User talk:High Contrast/Archive 8

Latest comment: 10 years ago by Gretarsson in topic "Diorit"-Foto

2013!

  * * * 2013 !!! * * *
Frohes Weihnachten! Frohes Neues Jahr!

Mit freundlichen Grüßen, Georgij -- George Chernilevsky talk 22:23, 24 December 2012 (UTC)

Thanks George! I wish you the same! Kindest regards, High Contrast (talk) 23:06, 24 December 2012 (UTC)
 

und einen guten Rutsch ins neue Jahr! Cobatfor (talk) 12:19, 26 December 2012 (UTC)

Agnes Lovise Matre

I`m trying to upload an image of the author Agnes Lovise Matre. I`m writing the article on Wikipedia on behalf of the author and her publisher, and the pictures that I have uploaded so far are her official published pictures to use in several media. The last one I uploaded is as well my own private photo of the author, and I have her own approval of using it.

Hi; a written permission is required of that. You only have to send this perission to the email adress which you can find at this site: COM:OTRS. Thank you. Regards, High Contrast (talk) 23:58, 25 December 2012 (UTC)

A written permission from me has been send to the adress. Du you need one from the author as well?

No, I do not need anything. It is no the job of the OTRS-team. Send them as much as you have that can be used for evidence for a freely licensed image. Regards, High Contrast (talk) 00:16, 26 December 2012 (UTC)

Weihnachten

Ups, fiel mir ja gar nicht auf mit dem Windows bla bla... Hier noch ein bisschen Weihnachten: File:UH-1E HML-167 Christmas paint 1970.jpg oder File:F-4B VF-111 CVA-43 Santa launch 1971.jpg. Grüße Cobatfor (talk) 13:18, 26 December 2012 (UTC)

Kein Problem. Das sind bloß Kleinigkeiten. Nette Bildchen hast du gefunden. Gratulation! Gruß, High Contrast (talk) 13:30, 26 December 2012 (UTC)

Trying To Add Picture to Page

Hello, I log in as Kamitra1, but when in Hollyood too many years ago, my name was Valora Noland. I am not a proficient internet or wiki user.

I uploaded File:Valora Noland 1967.JPG to your system, and should have said "created by me", as admitting that the photo was taken by "Oliver" raises copyright questions---maybe. Aside from the primary rules, I think you should find it okay for me to place it on the Wikipedia page for Valora Noland (one I didn't create originally). I uploaded a second of smaller size, but, for it to land in the right spot, someone will have to help. I have asked help via "Contact", and may get it now that the pic. is in system.

If this snapshot is not alright, nothing else I have from those days is either.

Valora

Hello Valora! Thank you for your contributions. Of course you can use this image in an articel on Wikipedia. But there is only one problem: you must choose a license under which this image is available. Is it in the public domain? Regards, High Contrast (talk) 18:17, 27 December 2012 (UTC)

Please return self-propelled artillery from tanks to artillery

On 27 September you moved a lot of self-propelled guns from correct category to improper. If you don't like when armoured vehicles alternates with towed artillery you can create Category:Self-propelled artillery at the United States Army Ordnance Museum. Ain92 (talk) 11:24, 28 December 2012 (UTC)

Hello Ain92! Yes, Jagdtiger, Kanonenjagdpanzer and Ferdinand are no artillery pieces. --High Contrast (talk) 13:50, 29 December 2012 (UTC)
This might be a possibility. Would perfectly fit in the category structure. --High Contrast (talk) 22:57, 29 December 2012 (UTC)
  • If you don't want to create this category, than could you be so kind to move all that files into this category? I will create it soon after that. (message by Ain92)
You can do so, too. For an easier doing, you can use the Cat-a-lot-tool. It is quite good. Regards, High Contrast (talk) 18:20, 30 December 2012 (UTC)
Well, a Category:Military equipment in the United States Army Ordnance Museum would be redundant because the US Army Ordnance Museum only exhibits military museums. Collections of military equipment by museum only makes sense for museums which exhibit non-military stuff, too. A new tree based on Tank destroyers should not be a problem. If you want to, you can start it. I think you will surely get that. Regards, High Contrast (talk) 23:10, 30 December 2012 (UTC)
Perfect! Thanks! Best regards, High Contrast (talk) 23:32, 3 January 2013 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

 
Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Stadtplatz von Deggendorf -01.JPG, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates.

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments   Comment slightly perspective distortion imo --Rjcastillo 00:47, 24 December 2012 (UTC)
Of course. Thanks for your remark! I have recreated the perspective correction. Regards, High Contrast 22:57, 24 December 2012 (UTC)  Comment OK for me --Rjcastillo 01:48, 26 December 2012 (UTC)

File:Azipod, early design with retrofitted fin..jpg

Hi, can you restore this image. The license is ok, I just wanted to make sure it really was PD. As https://www.sttinfo.fi/about?7 (Finnish) and e-mail that I received from STT. Thank you. –Makele-90 (talk) 17:01, 28 December 2012 (UTC)

Hello! Thanks for your support! I have just restored the image. Regards, High Contrast (talk) 13:51, 29 December 2012 (UTC)
User:INeverCry deleted the file.. –Makele-90 (talk) 06:38, 4 February 2013 (UTC)

File:Beso entre novios.jpg

Es: Esta imagen fue tomada por mi misma cuándo una pareja de novios (AMIGOS MÍOS) se besaba ¿de donde sacan que podría tener copyright si yo misma la tome?. ¡EXIJO UNA EXPLICACIÓN INMEDIATAMENTE!.

En: This image was taken by myself when some boys were kissing (which by the way are my friends). Where do you may be copyrighted if I shoot the same?.I demand an explanation at this very moment!. D vsquez (talk) 00:14, 30 December 2012 (UTC)

I doubt this because it is of an extreme low resolution. Can you provide a higher resoluted version of it? By now it is hardly convincingly that it is your work. Please keep in mind that I did not delete it. --High Contrast (talk) 09:44, 30 December 2012 (UTC)

Imperial War Museum Photos

Does anyone know the rules on UK Imperial War Museum photos from WW2? Are they public domain like US DoD photos? Or does the UK government still hold copy right? Thank you for any help. (message by User:Jackehammond)

Please post your question here - I think there has been a discussion about these images. As far as I can remember, some files were problematic. --High Contrast (talk) 10:38, 30 December 2012 (UTC)
 
With thanks for your support and the pleasant co-operation in the past year, I wish you all the best in the new year! --Túrelio (talk) 20:20, 31 December 2012 (UTC)

Image Deletetion

Hi,

You have mentioned that my image doesn't have EXIF information and is in low resolution. I took the picture yesterday using my mobile phone and moved it into my computer and then resized it. I don't know why it's not having the EXIF information. Maybe when I resized it, the information is deleted.

Thanks (message by User:Arsi Warrior)

HI! I have replied on your talk page. Regards, High Contrast (talk) 10:18, 2 January 2013 (UTC)

Panoramio images

Hello and happy new year ! One year ago, I could upload high resolutions on Panoramio, but now I can't, I don't know why (I have an account yet), on firefox, I see that each pictures are cut into many small others pictures, so if you know how to get them, please say me ! I upload pictures from "media" in "page informations" and use flinfo.

Thanks, regards, --Glabb (talk) 11:33, 3 January 2013 (UTC)

Hello and happy new year, too! Well, you should go to the panoramio image site directly, click on it and click on "View the original image" - there you have the highest resolution. Please notice, that I have uploaded the highest resolution for this image already: File:Sihanoukville, Cambodia2.jpg. Regards, High Contrast (talk) 12:50, 3 January 2013 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

 
Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Church of St. Paul in Passau.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates.

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments Somewhat high contrast ;-) but still ok. --Smial 10:49, 2 January 2013 (UTC)

move from local wiki to commons

Привет, я видел, как много ты переносишь файлов из ру.вики на Викисклад - это круто! :) В рамках небольшого спама: т.к. CommonsHelper любит терять описания файлов из ру.вики, укр.вики и других на основе кириллицы (пример), хочу посоветовать недавно найденную мною тулзу, которая переносит более корректно - ru:ВП:FTCG, может, пригодится rubin16 (talk) 09:03, 6 January 2013 (UTC)

благодарю́! Но обратите внимание: [1], [2], [3], [4], ... Пока́! --High Contrast (talk) 10:43, 6 January 2013 (UTC)
Да, я видел. Поэтому и советую инструмент, который избавит от необходимости этой чистки после загрузки :) rubin16 (talk) 11:48, 6 January 2013 (UTC)

Moved incorrectly named category

Hello High Control, I've just read your message. Sorry for the very bad english of this answer, actually my native language is french.

So, first I thought I wouldn't mind with your renaming, but it may cause a problem: as you can see all categories except Croatia are named after the name of the country instead of the adjective, and I think it's important to keep the same kind of naming within a larger category (i.e. in this case "national basketball teams". I started categorizing basket-ball files only since last september, and I always wanted to follow what contributors did before me when I created a category, especially the way association football did.

So maybe people who care about the problem should debate and take a clear decision that would guide editors. Anyway, thanks for having warned me. (and happy new year, by the way!) --El Funcionario (talk) 06:09, 8 January 2013 (UTC)

This is indeed strange. I tracing this issue. Regards, El Funcanio. --High Contrast (talk) 16:34, 8 January 2013 (UTC)

Anfrage nach Category:Ships on Bodensee

Moin High Contrast, meine Frage, würde es Sinn machen eine Kategorie mit allen Bodenseeschiffen zu erstellen?. Interesse gäbe es. Gruß -- Biberbaer (talk) 19:26, 10 January 2013 (UTC)

Hallo! Gute Idee! Wieviele Schiffe gibt es, die nur auf dem Bodensee unterwegs sind? Gibt es eine ausreichende Zahl? Nichtsdestotrotz,f olgende Kategorien könnten interessant sein: [[Category:Bodensee]], [[Category:Ships in Austria]] etc, [[Category:Ships by sea or lake|Bodensee]]. Gruß, High Contrast (talk) 00:39, 12 January 2013 (UTC)

Cultural heritage monuments in Landshuter Altstadt

Schaust du bitte mal hier vorbei: Category talk:Cultural heritage monuments in Landshuter Altstadt. Da scheint etwas schief gegangen zu sein. Cultural heritage monuments in Landshuter Altstadt ist nicht nicht die beste Formulierung für diese Category. Bitte zurücksetzen oder in Cultural heritage monuments in Landshut-Altstadt ändern. --Rufus46 (talk) 21:17, 12 January 2013 (UTC)

So besser? --High Contrast (talk) 21:19, 12 January 2013 (UTC)
Danke. --Rufus46 (talk) 07:40, 13 January 2013 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

 
Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Austrian post box, 2011.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates.

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments Good quality. --Poco a poco 08:57, 12 January 2013 (UTC)

Picture of the Year voting round 1 open

Dear Wikimedians,

Wikimedia Commons is happy to announce that the 2012 Picture of the Year competition is now open. We're interested in your opinion as to which images qualify to be the Picture of the Year for 2012. Voting is open to established Wikimedia users who meet the following criteria:

  1. Users must have an account, at any Wikimedia project, which was registered before Tue, 01 Jan 2013 00:00:00 +0000 [UTC].
  2. This user account must have more than 75 edits on any single Wikimedia project before Tue, 01 Jan 2013 00:00:00 +0000 [UTC]. Please check your account eligibility at the POTY 2012 Contest Eligibility tool.
  3. Users must vote with an account meeting the above requirements either on Commons or another SUL-related Wikimedia project (for other Wikimedia projects, the account must be attached to the user's Commons account through SUL).

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. From professional animal and plant shots to breathtaking panoramas and skylines, restorations of historically relevant images, images portraying the world's best architecture, maps, emblems, diagrams created with the most modern technology, and impressive human portraits, Commons features pictures of all flavors.

For your convenience, we have sorted the images into topic categories. Two rounds of voting will be held: In the first round, you can vote for as many images as you like. The first round category winners and the top ten overall will then make it to the final. In the final round, when a limited number of images are left, you must decide on the one image that you want to become the Picture of the Year.

To see the candidate images just go to the POTY 2012 page on Wikimedia Commons

Wikimedia Commons celebrates our featured images of 2012 with this contest. Your votes decide the Picture of the Year, so remember to vote in the first round by January 30, 2013.

Thanks,
the Wikimedia Commons Picture of the Year committee


Delivered by Orbot1 (talk) at 09:30, 19 January 2013 (UTC) - you are receiving this message because you voted last year

Lizenz von Bildern aus dem BMW-Archiv

Hallo High Contrast, ist die Verwendung folgender Bilder aus dem BMW-Archiv in Ordnung: Gustav_Otto_with_an_Argus_aircraft_engine.jpg und Portrait_of_Gustav_Otto1910.jpg? Ich verstehe die Lizenzierung nicht. Die Bilder "gehören" doch aktuell BMW, auch wenn sie vor 1923 geschaffen wurden und damit unter PD 1923 fallen. Anders gefragt - können wir alle Bilder vor 1923 aus dem BMW-Archiv hochladen? Grüße --Bergfalke2 (talk) 13:24, 25 January 2013 (UTC)

Hallo Bergfalke! Da hast du Recht: die Lizenzierung beider Bilder ist höchst zweifelhaft. Das Bild "Portrait of Gustav Otto" ist meiner Meinung nach nicht gemeinfrei, genausowenig wie das andere Bild - beide Bilder müssen gemäß PD 1923 in den Vereinigten Staaten als auch im Herkunftsland gemeinfrei sein. Dass sie in Deutschland gemeinfrei sind kann ich mir in Anbetracht der angegebenen Infos nicht vorstellen. Wenn du willst, dann kannst du einen Löschantrag starten. Gruß, High Contrast (talk) 21:29, 25 January 2013 (UTC)
Danke für Deine Einschätzung. Fairerweise werde ich dann einen Löschantrag stellen - vielleicht kriegen wir die BMW-Leute ja mal ins Boot, da sollten wir dann keine Leichen im Keller haben. --Bergfalke2 (talk) 14:16, 28 January 2013 (UTC)
Bitte - keine Ursache. Wenn du willst, dann kannst du versuchen eine spezielle Freigabe derartiger Dateien bei BMW zu erfragen. Zum Teil sind Großunternehmen dafür recht offen. Das wäre dann ein Fall für COM:OTRS/de. Gruß, High Contrast (talk) 14:32, 29 January 2013 (UTC)

Albanian Fascist Party images deletion

Hello, Why did you delete the following images? : File:PFA flag.png File:PFA ranks.png File:Partia Fashiste Shqiptare.png File:Kol Bib Mirakaj.png As i see you doubt that they are my creation... I inform you that: THEY ARE COMPLETELY MY CREATION! I HAVE DRAWN THEM ACCORDING TO HISTORICAL PHOTOS OF MY COLLECTION. So, i ask you to reupload them immediately!

Please read COM:DW. These images are not your own work - you have just redrawn them. That's a copyright violation as well. I will restore nothing. Regards, High Contrast (talk) 21:28, 11 February 2013 (UTC)

I have read them and what i did does not come across with any copyright restriction.Nevertheless, many other pictures and images uploaded in wikipedia are production of redrawning, such as this: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Italian_Fascist_flag_1930s-1940s.svg or this: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Heer_-_decal_for_helmet_1942.svg or even this: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:National_Fascist_Party_logo.svg and this: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Fascist_Eagle.svg So i ask you,politely, again to restore my deleted images. butrintifan89

If you feel uncofortable with the files you have brought up above, then start a DR against them. Again, I will not undelete your images: a) I have not deleted them (as you can see in the DRs) b) Your works are still derivative works of copyrighted images. Kindest regards, High Contrast (talk) 19:29, 14 February 2013 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

 
Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Kraftwerk Jochenstein - Torbögen.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates.

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments Good Quality. - Godot13 04:43, 12 February 2013 (UTC)

 
Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Higer KLQ 6896Q bus.JPG, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates.

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments Good quality. War das am Toten Meer? --Berthold Werner 17:44, 11 February 2013 (UTC)

File:Gabriela (Chamanapamba Falls) -Baños Ecuador LR.jpeg

This photo seems distorted. -mattbuck (Talk) 01:02, 16 February 2013 (UTC)

No, the photo is ok. Click on the image. --High Contrast (talk) 22:04, 16 February 2013 (UTC)

Forst Bier ehhhhtc

Hallo, Ich schick dir lieber eine Kiste Lagreinflaschen aber versteh eigentlich nicht worum es geht?--Wolfgang Moroder (talk) 00:46, 17 February 2013 (UTC)

Danke ;-) Worum es geht? Wahrlich ein Minimalum: Datumsanpassung: ich verschob deine Foto-Kandidatur unter die passende "Datumslinie". --High Contrast (talk) 00:48, 17 February 2013 (UTC)
Schon sooo spät, und wir hängen immer noch an diesen Maschinen. Schlaf gut!--Wolfgang Moroder (talk) 00:50, 17 February 2013 (UTC)
Spät? Früh? Liegt an den entsprechenden Arbeitszeiten. Grüße und dito! --High Contrast (talk) 00:54, 17 February 2013 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

 
Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! ČD Class 814 in Nové Údolí (2).JPG, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates.

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments Good quality. --Poco a poco 19:50, 15 February 2013 (UTC)

 
Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! MAN truck without the typical trademark.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates.

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments OK. --Mattbuck 00:23, 16 February 2013 (UTC)

 
Hello, High Contrast. You have new messages at Stefan4's talk page.
You may remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

asturianu  беларуская (тарашкевіца)  български  বাংলা  català  čeština  Deutsch  Deutsch (Sie-Form)  English  español  suomi  français  galego  हिन्दी  hrvatski  magyar  italiano  日本語  ქართული  македонски  മലയാളം  Plattdüütsch  Nederlands  português  română  русский  sicilianu  slovenščina  svenska  Tagalog  Türkçe  简体中文  繁體中文  +/−

Stefan4 (talk) 19:56, 19 February 2013 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

 
Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! St. Nikolaus orthodox church.JPG, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates.

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments Good -- George Chernilevsky 19:31, 17 February 2013 (UTC)

 
Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Bishop Nicholas of Myra church in Lower Bavaria.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates.

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments Good quality. --Poco a poco 11:43, 17 February 2013 (UTC)

Op. Chariot, deutsch

Ich habe der Seite http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Diskussion:Operation_Chariot#Opferzahlen eine Erläuterung hinzugefügt.

mfG, Lutz Pietschker (Kontakt siehe dort von mir zitierte Webseite)

Hallo! Dank für deine Benachrichtigung! Gruß, High Contrast (talk) 17:36, 20 February 2013 (UTC)

Suche Bot zur Auffindung, zur Nutzung eigener Bilder

Hallo,

in gewisser Regelmäßigkeit suche ich nach den Fotos von mir und den Websites die sie nutzen(Wikis). Gibt es einen Bot der mir die Websites anzeigt die meine Fotos verwenden? Denn je mehr Fotos ich hochlade desto mühsehliger wird das ganze.

Vielen Dank im Vorraus.

--Blackerking (talk) 17:13, 22 February 2013 (UTC)

Hallo! Meines Wissens nicht. Sorry. Aber du kannst deine Frage gerne hier posten. Gruß, High Contrast (talk) 02:13, 23 February 2013 (UTC)

License review request

Could you check if all is done correctly here
http://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=File:Izhmash-ak103-1.png

Thanks in advance --RussianTrooper (talk) 06:19, 23 February 2013 (UTC)
This source statement seems to be absolutely superfluous. Or why do you think this source would be important? --High Contrast (talk) 14:05, 23 February 2013 (UTC)
Just inserted as the additional source in addition to the Author's DA page (primary source). If the file is OK so may be you could finalise the review process? Thanks in advance --RussianTrooper (talk) 16:38, 23 February 2013 (UTC)
Is this the original source? Really? If yes, then we cannot assume that this image is the "ageofatom.wikia.com"-user because there is no indication that it is his own work. --High Contrast (talk) 13:40, 24 February 2013 (UTC)
The original source is here http://dalttt.deviantart.com/art/AK-103-193394785 - mr. Kenshin's DA account. But it is also placed by the author of the image on Age of Atom Wiki - hence is the additional source, because the image was placed there by the author himself suggested he doesn't have to attribute it to himself. --RussianTrooper (talk) 15:10, 24 February 2013 (UTC)
I just wanted to review it, but it is done right now by a different user. It is only neccessary and reasonable to paste the original source. There is no need to list up every homepage where one specific image can be found. Regards and thanks for your support! --High Contrast (talk) 18:03, 24 February 2013 (UTC)

FP Promotion

 
This image has been promoted to Featured picture!

The image File:Cigarette smuggling with a book.JPG, that you nominated on Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Cigarette smuggling with a book.JPG has been promoted. Thank you for your contribution. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so.

 

/FPCBot (talk) 14:08, 23 February 2013 (UTC)

It's right here!

http://www.flickr.com/photos/walter_rw/7213189710/sizes/o/in/photostream/ http://www.flickr.com/photos/walter_rw/7213189710/in/set-72157629773697034

Deleted picture

File:Galaxy Park DVD hoesje.png

Hi, you deleted a picture that i uploaded because you were thinking that I found it on the internet. But i didn't found it on the internet. I made it my self. I have a DVD-box of Galaxy Park and I made a picture of my own DVD-box. I don't think that's a problem? Klodde (talk) 19:18, 5 March 2013 (UTC)

Hi! I did not deleted it, it was User:INeverCry. But anyway, it is a copyright violation because you are not the copyright holder of that motive. You just own the DVD box. Regards, High Contrast (talk) 13:38, 6 March 2013 (UTC)

Hinzufügen von Bildern als Qualitätskandidaten

Hallo, Wie kann ich einfach ein paar meiner hochgeladenen Bilder zu den Qualitätskandidaten hinzufügen? So wie es aussieht muss man dabei immer in den Editor gehen und im Quellcode rumtüfteln. Gibt es da keinen Wizard oder Ähnliches? Nebenbei, kannst du vielleicht mal bei meinen Bildern drüber schauen und deine Meinung sagen, welche sich als Qualitätskandidaten eignen?

