deleted.

Thanks for uploading File:Lichtenberg Baudenkmale Kielblock~ 2 ama fec 2023-09-19 (60).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.

And also:

• File:Lichtenberg Baudenkmale Kielblock~ 2 ama fec 2023-09-19 (63).JPG
• File:Lichtenberg Baudenkmale Kielblock~ 2 ama fec 2023-09-19 (66).JPG
• File:Lichtenberg Baudenkmale Kielblock~ 2 ama fec 2023-09-19 (67).JPG

This action was performed automatically by AntiCompositeBot (talk) (FAQ) 13:08, 21 September 2023 (UTC)

Gedenktafel Möllendorffstr 34 (Liber) Lichtenberg 1900-.jpg

Hallo 44Pinguine, Du hast vermerkt, dass die Kategorie Roedeliusplatz falsch ist (falsche kategoie: hat NIX mit dem Roedeliusplatz zu tun!!). Im Text auf der Tafel wird der Platz allerdings erwähnt, da 1905 die dortige Kirche eingeweiht wird. Beste Grüße OTFW (talk) 09:45, 6 October 2023 (UTC)

Ja mag, sein, aber eine erwähnung als kategorie einzuordnen, finde ich übertrieben. Zumal es hier hauptsächlich um die Möllendorffstr. geht; die liegt ziemlich weit ab vom Roedeliuplatz... . Wenn du das trotzdem richtig findest, tu's nur wieder rein. Gruß 44Pinguine (talk) 17:27, 6 October 2023 (UTC)

Copyright status: File:Amtsgericht Danzig histor AK, um 1915.jpg

Copyright status: File:Amtsgericht Danzig histor AK, um 1915.jpg

This media may be deleted.

Thanks for uploading File:Amtsgericht Danzig histor AK, um 1915.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) 17:11, 28 October 2023 (UTC) -->changed!

It was a mistake, is now corrected and became the licence PD-old. 44Pinguine (talk) 19:58, 24 February 2024 (UTC)

Christa Sammler

Hallo 44Pinguine, es wäre gut, diese Christa-Sammler-Angelegenheit bzgl. Mädchen mit Ball auf de:Diskussion:Christa Sammler zu thematisieren. Im Artikel über die Künstlerin ist ihr die Skulptur weiterhin zugeordnet. Außerdem wäre es auch gut, wenn derjenige, der sich bei dir gemeldet hat, eine gleichlautende Stellungnahme ans Supportteam (permissions-commons-de@wikimedia.org) senden würde, damit das ein bißchen offizieller wird. --Túrelio (talk) 19:24, 24 February 2024 (UTC)

Nee, für mich ist das nicht diskussionswürdig sondern gehört schnellstmöglicht bereinigt. Allerdings habe ich den Wunsch betr. der commons noch mitgeteilt und den Lemmatext gesäubert. Ich vermittle hier nur und bin ansonsten unbeteiligt! Gruß 44Pinguine (talk) 19:57, 24 February 2024 (UTC)