User talk:Eissink

Flickr2Commons

I have just come across a few images you have recently uploaded from Flickr. I would appreciate it if in the future, you used the Flickr2Commons tool. This tool allows images to be moved to Commons from Flickr without having to download the images to your own computer. It also brings in the largest resolution of the image, as well making sure to list the correct license and url, making it easy for the automated Flickr Review system. Also, it is fairly easy to categorize images with this tool. To use it, you just need to go to the url and authorize it (where it says "authorise first"). --A1Cafel (talk) 06:48, 23 September 2019 (UTC)

Hello, A1Cafel. Lately I hardly ever, if ever, download images from Flickr to upload them to Commons, so you must have encountered some of my older uploads. While I found Flickr2Commons inconvenient for single and non-photoset uploads (and not always working!), I am very glad the UploadWizard these days makes it possible to transfer from Flickr directly, and this is the method I use now. I would appreciate it if you mention this possibility to other users, if you feel you should warn them for downloading images from Flickr; I never had a problem with the automated Flickr Review system, by the way. Greetings from the Netherlands, Eissink (talk) 11:01, 23 September 2019 (UTC).

A1Cafel, only after my reply I found out that you must have been referring to my recent uploads. My – earlier! – uploads have been deleted in favor of your uploads, probably because someone tagged mine as a duplicate. If it was you who tagged them, please tag your own uploads the next time, if they are the real duplicates. And, more important, next time if you want to address something: get to it straight away, please, don't try to lecture someone on uploading when you don't even know how pictures had been uploaded, and certainly not if it is you yourself who uploaded duplicates — it is quite grotesque. Eissink (talk) 11:58, 23 September 2019 (UTC).

File:2019-09-02 Chalk illustrations of CA and NC flora.jpg

File:2019-09-02 Chalk illustrations of CA and NC flora.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 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!

A1Cafel (talk) 04:03, 4 October 2019 (UTC)

File:2019-09-08 Hong Kong anti-extradition bill protest 25.jpg

File:2019-09-08 Hong Kong anti-extradition bill protest 25.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 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!

Patrick Rogel (talk) 11:14, 5 October 2019 (UTC)

Wrong date for photos of Tuen Mun Protest

Tuen Mun Protest (光復屯門公園遊行) was held on 21/9 instead of 22/9. Would you consider renaming your photos from "2019-09-22 Tuen Mun 光復屯門公園遊行 xx.jpg" to "2019-09-21 Tuen Mun 光復屯門公園遊行 xx.jpg"?--202.40.137.198 03:17, 6 October 2019 (UTC)

Obviously I made a mistake there. I have just changed the category and asked for renaming of 48 files. Thank you for noticing. Eissink (talk) 10:05, 6 October 2019 (UTC).

Borstvoeding

Hey Eissink, ik kom je toevallig soms tegen op die lijsten, dus ik volg je niet :-) (lol). Sommigen denken dat als je steeds bij hen/hun reageert, maar ik ga die lijsten weleens na of er Nederlandse of Nederlandstalige bestanden tussen staan. Dus vandaar. Groet, - Richardkiwi (talk) (talk) 20:53, 14 October 2019 (UTC)

video2commons

Hi, I saw there were one of your tasks caught during the maintenance (server rebuild) earlier, which should be fixed. Would you mind trying it again? --Zhuyifei1999 (talk) 22:08, 26 October 2019 (UTC)

Correcte licentie op File:Westbroekpark,_monument_Troelstra_HGA001-081591.tjp.jpg ?

Dag Eissink, Ik zag je foto van het monument Troelstra staan van het Haags Gemeente Archief. Ik die op de beeldbank van het archief alleen geen licentie staan. Kan je mij laten zien waar deze licentie staat? Martsniez 28 nov 2019 10:45

Dag, Martsniez.

