User talk:BuzzWoof

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search

Welcome!

Hello, BuzzWoof, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question and then place {{helpme}} after the question on your talk page. Again, welcome! Iamunknown 23:07, 27 April 2007 (UTC)

Image:Valley_church_forchtenberg.jpg[edit]

Thanks for uploading Image:Valley_church_forchtenberg.jpg. I notice 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 {{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 any fair use images which are replaceable by free-licensed alternatives 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. Iamunknown 23:07, 27 April 2007 (UTC)

BuzzWoof, note that this message also applies to Image:Townhall forchtenberg.jpg. I have replied to your question on my talk page at Image talk:Valley church forchtenberg.jpg. --Iamunknown 10:15, 29 April 2007 (UTC)

Image:Valley church forchtenberg.jpg listed for deletion[edit]

Dear uploader: The media file you uploaded as Image:Valley church forchtenberg.jpg has been listed for speedy deletion because you selected a copyright license type implying some type of restricted use, such as for non-commercial use only, or for educational use only or for use on Wikipedia by permission. While it might seem reasonable to assume that such files can be freely used on Wikipedia, this is in fact not the case[1][2]. Please do not upload any more files with these restrictions on them, because content on Wikipedia needs to be compatible with the GNU Free Documentation License, which allows anyone to use it for any purpose, commercial or non-commercial. See our non-free content guidelines for more more information.

If you created this media file and want to use it on Wikipedia, you may re-upload it (or amend the image description if it has not yet been deleted) and use the license {{GFDL-self-no-disclaimers}} to license it under the GFDL, or {{cc-by-sa-2.5}} to license it under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike license, or use {{PD-self}} to release it into the public domain.

If you did not create this media file but want to use it on Wikipedia, there are two ways to proceed. First, you may choose one of the fair use tags from this list if you believe one of those fair use rationales applies to this file. Second, you may want to contact the copyright holder and request that they make the media available under a free license.

If you have any questions please ask at Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. Thank you. // Pilotguy radar contact 20:33, 30 April 2007 (UTC)

Hey BuzzWoof, sorry I missed your message. The problem with these images is that Wikipedia is the free encyclopedia; we generate free content which, defined in the new resolution by the Wikimedia Foundation (the organization that runs Wikipedia) (you can see it at foundation:Resolution:Licensing policy and related content at freedomdefined.org), includes commercial reuse and derivative works. That means that, ideally, any person can make profit off of content you or I submit and should be able to do modify it. This content is, of course, licensed under the GNU Free Documentation license which means that they have to let others have the same freedom (of making profit and modifying) that they do.

The images that the mayor gave you are, unfortunately, not free. They are "for Wikipedia's use only". That is not "free" as the Wikimedia Foundation defines it. Further, they are images that could easily be replaced by someone who goes to the mayor's town and snaps a photograph; thus they are "replaceable fair use images" and should be deleted. Hope this helps. Feel free to ask any further questions. --Iamunknown 02:31, 2 May 2007 (UTC)

BuzzWook, I have, because of the same reasons outlined above, suggested that Image:Forchtenberg.jpg, Image:Kern museum forchtenberg.jpg, Image:Sophie scholl forchtenberg.jpg, Image:Forchtenberg christmas market.jpg and Image:Fort ruins forchtenberg.jpg be speedy deleted. If you wish to contest the deletions, you may add {{Replaceable fair use disputed}} to the image description pages. If you have any questions, feel free to ask me. Regards, Iamunknown 01:40, 13 May 2007 (UTC)

Re: Deleted images[edit]

Hi, yeah it can be confusing I guess. The "core" issue is that the Wikipedia project is about creating a free content ensyclopedia. That means only material that is licensed under what is considered a free license is allowed. Basicaly the copyright holder must agree to allow anyone to use the material in any way (inclding commercialy), modify it and re-distribute it (See Wikipedia:Copyright for more). Since sometimes we are not eable to get free licensed material for everyting there is an exception that allow non-free material to be used without a proper license per the US fair use law, however the policy is to only allow this when it's not possible to get free licensed material in it's place. That's why photos of most people, buildings and things like that are not allowed unless they are freely licensed. Those photos you uploaded where not licensed under a free license, and since it would be possible for someone to take photos of those buildings they are considered "replacable" (See Wikipedia:Non-free content for more on this). So basicaly in order to upload stuff to Wikipedia you must either have created it yourself and agree to release it under a free license, or you must have gotten permission from the creator to release it under a free license (see Wikipedia:Requesting copyright permission for more on this), or it must be a image for wich no freely licensed equivelent could be created. Either because it's a photo from a historic event, or because trying to create our own image would be impossible wihtout infrindging on existing copyrights (for example you can't make a drawing of Spider-Man and release it under a free license becuse the character itself is copyrighted by Marvel).

