Wilhelm Zimmerling PAR

	SpBot archives all sections tagged with {{Section resolved|1=~~~~}} after 7 days. For the archive overview, see Archive/. The latest archive is located at Archive/2024.

Babel user information
de Dieser Benutzer spricht Deutsch als Muttersprache. en-3 This user is able to contribute with an advanced level of English. ru-2 Этот участник может вносить вклад в данный проект на русском языке среднего уровня. nds-1 Disse Bruker hett grundleggen Plattdüütsch-Kenntnis.
Users by language

Willkommen

Welcome to Wikimedia Commons, Wilhelm Zimmerling PAR!

First steps tutorial Our first steps tour and our frequently asked questions will help you a lot after registration. They explain how to customize the interface (for example the language), how to upload files and our basic licensing policy (Wikimedia Commons only accepts free content). You don't need technical skills in order to contribute here. Be bold when contributing and assume good faith when interacting with others. This is a wiki. Getting help More information is available at the community portal. You may ask questions at the help desk, village pump or on IRC channel #wikimedia-commons (webchat). You can also contact an administrator on their talk page. If you have a specific copyright question, ask at the copyright village pump.

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

-- Wikimedia Commons Welcome (talk) 21:07, 12 July 2016 (UTC)

Category:Gänseblümchen_(Bellis_perennis)_in_Ruhland

Gänseblümchen (Bellis perennis) in Ruhland has been listed at Commons:Categories for discussion so that the community can discuss ways in which it should be changed. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry. If you created this category, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for discussion 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. If the category is up for deletion because it has been superseded, consider the notion that although the category may be deleted, your hard work (which we all greatly appreciate) lives on in the new category. In all cases, please do not take the category discussion personally. It is never intended as such. Thank you!

Ies (talk) 04:43, 27 August 2019 (UTC)

Category:Pieris brassicae in Ruhland

Hello, I just want to let you know that these butterflies are actually Pieris rapae, except for this one and that one, which are Pieris napi. Best regards --LamBoet (talk) 21:13, 14 April 2020 (UTC)

Hello @LamBoet: , thanks for the hint (which is welcome further, too), I have corrected file names and categories now. Best regards --Wilhelm Zimmerling PAR (talk) 10:51, 15 April 2020 (UTC)

Hi, I see that you just renamed this picture to rapae, but I have to insist, it is really napi: the greenish lining of the veins on the underside hindwing is well visible, despite the angle of view. Moreover, you posted the upperside view of the same specimen and it is typical napi, with the grey lining at the end of every vein. Best regards --LamBoet (talk) 18:59, 21 April 2020 (UTC)

Hello @LamBoet: , I'd seen one (or two) black dot(s) outsight its wings and thought, this speaks against P.napis (?) And what's with this picture? Regards --Wilhelm Zimmerling PAR (talk) 19:17, 22 April 2020 (UTC)

If you mean the number of black postdiscal dots on the forewing, it is used to distinguish males (1 dot) from females (2 dots), but not to distinguish the species. To recognize P. napi from P. rapae, what matters is the presence of the grey lining on the veins. Your butterfly here and here is similar to the 2nd and 3rd pictures of this page (female P. napi), but it has less visible lining because it is 2nd generation. By contrast, P. rapae has no grey lining at all on either side.

About the other picture, it's a little hard to exploit, but it's most probably P. rapae (no grey lining at the end of veins), a male (1 dot). I hope this helps. --LamBoet (talk) 22:26, 22 April 2020 (UTC)

Conifers 2

Hi @MPF: , hope all is well. Once more I have folders with some pictures. (I left the Eucalyptus with close-up.)

„Series“ means overlapping photos similiar panorama.

Additional, is the hedge here Thuya occidentalis, and, what ist this (if the photo shows enough).

Best Regards --Wilhelm Zimmerling PAR (talk) 12:25, 3 February 2021 (UTC)

Conifers 4

Hi Wilhelm - thanks for the email! From set 4:

• IMG_8988 left to right, a distant Pseudotsuga menziesii subsp. glauca, and 3x Picea abies.
• IMG_8989 left to right, a distant Thuja plicata, several Picea abies (cones pale, conspicuous), 2 or 3 Picea omorika (cones small, dark, barely visible), and another group of Picea abies.
• IMG_9005 - 9009 Pseudotsuga menziesii subsp. menziesii.
• IMG_9019 left, Picea sp., not quite sure: the broad crown structure is not normal for Picea pungens, more like Picea sitchensis, but not enough foliage detail visible to be sure (could still be an unusual Picea pungens though); right, Picea pungens, a much more typical specimen. Can you get a close-up of the foliage of the left tree?
• IMG_9020 left, Picea abies; right Pseudotsuga menziesii subsp. menziesii.
• IMG_9023 Abies alba.
• IMG_9023 Abies koreana.
• Subfolder Pinus mugo cv. - yes.
• Subfolder Thuja occidentalis - yes.

Hope all is well! - MPF (talk) 00:15, 27 February 2021 (UTC)

Thanks, uploaded with right descriptions and categorys.

