User talk:Yann/archives 12

Je souhaite vous contacter, mais ne suis pas encore très expert dans les procédures. Est-ce possible par mail ? J'ai demandé la supression d'une image sous copyright, et vous n'avez pas retenu cette demande. Je souhaite pouvoir vous prouver le problème, étant le détenteur des droits sur cette image. Je peux aussi vous contacter par téléphone. AJOLI

This message refers to a deletion you made on January 2, 2011 at 6:53 a.m. under

http://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Psychonaut01&diff=0&oldid=39441630

The file I wanted to use was already in wikipedia. It was in the Bavarian section of the net. According to what the person there said, the file I wanted to use did not qualify for copyright, because it did not meet the protection standards. It was void of originality, therefore it could be used. Hence, there is no copyright violation.

This person is to be found in bar.wikipedia.org under the URL

http://bar.wikipedia.org/wiki/Benutzer:Kazu89

and he goes by the name "André".

--Psychonaut01 (talk) 13:41, 2 January 2011 (UTC)Reply

This is a DR I filed on another image by this uploader. It concerns one image the uploader uploader uploaded which you later deleted. I doubt it can be kept without OTRS...and there is none. Regards, --Leoboudv (talk) 19:57, 2 January 2011 (UTC)Reply

• Thank You for your help. --Leoboudv (talk) 20:24, 3 January 2011 (UTC)Reply

Hi. I noticed the image Minotaurasaurus_BW.jpg has been deleted. The uploader, Nobu Tamura is a highly respected paleo-artist who always publishes his own work under a Creative Commons license; I'd advise you look further into this as I highly doubt it was a copyvio. Thanks! Bob the Wikipedian (talk - contribs) 06:18, 3 January 2011 (UTC)Reply

OK, I restored the image, but I think that this file needs an OTRS permission. Yann (talk) 07:15, 3 January 2011 (UTC)Reply

Shouldn't the {{self|GFDL|cc-by-3.0}} be enough? Last I checked, self-created images don't require OTRS if released under such a free commercial use license. Bob the Wikipedian ^{(talk • contribs)} 00:31, 4 January 2011 (UTC)Reply

In this case, no because 1. it is not self evident that it is a self-created work; 2. the uploader is not the creator; 3. it is already published on the Web. Yann (talk) 07:23, 4 January 2011 (UTC)Reply

I have sent an email to Mr. Tamura at the address listed at Palaeocritti (the website the would-be offending images appear on). I'll forward you his response so it can be documented with OTRS. Bob the Wikipedian ^{(talk • contribs)} 06:24, 5 January 2011 (UTC)Reply

Hi, I am the creator of this image and allowing its use on wikipedia. NobuTamura (talk) 06:27, 5 January 2011 (UTC)Reply

Wow. Email-summoning really works pretty nicely, it would seem. Looks like my work's done here, you two can sort this out. Bob the Wikipedian ^{(talk • contribs)} 06:48, 5 January 2011 (UTC)Reply

Hi,
You just suppressed File:Affiche Cave affinage Juraflore - Fort des Rousses 01 by Line1.JPG which I uploaded some time ago.
But I was not warned, nor did I see anything on my Watchlist.
Is that normal?
Regards Liné1 (talk) 15:24, 4 January 2011 (UTC)Reply

OK, je voulais juste vérifier que dans ton process, il y avait bien une étape d'avertissement. Cordialement Liné1 (talk) 17:03, 4 January 2011 (UTC)Reply

Hi Yann. I noticed you correctly deleted the image File:CheetahsLogoplain.PNG as it was using the incorrect license. Would you be able to email me a copy of this file so that I can upload it to Wikipedia using the correct fair use license for logos? Many thanks, Bettia (talk) 11:55, 5 January 2011 (UTC)Reply

OK, please send me your mail address, I will send you a copy of the logo. Yann (talk) 12:03, 5 January 2011 (UTC)Reply

I've been messing around with this section, since I found it very confusing. (I hope I'm helping and not mucking it up through ignorance. You may notice that my knowledge of French is minimal.) I was looking for an article in the JPG category of volume 11 and it seems to be missing pages 760–797 (at least they're not where they seem like they ought to be). I see them on the French Wikisource, so I guess they are in the DJVU files. Should these be added to the JPG category on Commons? Or am I missing something? Thanks for help. --Robert.Allen (talk) 12:12, 6 January 2011 (UTC)Reply

Some of the planches PNG files produce "Error creating thumbnail: Invalid thumbnail parameters or PNG file with more than 12.5 million pixels". Do you know whether there are plans to somehow correct these? Otherwise I will upload JPG files to replace them. (I don't know whether this error is produced by my Safari browser or the Wikipedia server.) --Robert.Allen (talk) 01:47, 8 January 2011 (UTC)Reply

Yes, this a (more or less intentional) bug of MediaWiki. Producing thumbnails of big PNG files require a lot of resources. Therefore it is disable if the file is more than 12.5 million pixels. So either create a JPEG or a smaller PNG file. It is important to keep the big files as archives though. Yann (talk) 06:23, 8 January 2011 (UTC)Reply

Thanks for the feedback. It must have been frustrating to discover this after uploading so many files. I started already adding some JPGs, hoping I would not be wasting my time. Re the old files: I'm adding "other version" links from JPG to PNG and from PNG to JPG. Also, putting the too "large PNG" files into a subcategory for each volume category, and trying to remember to update the Gallery page links, and hoping this will all be OK. I was unaware of Diderot's encyclopedia until a few days ago. A lot has been done, but obviously there's always more to do. --Robert.Allen (talk) 06:45, 8 January 2011 (UTC)Reply

Yes, the proofreading is just started. With 17 volumes, and 18,000 pages of text, there is more to do... I think this is a direct ancestor of Wikipedia, by the spirit it was written, as well as by the extend of the subjects covered at the time. Yann (talk) 07:02, 8 January 2011 (UTC)Reply

None of the images are photographs. This is very clear from the shitty quality of the image as well as the fact that it lacks any form of EXIF data. It is a screencap from some sort of video recording and not originally owned by the uploader. File:SNSD 00 Shanghai 2010-04-17.jpg, File:Hyoyeon Shanghai 2010-04-17.jpg, File:Jessica Shanghai 2010-04-17.jpg, File:Sunny Shanghai 2010-04-17.jpg, File:Yuri Shanghai 2010-04-17.jpg, and File:Yoona Shanghai 2010-04-17.jpg are all under this category. I don't know why you decided to untag several of them. They are clear copyvios.—Ryūlóng (竜龍) 07:16, 7 January 2011 (UTC)Reply

Well, you didn't explain why you want them to be deleted. Yann (talk) 09:51, 7 January 2011 (UTC)Reply

This file is simply the emblem of the soccer club Sociedade Esportiva Santa Maria in Brazil. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Maykonpaulo (talk • contribs)

Hi, Yann. Could you please tell me what the appropriate tags for this type of file would be, so that it is not deleted? I am a bit confused about the deletion. Merci beaucoup! Motstravail

Hi,Yann Re: Elvis Presley image. user: vital57: I am a creator of the images, which are trying to uploaded. My name is Vitaliv, web site www.vitaliv.info , web page vitaliv. as I understand the main reson for deleting that I put (own work) instead of (own). I am sorry, I did as it said in explonaitions. If u realy think this is the reason for deleting my file, I will find someone who could read better then me, and I will do more portraits. In my opinion its not fair, and I haveto decide what kind of license to chose. I did {{cc-by-sa-3.0}} Tell me whats problem with this choise? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Vital57 (talk • contribs)

Hello, It is not clear who made this work. Beside it is probably out of scope with Wikimedia Commons. Regards, Yann (talk) 05:48, 11 January 2011 (UTC)Reply

Re:Commons:Deletion requests/File:SmileyOriginal.jpg, what was your reason for deletion? The Smiley face logos cannot be copyrighted as they entered the public domain in the 60s and besides they do not have sufficient originality, e.g. see [1] - copyright and trademark are not the same. It's a pity to see the word of an editor with a probable COI taken at face value like that. Fences and windows (talk) 19:22, 11 January 2011 (UTC)Reply

The file was deleted by Túrelio. Please ask him. Yann (talk) 12:54, 12 January 2011 (UTC)Reply

hi i want to delete the image until i have a answer from the foundation that have the copyright on Manzoni work.

how i can delete the photo directly?

