User talk:Tokfo/arĥivo/2013

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! TWT 2012 27 K 2319 k5 3964 Schlossallee.JPG, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Nino Verde 13:33, 15 April 2013 (UTC

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! 26 Langobardenstrasse.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Level of detail could be better. IMHO it is due to use of compact cam. Nonetheless nice light and good quality. --Tuxyso 12:16, 21 April 2013 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Linie 68 Schwedenbruecke von Marienbruecke.JPG, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Tuxyso 12:20, 21 April 2013 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Linie 66 Favoritenstrasse vor Hst Altes Landgut.JPG, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good Quality --Rjcastillo 17:21, 21 April 2013 (UTC)

FP-Review

Hallo Darkweasel94! Ich hatte ja schon kurz auf deine Bewertung auf FPC geantwortet. Ein Bild wegen "Nicht Gefallens" bzw "No wow" abzulehnen ist völlig in Ordnung, ich mach' das hin und wieder auch, teilweise auch einfach mit einer Neutral-Stimme. Allerdings sollte man dies nicht unmittelbar nach einer frischen Nominierung tun, sondern erst mal die anderen werten lassen, denen das Foto vielleicht gefällt, oder die ein wirkliches Problem mit dem Foto sehen, z.B. eine schlechte Kompositon oder sonstige technische Defizite. Das Problem ist, dass man mit einer unmittelbaren Contra-Bewertung häufig die ganze Nominierung kaputtmacht und sich darüber der Nominierer meist ärgert. --Tuxyso (talk) 20:41, 7 May 2013 (UTC)

Ok, ich gelobe Besserung. ;) darkweasel94 20:43, 7 May 2013 (UTC)

Sehr gut. Meine Bemerkung richtet sich explizit nicht gegen deine Meinung und Bewertung, nur ist es so eine Art "Gentlemen’s Agreement", dass man mit den Nicht-Gefallen-Bewertungen bei FP-Nomierungen etwas abwartet. So habe ich die gängige Praxis hier zumindest erfahren. --Tuxyso (talk) 20:49, 7 May 2013 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Linie 68 Schwedenbruecke 1.JPG, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Colour balance is off, but otherwise good. Mattbuck 23:52, 29 April 2013 (UTC) Poor prospects for an encyclopedic representation --Steindy 19:06, 3 May 2013 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Linie 66 Reumannplatz 1.JPG, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Unsure here. Being picky, there's CA, and on the right the focus is too far away. But good composition. Mattbuck 23:52, 29 April 2013 (UTC) Poor prospects for an encyclopedic representation --Steindy 19:06, 3 May 2013 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Linie 66 Wiedner Hauptstrasse Einfahrt Ustrab.JPG, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Fix CA and it's promotable. Mattbuck 23:52, 29 April 2013 (UTC) Poor prospects for an encyclopedic representation --Steindy 19:06, 3 May 2013 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Linie 66 Wiedner Hauptstrasse nach Hst Paulanergasse.JPG, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Pretty, but I'd say the focus seems to be on the shops, not the tram. Some CA too. Mattbuck 23:52, 29 April 2013 (UTC) Poor prospects for an encyclopedic representation --Steindy 19:06, 3 May 2013 (UTC)

COM:AN/U

---

Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion at Commons:Administrators' noticeboard/User problems#Disruptive editing by Ottava Rima. This is in relation to an issue with which you may have been involved.

--Fæ (talk) 17:04, 5 July 2013 (UTC)

Really?

[1] Did you read the topic before you discussed?

