Ikar.us

/Archiv

Baischstraße in Stadtwiki.net

Hello Michael,
Happy to see you aroud there! Thanks for the set you've nominated, I learnt on Hermann Billing with your pictures. About Baischstraße in Stadtwiki.net, we could propose some emendations for the article in French, couldn't we? Kind regards, --Myrabella (talk) 13:35, 29 June 2012 (UTC)

Bonjour!

Unfortunately, the French Stadtwiki doesn't get much attention.

Of course, we/you can propose emendations

(or just register and conduct them, native speakers are very welcome!).

Thanks for yor review and support,

--Ikar.us (talk) 16:15, 29 June 2012 (UTC)

2013!

		* * * 2013 !!! * * *
		Hallo Michael! Frohes Weihnachten! Frohes Neues Jahr! Mit freundlichen Grüßen, Georgij -- George Chernilevsky talk 22:19, 24 December 2012 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Brilliant Idea Barnstar
	Thanks to you, VICbot is running again! "Oh, those quotation marks!" Myrabella (talk) 07:40, 11 January 2013 (UTC)

Aerial view of Television Tower St. Chrischona

Hello Ikar.us, There is a mess with that MVR, with a new page created for the renomination - and some other redirect pages (e.g. [1]) and maybe this is not the right way to deal with the former VI page -> Commons:Valued image candidates/Aerial view at Television Tower St. Chrischona. --Myrabella (talk) 23:02, 27 January 2013 (UTC)

Now he has processed it. More or less.

But other MVRs where former VIs were traeted differently aren't completed either.

--Ikar.us (talk) 12:46, 28 January 2013 (UTC)

Thank you for the fine tuning of that MVR. For the other MVRs, yes, it's weird. Furthermore, the VI label must be manually replaced with the {{VI-former}} template in the former VI file page; it would be helpful to have this step in VICbot process.

By the way, maybe I would have closed this one with an undecided status for both candidates ("status=undecided, for all VICs in an MVR which ended up without a VIC with a positive score larger than all others"). However I edited neither the closure nor the former VI—which is still VI then.

Best, --Myrabella (talk) 16:26, 28 January 2013 (UTC)

Thank you for fine tuning the archive calendar.

I agree about status=undecided. Used it now in this one, which has the technical challenge that the challenged candidate had been promoted by MVR in its first run. And the jurisdicial challenge that it didn't get any attention at all in the challenge. Hope that VICbot's shortfall lets it stay VI silently…

--Ikar.us (talk) 19:53, 29 January 2013 (UTC)

Commons:Valued image candidates/Polarlicht 2 kmeans

Could you revert your close of this VIC? I don't think it is appropriate for a participant in the discussion to be closing it, even if the time is up. Otherwise, I would have closed it myself a long time ago as successful, 7 days after DimiTalen's vote. -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 19:13, 30 January 2013 (UTC)

Closing is a routine task that anyone can perform.

I did not close it when it was due, but waited for 11 days, during which you could have fixed the nomination and explained it.

Unclosing isn't provided and not necessary.

You can simply renominate it, if you're ready for discussion now.

--Ikar.us (talk) 19:33, 30 January 2013 (UTC)

Commons:Valued image candidates/The fossil cliffs of Steigerberg

Hallo,

ich bin neu in WikiCommons und kenne die Gepflogenheiten noch nicht so gut deshalb schreibe ich auf diesem Weg. Zu dem Kontra zu o.g. VIC habe ich einen Kommentar auf der Kandidatenseite geschrieben. Es ist wirklich ein ausgesuchter Set von Bildern aus einer größeren Sammlung von Bildern dieses inzwischen wieder zugeschütteten Geotops. Vielleicht können Sie ihre Bewertung ja nochmal überdenken.

Viele Grüße Arcalino (talk) 16:22, 13 February 2013 (UTC)

VIS Promotion

Congratulations!
The set of images you nominated for valued image set was reviewed and has now been promoted to the Valued image set: Nesvizh Castle, Belarus.

It is considered to be the most valued set of images on Commons within the scope:
Nesvizh Castle, Belarus.
If you would like to nominate another image set, please do so at Valued images candidates.

Congratulations!
The set of images you nominated for valued image set was reviewed and has now been promoted to the Valued image set: Church of Saint Virgin Mary, Belarus.

It is considered to be the most valued set of images on Commons within the scope:
Church of Saint Virgin Mary, Belarus.
If you would like to nominate another image set, please do so at Valued images candidates.

Congratulations!
The set of images you nominated for valued image set was reviewed and has now been promoted to the Valued image set: Great Synagogue in Grodno, Belarus .

It is considered to be the most valued set of images on Commons within the scope:
Great Synagogue in Grodno, Belarus .
If you would like to nominate another image set, please do so at Valued images candidates.

★ 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:
Lubča Castle, Belarus.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

•  Support --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 14:48, 8 February 2013 (UTC)

Scores: 
1. Любча2.jpg: 0 
2. Lubcza.jpg: +1 <--
=>
File:Любча2.jpg: Declined. 
File:Lubcza.jpg: Promoted. <--

--Myrabella (talk) 20:42, 12 March 2013 (UTC)

Thank You

For the VI Barnstar. A great addition to my day! -- Godot13 (talk) 19:07, 18 February 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for your comment on my VISC. I've changed the scope for Commons:Valued_image_candidates/Sea-Air_Rescue_Training_(Norwegian_Coast_Guard) to more accurately reflect the set. Please let me know if you approve with the new scope. Thanks- Godot13 (talk) 01:55, 19 February 2013 (UTC)

Question

The VIS Great Synagogue is promoted and closed. This does not effect the outcome, but I just noticed that someone added a support vote and changed the vote numbers after I had closed it. I have only been on Commons for 2 months so I do not know whether I should say something or just forget it. Do you have an opinion? - Godot13 (talk) 05:41, 22 February 2013 (UTC)

All other contributions by this user look useful.

