Mediocrity

Babel user information
de-N Dieser Benutzer spricht Deutsch als Muttersprache. en-2 This user has intermediate knowledge of English.
Users by language

Graz Herz Jesu

Your image Graz Herz Jesu Kirche 20061216.jpg suffered from extreme perspective distortion, so I tried to fix it. I couldn't fix it 100% since it was very distorted, but I think I did a nice job. PLease reload it to see it now, if you don't like the result, I can revert it back to its former state. -- Drini 20:50, 16 December 2006 (UTC)

Looks very good, thanks a lot. Greetings from Graz, Austria.--Mediocrity 20:52, 16 December 2006 (UTC)

Stuebing Dreikanthof 20060618.jpg

Hallo Mediocrity, ich hoffe, Du bis eine(r) von Marion Schneider & Christoph Aistleitner. Aus Eurem schönen Foto habe ich einen m.E. nicht minder schönen Ausschnitt ausgewählt und stattdessen im Bauernhof-Artikel platziert. Wenn Euch der Ausschnitt missfällt, könnt Ihr gerne stattdessen wieder das vollständige Bild hineinstellen. Schönen Gruß zum fast beendeten Fest und zum neuen Jahr von --Ulamm 19:03, 26 December 2006 (UTC)

Gefällt mir gut, vielen Dank. mfg. --Mediocrity 17:01, 1 January 2007 (UTC)

Foto Wilhering

Hallo Mediocrity, ich habe gerade euer tolles Foto vom Innenraum der Stiftskirche Wilhering gesehen. Dazu meine Frage: Mit welcher Kamera habt ihr dieses wirklich gelungene Bild gemacht? anzi9 7:44 Uhr, 1 August 2007

Schön, dass dir das Bild gefällt. Aufgenommen ist es mit einer Canon DIGITAL IXUS 430, mit einer Kompaktkamera, ist dafür aber verhältnismäßig gut geworden. Das mit dem Fotographieren in Kirchen ist ja so eine Sache. Inzwischen mit einer Canon EOS 400D DIGITAL, da werden die Bilder im Allgemeinen besser (=schärfer, bei Dunkelheit). Liebe Grüße. --Mediocrity 11:48, 12 September 2007 (UTC)

Copyright

I am aiming to get Northern Bald Ibis to FA on en-wiki. It currently uses your image Image:Graz Schlossberg Waldrapp Infotafel.jpg. It is certain that its copyright status will be queried at FAC, since it says self-made by Marion Schneider & Christoph Aistleitner, but it has your username, which is different. Could you please modify the image page to make it clear that you are one (both?) of the two people listed? Many thanks, Jimfbleak (talk) 15:33, 6 December 2008 (UTC)

I made that change. Anyway, the description of the image in the english article is incorrect. This is not about a reintroduction, the text says: Waldrapp (Klausrabe). This legendary species is a relative of the Sacred Ibis of the ancient Egyptians. This bird bred in Styria until 1566 exclusively in this rock face. It was under the protection of the kings and dukes, but nevertheless it became extinct 400 years ago in whole Europe. Currently, in the world there are 130 couples living in freedom, in northern Africa an probably in Yemen.

This means, the bird used to live in Graz, Styria (in Southern Austria) until 1566, but now it is extinct, and it is not tried to reintroduce the bird here. They try to reintroduce the bird in Grünau im Almtal, Upper Austria, which is approx. 150 kilometres from here. If there are questions, please ask. Best regards. --Mediocrity (talk) 16:16, 6 December 2008 (UTC)

File tagging File:Graz_Schlossberg_Waldrapp_Infotafel.jpg

This media may be deleted.

Thanks for uploading File:Graz_Schlossberg_Waldrapp_Infotafel.jpg. This media is missing permission information. A source is given, but there is no proof that the author or copyright holder agreed to license the file under the given license. Please provide a link to an appropriate webpage with license information, or ask the author or copyright holder to send an email with copy of a written permission to VRT (permissions-commons@wikimedia.org). You may still be required to go through this procedure even if you are the author yourself; please see Commons:But it's my own work! for more details. After you emailed permission, you may replace the {{No permission since}} tag with {{subst:PP}} on file description page. Alternatively, you may click on "Challenge speedy deletion" below the tag if you wish to provide an argument why evidence of permission is not necessary in this case. Please see this page for more information on how to confirm permission, or if you would like to understand why we ask for permission when uploading work that is not your own, or work which has been previously published (regardless of whether it is your own). Warning: unless the permission information is given, the file may be deleted after seven days. Thank you.

