User talk:MGA73/Archive 1

Welcome to Wikimedia Commons, MGA73!

First steps tutorial Our first steps tour and our FAQ will help you a lot after registration. They explain how to customize the interface (for example the language), how to upload files and our basic licensing policy. You don't need technical skills in order to contribute here. Be bold contributing here and assume good faith for the intentions of others. This is a wiki—it is really easy. Getting help More information is available at the community portal. You may ask questions at the help desk, village pump or on IRC channel irc:wikimedia-commons #wikimedia-commons (direct access). You can also contact an administrator on their talk page. If you have a specific copyright question, ask at Commons talk:Licensing.		Goodies, tips and tricks Put Babel boxes on your user page so others know what languages you can speak and indicate your graphic abilities. All your uploads are stored in your personal gallery Please sign your name on Talk pages by typing ~~~~ Use the CommonSense tool to find good categories for your files (then other people can find them too!) To link to an image page without embedding the image, type: [[:Image:Foo.jpg]], which produces: Image:Foo.jpg If you're copying files from another project, be sure to use the CommonsHelper Made a mistake? Did you want to rename or move a file? Simply upload the file again and mark the old one like this: {{bad name|correct name}} For more information read the full deletion guidelines.
(P.S. Would you like to provide feedback on this message?)

I am...

Hi! I'm from the danish Wikipedia. Please contact me there --> da:Brugerdiskussion:MGA73

TUSC token c8363448f99fd922f6df2327ac0125a6

I am now proud owner of a TUSC account!

---

An offering for our new administrator from your comrades...

MGA73, congratulations! You now have administrator rights on Commons. Please take a moment to read the Commons:Administrators page and watchlist related pages (in particular Commons:Administrators' noticeboard and its subpages), before launching yourself into page deletions, page protections, account blockings or modifications of protected pages. The majority of the actions of administrators can be reversed by the other admins, except for history merges which must thus be treated with particular care. Have a look at the list of Gadgets (on the bottom there are the ones specifically for admins – however, for example the UserMessages are very helpful too).

Please feel free to join us on IRC: #wikimedia-commons ^webchat on irc.libera.chat. There is also a channel for Commons admins, which may be useful for more sensitive topics, or coordination among administrators: #wikimedia-commons-admin ^webchat.

You may find Commons:Guide to adminship to be useful reading. You can find the admin backlog overview at COM:AB.

Please also check or add your entry to the List of administrators and the related lists by language and date it references.

Bastique ^demandez 18:48, 9 March 2009 (UTC)

Congratulations

Good luck. Remember to ask if you're not sure! Also, you might want to read the mellow essay. Best regards, --Kanonkas_(talk) 18:49, 9 March 2009 (UTC)

Thank you all. I look forward to be of assistance when I have read the advices I have got. --MGA73 (talk) 18:55, 9 March 2009 (UTC)

Congrats&welcome! Looking forward to cooperating with you. Regards, Finn Rindahl (talk) 19:52, 9 March 2009 (UTC)

File:Bougainvillea spectabilis.jpg

Hi MGA73, did i miss any usage of this image? Image redirects are not working and not useful, so i sugest deletion of the redirect. Ok? --Martin H. (talk) 15:18, 11 March 2009 (UTC)

Image redirect are working, but only useful in cases where images can't ve replaced easily (protected pages at Wikinews, files within complex templates etc).Finn Rindahl (talk) 15:32, 11 March 2009 (UTC)

Realy? Did not know this, always thought, that redirects only working in one project but not in crosswiki embedding. Thanks for the info. --Martin H. (talk) 15:35, 11 March 2009 (UTC)

Hi Martin H. No it is just that the text in Template:Duplicate say "4. Redirect this filename to the other image.". I just did the "monkey see, monkey doo" :-) I will check around to find out when redirects should be used. --MGA73 (talk) 16:43, 11 March 2009 (UTC)

hm, thats the second time i learned something new in only one discussion. It relay says! I dont think it is needed, will ask on COM:AN, I never saw someone creating redirects including myself with some 1000 deleted dupes. --Martin H. (talk) 17:07, 11 March 2009 (UTC)

It would be nice if the text in the template was adjusted, "4. Redirect this filename to the other image if some uses couldn't be replaced." or whatever is preferred. --MGA73 (talk) 17:36, 11 March 2009 (UTC)

I commented on COM:AN, I normally don't create redir myself either (never saw the benefit of those). Regards, Finn Rindahl (talk) 18:07, 11 March 2009 (UTC)

