User talk:Mstp77/Archive 1

This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

Tip: Categorizing images

Latest comment: 12 years ago3 comments1 person in discussion

Afrikaans ∙ العربية ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца) ∙ বাংলা ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ dansk ∙ Deutsch ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form) ∙ Ελληνικά ∙ English ∙ Esperanto ∙ español ∙ فارسی ∙ suomi ∙ français ∙ galego ∙ עברית ∙ magyar ∙ íslenska ∙ italiano ∙ 日本語 ∙ ქართული ∙ 한국어 ∙ македонски ∙ മലയാളം ∙ norsk bokmål ∙ Plattdüütsch ∙ Nederlands ∙ norsk ∙ polski ∙ português ∙ português do Brasil ∙ română ∙ русский ∙ sicilianu ∙ slovenčina ∙ slovenščina ∙ српски / srpski ∙ svenska ∙ Türkçe ∙ українська ∙ Tiếng Việt ∙ 中文（简体）‎ ∙ 中文（繁體）‎ ∙ +/−

Hello, Mstp77!

Tip: Add categories to your files

Thanks a lot for contributing to the Wikimedia Commons! Here's a tip to make your uploads more useful: Why not add some categories to describe them? This will help more people to find and use them.

Here's how:

1) If you're using the UploadWizard, you can add categories to each file when you describe it. Just click "more options" for the file and add the categories which make sense:

2) You can also pick the file from your list of uploads, edit the file description page, and manually add the category code at the end of the page.

[[Category:Category name]]

For example, if you are uploading a diagram showing the orbits of comets, you add the following code:

[[Category:Astronomical diagrams]]

[[Category:Comets]]

This will make the diagram show up in the categories "Astronomical diagrams" and "Comets".

When picking categories, try to choose a specific category ("Astronomical diagrams") over a generic one ("Illustrations").

Thanks again for your uploads! More information about categorization can be found in Commons:Categories, and don't hesitate to leave a note on the help desk.

CategorizationBot (talk) 16:06, 23 October 2011 (UTC)

Image:Webenheim.JPG was uncategorized on 22 October 2011 CategorizationBot (talk) 16:06, 23 October 2011 (UTC)
Image:Webenheim - Bauernhaus.JPG was uncategorized on 22 October 2011 CategorizationBot (talk) 16:06, 23 October 2011 (UTC)

Category:Bahnhof Völklingen

Latest comment: 11 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Vielen Dank für die Erfüllung des Bilderwunschs, prima Fotos. Gruß -Richtest (talk) 19:25, 24 September 2012 (UTC)

File:Sotzweiler St. Mauritius Innen Seitenschiff 01.JPG

Latest comment: 10 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

File:Sotzweiler St. Mauritius Innen Seitenschiff 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 ∙ +/−

Heubergen (talk) 19:22, 6 June 2013 (UTC)

File:Sotzweiler St. Mauritius Innen Figur.JPG

Latest comment: 10 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

File:Sotzweiler St. Mauritius Innen Figur.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 ∙ +/−

Heubergen (talk) 19:22, 6 June 2013 (UTC)

File:Sotzweiler St. Mauritius Innen Kanzel.JPG

Latest comment: 10 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

File:Sotzweiler St. Mauritius Innen Kanzel.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 ∙ +/−

Heubergen (talk) 19:23, 6 June 2013 (UTC)

File:Sotzweiler St. Mauritius Innen Gnadenbild.JPG

Latest comment: 10 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

File:Sotzweiler St. Mauritius Innen Gnadenbild.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 ∙ +/−

Heubergen (talk) 19:23, 6 June 2013 (UTC)

File:Sotzweiler St. Mauritius Innen Seitenaltar Detail Marienfigur.JPG

Latest comment: 10 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

File:Sotzweiler St. Mauritius Innen Seitenaltar Detail Marienfigur.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 ∙ +/−

Heubergen (talk) 19:23, 6 June 2013 (UTC)

File:Sotzweiler St. Mauritius Innen Kriegsgedächtnisstätte.JPG

Latest comment: 10 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

File:Sotzweiler St. Mauritius Innen Kriegsgedächtnisstätte.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 ∙ +/−

Heubergen (talk) 19:23, 6 June 2013 (UTC)

File:Sotzweiler St. Mauritius Innen Seitenaltar 01.JPG

Latest comment: 10 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

File:Sotzweiler St. Mauritius Innen Seitenaltar 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 ∙ +/−

Heubergen (talk) 19:23, 6 June 2013 (UTC)

File:Sotzweiler St. Mauritius Innen Seitenaltar 02.JPG

Latest comment: 10 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

File:Sotzweiler St. Mauritius Innen Seitenaltar 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 ∙ +/−

Heubergen (talk) 19:24, 6 June 2013 (UTC)