[2]: "Do we need a rule allowing us to keep images that are uploaded for advertising or self-promotion if they are nevertheless educational? (That is probably the unwritten practice at present)"

and

"Although our existing policy requires the deletion of images that amount to self-promotion or that add nothing educationally distinct to the collection of images we already hold covering the same subject"

You accuse me of discussing these things unfairly when the whole point of the page is to discuss these items. Your statements are utterly baffling. Ottava Rima (talk) 17:54, 5 July 2013 (UTC)

Misses the point? No, you missed my point. I have not pointed out specific examples of people uploading vanity images. I have only ever talked about the idea of it. That was obvious throughout my discussions. The opposition to restricting vanity images is, by definition, of support of vanity images. That cannot be escaped, and it cannot be dismissed by claiming my statements were off topic when they were the very topic of discussion. Ottava Rima (talk) 19:20, 5 July 2013 (UTC)

Then what is this? [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] [8] [9] - I haven't gone further in the history (I think there are more of these), but in each of these you talk about/to one very specific participant whom you accuse of uploading "too much" or "vanity" or something like that. darkweasel94 19:27, 5 July 2013 (UTC)

PS: I will remove all further comments about this dispute from this talk page, in the interest of keeping everything relevant on one page (the AN/U thread). darkweasel94 19:30, 5 July 2013 (UTC)

Commons:Administrators' noticeboard/User problems

Thanks for notification. --Čeha (talk) 22:16, 10 July 2013 (UTC)

New messages

Commons:Deletion requests/File:Tweet Button.png —Mono 16:34, 20 July 2013 (UTC)

File:Richard Stallman en vintra vestaĵo.jpg

File:Richard Stallman en vintra vestaĵo.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!

High Contrast (talk) 07:32, 1 August 2013 (UTC)

Vorzeitig geschlossen: Gehen wir vom Idealfall aus, nämlich die nd-Lizenz gelte für andere Teile der Homepage. --High Contrast (talk) 08:33, 1 August 2013 (UTC)

Commons talk:SVG guidelines

In response to your comment at Commons talk:Featured picture candidates; I have set up a discussion page and drafted a proposal which can be found at Commons talk:SVG guidelines. Please read and provide your opinion.—Love, Kelvinsong talk 23:07, 4 August 2013 (UTC)

hey

I want you to check my last edit or two at the Russ discussion, as I deleted your comment (the collapse one) but I am not sure if you will mind or not. It just makes a separate section, which keeps DC happy I would think, and doesn't need the comments of multiple editors collapsed because they are now in a different section. But it did remove your comment about your compromise/collapse, so it is important that you are OK with my removing your comment. So I must tell you about it, hope it's ok, or let's see what else we can do. Penyulap ☏ 07:23, 16 August 2013 (UTC)

Yeah ok, I don't really care too much about that. darkweasel94 07:25, 16 August 2013 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Flexity en Bratislavo, Obchodná.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Ralf Roletschek 13:31, 20 August 2013 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Tramo en Brno, returniĝa buklo Technologický park 1.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Ralf Roletschek 13:31, 20 August 2013 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Tramo de Gmunden, vagono 100.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments OK for me --AleXXw 06:51, 20 August 2013 (UTC)

File HornodeCuerpoNegroGif.gif

Hola Darkwease, te escribo ya que tenemos un problema. Por favor ¿puedes solucionar el problema de este fileCommons:Deletion requests/File:HornoCuerpoNegroGif.gif? Es importante ya que necesitamos esta imagen animada para el artículo La Constante_de_Planck que estamos mejorando. La imagen antigua File:HORNO_CUERPO_NEGRO_TT.jpg no nos sirve porque está incompleta. Muchas gracias y un saludo. --LFISUPM2013 (talk) 19:38, 27 August 2013 (UTC)

¡Hola LFISUPM2013! No escribo bien en español (lo he aprendido solo dos años en la escuela, y debo mucho usar el diccionario cuando escribo en español), entonces perdón si mi mensaje tiene errores. Yo no puedo hacer nada porque no soy administrador y no puedo restaurar imágenes. El problema es que la imagen ya ha sido borrada, restaurada según tu pedido, y otra vez borrada porque estaba similar a File:HORNO CUERPO NEGRO TT.jpg, y en la pagina de descripción no ha sido claro si tu eres el mismo usuario que ha hecho esta imagen - si no eres este usuario, debes mencionar en la página de descripción que es una modificación, quién es el autor original, y que lo liberas so la misma licencia. Si explicas el problema a un administrador que habla español, este administrador puede restaurar la imagen y tu puedes adjuntar las informaciones faltandas en la página de descripción. darkweasel94 19:59, 27 August 2013 (UTC)

