Wikimedia Commons

User talk:JoJan/Archive 4

< User talk:JoJan
Latest comment: 14 years ago by Cretanforever in topic Category:Agora of Izmir

Please link images edit

Latest comment: 14 years ago6 comments3 people in discussion
Done. JoJan (talk) 17:59, 7 September 2009 (UTC)Reply
 
File:Oostende.King_Baudouin_(01).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 ∙ bosanski ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ dansk ∙ Deutsch ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ ∙ eesti ∙ English ∙ español ∙ Esperanto ∙ français ∙ galego ∙ hrvatski ∙ íslenska ∙ italiano ∙ magyar ∙ Nederlands ∙ norsk bokmål ∙ norsk nynorsk ∙ occitan ∙ Plattdüütsch ∙ polski ∙ português ∙ português do Brasil ∙ română ∙ shqip ∙ sicilianu ∙ slovenčina ∙ slovenščina ∙ suomi ∙ svenska ∙ Tiếng Việt ∙ Türkçe ∙ Zazaki ∙ Ελληνικά ∙ беларуская ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ ∙ български ∙ македонски ∙ русский ∙ српски / srpski ∙ українська ∙ հայերեն ∙ বাংলা ∙ മലയാളം ∙ ပအိုဝ်ႏဘာႏသာႏ ∙ မြန်မာဘာသာ ∙ ไทย ∙ 조선말 ∙ 한국어 ∙ 日本語 ∙ 简体中文‎ ∙ 繁體中文‎ ∙ עברית ∙ العربية ∙ پښتو ∙ فارسی ∙ ދިވެހިބަސް ∙ +/−

Brbbl (talk) 09:41, 12 January 2009 (UTC)Reply


 
File:Oostende.King_Baudouin_(02).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 ∙ bosanski ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ dansk ∙ Deutsch ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ ∙ eesti ∙ English ∙ español ∙ Esperanto ∙ français ∙ galego ∙ hrvatski ∙ íslenska ∙ italiano ∙ magyar ∙ Nederlands ∙ norsk bokmål ∙ norsk nynorsk ∙ occitan ∙ Plattdüütsch ∙ polski ∙ português ∙ português do Brasil ∙ română ∙ shqip ∙ sicilianu ∙ slovenčina ∙ slovenščina ∙ suomi ∙ svenska ∙ Tiếng Việt ∙ Türkçe ∙ Zazaki ∙ Ελληνικά ∙ беларуская ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ ∙ български ∙ македонски ∙ русский ∙ српски / srpski ∙ українська ∙ հայերեն ∙ বাংলা ∙ മലയാളം ∙ ပအိုဝ်ႏဘာႏသာႏ ∙ မြန်မာဘာသာ ∙ ไทย ∙ 조선말 ∙ 한국어 ∙ 日本語 ∙ 简体中文‎ ∙ 繁體中文‎ ∙ עברית ∙ العربية ∙ پښتو ∙ فارسی ∙ ދިވެހިބަސް ∙ +/−

Brbbl (talk) 09:46, 12 January 2009 (UTC)Reply


 
File:Oostende.King_Baudouin_(03).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 ∙ bosanski ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ dansk ∙ Deutsch ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ ∙ eesti ∙ English ∙ español ∙ Esperanto ∙ français ∙ galego ∙ hrvatski ∙ íslenska ∙ italiano ∙ magyar ∙ Nederlands ∙ norsk bokmål ∙ norsk nynorsk ∙ occitan ∙ Plattdüütsch ∙ polski ∙ português ∙ português do Brasil ∙ română ∙ shqip ∙ sicilianu ∙ slovenčina ∙ slovenščina ∙ suomi ∙ svenska ∙ Tiếng Việt ∙ Türkçe ∙ Zazaki ∙ Ελληνικά ∙ беларуская ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ ∙ български ∙ македонски ∙ русский ∙ српски / srpski ∙ українська ∙ հայերեն ∙ বাংলা ∙ മലയാളം ∙ ပအိုဝ်ႏဘာႏသာႏ ∙ မြန်မာဘာသာ ∙ ไทย ∙ 조선말 ∙ 한국어 ∙ 日本語 ∙ 简体中文‎ ∙ 繁體中文‎ ∙ עברית ∙ العربية ∙ پښتو ∙ فارسی ∙ ދިވެހިބަސް ∙ +/−

Brbbl (talk) 09:48, 12 January 2009 (UTC)Reply

Category:Agora of Izmir edit

Latest comment: 14 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Hello JoJan! I saw that you created the above category. I suggest gathering the related images under Category:Agora of Smyrna, which seems more fitting and will offer the advantage of being directly incorporated into Category:Smyrna. I also do think it's worth preserving a distinct category for the agora under the category for the ancient city though. Regards. Cretanforever (talk) 25 January 2009

Hello JoJan! Since I haven't heard from you, I will go on with the name change to put the images in question under Category:Agora of Smyrna. Regards. Cretanforever (talk) 05:52, 29 March 2010 (UTC)Reply