You can't. Only admins can delete files. Yann (talk) 18:35, 23 January 2011 (UTC)Reply

I plan to proofread this book for Russian Wikisource. I need to know original French title (Russian is "Жёны артистов. Очерки нравов" (Wives of artists. Essays of morals)) and date of creation/publication. Is it collection of independent short stories or whole work? Unfortunately Google Translate on French Wikipedia/Wikisource pages about Alphonse Daudet didn't help me. --EugeneZelenko (talk) 16:02, 18 January 2011 (UTC)Reply

You may be an expert in these discussions as you are a part of Commons:Deletion_requests/File:Lord_Ram.jpg

1. Commons:Deletion requests/File:Aravana.JPG
2. Commons:Deletion requests/File:Guruvayurappan-1.jpg

--...Captain......Tälk tö me.. 14:37, 28 January 2011 (UTC)Reply

Your thoughts may be helpful at Commons_talk:Only_use_category_redirects_where_necessary#Changes needed to turn this into a guideline. Walter Siegmund (talk) 18:30, 30 January 2011 (UTC)Reply

Hi Yann. I see you undeleted one of my files File:Masjid_Al_Haram._Mecca,_Saudi_Arabia.jpg Another one that is from Saudi was also deleted under the same pretext. Could you please Undelete Commons:Deletion_requests/File:Masjid_Nabawi._Medina,_Saudi_Arabia.jpg ?

Many thanks, -- Ali Imran Feb 13, 2010

As you well know, neither our rules nor our aim to be civil to one another allow you to arbitrarily reverse another Admins actions. If you disagree with a closure, you have three ways of dealing with it:

1. A request on the closing Admin's talk page.
2. Reopening the DR, including restoring the tag on the image file
3. Entering an undeletion request

Simply reverting my action is not one of them -- I would be fully within my rights to simply delete your action -- post-closure comments can be deleted on sight.

As for this particular case, while the Al-Masjid al-Nabawi mosque is ancient, the facade and building which occupies these images is modern. The green dome of the original building can be barely be seen in the middle of one of the images. The modern building surrounds it.

If we are going to respect architect's rights anywhere, this is certainly a case where we should, as except for the green dome, virtually everything else in the images is modern.      Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 11:35, 14 February 2011 (UTC)Reply

This is more a general view of the city. I don't understand how the architecte could claim a copyright on this image. Using caution doesn't mean we need to be overzealous in deleting files. Yann (talk) 13:03, 14 February 2011 (UTC)Reply

Are we looking at the same picture? Everything in the image, except the green dome and the four or five buildings in the far back -- everything -- is the modern mosque. But that is beside the point -- what about your restoring it without process or civility?      Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 13:32, 14 February 2011 (UTC)Reply

As the nominator, i was about to re-start the discussion, your keep reasons not giving the real punch......Captain......Tälk tö me.. 16:51, 14 February 2011 (UTC)Reply

--ŠJů (talk) 23:31, 17 February 2011 (UTC)Reply

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） ∙ +/−

Dcoetzee (talk) 03:30, 28 February 2011 (UTC)Reply

File:Affiche_OMS-AIEA.jpg has been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether it should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry. If you created this file, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with it, such as a copyright issue. Please 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） ∙ +/−

Multichill (talk) 16:05, 18 March 2011 (UTC)Reply

Bonjour Yann, Il y a peu, j'ai vu un film bollywoodien, La Famille indienne (Kabhi Khushi Kabhie Gham...) et j'y ai tout de suite reconnu Amitabh Bachchan pour l'avoir déjà vu en Valued Image, grâce à la nomination que tu avais faite (et remportée) l'année dernière ! A part ça, j'espère que tu vas bien. Toujours en Inde ? Bien cordialement, --Myrabella (talk) 09:27, 23 March 2011 (UTC)Reply

Thank you for dealing with the undeletion request I filed for a pair of images of Dubai. Dealing with all the FoP related deletion requests on my uploads has taken over six months, so I'm glad this is sorted. CT Cooper · talk 11:05, 7 April 2011 (UTC)Reply

thank you for your work on Free-speech-flag-ps3.svg Decora (talk) 14:33, 12 April 2011 (UTC)Reply

File:The_Origins_of_Totalitarianism.djvu has been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether it should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry. If you created this file, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with it, such as a copyright issue. Please 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） ∙ +/−

 — billinghurst sDrewth 10:11, 19 April 2011 (UTC)Reply

Did you received or verified a link for the photograph, that it is existing in PD..??? ...Captain......Tälk tö me.. 10:46, 11 May 2011 (UTC)Reply

From where you got the publication date, as i cannot find it in any of the links.....Captain......Tälk tö me.. 03:51, 12 May 2011 (UTC)Reply

Bonjour ! Voir Commons:Deletion requests/File:Royal-de-luxe-Élephant-mai-2005-2.jpg - Marc ROUSSEL - --Markus3 (talk) 08:26, 30 May 2011 (UTC)Reply

Hi Yann, I'm a producer helping out with visual acquisitions for a new documentary. We would like to use your image http://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fichier:World_Health_Organisation_building_from_west.jpg. Unfortunately, since we have licensed other 3rd party material, we are unable to do a GNU license. Are you open to providing permissions for us to use this image in our doc? Pls let me know if you'd like to get more details. I can be found at rivkahbeth at hotmail {dot} com. thanks for your attention and great photo!Rivkahbeth (talk) 22:19, 31 May 2011 (UTC)Reply

You restored Category:Murghab River. You restored it as a redirect.

Forgive me for nit-picking, but I am going to suggest the other name should really redirect to Category:Murghab River, and not vice versa.

I am going to suggest that Category:Murghab River should be the base category for several reasons:

1. Another contributor emptied Category:Murghab River without any prior discussion. I suggest that emptying was inappropriate. It seems to have been a newbie mistake. I suggest this is a strong reason why Category:Murghab River should be the basename.
2. Letting the newbie get away with this newbie mistake sends the message that emptying existing categories, without discussion is OK. But, it isn't OK. It is disruptive.
3. As per the discussion, transliteration of names from Afghanistan is tricky. As per the discussion the only variant used on official Afghan government websites is Murghab River, not Morghab River. I suggest this too is a strong reason why Category:Murghab River should be the basename.

Thanks Geo Swan (talk) 02:14, 1 June 2011 (UTC)Reply

I don't have an opinion on which name should be the main one. Please change it if you think it is better. Yann (talk) 08:06, 1 June 2011 (UTC)Reply

OK, thanks Geo Swan (talk) 15:21, 1 June 2011 (UTC)Reply

I own a picture that you deleted, how do I add a copyright to this picture ? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Juliomanco (talk • contribs)

Hello Yann. Could you move the File:Rodrigo Cofrtés cropped.jpg to File:Rodrigo Cortés cropped.jpg? (cause of my mistake) Thank you very much ;-) --RanZag (talk) 17:22, 5 June 2011 (UTC)Reply

Bonjour,

Merci de ne pas proposer à la suppression des images si le bâtiment n'est pas le sujet principal de la photo. File:SNV87176-Paris 13e - place Henri-Langlois - entrée de métro.JPG : le bâtiment est considéré comme de minimis. Cordialement, Yann (talk) 07:49, 6 June 2011 (UTC)Reply

Pour ma part, je n'ai rien proposé à la suppression ! --Ordifana75 (talk) 07:57, 6 June 2011 (UTC)Reply

Oops désolé... :oS J'ai mis un mot à User talk:De728631, et j'ai retiré l'avertissement. Yann (talk) 08:05, 6 June 2011 (UTC)Reply

Je ne comprends pas grand-chose à ce qui se passe... --Ordifana75 (talk) 08:13, 6 June 2011 (UTC)Reply

De728631 avait proposé tes images à la suppression par erreur. Cordialement, Yann (talk) 08:15, 6 June 2011 (UTC)Reply

Vu, merci. --Ordifana75 (talk) 08:20, 6 June 2011 (UTC)Reply

Merci de ne pas proposer à la suppression de cette image, J'ai porté le béret rouge que j'ai photographié chez moi, bien cordialement. Fantassin 72 (talk) 04:21, 7 June 2011 (UTC)Reply

Please take care about rest of user uploads. Thank you. --EugeneZelenko (talk) 14:41, 7 June 2011 (UTC)Reply

  Done Yann (talk) 15:08, 7 June 2011 (UTC)Reply

Hi, Yann. Can you please explain what you meant here by "Kept by jcb"? Jcb closed the first two DRs on that file; the second and third DRs were specifically in opposition to his prior closes. I don't see why his opinion on closing or not closing should hold greater weight than mine or Captainofhope's. Powers (talk) 21:06, 8 June 2011 (UTC)Reply

Well the license has been reviewed by the admin and the decripton is very clear for this image and also this one. What's wrong with these two images so as to be nominated for speedy deletion. --Vensatry (talk) 12:33, 9 June 2011 (UTC)Reply

Why did you remove the deletion tag from File:Barrel-Racing-Szmurlo.jpg without deleting the old version, which contains the copyrighted logo? 117Avenue (talk) 17:59, 9 June 2011 (UTC)Reply

The logo is de minimis in this image. There is no need to remove it. Yann (talk) 18:27, 9 June 2011 (UTC)Reply

Is File:TKWC wem.jpg legal? 117Avenue (talk) 19:50, 9 June 2011 (UTC)Reply

Yes, here also, the logos are a small part of the image. and not the main subject, therefore de minimis. Yann (talk) 10:13, 10 June 2011 (UTC)Reply

This really isn't much better, you know. Are you saying you agree with Jcb that reopening the deletion discussion was "disruptive"? Powers (talk) 22:24, 9 June 2011 (UTC)Reply

