Welcome to Wikimedia Commons, Karmakolle!

-- Wikimedia Commons Welcome (talk) 09:08, 3 September 2012 (UTC)Reply

edit
bahasa melayu  català  čeština  dansk  deutsch (Sie-Form)  deutsch  english  español  français  galego  hrvatski  italiano  magyar  nederlands  norsk  norsk bokmål  norsk nynorsk  português  polski  português do Brasil  română  sicilianu  slovenčina  slovenščina  suomi  svenska  türkçe  беларуская  беларуская (тарашкевіца)  български  македонски  русский  українська  ಕನ್ನಡ  ತುಳು  മലയാളം  한국어  日本語  中文(简体)  中文(繁體)  עברית  العربيَّة  فارسی  +/−
 
This media may be deleted.
Thanks for uploading File:Mastenwald, 1938.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) 13:24, 20 January 2015 (UTC)Reply

edit
bahasa melayu  català  čeština  dansk  deutsch (Sie-Form)  deutsch  english  español  français  galego  hrvatski  italiano  magyar  nederlands  norsk  norsk bokmål  norsk nynorsk  português  polski  português do Brasil  română  sicilianu  slovenčina  slovenščina  suomi  svenska  türkçe  беларуская  беларуская (тарашкевіца)  български  македонски  русский  українська  ಕನ್ನಡ  ತುಳು  മലയാളം  한국어  日本語  中文(简体)  中文(繁體)  עברית  العربيَّة  فارسی  +/−
 
This media may be deleted.
Thanks for uploading File:René Lambrichts, 17 juli 1942.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.

Martin H. (talk) 14:34, 24 May 2015 (UTC)Reply

The selected license template requires evidence of the authors deathyear. --Martin H. (talk) 14:35, 24 May 2015 (UTC)Reply

File:René Lambrichts, 17 juli 1942.JPG

edit
 
File:René Lambrichts, 17 juli 1942.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 H. (talk) 21:30, 26 May 2015 (UTC)Reply

Please do not recreate deleted content

edit
čeština  Deutsch  Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎  English  español  français  italiano  magyar  Nederlands  Plattdüütsch  polski  português  sicilianu  svenska  suomi  Ελληνικά  македонски  русский  українська  বাংলা  മലയാളം  မြန်မာဘာသာ  日本語  中文(简体)‎  中文(繁體)‎  עברית 

Bahasa Indonesia  . +/−


 
Your image or other content, Bombardment of Brussels (1695), was recently deleted in accordance with our process and policies. You have recreated this content after it was deleted; please do not do this. If you would like to contest the deletion, please visit Commons:Undeletion requests and follow the instructions there to have the deletion reviewed. Recreating deleted content outside of process is not allowed, and doing so repeatedly may cause you to lose your editing privileges. Thank you for understanding.

If you have questions, you may ask them at the Village Pump in any of 42 languages or on my talk page. I will also watch for questions here on your talk page for at least a week. .     Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 14:00, 21 June 2015 (UTC)Reply

Apologies! I was trying to create a category but I messed up. Karmakolle (talk) 08:32, 22 June 2015 (UTC)Reply
Aha. That's a frequent mistake, I have done it myself, more than a few times. Thank you for your contributions. .     Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 09:34, 22 June 2015 (UTC)Reply

Notification about possible deletion

edit
 
Some contents have been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether they should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at their entry.

If you created these pages, please note that the fact that they have 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 them, 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!

Affected:


Yours sincerely, BrightRaven (talk) 07:35, 21 October 2015 (UTC)Reply

Round 2 of Picture of the Year 2015 is open!

edit
 

You are receiving this message because you voted in R1 of the 2015 Picture of the Year contest.

Dear Karmakolle,

Wikimedia Commons is happy to announce that the second round of the 2015 Picture of the Year competition is now open. This year will be the tenth edition of the annual Wikimedia Commons photo competition, which recognizes exceptional contributions by users on Wikimedia Commons. Wikimedia users are invited to vote for their favorite images featured on Commons during the last year (2015) to produce a single Picture of the Year.

