User talk:DrJunge

First steps tutorial Our first steps tour and our FAQ will help you a lot after registration. They explain how to customize the interface (for example the language), how to upload files and our basic licensing policy. You don't need technical skills in order to contribute here. Be bold contributing here and assume good faith for the intentions of others. This is a wiki—it is really easy. Getting help More information is available at the community portal. You may ask questions at the help desk, village pump or on IRC channel #wikimedia-commons (direct access). You can also contact an administrator on their talk page. If you have a specific copyright question, ask at Commons talk:Licensing.		Goodies, tips and tricks Put Babel boxes on your user page so others know what languages you can speak and indicate your graphic abilities. All your uploads are stored in your personal gallery Please sign your name on Talk pages by typing ~~~~ Use the CommonSense tool to find good categories for your files (then other people can find them too!) To link to an image page without embedding the image, type: [[:Image:Foo.jpg]], which produces: Image:Foo.jpg If you're copying files from another project, be sure to use the CommonsHelper Made a mistake? Did you want to rename or move a file? Simply upload the file again and mark the old one like this: {{bad name|correct name}} For more information read the full deletion guidelines
(P.S. Would you like to provide feedback on this message?)

--SieBot (talk) 21:08, 2 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I took this picture in Ferrocarril Museum (Madrid) (http://www.museodelferrocarril.org/informacion.htm).

do you like? --Tamorlan (talk) 11:55, 14 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It is the only picture (not drawing) of the Papin digester I could find! Yes I like it. I'll add the infor to the picture. I touched up the photo a little bit, hope you like it. -- DrJunge (talk) 12:29, 14 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Yes. This is a kind of Science Museum in Madrid, near to the little Railway Museum in Delicias (Madrid). You can fin de direction here. If you want more photos about this Digester, It will be a pleasure send more.

Saludos --Tamorlan (talk) 06:44, 15 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I would love to see another picture of the digster! I am especially interested in one were the safety valve (the round thing in the font/middle of the lid is not superimposed on the threaded bolt keeping the lid closed (back/middle)). Do you know if the pictured digester is just a model? The absent heat induced coloring of the brass cylinder makes it being a model probable but than some curator could just have cleaned it very thoroughly. Do you know when it was build and what size it is? -- DrJunge (talk) 10:57, 15 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I'll try my best this weekend ...OK? --Tamorlan (talk) 19:00, 29 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

That would be fantastic. Perhaps you could also gain some information about other places having a Papin Digester on display! I was visiting the 'Museum im Welfenschloss' in Hann. Münden, Germany, last weekend, as they were supposed to have a digester on display, but they even don't have one in storage. -- DrJunge (talk) 07:02, 30 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The picture marked with "1784" is from a book published in 1878 in New York: Title: "A history of the growth of steam engine", by Robert H. Thurston, professor of mechanical engineering in the Stevens Institute of Technology, Hobroken, USA. Kind Regards, Lidingo (talk) 16:38, 29 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The rest of the discussion can be found at Lidingos discussion page.

Die Originalbeschreibungen sollen nicht angefasst werden, das schließt Rechtschreibfehler mit ein. Setze bitte deine Änderungen diesbezüglich selbstständig zurück, danke.--D.W. (talk) 14:40, 10 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

... und wo steht das? Es kann doch nicht sein, das wir hier tausende von echten Rechtschreibfehlern tollerieren, nur weil ein Legasteniker die Bilder beschrieben hat. Das Beibehalten von Rechtsreibfehlern führt auch zu Problemen bei der Volltextsuche.--Mirko Junge (talk) 14:45, 10 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Bei jedem Bild steht der gelbe Hinweis, noch dazu werden regelmäßig auch Rechtschreibfehler bei Commons:Bundesarchiv/Error reports gemeldet.--D.W. (talk) 14:53, 10 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Der gelbe Hinweis lautet: For documentary purposes the German Federal Archive often retained the original image captions, which may be erroneous, biased, obsolete or politically extreme. Factual corrections and alternative descriptions are encouraged separately from the original description. Additionally errors can be reported at this page to inform the Bundesarchiv.. Nur steht da nichts von Rechtsschreibfehlern (spelling mistakes), sondern nur von inhaltlichen Fehlern (erroneous Captions). Weiterhin handelt es sich bei der Korrektur von Rechtschreibfehlern weder um Factual corrections, also eine inhaltliche Korrektur, noch um alternative descriptions, also alternative Beschreibung. Weiter heißt es dort, dass Fehler (errors) jedweder Diginität auch an das Bundesarchiv gemeldet werden können, aber nicht müssen.

