User talk:Xorx

FP Promotion

★ This image has been promoted to Featured picture! ★ The image File:Confocal measurement of 1-euro-star 3d.png, that you nominated on Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Confocal measurement of 1-euro-star 3d.png has been promoted. Thank you for your contribution. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so.

/FPCBot (talk) 23:02, 5 April 2010 (UTC)

Stability

Congratulations!
The set of images you created for valued image set was reviewed and has now been promoted to the Valued image set: States of system stability.

It is considered to be the most valued set of images on Commons within the scope:
States of system stability.

review

Commons:Valued_image_candidates/Stability

•  Support Good and consistent series, such series might be easier to handle here as a gallery such as stability. --Foroa (talk) 06:29, 30 June 2008 (UTC)

Result: 1 support => Promoted.

-- Dr. Schorsch (talk) 18:06, 4 July 2008 (UTC)

-- Dr. Schorsch (talk) 20:25, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

Valued Image Promotion

★ Your nomination has been reviewed and promoted ★
Congratulations! The image you nominated was reviewed and has now been promoted as a valued image. It is considered to be the most valued image on Commons within the scope:
microscopic 3d surface profile.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

•  Comment Please link scope (COM:VISC), if possible, and add geolocation or claim an exemption. Walter Siegmund (talk) 17:53, 15 February 2010 (UTC)
•  Info Thanks for you comment. The image has no geocode because it is a studio work. I have linked the scope, but there isn't very much on commons yet where I could link to... -- Dr. Schorsch (talk) 20:06, 15 February 2010 (UTC)
•  Support This image illustrates two articles on dewiki; it is a notable topic. Other criteria are met except geocoding for which a valid exemption is claimed. Walter Siegmund (talk) 02:23, 17 February 2010 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. George Chernilevsky ^talk 05:40, 19 February 2010 (UTC)

★ Your nomination has been reviewed and promoted ★
Congratulations! The image you nominated was reviewed and has now been promoted as a valued image. It is considered to be the most valued image on Commons within the scope:
Principle of a tactile profilometer.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

•  Comment Image has no geocode because there is obviously no relation to a specific location on earth. –– Dr. Schorsch (talk) 20:06, 20 February 2010 (UTC)
•  Comment If the scope is “Principle of a tactile profilometer” image is the best, but the real scope is “Profilometers” and the best image is that of the machine. Change the scope? --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 09:46, 21 February 2010 (UTC)
•  Support This file is used in en:Roughness and on two other projects; I think the subscope is fine. It may be better worded as "Profilometry". This image satisfies 5 criteria with a valid exception claimed for geocoding. It is important to recognize artwork as especially valuable in explaining concepts and mechanisms. I don't find the photograph of the machine as valuable as this one.Walter Siegmund (talk) 16:27, 21 February 2010 (UTC)
•  Comment Thank you for your support Walter! I have choosen the scope as "principle of a tactile profilometer" because the picture is not showing a real profilometer but explaning it's working principle and it's fundamental properties. As I understood linking the scope is only good practice to allow reviewers to find competitive images easier. In my understanding the real scope is given by the text and not by the link. Anyway there is no category or gallery principle of tactile profilometers I could have linked to. Am I misinterpreting the VI guidelines doing so? –– Dr. Schorsch (talk) 19:39, 21 February 2010 (UTC)

   Comment COM:VISC lists "A visually distinct type or significant aspect of an object" (example 2) as a suitable scope, so I think it is fine. Its use in articles on three projects demonstrates that it is a significant aspect and a diagram is visually distinct from a photograph of the machine. Walter Siegmund (talk) 19:58, 21 February 2010 (UTC)

•  Info I have annotated the picture to allow quicker understanding. -- Dr. Schorsch (talk) 19:42, 21 February 2010 (UTC)
•  Comment Perhaps you could call the scope profilometry? 99of9 (talk) 23:45, 21 February 2010 (UTC)

   Comment This broader scope would include images of surface profiles, photographies of profilometers, optical profilometers, applications of profilometers, etc.. I think this is to broad for a scope. That was the reason why I have choosen the "principle" scope. -- Dr. Schorsch (talk) 19:52, 22 February 2010 (UTC)

   Comment I agree with the current scope, "principle of a tactile profilometer", having considered more fully my earlier suggestion. Walter Siegmund (talk) 02:29, 23 February 2010 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. George Chernilevsky ^talk 05:52, 25 February 2010 (UTC)

