User talk:Djmutex

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Welcome to my talk page. — djmutex

[edit] Attic

• Older 1 (before May 2003): use of hyphens/dashes, discussion about Emphasis (typography).
• Older 2 (before June 2003): how to not screw up moving pages; pangrams, bicameral parliaments, Harry Potter, and the Franks.
• Older 3 (before Dec 2003): German history.

[edit] Current stuff

Add it here. :-)

[edit] Germans

I've for long (a year, actually) been itched by the way Wikipedia-links are done with often sloppy distinctions between nationality, citizenship and ethnicity (with regard to persons) and also between nations and countries. This is particularly obvious in the case of people or entities that are denoted as German. A link to the Federal Republic of Germany is often outright unhistorical and wrong, but this has until now been the most usual.

Therefore I'm considering an article on Germans, which I've started at User:Ruhrjung/Germans. I would wish to avoid lots of edit wars. In particular, I would not wish to see the current disputes over German-Polish matters automatically extend also to this article, why I kindly ask you for comments now, in advance, in order to try to find wordings acceptable to as many as possible of concerned wikipedians.

I look forward to your comments at User talk:Ruhrjung/Germans.
--Ruhrjung 23:38, 14 Apr 2004 (UTC)

[edit] Walbaum-Fraktur

Howdy. With regards to your provided image (fig. 1) on the Fraktur page, you say that you provided the image yourself. I noticed that similar fonts from font companies look fairly different. Can you provide an image of the numbers from the Walbaum-Fraktur set? Danke in advance! -john

Done. I have updated the three sample screenshots on Fraktur. Hope that helps. djmutex 17:41, 2 Aug 2004 (UTC)

Hi, thanks for the Fraktur examples. I am not an expert, but I think that the "s" in the word "Werbedeutsch" is not correct, it should be a long s. -- Aleph4 20:26, 26 Feb 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Thanks

I have a longtime amateur interest in history of modern Germany, and want to thank you for your major contributions to Wikipedia, which I have only now discovered.CoppBob 04:09, 22 Jul 2004 (UTC)

I feel honored that somebody is still recognizing that work even though I have been away for most of the last 12 months. Thanks for the kind words. djmutex 17:45, 2 Aug 2004 (UTC)

[edit] Die Welt

I see you have Die Welt on your work list - I have just found there was no article on it in the English wikipedia, so I have added one by quick translation from the body of the German version. I may have made some errors, and it is fairly skeletal - if you'd like to improve it that would be welcome. seglea 23:54, 23 Nov 2004 (UTC)

[edit] Article Licensing

Hi, I've started a drive to get users to multi-license all of their contributions that they've made to either (1) all U.S. state, county, and city articles or (2) all articles, using the Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike (CC-by-sa) v1.0 and v2.0 Licenses or into the public domain if they prefer. The CC-by-sa license is a true free documentation license that is similar to Wikipedia's license, the GFDL, but it allows other projects, such as WikiTravel, to use our articles. Since you are among the top 1000 Wikipedians by edits, I was wondering if you would be willing to multi-license all of your contributions or at minimum those on the geographic articles. Over 90% of people asked have agreed. For More Information:

• Multi-Licensing FAQ - Lots of questions answered
• Multi-Licensing Guide
• Free the Rambot Articles Project

To allow us to track those users who muli-license their contributions, many users copy and paste the "{{DualLicenseWithCC-BySA-Dual}}" template into their user page, but there are other options at Template messages/User namespace. The following examples could also copied and pasted into your user page:

Option 1

I agree to [[Wikipedia:Multi-licensing|multi-license]] all my contributions, with the exception of my user pages, as described below:

{{DualLicenseWithCC-BySA-Dual}}

OR

Option 2

I agree to [[Wikipedia:Multi-licensing|multi-license]] all my contributions to any [[U.S. state]], county, or city article as described below:

{{DualLicenseWithCC-BySA-Dual}}

Or if you wanted to place your work into the public domain, you could replace "{{DualLicenseWithCC-BySA-Dual}}" with "{{MultiLicensePD}}". If you only prefer using the GFDL, I would like to know that too. Please let me know what you think at my talk page. It's important to know either way so no one keeps asking. -- Ram-Man (comment| talk)

[edit] Unverified images

Hi! Thanks for uploading the following images:

• Image:Inflation-1923-small.jpg
• Image:Inflation-1923.jpg

I notice it currently doesn't have an image copyright tag. Could you add one to let us know its copyright status? (You can use {{gfdl}} if you release it under the GNU Free Documentation License, {{fairuse}} if you claim fair use, etc.) If you don't know what any of this means, just let me know at my talk page where you got the images and I'll tag them for you. Thanks so much. [[User:Poccil|Peter O. (Talk, automation script)]] 21:44, Dec 10, 2004 (UTC)

P.S. You can help tag other images at User:Yann/Untagged_Images. Thanks again.

