User talk:NVO

ru:ВП:ВВ, так и не понял, подойдете или нет? - A.S. 09:32, 28 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

• Нет, не буду. NVO (talk) 14:50, 28 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hello,

Why did you mirror File:RIAN_archive_59790_Tanks_heading_for_the_front.jpg ?

Jean-Fred (talk) 22:37, 1 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

• 
  View from Tverskaya 6
• 
  Central Telegraph closeup

• The original was mirrored. The camera was placed on the roof of Tverskaya, 6 55°45′35.95″N 37°36′41.48″E / 55.7599861°N 37.6115222°E / 55.7599861; 37.6115222 looking SSE (towards Red Square).
• (left/right refers to mine version:) The street gently bends to the left (to the north). The dark corner building on the right is the Central Telegraph building (Tverskaya 7), the one further down is the Yermolova Theatre (Tverskaya 5), then a now-demolished building on the place of Ritz Carlton (Tverskaya 3). The empty corner lot in foreground right is present-day Tverskaya, 9. All these odd numbers are on SW side of the street. NVO (talk) 06:28, 2 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Good pick up on that NVO, always leave it to you to find and fix such quirks. russavia (talk) 09:29, 2 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Waw, impressive catch :-) Next time, could you briefly explain it in the reupload summary, so that no one wonders why? Thanks. Jean-Fred (talk) 23:20, 2 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Могилки обсудим у меня.--PereslavlFoto (talk) 13:54, 6 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

• Итог. Нынешнее положение мне ясно и я не против. Однако полагаю, что в будущем оно вызовет сомнения у кого-то ещё. Причина же в том, что сейчас могилы - подкатегория кладбищ, хотя могилы могут быть и вне кладбищ. Это отличный стимул: я постараюсь собрать фотографии могил вне кладбищ, чтобы подчеркнуть проблему.--PereslavlFoto (talk) 13:55, 7 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I wanted to apologize for my little outburst on that DR; it was unnecessary. However, I just want to ensure that I dispel any rumors about socking or the like. I have one account, I use one account, and I have not previously edited under a different account. I didn't say "ours" anywhere in that statement. Regardless, it's not a big deal and I'd like to move on, so my apologies to you. Regards, MacMed (talk) 17:23, 19 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, NVO. You have new messages at Mono#User_rights's talk page. You may remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template. asturianu ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца) ∙ български ∙ বাংলা ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ Deutsch ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form) ∙ English ∙ español ∙ suomi ∙ français ∙ galego ∙ हिन्दी ∙ hrvatski ∙ magyar ∙ italiano ∙ 日本語 ∙ ქართული ∙ македонски ∙ മലയാളം ∙ Plattdüütsch ∙ Nederlands ∙ português ∙ română ∙ русский ∙ sicilianu ∙ slovenščina ∙ svenska ∙ Tagalog ∙ Türkçe ∙ 简体中文 ∙ 繁體中文 ∙ +/−

theMONO 00:10, 22 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

just a test pad - still struggling with display calibration. NVO (talk)

Розовый дом — в холодных тонах, небо я бы сделал более синим, однако оттенка никакого нет. Коричневый дом с угла — в тёплых тонах, на облаке розовый оттенок, небо голубое с уходом в желтизну, а дом в полном порядке. Фабричный двор — на первый взгляд всё в порядке, но если убедить себя, что дело табак, тогда небо с жёлто-зелёным намёком, а земля не ровного нейтрального оттенка, а с цветом грязи. Но так ведь и быть должно. Белый кирпич, которым заложен проём в здании, прямо белый. Просмотрел на калиброванном плоском мониторе. Мне кажется, в общем, что вы придираетесь к себе.--PereslavlFoto (talk) 22:10, 4 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

«Каждая вторая (фотография) кажется либо зелёной, либо фиолетовой». Подобный эффект был у меня при окрашенном освещении в комнате.--PereslavlFoto (talk) 12:57, 5 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

• Комната та же, освещение то же, хард, софт - всё примерно то же. Я грешу, что это просто субъективный эффект привыкания-отвыкания - в течение месяца, пока рабочий комп стоял без движения (сдох винт) - пользовался ноутбуком, на экране которого все кошки сизые. Потом вернулся к полноценному монитору и.... прошла неделя, и уже не так страшно. NVO (talk) 02:42, 6 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Там было по сути, тут про языком махать. Сначала скажу, что речь не про летнюю Подгорную слободу, которая получила QI именно за "образец миниатюры", а про общий случай. Снимки, сделанные при помощи горизонтального наклона, будут размыты по краям (как у меня на фонаре). Зона резкости становится перпендикулярна к плоскости кадра, чёткая картинка остаётся лишь в середине. Именно на это, как на формальный недостаток объектива, указали мне в обзоре одного снимка, хотя именно это было моим нарочитым инструментом при фотографировании, то есть инструментом для выделения центра и размывания краёв.--PereslavlFoto (talk) 13:08, 19 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Что же касается вашего мнения о резкости объектива, совсем не могу согласиться. Мыльный объектив, который даёт чудовищные хроматические аберрации по всем контурам. Обработка снимков с него долга и неприятна. Фотошоп правит ХА на вертикальных контрастных контурах, а вот на горизонтальных контурах не правит. Представьте себе квадратную будку, которая находится на фоне неба и которая по всему контуру, со всех четырёх сторон окружена ХА. Справа и слева ХА убираются при raw-конверсии, а вот сверху и снизу убрать нельзя. Я полагаю, что причина тому — сдвиги, которые трудно просчитать при разработке объектива. Снимать этой линзой днём на открытой диафрагме невозможно, начинается буйство ХА. Однако я говорю про 1-ю версию, нынче выпускают 2-ю, и пишут, что она порезче и менее аберративна. Даст бог, на будущий год проверю.--PereslavlFoto (talk) 13:08, 19 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

И наконец, я говорю не про особое правило для такого-то объектива. Я говорю про особое правило для объективов, основанных та таком-то физическом принципе: для объективов с наклоном.--PereslavlFoto (talk) 13:08, 19 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Про музей вы перегибаете, я спросил о другом. Я спросил, охраняется ли творческое произведение -- "выставка". Похоже, что за границею не знают об этом, а значит, надо разыскивать по России прецеденты.--PereslavlFoto (talk) 13:42, 23 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

NVO - thank for taking the time to defend my uploads. Indeed, I'm very new to this and will most likely never be a quality contributor. However, I would like to illustrate the articles I submit as being a little better than the dry Encyclopedia Britannica model we all still carry in our heads, in the US at least.- Thank you again Mlane (talk) 17:38, 9 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

что-то я не обратила внимание, что это дотошные немцы копают... --Shakko (talk) 16:48, 24 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

	A dandelion
	This is a dandelion. Dandelions promote wikilove and remind us of our own mortality. "We"? "Us"? Ah, never mind. Today it's shiny yellow, tomorrow it's gone. NVO (talk) 03:04, 7 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

By nature, Wikipedia is about as bold as a bowl of muesli.
WFCforLife, 07-Sep-2011.

File:Noginsk_TrInt_62_02.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! Afrikaans ∙ العربية ∙ беларуская ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца) ∙ български ∙ ပအိုဝ်ႏဘာႏသာႏ ∙ বাংলা ∙ bosanski ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ dansk ∙ Deutsch ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form) ∙ Zazaki ∙ ދިވެހިބަސް ∙ Ελληνικά ∙ English ∙ Esperanto ∙ español ∙ eesti ∙ فارسی ∙ suomi ∙ français ∙ galego ∙ עברית ∙ hrvatski ∙ magyar ∙ հայերեն ∙ Bahasa Indonesia ∙ íslenska ∙ italiano ∙ 日本語 ∙ 한국어 ∙ 조선말 ∙ македонски ∙ മലയാളം ∙ Bahasa Melayu ∙ မြန်မာဘာသာ ∙ norsk bokmål ∙ Plattdüütsch ∙ Nederlands ∙ norsk nynorsk ∙ norsk ∙ occitan ∙ polski ∙ پښتو ∙ português ∙ português do Brasil ∙ română ∙ русский ∙ sicilianu ∙ slovenčina ∙ slovenščina ∙ shqip ∙ српски / srpski ∙ svenska ∙ ไทย ∙ Türkçe ∙ українська ∙ Tiếng Việt ∙ 中文 ∙ 中文（简体） ∙ 中文（繁體） ∙ +/−

Warfieldian ^(talk) 05:21, 10 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hi NVO,

Thank you for your support and best regards.