Hundreds of images that have been rated Featured Pictures by the international Wikimedia Commons community in the past year were entered in this competition. These images include professional animal and plant shots, breathtaking panoramas and skylines, restorations of historical images, photographs portraying the world's best architecture, impressive human portraits, and so much more.

There are two total rounds of voting. In the first round, you voted for as many images as you liked. In Round 1, there were 1322 candidate images. There are 56 finalists in Round 2, comprised of the top 30 overall as well as the top #1 and #2 from each sub-category. In the final round, you may vote for just one or maximal three image to become the Picture of the Year.

Round 2 will end on 28 May 2016, 23:59:59 UTC.

Click here to vote »

Thanks,
-- Wikimedia Commons Picture of the Year committee 09:43, 22 May 2016 (UTC)

File tagging File:Chapelle rouge.jpg

edit
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:Chapelle rouge.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).

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:Chapelle rouge.jpg]]) and the above demanded information in your request.

LX (talk, contribs) 18:52, 20 February 2018 (UTC)Reply

File tagging File:Rue De La Loi, Bruxelles, 1920.jpg

edit
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:Rue De La Loi, Bruxelles, 1920.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).

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:Rue De La Loi, Bruxelles, 1920.jpg]]) and the above demanded information in your request.

LX (talk, contribs) 18:53, 20 February 2018 (UTC)Reply

File tagging File:Katelijne moer.jpg

edit
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 may be deleted.
Thanks for uploading File:Katelijne moer.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.

Ronhjones  (Talk) 21:04, 26 September 2018 (UTC)Reply

edit

Copyright status: File:Hertoginnedal gevel 1906.jpg

bahasa melayu  català  čeština  dansk  deutsch (Sie-Form)  deutsch  english  español  français  galego  hrvatski  italiano  magyar  nederlands  norsk  norsk bokmål  norsk nynorsk  português  polski  português do Brasil  română  sicilianu  slovenčina  slovenščina  suomi  svenska  türkçe  беларуская  беларуская (тарашкевіца)  български  македонски  русский  українська  ಕನ್ನಡ  ತುಳು  മലയാളം  한국어  日本語  中文(简体)  中文(繁體)  עברית  العربيَّة  فارسی  +/−
 
This media may be deleted.
Thanks for uploading File:Hertoginnedal gevel 1906.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.

(talk) 11:12, 16 October 2018 (UTC)Reply

You have claimed the image is 120 years old, clearly it is not. -- (talk) 11:14, 16 October 2018 (UTC)Reply
edit

Copyright status: File:Muren hertoginnedal.jpg

bahasa melayu  català  čeština  dansk  deutsch (Sie-Form)  deutsch  english  español  français  galego  hrvatski  italiano  magyar  nederlands  norsk  norsk bokmål  norsk nynorsk  português  polski  português do Brasil  română  sicilianu  slovenčina  slovenščina  suomi  svenska  türkçe  беларуская  беларуская (тарашкевіца)  български  македонски  русский  українська  ಕನ್ನಡ  ತುಳು  മലയാളം  한국어  日本語  中文(简体)  中文(繁體)  עברית  العربيَّة  فارسی  +/−
 
This media may be deleted.
Thanks for uploading File:Muren hertoginnedal.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.

(talk) 11:15, 16 October 2018 (UTC)Reply

You have claimed the image is 120 years old, but there is no date information. -- (talk) 11:16, 16 October 2018 (UTC)Reply

File:Hertoginnedal oude gevel 1780.jpg

edit
 
File:Hertoginnedal oude gevel 1780.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!

(talk) 11:17, 16 October 2018 (UTC)Reply

File:Hertoginnedal hollandse zaal.jpg

edit
 
File:Hertoginnedal hollandse zaal.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!

(talk) 11:25, 16 October 2018 (UTC)Reply

File:Hertoginnedal gotische zaal.jpg

edit
 
File:Hertoginnedal gotische zaal.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!

(talk) 11:26, 16 October 2018 (UTC)Reply

File:Hertoginnedal eetzaal.jpg

edit
 
File:Hertoginnedal eetzaal.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!