Danke im Vorraus. --Blackerking (talk) 18:41, 6 March 2013 (UTC)

Hallo!
Die Nominiererei ist nicht so tragisch: als Unterstützung solltest du unter "preferences" oder "Einstellungen" (neben deiner Diskussionsseitenverlinkung oben rechts) das Häckchen für den Help:Gadget-QInominator aktiverien. Dieses Tool erleichtert das Einfügen deiner Bilder. Probiers einfach aus! Welches Bild nun gute Chancen hat oder nicht, ist im Allgemeinen schwer einzuschätzen - nicht selten werden relative schlechte Bilder "promoted" und manchmal werden wirklich gute Bilder als zu schlecht abgetan. Richtlinie dürfte dieses Monstrum sein: Commons:Image guidelines. Wenig Chancen dürfte aber dieses Bild haben, da es eine Datumseintragung beinhaltet - sieht man hier generell sehr kritisch. Außerdem könnte dieses Bild als Touristenfoto abgetan werden, da die Bildkomposition "zu unruhig" ist. Mein Tipp: Schau dir an, was derzeit nominiert ist und stell deine Bilder einfach rein. Das ein oder andere wird das QI-Abzeichen schon erhalten. Gruß, High Contrast (talk) 19:01, 6 March 2013 (UTC)

One of your uploads was used as an example of what is wrong with Commons

 
This is the photo

Hiya, the photo shown here is one that was used in this Polish article as an example of what is wrong with Commons. I have asked some questions of you here which I hope you might be able to answer. Please check the live version of the VP, as I am likely to expand on it a little. Thanks, russavia (talk) 04:23, 9 March 2013 (UTC)

Because I am no English native speaker, handling such long comments is not easy. Keeping short would help. Well, what extern people write is not of a primary relevance - you might remember how you have extinguished every link to Gregory Kohn's writings (there you seemed not to be interested to external opinions). Nevertheless, there is no problem with this bikini car wash image. I do not know what is written in this polish article exactly because I do not speak Polish (as you do not, too). And no, I do not have a "like" for bikini images. Browse my uploads or my works. --High Contrast (talk) 09:22, 9 March 2013 (UTC)
I'm not having a go at you in any way shape or form, but am merely showing you a parallel situation. Can you possibly tell me what the scope for this bikini image is, and why we should keep it above all the other bikini and/or car wash images we have? Am curious for your opinion on that. russavia (talk) 08:50, 10 March 2013 (UTC)
The situation between Polandball and this bikini car wash image is different. I think you are experienced enought to determine its scope. Nevertheless, if you have severe doubts run a DR. --High Contrast (talk) 14:34, 10 March 2013 (UTC)

Imágenes que he subido

Como puedes comprobar en el link que acabo de añadir, los contenidos de la web del Ararteko se pueden compartir, tienen una licencia creative commons señalada.

http://argitalpen.ararteko.net/index.php?id_l=39&id_a=116&leng=cast

Un saludo --Laukatu (talk) 20:10, 10 March 2013 (UTC)

  Done --High Contrast (talk) 20:11, 10 March 2013 (UTC)

Valued Image Promotion

Your nomination has been reviewed and promoted
Congratulations! The image you nominated was reviewed and has now been promoted as a valued image. It is considered to be the most valued image on Commons within the scope:
Cigarette smuggling in books..
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

Nagging people about poor transfers

No need to use a custom text when I already templified it: Template:How to transfer. Magog the Ogre (talk) (contribs) 03:26, 13 March 2013 (UTC)

a) nobody gets nagged by informing a user about this
b) from where should I know that you have recently created this template, please?
Regards, High Contrast (talk) 14:17, 13 March 2013 (UTC)
I was being facetious when I used the word "nag." I meant, if you and I are both going to notify users that they're doing something wrong, better to use the template for it that I already created. And you know that it's been created because I informed you of it. Magog the Ogre (talk) (contribs) 02:24, 14 March 2013 (UTC)
Thank you very much. As a non-native speaker such details in language use oftenly don't work. Kindest regards, High Contrast (talk) 13:28, 14 March 2013 (UTC)

Zurück....

aus dem Heeresinstandsetzungswerk Schraubenklappersdorf können wir dieses Fahrzeug   jetzt getrost bei der Prüfstufe C vorstellen -- Steinbeisser (talk) 15:05, 13 March 2013 (UTC)

Gute Arbeit! Gruß, High Contrast (talk) 16:11, 13 March 2013 (UTC)

template

Before placing a template {{No source since}}, look in the section Metadata. —Octave Laval (talk) 05:47, 16 March 2013 (UTC)

You should think of that I am experienced enough to be aware of this. But you must think of that EXIF data can be easily modified. Nevertheless, the uploader must provide clear source information. And you are the uploader of these images. Any by the way, this is no big act - just paste the correct site links where you have found these images. That's all. After that you can remove the no source tags yourself. --High Contrast (talk) 19:50, 16 March 2013 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

 
Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Burg Krempelstein, 2012.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates.

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments Good quality. --Coyau 22:04, 14 March 2013 (UTC)

File:Black thong whale tail.jpeg

Hello While it's true (and obvious) that the image has been edited, it is in fact the uploader's very own work. The uploader has no idea about what EXIF-information is, sorry about that.Jushne (talk) 17:59, 17 March 2013 (UTC)

Drawings on the Altes Rathaus of Deggendorf, Bavaria.

Hello High Contrast, I like your picture a lot but I would like it much more if the perspective was completly corrected. As I never ask the other contributors to do what I'm unable to do, I uploaded the picture yesterday and I fixed it. Within only three minutes, I got four perfect square angles (I used Gimp). I'm sure you can do it too.-- If you have no more time to lose with this photo, and only if you want it, of course, I can upload my new version and let someone else decide. -- Sorry for my English. Best regards. JLPC (talk) 13:39, 18 March 2013 (UTC)

Hi JLPC! Sorry for my late response. I made several perspective correction attempts but most of them were heavily distorted. I have chosen the best version for the re upload. But you can also upload your version over the "latest" one. Thanks! --High Contrast (talk) 14:44, 20 March 2013 (UTC)
Hello ! It's my turn to be late : sorry. I wasn't at home, but lost in another part of the French countryside, without any internet connection ! I uploaded the new file a few minutes ago. I hope you'll agree with my modifications.-- Have a nice sunny week-end ! --JLPC (talk) 17:06, 23 March 2013 (UTC)
Hi! No problem! Thanks for the upload! Which software did you use? --High Contrast (talk) 17:09, 23 March 2013 (UTC)

Hi High Contrast, you recently closed the above DR. Another image (File:The world according to wiki censors.jpg) was also a subject of that DR, but didn't get deleted (the commenting format might have obscured it; it's the first bullet after the nomination statement). Could you process that one too? Thanks, Эlcobbola talk 15:46, 21 March 2013 (UTC)

  Done Sorry for missing this one. Regards, High Contrast (talk) 15:46, 21 March 2013 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

 
Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Altbau und Pausenhof des St.-Gotthard-Gymnasiums Niederaltaich.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates.

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments Good quality. --Moroder 18:07, 20 March 2013 (UTC)

Adriana Zapisek.jpg

I toke this image during an exhibition of Adriana Zapisek with a compact camera. There were bad light conditions, then I cropped and exported for web on Photoshop, maybe that the reasons EXIF are lost. Please don't remove it. Thanks! --Minimundos (talk) 09:31, 25 March 2013 (UTC)

Can you upload the initial version, please? --High Contrast (talk)
  Done THANK YOU! --High Contrast (talk) 22:26, 27 March 2013 (UTC)

Original pic

This one is the original pic from the camera > http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Adriana_Zapisek_original.JPG On cropped version I also modified contrast and levels because it was a bit dark... Thanks! --Minimundos (talk) 15:38, 25 March 2013 (UTC)

  Done --High Contrast (talk) 22:28, 27 March 2013 (UTC)

Nennung als Fotograf

Hallo, ich arbeite für ein Forschungsprojekt an der TU Berlin und wir würden gern für unsere Abschlusspublikation dieses Bild benutzen: http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Mercedes_Benz_water_truck_in_Jordan.JPG

Dafür würden wir Sie gern als Fotograf nennen, wofür wir Ihren Klarnamen bräuchten, wenn Sie damit einverstanden sind.

MfG, Magdalena

Hallo Magdalena!
Gerne kannst du das Bild von mir verwenden. Es wurde ja auch unter einer freien Lizenz von mir veröffentlicht. Meinen Klarnamen möchte ich hier nicht angeben. Bitte einfach nur "High Contrast/Wikimedia" angeben - das reicht. Wenn es weitere Rückfragen geben sollte, dann gerne auch per E-Mail (Kleine Bitte: Sende mir bitte das Kapitel zu, in dem mein Bild auftaucht - als pdf). Viele Grüße, High Contrast (talk) 22:24, 27 March 2013 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

 
Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Altes Rathaus Deggendorf - Detail.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates.

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments OK. Mattbuck 11:21, 26 March 2013 (UTC)

Ё-named Russian ship

Hi, High Contrast, rein zur Information. So muss das russische Schiff beschriftet werden, wenn es einen Ё-Buchstaben enthält YO, was bei PETR VELIKIY nicht der Fall ist. Da ist eindeutig E sowohl an der Schiffswand als auch in Putins Ukas (z. Info, Putin ist der russische Führer und Staatschef).

 ,

Best regards,--PjotrMahh1 (talk) 01:43, 9 April 2013 (UTC)

Why should that be of interest for me, please? --High Contrast (talk) 15:38, 9 April 2013 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

 
Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Verona - Piazza Erbe as seen from Lamberti tower.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates.

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments Nice --Poco a poco 06:04, 6 April 2013 (UTC)

File:Latakia harbour.jpg

All information are contained in the file, affirmed by the camera's data (KODAK EASYSHARE C813 ZOOM DIGITAL CAMERA), but because the file's name was in Arabic, I uploaded it with an English name. You can see the original file (ملف:اللاذقية.jpg) at Arabic Wikipedia. If you didn't remove the deletion template at the right time, the file may be deleted, sourced, or unsourced!!!Maher27777 (talk) 15:23, 10 April 2013 (UTC)

Just work better and such things won't occur. Watch your talk page, I left a note for you there. --High Contrast (talk) 16:16, 10 April 2013 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

 
Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Lawinengefahr-Warnschild in Österreich -2.JPG, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates.

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments Good quality. --Moroder 15:44, 10 April 2013 (UTC)

Grenztruppen Ural

[5] - swiw ist das kein Ural 375D, sondern der Benziner. Der Diesel hatte einen anderen Grill. --Markscheider (talk) 22:12, 13 April 2013 (UTC)

Ich orientierte mich an den Kategorien, die ich nicht hinzufügte. Wenn du es schon weißt, dann kannst du dies gerne auch verbessern. --High Contrast (talk) 22:21, 13 April 2013 (UTC)
Sorry, ich lag falsch. Das Dieselmodell heißt de:Ural 4320. Damit erledigt. --Markscheider (talk) 22:34, 13 April 2013 (UTC)
Kein Problem! --High Contrast (talk) 22:58, 13 April 2013 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

 
Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Obernzell - as seen from the Danube.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates.

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments Good quality. --Moroder 09:56, 13 April 2013 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

 
Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Gemeinde Aunkirchen - Flurbereinigung 1970-1982.JPG, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates.

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments Can you geolocalize this photography? --Grondin 19:09, 11 April 2013 (UTC)   Done I just forgot it, thanks for informing me about this. --High Contrast 14:57, 12 April 2013 (UTC)  Support --Rjcastillo 14:16, 14 April 2013 (UTC)

File

delete the File:Испытания экипировки "Ратник" на базе 27-й отдельной мотострелковой бригады в Алабино.jpg Octave Laval (talk) 02:11, 17 April 2013 (UTC)

Is that some kind of order or what? --High Contrast (talk) 14:31, 17 April 2013 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

 
Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Kraftwerk Jochenstein AUT-GER, August 2012.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates.

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments Good quality. --Bgag 16:13, 15 April 2013 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

 
Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! DB Baureihe 218 400-0 in München.JPG, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates.

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments Good quality. --Berthold Werner 16:19, 16 April 2013 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

 
Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Taferl-Kapelle, Vilshofen a.d. Donau.JPG, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates.

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments Good quality. --Nino Verde 16:02, 17 April 2013 (UTC)

 
Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Lawinengefahr-Warnschild in Österreich -1.JPG, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates.

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments {{{3}}}

File:Stadtwerke Vilshofen.jpg

Hi, what's the problem with File:Stadtwerke Vilshofen.jpg you tagged as "no source".? There isn't no problem i can see. --Quedel (talk) 14:46, 21 April 2013 (UTC)

Hallo! Es fehlt die Quelle und damit der Nachweis, dass diese Datei unter einer freien Lizenz veröffentlicht wurde: "Stadtwerke Vilshofen" ist das einzige, was angegeben wird, was aber unzureichend ist. Genau genommen ist es eine schnöde Urheberrechtsverletzung, da es hier zu finden ist. Die Diskussionsseite des Benutzers spiegelt genaus dasselbe Problem wider - es wurde bereits im Oktober 2011 angesprochen und führte zur Löschung auf de.wiki. --High Contrast (talk) 16:59, 21 April 2013 (UTC)
Quelle ist die Hochladerin, sie hat doch angegeben, dass sie das Foto selbst gemacht hat („Ich bin Urheber dieses Bildes“), als Attributierung kann jeder wählen, was er/sie will. Nur weil die Dame das Bild auch für die Homepage ihres Arbeitgebers zur Verfügung stellt, ist es keine Urheberrechtsverletzung. Desweiteren ist das Bild nie wegen rechtlicher Probleme gelöscht wurden, es wurde exakt einmal gelöscht: weil es nach Commons übertragen wurde. Ist es so besser? --Quedel (talk) 14:21, 22 April 2013 (UTC)
a) Du hast Recht: das Bild stand auf de.wiki nicht im Verdacht eine URV zu sein - das habe ich mit dem Artikel verwechselt, der wegen URV gelöscht wurde - obschon dieser dann wohl auch wiederhergestellt werden sollte, sofern du dem Argument dieses Benutzers Glauben schenkst, dass dieser der Webadmin dieser Seite sei.
b) Da sind wir schon beim eigentlich Problem: Gab es je eine OTRS-Verifizierung dieser Webadmin-Behauptung?
Gruß, High Contrast (talk) 17:41, 23 April 2013 (UTC)
Nein, gibts im OTRS nicht und ist auch nicht vorgesehen. Da ja jederzeit gesagt wurde, sie habe das Foto selber gemacht und später gesagt wurde, sie sei auch die Webseitenbetreuerin, ist das eher "normal". Wenns andersdrum ist, ist oftmals was nicht ganz richtig (alte Erfahrung als DÜP'ler). Jeder kann ja mit seinen Bildern machen was er will. Ich veröffentliche meine Bilder ja auch nicht nur hier, sondern auch woanders. OTRS brauchts dafür nicht. Weil was soll da rauskommen? Bleibt ja bei der gleichen Aussage. --Quedel (talk) 18:14, 24 April 2013 (UTC)
Was soll dabei rauskommen? Naja, das ist immer das gleiche Prozedere und auch ein oft auftretendes Problem auf Commons. Pronzipiell kann jeder irgendetwas auf einem Wiki behaupten - sei es nun dieser mutmaßliche Webmaster dieser Stadtwerke oder sonst wer. Jeder könnte das Bild von der Stadtwerke-Webseite nehmen, es hier hochladen und behaupten sie/er habe die Bevöllmächtigung dazu. Demzufolge ist OTRS. Komisch, dass das Bild in der genau der gleichen Auflösung auf de-Wiki landete, wie auf der Stadtwerke-Homepage. Auf Commons ist sowas nicht haltbar. Ideal wäre wirklich eine Bestätigung: Kannst du der betreffenden Frau eine Email schreiben? --High Contrast (talk) 18:50, 24 April 2013 (UTC)
Richtig, es kann jeder alles hier behaupten. Dann fordere doch von mir auch OTRS-Tickets an. Die Person hat nicht angegeben, dass sie die Bevollmächtigung habe, sondern, dass sie (und nicht er!) es selbst fotografiert hat. Und das der Benutzername rein zufällig auch noch genauso heißt wie die Medienagentur, die die Website betreut ist auch lang geplantes URV-Spiel? Ebenso wie der URVling erst herausgefunden hat, dass die Chefsekretärin zufällig auch Betreiberin der Medienagentur ist, damit er/sie es dann als Begründung auf die Disk schreibt (und das noch ohne Nachfrage zu irgendeinem Stadtwerke-Zusammenhang). Sorry, wenn du unbedingt ein OTRS-Ticket drauf haben willst, dann schreib du sie an und erkläre in vielen E-Mails wie das läuft und warum es so ist. Ich machs nicht, da es hier nix bringt. Wenn ich was mache, dann stelle ich es auf de.wp wieder her und was mit der Commons-Kopie geschieht ist egal. Übrigens, bitte auch noch die Stadtwerke anschreiben, vielleicht haben die das Bild ja geklaut? Die älteste archivierte Fassung der Seite ist nämlich von 2012, die hochgeladene Datei von 2011. --Quedel (talk) 22:10, 24 April 2013 (UTC)
Plötzlich zeigst du erstaunlich wenig Ausdauer und verlässt offensichtlich die Sachebene. Dir ist sicherlich bewusst, dass dies nicht zur Klärung des Sachverhalts beiträgt. Nichtsdestotrotz habe ich die Benutzerin auf de:wiki angeschrieben - obschon dies nicht meine Aufgabe ist, sondern eher deine. Mal sehen was kommt. Nachdem die Frage nach der Quelle geklärt ist, fehlt nur noch die entsprechende OTRS-Bestätigung. Dementsprechend wurde auch der "problem-tag" abgeändert. --High Contrast (talk) 15:02, 25 April 2013 (UTC)

Wieso...

hab ich manchmal in der Leiste oben "Edittools" stehen und manchmal nicht - und wenn nicht, wie kriege ich das her?

In der Leiste mit Erweitert - Sonderzeichen - Hilfe steht manchmal (jetzt zum Beispiel) rechts daneben “Editools” mit den ganzen hilfreichen Sachen wie {{DEFAULTSORT} {{NAMESPACE} {{PAGENAME} #rRedirect . -- [ ] [[ ]] {{ }} {{{ }}} “ ” u.s.w -- aber halt nicht immer. Steinbeisser (talk) 14:31, 22 April 2013 (UTC)

Dieses Phänomen kenne ich auch. Woran es liegt weiß man nicht genau - kurzum: die Wikisoftware hat manchmal einen Hänger. --High Contrast (talk) 17:37, 23 April 2013 (UTC)
ja, da kann man nix machen - merci -- Steinbeisser (talk) 16:22, 24 April 2013 (UTC)
Ärgerlich, aber so ist es. --High Contrast (talk) 18:55, 24 April 2013 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

 
Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! The former oil power plant Pleinting.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates.

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments Good Quality --Rjcastillo 23:01, 20 April 2013 (UTC)

File:Mavis Acquah.jpg

I know I have been offline for a while and I know I have made mistakes in the past, but did I ever make up source information or lie about source information? Jcb (talk) 16:25, 26 April 2013 (UTC)

Do you have any valid permission for a free release of that image? COMMONS:OTRS? --High Contrast (talk) 23:20, 26 April 2013 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

 
Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Griechisch-orthodoxe Kirche St. Salvator.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates.

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments Good Quality --Rjcastillo 00:51, 25 April 2013 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

 
Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! St. Salvator in Munich - church tower.JPG, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates.

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments Good Quality --Rjcastillo 19:38, 25 April 2013 (UTC)

 
Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Kriegerdenkmal am Karolinenplatz - Löwenkopf.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates.

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments Good quality. --Ralf Roletschek 14:00, 25 April 2013 (UTC)

 
Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Bobcat telehandler in Germany.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates.

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments Good quality. --Ralf Roletschek 14:02, 25 April 2013 (UTC)

 
Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! JCB compact excavator, 2013.JPG, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates.

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments Good quality. --Moroder 09:20, 25 April 2013 (UTC)

We talk of this image File:Seattle, looking north on First from Union, 1972.jpg

http://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=File:Seattle,_looking_north_on_First_from_Union,_1972.jpg&diff=95464008&oldid=88071116: rather than revert you, I figured I'd ask, since you are certainly an excellent editor. Two of the three most visible establishments in this photo are places that showed pornographic movies. I notice you kept Category:Cinemas in Seattle, so presumably you agree that they constitute a significant element of the picture, so why remove Category:Pornography? - Jmabel ! talk 00:22, 2 May 2013 (UTC)

Per COM:CAT: the main subject of that image may be the buildings and the street but not "Pornography". Per definitionem P. is: Pornography or porn is, in its broadest state, the explicit representation of the human body or sexual activity with the goal of sexual arousal and/or sexual relief. - is something like that shown on that image? I say no. --High Contrast (talk) 15:32, 2 May 2013 (UTC)
No, but we don't have any subcategories related to venues that specialize in showing pornography or selling pornographic books, so I used th higher-level category we have. Perhaps we should add subcategories comparable to Category:Red-light districts (a subcategory of Category:Prostitution. Clearly a red-light district has a similar relation to prostitution that a porn theater or bookstore has to pornography. - Jmabel ! talk 04:21, 3 May 2013 (UTC)
Do you plan to create such a category tree? --High Contrast (talk) 15:02, 3 May 2013 (UTC)
Already did, look under Category:Pornography. I haven't gone about populating them other than this one image, but some time this weekend I'll see what we've got. - Jmabel ! talk 20:25, 3 May 2013 (UTC)
Great! Can you please past the full link. My browser (or the wiki software) does not work correctly. Regards, High Contrast (talk) 01:02, 4 May 2013 (UTC)

I'm not sure what "full link" you have in mind. I've created Category:Porn cinemas and Category:Pornographic bookshops. There are probably other types of porn-related businesses that deserve categories of their own. - Jmabel ! talk 15:51, 5 May 2013 (UTC)

Transfer from English Wikipedia

Hello. I transferred this [6] to Commons [7], using For the Common Good. There seems to be a problem with respect to license though. Can you please take a look? Thanks! Cavann (talk) 19:54, 4 May 2013 (UTC)

Hi! The problem is the missing source information. There is no author information given. We do not know who took this photo and a valid permission of the photographer is not given. The user on en wiki only states that he has a written permission. But this is not enough. --High Contrast (talk) 20:04, 4 May 2013 (UTC)
Oh I had assumed there was one. Original uploader has not edited since 2010. I guess it'll be deleted from Commons. Thanks for your help tho! Cavann (talk) 20:06, 4 May 2013 (UTC)
You can write an Email to this user in order to ask if he/she can send this permission to the Emailadress given. --High Contrast (talk) 20:14, 4 May 2013 (UTC)

jQuery

can't find variable mw, jQuery, Reference error, $, InsertTags. [undefined] is not a object

When did that happen? --High Contrast (talk) 00:27, 5 May 2013 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

 
Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Fünferlsteg in Passau (top).JPG, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates.

