User talk:Markscheider

	SpBot archives all sections tagged with {{Section resolved|1=~~~~}} after 30 days. For the archive overview, see Archiv.

Categories

Hi. Please, when you create a new category combining two or more criteria, categorize it by both (all) of them. For example, if you created "Steam mining locomotives", categorize it not only as "Mining locomotives by motive power" but also as "Steam locomotives". If you create a category "Hungarian mining locomotives", it's evident that it should be categorized not only as "Mining locomotives by country" but also into some categories of Hungary (Locomotives of Hungary, Mining in Hungary etc.). Try to respect the logic of categorization. --ŠJů (talk) 00:10, 20 February 2011 (UTC)

It's a lot of work, but i will try. Btw, i'm not quite sure if Category:Mining locomotives of Hungary is that much better. I'm trying to explain: the vehicle in question (EL-9) is/was only operated by some hungarian mining company, but originates to germany. Therefore i meant Category:Hungarian mining locomotives as mining locomotives, used in hungary. Category:Mining locomotives of Hungary, as suggested, implies for me mining locomotives, built in hungary. The same, of course, applies for the other Countries. Last, but not least: i'm not the great categorizer, but only a miner, who sees the work if it's need to be done. And maybe you can help me with a still unsolved problem: there's underground and above-ground mining (i.e. open pit mining in most cases) and locomotive types differ in size and construction for their respective uses. Category:Underground Mining locomotives was easy, but what about the other ones? TIA, --Markscheider (talk) 10:21, 20 February 2011 (UTC)

Country categorization is an old problem of vehicle categorization. See this proposal and its discussion – probably more discussions passed, not only this one. However, new categories should be as much as posible compatible with the existing category system and naming conventions. There exist Category:Locomotives by country and their country subcategories are named "locomotives of ..." and combine together all three local criteria - 1) where the vehicle was photographed, 2) where the vehicle or the operator were registered, 3) where the vehicle was produced. The third criterium should be applied preferably through manufacturer subcategories. The first and the second criteria are difficult to separate - the best way is to use double-categorization in case of vehicles photographed abroad, or categorization through operator subcategories. Fortunately, most of mining railways are not international. Thus, a photo of a locomotive should by categorized by country where the photo was taken (which is often identical with country of operator) and paralelly by type→manufacturer→country of origin. (See also subcategories of Category:Buses in Poland as other examples. --ŠJů (talk) 20:19, 20 February 2011 (UTC)

I'll try to get along in the future.--Markscheider (talk) 20:27, 20 February 2011 (UTC)

MiG-21

Hallo Markscheider!

Woher weißt du das? Ich vermute dies ebenso, nur aus sicherer Hand könnte ich keine Quelle nennen. --High Contrast (talk) 19:55, 5 April 2012 (UTC)

Daher. ;) Ich habe da ein wenig Arbeit reingesteckt, möchte aber nicht generell ausschließen, daß ich das eine oder andere falsch einsortiert habe. Bleistiftsweise habe ich im Netz ein Foto einer MiG mit der Bortnummer 503 gefunden, die der polnischen Luftwaffe zugeschrieben wird. File:RAF Museum Cosford - DSC08458.JPG zeigt allerdings den ungarischen Stern. Ob das nun dieselbe ist, kann keiner sagen. Ich halte es prinzipiell für nicht unmöglich und -wahrscheinlich, daß ein Museum so einen Vogel umlackiert und umkennzeichnet, wie hier geschehen. --Markscheider (talk) 20:08, 5 April 2012 (UTC)

Datum.at ist eine verlässliche Quelle. Gute Auffindung! Gruß, High Contrast (talk) 20:21, 5 April 2012 (UTC)

Ich schaue da weniger auf den url, sondern versuche das, was da geschrieben steht einzuschätzen. Und das kam mir in dem Fall plausibel vor. --Markscheider (talk) 20:28, 5 April 2012 (UTC)

Selbstverständlich sollte beides in die Beurteilung einfließen. Viel Spaß --High Contrast (talk) 20:36, 5 April 2012 (UTC)

Category:Landmines at the Panzermuseum Munster

What's the sense of this category? You created a lot of useful categories for AFVs, but IMHO this one is absolutely needless! It's highly unlikely that there're some other landmines in the museum than this one and somebody will make further photos. And I'm not talking about the fact that you didn't added specific category (Landmines) to this cat, as well as a lot of anothers. I think that too much categories are almost as bad as few categories. Ain92 (talk) 14:35, 27 September 2012 (UTC)

It was a whole lot of pics in Category:Panzermuseum Munster, virtually all of them named "Panzermuseum Munster nnnn.jpg". Nobody would've found there anything. It was whole lot of work, too. Besides, i've still not finished the job. Maybe you've noticed, that i've begun to add parent categories to some of them, tanks first. Rome wasn't build i a day, so it goes. Now for the landmines: when i created this cat, i did not have fully ovelooked all files, because there too much of them. Now we can go into details, switching files to other cats, if i've made some mistakes (and i'm sure, there are some). If there are cats like this, with just 1 file - i would be glad, if you or someone else would go ahead and recat them into the main cat or wherever it may fit. Last but not least - if i had fine tuned every cat i've created at the spot, i would not hve come that far as i'm now. And the last part will be to upload my own pics. This i will do only, if they are of better quality or show some details we still miss. --Markscheider (talk) 14:48, 27 September 2012 (UTC)