¡Hola Darkwease! Muchas gracias por contestarme. Me alegra mucho. Y también gracias por intentar escribir en español. Se entiende muy bien. Yo tengo dificultad para escribir en inglés aunque lo entiendo. Además, me das la posible solución. Necesitaba conocer a algún administrador de Commons de habla hispana así que de nuevo, ¡muchas gracias!. Ahora lo solicitaré como me indicas. Que te vaya muy bien. --LFISUPM2013 (talk) 21:56, 27 August 2013 (UTC)

Re: Removal of QIC nominations

Hello, I apologise: this was my mistake. (Also replied on my talk page.) Heuschrecke (talk) 20:23, 1 September 2013 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Tramo en Linz ĉe la haltejo Saporoshjestraße.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Ralf Roletschek 15:04, 4 September 2013 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Wagramer Str-2013-08-17-IMG 3644.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Ralf Roletschek 15:09, 4 September 2013 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Wagramer Str-2013-08-17-IMG 3662.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Ralf Roletschek 15:09, 4 September 2013 (UTC)

Re: Commons:Deletion requests/File:POLANDBALL TUTORIAL.png

You're totally right. Because of that, I uploaded a new version, with the icon drawn instead of copied. Thanks for the comment.--Continentalis (talk) 14:33, 11 September 2013 (UTC)

PD: Remove this deletion request. --Continentalis (talk) 14:37, 11 September 2013 (UTC)

RfA

Hi Darkweasel94, I have nominated you for adminship here on Commons, and I hope you will accept the nomination. See Commons:Administrators/Requests/Darkweasel94 and good luck. Cheers, russavia (talk) 17:25, 15 September 2013 (UTC)

Darkweasel94, thank you for replying to my questions. I hope you appreciate that I would expect any RfA with my name on it to have a comment along the lines "Oh dear me no..." too -- I'm expecting qualities from an admin that I don't (believe I) have myself. I'll continue the discussion here because there is a danger of diverting the RfA into some kind of deletion debate.

One problem with some of the deletion discussions you linked is that one could formulate a policy-based argument for either position and the outcome would be "meh" either way. They aren't particularly controversial and were discussed by so few editors that it would be hard to argue there was a "consensus" at all. This is a problem for Commons as it leads admins to close DRs largely on their own opinion, treating the comments and !votes as "information" rather than the DR being a meeting of equals to determine consensus. I don't know the solution to this, but it makes it all the more important that admins are chosen well.

Wrt JealousMike's picture, our mythical admin who renamed it closes your DR with "Keep: Subject not identifiable, COM:IDENT does not apply". The new filename doesn't identify the subject by name (I would hope the old one would have been deleted rather than a redirect), and the subject's face isn't included. How do you feel about that? Meanwhile JealousMike sent links to our Common's file to his ex-girlfriend and her friends and new boyfriend. She contacts us to request a courtesy deletion and is told it can't be deleted as the file is "in use". As a side: it is possible that in future Mike's actions could lead to a prison term as there are suggestions that (in the US at least) such actions would be a criminal offence.

Wrt PJacksonMD he wasn't trying to harm the subject and genuinely believed he didn't need consent to publish and it was OK as she couldn't be identified (though the image may well be identifiable to the subject herself and parter). Someone reports Jackson to his hospital and the professional association he belongs to. It turns out Jackson broke his employment contract and the standards of his professional association. He asks WP to delete the file as a courtesy deletion only to be told it can't be deleted as the file is "in use", that it can be held legally by Wikimedia, CC licences are irrevocable, and Commons is not censored, and any legal issues are his problem -- go hire a lawyer.