Yes, when there is no new argument, reopening a DR is disruptive. Yann (talk) 10:08, 10 June 2011 (UTC)Reply

But there was a new argument. The consensus in the undeletion discussion was extremely weak, constituting the uploader and three others -- one of whom had a completely irrelevant rationale. What other option do we have for gaining a wider discussion of this issue than via another deletion request? Powers (talk) 20:32, 13 June 2011 (UTC)Reply

Please note that there is a discussion about this on the user's talk-page. Feel free to join it. There are a lot of images of this user affected. Thanks -- RE rillke questions? 17:10, 15 June 2011 (UTC)Reply

Re: File:Passer domesticus -Ireland -female-8.jpg. Thank you for deleting this file, but your edit summary is wrong. Your edit summary is "[[Copyright violation]]", and there was no evidence of this whatsoever. I would be grateful if you would amend this mistake. Snowmanradio (talk) 21:15, 15 June 2011 (UTC)Reply

Thank your for doing the correction. Snowmanradio (talk) 08:18, 16 June 2011 (UTC)Reply

You marked this because "non-free content, no source, no permission" but it is presumably the uploader's own work according to the information provided. May you share why it is a copyright violation and any evidence? Otherwise it should be nominated for deletion. Thanks! --ZooFari 21:50, 15 June 2011 (UTC)Reply

Look for "Zac and Suellenn" in Google Images. Yann (talk) 21:52, 15 June 2011 (UTC)Reply

The deletion of this image because of a 'fake licence' didn't take account of my submission for retaining the photograph : http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons_talk:Deletion_requests/File:Triumph_Tiger_Trail_TR7T_dealer_poster.jpg . I took the photograph- the poster is hanging on my wall in front of me as I type! I sold spare copies of it-hence the eBay photo logo. Kindly restore it- it seems wrong to remove it without question. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Meriden.triumph (talk • contribs)

Please take care about rest of user uploads. Same goes for Commons:Deletion requests/File:25010 113086808712129 106337016053775 165799 181157 n.jpg, Commons:Deletion requests/File:Velasco - alvarado 1973.jpg, Commons:Deletion requests/File:74254 6 91177 6.jpg, Commons:Deletion requests/File:CALAMBA City.jpg. Thank you. --EugeneZelenko (talk) 14:47, 16 June 2011 (UTC)Reply

You have put a copyright warning on my page. I didn't upload that particular picture on wikimedia commons. I just edited it. So why the warning? Citypeek (talk) 08:19, 19 June 2011 (UTC)Reply

You changed the license tag of those files, possibly you can give a source that confirms the copyright status? I mean a source different to [2] (which is not the source and which not confirms anything). --Martin H. (talk) 14:52, 19 June 2011 (UTC)Reply

Well, I don't know where these files where copied from, but the photos were undoubtably made by the United States Department of Energy. Yann (talk) 21:34, 20 June 2011 (UTC)Reply

Hi there, about this file, what do you mean by "the frame is de minimis"? Regards, Vincent Steenberg (talk) 13:25, 21 June 2011 (UTC)Reply

The frame does not create a copyright by itself. Since the painting is old, it can be published on Commons. See COM:DM. Yann (talk) 13:26, 21 June 2011 (UTC)Reply

ok, I see. But this is not a painting, but a en:Diorama. Dioramas are always 3D and so they can't be PD-Art. Vincent Steenberg (talk) 13:29, 21 June 2011 (UTC)Reply

OK, I created a deletion request. Yann (talk) 13:32, 21 June 2011 (UTC)Reply

I don't understand why you are deleting work that is my own. I took the photos with my camera. The rest were photos put out by Dell, they were public promotional photos in sales catalogs and on the Dell Home Website. I tried to put the correct copyright acknowledgements on the photos when I uploaded them. User talk:thomasp94 10:57, 21 June 2011 (UTC)Reply

Yann, otrs:2011062110009876 came in and covers File:Dell XPS Gen4 01.jpg, could you undelete that one? Please tell me when it's restored so I can close the OTRS ticket. Thanks, ←fetchcomms 19:29, 21 June 2011 (UTC)Reply

Done. Yann (talk) 21:50, 21 June 2011 (UTC)Reply

Can you tell me whats wrong with the source to this image? Its a NASA owned public domain image.

Could you please explain this tag? I can't comment if it is true or not, but the uploader claims it is their own work. Why is this not a source? Regards. Materialscientist (talk) 01:31, 23 June 2011 (UTC)Reply

This is a very small photo without any EXIF data, so it looks suspicious, as other uploads of this user. Yann (talk) 13:31, 27 June 2011 (UTC)Reply

Hi. I notice that you deleted my photo of Frank Lucas because it was, according to the Frank Lucas WP article's edit history, a "copyright violation". This must've been a mistake, as it's my photo, and I'm fairly certain that I uploaded it correctly with the Attribution 3.0 license, just as I did with all the other photos I took at the November 2008 Big Apple Convention, such as this one, for example. Why was no notice placed on my talk page? Nightscream (talk) 04:09, 23 June 2011 (UTC)Reply

Can you tell me who tagged it? I don't know they concluded that I was the one doing the copyright violation, since I'm the one who took that photo. Apparently it didn't occur to the person who tagged it that it was the blogspot user who was violating my copyright, even though my name appears in the photo's name in that url you linked to. I've seen hundreds of my photos being used all over the web without proper credit, as indicated by the license, and this appears to be one more.

Question: Can you tell me who tagged it, and also, the blogspot page of the user who put it on their blog? Thanks. Nightscream (talk) 14:13, 27 June 2011 (UTC)Reply

Hey Yann, you left out this one above after deleting File:Unidive 3 boats DI2 Final LR.jpg earlier, from the same company with the "ALL RIGHTS RESERVED" stated on their website. Also, a related but non-notable person's mugshot (File:Edwin Tan.jpg) was marked by me, please speedy it if possible. Note: all the above were used for promotion on EN-WP. Thanks. --Dave1185 (talk) 11:38, 30 June 2011 (UTC)Reply

Bonjour, Je l'avoue mes réponses ont pu être un peu sèches. Cependant, je n'ai pas beaucoup aimé votre suggestion et je pense qu'il est de mon devoir d'informer les gens des risques qu'ils prennent en publiant des photos prises en France. Le dernier rempart pour se protéger contre des poursuite et des actions judiciaires est la bonne foi. Vous avez commis une action répréhensible et quelqu'un vous a mis en demeure, la façon la plus simple de s'en sortir: des excuses et la correction de l'erreur. Cependant, ce que vous avez proposé est à la fois interdit par la loi et hors de la bonne foi. Vous proposez donc de contourner la loi en toute conscience de cause et cela pourrait se retourner contre vous. Il n'est pas acceptable de prendre une photo d'un ensemble d'objets comprenant une oeuvre d'art en clamant la clause de minimis pour ensuite l'utiliser pour montrer cette oeuvre d'art en particulier. Par exemple, plusieurs personnes m'ont dit que cette image était acceptable puisque les éléments qui pourraient être soumis au copyright (genre le logo de LG) sont inclus dans la photo sans qu'il soit possible de les y enlever. Cependant, couper la photo pour faire ressortir le logo de LG et le mettre sur la page de la compagnie serait très certainement une violation du droit d'auteur. De la même façon, prendre une photo d'une vallée et d'un viaduc soumis à un droit d'auteur et l'utiliser avec le sous-titre: Le viaduc de blablabla est à mon avis (et je suis pas mal certain que c'est un avis partagé) tout à fait dans le domaine de la contrefaçon en France. C'est malheureux, nous le déplorons tous, mais c'est comme ça. Recevez mes excuses si vous avez senti que j'ai été rude avec vous. Cependant, j'espère que vous prendrez le temps de lire COM:FOP et COM:DW qui vous expliqueront comment la démarche que vous proposez n'est pas acceptable. De plus, je suis très sensible aux arguments du type fr:Deux faux font un vrai. C'est une façon très peu convaincante d'argumenter et j'aimerais que vous portiez le débat sur des textes de lois, des recommendations ou des règles de Commons pour supporter votre argumentaire. Au plaisir de discuter encore et dans le plus grand respect, Letartean (talk) 12:38, 30 June 2011 (UTC)Reply

Hiyas Yann,

I just saw that at least some of the photos contributed by Wolfgang are now without any license at all. While I totally agree with the invalidity of those license additions by Wolfgang, from my POV the deletion decision itself should've been more a signal to Wolfgang that his additions are a) invalid and b) not wanted on Commons so that he himself would've had a chance to change either the license or remove the images from common. But the status quo isn't really the optimal solution as there's no license at all.