Cykelruter og cykelstier

Hej Michael! Du er så god til det med kategorisering. Det ville glæde mig, hvis du kiggede på mit forslag (se brønden) og kommenterede det, ligesom Ingolfson har gjort. Kritik er ligeså velkommen som støtte. Nillerdk (talk) 17:29, 30 March 2009 (UTC)

OTRS

Hej! Kan du ikke arkivere de personlige e-mails fra File:Cta_1943.jpg og File:Vejen_ender_ved_havet.jpg i OTRS-systemet? Hov, den foerste er slet ikke flyttet endnu. Hilsen Nillerdk (talk) 06:45, 14 April 2009 (UTC)

Hej Nillerdk. På billedesiden står der "An email containing details of the permission for this file has been sent in accordance with Commons:OTRS/en.". Har du sendt en mail eller er det blot en henvisning til den nu slettede tekst samt henvendelsen på min side? --MGA73 (talk) 19:31, 14 April 2009 (UTC)

Hej. Det var blot en henvisning til den nu slettede tekst samt henvendelsen på denne side. Det skulle jeg have skrevet klarere. Nillerdk (talk) 20:07, 14 April 2009 (UTC)

Så havde jeg jo ikke noget at spørge om :-D --MGA73 (talk) 20:08, 14 April 2009 (UTC)

Så er den arkiveret. Mht. til Cta_1943.jpg, så er det alene egne oplysninger, han udleverer. Så der er ikke det store problem. Desuden vil billedet efter min opfattelse være frit alligevel, da det ikke næppe har værkshøjde og er fra før 1970. --MGA73 (talk) 16:34, 17 April 2009 (UTC)

PD review

I answered your question at COM:AN — Rlevse • Talk • 19:58, 26 April 2009 (UTC)

File:Rapspresser.jpg Is there a direct link to this file on PDFnet? I can't find it there. respond on my talk page pls. — Rlevse • Talk • 02:34, 29 April 2009 (UTC) Same deal here: File:Sort sol pdfnet2.jpg. — Rlevse • Talk • 02:37, 29 April 2009 (UTC)

I found the direct link to the second, and asked the owner of www.pdfnet.dk if he can tell us where the first is. Nillerdk (talk) 05:54, 29 April 2009 (UTC)

As I wrote on the pictures I can't find the links to the files on PDFnet. Nillerdk, please check the link again: The images are not the same? --MGA73 (talk) 06:03, 29 April 2009 (UTC)

Also see followup on User_talk:Rlevse#Re:_PDFnet. --MGA73 (talk) 06:18, 29 April 2009 (UTC)

Categorizing

Hello MGA73: Sorry for the French comment, but here are my last posts in English to BotMultichik (something like that) As you never answer back, I've found some categories for some images that are still not categorized but don't know how to place a template or whasoever in each page. So please Help me.
Photo: Scott_Ross.jpg = Category: Artists
Photo: Lilian_Gish.jpg = Category: Artists
Photo: Philip_Workman.jpg: Category = People
Photo Alma_Rose.jpg = Category: Artists (but it is a photo of her grave)
Photo jon_sunflower_2007.JPG = Category: Artists
Photo GILLAN3_sunflower_08.JPG = Category Artists
Photo JPFAYE.jpg. = Category People (or writers if it exists)
Photo Dumur_Gischia.jpg = Category People (or writers if it exists)
Best User Talk: MenerbesMenerbes (talk) 13:54, 28 April 2009 (UTC)15:52
So Thanks if you can help!!! BEST.User talk: MenerbesMenerbes (talk) 10:42, 29 April 2009 (UTC)12:40

I will have a look. --MGA73 (talk) 19:00, 29 April 2009 (UTC)

The images have already been categorized :-) --MGA73 (talk) 19:08, 29 April 2009 (UTC)

Requesting undeletion

Hi I have restored the three images thought I'm quite shure about copyvio. Is the author related to the musik group and has desinged the covers by himself? I dont belive it.. Greetz --anro (talk) 22:34, 30 April 2009 (UTC)

Thank you. The original uploader on dawiki has added info about the former band members and what happend to them after. Info not easy for the public to find. That indicates that it is in fact a former band member or at least someone close to them. So thats why I found the uploader trustworthy and transfered the images to Commons. I made the undeletion request so we could have a debate since this is a special case. Lets wait and see what others think. --MGA73 (talk) 07:40, 1 May 2009 (UTC)

demis.nl

Hvad ved du om kilden/licensbetingelserne for demis.nl-filerne (f.eks. File:Rødsand_og_Nysted_Havmøllepark.gif)? Kortmateriale er sjældent frit - der bør nok være en forklaring. Nillerdk (talk) 05:32, 5 May 2009 (UTC)