These aren't straightforward cases, and some reasonable arguments could be made for delete or keep based on policy or law or ethics. I don't find it helpful to have robot admins who repeat policy as some mantra, unyielding to common sense or to opinions other than their own. I'd like an admin to think carefully, not be a slave to rules, to respect community consensus and work to improve our standards wrt people and consent. I'd also like us to get away from an "ark" mentality that tries to keep every image donated with a "free" licence. We need to make editorial decisions in order to curate a repository that is of any use, and Commons isn't the only repository of images. Colin (talk) 12:49, 16 September 2013 (UTC)

Hi Colin. I agree with your second paragraph, low participation in deletion debates really is a problem but I also don't see anything that could be done about it. From time to time (when I have some free time), I skim the current day's deletion requests and comment/!vote on stuff where I have something to add, and put other interesting stuff (e.g. borderline copyright cases) on my watchlist. That last category often results in no further comments, and an admin deleting a week later simply because of lack of further information - and I can't blame that admin, it's not their obligation to do detailed research on these files, only to evaluate the information that has actually been given.

As for JealousMike's situation - I would accept the closing admin's decision and not do anything more about it - I don't think it's my moral obligation to annoy everybody in order to still have it deleted. When we actually receive an actual request from the subject to take it down, I do however think we should delete it even if it is in use. "In use" really should protect only from "no educational value" deletions, not from anything else.

As for PJacksonMD's situation - same argument, I also think that if the uploader might actually credibly be harmed professionally by our hosting of the image, it should be deleted even if it is in use. In this case, this is simply best for Commons: if people see that even in such cases they can't get their uploads removed, that will make them more reluctant to upload things in the first place. darkweasel94 13:13, 16 September 2013 (UTC)

I'm disappointed you are more concerned with not "annoying" anyone than doing what you think is right, and that you think it is ultimately up to the subject to deal with violations of their privacy. We don't take such an approach with copyright concerns. What reasons do we have to host such an image? We have no shortage of suitable alternatives. Do you think we "took into account human dignity"? Do you think in such cases the default should be delete rather than keep? In terms of "identifiability" we underestimate how identifiable images really are. For example, Jealous Mike has (unknown to us) identified the images by email or on Facebook or whatever. Or the GPS data identifies Brenda's house. Or the EXIF camera id identifies Brenda's father's DSLR, and he comes across the image when using an image search engine to find online copyright violations of his photos. And so on.

Anyway, if you do become an admin, I hope you consider you will be faced with very strong willed people who love to quote policy as though written in tablets of stone. Don't be afraid to annoy them. Colin (talk) 14:11, 16 September 2013 (UTC)

I would indeed also typically (i.e. unless it is totally absurd) respect another admin's decision when it comes to copyright concerns. See Commons:Deletion requests/File:Hauptbahnhof 01.JPG for one such case. I'm not the "messiah" you're expecting who is going to totally revolutionize Commons's attitude. ;) If another admin's decision is broken because of broken policies, I'd rather fix the policies than be stubborn about a single decision. darkweasel94 15:34, 16 September 2013 (UTC)

Ah well I know that you are no messiah, nor do I expect one. There are some good admins. But I wouldn't support an admin who places more respect for another admin than for the subject of a photograph. Actually, policies should be based on "best practice" and the consensus of the community -- not the other way round. This rigidity to what policy currently says is part of what prevents Commons from moving on. And it is very hard to write policy/guideline that works in all cases to everyone's taste -- so case-by-case judgement will always be required. Hence sometimes that judgement when made arbitrarily by one admin may be wrong and may also not be best fixed by changing policy. And our policy pages are generally crap and untouched for years. There's a whole bunch of not quite guidelines or rejected ones. The "courtesy deletion" practice we had wasn't even written in any policy or guideline until I prompted Matt to write one, and even then it is just a stub. You won't find "consensus" in our deletion policy (though it is mentioned in other procedural pages, which aren't policy). And so on.