Merci pour ton temps et je te souhait une bon week-end ;)

--Odeesi (talk) 20:46, 1 July 2011 (UTC)Reply

Hey, on that file there was a speedy and a normal DR. Could you close the DR too? Thanks ;) - Amada44  ^{talk to me} 21:02, 2 July 2011 (UTC)Reply

Hi, thank you for reverting vandalism on my talk page.   ■ MMXX  ^talk  10:45, 3 July 2011 (UTC)Reply

Hi Yann, may I ask where you found the information that the stamps discussed in said DR were published in an official gazette? I couldn't find anything related, unfortunately. Thanks, —Pill (talk) 11:32, 3 July 2011 (UTC)Reply

I don't think this information is necessary. See Nobbi's argument, which is just fine for me. BTW that's just what the template says. If you don't agree, open a discussion to change the template. Yann (talk) 13:43, 3 July 2011 (UTC)Reply

• en:File:RSAF Hawker Hunter (front).jpg
• Hi Yann, may I enquire from you as to how to transfer an image I've uploaded to En WP to commons? Please enlighten me, thank you. --Dave1185 (talk) 02:58, 4 July 2011 (UTC)Reply

What you mean by copyvio? What on your conclusion based? Xood (talk) 19:38, 4 July 2011 (UTC)Reply

It is an album cover, so it is obviously not free. Yann (talk) 19:40, 4 July 2011 (UTC)Reply

Good. Then how it can be not free if it's my own work? Xood (talk) 19:58, 4 July 2011 (UTC)Reply

If it is your own work, you need to send a permission, as it was first published outside Commons. This is to protect your rights, otherwise anyone could publish an album cover here, and claim that it is his own work. See COM:OTRS for details. Yann (talk) 20:33, 4 July 2011 (UTC)Reply

Thanks. I'll send a permission. Xood (talk) 20:38, 4 July 2011 (UTC)Reply

Hi Yann, thank you very much! Vadszederke Agnes Modis (talk) 21:57, 4 July 2011 (UTC)Reply

I have expressed my concerns over your closure of Commons:Deletion requests/File:Stamps of Germany (DDR) 1983, MiNr 2830.jpg at Commons:Administrators' noticeboard#Contested closure of a deletion request (decision was to keep). You might like to visit the thread to check that I have not misrepresented your stance in any way. Jappalang (talk) 12:58, 5 July 2011 (UTC)Reply

Why did you deleted speedydelete tags from my pictures? According to point VIII.2. of CC-BY-2.5-PL as the copyright holder I can demand to have my files deleted. License IS irrevocable. Plus quit changing attributions, what the hell? I've done the same thing with other picture and it was deleted within minutes. Files in question:             Vultee (talk) 11:53, 6 July 2011 (UTC)Reply

Untrue. For example I can download and upload files again as CC-BY-2Bulwersator (talk) 12:17, 6 July 2011 (UTC)Reply

Please, undelete File:Joanna_Mucha.jpg Bulwersator (talk) 12:41, 6 July 2011 (UTC)Reply

Vultee, I assume you meant to say that the license is revocable, but it's not. Section VIII 2 of the Polish version of CC-by-2.5 corresponds to Section 7 b of the English version. That section says that the license is perpetual (or irrevocable, meaning it cannot be revoked). It says that you can stop distributing the work, but that you cannot stop Commons or anyone else from distributing the work under the original license. —LX (talk, contribs) 12:56, 6 July 2011 (UTC)Reply

Right, LX. Undeleted File:Joanna Mucha.jpg and also reverted the license change there. --Martin H. (talk) 13:26, 6 July 2011 (UTC)Reply

Hello Yann, could you please comment at Commons:Deletion requests/File:17723 EscherMuseum.jpg? Thank you. Cheers --Saibo (Δ) 01:57, 7 July 2011 (UTC)Reply

Bonjour, vous avez demandé le retrait de l'image File:Béatrice Tillier.png sur la page Béatrice Tillier. Pourtant, j'ai pris moi-même cette photo, j'ai donc le droit de l'utiliser. comment la remettre en ligne ou accéder à toutes les permissions ? D'avance Merci

Orzaba

Bonjour,

Je suis l'animatrice du projet Wiki-Brest et je me demandais si vous habitiez ou étiez fortement attaché au Finistère. Je vous pose cette question car nous sommes en train de créer une communauté de wikipédiens liés au Pays de Brest.

Cordialement. Gaëlle FILY (talk) 09:39, 11 July 2011 (UTC)Reply

Désolé, non. Actuellement, j'habite en Inde, donc pas exactement dans le Finistère. ;o) Yann (talk) 05:30, 12 July 2011 (UTC)Reply

this: Commons:Deletion requests/File:Tg.jpg - something went wrong ? Cholo Aleman (talk) 19:26, 14 July 2011 (UTC)Reply

Hi Yann, after the uploader's request at COM:FORUM[3] and some discussion with him, I've temp-undeleted File:Carl-Reuther-Berufskolleg-Hennef.jpg. The uploader then uploaded the native image version with full EXIF data, which makes his own-work-claim credible. --Túrelio (talk) 10:05, 19 July 2011 (UTC)Reply

Very good! Yann (talk) 15:41, 23 July 2011 (UTC)Reply

Hi, please do not delete file redirects (resulting from renames or duplicate deletions) like you did at File:P Art2.png. These should normally be kept, as they allow downstream reusers to find the original file - who knows who might have a link to http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:P_Art2.png ? The chief exceptions are for recent uploads, and misleading redirects (mouse.jpg to cat.jpg), and shouldn't be tagged with {{Speedy}}, nevermind deleted.--Nilfanion (talk) 22:40, 23 July 2011 (UTC)Reply

What the hell does your no valid reasons mean? What is now the educational purpose? --Yikrazuul (talk) 11:39, 24 July 2011 (UTC)Reply

Dear Yann:

I was surprised to see that the image http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Cornelius_Castoriadis_with_dancer-choreographer_Clara_Gibson_Maxwell.jpg#file which you had moved for reasons that I didn't fully understand, has now been edited to crop out one of the two people in the image: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Cornelius_Castoriadis.jpg

I thought that I was giving people authorization to use the image but not to cut it up (alter it). Did something happen when you changed the location? Or did I make a mistake originally? It makes no sense to cut out one of the two individuals and still say that this is a portrait of the two.* Can this be cleared up so that the picture remains intact, as I had originally intended? Thanks in advance for your help. I'm no computer wizard.

Sincerely, David Ames Curtis

• "I have known Ms Clara Gibson Maxwell for over 11 years now. I have followed continually her work, and watched all the performances she gave in the Paris area. We have had extended and frequent discussions relative to her conception of dance, of its relation to the whole of culture and of its possible role in the contemporary social and historical situation. During her performances, I have been impressed by the strength of her technique, the elegance of her movements and the richness and originality of the choreography. ...I have been equally impressed, during our discussions, by the solidity, relevance and incisive character of her thinking about contemporary dance. Being myself a philosopher..., I listened with attention to what she had to say and found myself in agreement with her most of the time. ....La Cartésienne was a brilliant and effective illustration of the manner she is working to weave together philosophical reflection and contemporary dance." - Cornelius Castoriadis (1922-1997), Director of Studies, École des Hautes Études en Sciences Sociales

Bonjour, J'ai renommé votre photo pour lui donner un nom plus parlant. En déposant votre photo sur Commons, vous autorisez explicitement les modifications qui peuvent lui être apportées. C'est le principe même d'une licence libre. Vous avez aussi donné l'autorisation de la copier et de la vendre. Avez-vous lu le message que vous envoyé ? Cordialement, Yann (talk) 17:25, 30 July 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for this response. My intention was to allow use of the photo, not to have it cut up so that it the result contradicts the title. How do I do that? Aren't there different types of licenses? I thought I had done that, but I'm not sure where the original page is anymore, as it was moved. Sorry, again, but as I said I'm no computer expert. Also, I never received any notification of this unauthorized change to the image. Why is that? I thought I clicked "watch this page." Doesn't that do it? Sincerely, David Ames Curtis

Looking forward to hearing back from you. I notice that at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Cornelius_Castoriadis.jpg the attribution has changed so that the title has been altered, too. Is that permissible? Sincerely, David Ames CUrtis

Commons:Deletion requests/File:FOURNIER DE LA MOTTE.jpg Hi Yann, your deletion closure is a bit wrong. ;) It was not "deleted" as you write. If you intend to keep it please state on the file page why it is pd-old-70. Cheers --Saibo (Δ) 04:05, 31 July 2011 (UTC)Reply

Oops!... Thanks for checking. Yann (talk) 04:08, 31 July 2011 (UTC)Reply

Well, you changed the deletion request closure, correct now. But you missed my last sentence here: "If you intend to keep it please state on the file page why it is pd-old-70.". --Saibo (Δ) 00:41, 1 August 2011 (UTC)Reply

Umm.. Yann, sorry - did you read my last comment at Commons:Deletion requests/File:Spy Urinal.jpg It is a room inside a building (at least we do not know it is right in the middle of a marketplace). FOP in Germany is only outdoors, as I said...! Cheers --Saibo (Δ) 00:41, 1 August 2011 (UTC)Reply

See also Commons talk:Deletion requests/File:Spy Urinal.jpg --Saibo (Δ) 01:00, 1 August 2011 (UTC)Reply