• OK, I could wait for some time, maybe a week or about that (I could forget about it for a longer period). I think it'ld be great if you notice me after you finish all the work and then we could check it together. Ain92 (talk) 15:11, 27 September 2012 (UTC)
• Well, thank you after all for categorization, I underestimated your work at first. ;-) And why do you think that tanks in the Panzermuseum Munster are not tanks of Germany? Ain92 (talk) 16:18, 27 September 2012 (UTC)

• Categories containing only one file causes the greatest inconvenience because one can't see the preview icons of images. Personally I usually create a category if I'm sure that it'll contain at least about 5 files and it'll be added in ≥2 accurate categories. Ain92 (talk) 15:11, 27 September 2012 (UTC) P.S. All tanks are AFVs, but most AFVs aren't tanks. Also IFVs are usually not considered to be APCs. P.P.S. I tried to add this berore your answer, but you were faster. =)

While i do agree with you in generell, this case was different. You can't handle some 500 Pics in this kind of way. I rather choosed to sort them roughly first and fine later. Errors and mistakes occur, both ways. I think, you'll help and already begun. For the tanks cat: i've pondered a while, because i see it like you do. But than - it's a _tank_ museum, and i -OTOH- didn't wan't its probably most sought after cat too deep bunked. --Markscheider (talk) 15:25, 27 September 2012 (UTC)

• Of course 500 pics are obviously too much. However, one could view all photos in three clicks that is sometimes easier than going deep in the wilds of cat tree. I'm ready to wait and help you, moreover, actually I've already started. =) For the tanks cat: I think that in this case we should not violate the principles of categorization but use a template like {{Cat see also}}. Ain92 (talk) 16:18, 27 September 2012 (UTC)

Agreed.--Markscheider (talk) 16:42, 27 September 2012 (UTC)

Mining categories

Hi - You've moved some images from Underground mining to Mining schemas and diagrams. Since the latter is a more general category including also mining machines it is not really an either-or situation. We could add back the underground mining category to the diagrams or better we could split the schemas category up with Category:Underground mine diagrams or something similar. I do not have time for the latter project. If you do, you could also consider splitting Category:Roof support into architectural and mining subcategories. If you do not, then I will at some point find the time to add underground mining back to the underground mine diagrams. Regards Dankarl (talk) 13:22, 18 October 2012 (UTC)

There are too few files in Mining schemas and diagrams for a split, i guess. I'll add underground mining back. --Markscheider (talk) 13:28, 18 October 2012 (UTC)

Category Diving knifes

Correct English spelling would be Diving knives, Cheers, · · · Peter (Southwood) ^(talk): 14:27, 11 July 2014 (UTC)

Thank you. How comes this consonant shifting? --Markscheider (talk) 15:15, 11 July 2014 (UTC)

It's English, no logic need apply ;-)

Seriously though, the reason is probably historical and complicated, but I don't know what it is.

Thx, this is a hurdle that makes a non-native speaker like me stumble. --Markscheider (talk) 09:29, 12 July 2014 (UTC)

Category:Filterselbstretter

Filterselbstretter has been listed at Commons:Categories for discussion so that the community can discuss ways in which it should be changed. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry. If you created this category, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for discussion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with it. If the category is up for deletion because it has been superseded, consider the notion that although the category may be deleted, your hard work (which we all greatly appreciate) lives on in the new category. In all cases, please do not take the category discussion personally. It is never intended as such. Thank you!

Gazebo (talk) 18:45, 17 January 2015 (UTC)

Herzliches Dankeschön für Deine Fotos zum Jahreswechsel

Hallo Markscheider,

Danke für Deinen Beitrag zum Weihnachts-Fotowettbewerb zum Thema Weinachtszeit, Winterzeit, Wendezeit''!

Mit Deiner Hilfe wurden commons um über 1500 Bilder zu Winter- & Weihnachtsthemen bereichert - mit einer großen Motivvielfalt, die von Weihnachtsmärkten und -dekorationen über Weihnachtsmänner, verschneite Landschaften und Schlössern zu typischen Speisen und Getränken reicht.

Wie Du vielleicht unserem Bericht im Kurier schon entnommen hast, haben wir die Community nun zu Abstimmungen in der Endrunde aufgerufen. Zur Wahl stehen die 14 eingereichten Artikel und 100 Bilder, die bis zum 20. Januar durch die Vorrunde und die Einbindung in Artikel ausgewählt wurden. Für die Gewinner, die bis zum 31. Jänner/Januar mit Eurer Hilfe ermittelt werden, stehen durch Unterstützung seitens von WMDE und WMAT insgesamt 12 Bild- und 4 Artikelpreise zur Verfügung. Da in jeder Kategorie – Bild oder Artikel – nur maximal ein Preis pro Teilnehmer möglich ist, sind die Preischancen groß.