And yes, here all is well, too. Best regards ! --Wilhelm Zimmerling PAR (talk) 09:38, 6 March 2021 (UTC)

Lepidoptera-species

Hello @LamBoet: hope all is well for you. Can you say what's with this pictures?. 6 should be Melitaea athalia (?), but the photos are not good. Thanks for your hints, best regards --Wilhelm Zimmerling PAR (talk) 09:41, 22 August 2022 (UTC)

nicht bestimmter Schmetterling in Oxfordshire

Hallo Werner, auf diesem Bild Caterpillar attack^ - geograph.org.uk - 192669.jpg sind einige Raupen an einer Brennessel zu sehen. Hätte ich das fotografiert, hätte ich mehr Details aufgenommen. Aber ich halte die für Aglais io. Kann das stimmen? Gruß anro (talk) 14:52, 8 March 2023 (UTC)

Hallo @AnRo, ich halte das ebenfalls für Aglais io. Habe das selbst schon so vorgefunden, leider war ich da noch ohne Kamera und Handy.

Die noch infrage kommenden Vanessa atalanta sollten (da Details fehlen) wenigstens wegen des Gesamt-Farbeindrucks ausgeschlossen werden können, nicht ganz so sicher auch Aglais urticae. Da habe ich aber in letzter Zeit selbst keine Raupen gefunden, leider. Viele Grüße --Wilhelm Zimmerling PAR (talk) 15:46, 8 March 2023 (UTC)

Danke! ich habs in die entsprechenden Kategorien gesetzt und entsprechend umbenannt. Gruß anro (talk) 16:31, 8 March 2023 (UTC)

File:Chorleiter Herbert Richter Homepage 2019.pdf

File:Chorleiter Herbert Richter Homepage 2019.pdf 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!

Omphalographer (talk) 21:45, 1 September 2023 (UTC)

Conifers 11

Hi @MPF: , hope all's well! Please look at

• 
• 

What species can you see? Thanks, best wishes and regards -- Wilhelm Zimmerling PAR (talk) 17:54, 19 November 2023 (UTC)

Danke! #1 is Category:Juniperus × pfitzeriana and can also be added to Category:Cloud trees (a form of Category:Topiary). For #2, the central tree (outside the fence) is Category:Cupressus × leylandii. Best wishes - MPF (talk) 20:22, 19 November 2023 (UTC)

Thanks, best wishes again! --Wilhelm Zimmerling PAR (talk) 20:27, 19 November 2023 (UTC)

Copyright status: File:Ruhland, Kirchplatz, Weihnachtsmarkt 2023, Dank an die beteiligten Vereine und Organisatoren 01.jpg

Copyright status: File:Ruhland, Kirchplatz, Weihnachtsmarkt 2023, Dank an die beteiligten Vereine und Organisatoren 01.jpg

This media may be deleted.

Thanks for uploading File:Ruhland, Kirchplatz, Weihnachtsmarkt 2023, Dank an die beteiligten Vereine und Organisatoren 01.jpg. I notice that the file page either doesn't contain enough information about the license or it contains contradictory information about the license, so the copyright status is unclear. If you created this file yourself, then you must provide a valid copyright tag. For example, you can tag it with {{self|GFDL|cc-by-sa-all}} to release it under the multi-license GFDL plus Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike All-version license or you can tag it with {{PD-self}} to release it into the public domain. (See Commons:Copyright tags for the full list of license tags that you can use.) If you did not create the file yourself or if it is a derivative of another work that is possibly subject to copyright protection, then you must specify where you found it (e.g. usually a link to the web page where you got it), you must provide proof that it has a license that is acceptable for Commons (e.g. usually a link to the terms of use for content from that page), and you must add an appropriate license tag. If you did not create the file yourself and the specific source and license information is not available on the web, you must obtain permission through the VRT system and follow the procedure described there. Note that any unsourced or improperly licensed files will be deleted one week after they have been marked as lacking proper information, as described in criteria for deletion. If you have uploaded other files, please confirm that you have provided the proper information for those files, too. If you have any questions about licenses please ask at Commons:Village pump/Copyright or see our help pages. Thank you.

And also:

• File:Ruhland, Kirchplatz, Weihnachtsmarkt 2023, Dank an die beteiligten Vereine und Organisatoren 02.jpg
• File:Ruhland, Weihnachtsmarkt 2023, Programm, 01.jpg

This action was performed automatically by AntiCompositeBot (talk) (FAQ) 15:07, 4 December 2023 (UTC)

Du erhältst einen Orden!

