Welcome to Wikimedia Commons, FLAVIVSAETIVS!

-- Wikimedia Commons Welcome (talk) 16:45, 17 March 2014 (UTC)Reply

 
File:CUARTEL DE INTENDENCIA. PEÑA CELESTINA. AUTOR DESCONOCIDO. AÑOS 30.jpg has been marked as a possible copyright violation. Wikimedia Commons only accepts free content—that is, images and other media files that can be used by anyone, for any purpose. Traditional copyright law does not grant these freedoms, and unless noted otherwise, everything you find on the web is copyrighted and not permitted here. For details on what is acceptable, please read Commons:Licensing. You may also find Commons:Copyright rules useful, or you can ask questions about Commons policies at the Commons:Help desk. If you are the copyright holder and the creator of the file, please read Commons:But it's my own work! for tips on how to provide evidence of that.

The file you added has been deleted. If you have written permission from the copyright holder, please have them send us a free license release via COM:VRT. If you believe that the deletion was not in accordance with policy, you may request undeletion. (It is not necessary to request undeletion if using VRT; the file will be automatically restored at the conclusion of the process.)

Warning: Wikimedia Commons takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing.

Afrikaans  asturianu  azərbaycanca  Bahasa Indonesia  Bahasa Melayu  català  čeština  dansk  Deutsch  Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎  English  español  euskara  français  galego  hrvatski  italiano  Lëtzebuergesch  magyar  Malti  Nederlands  norsk bokmål  norsk nynorsk  oʻzbekcha / ўзбекча  Plattdüütsch  polski  português  português do Brasil  română  sicilianu  slovenčina  slovenščina  suomi  svenska  Türkçe  Tiếng Việt  Zazaki  Ελληνικά  беларуская беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎  български  македонски  русский  српски / srpski  тоҷикӣ  українська  հայերեն  मराठी  বাংলা  മലയാളം  ပအိုဝ်ႏဘာႏသာႏ  မြန်မာဘာသာ  ไทย  한국어  日本語  中文(简体)‎  中文(繁體)‎  עברית  العربية  فارسی  +/−

--Krdbot 07:00, 20 April 2016 (UTC)Reply

Round 2 of Picture of the Year 2015 is open! edit

 

You are receiving this message because you voted in R1 of the 2015 Picture of the Year contest.

Dear FLAVIVSAETIVS,

Wikimedia Commons is happy to announce that the second round of the 2015 Picture of the Year competition is now open. This year will be the tenth edition of the annual Wikimedia Commons photo competition, which recognizes exceptional contributions by users on Wikimedia Commons. Wikimedia users are invited to vote for their favorite images featured on Commons during the last year (2015) to produce a single Picture of the Year.

Hundreds of images that have been rated Featured Pictures by the international Wikimedia Commons community in the past year were entered in this competition. These images include professional animal and plant shots, breathtaking panoramas and skylines, restorations of historical images, photographs portraying the world's best architecture, impressive human portraits, and so much more.

There are two total rounds of voting. In the first round, you voted for as many images as you liked. In Round 1, there were 1322 candidate images. There are 56 finalists in Round 2, comprised of the top 30 overall as well as the top #1 and #2 from each sub-category. In the final round, you may vote for just one or maximal three image to become the Picture of the Year.

Round 2 will end on 28 May 2016, 23:59:59 UTC.

Click here to vote »

Thanks,
-- Wikimedia Commons Picture of the Year committee 09:42, 22 May 2016 (UTC)

Category talk:Dragendorff 79 edit

Wrong typology, I think. As far as I know there is no such thing as a Drag. 79 form. N° 79 is for Η. B. Walters (not Walter's) form.
Dragendorff did the Drag. 1 to Drag. 55, following numbers are Déchelette's 56 to 77, then you get Knorr 78, then Walters 79 to 81. Plus a lot of variants derived from these ; plus other typologies, entirely indépendant from these (like those of Curle, Ludowici, Ritterling, Unverzagt a.s.o.)
Any news from you? Pueblopassingby (talk) 11:51, 1 December 2019 (UTC)Reply

File:DSC03539 Foro romano Asturica.jpg edit

Hi, is this sign/board indoors or outdoors located? --Túrelio (talk) 14:05, 4 March 2021 (UTC)Reply

The same question for File:DSC03532 Museo romano Astorga.jpg, File:Villa Pared Moros.jpg and File:AP1010008 Maqbara.jpg. --Túrelio (talk) 14:06, 4 March 2021 (UTC)Reply

Do you know how old are the photographies, reproduced in File:Aula Arqueológica de Villasabariego 30.jpg? --Túrelio (talk) 14:12, 4 March 2021 (UTC)Reply

File:DSC03532 Museo romano Astorga.jpg edit

 
File:DSC03532 Museo romano Astorga.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!