Jean-Pol GRANDMONT (talk) 06:36, 11 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks !

It was a mistake between User:Trizek and User:Trizek/WLMRFD.

Need coffee.

Trizek ^{here or on fr:wp} 16:05, 15 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Калужский помещик?! Но ведь вы фотографировали Москву?--PereslavlFoto (talk) 20:08, 15 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

• А также Боровск. Китовым, заметьте, объективом. NVO (talk) 20:16, 15 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • О, здорово. Есть две школы; одна учит, что киты мажут; другая учит, что киты не мажут, а дают такую же резкость, как и объективы более продвинутого класса. Будьте так добры, поделитесь со мною вашими наблюдениями. Со своей стороны могу сравнить тамрон 17-50 и портретный зум canon 70-200.--PereslavlFoto (talk) 20:26, 15 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • А вы, должно быть, и за погодой следите, и ясный день выбираете, и, паче чаяния, делаете запасные дубли сюжета? :-) А на Володарского у вас дом растянут широким углом.--PereslavlFoto (talk) 20:31, 15 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
    • Всё широкое мажет (или хроматит, или и то, и другое). Как может мазать недешёвый широкий фикс, вам уже известно. Это не портретный диапазон, где даже зум (оба L 70-200) можно сделать очень приличным за вмеяемые деньги. А за погодой я, вестимо, слежу - помещику без того никак нельзя. NVO (talk) 20:45, 15 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
      • Не уверен про широкое. Тамрон 17-50 очень чётко и резко снимает на широком углу, когда f/9—12, он просто душечка для таких штук. Тилт мажет не от широкости, а от сдвига: думаю, слишком трудно рассчитать компенсации для всех сдвигов. Он мажет только там, куда сильно сдвинут: если сдвинуть вверх, то нерезкость будет в верхней трети кадра. Пишут, что вторая версия тилта мажет куда меньше, однако я пока не накопил на вторую версию. Но — коплю.--PereslavlFoto (talk) 21:24, 15 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
      • Тамрон был куплен именно потому, что он стоил вменяемые деньги, потому что он компромисс. А вот 70-200/4 стоит совершенно невменяемых денег. Но там не приходится выбирать, к сожалению. Тамроном вообще нельзя снимать на открытой диафрагме (если шире, чем f/4.5, тогда будет ерунда нерезкая), а вот элькой — можно и на открытой. Это было для меня очень сильное откровение. Потому-то я и спросил у вас насчёт кита, заметна ли в нём разница, примечаете ли вы её по ходу дела. Ведь по готовому снимку рассуждать об объективе нельзя: слишком многое приходится исправлять в обработке.--PereslavlFoto (talk) 21:24, 15 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Как интересно! А почему вдруг олимпус, а не один из двух религиозных, канон и никон? --PereslavlFoto (talk) 21:28, 15 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

• Именно из-за оптики. Потому и не слезаю с давно устарелой платформы. Ну и потому что жаба давит за полнокадры, которые уже четвёртый год в серии. Жду-с пятак-марк-три или как он там будет. NVO (talk) 02:39, 16 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • А зачем полный кадр? Я вот с кропом, так и то приходится напрягаться (то есть компьютер, купленный в 1999 году, не может обрабатывать такие снимки, и пришлось обновлять). Все практические резоны в пользу полного кадра, которые я слышал от живых фотографов, сводятся к религии. Самый очаровательный был: "На кропе объектив не даёт нужной резкости". О да, о да.--PereslavlFoto (talk) 12:50, 16 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
    • См. выше. На кроп нет хороших шириков. Риторический вопрос - существуют ли на кроп объективы экв. 24 мм, достойные хотя бы 12-мегапиксельных матриц? Вот я вертел в руках Nikon D7000 - прекрасная тушка (по эргономике почти не хуже Е-3), но стекла-то к ней (под мои хотелки) нет. Портретные и репортажные углы - на любой вкус, ширики - только на ФФ. NVO (talk) 13:15, 16 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
      • По счастию, мне не нужна вся ширина, кроме некоторых интерьерных случаев. Ширина ведь, к сожалению, это бочкообразная дисторсия плюс ХА, слишком уж сильно приходится изгибать лучи. Спасибо, я понял ваш выбор.--PereslavlFoto (talk) 17:15, 16 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hey mate, what would you think about the possibility of a Commons Project Russia...kindly like en:WP:RUSSIA, but devoted to the goals and needs on Commons where it concerns "Russia". It could act as a centralised discussion point, and possibly as an organisational tool. Would welcome any initial comments from you---we could set up a centralised discussion point and then bring others in on conversation or whatever. russavia (talk) 20:59, 15 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

• Good, let's jump right in and see what happens. NVO (talk) 02:35, 16 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

  Is it still on board? I think we would urgently need to agree at least on categorization before the mess introduced in September becomes undoable.--Ymblanter (talk) 23:41, 1 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Какой mess? Я что, опять самое интересное проспал ? NVO (talk) 05:59, 2 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Думаю, нет, я имею в виду свалку в Category:Cultural heritage monuments in Saint Petersburg. Вчера я там с некоторым удивлением обнаружил Гатчинский дворец, например.--Ymblanter (talk) 08:07, 2 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Это как раз объяснимо и простимо. Мы, калужские помещики, также недоумеваем: если Кронштадт и Царское - это СПБ, то почему Гатчина - не СПБ? Ингерманландский gerrymandering, обыватели в смятении. NVO (talk) 08:17, 2 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

А вот то, что всё это продублировалось в Category:Cultural_heritage_monuments_in_Russia - нелепица. NVO (talk) 08:27, 2 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Ну да, и, боюсь, не единственная. Я вчера вечером взялся развесить шаблоны по памятникам из базы данных по Архангельской области, сделал два района, так там такое с категоризацией наворочано, что всё надо проверять. Да и у меня мы давеча проблемы обсуждали. Хорошо бы их один раз и навсегда зафиксировать, а то будет только хуже.--Ymblanter (talk) 08:32, 2 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

ok, пойду погляжу архангельских NVO (talk) 08:36, 2 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Я там кое-что исправил уже, как минимум по районам всё, что я нашёл, категоризировано, но бардак с деревнями - сёлами - пгт - городами, по-видимому, вечен.--Ymblanter (talk) 08:41, 2 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

На уровне области всё решается вытряхиванием из Cities in Arkhangelsk Oblast в Settlements in Arkhangelsk Oblast (по аналогии с большинством областей - тех, где есть settlements). На национальном - не знаю, что делать. Есть принципиальная двусмысленность понятий бытовых ("город") и канцелярских ("городское поселение"), а для СПБ ещё и третий уровень накладывается. Полагаю, оптимальным было бы вытряхнуть и Villages in Russia, и Cities in Russia в Settlements - но это (а) чересчур радикально, "народ не поймёт" (б) это противоречит глобальной схеме. NVO (talk) 08:50, 2 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Ну, я тут вариантов особенно не вижу. Дело в том, что если мы оставляем отдельно cities, а отдельно villages, то мы заставляем обычного, не продвинутого юзера, знать, к какой категории относится его населённый пункт. Стрельна или Икша - это city или village? Можно вместо dettlements in Russia сделать cities and villages in Russia, если от этого легче. Второй вопрос - класть в основу административное деление (как в английской Википедии) или муниципальное (как в русской). Если административное, то никакие городские поселения не нужны в принципе, бывают только города, пгт и нп сельского типа, причём категоризовать их надо по районам. Но в России сейчас муниципальное деление употребляется гораздо активнее административного. Сюда же, кстати, разницу между северным селом и северной деревней - например, село Лядины состоит из четырёх деревень, одна из которых Гавриловская. Как Лядинский ансамбль категоризировать? Кстати, в СПБ по административному делению столько же уровней: Субъект РФ -> город (например, Петергоф) или район -> если надо, более мелкое деление.--Ymblanter (talk) 09:19, 2 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Да, а с объектами культурного наследия - мы их по районам разбиваем? Я в Архангельской этого не делал.--Ymblanter (talk) 09:20, 2 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Мне удобнее по районам. Они совсем разные - в одних объекты можно по пальцам пересчитать, а где-то сотни записей и сотни уже загруженных фото. NVO (talk) 09:27, 2 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Хорошо, разобью по районам. По Архангельской, с которой я сейчас работаю, боюсь, сожгут всё до того, как будет хотя бы сто фотографий в одной районе, а вот по Питеру это куда как акутальнее.--Ymblanter (talk) 09:49, 2 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

There were a lot of vikings settled in Scotland , as in Russia. Not that historical accuracy and Walter Scott necessarily have much to do with each other. Dankarl (talk) 04:08, 20 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Correct, but the painting reflects 19th century romantic fantasies of the slavophiles - removed as far as possible from the Normanic Legend. A fantasy of a fantasy - late 19th century vision of "legends" concocted some fifty years before. NVO (talk) 08:01, 20 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Might I introduce you to {{rename}}?