(talk) 11:27, 16 October 2018 (UTC)Reply

File:Hertoginnedal grote salon.jpg

edit
 
File:Hertoginnedal grote salon.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!

(talk) 11:27, 16 October 2018 (UTC)Reply

File:Muren hertoginnedal.jpg

edit
 
File:Muren hertoginnedal.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!

JuTa 09:10, 21 October 2018 (UTC)Reply

File rename

edit

@Karmakolle: , this file should be renamed because of #2. Do you have a suggestion? Jacques Carabain: Maagdenpalmgang en Hellegang in de Kantersteen ? Thank you for your time. Lotje (talk) 04:07, 24 October 2018 (UTC)Reply

@Karmakolle: in facht they all should be renamed because of confusing. Lotje (talk) 04:20, 24 October 2018 (UTC)Reply
Hi Lotje, The names are not very helpful indeed, I just made them short and gave the information in the file description. I have no objections of course to renaming them. Best regards, Karmakolle (talk) 08:30, 25 October 2018 (UTC)Reply

Notification about possible deletion

edit
 
Some contents have been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether they should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at their entry.

If you created these pages, please note that the fact that they have 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 them, 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!

Affected:

And also:

Yours sincerely, Arthur Crbz (talk) 09:59, 29 January 2019 (UTC)Reply

Notification about possible deletion

edit
 
Some contents have been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether they should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at their entry.

If you created these pages, please note that the fact that they have 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 them, 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!

Affected:

And also:

Yours sincerely, Arthur Crbz (talk) 10:04, 29 January 2019 (UTC)Reply

Collaborateurs?

edit

Hallo Karmakolle persoonlijk vind ik de filename nogal pejoratief overkomen. Had je dit ergens vandaan? Thnks. :-) Lotje (talk) 12:32, 6 July 2019 (UTC)Reply

Dag Lotje, De drie redenaars op de meeting, René De Clercq, Richard de Cneudt en Alfons Van Roy, zijn allen na de oorlog ter dood veroordeeld wegens collaboratie. Ik ben akkoord dat de term een negatieve lading heeft, maar dat is nu eenmaal wat ze deden. De volksraadpleging op de laatste Alhambrameeting was een pure klucht. Beste groet, Karmakolle (talk) 12:55, 6 July 2019 (UTC)Reply
Fijn, bedankt voor de interessante toelichting. :-) Lotje (talk) 16:15, 6 July 2019 (UTC)Reply

Emperor Philippus Arabicus

edit

Greetings Karmakolle, Please do not take offence, but I have reverted your cropped version of Emperor Philippus Arabicus to the original version, because the original version contains the entire bust (not just the close-up). Your cropped version is very nice, in my opinion, and the best way to incorporate it into Commons is for you to upload it as a separate picture. That way we will have both the original version, and your cropped version in Commons. In fact, this is the usual procedure for doing such things. Again, I do like your version, and hope you will upload it (but just not over-write the original). with best wishes, Daderot (talk) 21:55, 29 August 2019 (UTC)Reply

Hi Daderot, I must have done some wrong manipulation in CropTool, which normally leaves the original file intact. This is indeed not the way things are done. My sincere apologies! Karmakolle (talk) 22:01, 29 August 2019 (UTC)Reply

Bethlehemplein in welke plaats?

edit
 
Waar?

Dag Karmakolle, ik wilde een juiste categorie bij het bestand File:Bethlehemplein.jpg zetten, maar ik heb geen idee in welke plaats dat is.

Zou je me dat willen zeggen? Alvast bedankt. Wouter (talk) 14:46, 5 June 2020 (UTC)Reply

Dat is in Sint-Gillis (Brussel), Wouter. Vriendelijke groet, Karmakolle (talk) 15:51, 5 June 2020 (UTC)Reply
Bedankt voor het snelle antwoord. Wouter (talk) 18:11, 5 June 2020 (UTC)Reply

File:Brederodestraat04.JPG

edit

Vraagje, was dit de Banque d'Outremer van Albert Thys :-) Lotje (talk) 15:14, 15 June 2020 (UTC)Reply