Why did you delete the photo File:Gpdl5.png if I did not infringe any copyright. This photo is mine. --MarioNone (talk) 20:11, 31 July 2011 (UTC)Reply

About the photo File:Serafino Famà.jpg: this photo was delivered to the undersigned by the victim's family, daughter in particular, for this was uploaded. Pending immediate information, see you soon.--Wildflower78 (talk) 07:23, 1 August 2011 (UTC)Reply

Heya Yann, Sorry to bother you with this newbie question, but where do I ask to rename images? I have uploaded two images, in 2010, one with a Spelling error, and the other with a Generic name. I want to correct the former and specify something in the latter. How do I go about doing this? Regards, --Rsrikanth05 (talk) 15:21, 2 August 2011 (UTC)Reply

i am completely new here. & this place being bit dangerous because of copyrights issue, am not understanding a thing. Can you help me by replying here? Is Nehru's independence speech "Tryst with destiny" now out of bounds of copyrights as it is more than 60yrs old? Can i just download it from anywhere & upload it here? -Animeshkulkarni (talk) 17:38, 5 August 2011 (UTC)Reply

Hi Animeshkulkarni, maybe I can help, too: I guess you are talking about Jawaharlal Nehru's speech Tryst with destiny? The speech itself could still be copyrighted if it does not count as a government's work. Are you talking of a recording? When was it made and published? If it was made and published 1947 then the recording is out of copyright.

The thoughts before are just about India. According to our copyright rules we need to obey the US law as well. The recording probably is not copyrighted but the text could be. I suggest you ask at COM:VPC - that is the correct place for such questions - not talk pages of individuals. Just copy my answer over to VPC and add explanations what you mean exactly. Cheers --Saibo (Δ) 19:49, 8 August 2011 (UTC)Reply

Nous somme en train d'organiser une collecte de photos afin d'illustrer les 89 communes du Pays de Brest sur Commons. Certaines ne rassemblent aucune photo, d'autres moins de 20 et quelques unes sont largement représentées. Retrouvez ici la page listant la quantité de photos pour chaque commune.

En consultant vos contributions sur Commons je me suis rendue compte que vous publiez des photos sur ce territoire. Je vous invite à participer à cette action si vous n'en avez pas déjà connaissance.

• Consulter l'article de lancement de la collecte
• Consulter l'article annonçant 60 photos de plus sur Commons concernant le Pays
• Aujourd'hui plus de 380 nouvelles photo

Rejoignez aussi la liste brest@wikimedia.fr. Cette liste permettra de communiquer sur des actions telles que cette collecte, de réfléchir ensemble sur d’autres projets comme Brest 2012 et de proposer des rencontres. Merci de me faire savoir si vous souhaitez être inscrit, car pour l’instant seuls les abonnés de l’association Wikimedia France peuvent directement s’abonner à la liste.

Je vous invite également à participer au projet Wiki-Brest, site participatif sur le patrimoine et le vivre ensemble au Pays de Brest http://www.wiki-brest.net --Gaëlle FILY (talk) 13:11, 8 August 2011 (UTC)Reply

We wanted to let you know that we've used one of your pictures in a project of ours: http://litpics.tumblr.com/post/8400051121/lit-the-prose-works-of-jonathan-swift-d-d

We created a computer program to generate random pairings of sentences from public domain texts and public domain / creative commons images. Some of the pictures we've selected come from the Wikipedia Commons. All the pictures we select ourselves, but the pairings and the text are random. Of these pairings that are generated, we only post the most interesting combinations.

We welcome any feedback about our site.

Thanks for sharing your pictures,
Samantha and Patrick

blog: http://litpics.tumblr.com/
email: litpicsblog@gmail.com
twitter: http://twitter.com/litpics

Litpics (talk) 21:33, 8 August 2011 (UTC)Reply

I can't see how you can accept the line of reasoning that Tomascastelazo used here. He says, fundamentally, that anything in public is fair game, whether permanent or temporary and whether the object photographed was created with the permission of the copyright holder or not. He goes on to say that if the copyright holder has a problem with it, it is up to them to sue, not up to us to worry about it.

If we accept his reasoning, then anything is fair game. All FOP discussions go out the window, because he argues that there is (or should be) FOP everywhere for everything.

I usually shrug and walk away when one of my DRs is closed as a keep, but I'd like you to reconsider this decision. If it stands, then every single FOP discussion we have from people familiar with Commons is going to cite it as a reason keep an image regardless of the FOP rule that applies.     Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 10:48, 25 August 2011 (UTC)Reply

I agree with Tomas in that some deletions because of copyright violation are going too far. This particular case is interesting, and I have very serious doubt that it would be considered as a copyright violation by a court. That's all. If you think I am wrong, reopen it, I won't argue about it, but Tomas has a point. Yann (talk) 16:53, 25 August 2011 (UTC)Reply

How, then, is it different from any sculpture in the USA or France, where we regularly delete images? He's not claiming FOP here, just that anything in public should be fair game. I agree that in an ideal world, that might be a good thing, but that is not the law anywhere.

As for a court decision, I strongly suspect that the balloon itself is unlicensed, so I think that if Nickelodeon discovered it, they would be able to stop its public use immediately.      Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 21:41, 25 August 2011 (UTC)Reply

Why don't you ask them, instead of making assumptions? Yann (talk) 06:30, 26 August 2011 (UTC)Reply

I don't like to stir up trouble for third parties. Although I don't think we can keep the image here, the balloon is fun. Why would I want, for the sake of one image, to ask Nickelodeon, "Hey, does this balloon have a license to your copyright?" If they don't have actual notice of its existence, they can ignore it, but once someone notifies them -- and it becomes part of the record here -- then they have to act against it.

And, of course, it's not my job to determine that the balloon does have a license -- it is the uploader's job, but he doesn't think it's important to our keeping the image.      Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 11:10, 26 August 2011 (UTC)Reply

Copyright law, as any other laws, is not physics or maths. There are very few black and white spots, but a lot of grey shades. I think that on Commons we apply copyright law as it were a hard science. It is not, as I have learnt during the last 15 years I have worked with Internet publication. Applying copyright law like hard science leads to wrong results as the subtilities are lost in the process. Regards, Yann (talk) 14:54, 26 August 2011 (UTC)Reply

Hi, may I know the reason behind the deletion of this file. You said it's copy-vio, but how did you prove that? --Vensatry (talk) 03:47, 27 August 2011 (UTC)Reply

Hello, Actually it works the other way: you have to prove that the image is free. In this case, there is a strong suspicious that it is not, as it was already published here. Regards, Yann (talk) 06:12, 27 August 2011 (UTC)Reply

Fine. Well I have a doubt like how do we conclude if an image is a copy vio. Sometimes the websites could have copied from WP itself right? --Vensatry (talk) 08:33, 27 August 2011 (UTC)Reply

Would you kindly have a look at this? Cordially, SergeWoodzing (talk) 13:57, 27 August 2011 (UTC)Reply

Hello. I have restored an image you speedy deleted. I believe the speedy delete tag was placed on the image inappropriately; see File talk:Dianne Feinstein 1994.jpg. Cheers, Infrogmation (talk) 20:12, 27 August 2011 (UTC)Reply

OK fine. Yann (talk) 20:14, 27 August 2011 (UTC)Reply

Hello Yann.

I would like to draw your kind attention for the deletion requests of the following files from the Commons:

• Commons:Deletion_requests/File:Urdu_wall.jpg
• Commons:Deletion_requests/File:Urdu_in_Devanagari.png
• Commons:Deletion_requests/File:India_Hindi_INDIA.jpg
• Commons:Deletion_requests/File:RubyLalitKolhe's_Hindi_Marriage_Certificate.jpg

Regards, Hindustanilanguage (talk) 08:04, 2 September 2011 (UTC)Reply

Please take care about second file mentioned in request. Thank you. --EugeneZelenko (talk) 15:00, 4 September 2011 (UTC)Reply

  Done Yann (talk) 15:04, 4 September 2011 (UTC)Reply

Bonjour. Je crois que tu viens d'oublier de signer ta proposition QI du temple hindou...--Jebulon (talk) 15:30, 4 September 2011 (UTC)Reply

  Done Yann (talk) 15:32, 4 September 2011 (UTC)Reply

I would ask that you reconsider your keep here - llanfair.....goch is NOT the name of the village, the village is named Llanfairpwll, as is the station in reality. -mattbuck (Talk) 19:17, 4 September 2011 (UTC)Reply

Hi Matt. You should read en:Llanfairpwllgwyngyll. Yann (talk) 19:21, 4 September 2011 (UTC)Reply

Dear Yann, this morning I made an upload of image File:GKlogo2.jpg and only after upload I realized that I chose the wrong option. I kindly request you to delete the image so that I can re-upload it the correct way, including the necessary autorizations. I apologize for the inconvenience and thank for your help. (Brunoptsem (talk) 17:34, 5 September 2011 (UTC))Reply

Hi! I got this in my watchlist:

• (Deletion log); 10:47 . . Yann (talk | contribs) deleted "File:BSicon exvSTRqgr-STRqgl.svg" (Copyright violation)
• (Deletion log); 10:46 . . Yann (talk | contribs) deleted "File:BSicon exvABZer.svg" (Copyright violation)

I know what these are (were) — two of the many BSicons I created, which got properly renamed by someone else, leaving those unused redirects you now deleted. Good that you deleted them, but could we not have them tagged as copyvio? These are usually considered PD-shape or some such, and the reason for deletion was «Unused Redirect». I dont want to have reds in my contributions list marked as copyvio, neither the rest of the BSicon people, I’m sure. --Tuvalkin (talk) 11:17, 6 September 2011 (UTC)Reply

OK done. Yann (talk) 17:50, 6 September 2011 (UTC)Reply

Many thanks! --Tuvalkin (talk) 22:07, 6 September 2011 (UTC)Reply

Hello Yann, I'm Cristina and my nickname is LaZingo. I've uploaded the images regarding the Remo Bianco's voice that you deleted because of the copyright violation. Maybe I made a mistake because of my inexperience, but I've got the permission to use these images. The rights are owned by Remo Bianco Foundation and I've obtained the permission from the President, Mr. Riccardo Gianni. With his authorization I have had an OTRS ticket from it.wiki and I was thinking that this could be give me the possibility to upload the images on other projects and on Commons too. I'm very sorry for this inconvenience, could you please help me to solve this issue? Many thanks in advance. LaZingo

It seems you deleted the arms of the West London Free School. I tried to get the right tag/license when uploading it, which may be the same category of usage as e.g. File:MG_Rover_Corporate_Logo.jpg and File:London_School_of_Economics_crest.png. Do you agree? Could you help to load this picture again, which is used as an illustration in en:West_London_Free_Schooll ?

Best regards, User:Nepomuk_3

Upload this logo as fair use on Wikipedia, not here. Yann (talk) 07:43, 7 September 2011 (UTC)Reply

Thanks for the tip, User:Nepomuk_3

Please take care about rest of user uploads. Thank you. --EugeneZelenko (talk) 14:55, 7 September 2011 (UTC)Reply

"Error creating thumbnail: Invalid thumbnail parameters or PNG file with more than 12.5 million pixels". Can you please help fix this error? Please note that the files are less the 1 MB and are less than 5,500 X 4,500 PX. This happened when common had that problem with the "Upload Wizard ". thanks in advance. -- The Egyptian Liberal (talk) 09:51, 8 September 2011 (UTC)Reply

I did and it didnt work out. Can you delete both of them and I will upload them again? thanks in advance -- The Egyptian Liberal (talk) 14:56, 8 September 2011 (UTC)Reply

Hi,
Could you remove my old image? File:Renault thalia.jpg
I don't want this photo on commons...
Konradr (talk) 14:30, 8 September 2011 (UTC)Reply

You deleted File:Horloge-republicaine0.jpg as copyvio suspect, but analogous copyvio suspect File:Horloge-republicaine1.jpg was finally kept at Commons:Deletion requests/Image:Horloge-republicaine1.jpg. So please undelete File:Horloge-republicaine0.jpg. 79.191.246.4 11:18, 10 September 2011 (UTC)Reply

Actually, Commons:Deletion requests/File:Horloge-republicaine1.jpg is still open (that's a new DR; I admit I hadn't seen the prior one when opening this.) And the uploader of File:Horloge-republicaine0.jpg as well as the IP above are ban-evading socks of User:Wikinger and should be met with nothing but block-revert-delete-ignore. I'd strongly recommend leaving this file deleted irrespective of the outcome of the DR for the others; it's block evasion, it's a distorting and falsifying crop and therefore has no educational value (out of project scope), and its only conceivable use is disruption by Wikinger on other projects where he is likewise banned. Fut.Perf. ☼ 14:09, 10 September 2011 (UTC)Reply

I added the 2nd image to the DR. It will be dealt with when the DR is closed. Best regards, Yann (talk) 14:32, 10 September 2011 (UTC)Reply

Not sure if that is the best thing to do. File 1 was a good-faith upload with a genuine educational use on several wikis, there is currently a good-faith effort at procuring a free release underway, and deletion depends solely on the copyright issue. File 0 was uploaded by a banned user, has serious issues beyond the copyright question, and never had any good-faith use on any project; its very presence here on Commons serves no other purpose than to invite yet more disruption by sock accounts trying to insert it on projects where they have no business doing anything. Fut.Perf. ☼ 14:39, 10 September 2011 (UTC)Reply

Salut Yann,
Il me semble que les déplacements que tu as effectués concernant les pages Commons:Deletion requests/File:One eskimO.jpg et Commons:Deletion requests/Commons:Deletion requests/File:One eskimO.jpg rendent la situation incompréhensible. La DR concernant le fichier File:One eskimO.jpg semble par le fait même être devenue introuvable. Si on la cherche on tombe maintenant plutôt sur la DR de la DR que tu as mise à la place de la DR du fichier. Serait-il possible, s'il-te-plaît, de remettre les choses dans leur état antérieur ? -- Asclepias (talk) 13:19, 10 September 2011 (UTC)Reply

Hi Yann,

I just found out that you triggered the deletion of an image I uploaded to illustrate an article in the German WP (Unity (Spielengine)). The image "UnityScreenshot.jpg" was a screenshot of the Unity GUI I took myself, the contents inside is my own work.

I do understand the term "Derivative work of non free content" but I doubt it is applicable in this case: The Unity software is free to use for own (even commercial) works. This is explicitly stated in the EULA of the software: http://unity3d.com/unity/unity-end-user-license-3.x Would you please reconsider the removal of the image?

Kind regards, --Tmfroehlich (talk) 21:37, 11 September 2011 (UTC)Reply

Hello Yann,

I would appreciate you reconsidering your close of the deletion discussion for this image http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Korean_Vulva2.jpg

The reason that we have deletion discussions is too consider whether there is something particular about an image that we need to consider.

It would be very unethical for someone to take this picture and upload it without this persons consent. We do not know whether the person gave consent or not. It was taken in a private location (bedroom) and there no indication that the person was aware that the image was being taken. We are at risk of exploiting this person. And if someone else uses it they are at risk of exploiting this person, too.

The spirit of the Com:PEOPLE is that people have the right to control the way that they are portrayed. While often having the face not appear in the image can stop the exploitation, that would not be true in this instance. She would be easily identifiable to herself and other people who knew her well, or had access to images of her body or her bedroom, or knew what they looked like.

Keep in mind that this is a poor quality image that is not in use. So, the deletion will not cause any disruption to any articles. And it is very replaceable if someone would want an image of a nude female drying her hair in heels.

If this person was to contact OTRS, I have no doubt that we would agree to remove it in a heartbeat. But why should we make someone contact us to get it removed if they did not give consent. Everyday that it is on site we are giving people a free license to copy it when we have no idea whether it is truly free to use.

For these reasons, I ask you to reconsider and delete the image. Thank, FloNight♥♥♥ 00:23, 12 September 2011 (UTC)Reply

Thank you for reconsidering your close and deleting the image. I appreciate the work that you do on Commons closing the deletion discussions that reduce the back log. FloNight♥♥♥ 16:06, 12 September 2011 (UTC)Reply

Please see the Talk Page of the uploader who obviously had some copyright problems in the past. Similar images ("korean vulva 3" or stuff like that) have been deleted. Adornix (talk) 09:18, 12 September 2011 (UTC)Reply

File:Korean_Vulva3.jpg was not deleted for copyright issue. Yann (talk) 10:39, 12 September 2011 (UTC)Reply

Hi, i'm trying to put the albums covers for A Hope for Home on their album articles but I can't re-upload the photos because they've been deleted. I need help. MatthewCJones (talk) 01:17, 12 September 2011 (UTC)Reply

--. HombreDHojalata.^talk 19:10, 13 September 2011 (UTC)Reply

Hi. Normally I do not care about BS-icons, but there is something mysterious with File:BSicon uABZa.svg. You deleted it with the motivation that there was no file there. Yet the file was in use, see sv:template:Linjekarta London Tramlink (and also in sv:Göteborgs spårväg). So I am puzzled. Is there a glitch in the database? Is it possible to undelete a file that does not "exist"? /Pieter Kuiper (talk) 21:17, 13 September 2011 (UTC)Reply

It was a redirect tagged by deletion with {{speedy|un-needed redirect}}. The file was moved here: File:BSicon uABZq+lr.svg. Yann (talk) 21:21, 13 September 2011 (UTC)Reply

Well, I could not replace this with the new name, so I restored this file pending enquiries. Yann (talk) 21:28, 13 September 2011 (UTC)Reply

Thanks. I fixed the template. Now I will try to locate the other one. (Boys and their naming conventions :) ) /Pieter Kuiper (talk) 21:32, 13 September 2011 (UTC) Replacements done on svwp. Thanks again. /Pieter Kuiper (talk) 21:35, 13 September 2011 (UTC)Reply