★ Your nomination has been reviewed and promoted ★
Congratulations! The image you nominated was reviewed and has now been promoted as a valued image. It is considered to be the most valued image on Commons within the scope:
Principle of the photogram.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

•  Info No geocode because there is no relation of the drawing to a specific location on earth. Link of scope is not identic to scope because I don't know a gallery or category on commons that is about the principle of photograms. -- Dr. Schorsch (talk) 20:19, 21 February 2010 (UTC)
•  Comment I'd suggest a small amendment in the description: adding that the result depends also on the transparency of the objects (not only on their distance to the film). Semi-transparent objects give grey tones. --Myrabella (talk) 15:50, 28 February 2010 (UTC)

   Comment Thank you, that is a good suggestion. I wanted to keep the image description simple, because the details are explained in the related articles. But this information can be added easily. -- Dr. Schorsch (talk) 15:57, 28 February 2010 (UTC)

---

Scope changed from Principle of a photogram's development to Principle of a photogram's exposure Myrabella suggested a change of the scope to be clearer. Development is not only the process of the creation of something but also the chemical film development. --Dr. Schorsch (talk) 15:00, 1 March 2010 (UTC)

• Please notify previous voters of this change. Remember: "A support vote that was made before a change of scope is not counted unless it is reconfirmed afterwards; an oppose vote is counted unless it is changed or withdrawn".

---

•  Support Quite OK to me. About the scope: "Principle of the photogram" might be simpler and sufficient? --Myrabella (talk) 17:58, 1 March 2010 (UTC)

   Comment Thanks for your support! "Principle of the photogram" sounds a bit missleading to me, like the principle of a specific photogram. Maybe a native speaker can give us a hint on this. -- Dr. Schorsch (talk) 19:38, 2 March 2010 (UTC)

 Comment It sounds a bit like "principle of the steam engine" to me (see [1]) but you're right, let's ask a native speaker! --Myrabella (talk) 08:01, 3 March 2010 (UTC)

 Comment I am a native English speaker and can easily be misunderstood () so may not be the best person to comment. However "Principle of a photogram's exposure" seems ok to me but I do think "Principle of the photogram" is both simple and effective. I have also amended the English in the notes slightly. I hope that helps, regards --Herby ^{talk thyme} 11:13, 3 March 2010 (UTC)

---

Scope changed from Principle of a photogram's exposure to Principle of the photogram Thanks for your comments! I think this is a good solution for the scope. I would kindly ask Myrabella to confirm her vote after this scope change. -- Dr. Schorsch (talk) 11:38, 3 March 2010 (UTC)

• Please notify previous voters of this change. Remember: "A support vote that was made before a change of scope is not counted unless it is reconfirmed afterwards; an oppose vote is counted unless it is changed or withdrawn".

---

•  Support I confirm my support. --Myrabella (talk) 13:13, 3 March 2010 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. George Chernilevsky ^talk 19:36, 5 March 2010 (UTC)

★ Your nomination has been reviewed and promoted ★
Congratulations! The image you nominated was reviewed and has now been promoted as a valued image. It is considered to be the most valued image on Commons within the scope:
Tyndall's bar breaker.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

•  Info No geocode, because there is no specific location on earth associated to this figure. -- Dr. Schorsch (talk) 22:55, 27 February 2010 (UTC)
•  Support Meets all the criteria. Good to have it! --MichaelBueker (talk) 23:23, 5 March 2010 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. George Chernilevsky ^talk 10:33, 8 March 2010 (UTC)

★ Your nomination has been reviewed and promoted ★
Congratulations! The image you nominated was reviewed and has now been promoted as a valued image. It is considered to be the most valued image on Commons within the scope:
Theory of Radar Distance Measurement.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

•  Info This picture exists in a couple of translations:
• File:Sonar Principle-cs.svg
• File:Sonar_Principle_EN.svg
• File:Sonar_Principle_ES.svg
• File:Sonar Principle-sv.svg

I decided not to nominate this as a valued image set, since there is no real difference in the drawing itself beside the translation. I suggest to do the VI review on the (original) german version and to promote all translation if successful. Tell me if I am wrong. -- Dr. Schorsch (talk) 13:10, 7 March 2010 (UTC)