File:Sotzweiler St. Mauritius Innen Seitenaltar Detail.JPG

Latest comment: 10 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

File:Sotzweiler St. Mauritius Innen Seitenaltar Detail.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 ∙ +/−

Heubergen (talk) 19:24, 6 June 2013 (UTC)

File:Sotzweiler St. Mauritius Innen Figur St. Barbara.JPG

Latest comment: 10 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

File:Sotzweiler St. Mauritius Innen Figur St. Barbara.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 ∙ +/−

Heubergen (talk) 19:24, 6 June 2013 (UTC)

FYI

Latest comment: 10 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion

Vielleicht interessiert dich diese Diskussion. --Martina talk 19:02, 7 June 2013 (UTC)

Danke für den Hinweis. --Mstp77 (talk) 07:20, 8 June 2013 (UTC)

File:Hauenstein Katholische Pfarrkirche Christkönig Innen Altarraum Hochaltar Altarbild.JPG

Latest comment: 10 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

File:Hauenstein Katholische Pfarrkirche Christkönig Innen Altarraum Hochaltar Altarbild.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 ∙ +/−

Bgfx (talk) 10:28, 27 July 2013 (UTC)

File:Hauenstein Katholische Pfarrkirche Christkönig Innen 01.JPG

Latest comment: 10 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

File:Hauenstein Katholische Pfarrkirche Christkönig Innen 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 ∙ +/−

Bgfx (talk) 10:29, 27 July 2013 (UTC)

File:Heiligenwald Grube Itzenplitz 06 & 08 2013-05-02.jpg

Latest comment: 10 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion

Guten Tag ich schauen die letzten online gestellten Fotografien an, und sah zwei von Ihr, die zusammengesetzt werden konnten. Hier das Ergebnis, indem man hofft, dass er sich Ihnen eignet. Herzlich. François de Dijon (talk) 13:56, 10 August 2013 (UTC) (übersetzung durch Rechner)

Bonjour, en regardant les dernières photographies mises en ligne, j’ai vu deux des vôtres qui pouvaient être assemblées. Voici le résultat, en espérant qu’il vous convienne. Cordialement.

File:Heiligenwald Grube Itzenplitz 06 & 08 2013-05-02.jpg

Bonsoir. Très joli. Cordialement. --Mstp77 (talk) 18:05, 10 August 2013 (UTC)

Heilige Familie Winterbach

Latest comment: 10 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion

Hallo Mstp77!
Wir wollten uns nur bedanken für die schönen Bilder unserer Pfarrkirche Heilige Familie Winterbach. Sie sind wirklich sehr gut gelungen und nehmen uns ein gutes Stück zukünftiger Arbeit ab ;-)
Viele Grüße aus Winterbach!
wvl-live im Namen der Messdiener Winterbach (talk) 13:48, 31 August 2013 (UTC)

Hallo wvl-live,

gern geschehen. :-) Es freut mich sehr, dass die Bilder so gut angekommen sind.

Viele Grüße!

--Mstp77 (talk) 16:20, 9 September 2013 (UTC)

Orgel im Kloster Püttlingen

Latest comment: 10 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion

Hallo, ich habe gesehen, dass Sie die Orgel im Heilig-Kreuz-Kloster Püttlingen fotografiert haben. Haben Sie bei dieser Gelegenheit auch die Disposition der Orgel aufgenommen? Viele Grüße, Christopher Marx --Cmcmcm1 (talk) 15:57, 22 December 2013 (UTC)

Hallo Cmcmcm1. Die Disposition dieser Orgel liegt mir leider nicht vor. --Mstp77 (talk) 11:23, 5 January 2014 (UTC)

Danke

Latest comment: 10 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion

Einfach mal Danke für die Kategorisierung der ganzen Luftbilder die ich mal hochgeladen hatte Mstp77. Wenn Interesse an so einem Bild besteht, kann ich es gerne in höherer Auflösung hochladen, ist so nur erstmal zur Übersicht gedacht. Qualität ist leider nicht besonders, da es an dem Tag sehr trüb war. Grüße und eine schöne Woche --Unimog404 (talk) 08:21, 31 March 2014 (UTC)

Gern geschehen. Gruß zurück und ebenfalls eine schöne Woche. --Mstp77 (talk) 15:08, 31 March 2014 (UTC)

Kirchenfotos Landkreis St. Wendel

Latest comment: 10 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Hallo atreyu,

ich bin bereits dabei die Fotos einiger Kirchen im Landkreis St. Wendel hochzuladen. Ich habe noch einige weitere Kirchen, die ich jetzt noch nicht angefügt habe. Kann ich bei Gelegenheit auch noch hochladen. Im Landkreis Merzig-Wadern kann ich (vor allem im Raum Wadern-Weiskirchen) beieinigen Kirchen Fotos beitragen.

