Open main menu

Contents

CC-BY-SA versus CC-BYEdit

Your images appear to be dual-licensed under the GFDL and CC-BY-SA. This is fine for Wikipedia but may be problematic for most printed publications. Most books do not need to be changeable, because the authors express their opinions and nobody needs to change or adapt those opinions. Apart from things like encyclopedias and software documentation, most authors don't pick the GFDL[1] or CC-BY-SA[2]. The reason is that these licenses would require them to distribute their works under the same (or similar/compatible) license. The GFDL makes it even worse, because it would require them to include a physical printout of the GFDL[3]. All this would not be the case with CC-BY[4] licensing. CC-BY is a non-copyleft free license, but it is "good for art and entertainment works, and educational works"[5] and you would still receive attribution: "You must attribute the work in the manner specified by the author or licensor (but not in any way that suggests that they endorse you or your use of the work)." --82.171.70.54 01:04, 23 March 2009 (UTC)

  • Never mind, I was wrong. Such a book would be a Collection ("in which the Work is included in its entirety in unmodified form along with one or more other contributions") and thus section 4b of the license does not apply. --82.171.70.54 01:54, 23 March 2009 (UTC)

License RequestEdit

Could you please dual-license http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Gluecksklee.jpg --82.171.70.54 02:16, 23 March 2009 (UTC)

Done. --Kolossos (talk) 08:22, 23 March 2009 (UTC)
Thanks a lot. --82.171.70.54 15:24, 23 March 2009 (UTC)

Tip: Categorizing imagesEdit

Afrikaans | العربية | беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ | català | čeština | dansk | Deutsch | Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ | Ελληνικά | English | Esperanto | español | فارسی | suomi | français | galego | עברית | magyar | íslenska | italiano | 日本語 | ქართული | 한국어 | македонски | മലയാളം | Plattdüütsch | Nederlands | norsk | polski | português | português do Brasil | română | русский | slovenčina | slovenščina | српски / srpski | svenska | українська | Tiếng Việt | 中文 | 中文(简体)‎ | 中文(繁體)‎ | ಕನ್ನಡ | ತುಳು | +/−


Hello, Kolossos!

Thanks a lot for contributing to the Wikimedia Commons! Here's a tip to make your uploads more useful: Why not add some categories to describe them? This will help more people to find and use them.

Here's how:

1) If you're using the UploadWizard, you can add categories to each file when you describe it. Just click "more options" for the file and add the categories which make sense:

2) You can also pick the file from your list of uploads, edit the file description page, and manually add the category code at the end of the page.

[[Category:Category name]]

For example, if you are uploading a diagram showing the orbits of comets, you add the following code:

[[Category:Astronomical diagrams]]
[[Category:Comets]]

This will make the diagram show up in the categories "Astronomical diagrams" and "Comets".

When picking categories, try to choose a specific category ("Astronomical diagrams") over a generic one ("Illustrations").

Thanks again for your uploads! More information about categorization can be found in Commons:Categories, and don't hesitate to leave a note on the help desk.

BotMultichillT 05:59, 7 April 2009 (UTC)

moin, moinEdit

Das Bild File:Augustusburg-Hof-gp.jpg hast du aber am 11.04. gemacht. Zumindest bin ich mit drauf und ich war am 12. nicht dort oben ;-) --LC-de (talk) 11:39, 26 April 2009 (UTC)

Na dann ist das wohl so. Ich nehme das mit dem Datum schon aus Datenschutzgründen nicht so genau, sondern wähle im Commonist für alle Bilder einfach ein Datum. --Kolossos (talk) 12:48, 26 April 2009 (UTC)

Bilder mit falschen GeokoordinatenEdit

Moin Kolossos, ich habe hier und hier zwei Bilder gefunden, die definitiv nicht dorthin gehören. Been there, seen that. Nun habe ich die falschen Koordinaten schon vor Wochen entfernt (wie mir der Unfall mit der falschen Version passiert ist, kann ich nicht mehr nachvollziehen, aber egal, tut nix zur Sache, hier ist es gutgegangen). Beide Bilder werden aber immer noch per gurgel angezeigt. Was muß man tun, um die da rauszukriegen? Automatisch scheinen die ja nicht zu verschwinden. Wenn ich bei anderen Bildern Koordinaten korrigiere oder heading ergänze o.ä., erscheinen die Änderungen ja nach einigen Minuten oder Stunden in der Karte, also läuft ja anscheinend ein Bot über die Bildbeschreibungsseiten. Gibt es einen Baustein, der dem Bot sagt "Diese Koordinaten sind Dummfug!"? -- smial (talk) 08:18, 16 May 2009 (UTC)

