More information is available at the community portal. You may ask questions at the help desk, village pump or on IRC channel irc:wikimedia-commons #wikimedia-commons (direct access). You can also contact an administrator on their talk page. If you have a specific copyright question, ask at Commons talk:Licensing.
|(P.S. Would you like to provide feedback on this message?)|
Tip: Categorizing imagesEdit
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.
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]]
When picking categories, try to choose a specific category ("Astronomical diagrams") over a generic one ("Illustrations"). Pro-tip: The CommonSense tool can help you find the best category for your image.
- Image:Do we want those links.png is uncategorized since 14 December 2008. BotMultichillT (talk) 06:02, 15 December 2008 (UTC)
|File:Mensch aergere dich nicht.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.
Notification about possible deletionEdit
|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.
Thank you for participating in Wiki Loves Monuments 2012!
Thanks to the participation of people like you, the contest gathered more than 350,000 pictures of cultural heritage objects from 36 countries around the world, becoming the largest photography competition to have ever taken place.
You can find all your pictures in your upload log, and are of course very welcome to keep uploading images and help develop Wikimedia Commons, even though you will not be able to win more prizes (just yet).
If you'd like to start editing relevant Wikipedia articles and share your knowledge with other people, please go to the Wikipedia Welcome page for more information, guidance, and help.
To make future contests even more successful than this year, we would like to invite you to share your experiences with us in a short survey. Please fill in this short survey in your own language, and help us learn what you liked and didn't like about Wiki Loves Monuments 2012.
- Message delivered by the Wiki Loves Monuments 2012 notification system on 23:28, 27 October 2012 (UTC)
|Pay attention to licensing
||Wikimedia Commons only accepts free content : images and other media files that can be used by anyone, for any purpose.
File:Kölnerlichter.jpg seems to be free (or it would be proposed for deletion), but it was identified as having a wrong license. Usually, it is because a public domain image is tagged with a free license, or because the stated source or other information is not sufficient to prove the selected tag is correct. Please verify that you applied the correct license tag for this file.
If you believe this file has the correct license, please explain why on the file description page.
Would you be so kind to tell me what the difference is between licenses i have picked and the one that is supposed to be correct. My source for this was , which says "This file is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 Unported, 2.5 Generic, 2.0 Generic and 1.0 Generic license." and the other, "more original" source says "This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 2.0 Germany License.". So i guess you are saying whoever put it on wikivoyage-old.org already picked a wrong one...or the author decided to multi-license.. besides that i don't know, we can also just replace this with another free one (own work) with very similar content. Mutante (talk) 23:50, 3 December 2012 (UTC)