User talk:Ellin Beltz/Archive 7

Please restore File:Ya_Tosiba.jpg for which we now have an OTRS ticket. Thanks in advance. Ww2censor (talk) 17:21, 25 March 2019 (UTC)

Hi Ww2censor - It seems to be undeleted now! Thanks for the note. Cheers. Ellin Beltz (talk) 22:06, 31 March 2019 (UTC)

You were not active for a few days, so I asked elsewhere. Sorry I should have struck it out. Thanks anyway. Ww2censor (talk) 22:38, 31 March 2019 (UTC)

Re the photos "File:Subhas Bhattacharya 3.jpg", "File:Subhas Bhattacharya 2.jpg", "File:Subhas Bhattacharya.jpg", I can confirm they were all taken by me. I am surprised by your throwaway comment "Dubious claim of own work". They were taken on mobile. And this is Wikipedia, I am not competing for the Turner Prize just yet, so the quality is just fine. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Chilledude (talk • contribs)

@Chilledude: Please reply at Commons:Deletion requests/Files uploaded by Chilledude. Talk page correspondence is not included in the final decision by a different administrator. Ellin Beltz (talk) 22:33, 6 April 2019 (UTC)

Hi Ellin Beltz. You deleted a file with the same name as this back in November 2016. This file was uploaded in December 2016, but I can't tell if it's exactly the same file or a different file with the same name. This might be "own work", but there's no EXIF data or source information to suggest that it is and I don't think it would be {{PD-logo}} or {{PD-Shape}} per COM:TOO New Zealand. -- Marchjuly (talk) 05:29, 12 April 2019 (UTC)

@Marchjuly: It is very similar to the prior one. It's likely it was uploaded to replace the one removed as copyvio. It's not own work and I agree with you on the COM:TOO New Zealand. Send to DN with my compliments? Cheers! Ellin Beltz (talk) 20:29, 12 April 2019 (UTC)

Thanks for checking on this. -- Marchjuly (talk) 22:12, 12 April 2019 (UTC)

Hi! Please upload deleted file local https://uk.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Файл:Гідрографічна_сітка_України.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1 for fair use. Thanks.--Dim Grits (talk) 00:23, 17 April 2019 (UTC)

Hi Dim Grits, the source=http://www.poezdnik.kiev.ua/reki.html, please feel free to do with it what you wish. Ellin Beltz (talk) 21:03, 17 April 2019 (UTC)

Hi! I took the deletion template off, this is created from File:Ukraine topo en.jpg Teemeah (talk) 11:16, 17 April 2019 (UTC)

Hi Teemeah: Great! Thanks!! Ellin Beltz (talk) 21:06, 17 April 2019 (UTC)

It is not a problem of source and author only. Because these image include template:self in license. Thanks --Garam _talk 03:38, 17 April 2019 (UTC)

Hi Garam I thought I fixed it to match the source? Please advise with longer sentences of explanation if there is still a problem. Cheers! Ellin Beltz (talk) 21:05, 17 April 2019 (UTC)

User Vimraj Wilfred, who made File:2019 Thai general election results per province.svg, copied these file from File:Thailand elections result 2019.svg and changed colors. But he/she licensed it as "CC BY-SA 4.0" using template:self like his/her own work only. After that, you corrected some data on information. Nonetheless, its license is still {{self|cc-by-sa-4.0}}, and it looks like I licensed as "CC BY-SA 4.0" now. Thanks. --Garam _talk 08:03, 20 April 2019 (UTC)

Of course the US law regarding freedom of panorama does not allow for photos of public art, but what about the explanatory plaques accompanying the art? I would appreciate your observations at the following deletion discussions. Binksternet (talk) 22:44, 20 April 2019 (UTC)

• Commons:Deletion requests/File:Glendale Comfort Woman Plaque.jpg
• Commons:Deletion requests/File:Palisades Park Comfort Women Plaque.jpg
• Commons:Deletion requests/File:Southfield Comfort Woman Plaque.jpg

  Done I see how you became confused, but even nonsensical text is copyright in Panorama photos in the U.S. I ran up against this in my earliest days in Commons...[1]. Cheers! Ellin Beltz (talk) 18:12, 21 April 2019 (UTC)

Please restore File:PeterBaxter,ParkCity,Utah.jpg for which we have this OTRS ticket#2019031510008316. Thanks in advance. Ww2censor (talk) 11:32, 22 April 2019 (UTC)

Hi Ww2censor,   Done! Please review the file, I am not an OTRS editor due to real name editing. Cheers! Ellin Beltz (talk) 01:50, 23 April 2019 (UTC)

Hello.

I try to answer your request for this file File:Esquisse I am Error.png [2].

After reading COM:DW, I fail to see how this file can be a derivate work. As you can see on the original screen shot of the game Nintendo owns copyrights, "Esquisse I am Error.png" do not use any of the material from the original. All have been redrawn. There, is even any color corresponding, and also any pixel corresponding, font are not the same too. This file only use random shape and color, from the original one, and every objet is finally different, far from the original.

So it's an artist view entirely done by his author. Can you reasonnablely say the geen puppet on "Esquisse I am Error.png" made of 4 lines and 1 circle is a derivate work of Link ? hum, i'm not sure.

So this map File:Lut Gholein.jpg, representing a map seen in a game don't respect Commons licence ? and his category Category:Maps of video game locations ?

Do you consider modifying you're last edit on the file ?

Regards --Archimëa (talk) 15:48, 24 April 2019 (UTC)

Hi Archimëa that your drawing is not as polished as the one from which it was copied doesn't make it not a derivative work. The point of your copy is to copy the original but skip what you think makes it copyright. It doesn't work like that, sorry! Ellin Beltz (talk) 18:53, 24 April 2019 (UTC)

Hi, Ellin Beltz. I've seen your request for source and author info on this file, but I don't fully understand your reasons as both are provided. Could you please elaborate on this? Thanks. Qoan (dis-me!) 21:15, 24 April 2019 (UTC)

If it helps, be aware that this is not a copy a map in the game. There's a sort of 3D ghostly map in the game, but it doesn't look anything like this. I think this pic shows what I mean. Qoan (dis-me!) 21:36, 24 April 2019 (UTC)

Hi Qoan - I think the best thing to do is to let the community discuss it. What caused me to mark it is that you have it labeled as if it is from the game, without explaining why you think that the layout of the game - whether drawn by them or as you imagine it - is "own work." I did not see any explanation of this, and thus tagged it. No source, even Deletion Nomination, is not a judgement on you, but a opportunity to assure our end users that we have done our due diligence to be sure files are actually free of copyright and available for use. Cheers! Ellin Beltz (talk) 17:23, 26 April 2019 (UTC)

Hello, I noticed you deleted the logo and the HQ picture I added to one of the Taiwan Companies studs I've editing. Can you help me understand what kind of copyright infringement am I committing and to solve it? Thanks! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Marcoandrept (talk • contribs) 02:39, 29 April 2019 (UTC)

Hi Marcoandrept: The templates on your talk page provide the information you seek... "Thanks for uploading ... (the files). This media is missing permission information. A source is given, but there is no proof that the author or copyright holder agreed to license the file under the given license. Please provide a link to an appropriate webpage with license information, or send an email with copy of a written permission to OTRS (permissions-commons@wikimedia.org). This also applies if you are the author yourself." Since there was a source, perhaps a company, but there was no permission by that company sent via OTRS, see COM:OTRS, the media was deleted. Cheers! Ellin Beltz (talk) 23:28, 30 April 2019 (UTC)

Hi, can I email the company asking for permission to use the logo and the headquarters picture and then email that to commons@wikimedia.org. Is that enough? Is there any template for the permission text? thanks Marcoandrept (talk) 17:32, 1 May 2019 (UTC)

Hi Marcoandrept: If you follow this link COM:OTRS, there is a sample email letter to use! Ellin Beltz (talk) 21:04, 2 May 2019 (UTC)

Hi Ellin beltz, I saw that you deleted the files about Terragni, Covema and Pontremoli that I have upload. I want to say you that I have the rights to upload that file. The people that have gived to me that file wrote to Wikipedia , in that mail you can see that they gives only to me the permission to upload that file. So can you please undelete that images? This is the ticket for the images about pontremoli (Mario and Roberto)Ticket#: 2019042410004499. This is the ticket for the images about Covema and Marco Terragni Ticket#: 2019041810008167. G.C. Giovannicaciotta (talk) 16:22, 3 May 2019 (UTC)

Hi Giovannicaciotta - All those images were previously undeleted, tagged with the OTRS template.   Done Cheers! Ellin Beltz (talk) 17:43, 3 May 2019 (UTC)

Thank you Ellin Beltz, Can I publish them ? Giovannicaciotta (talk) 20:18, 5 May 2019 (UTC)

Hi Giovannicaciotta - I would wait until the OTRS process is finished. Ellin Beltz (talk) 20:18, 5 May 2019 (UTC)

Hello Ellin, please excuse my ignorance of deletion procedures but much of the online information available seems overwhelming (as well as somewhat discouraging with regards to uploading images of ‘public art’ when one struggles to make the time available to do this) and in spite of my efforts to present arguments against recent decisions to ‘delete tag’ some of my images much of my communications appear to have been ignored and questions left unresolved with deletions apparently carried out anyway. Perhaps if I use one file (File:Adam Mickiewicz Vilnius 18.jpg) as an example you could take the time to explain to me why an image of an apparent reproduction (in a museum in Vilnius in Lithuania which I do understand has restricted FOP copyright licensing) of an original painting created in 1828 by Walenty Wańkowicz which is now currently housed in the National Museum of Warsaw (File:Wańkowicz Adam Mickiewicz.jpg) and apparently available under ‘PD Art|PD-old-100’ licensing (which is what I subsequently suggested for the file in question) cannot be kept? Admittedly in the case of files …20, …22 and …16, which you also recently deleted, it seems more difficult to establish the creators and dates of the original works although there is anecdotal information available at least with some of these to indicate the attribution of similar licensing. I hope my ignorance is not simplistic naivety and as such is wasting your valuable time but a response and appropriate advice would be appreciated. Thank you --SM1 (talk) 10:19, 7 May 2019 (UTC)

Hi Scotch Mist: In this case, I would ask you to consider if Commons has a very good copy of an image, in high quality with valid source & attribution, such as File:Wańkowicz Adam Mickiewicz.jpg, and another is uploaded with less than sufficient source and information, why the lesser of the two should be kept? Usually we want the very best on display, so File:Wańkowicz Adam Mickiewicz.jpg was kept and a photo that was smaller, blurrier, had a hotspot on it from the flash and wasn't correctly described or attributed was removed. Regarding the information at upload, notice that you listed "|date=2018-06-05 11:41:25

|source=Own work |author=Scotch Mist" even though it's obviously not own work. That is what got it tagged for no permissions, and on review we had a much better image, so no reason to keep it even if it was old enough to be retained. Many if not all of the deleted images were uploaded with claims of "own work", recent dates, your name as author and a big long description about the town of Vilnius which says nothing at all about what is depicted, the images were not able to be retained due to lack of information about their creators. Please let me know if I can be of more assistance. Cheers! Ellin Beltz (talk) 19:23, 7 May 2019 (UTC)

Thank you Ellin for taking the time to respond to my question and for clarifying your decision with regard to the file referenced. Certainly I have been naïve in unintentionally limiting my understanding of ‘source’ to “if you are uploading a file or image that you have created entirely by yourself, you should mark the source field as source='own'”, because although I took the photo to create this particular image “entirely” by myself (on the date specified), I did not create the original painting which now on further reading in ‘Commons’ I appreciate should more strictly have been uploaded as Self-photographed. That said I hope you will indulge me further by considering the following points:

1. While correcting the source and attributing the artist (which I planned to do once this was discovered although in spite of my subsequent questions I was not specifically advised that this was necessary for possible removal of the ‘deletion tag’ – in fact when this was added a comment that an 'Artwork' template, instead of an 'information' template, is required would have been helpful) can be reasonably easily corrected\added at a later date, a new higher resolution image which extends a greater canvas area with museum lighting (not a “flash hotspot”) that better reveals details of the painting (see the lyre on left hand side which demonstrates all three of these points) cannot be readily obtained, nor can the frame used in the Vilnius Museum presentation be readily re-created. Furthermore, all of the images retained are of lower resolution than the image deleted and one of the images is of significantly less resolution and quality than the image deleted.
2. Given the rationale for deleting ‘18’, this makes the deletion of ‘20’ even more perplexing because although I have not yet discovered the original artist (not found any other examples of this painting on Wikimedia) I have discovered contemporary artwork (lithograph of AM portrait in painting) by Ducarme that confirms the period of the original work as early 19th century and therefore, by my understanding, should be retained under ‘PD Art|PD-old-100’ as suggested, with artist details to be added once identified (which is also more likely to occur if the image is retained rather than deleted).
3. Image ‘22’ is more complex to assess as the sculptor and the date the artwork was created are both known (Ryszard Jan Kozlowski 1933), but given that this work was created nearly 80 years after the death of Mickiewicz, it seems likely that this work was modelled on the works of others (sculptures and\or paintings) and so the ‘original copyright(s)’ has\have presumably also already expired?
4. Image ‘16’ includes a ‘profile sculpture’ that could have been created at the time of Mickiewicz but admittedly could have been created much more recently and therefore could be considered an ‘artwork’ covered by current copyright, but again if the image is deleted we are unlikely to discover who created the work and when and so whether, if out of copyright, the original sculptor can be appropriately credited.
5. It is fully appreciated that there are a number of differing, if not contradictory, considerations in deciding whether to delete an image or not, but given that most ‘uploaders’ are ‘amateur photographers’ like myself with limited time available to research each image that Wikimedia apparently encourages be uploaded, perhaps the balance should be in favour of welcoming rather than discouraging uploads where the provenance (copyright status) of a particular work of art is not established beyond all doubt. (As an example I would refer to the ‘BarnStar’ I obtained relative to an image containing information that I had not identified previously but by uploading ‘early’ had importantly been discovered by a user attempting to trace family links from the US back to Poland.)

PS The “big long descriptions’ by way of background details and links are intended to convey some local information and perhaps encourage others with more local knowledge or time available to add more pertinent details (perhaps including creator\date if not provided). I have frequently added such information myself in the past when I have discovered more relevant details and if any of the above images are un-deleted I will use what I now know to be the correct templates and insert the information I have discovered since my original uploads. Thank you for your further consideration --SM1 (talk) 22:53, 8 May 2019 (UTC)

Hi Scotch Mist: When you have actual creators for the 2D and 3D works you uploaded, as well as descriptions of the works themselves, please go to COM:UNDEL and request a second opinion. I wouldn't suggest writing long or complicated messages, perhaps do one image first to see the process. Cheers! Ellin Beltz (talk) 21:00, 9 May 2019 (UTC)

Why did you delete President Lyndon Johnson signs the Medicare Bill (which created both Medicare and Medicaid) while former President Harry S Truman, right, observes.jpg when I provided copyright.I spent a lot of time editing and adding that image, and now you removed it. Completely unfair, and has made me decide to stop editing on Wikipedia, if my hard work is unfairly deleted. https://i.ibb.co/Q8K084g/WHY.jpg Please respond. — Preceding unsigned comment added by H.A.W.C 101 (talk • contribs) 08:27, 9 May 2019 (UTC)

Hi H.A.W.C. 101: Because while the Source given in the upload template was "US Government," the photo is credited to AP on https://www.houstonchronicle.com/local/gray-matters/article/Happy-birthday-Medicaid-6413316.php. Since it's not a government photo, the government license did not apply. Please sign four tildes (~~~~) to automagically leave your signature & datestamp. Cheers! Ellin Beltz (talk) 21:00, 9 May 2019 (UTC)

Hi Ellin,

Why do you think the files uploaded by Allgau need a permission. They all have consistent EXIF data, so I don't see the issue. Did I miss something? Regards, Yann (talk) 05:06, 13 May 2019 (UTC)

Hi Yann: It looks to me like Raccoonish is deleting them. Specifically, the ones I tagged read this "|source=za zgodą posiadacza praw autorskich" which means "by permission of copyright holder" or similar. So they may have consistent Meta, but I don't think they are "own work," thus lacking in permissions. Best wishes! Ellin Beltz (talk) 19:55, 13 May 2019 (UTC)

OK, thanks for your message. Regards, Yann (talk) 03:58, 14 May 2019 (UTC)

Hello. You deleted 7 files which I have uploaded. They had an Template:OTRS pending notice. The owner emailed Wikipedia. So why did you delete them?

• File:Winterthurer Grossfeldtrophy 2017 Pokale.jpg
• File:Winterthurer Grossfeldtrophy 2016 Pokale.jpg
• File:Winterthurer Grossfeldtrophy 2015 Pokale.jpg
• File:SHV-Grossfeld-Cup Pokal.jpg
• File:SHV-Grossfeld-Cup Pokal 2017.jpg
• File:SHV-Grossfeld-Cup 2016 Medaillen.jpg
• File:SHV-Grossfeld-Cup 2014 Medaille Gold.jpg

--Malo95 (talk) 10:53, 13 May 2019 (UTC)

Hi Malo95: Because they have been pending since October 2018, the source was Fotos of Kalypso Partners Grossfeldtrophy, and if / when the OTRS is processed as accepted their administrators can restore the images. Cheers! Ellin Beltz (talk) 19:53, 13 May 2019 (UTC)

Dear Ellin,

On August 22, 2018 Gbawden filed a deletion request for the following photos, which I shot personally and uploaded to WikiCommons in 2015:

• File:Kirill Troussov 70-1-50.jpg,
• File:Kirill Troussov 6.jpg,
• File:Kirill Troussov 70.jpg and
• File:Kirill Troussov 26.jpg.

Only hours later, before I could react, you deleted these files. As I would like to upload new photos (and restore the ones that were deleted) I would like to understand why my photos were deleted.

Some information for you: I am a professional photographer. The photos that were deleted show the German violinist Kirill Troussov. They are also being used on the artist's website and in other places. As you can see in the legal disclaimer on Kirill Troussov's website (https://troussov.com/en/legal.php) all my photos of Kirill Troussov are free to use, according to Creative Commons license CC BY-SA 4.0. Therefore I do not understand why my photos have been deleted from WikiCommons.

I hope your answer will help me to avoid a repetition of this problem in the future.

