Commons:Help desk/Archive/2012/02

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

Problem or not?

The image File:Steinway & Sons concert grand piano, model D-274, manufactured at Steinway's factory in Hamburg, Germany.png has been removed from a Wikipedia article with the reason "No copyrighted images allowed, no images with requirement for copyright notice"[1] As I understand there should be no problem if an image has a requirement for attribution like "Photo: © Copyright Steinway & Sons", because the license template says "You must attribute the work in the manner specified by the author or licensor (but not in any way that suggests that they endorse you or your use of the work)." Furthermore, the image File:Steinway & Sons concert grand piano, model D-274, manufactured at Steinway's factory in Hamburg, Germany.png is copyrighted, but can be used under the license "CC BY SA 3.0", which as I understand is allowed on Wikipedia. I hope that someone can tell me what the problem is if there is any problem with the image I have uploaded. --Fanoftheworld (talk) 03:01, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

Thats a question for Wikipedia. --Martin H. (talk) 08:07, 1 February 2012 (UTC)
This has already been answered at Commons talk:Licensing#Problem or not? Please don't crosspost. —LX (talk, contribs) 08:43, 1 February 2012 (UTC)
This section was archived on a request by: Saibo (Δ) 00:40, 3 February 2012 (UTC)

hi

i would like to keep this [2] it was used with my own personal camera at my house and i don't no wither i say own work or central bank of kuwait..i want to keep it here in commons for information in commons for everyone.. thanks

--Neogeolegend (talk) 07:42, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

Taking a photo of someone else's work does not make it your own work and does not transfer the copyright (including the right to issue copyright licenses) to you. Is there any reason to believe that this is anything but a non-free copyrighted work? —LX (talk, contribs) 08:40, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

no the photo was taken by me at my own house of the current usage of 10 kuwaiti dinar and if you want me to change some description to be legalized use it in commons. please tell me.--Neogeolegend (talk) 09:13, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

Again, it doesn't matter that you took the photo, because making a photographic reproduction of someone else's work does not make it your own work. Again, is there any reason to believe that the design of the 10 Kuwaiti dinar bill is free? (Kuwait is not listed on Commons:Currency.) Unless there is, it isn't legal no matter what changes you make to the description. —LX (talk, contribs) 12:38, 1 February 2012 (UTC)
This section was archived on a request by: Saibo (Δ) 00:45, 3 February 2012 (UTC)

Can we upload movie poster in Commons ?

Hello, I would like to modify and complete an article about a movie. I would like to add the movie poster and maybe some pictures of the film. Can I do it if I indicate my sources ? What are the precautions I must take in order to respect property rights ? Thank you in advance. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Carole Luciole (talk • contribs)

Hello,
No, unless you have a formal written permission from the designer's poster. You may upload it on the English Wikipedia under fair use. Regards, Yann (talk) 10:50, 2 February 2012 (UTC)
"designer's poster" ==> "poster's designer". And "under fair use" meaning fill out the non-free use rationale (look for en:template:non-free use rationale on en-wiki. - Jmabel ! talk 16:29, 2 February 2012 (UTC)
Here is a direct link to the upload page for posters. Make sure you read the explanation and fill out the fields completely. Dcoetzee (talk) 22:38, 5 February 2012 (UTC)
This section was archived on a request by: Saibo (Δ) 00:47, 3 February 2012 (UTC)

Missing in File list

Hi,
something that bugs me a little is that there's these two files that on the one hand I appear as their uploader and on the other hand they do not show in my upload list.. How is this possible?
The files are Plastico.jpg and Kishon Junction.JPG. Thanx! Orrlingtalk 00:29, 3 February 2012 (UTC)

Because you are not the last uploader (see the file versions). Also read the header of your file list: "When filtered by user, only files where that user uploaded the most recent version of the file are shown." Don't you see that? What is your interface language?
Use the gallery tool to see also those two files. Cheers --Saibo (Δ) 00:35, 3 February 2012 (UTC)
This section was archived on a request by: Saibo (Δ) 00:35, 3 February 2012 (UTC)

