Last modified on 9 August 2014, at 17:46

User talk:Augiasstallputzer

Return to "Augiasstallputzer" page.

Why the new version of Image:Sin_escudo.svg? I don't think it's better than the previous one (genau gesagt gefällt mir das Fragezeichen nicht). What was wrong with it? —TM 20:37, 26 April 2006 (UTC)

1. Too much tags inside which are not nessesary, therefore slowly rendering in the browser. 2. Wrong Size, the image needs to have a Width of 140 px, not a Width of 125 3. something like a copyright in the sourcecode. not Ok with the GFDL. Augiasstallputzer

  1. SVG is not rendered by the browser in Wikipedia. The user gets a PNG.
  2. Does not matter. You can use the image in any size you want without loosing quality. That's the main advantage of SVG!
  3. There is no copyright in the source. --TM 19:38, 29 April 2006 (UTC)

User:Augiasstallputzer/monobook.cssEdit

you should replace Benutzer: with User: there -- 07:58, 8 August 2006 (UTC)

I 've forgotten to translate. Thank you for the information. Augiasstallputzer 15:24, 9 August 2006 (UTC)

Duplicates deletionEdit

Please see my answer here. --Panther 09:54, 11 August 2006 (UTC)

Template:DuplicateEdit

Bitte mal den Text dieser Vorlage genau durchlesen, diese Vorlage ist nicht nur für exakte Duplikate sondern auch für kleinere Versionen eines Originalbilds zulässig/zuständig. --Denniss 03:47, 14 August 2006 (UTC)

LöschanträgeEdit

Hallo, bitte sorge dafür, dass die Bilder, die du zur Löschung vorschlägst auch nicht mehr benutzt werden (mit Hilfe von check usage). Und sei bitte mit deinen Kommentaren wie bei Image:TennisCourtOath.jpg etwas vorsichtiger, Tennis Court Oath ist der englische Begriff für den Ballhausschwur und der wird dort abgebildet, also passt der Name. --jed 17:56, 30 August 2006 (UTC)

Aha, man wird halt jeden Tag schlauer... Normalerweise entlinke ich die Bilder auch, jedoch gibt es manchmal Edit-Probleme, z.B. Schreibschutz, und ein Revert durch andere ist sowieso immer möglich. Augiasstallputzer 15:29, 2 September 2006 (UTC)

Duplicate, badname etcEdit

On Image:Test d'un moteur ionique au xénon, dans un laboratoire du JPL.jpg, you removed a {{duplicate}} tag from the image (correctly) and replaced it with {{superseded}}. That was fine, however you then tagged it with {{badname}}. That is for use by the uploader when they uploaded to a bad file name (and is unused).--Nilfanion 02:17, 3 September 2006 (UTC)

BOT FlagEdit

Go to COM:RFA and request the bot flag for User:PortalBot, explaining why you need it! Thanks! Cary "Bastique" Bass parler voir 22:04, 7 September 2006 (UTC)

PD-Russia and the categoryEdit

PD-Russia was written by Fred; I only included the rules for the U.S. Although it disregards the "simultaneous publication" stuff, I think the tag might be ok for all those Soviet works that were published by a publisher who is today a Russian citizen or a publishing house that is today based in Russia. But you're right, it should use a different category. I think the PD-Russia tag should not be used for works that were published by a publishing house that today is based in some other CIS nation (e.g. the Ukraine, or in Georgia), or in one of the three Baltic states. I think (but I'm not sure yet) that for such works, we'd have to apply the respective current countries' copyright laws, i.e., we'd need to figure out what the copyright rules for Soviet-era works were in all the CIS states and the Baltic states. Researching where and by whom a Soviet work was first published might be prohibitively complicated, so we might apply the rule of thumb to assume that PD-Russia applied unless we know already that a work was, say, first published by a publisher in what is today Estland... It's not a perfect solution, but then I fear we'll never be able to get a 100% correct solution. At least PD-Russia is far more correct than PD-Soviet was. Lupo 19:36, 11 September 2006 (UTC)

User:PortalBotEdit

As there was no real objection to this after seven days, I have set the bot blag for User:PortalBot. Use it wisely! Cary "Bastiqe" Bass demandez 22:09, 14 September 2006 (UTC)