Thanks, Marco — Preceding unsigned comment added by MarcoBorggreve (talk • contribs) 11:04, 15 May 2019 (UTC)

Hi MarcoBorggreve - Check now, Gbawden has restored them. Thank you for the clarity about the license; it was not immediately apparent to me, but you are absolutely correct it is there. . Cheers! Ellin Beltz (talk) 07:00, 16 May 2019 (UTC)

Hello!

Description of files used in Książnica Cieszyńska article is correct. These pictures ("Pracownia Konserwacji Sucha Ksiaznica Cieszynska" and anoher) are whole my own job. I'm Książnica Cieszyńska worker. I had mistakes in pictures description in another article (Dziedzictwo św. Jana Sarkandra) and user ديفيد عادل وهبة خليل 2 questioned all files I uploaded (now most of them has been corrected already). Ok?

Greetings! JohnyBob — Preceding unsigned comment added by JohnyBob (talk • contribs) 07:49, 17 May 2019 (UTC)

JohnyBob: Please discuss the files at the Deletion Nomination because nothing we say on the talk pages can be included in the determination of the closing administrator. I do not disagree with you. I do not want all your photos to have issues either! I sent you a "ping" from the nomination page it should be at the bell icon at top of your page. Cheers! Ellin Beltz (talk) 20:59, 18 May 2019 (UTC)

Dear Ellin, What is the best way to restore this photo with the proper licence? I am assuming you deleted it because the licence was not stated. It is CC0. I took the picture in Venezuela in 1997, and it is used online on a few websites. It had been online on the Spanish Wikipedia article for years, so I would have thought that it deserved a little consultation before deleting it so swiftly. Cheers, Desde la Torre (talk) 20:10, 18 May 2019 (UTC)

Hi Desde la Torre: Please have a glance at the file history (minus routine changes):

• 10:14, 18 May 2019 Ellin Beltz talk contribs block deleted page File:SuYuChang Profile.jpg (Copyright violation, see Commons:Licensing)
• 23:08, 30 April 2019 . . Y.haruo (talk | contribs | block) 532 bytes (Missing permission)
• 04:32, 2 February 2011 . . User:Nodens2k~commonswiki (talk | contribs | block) 452 bytes ({{Information |Description =
  English: Master Su Yu-Chang performing one of the basic Piguaquan forms.
  Español: El maestro Su Yu-Chang mostrando una de las posturas básicas de Pikua Chuen
  |Source =http://www.wutangcenter.com/wt/Su.html |Author )
• 04:32, 2 February 2011 . . Nodens2k~commonswiki (talk | contribs | block) 260 × 336 (42,425 bytes) ({{Information |Description =
  English: Master Su Yu-Chang performing one of the basic Piguaquan forms.
  Español: El maestro Su Yu-Chang mostrando una de las posturas básicas de Pikua Chuen
  |Source =http://www.wutangcenter.com/wt/Su.html |Author )

There were 18 days between when the file was sent to "no permissions" and when I removed public access. Please have a look at the source as given at your upload, it's given to a website. It may have been on the Spanish Wiki, but we don't have records from other projects unless the uploaders provide them. If you would like to ask for help at COM:UNDEL, you might quickly get the opinions of others on your best way to proceed. Cheers! Ellin Beltz (talk) 20:55, 18 May 2019 (UTC)

Hello, Ellin Beltz. These are my own files. I photographed my friend and his painting. Why do these files need to be deleted?

• File:Вульфович.jpg
• File:Григорий_Вульфович.jpg
• File:Свет2.jpg,
• File:В.Г.1.jpg,
• File:В.Г.2.jpg,
• File:В.Г.3.jpg,
• File:В.Г.4.jpg,
• File:В.Г.5.jpg,
• File:В.Г.6.jpg,
• File:В.Г.7.jpg,
• File:В.Г.8.jpg.

Thanks. FredericaBern 17:54 19 may 2019 (UTC)

Hi FredericaBern: Please see and discuss at Deletion Nomination https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Deletion_requests/Files_uploaded_by_FredericaBern. Copies of someone else's artworks require COM:OTRS permission to retain. Images copied from Facebook and other online sources require permission of whoever actually took the photos. You can have the actual photographer/s (yes, even you) acknowledge where the photos

• File:Вульфович.jpg &
• File:Григорий_Вульфович.jpg

were published on the internet and send COM:OTRS permission. This is because the images were previously published. Your friend the artist also can send permission to COM:OTRS for the free use of artworks such as are shown on File:Свет2.jpg, File:В.Г.1.jpg, File:В.Г.2.jpg, File:В.Г.3.jpg, File:В.Г.4.jpg, File:В.Г.5.jpg, File:В.Г.6.jpg, File:В.Г.7.jpg, and File:В.Г.8.jpg. But be advised, promotionalism is not permitted on Commons as out of COM:SCOPE. Please read COM:L and Commons:Project_scope/Pages,_galleries_and_categories for more information. Cheers! Ellin Beltz (talk) 16:45, 20 May 2019 (UTC)

Hello, Ellin Beltz, here is the license agreement of the site vk.com (ВКонтакте — Russian social network. Opportunities of the social network VKontakte allow each user to upload and download various images without restrictions). [3]. FredericaBern 19:22 22 May 2019 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by FredericaBern (talk • contribs) 19:22, 22 May 2019 (UTC)

•   Ticket:2019052410001481 has been received regarding to file(s) mentioned here. --Krdbot 05:00, 24 May 2019 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by FredericaBern (talk • contribs) 08:49, 24 May 2019 (UTC)

Hi Ellin. Did you check out the DR before deleting the file? Also you issued no warning on the userpage. I have undeleted the file as it is clearly done by uploader. If you disagree please open a DR. Amada44  ^{talk to me} 09:53, 20 May 2019 (UTC)

Sorry, my mistake. I did not remove the OTRS-pending tag. cheers, Amada44  ^{talk to me} 09:56, 20 May 2019 (UTC)

Amada44 No worries, but I am curious as to your meaning since my name does not show at all on the file history page of the image File:Flucht-_und_Rettungsplan_DIN_ISO_23601_Muster.png or the Deletion Nomination Commons:Deletion requests/File:Flucht- und Rettungsplan DIN ISO 23601 Muster.png that I can tell. Ellin Beltz (talk) 16:47, 20 May 2019 (UTC)

you deleted it :) - Amada44  ^{talk to me} 17:13, 20 May 2019 (UTC)

Wierd it didn't show on the history! Ellin Beltz (talk) 17:15, 20 May 2019 (UTC)

Hi. You marked my photos to be deleted Commons:Deletion requests/File:Феміністки - за Шведську модель боротьби з проституцією.png and already have deleted several. I understand that you can see what camera were these photos taken with and that ALL of them are taken with THE SAME camera. Anyway, you still think that the photos are not mine because I put logos on them? Logos are forbidden on wiki? Logos show the group I created on Facebook, where I am one of the admins. I have already sent emails to confirm that these where my photos according to the procedure. However, some photos were already deleted just because I put logos on them and notwithstanding email confirmation. And others remain in question. So what should I do more to prove that I own this camera? I can send some other photos (not published) so that you can see that the camera will be the same again). Thanks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Lacena (talk • contribs) 15:52, 21 May 2019 (UTC)

Hi, Ellin, images of this user are pending OTRS. --Ата ^(talk) 08:39, 22 May 2019 (UTC)

Hi Lacena and Ата: The FBMD is an automatic trigger due to so many uploads coming from Facebook without permission. I am so glad these are actually yours. I think you are the first person whose "FB" pictures that I have nominated is filing an OTRS on the images, and that's over several years. Congratulations! Don't worry, when the OTRS number comes in, they will post it on the Deletion Nomination, they probably will ping me and it stops then. If the images have been removed prior to OTRS confirmation, OTRS administrators can restore the images. Don't worry, it's just a process. I am really pleased to meet an actual Facebook user participating in Commons. Ellin Beltz (talk) 20:22, 22 May 2019 (UTC)

Hi, you stated that my images uploaded to add richness to the page I am creating for Peter Panagiotis Vekinis, are scheduled for deletion. These were supplied by Peter P. Vekinis himself and were taken by him thus he owns the copyright. Else I wouldn't have uploaded them of course. And where is the text for Peter P. Vekinis. I don't have it on my page anymore. Please let me know if you have information on this. Thank you, Wendy — Preceding unsigned comment added by Wendygorski (talk • contribs)

Hi Wendygorski: Please see Commons:Deletion requests/File:DXFlightsOriginal.jpg and Commons:Deletion requests/Files uploaded by Wendygorski. The reasons for deletion nomination are explained on the nomination pages. If you are uploading the work of someone else, or that someone else holds copyright, they have to fill in the form at COM:OTRS. I have no idea where any text is or was, "on my page" is insufficient information for me to find anything. If you can share the URL, I could try to figure it out with you. If you are referring to https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Peter_Panagiotis_Vekinis, the explanation of why the article was declined is explained in the pink box. Cheers! Ellin Beltz (talk) 19:44, 30 May 2019 (UTC)

Hi. The file you deleted, File:S-cam brake.jpg, was a technical drawing and copyright free work as described in the discussion. The deletion was unreasoned. Would you revert it please? --Gwafton (talk) 02:11, 1 June 2019 (UTC)

Hi Gwafton: The route for requests for undeletion goes to COM:UNDEL where you can get a second opinion. Remember that images have to be free of copyright both in their home country and in the U.S. where the servers are. Cheers! Ellin Beltz (talk) 18:03, 1 June 2019 (UTC)

Hi Ellin, I have posted for several years. All the photos I post were and are taken by me, Joan Gramatte, and I own them. Is there some way that I can keep all of these photographs from being deleted? For instance, the one of Edward Albee was taken by me in his Manhattan apartment and I have several other slides of that evening. Please let me know how I can keep them posted on Wiki. I have supported the website these years with usage and donations. Thank you, Joan — Preceding unsigned comment added by Gloverpark (talk • contribs)

Hi Gloverpark: Please see discussion at Commons:Deletion requests/Files uploaded by Gloverpark. Nothing we discuss on talk pages gets considered on deletions. Although the advice is the same. Fill in the tiny email form at COM:OTRS to make it all go away.   Ellin Beltz (talk) 18:02, 1 June 2019 (UTC)

I saw you checked several of my edits, thats great. :-)

I assume it started by deleting File:Jacques Drillon.png, which I marked as missing source, because it relates to File:Jacques Drillon.pdf, which was deleted in Janury after I marked this as missing source, see User_talk:Jacques_Drillon for more infos.

When I am volunteering for requests on c:Commons:Graphics village pump, c:Commons:Graphic_Lab/Illustration_workshop, de:Wikipedia:Grafikwerkstatt, de:Wikipedia:WikiProjekt SVG, en:Wikipedia:Graphics_Lab/Illustration workshop, Commons:Help desk, I first check for obvious copyrightissues and ask the uploader for the copyright (see Wikipedia:Graphics_Lab/Illustration_workshop/Archive/May_2019#Multi-colored_background_needs_to_be_adjusted_to_one_color for example), or mark it with {{No source since}} or a DeletionRequest or similar. But if there are not obvous copyrightmistake I take requests.

Anyhow I had added in the extracted images File:Sumerian_figurine.png, File:Ventral view of turtle with respiratory muscles.svg and File:Nils_Andersson_Bävik.jpg the respective source of Sumerian figurine.pdf, Ventral view of turtle with respiratory muscles.pdf and Nils Andersson Bävik.pdf in the source-field. Onto that I added a link to Commons:Graphics_village_pump/January_2019#Help_needed_with_Category:Files_with_inappropriate_PDF_format in the upload-comment, therfore it is clear that I am not the author of those files.

You reqested File:Sumerian_figurine.png and File:Ventral view of turtle with respiratory muscles.svg for deletion, but you did not make a deletionrequest to the source. You worte on my talkpage, but not at the original uploaders User_talk:Ajaulwes and User_talk:Inquisitio_scientiae.

I am not shure what I should do with those deletion-requests, should I mark the source-files with deletion-requests, should I inform the original uploaders? It would be pointless deleting those images, but keeping the {{FakePDF}}s, because they will be extracted again, since {{FakePDF}} are undesired.

Another comment: In Special:Diff/353304105 you wrote: "scanned by uploader", which is in my opinion missleading, it was extracted from Nils Andersson Bävik.pdf, which was uploaded by Johanvictor.

 — Johannes Kalliauer - Talk | Contributions 22:34, 5 June 2019 (UTC)

The closing administrator will make the determinations, please limit discussion of Deletion Nominations to the location of the nomination. Nothing discussed on other pages will be included in the decision. Ellin Beltz (talk) 19:10, 7 June 2019 (UTC)

Hi there,

I just noticed that you've nominated some uploads by User:Sherwin2 for deletion here.

I'm assuming the fact I'd already made some nominations drew your attention to it.

(I also notice you'd marked some of the images of toy cars, which I wasn't sure about personally.)

Unfortunately, I didn't realise you'd done this and continued nominating and/or marking as copyvios more images by Sherwin2, including some of the images you'd already included in that deletion request.

This means that some are now in two DRs. Apologies for any mess this has caused- should we try undoing or deleting these duplicate requests?

Ubcule (talk) 20:53, 8 June 2019 (UTC)

Hi Ubcule. It's ok, if they get deleted before the Deletion Nomination is closed, the closing administrator will just take note. Unless you want me to change something? Cheers! Ellin Beltz (talk) 20:55, 8 June 2019 (UTC)

No, that's fine. I just thought it would cause a bit of confusion or nuisance; if it's no big deal, it's probably just best to leave it as-is. Thanks for your help. Ubcule (talk) 21:01, 8 June 2019 (UTC)

Hi Ellin Beltz, I noticed that you deleted several files linked in this discussion. I cannot see any reason why they should be deleted; at least the ones I can still access, such as

• File:SimcaPrésidenceCAAPY 1.JPG
• File:Autobianchi A112 V2 1.JPG or
• File:Variable Geometry Turbine Open.JPG,
• File:Variable Geometry Turbine Closed.JPG seem completely innocent. Please reinstate these images unless there is a good reason to delete them; especially in light of the withdrawal of the deletion request. mr.choppers (talk)^-en- 19:02, 8 June 2019 (UTC)

  Done. Mr.choppers please give assistance with these remaining image issues:

• File:LamborghiniMiura.JPG
• File:CitroenC-Metisse11.JPG — no source/ no author
• File:RadialInflowturbine.JPG — no source, claims to be its own source, the other file listed was deleted.
• File:Lexus LS460.JPG — no source/ no author

Please let me know how you feel about these last four. Cheers! Ellin Beltz (talk) 20:32, 8 June 2019 (UTC)

Thanks!

• File:LamborghiniMiura.JPG - small pic (original and reverted version) is a good photo by ChiemseeMan, as indicated by the use of his personal copyright tag. The larger image looks like one of Ton1's, if it was a rare photo then I would extract it but there are many shots of the Miura already available. But no need to delete ChiemseeMan's image.
• File:CitroenC-Metisse11.JPG — one of a series, sequential. See here for the rest. Definitely Ton1.
• File:RadialInflowturbine.JPG - Ton1 took the original photo, and then Martinkoronowski uploaded an version with a corrected title ("This is a retouched picture, which means that it has been digitally altered from its original version. Modifications: change title. The original can be viewed here: Compressor.JPG. Modifications made by Mkoronowski."). Turelio then deleted the original and replaced it with the new version.
• File:Lexus LS460.JPG — matches all the other pics Ton1 took at the 2006 Paris auto show.

I think AGF proved the correct approach to all of Ton1's uploads long ago. I honestly can't see why anyone would find any of these problematic aside from requirements having been changed since they were originally uploaded. What are we going to do in twenty years' time when the people who took millions of Commons photos have died and can't defend their uploads any longer? Best, mr.choppers (talk)^-en- 04:23, 9 June 2019 (UTC)

Mr.choppers - They are all back.   Ellin Beltz (talk) 01:21, 11 June 2019 (UTC)

Great, thank you. Best, mr.choppers (talk)^-en- 01:57, 11 June 2019 (UTC)

Good afternoon Ellin Beltz, Don't try to be a smarty pants. All our files are awaiting the approval of the OTRS team. The first email was sent from the company's domain (air-jurkowscy.pl) 6 months ago. https://www.dropbox.com/s/zru4he1yqj8iq5i/copyrights%20of%20work%20depicted%20and%20media%2014%20dec%202018.jpg?dl=0 And the second email was sent 4 months ago. https://www.dropbox.com/s/8bg368vpzc891v8/Ticket2018121410006939.jpg?dl=0 It is not our fault they are so slow in responding. I'm a partner in AiR Jurkowscy Architekci architectural firm, and that makes me a copyright holder of all the photos I upload. Which, by the way, go to the article on Ryszard Jurkowski, who is a founding partner of AiR Jurkowscy Architekci, and who personally chose the photos to accompany his article. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ryszard_Jurkowski Regards --Pysiatko (talk) 11:14, 9 June 2019 (UTC) P.S. When you nominate photos for deletion shouldn't you by any chance give a valid reason? Because I can see you nominated files such as: File: Altar for Pope.jpg and File:Altar for Pope John Paul II.jpg, which have never been published before and were taken in 1999 (so before even the internet era) during the Pope's visit to Poland. You nominated File:Ryszard Jurkowski1.jpg, a photo that was taken personally by me in 2007 on a trip to Berlin, and it has never been published before either. You have nominated File:Energopol Office Building, Katowice.jpg which has never never published, and finally you've chosen File:Ryszard Jurkowski.jpg, the very photo that Ryszard Jurkowski nominated as his profile pic for wiki. So just get a grip!!! --Pysiatko (talk) 11:39, 9 June 2019 (UTC)

Pysiatko Please make all comments at the Deletion Nomination/s.

• Commons:Deletion requests/Files uploaded by Pysiatko
• Commons:Deletion requests/File:Hotel in Katowice.jpg.

Notice that OTRS has already tagged your images with a number, but that the letter has not been processed. Commons is a system and its currently working. Please make any / all comments at the deletion nomination pages, because nothing said on a talk page has any bearing on the deletions. If images have OTRS pending yet were hidden - when the OTRS is accepted they will reappear. Cheers! Ellin Beltz (talk) 01:27, 11 June 2019 (UTC)

Leave a message!