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments Good quality. --Ralf Roletschek 14:27, 2 May 2013 (UTC)

8 Images

I thought these 8 images were licensed as 'cc by sa 3.0' So, if there is a deprecated license issue, maybe you know how to rectify the problem. Just curious, --Leoboudv (talk) 04:26, 5 May 2013 (UTC)


PS: Is it advisable to flickr pass this image below:

I have never seen this flickr account before. Best Regards, --Leoboudv (talk) 04:28, 5 May 2013 (UTC)

Which "8 images" do you mean? --High Contrast (talk) 10:28, 5 May 2013 (UTC)

Here are 3 of them:

Regards, --Leoboudv (talk) 18:50, 5 May 2013 (UTC)

Well, actually there is no problem with these 3 images listed above. Yes, the software identifies the licensing as problematic due to the "old" "CC-template"-use but there is also a valid CC-by-sa-licensing. This old CC-template is used by this user specific and user created template. Maybe you can ask him to rework his own template. Regards, High Contrast (talk) 16:12, 6 May 2013 (UTC)

File:Sintel_poster.jpg deletion

I wonder why this file was deleted (without discussion?). IMO, it's covered by the Sintel sharing guidelines. I also think I even contacted Ton about this and he said that the posters were covered by the CC-license, I don't remember what movie project that was, though, but the sharing policy is identical for all of them. A short explanation would be nice. Thanks. --Julian H. (talk/files) 09:33, 5 May 2013 (UTC)

Does also apply to this movie poster? Please note that I did not run that DR. I have only deleted that file because there was no objection by others but if you can show that also this image was published under a free CC license I will restore that file of course. Regards, High Contrast (talk) 10:27, 5 May 2013 (UTC)
Hello there. You could find the answer here: http://www.sintel.org/sharing/ (Btw: The poster is from this website, or? Haven't found it yet.)
The only thing we have to do is, that we point out that the logos and trademarks have their own rights / are not under the CC license. Greetings, --#Reaper (talk) 15:20, 5 May 2013 (UTC)
This was my question: Is that poster on sintel.org? --High Contrast (talk) 17:26, 5 May 2013 (UTC)
http://www.sintel.org/production/movie-posters-printed-for-sale/ --84.152.129.97 22:27, 5 May 2013 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

 
Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Friedhofskapelle Schweiklberg - 2013 -1.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates.

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments QI for me. --Kadellar 16:19, 3 May 2013 (UTC)

 
Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Museum Lenbachhaus in München, 2013.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates.

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments QI for me. --Kadellar 16:21, 3 May 2013 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

 
Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Taferl-Kapelle in Vilshofen a.d. Donau.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates.

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments   Support --Rjcastillo 02:24, 5 May 2013 (UTC)

 
Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Technische Universität München (Luisenstraße).JPG, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates.

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments Good Quality. --Christian Ferrer 09:47, 05 May 2013 (UTC)

message that file I just uploaded is nominated for deletion

The situation: I just uploaded ARMOR magazine covers.jpg to replace the old cover illustrations showing on the Wikipedia page for ARMOR magazine. Then I get a message from you, almost immediately, that this new illustration was nominated for deletion, even though I am still working on the page.

One, I am the subject-matter on the content on this Wikipedia page, as I run ARMOR magazine, so while I may not be doing things correctly, I am not violating any copyrights. Two, I am not violating copyrights because it is not copyrighted -- ARMOR magazine, including its covers, are in the public domain because they are U.S. government products.

In short, please do not delete this graphic -- we created it. Please help me get the Wikipedia page updated if I'm doing something wrong. This is the first time I've had a Wikipedia account and am still trying to navigate through what to do. Thank you. Lisa Alley Editor in Chief, ARMOR magazine Fort Benning, Georgia (USA)

  Done Thanks for your support. The licensing is OK now. Best regards, High Contrast (talk) 19:33, 9 May 2013 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

 
Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Propyläen München, 2013.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates.

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments Good quality. --Ralf Roletschek 12:58, 8 May 2013 (UTC)

File:MTV Video Music Awards hosts.png

Done. Jorge Barrios (talk) 00:59, 12 May 2013 (UTC)

  Done :-) --High Contrast (talk) 01:00, 12 May 2013 (UTC)

Files uploaded by Atcace (talk · contribs)

Hello High Contrast -

ALL uploaded images are in fact owned by me and can be viewed at www.austincalhoon.com, please do not delete.

Thank you, austin calhoon user atcace— Preceding unsigned comment added by Atcace (talk • contribs)

Hi! No problem, if everything's allright, these images will of course be kept. Really your own photos? Did you take them all? Can you upload them in a higher resolution, please? --High Contrast (talk) 14:30, 16 May 2013 (UTC)


Thanks, Yes I took them all. I am a still life photographer and noticed a lot of the things I shot had not so good examples on the wiki pages. This is the standard web resolution from my website, it will take a lot of time to resize everything but I can do it soon. Thanks, Austin. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Atcace (talk • contribs)

Would be great to have them in the highest resolution you have. On Commons, such sizes are highly appreciated. By the way, I have closed the deletion request. Please keep me in the loop about the re-upload in a higher resolution of your files. Just tell me when you start to do it. Thanks for your support. Regards, High Contrast (talk) 15:33, 16 May 2013 (UTC)
I notice they all seem to have been renominated, due to lack of OTRS ID-confirmation.—Odysseus1479 (talk) 02:49, 20 May 2013 (UTC)
Good finding! Have you noticed this? Regards, High Contrast (talk) 07:56, 20 May 2013 (UTC)

These are my photos and should not be deleted. I uploaded them so they could be used in commons. What do I need to do to confirm? Atcace

AN/U

You don't get to vote twice. Accept it. Fry1989 eh? 19:30, 16 May 2013 (UTC)

What a ridiculous action. --High Contrast (talk) 19:33, 16 May 2013 (UTC)

Quality images of rolling stock

I noticed you copied most of my QI category to the QI rolling stock category. Unfortunately my QI folder all have sortkeys, so they won't be sorted alphabetically in the new category. -mattbuck (Talk) 20:48, 16 May 2013 (UTC)

Well, I did not create this category. I only started to copy some files into this cat. You may ask the creator. --High Contrast (talk) 12:38, 17 May 2013 (UTC)

Consulta

si las fotos que subi son publicas segun la plantilla de copyrihgt, ella dice:

 
This image is in the public domain because the copyright of this photograph, registered in Argentina, has expired. (Both at least 25 years have passed after the photograph was created, and it was first published at least 20 years ago, Law 11.723, Article 34 as amended, and Berne Convention Article 7 (4)).
Use this template exclusively for photos and NOT for drawings or other pieces of art.
 
Warning: date and source of any publication prior to 20 year old must be indicated so anyone can check it, and clear evidence that the image was taken more than 25 years ago must be given.

العربيَّة | Deutsch | English | español | suomi | français | galego | italiano | македонски | മലയാളം | português | português do Brasil | русский | sicilianu | 中文(中国大陆)‎ | +/−

 

Fotografías argentinas publicadas por primera vez hace más de 25 años.

Todas las fotos son de Militares Argentinos Fallecidos y/o condecorados en la Argentina.

Aparte dice: "Esta imagen es de dominio público porque el copyright de esta fotografía, registrada en la Argentina, ha expirado. (Todas las obras fotográficas de más de 25 años de antigüedad pasan al dominio público luego de 20 años desde su primera publicación, conforme Ley 11.723, Artículo 34 y sus modificaciones, y el Artículo 7 inc. (4) del Convenio de Berna)." Cite un libro (de entre todos lo que pùblicaron esas fotos desde que termino el conflicto en Malvinas en 1982). mis preguntas son: 1) que hice mal o entendi mal? 2)porque no puedo subirlas? gracias desde ya por su respuesta. --Arpatt 22:52, 16 May 2013 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

 
Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! View over the Italian city of Verona.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates.

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments Good quality. Please ad the location --Moroder 06:52, 12 May 2013 (UTC)

Mont Blanc photo

Hi, it seems you deleted my upload [8] with explanation scaled down version of File:PanoMontBlancHDR edit 1.jpg; no need for this. It was actually not only scaled down but also cropped to fit Wikivoyage banner ratio [9] because I wanted to use it as such there. Can you undo your deletion?

Best, Jjtkk (talk) 12:03, 18 May 2013 (UTC)

Hi! I have just restored it. --High Contrast (talk) 16:50, 18 May 2013 (UTC)
Thanks! Jjtkk (talk) 09:06, 19 May 2013 (UTC)

Yes

Why have you removed this picture (File:Tatiana Sorokko falcon dress.jpg) of Tatiana Sorokko that I have personally taken in 2010? I own the copyright of this image, and I have released it appropriately. Please restore the file.--FrancoiseDubois (talk) 17:32, 18 May 2013 (UTC)

The same image appeares here http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_x2KU6LjBYIY/S7EYNffKXCI/AAAAAAAACNk/HgVxGV3IGeQ/s640/Falcon+Dress.jpg . As such it is very doubtful that it is your own work. --High Contrast (talk) 17:35, 18 May 2013 (UTC)
You may opine that this is very doubtful, but the work, in fact, is mine. I am a professional photographer's assistant and took the picture myself in 2009. Please do not act on your unsubstantiated doubts and restore my photograph.--FrancoiseDubois (talk) 17:58, 18 May 2013 (UTC)
I have mistakenly written that I have taken the picture in 2010 in my first note to you. I took it in 2009.--FrancoiseDubois (talk) 18:03, 18 May 2013 (UTC)
Upload it in its original resolution/pixel count. --High Contrast (talk) 19:12, 18 May 2013 (UTC)
Okay. Thank you. But would it not be easier if you simply reversed your deletion? Can it be done? Thanks again.--FrancoiseDubois (talk) 20:57, 18 May 2013 (UTC)
Just upload it. No need to restore the old one. Please let me know if you have uploaded the "new" original file. --High Contrast (talk) 21:13, 18 May 2013 (UTC)
I'll have to do it on Monday. The file is in my office. I'll let you know.--FrancoiseDubois (talk) 21:56, 18 May 2013 (UTC)
Great! Leave me a short message here. If any questions are left, feel free to ask me. Regards, High Contrast (talk) 21:58, 18 May 2013 (UTC)

Reply

Greetings - I got your message about image sourcing. Unfortunately the Air Force image publishing system is not very friendly for links to the image descriptions...you pretty much have to go the base's image homepage and search for the caption text. Here is where I found that particular image; unfortunately the URL is not stable as the page number changes as new photos are added. Kelly (talk) 19:38, 18 May 2013 (UTC)

That's not correct. The Air Force pages do host pages including file and information - please check out the link which I have posted on your talk page. --High Contrast (talk) 19:40, 18 May 2013 (UTC)
They are good about including all info in the metadata though...I think that's how the description popups are generated. Kelly (talk) 19:41, 18 May 2013 (UTC)
Please check the link I have posted on your talk page. I have inserted a link on a file uploaded which is considered to be a valid source. Please keep in mind that EXIF-data can easily be modified. Please respect COM:L. --High Contrast (talk) 19:44, 18 May 2013 (UTC)
Not all images are used in news stories. I am a license reviewer, BTW. Kelly (talk) 19:45, 18 May 2013 (UTC)
If these images do not occur in news stories they appear on different subpages on this af-site. Because you are a license reviewer you should set a good example. --High Contrast (talk) 19:48, 18 May 2013 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

 
Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Staatliche Antikensammlungen in Munich - exterior view.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates.

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments Good Quality --Rjcastillo 20:35, 16 May 2013 (UTC)

 
Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Brauerei Hacklberg Passau.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates.

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments OK for me --Rjcastillo 19:33, 16 May 2013 (UTC)

 
Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Bomag Straßenwalze -01.JPG, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates.

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments good quality -- Malchen53 18:53, 16 May 2013 (UTC)

 
Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Amsel - Strompolizei (2011).JPG, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates.

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments Good quality. --NorbertNagel 18:14, 16 May 2013 (UTC)

A bot upload from Free Photo World is containig duplicates

Please note very small difference between File:Daf 3300.jpg and File:Daf 3300 (7354359940).jpg, File:Fiat 40 NC - Flickr - Joost J. Bakker IJmuiden.jpg and File:Fiat 40 NC (7358504388).jpg. Ain92 (talk) 18:14, 19 May 2013 (UTC)

  Done --High Contrast (talk) 18:15, 19 May 2013 (UTC)

  • I think that you should somehow search for other duplicates because Free Photo World seems to upload a lot of Joost J. Bakker photos with corrected lightness/contrast/gamma etc. Maybe it's useful to upload corrected versions to the old filenames. Ain92 (talk) 18:19, 19 May 2013 (UTC)
  • Is Free Photo World violating author rights of J. J. Bakker? They do not indicate his authorship although AFAIK it's required for the CC-BY license. Ain92 (talk) 14:47, 20 May 2013 (UTC)
Free Photo World seems to be the new account of J. J. Bakker. His old one is defunct. Newest contributions from May 2013 are of the same style and the same technical appearance as the old images. So, it is highly unlikely that there is a huge copyvio-monster. But if you have certain doubts you must ask the flickr user. --High Contrast (talk) 18:04, 20 May 2013 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

 
Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Amerikanisches Generalkonsulat in München.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates.

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments Good quality. --JLPC 16:49, 17 May 2013 (UTC)

File:Self-portrait photograph mirror.jpg

 
File:Self-portrait photograph mirror.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!

71.225.167.120 02:55, 20 May 2013 (UTC)

This Message

Dear Admin High Contrast,

I don't know you but I remember that you uploaded many images from flickr among other photo sites. So, I thought I should give you this 'warning' about the newly redesigned flickr site which sucks. Yahoo, which owns flickr, just threw up another barrier for flickr account owners to license an image freely. A flickr account owner has to learn 2 or 3 steps to license an image freely now. Somehow, I wonder if the flickr redesign is about money. Don't reply to my message. Just read it and maybe make a note of what I and Bidgee said there....in case you want an image licensed freely in future. Best Regards, --Leoboudv (talk) 04:35, 21 May 2013 (UTC)

Hi Leoboudv! Agreed. The "new" flickr site is complete bullshit. The interface is bullshit and the performance is bullshit. Flickr is dead for me now if there is no possibility to get to the old structure. Regards and thanks! --High Contrast (talk) 13:20, 21 May 2013 (UTC)
  • You're welcome. Yahoo put up more barriers to get a flickr account owner to license an image freely from say ARR that maybe the amount of photos that Commons will get from flickr will fall by 50% I think (except from images of accounts that already have their images licensed freely) sadly. Best Wishes, --Leoboudv (talk) 18:36, 21 May 2013 (UTC)

File Die City Preachers 1970.jpg

File Die City Preachers 1970.jpg This picture is free under Creative Common Licence (CC - http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/de/legalcode). So please don't delete this picture. I guarantee that it is for free use! --MichiOne (talk) 16:21, 21 May 2013 (UTC)

Are you the photographer of this image? --High Contrast (talk) 21:04, 21 May 2013 (UTC)

File:BNACVBGolf.jpg not eligible for speedy deletion

This file is of the same tag as in the English Wikipedia page and the Commons:Licensing and Wikipedia policies state that any file with the same Licence as in English Wikipedia may be transferred to Commons. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Moving_images_to_the_Commons states that "If there are multiple authors, each must be cited. If the file is a derivative of another file on a WMF project, that file must be sourced, the new file's license must follow the guidelines set by the old file's license (i.e. if a file released under a Creative Commons Share Alike license, a derivative of that file must also be licensed with at least a Creative Commons Share Alike license.)" Please verify and remove the deletion tag. Ramakrishnan.nikhil (talk) 10:57, 22 May 2013 (UTC)

This file is a copyright violation here on Commons and it was one on en-wiki. --High Contrast (talk) 20:32, 22 May 2013 (UTC)

Estadio IPD de Moyobamba.jpg

my dearest friend, the Stadium file IPD Moyobamba.jpg, is 100% mine, only work for a magazine of a regional circulation daily, and put that picture on the cover of the newspaper, but now I want to upload Wikipedia, with the logo of my company, what should I do to verify that is 100% mine?

ESPAÑOL

mi queridisimo amigo, el archivo Estadio IPD de Moyobamba.jpg, es 100% mio, solo que trabajo para una revista de un diario de circulacion regional, y puse esa foto en la portada de dicho periodico, pero ahora quiero subirlo a Wikipedia, con el logotipo de mi empresa, ¿que hago para constatar que es 100% mio?

Agradesco tu pronta respuesta. --Matador3020 (talk) 22:12, 22 May 2013 (UTC)

My dear friend! Can you please upload the same image in a higher resolution and without that watermark? --High Contrast (talk) 22:17, 22 May 2013 (UTC)
Hello!,the original resolution camera is on the watermark logo you mean: D 'Moyo Studio "no?
Sure, and non

--Matador3020 (talk) 22:26, 22 May 2013 (UTC)

Upload the original photo without that watermark. Overwrite the old file. --High Contrast (talk) 22:28, 22 May 2013 (UTC)
explain us how to overwrite a file, can you do it?. --Matador3020 (talk) 22:34, 22 May 2013 (UTC)
Just upload it under a new file name. That's easier now. Please start to upload. --High Contrast (talk) 22:36, 22 May 2013 (UTC)
Ready, here is the 100% original photo from my Canon camera, what do I do now? thumb|Interior del estadio IPD de Moyobamba --Matador3020 (talk) 22:45, 22 May 2013 (UTC)
Nothing. All is done - it is ok. One question: Do you have a bigger version of it? --High Contrast (talk) 22:47, 22 May 2013 (UTC)
From how much resolution you want?, because if so, I can enlarge in Photoshop Lightroom without affecting the quality. --Matador3020 (talk) 22:52, 22 May 2013 (UTC)
NO, no enlargement by software. No need for this. Just upload the original size from your photo apperatus - by now the image is very small. --High Contrast (talk) 22:55, 22 May 2013 (UTC)
Look, I have the original resolution is 2272 X 1704 pixels, okay if I upload this? --Matador3020 (talk) 23:19, 22 May 2013 (UTC)
Yes, upload this file in its original 2272 X 1704 pixel size. Please do so with all files you are uploading. Can you do the same with this image: File:Catedral de Moyobamba.jpg. --High Contrast (talk) 10:45, 23 May 2013 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

 
Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Einfamilienhaus in Pasing, München.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates.

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments Good quality. --Moroder 14:10, 19 May 2013 (UTC)

 
Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Bertsche Kommunalgerät G 129.JPG, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates.

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments Good quality. --NorbertNagel 14:21, 19 May 2013 (UTC)

 
Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Turkish DAF XF truck in Munich.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates.

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments Good quality. --NorbertNagel 14:21, 19 May 2013 (UTC)

Why are you deleting my images?

I uploaded a picture I took during the Russian Invasion of South Ossetia and you deleted it. I now see you are trying to other images taken off this page.

Why are you doing this?

I was in the Republic of Georgia during the Russian invasion 2008. I was driving near Tskhinvali and some of the Russian armored units were out of position of the areas they were supposed to be in by the Paris agreement before the Georgians went back into Gori. Some Russian armored units were trying to provoke an incident and would periodically shoot at passing cars. I thought someone should know what was happening so I hid my camera in my hat to get this picture. By all evidence this is the only know image of a Russian soldier engaged in ethnic cleansing in South Ossetia (that's why their faces are masked)during the war. I think it's important for this picture to be seen. Someone, and I have my suspicion which group, removed it when it was uploaded before. Please realize I was in some danger to get this picture. To be honest, I have a few enemies who monitor my work and they will periodically sabotage my efforts in this area of reporting. I have to ask this question, although it may sound overly dramatic, but due to the nature of my reporting and the places I go, I have to ask this question: Are you an agent of the Russian government or a Russian nationalist with sympathies for the illegal invasion of Georgia? If not, then please explain why you are removing important images and documents relating to possible criminal activities by Russian troops in this war.

Signed: Ernest Sipes, University of A'Sharqiyah, Oman. Tele (968) 972-59309 EMAIL: Personal: ernestsipes@hotmail.com, A'Sharqiyah University, Oman: ernest.s@asu.edu.om

Hello! If I was involved in this deletion process then something was wrong there. Can you please paste the link to this image? --High Contrast (talk) 11:01, 23 May 2013 (UTC)

Re: File:General Gladeon Barnes meets with colonel Paul Gillon.jpg

Whoops—thanks! There are around 20 files I'll be uploading from that website, so I'll keep your suggestion in mind. I will now go to add that template to those files I already uploaded, thanks again :) odder (talk) 11:11, 23 May 2013 (UTC)

You are welcome. --High Contrast (talk) 11:12, 23 May 2013 (UTC)

Discussion at Village Pump

I've started a discussion about using a hidden category to identify the Commons user who has uploaded a particular image from Flicker. You may wish to comment there. Delicious carbuncle (talk) 15:59, 23 May 2013 (UTC)

Replied on your talk page. --High Contrast (talk) 16:01, 23 May 2013 (UTC)

Request that category moves are better documented in edit summary

Hi. I am repeatedly being poked by people not liking category moves, this usually follows my doing a removal or catredirect from the commands page. I am asking all admins who add category moves if they would please look to better document the moves that are being ordered for SieBot. As background, I asked Siebrand if there was a better means to automate the "who ordered" statement, but he is unable to do so, such we are going to need to do this manually. Thanks for your cooperation.