Of course. Thank You :-)) Augiasstallputzer 22:11, 14 September 2006 (UTC)

VerkehrszeichenEdit

Wir sollten uns noch absprechen, wie die Kategorie Category:diagrams of road signs of Germany organisiert werden soll. Ich würde am liebsten die PNGs ganz rauswerfen (also erst überall durch SVGs ersetzen und dann zum Löschen markieren) -- womit auch Category:road signs of Germany (SVG) und Category:road signs of Germany (PNG) und natürlich die (inzwischen) falsch benannte Category:road signs of Germany überflüssig würden. -- 3247 13:50, 15 September 2006 (UTC)

Es läuft ein Löschantrag für die PNGs. Sie werden z.Z. entlinkt. Besser erstmal nichts mehr verschiebenoder löschen, bis die PNGs weg sind. danach können wir uns um die anderen Grafiken kümmern. Augiasstallputzer 20:07, 15 September 2006 (UTC)

Hab ich was verpasst? Ich habe bisher keinen LA gefunden. Aber mir soll's recht sein. --  (talk) 00:55, 16 September 2006 (UTC)

Können die SVG-Bilder dann (wenn die PNGs alle weg sind) wieder nach Category:diagrams of road signs of Germany zurückverschoben werden? Das ist ja nicht schön mit dem (SVG) hintendran, außerdem sucht man ja nicht da und außerdem braucht man ja nicht differenzieren, wenn es nix andres gibt. --MarianSigler {bla} 17:21, 17 September 2006 (UTC)

Die SVGs sind ursprünglich zusammen mit den PNGs in der Category:Road signs of Germany gewesen. Daher werde ich sie nach dem Löschen der PNGs wieder dorthin sortieren, zumal ich das auf der LA-Seite zugesagt habe. Wohin sie danach hinkommen, dass überlasse ich denen, die sich hier wohl ein Kat-System ausgedacht haben. Ich habe nur eine Bitte: Bitte keine Kategorien mit weniger als 12 Bildern. Augiasstallputzer 21:27, 17 September 2006 (UTC)

Genau da sollten sie ja raus, weil die Kategorie nicht dem Muster anderer Länder (gezeichnet: [[category:diagrams of road signs of ''country name'']], Fotos: [[category:road signs '''in''' ''country name'']]. Ok, nachdem ich die letzten Wochen keine Zeit hatte, werde ich das wohl heute und morgen machen. --  (talk) 15:56, 2 October 2006 (UTC)
Warum hast du auch Category:VzKat 1992 und Category:post-VzKat 1992 gelöscht? Eine historische Kategorisierung der Zeichen ist doch sinnvoll! --  (talk) 15:38, 3 October 2006 (UTC)

Image:Soviet Union-1967-Stamp-0.06. On Moon.jpg and otherEdit

Could you please remove {{PD-self}} tags from these images? Scanning don't add authorship, so this tag is not appropriate. Thank you. --EugeneZelenko 18:34, 16 September 2006 (UTC)

This is an "image of an image". The design of a Soviet stamp, (the "image in the image") is PD-RU-exempt, but the uploaded image itself, the photograph or scan, is PD-self from the creator. Therefore, both licences are correct PD-self for the scan and PD-Soviet-exempt for the official content of the scan / photo . Augiasstallputzer 01:32, 17 September 2006 (UTC)

KbotEdit

Hello! I have added template you sugested. Regards, --kb 20:43, 20 September 2006 (UTC)

PD-Soviet retaggedEdit

Please check http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/Alex_Bakharev and http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/Introvert there are around one thousand images retugged between two of us. Also there are ~1300 images in Category:PD-Russia, all of them were retagged last week. Alex Bakharev 00:44, 24 September 2006 (UTC)

Image:Illustration Lupinus luteus0.jpgEdit

Hi, Augiasstallputzer. Can you justify you revert on this picture please ? Kelson 10:26, 27 November 2006 (UTC)

