User talk:Remi Mathis

First steps tutorial Our first steps help file 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 #wikimedia-commons. 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 Graphics 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, write this: [[:Image:Foo.jpg]], it makes this: 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?)

العربية ∙ asturianu ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ ∙ বাংলা ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ dansk ∙ Deutsch ∙ Ελληνικά ∙ English ∙ español ∙ euskara ∙ فارسی ∙ suomi ∙ français ∙ galego ∙ עברית ∙ hrvatski ∙ magyar ∙ italiano ∙ 日本語 ∙ 한국어 ∙ македонски ∙ മലയാളം ∙ norsk bokmål ∙ Plattdüütsch ∙ Nederlands ∙ norsk nynorsk ∙ norsk ∙ polski ∙ português ∙ português do Brasil ∙ русский ∙ sicilianu ∙ slovenčina ∙ slovenščina ∙ svenska ∙ ไทย ∙ Türkçe ∙ українська ∙ Tiếng Việt ∙ 简体中文‎ ∙ 繁體中文‎ ∙ +/−

This media may be deleted.

Thanks for uploading Image:Catalogue livres Ferenc Széchényi.jpg. I notice the image page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you have not created this media yourself then you need to argue that we have the right to use the media on Wikimedia Commons (see copyright tagging below). If you have not created the media yourself then you should also specify where you found it, i.e., in most cases link to the website where you got it, and the terms of use for content from that page. If the content is a derivative of a copyrighted work, you need to supply the names and a licence of the original authors as well.

If the media also doesn't have a copyright tag, then you must also add one. If you created/took the picture, audio, or video then you can use {{self|cc-by-sa-2.5}} to release it under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike license or {{PD-self}} to release it into the public domain. See Commons:Copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

Note that any unsourced and untagged images will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have uploaded other media, please check that you have specified their source and copyright tagged them, too. You can find all your uploads using the Gallery tool. Thank you. |EPO| 13:48, 10 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Regarding what you asked here, there must be at least 5 supporting votes for the picture to be featured. The rules are outlined at the top of this page. I was humming and harring about that particular case, but unfortunately had no choice but to decline FP status. Unfortunately it's not me who decides what is consensus :(, I personally would have liked the image to become featured. French (computer-translated): Concernant ce que vous avez demandé ici, il doit y avoir au moins de 5 conviennent des voix pour que l'image soit décrite. Les règles sont décrites au dessus de cette page. J'étais irrésolu au sujet de ce cas particulier, mais n'ai malheureusement eu aucun choix mais pour diminuer le statut de point de gel. Malheureusement il n'est pas moi qui décide ce qui est consensus, je personnellement voudrait que l'image devînt comportée. --Pumpmeup 02:50, 10 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

العربية ∙ asturianu ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ ∙ বাংলা ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ dansk ∙ Deutsch ∙ Ελληνικά ∙ English ∙ español ∙ euskara ∙ فارسی ∙ suomi ∙ français ∙ galego ∙ עברית ∙ hrvatski ∙ magyar ∙ italiano ∙ 日本語 ∙ 한국어 ∙ македонски ∙ മലയാളം ∙ norsk bokmål ∙ Plattdüütsch ∙ Nederlands ∙ norsk nynorsk ∙ norsk ∙ polski ∙ português ∙ português do Brasil ∙ русский ∙ sicilianu ∙ slovenčina ∙ slovenščina ∙ svenska ∙ ไทย ∙ Türkçe ∙ українська ∙ Tiếng Việt ∙ 简体中文‎ ∙ 繁體中文‎ ∙ +/−

This media may be deleted.

Thanks for uploading Image:Henri_Lafontaine.JPG. I notice the image page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you have not created this media yourself then you need to argue that we have the right to use the media on Wikimedia Commons (see copyright tagging below). If you have not created the media yourself then you should also specify where you found it, i.e., in most cases link to the website where you got it, and the terms of use for content from that page. If the content is a derivative of a copyrighted work, you need to supply the names and a licence of the original authors as well.

If the media also doesn't have a copyright tag, then you must also add one. If you created/took the picture, audio, or video then you can use {{self|GFDL|cc-by-sa-all}} to release it under the multilicense GFDL plus Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike All-version license or {{PD-self}} to release it into the public domain. See Commons:Copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

Note that any unsourced and untagged images will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have uploaded other media, please check that you have specified their source and copyright tagged them, too. You can find all your uploads using the Gallery tool. Thank you. Polarlys 21:54, 11 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

-mattbuck (Talk) 21:56, 12 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Bonjour,

J'ai supprimé 2 des catégories du fichier ci-dessus parce qu'elles me semblaient inapropriée ou trop vague (Paris). Mais je n'ai pas su le ranger dans une categ + pertinente. Cordialement. --Pline (talk) 22:30, 20 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Bonjour,

J'ai déplacé ta demande sur la page Commons:Deletion requests/File:Mottet agathe.jpg. C'est une simple formalité qui ne change rien au fond de l'affaire. J'ai aussi rajouté un bandeau sur l'image et un avertissement sur la page de discussion de Furmeyer. Teofilo (talk) 13:32, 10 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Afrikaans ∙ العربية ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца) ∙ বাংলা ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ dansk ∙ Deutsch ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form) ∙ Ελληνικά ∙ English ∙ Esperanto ∙ español ∙ فارسی ∙ suomi ∙ français ∙ galego ∙ עברית ∙ magyar ∙ íslenska ∙ italiano ∙ 日本語 ∙ ქართული ∙ 한국어 ∙ македонски ∙ മലയാളം ∙ norsk bokmål ∙ Plattdüütsch ∙ Nederlands ∙ norsk ∙ polski ∙ português ∙ português do Brasil ∙ română ∙ русский ∙ sicilianu ∙ slovenčina ∙ slovenščina ∙ српски / srpski ∙ svenska ∙ Türkçe ∙ українська ∙ Tiếng Việt ∙ 中文（简体）‎ ∙ 中文（繁體）‎ ∙ +/−

---

Hello, Remi Mathis!

