Commons:Help desk/Archive/2011/12

From Wikimedia Commons, the free media repository
Jump to navigation Jump to search

Hello

I have uploaded a file from Klassik Stiftung Weimar. I've got persmission to upload this file from Dr. Silke Henke, 23.11.2011 of the Goethe- and Schiller-Archiv in Weimar. I had to upload it mentioning GSA 26, LIV, 8 and alos mentionien: Foto: Klassik Stiftung Weimar. Contact in Weimar: Silke.Henke@klassik-stiftung.de

sincerely

--Peer Schilperoord (talk) 21:52, 26 November 2011 (UTC)

Bliebe zu wissen, was die Freigabe beinhaltet. Eine Freigabe nur etwas hochladen zu dürfen ist nicht ausreichend, die Freigabe muss eine viel weitergehende Einverständniserklärung umfassen die Jedermann erlaubt das Bild überall und für jeden Zweck zu verwenden im Sinne freier Inhalte.
Allerdings stellt sich mir noch die Frage, wer der Urheber der Zeichnung ist. --Martin H. (talk) 23:23, 26 November 2011 (UTC)
Goethe- und Schiller-Archiv? So maybe it was Goethe or Schiller? Is "LA II 9 A." a book? If so, what's its title?--Stanzilla (talk) 14:14, 1 December 2011 (UTC)
Der Inhalt der schriftliche Genehmigung zur Veröffentlichung in Wikipedia lautet:
Das Goethe und Schiller Archiv erteilt den Antrag vom 16.11.11 die Genehmigung. Bei der Veröffentlichung sind als Besitznachweis die Archivbezeichnung (Abkürzung GSA) sowie die vollständige Archivsignatur (Bestandsnummer und Signatur der Archivalieneinheit) anzugeben. Bei Abbildungen ist zusätzlich anzuführen: Foto: Klassik Stiftung Weimar.
Die Genehmigung zur Veröffentlichung beinhaltet nicht die Übertragung des Copyrights an den Archivalien. Sie gilt für die einmalige Verwendung zu dem angegebenen Zweck. Für Neuauflagen, Übersetzungen oder für die Verwendung in anderen Veröffentlichungen ist eine erneute Genehmigung erforderlich. Gez. S. Henke, Weimar 23.11.2011.
Vor meinem Antrag bei der Stiftung habe ich Frau Silke Henke gefragt ob nicht Wikipedia den Antrag stellen sollte, was sie verneinte. Darauf hin habe ich die Genehmigung bekommen und bitte um Freigabe des Bildes. Falls es Unklarheiten gibt, bitte direkt mit Frau S. Henke Kontakt aufnehmen. Siehe Emailadresse weiter oben. Danke, --Peer Schilperoord — Preceding unsigned comment added by 188.60.152.64 (talk • contribs) 2011-12-02T16:37:13‎ (UTC)

Your advice, please

I want to upload the portrait found here--or any other version (see Google search). I don't know how permissions work, unfortunately, and would appreciate your help. FYI, I'm writing his article on the English wiki, and if you could drop me a line there, that would be great. Thanks so much! Drmies (talk) 17:23, 2 December 2011 (UTC)

✓ Done I uploded the image as File:Wolter Robert van Hoëvell.jpg --Jarekt (talk) 18:08, 2 December 2011 (UTC)
Thanks! Now I know what to do next time. Drmies (talk) 18:54, 2 December 2011 (UTC)
Jarekt, how can we be certain this image is in the public domain? Powers (talk) 21:22, 2 December 2011 (UTC)

wikipedia

how do I write an Article on wikipedia? — Preceding unsigned comment was added by 76.210.248.205 (talk) 18:49, December 2, 2011 (UTC)

Welcome! You probably meant to post this at en:Wikipedia:Help desk. This is Wikimedia Commons, not Wikipedia. If you go to en:Wikipedia:Your first article, you will find instructions for creating a Wikipedia article on the English Wikipedia. --Philosopher Let us reason together. 01:00, 3 December 2011 (UTC)

What’s wrong with my picture license? Was ist mit meinem Bild noch falsch kategorisiert? Ich verstehe es nicht!

--Fac Simile (talk) 00:09, 3 December 2011 (UTC)

You didn't say what the license was. You need to select the appropriate copyright tag from Commons:Copyright tags and put it on the image. If you are having trouble deciding which one is appropriate, you can describe the copyright status here and we'll try to help. --Philosopher Let us reason together. 01:05, 3 December 2011 (UTC)
Hallo Fac Simile, zu der Lizenz-/Urheberrechtsfrage: "W. Dahms, O. E. Deutsch" sind die Notzensetzer? Oder was haben sie gemacht? Denn die Komposition is ja von Schubert (gestorben 1828), wenn ich es recht verstehe. Und "Autograph" heißt ja dass der Komponist es selbst geschrieben hat, oder? Viele Grüße --Saibo (Δ) 01:43, 3 December 2011 (UTC)
Ich habe nun schonmal ein paar Dinge geändert, so wie ich es mir gedacht habe. Würde mich dennoch freuen, wenn du mir hier noch antworten bzw. weiterhelfen könntest. Viele Grüße --Saibo (Δ) 03:02, 4 December 2011 (UTC)

Privacy oddity with single sign-on

Hi, some days ago I added a comment to a deletion request. The requester is unhappy with the keep result, and initiated some kind of dispute resolution on w:en:. For that purpose he or she tried to inform the folks involved with the deletion request on their talk pages. Very proper, but there's a catch in my case: I had an account on w:en: and m: five years ago, but it is not my new (2011) mw: and commons: account, and the old account is anyway dead and intentionally unusable (password randomized beyond repair). So far everything is as it should be, give or take the commons: vs. w:en: talk page difference.

But I have enabled "send wiki-mail if my talk page is modified", and got a mail for the modification of the talk page on w:en:. As this is not my account on w:en: I think that's a bug. In theory I could go to mediazilla: and find or report a bug. But the third and last of my dead and intentionally unusable old accounts is on mediazilla:, and I have not the faintest idea which position mediazilla: has wrt "socks", "right to leave", and similar privacy issues. –Be..anyone (talk) 04:10, 3 December 2011 (UTC)

Special:CentralAuth/Be..anyone - seems to be your account. -- RE rillke questions? 09:34, 3 December 2011 (UTC)
Maybe I don't understand the problem, you could get a new password by your email, then deactivate the email (uncheck "E-mail me when my user talk page is changed" in the references (and the other email options too)). Then ask an admin on en to block your page. There's a description in German of how to do that at de:Hilfe:Benutzerkonto stilllegen.--Stanzilla (talk) 10:19, 3 December 2011 (UTC)
I found the according page on en now: Self-requested blocks. There are only 11 admins on the list.--Stanzilla (talk) 11:04, 3 December 2011 (UTC)
Yes, and I got rid of the unwanted talk page with db-nouser, with a (last) wiki-mail informing me about the deletion write access on this talk page. I'll simply consider this "bug" as "feature", after all it's good to know when somebody tries to edit a talk page belonging to a non-existent user on en:w: which could be only created by me (but I won't do that for the reasons indicated above). –Be..anyone (talk) 14:20, 3 December 2011 (UTC)
That account on en.wp obviously exists and belongs to you. If the e-mail notification is enabled in your global preferences, I suppose there's probably a way to remove it from your local preferences on en.wp if you don't want to be notified about messages posted there. -- Asclepias (talk) 16:41, 3 December 2011 (UTC)
That's not really my account; I guess it's reserved for me if I ever want it as a side-effect of the single sign-on magic.  Your query results in exists for more Wikimedia projects — I've replaced en by de to show the effect.  If you check w:en:Special:Contributions/Be..anyone etc. it shows nothing as it should. –Be..anyone (talk) 17:17, 3 December 2011 (UTC)
People can create accounts and not contribute with them. Actually, it is frequent. According to the Special:CentralAuth link, you have created and you own local accounts on the six projects that you have visited at any point since you have this unified account and while you were logged in to it. Now, every time you log in to Commons, you are also automatically logged in to your existing account on en.wp, as well as to your four other existing accounts. However, on the Wikimedia projects that you have never visited while logged on, you do have a reserved name, but no account yet. If you go to your en.wp account, you should have access to your local preferences there and you can modify them (you wouldn't have that option if you didn't have an account there). -- Asclepias (talk) 17:58, 3 December 2011 (UTC)
That's rather odd for w:es:, at best I could guess what w:es: pages are about.  For w:de: I don't care, I never had another account there, and maybe I'll use this account when I feel like it (for an average of less than one edit per year).  For w:en: it's bad, because I've intentionally destroyed the old account, and don't plan to use this account as some kind of "sock".  With some limitations it is perfectly possible to use w:en: as unregistered user, there is even a "redirect for creation" procedure. –Be..anyone (talk) 18:55, 3 December 2011 (UTC)
You're right about "feature, not bug." For a rather extreme case, you can see my SUL - I have a lot of accounts named "Philosopher," most of which I have never and will never use, but they were automatically created because I was logged in to an existing account when I visited the wikis. It does make it useful a) to avoid impersonation and b) to ease the transition if/when I decide to edit at a new wiki. --Philosopher Let us reason together. 20:46, 3 December 2011 (UTC)

The file is released by the the Parliament of India, Government of India on their website. It is prohibited to shoot photos inside the Parliament of India. The copyright info on the website states: The material posted on the website may be reproduced without formal permission for the purposes of non-commercial research, private study, review and news reporting provided that the material is appropriately attributed. However, the material has to be reproduced accurately and not to be used in a derogatory manner or in a misleading context. Is this sufficient for Commons, or do you think, it would be ok to upload the picture on Wikipedia? Thanks. --Tinpisa (talk) 21:16, 3 December 2011 (UTC)

In this case, it depends - we need more information. (The general rule follows, below) Since this is an image of a picture, we need to know the copyright status of the underlying picture. Since this is a mere reproduction of the original picture, we don't have to worry about the copyright status of the photo - it isn't eligible for copyright - but we do have to know the copyright status of the underlying picture.
For situations where the photos you get from the website aren't mere reproductions, they aren't appropriate for Commons due to the restrictions on re-use. According to COM:COPYRIGHT#Acceptable licenses, a license has to be available to be re-used commercially (a non-commercial/educational restriction is not allowed) and derivatives must be allowed, neither of which is the case with this license. However, such images may be appropriate for the English Wikpedia under its fair use policy, if they meet the requirements at en:WP:FUR and are appropriately tagged with both the appropriate copyright tag and with a en:Template:Non-free use rationale for the particular article/articles they are used in. --Philosopher Let us reason together. 22:15, 3 December 2011 (UTC)
Thanks for the prompt answer! Maybe it would be better to delete this photo from Commons, then! --Tinpisa (talk) 22:35, 3 December 2011 (UTC)

How to Attribute Public Use Photos?