•  SupportIt does appear to be the best image in scope, the other criteria are met. --MichaelBueker (talk) 11:57, 9 March 2010 (UTC)
•  Comment As a VI is "the most valuable illustration" of its kind, there is only one picture labelled by scope. The other versions in various languages couldn't be promoted if this one was chosen. I would rather support the English version because it can be understood more widely, I guess. --Myrabella (talk) 21:22, 9 March 2010 (UTC)

   Comment Hi Myrabella! That was my question above: Is the difference in the images big enough to make it an Image Set? I thought rather not, but maybe this is the better way to handle it. My target was to have all images promoted, so it becomes clear to all language wikis that this is a VI. -- Dr. Schorsch (talk) 21:45, 9 March 2010 (UTC)

• Hi Dr. Schorsch! I am afraid that it would overflow the VI sets purpose. English has been the usual "working language" of the VI project until now (rules indicate for instance: "An English description is preferred although not essential" or, about scope: "In the future, scopes should be internationalized, embedding links in different languages. In the meantime, please limit cross-project links to the English Wikipedia"). Let's take some advice => I am going to ask the question on the VIC talkpage. --Myrabella (talk) 22:08, 9 March 2010 (UTC)

 Done: see Commons_talk:Valued_image_candidates/candidate_list#Internationalized_diagrams_and_VI. The discussion is ongoing. --Myrabella (talk) 09:51, 10 March 2010 (UTC)

•  Oppose - For now. For a simple illustration like this one I think that quality (sophistication) could and should be higher. What I don't like is the lettering (too large and too close to the arrows) and the arrows. -- Alvesgaspar (talk) 17:48, 10 March 2010 (UTC)
•  Support Satisfies the criteria in my opinion. Walter Siegmund (talk) 02:50, 13 March 2010 (UTC)

Result: 2 support, 1 oppose =>
promoted. Myrabella (talk) 22:54, 15 March 2010 (UTC)

★ Your nomination has been reviewed and promoted ★
Congratulations! The image you nominated was reviewed and has now been promoted as a valued image. It is considered to be the most valued image on Commons within the scope:
microscopic 3d surface profile.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

 Info New annotations translated in French ! ;)--Jebulon (talk) 15:24, 5 April 2010 (UTC)

•  Support I agree. This version is more informative. Walter Siegmund (talk) 17:53, 5 April 2010 (UTC)
•  Support per Walter Siegmund.----Jebulon (talk) 21:52, 5 April 2010 (UTC)
•  Support more informative --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 12:05, 6 April 2010 (UTC)

Result: 3 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Dr. Schorsch (talk) 07:43, 8 April 2010 (UTC)

★ Your nomination has been reviewed and promoted ★
Congratulations! The image you nominated was reviewed and has now been promoted as a valued image. It is considered to be the most valued image on Commons within the scope:
Illustrations showing principle of instruments for measuring transepidermal water loss.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

•  Comment Must connect the scope to the category that contains the image --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 05:15, 27 October 2018 (UTC)

•  Comment Thanks for the hint. In fact there was no category for this type of measurement instruments. The metrology category tree is still quite incomplete. Therefore I had to create a new category for skin metrology instruments, which is still a too broad category for this image, because there are a lot of instruments measuring on skin (e.g. Skin temperature, skin colour, skin gloss, skin elasticity, etc.) -- Dr. Schorsch (talk) 16:56, 27 October 2018 (UTC)
• Fixed category name

 Comment Look at the modified syntax of the scope. On the form it is acceptable on the other hand it is not a measuring instrument that is shown but an explanatory diagram of the principle of measurement. This is what the scope must contain. --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:00, 28 October 2018 (UTC)

 Comment Thanks for your recommendations, it is just too long ago that I was here last time. I have changed the category according to your recommendations. -- Dr. Schorsch (talk) 15:55, 28 October 2018 (UTC)

•  Support Used & useful --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:09, 29 October 2018 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:16, 31 October 2018 (UTC)

★ Your nomination has been reviewed and promoted ★
Congratulations! The image you nominated was reviewed and has now been promoted as a valued image. It is considered to be the most valued image on Commons within the scope:
Pictures illustrating the principle of Ratchets.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

 Support best in scope. --MB-one (talk) 09:44, 2 November 2018 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 05:35, 4 November 2018 (UTC)