User Para kümmert sich eigentlich darum. Sein Script schaut meines Wissens immer danach, welche Artikel sich geändert haben. Vielleicht berücksichtigt er aber auch nur Artikel mit Koordinate oder sein Skript lief zu der Zeit aus irgendeinem Grunde nicht. Soll ich ihn mal ansprechen, oder willst du das machen. Aus eigener ERfahrung weiss ich, dass Tools-Entwickler bei den Datenmengen hier nicht mehr alles selbst überblicken können und für solche Fehlermeldungen z.T. dankbar sind. --Kolossos (talk) 10:27, 16 May 2009 (UTC)
Hmpf, ich lese bei Para nix von Deutschkenntnissen, bei meinem schwachen Englisch... Wenn du ihm das schreiben könntest, wäre ich dir sehr dankbar. Könnte man nicht, statt die Koordinatenangabe komplett zu löschen, die offensichtliche Falschangabe durch sowas wie "location dec|??|??" ersetzen? Das sollte doch per script auswertbar sein, oder? Oder eben ein passendes "Kaputte-Koordinaten-Template" basteln. -- smial (talk) 16:05, 16 May 2009 (UTC)
Klar, kein Problem. Jetzt warten wir mal auf die Antwort. --Kolossos (talk) 21:31, 16 May 2009 (UTC)
Kommst du mit Paras erfolgter Antwort klar? Er hat das Problem ja gelöst.--Kolossos (talk) 19:03, 18 May 2009 (UTC)
Ja, danke für deinen Einsatz. Englisch lesen klappt ja einigermaßen, nur selber formulieren ist böse :-)
Wobei ich mir nicht vorstellen kann, daß eine rein händische Bearbeitung auf Dauer handhabbar ist. -- smial (talk) 21:24, 18 May 2009 (UTC)

Quality Image PromotionEdit

Your image has been reviewed and promoted
Congratulations! Fort Lauderdale-Art-Institute.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.
Your image has been reviewed and promoted
Congratulations! Miami-Bayside.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.

Quality Image PromotionEdit

Your image has been reviewed and promoted
Congratulations! Cocoa-Watertower.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.

Quality Image PromotionEdit

Your image has been reviewed and promoted
Congratulations! Dresden-Palais-Grosser-Gart.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.

Please avoid removing correct categoriesEdit

Please avoid removing correct categories without justification, as you did removing Category:Symmetry impressions on File:Kaaba mirror edit jj.jpg here[6]. Especially for visual categories holding things impossible to find from keywords and search engines. Thanks. 62.147.39.224 23:45, 21 June 2009 (UTC)

I analyse this building also with the help of google earth. There is no full symmetry in this image, you have a egde on the right side of the image. An acceptable symmetry would be on a 45° turned angle. The kaaba and the towers are also not exactly on one line in the image. Booth are not in the middle and also the backround buildings disturb the symmetry. We have enought symetric images so the requirements for this category are high. --Kolossos (talk) 18:51, 22 June 2009 (UTC)

Stöckhardt-BauEdit

 
„Altbau“

Das ist nicht der Stöckhard-Bau, wie ich heute beim Besuch in Tharandt feststellen musste, sondern der sogenannte „Altbau“ (im Giebel steht noch „Forstliche Hochschule Tharandt“). Grundsätzlich ein behaltenswertes Foto, weil das Gebäude unter Denkmalschutz steht, aber falsch bezeichnet. Hab den „echten“ Stöckhardt-Bau heute selbst vor die Linse bekommen. Gruß, --Paulae (talk) 15:39, 10 August 2009 (UTC)

War letztes Jahr nur mal einen Tag mit den OSM-Leuten in Tharandt, da kann man schonmal daneben liegen. Hab es in der Bildbeschreibung vermerkt. --Kolossos (talk) 18:33, 10 August 2009 (UTC)

FP PromotionEdit

This image has been promoted to Featured picture!

The image File:DD-Schloss-gp.jpg, that you nominated on Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:DD-Schloss-gp.jpg has been promoted. Thank you for your contribution. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so.

 

/FPCBot (talk) 22:52, 23 August 2009 (UTC)

Quality Image PromotionEdit

Your image has been reviewed and promoted
Congratulations! Dresden-Carolabruecke-gp.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.
Your image has been reviewed and promoted
Congratulations! Dresden-Hofkirche-Turm.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.
Your image has been reviewed and promoted
Congratulations! Dresden-Fontaine-WienerPlatz.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.