Somit ist das Verbessern von Rechtschreibfehlern meines Erachtens gestattet. --Mirko Junge (talk) 16:15, 10 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Schau mal hier (allgemein mal lesenswert), ich bin nicht der einzige, der das so streng sieht. Da es nirgends konkret erlaubt wurde und im Zweifel der Grundsatz NICHT ANFASSEN übrig bleibt, halte ich an meiner Bitte fest. Ansonsten sehe ich dich im Zugzwang diesbezüglich für Klärung zu sorgen.--D.W. (talk) 16:26, 10 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Mit dem lesenswert hast Du recht. Leider legst Du die Aussagen sehr nach Deiner Überzeugung hin aus: Auch Martin H. schreibt, das man Fehler (einschließlich Rechtschreibfehler) auch im Kasten "Originalbeschreibung Bundesarchiv" korrigieren darf und dann unter Commons:Bundesarchiv/Error_reports melden soll. Von letzterer Pflicht befreit einen jedoch der oben bereits zitierte 'gelbe Text', den ich zugegebenermaßen in der Vergangenheit sehr liberal in Richtung 'Nicht-Melden' ausgelegt habe.

Ich finde es schon schlimm genug, dass wir eine alte und eine neue Deutsche Rechtschreibung haben, dann auch noch die orthografischen 'Besonderheiten' des Bundesarchivs zu tolerieren finde ich unerträglich, zumal die zurzeit implementierte Volltextsuche gegenüber Rechtschreibfehlern völlig untolerant ist und somit das Arbeiten durch diese Rechtschreibfehler sehr erschwert wird. --Mirko Junge (talk) 16:46, 10 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Für mich bleibt es so, dass wenn ich was ändern möchte, das auch zu melden habe, ansonsten is nix mit der Rumfuscherei. Aber das ist alles nicht so tragisch, wenn du bei deinen Änderungen zwischen reinen Typos (ein H in Jahrhundert einbauen) und solchen Änderungen unterscheidest, die in ner falschen Sortierung oder ähnlichen resultieren können (Leibzig zu Leipzig machen), sowas gehört mMn dann zwingend gemeldet. Und erst recht gibt es ja genug zeitgenössische Schreibweisen (sind ja auch Bilder aus der Vor-Duden-Zeit dabei ;-))--D.W. (talk) 17:06, 10 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Inhalt zu ändern ist ja auch etwas ganz Anderes, aber ich werde über meinen Schatten springen und künftig auch die orthographischen Besonderheiten melden. Schreibweisen aus der Vor-Dudenzeit sind natürlich in ihrer Urform zu belassen. Da hilft dann meist sowieso nur eine komplette Übersetzung in die moderne Sprache, damit dann neben der Volltextsuche auch die Übersetzungsprogramme zurechtkommen (siehe zum Beispiel: Daniel Tilas, Nachrichten vom Svukugebirge, 1743).--Mirko Junge (talk) 17:45, 10 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Teils haben sich ja die Typos gleichzeitig auch in den Dateinamen versteckt, wenn man die ebenfalls konsequent meldet können die dann mal in einer Aktion korrigiert werden (wenn das Verschieben von Bildern mal länger als einen Tag möglich ist, das Feature ist anscheindend noch nicht ausgereift..)--D.W. (talk) 17:53, 10 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Die Typos in den Dateinamen sind ein ganz besonderes Problem, das sich leider ganz und gar nicht auf die Bundesarchiv-Dateien beschränkt. Ich warte auch schon händeringend auf eine entsprechende Funktionalität. Eine Änderung des Dateinamen wäre aber eine Änderung, die auf jeden Fall an den Urheber, Bundesarchiv oder sonst wer, zu melden wäre. Grüße, --Mirko Junge (talk) 19:05, 10 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I am now proud owner of a TUSC account!

Thank you for your improvements to the picture I uploaded of a Bristol 412. The picture is one I took on a London street on a rainy day with a cheap camera. I uploaded to wikipedia it because it was an unusual car: not because it was a good picture. So I do not "think [you] 'defaced' some of [my] best shots". I think you improved it. And I know enough to know that that is a difficult thing to do. So thank you.

You also improved a picture I made of a Lotus, but I do not think anyone saw fit to include that picture in a wikipedia entry. The car is not so rare and there are more better pictures to choose from. But thank you for your improvements to that one, also.

Regards Charles01 (talk) 21:13, 7 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Glad you like it. Did you notice that the AC 428 was featured in the Fotowerkstadt in the German Wikipedia:

• 
  Your Original
• 
  Retouched, denoised, color corrected. MJ
• 
  Retouched (again), hue and saturation adjusted. AM The final version (denoised again). MJ

I think the result is astonishing! --Mirko Junge (talk) 20:56, 8 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Interesting to see the AC picture enhanced.

That AC one was quite an interesting picture in the first place (angle, color, beautiful car, relatively abundant albeit indirect - for the car itself - light/clearer focus) but suffered (I think) from deterioration of the Dias over the last 40 years. I still think the colour of the car itself was more truthfully recalled in the unimproved version, but of course the improved version is a much better picture overall. And I may well remember the original colour wrongly. (I DO remember thinking it was an unusual colour even then.) Also it was taken on a very cheap camera with a fixed lens, so was never going to be very sharp.