It is humble in its appearance, simple to use (having only one attribute) and recommended for really bad image names.

The photograph with the mountains did me in, I lost my sense of humor and really did think that if the child who took and uploaded those photographs had sobered up, that re-uploading them would be a good task to re-affirm grasps on reality, what goes where and why and how a little effort makes a lot of difference, etc.

Actually, I still feel that way about those images. -- Queeg (talk) 09:25, 30 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

• Hmmm, she did not change at all since we met in 2007 ;) Just kidding: back then renaming required actual reupload-deletion. Then, around August or September, the evil sysops decided that it's too big a burden for them. NVO (talk) 10:05, 30 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you so much for your help with the images. I will definitely have that fixed for all my future uploads. ArtLibrn2011 (talk) 17:50, 30 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

This message was added automatically by Nikbot, if you need some help about it please read the text above again and follow the links in it, if you still need help ask at the → Commons:Help desk in any language you like to use. --Nikbot 18:37, 9 October 2011 (UTC)

Не будете возражать, если я списки по Калужской по алфавиту отсортирую?--Ymblanter (talk) 18:58, 12 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

• в смысле cat sort (не возражаю) или внутри таблиц? (сам ещё не знаю как лучше) NVO (talk) 19:02, 12 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

  Нет, пока только ключ сортировки по категориям. Про таблицы пока толком не думал, сам сортирую по алфавиту деревень с возможным исключением для райцентров. Спасибо, сейчас сделаю.--Ymblanter (talk) 19:16, 12 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there - I wonder if you could help us out a bit. As you will see here there are some concerns about this page and I noticed you have created similar ones. I guess there are two main concerns - the fact that most of the links give "Bad gateway" messages is not helpful to anyone searching for anything. Equally as it is in the main Gallery space the complete lack of images seems odd? Maybe it should be part of another namespace? Thanks for the help and time - regards --Herby ^{talk thyme} 10:30, 17 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Работаю над списком проектов и построек Шехтеля (см. у меня песочнице). Быть может у Вас сохранились какие-то изображения построек, возможно исторические. Буду рад, если выскажите своё мнение по структуре и содержанию списка. PS: случайно загрузил файл с неправильным названием File:Schechtels Draft of the Sportpalace.jpg (на самом деле это, конечно, концертный зал "Олимп"). Не могли бы помочь переименовать?--Moreorless (talk) 05:41, 22 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

По той же причине я думаю следует удалить http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Kirillo-Beloserski-Kloster_Gesamtansicht.jpg и File:Карта национального парка "Русский Север".jpg. Фотографиия Прокудин-Горского в общем доступе. --Wolkodlak (talk) 15:20, 28 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Здравствуйте! Вы в своё время загружали фотографии из альбома принадлежащих Московскому Городскому Общественному Управлению. Последнее время фотографии из этого альбома в хорошем качестве выкладываются в ЖЖ Sontucio. Например вот http://sontucio.livejournal.com/440842.html. Думаю, это должно быть вам интересно. --Andreykor (talk) 13:28, 30 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

• Замечательно! только сначала надо летние фотографии как-то пристроить. NVO (talk) 15:35, 30 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Мне помнится, что у нас где-то уже был сжатый2 пул аргументов за то, чтобы не удалять и не выставлять к удалению по отдельности вот такие вот файлы: Commons:Deletion requests/File:Станция Борзя.jpg? --Kaganer (talk) 18:46, 30 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

• Нет таких аргументов. Вокзал явно послевоенный. NVO (talk) 18:58, 30 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Милостивый государь, не оставьте советом, что в категории может рисковать по свободе панорамы? Авторы под боком, запросить от них согласие легко, если придётся. Примите уверения в совершеннейшем к вам почтении и преданности. PereslavlFoto (talk) 16:06, 10 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
    • А кто ж его знает, какой лесник с лопатой пожалует. По мне, аквариумы в углах однозначно тянут на удаление - поскольку аквариум в целом может рассматриваться как один объект искусства (инсталляция), крупным планом. Как смел ты, о недостойный, нарушить священный копирайт аквариумистов? Стена с рядом мелких работ - пожалуй, в безопасности. 00:47, 11 November 2011 (UTC)
      • То есть надо иметь письмо о согласии музея на угловые аквариумы? Ясно.--PereslavlFoto (talk) 13:32, 11 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
        • Не музея, автора (авторов). Не музей же застеклённые холсты писал. Всё изложенное, конечно же, частное мнение и не заменяет полноценного обсуждения на публике. NVO (talk) 14:31, 11 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
        • ОК, буду собирать согласия с авторов того, что выставлено в стеклянных ящиках. Это дело нетрудное. На сём кланяюсь.--PereslavlFoto (talk) 14:42, 11 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

А точно, вокзал в Борзе именно послевоенный. Как вы угадали!--PereslavlFoto (talk) 13:57, 8 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hey NVO, howzit? Have you seen this? I wonder if this "radek" person thinks the same way about other people's works and contributions to this project? russavia (talk) 05:45, 31 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

В обсуждении галереи мне бросилось в глаза единообразие замечаний. Разные люди упрекали мои критические описания фотоснимков. Однако никто не придрался к тому, что другие снимки описаны с похвалой. Как же так? Это ведь получается этическая цензура — хвалить хорошее можно, а вот о плохом следует молчать?--PereslavlFoto (talk) 16:04, 11 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Это скорее не "этическая цензура", а "природа человека" :) --Lodo27 (talk) 15:56, 12 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Однобокость в природе человека?--PereslavlFoto (talk) 19:08, 12 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Природа сделала человека так, что он не любит когда его критикуют и ставят под сомнение его компетентность. Зачем она так сделала? - Учёные до сих пор ломают головы над вопросами такого типа. :) --Lodo27 (talk) 12:13, 13 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Это у меня голова сломалась, от ваших, гг. философы, дискурсов. Водочки! NVO (talk) 15:54, 13 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Будьте добры, добавьте на Commons:Deletion requests/Пересечение 2011 в Переславле шаблон {{Keep}} возле своей реплики. К сему примите уверения и прочее.--PereslavlFoto (talk) 14:58, 15 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Спасибо. Похоже, в США и в Англии разные языковые традиции. Одно безусловно понятно: родовые названия АТО пишем с прописной, сиречь по-английски будет "Ленинский Район Московской Области". И то хлеб :-). Я буду следить за их разговором, это полезно.--PereslavlFoto (talk) 12:22, 17 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Поскольку Panther перед Вами извинился, мне кажется, было бы разумно, если бы Вы вернулись в это обсуждение. Мне тоже не все там участвующие, скажем так, представляются крайне приятными в общении, но согласитесь, что делать одну и ту же работу дважды - это совсем уже никуда не годный идиотизм.--Ymblanter (talk) 13:14, 17 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Мне показалось, что там все трудности — в смысле слов. Вы обсуждаете почти про одинаковые штуки, называя их разными словами. И чтобы два раза не вставать, почему сделано исключение для археологических памятников? Чтобы не фотографировали неприметный холмик-курган? Чтобы не провоцировать грабителей?--PereslavlFoto (talk) 14:04, 17 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

• Вроде все согласились, что археологические памятники нужны в списках, насколько я понимаю. В списках, которые составлял я, они есть. --Ymblanter (talk) 14:41, 17 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

(ec) PereslavlFoto:

• "исключение" - ?? - я его не делал. Не вижу смысла вымарывать общеизвестные факты, зафиксированые в законодательстве и целой россыпи печатных и онлайн источников. Под каждым старым городом - городища, культурные слои. Вдоль каждой большой реки - цепи древних поселений. Навряд ли эти селища интересны чёрным копателям - ни злата, ни серебра там нет. Куда выгоднее по болотам смертные жетоны собирать.
• есть, однако, существенное замечание - идентификация археологических объектов по письменным описаниям может быть ошибочна, а как проверить? GPS-то в справочнике не прописан. Может, вот этот холмик на фото и есть "курган IV", а может это навозная куча времён исторического материализма. Но точно так же можно ошибиться и в идентификации зданий - это же не повод, чтоб и их исключать. NVO (talk) 14:47, 17 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

• • Спасибо.--PereslavlFoto (talk) 15:04, 17 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Николай, а вы не знаете случаем, откуда пошло приписывание Новодевичьего сабжу? --Ghirlandajo (talk) 21:35, 20 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

• Нет, - следов много, источника не знаю. NVO (talk) 21:47, 20 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Dear NVO, I am writing on behalf of a Moscow museum which wishes to use a few of your Wikipedia photos related to Konstantin Melnikov in an exhibition about him in their new home, the bus depot that he designed. Will pay you for your work and credit you as per your wishes. Interested? Please contact me, Roberta at rgnewman12@gmail.com and I will provide details. Thanks!