You may also wish to look at the comment on my talk page about one of the moves that you ordered.  — billinghurst sDrewth 00:21, 24 May 2013 (UTC)

Good point! I agree with this complaint. But, Siebrand is not willing to cooperate? Really? But, what should be added to an approved by this bot removal? --High Contrast (talk) 00:25, 24 May 2013 (UTC)

Category:Marienbrücke, Vienna - Category:Marienbrücke (Vienna)

Hallo, offenbar warst es du, der erstere Kategorie auf zweitere verschieben hat lassen. Kannst du mir erklären, wieso? Die meisten vergleichbaren Kategorien, die ich bislang gesehen habe, verwenden da ein Komma - teils werden sie sogar extra dorthin verschoben. lg darkweasel94 07:51, 24 May 2013 (UTC)

Hallo! Ein einheitliche Richtlinie bzgl. Komma oder Klammer gibt es nicht. Dennoch: Häufiger verwendet wird für den Ortszusatz in der Regel ein Klammer bei Brücken, o.ä. Mittlerweile haben wir mehrere Kategorie über Marienbrücken. Aus Gründen der Einheitlichkeit wurde auch diese (Wiener) Kategorie verschoben. --High Contrast (talk) 17:57, 24 May 2013 (UTC)
Wenn ich mir Kategorien wie Category:Streets in Vienna ansehe, scheint es mir aber so, als wäre das Komma durchaus ein De-Facto-Standard - zumindest in Wien. Ich sehe aber andererseits auch, dass das in manchen anderen Städten nicht so zu sein scheint - irgendwie gehörte da, finde ich, eine Namenskonvention her ... ich werde da jetzt weiter nichts unternehmen, aber es könnte sein, dass andere Commoner aus Wien das wieder rückgängig machen, denn hier ist die Tendenz zum Komma halt schon recht groß. ;) lg darkweasel94 18:09, 24 May 2013 (UTC)

File deletion, how to manage or obtain valid copyright

Hello High Contrast,

I uploaded the file Tirelire-Combines-&-Cie-Affiche.jpg that is actually a movie poster. i would like to know if that kind of file can be considered as part of the public domain as they are shown around every theaters outside for free when a new movie is shown in theaters.

If it cannot be cosidered as public, what are the steps i should do if i want to request to the author of this poster if it can be added to wikipedia?

Thanks, Tommy Boucher (Zikmen)

Hi!

Can you please paste the link of this image? Couldn't find it. Regards, High Contrast (talk) 22:25, 25 May 2013 (UTC)

File:Swedish VLC media player.png

Hi, how was this image violating copyright since VLC is a free software and Big Buck Bunny is released under the Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 license? // WikiPhoenix [Talk] 16:00, 26 May 2013 (UTC)

Hi! From where should I know this? Not the fram is unfree but the movie or whatever is shown is likely copyrighted. --High Contrast (talk) 20:27, 26 May 2013 (UTC)
The movie is called "Big Buck Bunny" and it is a open source film released under Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 license. It is not copyrighted. // WikiPhoenix [Talk] 10:06, 27 May 2013 (UTC)
  Done file restored. Can you please comment that by using a weblink that verifies the free CC-license of the movie? Otherwisely it may be possible that someone else is restarts a DR in the future again. Thank you in advance. Regards, High Contrast (talk) 12:03, 27 May 2013 (UTC)
A web link is to the movie's license information can be found at the top of the {{Big Buck Bunny}} template in the file description. // WikiPhoenix [Talk] 16:10, 27 May 2013 (UTC)
Partly ma fault :-( Thanks, High Contrast (talk) 20:51, 27 May 2013 (UTC)

Unbekannt

Was ist daran unbekannt?--Sanandros (talk) 22:03, 26 May 2013 (UTC)

94th Aero Squadron photographs

What's the problem with these? They are all over 90 years old, taken by the Air Service, United States Army and all in the public domain ? Bwmoll3 (talk) 23:34, 28 May 2013 (UTC)

We had this discussion already in the past. You need to provide evidence that these images were created by a US governmental employee on duty. Your source cannot prove this. --High Contrast (talk) 23:35, 28 May 2013 (UTC)
Who else would have taken them? World War I Ended over 90 years ago and any copyrights would have expired anyway. Bwmoll3 (talk) 23:37, 28 May 2013 (UTC)
No, it is not sure that the copyrights have expired. And a "would have"-speculation is a violation of our basic principle. You need to provide a full and valid source information - you should know what is understood under this. You did that correctly in the last time. --High Contrast (talk) 23:40, 28 May 2013 (UTC)
Please submit this to a review before your arbitrary decision deletes these valuable historical photos]] Bwmoll3 (talk)
Better would be if you provide valid sources at first so that it does not come to a deletion. --High Contrast (talk) 20:20, 29 May 2013 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

 
Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Riva del Garda, Italy.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates.

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments
  Comment IMO it need perspective correction --Christian Ferrer 05:19, 24 May 2013 (UTC)   Done minimum distortion reworked. But please keep in mind that the buildings do not stand perfectly in a line. They are positioned in a curve. --High Contrast 18:15, 24 May 2013 (UTC)
For me it's better now. --Christian Ferrer 04:54, 24 May 2013 (UTC)

 
Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Former Magirus-Deutz 170D11 fire engine in Bavaria - front view.JPG, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates.

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments Good quality. --NorbertNagel 17:38, 23 May 2013 (UTC)

 
Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Former Magirus-Deutz 170D11 fire engine in Bavaria.JPG, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates.

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments Good Quality Arcalino 13:15, 21 May 2013 (UTC)

 
Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Cardo maximus in Petra.JPG, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates.

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments Good quality. --Cayambe 07:20, 23 May 2013 (UTC)

 
Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Opel-based Hymer Mobil.JPG, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates.

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments Some small overexposed reflections, all in all good quality. --Smial 11:31, 21 May 2013 (UTC)

 
Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Riva del Garda, Italy.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates.

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments
  Comment IMO it need perspective correction --Christian Ferrer 05:19, 24 May 2013 (UTC)   Done minimum distortion reworked. But please keep in mind that the buildings do not stand perfectly in a line. They are positioned in a curve. --High Contrast 18:15, 24 May 2013 (UTC)
For me it's better now. --Christian Ferrer 04:54, 24 May 2013 (UTC)

 
Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Former Magirus-Deutz 170D11 fire engine in Bavaria - front view.JPG, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates.

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments Good quality. --NorbertNagel 17:38, 23 May 2013 (UTC)

 
Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Former Magirus-Deutz 170D11 fire engine in Bavaria.JPG, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates.

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments Good Quality Arcalino 13:15, 21 May 2013 (UTC)

 
Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Cardo maximus in Petra.JPG, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates.

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments Good quality. --Cayambe 07:20, 23 May 2013 (UTC)

 
Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Opel-based Hymer Mobil.JPG, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates.

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments Some small overexposed reflections, all in all good quality. --Smial 11:31, 21 May 2013 (UTC)

Pedido de re-edição

Olá Alto Contraste! Meu nome é Paulo Rochedo da Costa e psedônimo Prof.Paulo Rochedo. Você solicitou a retirada de minha foto na minha página de usuário. Peço desculpas pela minha dificuldade. Coloquei minha foto na forma JPG em baixa definição apenas com intenção de ficar mais leve o acesso pelos usuários. Usei uma foto minha 3x4 e escaneei-a em baixa resolução. Tenha absoluta certeza de que a foto é minha mesmo! Você pode por gentileza, reeditá-la ? Muito obrigado Paulo Rochedo da Costa Paulo Rochedo (talk) 02:16, 29 May 2013 (UTC)

Well, I do not speak this language but I think you may point out that you do not want your file deleted. It is fact that I did not deleted your image. Please get in contact with the administrator who did that. Besides, the deletion debate was open for over 7 days and you did not state any comment there. Why not? --High Contrast (talk) 20:22, 29 May 2013 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

 
Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Karolinenplatz in Munich with the Obelisk.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates.

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments NIce. But you can clean noise from sky to make it better :) --Nino Verde 15:49, 27 May 2013 (UTC)

Simon Rex Profile Picture

Hello,

My name is Ben I work at Shoot To Kill Music, this is one of our clients that we have. We own the rights to this photo and would like to submit to wikipedia's creative common use section so that it may be used.

For any questions concerning this feel free to reach me at Ben@shoottokillmusic.com.

Thank you for your concern, much appreciated. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Brod3000 (talk • contribs)

Hi! No problem. Please only send a permission to permissions-commons@wikimedia.org in which you explain in short that you are the copyright holder. Please use official emailadresses. Your request is dealt confidentially. Regards, High Contrast (talk) 09:22, 30 May 2013 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

 
Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Annakapelle in Sankt Johann im Pongau - Portal.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates.

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments Dull but ok. --Mattbuck 19:29, 28 May 2013 (UTC)

Please pay more attention when taging copyvio images

Hello! You added the copyvio information to my user page regarding the File:StonehengeFE.jpg picture. You can find there what was the case: The original uploader to the en.wikipedia was user Edgy01, who says there about himself that he is Dan Lindsay - who in fact is a photographer of the picture on Photobucklet, so everything seems ok. All the information was available imediately on the picture page, it was only necessary to read them carefuly. Please pay more attention to this kind of images as they may be wrongly removed if the attention is insufficient. Or if You believe Edgy01 is not the true author of the photo, ask directly him. Thanks a lot. Okino (talk) 10:49, 31 May 2013 (UTC)

Then it is a COM:OTRS-issue. Anybody can claim to be the original photographer. Can you please ask the Wiki user to write an Email to permissions-commons@wikimedia.org in order to have it fixed for any time? --High Contrast (talk) 11:01, 31 May 2013 (UTC)
In relation to this advice, I have raised Commons:Deletion requests/File:StonehengeFE.jpg with a counter-view. I would be happy to discuss the most effective, and least burdensome, process to follow there. Thanks -- (talk) 11:34, 31 May 2013 (UTC)
Thank you very much! I wouldn't have found it. --High Contrast (talk) 11:36, 31 May 2013 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

 
Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! St. Gertraud in Passau, 2013.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates.

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments Good Quality --Rjcastillo 02:07, 29 May 2013 (UTC)

File:Howard Hughes piloting Spruce Goose.jpg

 
File:Howard Hughes piloting Spruce Goose.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!

El Grafo (talk) 07:50, 1 June 2013 (UTC)

Copyright notices in files you uploaded from Flickr

Hello High_Contrast!

You have recently uploaded a bunch of interesting photos by Andre Gustavo Stumpf Filho, from Flickr (eg 1, 2). In the description (copied over from Flickr) there is an aggressive copyright statement which clearly goes against the CC-by license.

Is it possible that the CC license was selected on Flickr by mistake? Should we delete these photos or just remove the text? Thanks, Ariadacapo (talk) 15:36, 1 June 2013 (UTC)

Hi!
I have noticed the writings by this flickr user, but:
a) It is not against CC because per Commons:Multi-licensing you can use an unfree license when you add a free one - this is given with all his files
b) Is it a mistake? Very likely not. You may call it a mistake if such an image was only available for a few days under a "wrong" license then one can assume a mistake. But here, the flickr user uploads sinc 2009 his images under a free CC license in combination with his strange copyright remark.
c) The only solution would be to ask the flickr user what he thinks about it.

Regards, High Contrast (talk) 20:45, 1 June 2013 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

 
Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Wallfahrtskirche Mariahilf, 2013.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates.

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments Good quality. --Cayambe 08:47, 30 May 2013 (UTC)

 
Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! An A380 at Munich airport, 2012.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates.

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments Quality is good, minus some CA, but the lamppost in the way is rather annoying. Mattbuck 19:29, 28 May 2013 (UTC)
This image depicts a realistic airport scene. It was intended to show the surrounding field of such an aircraft at an airport - lamppost included. --High Contrast 22:52, 29 May 2013 (UTC)
If you say so! Mattbuck 17:10, 30 May 2013 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

 
Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Auferstehungskirche - Passau -03.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates.

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments   Support OK --A.Savin 10:53, 31 May 2013 (UTC)

 
Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Augustinerchorherrenstift St. Nikola in Passau.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates.

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments Good quality. --Carschten 09:15, 31 May 2013 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

 
Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Nimmerfallstraße 20–36 in Munich-Pasing.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates.

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments Good -- George Chernilevsky 08:13, 2 June 2013 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

 
Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Castello di Malcesine -03.JPG, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates.

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments OK, though should be a bit darker - some overexposure on the boat and people. --Mattbuck 20:04, 2 June 2013 (UTC)

Your DRs on Atcace's images

Regarding the closed discussions Commons:Deletion requests/Files uploaded by Atcace and Commons:Deletion requests/Files uploaded by Atcace - 2:

I'm an OTRS volunteer handling ticket #2013060410008066, which is an email message from Austin Calhoon, from an email address bearing a similar name, stating "I am confirming I am the owner of the images posted to commons under the user name ATCACE."

He agrees to publish that work under the free license "Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported" and GNU Free Documentation License. The images are OK to undelete. I am not sure what to do from here; re-open the DR? I have also left a similar note on an admin's talk page at User talk:Jameslwoodward#OK to undelete. Amatulic (talk) 13:35, 5 June 2013 (UTC)

This file history

Please consider if you can change the license to cc by 3.0 as the flickr account owner requests on the flickr source. I only pass the image on a cc by 2.0 license as the flickr license is. Thank You, --Leoboudv (talk) 02:42, 7 June 2013 (UTC)

Secondly, can you please kindly pass this image as I cannot mark images that I uploaded. It seems that I am the only person marking images from flickr sometimes right now. Best Regards, --Leoboudv (talk) 05:30, 7 June 2013 (UTC)

  Done --High Contrast (talk) 17:59, 7 June 2013 (UTC)

 
File:Abandoned nuclear power station in Tatarstan (7948763846).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!

JuTa 11:37, 9 June 2013 (UTC)

Simon Rex image takedown

I own all permissions of my image and want to submit it to wikipedia.

Thank you for your post and thank you for your support. Regards, High Contrast (talk) 21:57, 21 June 2013 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

 
Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! West Glockenturm und Haupteingang, Hauptzollamtes München.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates.

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments QI.--ArildV 07:17, 8 June 2013 (UTC)

 
Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Kraftwerk Jochenstein Schleuse - Westseite.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates.

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments Good quality. --Moonik 08:53, 8 June 2013 (UTC)

 
Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! St. Gertraud in Passau, photographed 2013.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates.

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments
  Support The size is just --Christian Ferrer 11:07, 7 June 2013 (UTC)

Category:Frankenberg (Eder)

Hallo, es wird wohl so richtig sein, aber warum hast du die Galerie bei o.g. Kategorie entfernt? Ich wollte im Prinzip so etwas machen, wie das hier, bin aber beim Versuch gescheitert. Das Problem war, dass viele Bilder der Galerie nicht in der Commons-Galerie erscheinen. Gruß --Dawohajo (talk) 14:23, 12 June 2013 (UTC)

Hallo! Du hast im Pronzip die gesamte Kategorie zerstört. Das ist in keinster Weise hinnehmbar - obschon ich dir damit keine bösen Absichten unterstellen möchte. Ich glaube, dass du diese Seite gesucht hast: Frankenberg (Eder) (man beachte, dass es sich hierbei nicht um eine Kategorie handelt). Sofern du Lust hast, kannst du diese Seite nach belieben bearbeiten (gerne auch auf Deutsch) - sie macht ohnehin einen eher verlassenen Eindruck. --High Contrast (talk) 14:26, 12 June 2013 (UTC)
Oh Gott, sorry. Ich war deshalb verwirrt, weil wenn man in Marburg auf den Commons Link klickt, kommt man auf die editierbare Seite, während man in Frankenberg auf die Seite kommt, die man, was ich nicht wusste, nicht editieren darf. Könntest du das irgendwie im Wiki-Artikel umstellen? Denn so findet man viele Bilder nicht (Rathaus etc.). Gruß --Dawohajo (talk) 14:34, 12 June 2013 (UTC)
  Done --High Contrast (talk) 14:38, 12 June 2013 (UTC)
Danke! --Dawohajo (talk) 14:40, 12 June 2013 (UTC)
Bitte! Bei weiteren Fragen Commons betreffend kannst du mich gerne kontaktieren. --High Contrast (talk) 14:44, 12 June 2013 (UTC)
Dann nehme ich das Angebot doch gleich mal in Anspruch: Muss ich die Bilder, die da momentan in der Galerie stehen, alle auf der Seite lassen oder kann ich die nach eigenem Ermessen aus der neuen Galerie löschen? Denn da sind teilweise Bilder drin, die optisch nicht sonderlich attraktiv sind oder irrelevant (Foto von Telefonzelle). Gruß --Dawohajo (talk) 14:47, 12 June 2013 (UTC)
Wenn deine Änderungen sinnvoll sind und eine Verbesserung darstellen, dann schmeiß raus, was du willst. Du kannst die Seite komplett überarbeiten, sofern du das wünschst. --High Contrast (talk) 14:49, 12 June 2013 (UTC)
Sehr gut, danke. Die Telefonzelle ist ein kleiner Bücherladen, sehe ich gerade, hat also doch ihre Berechtigung. Aber so Schneematsch-Bilder will niemand sehen. Gruß --Dawohajo (talk) 14:51, 12 June 2013 (UTC)
Aber bitte mit Bedacht arbeiten. Gruß und viel Spaß beim Verbessern! --High Contrast (talk) 14:59, 12 June 2013 (UTC)

File:Debian.png

Hello High Contrast, could you please delete this file page. I need it to move a file I renamed a little too quickly. Thank you.--MainFrame (talk) 14:57, 12 June 2013 (UTC)

Hello!   Done --High Contrast (talk) 14:58, 12 June 2013 (UTC)
Thank you!--MainFrame (talk) 15:00, 12 June 2013 (UTC)
No problem! Happy editing! --High Contrast (talk) 15:02, 12 June 2013 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

 
Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Hochbunker Lohnrößlerweg 8 in München-Trudering.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates.

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments Good quality--Lmbuga 21:50, 8 June 2013 (UTC)

 
Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! View over the roofs of Obernzell in Bavaria.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates.

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments Good quality--Lmbuga 21:43, 8 June 2013 (UTC)

Unidentified location

Hi High Contrast. The File:Krupp-canon damaged by a squib.jpg that you have uploaded, has no location. It will be interesting to know where this cannon is, in which monument (a castle?) and in which city. Thank you very much! --DenghiùComm (talk) 08:35, 14 June 2013 (UTC)

Hi! A little riddle: A view in the file history may help you in answering your question ;-) --High Contrast (talk) 17:42, 14 June 2013 (UTC)
Hallo! This is precisely the problem. This file has no history and in your gallery it is located between a file of Verona and a another file of Venice. Do you remember in wich monument and city this cannon is located? Thank you so much! Best regards --DenghiùComm (talk) 17:01, 17 June 2013 (UTC)
Hello DenghiùComm! Sorry for my late response. I did not notice your message due to the fact that other posts arrived in the meantime. Well, the image was taken in the castle of Udine. Best regards and hopefully my next interaction with you will not come with such a delay! --High Contrast (talk) 15:51, 24 June 2013 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

 
Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Ziegler Ford Transit fire engine of the Volunteer Fire Department of Ramsbach.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates.

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments OK for QI. --NorbertNagel 20:16, 14 June 2013 (UTC)

 
Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Paläontologische Museum München, 2013.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates.

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments Good quality. --Cayambe 06:37, 14 June 2013 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

 
Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Hotel Rechthaler Hof, München - 2013.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates.

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments QI imo. --ArildV 22:07, 15 June 2013 (UTC)

 
Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! BG BAU - Berufsgenossenschaft der Bauwirtschaft, Munich -2013.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates.

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments Good quality. --Cayambe 16:06, 15 June 2013 (UTC)

 
Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Doppelhaus in Pasing, München.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates.

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments Good quality. --NorbertNagel 10:15, 15 June 2013 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

 
Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Laufkatze eines Baukranes, 2013.JPG, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates.

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments Good quality--Lmbuga 01:32, 16 June 2013 (UTC)

Email

I have sent you an Email. --178.2.59.123 19:15, 19 June 2013 (UTC)

  Done --High Contrast (talk) 12:21, 20 June 2013 (UTC)

Answer

What is Copyright violation i did or upload , all of them are my work ? , tell me just one thing , or if there isn't stop lying , i want your answer now.GhiathArodaki (talk) 20:56, 22 June 2013 (UTC)

File:MuftiHassoun.jpg, File:YABOOKCOVER.gif, File:The photo of Hassoun Mufti of Syria.jpg for instance. --High Contrast (talk) 20:57, 22 June 2013 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

 
Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Ehem. Postdienstgebäude Hopfenstraße 4,6,8, München.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates.

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments Good quality. --Cayambe 07:56, 21 June 2013 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

 
Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Beer garden FranZz in Munich.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates.

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments QI for me. --Kadellar 15:05, 22 June 2013 (UTC)

 
Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Auferstehungskirche - Passau -02.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates.

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments QI for me--Lmbuga 02:19, 22 June 2013 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

 
Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! U-Bahn sign in Munich, 2013.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates.

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments Good quality. --Moonik 06:25, 23 June 2013 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

 
Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Kath. Pfarrhaus in Pasing.JPG, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates.