I'm afraid the Audi 100 shot that I see you also worked on was always messed up in terms of light. Same cheap camera helped by cheap 'super-market own-brand' film. There were so many of those Audi 100s around in the 1970s, I was surprised how few wiki images there were on commons of it, though there are more than there were. I got quite a good 'wiki conventional' one this year at an Oldtimer-Fest, but that was of a slightly different (newer) model than the one you were working on (the new one has a slightly 'squared up' front.) Just thinking on paper. Time for breakfast. Charles01 (talk) 07:19, 9 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hello DrJunge, and thank you for your application to be a flickr reviewer. The application has been removed as successful, and you've been added to the list of reviewers. Congratulations! Please see Commons:Flickr images if you haven't done so already, and the backlogs at Category:Flickr images needing human review and Category:Flickr review needed. A helpful script for easy-tagging flickr images is at importScript('User:Patstuart/Flickrreview.js'); (which you can add to your monobook.js), and you can add {{User reviewer}} or {{User trusted}} to your user page if you wish. Thank you for your work on Commons! :) Pmlineditor ∞ 09:55, 19 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Good luck with the review work! --Neozoon (talk) 18:14, 19 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Nice work on File:CassanoHeadCrop.jpg! Can you work some similar magic on File:SalvatoreCassano.jpg, which appears on Salvatore Cassano? Frank (talk) 13:40, 24 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Done. Glad you liked my work. --Mirko Junge (talk) 15:33, 24 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Sweet, thanks again. I know it's probably "no big deal" to you but it would be a big deal for me to try to get those results. And, I think they improve things considerably! Frank (talk) 16:24, 24 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

He seems like a guy that deserves a better picture. Bye, --Mirko Junge (talk) 16:34, 24 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

FYI, the picture you worked on (and the article itself) will be appearing in about an hour on the main page under Did you know.... Frank (talk) 17:47, 31 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the information. Looks great! Happy New Year, --Mirko Junge (talk) 20:06, 31 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

You must set your own priorities for what most urgently needs to be done by you in Wikipedia, based one your interests and skills, Dr Junge. However, since I see that you still work on on improving an (originally less than wonderful) picture I once uploaded of an Audi 100 GL, I cannot resist wondering if the attached image of an Ascona break from more or less the same period might tempt you.....

Either way, (since it is 25 december here) I wish you joy at Christmas and success in 2010. Regards Charles01 (talk) 06:52, 25 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

This message was added automatically by Nikbot, if you need some help about it, ask its master (Filnik) or go to the Commons:Help desk. --Filnik 16:54, 27 December 2009 (UTC)

File:Cabrillo College Salvia garden-02-MJ.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! Afrikaans ∙ العربية ∙ беларуская ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца) ∙ български ∙ ပအိုဝ်ႏဘာႏသာႏ ∙ বাংলা ∙ bosanski ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ dansk ∙ Deutsch ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form) ∙ Zazaki ∙ ދިވެހިބަސް ∙ Ελληνικά ∙ English ∙ Esperanto ∙ español ∙ eesti ∙ فارسی ∙ suomi ∙ français ∙ galego ∙ עברית ∙ hrvatski ∙ magyar ∙ հայերեն ∙ Bahasa Indonesia ∙ íslenska ∙ italiano ∙ 日本語 ∙ 한국어 ∙ 조선말 ∙ македонски ∙ മലയാളം ∙ Bahasa Melayu ∙ မြန်မာဘာသာ ∙ norsk bokmål ∙ 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） ∙ +/−

--AFBorchert (talk) 00:43, 31 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Lmbuga, if you would have looked carefully at the history of the file you would have noticed, that we were editing the file at the same time. When I noticed the conflict I reverted the image to your image. That the thumbprint still showed the signature in the original Flickr image is a cache related bug when the image sizes of consecutive uploades do not differ. Right now the cache conflickt is resolved, thus the last two images are absolutly identical! Thus no 'misbehaviour on my side! Furthermore the uploaded image should always be the same as the Flickr image, the reworked version should overload the original image. This helps the FlickrBot and saves us a lot of work. Keep up the good work, --Mirko Junge (talk) 17:58, 2 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hallo,

Ra'ike hatte mich im Chat wegen des Reviews einer Reihe von CC-by-sa-lizenzierten Bildern angesprochen, die sie von Mindat nach Commons transferiert hat. Sie wünscht sich, da das wohl noch mehr Bilder werden, eine ähnliche Form der „Gegenzeichnung“ durch einen Reviewer wie bei Flickr-Bildern. Ließe sich das mit einem eigenen Baustein verbunden beim Flickr-Review andocken, oder braucht es dafür einen eigenen Prozeß mit allem Brimborium? Grüße --Eva K. ^{is evil} 13:07, 7 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hallo Eva, ich glaube, da braucht es einen Prozess. Im Flickr Review kommen auch immer wieder Bilder von anderen Quellen vor, die sich nicht mit den vorgesehenen Mitteln abarbeiten lassen und somit von hand nachgeprüft werden müssen. In der Regel bedeutet dies sogar, dass die Bilder wegen Copyright Violation schnellgelöscht werden. Das Einfachste wäre natürlich ein echter Flickr-wash: Die Bilder mit der entsprechenden Lizenz auf Flickr zu laden, dann halbautomatisch nach Commons und vom Flickrbot freischalten lassen. Nett ist das aber nicht... --Mirko Junge (talk) 20:28, 10 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hallo DrJunge, den Umweg über flickr fände ich jetzt auch nicht wirklich gut und würde einen richtigen Review-Prozess vorziehen. Ich habe deshalb auch mal bei Bryan nachgefragt. Gruß -- Ra'ike T C 23:17, 10 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