Ellin Beltz (talk) 01:27, 11 June 2019 (UTC)

Hi there. I see you were part of Commons:Deletion requests/File:Kelly.jpg. The file has recently been overwritten with the photo of this Nigerian DJ. Would you have a moment to sort it out? Thanks! Magnolia677 (talk) 23:22, 13 June 2019 (UTC)

I have fixed this in the meantime. Jcb (talk) 23:32, 13 June 2019 (UTC)

Hello there. I want to know how would you have assume that these images were not my own work? Do u have solid evidence for these? These were all taken from my own sources, and the movie images were taken from movies that had their copyright licenses expired and made for free work. Please feel free to reply to this thank you. --Hari147 (talk) 16:09, 14 June 2019 (UTC)

Hi Hari147: Did you read Commons:Deletion requests/Files uploaded by Hari147? The answer is there! Also please comment right there under the nomination for your comments to be considered by the closing administrator. Nothing discussed on talk pages will enter their decision. Cheers! Ellin Beltz (talk) 20:00, 17 June 2019 (UTC)

Hi Ellin, You removed an image: File:The-Times-April-1992.jpg from Paul Heeren. The Photographer, Richard Walker, sent a release email to permissions-commons@wikimedia.org on the 19th of October 2018 using the suggested template email. Has this email not been processed, or did it not provide sufficient justification for Wikipedia to include the image in the Commons database? Thank you for taking the time to consider this issue. Wikicw (talk) 02:28, 23 June 2019 (UTC)

Hi Wikicw: It's visible and the OTRS tag is in the right place. Sometimes nominating images shakes the OTRS process loose. Apparently it did this time. Cheers! Ellin Beltz (talk) 12:15, 24 June 2019 (UTC)

Thanks Ellin Wikicw (talk) 03:18, 26 June 2019 (UTC)

Hallo Ellin Beltz, du hast Collagen von mir gelöscht, die alle als eigene Aufnahmen markiert sind. Dazu gibt es eine Beschwerde bei OTRS - Setze dich bitte mit Reinhard Kraasch über "Permissions - German Wikipedia <permissions-de@wikimedia.org> " in Verbindung. Zu einem ähnlichen Vorfall gibt es bereits ein Ticket: [Ticket#2019061310005022]. Leider bin ich gesundheitlich öfter längere Zeit nicht im Netz. Ich empfinde es als Vandalismus Arbeiten andere zu Löschen, ohne die Meinung der Gemeinschaft zu hören.

• https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:2018_Freital_Niederh%C3%A4slich_R%C3%B6sche_Segen-Gottes-Schacht.jpg
• https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Brandau_-_Brandov_Lindengarten_-_U_H%C5%99i%C5%A1t%C4%9B.jpg

Besonders ärgelich ist das damit auch Verlinkungen auf OpenStreetMap nicht mehr funktionieren: https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/1326812516 https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/389909390 Gruß aus Sachsen - Gerd Richter--Geri-oc (talk) 18:51, 25 June 2019 (UTC)

Hi Geri-oc: Since they are own work, there should be no problem uploading and licensing each image. Cheers! Ellin Beltz (talk) 21:26, 25 June 2019 (UTC)

Diese Dateien waren ordnungsgemäß mit own gekennzeichnet. Vielleicht sollte die deutsche Gemeinschaft über solche Sachen entscheiden. Da es Collagen sind, sind die einzelnen Fotos nicht archiviert und ein erneutes Hochladen ist ein arbeitsaufwand, den man mit etwas "Zusammenarbeit" vwermeiden kann. --Geri-oc (talk) 06:04, 26 June 2019 (UTC)

Hi Geri-oc. Thank you for your second reply. However on a full review of the two deleted images, I find :

[1] Regarding image File:2018_Freital_Niederhäslich_Rösche_Segen-Gottes-Schacht.jpg - a composite of five images as follows

(A) Sign “Berbau - Lehrpfad (not own work)

(B) Poster from “WISMUT” (not own work)

(C) Photo of a rail car with a logo on it.

(D) Photo of a plaque (“Mudloch Rosche Segen Gottes Schact”)

(E) Photo of a stone labeled “S.G.S. ROESCHE 1858"

The template reads {{Information |description={{de|1=2018 Freital Niederhäslich Rösche Segen-Gottes-Schacht}} |date=2018-07-31 19:40:13|source={{own}}|author=[[User:Geri-oc|Geri-oc]]|permission=|other versions=}}

[2] Regarding image File:Brandau - Brandov Lindengarten - U Hřiště.jpg - a composite of two images as follows

(A) Photo of building

(B) Postcard of same building (not own work)

Here the template reads =={{int:filedesc}}== {{Information |description={{de|1=Früher Gasthof "Lindengarten" - zwischenzeitlich auch andere Namen (z.B. "Sokol") - 2019 "U Hřiště"}} |date=2019-03-27 16:11:31|source={{own}}|author=[[User:Geri-oc|Geri-oc]]|permission=|other versions=}}

Please understand that "own work" on Commons means things you photographed or created yourself. The "WISMUT" poster has many smaller images on it which you did not create, and the sign and the postcard are also not obviously your own work. Thus the images did not match with the information provided on the templates, i.e. "own work" for all parts. The OTRS # cannot be applied to it because it contains images within images, "Derivative Works". Please see COM:DW. It is possible that due to location of the sign, poster, plaque and so on that Freedom of Panorama may be able to provide license for some things. And if you knew the actual age and author of the postcard, it might be able to be licensed. But there is insufficient information on the templates, because you said "own work" and did not give the information necessary to be certain (COM:PRP) of valid license. This is why individual images uploaded separately are so important. Some of these images have different licenses - they may be free - and which if they are compatible with Commons may be able to be kept, but the correct information must be in the template. Nothing is gone; only hidden. Work with me and let's see what we can do. Cheers! Ellin Beltz (talk) 22:57, 26 June 2019 (UTC)

Hi!

I just saw that you deleted the file "Lockout au quotidien La Presse en 1971.jpg" that I used on one of my contributions on Wikipedia. Can you give me more details on the reasons behind that? The picture came directly from an employee at the archives of the CSN, a local trade union here in Quebec. The CSN owns the right on the photo (same as most of the other documents uploaded by User:Marc Comby).

Thanks in advance.

--Hamza.Tabaichount (talk) 13:49, 2 July 2019 (UTC)

Hi Hamza.Tabaichount : The upload template reads =={{int:filedesc}}== {{Information |description={{fr|1=À l'occasion d'une manifestation durant le conflit au journal La Presse en 1971, la charge des policiers sur la foule entraine la mort de Michèle Gauthier, 28 ans, étudiante au cégep du Vieux-Montréal.}} |date=2019-06-17 12:21:46 |source=Archives CSN |author=Inconnu |permission= |other versions= }} =={{int:license-header}}== {{cc-by-sa-4.0}} With author Inconnu (unknown), this license is not possible. Cheers! Ellin Beltz (talk) 18:28, 2 July 2019 (UTC)

W.r.t. this request, please enlighten me on how "FBMD at metadata" is a valid reason for deletion. The photo was uploaded by its author, who licensed it under CC. Wumbolo (talk) 14:13, 5 July 2019 (UTC)

Hi Wumbolo: Because the image was previously published on Facebook, we need COM:OTRS to restore it - as discussed in the Commons:Deletion requests/File:A capture of an image of Steven Bonnell II ("Destiny") streaming at his apartment in California.jpg. Cheers. Ellin Beltz (talk) 01:13, 6 July 2019 (UTC)

Hi Ellin Beltz,

there are two photos that should be deleted, the first the person in the photo is not the Italian journalist indro montanelli (as it is stated), the second is copyright and is not in the public domain in the united states and was taken in ethiopia

1 Duce Ethiopia

2 Indro Montanelli with Ethiopian slave just purchased --Walshevans1 (talk) 15:36, 7 July 2019 (UTC)

Hi Walshevans1: While I had nothing to do with it; the images File:Duce Ethiopia.jpg and File:Indro_Montanelli_with_Ethiopian_slave_just_purchased.jp are now   Done. Cheers! Ellin Beltz (talk) 04:13, 10 July 2019 (UTC)

Hello Ellin,

I really don't understand why you deleted some of the pictures I put on the Dutch wiki section about the former wallpaper company of my grandfather and his brothers ( " Rath & Doodeheefver "). I get these original pictures from my father who get it from his father. So, I own now the original pictures made by my family's members (most of them passed away). So these pictures are free of rights and my purpose is only, to illustrate this former famous family business that doesn't exist anymore. So, no commercial purpose at all.

So, please, can you explain me how to put these photo again ont the wiki section? (except the google Prinsegracht street one).

Thanks for your help.

Paul

Paul Adrien Doodeheefver (PADO contributor) — Preceding unsigned comment added by PADO (talk • contribs) 10:17, 15 July 2019 (UTC)

Hi PADO: Sorry, but several images you uploaded were advertising. If you received these from family members, they may not (probably didn't) have the copyrights to these images. If you feel that images were created by your family members to whom you are the heir, please fill in the form at COM:OTRS and the volunteer editors there can help you with the permissions. I would however suggest that you review the images before starting this process. I don't see how your family could have created all the pictures you uploaded and it wouldn't be good to say they did if they didn't. Cheers! Ellin Beltz (talk) 18:23, 16 July 2019 (UTC)

We now have an OTRS ticket #2019053110002841 for File:תמונה סרוקה-1 (1).jpg. Please restore at your convenience, so I can finish processing it. Thanks in advance. Ww2censor (talk) 14:13, 16 July 2019 (UTC)

Hi Ww2censor   Done Ellin Beltz (talk) 18:18, 16 July 2019 (UTC)

That’s right. There’s no solid reason from you for my images to be deleted. Next time please ask others opinions before deleting photos. And also if people give you reasons for their undeletion can you please process the undeletion? Since you are the reason for deleting these pictures. You seem to be on edge to delete photos but do not seem to logically think. This is a fair warning to you from me Hari147 (talk) 18:45, 22 July 2019 (UTC)

Hi Hari147: Please see Commons:Deletion requests/Files uploaded by Hari147. I think the administrator who deleted the images is Didym and yes, there were valid reasons to delete. If you disagree, the method is to request undeletion at COM:UNDEL. Ellin Beltz (talk) 04:35, 23 July 2019 (UTC)

We now have an OTRS permission ticket#2019072210008028 for File:Wikiheadshot.jpg. Please restore at your convenience. Thanks Ww2censor (talk) 23:14, 22 July 2019 (UTC)

Ww2censor:   Done Ellin Beltz (talk) 04:36, 23 July 2019 (UTC)

Hello Ellin,

I recently uploaded two photos that my company (Eurasia Group) owns but that you deleted. I'm having difficulty determining how we can re-upload the photo with the appropriate information about ownership so it doesn't get deleted again, in addition to determining how we can upload our own photos so they're never deleted in the first place.

One photo was a headshot of our president, Ian Bremmer. The other was a photo of Mr. Bremmer with Antonio Guterres, the secretary-general of the United Nations. Again, we own both of these photos, as well as another of Mr. Bremmer speaking at an event, which we saw you also labeled for deletion. We emailed permissions-commons@wikimedia.org regarding the photo of Mr. Bremmer and Mr. Guterres. Please let me know how we can get these uploaded as quickly as possible and the specific information we must enter when uploading a photo to remove any doubts that these photos belong to us.

Thank you. --Ngedana (talk) 18:01, 16 July 2019 (UTC)

Hi Ngedana: "Owns" is not the same thing as "owns the copyright." Images here need the permission of the copyright holder. If you feel you have this right, and that the image was deleted in error, fill in the form at COM:OTRS where volunteer editors skilled in permissions will help you. Cheers! Ellin Beltz (talk) 18:20, 16 July 2019 (UTC)

Hi Ellin Beltz Thank you for the helpful response. I believe my company (Eurasia Group) "owns the copyright" in both cases. One is a photo a member of our staff took. The other is a headshot we arranged for our president. When you say to fill in the form at COM:OTRS, are you suggesting we submit the files to the Wikimedia OTRS release generator or that we email permissions-commons@wikimedia.org? Earlier this week, I emailed permissions-commons@wikimedia.org. In case it's helpful to have, our Ticket # is 2019071610006596. In the future, what is the best way for us to quickly upload a photo with proof that we own the copyright? Apologies if this question seems pedestrian, but we've found the links to several guides on this very confusing! --Ngedana (talk) 21:26, 19 July 2019 (UTC)

Circling back on the questions above to see what we can do to get this issue resolved promptly, Ellin Beltz. Thanks in advance for your assistance/guidance on getting appropriate permission to upload work for which we own the copyright. --Ngedana (talk) 21:26, 19 July 2019 (UTC)

Hi Ngedana: You just add that OTRS number to future uploads - if they have the same copyright situation as the OTRS covers. No worries about asking questions, ask as many as you'd like! Ellin Beltz (talk) 21:39, 19 July 2019 (UTC)

Hi Ellin Beltz And the OTRS number is something we should receive in response to the email I sent to permissions-commons@wikimedia.org? Or is it best for us to upload the files to the Wikimedia OTRS release generator? Is there any sense of how long it takes for us to receive an OTRS number, and is there any way for us to quickly follow up if we are not hearing back? Finally, we mistakenly thought that a member of our staff took the photo of Mr. Bremmer and the UN Secretary-General. Yesterday, I learned that it was a UN staff member who took the photo. I contacted the UN, and their representative said that while they cannot release the copyright, we "can use the image with the copyright restrictions in place." Can you advise how we can go about uploading the photo under those circumstances? Thank you again. --Ngedana (talk) 19:48, 20 July 2019 (UTC)

Hi Ngedana: Yes the OTRS number will come in response to your permissions letter. I am sorry I am not an OTRS editor, I cannot advise you on the amount of tiem it will take. What are the UN copyright restrictions, please? Do you have a link to their page where the picture came from? Ellin Beltz (talk) 21:44, 26 July 2019 (UTC)

Hello. For the File:Striene-ca1200.jpg, I have mentioned two authors, me and another one who could be considered author of the work, since I used a tiny bit of his map to create the Striene file. I don't understand why this file has been deleted. Idem for File:Salwa-canal-Saudi-ar-Qatar-fr.jpg Regards. --Io Herodotus (talk) 16:10, 18 July 2019 (UTC)

Hi Io Herodotus: Do you have the source file addresses for those files? That's what's needed. If you could put those here, I can look into it. Cheers! Ellin Beltz (talk) 21:41, 19 July 2019 (UTC)

Concerning File:Striene-ca1200.jpg and File:Striene-ca1300.jpg, I used File:Burgundian-possessions-in-the-low-countries.png

Concerning File:Salwa-canal-Saudi-ar-Qatar-fr.jpg, File:Salwa-canal-Saudi-ar-Qatar-en.jpg and File:Salwa-canal-Saudi-ar-Qatar.svg.png I used File:Qatar location map.svg. Cheers to your heath! --Io Herodotus (talk) 05:15, 20 July 2019 (UTC)

Hi Io Herodotus: Unfortunately, I don't see a source on that image either. The uploader's contributions do not seem to suggest they are a cartographer. Ellin Beltz (talk) 04:38, 23 July 2019 (UTC)

File:Qatar location map.svg also ? It's used for geolocalisations of Qatar! --Io Herodotus (talk) 08:03, 23 July 2019 (UTC)

Hi Io Herodotus: On File:Qatar location map.svg see "Source own work, using United States National Imagery and Mapping Agency data

www.gisqatar.org.qa" - but there is no such statement on the other file. Ellin Beltz (talk) 21:45, 26 July 2019 (UTC)

Well I'm not sure how to write down this license, I have tried something on File:Salwa-canal-Saudi-ar-Qatar-fr.jpg. Regards. Io Herodotus

Hi Ellin Beltz. Could you take a look at this "file" page? I'm not sure what the uploader is trying to do here, but it's not really a file per se, but rather File:Colombia futbol.jpg being added to page as a file. FWIW, you deleted "File:Logo Banderín Colombia.png" a few days ago as a copyvio, and the newly uploaded jpg is bascially the same file. Whether it's too simple to be considered copyrighted might be true, but simply claiming it's an imitation of a copyrighted file and therefore non-copyrightable in its own right seems to be wrong. -- Marchjuly (talk) 07:11, 30 July 2019 (UTC)

@Marchjuly: :   Done! Ellin Beltz (talk) 07:48, 30 July 2019 (UTC)

Hi. Did you actually delete the last two?

• File:Mausam Benazir Noor at Public Rally.jpg
• File:W.B CM Mamata Banerjee.jpg

I couldn't see deletion in the logs, and the user removed the DR tags, so I ended up tagging them again before seeing there was already a DR. Apologies if I looked in the wrong place. -- Begoon 04:49, 7 August 2019 (UTC)

Greetings Begoon: I zapped a couple from that set, sent some to DN. Don't worry if there's duplication on the tags, the closing administrator will get it! Cheers! Ellin Beltz (talk) 19:25, 7 August 2019 (UTC)

I have no skill here. Could do something with this user Jélio32 (talk · contributions · Statistics), which doesn't stop adding copied images, after several warnings. O revolucionário aliado (talk) 02:06, 13 August 2019 (UTC)

Hi O revolucionário aliado: It seems they have already been taken out by another administrator! If you see this kind of situation again, please leave a message at COM:ANU "Administrator's Notice Board"! Or on my talk page as you did this time... either one works! With best wishes, Ellin Beltz (talk) 19:21, 15 August 2019 (UTC)

I am the elder son of Howard S. England from Key West Fl. I had noticed for a number of years that whoever had constructed the Howard S. England page had inadvertently included several errors and omitted several key facts. Recently, I had time to use my Wikipedia account to edit the page and improve its content. Once I had edited the wording, I decided to include several photos that tied to the content. Those included: a photo that I took in 1984 when he retired from the Florida Park Service, a photo of the cover of the Third Edition of his original 1977 book that I re-published in 2015, a photo of the book, Digging into History, that I published in 2014, and a photo that I took in 2018 of his Great Floridian 2000 plaque that he was awarded in 2000.

All of the photos are my original copyright property of real artifacts. I thought that by adding them to the article I could enhance its utility for individuals who visited his site. But one by one, the community has challenged and removed these photos, beginning with the Digging into History, then his Retirement Photo, and now his Great Floridian plaque.