Anyway yeah a a lot of things to keep in mind and you are in good company when finding it confusing, unfortunately it's not an easy consept to explain in a short enough form that most people would bother reading (it's usualy hard enough to make people understand that we rely mean it when the upload page says that images with no info on them whatsoever will be deleted), attempts are beeing made to make the upload process more of a "wizard" type experience, maybe that will help avoid "information overload" problems. Me and a few other shave also put together an "essay" called Wikipedia:Basic copyright issues, but it's not exactly linked on the front page, so I guess few new users will ever find it... --Sherool (talk) 18:08, 27 May 2007 (UTC)

Welcome to WikiProject Germany[edit]

Flag of Germany.svg

Welcome, BuzzWoof, to the WikiProject Germany! Please direct any questions about the project to its talk page. If you create new articles on Germany-related topics, please list them at our announcement page and tag their talk page with our project template {{WikiProject Germany}}. A few features that you might find helpful:

  • The project's Navigation box points to most of the pages in the project that might be of use to you.
  • Most of the important discussions related to the project take place on the project's main talk page; you may find it useful to watchlist it.
  • We've developed a number of guidelines for names, titles, and other things to standardize our articles and make interlinking easier that you may find useful.

Here are some tasks you can do:

If you have any questions, please feel free to ask me or any of the more experienced members of the project, and we'll be very happy to help you. Again, welcome, and thank you for joining this project! -- Kusma (talk) 16:22, 28 May 2007 (UTC)

Photo of Forchtenberg[edit]

Hello, BuzzWoof.

I'm QBay in Japan. I'm going to write an article of Forchtenberg to ja-wikipedia. I found your excellent photo on the German Page. Bild:Forchtenberg fluss.jpg is it. I'd like to use the photograph on my Japanese page. Would you upload it to Wikimedia Commons? --QBay 14:48, 18 August 2007 (UTC)

Thank you for uploading the photo. I've used it for Japanese article. It makes my article better. Regards. --QBay 23:53, 23 August 2007 (UTC)

License tagging for Image:PINGroupGermany.jpg[edit]

Thanks for uploading Image:PINGroupGermany.jpg. Wikipedia gets thousands of images uploaded every day, and in order to verify that the images can be legally used on Wikipedia, the source and copyright status must be indicated. Images need to have an image tag applied to the image description page indicating the copyright status of the image. This uniform and easy-to-understand method of indicating the license status allows potential re-users of the images to know what they are allowed to do with the images.

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

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. If you need help on selecting a tag to use, or in adding the tag to the image description, feel free to post a message at Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. 21:08, 2 November 2007 (UTC)

Stuttgart[edit]

Hi!
Talking about the distance from Stuttgart to the Black Forest I think your suggestion is a good one we can all live with. Thanks. ;-)
--Fromgermany 09:00, 5 November 2007 (UTC)
PS: Hab' gerade auf Deiner Benutzerseite gesehen, daß wir DEUTSCH miteinander sprechen können. Let's keep this in mind. Tschüß!!


Disputed fair use rationale for Image:800px-Campina Logo.jpg[edit]

Thanks for uploading Image:800px-Campina Logo.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot (talk) 19:07, 22 December 2007 (UTC)


Image copyright problem with Image:TettnangOldCastle.jpg[edit]

Image Copyright problem

Thank you for uploading Image:TettnangOldCastle.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. NOTE: once you correct this, please remove the tag from the image's page. STBotI (talk) 12:52, 31 December 2007 (UTC)

PIN Group[edit]

Hallo, wie ich gesehen habe, hast Du den Artikel über die PIN Group angelegt. HAbe heute den Artikel in der deutschen Wikipedia überarbeitet und neu strukturiert. Es wäre schön, wenn Du den Artikel in der englischen Wikipedia überarbeiten und anpassen könntest. 83.135.251.191 Martinvoll (talk) 21:36, 23 January 2008 (UTC)

March 2008 edition of the WikiProject Germany newsletter[edit]