Wir freuen uns, wenn Du Zeit findest, dich an der Wahl zu beteiligen. Du hast beliebig viele gereihte Stimmen, wobei erste Stimmen mehr zählen als nachfolgende (zur Reihung setzt Du einfach eine Zahl vor deine Unterschrift).

Um eine genüssliche Betrachtung der Bilder zu ermöglichen, sind die Finalisten nicht nur auf der Abstimmungsseite, sondern auch in einer Galerie zu finden.

Liebe Grüße und viel Spaß beim Bilder und Artikel bewerten!

Anna reg, Dr. Bernd Gross (talk) 08:16, 23 January 2015 (UTC)

Copyright status: File:Cottbus 01 (RaBoe)-Cottbus 03 (RaBoe).jpg

This media may be deleted.

Thanks for uploading File:Cottbus 01 (RaBoe)-Cottbus 03 (RaBoe).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.

Yours sincerely, JuTa 08:27, 1 March 2015 (UTC)

Hi there, it's a derivate work of the following files:

• Cottbus 01 (RaBoe).jpg
• Cottbus 02 (RaBoe).jpg
• Cottbus 03 (RaBoe).jpg

I've had some trouble with uploading, particulary "derivate work" wasn't displayed. I tried several times, then gave up. My intention was to settle this later, but i forgot about it. Then in realised, that User:RaBoe has had already done the same stitching and loaded it up under: Cottbus panorama 01 (RaBoe).jpg. So, to make a long story short, my version of this panorama should be deleted. Thanks for reminding! --Markscheider (talk) 08:48, 1 March 2015 (UTC)

File:Rabensteiner Stolln Bohrhammer BHS26S 1196.JPG

Nichts für ungut, aber der Blickwinkel ließ mich vermuten, dass die Kamera bei der Aufnahme um 90° gedreht war (siehe Hintergrund). Gedreht sah das ganze dann etwas "natürlicher" aus. -- Platte U.N.V.E.U. 11:51, 6 April 2015 (UTC)

Dann schau Dir mal die anderen beiden Bilder von diesem Bohrhammer an: File:Rabensteiner Stolln Bohrhammer BHS26S 1195.JPG und File:Rabensteiner Stolln Bohrhammer BHS26S 1200.JPG. Ich habe bewußt eine Draufsicht gemacht. --Markscheider (talk) 13:46, 6 April 2015 (UTC)

Help with category renaming ?

Hello,

I saw that you used cat-a-lot to improve the category 'Rehearsals for the 2014 Moscow Victory Day Parade'

I realized that a similar improvement could be done to 'Rehearsals for the 2015 Moscow Victory Day Parade':

1) Rename category 'Rehearsals for the 2015_Moscow Victory Day Parade' to 'Rehearsals for the 2015 Moscow Victory Day Parade in Alabino' (moving all the images as well),

2) Create a new category 'Rehearsals for the 2015 Moscow Victory Day Parade',

3) Make the category 'Rehearsals for the 2015 Moscow Victory Day Parade in Alabino' belong to the categories 'Rehearsals for the 2015 Moscow Victory Day Parade' and 'Alabino proving ground',

4) For the few images that belong to both 'Rehearsals for the 2015 Moscow Victory Day Parade in Alabino' and 'Flypasts in Russia', replace those two categories with 'Rehearsals for the 2015 Moscow Victory Day Parade',

5) For the remainder of images that belong to 'Rehearsals for the 2015 Moscow Victory Day Parade in Alabino', remove the category 'Alabino proving ground'.

I don't have the privilege to rename categories, so I was wondering if it would be not too much trouble for you to help me with step 1) ?

Or if you think this whole change is a bad idea, then just forget about it.

Thanks either way, Lklundin (talk) 19:44, 26 April 2015 (UTC)

Hi, i'm appreciating your work as well. Renaming of a category should be done with template {{Badname}}. The actual renaming will be done by admin. In our case it wasn't necessary; i've just created Category:Rehearsals for the 2015 Moscow Victory Day Parade in Alabino, then moved all files to it and typed both parent categories in. While am at it, i've done the same for 2012. If one or another file slipped into the worng category, pls correct it. --Markscheider (talk) 05:58, 27 April 2015 (UTC)

Many thanks! For 2105 the changes look good. For 2012, many photos in category Category:Rehearsals for the 2012 Moscow Victory Day Parade in Alabino seem to also be directly in Category:Rehearsals for the 2012 Moscow Victory Day Parade, which they should probably not be. I will look into the 'cat-a-lot' tool, it seems useful. Btw, I would say that on your user page you can safely upgrade your level of English, at least to en-2... All the best, Lklundin (talk) 11:00, 27 April 2015 (UTC)