I fail to understand why these photos that are my property can't be used under the Common Creative property. As the copyright owner, don't I have the right to grant permission to use these items?

As each day goes by, more and more content seems to be challenged. I would appreciate a reasonable explanation as to what norms or rules I have violated.

Englandel — Preceding unsigned comment added by Englandel (talk • contribs) 10:21, 25 August 2019 (UTC)

Hi Englandel: The situation here is that physical ownership is not the same as copyright ownership.

For example on the blue round Florida way marker you photographed. That was created by state of Florida - not you. Therefore the copyright for that is State of Florida. If you can find that they have released copyright on their waymarkers, we could discuss undeletion.

The image of the book cover's copyright belongs to your dad for 70 years post demise, and/or to his heirs depending on their inheritance. It might be able to be retained if you are your dad's only heir and you fill in the simple letter at COM:OTRS. If there are more than one heir, all have to send letter.

I have restored the photo you took of your dad, added category and a wiki link to Howard S. England.

Any image uploaded to Commons can be restored if the license is found to be compatible with Commons licenses. Hope this helps! Cheers! Ellin Beltz (talk) 16:24, 25 August 2019 (UTC)

Please recreate the page File:«Armenia_og_armenierne.»_(Bodil_Biørn_okt._1944).pdf. I've received an OTRS message with permission. Ticket#2019082710005038. Nsaa (talk) 19:53, 27 August 2019 (UTC)

Hi Nsaa: Usually the OTRS administrators restore the files as part of their process. Ellin Beltz (talk) 01:25, 28 August 2019 (UTC)

None of us Norwegian OTRS agents are Commons administrators. We have been told the correct process is to ask the deleting admin to undelete. Jon Harald Søby (talk) 09:02, 29 August 2019 (UTC)

  Info: I have request it for undeletion at Commons:Undeletion requests/Current requests#File:«Armenia og armenierne.» (Bodil Biørn okt. 1944).pdf. Kind regards, — Tulsi Bhagat (contribs | talk) 09:17, 2 September 2019 (UTC)

@Nsaa: In future, please come with such requests to COM:UDR directly. Ankry (talk) 11:54, 2 September 2019 (UTC)

@Jon Harald Søby: : Sorry, but I am not an OTRS editor, cannot read or review the item and thus have to rely upon the OTRS editors to make that decision. Thanks Ankry! Ellin Beltz (talk) 19:12, 2 September 2019 (UTC)

Thanks @Jon Harald Søby: for recreating the Picture. I'm an OTRS agent handling a lot of cases involving pictures. This is the first tiome the deleting admin at Commons did not recreate the picture when asked. Is it possible for me to get rights to recreate pictures on Commons @Ellin Beltz: ? That would help speed up the process doing and hhandling important cases like this. We should be very careful not to over bureaucracy the processes like this. Best regards, Nsaa (talk) 09:37, 3 September 2019 (UTC)

Problems solved, convo being archived. Ellin Beltz (talk) 01:41, 4 September 2019 (UTC)

Hi, may I suggest converting File:台盟.jpg and File:Taiwan Democratic Self-Government League logo.png into a regular deletion request? The problem is that it was just two Chinese characters and whether the writing qualifies to be an artistic work is debatable (so it's not entirely unreasonable to assume {{PD-textlogo}}). It might have to be deleted eventually, but I don't think it was obvious enough to be subject to speedy deletion. whym (talk) 08:16, 25 August 2019 (UTC)

Hi Whym: I like your suggestion, but the two images would have ended up in two deletion requests because they were not by the same uploader. The original image clearly showed its origin. User WQL's copyvio nomination read "All these are from official WeChat account, copyrighted. - Marking as possible copyright violation because fair use media are not allowed on Commons." The original version clearly shows the (C) notice. Usually I would have no problem with your request, but I'd need a statement of overriding concerns on these images since they aren't own work, the original came to us clearly (C) and there is no fair use on commons. I would not object to a COM:UNDEL request, but I am not going to undelete either one of these based on their file history, upload template and WeChat. Cheers! Ellin Beltz (talk) 16:10, 25 August 2019 (UTC)

Sorry, I'm not sure if I'm following your reasoning. I'd appreaciate clarification. I meant to suggest that the logo had a fair chance to be non-copyrightable because of its simplicity and that a fair chance would be enough reason to go for a regular deletion request instead of speedy deletion. Your response seemed to be largely about the existence of a (c) mark (was there really one? I couldn't find it) and the impossibility of fair use, which would be relevant only if the work is copyrightable. Do you have any comment on the copyrightability of the writing? whym (talk) 10:04, 26 August 2019 (UTC)

Chinese calligraphy is considered to be copyrightable. The source it came from said (C). The logo was thus considered copyright by its creators. It was taken from "WeChat" application by the original uploader complete with the (C) symbol and added an "own work" license (which it is obviously not). The second user removed the (C) symbol by cropping the image. It was sent to speedy in both versions for all obvious reasons. Ellin Beltz (talk) 17:31, 26 August 2019 (UTC)

Applicable summaries for your UNDEL request (easiest read in edit):

• [[:File:台盟.jpg]] *01:30, 17 December 2018 . . CentreLeftRight (talk | contribs | block) 562 × 562 (73,142 bytes) (Logo cropped.) *00:36, 27 December 2017 . . Wkbreaker (talk | contribs | block) 678 × 794 (74,957 bytes) (Cross-wiki upload from en.wikipedia.org) == {{Information |description={{en|1=logo with the abbreviation "台盟"(TDSGL).}} |date=2017-12-27 |source={{own}} |author=[[User:Wkbreaker|Wkbreaker]]}} {{self|cc-by-sa-4.0}}

• [[:File:Taiwan Democratic Self-Government League logo.png]] * 23:37, 31 December 2018 CentreLeftRight 562 × 562 (51,241 bytes) (User created page with UploadWizard) == {{Information |description={{en|1=Logo of the Taiwan Democratic Self-Government League.}} |date=1947 |source=[https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:%E5%8F%B0%E7%9B%9F.jpg Original uploaded to Wikimedia Commons] |author=Taiwan Democratic Self-Government League |permission= |other versions= }} {{PD-China}}

Notice in the second upload template, the source is given as the first file, and then the license is changed without a source to verify. The original file is copyright in its original upload which is stated to be own work, however derived from WeChat. Ellin Beltz (talk) 17:41, 26 August 2019 (UTC)

Hi Whym: Thanks for the "thank". Also I noticed but failed to mention before that the license cannot be PD-China because Taiwan copyright is not part of China as defined in that Template. Cheers! Ellin Beltz (talk) 19:20, 2 September 2019 (UTC)

Thank you for the response. I still maintain that the primary issue to consider is copyrightability/threshold of originality, and whether the correct template was used and whether there was a (c) mark were secondary. If the work is deemed below threshold of originality, then the latter questions will not matter - we will be able to simply use one of the PD templates, claims from the creator alone will not automatically override arguments against copyrightability.

So back to TOO - I admit I was knowledgeable about Taiwan's TOO except for COM:TOO#Taiwan which does seem low, making your position understandable. (Sorry for not realizing this earlier.) I can see people arguing against that, too, though. Whether it surpassess "minimal creativity" doesn't seem that obvious.

One might say that all hand-written logos are automatically copyrightable and there is no need for such discussion, but I don't think that is prudent. I still think it is more prudent for simple text logos to go through a regular deletion process where we could discuss TOO - would you agree? (Please consider this as a question for future similar cases - the two files have been discussed by us two here, and I'm not keen to vote for 'keep' anymore.) whym (talk) 11:53, 7 September 2019 (UTC)

Hi! May I ask why User:陈少举's photos were recently deleted? They look legit and they've been uploaded for 13 years. For example, File:2006-06-08中国高考等候考生的家长.jpg has EXIF intact.--Roy17 (talk) 14:27, 7 September 2019 (UTC)

Hi Roy17: They contained large amounts of text by others, and at least one of them had no source. If I take a photograph of a wall poster of text created by another person or entity, I do not obtain the copyright to their text. That was the situation with these; two were head-on reproductions of documents, the others had long banners of calligraphy, etc. Cheers! Ellin Beltz (talk) 17:19, 8 September 2019 (UTC)

Those are not calligraphy but computer fonts. Could protest banners be considered as copyvios? What about File:2006-06-08中国高考等候考生的家长.jpg? It has nothing copyrightable.--Roy17 (talk) 17:31, 8 September 2019 (UTC)

Hi Roy17: I am sorry but I am out of time for today with the prospect of the "week from hell" looming. I do not wish to delay your issue due to lack of time to research this fine point. I will not oppose or even comment on an UNDEL request for these. Please take to COM:UNDEL where we can rely on the knowledge of the community to arrive at a good consensus decision. Cheers! Ellin Beltz (talk) 17:35, 8 September 2019 (UTC)

original video
Hi, I made a two-second video with my smartphone. The image is a screenshot. There's not copyright violation. Please, restore the image. Thank you, --Sentruper (talk) 12:39, 7 September 2019 (UTC)

Hi Sentruper: A screenshot made by your phone of material someone else made is a copyright violation. Cheers. Ellin Beltz (talk) 17:14, 8 September 2019 (UTC)

This is a screenshot made with my personal computer of a video made with my smartphone. There's not copyright violation. Please, restore the image. Thank you, --Sentruper (talk) 16:37, 9 September 2019 (UTC)

RMaung (WMF) 01:12, 10 September 2019 (UTC)

Hi RMaung (WMF): I took the survey but the page which said "add your name" didn't seem to work correctly - something with not accepting my Wikimedia Commons login - and I was out of time to keep trying it. Ellin Beltz (talk) 17:12, 12 September 2019 (UTC)

please correct this: https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Category:Wikimedians_in_the_United_States --Estopedist1 (talk) 06:44, 12 September 2019 (UTC)

Hi Estopedist1:   Done Ellin Beltz (talk) 17:10, 12 September 2019 (UTC)

I just wanted to clarify, given your remark at RfA, that I didn't start the discussion to open these requests because I belonged to any pack. Quite the opposite, I chose to be the one to start the discussion because I felt like a person who fairly uniquely belonged to no pack, and I felt that the discussions at ANU and AN were descending into oblique partisanship, that was unlikely to resolve anything in an unstructured discussion.

Regardless of the outcomes, I hope both candidates carefully consider the feedback given by the community, and either keep, or regain their tools, incorporating that feedback into their future efforts. GMG^talk 22:02, 19 September 2019 (UTC)

Hi GreenMeansGo: No particular individual was mentioned in "There are aspects of how this situation got here that seem like pack hunting behavior - that is sad." I am sorry if you see yourself in it, that was not my intention. Ellin Beltz (talk) 04:27, 20 September 2019 (UTC) Also referenced same remark at [4].

Please delete the first version of File:《求闻》2019年第3卷.pdf. Photo on page 13 is not free. Thank you!--Roy17 (talk) 10:52, 28 September 2019 (UTC)

  Done Cheers! Ellin Beltz (talk) 18:10, 1 October 2019 (UTC)

Hi,

I notice you (essentially) said that you were almost certain that this was the work of a US government employee. While it may be PD as such, I don't think that the original {{Cc-zero}}- which remains unchanged- accurately reflects the reasons for its status.

I was going to mark it as "disputed" since I wasn't 100% sure- and the decision wasn't mine- but I've changed it to {{PD-USGov}} instead. Please change this if this does not accurately reflect your reasoning or if it's wrong for any other reason- thank you. Ubcule (talk) 18:52, 2 October 2019 (UTC)

Hi Ubcule: Subsequently I found the actual information that solves all of this and as soon as I send you this note, I will update the photo page. https://www.whaleoil.net.nz/tag/pete-and-annie-mae-fultz/ https://www.whaleoil.net.nz/2015/02/photo-day-534/#more-177346 Credit: Robert Knudsen. White House Photographs. John F. Kennedy Presidential Library and Museum, Boston, 2 August 1962. "President John F. Kennedy visits with Mary Alice Fultz, Mary Louise Fultz, Mary Anne Fultz, and Mary Catherine Fultz, a set of quadruplets from Milton, North Carolina, 2 August 1962." Cheers! Ellin Beltz (talk) 20:08, 2 October 2019 (UTC)

That's great, thank you. Ubcule (talk) 20:37, 2 October 2019 (UTC)

Dear Ellin Beitz,

As a fellow contributor to Wikipedia I thank you for your work. However I do have one small query. In three Wikipedia entries to which I have contributed, the photos of the subjects have disappeared. They are:

Michael Roberts ((my father) Janel Adam Smith (my mother) Adam Roberts (myself).

In all three cases I went to some trouble to obtain photos which were not subject to any copyright or other restrictions at all. Indeed, the last 2 photos were taken by myself, and at no time were they subject to any copyright limitation. The one of Michael was a photo taken by a member of the family, and, again, no suggestion at all of any copyright or related issues.

At the time when the three photos were posted on Wikipedia, I went to some trouble to follow the rules of Wikipedia and Wikimedia Commons. I have today checked the commons:Licensing page on the Wikimedia website, and am certain that these photos are within the guidelines.

It appears from the "View History" of these entries that you were involved in the removal of these photos. If you could see your way to replacing them and their captions I would be very grateful, as I am not very familiar with Wikimedia Commons: indeed, that may be part of the problem!

Don't hesitate to shout back at me if you think I am wrong.

Regards, Adam

Prof. Adam Roberts 48 Thorncliffe Road Oxford OX2 7BB UK — Preceding unsigned comment added by Aberdonian99 (talk • contribs) 14:14, 2 October 2019 (UTC)

Hi Aberdonian99. There are three images. Let's take them one at a time.

• File:PeopleJanet Adam Smith (writer) in 1992.jpg With the following information appended: {{Information|description={{en|1=Janet Adam Smith at her home in London on 26 July 1992}}|date=2011-06-02|source={{own}}|author=[[User:Aberdonian99|Aberdonian99]]|permission=|other_versions=|other_fields=}}
  • For this one, we need one or the other of the dates to be right and please confirm the name of the actual original photographer. Rephotographing older images does not transfer copyright.

• File:Michael Roberts, writer - 21 March 1946.jpg. With the following information appended: ({{Information |Description ={{en|1=Michael Roberts, writer, poet and teacher, in 1946 when he was Principal of the College of St Mark and St John, London}} |Source ={{own}} |Author =Aberdonian99 |Date = |)
  • For this one please confirm the name of the actual photographer of the original image, as above.

• File:Adam Roberts, Oxford, April 2006.JPG

With the following information appended:  ({{Information |Description ={{en|1=Professor Adam Roberts in the garden of his Oxford home}} |Source ={{own}} |Author =Aberdonian99 |Date =2006-04-17 |Permission = |other_versions = }} )

• • For this one, please confirm the name of the author, as the date seems to be correct.

Once you provide those bits of information, I will be better able to answer your query. Cheers! Ellin Beltz (talk) 20:21, 2 October 2019 (UTC)

Dear Ellin Beltz,

SHOUTING IN IGNORANCE

Thank you very much for this very full and helpful response. I have the info you request, but am not sure of the technicalities of how to respond. Using this User Talk page in this way (as if I was in editing mode) seems clunky. I tried Help but failed to find the answer. All the best. Aberdonian99. Adam Roberts. Email is adam.roberts@balliol.ox.ac.uk. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Aberdonian99 (talk • contribs) 22:21, 2 October 2019 (UTC)

Continuing dialog via email. Cheers! Ellin Beltz (talk) 15:19, 4 October 2019 (UTC)

Hello Ellin Beltz, Can you please tell me the reason for deleting my images although I am only the copyright holder of these all works. So, I would be so thankful to you if you would help against this. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rawal Bishal (talk • contribs) 02:51, 4 October 2019 (UTC)

Hi Rawal Bishal As noted on your talk page in that large box at the bottom, please reply at Commons:Deletion requests/Files uploaded by Rawal Bishal. There is another notice on your talk page to Commons:Deletion requests/File:Malikarjun.jpg, you might wish to engage in the discussion of your copyright claims at that location. Also please read COM:L and perhaps COM:HIRTLE before explaining your claim to being the only copyright holder. There are issues such as "transmission codes" (for example Original transmission location code E4Fn21hgiIZjWwwlQIvD) contained in the metadata. Sometimes this is just simple matter, but you as uploader get to explain it. See COM:EVID. Also there is no "help against this" - on this project we work together to attempt to retain all the images we possibly can. It is only with the greatest and lengthiest process that images are removed. Cheers! Ellin Beltz (talk) 15:18, 4 October 2019 (UTC)

Just once, I got the Copyright Violations page empty!! 10/08/19

 

Ellin Beltz (talk) 17:46, 8 October 2019 (UTC)

This file still needs a license for its home country. Are we sure it was an unknown author? Magog the Ogre (talk) (contribs) 23:15, 3 December 2019 (UTC)

Hiya Magog the Ogre: I found https://www.gracesguide.co.uk/The_Engineer_1908_Jan-Jun:_Index:_Illustrations which refers to page 500 — 15th May 1908 and lists the illustration by the same title we have it. Since it was published in 1908, outside the U.S., it seemed appropriate to put PD-1923 on it and continue to look for it. The actual publication is locked up behind a firewall although with that much information it might be possible to petition an original from a library. The journal is still extent [5]. Best. Ellin Beltz (talk) 23:27, 3 December 2019 (UTC)

What’s the policy you based the deletion of this file on? And why the scare/mock quotes around the word "blurrable"? -- Tuválkin ✉ ✇ 23:45, 3 December 2019 (UTC)

Hi Tuvalkin: Unused personal image, of uncertain provenance due to size, style, etc. I used quotes twice in that close, to show reference to the two photos which had been previously mentioned. They are not scare or mock, but to highlight a word that was used in the discussion as an attempt to direct the reader to the proper images. Cheers! Ellin Beltz (talk) 00:09, 4 December 2019 (UTC)

• Thanks for your explanation about those quotemarks, and sorry for being testy. As for the provenance of the image I presumed it was self uploaded, made using the same tool my daughter used to create this similar mosaic. -- Tuválkin ✉ ✇ 00:31, 4 December 2019 (UTC)

Hi Tuvalkin: I see the applications are available. I felt the image as unused, with its uploader's history fell under "unused PRP". Cheers! Ellin Beltz (talk) 19:58, 4 December 2019 (UTC)

Hi, Ellin Beltz. I uploaded File:The Pestilence (formerly War).jpg today. It's an image of an oil painting from ca.1918 by Hugh Breckenridge (1870-1937) and I got it from a museum website. I thought it would be public domain because of death of the creator + 70 years. However, I also noticed after uploading that the image's metadata shows the image was a photo of the painting taken in 2011 with a copyright tag. If this is true, I'll request a G7 speedy deletion. But can you clue me in on when or whether this type of image is still under copyright? Thanks. CactusWriter (talk) 17:34, 9 December 2019 (UTC)

Hi CactusWriter: This is a great topic and one on which contributors and admins have spent a lot of time. Please read COM:ART where the distilled wisdom is laid out. The most applicable section is "The U.S. case of Bridgeman v. Corel (1999) In Bridgeman Art Library v. Corel Corp. (1999), the New York District Court held that "a photograph which is no more than a copy of a work of another as exact as science and technology permits lacks originality. That is not to say that such a feat is trivial, simply not original". In spite of the effort and labor involved in creating professional-quality slides from the original works of art, the Court held that copyright did not subsist as they were simply slavish copies of the works of art represented. The rule therefore excludes from copyright protection photographs which are intended to be no more than a faithful reproduction of a two-dimensional work of art such as a painting. If only technical expertise is involved (to take a faithful and unimaginative picture), the photograph acquires no copyright protection in its own right. The case extends the rule that scans and photocopies of two-dimensional originals are not copyrightable to cover in addition faithful reproductions created in the U.S. through photography. As a result of this case, anyone taking in the U.S. a mere 'record' photograph of a 2D work of art — plain, full-framed — gets no copyright protection for the photograph. If the original work of art is sufficiently old that its own copyright has expired, the photograph itself will then be free for use on Commons." While it doesn't affect this question, you may find COM:HIRTLE of interest regarding the fine points of U.S. copyright. Sorry for the delay in replying to you. It's the holidays!   Cheers! Ellin Beltz (talk) 04:47, 12 December 2019 (UTC)

That's perfect. I very much appreciate the great explanation and the links. (COM:ART states that I should have uploaded the file without the photographer's claim in the metadata, but the image is PD regardless.) Thanks again and happy holidays! CactusWriter (talk) 15:49, 12 December 2019 (UTC)

Dear Ellin

You nominated all the pictures that i recently uploaded , i can assure you i own the copyrights of all the pictures, and i am the photographer of the pictures too, and with the permission of the artist. Please Ellin reconsider your desicion, i am trying to do my best and be a great user in Wikepidia.