Maybe he has confused it with QI consensual review, where the template looks similar, but the running total has to be updated by each voter.

I think you can forget it.

--Ikar.us (talk) 10:52, 22 February 2013 (UTC)

Okay, thanks!-Godot13 (talk) 18:57, 22 February 2013 (UTC)

VIC talk page

Hi Ikar!

I have started two discussion topics at Commons talk:Valued image candidates/candidate list. But it seems that this page is visited less frequently. Hence thought of notifying you as you are a regular editor at VIC. Please put your views, if any, on these topics. §§Dharmadhyaksha§§ {T/C} 09:43, 14 March 2013 (UTC)

Prison destroyed, restored by me

In some way, this is not absolutely wrong !

After the destruction, a new building was erected in 1902. Believe me or not, my own family flat, from where I'm writing you right now, is in this new building, second floor. And yes, I've restored this flat (paintings, electricity and so....).

Ah Ah !

Funny, isn't it ?--Jebulon (talk) 17:37, 18 March 2013 (UTC)

File:Windkraftwerk in Schiff.jpg

Nice photo that you have added. However, it looks really weird when we used it in the articles having the white space around the upper left side of the image. I think it will look better if you use the original image (768 x 1024), rotate clockwise for 17 degrees, and crop down toward the center (crop left-right equally and top-bottom equally) to the size of 565 x 765. The result image will have the ship angle that is not perfect, but it will look reasonable. It will not have any white space, and it still get the whole idea of the ship with the tower inside it. The lower right will still have water to show that the ship is running through a waterway. If you want, I can make that I upload for you. Your thought? Z22 (talk) 03:08, 16 October 2013 (UTC)

That would be really too small. Please use the original file: http://ikar.us/Windkraftwerk_in_Schiff.JPG --Ikar.us (talk) 09:49, 16 October 2013 (UTC)

Could you please take your original and upload it to File:Windkraftwerk in Schiff.jpg? This way, your high resolution file will be released as Creative Common license as well. Then I can rotate, crop and upload for you right after your upload. Sorry for nitpicking, but it seems that people in Commons are very strict with the copyright stuff. I just got a picture that I took deleted from Commons the other day due to some complications with copyright. I just don't want another problem. Z22 (talk) 01:53, 17 October 2013 (UTC)

Copyright status: File:Magic Offenbach.jpg

This media may be deleted.

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

And also:

• File:Schwabenheim Schleusentor.jpg
• File:Schwabenheim Schleusentor offen.jpg

Yours sincerely, Jarekt (talk) 14:06, 16 October 2013 (UTC)

IMO 7804819

Hello Michael, Thank you for the categorization! --Myrabella (talk) 12:25, 17 October 2013 (UTC)

Copyright status: File:Spatzenbrücke.jpg

This media may be deleted.

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

Ww2censor (talk) 18:21, 2 January 2014 (UTC)

Hello

Hello Michael,
I hope you're fine. Each time that I upload a photo about river transport on Commons, I think of you—that is to say, not very often but it happens. I guess because of one of your very first VIs, I had spent time scrolling through the related categories then! So I am pleased to dedicate my lastest image on this topic to you → File:Dragage_Seine_Paris.jpg. Cheers, --Myrabella (talk) 09:23, 13 April 2014 (UTC)

Wiki Loves Monuments 2014 startet in Kürze

Hallo Ikar.us,

in Kürze ist es wieder soweit. Der nun schon traditionelle Fotowettbewerb Wiki Loves Monuments wird im September zum vierten Mal stattfinden. In ähnlicher Form hatte unlängst der Wettbewerb "Wiki Loves Earth" eine erfolgreiche Premiere. Zu allen bisherigen vier Wettbewerben haben seit 2011 gut 3000 unterschiedliche Teilnehmer (User) ihren Beitrag geleistet. Du warst dabei, und bist auch herzlich eingeladen, am bevorstehenden WLM-Wettbewerb wieder dabei zu sein.

Allein in Deutschland wurden in den letzten drei Jahren im Rahmen von WLM rund 100.000 Fotos zu den insgesamt ca. 850.000 Kulturdenkmalen bundesweit hochgeladen. Jährlich haben sich mehrere Hundert Wiki-Fotographen daran beteiligt. Auch im kommenden Denkmalmonat wird dies gewiss wieder der Fall sein. Der Tag des offenen Denkmals am 14. September bietet bundesweit vielfältige Möglichkeiten, Denkmale nicht nur von außen, sondern auch von innen zu fotografieren. Denkmallisten sind dabei ein wichtiger Orientierungspunkt und zugleich auch Ziel der Einbindung der Fotos. Auch in diesem Jahr sind wieder neue Denkmallisten hinzugekommen, die hilfreich bei der Planung von individuellen oder Gruppen-Fototouren sind und auf eine Bebilderung warten, wie z.B. zu Görlitz oder Zittau. Unter den Landeshauptstädten fehlt nur noch Stuttgart. Aber auch hier ist Licht in Sicht.

