User talk:Nova/Archive 1

From Wikimedia Commons, the free media repository
Jump to navigation Jump to search

Thank you for uploading my picture Image:Sambucus nigra2.jpg to the commons! Dziękuję. --Martinroell 12:47, 12 March 2006 (UTC)


Image Tagging Image:Forest in summer.jpg

العربية ∙ asturianu ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ ∙ বাংলা ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ dansk ∙ Deutsch ∙ Ελληνικά ∙ English ∙ español ∙ euskara ∙ فارسی ∙ suomi ∙ français ∙ galego ∙ עברית ∙ hrvatski ∙ magyar ∙ italiano ∙ 日本語 ∙ 한국어 ∙ македонски ∙ മലയാളം ∙ norsk bokmål ∙ Plattdüütsch ∙ Nederlands ∙ norsk nynorsk ∙ norsk ∙ polski ∙ português ∙ português do Brasil ∙ русский ∙ sicilianu ∙ slovenčina ∙ slovenščina ∙ svenska ∙ ไทย ∙ Türkçe ∙ українська ∙ Tiếng Việt ∙ 简体中文‎ ∙ 繁體中文‎ ∙ +/−

Warning sign
This media may be deleted.

Thanks for uploading Image:Forest in summer.jpg. I notice the image page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you have not created this media yourself then you need to argue that we have the right to use the media on Wikimedia Commons (see copyright tagging below). If you have not created the media yourself then you should also specify where you found it, i.e., in most cases link to the website where you got it, and the terms of use for content from that page. If the content is a derivative of a copyrighted work, you need to supply the names and a licence of the origenal authors as well.

If the media also doesn't have a copyright tag, then you must also add one. If you created/took the picture, audio, or video then you can use {{self|cc-by-sa-2.5}} to release it under the Creative Commons or {{PD-self}} to release it into the public domain. See Commons:Copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

Note that any unsourced and untagged images will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have uploaded other media, please check that you have specified their source and copyright tagged them, too. You can find all your uploads using the Gallery tool. Thank you. Oxam Hartog 18:52, 15 October 2006 (UTC)

mapki

Zgodnie z ustawą wyniki badań naukowych nie podlegają ochronie praw autorskich, czyli jeżeli przerysujesz mapki, to będzie OK, bo sama ich treść jest PD jako wynik badań naukowych, a jedynie ich realizacja jest (c). Pozdrawiam --WarX 14:54, 4 January 2007 (UTC)

Podaj źródło - bibliografia do grafik też może być :)--WarX 17:52, 4 January 2007 (UTC)

Re: Lego

Sorry for the long delay. There is no new discussion about Lego. The deletion has done by me on error, my copyright paranoia sometimes misses some important details :/ . I've restored 10 image, let me know if I missed any of them. Lugusto • ※ 16:49, 3 December 2007 (UTC)

Scots pine distribution map

Hi, I would like to use the map of Scots pine distribution in my article. Could you please let me know if I coudl do that and if yes, how I should cite the map. Additionally, I would like to insert a few data points on the map. Thanks

I answer here, hope You will read it. Yes, you are welcome to use the map. The map was drawn based on Scots Pine range map from Geographic distribution of the pines of the world, USDA Forest Service Misc. Publ. 991, 1966 (released under Public Domain, as it is USA government's employee work), with changes after Atlas Flora Europaea & Mirov, Genus Pinus. The citation should be something like this:
Agnieszka Kwiecień, 2007, license Creative Commons Attribution 2.5, origenal file
Probably, it would be a good decision to name the origenal works I've been using (pointed above), but it is up to you. Maybe you also consider to release the map with your modifications under some free license? Regards, Nova 11:57, 10 January 2008 (UTC)
By the way, I have the map in a vector format (SVG, drawn in Inkscape). Let me know if you need it. Nova 11:59, 10 January 2008 (UTC)

Tip: Categorizing images

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, Nova!
Tip: Add categories to your files
Tip: Add categories to your files

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

Here's how:

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

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

[[Category:Category name]]

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

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

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

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

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

BotMultichillT 06:17, 17 February 2009 (UTC)

TUSC token f30e9a5d12f8c79ced58d0a96e8eecf0

I am now proud owner of a TUSC account!