Thanks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Metalmed (talk • contribs) 18:43, 18 December 2019 (UTC)

Hi Metalmed: The artist needs to give permission via the simple email form located at COM:OTRS. Cheers! Ellin Beltz (talk) 18:45, 18 December 2019 (UTC)

This photo is my own work which I took specially to illustrate an existing article on the subject. I cropped the image to remove the grassy area in front of the church.

Jamie — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jamie Stuart 11 (talk • contribs) 18:26, 3 January 2020 (UTC)

This is my own work. It is a photograph of a photograph which probably explains the quality.I could not find a photograph of it on the Commons. I used it to illustrate the entry on the house's architect C W Stephens.

Jamie Stuart — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jamie Stuart 11 (talk • contribs) 18:40, 3 January 2020 (UTC)

Ardlamont House, Argyll, Scotland

I can't remember where I found this image but it is a colourised Victorian postcard, and I believed it to be out of copyright. I wanted to use it to better illustrate the article on the Ardlamont Murder case showing the appearance of the house at that time.

Jamie Stuart — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jamie Stuart 11 (talk • contribs) 19:01, 3 January 2020 (UTC) Sorry, I didn't sign off properly, I thought I had. So here goes, hope it's right this time.

Jamie Stuart 11 (talk) 13:32, 4 January 2020 (UTC)

Hi Jamie Stuart 11 Replying to all three of your messages in one. Please leave your statements of own work on the deletion nominations themselves which are linked on your talk page. Each one of those boxes says "at its entry" and that's a clickable link. For the postcard, we need more information as to date/source in order to determine the copyright. You might find reading COM:L or COM:HIRTLE enlightening! To sign your name type four ~~~~ "tilda" characters, and the system will autosignature/datestamp for you. Cheers! Ellin Beltz (talk) 19:04, 6 January 2020 (UTC)

According to a bot, you deleted an image of Luis Parra for copyright violation. Where is the record of the deletion and record of which editor uploaded it? How can I track that down if that happens again? David Tornheim (talk) 19:20, 7 January 2020 (UTC) Apparently the photo was re-uploaded? File:Luis Eduardo Parra Rivero.jpg Is it ok now?--MaoGo (talk) 00:03, 8 January 2020 (UTC)

Hi MaoGo:

Part One: To find the history of the deleted file, you would go to File:Luis Eduardo Parra Rivero.jpg or if you were trying to get there without using Commons markup, you type https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Luis%20Eduardo%20Parra%20Rivero.jpg ... notice the file name at the end. Then you tap "all public logs" ... which leads you to https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:Log&page=File%3ALuis+Eduardo+Parra+Rivero.jpg which shows the entire history of the file, even from before the deletion.

Part Two: Yes the image was reuploaded, it is speedied again. The uploader is persistent. Please see User_talk:Ángel_22905_Olivares. Cheers! Ellin Beltz (talk) 21:49, 10 January 2020 (UTC)

Some contents have been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether they should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at their entry. If you created these pages, please note that the fact that they have 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 them, 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! Afrikaans ∙ العربية ∙ беларуская ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца) ∙ български ∙ ပအိုဝ်ႏဘာႏသာႏ ∙ বাংলা ∙ bosanski ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ dansk ∙ Deutsch ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form) ∙ Zazaki ∙ ދިވެހިބަސް ∙ Ελληνικά ∙ English ∙ Esperanto ∙ español ∙ eesti ∙ فارسی ∙ suomi ∙ français ∙ galego ∙ עברית ∙ hrvatski ∙ magyar ∙ հայերեն ∙ Bahasa Indonesia ∙ íslenska ∙ italiano ∙ 日本語 ∙ 한국어 ∙ 조선말 ∙ македонски ∙ മലയാളം ∙ Bahasa Melayu ∙ မြန်မာဘာသာ ∙ norsk bokmål ∙ Plattdüütsch ∙ Nederlands ∙ norsk nynorsk ∙ norsk ∙ occitan ∙ polski ∙ پښتو ∙ português ∙ português do Brasil ∙ română ∙ русский ∙ sicilianu ∙ slovenčina ∙ slovenščina ∙ shqip ∙ српски / srpski ∙ svenska ∙ ไทย ∙ Türkçe ∙ українська ∙ Tiếng Việt ∙ 中文 ∙ 中文（简体） ∙ 中文（繁體） ∙ +/−

Affected:

• File:Harriet Quimby 054.png

And also:

• File:Miss Harriet Quimby, Boston girl aviator who lost her life trying to entertain the public at Squantum.jpg

Yours sincerely, Pi.1415926535 (talk) 06:11, 10 January 2020 (UTC)

Hi Pi.1415926535: Thanks for your work on this series of images. I was glad to see that the one I worked on was indeed as old as I thought it was. Cheers! Ellin Beltz (talk) 21:50, 10 January 2020 (UTC)

Hello my name is Sendi, you recently took down an original video I posted on the Senna spectabilis page I spent a lot of time on the time lapse, using my own camera, plant, and a free software from my computer. This work was created by me and I don't understand why it was taken down. I don't understand how it violates the copy right agreement if it's my own work. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sendi Mejia (talk • contribs) 21:31, 31 December 2019‎

Hi Sendi Mejia: "A file that you have uploaded to Wikimedia Commons, File:Distribution of Senna spectabilis.png, is a derivative work, containing an "image within an image". Examples of such works would include a photograph of a sculpture, a scan of a magazine cover, or a map that has been altered from the original. In each of these cases, the rights of the creator of the original must be considered, as well as those of the creator of the derivative work."

Just because we can take a photo of someone else's photo, doesn't make the resulting image "own work." Please feel free to write back. Please use four tilda characters ~~~~ at the end of your message - the system will autosign and date. It will also notify me that you wrote! Cheers! Ellin Beltz (talk) 07:46, 11 January 2020 (UTC)

hi,

you've recently sent me a last warning and wikipedia deleted my uploaded images

my problem is that i created the page (https://hu.wikipedia.org/wiki/Walter_Csaba) for the request of the family of csaba walter. it was his present for his 40th birthday

they sent me all the pictures you've deleted, and they have all the rights to use them even on wikipedia

what can we do?

thanks — Preceding unsigned comment added by Motorsportfan hu (talk • contribs) 08:18, 11 January 2020 (UTC)

Hallo and sorry for almost a year delay in answering. You’ve deleted the file on suggestion of copyright violation. Clearly, the Twitter status from 2019 is not the source for the photo originally taken on 2014 and uploaded in 2015. If there was some OTRS information missing from the file description, we could’ve updated it. If possible, please restore this file. Arkadiusz / on behalf ECS Gdańsk (talk) 12:06, 11 February 2020 (UTC)

Hi ECS Gdańsk, It's restored and nominated for deletion. Please have a look. Commons:Deletion requests/File:Basil.Kerski.2014.JPG Cheers! Ellin Beltz (talk) 22:36, 14 February 2020 (UTC)

Please take a look at Commons:Village pump#Is plantillustrations.org a source of Public Domain images. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 01:15, 15 February 2020 (UTC)

Hi Pigsonthewing: Seems sorted? Ellin Beltz (talk) 20:41, 18 February 2020 (UTC)

It most certainly is not. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 21:36, 18 February 2020 (UTC)

Relatively new to wiki editing and may have created errors in the upload and detailing of copyright for inclusion in the Commons. I am the owner and creator of the video. Happy to upload again with correct copyright info. Please advise and/or restore. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Timarnold72 (talk • contribs) 03:30, 19 February 2020 (UTC)

Hi Timarnold72: I have restored it - and promptly nominated it for deletion (please don't panic, it's a process with an ominous name). The issues with the copyright are addressed at the "deletion nomination" for it. Please discuss there. I have no doubt you created it, but there are other issues. Again, please click here and talk about it Commons:Deletion requests/File:WarEagleRoad gopro for wiki.webm. This is the same link as has appeared on your talk page where it is bolded and say "at its entry." On talk pages, or wherever you finish a typed conversation, type ~~~~ "four tilde" characters. The system will autosign and date for you. Don't hesitate to ask more questions. Cheers! Ellin Beltz (talk) 20:55, 19 February 2020 (UTC)

thank you! Still new to this and just trying to get the wiki page right! Appreciate your assistance. Cheers!--Timarnold72 (talk) 21:07, 19 February 2020 (UTC)

Hi, I'm really not sure the whether the file itself has violiate any criteria of wikimedia commons.

I've already specified that the traffic card itself is owned by me here https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File_talk:A_Shenzhentong_Transport_Card_with_LingnanPass_and_T-Union_Support_(front).jpg.

"I Owns this card and scanned the card by myself. So the file may not be regarded as the "derivative work" as there are also many files about the "traffic card" uploaded under the CC-BY-SA license (like the file on the right)

 --Sparktour (talk) 10:42, 3 February 2020 (UTC)"

Regards, --Sparktour (talk) 07:42, 24 February 2020 (UTC)

Hi Sparktour. Did you read the link on "derivative work" provided at the Deletion Nomination for this new image of same thing you just uploaded? See Commons:Deletion requests/File:TheOctopus2.jpg if not. COM:DW means that you don't own the copyright of the item which you photographed. Such as, I can own a book and own a camera and take a photo of the book jacket and still not be able to upload it to Commons because I do not own the underlying copyright on the cover. Hope this helps. Cheers! Ellin Beltz (talk) 19:39, 25 February 2020 (UTC)

Hi Ellin Beltz, thanks for the explanation, I've recognized the problem on the copyright of my file after your explanation. --Sparktour (talk) 11:32, 26 February 2020 (UTC)

Hello, I am author of this picture --Palapa (talk) 21:26, 15 March 2020 (UTC)

Hi Palapa Please discuss at https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Deletion_requests/File:Spring_is_near.jpg The problem is that the picture is the size of Facebook and also has Facebook transmission data. If it's your own photo, feel free to upload (right on top of that one) a larger one without FBMD in the exif. Thanks! Ellin Beltz (talk) 21:29, 15 March 2020 (UTC)

Hi I wanted to report suspected multiple violations of private logos and company images uploaded by this user. His contributions are full of them and many seem to violate any form of copyright possible.

https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:ListFiles&dir=prev&user=Gambo7 — Preceding unsigned comment added by JN95 (talk • contribs) 21:57, 19 March 2020 (UTC)

The user is a repeat offender.

For example:

https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Logo_Anna_Molinari.jpg https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Logo_carlino.gif --JN95 (talk) 21:57, 19 March 2020 (UTC)

Hi JN95 The two you suggest don't seem to be a problem. They are all letters, nothing original. Cheers! Ellin Beltz (talk) 00:06, 21 March 2020 (UTC)

Hello. Administrator A. Savin issued me an administrative warning under COM:RENAME. When I asked to indicate with what edits I violated the rule, he refused. Renaming files is one of my main areas of work, I have contributed more than 400 completed requests and only about 3-5 (for 3.5 months) completely rejected. Can you help me somehow? — Ирука¹³ 16:53, 20 March 2020 (UTC)

My old friends Al and Barbara Garvey just uploaded a bunch of images from their shared life together, taking about an hour of my time as I walked them through it, a difficult process because they are 88 and 86 years old. All of the images were quickly nominated for deletion by a very active deletionist here on Commons. Can you help me save the images from him? Please see Commons:Deletion requests/Files uploaded by Alybarbara. I don't want to go through all the effort again, and I don't want Al and Barbara to think we are all idiots. Binksternet (talk) 01:20, 21 March 2020 (UTC)

@ Binksternet and @ Patrick Rogel. Pardon my lateness, I have been and still am not feeling well. In truth, Binks, Patrick is right here - by the rules of Commons. Their is no fair use COM:FAIRUSE, and the works above appear to be from many photographers, each one needs to have it's particular license figured out to keep it. That's up to the uploader, please see COM:EVID. Personally I would start on the list at COM:HIRTLE which seems to me in my current foggy state to be perhaps the best explanation of how to find the right license for each image. Since they were created by different people at different times - some of them may be able to be kept easily... if not there's always asking the photographer to release it via the very simple form at COM:OTRS. Since everyone - including me - seems to be stuck at home, this would be a great time to reach out and get the actual stories and photographers' names on these images in the hopes of being able to keep some or maybe if everything falls into place all of them. As for work-for-hire, or this one that one above... this is only a tiny bit of historical research that's being asked. I think the term "deletion" somehow brings up a giant monster of evil doom. It's not. In truth, even when I hit "delete," the image is not removed - merely hidden. So if each of these were to vanish, and later you found out we could keep one, or more - they can be restored. Be at peace, this is a historical research project and a fun time, not any kind of judgment on you or anyone else as an individual. If they bought all the photos, a simple email to COM:OTRS (as linked above) will get them in touch with one of the specialized copyright folks. I believe there are ways that you can work with your elderly friends, and also with the OTRS folks... but I am not an OTRS editor - which is a specialized and beloved skill - so please,   be at peace with the process. We'd like to keep every picture possible here. Help us out!! Best wishes, I hope to be back more soon. Ellin Beltz (talk) 19:07, 27 March 2020 (UTC) PS: Please continue discussion at the Deletion Nomination because neither me nor Patrick will be the one who pulls the plug on these if we can't work together to get the licenses straightened out. If it's just the artist's their own paintings are a snap. Read COM:OTRS. The tricky part is the photos by others. Cheers! Self-isolate, being sick is not cool. Ellin Beltz (talk) 19:09, 27 March 2020 (UTC)

Hello. I am contacting you since you were involved in the identification of several copyvios by the said user (1, 2). There is an ongoing discussion about further cases. Gun Powder Ma (talk) 23:02, 18 April 2020 (UTC)

Looks like you've got folks working on it! Thanks for letting me know. Ellin Beltz (talk) 03:54, 20 April 2020 (UTC)

Hello, I hope you are well in these crazy times. I noticed you deleted my photos https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=RopB/Rgg_Transcriptional_Regulator&action=history which is fine, but I dont know why, or how to correct the problem. I am doing this for a class assignment and to my knowledge I provided all of the information possible: urls, the majority had formal citations from pubmed, crystal structures used the correct citation format specified at protein data bank. I think I just am not sure whether to put xyz evidence into the caption section, the description, or somewhere else i am not aware of? Could you tell me what exactly was missing and where i should put it?