In der Mitte Deutschlands hat die Denkmallandschaft der thüringischen Landeshauptstadt Erfurt nun das Licht der Wikipedia-Welt entdeckt. Mehr als 50 Tabellen enthalten 3.700 Denkmale. Allein die wunderschön restaurierte Altstadt umfasst 1.800 Denkmale. Eine von WMDE geförderte WLM-Fototour nach Erfurt am Wochenende vom 29. – 31. August lädt herzlich ein, diese einzigartige Kulturlandschaft zu dokumentieren. Mehr Informationen findest Du auf der Projektseite.

Wir freuen uns auf Deine weiteren Beiträge für Wikimedia-Projekte.

Viel Spaß beim größten Fotowettbewerb der Wiki(m/p)edia wünscht Dir das Orga-Team.

( Bernd Gross, 16. August 2014)

Schwabenheim barrage in VI

For this series I perceive that you forgot to put in a caption in English on the images. Can you fix it, thank you. :) --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 05:07, 9 October 2014 (UTC)

Is it required? Anyway, provided.--Ikar.us (talk) 07:09, 9 October 2014 (UTC)

Die von

Dir hier angegebene Kategorie verstehe ich nicht. Hast Du Dich vielleicht verklickt? Gruß, --4028mdk09 (talk) 15:57, 17 October 2014 (UTC)

Stimmt, danke. --Ikar.us (talk) 17:31, 17 October 2014 (UTC)

Gern geschehen. --4028mdk09 (talk) 17:36, 17 October 2014 (UTC)

Bravo!

Very good initiative, ranking in VI. --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:14, 16 January 2015 (UTC)

Valued image candidates review / Bardentreffen 2014 So 1868.JPG

Hi, thank you for your note. Changed scope to Catalina García of the Colombian music band Monsieur Periné -- rs-foto (talk) 10:28, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

Commons:Valued image candidates/HydroelectricitySrilanka.png

Hi. Thanks for your vote. Scope changed to Hydroelectric power plants in Sri Lanka. Regards, Rehman 14:28, 24 February 2015 (UTC)

Copyright status: File:Dossenheim Vatter.jpg

This media may be deleted.

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

No required license templates were detected at this file page. Please correct it, or if you have any questions please check my FAQ or contact me on my talk page. Yours sincerely, Jarekt (talk) 16:42, 19 June 2015 (UTC)

KA300-Stadtteilprojekte Grünwinkel

Hallo Ikar.us,
von Karlsruher zu Karlsruher: Ich habe gesehen, dass Du einige "Krähenbilder" auf Wikimedia hochgeladen hast. Anlässlich des Stadtgeburtstages sind ja über ganz Karlsruhe Kunstwerke vertreut. Ich selbst habe auch schon fotografiert und z.B. den Mercedes am "Besitos" am Marktplatz hochgeladen. Kurz darauf habe ich aber, nach einem Hinweis, kalte Füße bekommen und eine Schnelllöschung beantragt. Denn bei allen handelt es sich um nur vorübergehend ausgestellte Kunstwerke, die nicht durch FoP-Germany abgedeckt sind. Für FoP müssten sie dauerhaft installiert sein. Dies könnte auch für die Grünwinkler Krähen gelten, ebenso wie z.B. den erwähnten Mercedes, das hängende Haus, für Nachaufnahmen der Scheinwerfer z.B. vom Turmberg aus oder das Anstrahlen des Schlosses bei der Hauptfeier.
Ich habe deshalb letzte Woche beim Stadtmarkting angerufen (Name und Telefonnummer kann ich Dir auf Wunsch mitteilen) und das Problem geschildert, dass diese Objekte nicht für Wikimedia fotografiert werden dürfen und viel schlimmer, dass sich im Grunde jeder, der mit dem Handy fotografiert und das per Watsapp oder Facebook weiterschickt, sich der Urheberrechtsverletzung schuldig macht. Das Problem war im Stadtmarketing anscheinend gar nicht bekannt ("Wir wollen doch, dass die Leute das fotografieren und bekannt machen"). Da zumindest ein Teil der Aktionen in Kooperation mit dem ZKM durchgeführt werden, muss die Angelegenheit auch mit dem ZKM geklärt werden, sie wollen Rücksprache halten. Man hat mir zugesagt, dass ich informiert werde, sobald ein Ergebnis vorliegt. Solange wäre ich vorsichtig (ich habe auch noch das eine oder andere Bild in petto, aber ich warte jetzt noch ab). Falls Du allerdings sicher bist, dass die Krähen fotografiert werden dürfen, bitte ich um kurze Mitteilung (und Begründung), ich würde gerne auch die eine oder andere fotografieren. Mit den besten Grüßen --Llez (talk) 10:37, 29 June 2015 (UTC)

Erstmal ein ganz großer Irrtum: Der Urheberrechtsverletzung macht sich nicht der schuldig, der es fotografiert und weiterschickt, sondern der, der es bekommt und kommerziell weiterverwendet. Also z.B. einer, der die Krähe im Stadtwiki findet, damit Postkarten druckt und in seinem Kiosk verkauft.