Cat-a-lot is really helpfull, you should give it a try. Sometimes it works not correctly, though. Especially at times with high server activity. For example, i've 'moved' all without four files from Category:Rehearsals for the 2012 Moscow Victory Day Parade to Category:Rehearsals for the 2015 Moscow Victory Day Parade in Alabino (i.e.: one level down), and this is marked with "(Cat-a-lot: Removing from Category:Rehearsals for the 2012 Moscow Victory Day Parade)". So if you have some files in two categories and they should be just in one of them, you mark'em in the cat where you don't want them and then move those to the other one. Cat-a-lot will automatically 'see' that the file is already in the target category and simply remove it. Yesterday, however, i've had some trouble with this routine and therefore was forced to switch to hotcat - which means, it was a lot of work instead less than 10 mouseclicks. Rgds, --Markscheider (talk) 11:34, 27 April 2015 (UTC)

OK and thanks for the explanation. All the best, Lklundin (talk) 19:47, 28 April 2015 (UTC)

RBK 250

Wegen [1] - je eine Stabilisierungstrebe würde die Ringe zwischen den Flossen bei einer FAB auf 45° verbinden. Politik müssen wir hier nicht betreiben, falls es das war - das erste veröffentlichte Video hatte bereits einen Angriff durch einen Submunitionsträger drin. Alexpl (talk) 12:51, 12 October 2015 (UTC)

Auf das Leitwerk hatte ich weniger geachtet, mir erschien die Spitze nicht so flach-konisch wie bei einer RBK, sondern mehr rund. Politik ist wurscht - der Westen versucht zwar, alles propagandistisch auszunutzen, sollte aber eher den Ball flach halten, angesichts dessen, wer noch so alles Streumunition einsetzt. --Markscheider (talk) 13:35, 12 October 2015 (UTC)

Category:Non-disintegrating ammunition belts

Kannst du eine Definition für diese Kat geben?--Sanandros (talk) 14:53, 15 October 2015 (UTC)

Auf Deutsch? Dauergurt. --Markscheider (talk) 14:55, 15 October 2015 (UTC)

Ansonsten: "Many modern ammunition belts use disintegrating links. Disintegrating links retain a single round and are articulated with the round ahead of it in the belt. When the round ahead is stripped from the belt and fed into the feed system or chamber, the link holding it is ejected and the link holding the following round is disarticulated." en:Belt (firearms) - und davon das Gegenteil. --Markscheider (talk) 14:57, 15 October 2015 (UTC)

Hast Du jetzt die Fotos aus People with... wieder rausgeholt, wo der Gurt prominent ist? Gut so, das hatte ich auch vor, aber ich wollte erstmal die Übersicht haben, auch wenn das bedeutet, manche zweimal anzufassen. --Markscheider (talk) 15:00, 15 October 2015 (UTC)

1. Und du weisst dass die Munition in der Unterkat alle integrated bzw dis-integrated sind? 2. Ja People with heisst, zumindest bei mir, dass der Typ auch irengd wie intergagiert. Aber wen der Gurt nur mit dem MG interagiert oder nur rumliegt dann finde ich People with nicht angebracht.--Sanandros (talk) 15:03, 15 October 2015 (UTC)

Ich hab sie einzeln angeschaut. Wenn mal einer flasch sein sollte, kann man das ändern. Aufpassen muß man bspw. bei MG3, da können deutsche Dauergurte oder Nato-Zerfallsgurte verwendet werden... Ansonsten: .50er immmer Zerfall, 5,56x51 Zerfall, Russische Gurte < 12,7 Dauergurte, 14,5 auch Dauer. Ist jetzt nicht soo kompliziert, man muß nur genau hinschauen.--Markscheider (talk) 15:13, 15 October 2015 (UTC)

Ich dachte aber es hängt nicht von der Munition ab ob sie zerfallen oder nicht, sondern vom MG.--Sanandros (talk) 15:29, 15 October 2015 (UTC)

Weder noch. Es hängt allein von den Gurtgliedern ab. Beim Zerfallsgurt verbinden die Patronen die Glieder, und deshalb zerfällt der Gurt, wenn die Patrone ausgezogen oder -geschoben wird. Beim Dauergurt sind die Glieder z.b. durhc Metallspiralen miteinander verbunden und halten auch ohne Patronen zusammen. --Markscheider (talk) 15:33, 15 October 2015 (UTC)

OK wieder was gelenrt. Wäre gut wenn mal jemand ein Vid oder gif macht.--Sanandros (talk) 15:59, 15 October 2015 (UTC)

Stimmt. Aber damit kann ich leider nicht aushelfen...YT gibt etwas her: PK mit Dauergurt; M60 mit Zerfallsgurt; MG42 mit Dauergurt; MG3 mit Dauergurt; M249 mit Zerfallsgurt --Markscheider (talk) 16:12, 15 October 2015 (UTC)

Ich meinte eigentlich ein animation für den Zerfallsgurt die wir evtl selbst machen könnten, aber dazu wäre es gut wenn wir ein vid in RL hätten.--Sanandros (talk) 20:45, 15 October 2015 (UTC)