Thanks a lot for contributing to the Wikimedia Commons! Here's a tip to make your uploads more useful: Why not add some categories to describe them? This will help more people to find and use them.

Here's how:

1) If you're using the UploadWizard, you can add categories to each file when you describe it. Just click "more options" for the file and add the categories which make sense:

2) You can also pick the file from your list of uploads, edit the file description page, and manually add the category code at the end of the page.

[[Category:Category name]]

For example, if you are uploading a diagram showing the orbits of comets, you add the following code:

[[Category:Astronomical diagrams]]

[[Category:Comets]]

This will make the diagram show up in the categories "Astronomical diagrams" and "Comets".

When picking categories, try to choose a specific category ("Astronomical diagrams") over a generic one ("Illustrations").

Thanks again for your uploads! More information about categorization can be found in Commons:Categories, and don't hesitate to leave a note on the help desk.

BotMultichillT 00:08, 8 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

• Image:Envoi de René Girard.JPG was uncategorized on 6 September 2009.
• Image:Wikipedians at work.jpg was uncategorized on 7 July 2011 CategorizationBot (talk) 11:34, 8 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]
• Image:Église de Saint-Restitut - obiit prêtre Arnauldus.jpg was uncategorized on 12 August 2011 CategorizationBot (talk) 11:43, 13 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
• Image:Getty Center - Terrasse Nord-Ouest (cantine).jpg was uncategorized on 12 November 2011 CategorizationBot (talk) 19:22, 13 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
• Image:Getty Villa - storages jars - inv. 86.AE.79 and 86.AE.80.jpg was uncategorized on 17 November 2011 CategorizationBot (talk) 22:07, 18 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
• Image:Pegasus bridge - détail.jpg was uncategorized on 22 November 2011 CategorizationBot (talk) 14:31, 23 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
• Image:Pegasus bridge - profil.jpg was uncategorized on 22 November 2011 CategorizationBot (talk) 14:31, 23 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
• Image:Pegasus bridge - détail2.jpg was uncategorized on 22 November 2011 CategorizationBot (talk) 14:31, 23 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
• Image:Pegasus bridge - mécanisme.jpg was uncategorized on 22 November 2011 CategorizationBot (talk) 14:31, 23 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
• Image:Pegasus bridge - haut du mécanisme.jpg was uncategorized on 22 November 2011 CategorizationBot (talk) 14:31, 23 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
• Image:Oxford - Merton fields 6.JPG was uncategorized on 23 December 2011 CategorizationBot (talk) 13:06, 24 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
• Image:Oxford - Merton fields 8.JPG was uncategorized on 23 December 2011 CategorizationBot (talk) 13:06, 24 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
• Image:Oxford - Merton fields 9.JPG was uncategorized on 23 December 2011 CategorizationBot (talk) 13:06, 24 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
• Image:Oxford - Merton fields 7.JPG was uncategorized on 23 December 2011 CategorizationBot (talk) 13:06, 24 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
• Image:Oxford - Merton Fields 9.JPG was uncategorized on 23 December 2011 CategorizationBot (talk) 13:06, 24 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
• Image:Oxford - Merton Fields 11.JPG was uncategorized on 23 December 2011 CategorizationBot (talk) 13:06, 24 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hello,

Je voulais juste te signaler que je t’ai donné les droits d’Autopatrolled. Concrètement, cela ne changera rien dans ta manière de contribuer à Commons, mais les patrouilleurs de Special:RecentChanges et Special:NewPages sauront qu’il n’y a pas besoin de vérifier tes contributions en quête de vandalisme ou de boulette (tes modifications ne seront plus marquées du disgracieux point d’exclamation rouge).

Amicalement, Jean-Fred (talk) 21:04, 11 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Bonjour,

l'atelier photo qui avait lieu ce week-end s'est suffisemment bien passé pour que l'on envisage d'en organiser d'autres éditions. Comme tu avais exprimé de l'intérêt sans pouvoir venir, je me permets de t'écrire en priorité pour te demander s'il y a des lieux ou des dates qui t'arrangeraient ou te sembleraient pertinents. Si tu as des idées, tu peux les soumettre sur User talk:Rama/atelier photo 2.

Merci et peut-être à un de ces jours ! Rama (talk) 09:44, 7 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Bonjour,

Je me suis permis d'enregistrer l'image représentant la signature manuscrite de René Girard figurant sur la page Wikipédia qui lui est consacrée. Je pense que cette image est beaucoup trop grande et trop lourde (1669×918 pixels, 614 ko, c'est un peu dingue pour l'image d'une signature...). Je l'ai réduite (800×440 pixels, 40 ko) et nettoyée. Vous pouvez la consulter à l'adresse suivante et éventuellement remplacer l'image existante si vous pensez que c'est judicieux. http://img513.imageshack.us/img513/1456/signaturederengirard.jpg

très bien, merci. Remi Mathis (talk) 19:53, 28 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Bonsoir et merci de tes compliments gentils et élogieux !!

Comme tu l'auras peut-être noté, je suis un "classique" et tout ce qui touche à l'histoire m'intéresse. Tes photos me plaisent bien à cet égard car j'y retrouve mes centres d'intérêt !! les armoiries des d'Albert de Luynes sont très réussies. celles de Louis-le-Grand un tout petit peu moins mais c'est bon. Pour les dos, je crains qu'il ne te faille reprendre un cliché. Si tu regardes bien, tu t'aperçois que seul un (trop) petit centre est net, il y a donc un problème de "focus", dont je ne pense pas qu'il puisse être rattrapé par logiciel (j'utilise GIMP). En plus, à droite, il y a un vilain reflet qui empêche de distinguer de quels ouvrages il s'agit. Et à gauche, l'ouvrage de Pierre Louÿs est malencontreusement coupé. Amusant: j'ai pris celle-ci il y a quelques mois, dans le même esprit. Comme tu vois, l'idée m'avait séduit !!