I am working on building out a new e-commerce website for our gourmet foods business. I would like to use a few of the photos in this collection. The majority of those I am interested in are free with restrictions and say that I need to provide attributes according to the photographer's specifications. Where do I find these specifications?? I have followed any link I could find about the photographer and in all cases I can't find anything. Help is appreciated... Thanks! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 174.53.239.94 (talk • contribs) 03:05, 4 December 2011‎ (UTC)

I assume you mean "attribution" not "attributes". What that means is that you must credit the photographer. If no details are given, that means "photo by photographer's name" or if name is not given & it's own work by a contributor here, "photo by Wikimedia Commons user photographer's account name". Most licenses here also require you to identify the license and to link to a description of that license, typically the same link to a license that is on the relevant page here with the image. See Commons:Reusing content outside Wikimedia. If your questions aren't answered there, please come back here with something specific (and specific images as examples, since not all images here have the same licensing considerations). - Jmabel ! talk 04:24, 4 December 2011 (UTC)

an image on wikipedia is 90deg rotated

wondering through wikipedia, I ran into a rotated file. the image is hosted at: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Bill_Owens_official_photo.jpg

don't know exactly how to rotate it back. It's listed as rotated in the image metadata. Drorzm (talk) 00:48, 4 December 2011 (UTC)

Automated rotation requested - but the backlog on that means it'll take a few days to happen. Rd232 (talk) 01:12, 4 December 2011 (UTC)
thanks. How did you add the request? how can I do it myself (and maybe help with the backlog)?Drorzm (talk) 03:03, 4 December 2011 (UTC)
See Help:RotateLink. The current problem is that our bot is too slow for the current mass tagging (see here Category:Images_requiring_rotation_by_bot. ). So you cannot really help. Cheers --Saibo (Δ) 03:29, 4 December 2011 (UTC)

Rotated and replaced. Off2riorob (talk) 21:37, 4 December 2011 (UTC)

And now redone without destructive compression. —LX (talk, contribs) 20:00, 5 December 2011 (UTC)

Rotated image?

Hello,

When I look at the page http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Phallus_impudicus5.jpg, the image looks rotated, but when I click on the image it seems fine. What to do? Halvar nl (talk) 13:00, 4 December 2011 (UTC)

Sorry, missed the rotation link Halvar nl (talk) 13:00, 4 December 2011 (UTC)
Downloaded - rotated and re- uploaded. Off2riorob (talk) 21:28, 4 December 2011 (UTC)
And now redone without destructive compression. —LX (talk, contribs) 19:54, 5 December 2011 (UTC)

Dealing with an unacknowledged derivative work

Visually, File:PPF2-Hou.gif is clearly a derivative of File:Production Possibilities Frontier Curve.svg. However, this is not acknowledged (post-transfer, at least). Is the correct course of action to acknowledge the derivative now, or are there problems retrospectively filling these details in? I realise this is more a Copyright question, but I thought there might be a simple precedent I could refer to, hence my post here :) Regards, Jarry1250 (talk) 11:00, 5 December 2011 (UTC)

It's fine, just make sure the source file is attributed properly. Powers (talk) 21:19, 5 December 2011 (UTC)

Wrong name

Dear Editor: I uploaded a picture to Wikimedia Commons which I had earlier uploaded to Flickr. But I didn't title it correctly. It was 'Long Memories' in Flickr but I called it 'Christmas in Ballybrack' in Wikimedia Commons. Now I can't alter the title but have given my Wiki User account for the picture. Sorry about the confusion. It is a valuable lesson to me. Kind regards.

Kemiah

What do I need to provide so that there are no copyright issues for this graphic? It is a graphic that we created at NREL, a national/government lab, and anyone can use this info and graphic. We update, then upload, the graphic whenever a new record or sample point is available. DON Gwinner, don.gwinner@nrel.gov

--192.174.37.50 19:00, 5 December 2011 (UTC)

Hi Don! This particular image, being a purely factual line graph, lacks copyrightable originality and can therefore be tagged with {{PD-ineligible}}. For more creative content (like photos), we would need a permission statement from NREL to publish it under a free license. (Works by officers or employees of the U.S. government are in the public domain, but according to en:National Renewable Energy Laboratory and http://www.nrel.gov/disclaimer.html, NREL employees are employed by a private contractor, which retains the copyright to its works.) —LX (talk, contribs) 19:37, 5 December 2011 (UTC)

How do I update a map?

There is a map here of dry counties in the US. I have downloaded the map and edited it to be more current. How do I upload the current version in a way that takes the place of the old map? Masebrock (talk) 05:18, 6 December 2011 (UTC)

It would be very useful if you would provide a link to the file in question, so that someone can see how it is captioned and work out whether you should upload to replace the image or upload as a new image. That said, there should be an "Upload a new version of this file" link on the file page, which would be what you use to replace the image. - Jmabel ! talk 16:41, 6 December 2011 (UTC)
I think the problem is that I just now created an account to do this, and the link to upload a new version has not appeared for me yet. Thanks anyway. This is the file I want to update: http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:USA_Dry_Map.pngMasebrock (talk) 17:07, 6 December 2011 (UTC)
Four days after the creation of your account, you will gain the possibility of uploading new versions. -- Asclepias (talk) 17:42, 6 December 2011 (UTC)

photo for the Ernie Awards page

I have uploaded a photograph of the late Australian trade union leaded Ernie Ecob to wikipedia commons. Wikipedia does not have a page for Ernie Ecob but does have a page for the Ernie Awards which are named after him. I would like the photo to appear on the Ernie Awards page of wikipedia. How do i make the connection? Regards, Gary Ede

See en:Wikipedia:Picture tutorial. - Jmabel ! talk 16:42, 6 December 2011 (UTC)

Daddyo

I uploaded two identcal pictures by accident, File:Daddyo.jpg and File:Tridge Troll - Daddyo.jpg - I want to delete File:Daddyo.jpg and don't know how to do that.--Doug Coldwell (talk) 13:18, 6 December 2011 (UTC)

Makr it with {{Duplicate}}. - Jmabel ! talk 16:43, 6 December 2011 (UTC)

Guten Tag,

ich bin ein Mitarbeiter der Österreichischen Post und habe das eingefügt Bild (Neue Unternehmenszentrale seit Oktober) von unserer Unternehmenskommunikation erhalten und hochgeladen. Es wurde dabei besprochen, dass es für Wikipedia ist.

Welche Bestätitung wird benötigt, damit es veröffentlicht wird?

Vielen Dank.

--Lythronix (talk) 15:15, 6 December 2011 (UTC)

I'm not sure what you mean here by "veröffentlicht". If I understand you correctly, see COM:OTRS/de (in German). If you mean something else, either you'll need to clarify or someone with better German will need to answer. If it is already uploaded, a link to the image might help us understand the problem.
Ich bin mir nicht sicher, was Sie hier meinen mit "veröffentlicht". Wenn ich Sie richtig verstehe, sehen Sie COM:OTRS/de (auf Deutsch). Wenn Sie etwas anderes bedeuten, entweder müssen Sie klären, oder vielleicht jemand mit besseren deutschen kann Sie hilfen. Wenn es bereits hochgeladen ist, kann ein Link zu dem Bild helfen uns zu verstehen das Problem. - Jmabel ! talk 16:54, 6 December 2011 (UTC)
Jmabel, the link to the image is in the title. ;-) Cheers --Saibo (Δ) 21:18, 6 December 2011 (UTC)
Hallo Lythronix, danke für deine Mitarbeit hier! Wir benötigen eine schriftliche (per E-Mail) Freigabe für jedermann durch den Fotografen (oder den Inhaber der vollen Nutzungsrechte). Siehe dazu das Vorgehen und die E-Mail-Vorlage in COM:OTRS/de. Wenn du weitere Fragen hast, dann antworte einfach wieder hier. Uns freut auch es auzch zu hören, wenn keine Fragen mehr offen sind. Viele Grüße --Saibo (Δ) 21:18, 6 December 2011 (UTC)

Paul Blanchard

Picture of Paul Blanchard has been rotated - it needs setting back. - unsigned message by IP 84.13.60.199 15:39, 6 December 2011‎

Could you please provide a link to the picture so someone can follow up? - Jmabel ! talk 16:45, 6 December 2011 (UTC)
Probably File:Paul Blanchard.jpg -- Asclepias (talk) 17:47, 6 December 2011 (UTC)
I put in the request, but the bot looks like it has a 10-day backlog. If anyone wants to download this to their machine & fix it manually, feel free (but then don't forget to remove the request!). - Jmabel ! talk 01:45, 7 December 2011 (UTC)

this file is the logo to http://www.risingforcerecords.com/index.html but i could not get the licence right --Mekkis95 (talk) 18:25, 6 December 2011 (UTC)

That's because the file is copyrighted and cannot be uploaded here. Powers (talk) 19:43, 6 December 2011 (UTC)

8tracks.com Discussion/Talk Page

I am a new user and my first contribution was creating the page 8tracks.com. However, when I moved the content from my talkpage where I was developing it into the Wiki world there was a problem with the migration of the talk page. As such, one currently does not exist although 8tracks.com is currently published and I would like to know how to go about creating one so that the Wikipedia community can interact and collaborate on it with me. Thanks Jasonmarder (talk) 19:58, 6 December 2011 (UTC)

First, you're on the wrong site. :) You are apparently looking for the Wikipedia (en) site, more precisely the page Talk:8tracks.com. That (empty) page is there but you redirected it to somewhere else when you made this edit. -- Asclepias (talk) 20:25, 6 December 2011 (UTC)

Username usurpation

Hello, How do I usurp a username on commons? NetraaMR (talk) 23:38, 6 December 2011 (UTC)

→ Commons:Changing username/Usurp requests. Cheers --Saibo (Δ) 01:30, 7 December 2011 (UTC)
Cheers. NetraaMR (talk) 01:44, 7 December 2011 (UTC)

And another rotated image

For some reason, this image of Jupiter Tonans appears rotated, here and in all its linked articles. Adding "upright" to the syntax rotates the image, but not its field; when upright, the figure is compressed. I've no idea how this happened, or how to fix it. Can anyone help? Haploidavey (talk) 14:49, 4 December 2011 (UTC)

I added an rotate request for the image. On the page it says the cause is a software update Halvar nl (talk) 15:01, 4 December 2011 (UTC)
Many thanks for that. Haploidavey (talk) 15:20, 4 December 2011 (UTC)
I have had a go at resolving this issue and it appears to be sorted . Off2riorob (talk) 20:48, 4 December 2011 (UTC)

Does rotate mean turning the images right side to its left side? I always see images like that but I never know what its call or how people do it or fix it.--KAVEBEAR (talk) 21:26, 4 December 2011 (UTC)

It can mean either way, so as to get them to the correct position. I saved the picture with the issue to my personal computor and then used Gimp to rotate it and save it - and then re-uploaded it over the file - there is a link towards the bottom of the file pahge to do that. Gimp is a freeware program that is quite easy to do stuff like tis on and available for download here http://www.gimp.org/ - Off2riorob (talk) 21:34, 4 December 2011 (UTC)
Using GIMP to rotate images is not the best in that case (and takes much time for you to do it). GIMP cannot do lossless rotation with jpegs (see Lossy_compression). You can read a bit about this at Help:RotateLink. Wrong rotated images should be rotated with lossless tools like available with some image viewers (like xnview or irfanview) or with the commandline tools exiftran or jpegtran. That is what Rotatebot does. Cheers --Saibo (Δ) 22:34, 4 December 2011 (UTC)
I downloaded the original revision and fixed it up with exiftran instead. —LX (talk, contribs) 19:50, 5 December 2011 (UTC)
KAVEBEAR, "rotate" is that what you see here: File:Cathédrale_d'Amiens,_façade_nord.jpg#filehistory. You can just use RotateLink (to order Rotatebot) if you see such images to correct it. Currently some Commons users are trying to mass fix wrong images - so probably you could also just wait. If it not an image which is in use in an article. Cheers --Saibo (Δ) 22:34, 4 December 2011 (UTC)