I'm quite uninterested in deletion/copyright discussions like the poster you linked. I've long ago given up thinking that many aspects of copyright law, FoP and such like can be worked out through the application of common-sense. Rulings by the courts appear completely arbitrary and the variation from one country to another is illogical. I'm really mainly interested that Commons respects people, and this is more important than our need to host an unused picture, or to illustrate a Wikipedia article, or to appease a fellow admin. Colin (talk) 17:50, 16 September 2013 (UTC)

I agree with the substance of much of what you say. At the same time, I do not see it as specifically an admin's job to speak out against things that they find broken - it is the job of every community member equally. Admins are not supposed to have special editorial authority simply because of their technical status. In your hypothetical JealousMike case that we started with, given that I nominated the file for deletion, it would actually be a bad idea if I, as somebody who is in some way "involved", did anything to the file that involves admin tools, especially overruling another admin's decision. Bringing it up for further discussion, with the closing admin or the community, is something that everybody can do, not just an admin. darkweasel94 18:29, 16 September 2013 (UTC)

Well they only have "no special editorial authority" apart from "roles which require use of the admin tools", such as closing DR. And since deletion is one of Commons' main editorial activities (along with uploading and categorising), that's really quite a lot of special power. For various reasons, Commons DR don't get the huge community discussions we see on WP where the admin is merely expected to respect consensus rather than come to some conclusion on his own. This breeds admins who close DRs according to their own wishes and then delude themselves that their activity represents the community view. And this disregard for community input breeds a community who don't bother participating in discussions where they get ignored. I wouldn't expect you (or any admin) to unilaterally overrule another admin other than in the most dire circumstances -- but would expect admins to be keeping an eye on each other. Colin (talk) 19:05, 16 September 2013 (UTC)

Somewhat belated, but I'm sorry your RfA was unsuccessful, but at least you have a strong group of supporters. Keep up your good work dude. Let me know when your next RfA is and I will support you. :) Best wishes. WorldTraveller101 02:16, 22 September 2013 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Linz, Hauptplatz.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Two dustspots not easy to see becauses there are darkblue (see note) --Christian Ferrer 18:01, 11 September 2013 (UTC) They were terribly hard to spot, but I think I fixed them. Darkweasel94 09:53, 12 September 2013 (UTC)  Support ok --Christian Ferrer 18:48, 14 September 2013 (UTC)

RE: Email

I've sent a reply. I hope that it satisfies your curiosity. --Michaeldsuarez (talk) 11:35, 18 September 2013 (UTC)

Hi. Thanks but I didn't receive anything (I also checked the spam folder). Can you please re-send it, perhaps directly through "email this user"? darkweasel94 12:47, 18 September 2013 (UTC)

I've resent the message using "Special:EmailUser". Please let me know whether you receive it or not. If not, then I could post the information publicly here if you wish. The explanation isn't a secret. --Michaeldsuarez (talk) 00:03, 19 September 2013 (UTC)

I've received it, thank you! darkweasel94 00:04, 19 September 2013 (UTC)

You're welcome. Sorry, but I just had to send you yet another Email. Our status changed. The new Email should tell you the new details. --Michaeldsuarez (talk) 00:13, 19 September 2013 (UTC)

I had already seen that, you actually get redirected there if you follow the instructions in the first email. ;) Thanks anyway. darkweasel94 08:43, 19 September 2013 (UTC)

Oh, sorry. You're welcome again. --Michaeldsuarez (talk) 10:40, 19 September 2013 (UTC)

VisualFileChange

Hi Darkweasel! Thank you very much for telling me to use VisualFileChange to edit all my pictures at once, that's what I needed. --Kadellar (talk) 12:19, 20 September 2013 (UTC)

You're very welcome. :) darkweasel94 12:20, 20 September 2013 (UTC)