Ja, den skulle være god nok. Se evt. File:La2-demis-lolland-falster-moen.png for at komme videre. --MGA73 (talk) 06:30, 5 May 2009 (UTC)

File:Famildan.gif

Kan du se, om der ligger nogen tilladelse (jf. da:Brugerdiskussion:Loproc)? Nillerdk (talk) 08:14, 9 May 2009 (UTC)

Jo, den er modtaget men det ser ud til, at tilladelsen ikke er helt perfekt. Historikken er en smule rodet, så jeg vil få en af de gamle til at se, om de kan finde rundt. --MGA73 (talk) 12:53, 10 May 2009 (UTC)

Noget helt andet er, at jeg tvivler på at diagrammet har værkshøjde. Bogstaver og streger, du ved. Jeg vil forsøge at finde ud af, hvordan det forholder sig for (sådanne og lignende) tekniske diagrammer. Nillerdk (talk) 13:41, 10 May 2009 (UTC)

Har lige spurgt ham der behandlede sagen og han er enig i, at der aldrig kom en brugbar tilladelse. Så det afhænger af om det har værkshøjde og/eller om vi kan få en tilladelse. --MGA73 (talk) 18:27, 11 May 2009 (UTC)

Jeg vil prøve at danne mig et billede af tekniske diagrammers værkhøjde. Nillerdk (talk) 05:59, 14 May 2009 (UTC)

Personer i egen kategori

Godmorgen! Er du sikker på, at dette er bedre? Jeg har jo allerede lavet en egen kategori til ham... Selvom man måske kan mene, at egen kategori til Hr. Schneekloth er overkill, tror jeg alligevel at det gavner overblikket (jf. min forespørgsel hos Foroa. Nillerdk (talk) 05:59, 14 May 2009 (UTC)

Hovsa. Havde ikke set han havde sin egen kategori. Men nej, så er det jo overflødigt. Mht. kategorien "Billeder fra DKB" og "Xxx's postkortsamling" så kan jeg bruge min bot til at sætte dem på. Det er vel lettere? Det svære bliver at finde de billeder fra DKB som allerede er tjekket, for de ligger jo spredt. --MGA73 (talk) 06:18, 14 May 2009 (UTC)

Hovedparten af billederne bør ligge her http://toolserver.org/~daniel/WikiSense/Gallery.php?&wiki=commons.wikimedia.org&img_user_text=MGA73bot eller her Special:Contributions/MGA73bot da min bot jo har flyttet de fleste af billederne. Så når vi er færdige kan vi jo overveje at kigge på de gamle filer igen. --MGA73 (talk) 06:34, 14 May 2009 (UTC)

OK, det ville være fedt at få de to kategorier på semiautomatisk. Nillerdk (talk) 07:33, 14 May 2009 (UTC)

Så er de sat på. Alle postkortene fra dawiki burde være overført. Der er stadig en masse DKB-filer tilbage som jeg har fundet link på. De kommer senere. --MGA73 (talk) 09:52, 14 May 2009 (UTC)

Jeg roder ...

Gider du slette File:Lund 16arh.png? Jeg troede jeg havde fundet en kopi af File:Lund 16arh.jpg i højere opløsning, men det var blot pga. teksten... Nillerdk (talk) 06:38, 21 May 2009 (UTC)

File:Labia for wiki.JPG

Hello,

Sorry, I didn't see the OTRS ticket. I restored the image. Yann (talk) 08:36, 4 June 2009 (UTC)

Thank you :-) --MGA73 (talk) 08:46, 4 June 2009 (UTC)

Sletning af Nysted kunst

Hej Michael! Du har jo bemyndigelse til at slette indlysende overtrædelser. Der findes sådanne 10 i kategorien Category:Nysted kunst. Jeg har diskuteret sagen med Erik Damskier på [1]. Nillerdk (talk) 17:38, 8 June 2009 (UTC)

Skal vi ikke give ham et par dage (har skrevet en supplerende kommentar)? Så skal jeg nok slette. --MGA73 (talk) 17:45, 8 June 2009 (UTC)

Så er billederne slettet! --MGA73 (talk) 20:12, 10 June 2009 (UTC)

Gider du at slette nogle .PNG-billeder, der er blevet afløst af .SVG-billeder?

Hejsa Michael MGA73.