Réduire le bruit d'une photo ? La prendre avec l'ISO le plus bas possible !! Sinon, il y a bien des "plug in" dans GIMP (GREYCstoration par exemple), mais c'est à manier avec précaution, je ne sais pas très bien m'en servir. Si tu réduis le bruit, ça "lisse" l'image de façon artificielle et ça se voit (à mon avis). Donc il faut faire gaffe. Si tu regardes mes orgues de St Etienne du Mont de près, tu verras ce que je veux dire, j'ai fait très attention mais quand même, j'ai perdu des détails et ça se voit (ça se "sent", dirais-je...). je suis flatté que celles de Versailles t'aient plu. J'aime bien aussi (verticalité des colonnes et celle des tuyaux, nuances du gris...) A propos d'orgue... Petit, j'ai eu le privilège d'entendre de nombreuses fois Marcel Dupré à Saint-Sulpice... Je crains que ta photo à son sujet ne passe pas: reflets, lampe gênante, incongrue et incomplète, bas des tuyaux à droite et buffet coupés sont des défauts qui seront relevés je le crains. Mais il y a une "atmosphère".

Merci de ton message, et aussi de ne pas te formaliser de mon "rejet". J'essaie d'être honnête et de ne pas blesser les gens.

Mon arrivée dans "Commons" date d'à peine un an, et j'ai été beaucoup aidé par des commentaires et des rejets au début.

Nos chemins se recroiseront sûrement, si une de mes appréciations te surprend ou te choque, n'hésite bien sûr pas à me solliciter.

Bien cordialement --Jebulon (talk) 23:33, 30 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

PS: j'ai failli promouvoir ton pont ardéchois, mais le flou en haut à gauche ainsi que l'aberration chromatique magenta sous les tuiles me font hésiter. Le reflet est en revanche génial !!--Jebulon (talk) 23:39, 30 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Crédit Lyonnais annexe - rue Ménars - above the door.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. --Carschten 18:16, 29 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Salut.

je ne peux rien te promettre en terme de résultat, mais je vais essayer.

Peux-tu me donner des précisions ? (chapelle, nature de l'image, et toutes autres infos dont je pourrais avoir besoin pour ne pas te décevoir )

--Jebulon (talk) 19:39, 1 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

j'y vais demain, j'espère que je pourrai accéder. Une nouvelle fois, je ne te promets pas la qualité du résultat!--Jebulon (talk) 20:51, 1 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Mon nom dans les Nouvelles de l'Estampe ? Le rêve d'une vie ! Palmes Académiques et Ordre des Arts et Lettres me sont promis !--Jebulon (talk) 22:06, 1 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Mission accomplie ! Ce n'est pas une Ascension, mais une Résurrection. Tout juste restaurée ! J'ai pris une bonne cinquantaine de clichés, y compris de détails (cartouches de faux-bronze etc...). Dès que j'aurai accès à mon ordi tranquillement, je verrai à trier tout ça. Je fais aussi vite que possible, tu devrais trouver de quoi illustrer joliment ton article j'espère.--Jebulon (talk) 13:51, 2 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Parfait je t'envoie ça.--Jebulon (talk) 21:42, 3 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Salut! Alors, qu'est-ce que ça a donné ? Tu as publié ? Si oui, il faudra m'envoyer un exemplaire de la revue !

Amicalement, --Jebulon (talk) 14:19, 29 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

La revue doit sortir d'un jour à l'autre et ta photo est en couleur en pleine page :-)

Je t'en envoie un exemplaire dès sa sortie : peux-tu m'envoyer ton adresse postale ?

Merci encore

Remi Mathis (talk) 14:25, 29 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Coats of arms Louis le Grand on book.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 Not absolute sharpness but good.--Jebulon 22:35, 30 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Coats of arms book d'Albert de Luynes.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 Très bien !--Jebulon 22:34, 30 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Chariez belltower.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. --Cayambe 19:39, 5 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I have removed

• All the pictures in Category:Monument aux morts (Nice)
• General views in Category:Palais de la Porte Dorée

which you somehow included in

• Commons:Deletion requests/File:Guayaquil Montage by Ultraman X77.jpg

I removed them rather than fixing them, because even if you had created them as new DRs, they would not have been valid.

In each case you need to create a Commons:Deletion requests/Mass deletion request and notify each of the uploaders. I know this is a nuisance, but it must be done.      Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 14:47, 26 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Ne serais-tu pas mon grand voisin et compagnon de la soirée ? --LPLT (talk) 18:55, 15 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Ah non vu les photos t'étais trop loin ! J'en ai un paquet de plus proche ! que je suis en train de charger--LPLT (talk) 18:57, 15 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Dans 30-45 min j'aurais tout chargé. Dommage que ce ne fût toi, on aurait ainsi fait connaissance. Ce compagnon photographe était également très sympa !--LPLT (talk) 19:04, 15 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Coucou,

Suite à notre conversation de ce WE, je t’ai filé les droits de Commons:Renommeur de fichiers. Pense à lire Commons:Renommer un fichier.

Use it well.