I was the one who had tagged it. For some reason the uses on svwp didn't show up under "what links here". Now it really is un-needed. Useddenim (talk) 00:31, 14 September 2011 (UTC)Reply

Du coup, je fais quoi ? SI ? Comment ? {{speedy deletion}} ? Trizek ^{here or on fr:wp} 10:18, 14 September 2011 (UTC)Reply

Mouais. Élément d'un ensemblearchitectural + typo, on en a tués pour moins que ça. N'hésite pas à me dire qu'il y a d'autres RFD de ma part qui ne te conviennent pas, histoire que j'affine mes sélections. Trizek ^{here or on fr:wp} 10:24, 14 September 2011 (UTC)Reply

 

J'aurai viré celle-ci, car trop proche du sujet. ->

Merci pour l'avis en tout cas. Trizek ^{here or on fr:wp} 10:41, 14 September 2011 (UTC)Reply

Dear Yann, you've deleted file [Evro-2012.jpg] related to Borys Kolesnikov’s article. According to your explanation there was no permission for them. It should be some mistake, because I contacted the owner on August, 25 and she gave the permission for every single photo I uploaded. I resent her permission with licensing information on August, 29 to e-mail: permissions@wikimedia.org. Here is the full list of the files which were getting the permission: File:Електропотяг Hyundai .jpg File:Борис Колесніков.jpg. File:Віце-прем'єр-міністр України - Міністр інфраструктури України.jpg File:Evro-2012.jpg File:Donetsk.jpg File:Evro-objects.jpg File:Evro preparation.jpg File:Air2011.jpg File:Konf.jpg File:Kolesnikov politik.jpg

Please, restore the photo, which you've deleted:

Thank you in advance for your cooperation.Miu2010 (talk) 15:12, 15 September 2011 (UTC)Reply

You haven't reverted anything. I already fixed that problem. I reviewed about 10 pictures and then I got an edit conflict because of somebody who decided to add one picture every time and annoy other users. So I copy paste my version and then fixed the page 2 minutes later...--Someone35 (talk) 11:31, 16 September 2011 (UTC)Reply

Could you please explain your closure of Commons:Deletion requests/File:T-54A or T-55.jpg?

Why wouldn't an image of an armored vehicle be in scope? Geo Swan (talk) 17:41, 18 September 2011 (UTC)Reply

This is essentially a photo of 2 girls enjoying a ride on a tank. I don't think that's encyclopedic. Beside that, there are probably minor, and we would need the parents' consent. Yann (talk) 17:43, 18 September 2011 (UTC)Reply

The image I submitted to be used for Perfume_(group) (File:Cars_2_Premiere.jpg) was deleted. I would like some clarification on the reasons why it was deleted on copyright purposes, seeing as how I took the picture myself with my own camera. If there is any advice on ways for me to reverse these copyright claims, that would be much appreciated.

Yann,

could you please schedule an immediate request for deletion of File:UnityScreenshot.jpg which I uploaded? There where issues on derived work with my screenshot. I order to avoid any copyright problems, I'd like to get the image removed. Once this is done, I'll contact the vendor of the software directly to get a written permission to publish it and upload it again, if granted. Thank you for your fair treatment of the case and please accept my apologies for the trouble. It was my first try uploading an image.

Kind regards,

--Tmfroehlich (talk) 00:23, 24 September 2011 (UTC)Reply

Vous venez de supprimer le lien du logo du CFPC. Je vous signale que j'ai dès Vendredi envoyé un message à permission-commons, corrobé dans l'heure par le secrétaire-général du dit-comité. Néanmoins vous nous avez rendu service dans la mesure où la license commons ne serait pas adaptée aux logos. Pouriez-vous avoir de surcroît la gentillesse de supprimer le fichier source sur commons, ce qui semble une condition préalable à une importation sur Wikipédia-France ? Merci d'avance--Claude PIARD (talk) 19:49, 9 October 2011 (UTC)Reply

du hast in der letzten Nacht mehrere Bilder von http://pgengler.net u.a. File:Amtrak EMD AEM-7 in Elizabeth, New Jersey.jpg gelöscht. Zum Zeitpunkt des Uploads standen die Bilder unter einer freien Lizenz auf der Website des Autors. Durch deine Löschungen hast du jetzt dankenswerter Weise dafür gesorgt, dass freies Bildmaterial wieder unfrei wurde. Diene Admintätigkeit schädigt Commons. Liesel (talk) 05:02, 11 October 2011 (UTC)Reply

Hi Yann,

please define and clarify what here is the problem. --Wladyslaw (talk) 09:26, 11 October 2011 (UTC)Reply

Hi. I think the deletion was a mistake. I uploaded the file on Commons since Template:PD-UA-exempt provides that "symbols and signs of enterprises, institutions and organizations" are not under copyright. FC Sumy is registered in Ukraine as LLC (Товариство з обмеженою відповідальністю, see uk:Суми (футбольний клуб). And the user, who listed the file for deletion, changed the correct PD-UA-exempt for "non-free logo" without giving a reason. --Blacklake (talk) 10:56, 11 October 2011 (UTC)Reply

Re: http://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=File:Guyana_Airways_Douglas_DC-3_Wheatley.jpg&action=delete just asking why you deleted it? russavia (talk) 18:51, 11 October 2011 (UTC)Reply

Hi, can you provide context for the NJ transit deletions? Specifically, File:NJT ALP-44.jpg, File:NJT Arrows III ALP-44.jpg, File:ALP-44 IMG 1573.jpg, and File:NJT PL42AC.jpg. How are these copyvios? Thanks. --ChrisRuvolo (t) 19:47, 11 October 2011 (UTC)Reply

I tagged those as copyvios because the source link provided had a license of no commercial use. Train2104 (talk) 23:58, 11 October 2011 (UTC)Reply

Here's a link sample. "All photos © 2001–2009 Phil Gengler You are, of course, welcome to use these images for personal or other fair uses. " implies NC. Train2104 (talk) 00:01, 12 October 2011 (UTC)Reply

Thanks. Do we know that Phil Gengler was not the uploader? Shouldn't we have made an OTRS request instead since he has a "contact me" link about image use? Either way, I would prefer if this kind of thing was not speedied without any discussion or trail of what happened other than a deletion log saying copyvio. Maybe policy doesn't back that up, I'm not sure. Cheers. --ChrisRuvolo (t) 15:52, 12 October 2011 (UTC)Reply

Hier im Webarchive [4] sieht man doch die ursprüngliche Lizenzierung als cc-by 2.5. Da Webseiteninhaber diese Lizenz inzwischen geändert hat, ist noch lange kein Grund hier irgendwelche Dateien zu löschen. Das hätte sich Phil Gengler vorher überlegen sollen. Eine Lizenz kann man nicht wiederrufen. Liesel (talk) 17:31, 13 October 2011 (UTC)Reply

Thank you, Liesel. Yann, can you restore these? --ChrisRuvolo (t) 21:21, 13 October 2011 (UTC)Reply

Listed at Commons:Undeletion_requests/Current_requests#deletion_of_cc-by-2.5_licensed_images_from_Phil_Gengler. --ChrisRuvolo (t) 13:20, 14 October 2011 (UTC)Reply

hi! i take this picture when he come here to mexico in a concert,how can i prove it? the picture is mine--Augusto664 (talk) 08:45, 12 October 2011 (UTC)Reply

hi again! thank you very much with this,can i or you change the name of the file? farrukopr-farrukoMX?thanks--Augusto664 (talk) 02:09, 13 October 2011 (UTC)Reply

Hello Yann! I see you deleted the above image. Well, the uploader User:Siradia is also the copyright holder of the photograph in flickr. The user has sent me a flickrmail. Should I forward it to OTRS or something? Thanks in advance. Novice7 (talk) 15:55, 12 October 2011 (UTC)Reply

FYI, I noticed this as well and just requested undeletion over here and changed the license on flickr as well. --Siradia (talk) 02:17, 13 October 2011 (UTC)Reply

Thanks for restoring the photo Yann! Novice7 (talk) 12:17, 13 October 2011 (UTC)Reply

Salut, comme tu es l'auteur de ce modèle et qu'en plus tu es administrateur, je subodore que tu es la meilleur personne à contacter. Voilà le problème : ce modèle permet de faire des liens vers Gallica, ce qui est utile en soi ; malheureusement, ce type de lien semble obsolète sur Gallica, et il faudrait préférer les liens en ark:/ (cf. modèle ARK-BNF) qui sont plus pérennes. D'autre part, la plupart des images qui utilisent ce modèle n'ont pas de document en argument, ce qui a pour effet de générer un lien cassé qui pollue les recherches de liens externes sur Gallica. (En fait, je suis en train de tenter de mettre des liens ARK semi-automatiquement sur les documents originaires de Gallica, et ça n'est pas de la tarte, pour le moins.) Y a-t-il moyen de réparer ça ? Pmx (talk) 19:55, 16 October 2011 (UTC)Reply

Hi, I'm hoping you can help with the above file. It is a wonderful drawing, uploaded by the artist. I think it would be essential to get OTRS permission for this just to be sure all will be ok in the future. On the talkpage, User:Tsaag Valren (not the uploader) added a note saying to contact him with questions, and I did. He came back (on my talkpage) saying that he would be better at communicating in French (as would the author). My French doesn't stretch as far as that - Would you be able to look after this? Thanks if you can & let me know if not, and I'll see if I can find another admin. Kind regards, -- Deadstar (msg) 07:51, 17 October 2011 (UTC)Reply

You deleted MY OWN PICTURE!