Hi. Please contact me. I would like to use three of your photos in a book about european art-museums. kristina.arvidson@gmail.com

Battle of Nieuwpoort edit

Latest comment: 15 years ago3 comments2 people in discussion

Are you planning to add images to this gallery? If it remains empty it will most likely be deleted. Regards, Finn Rindahl (talk) 21:03, 25 February 2009 (UTC)Reply

Please delete the empty gallery. JoJan (talk) 19:12, 26 February 2009 (UTC)Reply
  Done Regards, Finn Rindahl (talk) 19:15, 26 February 2009 (UTC)Reply


File:Duinenkerkje09.jpg edit

Latest comment: 15 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
 
File:Duinenkerkje09.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 ∙ bosanski ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ dansk ∙ Deutsch ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ ∙ eesti ∙ English ∙ español ∙ Esperanto ∙ français ∙ galego ∙ hrvatski ∙ íslenska ∙ italiano ∙ magyar ∙ Nederlands ∙ norsk bokmål ∙ norsk nynorsk ∙ occitan ∙ Plattdüütsch ∙ polski ∙ português ∙ português do Brasil ∙ română ∙ shqip ∙ sicilianu ∙ slovenčina ∙ slovenščina ∙ suomi ∙ svenska ∙ Tiếng Việt ∙ Türkçe ∙ Zazaki ∙ Ελληνικά ∙ беларуская ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ ∙ български ∙ македонски ∙ русский ∙ српски / srpski ∙ українська ∙ հայերեն ∙ বাংলা ∙ മലയാളം ∙ ပအိုဝ်ႏဘာႏသာႏ ∙ မြန်မာဘာသာ ∙ ไทย ∙ 조선말 ∙ 한국어 ∙ 日本語 ∙ 简体中文‎ ∙ 繁體中文‎ ∙ עברית ∙ العربية ∙ پښتو ∙ فارسی ∙ ދިވެހިބަސް ∙ +/−

--Simonxag (talk) 19:44, 16 April 2009 (UTC)Reply

File:Duinenkerkje08.jpg edit

Latest comment: 15 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
 
File:Duinenkerkje08.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 ∙ bosanski ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ dansk ∙ Deutsch ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ ∙ eesti ∙ English ∙ español ∙ Esperanto ∙ français ∙ galego ∙ hrvatski ∙ íslenska ∙ italiano ∙ magyar ∙ Nederlands ∙ norsk bokmål ∙ norsk nynorsk ∙ occitan ∙ Plattdüütsch ∙ polski ∙ português ∙ português do Brasil ∙ română ∙ shqip ∙ sicilianu ∙ slovenčina ∙ slovenščina ∙ suomi ∙ svenska ∙ Tiếng Việt ∙ Türkçe ∙ Zazaki ∙ Ελληνικά ∙ беларуская ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ ∙ български ∙ македонски ∙ русский ∙ српски / srpski ∙ українська ∙ հայերեն ∙ বাংলা ∙ മലയാളം ∙ ပအိုဝ်ႏဘာႏသာႏ ∙ မြန်မာဘာသာ ∙ ไทย ∙ 조선말 ∙ 한국어 ∙ 日本語 ∙ 简体中文‎ ∙ 繁體中文‎ ∙ עברית ∙ العربية ∙ پښتو ∙ فارسی ∙ ދިވެހިބަސް ∙ +/−

--Simonxag (talk) 19:49, 16 April 2009 (UTC)Reply

request edit

Latest comment: 14 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

JoJan,

I would like to get your permission for using the picture of Galileo Galilei in my book. Please respond to marekj.

Reagrds Marek

If you mean this photo File:Galileo Galilei01.jpg, there is no problem, but attribution is required. JoJan (talk) 17:12, 31 July 2009 (UTC)Reply

Not Clare of Assisi but Rita of Cascia edit

1 Scueseme I'm not a good English speaker.

2 Your image http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Temple.of.Minerva03.jpg is not Clare of Assisi but Rita of Cascia.


File source is not properly indicated: File:Latimeria_chalumnae01.jpg edit

Latest comment: 14 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion
العربية ∙ asturianu ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ ∙ বাংলা ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ dansk ∙ Deutsch ∙ Ελληνικά ∙ English ∙ español ∙ euskara ∙ فارسی ∙ suomi ∙ français ∙ galego ∙ עברית ∙ hrvatski ∙ magyar ∙ italiano ∙ 日本語 ∙ 한국어 ∙ македонски ∙ മലയാളം ∙ norsk bokmål ∙ Plattdüütsch ∙ Nederlands ∙ norsk nynorsk ∙ norsk ∙ polski ∙ português ∙ português do Brasil ∙ русский ∙ sicilianu ∙ slovenčina ∙ slovenščina ∙ svenska ∙ ไทย ∙ Türkçe ∙ українська ∙ Tiếng Việt ∙ 简体中文‎ ∙ 繁體中文‎ ∙ +/−
 
This media may be deleted.
A file that you have uploaded to Wikimedia Commons, File:Latimeria_chalumnae01.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!