Jean-Fred (talk) 17:13, 21 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

You should be aware that in some circumstances, a frame can be copyrighted even when the painting contained in the frame is out of copyright. The usual Wikimedia Commons practice is to trim away the frame in a photograph of one painting... AnonMoos (talk) 19:39, 18 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I prefer to upload the painting both with and without the frame since 1/the kind of frame used is an important information 2/it enables you to be sure that the painting is entire (a reproach often made against Commons by art historians). Best wishes. Remi Mathis (talk) 19:45, 18 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. When you upload a PD old painting like File:Gérôme - Dante et Virgile aux Enfers - cadre.jpg, please add {{Non-free frame}} (if needed). Thank you :)--Trixt (talk) 19:39, 18 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

OK, I didn't know. Thx. Is it better to upload under CC-BY-SA? Remi Mathis (talk) 19:46, 18 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

For example, in File:Gérôme - Dante et Virgile aux Enfers - cadre.jpg you should specify a free license for your photograph (CC-BY-SA-3.0 is ok, {{Cc-by-sa-1.0+}} is better ;) Actually, the copyright status of the photographic reproduction is missing...--Trixt (talk) 20:50, 18 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

(Chiming in) It is better to not use PD-Art when uploading your own photographs. You may want to use {{CC-zero}} if you wish to dedicate your photograph to the public domain (on top of {{PD-Old-100}} to tell the artwork itself is PD). Jean-Fred (talk) 20:52, 18 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Bonsoir !

Content de te revoir !

Merci de ton vote et de ton compliment. J'ai d'autres textures de murs à venir, j'espère qu'elles te plairont également. J'aime bien faire aussi ce genre de photo, j'y trouve de la poésie, et ça me change des plafonds obscurs d'églises et des Corneilles ;) !

Cordialement, --Jebulon (talk) 23:12, 19 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Oui, ç'a un côté presque abstrait qui me touche beaucoup. Dans le même genre figuratif/abstrait, j'ai bien aimé la meule de foin également ! Amitiés, Remi Mathis (talk) 20:47, 20 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Fontaine-de-Vaucluse - moulin - pales.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 Interesting and good quality. --Ximonic 23:45, 18 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Prieuré du Val des Nymphes - miroir.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, nice evening light. A geotag would be great. --Coyau 22:19, 25 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Salut Rémi, au cas où tu ne l'aurais pas vu ta photo penche légèrement sur le droite. Là c'est génant parce qu'on le voit à cause des lignes du bâtiment. Je pense que cela pourrait être un QI si tu la redresses. PierreSelim (talk) 08:06, 30 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

J'ai chargé une nouvelle version : est-ce que ça va ou faut-il plus redresser ? Merci, Remi Mathis (talk) 08:22, 30 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Moi je trouve ça bien. PierreSelim (talk) 08:35, 30 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Bibliothèque nationale de France (Richelieu) - oculi cour Vivienne 2.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 ça penche un poil à droite.--Jebulon 14:06, 26 August 2011 (UTC) It's better now, QI for me PierreSelim 09:04, 30 August 2011 (UTC) agree.--Jebulon 10:17, 30 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Bonjour, j'ai vu que tu avais déposé des photos des inscriptions latines retrouvées au val des nymphes. J'aimerai savoir si tu les as vu sur place car pendant longtemps elles étaient conservées dans l'église de la La Garde Adhémar. Cordialement,Rossignol Benoît (talk) 22:13, 1 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

D'accord (j'ai cru qu'on les avais bougé ! :-) ), je vais indique le lieu de conservation dans les descriptions. Cordialement. (tu es Drômois ?)Rossignol Benoît (talk) 22:21, 1 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

C'était parce que je suis dans le coin... Merci pour ces photos en tout cas !Rossignol Benoît (talk) 22:25, 1 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Je vais voir si je peux combler certains manques.Rossignol Benoît (talk) 22:30, 1 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Les deux objets mobiliers sont mobiliers, justement. Certes inclus dans le monument historique immobilier, mais là n'est pas le thème du concours. C'est ainsi que je vois les choses. Seulement, entre vérificateurs, nous ne sommes pas d'accord entre nous. Trizek ^{here or on fr:wp} 06:59, 16 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Je prends tes arguments ; voici les miens : si le sujet principal de la photo n'est pas le monument immobilier protégé, la photo est alors hors-sujet. Je viens de retirer une photo qui ne respectait pas cela. Le règlement du concours l'indique clairement : on traîte l'immobilier protégé, pas le reste. C'est peut-être radical, mais cela évite les protestations et les reproches sur le manque de sérieux. En cas de contestation (je n'en ai pas eu, hors copyvio), je renverrai vers les autres vérificateurs, pour avis. Pour le mobilier, on verra l'an prochain, car la tâche est monstrueuse ! Si on se lance là dedans, je veux une équipe de vérificateurs garantie ! :-)

Trizek ^{here or on fr:wp} 07:54, 16 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Bonjour Président !

Juste un petit mot pour te féliciter es qualités pour le succès français de cette amicale compétition.

C'est vraiment une très bonne idée, et une bonne pub pour Wikimedia.

J'ai modestement participé pour la première fois, et ça m'a beaucoup intéressé. Étant un assidu des "QI", j'ai pu constater aussi la réussite de la chose dans d'autres pays en examinant les photos d'autres contributeurs européens.

J'ai évidemment appris beaucoup de choses et j'en suis ravi.

25.000 participations, c'est vraiment bien, je trouve !

Bravo encore et bon courage, maintenant, à toi et aux autres membres du jury, ça ne va pas être simple !

J'espère que la qualité sera au rendez-vous de la quantité, et que nous serons régulièrement informés de l'évolution de la chose et des décisions prises !

à bientôt et merci pour ce mois historique de photos historiques !!--Jebulon (talk) 15:32, 2 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Bonjour Président !

En organisant mes galeries, je constate que le bandeau "téléchargé pendant le WLM 2011" que j'avais placé sur cette image a été retiré le 30 septembre à 23h18 par User:Sebleouf, je voudrais bien savoir 1) pourquoi, 2) si le censeur était mandaté pour ce faire et quel sont les limites de ce mandat, et 3) pourquoi je n'en ai pas été avisé.

Voici qui ressemble à une bien mauvaise pratique et qui sent un peu mauvais, je trouve.