I min grønne ungdom kom jeg til at oploade nogle .PNG-billeder, jeg havde tegnet. Det viste sig at .SVG-billeder var bedre, så jeg konverterede dem til .SVG-billeder. Jeg taggede dem med {{SupersededSVG|indsæt navn}}, så gider du venligst at slette dem?

• File:Slovak roundel WW2.PNG
• File:Croatian roundel WWII.PNG
• File:Romanian aircraft marking wwii.png
• File:Imperial Russian Aviation Roundel.png
• File:Spanish Civil War fascist aircraft.png
• File:RAF Far East Command.png
• File:Norwegian Army Air Service wwii.png
• File:Paraguayan roundel.png
• File:Roundel of Venezuela.png

--Necessary Evil (talk) 19:29, 11 June 2009 (UTC)

Hvis du selv har lavet dem og de er ubrugte, så går det nok. Men ellers er det et følsomt emne at slette "gamle filer" som er erstattet af svg-filer :-) --MGA73 (talk) 20:00, 11 June 2009 (UTC)

Uhadada. --Necessary Evil (talk) 21:54, 11 June 2009 (UTC)

Kender du noget til ...

En e-mail tilladelse til [2] (jeg ved kun hvad der står på billedsiden)? Nillerdk (talk) 16:42, 15 June 2009 (UTC)

Nej, det er før min tid (2006). Jeg har søgt i OTRS og har ikke kunnet finde noget. --MGA73 (talk) 17:27, 15 June 2009 (UTC)

En speedy til dig - selvom jeg ikke indstiller til speedy mere

Jeg er godt i gang med Category:Media_needing_category_review_in_use_at_da.wikipedia. Gider du speedy-slette denne (efter brugerens ældgamle ønske): File:Fornsidr.jpg. Udover sådanne nemme tilfælde (brugerønsker, helt vildt klare og grove copyvios) er jeg holdt op med at indstille til speedy, da jeg synes det virker alt for uvenligt over for uploaderen, der ofte ikke har en chance for at finde ud at hvad der er sket og hvorfor. Jeg subster i stedet {{Npd}}, hvilket vist svarer nogenlunde til vores TvivlsomLicens og er meget nemmere end en Deletion request. Der er endda et smart tool til at slette npd-markerede filer. Nillerdk (talk) 07:50, 16 June 2009 (UTC)

Speedy er fint til helt klare tilfælde som fx at skanne en forside af et blad eller tage det fra en hjemmeside eller andet, der er helt ubrugeligt. Mht. et smart tool (har ikke prøvet det), så kan det også blive for smart. Jeg gendanner indimellem billeder, der var mærket med fx manglende kilde. Et af dem havde licensen pd-self og der stod "Me" ud for Author. Hvor meget mere kan man forlange?

Filen er nu slettet. Det tager heldigvis ikke så lang tid. Man klikker bare på linket "Delete" og "Ok".

Jeg har rost din store indsats overfor User:Multichill der satte mig i gang med at flytte fra dawiki. Han er misundelig. Vi har gang i at kategorisere. Der mangler godt 100.000 billeder! En del af dem er nu flyttet hertil: Category:Unidentified logos. Jeg er selv i gang med dubletter, og vi burde også gennemgå sletteforslagene og få lukket de gamle. Så der er meget at gå i gang med. --MGA73 (talk) 09:20, 16 June 2009 (UTC)

Speedy er helt fint set fra admin-siden. Uploaderen når dog næppe at forstå, hvad der er sket (han kan jo ikke engang checke, hvad han oprindeligt skrev!). Vi har mange uploads i god tro, der er copyvios og kandidater til speedy. Det haster i de fleste tilfælde ikke mere, end at man kan give uploaderen 14 dage til at indse "forbrydelsen" - eller endnu bedre skaffe en tilladelse. Filen bliver med {{Npd}} jo mærket med en stor advarsel. Det er ærgerligt, hvis vi skræmmer folk væk med brutale speedy-sletninger. Jeg blev da også selv udsat for "Billeddestruktøren EPO" før jeg læste om ophavsret. Selv om han havde helt ret i sine speedy-sletninger var det ret ubehageligt, for jeg handlede jo i god tro. Jeg ville gerne have haft de 14 dage til at forstå. Check iøvrigt toolet på [3] - det giver rigtig gode muligheder for at tjekke og så slette.