Public Domain

Hello. I would like to upload the photo that is at the link below to here, but I don't know what the license would be?
http://totallyfreeimages.com/483313/Culture-adds-flavor ReelAngelGirl (talk) 14:39, 2 February 2012 (UTC)

Hello, Be cautious with the websites that reuse pictures. Whenever possible, try to find the original source and see what what the credit notice says. In this case, it would seem to be this photo and the status tag on Commons would be Template:PD-USGov-Military-Army. -- Asclepias (talk) 14:58, 2 February 2012 (UTC)
This section was archived on a request by: Bulwersator (talk) 06:43, 3 February 2012 (UTC)

Russell-Knox Building image

I am working on the Naval Criminal Investigative Service on Wikipedia and I would like to replace the image of the Russell-Knox Building with another image I found on the NCIS official website. I do not know the proper way to upload an image with the correct identifications (such as it being the work of the US Government meaning it is in the public domain) and I was hoping that somebody could do this for me.

The image I found is here which was found on this page. If it is up-loadable to the Commons, I would like for it to be uploaded to the following page: File:Russell-Knox Building.jpg

Lastly, since this image is of higher quality than the current image found here, would it be advisable to delete the older image and replace it on the two pages it is being used at? Thanks. Evan.oltmanns (talk) 04:17, 3 February 2012 (UTC)

Last things first: we don't usually delete images on Commons just because we have a better image of the same subject; there are buildings of which we have dozens of photos. But, yes, if a higher-quality image is uploaded, then it would make sense to use the higher-quality image on, for example, Wikipedia pages.
Since I started going backwards: image looks uploadable to me; presumably a work of the U.S. government and therefore public domain. It's too bad they aren't explicit about that, though: it could imaginably be a copyrighted photo taken by (for example) an independent contractor who was not a government employee.
I'll leave a little time here for anyone else to weigh in, and if no one objects (or takes care of it) I'll do the upload. - Jmabel ! talk 02:32, 4 February 2012 (UTC)
Done. You may want to add more categories. - Jmabel ! talk 09:33, 4 February 2012 (UTC)
This section was archived on a request by: Jmabel ! talk 09:33, 4 February 2012 (UTC)

I wish to upload a logo for a wikipedia page about the Gotthard Oberalp Arena. Obviously this logo will be copyrighted.

Will I be able to upload and use the logo? Sas1998 (talk) 17:40, 2 February 2012 (UTC)

If the logo is copyrighted it can not be uploaded here at Wikimedia Commons. But you can upload the copyrighted logo under a license called fair use, which is allowed at for example the English Wikipedia. You must be an autoconfirmed and registered user logged in on the English Wikipedia before you can upload the logo there. See Wikipedia:Upload. Further questions about uploading a logo under fair use should be asked at the help desk at Wikipedia: Help desk of the English Wikipedia. --Fanoftheworld (talk) 21:46, 2 February 2012 (UTC)
If you are thinking about uploading http://www.gotthard-oberalp-arena.ch/prog/img/logo_sedrun-andermatt.gif - you can upload that to Commons with those copyright templates: {{PD-textlogo}}{{Trademarked}}. Those two inidicate that this logo is not copyrighted since it is too simple (just a bit text and simple shapes (swiss cross)). Cheers --Saibo (Δ) 00:50, 3 February 2012 (UTC)
That is the logo I was thinking of, yes. I have tried to upload it onto Commons, but I am unsure of the author. What do I do/write? Sas1998 (talk) 10:08, 4 February 2012 (UTC)
If you want to do it very good: write {{unknown|author}} / Gotthard Oberalp Arena or similar. The author does not really matter (since it is public domain) and is just a courtesy (but we do not know the author - just the trademark holder). Select "a logo using simple geometry and general typeface" at Commons:Upload/public domain to start. Cheers --Saibo (Δ) 01:11, 6 February 2012 (UTC)
This section was archived on a request by: Saibo (Δ) 01:11, 6 February 2012 (UTC)