[edit] Soviet flag over Reichstag

Hi there, Djmutex! I've just read the article on the Reichstag and noticed that you wrote the passage on the red flag saying it was staged and stuff. I checked with modern Russian sources and they say that the daytime attack on the Reichstag began on April 30, 1945. Indeed, a couple of them say that the attack was unsuccessful, however, most of them say that it did happen and soldiers V.Provotorov and G.Bulatov attached the flag to the pediment at 2:25 pm on April 30. Bulatov's awarding ceremony has been documented (order No.0121/н from June 8, 1945). The sources then say that soldiers M.A.Yegorov and M.V.Kantariya placed the flag on the cupola of the Reichstag at 9:50 pm on April 30 (looks like a few hours later). Some sources say that by early morning of May 1, the flag had already been there. I just wanted to know your opinion on all of this. KNewman 16:28, Dec 14, 2004 (UTC)

[edit] List of Frankish Kings

Hi, at List of Frankish Kings I made some structural changes, also see my revisions (and creation) at Template:Carolingians and Template:Merovingians and Template:Kings of the Western Franks (awkward name but it works). I was having some trouble with the format but I think on balance the changes are good. I'd welcome your input. Kaisershatner 13:23, 14 Jun 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Enabling Act

Hi, I come here to you because of your knowledge in the matter of the Fire Decree . Can you tell me when there was a follow up ' further ' decree which legally clarified the arrest/ detention of Deputies following the known Decree. My understanding at present is that Hitler illegally started arrests just prior to the Fire, including Deputies , that the decree did not allow for those or further Deputy arrest, so I am interested to know the relevant specifics and date of the further decree- particluarly if it was in force by 23 March 1933 . Can you answer please on discussion for this Enabling Act and view/ad/correct/suggest etc to what I am currently 9statting now0 going to up-load there , provisionally , as a guide for our understanding of the collapse/seizure/whatever of Power on 23 march ? Thankyou .Famekeeper 10:59, 29 July 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Toaster powered by NetBSD

Hi, It's Henry. I found this and I thought you would find it hilarious/interesting. I thought it was so weird I had to tell someone. It actually toasts.

[edit] Image copyright problem RE: Image:Renate-kuenast.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Renate-kuenast.jpg. The Wikimedia Foundation is very careful about the images included in Wikipedia because of copyright law. We need you to specify two things on the image description page:

• The copyright holder, and
• The copyright status

The copyright holder is usually the creator. If the creator was paid to make this image, then their employer may be the copyright holder. If several people collaborated, then there may be more than one copyright holder. If you created this image, then you are the copyright holder.

Because of the large number of images on Wikipedia, we've sorted them using image copyright tags. Just find the right tag corresponding to the copyright status of this image, and paste it onto the image description page like this: {{TAGHERE}}.

There are 3 basic ways to licence an image on Wikipedia:

• An open content licence
• Public Domain
• Fair Use

• The copyright holder gets the best protection of his work by licencing their work under an open content license like the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike licence. If you have the express permission of the copyright holder to licence their work under the above licence, use the image copyright tag: {{cc-by-sa-2.5}}. The GNU Free Documentation License is another choice for licencing one's work. Again, if you have the express permission of the copyright holder, use the tag: {{GFDL}}.

• The copyright holder can also release his work into the public domain, see here for images released into the public domain.

• • Images from certain sources are automatically release into the Public Domain. This is true for most governments like the federal United States government. (See here for images from the government of the USA and here for other governments) However not all governments release their work into the public domain, such as the UK government (See here for images from the UK government). Non-free licence governments are listed here.

• Also, in some cases, an image is copyrighted but allowed on Wikipedia because of Fair Use. To see if this image qualifies and then how to tag it, see Wikipedia:Fair use.

For any other sources of for more information see Wikipedia:Image copyright tags. Please remember that if you don't tag your images, they will be deleted.

P.S. If you have uploaded other images without including copyright tags, please go back and tag them. Also, please tag all images that you upload in the future.