Tak for rosen. Nillerdk (talk) 09:58, 16 June 2009 (UTC)

Selvom man bruger {{Speedydelete}} så er det jo stadig meningen at man skal orientere uploaderen og forklare problemet. At man bruger en af de andre skabeloner er jo ingen garanti. Se fx min kommentar her: User_talk:Túrelio#File:Martin_garrod.jpg.

Jeg har tjekket toolet og det ser fint ud, men jeg er bare bange for, at det frister ivrige administratorer til at slette uden at tjekke ordentligt. Jeg mener at det bør fremgå rimeligt klart af siden hvorfor billedet bør slettes, så bør man tjekke at uploaderen ER informeret og er vedkommende ikke det, så bør man selv lægge en besked og så give uploaderen en chance inden man sletter. man bør selvfølgelig også tjekke om de manglende oplysninger ved en fejl "kun" er lagt på brugerens diskussionsside. Derudover kan det være en god ide at bruge tineye og tjekke for metadata inden man sletter. Man bør også se om der er dubletter idet dubletten kan give de oplysninger man mangler. Alt dette kan man ikke se på dette tool. --MGA73 (talk) 11:02, 16 June 2009 (UTC)

At bruge et tool er ingen undskyldning for ikke at tjekke alt det du nævner, men toolet er en genvej (hurtige links) og admins har jo nok at gøre. Med min nye yndlingstemplate (-: er der en fast procedure for hvordan fodfolket (det er mig!) skal informere uploaderen. Det aflaster admins (det er dig!), som jo har nok at gøre. Endeligt: Bare alle admins var lige så grundige som dig (-; Nillerdk (talk) 12:46, 16 June 2009 (UTC)

Smil. Takker. Jamen hvis alle brugere var lige så grundige som dig, så skulle admins jo kun slette når brugerne lavede tyrkfejl og andre småting :-D Nu hvor flytteprojektet snart er overstået (se da:Speciel:Nye_filer) og min bot har tjekket kategorier på commons, så håber jeg da at få lidt tid til at slette dubletter og speedyer. Når de så er i bund så har vi vist også værktøjer til at finde de dubletter, som ikke er markeret med en skabelon. Osv. Nåe ja og så er der også dawiki :-) --MGA73 (talk) 12:52, 16 June 2009 (UTC)

Why delete

A friend of mine, who shot that picture, File:Lizhi Fang.jpg, changed his mind. He did not want to publish it any more. I've removed the usage of that picture in the pages I added. It shall not be used any more. --Mongol (talk) 21:23, 29 June 2009 (UTC)

Thank you. Normally uploads are binding. But since the photographer is not the uploader we can't be sure he knew the consequences. Therefore I support a deletion. However I would like a second opinion. --MGA73 (talk) 22:06, 29 June 2009 (UTC)

I support deletion. It can be treated as a copyvio because there is no proof that the photographer knew the exact conditions of the license. Very likely he has just been asked "can I upload your photo to Wikipedia?". This is not sufficient. Nillerdk (talk) 15:20, 30 June 2009 (UTC)

Bot job

Hello MGA73. I write to you in English this time because it might have a broader audience. What do you think about the possibility of making regular bot runs in order to perform the following tasks:

• Look for file pages with the license template {{PD-Denmark50}} not having either {{PD-1923}} or {{PD-1996}}
• Add these files to some gallery, for example User:MGA73/PD-Denmark50 files to be checked

The PD-Denmark50 is invalid alone since it gives no statement to USA-copyright. The situation might be the same for the {{PD-Sweden-photo}} and {{PD-Finland50}}. I haven't checked how they are handling the situation. Nillerdk (talk) 15:43, 30 June 2009 (UTC)

Hi Nillerdk! Currently there is 246 (+ 63?) files in Category:PD Denmark. Instead of making a new place for PD-review we could ask the expert at Category:PD files for review if it would be ok to put them in their category. Would you ask them?

Maybe we could look in the category to se if there is a fast way to identify some that could be fixet easily. Like if they are from 17xx or whatewer the reason might be. --MGA73 (talk) 16:42, 30 June 2009 (UTC)

+ the template should be changed so it informs the user not to use the DK-template alone. --MGA73 (talk) 17:28, 30 June 2009 (UTC)

The template has already been changed (by Hemmingsen) to show this. Well, I'll just start checking that category. I assume to find all kind of legal and illegal cases. Maybe I'll even identify a pattern. In that case, I'll inform you. The bot is more relevant for the future. Why? Now there are probably 240 files marked with PD-Denmark50 alone. Let's say we'll have 230 of those afterwards but additionally marked with PD-1923 or PD-1996 - and none only with PD-Denmark50! For future uploads, a clever solution would indeed be to dump them in Category:PD files for review as their number is probably going to be limited. Let's see. Nillerdk (talk) 20:20, 30 June 2009 (UTC)

Overvågning og et spørgsmål

Først spørge: Hvorfor skal File:CPH_West_logo.jpg denne ikke udryddes?