Change format of image without creating a new page

Do anyone know the easiest way to change an image from ".png format" to for example ".jpg format"? I would like to change the format of the following photo, because some users think the ".png format" is not good – see: Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Steinway & Sons concert grand piano, model D-274, manufactured at Steinway's factory in Hamburg, Germany.png. I have already a file in ".jpg format" with the same photo. I just don't know how to change the ".png format" to ".jpg format". --Fanoftheworld (talk) 21:38, 2 February 2012 (UTC)

Doesn't work (admins can work around). You have to upload new. But I fail to understand what is wrong with png here. Cheers --Saibo (Δ) 00:39, 3 February 2012 (UTC)
What do you mean by "admins can work around"? --Fanoftheworld (talk) 01:57, 3 February 2012 (UTC)
Admins can delete the file version (requires a delete and restore) attached to the page, then move the page to the new name and then upload a new file version (preserving all source information, of course). Example --Saibo (Δ) 01:14, 6 February 2012 (UTC)
This section was archived on a request by: Saibo (Δ) 01:14, 6 February 2012 (UTC)

Uploading photo

Have been trying for past 5 days to upload a photo - Keep getting waiting for Wikimedia - IE just shuts off after an hour or two. I've uploaded 15-20 photos already, so I think it's in Wikimedia ?? - — Preceding unsigned comment added by [[User:|]] ([[User talk:|talk]] • contribs)

  • Is this a much larger file than the ones you have successfully uploaded? And is it possible that you might now be on a slower connection? How's your time to download a large, full-res photo? - Jmabel ! talk 01:12, 2 February 2012 (UTC)

User:SeikoEN maps and copyvios

Hi

I have had ongoing discussions with Seiko about their maps as most, if not all, have text inserts. The text inserts are excerpts from a copyrighted site, www.encyclopaediaofukraine.com, and I have discussed and requested many times that they remove the text as it is copyrighted material here and answers on my page User_talk:Chaosdruid. I find this is not happening and, after ample time, I feel it is unfortunate but necessary to do something to remove them.

I cannot find all the users maps, as there are far too many categories to go through, but wondered if there is a way to perform a user gallery and do a group nomination. Chaosdruid (talk) 11:58, 3 February 2012 (UTC)

Image with wrong name

I have posted image with wrong name ( File:Temeperature minime 1956.gif ). The right name of file is File:Temperature minime 1956.gif. You can move the image ? Thanks --Andre86 (talk) 15:53, 8 February 2012 (UTC)

This section was archived on a request by: Jmabel ! talk 16:12, 9 February 2012 (UTC)

Tasya van Ree pic

Hi, again. I came across this image, while editing, and wanted to make a cropped version showing only Tasya van Ree for her article, but noticed that copyright problem notice on that image's page, and didn't want to upload another version if the image would soon be deleted. The thing is, the deadline indicated by that notice came and went almost two months ago. Do you know what's going to happen to the image? Is it going to be deleted? Thanks. Nightscream (talk) 15:44, 9 February 2012 (UTC)

Looks like it's now been deleted. By the way, in the future, on Commons it's a lot more useful if you provide a link to the image on Commons, not the mirror URL on the English-language Wikipedia. - Jmabel ! talk 16:19, 9 February 2012 (UTC)
I did provide the Commons link. It was http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Isabel-Lucas-Matt-Dallas-Foto-Tasya-Van-Ree-01.jpg. It's still there in my original message above. Thanks. Nightscream (talk) 18:25, 9 February 2012 (UTC)
The normal way to link on Commons is File:Isabel-Lucas-Matt-Dallas-Foto-Tasya-Van-Ree-01.jpg, not a URL. That way it will "go red" if/when the image is deleted. And, yes, now I see that one of your URLs is within Commons. - Jmabel ! talk 01:35, 10 February 2012 (UTC)
This section was archived on a request by: Jmabel ! talk 16:19, 9 February 2012 (UTC)

1951 Image by Elmer Wexler -- Copyright or Public Domain

Is there any way to find out if this image is really in the public domain < http://insitebuilders.com/42-ElmerWexlerFalloutIllustration.jpg > It is listed as sourced to the NYPublic Lib, but shows a copywrite to Life Magazine, and was published in June 1951.