So for example for this deletion: https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=File:Crystal_Structure_of_RopB.png&action=edit&redlink=1 I filled in the wikimedia uploader fields like:

1. Source- Protein Data Bank Link- https://www.rcsb.org/3d-view/5DL2 2. Description or Caption?-Cited it as PDB dictates below image: https://www.rcsb.org/3d-view/5DL2 "Citation Images created using Mol* should cite the PDB ID, the corresponding structure publication, Mol* (D. Sehnal, A.S. Rose, J. Kovca, S.K. Burley, S. Velankar (2018) Mol*: Towards a common library and tools for web molecular graphics MolVA/EuroVis Proceedings. doi:10.2312/molva.20181103), and RCSB PDB"

3. Author- Provided Authorship link from NCBI article: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/?term=26714274 4. Permission-Reviewed License page: https://www.rcsb.org/pages/policies#References 5. I even emailed someone from PDB about it and they said the following:

"Thank you for your email message; you have our permission to use this image.Please cite the image as follows:Image from the RCSB PDB (rcsb.org) of PDB ID 5dl2 (Makthal, N., Gavagan, M., Do, H., Olsen, R.J., Musser, J.M., Kumaraswami, M. (2016) Structural and functional analysis of RopB: a major virulence regulator in Streptococcus pyogenes. Mol Microbiol 99: 1119-1133). Please let us know if we can be of additional assistance. Sincerely, Rachel Green

RACHEL KRAMER GREEN, PH.D. Scientific Support & Customer Service Lead RCSB Protein Data Bank Rutgers, The State University of New Jersey 174 Frelinghuysen Road, Piscataway NJ 08854 rachel.green@rcsb.org rcsb.org | facebook | twitter Join our biocuration team http://www.rcsb.org/pages/jobs http://jobs.rutgers.edu/postings/106306 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Tleemundo (talk • contribs) 16:29, 22 April 2020 (UTC)

Hi Tleemundo: Please have Dr. Green send permissions to COM:OTRS not to yourself! They will need to release permissions on all images taken from various publications. I have read https://www.rcsb.org/pages/usage-policy - and feel that while some of your items might have been properly licensed under 4.0; not all were, and under COM:PRP, I took them from public viewing status ("deleted") until this could be resolved. After resolution via COM:OTRS, the OTRS editors are able to restore images which are properly licensed. For example, the exact page above you referenced clearly reads "© 2015 The Authors. Molecular Microbiology published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd". It would be best to let OTRS work with Dr. Green to resolve this. Cheers! Ellin Beltz (talk) 18:38, 22 April 2020 (UTC)

Hi, why did you erase the file in the object? Is an OLD advertising of that company, now she doesn't exist anymore like the telephone number or the address. --IlCommenda (talk) 20:04, 22 April 2020 (UTC)

Hi IlCommenda: Because it was a Copyright violation. Please see COM:COPYVIO. Wikimedia Commons does not accept fair use content. Cheers! Ellin Beltz (talk) 21:52, 24 April 2020 (UTC)

Hello (I hope I'm not going to make a mistake (I'm French)) : You've recently deleted the file : File:Communiqué EI via Amaq Attentats 13-11-2015 Paris (version française).jpg. I had marked it in unknown license, because I didn't know what to put, and asked for help on the French pages of the Bistro and on the Service d'aide, but nobody gave me an answer. Why wouldn't this file be free of rights ? It has been spread all over the world, relayed by all possible media, and above all, it is only a text, so not a photo or a work that would be effectively non-free. Could you enlighten me on this point? Furthermore, if it is not possible to import the image, do you think that is possible to copy word for word the text on the Wikipedia page of the article concerned ? Thank you in advance. Cordially. --Bastien65 (talk) 01:48, 23 April 2020 (UTC)

Hi Bastien65: The image you uploaded was of text which of course has copyright, even if it is all over the world. I have no idea what Wikipedia page, or which language Wiki you refer to. Perhaps the best course of action is to ask at that project. Wikimedia Commons can only accept free media - there is no fair use at Commons. Cheers! Ellin Beltz (talk) 21:55, 24 April 2020 (UTC)

Hi, I recreated my village in Minecraft (the church) and published the screenshots to Wikipedia. The files were deleted due to copyright, but these are my creations: / — Preceding unsigned comment added by Vincent Tupinier (talk • contribs) 09:23, 23 April 2020 (UTC)

Hi Vincent Tupinier - However since you did not create the game "Minecraft," you are subject to their copyright restrictions. See https://account.mojang.com/documents/commercial_guidelines & https://www.minecraft.net/en-us/licensed-content/ Cheers! Ellin Beltz (talk) 21:58, 24 April 2020 (UTC)

I uploaded my anthem files for good! not bad! They belong to Peter Briener, and I DID Credit him! you dont have to delete those files if I credited him! because I dont want people to think I stole them but they are dumb and they didnt notice the Author section! If there were no anthem files, people wouldnt even know what they sound like!

Adam Hegazy337259: The message on your talk page is from Illegitimate Barrister. Please do not upload files created by other people or other copyrighted materials. Please see COM:L before uploading any more files. Also, calm down. This is a process not a persecution. Chill and work with the administrators instead of calling administrators names. Ellin Beltz (talk) 16:43, 30 April 2020 (UTC)

Hello, I'd like to let you know I've requested undeletion of File:Senioři_píší_Wikipedii_v_MKP.webm. I've explained the reasons in my UD request. All the best, --Martin Urbanec (talk) 21:15, 4 May 2020 (UTC)

Noted. Seems like Jim Woodward has answered your question over there. Cheers! Ellin Beltz (talk) 02:18, 5 May 2020 (UTC)

Dear Ellin! The Đuro Blažeka files was never copyright violations. See thi YouTube file. I'am the author of this video. This is my property, my file. DoncseczII (talk) 20:34, 9 May 2020 (UTC)

I can’t figure out why you have nominated my work for deletion. Please just tell me so I can avoid what I have done wrong on the future. Janvermont Jan Lourie Janvermont (talk) 16:49, 22 May 2020 (UTC)

Hi Janvermont: I went back and looked at your talk page, and this issue was solved as "kept" in 2016. Here's the discussion Commons:Deletion requests/Files uploaded by Janvermont and on your talk page I left you a message that said you did great. The base situation is that artwork may have copyright as do photographs. It is different in nearly every country on Earth. Wikimedia Commons has servers in the US, so the copyrights have to be ok for home county and ok for US. So, for a sculpture, there is a copyright held by the artist even if someone else takes a photograph of that sculpture. In this case, the images were created based on artworks by Janice Lourie and the photograph had a copyright based on your anonymous Wikimedia account. So permission, via COM:OTRS was required for the artwork (I am assuming because I am not an OTRS specialist - nor have access to their files). Once the permission was received, the works were marked "kept" and the files remain to this day. I do not know if you are the artist Janice Lourie - probably a good idea on the internet not to be oneself all the time, but if you are, the former OTRS permission # is valid for all future uploads where art is copyright Janice Lourie and photographs are copyright Janvermont. If you photograph works by a different artist or in another country, please read COM:FOP - it has the best global explanations for "freedom of panorama" which incorporate artworks. The US has none. If you'd like to vanish that section on your talk page, you can archive it, or actually delete it, just put that you removed it on the "edit summary" in case you ever need to find it again someday. Cheers! Ellin Beltz (talk) 15:44, 23 May 2020 (UTC)

I can’t figure out why you have nominated my two works for deletion ("Harold Raley, American writer and philosopher", and "Enrique González Fernández, Spanish writer and philosopher"). Please just tell me so I can avoid what I have done wrong. Thank you.--Francisca Minerva Minerva (talk) 15:25, 23 May 2020 (UTC)

Hi Francisca Minerva Minerva: There are two concepts here. Deleted uploads and those nominated for deletion.

Starting with deleted - by me - File:María Cristina Rafael Gasset.jpg, File:María Cristina Romanones 2.jpg, and File:María Cristina Romanones 3.jpg. All three files were reproductions from a book, the upload template said they were "own work" which they weren't because they were by María Cristina not Francisca Minerva. No information was given about the age of the works, the country of origin, the title of the book, anything, just all it said was "own work" which is not possible.

For the works nominated for deletion, that discussion continues at Commons:Deletion requests/Files uploaded by Francisca Minerva Minerva, please join the discussion at that page as requested both here and on your talk page. Anything discussed on user pages is not included in the closing administrator's decision. Cheers! Ellin Beltz (talk) 15:54, 23 May 2020 (UTC)

Sorry, I apologize for my harassment and disrespect that I have committed for my misconduct--Aurelio de Sandoval (talk)

Hi Aurelio de Sandoval - Thank you. We all work together here! Ellin Beltz (talk) 14:37, 25 May 2020 (UTC)

Hello, you marked some files, between maps and shield drawings, to be deleted. Which are drawings or editions, made by me.

how can I prove that they are my own? --Fernando6718 (talk) 16:20, 25 May 2020 (UTC)

Hi Fernando6718 - Discuss at the Commons:Deletion requests/Files uploaded by Fernando6718 only. Ellin Beltz (talk) 16:21, 25 May 2020 (UTC)

The ping probably didn't work, so please see my query at Commons:Deletion requests/Files uploaded by Ajajr101. Thanks. - NitinMlk (talk) 17:50, 25 May 2020 (UTC)

  Done Ellin Beltz (talk) 19:06, 26 May 2020 (UTC)

Hi there,

I was notified about deletion of some photos I uploaded:

Affected:

File:Romanian ZK-383 SMG.jpg And also:

File:French Laffly S15T artillery tractor.jpg File:Romania Soluthern anti-tank gun.jpg

These photos are WW2 material, made between 1940-1944 and are circulating freely on internet, I never encountered a copyright claim about them. I doubt there is info available about every WW2 photo on wikipedia about the holder of the rights, if any.

Now, Romania is member of EU and for photography the Berne Convention which is applicable which sets a minimum term of 25 years from the year the photograph was created and 50 years for unknown authors (which may be restored if the author is found). That's why I uploaded the photos because they're clearly much older than 50 years.

I know hundreds of WW2/WW2 photos which are in hard copy the property of museums and their author is unknown and nobody bothered to find out (I do historical research as hobby and I am in course of writing a book).

It would be impossible to provide clear information about most of the good photos from the respective period therefore under the rules which were set for wiki, I doubt many would be available online, which frankly, I find rather pedantic.

Kind regards, Andrei — Preceding unsigned comment added by Amzro (talk • contribs) 07:58, 26 May 2020 (UTC)

Hi Amzro - Please make your comments at the Deletion Nomination itself Deletion requests/Files uploaded by Amzro because nothing we discuss here is covered or reviewed by the closing administrator. In general, however, the problem is not what you know about WWII, but how you wrote in the template when you uploaded the files... example "Source Own work -Author Amzro-Licensing I, the copyright holder of this work, hereby publish it under the following license: w:en:Creative Commonsattribution share alike... This file is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 4.0 International license."

Obviously, these images are not your own work. Therefore they were nominated as not your own work. Whether a photo appears all over the internet or not, does not make it free of copyright. These photographs came from somewhere, that is "source" - they are not own work. They had a photographer, that is "author" - not you. They have an actual date, not "Date 12 December 2019" as claimed on the upload template. Also please read COM:L and realize that images have to be out of copyright in both their country of origin and in the U.S. where the servers are located. I think your comment about pedantic is silly because we have a lot of WWII images that other people have managed to source, author and license correctly. That you were unable to do so doesn't make the project wrong, or the volunteers wrong. Ellin Beltz (talk) 20:12, 26 May 2020 (UTC)

(Hello. File:Elisha Mro.jpg is user image. Please don't to be delection. )Thank you so much.Moyezan (talk) 10:41, 26 May 2020 (UTC)

Hi Moyezan - It still has to have valid copyright to be hosted here for free. Ellin Beltz (talk) 20:12, 26 May 2020 (UTC)

Hello! i found your profile in a debate related to this image https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Sachsenhausen_Concentration_camp_homosexual.webp I work at the Sachsenhausen Memorial and we checked the visible numbers of the prisoners, they are not listed in our database as homosexual prisoners. We don't know who classified them as homosexual prisoners in the internet but its not true and we would be thankful if you could correct it. Thanks you! And if you have any questions about this feel free to contact me — Preceding unsigned comment added by VoloSachsenhausen (talk • contribs) 13:02, 26 May 2020 (UTC)

Hi VoloSachsenhausen - Perhaps you should contact "the History Channel" which is where this image was apparently taken from? https://www.history.com/news/pink-triangle-nazi-concentration-camps I have edited the file template. Please see if it is better now. Ellin Beltz (talk) 20:17, 26 May 2020 (UTC)

Related to that issue is a potential problem with the name Janvermont. I use the name Janice Lourie for my scientific work. I use the name Jan Lourie for my

  Composite graphics.

I chose Janvermont because I use it for “userid” on most website logins. I didn’t realize that When I responded to “user” on wikimedia that it was not what I really wanted. ?can I change Janvermont to Jan Lourie without causing a problem? Hope it is ok to ask this question in this place.

Very many thanks. Jan Janvermont (talk) 15:53, 29 May 2020 (UTC)

Hi Janvermont: I am sorry but I don't know how easy/hard it is to change a name on Commons. Perhaps ask at the Village pump? Thank you for the clarity! Best wishes, Ellin Beltz (talk) 22:38, 29 May 2020 (UTC)

Since this DR (Commons:Deletion requests/File:Stanley Kubrick in Dr. Strangelove Trailer (4) Cropped.jpg was closed as "Keep," should this one (Commons:Deletion requests/File:Stanley Kubrick in Dr. Strangelove Trailer (4).jpg) be too? Thanks! StrangeloveFan101 (talk) 15:20, 30 May 2020 (UTC)

StrangeloveFan101: No, because it was procedural. The image was nominated in two different nominations. Turelio wrote: DR for this file now included in Commons:Deletion requests/File:Stanley Kubrick in Dr. Strangelove Trailer (4).jpg. --Túrelio (talk) 11:56, 24 May 2020 (UTC). So I closed this one as kept because it will be dealt with alongside the uncropped version. Sometimes the "keeps" are procedural - not a statement of opinion. Best wishes, Ellin Beltz (talk) 00:48, 1 June 2020 (UTC)

I would like to discuss some other spots in the area for me the contribute files to. I have some ideas that i would like to discuss perhaps on my talk page. I wasn't sure if I could alert you from a mention of your name on my talk page. Thanks. RedwoodDrones (talk) 05:00, 31 May 2020 (UTC)

@RedwoodDrones: To get any user's notice from any project page it's {{ping|user_name}} or {{u|user_name}}. I know we used to have a list of needed photos in HumCo, I think it was over on en:wiki (English language Wikipedia) at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Wikipedia_requested_photographs_in_Humboldt_County,_California. No guarantee it's complete, but it's a start! Cheers!! Ellin Beltz (talk) 00:53, 1 June 2020 (UTC)

3 pictures belong to my grandfather's war memories. I am the author, that is, I downloaded. I downloaded the ancient coats of arms, so I marked the source. Why are you deleting my image? This is my own image. Why should the coats of arms I erected be deleted? And why delete quickly? Best wishes, Sword313 (talk) 13:41, 4 June 2020 (UTC)

Hi Sword313: As stated on Commons:Deletion requests/Files uploaded by Sword313, "Head shots and group shots as well as a series of crests, all claimed as own work, but Facebook or smaller sizes, locations and so on suggest not own work but internet harves. Closing administrator please review entire upload gallery." Please leave any comments you have at the nomination, Commons:Deletion requests/Files uploaded by Sword313, the closing administrators do not review talk pages to see what was discussed elsewhere. I could download the Brooklyn Bridge, it still wouldn't be my own work. Coats of arms have copyright. Please see COM:L for more information. Ellin Beltz (talk) 02:32, 6 June 2020 (UTC)

Hi Ellin! Hope you are fine. I am Aliona. I have uploaded this file https://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/%D0%93%D0%BE%D0%BB%D0%BE%D0%B2%D0%B0%D0%BD%D0%B8%D0%B2%D1%81%D0%BA%D0%B8%D0%B9,_%D0%A1%D0%B0%D0%B2%D0%B2%D0%B0_%D0%95%D0%B2%D1%81%D0%B5%D0%B5%D0%B2%D0%B8%D1%87#/media/%D0%A4%D0%B0%D0%B9%D0%BB:%D0%94%D1%80%D1%83%D0%B6%D0%BD%D0%B0%D1%8F_%D1%81%D0%B5%D0%BC%D1%8C%D1%8F_%D0%B2_%D0%BA%D0%B0%D1%80%D1%82%D0%BE%D1%82%D0%B5%D0%BA%D0%B5_%D0%A0%D0%93%D0%91_%D0%BD%D0%B0_%D0%92%D0%BE%D0%B7%D0%B4%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B6%D0%B5%D0%BD%D0%BA%D0%B5,_3_%D0%B4%D1%80%D0%BE%D0%B1%D1%8C_5.jpg

now i see that you nominated this for deletion, so, i`m really in a mess -- what is wrong with that? this is a beautiful picture, this is a very warm and kind element at wiki. These are card files at the main library in Moscow --The Russian State Library. Card by card grandfather -- son -- granddaughter. All of them scientists; grandfather and granddaughter -- also writers. They are genius. really. What do u want me to explain to prove you that it is okey for this article? thanks and regards aliona — Preceding unsigned comment added by Acinnilla (talk • contribs) 15:53, 5 June 2020 (UTC)

hi Acinnilla : As it says at Commons:Deletion requests/File:Дружная семья в картотеке РГБ на Воздвиженке, 3 дробь 5.jpg, "Uploader did not create item depicted.". Please leave any comments over there. If you feel the item being shown is out of copyright, please explain why over at Commons:Deletion requests/File:Дружная семья в картотеке РГБ на Воздвиженке, 3 дробь 5.jpg. Nothing we say on the talk pages influences the closing administrator. Cheers! Ellin Beltz (talk) 02:28, 6 June 2020 (UTC)

Hope you aware that Special:AbuseFilter/69 tagging changes "Adding OTRS permission by non-OTRS member", as it`s also tag filter log for you. I`d like to suggest you to request OTRS permission on Meta, if you can spend time to contribute there. Regards, ZI Jony ^(Talk) 15:06, 18 June 2020 (UTC)

Rejected self promotion by a user who has an empty page like this, has made a page for himself (placed under the category of a district of Istanbul) and for whom someone has made a category with the same files, although his personal photo is not an own work for sure... Not notable either. IMHO. --E4024 (talk) 04:48, 3 July 2020 (UTC)

restoret this faile Слезантий2 (talk) 13:48, 11 July 2020 (UTC) https://commons.m.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:%D0%AE%D1%80%D0%B8%D0%B9_%D0%A8%D0%B2%D1%8B%D1%82%D0%BA%D0%B8%D0%BD1.jpg — Preceding unsigned comment added by Слезантий2 (talk • contribs) 13:49, 11 July 2020 (UTC)

"File:Юрий Швыткин1.jpg Kept. Does not appear to have a valid deletion reason --Ellin Beltz (talk) 20:24, 18 March 2020 (UTC)" Please read the discussions and see that this image was here on Commons before it went elsewhere as a copy, including [here]. Ellin Beltz (talk) 18:50, 14 July 2020 (UTC)

The image File:Annotated setting student teacher 2020-05-25 10.21.29.png was removed due to copyright violation. Could you please check if that was mistake? Thank you checking

See also discussion for other BBB screenshots https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Deletion_requests/File:Screenshot_BBB_de_basic2.png Bert --Bert Niehaus (talk) 07:43, 10 July 2020 (UTC)

Hi Bert Niehaus: The one image was removed due to no source of enclosed derivative images, i.e. the student & teacher icons. Cheers! Ellin Beltz (talk) 18:53, 14 July 2020 (UTC)