Many pictures have gone wrong lately, perhaps due to a misplanned repair of some other problem. Lacking patience where the picture is in an important place, as File:Wtc7-2006-0911.jpg in the lead infobox of en:7 World Trade Center, I've been simply replacing them with a poorer but straight picture. The same article still has a picture of the building lying on its side but it is less prominent and less easily replaced. Jim.henderson (talk) 01:54, 7 December 2011 (UTC)

Lot of NFL-related images with the same problem, I've seen. Eagles 24/7 (C) 23:52, 8 December 2011 (UTC)
Yes, the recent flood of misrotated images highly probably could be traced back to this (also posted at Commons:Bots/Work_requests#...): Just had a chat in IRC #wikimedia-tech with a server admin: They run a thumb cleaner because they run out of HDD space on the thumb servers. He tried to only purge thumbs of files which are not in article use. I further discussed with him if it is possible to exclude the files with "Orientation" from the purge. He will look at it - seems to be possible.
For images which are in use you could request rotation by bot for others you probably can just wait until very hard-working users have fixed them in the mass fix attempt at Commons:Bots/Work_requests (link: see above). Cheers --Saibo (Δ) 02:26, 9 December 2011 (UTC)

photos I have unloaded to Commons

How to I add these photos to an article I have edited.....Pigeon Hill (Saint Armand) Quebec? - — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rosemary Willis Sullivan (talk • contribs) 2011-12-08T16:15:44‎ (UTC)

See en:Wikipedia:Picture tutorial. - Jmabel ! talk 16:40, 8 December 2011 (UTC)
Please see en:Wikipedia:Extended image syntax. -- Asclepias (talk) 16:53, 8 December 2011 (UTC)

Speedy deletion?

Is there a way to nominate an image for speedy deletion? Specifically File:Carlosboquin1.jpg.Ryan Vesey (talk) 21:07, 8 December 2011 (UTC)

If you can find the actual source, let us know and we can have it speedy deleted. User:Zscout370 (Return fire) 21:29, 8 December 2011 (UTC)
Or if it's a copyvio, you could slap {{copyvio|reason}} on it yourself. --Kramer Associates (talk) 21:45, 8 December 2011 (UTC)

OTRS details

I'm getting ready to move a group of en:wp images over here that have OTRS tags; the permissions email for the group was sent to permissions-en@wikimedia.org. When I bring them over here, how do I handle the OTRS template — do I simply type

{{OTRS pending|ticket number}}

as if I were making a derivative work from an image that had already been uploaded to Commons? Or does the fact that they didn't go to permissions-commons@wikimedia.org mean that I have to go through a few more hoops from the technical point of view? I understand that there are no policy-based problems; it's purely a technical question. Nyttend (talk) 12:54, 9 December 2011 (UTC)

Editor's summary: Bot: Requesting source information.

Dear editor, I would appreciate any advice you can provide me regarding how to provide an acceptable description of the image of the "Meeting Objections with Objections" article, which was written by Sam Brown.

This image was provided to me by Doug Brown, son of Sam Brown (Sam passed away in 1996). It is a photo of a newspaper advertisement that was created by Sam Brown and published in the St. Louis Globe-Democrat newspaper (that newspaper is now out of business). Doug had the article mounted on a wood plaque, and the image I posted shows the article on the plaque. Doug does not remember the date when the story was first published.

You had sent me the following note:

— Preceding unsigned comment added by Tshawcross (talk • contribs) 2011-12-08T19:58:29‎ (UTC)

Hi Tsawcross, first of all: welcome to Commons and Wikipedia! :-) Note: I have slightly edited your comment to collapse the bot's part.
According to your talk page the message is about File:Meeting objections with objections.jpg. The message was left on your talk page by a automatic robot doing some mass work for us humans. As you can see at the boxes on File:Meeting objections with objections.jpg the problem is that Commons only accepts freely licensed (by the author) or public domain images. You had provided no complete information on upload - therefore the bot's message to you.
To keep the text and the portrait photo we would need to get a release under a free license from the copyright holder of each. (Or know why they are public domain)
For the text: either we can blur it even more - or cut it away (crop out the photo)- or we need a free license release from the copyright holder if it is not public domain. I do not know if Doug owns the copyrights on this text - they may have been sold to the newspaper or someone else?
Same for the photo: Who is the photographer? He owns (if it is not public domain) the copyrights unless transferred to someone else.
Just replay here directly below my text. Cheers --Saibo (Δ) 01:46, 10 December 2011 (UTC)

Bad 120px thumbnail

Do you know how to regenerate the 120px thumbnail of File:Gunzenhausen St.Maria - Rittergrab 2.jpg : http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/9/91/Gunzenhausen_St.Maria_-_Rittergrab_2.jpg/120px-Gunzenhausen_St.Maria_-_Rittergrab_2.jpg , presently having a bad lower part ? Teofilo (talk) 23:45, 8 December 2011 (UTC)

It is fine for me (Germany, Arcor): 4536 bytes. You may have experienced bug 28613. Is it working for you now, too? --Saibo (Δ) 02:18, 9 December 2011 (UTC)
It is OK now. Teofilo (talk) 23:21, 9 December 2011 (UTC)
Then it was this, probably. --Saibo (Δ) 01:25, 10 December 2011 (UTC)

? in place of image

I've tried uploading this image: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:%25_of_U.S._households_connected_by_age.png more than 4 times by adjusting sizes, I purged the cache and did everything I could to make the thumbnail appear, but it still isn't working..please help! Achresto (talk) 20:33, 9 December 2011 (UTC)

The % in the file-name is the problem.

Error creating thumbnail: convert: unable to open image `/mnt/thumbs/wikipedia/commons/thumb/4/4b/%%_of_U.S._households_connected_by_age.png/120px-%%_of_U.S._households_connected_by_age.png': @ error/blob.c/OpenBlob/2498.

— img
-- RE rillke questions? 22:32, 9 December 2011 (UTC)

I don't get this file at all. The portrait or photograph was created in 1941, but the "PD-US" is too generic. When was it first published to the public? If published in the period between 1923 and 1963, it was either not renewed for copyrights or published without notice. --George Ho (talk) 23:02, 9 December 2011 (UTC)

The source shows that it was the McCall's magazine cover published in September 1941. See also this image of the cover. -- Asclepias (talk) 02:02, 10 December 2011 (UTC)
Tried to find the renewal registration of this image in both 1968 and 1969 catalogs of "Works of Art" in Archive.org. No such luck. If doubt, try searching it yourself. --George Ho (talk) 06:19, 10 December 2011 (UTC)

Tibet Railway extension to India map

Hello, could someone upload this map to Wikimedia Commons(http://hphotos-sea1.fbcdn.net/hphotos-snc6/191546_112703225476771_112702522143508_117177_5971255_o.jpg) because it is an edit of the map File:Qingzangrailwaymap.png so it can be uploaded with the same license. Thanks. - unsigned

Convenience link: File:Qingzangrailwaymap.png. - Jmabel ! talk 21:17, 10 December 2011 (UTC)
I believe that upload (and grant of license) would have to be done by the person who made the modifications. No obvious license is given at the linked location, and it is possible that they licensed it separately (not necessarily using the CC license provided at File:Qingzangrailwaymap.png), so we can't be sure those edits are released under the same license. Also, even if they are under that license, we'd need attribution for those edits. Or am I missing something? - Jmabel ! talk 21:22, 10 December 2011 (UTC)
I know that the person who made these edits would have no problems uploading it here, I suppose we would need to ask them though but I don't have an FB account to ask.. Could someone ask the guy here? : http://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=112703225476771&set=a.112703222143438.20608.112702522143508&type=3&theater — Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.19.206.29 (talk • contribs) 2011-12-11T13:47:50‎ (UTC)

Modified electoral map

I downloaded this map which shows the municipalities of Puerto Rico, and modified it in Paint to show the Senatorial districts of the island by coloring said sections in red. Can I upload it? And if I can, what license would apply? Thief12 (talk) 18:35, 10 December 2011 (UTC)

The file you modified is copyrighted, so you cannot upload modified versions here. You can find a map that you can modify freely in our Category:Maps of Puerto Rico. Powers (talk) 21:19, 10 December 2011 (UTC)
Ok, thanks! Thief12 (talk) 02:56, 11 December 2011 (UTC)

Email template to ask for permission to release and image under CC or something

I have found two images without copyright permission. The source of them is a website of a university. The uploader is a new user (just registered yesterday) and I would prefer to avoid flooding him with too much information too soon. I was going to contact directly the university and ask for copyright information about the image in question, but before I write an email, all by myself, I thought about asking here. Does someone has a formal email template to use in this cases, to request image copyright, and to suggest the release under a creative commons license?--Neo139 (talk) 15:32, 11 December 2011 (UTC)

Commons:Email templates. Thanks for your commitment. -- RE rillke questions? 15:46, 11 December 2011 (UTC)
Thanks! --Neo139 (talk) 16:08, 11 December 2011 (UTC)

Can someone fix this SVG for me?

I moved File:Ha-ha wall.svg from en.wikipedia, and it seems to be broken now (default size 0x0). can someone help?? Thanks, Calliopejen1 (talk) 02:20, 12 December 2011 (UTC)

Done (Commons:Graphic Lab/Illustration workshop would have been the better page to ask - but you couldn't know that it is a svg problem). Btw: you missed to transfer the first file version. --Saibo (Δ) 03:25, 12 December 2011 (UTC)

Photos from University newsdesk

The University of Maryland provides a photograph of Dr. Douglas Gomery meant to be used for any all informational purposes.

http://www.newsdesk.umd.edu/experts/portraits/101933207.jpg

Wouldn't this be alright to add to his profile? Let me know. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jimat41 (talk • contribs) 03:42, 12 December 2011‎ (UTC)

Where does it say that photos there can be used for any/all informational purposes? I looked but didn't see anything. --Kramer Associates (talk) 04:36, 12 December 2011 (UTC)

The author, Mr Gilles Esposito-Farèse, gave me permission (by e-mail) to use this gif on fr.wiktionary.org. But this schedule is not in API, so I can't use it. You could delete this file. --PVDM94 (talk) 15:11, 10 December 2011 (UTC)

What do you mean by "But this schedule is not in API"? By the way: It may even be that this is not copyright eligiblibe. If the author wants to give permission to use this to everybody please follow these steps. Cheers --Saibo (Δ) 02:07, 13 December 2011 (UTC)

Adding categories to my uploads

I have added just one category each image; "hidden categories" do not count. Go to Special:ListFiles/George Ho to see to which categories the images belong. --George Ho (talk) 12:11, 12 December 2011 (UTC)

I've added one or more categories to the files. Category:Television programs from the United States seems to be appropriate. Note, that I am not a specialist for categories like that, I bet more could be added. But at least the maintenance category vanished and I saw you already noticed it. :)--Stanzilla (talk) 10:24, 13 December 2011 (UTC)

This file was uploaded on English Wikipedia. For reasons that I cannot understand , this was unsable on Italian Wikipedia. So, I uploaded it on Commons, mentioning the original uploader (Jad.bh). How can I solve this problem? Thanks for suggestions & help --Drossi (talk) 00:08, 13 December 2011 (UTC)

You can solve the problem by requesting the speedy deletion of this file. Please do not upload to Commons files that are explicitely tagged as being unfree on Wikipedia (this file is tagged as fair use), unless you can provide evidence that the tagging is wrong and that they are free. This file is actually unsourced (the uploader to en.wp did not provide the source), its author is uncredited (the uploader to en.wp never claimed to be the author and did not credit the author), it is undated, there is no mention of when and where it was published. In short, this file has none of the essential informations and there is no evidence that it is free. -- Asclepias (talk) 00:35, 13 December 2011 (UTC)
On a technical level, the various language Wikipedias cannot access each other's image files. All of them can access Commons' files. So when you have an image that is indeed public domain or free-licensed, Commons is the right place for it. If it's neither public domain nor free-licensed, it needs to be uploaded to each individual language Wikipedia that will use it, and (leaving the technical for a moment) you need to comply with each of their rules for such non-free images. - Jmabel ! talk 01:57, 13 December 2011 (UTC)

How to attribute this photo?