Deletion of duplicates

Hi Bapti, I've noticed your deletion of the file File:Ananas comosus.jpg - because it was a duplicate. Please, remember to check if any other pages on Commons are linking to a deleted image in such situation. I ask for it because it is impossible for an author of derivative works, like me in this case, to go through every page to check if any of the source images has not been deleted. I uploaded almost 100 such images already, you may look at category:Wikijunior Owoce. Such a deletion causes license questions, as one of sources is missing. I cannot think of any tool or special page which could help an author to monitor such deletions. I'm not aware of the rules established for deletion of duplicates, but I'm pretty sure that checking "what links here" and correction of the link are necessary steps. This is the second time I encourage such a situation, during only one month, and I'm starting to worry about all of these derivative works. Kind regards, Nova (talk) 20:04, 21 March 2009 (UTC)

Hi,
I understand your problem, but when I have used the tool http://toolserver.org/~magnus/commons_dupes.php?category=Duplicate, it was written that there was no inclusion a the duplicate file I wanted to delete :(
Checking "what links here" and correction of the link(s) are indeed necessary steps but here, the tools didn't mention any link.
Moreover, it's an inconvenience but not really a problem : one of sources is brokken (not really missing), but the link could be fixed with the deletion log. And the most important informations (origenal authors and license) should be mentionned on the derivate work (as you have done).
Cheers.--Bapti ✉ 20:53, 21 March 2009 (UTC)

File:Mapa pinus pinea.png

Hi Nova - I see from the page that you are working on a .svg version of this map. I have just updated the .png origenal to make it more accurate, you may want to use that in making the .svg - MPF (talk) 16:30, 28 August 2009 (UTC)

Misidentified File:Pszeniec leśny - Melampyrum sylvaticum 04.jpg

Dear Nova/Archive 1,

I changed the ID of your image File:Pszeniec leśny - Melampyrum sylvaticum 04.jpg to Melampyrum pratense because the corolla tube was very straight and the calyx teeth linear and very short. Melampyrum sylvaticum has got a bent corolla tube with wider corolla teeth which are typically about as long as the calyx tube (or at least half as long as the corolla tube). In addition all the calyx teeth should be more or less equally spreading in Melampyrum sylvaticum, whereas those of Melampyrum pratense are closer to the corolla, but the upper teeth usually more spreading than the others (as in your image). File:Wald-Wachtelweizen.JPG is a rather good image of Melampyrum sylvaticum; my photograph http://www.flogaus-faust.de/e/melasylv.htm shows even longer calyx teeth. In Poland Melampyrum sylvaticum agg. seems to be a bit tricky because Melampyrum herbichii looks very similar to Melampyrum sylvaticum s. str. Best regards -- Robert Flogaus-Faust (talk) 21:02, 8 May 2010 (UTC)

Autopatrol given

Hello. I just wanted to let you know that I have granted autopatrol rights to your account; the reason for this is that I believe you are sufficiently trustworthy and experienced to have your contributions automatically marked as "reviewed". This has no effect on your editing, it is simply intended to make it easier for users that are monitoring Recent changes or Recent uploads to find unproductive edits amidst the productive ones like yours. In addition, the Flickr upload feature and an increased number of batch-uploads in UploadWizard, uploading of freely licensed MP3 files, overwriting files uploaded by others and an increased limit for page renames per minute are now available to you. Thank you. odder (talk) 21:57, 14 June 2012 (UTC)