My mistake, the link to the source wasn't correct. This has been fixed (under a Creative Commons license). Should be fine now, please feel free to check and let me know if something else needs fixing (read: I'm a noob)... Dewhurst picture

Thanks Jonschr (talk) 17:58, 10 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I completed the author information and changed the Licence to CC-by-2.0, like the licence on Flickr. The FlickerBot which tries to authenticate all the Flickr realted uploads always gets confused when the images on Flickr and Commons do not match. Like the crop in this case. Bye --Mirko Junge (talk) 20:21, 10 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Gut gemeint, aber leider ein wenig daneben gegangen. Erstmal sollte ein Scan vom Negativ oder Dia nicht entrauscht werden, das ist Korn und kein Rauschen. Dann ist bei der „Entrauschung“ die gesamte Zeichnung des Rasens verloren gegangen, was so etwa auf „betonieren und grün anstreichen“ hinauslief. Daher habe ich die Änderung zurückgesetzt, nachdem ich Smials Schmerzensschrei im Chat vernommen hatte. Grüße --Eva K. ^{is evil} 21:05, 3 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Kein Problem, ich fand die Struktur im eigentlichen Kühlturm so nur besser sichtbar. Auch die Straße hat beim Entrauschen einiges gelitten. Grüße, --Mirko Junge (talk) 21:12, 3 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Ein Tip zum Entrauschen: Nimm nicht den Photoshop-Entrauschungsfilter, der ist zu brachial. NeatImage als Plugin für PS ist wesentlich selektiver und sanfter. --Eva K. ^{is evil} 03:02, 8 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Danke für den Tipp, werde ich mir anschauen. Ich mache es in der Regel mit Noise Ninja, den kann man auch in der Plug-in Version sehr gut dosieren (ja, ich weiß, ist mir in der obigen Version mit dem Rasen nicht wirklich gut gelungen). --Mirko Junge (talk) 03:17, 8 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

File:DrJunge_Nyköping_20100403.JPG

Esby (talk) 09:26, 5 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I noticed you categorized this as one of your own images. On closer inspection I see that you've actually taken it upon yourself to delete one of my images (without any notification) and simply over-write it with one of your own.

Maybe yours is a better photo. That's not the issue - I just consider this an extremely rude action on what's supposed to be a collaborative project. Couldn't you have chosen your own filename? I'm sure MediaWiki gave you its usual warning about over-writing. Andy Dingley (talk) 20:39, 8 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I am sorry to have offended you in that way. The govenor in your photo does not show very well so I was faced with the choice either to photoshop your picture or just take picture under better lighting conditions so that the actual governor is seen more prominently. Because the original image was yours I just overloaded the new image (there is a specific button to do that!). But as you do not like it that way I reverted the image back to your picture and uploaded mine under an appended name. Sincerelly yours, --Mirko Junge (talk) 07:29, 9 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thankyou very much for changing this. It's much appreciated and my apologies for being so upset over this minor issue. It only became such a problem through a possible commercial re-use of this image, leading to a confusion over who should be credited. There's now a problem that the publisher concerned sees Wikimedia as unreliable for sourcing such images and is likely to avoid using it in the future. Andy Dingley (talk) 17:13, 20 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I've just hung a speedydelete on the subject. It consists of the description from File:Newcomens Dampfmaschine aus Meyers 1890.png. However, I guess that the user who created Translate might be asking for a translation of the German in the file description. Since the image is widely used, perhaps that is a good idea.

I don't speak German, but I do understand the device pictured, so I tried to do a translation using this as a start. I note that you speak German and English and have worked on this file several times in the past. Perhaps you would help?

The steam produced in the boiler A goes through the pipe C into the cylinder B. The piston D moves up, as in Papin’s invention, pulled by the counterweight K. The pump linkage I is coupled to the counterweight, which moves it down. Through [clasp of the pipe C by means of a rooster the cylinder contents are included if out of the water supply container L water injects over the direction P into the cylinder]. (This is the point in the cycle which is shown in the illustration). The injection of cold water from reservoir L through pipe P causes a vacuum in the cylinder B and the piston D is pushed down by the air pressure from outside.

The counterweight K and the pump linkage I are lifted by the balance beam F. The pipe R takes away the condensed water, [S marks the section submerged, U-shaped in the reservoir of the pipe that provides for a steam dense clasp of the cylinder]. M is the linkage of a small aŭiliary pump which fills the reservoir L through the pipe N. In the original interpretation, the roosters were served of a worker.