- - Newsletter Bot Talk 14:16, 23 March 2008 (UTC)

This newsletter is delivered by a bot to all members of WikiProject Germany. If you do not want to receive this newsletter in the future, please leave a note at the talk page of the Outreach department so we can come up with a better spamlist solution. Thank you, - - Newsletter Bot Talk 14:16, 23 March 2008 (UTC)

List of crossings of the Danube River[edit]

Hello! I noticed your German proficiency and was wondering if you might be able to help out with the article for List of crossings of the Danube River. Also the discussion as well at Talk:List of crossings of the Danube River. Thanks a ton! --DerRichter (talk) 07:32, 28 March 2008 (UTC)

Hi, what exactly would the scope of "might be able to help" involve? Could you possibly expand on what you mean? As you may have seen I am currently completely overhauling the Stuttgart page, a gargantuam enough task take up almost all of the spare time I have between managing a business and being a dad! BuzzWoof (talk) 19:37, 28 March 2008 (UTC)
I just meant something along the lines of checking for factual accuracy if you have been to certain places and accuracy of translations in the article. No biggie though. --DerRichter (talk) 21:20, 28 March 2008 (UTC)

Panoramapicture Karlspassage Breuninger[edit]

Hi BuzzWoof,

you said in past (the pictures of inside the store: 'but adds nothing to insights on Breuninger. Could be any perfume dept in any corner of the world.'). This is clear , and i understood. But this time it is a 360°-Panorama picture inside the Karlspassage. The Karlspasage is uniqe for Breuninger in Stuttgart ahd the picture shows imressive the architecture of the Karlspassage. In other articles there are often links to 306°-pictures, and some are commercial. So i ask where is the problem with this link.

with best wishes the ip —Preceding unsigned comment added by 91.89.130.170 (talk) 08:37, 10 June 2008 (UTC)

I understand your point, but it's interesting that the editor of the German article sees it the same way! If the article were about the building, or the architecture (like with the Mercedes Museum), I'd understand it. But this is about the company. BuzzWoof (talk) 12:57, 10 June 2008 (UTC)
I don't agree with you at all. Yes the article is about the company. But this company is not a small firm i an industrial area out of town, this is one if the largest department sotres in Stuttgart. And the builings, especially the Karlspassage, form the cityscape of Stuttgart very much. And the Karlspassage is open for pedestrian all time. There are pictures from the buildings in wikipedia, why don't we show a picture from the Karlspassage? And the thing with this german 'editor'. The first editor [KaPe] set the entry to 'gesichtet' and accepted the entry. And then hours after you undit the english version he did it for the german version with the hint to WP:WB but at the Wikibooks i didnot find any hints. And he didn't answer any questions. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 91.89.130.170 (talk) 15:47, 10 June 2008 (UTC)
Wie auch immer. Offensichtlich ist es ganz ganz wichtig. Wenn es Schlossplatz wäre oder ein großer offene Sehenswürdigkeit, würde ich das eher verstehen. Frage mich aber schon warum das wirklich dahingehört. Und warum Du nicht einloggst und hier im Wiki offiziell auftreten willst... BuzzWoof (talk) 18:10, 10 June 2008 (UTC)

Was das mit dem einloggen zu tun hat verstehe ich nicht ganz. Unter der ip bin ich ja auch da. Wenn ich mich mit der Wikipedia mehr identifizieren könnte, würde ich es mir schon überlegen. Meinst Du beim Schlossplatz wäre es einfacher? Ich hole mir gerade beim Hauptbahnhof (in meinen Augen auch eine Sehenswürdigkeit) wohl auch eine blutige Nase. Dort ist ein 360°-pano auf einer komerziellen Seite (mit Werbung) drin. Aber das darf ich wohl auch nicht ersetzten und zusätzlich, dann ist ja die Zahl der externen Links zu groß. Ok wenn ich hier Spam machen würde, wenn die Seite ganz offensichtlich kommerziell oder mit Werbung oder unanständigem vollgestopft ist, aber das kann man ja bei 360cities.net wohl nicht behaupten. Und dann soll ich mich mit WP identifizieren und mich einloggen. Tschuldigung musste einfach mal den Frust rauslassen. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 91.89.130.170 (talk) 18:38, 10 June 2008 (UTC)