Het Haags Gemeentearchief biedt veel van hun collectie aan met als enige voorwaarde naamsvermelding. Dat wordt ook duidelijk bij het downloaden van een afbeelding (er verschijnt dan een pop-upbericht), maar bij de zoekmogelijkheden kunnen ook reeds de beschikbare afbeelding worden gescheiden van de afbeeldingen waarvoor toestemming moet worden gevraagd.

Dit roept vaker vragen op, ook bij andere archieven, en zo had ik een vergelijkbare vraag bij Stadsarchief Amsterdam – zie deze discussie in De Kroeg. Hopelijk is daarmee je vraag beantwoord.

Zou je in het vervolg je overlegbijdragen willen ondertekenen met vier tildes, dus 4 x ~? Dan verschijnen vanzelf je naam en het tijdstip van bijdrage.

Groet,

Eissink (talk) 11:13, 28 November 2019 (UTC).

Bedankt voor de snelle reactie. Een statement die aangeeft dat een werk gebruikt mag worden betekent niet dat een CC-licentie van toepassing is. Dat moeten ze zelf expliciet aangeven. Via een OTSR of via een licentie op hun website. Er is daar geen geschreven bevestiging van? Martsniez (talk) 11:17, 28 November 2019 (UTC)

Zou je de discussie in De Kroeg, waarnaar ik heb gelinkt, even willen nalezen en eventueel daar verder reageren? B.v.d., Eissink (talk) 11:18, 28 November 2019 (UTC).

Ik heb een reactie achtergelaten op in De Kroeg. Waarschijnlijk niet het antwoord dat je graag zou willen zien over het onderwerp. Mocht je meer informatie willen over de werken van de Creative Commons-licenties dan kan je die vinden op creativecommons.nl. Daar vind je ook ons telefoonnummer als je een voorbeeld wilt doorspreken. Martsniez (talk) 12:35, 28 November 2019 (UTC)

Ik denk niet dat jij weet wat ik graag wil zien en ik zou wat terughoudend zijn met daar uitspraken over te doen, maar het was inderdaad niet het antwoord dat ik had verwacht, maar daar heb je het wat mij betreft wel zelf naar gemaakt. Als je sommige van mijn uploads verwijderd wilt zien, dan kun je ze alszodanig nomineren, maar ik heb verder geen behoefte aan discussie met jou over dit soort zaken. Regel het maar met mensen die daar ook voor betaald worden. Succes, groet, Eissink (talk) 13:03, 28 November 2019 (UTC).

Copyright status: File:Ed van Wijk 1977 — 740169.jpg

Copyright status: File:Ed van Wijk 1977 — 740169.jpg

This media may be deleted.

Thanks for uploading File:Ed van Wijk 1977 — 740169.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 OTRS 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.

And also:

• File:Simon E. Smit (boven) en Ed van Wijk, fotografen ca. 1960 — HGA001006977.jpg
• File:1954 Burgemeester mr. F.M.A. Schokking overhandigt prof. dr. G.A. van Poelje de zilveren penning van de gemeente bij zijn 70e verjaardag — HGA001051078.jpg
• File:1959 Parkstraat 25, Het Vaderland, oude pers — 054558.jpg
• File:1989 De TGV (train à grande vitesse), die in de toekomst naar Parijs gaat rijden, doet station Hollandse Spoor aan — HGA001-617821.jpg
• File:Marian Gobius in haar atelier, maart 1973 — 740168.jpg
• File:Marino Marini, beeldhouwer — HGA001004966.jpg
• File:Restauratie van de Gedenknaald ter herinnering aan 1813 — HGA001-078252.tjp.jpg

Yours sincerely, Magog the Ogre (talk) (contribs) 13:45, 29 November 2019 (UTC)

File:Marino Marini, beeldhouwer — HGA001004966.jpg

File:Marino Marini, beeldhouwer — HGA001004966.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 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!

Vysotsky (talk) 01:41, 1 December 2019 (UTC)

Dank ...