Newbie here - Very sorry but I am so confused as to what exactly is the identity of the photographer of this picture that I want to use and attribute:

http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Jerusalem_cricket2.JPG#filehistory

There is a name at the bottom of that page but appears to be another user. I don't see any other i.d. Do I just attribute "Wiki Commons?"???? HELP! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Thelongislandgardener (talk • contribs) 2011-12-13T01:00:57‎ (UTC)

Well, the uploader used a wrapping template stating that he is the copyright holder, so if we assume good faith from him (hard to tell beyond doubt when he uploaded only two files here and had a few other files deleted at fr.wp), and without a more explicit statement for attribution, then yes the attribution should probably be to the uploader's username as it appears in the upload history, in this case "VinceToto". What makes you think that "it appears to be another user"? -- Asclepias (talk) 01:57, 13 December 2011 (UTC)
Hi Thelongislandgardener, welcome to Commons! That is an old upload (2006) - that times our licensing/author info was not that complete/much as today. It really looks like VinceToto is the photographer. So you need to attribute him. You can choose one of the several licenses on the file page. For more info see Commons:Reuse. Did that help you? Cheers --Saibo (Δ) 02:02, 13 December 2011 (UTC)

images/upgrades/downloads

i am having problem with my wiki thru out my system ~thanks if you can help sincerly...Melinda Coronado — Preceding unsigned comment added by MisLozano (talk • contribs) 2011-12-13T01:26:22‎ (UTC)

Hi Melinda, could you please describe your problem more detailled? What does not work? When does it not work? On which page / URL does it not work? We will try to help you then. :-) --Saibo (Δ) 01:54, 13 December 2011 (UTC)

Help

Hi. I would like to enquire how I can change my username here, and in turn, streamline it to my account on English Wiki [1] ? Thanks in advance Hxseek (talk) 08:29, 13 December 2011 (UTC)

Hi Hxseek! Commons:Changing username (if you need more languages - look on the left side there: interwikis). Cheers --Saibo (Δ) 13:48, 13 December 2011 (UTC)

I did not create the concerned file (MWM Caterpillar RGB web.jpg), but I have asked the copyright holder for his permission to release it under one of the allowed licenses indeed before I uploaded it. They sent a mail to permissions-commons@wikimedia.org naming the appropriate license. So can anyone please help me being able to actually use the picture for Wikipedia?????? Immediate response is appreciated. Thank you.

--Iris Gerlach (talk) 14:00, 13 December 2011 (UTC)

Hi Iris, that is fine then! I have indicated the sent permission with putting {{subst:OP}} on the file page.
You can already use the picture if the copyright holder has already agreed to a free license. Put something like this in your article: [[File:MWM Caterpillar RGB web.jpg|thumb|Logo of MWM]]
Cheers --Saibo (Δ) 00:50, 14 December 2011 (UTC)

Personality rights for File:Jimmy Lydon Olive Stacey First Hundred Years 1951.JPG

Jimmy Lydon is still a living person, and this person photo was printed in 1951. Should I add {{Personality rights}}? --George Ho (talk) 12:12, 14 December 2011 (UTC)

Probably not a bad idea. Of course, personality rights always apply with or without a notice, but this might be a case where a reminder is in order. - Jmabel ! talk 17:01, 14 December 2011 (UTC)

Jessie Craig has given all thé publications rugbys to Elodie Navarre to use her portrait for her own use How to spécifie this to use this photo on her wikipedia page? Thanks for tour help - unigned

Assuming I understand your question correctly, see COM:OTRS (which is available in several languages. Judging by your writing I'm guessing you'd want COM:OTRS/fr). - Jmabel ! talk 17:02, 14 December 2011 (UTC)

Kathryn Kates Page

Hi:

I was sent an e mail about categorizing 2 pictures on the Kathryn Kates Wikipedia page I created and I'm not clear on what I have to do. There is a lot of information to sift through regarding this and I will attempt to make the changes. However, do I simply need to change / add a category to the image files I uploaded at the commons page where they reside, or do I make the changes on the Katrhryn Kates page? Thank you very much. Jnkates (talk) 15:43, 14 December 2011 (UTC)

Hard to be sure what's being asked of you without seeing the email, but I would presume you are being asked to add categories to the images here on Commons. Certainly, if they lack categories, that would be in order. If you don't know where to begin, you can either look at Commons:Categories or (maybe easier) look at some photos of similar people, and see how they are categorized. - Jmabel ! talk 17:05, 14 December 2011 (UTC)

Unexistent page displayed as blue link in Artwork template

On File:Sigurd and Fafnir (1906).jpg , Creator:H. Hinrichs is displayed as a blue link although it should be a red link. Teofilo (talk) 16:16, 14 December 2011 (UTC) 

#fileinfotpl_aut + td .new { color: #0645AD; }

@MediaWiki:Common.css -- RE rillke questions? 17:16, 14 December 2011 (UTC)

Thanks. I asked to remove that line at MediaWiki_talk:Common.css#Please_restore_red_links Teofilo (talk) 21:04, 14 December 2011 (UTC)

deletion of individual revisions possible?

title talks for itself. i mean, i misuploaded a file then immediately corrected, want to keep the whole history except of one particular one.--Aaa3-other (talk) 17:11, 14 December 2011 (UTC)

Possible, yes. But if the uploaded file is not completely unrelated or has a copyright-problem we won't do so. -- RE rillke questions? 17:34, 14 December 2011 (UTC)
ugh. what about this: File:Yamato-armorsheme-DE_-_magazines_cut.svg. please?      the second oldest (03:27) one is totally unneeded even for history keeping, it only differs in transparency from the third (03:37)... waste of space and loading time and overviewability of the history... please... im totally new to svg and didnt know in advance of that bug in setting bg-opacity... all the other important evolving of the file is well-documented and is there--Aaa3-other (talk) 18:00, 14 December 2011 (UTC)
The waste of space is the same either way. "Deletion" from history still doesn't remove it from the server, just hides it from being viewed. And, in general, unless there is a copyvio problem, the time involved in even in discussing it like this is simply not worth it. - Jmabel ! talk 05:16, 15 December 2011 (UTC)
ok. and thanks for all your answers. the server thing is a bit surprised me though, but thinking into possible administration mistakes has logic have to admit... [p.s. it'd still make the hist. more clean-looking & understandable :)]

I need to add this picture to an article "Bhagabat Panda/Apanda23 talk" which I have under review in wikipedia. How can I do it? Please advise.

Thanks, Aruna.

--Apanda23 (talk) 17:47, 14 December 2011 (UTC)

I added it. [2]  Chzz  ►  08:38, 15 December 2011 (UTC)

Licence help

I copied this question from the user's user page [3]  Chzz  ►  08:39, 15 December 2011 (UTC)

I cannot figure out which license to use. I have taken this picture myself and want to add it to the article Bhagabat Panda/Apanda23

Please advise. Apanda23 (talk · contribs) 18:51, 14 December 2011‎ UTC

Hi.
You need to choose which licence you want to choose.
The recommended licence is called "Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike".
That licence allows anyone to use your picture for any purpose. You should read the link, and make sure you understand the licence.
To choose that licence, edit the file page here, and change the "|Permission =" to;

|Permission = {{Cc-by-sa-3.0}}

...and then save the page.
If you have any problem, please ask again here. Thanks!  Chzz  ►  08:51, 15 December 2011 (UTC)

Mikropenis

Since I do not know wos must be pure, I translated it in here, if you have another tip NEN, I can use the post directly on my side, I look at it after greeting

So am still new ehier and dunno where to respond, in any case this is not porn or anything, the penis is not errigiert and information purposes only. The quality is not too bad, it's even in HD.

As far as the knowledge content, I understand that any intentional penis pics but are more about micro penis is, there is no vernünftiogen and has since in the discussion SOGAT a doctor said. Since I now have a real time micro-penis, where the testicles are also still very very small, I find it reasonable if this Pic to the article there is also and is not deleted. I think without sounding arrogant, that more of the other images from a medical standpoint, there are not purposeful.

Therefore, I disagree and request that the Pic stays there! Mgrasek100 (talk) 10:38, 15 December 2011 (UTC)Martin

Du hast zwei Dateien hier hochgeladen, File:Mikropenis.JPG und File:Mikropenis1.JPG. Keins von beiden wurde gelöscht. Geht es hier um Verwendung eines Bildes in der Wikipedia? Rd232 (talk) 16:34, 15 December 2011 (UTC)

Uploading Images

I have uploaded images of tv shows logos/title screens that i have downloaded from sites like Imdb. While i was uploading the image i clearly stated the image as from IMDB and it was accepted. The image has now been taken down but how come some tv show pages have their logo's and title screens not taken down but mine are?


Thanks in-advanced! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Fob Upset (talk • contribs) 2011-12-15T16:36:08‎ (UTC)

Probably because those others are simple logos, consisting of text and geometric forms too simple to qualify for copyright. Without specific examples, though, it's hard to say for certain. Could you give an example of a logo you think is complex enough to be copyrighted but has been allowed to remain on Commons? - Jmabel ! talk 17:09, 15 December 2011 (UTC)

Categorisation bot

The categorization bot keeps sending me messages about uncategorised pictures. How do I make it stop? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Op47 (talk • contribs) 2011-12-20T10:45:54‎ (UTC)

Please read here: User:CategorizationBot#How_do_I_stop_CategorizationBot_from_leaving_me_notes_about_uncategorized_files.3F. Cheers --Saibo (Δ) 15:22, 20 December 2011 (UTC)
This section was archived on a request by: Saibo (Δ) 19:57, 20 December 2011 (UTC)

Please rename

File:Schombergarbuthnot.jpg to File:GeoffreySArbuthnot.jpg 2.27.236.187 21:45, 20 December 2011 (UTC)

In general: Please see COM:RENAME for how to request this without cluttering the help desk. :-)
Regarding your request: what is the reason / need for renaming? Cheers --Saibo (Δ) 00:34, 21 December 2011 (UTC)
correct misleading name into accurate one Kittybrewster (talk) 17:13, 21 December 2011 (UTC)
Renamed to File:Geoffrey Schomberg Arbuthnot.jpg.
This section was archived on a request by: --GeorgHH • talk   17:59, 21 December 2011 (UTC)

Ich möchte das logo unseres Unternehmens hochladen, aber es wird nicht angezeigt. Ich habe zu wenig Beschreibungen/Aussagen zum Lizenzstatus gemacht. Wie kann ich das ändern/bearbeiten?