"Rooster" and "clasp" are bad translations. I suspect "clasp" should read "valve", but "rooster"? Sections that need work are in [brackets]. Thanks, . . . . Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk • contribs) 15:02, 21 April 2010 (UTC) If you choose to respond, please do so here.[reply]

I did the translation of the caption. Not really perfect, but close to the original (the German caption is the original caption from Meyers Encyclopaedia). Hope it helps. --Mirko Junge (talk) 19:55, 21 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Perfect -- that is, so close that I just touched up a few words. Thank you very much, . . . . Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk • contribs) 22:23, 21 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, now it is really very good! --Mirko Junge (talk) 10:36, 22 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

This message was added automatically by Nikbot, if you need some help about it, ask its master (Filnik) or go to the Commons:Help desk. --Filnik 15:20, 10 June 2010 (UTC)

Hello, I'm sorry, I didn't know that it need administrator review when there're modifications, I'm going to do as you say. Can I use the Flickr review message of one picture verified for a modificated picture by copy/paste ? I used to put the first message {{Flickrreview}} for all versions I upload. Thank you.

I tend to put the original Flickr picture as the base for all modifications. It makes a later manual check easier, if the need arises. See for example File:Jaguar E-Type.jpg. If you modify only part of picture and crop the result it may get very tricky to see the connection with the original. The authentication of the original unmodified image can be done by a bot no problem. Hope this helps, --Mirko Junge (talk) 18:52, 11 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

File:Dunkelblaue_Stunde.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! Afrikaans ∙ العربية ∙ беларуская ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца) ∙ български ∙ ပအိုဝ်ႏဘာႏသာႏ ∙ বাংলা ∙ bosanski ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ dansk ∙ Deutsch ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form) ∙ Zazaki ∙ ދިވެހިބަސް ∙ Ελληνικά ∙ English ∙ Esperanto ∙ español ∙ eesti ∙ فارسی ∙ suomi ∙ français ∙ galego ∙ עברית ∙ hrvatski ∙ magyar ∙ հայերեն ∙ Bahasa Indonesia ∙ íslenska ∙ italiano ∙ 日本語 ∙ 한국어 ∙ 조선말 ∙ македонски ∙ മലയാളം ∙ Bahasa Melayu ∙ မြန်မာဘာသာ ∙ norsk bokmål ∙ 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） ∙ +/−

Waugh Bacon (talk) 00:39, 7 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hello DrJunge,

As a reviewer, do you see any problem with this file? Geagea (talk) 04:40, 16 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

No I do not. I think that after adding the author/source information it should be OK. Since that was so easy I susspected that you were after something more, so I did the Flickr-Check but left the box in place. Thinking about it now, I should have alerted you to the additions and requested a removal of the box. Have you got some more problems with the picture? --Mirko Junge (talk) 06:00, 16 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Please read Commons:Flickr washing and remove/change your comment at the user talk page. Geagea (talk) 00:07, 17 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

You have to be more specific than just to assert Flickr Wasching. I could not find the photo anywere else and thus could not sustain your allegations. Bye, --Mirko Junge (talk) 05:09, 17 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

First you must understand what is Flickr washing. If user uploading copyvio photo to his own Flickr user and release it under one of the free commons license, and then he uploadig it to commons as a free Flickr image. In that case we have same user name and the photo uploaded to commons just after it uploaded to Flickr so more likly it Flickr washing. Since I did not find the file in Google I did not signed it as {{Copyvio}}. I asked the user to povide proper source. Geagea (talk) 02:56, 18 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Afrikaans ∙ العربية ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца) ∙ বাংলা ∙ 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 ∙ norsk bokmål ∙ Plattdüütsch ∙ Nederlands ∙ norsk ∙ polski ∙ português ∙ português do Brasil ∙ română ∙ русский ∙ sicilianu ∙ slovenčina ∙ slovenščina ∙ српски / srpski ∙ svenska ∙ Türkçe ∙ українська ∙ Tiếng Việt ∙ 中文（简体）‎ ∙ 中文（繁體）‎ ∙ +/−

---

Hello, DrJunge!

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.

CategorizationBot (talk) 10:50, 17 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