I think, that the colour of the old paper, where this plants are painted, belong to the original images. Therefore we shoudt not light up the images to a white background, because this will create also false colours of the objects. It is better to let them original or to change the background only to a colour like  this . If you want white background, I'll favourite an upload to annother name, e.g. a "1" instead a "0" at the end. Then, you can also add them to the category:Thomé, Flora von Deutschland (modified). Do you have a software for a well adjusting the backgroundcolor ? Augiasstallputzer 11:49, 27 November 2006 (UTC)

Hallo, glaubst du wircklich das die Farben die du Jetzt siehst sind die gleiche als die die mahlen waren ? Sonst, um dich besser zu antworten, habe ich leider kein speziales tool. Ich verstehe aber deine Meinung, obwohl ich nicht voll einverstanden damit bin. Ich werde aber diese Bilder wieder hochladen. Nächstes mahl, sag Bescheid, es ist besser und mehr Respecktvoll. Beste Grüsse. Kelson 12:11, 27 November 2006 (UTC)
Can you upload them to annother name ? That wouldt be nice. Augiasstallputzer 12:15, 27 November 2006 (UTC)
Yes I will do it. Kelson 12:19, 27 November 2006 (UTC)


Image Tagging Image:Animated-Flag-Afghan.gifEdit

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

Warning sign
This media may be deleted.

Thanks for uploading Image:Animated-Flag-Afghan.gif. 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. Yonatanh 23:27, 7 February 2007 (UTC)

Please give images good descriptions

العربية | català | dansk | Deutsch | English | español | suomi | français | galego | עברית | magyar | italiano | 日本語 | македонски | മലയാളം | Nederlands | occitan | polski | português | русский | українська | +/−


I noticed you've uploaded Image:Animated-Flag-Afghan.gif and I thought I should draw your attention to a common error.
Please give some thought to writing a good description of uploaded images. This ensures that they can be used. It also helps those that review and improve categories do a better job, which also ensures that images will get used in novel and interesting ways. Thanks, and happy editing!

Yonatanh 23:29, 7 February 2007 (UTC)

AnswerEdit

Are you a human or a bot ?

There are only 20 seconds (!) between upload and the messages here. I only needed to take a short research for the correct URL to add on the image-page. Copyright is important, but this attacking is like horror. Please give uploaders two minute time to add the information. With greetings Augiasstallputzer 23:39, 7 February 2007 (UTC)

I was just monitoring the recent changes section and I certainly am not a bot. When you add the source etc. just remove the template I added, sorry, apparently I was too quick. :) Yonatanh 23:53, 7 February 2007 (UTC)

Ok, you 've been as fast as a bot and therefore I thought..  ;-) There are several files following. Do you think, the URL to the main page of the source is exact enough ? Augiasstallputzer 23:57, 7 February 2007 (UTC)

Yep it seems fine. I'd suggest maybe adding a description but it seems fine. I'm e-mailing the owner of the site so he says that he's released them into the public domain (as the harsher admins here may think that wording isn't good enough). Yonatanh 01:09, 8 February 2007 (UTC)

HSTRM uswEdit

Changing HSTRM to uSTR was an error of course. It must have been uHSTR.

I cannot remember uploading SVG images recently. And I never created one myself. About what images are you talking? HandigeHarry 07:53, 2 April 2007 (UTC)

Sorry, that was an error reading a history. Augiasstallputzer 12:04, 2 April 2007 (UTC)

HochladenEdit

Insert non-formatted text here You can assume that I do not produce railway icons which I do not need. Well, bubSTR is an exception. I could create many more icons, but I find the job a bit too tedious, so I limit myself to the ones I need. That also answers the question whether my icons are needed (they are). Of course I attempt to keep the icon names consistent.

Discussing the icons and updating [1] is tedious too, since there are versions in many languages. There is even a language among them with which I am unfamiliar.