If you have any questions, just leave a message on my talk page. Thanks again. --SCEhardT 22:42, 10 December 2005 (UTC)

[edit] EffK is forced to Abandon a Corrupted Wikipedia

I refer you to my response of a few moments ago at 15 December [[1]],http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Requests_for_arbitration/EffK/Evidence#3_December_2005 EffK 01:59, 16 December 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Wikipedia:Wikipedians/Germany is being replaced by a category

Hello! You were listed on the Wikipedia:Wikipedians/Germany page as living in or being associated with Germany. As part of the Wikipedia:User categorisation project, these lists are being replaced with user categories. If you would like to add yourself to the category that is replacing the page, or one of the Bundesland-based subcategories, please visit Category:Wikipedians in Germany for instructions. --Angr (tɔk) 14:51, 15 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Image:Malcolm-x-small.jpg

[edit] Berlin wiki meeting

Hello, I have been mulling over this for some time (actually at least a year), and would like to propose a meeting of the Berlin-residing Users of the english wiki. Wolud you be interested at all, or do you think this a bad idea ? Thoughts are welcome. Cheers. Lectonar 20:03, 26 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Calling programmers

We need coders for the WikiProject Disambigation fixer. We need to make a program to make faster and easier the fixing of links. We will be happy if you could check the project. You can Help! --Neo139 08:56, 5 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Image tagging for Image:Thurgood-marshall-2-small.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Thurgood-marshall-2-small.jpg. The image has been identified as not specifying the source and creator of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. If you don't indicate the source and creator of the image on the image's description page, it may be deleted some time in the next seven days. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided source information for them as well.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:

• Wikipedia:Image use policy
• Wikipedia:Image copyright tags

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. 14:17, 4 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Orphaned fair use image (Image:Spd-logo.png)

Thanks for uploading Image:Spd-logo.png. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable under fair use (see our fair use policy).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any fair use images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. This is an automated message from BJBot 10:30, 15 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Possibly unfree Image:Helmut-schmidt-1994.jpg

[edit] Image copyright problem with Image:Franz-josef-strauss.jpg

Thank you for uploading Image:Franz-josef-strauss.jpg. However, it currently is missing information on its copyright status. Wikipedia takes copyright very seriously. It may be deleted soon, unless we can determine the license and the source of the image. If you know this information, then you can add a copyright tag to the image description page.

If you have any questions, please feel free to ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thanks again for your cooperation. BigDT 04:47, 27 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Unspecified source for Image:Emphasis typography2.png

Thanks for uploading Image:Emphasis typography2.png. I noticed that the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, then you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, then a link to the website from which it was taken, together with a restatement of that website's terms of use of its content, is usually sufficient information. However, if the copyright holder is different from the website's publisher, then their copyright should also be acknowledged.

As well as adding the source, please add a proper copyright licensing tag if the file doesn't have one already. If you created/took the picture, audio, or video then the {{GFDL-self}} tag can be used to release it under the GFDL. If you believe the media meets the criteria at Wikipedia:Fair use, use a tag such as {{non-free fair use in|article name}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:Image copyright tags#Fair use. See Wikipedia:Image copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have specified their source and tagged them, too. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following this link. Unsourced and untagged images may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If the image is copyrighted under a non-free license (per Wikipedia:Fair use) then the image will be deleted 48 hours after 00:27, 6 June 2007 (UTC). If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. —Remember the dot ^(talk) 00:27, 6 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Image:Verdana.png listed for deletion

An image or media file that you uploaded or altered, Image:Verdana.png, has been listed at Wikipedia:Images and media for deletion. Please see the discussion to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. Zab 10:42, 7 June 2007 (UTC) Zab 10:42, 7 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Replaceable fair use Image:Daeubler-gmelin.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Daeubler-gmelin.jpg. I noticed the 'image' page specifies that the image is being used under fair use, but its use in Wikipedia articles fails our first fair use criterion in that it illustrates a subject for which a freely licensed image could reasonably be found or created that provides substantially the same information. If you believe this image is not replaceable, please:

1. Go to the image description page and edit it to add {{di-replaceable fair use disputed}}, without deleting the original Replaceable fair use template.
2. On the image discussion page, write the reason why this image is not replaceable at all.

Alternatively, you can also choose to replace the fair use image by finding a freely licensed image of its subject, requesting that the copyright holder release this (or a similar) image under a free license, or by taking a picture of it yourself.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified how these images fully satisfy our fair use criteria. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on this link. Note that fair use images which could be replaced by free-licensed alternatives will be deleted 2 days after this notification (7 days if not used in an article), per our Fair Use policy. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Garion96 (talk) 10:29, 16 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Congratulations!

Congratulations! Your image Image:Berlin-brandenburg-gate.jpg was the random picture of the day for October 23, 2007. It looked like this:

Random picture of the day Image credit: Djmutex (talk)

The Brandenburg Gate

Image credit: Djmutex (talk)

. Again, Congratulations! - Presidentman (talk) Random Picture of the Day 20:08, 24 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Fair use rationale for Image:Spiegel-cover-no-41-1962.jpg

Thanks for uploading or contributing to Image:Spiegel-cover-no-41-1962.jpg. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is not a suitable explanation or rationale as to why each specific use in Wikipedia constitutes fair use. Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on those pages too. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free media lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. — Save_Us_229 18:59, 5 January 2008 (UTC)