• Image:Echte 1000m mit VW Bus.jpg was uncategorized on 16 October 2010 CategorizationBot (talk) 10:50, 17 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
• Image:Dublin Airport Terminal 2 Underpass.jpg was uncategorized on 18 December 2010 CategorizationBot (talk) 10:39, 19 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
• Image:Micro Compact Home - Interiour View 01.jpg was uncategorized on 14 January 2011 CategorizationBot (talk) 10:43, 15 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
• Image:Micro Compact Home - Interiour View 02.jpg was uncategorized on 15 January 2011 CategorizationBot (talk) 10:43, 16 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
• Image:Jasper Conran .jpg was uncategorized on 2 July 2011 CategorizationBot (talk) 10:47, 3 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]
• Image:SonjaDeLennart 1949 Mady Rahl modelt Sommermodell der Caprihose.jpg was uncategorized on 3 January 2012 CategorizationBot (talk) 11:21, 4 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
• Image:SonjaDeLennart 1950 Nicoletta modelt original Caprihose und Caprirock.jpg was uncategorized on 3 January 2012 CategorizationBot (talk) 11:21, 4 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
• Image:SonjaDeLennart 1945 Sonja De Lennart modelt ihren ersten Caprirock und Caprigürtel.jpg was uncategorized on 3 January 2012 CategorizationBot (talk) 11:21, 4 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
• Image:SonjaDeLennart 1949 Erni Mangold modelt Wintermodell der Caprihose.jpg was uncategorized on 3 January 2012 CategorizationBot (talk) 11:21, 4 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
• Image:SonjaDeLennart 1951 Sonja de Lennart modelt ihren original Caprirock.jpg was uncategorized on 3 January 2012 CategorizationBot (talk) 11:21, 4 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
• Image:SonjaDeLennart 1948 Sonja De Lennart modelt Wintermodell der Caprihose und Capribluse.jpg was uncategorized on 3 January 2012 CategorizationBot (talk) 11:21, 4 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

What can you tell me about this image, if anything? Why did you approve it? It seems like a clear case of flickrwashing, and I'd be inclined to delete. But I am seeking out any additional information before I'm too hasty. Thanks. -Andrew c (talk) 23:29, 6 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Andrew,

looks that way to me, too: Single image of an unknown user on Flickr. I hope it did not look that way when I reviewed the image a year ago. I would support a delete. Bye, --Mirko Junge (talk) 04:24, 7 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

català | dansk | Deutsch | English | Esperanto | español | eesti | français | galego | magyar | Lëtzebuergesch | norsk bokmål | Nederlands | norsk nynorsk | norsk | polski | português | română | русский | svenska | +/− Dear DrJunge, Thank you for contributing to Wiki Loves Monuments and sharing your pictures with the whole world. You are very welcome to keep uploading images, even though you can't win prizes any longer. To get started on editing relevant Wikipedia articles, click here for more information and help. You can find all uploaded pictures in our central media collection Wikimedia Commons. Many photos are already used in Wikipedia. The contest was very successful with more than 165,000 images submitted throughout Europe. To make future contests even more successful, we would like to invite you to share your experiences with us in this survey. Kind regards, the Wiki Loves Monuments team

Message delivered by Lucia Bot in 21:10, 17 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

This message was added automatically by Nikbot, 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. --Nikbot 19:19, 3 January 2012 (UTC)

File:Portrait of Carl David Anderson (1905-1991), Physicist.jpg has been marked as a possible copyright violation. Wikimedia Commons only accepts free content—that is, images and other media files that can be used by anyone, for any purpose. Traditional copyright law does not grant these freedoms, and unless noted otherwise, everything you find on the web is copyrighted and not permitted here. For details on what is acceptable, please read Commons:Licensing. You may also find Commons:Copyright rules useful, or you can ask questions about Commons policies at the Commons:Help desk. If you are the copyright holder and the creator of the file, please read Commons:But it's my own work! for tips on how to provide evidence of that. The file you added may soon be deleted. If you have written permission from the copyright holder, please replace the copyvio tag with {{subst:OP}} and have them send us a free license release via COM:VRT. If you disagree that the file is a copyright violation for any other reason, please replace the copyvio tag with a regular deletion request. Warning: Wikimedia Commons takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing. Afrikaans ∙ العربية ∙ asturianu ∙ azərbaycanca ∙ беларуская ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца) ∙ български ∙ ပအိုဝ်ႏဘာႏသာႏ ∙ বাংলা ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ dansk ∙ Deutsch ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form) ∙ Zazaki ∙ Ελληνικά ∙ English ∙ español ∙ euskara ∙ فارسی ∙ suomi ∙ français ∙ galego ∙ עברית ∙ hrvatski ∙ magyar ∙ հայերեն ∙ Bahasa Indonesia ∙ italiano ∙ 日本語 ∙ 한국어 ∙ Lëtzebuergesch ∙ македонски ∙ മലയാളം ∙ मराठी ∙ Bahasa Melayu ∙ Malti ∙ မြန်မာဘာသာ ∙ norsk bokmål ∙ Plattdüütsch ∙ Nederlands ∙ norsk nynorsk ∙ norsk ∙ polski ∙ português ∙ português do Brasil ∙ română ∙ русский ∙ sicilianu ∙ slovenčina ∙ slovenščina ∙ српски / srpski ∙ svenska ∙ தமிழ் ∙ тоҷикӣ ∙ ไทย ∙ Türkçe ∙ українська ∙ oʻzbekcha / ўзбекча ∙ Tiếng Việt ∙ 中文（简体） ∙ 中文（繁體） ∙ +/−

 

AtelierMonpli (talk) 20:22, 4 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