Wikimedia-Commons hat aber festgelegt, dass alle Bilder, die hier sind, so genutzt werden dürfen müssen. Also es muss für jedes Bild möglich sein, es für sich allein, aus dem Zusammenhang gerissen, unbeschränkt kommerziell zu verwenden. Die einzige zulässige Einschränkung ist, dass verlangt werden darf, dass die Urheber genannt werden.

Das ist eine Hausregel von Commons, und diese Hausregel ist das, was Commons von allen anderen Bilder-Host-Diensten unterscheidet. Deshalb haben Panoramio, Flickr, Facebook und alle anderen damit überhaupt kein Problem.

(Und Commons geht ja auch nicht konsequent so vor. Wenn ein Bild wegen Markenrecht, Wappenrecht, Persönlichkeitsrecht oder sonstwas nicht beliebig verwendet werden darf, wird das entsprechend gekennzeichnet, und jeder Nutzungsinteressent muss sich selber darum kümmern. Für Urheberrechtseinschränkungen könnte man das genauso handhaben. Man hat aber beschlossen, dass man das nicht will.)

Und jedes zivilisierte Land hat sein Urheberrecht so formuliert, dass es genug Freiheiten für private, journalistische und Bildungszwecke gibt. Auch ein Facebook-Reisebericht "ich hab eine bunte Krähe gesehen!" darf illustriert werden. Wenn Wikimedia-Commons für sich beschließt, den Beitragenden die Nutzung dieser Freiheiten zu verbieten, hat das auf den Rest der Welt überhaupt keinen Einfluss. Sehr viele, die davon hören, verwechseln die Commons-Hausregel mit einem Gesetz. (Ich frage mich allerdings, wie die Wikimedia-Stiftung Steuerprivilegien für Bildungszwecke bekommt, wenn sie die Bildungsfreiheiten ausschließt.)

Die Hausregel gilt auch nur speziell auf Commons und nicht in allen Wikimedia-Projekten. Als Russland die Panoramafreiheit rückwirkend aufgehoben hat, wurden in der russichen Wikipedia – nein, nicht etwa alle Bilder gelöscht, sondern ganz im Gegenteil, alle Russland-Bilder von Commons nach ru.wikipedia verschoben! Die hat nämlich ihre Hausregeln so festgelegt, dass russische Architektur dort dokumentiert werden kann. Dafür ist ein Lexikon ja da. Die Wikipedias sind Lexika. Commons ist ein Stock-Photo-Service. Der ursprüngliche Zweck, Bilder für Wikipedia-Lexika zur Verfügung zu stellen, ist an den Rand gerückt.

Was jetzt meine Krähenbilder anbetrifft: Von denen hab ich auf Commons nicht "einige" hochgeladen, sondern nur eine einzige, nämlich die vom CZK.

--Ikar.us (talk) 13:42, 29 June 2015 (UTC)

Zu Deiner abschließenden Frage: Fotografiert werden dürfen sie garantiert. Veröffentlichen kannst sie nach meiner Überzeugung bedenkenlos z.B. in Karlsruhe:Kategorie:Bild (KA300). Dort kannst auch {{Copyright}} setzen – anders als hier ist das aber kein Löschgrund. --Ikar.us (talk) 14:22, 29 June 2015 (UTC)

Danke für die Info, man lernt nie aus. Habe mich gerade beim Stadtwiki angemeldet. Werde bei Gelegenheit das eine oder andere Bild hochladen. Viele Grüße --Llez (talk) 15:26, 29 June 2015 (UTC)

Der WLM-Countdown hat begonnen

Hallo Ikar.us,

nun ist es wieder soweit. Vom 1. bis zum 30. September findet zum fünften Mal der internationale Wettbewerb Wiki Loves Monuments statt. Im Mittelpunkt steht bekanntlich das Fotografieren von Kulturdenkmalen. Du hast an einem der letzten Fotowettbewerbe teilgenommen und wir freuen uns auf weitere Bildbeiträge von Dir.

Viele interessante Motive, nicht nur Burgen und Schlösser, sondern auch Fachwerkhäuser, Brücken und Brunnen, technische und Industriedenkmale und vieles mehr gibt es noch zu fotografieren, damit sie in der Wikipedia dokumentiert werden können. Nützliche Tipps findest du auf unserer WLM-Projektseite. Du kannst gerne individuell Fototouren durchführen oder aber Dich auch Gruppentouren anschließen. Besonders freuen wir uns auf Fotos, die Lücken in den Denkmallisten der Wikipedia ausfüllen.

Darüber hinaus kannst Du auch an der Arbeit der Jury teilnehmen, die Mitte Oktober die Fotos bewerten und die Gewinner ermitteln wird. Bis zum 15. August kannst du hier Deine Bewerbung einreichen.

Viel Erfolg und Spaß beim größten Fotowettbewerb der Wiki(m/p)edia in den bevorstehenden Wettbewerbswochen wünscht Dir das Orga-Team. Wir freuen uns auf Deine Fotos.

( Bernd Gross, 6. August 2015)

Copyright status: File:KA-Naturkundemuseum FeG-Krankenwagen.jpg

This media may be deleted.

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

Yours sincerely, Magog the Ogre (talk) (contribs) 04:41, 7 May 2016 (UTC)

File:Sanitätswachdienst.jpg

File:Sanitätswachdienst.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!

Vielen Dank und Grüße Woelle ffm (talk) 06:40, 9 May 2016 (UTC)

File:Christival-2016 Sanitaeter.jpg

File:Christival-2016 Sanitaeter.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!