FPC Paisley Abbey

Just a courtesy notice that I've modified the Paisley Abbey image you reviewed. I've taken out the boost to overall contrast that I'd applied, as I felt it made the shadows too dark. -- Colin (talk) 17:44, 23 September 2013 (UTC)

Hi Darkweasel94! Ich habe eine neue Version meine FPCs hochgeladen, das du zuvor unterstützt hast, s. Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Panoramic Overview from Glacier Point over Yosemite Valley 2013.jpg. Die von dir ursprünglich unterstützte Version hatte kleinere perspektivische Probleme. Ich würde mich über Unterstützung der neuen Version freuen. --Tuxyso (talk) 10:42, 29 September 2013 (UTC)

Paisley Abbey

What are your thoughts, FP wise, on File:Paisley Abbey from the south east.jpg? -- Colin (talk) 08:42, 30 September 2013 (UTC)

österreichischer Admin

Hallo Darkweasel94, da du hauptsächlich mit Wiener Fotos hochladest, nehme ich an, dass du auch hier zu Hause bist. Vielleicht hast du Interesse an den Wiener Stammtischen siehe de:WP:Wien, wo es immer recht gemütlich zugeht. Es wäre sicherlich auch für die anderen von Vorteil, wenn wir einen österreichischen Admin als direkten Ansprechpartner persönlich kennnenlernen würden, da ja dochj auich immer wieder Fragen, die fremdsprachlich nicht immer leicht zu klären sind. Außerdem sind ja genug Wiener auch User auf Commons, jetzt nach WLM erst recht. Auch die Fotoaktivitäten bezüglcih Landtagsprojekt oder BDA sind ja auch für Commons hauptsächlcih interessant. lg aus dem Wienerwald K@rl (talk) 08:13, 17 October 2013 (UTC)

Hallo! Danke für die Einladung, allerdings bin ich kein Admin, also da kann ich nicht helfen. ;) Werde schauen, ob ich irgendwann einmal Zeit dafür habe. lg darkweasel94 08:24, 17 October 2013 (UTC)

Na dann kein Admin, trotzdem gern gesehen :-)) die nächsten beiden Termine bin ich nicht dabei, nur in Graz. Vielleicht wäre auch Porträtfotografie ein Thema, wir such en immer wieder auch Fotografen für die Landtagsprojekte, die sind auch immer ganz amüsant, interessant und immer wieder was neues. --gruß K@rl (talk) 10:36, 17 October 2013 (UTC)

URV

Hallo Darkweasel, du hast auf Bilder von Szalay3 URV gesetzt. Aber der User auf Panoramio ist doch ebenfalls Szalay3 - also doch kein URV. --K@rl (talk) 14:49, 21 October 2013 (UTC)

Ganz im Gegenteil, auf URV hat sie jemand anderer gesetzt und ich habe aus dem Schnelllöschantrag einen normalen Löschantrag gemacht, genau aus dem Grund, den du nennst. darkweasel94 14:51, 21 October 2013 (UTC)

Okay, hab ich übersehn, er hat sich ja in der Zwischenzeit auch entschuldigt. Aber wer nimmt, die URV raus ;-)? K@rl (talk) 18:50, 21 October 2013 (UTC)

es wäre natürlich super, wenn Szalay auch am Diskurs teilnehmen würde ;-) --K@rl (talk) 18:51, 21 October 2013 (UTC)

Die {{Copyvio}}-Vorlage habe ich ja eh rausgenommen? Oder habe ich was übersehen? darkweasel94 18:59, 21 October 2013 (UTC)

Bild Risku

Frau Risku, hat mir gemailt Sie habe die Genehmigung an die von wikipedia Commons gewünschte Adresse gesand. Ist sicher dass sie nicht ankam?--Falkmart (talk) 16:41, 28 October 2013 (UTC)

Das weiß ich nicht, aber in dem Fall bitte {{subst:OP}} auf die Beschreibungsseite setzen. darkweasel94 19:14, 28 October 2013 (UTC)

"Happy Diwali!"