• Hmm... a Moscow museum seeking photographs here through an American agent - sounds strange to me. Anything uploaded to commons is free for reuse, including commercial publications. However, Melnikov's works should not be uploaded on commons - see commons:Freedom of panorama#Russia. NVO (talk) 21:50, 20 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Мне кажется, ерунду вы написали в обсуждении. При чём тут like / not like. Я не обращаю внимания на лица, поэтому прошу вас убрать оттуда зацепки личного свойства. Насколько я помню, А.Савин порицал меня за то, что у него на фотоснимках хроматические аберрации и муар, а также за то, что он нарушает авторские права архитекторов. Бериллий порицал меня за то, что мне не нравятся его оскорбления. Ну, теперь-то я понимаю, что на викискладе разрешено оскорблять участников. Значит, Бериллий прав, пускай и дальше ругается на пустом месте. Наконец, за что _вы_ меня порицаете, я напрочь не помню.--PereslavlFoto (talk) 13:26, 8 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

И чтобы два раза не вставать, вот этот файл показывает, что для викисклада отлично подходят фотоснимки с макетов зданий. Это к вашей истории моделей. А.Савин усердно придирался к моей избе, а тут молчит.--PereslavlFoto (talk) 13:29, 8 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

File:Langman_sto.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! Afrikaans ∙ العربية ∙ беларуская ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца) ∙ български ∙ ပအိုဝ်ႏဘာႏသာႏ ∙ বাংলা ∙ bosanski ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ dansk ∙ Deutsch ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form) ∙ Zazaki ∙ ދިވެހިބަސް ∙ Ελληνικά ∙ English ∙ Esperanto ∙ español ∙ eesti ∙ فارسی ∙ suomi ∙ français ∙ galego ∙ עברית ∙ hrvatski ∙ magyar ∙ հայերեն ∙ Bahasa Indonesia ∙ íslenska ∙ italiano ∙ 日本語 ∙ 한국어 ∙ 조선말 ∙ македонски ∙ മലയാളം ∙ Bahasa Melayu ∙ မြန်မာဘာသာ ∙ norsk bokmål ∙ Plattdüütsch ∙ Nederlands ∙ norsk nynorsk ∙ norsk ∙ occitan ∙ polski ∙ پښتو ∙ português ∙ português do Brasil ∙ română ∙ русский ∙ sicilianu ∙ slovenčina ∙ slovenščina ∙ shqip ∙ српски / srpski ∙ svenska ∙ ไทย ∙ Türkçe ∙ українська ∙ Tiếng Việt ∙ 中文 ∙ 中文（简体） ∙ 中文（繁體） ∙ +/−

84.62.204.7 12:52, 9 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

• Thanks honey, NVO (talk) 16:30, 9 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Спасибо за ваш интересный вопрос. Hystrix (talk) 23:48, 16 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

У Вас Дмитров закончен уже? Я на той неделе туда собирался, если все адреса уже есть, могу фотографии сделать.--Ymblanter (talk) 12:52, 17 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

• Да - всё, что выложено, можно считать законченным. У меня в планах - Талдом, Коломна. NVO (talk) 15:30, 17 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
• Кстати, по Дмитрову на maps.yandex.ru есть панорамы улиц. В отличие от гугля, privacy laws им не писаны - видны номера не только домов, но и каждой арбы. NVO (talk) 16:05, 17 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

  По Коломне у меня ещё с лета кое-что есть, как будет список - загружу. С Дмитровом ясно, спасибо.--Ymblanter (talk) 18:46, 17 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Обидное и пустое вы про меня пишете. Категория для зданий Конной улицы это не all this mess, потому что я собираюсь её дополнять. Зачем же разжигать конфликт? В "деревянных домах Каширы" я разложил переполненную категорию по более точным категориям; для остальных домов ничего не могу сделать, потому что там не указана улица. Вы это называете троллингом?--PereslavlFoto (talk) 11:03, 20 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

"wasting time on a site" — получается, что для одних (фотографов, художников) вы позволяете соблюдать копирайт, а для других (архитекторов, скульпторов) не позволяете?--PereslavlFoto (talk) 12:13, 22 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Ну и в чём конструктив такого комментария? --Ghirlandajo (talk) 16:40, 22 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Это был не комментарий, а вопрос, чтобы узнать мнение коллеги по вики-складу. Пожалуйста, посмотрите мою подборку цитат о подземной архитектуре (правда, она ещё не закончена). Спасибо.--PereslavlFoto (talk) 17:06, 22 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! You published many pics of Большая Ордынка (Bolshaya Ordynka Street in Moscow - Category:Bolshaya Ordynka Street). I didn't find picute of House 22 Bolshaya Ordynka (it is of seat of the Interstate Aviation Committee (MAK, Межгосударственный авиационный комитет). Maybe you have an image of that building and then could you publish it? Greetings. --Lowdown (talk) 12:06, 23 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! You published many pics of Большая Ордынка (Bolshaya Ordynka Street in Moscow - Category:Bolshaya Ordynka Street). I didn't find picute of House 22/2/1 at Bolshaya Ordynka Street (it is of seat of the Interstate Aviation Committee (MAK, Межгосударственный авиационный комитет). Maybe you have an image of that building and then could you publish it? Greetings. --Lowdown (talk) 12:07, 23 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

• I don't have it on file - it's a fairly dull modern structure, barely imitating historic facade treatments. Maybe January, but don't be surprised if it gets deleted per COM:FOP. NVO (talk) 14:27, 23 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

[2] Пишут, что я ежедневно преследую вас, потому что вы — продуктивный редактор викисклада, и поэтому вы опустили руки и перестали участвовать в викискладе. Это вам для справки.--PereslavlFoto (talk) 19:21, 27 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

• Да, осталось только МО закончить и валю. Дело не столько в вас, сколько в операторах из рашкопедии. NVO (talk) 19:31, 27 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • МО — это список памятников? (Я бы за такое не взялся просто потому, что не понимаю, как такие списки можно проверить, не объехав их все...) Просто я не вполне понимаю, что на меня возводит А.Савин, поэтому и пишу временами сюда. Может быть, вы найдёте минутку растолковать мне, что именно я делаю не так и почему вы на одной из обсуждальных страниц предлагали меня блокировать? Спасибо.--PereslavlFoto (talk) 19:38, 27 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Будьте так добры, не глумитесь в обсуждениях. Я понимаю, что вы собираетесь бросить ВикиСклад и напоследок задаёте перцу. Но ведь такие реплики никого не украшают, и вас тоже не украшают.--PereslavlFoto (talk) 14:58, 28 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Any ideas how these should be classified? (There is a known issue with one of the descriptions, separate from this question.) The last image is the building with the square one.