Mfg

Cmcmcm1

Hallo Cmcmcm1, vielen vielen Dank. Das ist großartig! Ich freue mich schon auf weitere Bilder. MfG atreyu / Mstp77 (talk) 05:36, 8 April 2014 (UTC)

ArchiveBot

Latest comment: 10 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Hi, I noticed you have set up User:MiszaBot to archive your talk page. Unfortunately, the bot has stopped working, and given how its operator is inactive, it is unclear when/if this will fixed. For the time being, I have volunteered to operate a MiszaBot clone (running the exact same code). With that said, your input would be appreciated at Commons:Bots/Requests/ArchiveBot 1. Regards, FASTILY 07:45, 20 April 2014 (UTC)

Kirchen/Orgeln im Raum Merzig-Wadern

Latest comment: 9 years ago8 comments2 people in discussion

Hallo atreyu,

ich wollte mich gerne für die tollen Orgelfotos aus Saarhölzbach bedanken. Ein Bild hat auf Organindex schon Verwendung gefunden. Ich habe ebenfalls gesehen, dass du in Schwemlingen und Hilbringen warst. Diese Orgeln fehlen mir natürlich auch noch und da kommen deine Fotos schon sehr gelegen! Leider habe ich zu den beiden Instrumenten recht wenig Infos (Schwemlingen wurde 1993 von der Firma Walcker/Kleinblittersdorf erbaut). Waren die Kirchen einfach geöffnet oder hattest du einen Termin ausgemacht? Vielleicht könntest du mich ja irgendwie an die Pfarrgemeinde weiterleiten. Auf meine Mailanfrage an die auf der Webseite der Pfarreiengemeinschaft angegebenen Adresse an das Pfarrbüro hat man nicht reagiert...

Viele Grüße --Cmcmcm1 (talk) 22:44, 2 May 2014 (UTC)

Hallo Cmcmcm1,

gern geschehen. Freut mich, dass du etwas mit den Bildern auf Organindex anfangen kannst. Die Kirchen in Schwemlingen und Saarhölzbach waren geöffnet, da kann man tagsüber auch außerhalb der Gottesdienstzeiten hineingehen. Bei der Kirche in Hilbringen kann ich es nicht sagen. Als ich dort ankam war offen, aber es war auch eine halbe Stunde vor einem Gottesdienst. Termine habe ich nicht ausgemacht, sondern es einfach auf gut Glück versucht. Ich war an dem Tag auch an der Kirche St. Gangolf zwischen Besseringen und Mettlach. Die war verschlossen und ist wohl nur sonntags geöffnet, wenn Gottesdienst ist. Auf Mailanfragen bekomme ich übrigens meistens auch keine Reaktion. Darum versuche ich es ab und zu auch mal per Telefon, wie z.B. in Nunkirchen.

Viele Grüße --atreyu/Mstp77 (talk) 07:10, 3 May 2014 (UTC)

Hallo atreyu,

Danke für die Antwort! Ich hatte sie schon gesehen, jedoch noch vergessen zurückzuschreiben. Das Schild in Beckingen hat mich schon ziemlich überrascht. Da sieht man schon deutlich die Einstellung der Kirche früher (oder noch heute?!) bezüglich Frauen. Jedenfalls hat das Schild selbstverständlich keine Bedeutung mehr für die heutigen "Besteiger" der Empore.

Zu den Orgeln: Die Orgel in Schwemlingen wurde 1993 von der Firma Walcker erbaut. Ich habe eben an die Firma eben eine Mail hingeschickt und nachgefragt und sofort eine Antwort mit den nötigen Infos erhalten. Die Orgel ist auf Organindex eingetragen und dein Foto hat gleich Verwendung finden können. Über die Orgel in Hilbringen ist mir leider nichts bekannt. Eine Quelle nennt den Namen Breidenfeld im Zusammenhang mit Hilbringen, aber es ist unklar ob damit auch noch die bestehende Orgel gemeint ist. Das Gehäuse könnte durchaus von Breidenfeld sein, aber ob dort immer noch das ursprüngliche Instrument drin steht.?! Ich werde weiter recherchieren.

Viele Grüße --Cmcmcm1 (talk) 17:52, 4 May 2014 (UTC)

Hallo,

Danke für die Orgelfotos aus Brotdorf! Ursprünglich hatte ich vor dort am Samstagabend vorbeizufahren, habe mich jedoch kurzfristig umentschieden, weil ich die Chance hatte auf der Klais-Orgel in Beckingen zu spielen, was ich mir natürlich nicht entgehen gelassen habe. So habe ich jetzt ja unerwartet trotzdem Orgelbilder von Brotdorf bekommen. Falls du irgendwann nochmal in der Region dort oben bist: Von den Kirchen in Merzig (St. Joseph und vor allem St. Peter) fehlen leider auch noch Orgelfotos und ich weiß nicht, wann ich dort mal hinkäme, weil ich ja wie gesagt immer auf jemanden angewiesen bin, der mich fährt.

