Hashekemist

You removed the "southern Lebanon" district from my blank Israel map. However, that line was not for *Israeli* control - that's the borders of the *United Nations* control area. I'm reverting to put it back. This is noticed when you look at a version I've filled in, like Image:Israel districts named.png; that area is labelled as "UNIFIL". Do you have info that tells me that UNIFIL/UN has abandoned this area, and therefore the line is no longer needed? Please respond on my talk page. Thanks! --Golbez 18:53, 25 March 2006 (UTC)

removal of all categories from an image

This is known as category blanking. Some people advocate the the position as you do that an image in an article makes a category tag unnecessary. This is a very controversial subject but you are in the minority in the community by a factor of 2 to 1. Please see article Commons:Images on normal pages or categories:Vote

You favor the "Normal Pages" proposal- while the vast majority favour allowing the placement of category tags directly on images. Here are the votes:

Use normal pages (85) Use category pages (84) Use a mixed system (34) Use a merged system (Andre's proposal) (4) Use a merged system (Duesentrieb's proposal) (123)

Most people favor some use of categories by a vast majority. A live and let live attitude has grown up in the absence of any policy decision. Deleting all categories from an image is NOT live and let live.

So I shall be reverting your changes to Mirage. -Mak 16:58, 13 May 2006 (UTC)

Ok, I wasn't aware of such a vote. Thank you for letting me know that. Hashekemist 17:11, 13 May 2006 (UTC)

I know it looks like stupid repetition, but there are some things you can do better with cats, some better with articles. As far as I am concerned- Articles will gain in ascendency as the premier location to look at the definitive pictures with polished presentations. Really- as Commons grows, there will be thousands of Mirage III, and some will simply have to be omitted from the gallery because they are repetitious and add nothing. Whereas the category would be totally inclusive of all pictures, but users would be going through page after page of pictures of Mirage engines and inspection panels of no interest to them.

Example of something you can do better with cats. I tagged the australian mirage as RAAF. Using catscan, you can now do a search of all images of aircraft in RAAF made by Dassault. This is coolness. -Mak 18:03, 13 May 2006 (UTC)

Wikimedia Commons page User talk:Charly Whisky has been changed by Hashekemist

Hallo,

Das Foto der P-12 (Antennenfahrzeug) von meinem Freund Frank Rozendaal aus den Niederlanden fotografiert und er hat das Foto mir für meine eigene Homepage (www.radartutorial.eu) zur Verfügung gestellt. Diese Homepage ist komplett unter GDFL veröffentlicht. Also auch das fragliche Bild Image:Spoon Rest A.jpg. Bitte antworten Sie mir auf de:Benutzer:Averse, da ich sehr selten in den Commons bin.

Mit freundlichen Grüßen --Charly Whisky 13:14, 7 January 2007 (UTC)

I've replied in User_talk:Charly Whisky.

Regards,

Hashekemist 13:37, 13 January 2007 (UTC)

Nevertheless File:Spoon Rest A.jpg is deleted now.

This is not a joke, this is the plain truth!

84.188.68.254 21:59, 5 July 2008 (UTC)

Looks like it has been deleted because you did'nt specified it's source in the image page. You can re-upload it with the source specified . Hashekemist (talk) 15:31, 6 September 2008 (UTC)

כל הכבוד

סחטיין על התמונות של גבי אשכנזי. :) Yonatan ^talk 20:13, 21 April 2007 (UTC)

תודה :). מצאתי אותן כאן. מדי פעם אני סורק את האתר הזה תוך שימוש במילות המפתח israel ו-israeli כדי למצוא תמונות שמעניינות אותנו. Hashekemist 12:00, 28 April 2007 (UTC)

Image:F-15 Eagle drawing.png

Image deletion warning

Image:F-15 Eagle drawing.png has been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether it should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry. If you created this image, 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. In all cases, please do not take the deletion request personally. It is never intended as such. Thank you!

It is too easy to make a pdf, say it is a military document on the pdf, purchase a web site and put it online. Not that I doubt the information either -- lord knows I am from Michigan! I just don't think it is a government document. sorry. --carol 12:15, 7 January 2008 (UTC)

I'm happy to see that the matter has already been resolved. Hashekemist 14:35, 19 January 2008 (UTC)

File source is not properly indicated: File:SS-N-2 Styx.jpg

This media may be deleted.

A file that you have uploaded to Wikimedia Commons, File:SS-N-2 Styx.jpg, is missing information about where it comes from or who created it, which is needed to verify its copyright status. Please edit the file description and add the missing information, or the file may be deleted. If you created the content yourself, enter {{Own}} as the source. If you did not add a licensing template, you must add one. You may use, for example, {{self|GFDL|cc-by-sa-all}} or {{Cc-zero}} to release certain rights to your work. If someone else created the content, or if it is based on someone else's work, the source should be the address to the web page where you found it, the name and ISBN of the book you scanned it from, or similar. You should also name the author, provide verifiable information to show that the content is in the public domain or has been published under a free license by its author, and add an appropriate template identifying the public domain or licensing status, if you have not already done so. Warning: Wikimedia Commons takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing. Please add the required information for this and other files you have uploaded before adding more files. If you need assistance, please ask at the help desk. Thank you!

High Contrast (talk) 09:17, 17 May 2012 (UTC)

Better source request for your uploads

Thanks for your uploading. You provided a source, but it is difficult for other users to examine the copyright status of these files because the source is incomplete. Please consider clarifying the exact source so that the copyright status may be checked more easily. It is best to specify the exact web page where you found the file, rather than only giving the source domain or the URL of the file itself. Please update the file descriptions with a URL that will be more helpful to other users in determining the copyright status. If you have uploaded multiple files, consider checking that you have specified their source in a complete manner. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following this link. If you have any questions please ask them at the help desk or me at my talkpage. Thank you.

---

 

--High Contrast (talk) 13:15, 18 February 2013 (UTC)