While Diwali is popularly known as the "festival of lights", the most significant spiritual meaning behind it is "the awareness of the inner light". It is the belief that there is something beyond the physical body and mind which is pure, infinite, and eternal, called the Atman. The celebration of Diwali as the "victory of good over evil” refers to the light of higher knowledge dispelling all ignorance, the ignorance that masks one's true nature, not as the body, but as the unchanging, infinite, immanent and transcendent reality. With this awakening come compassion and the awareness of the oneness of all things (higher knowledge). This brings Satcitananda (joy or peace). Just as we celebrate the birth of our physical being, Diwali is the celebration of this Inner Light. While the story behind Diwali and the manner of celebration varies from region to, the essence is the same – to rejoice in the Inner Light! And this year Diwali and All Souls' Day come together to fully defeat the Evil! "Happy Diwali!" – JKadavoor Jee 09:06, 2 November 2013 (UTC)

Thanks Jkadavoor, happy Diwali to you as well! :) darkweasel94 10:12, 2 November 2013 (UTC)

---

Thank you for participating in Wiki Loves Monuments 2013! Please help with this survey. Dear Tokfo/arĥivo, Thank you for contributing to Wiki Loves Monuments 2013, and for sharing your pictures with the whole world! We would like to ask again a few minutes of your time. Thanks to the participation of people like you, the contest gathered more than 365,000 pictures of cultural heritage objects from more than 50 countries around the world, becoming the largest photography competition to have ever taken place. You can find all your pictures in your upload log, and are of course very welcome to keep uploading images and help develop Wikimedia Commons, even though you will not be able to win more prizes (just yet). If you'd like to start editing relevant Wikipedia articles and share your knowledge with other people, please go to the Wikipedia Welcome page for more information, guidance, and help. To make future contests even more successful than this year, we would like to invite you to share your experiences with us in a short survey. Please fill in this short survey in your own language, and help us learn what you liked and didn't like about Wiki Loves Monuments 2013. Kind regards, the Wiki Loves Monuments team

Happy Holidays

	Happy Holidays!
	G'day, just a quick greeting wishing you and your family happy holidays and all the best for 2014. And of course, a big thank you for putting a leg up by doing what you do on Commons, and helping to make it the fantastic project that it is. Greetings from a warm west coast of Aussie. russavia (talk) 01:58, 24 December 2013 (UTC)

Thanks russavia, merry Christmas to you as well, from an unfortunately not-so-warm Vienna. darkweasel94 08:47, 24 December 2013 (UTC)

Thanks mate, so this is more like what Vienna is at the moment? russavia (talk) 09:00, 24 December 2013 (UTC)

No, there is no snow either. darkweasel94 09:03, 24 December 2013 (UTC)

This section was archived on a request by: darkweasel94 21:45, 5 January 2014 (UTC)

Wien_Wallensteinstrasse_01_2009.JPG

Herzlichen Dank für die Hinweise. Ich bitte noch um einen kurzen Blick auf das Template, ob es so passt! Joadl (talk) 11:44, 25 December 2013 (UTC)

Hallo Joadl - ja, passt so. darkweasel94 12:03, 25 December 2013 (UTC)

This section was archived on a request by: darkweasel94 21:45, 5 January 2014 (UTC)

Straßenbahn-Bilder

Hi Darkweasel94, echt toll, dass du diese Fotos von Kurt Rasmussen gefunden und hochgeladen hast, die Aufnahmen sind spitze und können eine ganze Menge an (zeitlichen) Bilderlücken in den Artikeln schließen oder zumindest verkleinern. Super! -- Platte U.N.V.E.U. 09:27, 31 December 2013 (UTC)

Freut mich, dass sie nützlich sind! darkweasel94 12:55, 31 December 2013 (UTC)

This section was archived on a request by: darkweasel94 21:45, 5 January 2014 (UTC)