Jazeker, gebouwd in 1909! Karmakolle (talk) 22:53, 15 June 2020 (UTC)Reply
Bedankt! Een verwijzing naar de naam Albert Thys bij de beschrijving zou misschien zinvol zijn, ofwel, onderbrengen in de Category:Albert Thys? Thnks. Lotje (talk) 04:00, 16 June 2020 (UTC)Reply

Copyright status: File:Senegalese village, part of the French pavilion at the Exposition Universelle of 1905 in Liège.jpg

bahasa melayu  català  čeština  dansk  deutsch (Sie-Form)  deutsch  english  español  français  galego  hrvatski  italiano  magyar  nederlands  norsk  norsk bokmål  norsk nynorsk  português  polski  português do Brasil  română  sicilianu  slovenčina  slovenščina  suomi  svenska  türkçe  беларуская  беларуская (тарашкевіца)  български  македонски  русский  українська  ಕನ್ನಡ  ತುಳು  മലയാളം  한국어  日本語  中文(简体)  中文(繁體)  עברית  العربيَّة  فارسی  +/−
 
This media may be deleted.
Thanks for uploading File:Senegalese village, part of the French pavilion at the Exposition Universelle of 1905 in Liège.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) 13:05, 8 July 2020 (UTC)Reply

Copyright status: File:Gezicht op het Congolees museum en een nagebouwd Congolees dorp tijdens de wereldtentoonstelling te Antwerpen, Th. Lantin, 1894.jpg

bahasa melayu  català  čeština  dansk  deutsch (Sie-Form)  deutsch  english  español  français  galego  hrvatski  italiano  magyar  nederlands  norsk  norsk bokmål  norsk nynorsk  português  polski  português do Brasil  română  sicilianu  slovenčina  slovenščina  suomi  svenska  türkçe  беларуская  беларуская (тарашкевіца)  български  македонски  русский  українська  ಕನ್ನಡ  ತುಳು  മലയാളം  한국어  日本語  中文(简体)  中文(繁體)  עברית  العربيَّة  فارسی  +/−
 
This media may be deleted.
Thanks for uploading File:Gezicht op het Congolees museum en een nagebouwd Congolees dorp tijdens de wereldtentoonstelling te Antwerpen, Th. Lantin, 1894.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) 14:05, 8 July 2020 (UTC)Reply

File:Abain1.png en File:Abain2.png

edit

Hallo Karmakolle, ik vroeg me af of deze files niet beter worden hernoemd, #2. Thnks. Lotje (talk) 13:47, 15 July 2020 (UTC)Reply

Ik denk het wel, mijn enige zorg toen was snel een naam te hebben die het systeem accepteert :-) Karmakolle (talk) 13:50, 15 July 2020 (UTC)Reply
Doe jij dit of doe ik dit? Lotje (talk) 14:08, 15 July 2020 (UTC)Reply
Ga je gang Lotje! Karmakolle (talk) 14:17, 15 July 2020 (UTC)Reply
Had je een voorstel? Lotje (talk) 14:19, 15 July 2020 (UTC)Reply
Eenvoudigste lijkt me om de beschrijving over te nemen. Karmakolle (talk) 15:18, 15 July 2020 (UTC)Reply
  Done Lotje (talk) 06:05, 16 July 2020 (UTC)Reply

Category:Human zoos

edit

Ook hier opteer ik voor een rename naar Category:Ethnological expositions. Lotje (talk) 06:27, 16 July 2020 (UTC)Reply

edit

Copyright status: File:La petite plage (La Panne), 1909.jpg

bahasa melayu  català  čeština  dansk  deutsch (Sie-Form)  deutsch  english  español  français  galego  hrvatski  italiano  magyar  nederlands  norsk  norsk bokmål  norsk nynorsk  português  polski  português do Brasil  română  sicilianu  slovenčina  slovenščina  suomi  svenska  türkçe  беларуская  беларуская (тарашкевіца)  български  македонски  русский  українська  ಕನ್ನಡ  ತುಳು  മലയാളം  한국어  日本語  中文(简体)  中文(繁體)  עברית  العربيَّة  فارسی  +/−
 