File:Moschee Wangen bei Olten Minarett.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! Afrikaans ∙ العربية ∙ беларуская ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца) ∙ български ∙ ပအိုဝ်ႏဘာႏသာႏ ∙ বাংলা ∙ bosanski ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ dansk ∙ Deutsch ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form) ∙ Zazaki ∙ ދިވެހިބަސް ∙ Ελληνικά ∙ English ∙ Esperanto ∙ español ∙ eesti ∙ فارسی ∙ suomi ∙ français ∙ galego ∙ עברית ∙ hrvatski ∙ magyar ∙ հայերեն ∙ Bahasa Indonesia ∙ íslenska ∙ italiano ∙ 日本語 ∙ 한국어 ∙ 조선말 ∙ македонски ∙ മലയാളം ∙ Bahasa Melayu ∙ မြန်မာဘာသာ ∙ norsk bokmål ∙ 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） ∙ +/−

84.61.181.19 07:51, 26 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

This message was added automatically by Nikbot, 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. --Nikbot 21:12, 6 May 2012 (UTC)

File:Bürgermeister Wilde.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! Afrikaans ∙ العربية ∙ беларуская ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца) ∙ български ∙ ပအိုဝ်ႏဘာႏသာႏ ∙ বাংলা ∙ bosanski ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ dansk ∙ Deutsch ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form) ∙ Zazaki ∙ ދިވެހިބަސް ∙ Ελληνικά ∙ English ∙ Esperanto ∙ español ∙ eesti ∙ فارسی ∙ suomi ∙ français ∙ galego ∙ עברית ∙ hrvatski ∙ magyar ∙ հայերեն ∙ Bahasa Indonesia ∙ íslenska ∙ italiano ∙ 日本語 ∙ 한국어 ∙ 조선말 ∙ македонски ∙ മലയാളം ∙ Bahasa Melayu ∙ မြန်မာဘာသာ ∙ norsk bokmål ∙ 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） ∙ +/−

Quedel (talk) 17:00, 13 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

File:Novel flu virus Kopenhagen Airport 0960.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! Afrikaans ∙ العربية ∙ беларуская ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца) ∙ български ∙ ပအိုဝ်ႏဘာႏသာႏ ∙ বাংলা ∙ bosanski ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ dansk ∙ Deutsch ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form) ∙ Zazaki ∙ ދިވެހިބަސް ∙ Ελληνικά ∙ English ∙ Esperanto ∙ español ∙ eesti ∙ فارسی ∙ suomi ∙ français ∙ galego ∙ עברית ∙ hrvatski ∙ magyar ∙ հայերեն ∙ Bahasa Indonesia ∙ íslenska ∙ italiano ∙ 日本語 ∙ 한국어 ∙ 조선말 ∙ македонски ∙ മലയാളം ∙ Bahasa Melayu ∙ မြန်မာဘာသာ ∙ norsk bokmål ∙ 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） ∙ +/−

darkweasel94 Diskussion/talk/diskuto 21:13, 27 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hello DrJunge. You are receiving this message as a license reviewer. As you know, OTRS processes a large amount of tickets relating to image releases (called "permissions"). As a license reviewer, you may have the skills necessary to contribute to this team. If you are interested in learning more about OTRS or to volunteer please visit Meta-Wiki. Tell your friends! Thank you. Rjd0060 18:33, 1 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

العربية ∙ беларуская ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца) ∙ ပအိုဝ်ႏဘာႏသာႏ ∙ বাংলা ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ dansk ∙ Deutsch ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form) ∙ Ελληνικά ∙ English ∙ español ∙ euskara ∙ فارسی ∙ suomi ∙ français ∙ galego ∙ עברית ∙ hrvatski ∙ magyar ∙ հայերեն ∙ italiano ∙ 日本語 ∙ ಕನ್ನಡ ∙ 한국어 ∙ lietuvių ∙ latviešu ∙ македонски ∙ മലയാളം ∙ मराठी ∙ မြန်မာဘာသာ ∙ norsk bokmål ∙ Plattdüütsch ∙ Nederlands ∙ norsk ∙ polski ∙ português ∙ română ∙ русский ∙ sicilianu ∙ slovenčina ∙ slovenščina ∙ српски / srpski ∙ svenska ∙ ไทย ∙ Türkçe ∙ українська ∙ اردو ∙ Tiếng Việt ∙ 中文（简体） ∙ 中文（繁體） ∙ +/−

This media was probably deleted.

Thanks for uploading File:Liquid Oxygen.gif. 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). The file probably has been deleted. If you sent a permission, try to send it again after 14 days. Do not re-upload. When the VRT-member processes your mail, the file can be undeleted. Additionally you can request undeletion here, providing a link to the File-page on Commons where it was uploaded ([[:File:Liquid Oxygen.gif]]) and the above demanded information in your request.