Vielen Dank!!

--Multiplayer01 (talk) 10:00, 16 December 2011 (UTC)

Hallo Multiplayer, nun, wenn Douglas davon ausgeht, dass das Logo urheberrechtlich (das hat mit dem natürlich weiterhin vorhandenen markenrechtlichen Schutz nichts zu tun) geschützt ist, dann bräuchten wir eine Freigabe des Logos unter einer freien Lizenz wie beispielsweise Cc-by-sa-3.0. Da das Logo eigentlich nur aus Text besteht, könnte man aber auch davon ausgehen, dass es urheberrechtlich nicht geschützt ist und {{PD-textlogo}} auf der Dateiseite vermerken. Wie sieht das denn dein Unternehmen selbst? Viele Grüße --Saibo (Δ) 23:06, 16 December 2011 (UTC)
This section was archived on a request by: Saibo (Δ) 22:54, 22 December 2011 (UTC)

Modifying my own Flickr photo uploaded by somebody else

Through Special:LinkSearch, I just found out that somebody uploaded File:WindSeeker stationary at Kings Island (from Eiffel Tower replica).jpg in June. This is my own photo from Flickr (proof: [4] [5]). There are two small problems, though. Because I have only a free Flickr account and not a pro account, the uploaded file is only 1024×768, whereas the original on my computer is 2560×1920. Also, I prefer to place my photos under all versions of CC-BY-SA, not just the 2.0 used by Flickr (this is stated on my Flickr profile page and is what is used on all photos I've uploaded myself).

So, my questions are: 1) Are there any special procedures I need to follow to upload the larger version and change the license without raising eyebrows? 2) Should I change the source field to {{Own}}, or leave it alone since it was originally uploaded by somebody else? 3) Should I use {{Self}} for the license, or just use the new license template directly since it was originally uploaded by somebody else? 4) What should I do with the {{Flickrreview}} template; remove it or leave it? Any help would be appreciated. jcgoble3 (talk) 18:16, 20 December 2011 (UTC)

IMO, it depends if you leave the current version of the file which was uploaded by the reuser or if you upload directly another version.
  • If you leave the current version, as it was uploaded by the reuser, then I think you should not change the current information, which accurately reflects the facts about that version, its source and its upload. It was indeed uploaded to Commons by the reuser, not as his own work, but from the source at Flickr. So, the source of that version is the Flickr page of your image, not his own work. He indeed chose to reproduce it by using the CC-by-sa 2.0 license. He could have chosen any other of the licenses you offered on your profile page, but the fact is that the license he did use is the CC-by-sa 2.0. He also correctly tagged the file with the license template and he correctly did not use a declaration tag in a way that would have said that he was the copyright holder. Finally, the bot confirmed the presence at the source of the license under which the image was reused, and that is also a factual information. However, if you want, you could certainly add a note in the description page to say that you, the author, offer this image also under alternative licensing options.
  • If you upload your larger version, which certainly would advantageously replace the current version, then you should write the information that will accurately reflect your upload and this new version, i.e. the source will be "own", the licensing options will be whatever options you want to offer, you can use a declaration tag specifying that you are the copyright holder, etc. I do not think that there are special procedures for uplaoding your new version. You can upload it as a separate file and then request the deletion of the other file (for being of a lower resolution and for having less licensing options). Or you can overwrite the current version and change the information on its description page.
-- Asclepias (talk) 20:06, 20 December 2011 (UTC)
Thanks. Sorry if I wasn't clear, but your last sentence is exactly what I meant; uploading my larger version over top of the current Commons version. No need to clutter the deletion requests with something like this (and I haven't a clue how deletion requests work here anyway). I'll upload the new version here in just a little bit. jcgoble3 (talk) 22:04, 20 December 2011 (UTC)
This section was archived on a request by: Saibo (Δ) 22:04, 22 December 2011 (UTC)

Eingabefelder

Tracked in Phabricator
Task T35300

Liebe Commonsspezialisten, seit etwa zwei Wochen kann ich in die Felder bei Commons keinen Text in lateinischen Buchstaben mehr eingeben. Beginne ich in den Feldern zu arbeiten, so färbt sich der gesamte Hintergrund graublau und beim Eintippen kann ich nur kryptische Zeichen (vermutlich indonesisch oder so was) sehen. Ich helfe mir vorerst damit, den Text erstmal extern zu schreiben und ihn dann hineinzukopieren. Das ist aber stressig und sicher so nicht gewollt. Bitte ratet mir, was ich ändern muss, damit es wieder normal funktioniert. --44penguins (talk) 10:11, 21 December 2011 (UTC)

Vermutlich ist dieser "Narayam-Editor" dafür verantwortlich. Unter Special:Preferences#mw-prefsection-editing deaktivieren. -- RE rillke questions? 10:30, 21 December 2011 (UTC)
Nun als bug 33300 gemeldet. Leider ist der Editor für Deutsche (und manch andere Sprachen) standardmäßig aktiv, obwohl er total unnütz ist (bug 32997). Wenn er dann, wieso auch immer, auch noch anscheinend ungewollt nicht nur aktiv, sondern auch in den Eingabefeldern aktiv ist, dann ist das natürlich sehr unpraktisch und keineswegs eine Verbesserung zu vorher. --Saibo (Δ) 14:33, 21 December 2011 (UTC)
Habe das wie oben gezeigt, deaktiviert. Danach wars auch nicht anders. Aber beim Herumprobieren unter dem Kärtchen 'Eingabemethode' und dann Deutsch ankreuzen - so gings. Danke und "merry christmas! --44penguins (talk) 16:51, 22 December 2011 (UTC)
This section was archived on a request by: Saibo (Δ) 20:47, 22 December 2011 (UTC)

Move file to new name

I suggest that file:
File:Hauptmann Herbert Stemmer in front of a PzKpfw I.jpg is moved to
File:Herbert Stemmer in front of a PzKpfw I.jpg
File description indicates that Mr. Stemmers rank is unclear (Oberleutnant oder Hauptmann(R)). Thus the rank should be removed from the filename. KjellG (talk) 14:27, 16 December 2011 (UTC)

For this (or anything similar) just add the {{Rename}} template to the description of the image in question. - Jmabel ! talk 01:26, 17 December 2011 (UTC)

Thumbnail problem

For some reason, File:Jubilee Campus MMB H2 Melton Hall.jpg is not generating thumbnails. If one clicks the 640 thumbnail link, it comes up with this: 

Error creating thumbnail: convert: Insufficient memory (case 4) `/mnt/upload6/wikipedia/commons/8/84/Jubilee_Campus_MMB_H2_Melton_Hall.jpg' @ error/jpeg.c/EmitMessage/235.
convert: missing an image filename `/mnt/thumbs/wikipedia/commons/thumb/8/84/Jubilee_Campus_MMB_H2_Melton_Hall.jpg/640px-Jubilee_Campus_MMB_H2_Melton_Hall.jpg' @ error/convert.c/ConvertImageCommand/2970.

and similarly for other sizes. The original image displays fine. Does anyone know how this can be fixed? -mattbuck (Talk) 15:01, 16 December 2011 (UTC)

  • It's a progressive JPEG, resizing software should load complete file to the memory to resize the picture (and it seems that there is not enough memory for the resizer). But if the JPEG picture is non-interlaced, it's possible to use online resizing without complete loading of the file to the memory. It's possible to remove JPEG interlacing using ImageMagick -- "convert input.jpg -interlace none output.jpg", or you can try to select "Baseline" if you save JPEGs in Photoshop, or remove "Progressive" checkbox in GIMP. Trycatch (talk) 15:35, 16 December 2011 (UTC)

Lopsided on their own

Did I post this in the wrong place? SergeWoodzing (talk) 02:56, 17 December 2011 (UTC)

Yes, that was the wrong place. Nothing administrative about it. But the answer you got there was accurate:
:Commons:Village_pump#Why_has_an_image_rotated_without_being_told_to_do_so.3F - it's mediawiki's fault. -mattbuck (Talk) 05:19, 17 December 2011 (UTC)

- Jmabel ! talk 17:25, 17 December 2011 (UTC)

Sandglass in uploading

Tracked in Phabricator
Task T35316
RESOLVED

I have been unable to upload new medias since last weekend. I run into an endless sandglass, with no error message. I have already restarted my computer and tried many times. Thank you for your help. Tango7174 (talk) 13:43, 21 December 2011 (UTC)

What exactly happens? Do you use UploadWizard? Does the sandglass appear after selecting a file or after clicking on upload? -- RE rillke questions? 14:21, 21 December 2011 (UTC)

The sandglass appears right after I click on "Upload file" in the left column. I don't even have the chance to choose between UploadWizard and upload the old way. Thank you. Tango7174 (talk) 18:23, 21 December 2011 (UTC)

Please try Commons:Upload - does the upload wizard link on top of it (yellow box) work? Do the links below work? Cheers --Saibo (Δ) 18:26, 21 December 2011 (UTC)
Which browser/version do you use? Thank you. -- RE rillke questions? 18:36, 21 December 2011 (UTC)

When I clicked on the Commons:Upload link provided by Saibo, I got the screen I used to get. There, the "main upload form" and "basic upload form" work perfectly. But clicking on the UploadWizard (yellow box) gave me exactly the endless sandglass I got with the left column link. I use Internet Explorer Version 7.0.6002.18005, 64-bit Edition, Cipher Strength:256-bit, Update version:0. Thank you. Tango7174 (talk) 22:28, 21 December 2011 (UTC)

Yes, the endless sandglass is a problem that is known to happen when using the upload wizard. The link "Upload file" in the left column takes you to the upload wizard. The problem can be solved, as you found out, by using one of the other upload forms: basic or main. -- Asclepias (talk) 22:50, 21 December 2011 (UTC)
Not at Tango7174: One more reason not to link the beta-stage UW directly in the toolbox. ;-) Is this a reported bug? Can note the bug number here? --Saibo (Δ) 00:12, 22 December 2011 (UTC)
At Tango7174: Apparently the upload wizard developers (which are employees by Wikimedia - not volunteers) have forgotten something to fix for Internet Explorer 7. I personally suggest you to switch to Mozilla Firefox instead of Internet Explorer. :-) IE is probably the browser with the least support here. --Saibo (Δ) 00:12, 22 December 2011 (UTC)

Thank you all, for your solutions and suggestions. I appreciate it. Tango7174 (talk) 03:29, 22 December 2011 (UTC)

Can reproduce in IE7, we'll fix it ASAP.--Eloquence (talk) 06:27, 22 December 2011 (UTC)

I think I fixed it. It's a bit hard to tell for sure as there may be interactions with your gadgets. If you continue to have issues please reopen Bugzilla: 33316. NeilK (talk) 21:03, 22 December 2011 (UTC)