Sorry, aber das kann ich nun wirklich nicht. Ich wende mich bereits bei wesentlich einfacheren graphischen Problemen an die Grafikwerkstatt. --Markscheider (talk) 20:49, 15 October 2015 (UTC)

Ist auch nur als Idee gedacht, ich weiss das du das nicht kanst aber evtl wenn dir mal ein Zerfallsgurt in die Hände fällt, dann lass ihn mal in der Hand zerfallen. Oder evtl gib't irgend wo ein Patent wo es erklährt ist.--Sanandros (talk) 21:59, 15 October 2015 (UTC)

(Nach links gerückt) Also ich werde es mal im Auge behalten, aber die Chancen dafür stehen eher schlecht. Meine aktive Militärzeit ist schon ein paar Jährchen her und ich lebe auch nicht in den Staaten, wo man als Zivilist mit MGs schießen kann. ;) --Markscheider (talk) 08:12, 16 October 2015 (UTC)

Ich weiss leider sind keine Amis auf commons aktiv und die auf en wp kann ich nicht einschätzen.--Sanandros (talk) 19:59, 16 October 2015 (UTC)

File:Bundesarchiv Bild 146-1981-071-07A, Russland, Panzer VI "Tiger I".jpg

Hello, Regarding this. There is no issue with quotation marks in the filename. Your request is invalid and thus is denied it again. Please see our policy. --Steinsplitter (talk) 12:31, 29 April 2016 (UTC)

Quotation marks in filenames in combination with blanks are causin' trouble, because the "fixquote"-script replaces them with typographic quotation marks. [2], [3] and [4], [5] (and uncounted others). This script as part of monobook.js is widely used. --Markscheider (talk) 13:09, 29 April 2016 (UTC)

Then the third party "fix quote" script has to be fixed, we simple can't change x-files because a script is unable to handle it. --Steinsplitter (talk) 14:32, 29 April 2016 (UTC)

Copyright status: File:Christoph46 9.jpg

This media may be deleted.

Thanks for uploading File:Christoph46 9.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.

Yours sincerely, Magog the Ogre (talk) (contribs) 04:41, 18 September 2016 (UTC)

M49 submachine gun categorisation

I explained that I reverted your edit of File:M49submachinegun.jpg because the M49 submachine gun is not a PPSh-41 variant, but a distinct submachine gun model. It is based mostly on the Berreta M38 and not the PPSh. Please read the corresponding article on the English Wikipedia before improperly categorizing the article again. -M11rtinb (talk) 09:35, 15 November 2016 (UTC)

Link here --> en:M49 Submachine gun

File:Hk121.jpg

File:Hk121.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 has been deleted. If you have written permission from the copyright holder, please have them send us a free license release via COM:VRT. If you believe that the deletion was not in accordance with policy, you may request undeletion. (It is not necessary to request undeletion if using VRT; the file will be automatically restored at the conclusion of the process.) Warning: Wikimedia Commons takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing.

 

Rosenzweig τ 17:56, 5 March 2017 (UTC)

Category:V-2_type_diesel_engines

V-2 type diesel engines has been listed at Commons:Categories for discussion so that the community can discuss ways in which it should be changed. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry. If you created this category, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for discussion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with it. If the category is up for deletion because it has been superseded, consider the notion that although the category may be deleted, your hard work (which we all greatly appreciate) lives on in the new category. In all cases, please do not take the category discussion personally. It is never intended as such. Thank you!

Andy Dingley (talk) 20:27, 28 May 2017 (UTC)

Category:86 333

I find this name unhelpful as it gives no indication of what it is. A bunch of numbers could be anything. It would be better perhaps if it extended its parent category, i.e. Category:DRG 86 333. Cheers. Rodhullandemu (talk) 12:06, 30 July 2017 (UTC)

Category:86 346 and Category:86 457 already existed before my edits, so i made the new categories alike. --Markscheider (talk) 13:58, 30 July 2017 (UTC)

OK, but they weren't even sorted properly. I'm in the middle of a pile of work, but I'm tempted to move them to meaningful names as indicated above. Rodhullandemu (talk) 14:55, 30 July 2017 (UTC)

I will not interfere. --Markscheider (talk) 16:46, 30 July 2017 (UTC)

Besides: your new sortkey doesnt change anything, because all of them are like "86_xxx". So it really doesnt matter. --Markscheider (talk) 17:01, 30 July 2017 (UTC)

It depends how many there are within "DRG 86", but it makes sense to sort them by Class, then Loco Number. Certainly it makes no sense to have them all sorted under "8" in a class beginning with "8". That just puts then all in the same place. Rodhullandemu (talk) 17:16, 30 July 2017 (UTC)

Well, out of 776 total, there are 13 surviving machines. --Markscheider (talk) 17:36, 30 July 2017 (UTC)

File:HK 433.png

Hi, just wanted to let you know I made a deletion request for this file—Commons:Deletion requests/File:HK 433.png. I had put a copyvio tag on the image which you then removed, so I made a deletion request to discuss it. Cheers, IagoQnsi (talk) 06:52, 8 March 2018 (UTC)