This media may be deleted.
Thanks for uploading File:La petite plage (La Panne), 1909.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, 20 July 2020 (UTC)Reply

edit

Copyright status: File:Caparola arx et horti farnesiani.jpg

bahasa melayu  català  čeština  dansk  deutsch (Sie-Form)  deutsch  english  español  français  galego  hrvatski  italiano  magyar  nederlands  norsk  norsk bokmål  norsk nynorsk  português  polski  português do Brasil  română  sicilianu  slovenčina  slovenščina  suomi  svenska  türkçe  беларуская  беларуская (тарашкевіца)  български  македонски  русский  українська  ಕನ್ನಡ  ತುಳು  മലയാളം  한국어  日本語  中文(简体)  中文(繁體)  עברית  العربيَّة  فارسی  +/−
 
This media may be deleted.
Thanks for uploading File:Caparola arx et horti farnesiani.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) 07:06, 25 July 2020 (UTC)Reply


Notification about possible deletion

edit
 
Some contents have been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether they should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at their entry.

If you created these pages, please note that the fact that they have 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 them, 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!

Reise Reise (talk) 17:17, 22 October 2020 (UTC)Reply

 
File:Village sénégalais. Les Plongeurs, Exposition internationale d’Amiens, carte postale, 1906.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!

El Comandante (talk) 22:04, 24 March 2021 (UTC)Reply

Source of derivative work is not properly indicated: File:Postkaart Ardenne (cropped).jpg

edit
العربية  català  čeština  Deutsch  English  español  hrvatski  italiano  slovenščina  Tiếng Việt  беларуская‎  беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎  русский  ไทย  မြန်မာဘာသာ  ပအိုဝ်ႏဘာႏသာႏ  日本語  中文(简体)‎  中文(繁體)‎  فارسی  +/−
 
This file may be deleted.
A file that you have uploaded to Wikimedia Commons, File:Postkaart Ardenne (cropped).jpg, is a derivative work, containing an "image within an image". Examples of such works would include a photograph of a sculpture, a scan of a magazine cover, or a map that has been altered from the original. In each of these cases, the rights of the creator of the original must be considered, as well as those of the creator of the derivative work.

While the description page states who made this derivative work, it currently doesn't specify who created the original work, so the overall copyright status is unclear. If you did not create the original work depicted in this image, you will need to specify the owner of the copyright.

Please edit the file description and add the missing information, or the file may be deleted. If you created the original content yourself, enter this information as the source. If someone else created the content, the source should be the address to the web page where you found it, the name and ISBN of the book you scanned it from, or similar. You should also name the author, provide verifiable information to show that the content is in the public domain or has been published under a free license by its author, and add an appropriate template identifying the public domain or licensing status, if you have not already done so. Please add the required information for this and other files you have uploaded before adding more files. If you need assistance, please ask at the help desk. Thank you!

JuTa 20:21, 18 April 2021 (UTC)Reply

I added the original corporate author based on the file (ND Phot) and a PD-EU-anonymous licence, since no human author is known by name. I hope I am doing this right. Karmakolle (talk) 10:37, 20 April 2021 (UTC)Reply
@JuTa: I see you deleted the file because its source was not specified, despite the author and licence I provided further to your nomination. Did you not see it or do you deem it insufficient? If the latter, could you explain why? Karmakolle (talk) 07:32, 27 April 2021 (UTC)Reply
Well, the source image File:Postkaart Ardenne.jpg, where you extracted it from, had just source "own", which is not a valid source for such old images. --JuTa 15:25, 27 April 2021 (UTC)Reply
"Own" refers to the fact that the uploader took a photograph of the postcard. Why wouldn't that be valid? He had the physical 1900 postcard and he took a picture of it, that is 100% legit. Karmakolle (talk) 12:58, 28 April 2021 (UTC)Reply

Notification about possible deletion

edit
 
Some contents have been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether they should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at their entry.

If you created these pages, please note that the fact that they have 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 them, 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!

Affected:


Yours sincerely, Chassipress (talk) 20:30, 10 November 2021 (UTC)Reply

 
File:Plan géométrique de la Ville de Bruxelles dressé en 1835 par W.B. Craan (stitched).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!