It does work. Thank you very much. Tango7174 (talk) 14:11, 23 December 2011 (UTC)

This section was archived on a request by: Saibo (Δ) 18:11, 23 December 2011 (UTC)

Image being passed off as free content

Hey. I'm just enquiring about this image. I think it the license is incorrect, as it is from a TV Series that currently airs and still holds the copyright to it's work etc. However the uploader of File:OLTL Howarth2011.jpg released it under a special. I'm still fairly new to Commons, so not sure if deletion nominations are carried out in the same way as they are at Wikipedia.Raintheone (talk) 00:57, 23 December 2011 (UTC)

I went ahead and had it deleted for being a derived image from a copyrighted work. As for the deletion requests on the Commons; they are about the same as Wikipedia. User:Zscout370 (Return fire) 03:18, 23 December 2011 (UTC)
See Commons:Deletion requests for an info start. --Saibo (Δ) 03:26, 23 December 2011 (UTC)
This section was archived on a request by: Saibo (Δ) 03:26, 23 December 2011 (UTC)

Unknown error: "unknown-warning"

Hello

I am regularly uploading photos either with the old method or with the new wizard, without any problem. Since 2 days it's impossible and I get this msg: Unknown error: "unknown-warning". I have checked my computer and internet line. They seem OK. My internet access provider told me to look at the other end. Do you have had any trouble these last days? Best regards --FLLL (talk) 10:07, 16 December 2011 (UTC)

Is it always the same file you are trying to upload? -- RE rillke questions? 10:19, 16 December 2011 (UTC)
No, I have tried to upload several different. --FLLL (talk) 10:37, 16 December 2011 (UTC)
Can you monitor network traffic? E.g. a firewall, netmon (windows), network-connection-state? Do you get this error after uploading? Did you try Commonist? Was it always the same target-filename? Is it on Commons only or on Wikipedia, too? -- RE rillke questions? 01:11, 18 December 2011 (UTC)

I would like to upload this image from the Greek Wikipedia. What is its copyright status? It says there the image is public domain, but I don't know whether that is true outside Greece. --Epipelagic (talk) 21:59, 17 December 2011 (UTC)

It is a voluntary declaration from the author, so it is usable everywhere. However, the description page contains contradictory statements from the author. It says "public domain" in one place but it says "copyrighted free use" in another place. Both statements mean that the image may be used, but one statement means that the author releases the image to the public domain and renounces his copyright (where possible), and the other statement specifies that the author retains his copyright but allows free use. The tag seems to be the equivalent of the tag Template:Copyrighted free use on Commons. To be safe, you should probably treat the image as "copyrighted free use". If you speak Greek, the best would be to ask the user directly to clarify which statement is correct. -- Asclepias (talk) 01:02, 18 December 2011 (UTC)
Thanks :) --Epipelagic (talk) 02:33, 18 December 2011 (UTC)
I would like to delete the files and reload them again, all foles, please, help me

-- G Tch (talk) 10:59, 18 December 2011 (UTC)

Right now the copyright seems to be unclear, so it will get deleted in any case. But before you re-upload: ownership of the physical painting does not mean that you own the copyright. Is there a reason to believe that this work is not copyrighted? - Jmabel ! talk 17:23, 18 December 2011 (UTC)

What is the forum for tough copyright questions? If it is here, this is the question:

en:File:At the South Pole, December 1911.jpg was taken by a Norwegian citizen, en:Olav Bjaaland (1863-1961) outside of Norway (at the south pole) in 1911 and first published in London in 1913. So is the home country Norway (and thus {{PD-Norway50}}) or the UK (and thus {{PD-old}} until 2032)?

Yeah, that's tough, as far as I know the south pole belongs to no country due to the en:Antarctic Treaty System. There are persons on the photo though and thus this: Article 8 – Allows for jurisdiction over observers and scientists by their own states; (Norway) might apply.--Stanzilla (talk) 11:16, 19 December 2011 (UTC)
The forum would be Commons:Village pump/Copyright. But here is fine too. I suppose you're asking for the purpose of applying the internal policy of Commons. For that pupose, users of Commons generally refer to the definition of international conventions. In this case, it would probably be to article 5(4)(a) of the Berne convention. So the answer would be the United Kingdom. -- Asclepias (talk) 17:07, 19 December 2011 (UTC)

Upload Wizard does not work

Tracked in Phabricator
Task T35316

For the past two days the "Upload Wizard" can't seem to load onto my computer. Is this a problem at Wikimedia Commons or one with my computer? (Mmcmartin35 (talk) 14:41, 19 December 2011 (UTC))

What exactly happens? What do you see? -- RE rillke questions? 14:44, 19 December 2011 (UTC)
If it is not working, you can try uploading via Special:Upload as well. Ajraddatz (talk) 14:56, 19 December 2011 (UTC)

PDF Rendering not Working

The Article to PDF Render Service is not working (Since October 2, 2011). What's going on? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.52.212.244 (talk • contribs) 21:41, 3 October 2011‎ (UTC)

That is the wrong place here. Please ask at en:Wikipedia:Help_desk. --Saibo (Δ) 02:46, 26 December 2011 (UTC)
This section was archived on a request by: Saibo (Δ) 02:46, 26 December 2011 (UTC)

Question about court filings

I'm fairly new to Wikipedia, and I searched the FAQs and am not finding the answer I'm looking for. I have a court filing that was provided by the plaintiff to post as sourcing for a statement. However, my first attempt at adding the filing to the Commons was deleted stating that I didn't have permissions or media licensing to add. It's a United States District Court filing, but you can only access it publically online if you have a subscription to pacer.gov or it's provided electronically. What other permissions do I need to provide or state to prevent it from being delted again. Thank you!

http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Court_filing_20110726.pdf Creativejuice (talk) 15:34, 15 December 2011 (UTC)

Filings with the court are still copyrighted. If you get the plaintiff to file an COM:OTRS notice with us, we can host it, but you don't need it on Commons to cite from Wikipedia.--Prosfilaes (talk) 00:53, 16 December 2011 (UTC)
This section was archived on a request by: Rd232 (talk) 02:20, 26 December 2011 (UTC)

{{Personality rights}} for File:Ernest Hemingway with sons Patrick and Gregory with kittens in Finca Vigia, Cuba.jpg

Should I add this template to the specific file about living and deceased people? This photo was taken in 1946. However, postmortem rights of Ernest Hemingway and Gregory Hemingway (aka Gloria) may still be subjected to state statutes per en:Personality rights#United States. --George Ho (talk) 02:23, 16 December 2011 (UTC)

It's always a judgment call whether to add {{Personality rights}} to any given image. The rights pertain independently of whether we tag it, and probably every image of a living or recently deceased person would have personality rights issues if (for example) used in an ad. Always harmless to add it when in doubt, but I'll admit I almost never use it except on images I think would be embarrassing to the subject if taken out of context. - Jmabel ! talk
Sadly, I have added the template because of the (sad, tragic) history of the Hemingway family. I have made parameters of link to the article about one of Hemingway's sons. Another is still living. --George Ho (talk) 03:43, 17 December 2011 (UTC)
This section was archived on a request by: Rd232 (talk) 02:20, 26 December 2011 (UTC)

Nikbot problem

The Nikbot tells me File:1704 Louis.jpg, which I uploaded, does not have a license. It does. Is it a harmless problem? I don't want my image deleted. --Alexcoldcasefan (talk) 19:21, 23 December 2011 (UTC)

At the time nikbot informed you your upload not had a copyright tag. See the filepage history. You already fixed the problem with adding information and copyright tag to the page. -Martin H. (talk) 19:26, 23 December 2011 (UTC)
This section was archived on a request by: Saibo (Δ) 20:51, 25 December 2011 (UTC)

True, publicity photos distributed by ABC were published without copyright notice. However, photos distributed by Paramount Pictures Corporation were published with copyright notice. I have checked the notices in eBay items. What if this photo was used by Paramount? --George Ho (talk) 07:58, 17 December 2011 (UTC)

You can see in the first uploaded revision of that file that it was indeed distributed by ABC, not Paramount. Powers (talk) 01:47, 19 December 2011 (UTC)
Actually, to me, it was distributed to ABC and Paramount, not by. Permission is granted to periodicals for "editorial use only." Look at The Brady Bunch photos; for example: cast and Robert Reed. Too bad these have the wrong year. How about http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?VISuperSize&item=110399522536? What about http://www.ebay.com/itm/Press-Photo-Jack-Klugman-actor-Odd-Couple-TV-serie-/250954336553?pt=Art_Photo_Images&hash=item3a6e0b4929? --George Ho (talk) 03:25, 19 December 2011 (UTC)
I don't know who else would have been distributing such a photo if not ABC or Paramount. ABC's Press Relations return address is quite prominent on the original upload. It really couldn't be more clear. Powers (talk) 02:41, 21 December 2011 (UTC)

Category case not clear

Let's take a number of buildings. They are grouped into a category "Buildings of Town". There are too many images, so they are split into smaller categories named "Buildings at Street One" or "Buildings at Street Two". How are those smaller categories grouped? Are they still in "Buildings of Town"? Or maybe they are in "Streets of Town" now, while there are no images of streets, only images of separate houses? Thanks.--PereslavlFoto (talk) 23:08, 19 December 2011 (UTC)

Really not a good way to do the hierarchy: almost no one who doesn't know the town well will have a chance to find photos of any particular building. Also, in any but the smallest towns, you are going to get an insane number of streets. All of the following will just be my own rules of thumb but... If you are doing categories for streets, fine, do categories for streets (and that is one of the categories in which you can place a photo of a building); similarly for neighborhoods. But mainly break the Buildings in Town category down by what type of buildings they are (e.g. Houses in Town, Office Buildings in Town, etc.). If some of those get too crowded, then under those type-of-building in Town categories you can go to a category like Houses in Foo Neighborhood under both Office Buildings in Town and Neighborhood. I think Seattle presents a decent example of a breakdown that works for a city where we have several thousand images of buildings. If you have more than about 3 photos of a particular building, typically that justifies a category for the building itself (under the appropriate categories for type of building, street its on, neighborhood, etc.) so it can be found along any of these axes). I hope that helps. - Jmabel ! talk 05:16, 20 December 2011 (UTC)
The main idea I got looking at Category:Buildings in Seattle is that buildings cannot be grouped by territory. That is why the category is overfilled with images and categories partly grouped by type, partly ungrouped. When I have 296 files in Category:Houses in Seattle, how can I group them?--PereslavlFoto (talk) 11:17, 20 December 2011 (UTC)
There are probably some of these where we have 4 or more of the same house, where I'd make a category for that individual house. And we do already have -- under Category:Houses in Seattle -- Category:Houses in Seattle by neighborhood. That latter scheme could probably be expanded. No doubt some of the houses in Category:Houses in Seattle are in neighborhoods that already have such categories, and we could certainly start such a category for some others (a geographically broad Category:Houses in West Seattle, Seattle, Washington would probably absorb at least 30 of these). - Jmabel ! talk 17:01, 20 December 2011 (UTC)
You say, any particular building. I am thinking not about some special building, but about all the buildings in the neighbourhood, street by street, number by number, district by district. Those buildings are mostly common and usual, they have nothing special about each.--PereslavlFoto (talk) 21:37, 20 December 2011 (UTC)
They don't have to have anything special; if there are more than 3 images of the same building, it's worth a category just to keep them together. But, again, individual streets are rarely good as the major axis for breaking apart categories (except maybe if we are talking about something like avenues in Manhattan, where there are very few and they are a crucial part of how people think about the place). I suppose at some point the category for houses in a particular neighborhood/district can become so crowded that it's worth breaking down further, and then sometimes individual streets are the way to do that, but normally they are just confusing. For example, in Seattle, where I've lived over a third of a century, I'd be hard pressed to remember which Capitol Hill houses were on Mercer, vs. Republican vs. Harrison, and so would almost anyone who didn't live right in that neighborhood. - Jmabel ! talk 02:04, 21 December 2011 (UTC)
I hoped to see some unified method. Now I see there are too different cases between large cities and small towns.--PereslavlFoto (talk) 15:45, 21 December 2011 (UTC)