"Ich hole mir gerade beim Hauptbahnhof (in meinen Augen auch eine Sehenswürdigkeit) wohl auch eine blutige Nase." Das heisst, ich bin nicht der einzige, der hier denkt, diese 360° Ansicht - obgleich schön, obwohl interessant - irgendwie hier nicht hingehört. Ich kann es auch nicht erklären, aber der enzyklopädische Wert fehlt irgendwie. Sorry. Veilleicht einen neuen Artikel über die Karlspassage schreiben - dann würde ich das verstehen. BuzzWoof (talk) 08:43, 11 June 2008 (UTC)

Beim Hauptbahnhof ist ja ein Link zu einem 360°Bild drin. Allerdings zu einemr kommerziellen Webseite mit Werbung und da schon ein paar Jahre alt von der Qualität nicht so besonders. Zuerst habe ich einen Link zu 360cities (nichtkommerziell) danebengesetzt. Aber der war so schnell wieder draußen, der der ihn rausgenommen hat konnte in dieser Zeit keine der beiden Seiten besucht haben. Und ich denke eigentlich, dass die 'Betreuer' der Seiten in so einem Fall schauen sollten welches der bessere ist und wenn sie der Meinung sind dass zwei einer zuviel ist den schlechteren rausnehmen und nicht Besitzstandswahrung treiben, schließlich soll ja WP besser werden. Dann habe ich, was mir mal ein 'wohlmeinender' admin in einem ähnlichen Fall geraten hat, den Link ersetzt und im Kommentar auch klar dazugeschrieben warum. auch dies wurde ohne Kommentar rückgängig gemacht. Eine Anfage in der Disk des betreffenden Benutzers wurde bisher ignoriert. Hier hat man dann das Gefühl man ist unerwünscht, was die Motivation zur Mitarbeit beträchtlich erhöht. Was den enzyklopädischen Wert dieser Art von Bildern angeht, bin ich anderer Meinung. Ich denke zur Veranschaulichung sagen diese Bilder mehr aus als "flache" Bilder. Es ist ja leider bei Wikipedia aus verschiedenen Gründen nicht Möglich solche Bilder anders als als externe Links einzubinden, was dann gleich bei manchen Admins die Alarmglocken ertönen lässt. Andere Multimedia-Enyklopädien (kommerziell) zahlen inzwischen für die exklusive Nutzung von interaktiven 360°-Bildern schon einiges an Geld! Aber die WP ist hier durch ihre 'demokratische' Struktur viel zu schwerfällig. Und da solche Bilder (schon allein wegen des technischen und zeitlichen Aufwandes) meist von "Profis" gemacht werden kommt man wenn man zu solch einem Bild verlinkt schnell in den Verdacht des Werbenden. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 91.89.130.170 (talk) 09:10, 11 June 2008 (UTC)

Hallo, wollte Dir nur noch kurz bescheid geben, dass ich mich durchgerungen habe mich doch bei Wikipedia (zunächst deutsch) anzumelden. Gruß Hd pano -- 91.89.130.170 (talk) 18:38, 12 June 2008 (UTC)

Stuttgart[edit]

thanks for your message. I will have to get back to you however, there are quite a few articles sourced from other language versions on Wikipedia, they still must be referenced even if it's a foreign language! Michellecrisp (talk) 13:47, 4 August 2008 (UTC)

Stub status on Botnang[edit]

Having read the quality scale for articles, I'd be interested to know the rationale for rating the above article as a stub. I noticed it says on the talk page tag "If you rated the article please give a short summary at comments to explain the ratings and/or to identify the strengths and weaknesses.". Could you possible provide some comments as I set up the page and am keen to do anything to raise the standard. Considering it's a translation of the German article, which is about as comprehensive as you can get for a suburb with 13,000 inhabitants, I'm surprised it's only a "stub". BuzzWoof (talk) 18:46, 9 September 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for pointing that out, when tagging thousands of pages, mistakes like these are easy to make. On analysing the article quality, I felt a B Class and Mid importance rating was sufficient, if you feel differently, I would appreciate any opinion.