	Der Fleißorden
	Für deine Bilder und deine Arbeiten im Kategoriesystem. -- Triple C 85 | User talk | 11:28, 16 December 2023 (UTC)

Einheitsbäume

Hallo Herr Kollege, mir fällt auf, dass du gerade diverse Einheitsbäume zu Einheits-Bäumen verschiebst, die Einheitseiche Langebrück zum Beispiel. Das ist m.E. eine offenkundig falsche Schreibweise, die nicht vom Duden gedeckt ist. Warum verschiebst du? Zumal die Schreibweise mit dem frei erfundenen Bindestrich auch nicht dem vor Ort üblichen Eigennamen entspricht. Ich plädiere dafür, das du innehältst und dazu mal noch ein paar weitere Meinungen beikommen. Danke dir! Grüße, --Kleeblatt187 (talk) 20:10, 25 March 2024 (UTC)

Hallo @Kleeblatt187: , ich sammle gerade Einheitsbäume in eine WP-Liste. Habe damit die Einzelbäume mehr als verdoppelt, dabei wird es nicht bleiben. Die Schreibwese ohne Bindestrich würde auch ich bei Eiche, Linde und ähnlichen vorzuziehen, verändert habe ich Einheitsbaum in Klotzsche zu Einheits-Rosskastanie (Einheitskastanie wäre falsch, vielleicht gibt es die aber auch irgendwo). Dann gibt es einen Einheits-Tulpenbaum, den ich auch nicht ohne Bindestrich sehen würde, und mindestens eine Einheits-Hainbuche sehe ich genauso. Daraufhin habe ich die Eichen und Linden auch so behandelt - das gleiche Namensschema schien mir wünschenswert. Ich denke, unter dem Blickwinkel könntest Du mich verstehen. Viele Grüße --Wilhelm Zimmerling PAR (talk) 21:52, 25 March 2024 (UTC)

Hallo Wilhelm Zimmerling PAR, teilweise kann ich dir folgen – aber nicht ganz. Einig sind wir uns im Punkt, dass einheitliche Schreibweisen und Kategorieschemata wünschenswert sind. Nicht nachvollziehen kann ich aber, dass du zwar einräumst, dass du auch bei Eiche, Linde u.ä. die Schreibweise ohne Bindestrich (m.E. die richtige nach Duden) vorziehen würdest, aber wegen weniger Sonderfälle (?) die Mehrheit der richtigen Schreibweisen ohne Bindestrich dennoch auf die falsche Schreibweise mit Bindestrich verschiebst. Wie dem auch sei, du kennst jetzt meinen Unmut und meine Bedenken zur Schreibweise mit Bindestrich. Ich halte sie für sprachlich falsch und optisch unschön noch dazu. Ich bezweifle zudem, dass es wirklich triftige Gründe dafür gibt, eine Einheitseiche anders zu schreiben als eine Bismarckeiche, eine Sängereiche und eine Luthereiche, Stichwort einheitliche Schreibweise. Aber ich werde mich – allein aus Zeitgründen – in diesem Themenfeld nicht verkämpfen, der Baumexperte bist du. Grüße, --Kleeblatt187 (talk) 22:47, 26 March 2024 (UTC)

Achso, eine Bitte noch: Wenn du die Commonskategorien verschiebst (z.T. sogar ohne Weiterleitung, wie beim Einheitsbaum Klotzsche, dann wäre schön, wenn du gleich im Anschluss auch die entsprechenden Einträge in den zugehörigen Listen wie beispielsweise dieser (hier konkret in der letzten Spalte), bereinigen würdest, damit Dritte dann nicht erst ins Leere klicken und suchen müssen. Danke dir! Grüße, --Kleeblatt187 (talk) 22:47, 26 March 2024 (UTC)

Hallo @Kleeblatt187: , ich entschuldige mich für die Zusatz-Arbeit und bedanke mich für die Bereinigung. Rotlinks wollte ich nicht hinterlassen - ich hoffe, es war nur einer.

In Würdigung der Argumente halte ich es inzwischen für besser, meine Änderungen zurück zu nehmen und die Ausnahmen (Baumarten zusammengesetzt aus mehreren Wortstämmen) eben daneben stehen zu lassen. Aber das würde sicher erst nach Ostern werden.

Manchmal gibt es die ideale Lösung nicht, aber wäre das eine zufrieden stellende Lösung?

Und dann wäre noch die Frage einer Entscheidung Einheitsbaum (Ort) vs. Einheitsbaum Ort, wo ich mich für letzteres entschieden habe. Freundliche Grüße --Wilhelm Zimmerling PAR (talk) 10:32, 27 March 2024 (UTC)

Hallo Wilhelm Zimmerling PAR, ideale Lösungen gibt es tatsächlich manchmal nicht, Kompromisse sind zu schließen. Und mit guten Kompromissen bin ich auch zufrieden :-) Danke dir! Im Übrigen neige ich auch zu Einheitsbaum Ort. Viele Grüße und frohe Ostern! --Kleeblatt187 (talk) 21:00, 28 March 2024 (UTC)

File:Beelitz, Landesgartenschau 2022, Gemüsegartenbau, 01.jpg

File:Beelitz, Landesgartenschau 2022, Gemüsegartenbau, 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!

A1Cafel (talk) 03:35, 18 April 2024 (UTC)

File:Beelitz, Landesgartenschau 2022, Obstgartenbau, 01.jpg

File:Beelitz, Landesgartenschau 2022, Obstgartenbau, 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!

A1Cafel (talk) 03:35, 18 April 2024 (UTC)