Le bandeau "mérimée" a été maintenu (il est inutile en dehors du concours, la catégorie dédiée à ce monument le porte déjà)

As-tu une idée de vers qui je devrais m'adresser pour obtenir une explication ?

Merci--Jebulon (talk) 14:01, 3 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Merci de l'explication, ce point m'avait échappé. C'est en toute bonne foi que j'ai pensé l'avoir chargée avant la fin du concours. Mes excuses pour le dérangement, ce n'est certes pas moi qui vais râler pour ça et tu n'as pas à t'excuser ni à te justifier. Ce n'est ni abrupt ni bête, c'est moi qui n'ai pas été attentif, c'est tout. Vous aviez raison et j'avais tort, c'est simple ! a bientôt !--Jebulon (talk) 21:34, 3 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

català | dansk | Deutsch | English | Esperanto | español | eesti | français | galego | magyar | Lëtzebuergesch | norsk bokmål | Nederlands | norsk nynorsk | norsk | polski | português | română | русский | svenska | +/− Dear Remi Mathis, Thank you for contributing to Wiki Loves Monuments and sharing your pictures with the whole world. You are very welcome to keep uploading images, even though you can't win prizes any longer. To get started on editing relevant Wikipedia articles, click here for more information and help. You can find all uploaded pictures in our central media collection Wikimedia Commons. Many photos are already used in Wikipedia. The contest was very successful with more than 165,000 images submitted throughout Europe. To make future contests even more successful, we would like to invite you to share your experiences with us in this survey. Kind regards, the Wiki Loves Monuments team

Message delivered by Lucia Bot in 00:41, 18 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Bonjour, les vases du Getty Museum ont deux licenses ici par exemple. Il faurdait en supprimer une ;)--Zolo (talk) 21:35, 20 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Bonne et heureuse année 2012 ! -- Jean-Pol GRANDMONT (talk) 10:18, 2 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Regarding Category:Chauvet Cave, I feel that there's not much of a problem with the user-created photos. You can also check the talk of the category. Perhaps it would be better if we turned the speedy deletion into a Deletion Request (also notifying the uploaders of the photos) in order to examine more closely. Regards, Badseed ^talk 04:36, 18 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I converted it to a deletion request, which is at Commons:Deletion requests/Images from Chauvet Cave. If you like, give your insight. Thanks! - Badseed ^talk 22:49, 21 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I think that files uploaded by Wiki-Bot around 2011-10-16 are from Flickr group set by WM-ES for WLM-2011. Probably files listed at User:Vriullop/WLM 2011 out of date/France from Wiki-Bot are valid submissions, as well as those ones at User:Vriullop/WLM 2011 out of date/Spain. User:Platonides can confirm you this point. I'll ping him. --V.Riullop (talk) 12:10, 13 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Those images were indeed added to our flickr group in September. When moving them to Wikimedia Commons I noticed they were monuments of France (the uploader even provided the merimée code) and adapted the templates accordingly. Platonides (talk) 19:53, 13 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your answer. Actually, the organizer of WLM would like to be sure of what pictures could be taken into account and what not, in order to get the exact number of pictures uploaded. Regarding the explanation you give, we will just have to check the rules to be sure if they can be taken into account for WLM 2011 or not (which changes nothing for you actually ;-))

Best, thanks once more,

Remi Mathis (talk) 05:54, 14 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I see, perhaps they dont fit well with registered local rules. Anyway, Lodewijk closed yesterday the final count, so it really does not matter. --V.Riullop (talk) 07:36, 14 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Bonsoir,

Je crois pouvoir dire que cette île n'est pas une île de l'archipel du Frioul mais c'est l'Île Tiboulen de Maïre appartenant à l'archipel de Riou. J'en ai fait le tour ce matin. Elle est localement surnommée l'île de la tortue en raison de sa forme.--Béotien lambda (talk) 20:09, 8 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

беларуская ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца) ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ dansk ∙ Deutsch ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form) ∙ English ∙ Esperanto ∙ español ∙ eesti ∙ français ∙ italiano ∙ മലയാളം ∙ Nederlands ∙ русский ∙ slovenčina ∙ српски (ћирилица) ∙ srpski (latinica) ∙ svenska ∙ Tagalog ∙ українська ∙ +/− Thank you for participating in Wiki Loves Monuments 2012! Dear Remi Mathis, Thank you for contributing to Wiki Loves Monuments 2012, and for sharing your pictures with the whole world! Thanks to the participation of people like you, the contest gathered more than 350,000 pictures of cultural heritage objects from 36 countries around the world, becoming the largest photography competition to have ever taken place. You can find all your pictures in your upload log, and are of course very welcome to keep uploading images and help develop Wikimedia Commons, even though you will not be able to win more prizes (just yet). If you'd like to start editing relevant Wikipedia articles and share your knowledge with other people, please go to the Wikipedia Welcome page for more information, guidance, and help. To make future contests even more successful than this year, we would like to invite you to share your experiences with us in a short survey. Please fill in this short survey in your own language, and help us learn what you liked and didn't like about Wiki Loves Monuments 2012. Kind regards, the Wiki Loves Monuments team

Message delivered by the Wiki Loves Monuments 2012 notification system on 05:04, 28 October 2012 (UTC)

Bonjour, pas mal d'entrées Wikidata sont désormais lisées à la base Joconde. J'ai vuu que tu avais écrit un article dans le blog de Joconde [1]. Ce serait vraiment bien, si on pouvait aussi importer les données stockées dans la base. Comme j'ai vu que tu avais écrit un billet dans leur blog, je me demandais si tu pensais qu'une telle chose serait envisageable (Wikidata est en licence CC0). Cordialement, --Zolo (talk) 06:48, 8 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, merci pour tes efforts en tout cas. --Zolo (talk) 21:10, 14 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Encore moi, désolé mais j'essaie de mettre de l'ordre dans les entrées Wikidata sur la gravure, et c'est pas évident. J'aurais besoin du contrôle d'un connaisseur.