Vielen Dank und Grüße Woelle ffm (talk) 06:43, 9 May 2016 (UTC)

File:Christival-2016 Sanitaeter.jpg

File:Christival-2016 Sanitaeter.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!

2003:C7:B3DA:2400:B0D4:8B5F:EBBC:DC36 13:57, 13 May 2016 (UTC)

File:Kirbachhof Gaense.jpg

Hallo,

die Koordinaten für dieses Bild sind nicht korrekt. Aktuell sind diese im Bienwald (Pfalz) verortet. Ich bin durch https://tools.wmflabs.org/commons-coverage/#15/49.0211/8.0783 darauf aufmerksam geworden. Gruß --Pfalz39 (talk) 04:06, 12 June 2016 (UTC)

Stimmt, vertippt. --Ikar.us (talk) 20:06, 12 June 2016 (UTC)

Vielen Dank für Deine Teilnahme bei Wiki Loves Monuments 2016 in Deutschland!

Wiki Loves Monuments Deutschland

Hallo Ikar.us!

Vielen Dank für Deine Teilnahme am Wettbewerb Wiki Loves Monuments 2016! Das Organisationsteam freut sich über 38.988 Bilder von deutschen Bau- und Kulturdenkmalen, die in diesem Jahr hochgeladen wurden, und möchte sich ganz herzlich bei Dir für deinen Beitrag zum weltweit größten, von Ehrenamtlichen organisierten, Fotowettbewerb bedanken!

Du hast noch bis zum 18. Oktober die Gelegenheit Wettbewerbsbeiträge anderer Fotografen im Rahmen der Vorjury zu bewerten. Wir würden uns freuen, wenn Du dich daran beteiligst und mithilfst die besten Bilder des diesjährigen Wettbewerbs auszuwählen. Alle Informationen zur Vorjury findest Du hier.

An dieser Stelle sei noch auf die Preisverleihung von Wiki Loves Monuments 2016 in Deutschland hingewiesen: Diese findet am 25. November 2016 ab 20 Uhr in den Räumen von Wikimedia Deutschland in Berlin statt. Alle Interessierten laden wir ganz herzlich zur Teilnahme ein. Für die Fotografen der Top-10-Bilder und die Sonderpreisträger werden Reisekosten sowie eine Übernachtung durch Wikimedia Deutschland übernommen.

Nochmals vielen Dank für deine Beiträge. Wir würden uns freuen, wenn Du auch in Zukunft die Wikipedia bebilderst! Solltest du Fragen haben, so kannst du dich gerne an infowikilovesmonuments.de wenden.

(DCB im Namen des Organisationsteams von Wiki Loves Monuments Deutschland, 01.10.2016)

Image without license

File:Kreisverkehr Killisfeld.jpg

---

There seems to be a problem regarding the description and/or licensing of this particular file. It has been found that you've added in the image's description only a Template that's not a license and although it provides useful information about the image, it's not a valid license. Could you please resolve this problem, adding the license in the image linked above? You can edit the description page and change the text. Uploading a new version of the file does not change the description of the file. This page may give you more hints on which license to choose. Thank you.

This message was added automatically by MifterBot ^{(Talk • Contribs • Owner)}, if you need some help about it please read the text above again and follow the links in it, if you still need help ask at the → Commons:Help desk in any language you like to use. --MifterBot ^{(Talk • Contribs • Owner)} 20:04, 6 May 2017 (UTC)

Einladung zum Mitmachen bei Wiki Loves Monuments 2017

Hallo Ikar.us!

Vielleicht hast du es schon mitbekommen: Im Moment läuft – noch bis zum 30. September 2017 – der internationale Fotowettbewerb Wiki Loves Monuments 2017. Wir freuen uns auf deine Fotos von Bau- und Kulturdenkmalen! Wie du mitmachen kannst erfährst du auf unserer Mitmach-Seite, bei Fragen und Problemen kannst du dich auf unserer Support-Seite melden.

(Martin Kraft im Namen des Organisationsteams von Wiki Loves Monuments Deutschland, 12:37, 19 September 2017 (UTC))

Category:Burg Turmberg - Category:World War I memorials in Karlsruhe

Hallo Ikar.us!

Hoffe, deutsch ist ok!? - Ich hatte am 27. April 2017 die > Category:World War I memorials in Karlsruhe < ergänzt auf Grundlage des Fotos einer Gedenktafel an der westlichen Wand des Turms ([2]). Die Gedenktafel an Gefallene einer Sanitätskompanie zeigt oben die Jahreszahlen 1914 und 1918. Was bitte sprach gegen die Ergänzung dieser Kategorie, die Du am 26. Juli 2017 wieder gelöscht hast? Gruß--Muck50 (talk) 17:14, 30 October 2017 (UTC)

Der Turmberg im Ganzen ist kein Weltkriegsdenkmal.

Ich habe dafür dem Bild von der Tafel die Kategorie gegeben. Special:Diff/253140135

--Ikar.us (talk) 12:11, 31 October 2017 (UTC)

Das Bild war auch arg trüb. Das mag zum Thema passen, macht aber die Inschrift schwer lesbar. --Ikar.us (talk) 17:44, 31 October 2017 (UTC)

Ja, damit kann ich leben - ist ok so. Gruß --Muck50 (talk) 18:55, 31 October 2017 (UTC)

Welcome, Dear Filemover!