OOODDD (talk) 18:55, 9 September 2008 (UTC)

Pears Soap[edit]

Hallo BuzzWoof (da du Deutschkenntnisse auf muttersprachlichem Niveau angibst, erlaube ich mir, dich auf Deutsch anzusprechen); ich würde gerne den Artikel Pears soap für die deutschsprachige Wikipedia übersetzen. Die Angabe According to Unilever records, Pears Soap was the world's first registered brand stammt von dir und du hast dabei als Quelle "source: me, I used to be the brand manager" angegeben (am 4. September 2007). Nun halte ich diese Angabe für interessant und wichtig, sicher in der deutschen WP auch hilfreich, falls irgendjemand Zweifel an der Relevanz haben sollte. Aber gemäss WP:NOR bräuchte es dafür eigentlich eine zitierfähige Quelle ("Wikipedia does not publish original research or original thought. This includes unpublished facts ...."). Weisst du von irgendeiner Publikation, auf die man sich berufen könnte? Gestumblindi (talk) 22:17, 30 September 2008 (UTC)

Response here BuzzWoof (talk) 08:43, 1 October 2008 (UTC)

Danke für die Antwort. Schade... wenn es nichts Veröffentlichtes dazu gibt, muss ich das Faktum in meiner Übersetzung wohl gewissenhaft weglassen, aber dann kommen sicher Leute, die in der deutschen Wikipedia aufgrund der geringen Bekanntheit dieser Marke im deutschsprachigen Raum gleich einen Löschantrag stellen werden - das Alleinstellungsmerkmal "älteste Marke der Welt" hätte die Relevanz gleich schön klargemacht. Gestumblindi (talk) 18:12, 1 October 2008 (UTC)

Stuttgart Ballet[edit]

85.180.37.197 is an unregistered editor who's never done anything else on Wikipedia and well may not return; it would be nice if you were to restore the text that he or she so generously provided — and edit it if it is not to your satisfaction (it's not the loveliest on Wikipedia, but please restore it in any case.) I have not seen the company and generally restrict my writing to matters of which I have first-hand knowledge. — Robert Greer (talk) 03:24, 15 November 2008 (UTC)

Agreed the content is useful, but it's not on plastering stuff on articles then expecting others to mop it into shape! I've just moved home and my wife's expecting and and and. If you want, feel free to restore yourself and edit. Thx. BuzzWoof (talk) 21:24, 15 November 2008 (UTC)


Porsche Museum, Stuttgart[edit]

Hello BuzzWoof, I'm living close to the Porsche site. I will take some daylight photos of the object soon, after the opening next week hopefully. Thanks for the help.--RudolfSimon (talk) 13:08, 27 January 2009 (UTC)

Thanks. Though I live and work in the same area, and write a lot of stuff about Stuttgart and related articles, getting photos is never easy! Much appreciated. BuzzWoof (talk) 18:27, 27 January 2009 (UTC)

Image copyright problem with File:SchwarzerAdler.JPG[edit]

Thanks for uploading File:SchwarzerAdler.JPG. The image has been identified as not specifying the copyright status of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. Even if you created the image yourself, you still need to release it so Wikipedia can use it. If you don't indicate the copyright status of the image on the image's description page, using an appropriate copyright tag, it may be deleted some time in the next seven days. If you made this image yourself, you can use copyright tags like {{PD-self}} (to release all rights), {{self|CC-by-sa-3.0|GFDL}} (to require that you be credited), or any tag here - just go to the image, click edit, and add one of those. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided copyright information for them as well.

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

This is an automated notice by STBotI. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. NOTE: once you correct this, please remove the tag from the image's page. STBotI (talk) 14:12, 20 February 2009 (UTC)

Thank You[edit]

Thanks, glad I could help. References to German Wikipedia should be somehow replaced. Other Wikipedias are not allowed as sources. Squash Racket (talk) 17:28, 25 March 2009 (UTC)

Talk[edit]

Courage... Feketekave (talk) 00:53, 8 January 2010 (UTC)

That was a word of encouragement (and support). If an editor's style of interaction with essentially all others becomes a problem, it would be best if we brought up the issue together. Feketekave (talk) 20:04, 8 January 2010 (UTC)

File:Hagelloch Pos.png listed for deletion[edit]

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Hagelloch Pos.png, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files 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. Calliopejen1 (talk) 22:21, 16 November 2011 (UTC)

File:GreenDotGermany.jpg missing description details[edit]

Dear uploader: The media file you uploaded as:

is missing a description and/or other details on its image description page. If possible, please add this information. This will help other editors make better use of the image, and it will be more informative to readers.

If you have any questions, please see Help:Image page. Thank you. Message delivered by Theo's Little Bot (opt-out) 15:54, 13 August 2013 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open![edit]

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:33, 23 November 2015 (UTC)