Viele Grüße --Cmcmcm1 (talk) 14:17, 7 May 2014 (UTC)

Hallo,

gern geschehen. Brotdorf stand schon länger auf meiner Liste. Am kommenden Sonntag bin ich wahrscheinlich wieder im Raum Merzig unterwegs. Falls die Kirchen offen sind, werde ich versuchen Bilder in St. Peter und St. Joseph zu machen.

Viele Grüße, atreyu/Mstp77 (talk) 15:22, 7 May 2014 (UTC)

Hallo,

eine kleine Anmerkung am Rande: Die Kirche St. Gangolf zwischen Mettlach und Besseringen gehört offiziell noch zu Besseringen, also zur Stadt Merzig.

Außerdem: Ich war eben in der Wendalinusbasilika an der Orgel üben, weil ich morgen dort um 19:30 Uhr im Rahmen eines Schülerkonzertes spielen werde. Bei der Gelegenheit habe ich auch im nicht weit entfernen Hoof in der katholischen Kirche einige Fotos gemacht, die später noch hochgeladen werden sollen. Die Orgel ist selbstverständlich auch schon auf Organindex.

Viele Grüße --Cmcmcm1 (talk) 16:35, 10 May 2014 (UTC)

Hallo,

vielen Dank für die Bilder aus Hoof, St. Barbara und Lebach. Die Kirche St. Michael in Lebach war mir gar nicht bekannt.

Orgel spielen stelle ich mir unheimlich schwer vor. Respekt! Ich habe vor vielen Jahren mal angefangen Keyboard zu lernen, es aber wieder aufgegeben und bin zum Schlagzeug gewechselt.

Gestern war ich im Raum Dillingen und Merzig unterwegs und konnte Aufnahmen der Orgel von St. Peter (Merzig) machen. Bei St. Joseph ist mir das nicht gelungen. Die Kirche war verschlossen. Man konnte zwar von außen hineinsehen, aber die Reflexionen der Glasscheiben haben ordentliche Aufnahmen leider verhindert. Außerdem habe ich noch Orgelbilder von St. Johann (Dillingen) und St. Martin (Siersburg). Wird alles heute im Laufe des Tages hochgeladen.

Was St. Gangolf betrifft, so habe ich die Kirche in die Gemeinde Mettlach verfrachtet, weil sie in der Denkmalliste des Saarlandes bei den Baudenkmälern der Gemeinde Mettlach aufgelistet ist. Ein Blick in einen alten Saarland-Atlas zeigt mir, dass St. Gangolf auf dem Gebiet der Gemeinde Mettlach liegt. Also rein geographisch müsste die Zuordnung zu Mettlach eigentlich stimmen. Die Pfarrkirche selbst gehört allerdings tatsächlich zur Pfarrei Merzig-Besseringen. Trotzdem danke für deinen Hinweis. So richtig sicher war ich mir bei der Zuordnung nicht und bin es eigentlich immer noch nicht so wirklich. Notfalls lässt sich ja alles andern.

Viele Grüße, atreyu/Mstp77 (talk) 06:09, 12 May 2014 (UTC)

Hallo,

Danke für die Fotos aus Merzig, Dillingen und Siersburg!!! Die Kirche St. Michael in Lebach ist vielen unbekannt, da sie etwas abseits auf dem Seminargelände (heute unser Schulgelände) steht. Aufgrund von Besucherrückgängen wurden die Gottesdienste immer weiter zurückgeschraubt bis heute gar keine regulären Messen bis auf gelegentlich kleinere Schulgottesdienste abgehalten werden. Die Orgel ist schon seit ein paar Jahren vom Netz genommen. Es ist schon lange im Gespräch, dass das Gebäude die Schulen übergehen soll, die es dann wahrscheinlich weiter als Kapelle oder "Besinnugsraum" oder... etc. nutzen werden.

Orgelspielen fällt mir eigentlich gar nicht mal soo schwer. Klar war einiges an Übung dabei und ich übe immer noch viel, aber generell ist es für mich ein Instrument wie jedes andere auch, nur eben ein besonderes ;)

Viele Grüße --Cmcmcm1 (talk) 20:37, 12 May 2014 (UTC)

Kirchenfotos Kutzhof/Wahlschied, etc.

Latest comment: 9 years ago4 comments2 people in discussion

Hallo atreyu,

ich war heute im Raum Heusweiler unterwegs und habe Innenaufnahmen der Kirchen St. Jakobus Kutzhof, Evangelische Kirche Wahlschied, Selbstständig Evangelisch-Lutherische Kirche Walpershofen sowie St. Johannes Steinrausch machen können. Die Fotos werden noch nachbearbeitet, dann lade ich sie hier hoch. Außerdem war ich an den Evangelischen Kirchen in Holz und Heusweiler -jedoch beide verschlossen. In der Evangelischen Kirche Heusweiler hätte laut SZ Gottesdienst sein müssen, jedoch stand ich vor verschlossenen Türen, ebenso wie letzte Woche schon an der Evangelischen Kirche Türkismühle. Sowas ist dann ein wenig ärgerlich.