Triangulation

Hallo markscheider, danke, dass du dich um die Kategoriesierung der Triangulationspunkte kümmerst. gruß --Z ^thomas 06:21, 15 August 2018 (UTC)

Danke. Es ist viel Arbeit, und Handarbeit dazu, weil man aufgrund der Vorlage nicht mit Tools arbeiten kann. Aber ich denke, das Schema 'Category:Königlich-Sächsische Triangulirung Station xx $Name' ist klar. --Markscheider (talk) 07:36, 15 August 2018 (UTC)

das heißt, gelegentliche hilfe ist willkommnen und sei es nur beim befüllen der cats

hab gestern die Category:Basisendpunkt Quersa angelegt, du hast sie wieder geleert. wollen wir sie löschen oder lieber als weiterleitung beibehalten? gruß --Z ^thomas 08:48, 15 August 2018 (UTC)

Ich habe aus Gründen der Einheitlichkeit das o.a. Schema beibehalten wollen. Und da eine Katumbenennung meistens sehr lange dauert, habe ich es so gemacht. Die anderen alten Kategorien, die nicht ins Schema passen, können wir so nach und nach mit überführen, ob nun durch Umbenennung oder so wie ich es gemacht habe. Außerdem bin ich mir noch nicht endgültig im klaren, ob vielleicht bei der Basislinie doch eine Ausnahme von der Regel die bessere Lösung ist. Was meinst Du? --Markscheider (talk) 09:09, 15 August 2018 (UTC)

Wenn Du möchtest, kannst Du ja "von oben" anfangen (=Station 158) und mir entgegearbeiten. --Markscheider (talk) 09:43, 15 August 2018 (UTC)

bei der benennung der basislinie tendiere ich zum begriff basisendpunkt. aber das ist eher ein gefühl

die cats werde ich nach und nach wie diese Category:Königlich-Sächsische Triangulirung Station 155 Sandberg anpassen.

• vorlage rein
• orts-cat rein
• ggf denkmal-cat der gemeinde rein (trifft vermutlich auf alle zu)
• ggf berg-oder erhebungs-cat rein.

falls du lust hast, kannst du das auch mach. wenn nciht, mach ich das später mal :-) Glück Auf --Z ^thomas 16:06, 15 August 2018 (UTC)

Die Vorlage ist hinderlich, weil man sie nicht ordentlich pflegen kann. Besser sind hier ganz normale Kats. Ich habe eben zwei Deiner Edits nachgebessert, weil die sonst nicht in der Category:Second order trig point of Königlich Sächsische Triangulation auftauchen. die Dateien sollten immer nur in der Stations-Kat sein, und evtl. übergeordnete Kategorien wie Denkmal etc. in der Stationskat eingetragen werden. --Markscheider (talk) 16:09, 15 August 2018 (UTC)

hmm, ok. wobei ich die beschreibung des templates Template:Königlich Sächsische Triangulation so verstehe, dass sie in Category:Second order trig point of Königlich Sächsische Triangulation hätte auftauchen. langenbach hatte grad noch das template und war in der cat enthalten. oder versteh ich dich falsch

aber gut, wir brauchen nicht immer vorlagen. gruß --Z ^thomas 16:22, 15 August 2018 (UTC)

Das Problem ist, daß die Dateien in allen Kategorien, die in der Vorlage stehen, ganz oben auftauchen. Unmittelbar in der Hauptkat. Dass es eine eigene Objektkat gibt, wird ignoriert, hotcat und cat-a-lot kann man nicht einsetzen. Ich bin sicher, derjenige, der die Vorlage gemacht hat, hatte gute Absichten und auch viel Arbeit reingesteckt. Aber das nützt nichts. --Markscheider (talk) 16:25, 15 August 2018 (UTC)

geht es dir darum, dass durch die Vorlage die Datei oder die Cat sowohl in der Obercat Category:Königlich Sächsische Triangulation als auch in der Unterkat Category:Second order trig point of Königlich Sächsische Triangulation ist? So wie ich die Beschreibung der Obercat verstehe, ist das gewollt, weil damit unterschiedlich sortiert wird. Wir könnten ja mal Cmuelle8 anpingen. vielleicht bringt er licht ins dunkel. gruß --Z ^thomas 16:33, 15 August 2018 (UTC)

Ja, darum geht es. Solange es keine Unterkats gab, war das vielleicht okay. Aber es müllt die Hauptkat zu und es tauchen alle Dateien auf. Wenn ich von einer Säule 123 verschiedene Fotos hochlade, dann sind 123 Fotos in Category:Königlich Sächsische Triangulation. Eine Übersicht (zusätzlich zum de-wp-Artikel) auf Commons sollte man in dem Fall mit einer Galerie realisieren, von jedem Punkt das beste Bild. --Markscheider (talk) 16:36, 15 August 2018 (UTC)

aber durch die 156 Unterkats für die einzelnen stationen würden sich "nur" diese unterkats in der hauptkat befinden, sortiert nach dem Stationsnamen. Wenn es eine Unterkat für die Station gibt, kommt die Vorlage in diese kat rein und nicht in die fotos, so dass die hauptkat frei von stationsfotos ist. je länger ich darüber nachdenke, desto verständlicher wird das system. gruß --Z ^thomas 17:06, 15 August 2018 (UTC)