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments Good quality. --Poco a poco 18:29, 26 June 2013 (UTC)

Bot upload Vitaly Kuzmin's images

Hello, look like this bot did quite good job in here but it upload all pictures even pictures already upload before so how we going to handle those picture? Regards. And do we should rename some picture for easy find like this to Tu...?Tnt1984 (talk) 07:02, 30 June 2013 (UTC)

Hello! Yes, this problem has been discussed with the bot owner. But there is no very good solution possible. As such we need a human counter for dupes. Maybe you find some. Give me the links and I will delete them. Regards, High Contrast (talk) 17:08, 30 June 2013 (UTC)

Sure some of them are File:27th Independent Sevastopol Guards Motor Rifle Brigade (181-10).jpg, File:27th Independent Sevastopol Guards Motor Rifle Brigade (181-11).jpg, File:27th Independent Sevastopol Guards Motor Rifle Brigade (181-17).jpg, File:27th Independent Sevastopol Guards Motor Rifle Brigade (181-18).jpg. Another will may come after I do some categories later. Regards.Tnt1984 (talk) 05:09, 1 July 2013 (UTC)

Please give also the duplicated file. Both links are needed. Thanks! Regards, High Contrast (talk) 15:48, 1 July 2013 (UTC)

Sure in pair like bot-human,bot-human, bot-human, bot-human, bot-human. May be just like that first, after you see it all fit we will move forward with another. Wish you have a good day.Tnt1984 (talk) 05:49, 2 July 2013 (UTC)

  Done Thanks! --High Contrast (talk) 17:19, 2 July 2013 (UTC)

Hello, may be it time to move with another. Continue in pair bot-human, bot-human, bot-human, bot-human, bot-human and bot-human. I think I will take slowly for the best not to make mistake. Regards.Tnt1984 (talk) 08:04, 6 July 2013 (UTC)

  Done Thanks again! --High Contrast (talk) 16:26, 7 July 2013 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

 
Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Pritschenlaster MAN 8.163.JPG, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates.

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments Good quality. --Cayambe 08:19, 29 June 2013 (UTC)

The images uploaded are my own. I am the photographer and publisher. Thank you ~~ Imagesandevents

Quality Image Promotion

 
Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Mobiles Stromerzeugungsaggregat von AVS, 2013.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates.

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments Good for me--Lmbuga 20:32, 3 July 2013 (UTC)

 
Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Westbad in München - 04.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates.

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments OK. --Mattbuck 22:21, 2 July 2013 (UTC)

Hi, ich glaube, ich habe bei obiger Datei einen Fehler gemacht, da mir nicht klar war, dass "U.S. Navy photo by Royal Netherlands Navy Offshore Patrol Vessel HNLMS Holland/Released" offensichtlich "Royal Netherlands Navy photograph" (siehe EXIF Daten) bedeutet. Falls Du das auch so siehst, bitte löschen. Danke und Grüße Cobatfor (talk) 17:18, 8 July 2013 (UTC)

Hallo! Du hast Recht. Ich habe das Bild gelöscht. Danke für den Hinweis! Gruß, High Contrast (talk) 19:33, 8 July 2013 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

 
Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Römisch-katholische Kirche Maria Rosenkranzkönigin.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates.

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments Good quality. --Steindy 22:24, 5 July 2013 (UTC)

 
Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Agricultural field in the South of Munich.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates.

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments   Good quality--Llorenzi 19:41, 6 July 2013 (UTC)

Atalanta

Warum hast du die ganzen Navy pics (auch an board von Navy Schiffen) nach Atalanta verschoben? Ich dachte eigentlich wäre das nur den Europäern vorbehalten.--Sanandros (talk) 20:38, 9 July 2013 (UTC)

Die "ganzen Navy pics (auch an board von Navy Schiffen)" habe ich wahrlich nicht verschoben. Ich plane eine Category:Operation Ocean Shield, bei der die US-Schiffe sehr wohl involoviert sind. Da diese Bot-Kategorien à la "US Navy, location" scheiße sind, habe ich sie momentan zwischen geparkt. --High Contrast (talk) 14:59, 10 July 2013 (UTC)

  Done --High Contrast (talk) 15:48, 10 July 2013 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

 
Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Red horse-chestnut Aesculus × carnea.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates.

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments Good quality. --Ralf Roletschek 11:12, 8 July 2013 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

 
Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Westseite des Maximilianeum, 2013.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates.

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments Good quality. --Ralf Roletschek 20:38, 9 July 2013 (UTC)

Notification about possible deletion

 
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!

Affected:

And also:

Yours sincerely, russavia (talk) 20:26, 14 July 2013 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

 
Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Praterstraße 2 - Hauptpersonalrat und BlzfpB.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates.

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments Good quality. --Martin Falbisoner 21:29, 10 July 2013 (UTC)

 
Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Alpines Museum (München) in 2013.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates.

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments Good quality. --Martin Falbisoner 21:29, 10 July 2013 (UTC)

File:CBMDF (7952371884).jpg

 
File:CBMDF (7952371884).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 may soon be deleted. If you have written permission from the copyright holder, please replace the copyvio tag with {{subst:OP}} and have them send us a free license release via COM:VRT. If you disagree that the file is a copyright violation for any other reason, please replace the copyvio tag with a regular deletion request.

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  +/−

Leonardo (talk) 20:23, 15 July 2013 (UTC)

File:CBMDF (7952368318).jpg

 
File:CBMDF (7952368318).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 may soon be deleted. If you have written permission from the copyright holder, please replace the copyvio tag with {{subst:OP}} and have them send us a free license release via COM:VRT. If you disagree that the file is a copyright violation for any other reason, please replace the copyvio tag with a regular deletion request.

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  +/−

Leonardo (talk) 20:24, 15 July 2013 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

 
Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Cultural heritage monument in Gasthof Göttler in Trudering.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates.

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments Good quality. --Smial 21:29, 13 July 2013 (UTC)

Re.

I have added the license. The source was already specified --Ipvariabile (talk) 18:02, 17 July 2013 (UTC)

i have converted it to a DR. You need to provide clear evidence for such PD-license. --High Contrast (talk) 18:04, 17 July 2013 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

 
Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Liebherr 904 excavator.JPG, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates.

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments Good quality. --Vassil 14:06, 16 July 2013 (UTC)

 
Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Messeturm München, 2013.JPG, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates.

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments Good quality. --Smial 12:13, 16 July 2013 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

 
Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Mercedes-Benz O 405 bus in Munich.JPG, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates.

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments Good quality. --Steindy 17:52, 19 July 2013 (UTC)

 
Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Pantograph of a DBAG Class 423.JPG, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates.

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments OK   Support --Christian Ferrer 11:58, 19 July 2013 (UTC)
OK   Support Yndesai 05:05, 20 July 2013 (UTC)

Hello High Contrast,
Your image File:Pantograph_of_a_DBAG_Class_423.JPG was marked for rotating by 2 deg ...
But I think a perspective transformation has done a better job.
Jaybear...disc.21:03, 27 July 2013 (UTC)
Thanks for that! Best regards, High Contrast (talk) 15:39, 28 July 2013 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

 
Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Olympisches Dorf in München, Juni 2013.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates.

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments Perhaps it needs a little bit of perspective correction, but QI IMO--Lmbuga 17:27, 20 July 2013 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

 
Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Gollierstraße 40-42-44-46-46 a-46 b-46c-48-50-50 a-52 - München.JPG, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates.

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments I would add some sharpening. There is a tiny object the the left bottom (see note) which should be cropped out. --Tuxyso 20:57, 23 July 2013 (UTC)
All   Done --High Contrast 15:12, 24 July 2013 (UTC)
OK now. --Tuxyso 21:48, 24 July 2013 (UTC)

 
Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! BMW 320d, BMW 335i Gran Turismo, BMW 330d in Munich.JPG, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates.

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments Not quite sure. Good, except for overexposure.   Weak support I suppose. Mattbuck 10:04, 20 July 2013 (UTC)

Ich weiss

in Wikipedia plappert jeder irgendwem etwas nach, leider wird dann - wohl Mangels Möglichkeiten und Ausbildung - das Meiste selten hinterfragt, in Folge wird der größte Unsinn danach zu Wikipediarecht. Ich hätte nur eine Frage zu deiner Qualifikation, den rechtlichen Begriff Schöpfungshöhe interpretieren zu können. Und zwar Anhand dieser Beispiele: [10]. Wo bitte findet sich der vom Gesetzgeber geforderte Anteil einer, einer bestimmten Person zuordenbaren, Schöpfungshöhe? Diese Pläne sind keine Karten. Sie sind die, über Jahrhunderte übernommenen, in den allerseltensten Fällen selbst gezeichneten Grundrisspläne. Hier gibt es keine Schöpfungshöhe, welche sich in einer aktuellen Rechtsintepretation als solche definieren könnte. Zeitgenössische architektonische Zeichnungen haben im Hintergrund den Schöpfungsakt des Architekten. In diesem Fall ist das der Schöpfungsakt eines Baumeisters, der mit Sicherheit vor mehreren hundert Jahren verstorben ist.

Meine Frage: Bist du einfach nur ein Nachplapperer oder bist du hast du wirklich in der Lage, den juristischen Begriff Schöpfungshöhe nach deutschen und österreichischen Recht (belassen wir es einmal damit) aus dem Gesetzestext selbst und der aktuellen Judikatur zu interpretieren? Ich fürchte, dass du das nämlich nicht wirklich kannst. Ich gehe davon aus, dass du keine juristische Ausbildung hast. Wenn doch, dann wäre ich durchaus geneigt, mit dir einen kollegialen Diskurs zu beginnen, beginnend mit der unter uns Kollegen eigentümlichen Einleitung jeglichen Fachgesprächs: Es kommt drauf an. --Hubertl (talk) 10:16, 28 July 2013 (UTC)

Ich fürchte, dass du in derartigen Fragen überfordert bist. Ich gehe davon aus, dass du keine juristische Ausbildung hast. --High Contrast (talk) 15:39, 28 July 2013 (UTC)

Interview for Wikimedia blog

Hi High Contrast,

My name is Donna Peterson, and I'm a communications volunteer with the Wikimedia Foundation in San Francisco. We have a feature on the Wikimedia blog [11] to profile the photographers behind the beautiful photos that become Picture of the Day (POTD) on Wikimedia Commons. You can see some of our past POTD posts here: https://blog.wikimedia.org/c/communications/picture-of-the-day/

Given that one of your photos, Cigarette smuggling with a book, is scheduled for August 13, we'd love to do a short interview with you by email to discuss your photography and your POTD. Please let me know if you would be interested! You can email me at dpeterson wikimedia.org or respond on my talk page.

Thanks, 98.169.134.9 14:55, 31 July 2013 (UTC)

Hi!
I will have a look at it. Thanks for your notification! Best regards, High Contrast (talk) 15:16, 31 July 2013 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

 
Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Bahnhof München-Moosach -2.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates.

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments Good quality. --NorbertNagel 16:45, 29 July 2013 (UTC)

 
Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Manitou telehandler in 2013.JPG, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates.

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments Good quality. --JLPC 17:42, 27 July 2013 (UTC)

 
Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Offenbachstraße - München-Pasing.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates.

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments Good for me--Lmbuga 19:15, 27 July 2013 (UTC)

File:Richard Stallman en vintra vestaĵo.jpg

Wieso cc-by-1.0? Es steht zwar keine bestimmte Version dort, aber da das Foto aus einer Zeit kommt, wo 3.0 die aktuelle Version war, ist das schon am naheliegendsten. Ich werde allerdings gerne eine E-Mail an Stallman schreiben, damit er das klärt. darkweasel94 10:11, 1 August 2013 (UTC)

cc-by-3.0 ist reine Spekulation. Email schreiben und bei positiver Rückmeldung bei COM:OTRS vermerken lassen. --High Contrast (talk) 13:05, 5 August 2013 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

 
Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Mercedes-Benz Actros 2641 & Mercedes-Benz Atego 822.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates.

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments Good quality. --Ralf Roletschek 11:06, 30 July 2013 (UTC)

deletion of images

Hello sir I had uploaded some pictures on commons clicked by Mr Devendra Purbiya on commons to use them to update the wiki page of Spring Fest, th cultural festival of IIT Kharagpur, the premier engineering institute of India. I am Mahesh Karuveli, media head at Spring Fest core team. The photos were clicked by Devendra Purbiya, an alumnus during the fest last year, and sold to us. We have uploaded all these images on our Facebook page with his watermarks. I had taken prior permission to use these select images for Wikipedia, without watermarks and he was fine with it as long as due credits were given to him on the page. We have got a really good working pally with him, and he has been coming down every year to click for us. Please dont delete the photos as they are very important for our wiki page and publicity. If you have any issues against their use, please email me (Im not sure if there are wikipedia regulations against contacting outside wikipedia or publishing contact information, if so I'm sorry) Thanking you Mahesh Joseph mjkaruveli@gmail.com


PS this is the facebook link to the album https://www.facebook.com/springfest.iitkgp?ref=ts&fref=ts

Hi! Your post is better placed here: Commons:Deletion requests/Files uploaded by Maheshkaruveli --High Contrast (talk) 13:06, 5 August 2013 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

 
Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Caterpillar M315C excavator.JPG, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates.

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments good quality.--ArildV 06:58, 31 July 2013 (UTC)

 
Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Mobile art gallery Galeriewagen" in Munich.JPG, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates.

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments
  Comment Only the street lamp on the right is straight. The trailer seems a bit tilted. Can you fix it, please ? --JLPC 17:35, 29 July 2013 (UTC)
  Done removed tilt. --High Contrast 16:03, 30 July 2013 (UTC)
QI now. --JLPC 16:43, 30 July 2013 (UTC)

Question

Hello, Can I ask some question? Like this picture can upload to Commons? I'm not used to the rights of flickr so I ask you first before act. Regards.Tnt1984 (talk) 04:54, 4 August 2013 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) Yes, this image has a free licence at Flickr. You can upload it using the "Creative Commons Attribution ShareAlike 2.0" in the dropdown menu of the upload screen. De728631 (talk) 16:58, 4 August 2013 (UTC)
Thank and wish you well.Tnt1984 (talk) 05:25, 5 August 2013 (UTC)
Hi! Which thing is depicted on the image? Is it some kind of model? --High Contrast (talk) 13:02, 5 August 2013 (UTC)
Maybe. It's a very big model that you can ride it on road as well have fun with that toy prototype if you have 1.4 million dollars. Surely enough we can hope for some serious way of that thing going out later. Hope you like it.Tnt1984 (talk) 14:30, 5 August 2013 (UTC)
Alright with this image now. But you always have to insert a so called "flickrreview"-tag ({{flickrreview}}). You can use this tool for your flickr uploads. It makes the whole procedure much easier and faster for you ... and with all important flickr-tags. --High Contrast (talk) 16:46, 5 August 2013 (UTC)
Thank you for help and for the hint about this useful tool. It may come in handy later if I can find some impression images on flickr. Cheer.Tnt1984 (talk) 05:53, 6 August 2013 (UTC)
You're welcome. Happy editing! Cheers, High Contrast (talk) 10:23, 6 August 2013 (UTC)

Unterstützung bitte

Grüß dich!

Ich brauche deine Unterstützung. Ich habe dir eine Email geschickt... --178.7.239.191 11:58, 4 August 2013 (UTC)

  Done --High Contrast (talk) 13:01, 5 August 2013 (UTC)

Minjokculturalcenter02.jpg copyright infringement?

Hi, I recently saw a copyright infringement template on my own photo I took in July 2011. But, the metadata shows it is mine. Thanks and take care. Snowfalcon cu (talk) 11:31, 6 August 2013 (UTC)

Hi! Are you the photographer of it? Who is that panoramio user who published the same image there before you uploaded the one here of which you claim to be the creator of? --High Contrast (talk) 11:33, 6 August 2013 (UTC)
  • Hi! Thanks for the timely response. I am A. E. Michalak. The claim is verifiable on my site, [GLPS2.org]. There you can see my name and the affiliation with the academy. Can you please remove the violation format after I have been confirmed? It has been a really long day (it's 21:00 and still at work) and I am squinting at the monitor. Thanks and take care.Snowfalcon cu (talk) 12:08, 6 August 2013 (UTC)
I have closed the deletion request for now. Do you have the photo in a higher resolution than 1,024 × 683? --High Contrast (talk) 12:11, 6 August 2013 (UTC)
Highest image resolutions are always appreciated on Commons. Please do so if it is possible. --High Contrast (talk) 12:16, 6 August 2013 (UTC)
Wonderful! Thanks for your support. Please upload always the highest resolution of an image in future. Happy editing! Regards, High Contrast (talk) 23:13, 6 August 2013 (UTC)

Date adjust

I adjusted the deletion date on File:Osnat Tzadok.jpg the photographer's email didn't get sent to OTRS until today. I didn't ask what the delay was.--Canoe1967 (talk) 20:36, 6 August 2013 (UTC)

Under which license should this image be published? What did you suggest? --High Contrast (talk) 20:41, 6 August 2013 (UTC)
I didn't suggest either. I just sent them the url to the OTRS main page. The photographer then read it over and sent the email, I assume.--Canoe1967 (talk) 21:42, 6 August 2013 (UTC)
You know, File:Osnat Tzadok.jpg does not contain any licensing information. You need to offer anything to the creator: such as CC-by-sa-3.0, Free-art-license, or any other license. Normally, you as the person sending the email to the author should suggest some licensing. --High Contrast (talk) 22:10, 6 August 2013 (UTC)
No problem. Since I did 'offer' the OTRS page for them to read (before they emailed me the image), I will add a CC-by for now.--Canoe1967 (talk) 23:29, 6 August 2013 (UTC)

Revert

Hi! Why did you chose to overwrite the original image with a copyright infringing one? If you revert such images, please nominate the one of doubtful original for deletion. Thanks! --High Contrast (talk) 20:29, 8 August 2013 (UTC)
Please note this. Regards, High Contrast (talk) 21:01, 8 August 2013 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

 
Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Altglas-Sammelstelle in München.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates.

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments Ok for QI --Martin Kraft 21:10, 10 August 2013 (UTC)

 
Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Schloss Rannariedl im Sommer 2012.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates.

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments Sharpness on the right side of the photo (problem with your lens?) could be better, imho nonetheless QI. --Tuxyso 06:33, 8 August 2013 (UTC)

 
Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Neupfarrkirche in Regensburg - Turmuhr.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates.

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments   Support Good quality. In my opinion it does not need more perspective correction (taken from below), but it's possible--Lmbuga 19:52, 7 August 2013 (UTC)

 
Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Volvo 121 in Munich.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates.

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments OK for QI. --NorbertNagel 16:37, 7 August 2013 (UTC)

 
Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Bayerische Zugspitzbahn - Verkehrszentrum -07.JPG, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates.

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments Good quality. --NorbertNagel 16:52, 7 August 2013 (UTC)

Picasa photo mis-linked

Hi High Contrast - for this pic File:ГАЗ Водник, День Победы 9 Мая, 2009 г., г.Сысерть.JPG the source link at Picasa is for the wrong pic. Can you check it and correct the link, please? Thanks! - MPF (talk) 16:37, 14 August 2013 (UTC)

  Done Sorry for that. --High Contrast (talk) 18:49, 14 August 2013 (UTC)

Thanks! - MPF (talk) 22:40, 14 August 2013 (UTC)

Copyright issue

Hi.. I have sent the approval for the images to the OTRS team. The images will be confirmed very soon.. Thanks --BiH (talk) 21:50, 15 August 2013 (UTC)

Hi! Thanks for your response. I have changed the image site accordingly. Regards, High Contrast (talk) 21:52, 15 August 2013 (UTC)

On reflection

Hi High Contrast, I would like to apologise for my reaction to being blocked, on reflection no excuse for not doing things correctly Caomhan27 (talk) 12:47, 16 August 2013 (UTC)

Hello; especially this message (with its comment) and your Goebbels-pseudo-question are very impertinent. I think you were thinkinh that I am a German (which I am not), that's why you used that words. Besides, you have made several severe mistakes on Commons which I have listed on your talk page. Furthermore, your problems from Commons were transported by you to the Englisch Wikipedia, where they also cause irritations. This is a massive encroachment of volunteers. Nevertheless, I believe in the good of humans. As such I think you are well advised not to cause such a superfluous trouble again. BTW, I have created your archiving-subsite on your talk page. Just copy-and-paste the content from your regular talk page to the archive. Regards, High Contrast (talk) 13:36, 16 August 2013 (UTC)
Thanks for that archive assistance, Isn't there like a barnstar or something for admitting acting incorrectly and not being able to do anything else wrong (joke);). Anyway I hope you accept my apology for anything you found offensive, have a few german friends so my comments in that regard were not serious only tongue in cheek, as i said if i knew i was uploading files incorrectly for whatever reason i should not have proceeded. Best Regards Caomhan27 (talk) 14:45, 16 August 2013 (UTC)
You have decided to change your username. Why? --High Contrast (talk) 13:34, 2 September 2013 (UTC)
I felt so guilty about my incorrect licensing of pictures I couldn't take the guilt confronting me each time I logged in, well that and i didn't like my old one :) Setanta Saki (talk) 17:11, 4 September 2013 (UTC)

Interview for Wikimedia blog

Hello High Contrast,

Since your picture of the day has already appeared, we would still like to feature you on the Wikimedia blog to learn about your photography in general, like what your favorite picture is, etc. Also, if you could share some information about the work you do on the Commons, that would be great for readers to learn.

I'm sending along the general list of questions again, in case my e-mail didn't arrive. Feel free to add where you like.

1. Where are you from? Have you always lived there? 2. How old are you? (Optional) 3. Do you have a family? 4. Are you a professional photographer or do you consider it to be more of a hobby? 5. If it is a hobby what else do you do outside of Wikipedia/Wikimedia Commons? 6. How long have you been a photographer? How did you first get started? 7. Are there particular types of photos that you specialize in, or especially enjoy taking (i.e. specific subject matter, landscapes, portraits, black-and-white, etc.)? 8. Why do you contribute to Commons? 9. How long have you been contributing, and how did you first get started? 10. How has your experience on Commons been? 11. Can you tell us a little more about your featured picture? Is there a story behind it? 12. What were you doing when you came across the shot? 13. Was there anything tricky/interesting about the composition of the shot or the situation you were in? 14. What do you hope the picture will communicate to viewers? 15. How do you feel about having your photo featured on Commons and in the Wikimedia projects? Thank you very much for your participation in the Wikimedia blog interview. If there are any questions, you can contact me on my talk page or at dpeterson@wikimedia.org. Sincerely, DPeterson (WMF) (talk) 21:50, 19 August 2013 (UTC)

Hi!