Bist du auch wieder unterwegs dieses Wochenende?

Viele Grüße --Cmcmcm1 (talk) 13:42, 1 June 2014 (UTC)

Hallo,

super, dass du wieder die Möglichkeit hattest Bilder zu machen. Freue mich schon sie zu sehen. Die Disposition der Orgel der Ev. Kirche Wahlschied habe ich soeben in den Wikipedia-Artikel aufgenommen.

Du glaubst gar nicht wie oft ich schon vor verschlossenen Kirchentüren gestanden habe. Das muss man dann einfach hinnehmen, aber wenn trotz Gottesdienstordnung kein GD stattfindet und man umsonst den Weg auf sich genommen hat (ist mir auch schon passiert, z.B. bei St. Stephan in Illingen), dann ist das in der Tat ein wenig ärgerlich.

Ich wollte heute eigentlich Innenaufnahmen von St. Bonifatius in Püttlingen-Ritterstrasse machen, aber leider ist mir etwas dazwischen gekommen. Aber spätestens am nächsten Sonntag werde ich das nachholen. Ansonsten habe ich vor demnächst noch ein paar Kirchen in der Gemeinde Grossrosseln einen Besuch abzustatten und auch Werbeln, Differten und Hostenbach stehen immer noch auf der "To-do-Liste". St. Wendalinus in Grossrosseln ist tagsüber verschlossen, das weiß ich aus einem Zeitungsartikel, da muss ich warten bis Gottesdienst ist. Am kommenden Donnerstagabend böte sich da eine Gelegenheit.

Viele Grüße, atreyu/Mstp77 (talk) 14:06, 1 June 2014 (UTC)

Hallo, Danke nochmals für die Bilder! Wenn du irgendwo -speziell wenn du im Warndt unterwegs bist- auch an die Spieltische kämst und wie in Mondorf auch die Disposition und das Erbauerschild (sowie eventuelle Beschriftungen an Knöpfen unterhalb der Klaviatur) abfotografieren könntest würde mir das einiges an Arbeit ersparen, da ich sonst oft selbst nochmal an die Orgel fahren müsste um die Infos aufzunehmen. Ich weiß, dass die Spieltische oder Emporen oftmals verschlossen sind, aber manchmal hat man ja Glück oder es ist offen, weil gerade Gottesdienst war. Danke schonmal im Voraus für die Mithilfe! Die Fotos finden gute Verwendung!

Viele Grüße, --Cmcmcm1 (talk) 19:48, 2 June 2014 (UTC)

Hallo, nichts zu danken. Gern geschehen. :) Wenn sich die Möglichkeit bietet werde ich auf jeden Fall auch von den Spieltischen, Dispositionen, Erbauerschilden, etc. Bilder machen. Viele Grüße, atreyu/Mstp77 (talk) 20:11, 2 June 2014 (UTC)

Kirchenfotos

Latest comment: 9 years ago19 comments2 people in discussion

Hallo,

ich habe gerade wieder eine (SEHR!) erfolgreiche Orgeltour hinter mir. Ich habe Innenaufnahmen von den Kirchen St. Matthias Riegelsberg, St. Martin Köllerbach (Riegelsberger Straße), Begegnungskirche Köllerbach, Mariä-Himmelfahrt Geislautern, St. Wendalinus Großrosseln sowie Herz Mariae Dorf im Warndt. Ebenso habe ich Außenaufnahmen von der evangelischen Kirche VK-Wehrden. Ich werde jetzt alle Fotos noch etwas nachbearbeiten und noch die Einträge in Organindex machen und dann lade ich die Bilder auch auf Commons hoch.

Viele Grüße --Cmcmcm1 (talk) 18:24, 14 June 2014 (UTC)

Hallo,

freut mich, dass du so erfolgreich warst. Gerade die Warndt-Region war bislang noch sehr unterrepräsentiert und für St. Wendalinus in Großrosseln habe ich einen Artikel in Vorbereitung. Da kommen deine Bilder natürlich wie gerufen. Ein ganz großes Dankeschön fürs hochladen. :-)

Viele Grüße, atreyu/Mstp77 (talk) 23:10, 14 June 2014 (UTC)

Hallo, die Fotos sind oben. Es müssten noch Kategorien angelegt und die Bilder einsortiert werden. hier, hier, hier und hier.