• File:Interior of unidentified mission building. - NARA - 298074.jpg
• File:Another view of gymnasium in Duncan's School after Bureau of Education seizure, 1915. - NARA - 297405.jpg
• File:Gymnasium in Duncan's School after Bureau of Education seizure, 1915. - NARA - 297403.jpg
• File:View of Metlakahtla, Alaska. - NARA - 297857.jpg
• File:Metlakahtla Mission School building in deteriorating condition. - NARA - 297401.jpg

Regards, Dankarl (talk) 15:43, 4 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I just read your message, thanks for it. I have a little bit problem: I made some downloading but I had some pictures as duplicated. Of course I don't need both and I wanted cancel them. I cannot do this because I don't know how is possible. So I created a separate category (name: Should be deleted pictures), and I did think it will be help me. Anyway, do you know how is possible cancel permanently this category includ all picture what is under the name of "Should be canceled pictures"? Thanks a lot. Best regards: Dorogifc (talk

Если Вы ещё здесь, Вы не посмотрите список наследия по Коломне? По-моему, там что-то напутано с координатами по улица Зайцева. Например, угловой дом по Зайцева и Лазарева - номер 14 (как и на картинке), а координаты для номера 14 показывают как на картах Яндекса, то есть неверно.--Ymblanter (talk) 08:32, 16 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Some contents have been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether they should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at their entry. If you created these pages, please note that the fact that they have 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 them, 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! Afrikaans ∙ العربية ∙ беларуская ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца) ∙ български ∙ ပအိုဝ်ႏဘာႏသာႏ ∙ বাংলা ∙ bosanski ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ dansk ∙ Deutsch ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form) ∙ Zazaki ∙ ދިވެހިބަސް ∙ Ελληνικά ∙ English ∙ Esperanto ∙ español ∙ eesti ∙ فارسی ∙ suomi ∙ français ∙ galego ∙ עברית ∙ hrvatski ∙ magyar ∙ հայերեն ∙ Bahasa Indonesia ∙ íslenska ∙ italiano ∙ 日本語 ∙ 한국어 ∙ 조선말 ∙ македонски ∙ മലയാളം ∙ Bahasa Melayu ∙ မြန်မာဘာသာ ∙ norsk bokmål ∙ Plattdüütsch ∙ Nederlands ∙ norsk nynorsk ∙ norsk ∙ occitan ∙ polski ∙ پښتو ∙ português ∙ português do Brasil ∙ română ∙ русский ∙ sicilianu ∙ slovenčina ∙ slovenščina ∙ shqip ∙ српски / srpski ∙ svenska ∙ ไทย ∙ Türkçe ∙ українська ∙ Tiếng Việt ∙ 中文 ∙ 中文（简体） ∙ 中文（繁體） ∙ +/−

Affected:

• File:Moscow, Smolensky Bridge, Rusich train.jpg

And also:

• File:Moscow, Smolensky Bridge.jpg

Yours sincerely Artem Karimov (talk) 06:14, 22 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Some contents have been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether they should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at their entry. If you created these pages, please note that the fact that they have 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 them, 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! Afrikaans ∙ العربية ∙ беларуская ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца) ∙ български ∙ ပအိုဝ်ႏဘာႏသာႏ ∙ বাংলা ∙ bosanski ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ dansk ∙ Deutsch ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form) ∙ Zazaki ∙ ދިވެހިބަސް ∙ Ελληνικά ∙ English ∙ Esperanto ∙ español ∙ eesti ∙ فارسی ∙ suomi ∙ français ∙ galego ∙ עברית ∙ hrvatski ∙ magyar ∙ հայերեն ∙ Bahasa Indonesia ∙ íslenska ∙ italiano ∙ 日本語 ∙ 한국어 ∙ 조선말 ∙ македонски ∙ മലയാളം ∙ Bahasa Melayu ∙ မြန်မာဘာသာ ∙ norsk bokmål ∙ Plattdüütsch ∙ Nederlands ∙ norsk nynorsk ∙ norsk ∙ occitan ∙ polski ∙ پښتو ∙ português ∙ português do Brasil ∙ română ∙ русский ∙ sicilianu ∙ slovenčina ∙ slovenščina ∙ shqip ∙ српски / srpski ∙ svenska ∙ ไทย ∙ Türkçe ∙ українська ∙ Tiếng Việt ∙ 中文 ∙ 中文（简体） ∙ 中文（繁體） ∙ +/−

Affected:

• File:Aviamotornaya 03.jpg

And also:

• File:Aviamotornaya 04.jpg
• File:Aviamotornaya 05.jpg
• File:Aviamotornaya 07.jpg
• File:Aviamotornaya 10.jpg

Yours sincerely Artem Karimov (talk) 06:24, 22 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Some contents have been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether they should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at their entry. If you created these pages, please note that the fact that they have 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 them, 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! Afrikaans ∙ العربية ∙ беларуская ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца) ∙ български ∙ ပအိုဝ်ႏဘာႏသာႏ ∙ বাংলা ∙ bosanski ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ dansk ∙ Deutsch ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form) ∙ Zazaki ∙ ދިވެހިބަސް ∙ Ελληνικά ∙ English ∙ Esperanto ∙ español ∙ eesti ∙ فارسی ∙ suomi ∙ français ∙ galego ∙ עברית ∙ hrvatski ∙ magyar ∙ հայերեն ∙ Bahasa Indonesia ∙ íslenska ∙ italiano ∙ 日本語 ∙ 한국어 ∙ 조선말 ∙ македонски ∙ മലയാളം ∙ Bahasa Melayu ∙ မြန်မာဘာသာ ∙ norsk bokmål ∙ Plattdüütsch ∙ Nederlands ∙ norsk nynorsk ∙ norsk ∙ occitan ∙ polski ∙ پښتو ∙ português ∙ português do Brasil ∙ română ∙ русский ∙ sicilianu ∙ slovenčina ∙ slovenščina ∙ shqip ∙ српски / srpski ∙ svenska ∙ ไทย ∙ Türkçe ∙ українська ∙ Tiếng Việt ∙ 中文 ∙ 中文（简体） ∙ 中文（繁體） ∙ +/−

Affected:

• File:Berezhkovskaya 16-18 view to City 01.JPG

And also:

• File:Berezhkovskaya 16C2 PP 01.JPG
• File:Berezhkovskaya 16C2 PP 04.JPG
• File:Moscow City 16.05.2008 (2).jpg
• File:Moscow City 16.05.2008 (3).jpg
• File:Moscow, City May 2010 02.JPG
• File:Moscow, City May 2010 03.JPG
• File:Moscow, Peter Fomenko theater.jpg
• File:Moscow-City 30.03.2008 01.jpg
• File:Moscow-City 30.03.2008 02.jpg
• File:Moscow-City 30.03.2008 03.jpg
• File:Moscow-City 30.03.2008 04.jpg
• File:Moscow-City 30.03.2008 05.jpg
• File:Moscow-City 30.03.2008 06.jpg
• File:Moscow-City 30.03.2008 07.jpg
• File:Moscow-City 30.03.2008 08.jpg

Yours sincerely Artem Karimov (talk) 22:05, 22 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Kaluga Tsiolkovskogo 79 east 02.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. --Iifar 06:59, 17 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Kashira Morgunova 2 33.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. --Iifar 06:59, 17 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

File:Triumph palace moscow.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! Afrikaans ∙ العربية ∙ беларуская ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца) ∙ български ∙ ပအိုဝ်ႏဘာႏသာႏ ∙ বাংলা ∙ bosanski ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ dansk ∙ Deutsch ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form) ∙ Zazaki ∙ ދިވެހިބަސް ∙ Ελληνικά ∙ English ∙ Esperanto ∙ español ∙ eesti ∙ فارسی ∙ suomi ∙ français ∙ galego ∙ עברית ∙ hrvatski ∙ magyar ∙ հայերեն ∙ Bahasa Indonesia ∙ íslenska ∙ italiano ∙ 日本語 ∙ 한국어 ∙ 조선말 ∙ македонски ∙ മലയാളം ∙ Bahasa Melayu ∙ မြန်မာဘာသာ ∙ norsk bokmål ∙ Plattdüütsch ∙ Nederlands ∙ norsk nynorsk ∙ norsk ∙ occitan ∙ polski ∙ پښتو ∙ português ∙ português do Brasil ∙ română ∙ русский ∙ sicilianu ∙ slovenčina ∙ slovenščina ∙ shqip ∙ српски / srpski ∙ svenska ∙ ไทย ∙ Türkçe ∙ українська ∙ Tiếng Việt ∙ 中文 ∙ 中文（简体） ∙ 中文（繁體） ∙ +/−