 

JuTa 10:22, 31 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

File:RBMK reactor from Ignalina.gif 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! Afrikaans ∙ العربية ∙ беларуская ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца) ∙ български ∙ ပအိုဝ်ႏဘာႏသာႏ ∙ বাংলা ∙ bosanski ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ dansk ∙ Deutsch ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form) ∙ Zazaki ∙ ދިވެހިބަސް ∙ Ελληνικά ∙ English ∙ Esperanto ∙ español ∙ eesti ∙ فارسی ∙ suomi ∙ français ∙ galego ∙ עברית ∙ hrvatski ∙ magyar ∙ հայերեն ∙ Bahasa Indonesia ∙ íslenska ∙ italiano ∙ 日本語 ∙ 한국어 ∙ 조선말 ∙ македонски ∙ മലയാളം ∙ Bahasa Melayu ∙ မြန်မာဘာသာ ∙ norsk bokmål ∙ 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） ∙ +/−

Jcb (talk) 22:07, 12 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

File:Haguenau musée véhicule Nessel 1-MJ.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! Afrikaans ∙ العربية ∙ беларуская ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца) ∙ български ∙ ပအိုဝ်ႏဘာႏသာႏ ∙ বাংলা ∙ bosanski ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ dansk ∙ Deutsch ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form) ∙ Zazaki ∙ ދިވެހިބަސް ∙ Ελληνικά ∙ English ∙ Esperanto ∙ español ∙ eesti ∙ فارسی ∙ suomi ∙ français ∙ galego ∙ עברית ∙ hrvatski ∙ magyar ∙ հայերեն ∙ Bahasa Indonesia ∙ íslenska ∙ italiano ∙ 日本語 ∙ 한국어 ∙ 조선말 ∙ македонски ∙ മലയാളം ∙ Bahasa Melayu ∙ မြန်မာဘာသာ ∙ norsk bokmål ∙ 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） ∙ +/−

Malcolma (talk) 19:09, 3 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Moin von der Küste,
es ist schon so viele Jahre her, dass wir uns in Nürnberg getroffen haben, wir (Ailura und ich) planten deshalb einen Fotoworkshop im Frühjahr 2019. Als wir erfuhren, dass Sebastian ebenfalls in Frühjahr ein BarCamp plant, entschlossen wir uns, zusammen zu arbeiten. Wir gliedern uns organisatorisch an diesem BarCamp an, sprich sind im gleichen Hotel, essen gemeinsam und nutzen ein Raum des Camps für unsere Fotovorträge, ähnlich wie auf der WikiCon 2011 in Nürnberg.
Wie Ihr vielleicht mitbekommen habt, ist Gnu zu seiner letzten Wanderung aufgebrochen, daher möchten auch wir seiner Gedenken.
Die weiteren Tage wollen wir gemeinsam ein Programm aus Fototouren und Vorträgen zusammenstellen, es ist noch viel Luft für Eure Ideen und Vorträge. Den geplanten ausführlichen LR Workshop wird zu einem anderen Zeitpunkt im Frühsommer ( WMDE gibt den Ort vor) stattfinden, da dieser sehr weit in die Tiefe gehen soll. Ich würde mich freuen, Euch in Nürnberg begrüßen zu können, wundere Dich nicht über meine Nachricht auch wenn Du lange nichts mehr editiert hast, ich habe Deinen Namen aus den letzten FWS kopiert. ;)

Tschüß
Euer
-- Ra Boe watt?? 12:45, 19 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

File:Ayn Rand quote, American Adventure, Epcot Center, Walt Disney World.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! Afrikaans ∙ العربية ∙ беларуская ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца) ∙ български ∙ ပအိုဝ်ႏဘာႏသာႏ ∙ বাংলা ∙ bosanski ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ dansk ∙ Deutsch ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form) ∙ Zazaki ∙ ދިވެހިބަސް ∙ Ελληνικά ∙ English ∙ Esperanto ∙ español ∙ eesti ∙ فارسی ∙ suomi ∙ français ∙ galego ∙ עברית ∙ hrvatski ∙ magyar ∙ հայերեն ∙ Bahasa Indonesia ∙ íslenska ∙ italiano ∙ 日本語 ∙ 한국어 ∙ 조선말 ∙ македонски ∙ മലയാളം ∙ Bahasa Melayu ∙ မြန်မာဘာသာ ∙ norsk bokmål ∙ 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） ∙ +/−

RL0919 (talk) 18:20, 13 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

File:Friedländer.foto-MJ.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! Afrikaans ∙ العربية ∙ беларуская ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца) ∙ български ∙ ပအိုဝ်ႏဘာႏသာႏ ∙ বাংলা ∙ bosanski ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ dansk ∙ Deutsch ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form) ∙ Zazaki ∙ ދިވެހިބަސް ∙ Ελληνικά ∙ English ∙ Esperanto ∙ español ∙ eesti ∙ فارسی ∙ suomi ∙ français ∙ galego ∙ עברית ∙ hrvatski ∙ magyar ∙ հայերեն ∙ Bahasa Indonesia ∙ íslenska ∙ italiano ∙ 日本語 ∙ 한국어 ∙ 조선말 ∙ македонски ∙ മലയാളം ∙ Bahasa Melayu ∙ မြန်မာဘာသာ ∙ norsk bokmål ∙ 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） ∙ +/−

The Squirrel Conspiracy (talk) 05:46, 9 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]