---

Hi Ikar.us, you're now a filemover. When moving files please respect the following advice:

• Use the CommonsDelinker link in the {{Rename}} template to order a bot to replace all ocurrences of the old title with the new one. Or, if there was no rename-request, please use the Move & Replace-tab.
• Please leave a redirect behind unless you have a valid reason not to do so. Other projects, including those using InstantCommons, might be using the file even though they don't show up in the global usage. Deleting the redirects would break their file references. Please see this section of the file rename guideline for more information.
• Please know and follow the file rename guidelines.

--Steinsplitter (talk) 18:24, 29 December 2017 (UTC)

Category:Dampflok_18

Category:Dampflok_18 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!

NearEMPTiness (talk) 11:24, 6 March 2018 (UTC)

Image without license

File:Echterdingen-Stetten Anflugradar-STR.jpg

---

There seems to be a problem regarding the description and/or licensing of this particular file. It has been found that you've added in the image's description only a Template that's not a license and although it provides useful information about the image, it's not a valid license. Could you please resolve this problem, adding the license in the image linked above? You can edit the description page and change the text. Uploading a new version of the file does not change the description of the file. This page may give you more hints on which license to choose. Thank you.

This message was added automatically by MifterBot ^{(Talk • Contribs • Owner)}, if you need some help about it please read the text above again and follow the links in it, if you still need help ask at the → Commons:Help desk in any language you like to use. --MifterBot ^{(Talk • Contribs • Owner)} 16:12, 20 April 2018 (UTC)

File:Autobahnkirche-BB unten.jpg

File:Autobahnkirche-BB unten.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!

Martin Sg. (talk) 18:16, 15 May 2019 (UTC)

File:Autobahnkirche-BB Christoph.jpg

File:Autobahnkirche-BB Christoph.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!

Martin Sg. (talk) 18:16, 15 May 2019 (UTC)

File:Autobahnkirche-BB Altar.jpg

File:Autobahnkirche-BB Altar.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!

Martin Sg. (talk) 18:17, 15 May 2019 (UTC)

File:Autobahnkirche-BB innen.jpg

File:Autobahnkirche-BB innen.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!

Martin Sg. (talk) 18:17, 15 May 2019 (UTC)

Wiki Loves Monuments 2019

Hallo Ikar.us,

bald ist es soweit: Vom 1. bis zum 30. September 2019 findet zum neunten Mal der internationale Wettbewerb Wiki Loves Monuments statt. Dabei können Bau- und Kulturdenkmale fotografiert und die Fotos hochgeladen werden. Du hast an einem der vergangenen Fotowettbewerbe teilgenommen. Deshalb laden wir dich ein, dieses Jahr wieder mitzumachen. Wir freuen uns auf deine Fotos!

Es sind viele spannende Motive überall in Deutschland zu fotografieren. Neben beeindruckenden märchenhaften Schlössern, Burgen und Kirchen können auch andere Kulturdenkmale wie Brücken, Industrieruinen, Bauernhöfe oder Parks fotografiert werden, um sie unter anderem in der Wikipedia zu dokumentieren. In den letzten Jahren sind zahlreiche neue Denkmallisten entstanden, die sich über Fotos freuen. Für die Suche nach Motiven gibt es bei Wikipedia zahlreiche Listen und Karten. Als Einstieg hilft diese Übersichtsseite. Weitere Informationen erhältst du auf der Mitmach-Seite.

Du bist interessiert, am Wettbewerb mitzuwirken, dir fehlt aber die richtige Technik? Dann wirf doch mal einen Blick in den Technikpool und das Technikleihportal von Wikimedia Deutschland! Dort findest du Kameras, Objektive und Zubehör verschiedenster Art. Sollte noch Technik fehlen, die aber in Zukunft unbedingt benötigt wird, dann freut sich Wikimedia Deutschland über dein Feedback zum Technikpool.

Außerdem laden wir Dich ein, ab Mitte September 2019 an der Vorjury teilzunehmen. Diese bewertet die hochgeladenen Bilder und ermittelt so gemeinsam mit der Jury, die im Oktober tagt, die Sieger von Wiki Loves Monuments 2019 in Deutschland. Das Vorjurytool ist hier bald freigeschaltet. Du benötigst dafür nur deinen Benutzernamen und das Passwort.

Für Fragen steht das Organisationsteam gerne auf der Support-Seite zur Verfügung.

Viel Spaß und Erfolg bei größten Fotowettbewerb wünscht dir im Namen des Organisationsteams --Z thomas 14:28, 28 August 2019 (UTC)

Community Insights Survey

Share your experience in this survey

Hi Ikar.us,

The Wikimedia Foundation is asking for your feedback in a survey about your experience with Wikimedia Commons and Wikimedia. The purpose of this survey is to learn how well the Foundation is supporting your work on wiki and how we can change or improve things in the future. The opinions you share will directly affect the current and future work of the Wikimedia Foundation.

Please take 15 to 25 minutes to give your feedback through this survey. It is available in various languages.

This survey is hosted by a third-party and governed by this privacy statement (in English).

Find more information about this project. Email us if you have any questions, or if you don't want to receive future messages about taking this survey.