84.62.204.235 14:50, 12 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

File:Bccb azerbaijan 1948.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! Afrikaans ∙ العربية ∙ беларуская ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца) ∙ български ∙ ပအိုဝ်ႏဘာႏသာႏ ∙ বাংলা ∙ bosanski ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ dansk ∙ Deutsch ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form) ∙ Zazaki ∙ ދިވެހިބަސް ∙ Ελληνικά ∙ English ∙ Esperanto ∙ español ∙ eesti ∙ فارسی ∙ suomi ∙ français ∙ galego ∙ עברית ∙ hrvatski ∙ magyar ∙ հայերեն ∙ Bahasa Indonesia ∙ íslenska ∙ italiano ∙ 日本語 ∙ 한국어 ∙ 조선말 ∙ македонски ∙ മലയാളം ∙ Bahasa Melayu ∙ မြန်မာဘာသာ ∙ norsk bokmål ∙ Plattdüütsch ∙ Nederlands ∙ norsk nynorsk ∙ norsk ∙ occitan ∙ polski ∙ پښتو ∙ português ∙ português do Brasil ∙ română ∙ русский ∙ sicilianu ∙ slovenčina ∙ slovenščina ∙ shqip ∙ српски / srpski ∙ svenska ∙ ไทย ∙ Türkçe ∙ українська ∙ Tiếng Việt ∙ 中文 ∙ 中文（简体） ∙ 中文（繁體） ∙ +/−

russavia (talk) 06:24, 22 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

File:Bccb georgia 1948.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! Afrikaans ∙ العربية ∙ беларуская ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца) ∙ български ∙ ပအိုဝ်ႏဘာႏသာႏ ∙ বাংলা ∙ bosanski ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ dansk ∙ Deutsch ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form) ∙ Zazaki ∙ ދިވެހިބަސް ∙ Ελληνικά ∙ English ∙ Esperanto ∙ español ∙ eesti ∙ فارسی ∙ suomi ∙ français ∙ galego ∙ עברית ∙ hrvatski ∙ magyar ∙ հայերեն ∙ Bahasa Indonesia ∙ íslenska ∙ italiano ∙ 日本語 ∙ 한국어 ∙ 조선말 ∙ македонски ∙ മലയാളം ∙ Bahasa Melayu ∙ မြန်မာဘာသာ ∙ norsk bokmål ∙ Plattdüütsch ∙ Nederlands ∙ norsk nynorsk ∙ norsk ∙ occitan ∙ polski ∙ پښتو ∙ português ∙ português do Brasil ∙ română ∙ русский ∙ sicilianu ∙ slovenčina ∙ slovenščina ∙ shqip ∙ српски / srpski ∙ svenska ∙ ไทย ∙ Türkçe ∙ українська ∙ Tiếng Việt ∙ 中文 ∙ 中文（简体） ∙ 中文（繁體） ∙ +/−

russavia (talk) 06:24, 22 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

File:Bccb georgia capitals 1948.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! Afrikaans ∙ العربية ∙ беларуская ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца) ∙ български ∙ ပအိုဝ်ႏဘာႏသာႏ ∙ বাংলা ∙ bosanski ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ dansk ∙ Deutsch ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form) ∙ Zazaki ∙ ދިވެހިބަސް ∙ Ελληνικά ∙ English ∙ Esperanto ∙ español ∙ eesti ∙ فارسی ∙ suomi ∙ français ∙ galego ∙ עברית ∙ hrvatski ∙ magyar ∙ հայերեն ∙ Bahasa Indonesia ∙ íslenska ∙ italiano ∙ 日本語 ∙ 한국어 ∙ 조선말 ∙ македонски ∙ മലയാളം ∙ Bahasa Melayu ∙ မြန်မာဘာသာ ∙ norsk bokmål ∙ Plattdüütsch ∙ Nederlands ∙ norsk nynorsk ∙ norsk ∙ occitan ∙ polski ∙ پښتو ∙ português ∙ português do Brasil ∙ română ∙ русский ∙ sicilianu ∙ slovenčina ∙ slovenščina ∙ shqip ∙ српски / srpski ∙ svenska ∙ ไทย ∙ Türkçe ∙ українська ∙ Tiếng Việt ∙ 中文 ∙ 中文（简体） ∙ 中文（繁體） ∙ +/−

russavia (talk) 06:24, 22 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

File:Moscow dorogomilovo 1.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! Afrikaans ∙ العربية ∙ беларуская ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца) ∙ български ∙ ပအိုဝ်ႏဘာႏသာႏ ∙ বাংলা ∙ bosanski ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ dansk ∙ Deutsch ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form) ∙ Zazaki ∙ ދިވެހިބަސް ∙ Ελληνικά ∙ English ∙ Esperanto ∙ español ∙ eesti ∙ فارسی ∙ suomi ∙ français ∙ galego ∙ עברית ∙ hrvatski ∙ magyar ∙ հայերեն ∙ Bahasa Indonesia ∙ íslenska ∙ italiano ∙ 日本語 ∙ 한국어 ∙ 조선말 ∙ македонски ∙ മലയാളം ∙ Bahasa Melayu ∙ မြန်မာဘာသာ ∙ norsk bokmål ∙ Plattdüütsch ∙ Nederlands ∙ norsk nynorsk ∙ norsk ∙ occitan ∙ polski ∙ پښتو ∙ português ∙ português do Brasil ∙ română ∙ русский ∙ sicilianu ∙ slovenčina ∙ slovenščina ∙ shqip ∙ српски / srpski ∙ svenska ∙ ไทย ∙ Türkçe ∙ українська ∙ Tiếng Việt ∙ 中文 ∙ 中文（简体） ∙ 中文（繁體） ∙ +/−

84.61.181.19 21:41, 30 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

File:Gastello north 01.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! Afrikaans ∙ العربية ∙ беларуская ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца) ∙ български ∙ ပအိုဝ်ႏဘာႏသာႏ ∙ বাংলা ∙ bosanski ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ dansk ∙ Deutsch ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form) ∙ Zazaki ∙ ދިވެހިބަސް ∙ Ελληνικά ∙ English ∙ Esperanto ∙ español ∙ eesti ∙ فارسی ∙ suomi ∙ français ∙ galego ∙ עברית ∙ hrvatski ∙ magyar ∙ հայերեն ∙ Bahasa Indonesia ∙ íslenska ∙ italiano ∙ 日本語 ∙ 한국어 ∙ 조선말 ∙ македонски ∙ മലയാളം ∙ Bahasa Melayu ∙ မြန်မာဘာသာ ∙ norsk bokmål ∙ Plattdüütsch ∙ Nederlands ∙ norsk nynorsk ∙ norsk ∙ occitan ∙ polski ∙ پښتو ∙ português ∙ português do Brasil ∙ română ∙ русский ∙ sicilianu ∙ slovenčina ∙ slovenščina ∙ shqip ∙ српски / srpski ∙ svenska ∙ ไทย ∙ Türkçe ∙ українська ∙ Tiếng Việt ∙ 中文 ∙ 中文（简体） ∙ 中文（繁體） ∙ +/−

84.61.181.19 21:42, 30 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

File:Spb karpovka apartments igor fomin levinson 1934.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! Afrikaans ∙ العربية ∙ беларуская ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца) ∙ български ∙ ပအိုဝ်ႏဘာႏသာႏ ∙ বাংলা ∙ bosanski ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ dansk ∙ Deutsch ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form) ∙ Zazaki ∙ ދިވެހިބަސް ∙ Ελληνικά ∙ English ∙ Esperanto ∙ español ∙ eesti ∙ فارسی ∙ suomi ∙ français ∙ galego ∙ עברית ∙ hrvatski ∙ magyar ∙ հայերեն ∙ Bahasa Indonesia ∙ íslenska ∙ italiano ∙ 日本語 ∙ 한국어 ∙ 조선말 ∙ македонски ∙ മലയാളം ∙ Bahasa Melayu ∙ မြန်မာဘာသာ ∙ norsk bokmål ∙ Plattdüütsch ∙ Nederlands ∙ norsk nynorsk ∙ norsk ∙ occitan ∙ polski ∙ پښتو ∙ português ∙ português do Brasil ∙ română ∙ русский ∙ sicilianu ∙ slovenčina ∙ slovenščina ∙ shqip ∙ српски / srpski ∙ svenska ∙ ไทย ∙ Türkçe ∙ українська ∙ Tiếng Việt ∙ 中文 ∙ 中文（简体） ∙ 中文（繁體） ∙ +/−