I was the one who took the picture, uploaded to www.amusemnetparkauthority.com, and then I uploaded it to Wiki Commons. I DO NOT NEED PERMISSION for my own WORK!!

I am going to upload it again since it is my OWN work! --Jpp858 (talk) 04:07, 22 October 2011 (UTC)Reply

Category:France_FOP_cases_which_did_result_in_deletion has been listed at Commons:Categories for discussion so that the community can discuss ways in which it should be changed. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry. If you created this category, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for discussion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with it. If the category is up for deletion because it has been superseded, consider the notion that although the category may be deleted, your hard work (which we all greatly appreciate) lives on in the new category. In all cases, please do not take the category discussion personally. It is never intended as such. Thank you! čeština ∙ Deutsch ∙ English ∙ español ∙ français ∙ italiano ∙ magyar ∙ Nederlands ∙ português ∙ polski ∙ sicilianu ∙ slovenščina ∙ Tiếng Việt ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца) ∙ македонски ∙ русский ∙ українська ∙ ತುಳು ∙ ಕನ್ನಡ ∙ ไทย ∙ עברית ∙ 日本語 ∙ 中文 ∙ +/−

Nyttend (talk) 22:32, 24 October 2011 (UTC)Reply

Could you un-delete the file: File:Northcape1.jpg ? We've received just a valid agreement for CC-BY-SA 3.0 licence from the author. Thanks in adavnce.

Polimerek (talk) 09:56, 26 October 2011 (UTC)Reply

OTRS approval has still not been received for images that this template applies to. If none is received they will soon be deleted. – Adrignola talk 20:00, 29 October 2011 (UTC)Reply

Hi! I am a bit confused about the authorship of File:Le wwf columbus navire ambassadeur de l ong jette l ancre a brest 2008.jpg - it says "yann". Is this your photo? Is the license correct? /Pieter Kuiper (talk) 15:32, 30 October 2011 (UTC)Reply

No, this has nothing to do with me, although I like the image. Yann (talk) 17:31, 31 October 2011 (UTC)Reply

Yes, the dolphins and the WWF panda, but this photo might be a bit too good to be free. /Pieter Kuiper (talk) 12:19, 1 November 2011 (UTC)Reply

Hi! Would it be a problem if you upload your version as new file? Greets --AleXXw 18:46, 1 November 2011 (UTC)Reply

Not at all. Yann (talk) 19:40, 1 November 2011 (UTC)Reply

FYI, I've responded to your comment. Colin (talk) 08:26, 3 November 2011 (UTC)Reply

Hallo Yann, just a note (because you will not notice otherwise): you missed to click the "keep" near the file name in the DR for File:Joe Napolitano Quantum Leap.jpg ‎ and File:Coming out !.jpg - both still had the deletion template on the file page. :-) Cheers --Saibo (Δ) 17:57, 3 November 2011 (UTC)Reply

Back in june you vandalized a DRq I put on this file because you didn’t understand why this file gotta go. Well, I tagged it for deletion, again. This time make sure you access its context before deciding my DRqs are dumb. Thanksverymuch. -- Tuválkin ✉ 11:20, 5 November 2011 (UTC)Reply

Hi, Since you mention it on the VP, I took the permission to ask you a question about videos. ;o)

I made some short videos with my compact Nikon Coolpick 3100, and I would like to upload them to Commons, but some are much too big, even after conversion to Theora. See Category:Videos and sounds by Yann Forget and my questions here: Commons:Graphic Lab/Video and sound workshop‎. The biggest is 663 MB in AVI and still 133 MB in Theora.

Thanks for your help. Yann (talk) 17:32, 4 November 2011 (UTC)Reply

There are a few opportunity to bring it up to commons: you may upload it in 2 or more parts (you can cut it in virtualdub using the <- symbol for the beginning of a part and -> for the end, push delete to cut it off, save it as avi1. Reload the source and cut of the first part and save it as avi2). Or resize it analogue the procedure described at the village pump. A command line saved as batch (~.bat) like

ffmpeg2theora.exe x-720 y-576 %1 --aspect 16:9 --index-interval 150 --keyint 300 --videobitrate 1200 --two-pass --soft-target --speedlevel 0 --audiobitrate 64
should do such a job. If the resulting ogv looks to bad, simply open the batch and replace the parameter videobitrate 1200 with 1500 or higher. --Pristurus (talk) 00:34, 5 November 2011 (UTC)Reply

Thanks. I will try that. Yann (talk) 11:15, 5 November 2011 (UTC)Reply

Hi, I'm wondering why you decided to block Amanda123 for a week for what does not appear to be anything very serious. Why are you calling this vandalism? Is there some previous action I don't know of? -mattbuck (Talk) 19:56, 6 November 2011 (UTC)Reply

An IP created 2 DR without any reason, which I deleted. Then 12 minutes later, this account recreated the same DR, again without reason. These files are obviously not copyright violation, there are from NARA. So I think creating these DR is just disruptive behaviour, done as a revenge. Best regards, Yann (talk) 20:04, 6 November 2011 (UTC)Reply

I saw that, but it seems to me it was just as likely a mistaken DR and that blocking is rather heavy-handed, especially without any form of communication. -mattbuck (Talk) 20:21, 6 November 2011 (UTC)Reply

A mistake? You are not serious, isn't? A new account makes a DR as the first edit 12 mn after it was deleted. I can't see how it could be a mistake. But OK, I will add a message to this user. Yann (talk) 20:36, 6 November 2011 (UTC)Reply

And again it seems. I'm not doubting it's the same person, but I think it's best if we just treat these as proper DRs instead of just sweeping it under the carpet. -mattbuck (Talk) 00:10, 8 November 2011 (UTC)Reply

Matt, this is the banned user w:Special:Contributions/Chuckyreyna, a prolific sockpuppeteer. Tiptoety has been using CheckUser to see if it can be blocked here on Commons. He has already posted these spurious deletion requests three times to my talk page as well, from two accounts and an IP. What we should be doing is blocking it (indefinitely, not for a week), and deleting/reverting the contributions. Dominic (talk) 00:38, 8 November 2011 (UTC)Reply

  Done! Please see

• Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Justiniana Prima, aeroimage.jpg
• Commons:Valued image candidates/Justiniana Prima, aeroimage.jpg

Thanks! --WhiteWriter ^speaks 12:46, 7 November 2011 (UTC)Reply

Hi, I noticed you recently removed the image on the Course Setting Bomb Sight. This was due to my error cutting and pasting text from the RAF web site. All of these images have been released under CC-by-SA and have been checked into ORTS. Could you please restore this image for me? Maury Markowitz (talk) 16:20, 7 November 2011 (UTC)Reply

Hi, I noticed you recently removed the deletion tag of this file: File:Boca-Juniors.jpg which I had nominated for deletion. could you please tell me why should I considerer it a free logo while the same image is tagged as "non free" at Wikipedia? ([5]). As far as I know, in Argentina club badges are protected by copyright. Thanks. Fma12 (talk) 17:19, 7 November 2011 (UTC)Reply

File:Appreciate America. Come On Gang. All Out for Uncle Sam (Mickey Mouse) NARA 513869.png has been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether it should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry. If you created this file, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with it, such as a copyright issue. Please 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） ∙ +/−

Trycatch (talk) 17:29, 7 November 2011 (UTC)Reply

Hallo, it has been brought to my attention that one user from it.wiki has uploaded several doubtful pictures about last Genova water flood. Since his reaction to a request for comment has been a bit unseemly, I'm here asking to speedy the lot, feeling free to issue an appropriate warning and/or block to this user for copyright violations, recidival. --M7 (talk) 23:06, 7 November 2011 (UTC)Reply

The user has acknowledged his own copyright violation and has asked for the deletion of some pictures. I've asked him to carefully review every single picture and to certify on each image still present - both on it.wiki and on commons project - if the picture has been personally taken. In defect, the user will be blocked on it.wiki and his image deleted, since there are likely to be found several other pictures "taken from the web". --M7 (talk) 00:34, 9 November 2011 (UTC)Reply

Hallo Yann, did you notice the yellow banner on the file page File:ROCKEFELLER CENTER-6TH AVENUE SIDE - NARA - 551645.jpg? ;-) Cheers --Saibo (Δ) 19:18, 8 November 2011 (UTC)Reply

I don't really understand why not overwrite original files. The original is always available to anyone, but for actually using the image in a project, the original is not good. Yann (talk) 19:56, 8 November 2011 (UTC)Reply