★ Your nomination has been reviewed and promoted ★
Congratulations! The image you nominated was reviewed and has now been promoted as a valued image. It is considered to be the most valued image on Commons within the scope:
Drawings of light bulbs of Carl Heinrich Florenz Müller.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

•  Support best in scope, useful description in several languagesEzarateesteban 11:42, 7 November 2018 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. -- DeFacto (talk). 20:27, 10 November 2018 (UTC)

★ Your nomination has been reviewed and promoted ★
Congratulations! The image you nominated was reviewed and has now been promoted as a valued image. It is considered to be the most valued image on Commons within the scope:
Pohl's Wheel.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

 Support useful, best in scope --Ezarateesteban 11:32, 7 November 2018 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. -- DeFacto (talk). 20:28, 10 November 2018 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Confocal measurement of 1-euro-star 3d.png, 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 image. Good quality. -- MJJR 20:57, 20 February 2010 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Stylus Instrument.svg, 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 and clear image imo. --Cayambe 19:32, 27 February 2010 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Photogram Principle.svg, 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 Well done and useful. --Cayambe 07:54, 7 March 2010 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Tewameter Principle.png, 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. --Syed07 15:33, 23 October 2018 (UTC)

--QICbot (talk) 05:22, 26 October 2018 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Crossed coils gauge.svg, 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. --Trougnouf 18:50, 28 October 2018 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Pohl Wheel.svg, 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. --Trougnouf 18:50, 28 October 2018 (UTC)

--QICbot (talk) 05:26, 31 October 2018 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Confocal measurement of 1-euro-star 3d and euro.png, 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 Nice work --George Chernilevsky 15:16, 8 April 2010 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Digital Position Sensitive Device.svg, 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 nice --Carschten 20:11, 1 May 2010 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Interferometer Aufbau sw.svg, 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 The number 8 is slightly off centre, but otherwise good enough, imo. --Peulle 09:09, 29 October 2018 (UTC)

--QICbot (talk) 05:20, 1 November 2018 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Bulb of Carl Heinrich Florenz Müller.svg, 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. --MB-one 17:08, 1 November 2018 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Ratchet Drawing.svg, 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. --MB-one 21:40, 1 November 2018 (UTC)

--QICbot (talk) 05:34, 4 November 2018 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Arrayed-Waveguide-Grating.svg, 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. --GPSLeo 18:31, 3 November 2018 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! TSTN-LiquidCrystal.svg, 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. --GPSLeo 18:31, 3 November 2018 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Mirau Interferometer.svg, 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. --GPSLeo 18:31, 3 November 2018 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Laserprofilometer DE.svg, 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. --GPSLeo 18:31, 3 November 2018 (UTC)

--QICbot (talk) 05:23, 6 November 2018 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Planograph wiki.svg, 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 On the left the blue line is in front of the the red circles, on the right it is behind. Should be the same on both sides --GPSLeo 18:31, 3 November 2018 (UTC) Thank you for the hint. I will fix this. --Xorx 21:18, 3 November 2018 (UTC) Fixed: I have pushed the blue line to background. --Xorx 22:38, 3 November 2018 (UTC)  Support Good quality. --GPSLeo 18:20, 5 November 2018 (UTC)

--QICbot (talk) 05:17, 8 November 2018 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Principle of 3d fringe projection numbered.svg, 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. --Syed07 15:52, 9 November 2018 (UTC)

--QICbot (talk) 05:17, 12 November 2018 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Laserprofilometer EN.svg, 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. --Basile Morin 09:11, 10 November 2018 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Ellipsometry setup DE.svg, 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. --Basile Morin 09:11, 10 November 2018 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Ellipsometry setup.svg, 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. --Basile Morin 09:13, 10 November 2018 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Ellipsometry setup cz.svg, 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. --Basile Morin 09:13, 10 November 2018 (UTC)

--QICbot (talk) 05:12, 13 November 2018 (UTC)

Translation

Dear Dr. Schorsch,
I would be glad if I can help you. This is a suggested translation in French, but as I know neither German nor confocal microscopy, it would be wise to ask someone a read-through:
"Représentation tridimensionnelle d'un détail de la surface d'une pièce de 1 euro: cette figure montre l'une des étoiles en relief de la pièce. Le profil 3d a été mesuré avec un microscope confocal à lumière blanche µsurf de la firme NanoFocus. Le champ latéral de la mesure est de 800 μm par 800 μm (0,8 mm par 0,8 mm), son champ vertical est d'environ 60 μmm (0,06 mm). Les couleurs de la surface indiquent la hauteur, selon l'échelle de droite. Le graphique a été créé avec MATLAB."
Good luck for the FP review, and kind regards, --Myrabella (talk) 21:44, 30 March 2010 (UTC)