russavia (talk) 16:34, 14 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

File:Spb kirovsky prospect apartments simonov abrosimov hryakov 1934.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! Afrikaans ∙ العربية ∙ беларуская ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца) ∙ български ∙ ပအိုဝ်ႏဘာႏသာႏ ∙ বাংলা ∙ bosanski ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ dansk ∙ Deutsch ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form) ∙ Zazaki ∙ ދިވެހިބަސް ∙ Ελληνικά ∙ English ∙ Esperanto ∙ español ∙ eesti ∙ فارسی ∙ suomi ∙ français ∙ galego ∙ עברית ∙ hrvatski ∙ magyar ∙ հայերեն ∙ Bahasa Indonesia ∙ íslenska ∙ italiano ∙ 日本語 ∙ 한국어 ∙ 조선말 ∙ македонски ∙ മലയാളം ∙ Bahasa Melayu ∙ မြန်မာဘာသာ ∙ norsk bokmål ∙ Plattdüütsch ∙ Nederlands ∙ norsk nynorsk ∙ norsk ∙ occitan ∙ polski ∙ پښتو ∙ português ∙ português do Brasil ∙ română ∙ русский ∙ sicilianu ∙ slovenčina ∙ slovenščina ∙ shqip ∙ српски / srpski ∙ svenska ∙ ไทย ∙ Türkçe ∙ українська ∙ Tiếng Việt ∙ 中文 ∙ 中文（简体） ∙ 中文（繁體） ∙ +/−

russavia (talk) 16:36, 14 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

File:Spb district council igor fomin daugul 1930 1935.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! Afrikaans ∙ العربية ∙ беларуская ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца) ∙ български ∙ ပအိုဝ်ႏဘာႏသာႏ ∙ বাংলা ∙ bosanski ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ dansk ∙ Deutsch ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form) ∙ Zazaki ∙ ދިވެހިބަސް ∙ Ελληνικά ∙ English ∙ Esperanto ∙ español ∙ eesti ∙ فارسی ∙ suomi ∙ français ∙ galego ∙ עברית ∙ hrvatski ∙ magyar ∙ հայերեն ∙ Bahasa Indonesia ∙ íslenska ∙ italiano ∙ 日本語 ∙ 한국어 ∙ 조선말 ∙ македонски ∙ മലയാളം ∙ Bahasa Melayu ∙ မြန်မာဘာသာ ∙ norsk bokmål ∙ Plattdüütsch ∙ Nederlands ∙ norsk nynorsk ∙ norsk ∙ occitan ∙ polski ∙ پښتو ∙ português ∙ português do Brasil ∙ română ∙ русский ∙ sicilianu ∙ slovenčina ∙ slovenščina ∙ shqip ∙ српски / srpski ∙ svenska ∙ ไทย ∙ Türkçe ∙ українська ∙ Tiếng Việt ∙ 中文 ∙ 中文（简体） ∙ 中文（繁體） ∙ +/−

russavia (talk) 16:37, 14 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

File:Petrovsky inside.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! Afrikaans ∙ العربية ∙ беларуская ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца) ∙ български ∙ ပအိုဝ်ႏဘာႏသာႏ ∙ বাংলা ∙ bosanski ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ dansk ∙ Deutsch ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form) ∙ Zazaki ∙ ދިވެހިބަސް ∙ Ελληνικά ∙ English ∙ Esperanto ∙ español ∙ eesti ∙ فارسی ∙ suomi ∙ français ∙ galego ∙ עברית ∙ hrvatski ∙ magyar ∙ հայերեն ∙ Bahasa Indonesia ∙ íslenska ∙ italiano ∙ 日本語 ∙ 한국어 ∙ 조선말 ∙ македонски ∙ മലയാളം ∙ Bahasa Melayu ∙ မြန်မာဘာသာ ∙ norsk bokmål ∙ Plattdüütsch ∙ Nederlands ∙ norsk nynorsk ∙ norsk ∙ occitan ∙ polski ∙ پښتو ∙ português ∙ português do Brasil ∙ română ∙ русский ∙ sicilianu ∙ slovenčina ∙ slovenščina ∙ shqip ∙ српски / srpski ∙ svenska ∙ ไทย ∙ Türkçe ∙ українська ∙ Tiếng Việt ∙ 中文 ∙ 中文（简体） ∙ 中文（繁體） ∙ +/−

russavia (talk) 21:15, 14 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

File:Petrovsky interiors.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! Afrikaans ∙ العربية ∙ беларуская ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца) ∙ български ∙ ပအိုဝ်ႏဘာႏသာႏ ∙ বাংলা ∙ bosanski ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ dansk ∙ Deutsch ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form) ∙ Zazaki ∙ ދިވެހިބަސް ∙ Ελληνικά ∙ English ∙ Esperanto ∙ español ∙ eesti ∙ فارسی ∙ suomi ∙ français ∙ galego ∙ עברית ∙ hrvatski ∙ magyar ∙ հայերեն ∙ Bahasa Indonesia ∙ íslenska ∙ italiano ∙ 日本語 ∙ 한국어 ∙ 조선말 ∙ македонски ∙ മലയാളം ∙ Bahasa Melayu ∙ မြန်မာဘာသာ ∙ norsk bokmål ∙ Plattdüütsch ∙ Nederlands ∙ norsk nynorsk ∙ norsk ∙ occitan ∙ polski ∙ پښتو ∙ português ∙ português do Brasil ∙ română ∙ русский ∙ sicilianu ∙ slovenčina ∙ slovenščina ∙ shqip ∙ српски / srpski ∙ svenska ∙ ไทย ∙ Türkçe ∙ українська ∙ Tiếng Việt ∙ 中文 ∙ 中文（简体） ∙ 中文（繁體） ∙ +/−

russavia (talk) 21:15, 14 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

File:Pravda club molokov chekmotayev 1937.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! Afrikaans ∙ العربية ∙ беларуская ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца) ∙ български ∙ ပအိုဝ်ႏဘာႏသာႏ ∙ বাংলা ∙ bosanski ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ dansk ∙ Deutsch ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form) ∙ Zazaki ∙ ދިވެހިބަސް ∙ Ελληνικά ∙ English ∙ Esperanto ∙ español ∙ eesti ∙ فارسی ∙ suomi ∙ français ∙ galego ∙ עברית ∙ hrvatski ∙ magyar ∙ հայերեն ∙ Bahasa Indonesia ∙ íslenska ∙ italiano ∙ 日本語 ∙ 한국어 ∙ 조선말 ∙ македонски ∙ മലയാളം ∙ Bahasa Melayu ∙ မြန်မာဘာသာ ∙ norsk bokmål ∙ Plattdüütsch ∙ Nederlands ∙ norsk nynorsk ∙ norsk ∙ occitan ∙ polski ∙ پښتو ∙ português ∙ português do Brasil ∙ română ∙ русский ∙ sicilianu ∙ slovenčina ∙ slovenščina ∙ shqip ∙ српски / srpski ∙ svenska ∙ ไทย ∙ Türkçe ∙ українська ∙ Tiếng Việt ∙ 中文 ∙ 中文（简体） ∙ 中文（繁體） ∙ +/−

russavia (talk) 21:25, 14 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

File:Bccb stalin 1948.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! Afrikaans ∙ العربية ∙ беларуская ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца) ∙ български ∙ ပအိုဝ်ႏဘာႏသာႏ ∙ বাংলা ∙ bosanski ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ dansk ∙ Deutsch ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form) ∙ Zazaki ∙ ދިވެހިބަސް ∙ Ελληνικά ∙ English ∙ Esperanto ∙ español ∙ eesti ∙ فارسی ∙ suomi ∙ français ∙ galego ∙ עברית ∙ hrvatski ∙ magyar ∙ հայերեն ∙ Bahasa Indonesia ∙ íslenska ∙ italiano ∙ 日本語 ∙ 한국어 ∙ 조선말 ∙ македонски ∙ മലയാളം ∙ Bahasa Melayu ∙ မြန်မာဘာသာ ∙ norsk bokmål ∙ Plattdüütsch ∙ Nederlands ∙ norsk nynorsk ∙ norsk ∙ occitan ∙ polski ∙ پښتو ∙ português ∙ português do Brasil ∙ română ∙ русский ∙ sicilianu ∙ slovenčina ∙ slovenščina ∙ shqip ∙ српски / srpski ∙ svenska ∙ ไทย ∙ Türkçe ∙ українська ∙ Tiếng Việt ∙ 中文 ∙ 中文（简体） ∙ 中文（繁體） ∙ +/−