I will write a few lines as soon as possible. Best regards, High Contrast (talk) 13:25, 24 August 2013 (UTC)

Hello High Contrast, I'm checking back in to see if you are still interested in participating in the blog interview? Thank you for considering my request. DPeterson (WMF) (talk) 15:00, 19 September 2013 (UTC)

Hello! Still on my screen. Coming soon! --High Contrast (talk) 13:55, 20 September 2013 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

 
Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Obelisk at the Karolinenplatz in Munich, Spring 2013.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates.

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments Good quality. --Martin Falbisoner 21:32, 17 August 2013 (UTC)

 
Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Aldersbach - ehemalige Klosterkirche Maria Himmelfahrt.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates.

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments Good quality. --NorbertNagel 10:20, 17 August 2013 (UTC)

 
Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Obelisk at the Karolinenplatz in Munich, 2013.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates.

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments QI. I hate tramways and trolleybuses to take pictures... --Kadellar 12:32, 15 August 2013 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

 
Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Deutsches Museum Verkehrszentrum - Haupteingang.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates.

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments Good quality. --Martin Falbisoner 11:27, 18 August 2013 (UTC)

 
Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Adtranz GT6N in Munich (Line 19).JPG, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates.

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments Good quality. --Florstein 08:18, 18 August 2013 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

 
Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Oldtimerumzug Aidenbach 2013-08-18 - Porsche.JPG, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates.

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments Good quality. --Poco a poco 12:56, 20 August 2013 (UTC)

File:Школа № 1998 «Лукоморье».jpg

 
File:Школа № 1998 «Лукоморье».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!

Brateevsky (talk) 12:44, 23 August 2013 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

 
Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Železná Ruda-Alžbětín train station, CZ.JPG, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates.

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments Good quality. --JLPC 17:09, 20 August 2013 (UTC)

 
Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Pfarrkirche Großarl - Innen - Deckengemälde.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates.

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments OK. --Mattbuck 20:55, 20 August 2013 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

 
Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Reisebus - MAN Lion's Coach in Österreich.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates.

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments OK. --Mattbuck 20:14, 22 August 2013 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

 
Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Bayerisch Eisenstein-Železná Ruda-Alžbětín train station.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates.

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments Good quality. --JLPC 13:39, 24 August 2013 (UTC)

 
Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Železná Ruda-Alžbětín train station, CZ (2).jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates.

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments Need to correct perspective a bit. Vertical lines are not straight. --Nino Verde 12:41, 22 August 2013 (UTC)
You are right.   Done --High Contrast 18:38, 22 August 2013 (UTC)
Much better now! --Nino Verde 11:07, 23 August 2013 (UTC)

 
Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Železná Ruda-Alžbětín train station - plaque.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates.

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments Good quality. --Jean11 09:40, 24 August 2013 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

 
Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Kunigundenstraße 46 - München.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates.

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments Good quality. --Berthold Werner 19:44, 24 August 2013 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

 
Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Pfarrkirche Herz-Jesu Ludwigsthal - Kirchturm.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates.

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments I'd prefer more contrast but ok. --Mattbuck 21:40, 26 August 2013 (UTC)

MAKS-2015 - Doomych

Hello, High Contrast! I was at the MAKS yesterday. I made 570 photos. Please wait: I need time.

The organizers of the airshow took him at the end of August, when the weather is often poor. And so it happened. First, the sun was shining. But in the second half of the day the weather turned bad. First came the clouds, then it began to rain. Pictures of flights were not as colorful as we would like. I glag, I went on Friday. Today and tomorrow the weather should be even worse. But despite the weather, I was very pleased. --Doomych (talk) 13:22, 31 August 2013 (UTC)

Nevertheless, I think that your images are delightful contributions for Commons. I appreciate them, they cannot be bad :-) I hope to see them all. Best wishes, High Contrast (talk) 00:00, 1 September 2013 (UTC)
I finished. If you want to see all photos, download them from here (170 Mb).
P.S. Thanks for interest to Russia! --Doomych (talk) 10:52, 9 September 2013 (UTC)
Great! Thanks! Can you please also upload the Almaz-Antey images to Commons, please? --High Contrast (talk) 20:09, 9 September 2013 (UTC)
This time I was with friends, and couldn't photograph Almaz-Antey, engines, ets. I have one more suitable photo, but I can't identify it, and I will lay out a bit later to recognition of images. --Doomych (talk) 06:45, 10 September 2013 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

 
Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Bahnhof Bayerische Eisenstein, Waldbahn.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates.

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments Good quality. --Florstein 17:02, 29 August 2013 (UTC)

 
Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Yale forklift - 2013.JPG, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates.

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments I can't believe I'm saying this but in my opinion, the contrast is too high. Some whites are clipped and the dark areas are pretty close to black. Julian Herzog 05:58, 26 August 2013 (UTC)   Done New version uploaded. --High Contrast 23:35, 27 August 2013 (UTC)
A lot better. Still don't like the clipped whites but I guess it's ok. --Julian Herzog 07:35, 28 August 2013 (UTC)

 
Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Renault Magnum 500 truck.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates.

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments Good quality. --VT98Fan 13:05, 29 August 2013 (UTC)

 
Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! ATLAS Radlader AR 65 in Regensburg.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates.

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments OK. --Mattbuck 21:57, 29 August 2013 (UTC)

Notification about possible deletion

 
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!

Affected:

Eleassar (t/p) 08:20, 4 September 2013 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

 
Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Setra S 416 HDH coach in Vilshofen, Bavaria.JPG, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates.

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments Good quality. --Ralf Roletschek 06:46, 5 September 2013 (UTC)

 
Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Bürg 1 - Fenster.JPG, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates.

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments Good quality. --Ralf Roletschek 09:14, 5 September 2013 (UTC)

 
Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Stadtplatz 45 - Vilshofen an der Donau.JPG, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates.

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments Good quality. --JLPC 17:08, 5 September 2013 (UTC)

deletion request

Hi, I've created these files and now needed to delete them because of some errors. please delete them. thnx. https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Silver_contributor.png

https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Bronze_contributor.png

https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Platinum_contributor.png

https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Golden_contributor.png

-- Dan (talk) 01:48, 8 September 2013 (UTC)

Hi! Of course I will support you. But all of those 4 files are still in use here. Why the deletion? --High Contrast (talk) 19:20, 8 September 2013 (UTC)
Hi, for simple reason, letter "T" is missing in "Contributor" word !! I'll remove the 4 files used in that page. thank you again. -- Dan (talk) 07:25, 10 September 2013 (UTC)
  Done --High Contrast (talk) 20:15, 10 September 2013 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

 
Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Preysingplatz 22 - Plattling.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates.

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments Good quality. --Poco a poco 21:39, 6 September 2013 (UTC)

Help needed with proper licensing

Dear High Contrast, do you think that File:Angela Merkel hands.jpg is properly licensed? Best regards and thank you for your help!--FoxyOrange (talk) 08:54, 9 September 2013 (UTC)

Dear Foxy! Yes, now, it is correctly attributed. Thanks! --High Contrast (talk) 19:49, 9 September 2013 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

 
Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Stadtplatz Osterhofen - Brunnen (2).jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates.

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments Good quality. --Myrabella 21:40, 8 September 2013 (UTC)

 
Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Stadtplatz 12 - Osterhofen.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates.

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments   Support Good quality--Lmbuga 09:11, 8 September 2013 (UTC)

Deleted files

Дякую вам, тому що у вас є, щоб повідомити мені, тому що я дійсно нічого не знав про ці файли .

Дякую больші.--Бојанић Тибор (talk) 08:41, 15 September 2013 (UTC)

  Done --High Contrast (talk) 13:28, 15 September 2013 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

 
Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Meteoturm am Forschungsreaktor FRM in Garching.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates.

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments Good quality. --Ralf Roletschek 16:05, 10 September 2013 (UTC)

 
Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Preysingplatz 18 - Plattling.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates.

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments Good quality. --Marianne Casamance 05:26, 10 September 2013 (UTC)

דרעק

You asked: Here’s the answer. -- Tuválkin 14:21, 17 September 2013 (UTC)

A new one. Thanks! --High Contrast (talk) 14:23, 17 September 2013 (UTC)

Ohio

What happened to File:Ohio State Highway 115.svg and File:Ohio State Highway 25.svg? It says you deleted them, but I can click on them and see an empty file description page... --Rschen7754 19:15, 17 September 2013 (UTC)

Not my fault. Some strange server issue again - I have deleted them. --High Contrast (talk) 19:19, 17 September 2013 (UTC)
Okay, just curious. :) --Rschen7754 19:19, 17 September 2013 (UTC)
Usually such thinkgs disappear from alone. Let's see... --High Contrast (talk) 19:21, 17 September 2013 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

 
Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! VW Golf I - photographed in 2013.JPG, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates.

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments QI for me. --Kadellar 16:39, 15 September 2013 (UTC)

Need your help

Hello,

A picture I uploaded was deleted due to not providing enough information on permission. I have added the appropriate information but I cannot re-upload the picture or resubmit. Kindly advise.

Thank you.

Sararoubert2013 (talk) 00:19, 20 September 2013 (UTC)

Hi! Of course I will help, but... The problem is that the image seems not to have been published under a suitable free license. Who is the photographer of this image? Did the author publish it under a free license? Evidence for this? Let's clear these question first. Regards, High Contrast (talk) 13:59, 20 September 2013 (UTC)

Kategorien Baudenkmäler Regensburg by street

Ich bitte um Entschuldigung, ich hatte Deine Anfrage auf meiner Diskussionsseite zunächst übersehen. Anwort dort. --Johanning (talk) 17:17, 20 September 2013 (UTC)

  Done --High Contrast (talk) 18:51, 21 September 2013 (UTC)

File:Balti kett Käru.jpg

Hi, High Contrast. Could you please delete the previous non-free versions of File:Balti kett Käru.jpg? Thank you. --Eleassar (t/p) 16:08, 21 September 2013 (UTC)

  Done; I planned that before but for any reason it didn't work. Thanks for your support! Regards, High Contrast (talk) 18:51, 21 September 2013 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

 
Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Qubbat al-Khazna - Umayyad Mosque - Syria.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates.

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments Good quality. --Cayambe 10:05, 21 September 2013 (UTC)

 
Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Burg Marsbach - Austria -01.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates.

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments   Comment was there some retouch above the tower? Could be more accurate ... --P e z i 22:19, 20 September 2013 (UTC)
Just a little bit. --High Contrast 22:52, 20 September 2013 (UTC)

 
Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Hauptplatz Retz - Dampflöcher.JPG, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates.

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments Good quality. --Ralf Roletschek 20:32, 20 September 2013 (UTC)

 
Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Hall of the Knights - Krak des Chevaliers.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates.

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments   Support QI --Rjcastillo 19:55, 17 September 2013 (UTC)

Nominierung Umayyad Qasr of Amman in Jordan

Hallo High Contrast, dein Bild "Umayyad Qasr of Amman in Jordan" wäre für mich ein glattes QI wenn du die Spitze auch noch hättest. Siehe Notiz im Bild. lg --Isiwal (talk) 20:42, 24 September 2013 (UTC)

Hallo! Nein, ein Bildvariante mit komplettem Blitzableiter habe ich nicht mehr. Immerhin endet dieser tatsächlich pixelgenau mit dem derzeitigen Bildschnitt. Gruß, High Contrast (talk) 17:51, 25 September 2013 (UTC)
Ok - ich promote es. Mal schaun ob wer was dagegen hat, lg --Isiwal (talk) 23:01, 25 September 2013 (UTC)
Besten Dank, obschon deine Anmerkung bzgl. des Metallblitzableiters durchaus berechtigt ist. Mal sehen, ob es jemand anficht. Gruß, High Contrast (talk) 13:25, 26 September 2013 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

 
Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Hittite Lion statue, National Museum of Damascus.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates.

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments   Support QI --Rjcastillo 17:53, 22 September 2013 (UTC)

 
Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Palmyra - Syria -04.JPG, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates.

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments Good quality. --Poco a poco 23:28, 21 September 2013 (UTC)

 
Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Park in Amman, Jordan.JPG, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates.

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments Good quality. --Poco a poco 23:28, 21 September 2013 (UTC)

Letter to DOD and Polish Navy

Hi, I have been back from Turkey for a couple of days but am tied up answering questions related to my RFA. I have this task on my to-do list, and aim to knock it out when I have some "head-space" next week so I can do a good job of wording it nicely. Thanks for your patience. -- (talk) 12:30, 26 September 2013 (UTC)

Did you get a positive repsonse by the DoD? --High Contrast (talk) 13:22, 26 September 2013 (UTC)
I did not get a chance to write this before my holiday. I intend to write to both the DoD and the Polish Navy to confirm the facts. I'll publish the email text on-wiki when done as useful case studies, and drop you a note with a link.   -- (talk) 13:36, 26 September 2013 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

 
Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Stift Göttweig - Trompe l'oeil.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates.

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments Good quality. --JLPC 15:40, 24 September 2013 (UTC)

File:LBD-1 Gargoyle.jpg

Hai, ich fand obiges Foto, was jemand vom Smithonian NASM hat. Ich habe mal die Nutzungsbedingungen vom NASM dazu angegeben. Da gibt es aber nur "fair use". Dann sollte das wohl raus, rischtisch? Grüße Cobatfor (talk) 13:21, 29 September 2013 (UTC)

Hallo! Da hast du natürlich völlig Recht! Ich habe das Bild umgehend gelöscht. Danke fürs Aufmerksammachen! Gruß, High Contrast (talk) 17:01, 30 September 2013 (UTC)
Is aber immer noch da... Grüße Cobatfor (talk) 16:02, 1 October 2013 (UTC)
So, jetzt aber. Gruß, High Contrast (talk) 18:54, 2 October 2013 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

 
Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Glyptothek in München in 2013.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates.

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments Good quality. --Poco a poco 21:48, 25 September 2013 (UTC)

 
Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Umayyad Qasr of Amman, 2010.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates.

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments Good quality. --Isiwal 23:07, 25 September 2013 (UTC)

Chimp Brain in a jar.jpg

Hello High Contrast. Can you please explain this deletion. Thanks! Kaldari (talk) 17:07, 1 October 2013 (UTC)

Hi, Sorry, I hit the wrong button due to a loading delay. Thanks for helping! --High Contrast (talk) 18:58, 2 October 2013 (UTC)
Please try to be careful in the future. That image was used in nearly 100 pages, including as the lead image for the en.wiki brain article. I've restored it there, but I'm not sure where else it was removed from after it was deleted. Kaldari (talk) 19:33, 2 October 2013 (UTC)
Listen honey, that happened for the first time and for the last time as well. --High Contrast (talk) 19:38, 2 October 2013 (UTC)

CommonsDelinker

I'm probably not as familiar with the procedure as you, but I was confused by [12]. I thought the bot removed these itself once taken the actions. And it looks like some of these weren't done. Am I misunderstanding? Dominic (talk) 18:08, 1 October 2013 (UTC)

If some process was not done already, feel free to restore them --High Contrast (talk) 19:01, 2 October 2013 (UTC)
I am not an admin and cannot edit the page. I'm just trying to understand why you made that edit at all, when the bot removes images being processed itself. Was it a mistake? If so, can you revert yourself? If it was on purpose, can you explain to me why? Dominic (talk) 00:49, 3 October 2013 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

 
Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Wensauerplatz 15 - München.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates.

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments OK for QI --NorbertNagel 19:26, 30 September 2013 (UTC)

 
Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Ajlun Castle watchtower.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates.

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments   Support QI --Kreuzschnabel 04:48, 28 September 2013 (UTC)

Email

Hi, eine Email wurde geschrieben --178.2.56.234 09:21, 3 October 2013 (UTC)

Notification about possible deletion

 
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!

Affected:

And also:

Yours sincerely, Stefan4 (talk) 16:57, 5 October 2013 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

 
Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Steyr coach in Vilshofen a.d. Donau, Bavaria -02.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates.

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments Good quality. --Berthold Werner 09:23, 5 October 2013 (UTC)

Image question

I would like to include your great image of 'Weaponry found in Afghanistan' as part of a composite on a webpage for a small interdisciplinary group in Southampton University, UK (not yet live so I cannot link).

I am new to wikimedia creative commons, and am finding it difficult to identify how to credit you for the photo and where to link to. I was hoping to say

Composite image using CC photos courtesy of 'High Contrast' [linked as you request], {followed by the other credits for the composite}

As you are clearly experienced in this area, I would also be most grateful for any advice regarding how I credit the image http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:United_States_one_dollar_bill,_obverse.jpg which is in the public domain. With many thanks Kitjuniper (talk) 19:37, 9 October 2013 (UTC)

Hi!

Well,
this one File:United States one dollar bill, obverse.jpg is in the public domain
and this one File:Weaponry found in Afghanistan, 2011.jpg is by the "ISAF Headquarters Public Affairs Office" which released this image under a "Creative Commons Attribution 2.0 Generic license"; for the latter one you may credit "ISAF Headquarters Public Affairs Office/CC-by-2.0".

Regards, High Contrast (talk) 18:01, 11 October 2013 (UTC)

File:PL Eliza Orzeszkowa-Cham page005b.png

Can you explain, please, why did you remove this PD book cover?

Its author is anonymous so Template:Anonymous-EU applies.

It is also published before 1994, so the Template:PD-Polish applies to the photograph used there.

And because of the above it is not covered by URAA. Ankry (talk) 19:44, 12 October 2013 (UTC)

Can you provide clear and valid evidence that the author is unknown? I'm sorry but your speculation is not enough. In addition, get in contact with User:Marcus Cyron. He nominated it for deletion. Ask him. Regards, High Contrast (talk) 19:51, 12 October 2013 (UTC)
  1. It is not necessary, as PD-Polish applies also in this specific case. Author is irrelevant in case of this license as there is no copyright notice of the photographer in the book.
  2. What kind clear and valid evidence is expected when using the Anonymous-EU template? Or is it assumed that Anonymous-EU template is void and useless in commons at all and pictures marked using this template will never become PD (as we will never know the date of death of unknown author)? Do you suggest this should be considered list of deletion requests? Could you please point me to the commons rules applied in this case?
  3. Thanks, I will contact User:Marcus Cyron, but I suggest that the deletion request page should be better for this discussion. Could you, please, point me to that page? I cannot find it. Ankry (talk) 20:52, 12 October 2013 (UTC)
I have restored this image and opened a deletion discussion. Please get in contact with Marcus Cyron and discuss at the DR. I am out. Thanks for your support. Regards, High Contrast (talk) 20:55, 12 October 2013 (UTC)
Thanks. Ankry (talk) 21:00, 12 October 2013 (UTC)
I hope this file can be kept. Happy editing; --High Contrast (talk) 21:04, 12 October 2013 (UTC)

File:Watercraft on the Danube near Regensburg, 2013.jpg

You recategorised her as being a German barge. I could not find the flag, but see a flag of "Ben van Woerden" in the mast, a Dutch shipshandler. But no ENI number visible. Do you have other pictures of the vessel or what did I miss ? --Stunteltje (talk) 21:20, 12 October 2013 (UTC)

SORRY! That was an accident I wanted to add "Barges on the Danube River" but a wrong copy&paste insertion accured. I fixed it. Best regards, High Contrast (talk) 21:22, 12 October 2013 (UTC)
No problem at all. I make my own mistakes. No sorry needed :=)) --Stunteltje (talk) 21:24, 12 October 2013 (UTC)
-) Thanks for your excellent work on Commons! --High Contrast (talk) 21:25, 12 October 2013 (UTC)

Hai, ich habe gerade obiges Foto hochgeladen. In der Beschreibung steht "(U.S. Navy photo by John Whalen/Released)", aber in den EXIF-Daten, die ich hinterher sah, steht "©2013NewportNewsShipbuilding". Wat nu? Grüße Cobatfor (talk) 08:30, 13 October 2013 (UTC)

Hallo! Also wenn dieses Bild von einem US-Militärangehörigen im Dienst aufgenommen wurde, dann ist es gemeinfrei. Diesem EXIF-Appendix würde ich keine größere Bedeutung beimessen. Gruß, High Contrast (talk) 18:28, 14 October 2013 (UTC)

Stolpersteine in Vilshofen

Du hast 2 Stolperstein-Bilder hochgeladen(Category:Stolpersteine in Vilshofen an der Donau), die in Vilshofen verlegt sind, vielen Dank!

Weißt Du, ob es weitere in Vilshofen gibt oder ob es alle sind? Wenn Du weißt, wo die aufgenommenen Steine in Vilshofen sind: könntest Du diese noch geocodieren, dann könnte ich sie in OpenStreetMap erfassen?

Viele Grüße Dietmar --Goeggimuss (talk) 10:29, 13 October 2013 (UTC)

Hallo!
Ich hänge mich dran! Möglicherweise handelt es sich um alle Stolpersteine in dieser Stadt. Die genau Lage weiß ich nicht, kann sie aber ermitteln. Das wird allerdings einige Tage brauchen.

Bist du für OpenStreetMap tätig?

Gruß, High Contrast (talk) 18:26, 14 October 2013 (UTC)

Hallo, ja ich bin in OSM aktiv und erfasse nebenbei auch die Stolpersteine. Übrigens gibt es eine experimentelle Themenkarte dazu [13] --Goeggimuss (talk) 10:39, 15 October 2013 (UTC)

Ich kümmere mich baldmöglichst darum. Ich melde mich wieder auf dieser Diskussionsseite! Viele Grüße, High Contrast (talk) 18:11, 16 October 2013 (UTC)

  Done Relevante Infos via Email erhalten: Genauigkeit 10-15 m. Ausreichend? Gruß, High Contrast (talk) 21:37, 19 October 2013 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

 
Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Europäisches Trucker-Treffen in Passau -04.JPG, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates.

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments   Support Good for me--Lmbuga 20:55, 12 October 2013 (UTC)

 
Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Palmyra columns in 2010.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates.