Sehr geehrte Herr Doktor,
Ich habe ihrer Arbeit in FPC list gesehen, und habe eine französische Übersetzung für die "notes" gemacht. I hope it was not to inquisitive. Good luck. Best regards from Paris.--Jebulon (talk) 23:06, 30 March 2010 (UTC)
Tiens, salut, Myrabella !!

You are great folks! You make Wikimedia a success. Thank you for your contributions. Thank you Myrabella for your translation. I have some reading understanding abilities in French but I am a really unskilled writer. To me it sounds perfect and in case it is not: "It's a wiki ;-)". -- Dr. Schorsch (talk) 06:27, 31 March 2010 (UTC)

Graphics village pump

Hallo Xorx, wie ist dieser Edit zu erklären, wie soll das funktionieren? Nun vllt. bin ich auch etwas zu spät nach 7 Jahren, jedoch sollte es dann erst recht eine Antwort geben, da es immer noch in Gebrauch ist. Gruß -- Perhelion (talk) 09:37, 6 May 2014 (UTC)

Hallo Perhelion, mein Gedächtnis ist nach sieben Jahren leider auch nicht mehr taufrisch. Ich vermute dass es damals funktioniert hat und eine Unterseite mit Monats und Jahresname erzeugt hat, die dann in der folgenden Zeile als Vorlage eingebunden wurde (glaube ich zumindest heute)... Hilft Dir das weiter? -- Dr. Schorsch (talk) 18:51, 6 May 2014 (UTC)

Oha, ja, ich denke das hat man auch nicht so oft dass jemanden dazu noch aktiv trifft. :P Ich glaube das war wohl nur so eine Idee gewesen die aber praktisch nie funktioniert hat. Eine aktuelle Diskussion dazu gibt es dort. -- Perhelion (talk) 12:38, 10 May 2014 (UTC)

Community Insights Survey

Share your experience in this survey

Hi Xorx,

The Wikimedia Foundation is asking for your feedback in a survey about your experience with Wikimedia Commons and Wikimedia. The purpose of this survey is to learn how well the Foundation is supporting your work on wiki and how we can change or improve things in the future. The opinions you share will directly affect the current and future work of the Wikimedia Foundation.

Please take 15 to 25 minutes to give your feedback through this survey. It is available in various languages.

This survey is hosted by a third-party and governed by this privacy statement (in English).

Find more information about this project. Email us if you have any questions, or if you don't want to receive future messages about taking this survey.

Sincerely,

RMaung (WMF) 01:02, 10 September 2019 (UTC)

Reminder: Community Insights Survey

Share your experience in this survey

Hi Xorx,

A couple of weeks ago, we invited you to take the Community Insights Survey. It is the Wikimedia Foundation’s annual survey of our global communities. We want to learn how well we support your work on wiki. We are 10% towards our goal for participation. If you have not already taken the survey, you can help us reach our goal! Your voice matters to us.

Please take 15 to 25 minutes to give your feedback through this survey. It is available in various languages.

This survey is hosted by a third-party and governed by this privacy statement (in English).

Find more information about this project. Email us if you have any questions, or if you don't want to receive future messages about taking this survey.

Sincerely,

RMaung (WMF) 15:20, 20 September 2019 (UTC)

Reminder: Community Insights Survey

Share your experience in this survey

Hi Xorx,

There are only a few weeks left to take the Community Insights Survey! We are 30% towards our goal for participation. If you have not already taken the survey, you can help us reach our goal! With this poll, the Wikimedia Foundation gathers feedback on how well we support your work on wiki. It only takes 15-25 minutes to complete, and it has a direct impact on the support we provide.

Please take 15 to 25 minutes to give your feedback through this survey. It is available in various languages.

This survey is hosted by a third-party and governed by this privacy statement (in English).

Find more information about this project. Email us if you have any questions, or if you don't want to receive future messages about taking this survey.