Ok thanks, I thought that the reference to WikiCommons icon https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Gnome-stock_person.svg was in the description of the file, can I add the reference to the WikiCommons Gnome-stock_person.svg in a different way, so that the file could remain in the Wikiversity learning resource about Oral Assessments with video conferencing? --Bert Niehaus (talk) 06:28, 15 July 2020 (UTC)

Hi Bert Niehaus: I apologize, I don't know anything about Wikiversity. For Commons, you could make icons yourself, upload the icon with proper license, then add it to your original photo and reupload it over the one I removed. Ping me when you do that and I will take a look! Ellin Beltz (talk) 17:37, 15 July 2020 (UTC)

Hi Ellin Beltz the icon I used in my photo was from WikiCommons and it was allowed to create derivative work with the icon. In addition to cited icon I took a snapshot of the exam situation at our university and cover the person with that WikiCommons icon that was allowed for derivative work. The used WikiCommons icon was https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Gnome-stock_person.svg and cited in the description of my adapted snapshot and the reference to the WikiCommons icon Gnome-stock_person.svg was added to the description. I am not a lawyer but I do not understand the licensing violation for that icon that was cited CC-BY in the description added link to the icon within WikiCommons. What do I have to change to cite the derivative work properly. May be my workflow for derivative work of WikiCommons images was not as expected. Sorry for asking, but I want to use the image in correct way, This has nothing to do with Wikiversity. It is just for creating derivative work in a proper way. --Bert Niehaus (talk) 10:14, 16 July 2020 (UTC)

Hi Bert Niehaus: We seem to be closer to restoring this image. However, I will tell you why I removed it and did not feel it was the same as the *.svg you linked as source. on the *.svg file, there are no eyes or mouth (as on the teacher). So while it contained COM:DW from File:Gnome-stock person.svg, it wasn't a match because there was additional editing on top of that image which was uncredited. Additionally, the *.svg file is license https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/deed.en, and your file was license https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/deed.en. In the description of 3.0 license it reads "Attribution — You must give appropriate credit, provide a link to the license, and indicate if changes were made. You may do so in any reasonable manner, but not in any way that suggests the licensor endorses you or your use. ShareAlike — If you remix, transform, or build upon the material, you must distribute your contributions under the same license as the original." No indication was shown of changes made, and the license you applied was not the same license as the original. Copyright stuff is so picky!! Hope this helps! Cheers! Ellin Beltz (talk) 17:17, 16 July 2020 (UTC)

Thank you very much for the patience in fixing the problem, Ellin Beltz, that helps a lot. So the only digital object that I cannot define the license for is the icon File:Gnome-stock person.svg so the conclusion is, to change the license of the remix to https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/deed.en - I would also add a remark, that I added eyes,.. during the remix operation - would that be correct? --Bert Niehaus (talk) 07:54, 20 July 2020 (UTC)

Hi Bert Niehaus: That would do it. It's restored, please fix ! Ellin Beltz (talk) 00:51, 23 July 2020 (UTC)

Hi I would like to enquire and educate myself of why this file File:Cyclocybe parasitica fruiting body.jpg was deleted and how to resolve it. I think I followed the creative commons licensing but cant see the file or the page to check anything anymore. thank you Darmozrac (talk) 01:42, 23 July 2020 (UTC)

Hi Darmozrac: Because it came from iNaturalist which has Non-Commercial license. Commons cannot accept "NC" licenses. Cheers! Ellin Beltz (talk) 17:51, 23 July 2020 (UTC)

Hi Ellin Beltz: Thank you for the response. I educated myself a bit more, however, I still find it a bit puzzling. Cheers! Darmozrac (talk) 09:39, 27 July 2020 (UTC)

Hi, Could you please Restrict public visibility (Revision deletion) of User:Razaviraz edits & summeries which are offensive in here. kind regards. Déjà vu • ✉ 20:33, 28 July 2020 (UTC)

@DejaVu: ...   Done Cheers! Ellin Beltz (talk) 17:46, 29 July 2020 (UTC)

Hi. Noticed that you have some infinite IP blocks. Was this purposeful or just artefact of actions?  — billinghurst sDrewth 01:59, 11 August 2020 (UTC)

Hi billinghurst: Probably an artifact.  :) Ellin Beltz (talk) 05:04, 11 August 2020 (UTC)

Sweet. Thanks.  — billinghurst sDrewth 06:07, 11 August 2020 (UTC)

billinghurst: I do not do a lot of blocking, so if I ever make a mistake, do not hesitate to let me know! Ellin Beltz (talk) 17:45, 12 August 2020 (UTC)

Not an issue, I had had more there in the list than you did. I was just checking-in.  — billinghurst sDrewth 02:57, 13 August 2020 (UTC)

You have tagged a photograph that I took of a hand made pocket watch display case that I own. I took the photograph with my own camere (iphone) and I have posted it on wikipedia. Why is this viewed as a copyright violation? BuffaloBob (talk) 03:11, 14 August 2020 (UTC)

Hi BuffaloBob: Because it has Facebook metadata. Fill in the form at COM:OTRS and provide the Facebook link to where it came from. Cheers! Ellin Beltz (talk) 03:13, 14 August 2020 (UTC)

Thank you Ellin Beltz. I have the digital photo in my possession. OI own it. I also posted it on Facebook. It did not come from Facebook. BuffaloBob (talk) 03:16, 14 August 2020 (UTC)

BuffaloBob It will take less time to fill in the form than to argue about it. Cheers! Ellin Beltz (talk) 03:18, 14 August 2020 (UTC)

This is one of five files I uploaded last week. I was told by the photographer the appropriate email was sent to OTRS on Sunday 9 August. What is the basis for deleting them, just a slip-up in the OTRS system? Thanks, Eddaido (talk) 03:36, 14 August 2020 (UTC)

Hi Eddaido: When OTRS is done processing, if everything is ok, the image can be restored. Nothing is ever really deleted, merely hidden so it cannot be viewed until the license is correct. It was deleted for no license at all. Cheers! Ellin Beltz (talk) 23:21, 14 August 2020 (UTC)

Hi - Please can you revert your deletion requests. These were indeed uploaded by User:Arbil44 (the author, Anne Ammundsen) and I am entirely comfortable that they are either owned by or were taken by Anne Ammundsen. Thank you. Dormskirk (talk) 08:48, 14 August 2020 (UTC)

Hi Dormskirk: I can own a hundred copies of a single book and never own the copyright. The images which were removed were clearly copyright violations. The user Arbil44 needs to file COM:OTRS to tie a real life identity to their anonymous account. Cheers! Ellin Beltz (talk) 23:19, 14 August 2020 (UTC)

Hello. I would appreciate it if you were to revert your revert. This is exactly what these categories are there for, and I do not know where you have heard that rule that you were trying to apply. A category for undeletion can only be applied when the deletion is either clear or after it has taken place. Take a look at the category and see how people apply it, I have been in line with the correct useage of it. If you wish to bring this to COM:VP you can either do so yourself or let me know and I will. ℺ Gone Postal (〠 ✉ • ✍ ⏿) 06:56, 18 August 2020 (UTC)

Hi Gone_Postal Please take it to VP. Every deletion nomination clearly says not to make edits after the closure. Cheers! Ellin Beltz (talk) 06:57, 18 August 2020 (UTC)

Hola Elkin ! Estoy tratando de contribuir a una mejor edición de los archivos del club Almirante Brown , colabore con varias imágenes históricas e importantes , fueron denunciadas imágenes por el usuario Frodar del periódico 1 digital que no existía en el año 2007 de cuando son esas imágenes , inclusive es imposible copiar imágenes de ese sitio , www.1digital.com , llamativamente todas las imágenes son denunciadas por un mismo usuario , Frodar , este usuario si observas el artículo del club Almirante Brown se había apoderado del mismo y revertia , alejaba a todo Wikipedista que comenzará , realmente no sé si este usuario tiene un tema personal con el club o que es lo que le pasa ya que pueden observar mis ediciones y son respetando los copyright , verán que cada denuncia llamativamente es de el Usuario Frodar , pueden revisar mis procedimientos en el Artículo del Club Almirante Brown y los procedimientos de Frodar antes del mes de Abril cuando estaba apoderado del Artículo , por lo que le a llamado la atención hasta un bibliotecario , agradecería si alguien me va a controlar o ayudar , que no sea Frodar ya que tiene un tema personal con este artículo , no es mi intención generar problemas quiero simplemente aprender y que mejore el artículo del Club , Muchas Gracias ! AleAscenso (talk) 01:19, 22 August 2020 (UTC)

Perdón Ellin Beltz AleAscenso (talk) 01:28, 22 August 2020 (UTC)

Hola Ellin Beltz nuevamente , te voy a dejar un mensaje que le termino de dejar a un bibliotecario sobre las actitudes de Frodar :perdón por la molestia , Pasaron varios meses ya desde que el Usuario Frodar intento apoderarse del Artículo del Club Almirante Brown , gracias en ese momento por acompañarme , se que lo hicieron , ya actualmente después de casi 3 mil ediciones voy aprendiendo cada día más , sobre todo con mucha colaboración de Wikipedistas a utilizar un lenguaje enciclopedico ,estoy poniendo mucho empeño tiempo y ganas en el artículo , aprendí que un buen Wikipedista no es el que espanta a los nuevos usuarios si no el que los acompaña y les eseña, gratamente me encontré con varios, inclusive ya comence a denunciar vandalismo casi siempre con Taichi, el artículo si lo podés ver hoy cuenta con 140 referencias y está mucho más completo , se puede decir que estaba detenido y se alejaba a todo Wikipedista que quisiera colaborar, necesito por favor una vez más comentarles de las actitudes de Frodar que denuncia cada una de las imágenes que subo a Commons se encarga de revisarla y denunciarla. denuncias mal realizadas con imágenes que no tienen nada que ver con las editadas ,de medios donde no se pueden copiar imágenes , ojalá ese tiempo que emplea en revisar imagen por imagen del Articulo del Club Almirante Brown lo utilizará para construir y no destruir , me retiraron muchas fotos y hoy me dijeron en Conmina que es un solo usuario el que esta haciendo esto Frodar, así que sería importante por favor que protejan todo lo relacionado del Artículo del Club Almirante Brown en toda la Wikipedia , Conmina del Usuario Frodar que tiene una cuestión contra evidente contra este artículo ya que nunca colaboró en su desarrollo , alejo a buenos Wikipedistas que se iniciaban y ahora se dedica a denunciar imágenes , me di cuenta hoy de lo de las imágenes ya que estoy tomando recaudos para no violar el Copyright y realmente no hablo inglés y no se comunicarme bien , hoy no obstante deje un mensaje en Commons ,aprovecho para saludarte y espero me puedas ayudar , si ves el Artículo del Club Almirante Brown desde abril a la fecha verás mis ediciones , que no son perfectas pero voy a ir mejorando cada vez más , Saludos y perdón por escribir tanto pero pensé que este Usuario ya la había Terminado contra el Club Almirante Brown !Estoy a tu disposición y no quiero generar problemas y si estoy equivocado te agradecería me lo expliques , cómo puede ser que Frodar me denuncia después de todo lo que le hizo a este Artículo y no es capaz de dejarme un mensaje en mi página de discusión ,eso me duele su forma de actuar a las escondidas , no es de buen Wikipedista , Una vez más Saludos ! AleAscenso (discusión) 02:08 22 ago 2020 (UTC) AleAscenso (talk) 02:28, 22 August 2020 (UTC)

• (( Google Translate ))

Hello Elkin! I am trying to contribute to a better edition of the archives of the Almirante Brown club, collaborate with several historical and important images, images were denounced by the user Frodar of the digital newspaper 1 that did not exist in 2007 when those images are It is impossible to copy images from that site, www.1digital.com, strikingly all the images are reported by the same user, Frodar, this user if you look at the article of the Almirante Brown club had taken over it and reverted, it kept away all Wikipedians who will , I really do not know if this user has a personal issue with the club or what is wrong with him since they can observe my editions and are respecting copyright, they will see that each complaint is strikingly from User Frodar, they can review my procedures in the Article of the Almirante Brown Club and the procedures of Frodar before the month of April when he was in possession of the Article, for which he has called the attention to a librarian, I would appreciate if someone is going to control or help me, other than Frodar since he has a personal issue with this article, it is not my intention to generate problems, I just want to learn and improve the Club article, Thank you very much! AleAscenso (talk) 01:19, 22 August 2020 (UTC)

Sorry Ellin Beltz AleAscenso (talk) 01:28, 22 August 2020 (UTC)

Hello Ellin Beltz again, I am going to leave you a message that I have just left a librarian about Frodar's attitudes: sorry for the inconvenience, It has been several months since User Frodar tried to get hold of the Admiral Brown Club Article, thank you in That moment for accompanying me, I know they did, now after almost 3 thousand editions I am learning more every day, especially with a lot of collaboration from Wikipedians to use an encyclopedic language, I am putting a lot of time and desire in the article, I learned that A good Wikipedian is not the one who scares new users but the one who accompanies them and teaches them, I pleasantly met several, I even started to report vandalism almost always with Taichi, the article if you can see it today has 140 references and it is much more complete, it can be said that he was detained and all Wikipedians who wanted to collaborate were away, I need to please once again comment on the attitudes of Frodar who denounces each of the images that I upload to Commons is responsible for reviewing and reporting it. Bad complaints made with images that have nothing to do with the edited ones, from media where images cannot be copied, hopefully that time spent reviewing image by image of the Admiral Brown Club Article will be used to build and not destroy, I was withdrawn Many photos and today they told me in Conmina that it is a single user that is doing this Frodar, so it would be important to please protect everything related to the Almirante Brown Club Article in all Wikipedia, Conmina of User Frodar who has a question against evident against this article since it never collaborated in its development, it alienated good Wikipedians who were starting and now is dedicated to reporting images, I realized today about the images since I am taking precautions not to violate the Copyright and not really I speak English and I do not communicate well, today however I left a message in Commons, I take the opportunity to greet you and I hope you can help me, if you see the Club Article Almirante Brown from April to date you will see my editions, which are not perfect but I am going to improve more and more, Greetings and sorry for writing so much but I thought that this User had already finished it against the Almirante Brown Club! I am at your disposal and I do not want to cause problems and if I am wrong, I would appreciate you explain it to me, how can it be that Frodar denounces me after everything he did to this Article and is not able to leave me a message on my discussion page, that hurts his way to act secretly, is not a good Wikipedian, Once again Greetings! AleAscenso (talk) 02:08, 22 Aug 2020 (UTC) AleAscenso (talk) 02:28, 22 August 2020 (UTC)

Hi AleAscenso: Please discuss the deletion nomination, at the nomination Commons:Deletion requests/Files uploaded by AleAscenso ... Nothing we write on talk pages is considered by closing administrator. Cheers! Ellin Beltz (talk) 19:20, 24 August 2020 (UTC)

Hi, you recently deleted File:Itzy at a showcase debut on February 12, 2019.jpg and its extracted images File:ITZY K-POP Debut SHOWCASE (cropped).jpg, File:Hwang Ye-ji at a showcase debut on February 12, 2019.jpg, File:Lia at a showcase debut on February 12, 2019.jpg, File:Shin Ryu-jin at a showcase debut on February 12, 2019.jpg, and File:Lee Chae-ryeong at a showcase debut on February 12, 2019.jpg, File:Shin Yu-na at a showcase debut on February 12, 2019.jpg. These were uploaded by Kinocine, a long-time contributor who regularly uploaded photos of South Korean celebrities. They were tagged for deletion by J. Smile (Love & V.A.V.I) seemingly because cropped versions of the original appeared on other undated websites. Based on the uploader's other contributions, the deletion of these files as blatant copyright violations does not seem warranted here. Not only was there a lack of significant doubt over Kinocine's own-work claim, it seems very evident that the linked websites took the images from the original upload without proper attribution. I'd like to ask you to reconsider and undelete this files. ƏXPLICIT 11:09, 22 August 2020 (UTC)

Hi Explicit:   Done You are right. Restored. Ellin Beltz (talk) 19:18, 24 August 2020 (UTC)

Hi. Is this u? Until I saw someone calling you "she" today I never noticed that you were in Category:Female Wikimedians. (Probably because admins are generally males, even Daphne Lantier. :) As I understand you use your own name as nick I hope I did not make a stupid question. Just curiousity. Best. --E4024 (talk) 17:29, 22 August 2020 (UTC)

Hi E4024 Yup, that's me, the Frog Lady, LOL. I have been first female or one female of few for much of my life. I am glad to live now because I would have gone crazy with no freedoms at all. Cheers! Best wishes, Ellin Beltz (talk) 19:21, 24 August 2020 (UTC)

Hey Ellin, how are you? I was wondering if you could zap this superceded logo? Have a great what's left of 2020! --Palosirkka (talk) 11:45, 27 August 2020 (UTC)

  Done ! Ellin Beltz (talk) 22:54, 31 August 2020 (UTC)

 

--Don (talk) 06:41, 16 September 2020 (UTC)

Waves @ Abigail!! HUGS!!! Ellin Beltz (talk) 17:24, 16 September 2020 (UTC)

Hello Ellin Beltz,

We are conducting an interview study about WikiCommons. Our project description is on the WMF meta wiki: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Research:Studying_Wikimedia_Commons.

In some of our conversations with other Commons editors, they suggested you as a potential interview candidate and as someone who has insights about Commons.

Would you be willing to participate in an interview about your experience?

We are able to conduct the interview over Skype, Google Meet, Zoom, or phone. We make our best efforts to keep your participation confidential. Participation in our study is voluntary.

If you complete an interview with us, we will make a donation to a WMF 'like minded' organization. Specifically, for each participant who completes an interview with us, we acknowledge the contribution of their time, effort, and expertise to our research project with a donation of $15 to one of three charitable organizations (Wikimedia Foundation, or Creative Commons, or Internet Archive) selected by the participant. If the participant does not indicate a selected organization the default is WMF.

If you are willing to participate in this interview, or if you have additional questions please email us. Or, if you are concerned about direct email you can contact us through Wikipedia’s mail feature.

via Email on EN Wikipedia yyu2016@uw.edu (Yihan Yu) User:BunbunYU dwmc@uw.edu (David Mcdonald) User:dwmc

Best, BunbunYU

Can you explain why you deleted File:Nestor Redondo (1118250566).jpg a few months ago? I uploaded some of the images from https://www.flickr.com/photos/alan-light/albums/72157601430944410, including that one. Flickr2commons uploaded the image without any warning it had been uploaded before, and then deleted. I only learned it had previously been deleted when I added it to the w:Nestor Redondo.