I see no particular need to enter the icons in categories, but I will do as you please. When I want to know what icons are available, I check [2]. This list is always complete. HandigeHarry 21:52, 11 April 2007 (UTC)

CrossoverEdit

What do you mean by "[http://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Image%3ANuvola_apps_display.png&diff=5171216&oldid=4732206 no crossover" (the description of this edit)? The duplicate tag has to be on all images, or you won't know that it's a duplicate if you only see this one. Thank for your cooperation. Please explain. --Ysangkok 16:22, 23 April 2007 (UTC)

On the Page of Image:Nuvola apps display.png has been displayed, that it is a duplicate of Image:Nuvola apps krdc.png and on the Page of Image:Nuvola apps krdc.png has been displayed, that it is a duplicate of Image:Nuvola apps display.png (exact opposit relation, therefore "crossover" ). But there shoudt only be one image declared as duplicate, because it is nonsens to say "Delete Image A because it already exists an Image B" and to say "Delete Image B because it already exists an Image A". One file shoudt be kept. Augiasstallputzer 20:17, 23 April 2007 (UTC)

Image:Caspar David FRIEDRICH - Two Men Contemplating the Moon (First Version).JPGEdit

Duplicate|Image:Caspar David Friedrich 045.jpg}}

This File is a much to dark photography. No well use possible. The other one is better. all links fixed. Augiasstallputzer 22:05, 31 May 2007 (UTC)

Es gibt ein Problem mit dem anderen, das Farbgleichgewicht ist falsch. Sieh die Google-Suche. Der Hintergrund ist in der ursprünglichen Malerei schwarz. Das kann nicht modifiziert werden. Michelet-密是力 06:37, 3 June 2007 (UTC)
Deutsch: Wenn man das Bild aufhellt, dann sieht man oben und an den Seiten viele farbige Details. (Image:Caspar David Friedrich 045 light.png). Das zeigt, dass das Original nicht so viel Schwarz enthält, denn aus Schwarz entstehen beim Aufhellen keine Farben. Das viele Schwarz ist also ein Fehler. Vorsicht: Es gibt auch noch ein anderes, ähnliches Bild von Caspar David Friedrich, siehe Image:Caspar David Friedrich 028.jpg (blauer Hintergrund, Mann und Frau) Du kannst das Bild also ruhig löschen. Es sind noch zwei Versionen übrig.
Such dir eine der Sprachen für die Antwort aus.
English: If you brighten the image, you can see many details in the top part and sides. (Image:Caspar David Friedrich 045 light.png). This shows, that there is not so much black on the original painting, because you can not create coloured details from black by brightening. Therefore, black is surely an error. Attention: There exists also another image from Caspar David Friedrich, which looks very similar. See Image:Caspar David Friedrich 028.jpg (blue background, man and woman). I think you can delete the image. There are two versions left.
Select one of the languages for answer.

Augiasstallputzer 12:21, 3 June 2007 (UTC)

OK. By the way, the two men seems to be contemplating a moon eclipse, see the lighted border. Michelet-密是力 13:08, 4 June 2007 (UTC)

Danke. Augiasstallputzer 13:02, 6 June 2007 (UTC)

Re:Category:Other speedy deletionsEdit

I've just checked the reason and is ok. It's a problem with an user categorizing too specifically. Cheers. Anna 19:20, 6 July 2007 (UTC)

Ok, but why didn't you delete them, when speedy deletion is Ok ? Augiasstallputzer 21:01, 6 July 2007 (UTC)

Hi! These speedy deletion requests involve reverting an admin's actions. I read the discussion on his talk page and asked it if he opposes the speedy deletions. I'll work on it as soon as I get an negative answer. Jastrow (Λέγετε) 09:59, 7 July 2007 (UTC)

Ok. I think, even an admin has to accept, when he has made an error. Augiasstallputzer 10:05, 7 July 2007 (UTC)

Of course. If Quadell opposes the speedy deletions, I will convert them into a standard deletion process. Either way, thoses requests will stop cluttering Category:Other speedy deletions. I must ask you just a little patience. Jastrow (Λέγετε) 10:19, 7 July 2007 (UTC)

JugoslavijaEdit

Hallo! Ich möchte dir, dass du eine jugoslawische flagge mach, wie dieses Bild: Image:Animated-Flag-Austria.gif. Die jugoslawische flagge bitte keiner roter Stern. Danke. Szajci 13:15, 30 August 2007 (UTC)