russavia (talk) 01:29, 16 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

File:Moscow, City May 2010 03.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! Afrikaans ∙ العربية ∙ беларуская ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца) ∙ български ∙ ပအိုဝ်ႏဘာႏသာႏ ∙ বাংলা ∙ bosanski ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ dansk ∙ Deutsch ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form) ∙ Zazaki ∙ ދިވެހިބަސް ∙ Ελληνικά ∙ English ∙ Esperanto ∙ español ∙ eesti ∙ فارسی ∙ suomi ∙ français ∙ galego ∙ עברית ∙ hrvatski ∙ magyar ∙ հայերեն ∙ Bahasa Indonesia ∙ íslenska ∙ italiano ∙ 日本語 ∙ 한국어 ∙ 조선말 ∙ македонски ∙ മലയാളം ∙ Bahasa Melayu ∙ မြန်မာဘာသာ ∙ norsk bokmål ∙ Plattdüütsch ∙ Nederlands ∙ norsk nynorsk ∙ norsk ∙ occitan ∙ polski ∙ پښتو ∙ português ∙ português do Brasil ∙ română ∙ русский ∙ sicilianu ∙ slovenčina ∙ slovenščina ∙ shqip ∙ српски / srpski ∙ svenska ∙ ไทย ∙ Türkçe ∙ українська ∙ Tiếng Việt ∙ 中文 ∙ 中文（简体） ∙ 中文（繁體） ∙ +/−

 Ronhjones  ^(Talk) 01:10, 20 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Здравствуйте. Хочу с вами посоветоваться по поводу возможности использования аудиозаписи песни "Вдоль по Питерской" в одноименной статье. На commons, насколько я могу судить, этой песни нет ни в чьём исполнении. В интернете есть различные файлы (например, 1), вопрос в том, какие ограничения действуют на их использование в вики-пространстве. --Ceroi (talk) 10:51, 13 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

• Сама песня, как я понимаю, свободна, надо ещё чтобы исполнение было свободным - 70 лет после смерти исполнителя. Ну, или кого-то из друзей попросить исполнить, записать и выложить под свободной лицензией.--Ymblanter (talk) 10:59, 13 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

  Ф. И. Шаляпин умер в 1938, между тем, в описании файла приводится ссылка на 1917 год и на досоветскую публикацию. Вот я и думаю: что же насчёт 1920-30-х гг.? --Ceroi (talk) 11:13, 13 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

  Всё, что было опубликовано при жизни Шаляпина - в ОД. Всё, что было опубликовано до 1917 года в России, любого исполнителя, тоже ОД.--Ymblanter (talk) 11:30, 13 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Krasnoe Archangel Michael belltower 10j.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.--ArildV 06:37, 4 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Krasnoe archangel Michael 34.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, perhaps a bit too much of grass for my taste :-) --Cayambe 15:07, 4 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Приятно удивлён, обнаружив обработанную Вами фотографию (Сестрорецк дача на углу Лесной и Сосновой). Качество отличное. Большое спасибо за сотрудничество. С уважением--Пётр Иванов (talk) 17:59, 14 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hello!

I was hoping that I might be able to use your photo: http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Ruza_barn_doors_01.JPG as part of a matte painting in a feature film, Revelation Trail. If I read the CC license correctly, this is acceptable (but wanted to make sure). I just needed to know if you wanted attribution by name in the credits, and if so, how do I need to properly attribute you in the film's credits? Thanks for your time!

John Gibson

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Berezhkovskaya 16-18 view to City 01.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.--ArildV 14:48, 29 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

bahasa melayu ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ dansk ∙ deutsch (Sie-Form) ∙ deutsch ∙ english ∙ español ∙ français ∙ galego ∙ hrvatski ∙ italiano ∙ magyar ∙ nederlands ∙ norsk ∙ norsk bokmål ∙ norsk nynorsk ∙ português ∙ polski ∙ português do Brasil ∙ română ∙ sicilianu ∙ slovenčina ∙ slovenščina ∙ suomi ∙ svenska ∙ türkçe ∙ беларуская ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца) ∙ български ∙ македонски ∙ русский ∙ українська ∙ ಕನ್ನಡ ∙ ತುಳು ∙ മലയാളം ∙ 한국어 ∙ 日本語 ∙ 中文（简体） ∙ 中文（繁體） ∙ עברית ∙ العربيَّة ∙ فارسی ∙ +/−

This media may be deleted.

Thanks for uploading File:Noginsk 8 Marta 4 03.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.

–⁠moogsi (blah) 04:31, 6 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

bahasa melayu ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ dansk ∙ deutsch (Sie-Form) ∙ deutsch ∙ english ∙ español ∙ français ∙ galego ∙ hrvatski ∙ italiano ∙ magyar ∙ nederlands ∙ norsk ∙ norsk bokmål ∙ norsk nynorsk ∙ português ∙ polski ∙ português do Brasil ∙ română ∙ sicilianu ∙ slovenčina ∙ slovenščina ∙ suomi ∙ svenska ∙ türkçe ∙ беларуская ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца) ∙ български ∙ македонски ∙ русский ∙ українська ∙ ಕನ್ನಡ ∙ ತುಳು ∙ മലയാളം ∙ 한국어 ∙ 日本語 ∙ 中文（简体） ∙ 中文（繁體） ∙ עברית ∙ العربيَّة ∙ فارسی ∙ +/−

This media may be deleted.

Thanks for uploading File:Noginsk 8 Marta 4 35.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.

–⁠moogsi (blah) 04:36, 6 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

bahasa melayu ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ dansk ∙ deutsch (Sie-Form) ∙ deutsch ∙ english ∙ español ∙ français ∙ galego ∙ hrvatski ∙ italiano ∙ magyar ∙ nederlands ∙ norsk ∙ norsk bokmål ∙ norsk nynorsk ∙ português ∙ polski ∙ português do Brasil ∙ română ∙ sicilianu ∙ slovenčina ∙ slovenščina ∙ suomi ∙ svenska ∙ türkçe ∙ беларуская ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца) ∙ български ∙ македонски ∙ русский ∙ українська ∙ ಕನ್ನಡ ∙ ತುಳು ∙ മലയാളം ∙ 한국어 ∙ 日本語 ∙ 中文（简体） ∙ 中文（繁體） ∙ עברית ∙ العربيَّة ∙ فارسی ∙ +/−

This media may be deleted.

Thanks for uploading File:Noginsk 8 Marta 4 32.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.

–⁠moogsi (blah) 04:36, 6 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

bahasa melayu ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ dansk ∙ deutsch (Sie-Form) ∙ deutsch ∙ english ∙ español ∙ français ∙ galego ∙ hrvatski ∙ italiano ∙ magyar ∙ nederlands ∙ norsk ∙ norsk bokmål ∙ norsk nynorsk ∙ português ∙ polski ∙ português do Brasil ∙ română ∙ sicilianu ∙ slovenčina ∙ slovenščina ∙ suomi ∙ svenska ∙ türkçe ∙ беларуская ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца) ∙ български ∙ македонски ∙ русский ∙ українська ∙ ಕನ್ನಡ ∙ ತುಳು ∙ മലയാളം ∙ 한국어 ∙ 日本語 ∙ 中文（简体） ∙ 中文（繁體） ∙ עברית ∙ العربيَّة ∙ فارسی ∙ +/−

This media may be deleted.

Thanks for uploading File:Noginsk 8 Marta 4 05.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.

–⁠moogsi (blah) 04:37, 6 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

bahasa melayu ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ dansk ∙ deutsch (Sie-Form) ∙ deutsch ∙ english ∙ español ∙ français ∙ galego ∙ hrvatski ∙ italiano ∙ magyar ∙ nederlands ∙ norsk ∙ norsk bokmål ∙ norsk nynorsk ∙ português ∙ polski ∙ português do Brasil ∙ română ∙ sicilianu ∙ slovenčina ∙ slovenščina ∙ suomi ∙ svenska ∙ türkçe ∙ беларуская ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца) ∙ български ∙ македонски ∙ русский ∙ українська ∙ ಕನ್ನಡ ∙ ತುಳು ∙ മലയാളം ∙ 한국어 ∙ 日本語 ∙ 中文（简体） ∙ 中文（繁體） ∙ עברית ∙ العربيَّة ∙ فارسی ∙ +/−

This media may be deleted.

Thanks for uploading File:Noginsk 8 Marta 4 06.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.

–⁠moogsi (blah) 04:37, 6 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]