Viele Grüße --Cmcmcm1 (talk) 23:19, 14 June 2014 (UTC)

Hallo, ich habe gerade gesehen, dass du die Bilder bereits hochgeladen hast. Nochmals danke. :-) Ich werde dann mal die Kategorien anlegen und die Bilder einsortieren. Viele Grüße, atreyu/Mstp77 (talk) 23:28, 14 June 2014 (UTC)

Hallo, immer wieder gerne. Bin mal gespannt ob ich das nächste mal so spontan auch wieder solches Glück habe mit geöffneten Kirchen. Gleich drei Mal gestern war ich zur richtigen Zeit am richtigen Ort. Ursprünglich standen nu Köllerbach Begegnungskirche, Geislautern und Großrosseln auf dem Plan. Bei den drei anderen Kirchen waren keine Vorabendmessen, aber zufällig genau dann als ich da war jemand da, der mir aufgeschlossen hat.

Viele Grüße --Cmcmcm1 (talk) 09:03, 15 June 2014 (UTC)

Hallo, ja Glück gehört auch manchmal dazu. Von einigen Kirchen konnte ich auch nur Innenaufnahmen machen, weil gerade jemand da war (z.B. im Pfarrbüro), der mir aufgeschlossen hat.

Mal schauen, wo ich das nächste mal Bilder machen kann. Konkret ist noch nichts geplant. Aber die evangelischen Kirchen in Friedrichsthal und Rohrbach stehen derzeit ziemlich weit oben auf meiner Liste.

Viele Grüße, atreyu/Mstp77 (talk) 12:08, 15 June 2014 (UTC)

Hallo, von Friedrichsthal, Evangelischer Kirche fehlen auch noch jegliche Infos von der Orgel. Vielleicht kommst du ja auch an den Spieltisch wenn du mal dort vorbeifährst. Ich bin mal gespannt was ich in den nächsten Tagen noch so an Dispositionen zugeschickt bekomme. Demnach plane ich am Wochenende wieder eine Tour.

Viele Grüße --Cmcmcm1 (talk) 20:35, 17 June 2014 (UTC)

Hallo, ich werde mal versuchen an den Spieltisch ranzukommen, wenn ich in Friedrichsthal bin.

Ich bin schon sehr gespannt auf deine nächste Tour. Es ist immer wieder eine Freude deine Bilder zu sichten. :-)

Viele Grüße, atreyu/Mstp77 (talk) 05:19, 18 June 2014 (UTC)

Hallo, freue mich ebenso immer wieder auf deine Bilder!!! Mal sehen wohin meine nächste Tour hingeht. Von der Stadt Sulzbach fehlen noch einige Kirchen und Orgeln. So z.B. Altenwald Ev., Neuweiler St. Hildegard, Neuweiler Ev., Schnappach St. Barbara, Schnappach Ev., Hühnerfeld Ev., Brefeld, St. Pius. Jetzt ist es natürlich ziemlich doof, dass ich nicht weiß in welchen Kirchen dort elektronische Orgeln stehen. Nur von St. Hildegard Neuweiler weiß ich dank deiner Fotos, dass es eine echte ist und zwar eine Sebald von 1962. Wär ja auch ärgerlich wenn ich am Ende nur an elektronischen Orgeln vorbeikomme, wenn ich "auf gut Glück" extra von meinem Vater dorthin gefahren werde. Ich werd sehen müssen, wie ich das genau mache -die Pfarrämter dort antworten nicht auf meine Mailanfragen-. Jedenfalls habe ich diese Region auch noch im Blick.

Viele Grüße --Cmcmcm1 (talk) 17:06, 18 June 2014 (UTC)

Hallo, das Problem mit nicht antwortenden Pfarrämtern kenne ich auch. Auf Mailanfragen habe ich bislang nur ein einziges mal eine Antwort bekommen.

Ich habe gesehen, dass du auf organindex einige Orgeln aus den Gemeinden Wallerfangen/Rehlingen-Siersburg eingestellt hast. Von St. Remigius (Leidingen) und St. Margaretha (Bedersdorf) wollte ich letztes Jahr Innenaufnahmen machen, aber leider waren diese Kirchen verschlossen. Vielleicht hast du ja irgendwann einmal die Möglichkeit dort hinzugelangen.

Im Bereich St. Ingbert ist mir noch die Kirche Hl. Familie in Rentrisch in den Sinn gekommen. Dort müsste eine echte Orgel stehen. Ich habe im Internet eine Festschrift aus den 1980er Jahren gefunden, in der es heißt, dass die Orgel dort 1949 geweiht wurde und über 23 klingende Register verfügt. Es kann natürlich sein, dass die Orgel inzwischen umgebaut, neu gebaut, etc. wurde. Mal schauen, wenn ich dort mal vorbeikomme und es ist offen mache ich natürlich Bilder.