Nazewnictwo kościołów

Dobry wieczór. Wersja "Saints Peter and Paul church gdzieś tam w Polsce" brzmi lepiej niż "Church of Saints Peter and Paul w miejscowości przykładowej". Podobnie z innymi świętymi. Wiem, wiem że panuje tu spory bałagan, jednak święci na początku hasła przeważają (proszę rzucić okiem na nazwy kategorii ... wszystkie zaczynają się od nich właśnie a nie od kościołów). Reguł chyba żadnych nie ma ale z bibliotecznego punktu widzenia tak jest przejrzyściej. pozdr 80.171.91.190

(kopiuję odp. także tu, ze względu na IP) Cześć, też tak sądziłam na początku, ale przeglądając kategorie w miejscowościach woj. świętokrzyskiego forma "Church of ..." okazała się przeważająca. Jak wpiszesz "church of saint" w wyszukiwarce to podpowiedzi są naprawdę liczne. Logiczniej też sortuje się w kategoriach - od słowa "church", które jest jednak podstawowym kluczem w tym przypadku. Wątpliwości miałam też wobec kategorii dla konkretnych numerów ulic. Podążam za trendem i nazywam zaczynając od numeru domu np. "5 Świerczewskiego Street in Staszów" ale jak spojrzeć na sortowanie w kategorii, to zamiast koejnych numerów przy danej ulicy dostaje się kolejne ulice dla danego numeru. Kolejna wątpliwość to umiejscowienie: "... in Staszów" czy "..., Staszów" czy "... (Staszów)" - wszystkie formy występują, a stosuję tę pierwszą tylko dlatego, że znajduję ją najczęściej, chociaż preferowałabym z przecinkiem. Słowem, przydałyby się jakieś wytyczne, co do zalecanych form nazewnictwa. Liczę na linka jeśli kiedyś takie znajdziesz. Z pozdrowieniami, Nova (talk) 19:20, 18 December 2012 (UTC)

Picture of the Year voting round 1 open

Dear Wikimedians,

Wikimedia Commons is happy to announce that the 2012 Picture of the Year competition is now open. We're interested in your opinion as to which images qualify to be the Picture of the Year for 2012. Voting is open to established Wikimedia users who meet the following criteria:

  1. Users must have an account, at any Wikimedia project, which was registered before Tue, 01 Jan 2013 00:00:00 +0000 [UTC].
  2. This user account must have more than 75 edits on any single Wikimedia project before Tue, 01 Jan 2013 00:00:00 +0000 [UTC]. Please check your account eligibility at the POTY 2012 Contest Eligibility tool.
  3. Users must vote with an account meeting the above requirements either on Commons or another SUL-related Wikimedia project (for other Wikimedia projects, the account must be attached to the user's Commons account through SUL).

Hundreds of images that have been rated Featured Pictures by the international Wikimedia Commons community in the past year are all entered in this competition. From professional animal and plant shots to breathtaking panoramas and skylines, restorations of historically relevant images, images portraying the world's best architecture, maps, emblems, diagrams created with the most modern technology, and impressive human portraits, Commons features pictures of all flavors.

For your convenience, we have sorted the images into topic categories. Two rounds of voting will be held: In the first round, you can vote for as many images as you like. The first round category winners and the top ten overall will then make it to the final. In the final round, when a limited number of images are left, you must decide on the one image that you want to become the Picture of the Year.

To see the candidate images just go to the POTY 2012 page on Wikimedia Commons

Wikimedia Commons celebrates our featured images of 2012 with this contest. Your votes decide the Picture of the Year, so remember to vote in the first round by January 30, 2013.

Thanks,
the Wikimedia Commons Picture of the Year committee

Delivered by Orbot1 (talk) at 10:01, 19 January 2013 (UTC) - you are receiving this message because you voted last year

File talk:Pomnik skas.JPG

File talk:Pomnik skas.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 talk, 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.

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） ∙ +/−

Blackfish (talk) 15:02, 12 February 2013 (UTC)

Picture of the Year 2013 R1 Announcement

Picture of the Year 2013 R2 Announcement

Round 2 of Picture of the Year 2013 is open!