AntiCompositeNumber (talk) 04:38, 7 February 2022 (UTC)Reply

 
File:Martin de Tailly, Bruxella nobilissima Brabantiae civitas, 1640.png 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!

AntiCompositeNumber (talk) 04:38, 7 February 2022 (UTC)Reply

 
File:Autochrome of gentlemen in military and civic clothing on Place du Luxembourg, Brussels (c.1911) by Alfonse Van Besten.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!

TheBabelColour (talk) 22:03, 1 August 2022 (UTC)Reply

The Yawner

edit

Hallo Karmakolle,

ich habe die Kategorie geleert und lasse sie löschen, da der Kategoriename ohne Künstlerangabe nicht korrekt ist. Die Dateien sind jetzt sortiert in den oberen Kategorien, + einer neuen + 1 gefundenen Datei. Man kann ja auch die doppelte Zuschreibung in der Kategorie vornehmen. In der Museumsdatenbank bin ich nicht fündig geworden. Meige's syndrome Oursana (talk) 01:24, 3 March 2023 (UTC)Reply

File:Cité radieuse, Marseille.jpg

edit
 
File:Cité radieuse, Marseille.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!

A1Cafel (talk) 09:49, 15 June 2023 (UTC)Reply

File:Hans Holbein de Jonge, Portret van Erasmus.jpg

edit

You uploaded that file but I have some doubts on the artist. Are you sure this is of Hans Holbein de Jonge? Or by another painter after Hans Holbein de Jonge. My suspicion is that it is rather a copy of Hans Holbeins portrait of Erasmus as the original ones are much more elaborate. It also doesn't seem to be known enough to appear in the Wikipedia articles on the Erasmus House or at its website.Paradise Chronicle (talk) 22:01, 26 August 2023 (UTC)Reply

Hi, I checked the book from which I took the file (p. 72) and it is indeed ascribed to Hans Holbein the Younger, not after him or from his circle. In my eyes the book is high quality, but of course it could still contain some errors. Unfortunately there is not much information on-line on the collection of the Erasmus House and I am unable to double-check the authorship. I will look into it if I visit the Erasmus House once again, but I couldn't say when that would be. Karmakolle (talk) 16:36, 27 August 2023 (UTC)Reply
Thanks for reviewing your source. Well, it is a seemingly serious source, and if you can source it, that's it for now. Thanks again.Paradise Chronicle (talk) 17:01, 27 August 2023 (UTC)Reply

Notification about possible deletion

edit
 
Some contents have been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether they should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at their entry.

If you created these pages, please note that the fact that they have 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 them, 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!

Affected:


Yours sincerely, Rosenzweig τ 02:54, 2 January 2024 (UTC)Reply

Notification about possible deletion

edit
 
Some contents have been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether they should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at their entry.

If you created these pages, please note that the fact that they have 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 them, 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!

Affected:


Yours sincerely, Paradise Chronicle (talk) 20:02, 24 April 2024 (UTC)Reply

File:Alfonse Van Besten, Civic and military garb, c. 1910.jpg

edit

I think it would be a good idea to upload an enhanced version of this file, like the one I created here: archive.org/details/alfonse-van-besten-civic-and-military-garb-c.-1910

Unlike the enhancement done by BabelColour, I only used the "Auto-Level" option in Paint.NET to create this; it doesn't look as good as BabelColour, but it's still a decent enough improvement to add it to Wikimedia Commons as an alternative version of the 1910s image. Since I did a trivial change, it should also be licensed under public domain.

side node: the file should be removed from Category:PD-Art missing SDC copyright status by adding copyright status (P6216) = public domain (Q19652) to its Structured Data Commons, which I can't edit

Thank you, 185.254.167.152 12:31, 9 July 2024 (UTC)Reply

Hi, I'm not much of an expert, but I can't tell the difference with the original to be honest 😅 Feel free to upload your enhanced version, I'm sure it's me not looking properly! Karmakolle (talk) 12:56, 9 July 2024 (UTC)Reply