Derefter bede: Vil du ikke putte filerne på min User:Nillerdk/Check på din watchlist (du kan jo blot bruge Special:Watchlist/raw). Det ville ikke gøre noget med lidt kontrol. I nogle tilfælde kan du jo også bruge dine magiske administratorkræfter, når sagen også for dig er helt klar. (-: Nillerdk (talk) 21:48, 1 July 2009 (UTC)

I mailen nævnte du 4 filer/billeder men der var de 4 + et logo. Billederne var en copyvio og de kan let erstattes (ved bare at tage nogen nye). Når jeg ikke slettede logoet var det fordi der ikke var taget stilling til, om nogen (du?) ville prøve at få tilladelse (logoet kan jo ikke umiddelbart erstattes) eller om vi evt. skulle diskutere, om det var for simpelt til at opnå beskyttelse (tekst + et par cirkler).

Filerne er nu tilføjet på watchlisten (der er nu 3,873 i alt). Jeg skal nok kigge forbi dit galleri, men det skal normalt være ret slemt før man sletter direkte i stedet for at sætte en passende skabelon på. --MGA73 (talk) 06:46, 2 July 2009 (UTC)

At der var 5 skyldes nok, at han allerede har taget et nyt foto. Jeg har ikke lyst til at spørge om lov til logoet. Jeg regner chancerne for et positivt svar så små, at jeg hellere vil spare mig arbejdet. Chancerne er små fordi organisationer/virksomheder naturligvis er meget forsigtige med deres logo, også selvom en fri license ikke vil berøre den vigtige del af beskyttelsen: markedsføringsloven, varemærkeloven. Jeg norminerer den til sletning efter de normale principper for at for en vurdering af værkshøjden.

Tak for tilføjelsen på din watchlist. Jeg har 300 flere filer end du (-; Nillerdk (talk) 07:14, 2 July 2009 (UTC)

Image Issues

Hi MGA73,

Several months ago I uploaded the image ApelbaumJacob.jpg to the Wikimedia Commons. The image was used in the Wikipedia article about Jacob Apelbaum. I just noticed that for some reason it is not rendering correctly, do you know if there is anything I need to do to in order to fix this problem (is it an image licensing info, tagging, etc.)?--JillFine (talk) 03:21, 8 July 2009 (UTC)

Hi JillFine

Wierd... Well I changed to "image_width = 200px" instead of 50 (50 is a bit hard to see anyway) and now it workes when I look. Hope it works for you to. --MGA73 (talk) 06:47, 8 July 2009 (UTC)

Thank you so much for the help!--JillFine (talk) 12:36, 8 July 2009 (UTC)

George Clifford's Armour

I noticed that you have deleted the image I uploaded of the armor of Sir George Clifford. This is indeed an image from the Flickr album of thoog, real name Todd Hoogerland. However, he gave me permission to use the image. I sent him a message on Flickr asking to use it in this Wikipedia article and he said I was free to do so. Here was his response:

"You may use it for Wikipedia if you haven't already found a better one. Do I have to do anything? Someone asked to use a photo for Wikipedia before, but they said my licensing settings were "wrong" and needed to be fixed, and the general tone just made me ignore the request."

I think he might not understand how the licensing settings on Flickr work. But nevertheless he did give me explicit permission to use that image.Golden Hound (talk) 21:20, 9 July 2009 (UTC)

Hi Golden Hound! He can either change the license on Flickr or send us a permission. You can see what to do here: User_talk:Golden_Hound#File_Tagging_File:Scudamorearmor2.jpg. He could either give a permission for som specific files or all his files - thats up to him to decide. --MGA73 (talk) 21:41, 9 July 2009 (UTC)

Onopordum acanthium-Fuerth1.jpg

Hi MGA73, your edit (+cat Road signs in Germany) leaves me smiling - I certainly did not take this picture for the road sign in the first place ;-). Thanx, --Burkhard (talk) 21:29, 9 July 2009 (UTC)

No the filename told me you were looking for somhing else. I had trouble to decide if I should make the edit but as you noticed I decided that it was a good picture of a sign also :-) --MGA73 (talk) 21:35, 9 July 2009 (UTC)