Die Unterkats müssen aber eins tiefer, nach 1. und 2. Ordnung getrennt. Schau mal, wie ich das jetzt mit der Basislinie gemacht habe, Ich denke, dass das eine gute Lösung ist. --Markscheider (talk) 17:10, 15 August 2018 (UTC)

die trennung nach 1. und 2. Ordnung fand (bzw findet) in den Unterkats von Category:Trig points of Königlich Sächsische Triangulation by order statt. da gibt es jeweils eine cat für die 1. und eine für die 2. Ordnung. dort sind sie nach den stationsnummer sortiert

in der hauptcat sind ALLE stationsnummer (1. udn 2. Ordnung) nach namen sortiert.

wenn ich dich richtig verstehe, störst du dich daran, dass dieselben fotos innerhalb eines themas auf unterschiedlichen ebenen vorhanden sind. dies könnte man über eine andere ebene lösen. bin erstmal weg. gruß --Z ^thomas 17:42, 15 August 2018 (UTC)

File:Die Entgleisung.jpg

File:Die Entgleisung.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!

94.216.52.144 16:18, 30 September 2018 (UTC)

Renaming of Gewehr 1888 turning bolt in the Swedish Army Museum.jpg

Please explain why you moved File:Gewehr 1888 turning bolt in the Swedish Army Museum.jpg to its current name. The original source states that it is from the Mannlicher M93 rifle, the bolt is thus similar to the Gewer 88 design, but is not identical. --M11rtinb (talk) 11:21, 25 February 2019 (UTC)

If I'm wrong, please undo it. --Markscheider (talk) 08:28, 27 February 2019 (UTC)

Ihre Bilddatei "Schnittmodell eines Gewehres 98"

Hallo Markscheider,

ich habe eine Alternativ-Version Ihres Bildes "Schnittmodell 98" erstellt (Hintergrund entfernt, kleinere Tonwertkorrekturen ausgeführt, und einen "technischen Schatten" gesetzt). Nach dem Upload habe ich festgestellt, daß wieder die originale (also Ihre) Version angezeigt wird. Ich bin noch ziemlich neu bei Wikipedia & Wikimedia Commons und bitte für diesen Fehler um Entschuldigung. Die neue Version des Bildes habe ich jetzt (natürlich unter Angabe von Quelle und Autor) [[6]] abgelegt. - Ich hoffe, das ist okay so...--Auge=mit (talk) 09:53, 24 May 2019 (UTC)

Einfach den Browsercache neu laden. Sieht gut aus.--Markscheider (talk) 13:57, 24 May 2019 (UTC)

Ach Danke, das mit dem Browsercache hat sich ca. 2 Minuten nach meinem Posting "quasi von selbst erledigt"..;-) Freut mich, daß Ihnen das kleine Update gefällt, war ja bei der super Vorlage ein echtes Vergnügen... mit freundlichen Grüßen --Auge=mit (talk) 11:23, 26 May 2019 (UTC)

Category:Selbstretter

Selbstretter has been listed at Commons:Categories for discussion so that the community can discuss ways in which it should be changed. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry. If you created this category, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for discussion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with it. If the category is up for deletion because it has been superseded, consider the notion that although the category may be deleted, your hard work (which we all greatly appreciate) lives on in the new category. In all cases, please do not take the category discussion personally. It is never intended as such. Thank you!

Themightyquill (talk) 12:25, 7 August 2019 (UTC)

Category:Bucket-ladder dredges und Category:Chain-and-bucket excavators

Bitte nehme in acht dass Chain-and-bucket excavators von Category:Mining excavators sind. Ich denke nicht dass ein Schaufelradbagger ein "mining" machine ist. Bagger machines sind in Category:Bucket-ladder dredges. Sehe File:Schaufelradbagger Denkmal (Bucket-wheel excavator memorial) - geo-en.hlipp.de - 13529.jpg --Stunteltje (talk) 08:27, 5 April 2020 (UTC)

An 'Dredge' floats. This one comes from open pit mining, either lignite or maybe clay, given the size. --Markscheider (talk) 15:55, 5 April 2020 (UTC)

O.K. --Stunteltje (talk) 18:47, 5 April 2020 (UTC)

File:Koksbrocken.jpg

File:Koksbrocken.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!

Mercurywoodrose (talk) 18:27, 13 December 2020 (UTC)

Reminder

Hi Markscheider. I noticed that you've made a malformed deletion request at File:Harry Waibel (2015).jpg et al. When you want to delete a page by manually using the {{Delete}} template, please remember to follow the instructions in the template, including the "Click here to show further instructions" portion, otherwise you will create a lot of work for other people.   — Jeff G. ツ _{please ping or talk to me} 04:49, 6 April 2021 (UTC)

File tagging File:Franz-Franik-Büste Bergbaumuseum Reinsdorf.jpg

This media was probably deleted.