Si j'ai bien compris on a:

• gravure (it: incisione, es: grabado)

• gravure au burin (en: engraving, de: Stich ?) - pas vraiment d'article en français

• eau-forte (en: etching, de: Radierung)

Et en plus je ne sais pas quoi faire de en:printmaking, ni de de:Gravur et de:Stich und Schnitt... --Zolo (talk) 08:24, 12 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

D'accord merci, je vais essayer de régler ça. Dernière interrogation, il n'y a pas d'équivalent anglais exact du mot français "gravure" ? --Zolo (talk) 21:15, 14 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Non, mais ça vient d'une confusion en français entre "gravure" et "estampe". En anglais, on parlera d'estampe ("print", "printmaking" pour l'action, "printmaker" pour le graveur") et non de gravure où le vocabulaire est plus technique et donc tout de suite précis. Remi Mathis (talk) 09:19, 15 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Merci, je vais essayer de faire ça. J'ai l'impression que pour rendre le tout vraiment cohérent, il faudrait aussi revoir les articles de Wikipédia. Mais après tout, si Wikidata oblige à préciser le sens des articles de Wikipédia, c'est plutôt une bonne chose. --Zolo (talk) 12:13, 15 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Salut,
À propos de Template:Technique/fr, il me semble que engraving sert aussi en dehors de l'estampe (gravure sur pierre, par exemple -- là ça fait un peu étrange avec le burin). Pour la gravure au burin, il y a burin, qui a l'air de marcher pas mal pour la taille-douce.
Bonne soirée. --Coyau (talk) 15:51, 24 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Ah oui, mais il faut alors que les gens utilisent bien les techniques de manière précise (burin/eau-forte) sans utiliser engraving au sens français de "gravure". Car, dans le contexte de l'estampe, "engraving" = burin / "etching" = eau-forte : les anglais n'ont pas de mot pour dire "gravure" comme nous (d'ailleurs, ils regardent plus du côté "estampe" que "gravure" : ils parlent de "printmaker", pas de "graveur") Remi Mathis (talk) 15:57, 24 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Bon, j'ai essayé de faire un truc joli, mais il semble y avoir quelques incompatilibtés entre Wikipédia en français et en anglais (on dit que intaglio = "taille douce" mais en même temps on dit que toutes les etchings sont des intaglios alors que certains eaux-fortes ne sont pas en taille douce). En gros, ça donne ça : français ? anglais - allemand. --Zolo (talk) 17:54, 7 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Bonjour, si tu veux commenter Wikidata:Wikidata:Requests for permissions/Bot/SamoaBot 32, je ne sais pas s'il peut y avoir des questions de licence pour l'import de dates de naissance. --Zolo (talk) 08:59, 2 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

العربية ∙ беларуская ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца) ∙ ပအိုဝ်ႏဘာႏသာႏ ∙ বাংলা ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ dansk ∙ Deutsch ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form) ∙ Ελληνικά ∙ English ∙ español ∙ euskara ∙ فارسی ∙ suomi ∙ français ∙ galego ∙ עברית ∙ hrvatski ∙ magyar ∙ հայերեն ∙ italiano ∙ 日本語 ∙ ಕನ್ನಡ ∙ 한국어 ∙ lietuvių ∙ latviešu ∙ македонски ∙ മലയാളം ∙ मराठी ∙ မြန်မာဘာသာ ∙ norsk bokmål ∙ Plattdüütsch ∙ Nederlands ∙ norsk ∙ polski ∙ português ∙ română ∙ русский ∙ sicilianu ∙ slovenčina ∙ slovenščina ∙ српски / srpski ∙ svenska ∙ ไทย ∙ Türkçe ∙ українська ∙ اردو ∙ Tiếng Việt ∙ 中文（简体） ∙ 中文（繁體） ∙ +/−

This media may be deleted.

Thanks for uploading File:Archives nationales - signature du partenariat avec Wikimédia France 03.JPG. This media is missing permission information. A source is given, but there is no proof that the author or copyright holder agreed to license the file under the given license. Please provide a link to an appropriate webpage with license information, or ask the author or copyright holder to send an email with copy of a written permission to VRT (permissions-commons@wikimedia.org). You may still be required to go through this procedure even if you are the author yourself; please see Commons:But it's my own work! for more details. After you emailed permission, you may replace the {{No permission since}} tag with {{subst:PP}} on file description page. Alternatively, you may click on "Challenge speedy deletion" below the tag if you wish to provide an argument why evidence of permission is not necessary in this case. Please see this page for more information on how to confirm permission, or if you would like to understand why we ask for permission when uploading work that is not your own, or work which has been previously published (regardless of whether it is your own). Warning: unless the permission information is given, the file may be deleted after seven days. Thank you.

 

Flickrworker (talk) 15:45, 16 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. I recently made a trip to Pirenópolis, a colonial town here in Brazil, and I took some photos from this XVIIIth century church – the Igreja de Nosso Senhor do Bonfim –, but while uploading the pictures, I accidentally named them after another church in the same city: Igreja do Carmo. Can you help me rename the photos? The two photos (File:Igreja do Carmo em Pirenópolis com palmeiras.jpg to be renamed File:Igreja do Bonfim em Pirenópolis com palmeiras.jpg and File:Igreja do Carmo em Pirenópolis.jpg to be renamed File:Igreja do Bonfim em Pirenópolis.jpg) are in this category: [2]. Je vous remercie par avance. -- Rodrigogomesonetwo (talk) 00:17, 27 July 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:Henri Lafontaine.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.