Sincerely,

RMaung (WMF) 00:59, 10 September 2019 (UTC)

Wiki Loves Monuments France 2019

Bonjour,

Le concours Wiki Loves Monuments France est de retour et ouvert jusqu'à 31 septembre ! Déjà 8310 photos ont été importés cette année, vous aussi rejoignez le concours !

Le concours concerne tous les monuments présents dans la base Mérimée (qu'ils soient classés, inscrits ou simplement classés). De l'imposant château aux ruines industrielles, de la chapelle au coin de la rue aux mégalithes en forêt, c'est un impressionnant patrimoine qui attend d'être photographié et documenté. Où que vous soyez il y a des monuments autour de chez vous. Enfin, vous pouvez mettre en ligne autant de photos que vous le souhaitez de ces monuments. Pour information, le règlement est disponible sur le site du concours. Nous attendons vos photos avec impatience !

Les plus belles photos seront sélectionnées par un jury national composé d'amateurs et de professionnels, de contributeurs à Wikimedia Commons et d'acteurs du patrimoine. Un jury international sélectionnera ensuite des meilleures photographies mondiales.

Si vous avez des questions, l'équipe organisatrice se fera un plaisir d'y répondre.

P.S. : vous recevez ce message parce que vous avez participé au concours Wiki Loves Monuments en France les années précédentes. Si vous avez déjà ou si ne pouvez pas participer au concours cette année, faites passer le message autour de vous pour que de nouveaux et nouvelles photographes rejoignent l'aventure !

Bonne journée,

Sarah Krichen WMFr et Nicolas Vigneron, pour l'équipe de Wiki Loves Monuments France, 14:51, 12 September 2019 (UTC)

Reminder: Community Insights Survey

Share your experience in this survey

Hi Ikar.us,

A couple of weeks ago, we invited you to take the Community Insights Survey. It is the Wikimedia Foundation’s annual survey of our global communities. We want to learn how well we support your work on wiki. We are 10% towards our goal for participation. If you have not already taken the survey, you can help us reach our goal! Your voice matters to us.

Please take 15 to 25 minutes to give your feedback through this survey. It is available in various languages.

This survey is hosted by a third-party and governed by this privacy statement (in English).

Find more information about this project. Email us if you have any questions, or if you don't want to receive future messages about taking this survey.

Sincerely,

RMaung (WMF) 15:19, 20 September 2019 (UTC)

Reminder: Community Insights Survey

Share your experience in this survey

Hi Ikar.us,

There are only a few weeks left to take the Community Insights Survey! We are 30% towards our goal for participation. If you have not already taken the survey, you can help us reach our goal! With this poll, the Wikimedia Foundation gathers feedback on how well we support your work on wiki. It only takes 15-25 minutes to complete, and it has a direct impact on the support we provide.

Please take 15 to 25 minutes to give your feedback through this survey. It is available in various languages.

This survey is hosted by a third-party and governed by this privacy statement (in English).

Find more information about this project. Email us if you have any questions, or if you don't want to receive future messages about taking this survey.

Sincerely,

RMaung (WMF) 19:57, 3 October 2019 (UTC)

Important message for file movers

A community discussion has been closed where the consensus was to grant all file movers the suppressredirect user right. This will allow file movers to not leave behind a redirect when moving files and instead automatically have the original file name deleted. Policy never requires you to suppress the redirect, suppression of redirects is entirely optional.

Possible acceptable uses of this ability:

• To move recently uploaded files with an obvious error in the file name where that error would not be a reasonable redirect. For example: moving "Sheep in a tree.jpg" to "Squirrel in a tree.jpg" when the image does in fact depict a squirrel.
• To perform file name swaps.
• When the original file name contains vandalism. (File renaming criterion #5)

Please note, this ability should be used only in certain circumstances and only if you are absolutely sure that it is not going to break the display of the file on any project. Redirects should never be suppressed if the file is in use on any project. When in doubt, leave a redirect. If you forget to suppress the redirect in case of file name vandalism or you are not fully certain if the original file name is actually vandalism, leave a redirect and tag the redirect for speedy deletion per G2.

The malicious or reckless breaking of file links via the suppressredirect user right is considered an abuse of the file mover right and is grounds for immediate revocation of that right. This message serves as both a notice that you have this right and as an official warning. Questions regarding this right should be directed to administrators. --Majora (talk) 21:35, 7 November 2019 (UTC)

Commons:Deletion requests/Template:Cc-by-2.5-de

I decide to invite you to join this discussion, to determine that if changing license of File:MuehlburgerTor.jpg (which its "author" field points to you) is possible or not, because, as I mentioned on DR, the CC BY 2.5 DE doesn't really exist, there are 2.0 DE and 3.0 DE instead. --Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 00:57, 2 December 2019 (UTC)

Copyright status: File:Heidenklinge Wassertunnel-Einlass.jpg

Copyright status: File:Heidenklinge Wassertunnel-Einlass.jpg

This media may be deleted.

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

This action was performed automatically by AntiCompositeBot (talk) (FAQ) 21:05, 20 June 2021 (UTC)

Copyright status: File:Fuchsklinge Talkessel 2021 Baustelle.jpg

Copyright status: File:Fuchsklinge Talkessel 2021 Baustelle.jpg

This media may be deleted.