Sincerely,

RMaung (WMF) 19:58, 3 October 2019 (UTC)

Valued Image Promotion

★ Your nomination has been reviewed and promoted ★
Congratulations! The image you nominated was reviewed and has now been promoted as a valued image. It is considered to be the most valued image on Commons within the scope:
Vernier caliper reading.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

Previous reviews

•  Info Renomination after changing scope. -- Dr. Schorsch (talk) 15:56, 26 February 2020 (UTC)
•  Comment scope does not match image. Where is the reading? (Charlesjsharp) 22:25, 28 February 2020 (UTC)

•  Comment Please see the overlayed information boxes for the reading. -- Dr. Schorsch (talk) 18:40, 1 March 2020 (UTC)

•  Support Ok for me, good didactic presentation--Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 05:50, 29 February 2020 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:10, 2 March 2020 (UTC)

MOTD Notification

⭐ A file you uploaded is on the main page! ⭐ File:Water rocket liftoff slow motion.mpg, that you uploaded, is on the main page today. Thank you for your contributions to this project.

//EatchaBot (talk) 00:01, 17 July 2020 (UTC)

Schildtopographie MK88.svg

This drawing consists of extremly simple shapes. To draw an SVG like that by hand needs just a few minutes, and the file size would be only a few hundred bytes. But it's o.k. how you have drawn it – and when you dislike the tag it is o.k. when you remove it. -- sarang♥사랑 15:02, 17 July 2020 (UTC)

Thank you for your message. I am sure that this SVG file can be compressed to save some Kbytes. Your are welcome to do so. But I just uploaded a video with 80 MBytes and don't see the need to gain a few bytes here. -- Dr. Schorsch (talk) 17:29, 17 July 2020 (UTC)

FM Promotion

★ This file has been promoted to Featured media! ★ The file File:Water rocket liftoff slow motion.mpg, that you uploaded is now assessed as one of the finest file on Wikimedia Commons, the nomination is available at Commons:Featured media candidates/File:Water rocket liftoff slow motion.mpg. Thank you for your contribution. If you would like to nominate, please do so at this nomination page.

/FeaturedMediaBot (talk) 13:00, 22 July 2020 (UTC)

v > w

Gutemorgen Xorx. I am a little puzzled by your edit: [2]. The picture clearly shows a 'w' that you changed to a 'v'. Writing and spelling was possibly not very accurate in those days and dependent on the knowledge or education of the Steinmetz. However, the name of the father is written with a 'w' and the name of the daughter is with 'uw'. It is not unusual that family names were written differently over time. --VanBuren (talk) 07:55, 4 August 2020 (UTC)

Goedendag VanBuren, I moved this discussion to the pictures talk page. -- Dr. Schorsch (talk) 12:42, 4 August 2020 (UTC)

FM Promotion

This file has been promoted to Featured media! The file File:Slow motion whoopee cushions.ogv, which you nominated at Commons:Featured media candidates/File:Slow motion whoopee cushions.ogv, has been promoted. Thank you for your contribution. If you would like to nominate another file, please do so.

/FeaturedMediaBot (talk) 21:00, 17 August 2020 (UTC)

MOTD Notification

⭐ A file you uploaded is on the main page! ⭐ File:Tyndalls's bar breaker experiment.mpg, that you uploaded, is on the main page today. Thank you for your contributions to this project.

//EatchaBot (talk) 00:01, 21 September 2020 (UTC)

File:Position Sensitive Device EN.svg was recently deleted

File:Position Sensitive Device EN.svg was recently deleted by Christian Ferrer for reasons below. If you disagree with the deletion, you need to file an undeletion request.

Reason for deletion: per Commons:Deletion requests/Translations of File Position Sensitive Device DE.svg

It's best to discuss with the administrator who deleted your file before filing an undeletion request. Deletion Notification Bot (talk) 15:28, 9 October 2020 (UTC)

File:Position Sensitive Device ET Wiki.svg was recently deleted

File:Position Sensitive Device ET Wiki.svg was recently deleted by Christian Ferrer for reasons below. If you disagree with the deletion, you need to file an undeletion request.

Reason for deletion: per Commons:Deletion requests/Translations of File Position Sensitive Device DE.svg

It's best to discuss with the administrator who deleted your file before filing an undeletion request. Deletion Notification Bot (talk) 15:28, 9 October 2020 (UTC)

File:DataMatrix.png

File:DataMatrix.png has been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether it should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry. If you created this 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!

mik^talk 15:26, 16 September 2024 (UTC)