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments QI, very impressive -- Spurzem 21:47, 11 October 2013 (UTC)

Invitation to take part in the categorization of QI

Dear High Contrast! Your images were reviewed and have been promoted to Quality Image status. Congratulations! I invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. All new images with this status automatically placed to the page Commons:Quality_images/Recently_promoted. They have to be manually tagged with relevant categories using the QI categorization tool (see link at the top of the page, the author of this tool is User:Dschwen). Very few users do this job now, so a large number of uncategorizated photos time to time accumulates on this page... --Bff (talk) 10:12, 15 October 2013 (UTC)

Of course I will help! Regards, High Contrast (talk) 18:15, 16 October 2013 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

 
Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Europäisches Trucker-Treffen in Passau -15.JPG, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates.

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments Good quality. --XRay 05:17, 13 October 2013 (UTC)

Hi

This guy is Tv BROADCASTER AND THATS HIS PICTURE NO PROBLEM TO PUT IT IN

It would be no problem if this specific file was released under a free license but it isn't the case. --High Contrast (talk) 13:03, 17 October 2013 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

 
Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Europäisches Trucker-Treffen in Passau -37.JPG, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates.

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments Good quality. --Ralf Roletschek 10:39, 16 October 2013 (UTC)

 
Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Wasserkraftwerk Grafenmühle in 2013.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates.

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments QI for me -- Spurzem 21:34, 16 October 2013 (UTC)

 
Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Cornfield in Bavaria in Summer, 2013.JPG, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates.

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments Good quality. --Ralf Roletschek 10:42, 16 October 2013 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

 
Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Marktplatz 30 - Aidenbach.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates.

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments Good quality. --JDP90 16:52, 17 October 2013 (UTC)

 
Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Oldtimerumzug Aidenbach 2013-08-18 - MG Roadster.JPG, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates.

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments Good quality. --Berthold Werner 15:26, 17 October 2013 (UTC)
  Comment The MG A is a nice old car but the sharpness of the photo should be better for QI. -- Spurzem 19:28, 17 October 2013 (UTC)

 
Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! AmaWaterways cruise ship AmaPrima -04.JPG, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates.

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments Good quality. --Cayambe 18:24, 17 October 2013 (UTC)

 
Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Qasr al-Azraq - Jordan -01.JPG, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates.

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments Good quality. --Cayambe 18:24, 17 October 2013 (UTC)

 
Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Check24 das Vergleichsportal - Standort München -01.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates.

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments Good quality. --Ralf Roletschek 14:20, 17 October 2013 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

 
Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Steinfigur des hl. Johannes von Nepomuk a.d. Praterwehrbrücke.JPG, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates.

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments   Support QI --Rjcastillo 23:49, 18 October 2013 (UTC)

File:Woman with a sea urchin in her hand.jpg

 
File:Woman with a sea urchin in her hand.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!

198.228.200.158 20:02, 21 October 2013 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

 
Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Joseph-Groll-Büste in Vilshofen an der Donau - komplett.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates.

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments Qualitätsbild. --Frank Schulenburg 02:21, 20 October 2013 (UTC)

 
Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Jochenstein Schleusen.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates.

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments Good quality. --Poco a poco 22:11, 19 October 2013 (UTC)

 
Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Pfarrkirche mit dem Donaukreuz.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates.

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments Good quality. --NorbertNagel 06:35, 19 October 2013 (UTC)

Your assistance please

For every image that had been placed in You removed Category:Montrealais (ship, 1962), moored in Toronto from every image that used this category, replacing it with Category:Montrealais (ship, 1962) in Toronto, you then deleted Category:Montrealais (ship, 1962), moored in Toronto on the grounds it was empty.

Could you please tell me where I can find the discussion that preceded your actions? Geo Swan (talk) 05:59, 22 October 2013 (UTC)

There was no discussion because there wasn't one needed. You should understand that it is absolutely not of interest if the Montrealais was moored, manoeuvring or resting with engines stopped in the water in Toronto. The encyclopedic value is the fact that the Montrealais is in Toronto. As per COM:CAT, categories should be assessed on the basis of their scope, not what happens to be in them at any given moment. Best regards, High Contrast (talk) 14:30, 22 October 2013 (UTC)
Sorry, I disagree.
  1. Administrators, by long tradition, do delete empty categories, without prior discussion.
  2. You are entitled to the opinion that the category name I choose was too verbose. However, in my opinion, you should have initiated a discussion in which you suggested the alternate category name you preferred. Being entrusted with administrator authority does not make you infallible.
  3. I suggest for you to both replace the one category with another, on your sole judgment, and then to delete the category you yourself emptied, on the grounds it was empty, was an over-reach of your authority.
Even if, for the sake of argument, there was a discussion over these two alternate category names, and that discussion concluded the name you preferred was optimal, deletion was inappropriate. I believe you should know that long-standing names shuold be retained, and redirected -- not deleted, in order not to break links. Even if there are no WMF links to Category:Montrealais (ship, 1962), moored in Toronto there can be outside sites that link to the URL of the old category name. There would be absolutely no justification for you to break those links. Rather, doing so would be disruptive.
So, please don't act like you are infallible -- do initiate discussions when you think a category is redundant or poorly named.
Please don't delete long-standing names, when changing the file or category to a redirection is no more trouble and doesn't break incoming links.
I initiated a category name discussion. Geo Swan (talk) 23:43, 22 October 2013 (UTC)
So, why do you think Category:Montrealais (ship, 1962) in Toronto is totally wrong? --High Contrast (talk) 21:10, 25 October 2013 (UTC)

Hello HC, I just noticed you deleted and then undeleted this file. Why did you decide against deletion here? --Dschwen (talk) 15:36, 22 October 2013 (UTC)

Die nach wie vor existente talk-page lässt auf eine OTRS-Erlaubnis schließen. Grüße, High Contrast (talk) 21:09, 25 October 2013 (UTC)

Category:Montrealais_(ship,_1962)_in_Toronto

 

Montrealais (ship, 1962) in Toronto 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!


Geo Swan (talk) 22:43, 22 October 2013 (UTC)

To Highcontrast; reply

Hello, i have read the message you left for me. Appreciate your advice. But the majority of images i have uploaded are my on taken pictures, or the ones which really dont have any knon source. I niether use Flickr nor google. Because they are from a self taken pictures collection. Like the one Che behind the truck, havana panorama, innocence, etc are pictures taken by myself ith my on camera. How i can defend the objections over this. awaited. Regards, Mazar.

Quality Image Promotion

 
Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Petroglyphs in Wadi Rum -03.JPG, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates.

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments Good quality. --Poco a poco 19:20, 21 October 2013 (UTC)

 
Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Joseph-Groll-Büste in Vilshofen an der Donau.JPG, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates.

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments Please see notes--Jebulon 13:13, 19 October 2013 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

 
Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Holzkirchner Bahnhof - Südseite.JPG, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates.

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments Some clipping of whites at top, but that's OK, that part wasn't detail-rich to begin with. --King of Hearts 18:51, 23 October 2013 (UTC)

Re

Whoa, more and more advanced isn't it. Thank for inform about this page, this surely will save time. I will look forward with this bot (this look like it will be fun). Cheers.Tnt1984 (talk) 05:35, 27 October 2013 (UTC)

Hi Tnt1984! Thank you for your support with this! Yes, please use this site - it makes everything easier. If you find some duplicates, feel free to contact me on my user talk page in order to delete them. Best, High Contrast (talk) 21:01, 27 October 2013 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

 
Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Anglerstraße 9 - München.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates.

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments OK. --Mattbuck 18:42, 25 October 2013 (UTC)

Eugène Ogé

Hello, You tagged my upload so I immediatly corrected the source with a rectified one (Musée des Arts décoratifs) wich is a French State databank status.

As you can see on this file : File:Poster Exposition du livre 1894.jpg the source is a PRIVATE one (an auction sale catalogue). Is there a problem there ? Apparently not.

Could you please remove your tag ?

Yours, --Spiessens (talk) 16:55, 29 October 2013 (UTC)

COM:DM does not apply for these images due to their pixel counts and Commons does not allow fair use material. --High Contrast (talk) 18:23, 29 October 2013 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

 
Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Krak des Chevaliers - top view.JPG, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates.

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments OK. --Mattbuck 23:16, 27 October 2013 (UTC)

 
Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Europäisches Trucker-Treffen in Passau -16.JPG, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates.

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments {{{3}}}

Milan Nykodym

Moin, Habe den LA geschlossen da der Urheber auf seiner Flickerseite klargestellt hat :-). LG --Steinsplitter (talk) 09:21, 30 October 2013 (UTC)

Danke für die Mitteilung. Trotzdem wäre es mir Recht, dass du aus Gründen der Dokumentation in deiner abschließenden Bemerkung anführst, dass es ursprünglich durchaus einen problematischen Widerspruch gab. Zumal das "Speedy" unnötig ist. Freue mich von dir zu lesen. Grüße, High Contrast (talk) 10:34, 30 October 2013 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

 
Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Bahnhof Bayerisch Eisenstein und Železná Ruda-Alžbětín.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates.

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments Good quality. --Martin Falbisoner 15:17, 28 October 2013 (UTC)

File:Почепа Оксана.jpg

 
File:Почепа Оксана.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!

(talk) 16:57, 31 October 2013 (UTC)

AlexLoraEsclavodelrocanrol.jpg

Hello, first of all, I'm not native speaker in English. I have the permission of the person who owns the rights to the image AlexLoraEsclavodelrocanrol.jpg rights owner is the director of the film, Mr. Luis Kelly. I do not know how to solve the problem of the discussion guide me to appreciate it.

Hi there! Please have a look at COM:OTRS - if you have any question about it , please leave a note here. Best regards, High Contrast (talk) 03:10, 1 November 2013 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

 
Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Kriegerdenkmal Plattling -10.JPG, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates.

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments Good quality. --Poco a poco 20:46, 29 October 2013 (UTC)

 
Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Kabelsteg in München, autumn 2013.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates.

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments Good quality. --Florstein 17:16, 29 October 2013 (UTC)

 
Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Prinzenstraße 51 - München.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates.

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments Good quality (sky is a bit dark). --NorbertNagel 18:29, 29 October 2013 (UTC) Really? I like the deep blue colour. It works good with the building IMO --High Contrast 18:49, 29 October 2013 (UTC)

 
Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! BR-Betongebäude in der Arnulfstraße, München (2013).jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates.

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments Few things to paint out, also please sharpen. Mattbuck 18:42, 25 October 2013 (UTC)   Done --High Contrast 18:29, 29 October 2013 (UTC)
Better. Mattbuck 19:30, 29 October 2013 (UTC)

Action throttled

I don't know if you're the admin I should come to, I am the organizer of Wiki Loves Monuments in the Philippines and I've been e-mailing the users who made it to our national Finals, however it seems that there is an anti-spam feature. "Action throttled" As an anti-spam measure, you are limited from performing this action too many times in a short space of time, and you have exceeded this limit. Please try again in a few minutes. Return to Main Page. It's been roughly twelve hours and I have another set of finalists to communicate with, is there any work around for this? Namayan (talk) 00:49, 6 November 2013 (UTC)

Hi! I would like to help you but I do not know how. I am no system administrator of the Wikisoftware or the like. Please post this problem here: COM:VP. Best regards, High Contrast (talk) 19:34, 6 November 2013 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

 
Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Albersdorfer Hauptstraße 1 - Wegkapelle -03.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates.

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments OK. --Mattbuck 14:59, 3 November 2013 (UTC)

Deletion of PD satellite images

Can you please explain why you nominated File:Westbrook station USGS aerial 2008.JPG and File:Revere to Lynn Blue Line Extension.jpg for speedy deletion? Both were US Government satellite images available as historical layers on Google Earth (not copyrighted Google/Keyhole imagery) and thus public domain; they were in no way copyright violations. Pi.1415926535 (talk) 22:38, 6 November 2013 (UTC)

You used "USGS imagery via "Google Earth" as source. According to your source statement, the USGS used Google Earth for creating their image. Google Earth do not use "US Government satellite images", Google Earth material is copyrighted [14]. --High Contrast (talk) 15:24, 7 November 2013 (UTC)
HC, could you explain that to me in a bit more detail. I don't know if it's a language thing, but that's not my understanding of "via" (in fact it usually means the opposite, at least in the UK). To me, USGS imagery via Google Earth means that Google is using the USGS's imagery, not the other way around—for example, I just got off a train from Newcastle to Plymouth via Birmingham (meaning that it was going to Plymouth, but it was going to Birmingham first). Could you elaborate on your statement Google Earth do not use "US Government satellite images"; do you have a source for that? I apologise if it's just me, but this isn't my area of expertise. Best, HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 19:45, 7 November 2013 (UTC)
Google Earth stuff is copyrighted - that is what GE provides. No reason to doubt this, I think. If they use US material being in the PD, you have to ask. But doing some specualation that any satellite image is in the PD "because it could be taken through the lenses of a US satellite" is no good basis. I have restored both files and removed the copyvio-tag and added a no source tag. You as the person who deleted these two files, what do you think? Best regards, High Contrast (talk) 20:17, 7 November 2013 (UTC)
Whenever you have Google Earth opened, there is a small text at the bottom displaying the source if it is not from Google. This is visible on the Revere image - the text in Google Earth says "Image USDA Farm Service Agency". When I screenshotted the Westbrook imagery, it said "US Geologic Survey". Google displaying US Government imagery does not change that the government imagery is public domain; Google is merely displaying it. Pi.1415926535 (talk) 21:23, 7 November 2013 (UTC)
Is it the same with Google Maps? If so, can you please deliver the coordinates of the latter two images? --High Contrast (talk) 13:47, 8 November 2013 (UTC)
It is not the same with Google Maps - Google Maps uses Google's newest and highest-quality imagery, which is taken with their private satellites. The historical imagery available on Google Earth is often older and lower quality - but when PD, still useful for applications such as these. I will attempt to see if I can create a direct KMl link to the imagery that can be confirmed by any user with Google Earth. Pi.1415926535 (talk) 14:55, 8 November 2013 (UTC)
I have added information to the |source fields of both images that indicates these are public domain satellite images that are available as layers in the Google Earth viewer, and have nothing to do with copyrighted Google imagery. I have also added the date of the actual imagery. This explicitly satisfies the source requirements; additionally, any person with the (freely available) software can verify that Google Earth displays the government agencies as the source. Pi.1415926535 (talk) 23:10, 9 November 2013 (UTC)
OK. Can you please add the exact coordinates to both images, please? I have already added a helping tool to get them. Regards, High Contrast (talk) 18:08, 10 November 2013 (UTC)

I'll do you one better - I've added {{Overlay}} templates to both of them that display the image as an overlay in Google Earth. Now all someone has to do is to click on the link - which opens the image in its location in GE - and select the correct historical imagery to verify the match. (The Google Maps and Bing links don't work due to a problem with the template.) Pi.1415926535 (talk) 18:59, 11 November 2013 (UTC)

I have inserted {{Location possible}} again. Both links can be used (not only to verify its PD status). Please add those coordinates. Thank you. --High Contrast (talk) 19:27, 11 November 2013 (UTC)
I don't understand what you mean. These are aerial images covering a substantial amount of area - it's not possible to add a single geocoordinate for either. That is what the overlay is for. If you want a center-of-image coordinate I can provide that, but it's not appropriate data for the image description page. Pi.1415926535 (talk) 01:28, 12 November 2013 (UTC)
I think you understood correctly. It is usus for such images to implement a rough geographical location via coordinates. Use the center of the image. --High Contrast (talk) 16:02, 13 November 2013 (UTC)
Center locations added. Sorry for the delay. Pi.1415926535 (talk) 19:48, 16 November 2013 (UTC)
Thanks a lot for your support! Happy editing! --High Contrast (talk) 21:19, 16 November 2013 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

 
Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Kraftwerk Jochenstein - Unterlauf.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates.

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments Good quality. --NorbertNagel 20:17, 11 November 2013 (UTC)

Copyright violations

Caro High Contraste,

Fui sinalizado como tendo carregado uma imagem que viola os direitos de autor. Tal facto deriva de ter feito gravação da página sem a devida classificação. Devo referir que o sistema de classificação das imagens é extremamente confuso e imagens que estão no domínio público por terem origem em entidades públicas não é clara a forma de o declarar.

Quanto às imagens oriundas de fotografias tiradas pelos próprios também não é clara a forma de o declarar.

Peço desculpa se violei alguma regra, os meus contributos são genuínos e desinteressados. Tenho contribuído com textos elaborados por mim e com imagens que se destinam a "ilustrar" os textos que publico. Como é óbvio não sou isento de crítica.

Cumprimentos.

Soc Pepper (António Bastos)

Hello! Please only upload files of which you own the copyright or when they have been published under a free license. Thanks. --High Contrast (talk) 14:14, 15 November 2013 (UTC)

File:Zanger Rinus.jpg

You may wish to save your energy for more useful things. You have never seen me uploading copyright violations and you will never see me uploading copyright violations. Jcb (talk) 16:37, 15 November 2013 (UTC)

No, you may wish to save your energy for more useful things. Think about it --High Contrast (talk) 01:08, 16 November 2013 (UTC)
And BTW, you seem to work with the same low quality as you have did before you left your admin status. Be constructive, please. Don|t waste other people's time. --High Contrast (talk) 01:11, 16 November 2013 (UTC)

Fotos apagadas....

Abaixo publiquei na Esplanada: https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Esplanada#Fotos_apagadas....


Apagaram duas fotos de minha autoria que são: File:Igreja em Bandeirantes 031206 3 REFON .jpg e File:Bandeirantes 021206 REFON .jpg, fui avisado que foram apagadas no dia 13 de novembro de 2013 (17:53), mas não fui avisado que as duas estavam para serem apagadas e ai eu teria como argumentar. NÃO TIVE ESTA OPÇÃO !!!?? Essas fotos provavelmente estavam no Commons desde 2006 (!?!?!). Informou-me um usuário que "foram publicados num site comercial de direitos reservados ("copyright"), o que impede sua publicação na Wikipédia". Se estavam em algum site estavam sem minha autorização, ou não colocaram a origem do "Commons" com sua licença livre! Gostaria de saber em que site estão publicadas e porque não fui informado que seriam apagadas. Agradeço quem der essas informações. Reynaldo Avaré Msg 18:33, 19 November 2013 (UTC)

Descobri onde estão as minhas fotos: http://musicadogol.blogspot.com.br/2009/11/entrevistamos-rafael-pedro.html - as fotos foram colocadas sem minha autorização. Pela logica inclusive colocadas depois que coloquei no Commons. Mesmo assim no Blog não existe que o conteúdo tem copyright. Quem apagou minhas fotos aqui no Commons poderia ter se informado melhor, né assim que as coisas funcionam.Reynaldo Avaré Msg 19:07, 19 November 2013 (UTC)

Please get in contact with the person who tagged them as copyvios. --High Contrast (talk) 20:02, 19 November 2013 (UTC)

Por favor caro High Contrast, peço que restaure as fotos (acima) que deletou. Veja as justificativas: Commons:Esplanada#Fotos apagadas....- Please dear High Contrast, asks that recuperates the photos (above) that delete. See the vindicative ones: Commons:Esplanada#Fotos apagadas..... TKS Reynaldo Avaré Msg 13:32, 21 November 2013 (UTC)

I do not understand this language. Can you specify the problem? Did you contact the person who actually tagged these images as copyvios? --High Contrast (talk) 15:01, 21 November 2013 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

 
Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Maaloula landscape in Syria.JPG, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates.

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments   Support Good quality. --XRay 09:40, 17 November 2013 (UTC)

 
Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Mercedes-Benz Arocs - dump truck version (1).JPG, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates.

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments   Support Good quality. --XRay 09:40, 17 November 2013 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

 
Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Bethabara in Jordan in 2010.JPG, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates.

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments Good quality. --Ralf Roletschek 17:38, 19 November 2013 (UTC)

FP promotion

 
This image has been promoted to Featured picture!

The image File:Glyptothek in München in 2013.jpg, that you nominated on Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Glyptothek in München in 2013.jpg has been promoted. Thank you for your contribution. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so.

 

crush

it was a badly accident.--Sonia Sevilla (talk) 20:24, 23 November 2013 (UTC)

Such events are always sad. Hard thing. Thanks anyway for your contributions. I hope more images from Iran by you come to Commons. Thanks and happy editing --High Contrast (talk) 20:29, 23 November 2013 (UTC)
such events are happy also. like [File:Two happy girl sited on chair - Nishapur 1.JPG].--Sonia Sevilla (talk) 20:31, 23 November 2013 (UTC)
Well these two girls are not involved in an accident. That's pure happiness. But car accidents are really no nice events. --High Contrast (talk) 20:34, 23 November 2013 (UTC)
http://www.unicef.org/iran/media_4783.html .some drivers are INSANE!--Sonia Sevilla (talk) 20:41, 23 November 2013 (UTC)
Interesting link. Yes, some drivers are really crazy. But, sadly, these people exist in every country in the world. --High Contrast (talk) 20:50, 23 November 2013 (UTC)


Deletion requests

They're not entirely personal images - they're from a Flickr stream of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. Now...I have no problem at all with their being deleted. I'm just telling you where they come from in the first place. What the Fish and Wildlife Service is doing with them, your guess is as good as mine. --Ser Amantio di Nicolao (talk) 18:04, 24 November 2013 (UTC)

You obviously have not any understanding what the Commons project scope is. It absolutely equal who put those photo on flickr. If it was the US Wildlife Service, NASA or the president of Nauru. The image itself must be in scope (read it if you haven't yet). Private holiday pics are not within the scope. Again, read COM:SCOPE. The fact that you have put those private holiday hiking in the Category:Oktoberfest shows very effectfully that you are not really aware of what you are doing. Furthermore: you have been one placed on AN/U because of your problematic doings. --High Contrast (talk) 18:09, 24 November 2013 (UTC)

العربية  català  Deutsch  Deutsch (Sie-Form)  English  español  eesti  français  galego  magyar  italiano  Nederlands  polski  română  svenska  ไทย  українська  +/−

Thank you for participating in Wiki Loves Monuments 2013! Please help with this survey.

Dear High Contrast,
Thank you for contributing to Wiki Loves Monuments 2013, and for sharing your pictures with the whole world! We would like to ask again a few minutes of your time.

Thanks to the participation of people like you, the contest gathered more than 365,000 pictures of cultural heritage objects from more than 50 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 2013.