Thanks for uploading File:Fuchsklinge Talkessel 2021 Baustelle.jpg. I notice that the file page either doesn't contain enough information about the license or it contains contradictory information about the license, so the copyright status is unclear. If you created this file yourself, then you must provide a valid copyright tag. For example, you can tag it with {{self|GFDL|cc-by-sa-all}} to release it under the multi-license GFDL plus Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike All-version license or you can tag it with {{PD-self}} to release it into the public domain. (See Commons:Copyright tags for the full list of license tags that you can use.) If you did not create the file yourself or if it is a derivative of another work that is possibly subject to copyright protection, then you must specify where you found it (e.g. usually a link to the web page where you got it), you must provide proof that it has a license that is acceptable for Commons (e.g. usually a link to the terms of use for content from that page), and you must add an appropriate license tag. If you did not create the file yourself and the specific source and license information is not available on the web, you must obtain permission through the VRT system and follow the procedure described there. Note that any unsourced or improperly licensed files will be deleted one week after they have been marked as lacking proper information, as described in criteria for deletion. If you have uploaded other files, please confirm that you have provided the proper information for those files, too. If you have any questions about licenses please ask at Commons:Village pump/Copyright or see our help pages. Thank you.

This action was performed automatically by AntiCompositeBot (talk) (FAQ) 11:05, 4 July 2021 (UTC)

Copyright status: File:Perouse Waldenser-Kreisverkehr.jpg

Copyright status: File:Perouse Waldenser-Kreisverkehr.jpg

This media may be deleted.

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

This action was performed automatically by AntiCompositeBot (talk) (FAQ) 20:05, 6 September 2021 (UTC)

Plus que quelques jours pour participer à Wiki Loves Monuments France !

Bonjour,

Le concours Wiki Loves Monuments France est ouvert pour une semaine encore, jusqu'au 30 septembre. Déjà plus de 6 000 photos ont été importées cette année alors vous aussi rejoignez le concours ! Cette campagne de contribution concerne tous les monuments et objets mobiliers présents dans la base Mérimée et dans la base Palissy. De l'imposant château aux ruines industrielles, de la verrière décorative au reliquaire, c'est un impressionnant patrimoine qui attend d'être photographié et documenté. Vous pouvez dès à présent mettre en ligne autant de photos que vous le souhaitez de ces monuments et objets du patrimoine français. Nous attendons vos photos avec impatience !

Les plus belles photos seront sélectionnées par un jury national composé d'amateurs et de professionnels, de contributeurs à Wikimedia Commons et d'acteurs du patrimoine. Un jury international constituera ensuite une sélection des meilleures photographies mondiales.

Si vous avez des questions, l'équipe organisatrice se fera un plaisir d'y répondre.

P.S. : vous recevez ce message parce que vous avez participé au concours Wiki Loves Monuments en France

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 12:26, 26 September 2021 (UTC)

Copyright status: File:Stettenfels Türme Mauer BW-Fahne.jpg

Copyright status: File:Stettenfels Türme Mauer BW-Fahne.jpg

This media may be deleted.

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

This action was performed automatically by AntiCompositeBot (talk) (FAQ) 16:05, 26 June 2022 (UTC)

Copyright status: File:Mallauer Stativ m.jpg

Copyright status: File:Mallauer Stativ m.jpg

This media may be deleted.

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

This action was performed automatically by AntiCompositeBot (talk) (FAQ) 17:05, 26 June 2022 (UTC)

Copyright status: File:Calmbach GoldenerAnker.jpg

Copyright status: File:Calmbach GoldenerAnker.jpg

This media may be deleted.

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

This action was performed automatically by AntiCompositeBot (talk) (FAQ) 23:05, 7 July 2022 (UTC)

Copyright status: File:StNicolaiSteckby Orgel WindMaschine-Balg.jpg

Copyright status: File:StNicolaiSteckby Orgel WindMaschine-Balg.jpg

This media may be deleted.

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

This action was performed automatically by AntiCompositeBot (talk) (FAQ) 04:06, 14 August 2022 (UTC)

Copyright status: File:Vockerode Spinner.jpg

Copyright status: File:Vockerode Spinner.jpg

This media may be deleted.

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

This action was performed automatically by AntiCompositeBot (talk) (FAQ) 17:06, 25 September 2022 (UTC)

Copyright status: File:GKM Fernwärme-Armaturen.jpg

Copyright status: File:GKM Fernwärme-Armaturen.jpg

This media may be deleted.

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

This action was performed automatically by AntiCompositeBot (talk) (FAQ) 22:05, 6 November 2022 (UTC)

File:Werbetafel Bernhausen IP.jpg

Hi Ikar.us, das Foto ist enzyklopädisch interessant/wertvoll. Da das Werbeposter aber klar Schöpfungshöhe hat und wohl nur vorübergehend dort hängen dürfte, fällt es nicht unter die Panoramafreiheit. Statt es einfach zu löschen, wäre eine m.E. sinnvollere Option, den problematischen Bereich zu grob zu verpixeln, so dass man noch deutlich ahnen kann, dass sich dort eine Werbeanzeige befindet. Damit würde die enzyklädische Aussage kaum eingeschränkt. --Túrelio (talk) 14:09, 6 January 2023 (UTC)

Copyright status: File:Mannheim Handelshafen Neckarspitze Hochbunker.jpg

Copyright status: File:Mannheim Handelshafen Neckarspitze Hochbunker.jpg

This media may be deleted.

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

This action was performed automatically by AntiCompositeBot (talk) (FAQ) 20:05, 2 July 2023 (UTC)