... voor het helpen uitzoeken van die molens. Je bent er goed in. Groet, Wutsje 14:41, 6 December 2019 (UTC)

Constructie of Konstruktie

Je wijzigde de naam van het beeld van Cyril Lixenberg in Diepenheim van 'Constructie' in 'Konstruktie'. Ik maakte de foto van dit beeld op 15 augustus 2013. Direct daarna fotografeerde ik het informatiepaneel bij dit beeld. Daarop wordt als naam van de sculptuur 'Constructie' aangegeven. Op de nog bestaande website van Lixenberg wordt dit specifieke werk niet genoemd, wel worden op die website zowel de naam 'Constructie' als de naam 'Konstruktie' gebruikt. De gegeven titel was dus gebaseerd op de informatie bij het beeld zelf en geen vergissing. Met vr. groet, Gouwenaar (talk) 21:06, 16 January 2020 (UTC)

Dag, Gouwenaar. Ik wilde een categorie aanmaken en heb daarom voor de – vermoedelijk – juiste naam https://www.kunstinhofvantwente.nl/view.php?id=1 geraadpleegd, een site van een orgaan dat zich bij de beschrijvingen direct heeft gebaseerd op de bij de gemeente Hof van Twente beschikbare documentatie. Ik lees op deze foto van het informatiebord inderdaad ook 'Constructie'. De pagina waarnaar je linkt, geeft inderdaad van twee beelden uit 1981 ook de namen als Konstruktie 1 & II, dus de schrijfwijze met k is (zeker in die jaren) niet onwaarschijnlijk. Ik vermoed, maar het blijft gissen, dat de makers van het informatiebord de spelling keurig hebben aangepast naar de huidige standaard, maar zo werkt dat met titels natuurlijk niet. Ik hou vast aan 'Konstruktie', maar een halszaak is het natuurlijk niet.

Bijna twintig jaar lang ben ik wel bijna dagelijks langs het beeld heen en weer gefietst: het is een vertrouwd ding geworden. Mocht je recent niet in Diepenheim zijn geweest: in 2017 is bij de hostatuin van het Gazebo een tweede cortenstaalkunstwerk geplaats, MONOMET (eigen beelden) van Lucas Lenglet, een imposant werk. Vriendelijke groet, Eissink (talk) 21:47, 16 January 2020 (UTC).

Ja, die website "Kunst in Hof van Twente" heb ik ook gezien. Ik heb inmiddels de afbeelding van het informatiebord op Commons geplaatst en in de bestandsbeschrijving een alternatieve naam opgenomen. De naam van het bestand is voor mij verder ook halszaak, omdat deze redirect wel blijft bestaan. Ik reageerde alleen om duidelijk te maken dat de naamgeving in 2013 geen vergissing was. Met vr. groet, Gouwenaar (talk) 22:31, 16 January 2020 (UTC)

File:Broekerpad.webm

File:Broekerpad.webm 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 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!

Eatcha (talk) 10:19, 25 February 2020 (UTC)

File:Water bear.jpg

File:Water bear.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 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!

Hemiauchenia (talk) 21:49, 1 March 2020 (UTC)

File:2020-03-07 — Teddy bear with a medical protective mask – Coronavirus protection.jpg

File:2020-03-07 — Teddy bear with a medical protective mask – Coronavirus protection.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 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!

A1Cafel (talk) 02:29, 11 March 2020 (UTC)

File:The pueblo of Wukoki sign.jpg

File:The pueblo of Wukoki sign.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 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!

A1Cafel (talk) 02:33, 11 March 2020 (UTC)

File:2009-02-15 mural Save Deep Ellum.jpg

File:2009-02-15 mural Save Deep Ellum.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 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!

A1Cafel (talk) 02:37, 11 March 2020 (UTC)

File:2019-09-13 The Peak, Hong Kong 12.jpg

File:2019-09-13 The Peak, Hong Kong 12.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 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!

- Alexis Jazz ^{ping plz} 05:42, 16 March 2020 (UTC)