Kind regards,

the Wiki Loves Monuments team
 

Quality Image Promotion

 
Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Pyrawang at the Danube in Austria.JPG, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates.

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments Good quality. --XRay 21:43, 23 November 2013 (UTC)

 
Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Leiden Christi im Herbst, Obermenzing in München.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates.

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments Good quality. --Poco a poco 10:18, 23 November 2013 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

 
Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Europäisches Trucker-Treffen in Passau -19.JPG, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates.

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments Good quality. --Cccefalon 17:03, 24 November 2013 (UTC)

Not following

I'm not following the message just left on my talk page (which I assume may have been automatic.)

I identified the source and author. I have asked for a formal permissions statement, and will add that soon. The photo was provided by the PR department of the Washington Mystics, so I think it is reasonable to assume it is owned by them. I have asked for the specific name of a photographer, but I believe that is more a courtesy than a s requirement. Let me know if I'm missing something.--Sphilbrick (talk) 15:48, 27 November 2013 (UTC)

  OK. In the time I tagged it, you did not link to OTRS. Now done and there's actually no problem now. --High Contrast (talk) 15:50, 27 November 2013 (UTC)
Ah, yes, I added that shortly after, so now understand.--Sphilbrick (talk) 16:51, 27 November 2013 (UTC)
Thanks for your support and sorry if my housekeeping action irritated you. Best, High Contrast (talk) 15:17, 28 November 2013 (UTC)

IP-Vandal

Hello High Contrast,

could resolve this please. I already asked EugeneZelenko, but he didn't respond so far. Thank's.--Jean-Éric Poclain (talk) 15:28, 28 November 2013 (UTC)

Hi! Steinsplitter was a bit faster than me. Best, High Contrast (talk) 15:30, 28 November 2013 (UTC)
Nevertheless, Thank you.--Jean-Éric Poclain (talk) 15:33, 28 November 2013 (UTC)

MEADS International Imagery

Need help to address your issues - Wikimedia templates and coding are highly confusing.

The images posted yesterday and today have been produced by and cleared for public release by me as the company's agent. We receive US government funds in producing these images.

Since none of the combinations of my logic have been acceptable to you, please advise how my company can demonstrate our intent to release these images. Or should we merely acknowledge that they have been posted on our public website without restriction?

Hi! Thankk you for your support. Of course I can help and will help. The problem is that the homepage (with its photo gallery) gives no evidence for the image being in the public domain. We have many comfortable options since you are the company's agent:
  • first modify the web site so that there is a licensing statement on the photo gallery page that all images available there are in the public domain due to the fact that they were the work of US governmental employees on duty
  • put the images under a free Creative Commons license like for instance {{Cc-by-sa-3.0}} (also some some info on the homepage for that)

Here you can see an example of an image depicting a MEADS-vehicle. Here, the source clearly indicates that this image is the work of a US Air Force employee (Wolfgang Hofmann) - a work of a U.S. Air Force Airman or employee. As such this image is in the public domain. Best regards and I hope to hear from you in order to get these good images from http://meads-amd.com/. Thanks! --High Contrast (talk) 20:22, 28 November 2013 (UTC)

== Issue: most of our photography is taken by contractor personnel funded under government contract, not government employees exactly, but they do require a 3-nation public release review. Do you still regard such photos as in the public domain? Is the suggested Creative Commons license then applicable? The problem has been that available categories did not anticipate a multinational contractor organization, it seems to me.

francine tint images

Hi,

I am the web master for francinetint.com and Francine wanted me to put two pictures on her site: Francine tint.png (which got deleted). I added

 
Francine Tint with "RED" 53" x 122"


 
Sea of Mirmar 45 x 106

. I don't want these deleted either. Since her account was not yet activated, I could not upload files onto her page on wikipedia.org. They suggested I use wikimedia commons. So I did. For these two pictures, she has no copyright and they can be shared with no restrictions. I don't know what to write so they stay on the site without being deleted. I thought I filled out the upload forms correctly. Any help would be appreciated.

Joe Major

Hey Joe! Of course you have my support so that these images won't get deleted. And with your statement above I see no big problem. Since you are the web master for francinetint.com, you only have to write a short email with a short explanation that these files are in piblic domain/or have no copyright restrictions and paste the two links of those two images. Such evidence should be sent to permissions-commons@wikimedia.org . (Standard precedure according to Commons:OTRS)
Sorry for that but running a free media repository needs such confirmation. Thank you! Should there still be some problems with these images contact me on this talk page. Best regards, High Contrast (talk) 15:21, 29 November 2013 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

 
Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Fengdu Ghost City - dragon.JPG, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates.

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments Good quality. --Cayambe 20:56, 1 December 2013 (UTC)

Tim Yap

I would have appreciated some warning on the deletion of File:Tim Yap 1.png. It would have given me some time to produce proof that the photograph is not copyrighted by the Inquirer but used by them with the copyright holder's permission. I'm Tony Ahn (talk) 22:20, 4 December 2013 (UTC)

I have deleted File:Tim Yap 1.png BUT User:Allen3 was the person who tagged it as a copyright violation. The person who tags images must inform the uploader. It is NOT the admin's task to check if this was done. As such this allegation does not interest me. Regards, High Contrast (talk) 14:05, 5 December 2013 (UTC)

Herzlichen Glückwunsch zur erfolgreiche Teilnahme am Fotowettbewerb Wiki Loves Monuments 2013 in Deutschland

 

Hallo High Contrast,

etwas spät, aber noch nicht zu spät, möchte ich dir hiermit, pünktlich zum Nikolaus, im Namen der Juroren das Goldene Gummibärchen für deine erfolgreiche Teilnahme am Fotowettbewerb Wiki Loves Monuments überreichen.

Die Preise werden durch das Team Communitys von Wikimedia Deutschland verschickt. Bei Fragen kannst du dich jederzeit per mail an community@wikimedia.de wenden.

Ich hoffe dir hat der Wettbewerb mindestens ebenso viel Freude bereitet wie uns. Sehen wir dich 2014 wieder?

Ein besinnliches Adventswochenende und viel Erfolg im nächsten Jahr wünscht dir,
Anika (talk) 13:23, 6 December 2013 (UTC)

Ebenso und dankeschön! Viele Grüße, High Contrast (talk) 22:06, 6 December 2013 (UTC)

Editor @ ar.wiki

Hello. I would like to inform you that I have granted you editor flag at the Arabic Wikipedia, all your edits there will be automatically marked as patrolled. Best regards.--Avocato (talk) 13:58, 6 December 2013 (UTC)

Thank you! --High Contrast (talk) 23:26, 6 December 2013 (UTC)

Notification about possible deletion

 
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!

Affected:


Yours sincerely, LGA talkedits 05:16, 7 December 2013 (UTC)

File:Mandela Homenagem Joanesburgo.JPG

Hi there. You deleted Mandela Homenagem Joanesburgo.JPG for copyvio. The licensing was correct, I don't quite understand the reason. ~pikolas [[mia diskuto]] 13:50, 11 December 2013 (UTC)

Hi there! Did you ask the person who tagged this file as a copyright violation? What do you say to the fact that this image also appears here: http://fotospublicas.com/funeral-nelson-mandela/ ? --High Contrast (talk) 14:04, 11 December 2013 (UTC)
Hey. The original source is clearly the government-owned Agência Brasil, as supported by the metadata in the image itself. In the future, please open up a discussion before deleting it outright. If it's possible to restore the file, that would be best. Thanks. ~pikolas [[mia diskuto]] 03:54, 13 December 2013 (UTC)
I ask you again do you know who tagged this image for copyright violation? Obviously not. Rethink your baseless statemt and maybe you'll learn that it is not my thing to open a DR but the nominator's. Understood? --High Contrast (talk) 14:58, 13 December 2013 (UTC)
How am I supposed to know who the nominator was if the records were wiped out? ~pikolas [[mia diskuto]] 01:51, 15 December 2013 (UTC)
You should have received an automatically created image by the nominator (if he/she did everything correctly). Nevertheless, I have restored this file. --High Contrast (talk) 01:53, 15 December 2013 (UTC)
Thanks. In the future, please keep in mind that ABr is generally a reliable source for images, and they make it clear when the image is copyrighted. Also, the file metadata reveals original authorship. Cheers. ~pikolas [[mia diskuto]] 01:58, 15 December 2013 (UTC)
I know of this license but not all can find a permanent path to Commons. You may e.g. think of COM:DW. --High Contrast (talk) 02:01, 15 December 2013 (UTC)

Re:Copyvio-tagging by you

Ok, but...my language motherly is the Spanish. None problem?. Regards — ♫♫ Leitoxx    The Police ♪♪ — 14:01, 11 December 2013 (UTC)

No, that's no problem! As an alternative please just give a internetlink where this image also appears. Thanks! --High Contrast (talk) 14:03, 11 December 2013 (UTC)

"Diorit"-Foto

Hallo High Contrast,

weißt du zufällig noch, wo du dieses Bild aufgenommen hast? Es ist bei Fotos mit geologischem Inhalt stets wichtig, wenigstens den räumlichen Kontext mitzuliefern. Das verbessert die Überprüfbarkeit des Bildinhaltes und ermöglicht auch eine breitere Anwendung als Illustration in verschiedensten Wikipedia-Artikeln.

do you still know, where this photograph has been taken? Its always important so provide at least a spatial context to an image with geological content. This helps to make clear whether the image’s description is correct or not and also allows a broader use, in Wikipedia articles of very different kind.

Answer in English or German, just as you like. --Gretarsson (talk) 15:01, 13 December 2013 (UTC)

Interessehalber: Inwiefern hilft die Info wo dieser Stein aufgenommen wurde. In diesem Fall ist es nämlich so, dass der Aufnahmeort und der "Fundort" unterschiedlich ist. --High Contrast (talk) 20:01, 16 December 2013 (UTC)
In diesem Fall wäre beides wichtig: wo das Stück ursprünglich herstammt (im Fall, dass es sich um einen Findling handelt, ist anzunehmen, dass es irgendwo aus Norwegen oder Schweden kommt, das ist dann beinahe trivial) und wo es heute liegt bzw., wenn der Findling (so es denn einer ist) von seiner ursprünglichen Position (dort wo der Gletscher ihn hat liegenlassen), zum Zwecke der Ausstellung zusammen mit anderen Stücken, an einen anderen Ort verbracht wurde, dann ist auch das zu erwähnen. Fakt ist: jede Kontextinformation ist wertvoll und in jedem Fall (nicht nur bei Fotos von Steinen) korreliert die Anzahl der Verwendungsmöglichkeiten eines Bildes positiv mit der Menge an Kontextionformationen die zu einem Bild geliefert werden. Ist es ein Findling? Dann könnte das Bild potenziell auch im Artikel zum Themenkreis Pleistozän stehen. Das wäre schonmal eine Erweiterung gegenüber der auschließlichen Nutzung in Artikeln zum Themenkreis magmatische Gesteine. Der Fundort ermöglichte eine Verwendung des Bildes im Zusammenhang mit der lokalen/regionalen Geologie einer bestimmten Gegend usw. Ist es ein Ausstellungstück an einem Geo-Lehrpfad? Dann wäre z.B. auch schonmal geklärt, woher überhaupt die Info stammt, dass es sich um einen Diorit handelt. Es kann doch nur in deinem Interesse sein, wenn deine Bilder möglichst breite Verwendung finden, oder nicht? --Gretarsson (talk) 13:09, 18 December 2013 (UTC)
*Räusper!* Weißt du nun noch wo das Foto und der fotografierte Stein her ist? --Gretarsson (talk) 03:47, 25 December 2013 (UTC)
OK, es scheint, du weißt es nicht (mehr). Wäre nur schön, wenn du für zukünftige Uploads geologischer Fotos oben von mir erörtertes beherzigst. --Gretarsson (talk) 17:27, 14 January 2014 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

 
Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Lusen im Bayerischen Wald, 2013.JPG, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates.

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments   Support Good quality. --XRay 07:21, 13 December 2013 (UTC)

Please tell

What include ticket in deletion of picture File:Ilmari koppinen.jpg, because the picture are taken with me and there are no information where it has been copied.--Motopark (talk) 18:09, 17 December 2013 (UTC)

MEADS International Imagery

Issue: most of our photography is taken by contractor personnel funded under government contract, not government employees exactly, but they do require a 3-nation public release review. Do you still regard such photos as in the public domain? Is the suggested Creative Commons license -Cc-by-sa-3.0- then applicable? The problem has been that available categories did not anticipate a multinational contractor organization, it seems to me.

Is there some clear evidence for a free license on the source page? If yes, where? Regards, High Contrast (talk) 20:14, 18 December 2013 (UTC)

WLM 2013 survey thank you


العربية | català | Deutsch | Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ | English | español | eesti | français | magyar | Nederlands | polski | svenska | ไทย | +/−

Thank you for taking part in the Wiki Loves Monuments participants' survey!

Dear High Contrast,

Thank you for taking part in the Wiki Loves Monuments participants' survey. Your answers will help us improve the organization of future photo contests!

In case you haven't filled in the questionnaire yet, you can still do so during the next 7 days.

And by the way: the winning pictures of this year's international contest have been announced. Enjoy!

Kind regards,

the Wiki Loves Monuments team
 

WLM 2013 survey thank you


العربية | català | Deutsch | Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ | English | español | eesti | français | magyar | Nederlands | polski | svenska | ไทย | +/−

Thank you for taking part in the Wiki Loves Monuments participants' survey!

Dear High Contrast,

Thank you for taking part in the Wiki Loves Monuments participants' survey. Your answers will help us improve the organization of future photo contests!

In case you haven't filled in the questionnaire yet, you can still do so during the next 7 days.

And by the way: the winning pictures of this year's international contest have been announced. Enjoy!

Kind regards,

the Wiki Loves Monuments team
 

Quality Image Promotion

 
Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Round hay bales in Bavaria -01.JPG, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates.

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments Good quality. --Tuxyso 10:15, 15 December 2013 (UTC)

We are the right owners

About deleting image in: https://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/Айрапетян,_Борис_Александрович

Dear CommonsDelinker.

I'm officially representative of Boris Airapetyan. Many of those images I created by myself. I also actively take part in the Suvorof project. We have all the right! Please if you have any questions contact me directly by phone number +7 (495) 7975844 int. 0027 - Stanislav Markaryan.

We and only we are the right owners. Thank you.

Уважаемый CommonsDelinker.

Я официальный представитель Бориса Айрапетяна. Многии из тех изображении были нарисованны мной лично. Я тажке активно принимаю участие в проекте Суворов. Держу постоянный контакт с Борисой Айрапетяном. У нас есть все права на размещение этих изображений. Если у Вас есть какие-либо вопросы - пожалуйста свяжитесь со мной напрямую по номеру +7 (495) 7975844 доб. 0027 - Станислав Маркарян.

Мы правообладатели всех изображений и информации. Спасибо за Ваше понимание.

~Stenveel (Stanislav Markaryan)

Thank you! Best regards, High Contrast (talk) 21:36, 20 December 2013 (UTC)

The images you deleted and asked to delete

I understand your work as Administrator and license supervisor here in the Commons community, but many (I won't dare to say all), too many of the images you deleted or asked to delete were by own work. I can not understand the arrogance with which you assert that these files may not be drawn by me: File:ETA structure.jpg File:Independentzia.jpg   File:Mongolia Operations 1920-1921.jpg I can assure you that I have, indeed, created all the four images using backtop maps from Commons, regularly uploaded 2010 and 2011, and modifying them with a modern computer drawing programme, which is Paint.NET. Names and photos of the ETA structure I have found in the internet archives of Guardia Civil, or spanish police: they were on the "most-wanted" list, and were as such allowed to be diffused and divulged. I therefore ask you to remove your deletion requests. Thanks, --Nicholas Urquhart (talk) 16:54, 19 December 2013 (UTC)

You are a good example for people who know less but shout out loudly. Rethink your actions, please. And do not waste other people's time with your rude nescience, please. Thanks, High Contrast (talk) 21:34, 20 December 2013 (UTC)


The following Images uploaded are related to the original work on Amazing Vedic Epic authored by Mr. Kishen SSR and is useful to all:

   1 File:Reality.TIF
   2 File:Vidic Treasure.TIF
   3 File:Kanakachala.TIF
   4 File:The Purpose.TIF
   5 File:The Art of Treatment.TIF
   6 File:Spiritual Masters.TIF
   7 File:Vedic Microbiology.TIF
   8 File:Elements of Cosmos.TIF
   9 File:Vedic Microbiolog1.TIF
   10 File:Amazing Vedic Epic.TIF
   11 File:Child Form of Diviners.TIF
   12 File:Amazing Vedic Epic Coer Page 2.TIF
   13 File:Five Great Elements.TIF
   14 File:Vedas-1.TIF
   15 File:Vedic Management.TIF

Hence displayed in the public domain as it it is a derivative work and modified and created by me using the image of Vedic Deities. Now requesting you to rename that deem fit and proper.

Kishen SSR, Hyderabad India kishen.ssr@gmail.com

File source is not properly indicated: File:Intelligence flight takes trip to 'petting zoo', 2013.jpg

العربية  asturianu  беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎  বাংলা  català  čeština  dansk  Deutsch  Ελληνικά  English  español  euskara  فارسی  suomi  français  galego  עברית  hrvatski  magyar  italiano  日本語  한국어  македонски  മലയാളം  norsk bokmål  Plattdüütsch  Nederlands  norsk nynorsk  norsk  polski  português  português do Brasil  русский  sicilianu  slovenčina  slovenščina  svenska  ไทย  Türkçe  українська  Tiếng Việt  中文(简体)‎  中文(繁體)‎  +/−
 
This media may be deleted.
A file that you have uploaded to Wikimedia Commons, File:Intelligence flight takes trip to 'petting zoo', 2013.jpg, is missing information about where it comes from or who created it, which is needed to verify its copyright status. Please edit the file description and add the missing information, or the file may be deleted.

If you created the content yourself, enter {{Own}} as the source. If you did not add a licensing template, you must add one. You may use, for example, {{self|GFDL|cc-by-sa-all}} or {{Cc-zero}} to release certain rights to your work.

If someone else created the content, or if it is based on someone else's work, the source should be the address to the web page where you found it, the name and ISBN of the book you scanned it from, or similar. You should also name the author, provide verifiable information to show that the content is in the public domain or has been published under a free license by its author, and add an appropriate template identifying the public domain or licensing status, if you have not already done so. Warning: Wikimedia Commons takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing.

Please add the required information for this and other files you have uploaded before adding more files. If you need assistance, please ask at the help desk. Thank you!

레비Revi 12:24, 21 December 2013 (UTC)

Fixed. Huntster (t @ c) 15:36, 21 December 2013 (UTC)
Thank for your support! Best regards, High Contrast (talk) 12:26, 23 December 2013 (UTC)

File:Conversion al Judaismo.pdf

Copyright and more:[[15]]. The files have been turned up. Are copyrighted, with all rights reserved worldwide. This responds / reply / answer to all your questions. I am the author and I have the copyright, anything else I should ask? Thank you for your courtesy and respect and deference. --Krestos-Crestos (talk) 16:35, 21 December 2013 (UTC)

This is a question of COM:SCOPE, not of copyright. --High Contrast (talk) 12:09, 23 December 2013 (UTC)

2014 !

  * * * 2014! * * *
Merry Christmas! Happy New Year! Happy holidays! -- George Chernilevsky talk 21:15, 22 December 2013 (UTC)
Hello George! Thank you very much! I wish you the same ! Kindest regards, High Contrast (talk) 12:25, 23 December 2013 (UTC)

Happy Holidays

  Happy Holidays!
G'day, just a quick greeting wishing you and your family happy holidays and all the best for 2014. And of course, a big thank you for putting a leg up by doing what you do on Commons, and helping to make it the fantastic project that it is. Greetings from a warm west coast of Aussie. russavia (talk) 01:35, 24 December 2013 (UTC)

Holiday wishes

 
Happy Holidays!

Vera (talk) 13:55, 24 December 2013 (UTC)

Deutsch | English | Español | Français | Italiano | Nederlands | +/−

File source is not properly indicated: File:Dr. Edmund Gros.jpg

Thanks for your uploading. You provided a source, but it is difficult for other users to examine the copyright status of these files because the source is incomplete. Please consider clarifying the exact source so that the copyright status may be checked more easily. It is best to specify the exact web page where you found the file, rather than only giving the source domain or the URL of the file itself. Please update the file descriptions with a URL that will be more helpful to other users in determining the copyright status. If you have uploaded multiple files, consider checking that you have specified their source in a complete manner. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following this link. If you have any questions please ask them at the help desk or me at my talkpage. Thank you.

čeština | English | svenska | русский | മലയാളം | 中文 | 中文(简体) | +/−

--High Contrast (talk) 02:06, 25 December 2013 (UTC)

Done!   --Airleron (talk) 02:36, 25 December 2013 (UTC)
Great! Now, it is absolutely ok. Thanks! --High Contrast (talk) 17:20, 25 December 2013 (UTC)

Truppenübungsplatz Daaden

Moin, ich habe den Artikel "Truppenübungsplatz Daaden", welcher von Dir als lückenhaft markiert wurde, überarbeitet. Bitte überprüfe, ob Du Deine dort hinterlassene Markierung ändern, präzisieren oder bestenfalls sogar entfernen kannst. Schöne Feiertage und einen Guten Rutsch! MfG --Stubenviech (talk) 21:52, 25 December 2013 (UTC)

Hallo! Ja, der Baustein kann entfernt werden. Gruß und ebenfalls --High Contrast (talk) 22:21, 25 December 2013 (UTC)

TROLL

Why do you call me a troll? Please behave. Jcb (talk) 23:24, 25 December 2013 (UTC)

You should behave. You are clearly working in favor of a clear copyright violation. --High Contrast (talk) 23:26, 25 December 2013 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

  The Random Acts of Kindness Barnstar
Merry Christmas from the Philippines and best of luck, thanks for all your help to clean my works. Sincerely Ramon FVelasquez (talk) 00:59, 26 December 2013 (UTC)

Thank you very much! --High Contrast (talk) 18:45, 26 December 2013 (UTC)

Return to the user page of "High Contrast/Archive 8".