JuTa 19:41, 18 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Bisous

AlienSpoon (talk) 21:12, 13 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

	Der Fleißorden
	For all the DRs by Dr. Murali. :-) You may want to use Help:VisualFileChange to make it easier for you. It'll combine all those single DRs to one big one. Hedwig in Washington (mail?) 03:14, 1 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

File:Equus quagga quagga 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） ∙ +/−

Kulmalukko (talk) 09:12, 7 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Il s'agit du plan du domaine affiché à l'entrée d'accès au public pour permettre aux visiteurs de s'orienter sur un domaine de 130 hectares. Nous avions amputé la partie des bois du domaine, située sur la commune d'Ampus, puisque nous évoquions "l'urbanisation" de Tourtour et Ampus. j'ai donc mis en ligne le plan general que nous avions mis au point pour présenter le domaine dans son ensemble, à cheval sur les deux communes.--René Dinkel (talk) 17:31, 19 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Ce panneau a été realisé à partir de recherches effectuées en commun et nous le modifions régulièrement dans sa version informatisée (le panneau papier reste plus longtemps...), notamment lorsque des lots sont divisés, regroupés, etc... Je serai donc amené à y apporter régulièrement des modifications. Les éléments de base que nous avons utilisés, comme pour tous les types de cartes, sont le cadastre et les relevés, mais nous avons agrandi la largeur des allées et avenues du domaine pour pouvoir y porter le nom des rues, les indications diverses... --René Dinkel (talk) 18:07, 19 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Le graphisme a été réalisé en travail collectif, j'ai contribué et contribue encore à la synthèse des informations sur le domaine et la commune, et à la mise à jour des informations. Une des personnes qui y avait contribuée est, elle, décédée depuis plus de trois ans. La seule condition de reproduction des informations est qu'elles ne doivent reprendre que des informations accessibles au public puisque c'est le but.--René Dinkel (talk) 09:13, 20 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

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

العربية | català | Deutsch | Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ | English | español | eesti | français | magyar | Nederlands | polski | svenska | ไทย | +/− Thank you for taking part in the Wiki Loves Monuments participants' survey! Dear Remi Mathis, Thank you for taking part in the Wiki Loves Monuments participants' survey. Your answers will help us improve the organization of future photo contests! In case you haven't filled in the questionnaire yet, you can still do so during the next 7 days. And by the way: the winning pictures of this year's international contest have been announced. Enjoy! Kind regards, the Wiki Loves Monuments team

Hi, see [3]. Cheers, Nemo 21:28, 2 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Bonjour Rémi,

Puis-je te piquer le message laissé sur User talk:Vent des Forêts pour avertir d'autres utilisateurs chargeant des photos d'art contemporain sans suivre la procédure ? (quand j'en aurai le courage...)

Par ailleurs, je crois que ta PU Commons n'est plus tellement à jour !

Bonne soirée, kvardek du (la plej bela nombro) 19:38, 4 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Bien sûr ! Remi Mathis (talk) 00:17, 6 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

File:OM-Sochaux 2011 jardinier.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） ∙ +/−

Toni Müller (talk) 18:33, 13 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Are you sure that there is no reason to doubt that Marc antonio75 is the author of this file? Because he has tried to forge File:Adrien Goetz - Prix Landerneau Découvertes et Roman 2015.jpg. --jdx ^Re: 16:18, 17 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

File:Alexander Pfohl - Vase.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） ∙ +/−

Martin Sg. (talk) 14:25, 26 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Your photo File:Paris - palais de l'Élysée - cour 05.JPG was used on https://www.repubblica.it/esteri/2015/01/18/foto/case_reali_a_spasso_tra_le_dimore_dei_capi_di_stato-105197090/1/#10 without attribution. This is one of the largest newspapers of Italy. Nemo 20:46, 31 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi

You're receiving this message because you've previously contributed to the annual Wiki Loves Monuments contest in the UK. We'd be delighted if you would do so again this year and help record our local built environment for future generations.

You can find more details at the Wiki Loves Monuments UK website. Or, if you have images taken in other countries, you can check the international options. This year's contest runs until 30 September 2019.

Many thanks for your help once more! MichaelMaggs (talk) 15:35, 3 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Bonjour,

Le concours Wiki Loves Monuments France est de retour et ouvert jusqu'à 31 septembre ! Déjà 8310 photos ont été importés cette année, vous aussi rejoignez le concours !

Le concours concerne tous les monuments présents dans la base Mérimée (qu'ils soient classés, inscrits ou simplement classés). De l'imposant château aux ruines industrielles, de la chapelle au coin de la rue aux mégalithes en forêt, c'est un impressionnant patrimoine qui attend d'être photographié et documenté. Où que vous soyez il y a des monuments autour de chez vous. Enfin, vous pouvez mettre en ligne autant de photos que vous le souhaitez de ces monuments. Pour information, le règlement est disponible sur le site du concours. Nous attendons vos photos avec impatience !

Les plus belles photos seront sélectionnées par un jury national composé d'amateurs et de professionnels, de contributeurs à Wikimedia Commons et d'acteurs du patrimoine. Un jury international sélectionnera ensuite des meilleures photographies mondiales.

Si vous avez des questions, l'équipe organisatrice se fera un plaisir d'y répondre.

P.S. : vous recevez ce message parce que vous avez participé au concours Wiki Loves Monuments en France les années précédentes. Si vous avez déjà ou si ne pouvez pas participer au concours cette année, faites passer le message autour de vous pour que de nouveaux et nouvelles photographes rejoignent l'aventure !

Bonne journée,

Sarah Krichen WMFr et Nicolas Vigneron, pour l'équipe de Wiki Loves Monuments France, 14:51, 12 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

A community discussion has been closed where the consensus was to grant all file movers the suppressredirect user right. This will allow file movers to not leave behind a redirect when moving files and instead automatically have the original file name deleted. Policy never requires you to suppress the redirect, suppression of redirects is entirely optional.

