Talk:Bibliotheca Teubneriana

Typography High‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Typography, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of articles related to Typography on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.TypographyWikipedia:WikiProject TypographyTemplate:WikiProject TypographyTypography articles
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the importance scale.

Books

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Books. To participate in the project, please visit its page, where you can join the project and discuss matters related to book articles. To use this banner, please refer to the documentation. To improve this article, please refer to the relevant guideline for the type of work.BooksWikipedia:WikiProject BooksTemplate:WikiProject BooksBook articles

Classical Greece and Rome Mid‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Classical Greece and Rome, a group of contributors interested in Wikipedia's articles on classics. If you would like to join the WikiProject or learn how to contribute, please see our project page. If you need assistance from a classicist, please see our talk page.Classical Greece and RomeWikipedia:WikiProject Classical Greece and RomeTemplate:WikiProject Classical Greece and RomeClassical Greece and Rome articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Comparable?

Isn't the Corpus Christianorum a comparable publishing venture? Adam Bishop (talk) 21:21, 3 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

No, Teubner produces classical texts whereas the Corpus Christianorum is limited to Christian authors (i.e., Late Antique, non-classical authors). So the respectability may be comparable, but the purpose and scope of the collection is not. Boourns75 (talk) 15:20, 16 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

File:Teubner Gk type original.jpg Nominated for speedy Deletion

An image used in this article, File:Teubner Gk type original.jpg, has been nominated for speedy deletion for the following reason: All Wikipedia files with unknown copyright status

What should I do?

Don't panic; you should have time to contest the deletion (although please review deletion guidelines before doing so). The best way to contest this form of deletion is by posting on the image talk page.

If the image is non-free then you may need to provide a fair use rationale
If the image isn't freely licensed and there is no fair use rationale, then it cannot be uploaded or used.
If the image has already been deleted you may want to try Deletion Review

This notification is provided by a Bot --CommonsNotificationBot (talk) 22:14, 23 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Non-free fair-use rationale for typographic illustration images

An editor has removed the images illustrating the series' typographic design and its history three times (isn't that a problem vis-a-vis WP:3RR? The most recent and specific edit summary cites "WP:NFCC #1,3,8." However, these are precisely the non-free content criteria that apply to the images you are insisting on removing. The images have (1) no free equivalent, (3) are minimal in number and extent, and (8) are important to readers' understanding of the topic. If there is any disagreement about the applicability of these three subjective criteria, let's discuss it here, specifically and at length, and with informed reference to the article's subject matter. I believe I'm applying these criteria in good faith and don't understand why I'm getting block threats on my user talk page. Wareh (talk) 15:38, 23 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]