Viele Grüße, atreyu/Mstp77 (talk) 13:02, 19 June 2014 (UTC)

Hallo, in Rentrisch weiß ich gar nicht so genau was da steht. Man hat mir nur mal gesagt, dass der -mittlerweile schon lange verstorbene- ehemalige Organist die Trakturen einfach gekappt hätte, die Orgel somit unspielbar sei. So wie mir gesagt wurde hat dieser einfach mit einer Beißzange die Kabel durchtrennt. Wie man auf eine solche Idee kommt ist mir ein Rätsel. Vielleicht findest du ja trotzdem mal was raus und kannst Fotos machen.

Viele Grüße --Cmcmcm1 (talk) 20:04, 19 June 2014 (UTC)

Hallo,

kleiner Nachtrag: Meine Tour für am Sonntag steht in Grunzügen fest. Ich habe auch vor in Friedrichsthal vorbeizufahren.

Viele Grüße --Cmcmcm1 (talk) 18:36, 20 June 2014 (UTC)

Hallo, ich bin gespannt, wo du überall hinkommst und freue mich schon auf die Bilder. Für Friedrichsthal wären Bilder sehr willkommen. Ich wollte am Sonntag der Ev. Kirche in Rohrbach einen Besuch abstatten, habe aber gerade in der SZ gesehen, dass dort morgen kein Gottesdienst stattfindet. Mal schauen, was sich sonst noch so anbietet. Viele Grüße, atreyu/Mstp77 (talk) 07:23, 21 June 2014 (UTC)

Hallo, bin ebenfalls gespannt auf deine Bilder! Ich war in den Evangelischen Kirchen Hangard, Friedrichsthal und Fischbach sowie in St. Barbara Schnappach. Bis auf Friedrichsthal alles recht kleine Kirchen mit genauso kleinen Orgeln. Aber das kann man ja vorher nicht wissen. Hat sich jedenfalls trotzdem auf seine Art gelohnt! Die Bilder werden hochgeladen sobald sie bearbeitet sind! Viele Grüße --Cmcmcm1 (talk) 12:29, 22 June 2014 (UTC)

Hallo, na das hört sich doch sehr gut an. Vielen Dank schonmal fürs hochladen. :-)

Ich habe heute morgen mal die Landesgrenze überschritten und war im rheinland-pfälzischen Zweibrücken. Ich war dort in der ev. Alexanderskirche , der kath. Kirche St. Pirmin und der ev. Kirche in Zweibrücken-Wattweiler. Über die Orgeldispositionen der letzten beiden Kirchen konnte ich leider nichts in Erfahrung bringen. Für die Ott-Orgel in der Alexanderskirche liegt ja auf organindex die Disposition vor, nur ein Bild dazu fehlt bislang noch. Die Bilder sind hier zu sehen.

Viele Grüße, atreyu/Mstp77 (talk) 12:45, 22 June 2014 (UTC)

Hallo, danke für die tollen Bilder! Oh je, ich hab dagegen bei weitem nicht so schöne hinbekommen. Ich versuche alles mit der Kamera, doch irgendwie lässt sich die Qualität meiner Fotos kaum verbessern (Da macht die Nachbearbeitung oftmals noch viel aus!). Manchmal sind es auch ungünstige Lichtverhältnisse, wie z.B. in St. Marien Friedrichsthal, aber manchmal will mir einfach kein richtig gutes Foto gelingen.

Die Fotos werden gleich hochgeladen!

Viele Grüße --Cmcmcm1 (talk) 17:45, 22 June 2014 (UTC)

Hallo, gern geschehen.

Ich freue mich jedesmal sehr über deine Bilder. An dieser Stelle auch nochmals ein großes DANKESCHÖN fürs hochladen. :-)

Licht ist beim fotografieren mit das Wichtigste. Die Lichtverhältnisse in St. Marien Friedrichsthal haben mich fast in den Wahnsinn getrieben, genauso wie die in St. Laurentius Hirzweiler oder St. Bartholomäus Schwarzenholz. Auf den Bildern kommt das gar nicht so rüber, aber in den genannten Kirchen war es fast stockdunkel als ich drin war. Da ich leider über keinen guten Blitz verfüge, muss ich der Lichtausbeute meines Objektivs vertrauen, was aber nicht immer so richtig klappt. Seit Februar letzten Jahres fotografiere ich überwiegend mit einer digitalen Spiegelreflexkamera. Ab und zu kommt aber auch immer noch meine "alte" digitale Kompaktkamera zum Einsatz.

Viele Grüße, atreyu/Mstp77 (talk) 18:18, 22 June 2014 (UTC)

Hallo, ich war bei der Gelegenheit heute auch mal in St. Marien Friedrichsthal. Unmöglich brauchbare Fotos dort zu machen. Entweder ist es in den Kirchen zu dunkel, oder gerade dort wo die Orgel ist ist so ein helles Fenster, das alles wegblendet. In St. Matthias Riegelsberg ging es mir ähnlich. Da sind tatsächlich genau links und rechts der Orgel kleine Fensterstreifen, die gerade noch wegen der westlichen Lage am Abend so hell erleuchtet waren. Ich habe mittlerweile gemerkt, dass ich sonntagmorgens tendenziell besseres Licht habe als samstagabends, wobei das am Ende doch wieder von der Kirche abhängt.