Túrelio (talk) 16:36, 4 March 2021 (UTC)Reply

Wiki Takes Ávila 2021 edit

No te pierdas con el "asunto", porque en realidad quería agradecerte la faena que estás haciendo de catalogación. Estuvimos en una especie de convención en tierras de Ávila los compañeros Estevoaei, 19Tarrestnom65 y un servidor, y aprovechamos para ir sacando municipios que estaban sin foto. Nos fuimos un poco -un mucho- arriba y acabamos subiendo unas 4300 fotos de calculo que 80-90 municipios y entidades menores (muchas de ellas ya tenían alguna foto). De la provincia de Ávila, de las de Cáceres, Salamanca, Zamora y me ronda que hasta alguna de Toledo. Organizando todo esto un poco lo que veo es que Salamanca y mucho más Ávila -las provicias, quiero decir- no tienen mucha subcategorización.

Verás que hay un poco de todo, con ramalazos de las neuras de los participantes: trapas de alcantarilla, mojones, transformadores eléctricos, maquinaria agrícola (mea culpa) y hasta borricos, búhos y caracoles. Según voy revisando, voy creando categorías de cosas, aunque he visto que en algunos casos (Piedrahíta y El Barco son los dos que primero me vienen a la cabeza) si bien ya había fotos, orden no había tanto. A veces faltaban categorías de lo más gordo, tipo cementerio de Ávila capital. Sigo en ello, pero siendo de Valencia no me es tan fácil, sobre todo cuando las fotos no son de nuestra visita.

Pues eso, que muchas gracias por las categorías que vas creando. B25es (talk) 16:08, 26 September 2021 (UTC)Reply

Round 1 of Picture of the Year 2022 voting is open! edit

 
2022 Picture of the Year: Saint John Church of Sohrol in Iran.

Read this message in your language

Dear Wikimedian,

Wikimedia Commons is happy to announce that the 2022 Picture of the Year competition is now open. This year will be the seventeenth edition of the annual Wikimedia Commons photo competition, which recognizes exceptional contributions by users on Wikimedia Commons. Wikimedia users are invited to vote for their favorite images featured on Commons during the last year (2022) to produce a single Picture of the Year.

Hundreds of images that have been rated Featured Pictures by the international Wikimedia Commons community in the past year are all entered in this competition. These images include professional animal and plant shots, breathtaking panoramas and skylines, restorations of historical images, photographs portraying the world's best architecture, impressive human portraits, and so much more.

For your convenience, we have sorted the images into topical categories. Two rounds of voting will be held: In the first round, you may vote for as many images as you like. The top 30 overall and the two most popular images in each category will continue to the final. In the final round, you may vote for just three images to become the Picture of the Year.

Round 1 will end on UTC.

Click here to vote now!

Thanks,
the Wikimedia Commons Picture of the Year committee

You are receiving this message because you voted in the 2021 Picture of the Year contest.

Delivered by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 09:15, 20 April 2023 (UTC)Reply

Round 2 of Picture of the Year 2022 voting is open! edit

 

Read this message in your language

Dear Wikimedian,

You are receiving this message because we noticed that you voted in Round 1 of the 2022 Picture of the Year contest, but not yet in the second round. Wikimedia users are invited to vote for their favorite images featured on Commons during the last year (2022) to produce a single Picture of the Year.

Hundreds of images that have been rated Featured Pictures by the international Wikimedia Commons community in the past year were entered in this competition. These images include professional animal and plant shots, breathtaking panoramas and skylines, restorations of historical images, photographs portraying the world's best architecture, impressive human portraits, and so much more.

In this second and final round, you may vote for a maximum of three images. The image with the most votes will become the Picture of the Year 2022.

Round 2 will end at UTC.

Click here to vote now!

Thanks,
the Wikimedia Commons Picture of the Year committee

Delivered by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 07:45, 5 May 2023 (UTC)Reply

Duda romana edit

Buenas tardes FLAVIVSAETIVS. Como te veo bastante puesto en temas romanos, te quería hacer una pregunta. En las categorías de Mérida/Augusta Emerita me he encontrado que existen dos categorías sobre el Acueducto romano de San Lázaro (1, 2). Entiendo que no son lo mismo, y que el segundo se refiere al acueducto del siglo XVI, que por lo visto es una reconstrucción del antiguo (no sé si usando la misma ruta y estructura)...pero si te fijas en los enlaces a wikipedia, curiosamente la segunda categoría enlaza con el artículo del acueducto romano.

Entonces, no me queda claro si en general habría que combinar todo, como de hecho está en la wikipedia española, o mantenerlo por separado como está en Commons (y en wikipedia separar el acueducto romano del posterior del siglo XVI, con un nuevo artículo). En fin, no sé cómo lo ves. Saludos cordiales. CFA1877 (talk) 18:06, 15 April 2024 (UTC)Reply