If there was a copyright problem with that flickr user presumably we should have deleted ALL the images. Geo Swan (talk) 00:16, 5 October 2020 (UTC)

Hi Geo Swan. I am confused by your note. The file you are asking me about was only uploaded recently and I don't seem to have deleted it. I can't see an old file history, and the file is in use as you say at the en:wiki page. Any additional assistance you can offer would be appreciated. In general however, I would hope we would have permission for the artwork from the artist as whoever took the photo does not have artist's permission anywhere on their flickr page. Has the artist filed OTRS? Ellin Beltz (talk) 21:29, 5 October 2020 (UTC)

• See this en.wiki edit, which has the edit summary "Removing Nestor_Redondo_(1118250566).jpg, it has been deleted from Commons by Ellin Beltz because: Copyright violation, see c:Commons:Licensing." Geo Swan (talk) 21:43, 5 October 2020 (UTC)
  • With regard to a need for an explicit OTRS record... Well, I agree, in general, there are instances where an explicit OTRS record is essential.

On the other hand there are uploaders, both here on the commons, and on sites like flickr, where the uploader's record shows that an explicit OTRS record is unnecessary, and an annoyance.

Did you look at the flickr album where this image came from? That album says "These photos were scanned from the original 35MM film negatives. Photos by Alan Light." Photography was more challenging in the days of analog 35mm film. Nevertheless there were amateur photographers who were sufficiently devoted to their hobby to own good quality cameras, and to have made enough effort, to take professional quality, or near professional quality, photos.

I've come across several amateur photographers who had excellent quality analog images, on slides, who then went to the considerable effort to digitally scan those images, uploaded them to flickr, and put them under a free license.

When the record seems clear that the flickr uploader's story is internally consistent I would prefer not to pester them to take further efforts to establish they were their images, through OTRS. When their record is clear, I am afraid it will seem like an insult, and they could react by changing their licenses to a more restrictive license.

I have an OTRS ticket - but only because people were accusing me of illegally copying images from the flickr contributor booledozer - when I am the flickr contributor booledozer. But most commons contributors don't have an OTRS ticket. We don't think it is necessary when they have a record of good faith contributions. I think the same should hold true for flickr contributors who have an extensive record of apparently good faith contributions.

The flickr album contains 342 images. Taken as a body it just isn't credible that they were stolen images. Occam's Razor Alan Light was a comic book fan, just like he claimed, who took excellent analog photos at the 1982 comic-con, and decades later uploaded them and made them available under a free license.

Robert Taylor, flickr user bobolink, is another one of the guys who catalogued their kodachrome slides, decades ago, and then digitized them, and put them under a free license at flickr.

Roger Puta was another guy who took 10,000 excellent slides - of rail vehicles in his case - traveling all over North America to gather a definitive collection. I did have some suspicions, when I found his images under another guy's flickr ID. But when I looked into it I was touched. Puta died in early middle age, and left his valuable collection of slides to a friend. The collection was so comprehensive it had a definite dollar value. Multiple authors of books on transit used his images. But his literary heir decided to not make a profit from the collection and instead put the collection into the public domain. Another guy, a childhood friend of Puta's, helped out by digitizing the entire collection - a very substantial amount of work.

Puta didn't measure up to wikipedia notability, but I am a railfan myself, and I was moved by his legacy, so I created an article about him on a non-WMF wiki - Roger Puta.

To repeat my main point, I think the precautionary principle should be exercised with a measure of common sense, so we refrain from bugging people who made their images available under a free license, because excessively hounding people, when the copyright status is not reasonably in doubt, risks backfiring on us, and triggering them to change their licensing before we have uploaded our copies.

Cheers! Geo Swan (talk) 22:39, 5 October 2020 (UTC)

Thank you for your opinion. The copyright issue is with the art, not the photographer. Next time please comment on the deletion itself. Cheers! Ellin Beltz (talk) 19:20, 6 October 2020 (UTC)

• My point is that it is a mistake to carry PCP to extremes. In this particular case the body of Alan Light's work makes it incredible to be concerned he wasn't who he said he was. The captions of this photo and the other 341 images in this gallery strongly confirm he was the photographer, and the subjects of the photos, comic book artists, and other early leading figures in the comic book community, were his friends. Geo Swan (talk) 16:00, 7 October 2020 (UTC)

The copyright issue is with the art, not the photographer. Ellin Beltz (talk) 18:51, 8 October 2020 (UTC)

Last night you deleted the photos from the entry "Duomo di Bassano" because they were taken from 2 websites. What form do the managers of these websites have to sign for me to be authorized to use these photos under the heading "Duomo di Bassano del Grappa"?--Ezio1937 (talk) 07:44, 1 November 2020 (UTC)

hi Ezio1937: Follow the instructions at COM:OTRS. Whoever owns the copyright fills in a simple email and sends it in. If accepted, the files can be restored. Please do not upload new until the process is complete. Cheers! Ellin Beltz (talk) 15:34, 3 November 2020 (UTC)

The images I uploaded have been deleted. As the images are actually from my own web page, and are photographs that where originaly comissioned by myself, along with the band members and management, I do not see a problem Gibb2558 (talk) 14:29, 12 November 2020 (UTC)

Hi Gibb2558: Please fill in the simple email form at COM:OTRS - there are special administrators to help in this situation. Since all upload accounts here are anonymous, and the images were previously published, OTRS is now the way to go! Best wishes, Ellin Beltz (talk) 06:55, 13 November 2020 (UTC)

There were multiple images, you might want to process the others as well. DS (talk) 18:19, 22 November 2020 (UTC)

DS: Thanks for the poke! Ellin Beltz (talk) 05:43, 23 November 2020 (UTC)

I find the argument against deletion at Commons:Deletion requests/File:Pattuglia di soldati che aggiusta i tiri.jpg frankly incredible. The LOC page does not provide information on the copyright status of the image, nor does it provide sufficient information (author, place of publication) to determine the copyright status. The LOC does host images that are not yet in the public domain, so simply stating that it "was collected by the Library of Congress" is not sufficient. And the argument that it meets COM:L because it meets COM:L is circular. It's certainly possible that the image meets {{PD-US-not renewed}} or {{PD-US-no notice}}, but without knowing the author or where and how it was published, we have absolutely no reason to make that claim. Please reverse your closure. Thanks, --AntiCompositeNumber (talk) 16:30, 22 November 2020 (UTC)

Hi AntiCompositeNumber: With respect, the image is in wide use and there was a cogent argument in favor of keeping it. I will not oppose it if you renominate it where others can take a look at it and hopefully consensus can be attained. No one person is perfect all the time, certainly not me. Cheers! Ellin Beltz (talk) 23:12, 27 November 2020 (UTC)

Very bad. Frankly, I’m shocked. I’m used to half of the admins doing all sorts of bad stuff, but the good ones, like you — each new error hurts. Please don’t join the dark side, Ellin, there’s so few of you left. -- Tuválkin ✉ ✇ 21:33, 26 November 2020 (UTC)

hi Tuvalkin: I looked at the picture. It's not in use. I looked at the photostream. The photographer has licensed several derivative works as CC0. I am totally conflicted about this one too, but I felt there were several problems with it and since there was no corresponding article about this person, and when I looked them up, there was very little, I closed it as I did. I won't oppose it if you want to take it to COM:UNDEL. I just reviewed my entire thought process and I think it would be best if someone else looked. Thank you for your understanding. Best wishes! Ellin Beltz (talk) 23:08, 27 November 2020 (UTC)

• I will do so. And since the source photostream has COM:DW issues, maybe it should be listed as such in COM:Flickr and other photos from this stream investigated in that regard. (The matter of COM:DW is moot in regard to this photo, thought.) -- Tuválkin ✉ ✇ 01:09, 28 November 2020 (UTC)

Hello there! I’m an active editor on the Kalaripayattu page, and recently noticed that some of the images from the page have been removed, while one of them appears to have a reasonable request for removal, the removal of the other, titled, “Kalari Poothara Pooja” appears to have been removed with no attached reason. The image does not appear to have any copyrights attached to it (as far as I know). The image in question appears to have been removed by a bot. If you don’t mind me asking, what was the reason for this image’s removal? And is there a way to restore the image? I don’t mind trying to provide additional images, but some of the ones that were removed were, as far as I know, accurate images of some of the rituals that occur within the practice of this martial art. Thanks for taking the time to read this! I look forward to hearing back from you!Kalariwarrior (talk) 06:02, 12 December 2020 (UTC)Kalariwarrior (talk) 06:01, 12 December 2020 (UTC)

Hi Kalariwarrior: Sorry, but that's not enough information!! I found an image with a similar name as you mention File:Kalari_poothara_ppoja.jpg but it hasn't been deleted. I couldn't find the file name you mention in the backlist. There is apparently no such page as Kalaripayattu page, there was one, but it was deleted by Jameslwoodward on March 9, 2016. I deleted some martial arts images recently that came from Facebook, but they don't seem to be the same name as you have given. There is a category with a lot of really nice images at https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Category:Kalarippayattu. Would you be so kind as to provide more information so that I can assist you? Ellin Beltz (talk) 08:03, 13 December 2020 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) I believe I see the files in question in your deletion log from 2020-12-12 at 01:27, including File:Kalari Poothara Pooja.jpg. The reason given is copyvio. Not sure how many before & after that one are relevant.—Odysseus1479 (talk) 09:26, 13 December 2020 (UTC)

Ellin Beltz, the two files were removed from from the Kalaripayattu wiki page were: (as per the edit log on the page itself)

https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Kalari_Poothara_Pooja.jpg

And:

https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Kalaripayattu_Vidhyarambham.jpg

I wanted to ask why those two images were removed. As far as I know, they aren’t copyrighted. Or are they? Kalariwarrior (talk) 17:46, 13 December 2020 (UTC)

Hi Kalariwarrior with thanks to Odysseus1479. Both were deleted as Copyvio; a removal I take very seriously. There have been many times when I do not feel that a Copyvio nomination contains sufficient information to use the speedy system and will renominate the images to wait a week for Deletion Nomination discussion. That was not the case with these two:

https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Kalari_Poothara_Pooja.jpg

https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Kalaripayattu_Vidhyarambham.jpg

Both show metadata showing source from prior publication at Facebook. If we got COM:OTRS permission from the Facebook account holder, the images could be restored. Cheers! Ellin Beltz (talk) 04:47, 15 December 2020 (UTC)

Greetings,

I recently added content to the Town of Fountain Hills page and my material was flagged for copyright questions. If the material is owned by the Town, is this a copyright concern? How do I at least get the written content back on the page? If I do need to change out the visuals, I will gladly do so.

I am appreciative of the work editors do on these pages. Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by BowenLarsen (talk • contribs)

Hi BowenLarsen: "Owned" is not the same thing as "owns copyright." Please see COM:L for a full discussion of copyright. The images of your town seem to be derived from an archive of historical images. Correct dates, photographer's names, artist's names, and as much information as you have about the images will allow us to help you. "Own work" or "Town of Fountain Hills" isn't accurate for images that are from multiple origins. Also, in your case is the sculpture in the lake, which requires COM:OTRS from the holder of the artistic copyright - the artist or the artist's heirs. Cheers! Ellin Beltz (talk) 04:51, 15 December 2020 (UTC)

Thank you. I will use clear visuals and see how that flies. They won't be as pretty, though! — Preceding unsigned comment added by BowenLarsen (talk • contribs)

I am assuming this isn't enough eh? HickoryOughtShirt?4 (talk) 21:54, 19 December 2020 (UTC)

HickoryOughtShirt?4 No. Please read my reply and limit discussion to the actual deletion nomination. Thank you. Ellin Beltz (talk) 21:56, 19 December 2020 (UTC)

Can you help me rename File:Hurricane Lorenzo at peak intensity on September 29.jpg to File:Lorenzo 2019-09-29 0300Z.jpg. Final-Fantasy-HH (talk) 16:29, 20 December 2020 (UTC)

  Done Hi Final-Fantasy-HH - The renaming was done by the time I logged on because you left a request elsewhere and TommyG did it. Cheers! Ellin Beltz (talk) 23:58, 20 December 2020 (UTC)

Hi Ellen_Beltz, I noticed that you deleted the image of my painting. Please note that I personally painted that image and that I'm the copyright owner. I've filed a request to have it undeleted. Kindest regards, dsicore — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dsicore (talk • contribs) 17:09, 26 December 2020 (UTC)

Hi Dsicore: Please read up on "Derivative Works", on Commons at COM:DW. Because Conan the Barbarian is both a 1982 and a 2011 movie the character is likely copyright. Worse for this case, the upload template on your pen and ink drawing reads "Own work, but is a copy of pre-existing Conan artwork drawn by artist Henrik Sahlstrom." To restore the image would require COM:OTRS permissions from Mr. Sahlstrom and whoever owns the copyright of Conan the Barbarian, or a clear statement why that character is out of copyright. Thank you for your contribution. It's a lovely drawing, but work here needs to be free of copyright restriction to be hosted on Commons. Cheers! Ellin Beltz (talk) 20:37, 30 December 2020 (UTC)

This is a crop of File:Maggie Wilson Metro Channel April 2018.jpg, which you deleted as a copyvio, so should probably go likewise. --GRuban (talk) 01:33, 30 December 2020 (UTC)

GRuban   Done Thanks! Ellin Beltz (talk) 20:32, 30 December 2020 (UTC)

May I suggest that where you moved File:Eureka, California - Vance Hotel Building 01.jpg to File:Vance Hotel-2017 Eureka CA.jpg for the sake of sorting a particular category, you might have done better to add a sortkey? - Jmabel ! talk 00:51, 2 January 2021 (UTC)

Hi Jmabel Please be more specific about what you desire? Perhaps with instructions or example? I don't think putting the city name first where the building is depicted is the best way to sort images of buildings. The category is pretty evenly split between (city first) and (building first). I had just found the image elsewhere and added it to the category then noticed it did not sort out next to the other image we already had of the same building. If you would be so kind as to describe/example what you are suggesting, I would be happy to look at it - understanding that our best service is to users who may not know of advanced tricks and are merely looking for "more images of _____." Cheers! Ellin Beltz (talk) 01:01, 2 January 2021 (UTC)

"City first" is the way I have done it for about 35,000 images of buildings I have uploaded, so if you object to that we have a much larger issue to sort out.

I presume your intent here was to sort Category:Buildings in Eureka, not (for example) Category:July 17 in California, where it seems to me that the move you made is a liability. Instead of moving the file, on the file page you could have turned "[[Category:Buildings in Eureka]]" into "[[Category:Buildings in Eureka|Vance Hotel]]" or even "[[Category:Buildings in Eureka|Vance Hotel-2017]]". That is the normal way to sort a particular category. - Jmabel ! talk 01:19, 2 January 2021 (UTC)

This is the first I knew there were 35K images of this type, I am only looking at the one town because I am adding some historical images. Since the category seems to be half and half, are you going to fix all the images that don't fit your format? It's not an argument, it's a series of actions. I still think that the file names need to be descriptive and looking at city pages with repeat after repeat of city name first seems wrong way round, but if there have been discussions before - or a policy - please clue me in. I was unaware there was a "normal way" until your note - as it seems to be done every which way around all over the place. Of course, everything has great room for improvement in all places at all times, and I am certainly open to a discussion, but I am not going to go through zillions of images adding to their categories when we have many thousands of images with no categories at all.

I am hoping to get it all close enough that some subsequent generation can at least find the photos. Up to today because of other, earlier categorization, several images of buildings in Eureka were essentially invisible. We all do what we can, and it's all of us trying to do a good job that ends up with Commons being such a good resource. There will never be a day when it is perfect :) Cheers! Ellin Beltz (talk) 01:27, 2 January 2021 (UTC)

There is no requirement of uniformity of names across different uploaders. Essentially, the requirement is that the names be reasonably descriptive, and there is a strong presumption toward leaving files at their original names. See Commons:File renaming; you being an admin, I'm a bit surprised that any of this is at all new to you, but I guess I've got my blind spots, too. I strongly recommend you read (or re-read, as the case may be) the "Which files should be renamed?" section there, including the "Additional information" part. Note 4 in the latter there is very relevant here.

As I say: the normal way to sort the images within category is to add an explicit sort key in the link to that category on the file page, not to change the filename. - Jmabel ! talk 16:07, 2 January 2021 (UTC)

Item four reads "To harmonize the names of a set of images so that only one part of all names differs." which is what I thought I was doing and since it would seem that folks would go to the category Eureka > buildings in Eureka > building name in the above two categories, it seemed to me to be best to put the building name first. It really never occurred to me that "1972 in California" was considered the top level category for images by anyone. Oops, sorry - as you say - we all have things we don't know. Now that I understand a little bit more of your interest in doing it the other way round, I will certainly do even less file renaming of this type than I usually do (which is nearly zero). Thank you for bringing it up. One question I had this morning, would it not be the same thing to apply a sorting key to "Building Name, Town Name, State Name" so that it sorted out "Category:1972 in California|Eureka" as well? Cheers! Ellin Beltz (talk) 01:48, 3 January 2021 (UTC)

Sure, sorting any category in a reasonable, potentially maintainable sequence is pretty much always welcome (although the chance of other contributors maintaining your scheme is small, so I'd recommend it only for something that is a bit of a pet project you intend to maintain over time). But it should be done with sort keys, not by renaming files. - Jmabel ! talk 03:50, 3 January 2021 (UTC)

  Done I added the tag you suggested which returns the image to Eureka first sorting for the by date categories, and leaves the two images of the Vance Hotel together. If I upload more I will make sure they have that sorting tag if included in any by date or by year categories. I note that in many of these categories, there is no apparent sorting mechanism there were photos of "Wawana" right next to "Yosemite" when your case would have it "Yosemite-Wawana" since it is within the national park. I am not planning any massive changes to any of these categories or to do more renaming than I have over the past years - which is almost none. Thank you for the discussion. Please do not hesitate to continue it should you desire so. Cheers! Ellin Beltz (talk) 19:48, 3 January 2021 (UTC)