Commonist licensesEdit

Dear Kolossos,

As you might know Wikimedia is currently migrating from the GFDL to cc-by-sa-3.0. Wikimedia Commons is also migrating and we're down to less than 8000 files (started with about 1,8M files) . Unfortunatly this number keeps growing because Commonist contains outdated license templates. You appear to be running Commonist, could you please change the following lines in your license.txt?

{{self2|GFDL|cc-by-sa-2.5,2.0,1.0}} should be changed to {{Self|GFDL|Cc-by-sa-3.0,2.5,2.0,1.0}}
{{self2|GFDL|cc-by-2.5}} should be changed to {{self|GFDL|cc-by-3.0}}
{{self|cc-by-sa-2.5}} should be changed to {{self|cc-by-sa-3.0}}

Can I also fix the images you have already uploaded by adding {{Cc-by-sa-3.0}}?

Thank you very much, Multichill (talk) 12:46, 5 September 2009 (UTC)

I send allready a mail to the commonist-developer, without response. So please use your bot to make my description pages as short as possible and with cc-by-sa-3.0 most user-friendly. Thanks. --Kolossos (talk) 16:28, 7 September 2009 (UTC)
Same here. I've send an email but never got response. I'm thinking about moving the source the wmf svn (like we did with pywikipedia) and the website to the toolserver.
I'll change your uploads this week. Multichill (talk) 17:13, 7 September 2009 (UTC)
Im Commonist-Unterverzeichnis \etc ist eine licenses.txt, da kann man die Lizenzbausteine selbst direkt ändern. Allerdings kann man da auch schnell was kaputt machen, das ist so ne "halbe" Textdatei, irgendwie teilkompiliert oder so, nimm lieber ne Kopie zum Ausprobieren. Der Entwickler des Commonist ist irgendwie inaktiv. Datura hat uns den mal aufs Foto-Wiki angepaßt, der scheint sich da auszukennen. --Ralf Roletschek (talk) 17:16, 7 September 2009 (UTC)
A movement to the toolserver seems the best solution. I want to start the actual program with one click and want to trust the program because it gets my password.
An other wish from me was the option to order the images in the directory also by date and not only by name. The foundation gets 300.000$ to increase the usability of Commons. I think the Commonist is a good starting point. --Kolossos (talk) 17:59, 7 September 2009 (UTC)
Hmm, let's see if we can find some people to help and start a nice multi-maintainer project. Multichill (talk) 21:13, 7 September 2009 (UTC)
Could you please change the licenses.txt in the etc folder? You're now flooding Category:License migration candidates (it was empty). You can find an example file here. Multichill (talk) 19:04, 8 September 2009 (UTC)

FP PromotionEdit

This image has been promoted to Featured picture!

The image File:Schwerin-Schloss-gp.jpg, that you nominated on Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Schwerin-Schloss-gp.jpg has been promoted. Thank you for your contribution. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so.

 

/FPCBot (talk) 07:08, 15 September 2009 (UTC)

ImageworldEdit

http://toolserver.org/~kolossos/wp-world/imageworld-art-new.php seems to be broken. Any chance to get it back online? --Apoc2400 (talk) 10:54, 25 September 2009 (UTC)

It was easy to repair: http://toolserver.org/~kolossos/wp-world/imageworld-art-new.php?la=fr I hope the most common languages are enough for you. --Kolossos (talk) 22:40, 25 September 2009 (UTC)
Thanks a lot! Without the la= paramerter, is it for all (included) Wikipedia languages together? Also why is the cross there? Is it mistyped coordinates, a bug in the processing or do we have articles about individual latitudes and longitudes? --Apoc2400 (talk) 21:49, 5 October 2009 (UTC)
Yes, without la you get all languages and yes there is nothing what we not have: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2nd_parallel_north ;-) --Kolossos (talk) 19:14, 6 October 2009 (UTC)

FP PromotionEdit

This image has been promoted to Featured picture!

The image File:Dresden-Zwinger-Wallpavillion-gp.jpg, that you nominated on Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Dresden-Zwinger-Wallpavillion-gp.jpg has been promoted. Thank you for your contribution. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so.

 

/FPCBot (talk) 23:02, 13 October 2009 (UTC)

Quality Image PromotionEdit

Your image has been reviewed and promoted
Congratulations! Dresden-Neustadt-S-Bahn.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.