Die Fotos zu den vier Kirchen sind übrigens oben.

Viele Grüße --Cmcmcm1 (talk) 18:40, 22 June 2014 (UTC)

Super, danke. :-) Habe die Bilder aus Hangard und Schnappach noch schnell kategorisiert. Viele Grüße, atreyu/Mstp77 (talk) 19:02, 22 June 2014 (UTC)

Test

Latest comment: 8 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Dies ist ein Test! ;-) --Mstp77 (talk) 14:26, 28 September 2015 (UTC)

Notification about possible deletion

Latest comment: 3 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

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

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

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

Afrikaans ∙ Bahasa Indonesia ∙ 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 ∙ +/−

Affected:

File:Rohrbach Christuskirche Innen 01.JPG

And also:

Yours sincerely, Martin Sg. (talk) 13:29, 26 May 2020 (UTC)

File:Dudweiler St. Barbara Innen Altarraum.JPG

Latest comment: 3 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

File:Dudweiler St. Barbara Innen Altarraum.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 ∙ +/−

Martin Sg. (talk) 13:59, 7 June 2020 (UTC)

Notification about possible deletion

Latest comment: 3 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

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

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

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

Afrikaans ∙ Bahasa Indonesia ∙ 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 ∙ +/−

Affected:

File:Dudweiler St. Barbara Innen 01.JPG

And also:

Yours sincerely, Martin Sg. (talk) 14:00, 7 June 2020 (UTC)

File:Oberkirchen St. Katharina Innen 01.JPG

Latest comment: 3 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

File:Oberkirchen St. Katharina Innen 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 ∙ +/−

Martin Sg. (talk) 20:22, 7 June 2020 (UTC)

File:Gersweiler St. Michael Innen 01.JPG

Latest comment: 3 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

File:Gersweiler St. Michael Innen 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 ∙ +/−

Martin Sg. (talk) 20:24, 7 June 2020 (UTC)

File:Gersweiler St. Michael Innen 02.JPG

Latest comment: 3 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

File:Gersweiler St. Michael Innen 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 ∙ +/−

Martin Sg. (talk) 20:25, 7 June 2020 (UTC)

File:Merchingen St. Agatha Innen 01.JPG

Latest comment: 3 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

File:Merchingen St. Agatha Innen 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 ∙ +/−

Martin Sg. (talk) 21:05, 7 June 2020 (UTC)

File:Merchingen St. Agatha Innen 02.JPG

Latest comment: 3 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

File:Merchingen St. Agatha Innen 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 ∙ +/−

Martin Sg. (talk) 21:05, 7 June 2020 (UTC)

File:Saarbrücken St. Albert Innen Kuppel.JPG

Latest comment: 3 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

File:Saarbrücken St. Albert Innen Kuppel.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 ∙ +/−

Martin Sg. (talk) 16:58, 17 August 2020 (UTC)

Notification about possible deletion

Latest comment: 3 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

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

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

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

Afrikaans ∙ Bahasa Indonesia ∙ 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 ∙ +/−

Affected:

File:Saarlouis Evangelische Kirche Innen 07.JPG

And also:

Yours sincerely, Martin Sg. (talk) 17:26, 17 August 2020 (UTC)

File:Jägersburg St. Josef Innen 01.JPG

Latest comment: 3 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

File:Jägersburg St. Josef Innen 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 ∙ +/−

Martin Sg. (talk) 09:16, 14 April 2021 (UTC)

Notification about possible deletion

Latest comment: 2 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

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

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

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

Afrikaans ∙ Bahasa Indonesia ∙ 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 ∙ +/−

Affected:

File:Püttlingen Kloster Heilig-Kreuz 01.JPG

And also:

Yours sincerely, Martin Sg. (talk) 21:53, 2 July 2021 (UTC)

File:Püttlingen Kloster Heilig-Kreuz Kirche Innen 03.JPG

Latest comment: 2 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

File:Püttlingen Kloster Heilig-Kreuz Kirche Innen 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 ∙ +/−

Martin Sg. (talk) 21:59, 12 February 2022 (UTC)

Notification about possible deletion

Latest comment: 2 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

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

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

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

Afrikaans ∙ Bahasa Indonesia ∙ 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 ∙ +/−

Affected:

File:Merzig St. Josef Innen 04.JPG

And also:

File:Merzig St. Josef Innen 05.JPG

Yours sincerely, Martin Sg. (talk) 14:11, 13 February 2022 (UTC)

Testbild

Mondfinsternis 2015-09-28