Thanks for uploading File:Franz-Franik-Büste Bergbaumuseum Reinsdorf.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 ([email protected]). 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:Franz-Franik-Büste Bergbaumuseum Reinsdorf.jpg]]) and the above demanded information in your request.

 

Túrelio (talk) 08:23, 23 August 2021 (UTC)

Hi, wer ist der Bildhauer und wo genau steht die Büste bzw. wo hast du bei der Aufnahme gestanden? --Túrelio (talk) 08:26, 23 August 2021 (UTC)

Bildhauer war nicht angegeben, Büste steht im Museum und ich stand davor. --Markscheider (talk) 09:11, 23 August 2021 (UTC)

Davor, aber im Museum, ja? --Túrelio (talk) 09:17, 23 August 2021 (UTC)

Naja, hab ich doch schon geschrieben. Willst Du auf die Panoramafreiheit hinaus oder auf URV? --Markscheider (talk) 14:47, 23 August 2021 (UTC)

Äh, nein, die Angabe zum Fotografenstandort war nicht eindeutig. Und, ja, natürlich geht es darum, ob das Foto berechtigt ist oder nicht. Da der Abgebildete 1975 gestorben ist, dürfte die Büste auch kaum älter sein. Somit kann der Bildhauer nicht schon 70 Jahre tot sein. Du hast jetzt die Wahl zu versuchen eine Genehmigung einzuholen, wofür du aber den Bildhauer ausfindig machen musst, oder halt einen G7-LA zu stellen. --Túrelio (talk) 14:57, 23 August 2021 (UTC)

Die Büste ist von ~55, das steht auf dem Schild untendrunter.--Markscheider (talk) 15:36, 23 August 2021 (UTC)

Ok. Aber das ändert leider nichts, denn was zählt ist das Todesjahr des Bildhauers. Selbst wenn er 1956 gestorben wäre, wären es noch 5 Jahre. Du musst dich halt entscheiden: wenn es dir das Bild bzw. die Büste wert ist, denn versuche herauszufinden, wer der Bildhauer oder ggf. sein Erbe ist (Museum sollte das wissen), oder stell einen G7-SLA (damit dir ein URV-Logeintrag erspart bleibt). --Túrelio (talk) 18:38, 23 August 2021 (UTC)

Ehrlich gesagt, ist mir das ziemlich egal. Wenn jemand denkt, daß es gelöscht werden muß, dann ist das halt so. --Markscheider (talk) 18:50, 23 August 2021 (UTC)

Bei dem Weg: mir scheint, du kennst dich damit leidlich aus. Wie interpretierst Du diesen Text: "Das Fotografieren in den Ausstellungsbereichen ist nur mit gültiger Fotoerlaubnis gestattet.Das Benutzen von Lampen, Blitzgeräten und/oder Stativen ist dabei untersagt. Kommerzielle und gewerbliche Aufnahmen jeglicher Art und unabhängig vom Medium, einschließlich aller elektronischen Medien, sowie deren Veröffentlichung, Vervielfältigung und Vermarktung sind durch die Geschäftsführung zugenehmigen." ([7]). Kann man die mit dieser Fotoerlaubnis geknipsten Bilder auf Commons veröffentlichen? --Markscheider (talk) 19:44, 26 August 2021 (UTC)

Category:Self-contained_breathing_apparatus_(mining)

Self-contained breathing apparatus (mining) has been listed at Commons:Categories for discussion so that the community can discuss ways in which it should be changed. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry. If you created this category, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for discussion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with it. If the category is up for deletion because it has been superseded, consider the notion that although the category may be deleted, your hard work (which we all greatly appreciate) lives on in the new category. In all cases, please do not take the category discussion personally. It is never intended as such. Thank you!

Themightyquill (talk) 09:19, 11 December 2021 (UTC)

Category:Schützenschnur_(NVA)

Schützenschnur (NVA) has been listed at Commons:Categories for discussion so that the community can discuss ways in which it should be changed. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry. If you created this category, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for discussion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with it. If the category is up for deletion because it has been superseded, consider the notion that although the category may be deleted, your hard work (which we all greatly appreciate) lives on in the new category. In all cases, please do not take the category discussion personally. It is never intended as such. Thank you!

2003:CF:FF18:3000:DDF6:4BBB:F2D9:FF52 07:06, 19 July 2022 (UTC)

Rammelsberg - Werkhof

Bist Du sicher dass diese stimmt? Das Gebaeude ist etwa 200m niedriger/noerdlicher? Ymblanter (talk) 12:34, 1 January 2023 (UTC)

Danke für den Hinweis, habs korrigiert. Markscheider (talk) 14:28, 2 January 2023 (UTC)

Schon gut, vielen Dank. Ymblanter (talk) 15:24, 2 January 2023 (UTC)