こんにちは。はじめて、wikipedia に画像を投稿しました。

この写真は表題のバンダジェフスキー氏がフリーで公開されている医学論文の写真から取ったものです。http://harmonicslife.net/Blog/2011/GensBlog/20111004/lesvos_V1.2s_E.pdf 現在、彼はベラルーシ政府から国外追放処分となり、ウクライナに移住していますが、現在のところ連絡が取れません。このような場合、どうすればよいでしょう。教えていただければ幸いです。Todaidon --Todaidon (talk) 05:05, 20 December 2011 (UTC)

こんにちは。どこを見れば、「フリーで」公開されているということが確認できますか？--Ohgi (talk) 07:28, 21 December 2011 (UTC)

More discussion seems to take place at the file (talk) page (history). --Saibo (Δ) 18:17, 27 December 2011 (UTC)

This section was archived on a request by: Saibo (Δ) 18:17, 27 December 2011 (UTC)

SVG not showing up?

Tracked in Phabricator
Task T35323

On my firefox/IE svg images stopped showing up. Examples: File:Phenanthrene Clar rule.svg, File:Anthracene Clar rule.svg, File:Chrysene Clar rule.svg, File:Clar rule.svg which are used here. Materialscientist (talk) 00:50, 22 December 2011 (UTC)

I encountered the same for the formerly black parts of File:Sulfamerazin.svg. Maybe the color is not explicit set to black? -- RE rillke questions? 01:30, 22 December 2011 (UTC)
Looks like a svg renderer issue (maybe the - I suggest to move to COM:GL/ILL. For example the first svg is not valid svg. Commons:SVG Check may help, too. Cheers --Saibo (Δ) 01:33, 22 December 2011 (UTC)
Whohoo, a new change in the software (we would call it bug, the devs maybe something like more strict checking). Added stroke="black" and it worked. -- RE rillke questions? 01:51, 22 December 2011 (UTC)
Reported. RE rillke questions? 17:31, 22 December 2011 (UTC)
Developers are working on this right now. Follow the bug for updates. NeilK (talk) 00:45, 23 December 2011 (UTC)
This section was archived on a request by: Saibo (Δ) 18:14, 27 December 2011 (UTC)

--Kashyna sasha (talk) 20:45, 22 December 2011 (UTC) Hi! I added photo, but i can't find who did it. I only have link, from where i got it. If I must delete this photo? Or i can onle add the link on it? Thank you. p.s. excuse me for my bad english

This is photo about I talk http://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/Файл:Маргарита_Терехова.jpg

--Kashyna sasha (talk) 20:45, 22 December 2011 (UTC)

As far as I can tell, you do not hold the copyright to this photo, so you shouldn't have uploaded it to Commons and it should be deleted. Assuming you are a Russian-speaker, please read Commons:Рамки проекта, especially Commons:Рамки проекта#Должен быть опубликован под свободной лицензией, или не защищен авторским правом. - Jmabel ! talk 03:53, 23 December 2011 (UTC)
This section was archived on a request by: Saibo (Δ) 18:11, 27 December 2011 (UTC)

--122.181.147.194 06:36, 26 December 2011 (UTC)

The listed source, "kit.ac.in", suggests that it is a copyvio from [6]. If so, the image isn't allowed here. --Stefan4 (talk) 23:13, 26 December 2011 (UTC)
If you are not the photographer: The permission from photographer missing. Please read about Internet images and the intro of COM:L, thanks. --Saibo (Δ) 18:04, 27 December 2011 (UTC)
This section was archived on a request by: Saibo (Δ) 18:04, 27 December 2011 (UTC)

Dear administration of Wikimedia Commons!

I'd try do my best to upload a logo for my article on Russian version of Wikipedia called "Система «Международные денежные переводы ЛИДЕР»" and I have done everything by your recomendation. I indicated a licence (GNU Free Documentation License and even Trademark Certificate №393915, lion (image) Trademark Certificate №380056) and the author of this logo. But unfortunately the system did't change the status of my image. Please help me. --Yevgeniya S-S (talk) 15:57, 27 December 2011 (UTC) Best regards, Yevgeniya

Hi Yevgeniya, as the logo is not a textlogo we need a release under a free license like cc-by-sa 3.0 from the designer/copyright holder (the company) via e-mail. Please see COM:OTRS. Cheers --Saibo (Δ) 18:01, 27 December 2011 (UTC)
This section was archived on a request by: Saibo (Δ) 18:01, 27 December 2011 (UTC)

Non-free historic image

I was hoping to upload a picture of the New Orleans Saints 2009 Super Bowl Ring: http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Saints_2009_Ring.jpg like the image I saw on the Green Bay Packers team page: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Green_Bay_Packers. The file for the Packers ring says it its license is (Non-free historic image) and I am wondering if the same license can be used for this image and if so how is that accomplished? Kingsnoopy (talk) 02:25, 28 December 2011 (UTC)

I assume that you are referring to en:File:Ice Bowl packers and cowboys.jpg. Note that this image is strictly on en-wiki, not on Commons. Commons does not allow any non-free images; en-wikpedia does for certain images that are important to the articles and not readily replaced. Note how en:Template:Non-free use rationale is filled out in en:File:Ice Bowl packers and cowboys.jpg. You can do more or less the same, using that image as an example. Or you can pursue further advice on the en-wikpedia help desk, since this is not a Commons matter. - Jmabel ! talk 03:22, 28 December 2011 (UTC)
This section was archived on a request by: Saibo (Δ) 20:41, 28 December 2011 (UTC)

E-mailed image, not sent via Upload form

Hi, the copyright owner of an image has just attached the image to an e-mail, the wording of which stated that they agree to publish that work under the free license "Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0" (unported) and GNU Free Documentation License, and e-mailed it to permissions-en@wikimedia.org (rather than using the upload form). What happens next? I want to use that image in a Wikipedia listing. When will I be able to do that and how will I find the image in order to be able to include it in a Wikipedia listing? setomorp — Preceding unsigned comment added by Setomorp (talk • contribs) 2011-12-20T08:47:57‎ (UTC)

Hi Setomorp! Thanks for your help to get an image to Commons!
That could take some days or even weeks - only volunteers are working with the emails. You will notice when you and/or (depends of your email address was mentioned, too) the copyright holder get an email reply. Next time, if possible, upload yourself and follow the steps as outlined in COM:OTRS. Cheers --Saibo (Δ) 00:38, 21 December 2011 (UTC)

Is it too late? Can I use the upload form instead? But I'm not sure which options to choose. setomorp (Δ) 01:18, 21 December 2011 (UTC)

It is best to just wait now. Otherwise something will be done twice, I guess. Or do you know the ticket number (similar to [Ticket#2011122010009730]) of the email which was sent to the Wikimedia address? In that case you could upload the file and send another email with this number in the subject line telling that the file is already uploaded. Unless it is urgent I would just wait now. Cheers --Saibo (Δ) 01:23, 21 December 2011 (UTC)

There's been no reply from Wikimedia at all so far from the e-mail sent to them. Setomorp (talk) 01:46, 21 December 2011 (UTC)

Any idea when we might at least get a reply from permissions-en@wikimedia.org acknowledging receipt of the e-mail? Setomorp (talk) 16:42, 21 December 2011 (UTC)

Commons:OTRS/Noticeboard mentions currently "The current backlog of the permission queue is: 29 days" - that should be the longest possible duration. --Saibo (Δ) 17:26, 25 December 2011 (UTC)

{{Attribution}} versus {{Cc-by-3.0}}

Commons:Copyright tags#Other free tags says under the listing for the {{Attribution}} license tag: "If you are the author of the work, consider using {{Cc-by-3.0}}, instead." Why so? The full CC-BY license text (the "Legal Code") seems long and complex, wheras the license provided by {{Attribution}} seems simple and straightforward. Is there a good reason why it would be better to use the CC-BY license for my images instead of {{Attribution}}? Thanks! —[|Retro00064|☎talk|✍contribs|] 04:31, 22 December 2011 (UTC).

CC licenses have been scrutinized by actual lawyers with relevant professional expertise, which is not necessarily the case with Commons templates. However, you can use which one you want... AnonMoos (talk) 11:11, 22 December 2011 (UTC)
My understanding: The long contract means that in case of problems between you and the re-user you both can easily refer to the contract text and it may be already defined therein. Whereas if you use the hacked-up {{Attribution}} you cannot do such and would be more likely to need to go to a court - not sure if that would me a benefit for you or the re-user in the most cases. --Saibo (Δ) 16:14, 22 December 2011 (UTC)

Improperly named redirect delete

May I ask, if an image has been moved several times in confusion to (now) redirects with factually incorrect names, and links to such redirects have been universally replaced with the current image name, are the redirects eligible for deletion? --Officer781 (talk) 03:34, 31 December 2011 (UTC)

These redirects may be deleted. --Wvk (talk) 11:16, 31 December 2011 (UTC)
Can you please help me delete them then? Thanks. Here are the redirects (be careful, they're still redirects and some are still double-redirects, in which case both of them are listed here):

--Officer781 (talk) 14:37, 31 December 2011 (UTC)

This section was archived on a request by: --Wvk (talk) 19:04, 1 January 2012 (UTC)

It's my college image , how can I permanently upload it on wikipedia article "Kanpur Institute of Technology"


--223.227.2.130 04:49, 26 December 2011 (UTC)

Are you saying you took this picture yourself? Because it sure looks like a bad copy from elsewhere. - Jmabel ! talk 09:21, 26 December 2011 (UTC)
That's a copyvio, so it isn't allowed here. Only upload photos taken by yourself. Photos taken by other people may only be uploaded if the photographer died very long ago. --Stefan4 (talk) 22:54, 26 December 2011 (UTC)

Zoe Balcescu(help!!!)

by Andrei-Radu Georgescu(This painting has been reported stolen on 22 of August 2011,by Andrei-Radu Georgescu to Police Section No.3 Bucharest, Romania.The painting is still missing together with other paintings .userAristiderazu — Preceding unsigned comment added by Aristiderazu (talk • contribs) 2011-12-27T17:39:24‎ (UTC)

I guess you are talking about this painting File:Zoe_Balcescu,painted_by_Costin_Petrescu,1902,family_painting.jpg. So what is your question? Do you just want help to get the original painting (which was stolen) back? --Saibo (Δ) 21:29, 27 December 2011 (UTC)