Possible acceptable uses of this ability:

• To move recently uploaded files with an obvious error in the file name where that error would not be a reasonable redirect. For example: moving "Sheep in a tree.jpg" to "Squirrel in a tree.jpg" when the image does in fact depict a squirrel.
• To perform file name swaps.
• When the original file name contains vandalism. (File renaming criterion #5)

Please note, this ability should be used only in certain circumstances and only if you are absolutely sure that it is not going to break the display of the file on any project. Redirects should never be suppressed if the file is in use on any project. When in doubt, leave a redirect. If you forget to suppress the redirect in case of file name vandalism or you are not fully certain if the original file name is actually vandalism, leave a redirect and tag the redirect for speedy deletion per G2.

The malicious or reckless breaking of file links via the suppressredirect user right is considered an abuse of the file mover right and is grounds for immediate revocation of that right. This message serves as both a notice that you have this right and as an official warning. Questions regarding this right should be directed to administrators. --Majora (talk) 21:36, 7 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

bonjour, effectuant des recherches sur Louis Hesselin j'ai modifié la page wikipedia le concernant. Vous êtes l'auteur des armoiries illustrant précédemment la page. Ma question est la suivante pourquoi la présence de cette aile d'argent chez les Cauchon, que l'on ne retrouve nulle part dans les objets repertoriés comme ayant appartenus à Louis Hesselin et portant ses armoiries à savoir l'écartelé Cauchon-Hesselin. https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Hesselin_Coats_of_arms.svg dans l'attente de votre réponse meilleurs voeux 2021--Jc4xcat (talk) 09:41, 10 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Bonjour,

C'est ainsi que les armes des Hesselin-Cauchon sont blasonnés dans la plupart (tous ?) des armoriaux anciens et du 19e s (à commencer par Ménestrier). Je ne vois pas spécialement de raison de le remettre en cause, jusqu'à preuve du contraire (je n'ai pas lu la thèse de Moana-Weil)

Bien à vous et bonne année,

Remi Mathis (talk) 13:29, 10 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Bonjour, et merci pour vos voeux j'ai répondu sur la page de discussion concernant la suppression. J'ai un cadeau pour vous dans votre domaine, l'ex libris de Louis Hesselin. https://gallica.bnf.fr/ark:/12148/bpt6k12463316/f41.item.r=treslon%20cauchon?fbclid=IwAR1El9txXmgx1w4wMQXvCfOUK4HMXyulyyrzsLQGgFKUd1fl-aYLRmDB3YM Bonne année 2021--Jc4xcat (talk) 08:16, 12 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

File:Hesselin Coats of arms.svg 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） ∙ +/−

Jc4xcat (talk) 12:46, 10 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Bonjour j'ai vu que vous vouliez supprimer le fichier des armes de la famille Japy. Pour quelles raisons ? Pierreaj (talk) 21:19, 14 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Bonjour,

Il n'y a pas d'auteur du dessin, ce qui laisse penser qu'il y a violation de copyright. En savez-vous plus ?

Par ailleurs, je suis tombé dessus à partir d'une discussion dans le groupe Facebook "héraldique française", qui regroupe de nombreux spécialistes et amateurs... et personne ne sait d'où viennent ces armes. Un membre de la famille Japy elle-même s'étonne et demande des renseignements à leur propos : idem, si jamais vous en avez, cela vaudrait sans doute le coup de donner des renseignements sur leur origine et leurs sources.

Bien à vous,

Remi Mathis (talk) 21:47, 14 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Bonjour,

Le concours Wiki Loves Monuments France est ouvert pour une semaine encore, jusqu'au 30 septembre. Déjà plus de 6 000 photos ont été importées cette année alors vous aussi rejoignez le concours ! Cette campagne de contribution concerne tous les monuments et objets mobiliers présents dans la base Mérimée et dans la base Palissy. De l'imposant château aux ruines industrielles, de la verrière décorative au reliquaire, c'est un impressionnant patrimoine qui attend d'être photographié et documenté. Vous pouvez dès à présent mettre en ligne autant de photos que vous le souhaitez de ces monuments et objets du patrimoine français. Nous attendons vos photos avec impatience !

Les plus belles photos seront sélectionnées par un jury national composé d'amateurs et de professionnels, de contributeurs à Wikimedia Commons et d'acteurs du patrimoine. Un jury international constituera ensuite une sélection des meilleures photographies mondiales.

Si vous avez des questions, l'équipe organisatrice se fera un plaisir d'y répondre.

P.S. : vous recevez ce message parce que vous avez participé au concours Wiki Loves Monuments en France

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 12:31, 26 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Monsieur,

Pourriez-vous s'il vous plaît me dire quel logiciel vous avez employé pour dessiner cet arbre : https://commons.m.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Arbre_g%C3%A9n%C3%A9alogique_Bignon-Houdin-Heince-Borzone_par_R%C3%A9mi_Mathis.png#mw-jump-to-license

Merci par avance Cordialement 2A01:CB05:8985:F900:C25:ED19:F101:757 12:59, 24 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Bonjour,

C'est simplement fait dans Inkscape, en vectoriel

Bien à vous,

Remi Mathis (talk) 14:12, 25 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Salut Rémi,

dans la source je lis: © Monuments historiques, 1992 et Aucune copie numérique ou papier ne sera fournie par courrier ni courriel. A mon avis, les deux sont en contradiction avec les conditions d'une licence libre, non ? De quoi conclus-tu que l'image peut être publiée sous cc-by-sa ?

Amitiés Mussklprozz (talk) 15:21, 12 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Paris - passage du Bourg-l'Abbé - barometre passage.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  Support Good quality. --LexKurochkin 12:31, 4 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

--QICbot (talk) 05:29, 7 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Paris - Décoration XVIIe BnF Richelieu (mur de Cotte).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. --Kadellar 15:49, 15 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

--QICbot (talk) 05:34, 18 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]