Open main menu
Say no to Fair Use


Dieser Benutzer verwendet weder Sockenpuppen noch editiert er unter IP-Adresse.

  • Deutsch: Beiträge auf dieser Seite werden durch mich auch hier beantwortet, wenn die Diskussion bei dir begann, soll sie auch dort und nicht hier fortgesetzt werden.
  • English: I’ll answer your queries here. If we started the discussion on your discussion, I answer there.
  • Any sections older than 7 days are automatically archived to an archive
OTRS Wikimedia.svgThis user is a member of the Wikimedia OTRS team. (verify)


Contents

TUSC token ea10bfa8c837460b9d03bb73594292e5Edit

I am now proud owner of a TUSC account!

TUSC token dc981b9b44185bbbe64865c9ae3660e9Edit

I am now proud owner of a TUSC account!

File:Corrado maria daclon - amanda knox.jpgEdit

 
File:Corrado maria daclon - amanda knox.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 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!

Afrikaans | العربية | беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ | български | বাংলা | català | čeština | dansk | Deutsch | Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ | Zazaki | Ελληνικά | English | Esperanto | español | eesti | فارسی | suomi | français | galego | עברית | hrvatski | magyar | Հայերեն | Bahasa Indonesia | íslenska | italiano | 日本語 | 한국어 | 한국어 (조선) | македонски | മലയാളം | Plattdüütsch | Nederlands | norsk nynorsk | norsk | occitan | polski | پښتو | português | português do Brasil | română | русский | sicilianu | slovenčina | slovenščina | shqip | српски / srpski | svenska | ไทย | Türkçe | українська | Tiếng Việt | 中文 | 中文(简体)‎ | 中文(繁體)‎ | +/−

Patrick Rogel (talk) 14:12, 19 April 2019 (UTC)

The file of course was kept and now has OTRS permission, I provided written and certified evidence about the origin. Thank you for your message in support, I dont understand why this guy Patrick Rogel tries permanently to delete any photo I upload, he must be sick. In any case, solved. Scott335 (talk) 15:16, 21 April 2019 (UTC)
I would not speculate about diseases, that's not something people like to see for good reason. Although I can understand your anger. It is admittedly not always easy with such pictures. But the said reason could not be right. It's good, if there are people who look for correct licensing, unfortunately some are going a bit far with this sometimes. I hope, now we're done with this toppic. -- Marcus Cyron (talk) 16:38, 21 April 2019 (UTC)

File:Gerhard Hermanns, 2014.jpgEdit

Hallo Marcus,

vielen Dank für die Löschung! Ich hatte sie extra mit Hinweis auf das OTRS-Ticket wiederhergestellt und wollte gerade die Freigabe eintragen :-/ -- Ra'ike T C 19:10, 21 April 2019 (UTC)

Tut mir leid, da hat sich offenkundig etwas überschnitten. Marcus Cyron (talk) 19:15, 21 April 2019 (UTC)
Geschenkt. Aber sag mal, Du bist auch OTRS-Mitglied. Magst Du da bei einem Backlog von aktuell ~870 nicht auch mal ein paar Freigaben bearbeiten? Wiederherstellen und freigeben dürfte sicher befriedigender sein als löschen. -- Ra'ike T C 19:24, 21 April 2019 (UTC)
Ich habe schon des öfteren Freigaben bearbeitet. Mehr möchte ich gar nicht zu diesem in meinen Augen schon recht unhöflichen Beitrag schreiben. Marcus Cyron (talk) 19:29, 21 April 2019 (UTC)
Sorry, aber das kann aus lauter Frust schonmal passieren. Das Backlog ist schon lange einfach nur noch zum Verzweifeln. Dann versucht man mal wieder ein bisschen dagegen anzuarbeiten und kriegt gleich eine Freigabe in Bearbeitung unterm Hintern weggelöscht :-( -- Ra'ike T C 19:45, 21 April 2019 (UTC)

Renaming of incorrectly identified image - File:Japan Type 89 grenade discharger.jpgEdit

Hey Marcus,

New to Wikimedia, still learning the ropes. Was hoping you could clarify the issue with my proposed rename of the image? Did I miss a step in the process or is there something else? It is a Misidentified Object and does seem to fit the criteria. The guideline says "If an object or organism was incorrectly identified in the filename (such as calling a Sylvilagus floridanus by the name “File:Sylvilagus audubonii.jpg”), this criterion covers renaming the image". Seems analogous.

If theres doubt that it is misidentified, a correctly identified example of the Type 10 exists on the commons. Here is a Type 10, notice the identical trigger tab, the same right angle steps where the barrel ends and same general construction. The other image of the Type 89 here isn't great, but here is an external link to images. Notice the different designed buttplate, the different trigger tab, the elevation control knob, the curved section where barrel meets the "stock". Khitrir (talk) 12:40, 7 May 2019 (UTC)

You want to rename an image. There are three stages for the identification of an object. The least important is the name. At the end you can name a file how ever you like, it's of minor importance. But of importance is a correct categorization and the most important is a correct discription. The category as also the discription still saying "Type 89". So which effect other than inconsistence should a renaming have? But it's not my job to do this, because it's not my field of work - I don't know, if what I would do is correct. But what I can do, have to do, is not allowing an inconsistence in this all. What's next? Someone comes and want to rename it back to Type 89, because discription and category say so? -- Marcus Cyron (talk) 13:43, 7 May 2019 (UTC)
I don't get it. The obvious solution to me is also correcting the description and categories to match what's actually in the image. Its misidentified, the guideline seems clear that the filename should change. The name it has is actually the name of an entirely different thing. Like a photo of a Dog with the file name "Elephant.jpg". If such a photo existed, and had "Elephant" in the Categories and Description as well, is it just meant to be left like that? There's no process by which to fix it? Khitrir (talk) 15:39, 7 May 2019 (UTC)
I don't explain it a second time. If it's not worth to you to change the category and the discription, it can't be a problem. -- Marcus Cyron (talk) 15:41, 7 May 2019 (UTC)
I assumed changing the page details (the category and description) before the name change was approved would be bold. I intended to get the rename done, then fix the details. If all I have to do is fix those first, then request the rename, that's easy. Sorry for being a nuisance and thanks for your patience. If I've misunderstood, please let me know, otherwise I'll make those changes and re-request the name change after I check into the category and description standards to make sure anything I do is compliant. Cheers. Khitrir (talk) 16:11, 7 May 2019 (UTC)
Return to the user page of "Marcus Cyron".