OpenStreetMapEdit

I noticed you are involved in both projects and I am wondering if there is a way to create overlays like this with Commons images overlayed on top of OpenStreetMap? We could add a link like this directly to {{Location}} next to Google links and provide some more visibility to OpenStreetMap project. --Jarekt (talk) 19:19, 27 October 2009 (UTC)

I talk with Para about this: User_talk:Para#Commons-images_on_OpenLayers.
The problem is that we have both to fight with the difficults of openlayers, but I hope we find a solution. --Kolossos (talk) 20:57, 27 October 2009 (UTC)
Thanks, I hope you do too. --Jarekt (talk) 03:29, 29 October 2009 (UTC)

Zur Hülf, was ist mit google maps passiert?Edit

Hat google die Welt verschoben? Beispiel: hier, die Bilder habe ich vor längrer Zeit mal georeferenziert - und jetzt stimmen die alle nicht mehr. -- smial (talk) 12:49, 3 November 2009 (UTC)

Für mich ist nicht mehr reproduzierbar um wieviel Meter die Bilder zu Zeitpunkt des Geocodings abwichen, aber auch jetzt paßt es nicht optimal sondern ist ca. 10m daneben. Verglichen habe ich die Bilder mit den Google Straßen und in GoogleEarth mit dem OSM-Layer. Solche Probleme gab es schon früher, im Extremfall lag man 2 km daneben. Da kann man wohl nix machen. --Kolossos (talk) 19:23, 3 November 2009 (UTC)
Ein Koordinaten-Verschiebe-Bot, wär das nicht was? :-) --Dschwen (talk) 19:54, 3 November 2009 (UTC)
Na, da haben wir ja den Richtigen, um sowas zu schreiben. ;-) Aber ein Werkzeug, wo man nur noch einen Pin auf der Karte verschieben muß und der Rest dann automatische geht, wäre schon was. --Kolossos (talk) 21:03, 3 November 2009 (UTC)

Neue VersionEdit

 
Schloss Nossen

Habe versucht, die Mängel der ersten Bearbeitung zu vermeiden.

-- SabsLE (talk) 00:43, 5 November 2009 (UTC)

Paßt. --Kolossos (talk) 06:27, 5 November 2009 (UTC)

Quality Image PromotionEdit

Your image has been reviewed and promoted
Congratulations! Dresden-Jenidze-gp.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.
Your image has been reviewed and promoted
Congratulations! Dresden-Albrechtsberg-Brunnen-Lindenallee.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.

Quality Image PromotionEdit

Your image has been reviewed and promoted
Congratulations! Dresden-Albrechtsberg-Badehaus-Herbst.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.

Quality Image PromotionEdit

Your image has been reviewed and promoted
Congratulations! Dresden-Albrechtsberg-Pfoertnerhaus.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.

Dresden-Hauptbahnhof2.jpgEdit

Sehr geehrter Kolossos. Wir sind auf der Seite des Hauptbahnhof Dresden auf eines Ihrer Bilder gestoßen, welches uns sehr gut gefällt.

--> Dresden-Hauptbahnhof2.jpg

Gerne würden wir das Bild in eine unserer Firmenbroschüren mit aufnehmen, da das Dach des Hauptbahnhofs mit unseren Materialien beschichtet ist. Soweit wir verstehen ist die Nutzung möglich. Selbstverständlich würden wir Sie im Quellenverzeichnis nennen. Gerne senden wir Ihnen auch ein Belegexemplar per E-mail, wenn Sie uns Ihre Kontaktdaten nennen. Die Broschüre wird vorerst nur in elektronischer Version vorliegen. Herzlichen Dank im Voraus für Ihre Antwort. Gerne können Sie sich auch telefonisch mit uns in Verbindung setzen. Tel. 02131 14 2229. Mit freundlichen Grüßen, Pamela Fritze, Dyneon GmbH, Neuss (3M)

Hallo, einfach im Impressum eine Autorbezeichnung Kolossos@wikipedia und eine Lizenz:CC-BY-SA reicht mir in dem Fall und dürfte sich mit Commons:Weiterverwendung decken. Belegexexemplar oder Kontaktaufnahme gerne über die Mailadresse "kolossos at toolserver.org". --Kolossos (talk) 12:25, 5 January 2010 (UTC)

<<< Herzlichen Dank. Wir senden Ihnen die finale Version an die angegebene mail-Adresse.

Return to the user page of "Kolossos/Archive3".