 

shizhao (talk) 07:46, 10 April 2009 (UTC)

plese see Commons:Derivative works--shizhao (talk) 16:59, 13 April 2009 (UTC)

So what? In this situation freedom of panorama applies - see here. What is the problem? I do not need any permission for the picture. --Mediocrity (talk) 19:33, 13 April 2009 (UTC)

Ponte della Costituzione

hello :) can you look here please Category talk:Ponte della Constituzione? should change the title, how do you? thank you --Pava (talk) 04:41, 10 December 2011 (UTC)

Copyright status: File:Seychelles Airport.jpg

This media may be deleted.

Thanks for uploading File:Seychelles Airport.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.

–⁠moogsi (blah) 08:20, 8 April 2013 (UTC)

File tagging File:Maribor Vodni Stolp 20070107.jpg

This media may be deleted.

Thanks for uploading File:Maribor Vodni Stolp 20070107.jpg. This media is missing permission information. A source is given, but there is no proof that the author or copyright holder agreed to license the file under the given license. Please provide a link to an appropriate webpage with license information, or ask the author or copyright holder to send an email with copy of a written permission to VRT (permissions-commons@wikimedia.org). You may still be required to go through this procedure even if you are the author yourself; please see Commons:But it's my own work! for more details. After you emailed permission, you may replace the {{No permission since}} tag with {{subst:PP}} on file description page. Alternatively, you may click on "Challenge speedy deletion" below the tag if you wish to provide an argument why evidence of permission is not necessary in this case. Please see this page for more information on how to confirm permission, or if you would like to understand why we ask for permission when uploading work that is not your own, or work which has been previously published (regardless of whether it is your own). Warning: unless the permission information is given, the file may be deleted after seven days. Thank you.

 

Eleassar ^(t/p) 08:17, 21 May 2013 (UTC)

The photograph has two authors. One of them should send his/her permission to the OTRS. --Eleassar ^(t/p) 08:19, 21 May 2013 (UTC)

File tagging File:Maribor small panorama 20070107.jpg

This media may be deleted.

Thanks for uploading File:Maribor small panorama 20070107.jpg. This media is missing permission information. A source is given, but there is no proof that the author or copyright holder agreed to license the file under the given license. Please provide a link to an appropriate webpage with license information, or ask the author or copyright holder to send an email with copy of a written permission to VRT (permissions-commons@wikimedia.org). You may still be required to go through this procedure even if you are the author yourself; please see Commons:But it's my own work! for more details. After you emailed permission, you may replace the {{No permission since}} tag with {{subst:PP}} on file description page. Alternatively, you may click on "Challenge speedy deletion" below the tag if you wish to provide an argument why evidence of permission is not necessary in this case. Please see this page for more information on how to confirm permission, or if you would like to understand why we ask for permission when uploading work that is not your own, or work which has been previously published (regardless of whether it is your own). Warning: unless the permission information is given, the file may be deleted after seven days. Thank you.

 

Eleassar ^(t/p) 08:41, 21 May 2013 (UTC)

Please see Commons:Village pump/Copyright#Files uploaded by Mediocrity. --Eleassar ^(t/p) 08:56, 21 May 2013 (UTC)

File:Maribor Vodni Stolp 20070107.jpg

File:Maribor Vodni Stolp 20070107.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!

Denniss (talk) 18:40, 24 July 2013 (UTC)

File:Mura WWD 028.JPG

File:Mura WWD 028.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!

Eleassar ^(t/p) 00:22, 26 February 2014 (UTC)

File:Kunsthaus Weiz.jpg

File:Kunsthaus Weiz.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!

JeanBono (talk) 09:58, 5 June 2014 (UTC)

Category:Île_St._Pierre

Île St. Pierre 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!

Themightyquill (talk) 15:17, 10 April 2021 (UTC)