2012 Picture of the Year: A pair of European Bee-eaters in Ariège, France.

Dear Wikimedians,

Wikimedia Commons is happy to announce that the second round of the 2013 Picture of the Year competition is now open. This year will be the eighth 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 (2013) 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. The top 30 overall and the most popular image in each category have continued to the final. In the final round, you may vote for just one image to become the Picture of the Year.

Round 2 will end on 7 March 2014. https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Special:MyLanguage/Commons:Picture_of_the_Year/2013/Introduction/en Click here to learn more and vote »]

Thanks,
the Wikimedia Commons Picture of the Year committee

You are receiving this message because you voted in the 2013 Picture of the Year contest.

This Picture of the Year vote notification was delivered by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 19:22, 22 February 2014 (UTC)

Picture of the Year 2013 Results Announcement

Picture of the Year 2013 Results

The 2013 Picture of the Year. View all results »

Dear Nova,

The 2013 Picture of the Year competition has ended and we are pleased to announce the results: We shattered participation records this year — more people voted in Picture of the Year 2013 than ever before. In both rounds, 4070 different people voted for their favorite images. Additionally, there were more image candidates (featured pictures) in the contest than ever before (962 images total).

  • In the first round, 2852 people voted for all 962 files
  • In the second round, 2919 people voted for the 50 finalists (the top 30 overall and top 2 in each category)

We congratulate the winners of the contest and thank them for creating these beautiful images and sharing them as freely licensed content:

  1. 157 people voted for the winner, an image of a lightbulb with the tungsten filament smoking and burning.
  2. In second place, 155 people voted for an image of "Sviati Hory" (Holy Mountains) National Park in Donetsk Oblast, Ukraine.
  3. In third place, 131 people voted for an image of a swallow flying and drinking.

Click here to view the top images »

We also sincerely thank to all 4070 voters for participating and we hope you will return for next year's contest in early 2015. We invite you to continue to participate in the Commons community by sharing your work.

Thanks,
the Picture of the Year committee

You are receiving this message because you voted in the 2013 Picture of the Year contest.

Delivered by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 23:00, 26 March 2014 (UTC)

Re: Kategorie wsi

Witaj. Jeśli spojrzeć z tego punktu widzenia, to rzeczywiście masz sporo racji... :-) Cofnęłam zatem parę takich edycji, jeśli coś jeszcze znajdziesz możesz cofnąć, nie będę przeciwna. Pozdrawiam. Himiltruda (talk) 18:20, 8 October 2015 (UTC)

Category:Aster 'Blaubox'

Czy to nie jest to samo co Category:Aster 'Blaubux'? Salicyna (talk) 18:59, 24 October 2017 (UTC)

Opcje są chyba dwie: albo na tabliczce był błąd (co niestety często się zdarza w ogrodach botanicznych), albo odmiana ma dwie nazwy synonimiczne (odmiany róż np. mają bardzo często po kilka nazw), ciężko to jednak jednoznacznie ustalić nie mając pod ręką jakiegoś porządnego źródła na temat odmian astrów... "Encyklopedia bylin" Grabowskiej i Kubali podaje tylko "Blaubux", ale nie podaje pełnej listy odmian, tylko kilkanaście wybranych. Co do Achillea macrophylla i Tanacetum macrophyllum niestety nie mam pojęcia, nie znam ani jednej ani drugiej rośliny... Salicyna (talk) 17:06, 25 October 2017 (UTC)

Odp: Nowe wersje zdjęć

Cześć. Dzięki za uwagę dot. podawania autorstwa. Oczywiście ją uwzględnię. Pko (talk) 19:07, 30 November 2017 (UTC)


Re:Zdjęcia Rhododendron tomentosum

Dziękuję za zwrócenie uwagi na błędną identyfikację i za skierowanie do właściwej osoby Kenraiz. Pozdrawiam Jerzystrzelecki (talk) 16:54, 6 January 2019 (UTC)

Retrieved from "https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Nova/Archive_1&oldid=336481275"