FunkMonk (talk) 19:46, 30 August 2009 (UTC)Reply

The source has been added. JoJan (talk) 16:26, 2 September 2009 (UTC)Reply

Request for comment edit

Latest comment: 14 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Discussion regarding the Categories "Fossil xxx" is occurring on Wp:ToL (here). As a member of the project you input is requested in to gain a larger view of the communities opinion on how to handle the points raised. Thanks --Kevmin (talk) 18:22, 1 September 2009 (UTC)Reply

Dicentrarchus labrax vs Chelon labrosus edit

Latest comment: 14 years ago4 comments2 people in discussion

Hello JoJan, I've seen your picture "Chelon labrosus.jpg" and I think the "main" fish is an European seabass (Dicentrarchus labrax). Actually, you can also see half Thicklip grey mullet but a Wrasse and an European spider crab (Maja squinado) too. So, I think you should change the category (and perhaps the name) of this file, in order to avoid confusions. Best wishes, --DPC (talk) 17:24, 12 September 2009 (UTC)Reply

Move the mouse over the picture "Chelon labrosus.jpg" to see some notes. I'd like you to answer me, thanks.--DPC (talk) 08:26, 2 November 2009 (UTC)Reply
Sorry for the belated answer. You're right, the fish in the center is Dicentrarchus labrax. My mistake arose because I relied on the name at the aquarium. I have re-uploaded the image at File:Dicentrarchus labrax001.jpg, while at the same time photoshopping the image for better contrast and color balance. I've also asked for the deletion of File:Chelon labrosus.jpg.
  •  
    renamed and improved image
  •  
    original image

Cheers. JoJan (talk) 16:42, 2 November 2009 (UTC)Reply

Great!--DPC (talk) 18:40, 2 November 2009 (UTC)Reply

Jetairfly and Freedom of Panorama edit

Latest comment: 14 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion

It turns out that Belgium does not have the Freedom of Panorama, as seen here: Commons:Freedom of Panorama

Therefore the Jetairfly image may have to be moved to the English Wikipedia. See: Commons:Deletion requests/File:HPIM1924.JPG - I did this after consulting the village pump here: Commons:Village_pump#Belgium_and_Freedom_of_panorama - If it is removed from the Commons, it will be put on the English Wikipedia instead.

Thank you for taking the photo - It will still be here, even if it is on EN instead of the Commons. WhisperToMe (talk) 20:18, 26 October 2009 (UTC)Reply

OK JoJan (talk) 10:27, 27 October 2009 (UTC)Reply

Dear JoJan,

I would like to use your photograph of the stained glass window of St. Bernard in the Pisa baptistery in an article to be published in the scholarly journal (non-profit) Journal of Glass Studies. I see that you have given the rights to publish on the Wikipedia site, but could you also give me a written permission to publish your image? I am new to all of this! I am wondering how to give you proper credit for the image?

Thanks

Image of St. Bernard edit

Dear JoJan,

I would like to use your photograph of the stained glass window of St. Bernard in the Pisa baptistery in an article to be published in the scholarly journal (non-profit) Journal of Glass Studies. I see that you have given the rights to publish on the Wikipedia site, but could you also give me a written permission to publish your image? I am new to all of this! I am wondering how to give you proper credit for the image? Feel free to email me: thompsn@stolaf.edu

Thanks


File tagging File:Buteo_buteo(01).jpg edit

Latest comment: 14 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
العربية ∙ беларуская ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца) ∙ ပအိုဝ်ႏဘာႏသာႏ ∙ বাংলা ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ dansk ∙ Deutsch ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form) ∙ Ελληνικά ∙ English ∙ español ∙ euskara ∙ فارسی ∙ suomi ∙ français ∙ galego ∙ עברית ∙ hrvatski ∙ magyar ∙ հայերեն ∙ italiano ∙ 日本語 ∙ ಕನ್ನಡ ∙ 한국어 ∙ lietuvių ∙ latviešu ∙ македонски ∙ മലയാളം ∙ मराठी ∙ မြန်မာဘာသာ ∙ norsk bokmål ∙ Plattdüütsch ∙ Nederlands ∙ norsk ∙ polski ∙ português ∙ română ∙ русский ∙ sicilianu ∙ slovenčina ∙ slovenščina ∙ српски / srpski ∙ svenska ∙ ไทย ∙ Türkçe ∙ українська ∙ اردو ∙ Tiếng Việt ∙ 中文（简体） ∙ 中文（繁體） ∙ +/−
 
This media was probably deleted.
Thanks for uploading File:Buteo_buteo(01).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:Buteo_buteo(01).jpg]]) and the above demanded information in your request.

User:Zscout370 (Return fire) 19:24, 21 December 2009 (UTC)Reply

Add topic
Retrieved from "https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:JoJan/Archive_4&oldid=55449649"
Return to the user page of "JoJan/Archive 4".