32nd Mircea Voda Regiment photo(Defending Marasesti Train Station) ,copyright problems

This picture is the property of Andrei-Radu Georgescu from my great grand father album received as a gift from the Regiment itself.userAristiderazu — Preceding unsigned comment added by Aristiderazu (talk • contribs) 2011-12-27T17:43:37‎ (UTC)

About which picture do you need help? This File:General_Aristide_Razu,_with_the_Communication_and_Signalling_Regiment_in_1928.jpg? --Saibo (Δ) 21:28, 27 December 2011 (UTC)

--Deoliveirafan (talk) 00:59, 29 December 2011 (UTC) Hello, I uploaded three images today and wanted to make sure that they were acceptable. I get confused with the copyright rules and what I see on wikipedia all the time, so I figured I'd just give it a go.--Deoliveirafan (talk) 00:59, 29 December 2011 (UTC)

As for the one you linked: it's unlikely that a picture of Stanley Donen is by Stanley Donen, and even more unlikely that you have any rights to it to let you release it. Might be acceptable with a non-free use justification on en-wikipedia, not OK on Commons unless I'm really missing something. - Jmabel ! talk 01:08, 29 December 2011 (UTC)
Similar problem with File:Stanley-Donen- -Gene-Kelly.jpg. - Jmabel ! talk 01:10, 29 December 2011 (UTC)
File:Indiscreet1.jpg equally problematic: you don't even seem to be claiming any basis for licensing. Have you read Commons:Scope#Must be freely licensed or public domain? - Jmabel ! talk 01:12, 29 December 2011 (UTC)

My picture has been removed

Dear Support,

I am not familiar with upload copyright picture and I don't know how can I talk to someone for helping me.

I upload picture on Top Eleven Wikipedia. Top Eleven allowed me to post a new logo. The picture was created by Top Eleven. I was wondering would it be possible if I upload that photo for them? And how can I do for the right way to upload that. I rules are very complicate.

Thank you for your help, I am looking forwards to hearing from you.

Best regards, Top11Thai — Preceding unsigned comment added by Top11thai (talk • contribs) 08:57, 29 December 2011‎ (UTC)

Please follow COM:OTRS. We need a written permission from the copyright-holder. Thank you. -- RE rillke questions? 14:17, 29 December 2011 (UTC)

How to add categories / change licence AFTER document upload

I've uploaded three documents and need to add categories and change the licence. How and where can I do that? Do I need to do something else in order to be able to use the documents in my Wikipedia entry, e.g. press a particular "publish button" etc.? The documents are: File:Logo der Deutsch-Ägyptischen Gesellschaft Köln e.V..jpg, File:Berufsfachschule Dar-el-Salam Kairo.pdf and File:Schüler der Berufsfachschule in Dar-el-Salam, Kairo.jpg. Many thanks for you help! -- Blange28 (talk) 10:48, 29 December 2011 (UTC)

Wir können auch auf Deutsch kommunizieren. Wie wäre es, wenn Du die Sprachen, die Du sprichtst als COM:BABEL-Bausteine auf deine Benutzerseite setzt.
Your uploads: You are not the author. If the source is a website, please link to this site. Do you have permission from the copyright-holder to publish these images? No, then please add {{Copyvio}} to the image-description-pages. Otherwise, please follow COM:OTRS. Thank you. -- RE rillke questions? 14:15, 29 December 2011 (UTC)

Is it possible to restrict the use of the images I have uploaded? only to wikipedia without granting any further use (especially if commercial)?

Good morning, I hope you can assist me. I have uploaded several images of paintings by my father (of which I am the copyright holder). I would like to know if it is possible to restrict the possible use to wikipedia, otherwise I would like the procedure to cancel the uploaded images. Thank you very much for your assistance. Erbaluce70 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Erbaluce70 (talk • contribs) 10:33, 29 December 2011‎ (UTC)

Hello Erbaluce70, no. It is our "basic principle" that images must be freely reusable with certain limitations: You can request attribution, copyleft a copy of the original being passed along with a derivative work, the full inclusion of the license-text, .... If you use {{GFDL}}, you make it almost impossible to re-users using this image in printed media (the must append the whole license-text). There is also {{FAL}} that as some tricky conditions.
Experience has shown that most re-usages do not comply, even with the "simple" attribution or copyleft-request. In the case you can sue the re-users and demand compensation. Please note that I am not a lawyer and this information is without any warranty.
You find more information at COM:L and Commons:Copyright tags. -- RE rillke questions? 14:07, 29 December 2011 (UTC)

this picture was taken before 1939 and I found it in book published in 2007. If I give information about the source if I could publish the picture?

Regards --MarcinW (talk) 00:22, 29 December 2011 (UTC)

Hi MacinW! Is Henryk Lesiak the photographer? Do you know when he died? If you do not know it seems that according to Template:PD-Polish the photo would be public domain anyway. Put please try to provide the date of death info. And do you also know when it was first published? --Saibo (Δ) 02:06, 29 December 2011 (UTC)


Hi Saibo

>Is Henryk Lesiak the photographer?

No, I don't know the photographer. Henryk Lesiak is autor of the book where the photo was placed

>do you also know when it was first published?

I don't know, I found the photo in book. I sent request to publishing house, that issued the book, with question about permission to use the photo in wikipedia

For Commons, we need more than permission to use the photo in Wikipedia. See Commons:Project_scope#Non-allowable licence terms and (perhaps) COM:OTRS. - Jmabel ! talk 06:09, 30 December 2011 (UTC)

Hi, This has been recreated from the original paper document and I believe copyright isn't an issue as the Brand was abandoned following the insolvency of the parent company in 1990. The right were not sold as they were valueless. Nor was the parent company acquired, it was simply wound up. I have tried to document this at upload time but was unable to.

--PaganMan (talk) 17:04, 29 December 2011 (UTC) Anthony.

No need for sophisticated research. It is simply text so I did the following: Revision of File:Sunday Correspondent.png. Even if the Brand was abandoned following the insolvency of the parent company, we would require a written permission by the copyright-holder (the author) of the intellectual property (work) for a free license otherwise. -- RE rillke questions? 17:14, 29 December 2011 (UTC)
Really, there is no problem at all here. This is a text logo, not copyrightable in any case. - Jmabel ! talk 01:18, 30 December 2011 (UTC)

Hallo,

ich habe eben das Bild File:Goeztepe 1977-78.jpg hochgeladen. Ich hab dann sofort einen Hinweis bekommen, dass ich nicht ausreichende Lizenzangaben gemacht habe. Ich hab das foto von einem fußballer der auf dem bild zu sehen ist. das Foto hat er einem freund während des spiels machen lassen. Ich bin mit dem Fußballer, sein Name ist Irfan Ertürk befreundet. Er hat zugestimmt, dass ich das foto und viele weitere hochladen kann. Was muss ich nun machen damit es lizenztechnisch nicht zu konflikten kommt?

Danke im voraus

--Xberger (talk) 21:33, 29 December 2011 (UTC)

It seems unlikely that Ertürk would be the copyright holder; that is presumably the photographer. So unless we can get that photographer's permission (COM:OTRS) it seems to me this image won't be in scope because of rights issues. - Jmabel ! talk 01:21, 30 December 2011 (UTC)
The photographer is a relative of Erturk and he photographer is unfortunately died. The photo was created upon request from Ertürk. The photo has me Erturk out of his private photo album. He is the owner of the only copy.--Xberger (talk) 10:00, 30 December 2011 (UTC)

Why can't I upload a higher resolution version?

When I try to replace an image I previously uploaded with a higher resolution version of the same image, the software won't let me, and just tells me (unhelpfully) that I am trying to replace it with the same image. Similarly, if I try to create a new file for the new version, I am told that the image already exists on Commons, and am not allowed to proceed. I am not mistakenly trying to reload the same resolution, the replacement has ten times as many bytes. --Epipelagic (talk) 07:41, 30 December 2011 (UTC)

Could you possibly get a screenshot of the error you're getting? That might help. Also, how are you trying to upload? Via Special:Upload, Commons:Upload, or the link for uploading a new version on the existing file page? Also, what's the total size of the new file you're trying to upload? Killiondude (talk) 08:31, 30 December 2011 (UTC)
Ahh... my mistake, my apologies. The higher resolution version had already been loaded by someone else. --Epipelagic (talk) 09:35, 30 December 2011 (UTC)
Aha. We all make little mistakes like that. :) At least we know nothing is wrong with Commons. Killiondude (talk) 17:34, 30 December 2011 (UTC)

Logo modifications

IUST logo has been introduced at least 42 years ago. Since IUST is a governmental university, according to Iranian copyright law, its logo is in public domain (if a work belongs to a legal personality, it falls into public domain after 30 years from the date of publication or public presentation). But there is a small problem! The logo has been slightly changed since then. Here is the old logo and here is the newer version of the same logo (official website). I have created a new version of the logo using Inkscape that is far better than existing one (on enwp). Can I upload it here, on Commons? I have no idea about the date of introduction of the new logo (slightly modified). Any help would be appreciated. AMERICOPHILE 09:59, 30 December 2011 (UTC)

Hello, did you ask on COM:VPP or linked from that page? -- RE rillke questions? 11:46, 30 December 2011 (UTC)
Hi Rillke, Do you mean that I must ask my question on COM:VPP? AMERICOPHILE 12:08, 30 December 2011 (UTC)
I meant COM:VPC, sorry. It is your decision, but you will get more likely better input. -- RE rillke questions? 12:18, 30 December 2011 (UTC)
Thanks. I asked my question there too. AMERICOPHILE 12:32, 30 December 2011 (UTC)

Request

Please delete this file, I've uploaded a better version http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:%D0%90%D0%B2%D1%82%D0%BE%D0%B3%D1%80%D0%B0%D1%84_%D0%9A%D0%BE%D0%BD%D1%81%D1%82%D0%B0%D0%BD%D1%82%D0%B8%D0%BD%D0%B0_%D0%9A%D0%B8%D0%BD%D1%87%D0%B5%D0%B2%D0%B0.jpg --Slav9ln (talk) 16:24, 30 December 2011 (UTC)

Try {{Db-g7}}. It is for authors who want it deleted under good faith. --George Ho (talk) 00:12, 31 December 2011 (UTC)
Which is the better version? (File-link). Thank you. -- RE rillke questions? 11:31, 31 December 2011 (UTC)

PD-Somalia

Can any work by a Somali author, created in Somalia, be licensed as PD ? Or can content made available over the internet have US copyright restrictions, despite the lack of functioning copyright law in Somalia ? Thanks. --Claritas (talk) 11:23, 31 December 2011 (UTC)

  • 17 USC 104 (http://www.copyright.gov/title17/92chap1.pdf) only extends copyright in the United States to United States works and works from countries that are parties to an international copyright agreement. Somalia did sign WIPO in 1982 but has failed to enforce it. Whether US courts would grant copyright is a gray area. Circular 38a of the copyright office, which lists international agreements the US government considers to be in force, says Somalia's situation is unclear. You are probably all right but I would consult a lawyer, especially before using something for commercial gain. -Nard (Hablemonos)(Let's talk) 15:41, 31 December 2011 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Commons:Help_desk/Archive/2011/12&oldid=67213896"