Image:Hazard_X.pngEdit

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

If you created this image, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with it, such as a copyright issue. 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 | العربية | বাংলা | Беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ | Català | Čeština | Dansk | Deutsch | Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ | Zazaki | Ελληνικά | English | Esperanto | Español | Eesti | فارسی | Suomi | Français | Galego | עברית | Magyar | Bahasa Indonesia | Íslenska | Italiano | 日本語 | 한국어 | Македонски | മലയാളം | Plattdüütsch | Nederlands | Norsk nynorsk | Norsk bokmål | Occitan | Polski | Português | Português do Brasil | Română | Русский | Slovenčina | Slovenščina | Српски / srpski | Svenska | Türkçe | українська | Tiếng Việt | 中文 | 中文(简体)‎ | 中文(繁體)‎ | +/−

Karelj 15:06, 18 November 2007 (UTC)

Old version. Can be deleted.. Augiasstallputzer 17:50, 18 November 2007 (UTC)

Flagge von VietnamEdit

Bot Ihres Kindes haben eine Menge Animation auf der nationalen Zeit der Welt hochgeladen, aber nicht unter der Flagge von Vietnam, Sie sind nicht bitte hochladen? Vielen Dank Trần Nguyễn Minh Huy (talk) 14:02, 27 September 2009 (UTC)

Globe licenceEdit

Hello I would like to re-use your globe for a free software project. Unfortunately, the current licence is not applicable in my case : Public Domain is applicable only in very specific cases in my country. Would you agree to re-distribute it in another open content licence, such as CC BY, CC BY-SA, Art libre or other GNU licence ? I don't need a non-copyleft licence, my own version will also be redistributed in the corresponding page.

The related file http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Globe.svg

File:Uraniumhexafluoride.pngEdit

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

If you created this file, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with it, such as a copyright issue.
Please 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 | العربية | বাংলা | Беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ | Català | Čeština | Dansk | Deutsch | Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ | Zazaki | Ελληνικά | English | Esperanto | Español | Eesti | فارسی | Suomi | Français | Galego | עברית | Magyar | Bahasa Indonesia | Íslenska | Italiano | 日本語 | 한국어 | Македонски | മലയാളം | Plattdüütsch | Nederlands | Norsk nynorsk | Norsk bokmål | Occitan | Polski | Português | Português do Brasil | Română | Русский | Slovenčina | Slovenščina | Српски / srpski | Svenska | Türkçe | українська | Tiếng Việt | 中文 | 中文(简体)‎ | 中文(繁體)‎ | +/−

Yikrazuul (talk) 16:44, 3 September 2011 (UTC)

NotificationEdit

Hello, there is a de-flag proposal at Commons:Bots/Requests/de-flag which affects your bot. Regards --Steinsplitter (talk) 22:17, 29 July 2013 (UTC)

Bot de-flagging notificationEdit

Hi Augiasstallputzer, I'm writing to you because your bot PortalBot (talk · contributions · Number of edits · recent activity · block log · User rights log · uploads · Global account information) is about to be de-flagged as a result of inactivity. If you'd like to keep that account flagged as a bot, please speak up at Commons:Bots/Requests/de-flag#Discussion; otherwise, I'll remove the bot flag from that account in a week from now (). Thanks for your understanding, odder (talk) 22:42, 13 February 2014 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!Edit

Original Barnstar Hires.png The Original Barnstar
lmgj520@qq.com Lmgj520 (talk) 06:58, 3 June 2014 (UTC)

File:Uraniumperoxide.svgEdit

Commons-emblem-issue.svg File:Uraniumperoxide.svg 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 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 | العربية | বাংলা | Беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ | Català | Čeština | Dansk | Deutsch | Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ | Zazaki | Ελληνικά | English | Esperanto | Español | Eesti | فارسی | Suomi | Français | Galego | עברית | Magyar | Bahasa Indonesia | Íslenska | Italiano | 日本語 | 한국어 | Македонски | മലയാളം | Plattdüütsch | Nederlands | Norsk nynorsk | Norsk bokmål | Occitan | Polski | Português | Português do Brasil | Română | Русский | Slovenčina | Slovenščina | Српски / srpski | Svenska | Türkçe | українська | Tiếng Việt | 中文 | 中文(简体)‎ | 中文(繁體)‎ | +/−

JuTa 17:46, 9 August 2014 (UTC)