Thanks, Dennis — Preceding unsigned comment added by Insitebuilders (talk • contribs)

You might do better to ask this at Commons:Village pump/Copyright, which is where the "copyright people" tend to hang out. The issue would be whether copyright was renewed on that issue of Life; I, for one, have no idea. - Jmabel ! talk 02:36, 4 February 2012 (UTC)

Help reading in Dutch / German for attribution

Could someone look through http://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:Search&redirs=1&ns0=1&ns6=1&ns9=1&ns12=1&ns14=1&ns106=1&search=kraaiennest+wave+animation&limit=20&offset=0 and see if there is attribution of any of these graphics to computer programmers or engineers (by name) other than the Uploader? I know references are given to particular papers in the literature in general for equations, however, I am looking for names of people who are clearly attributed as doing this work. I'm an English-only person, and I might have missed something. My reason for doing this search is that I want to re-do the computer code in Mathematica (easily read syntax) and publish the code PD as I do at http://www.youvan.com for "Pseudocolor in Pure and Applied Mathematics". I also have an interest in depositing similar code at the wolfram.com site for kid's educational games: http://demonstrations.wolfram.com/MotionOfParticlesInOceanWaves/. Balls racing on ocean waves would be mesmerizing and educational as compared to your standard mindless video game! Doug youvan (talk) 01:06, 4 February 2012 (UTC)

Template doesn't work properly? File:Infostand_von_OroVerde_Detail.jpg

Hello!

I just uploaded my first file, using the template that is mentioned on the "Upload file" page (Template:Information/doc, I think) for the description. Unfortunately, the description looks kind of broken now... File:Infostand_von_OroVerde_Detail.jpg I'm quite confused now. Did I make a mistake or is there something wrong with the template? What can I do?

(The image also doesn't show up - is that because it's CYMK, not RGB? If so, I'd just upload a RGB version.)

Kind regards, Loxodonta (talk) 11:39, 9 February 2012 (UTC)

Template issue fixed. mickit 12:13, 9 February 2012 (UTC)

Thank you. But unfortunately the same thing happens when I try to upload another image - the description looks broken in the preview... Loxodonta (talk) 12:47, 9 February 2012 (UTC)

Please take a look at http://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=File:Infostand_von_OroVerde_Detail.jpg&diff=66789594&oldid=66787746 to see how your previous one had to be fixed; the principle is extensible. Also, please use Categories. - Jmabel ! talk 16:15, 9 February 2012 (UTC)
Du brauchst {{Information}} nicht extra hinzufügen, wenn Du JavaScript aktiviert hast. Das macht die Software von selbst. -- RE rillke questions? 16:16, 9 February 2012 (UTC)
This section was archived on a request by: Loxodonta (talk) 09:53, 10 February 2012 (UTC))

Geuploade foto wordt niet geplaatst.

Een door mij up-geloade foto: Gedempte sluis 2011.jpg wordt niet in het artikel (Sluis 7)opgenomen, drie andere wel. Wat is het probleem? Ik heb geprobeerd opnieuw te uploaden maar dan wordt vermeld dfat de foto reeds bestaat. Alleen de link in het artikel kan hem niet vinden. Faasco (talk) 08:44, 4 February 2012 (UTC)

Uw bestand is geüpload naar File:Gedempte_sluis_2011.jpg. Als u nodig hebt om het bij te werken, is er een link voor het uploaden van een nieuwe versie boven de categorieën op die pagina. Machine translated Ajraddatz (talk) 22:49, 4 February 2012 (UTC)

Whall window in St Mary's Church Bleasby Nottinghamshire.jpg

I have added two images under the above identification but they are totally wrong as the image does not refer to Bleasby Church but another (St Andrew's in Chippenham). I have now uploaded the correct image but would like the two "Whall window in St Mary's Church Bleasby Nottinghamshire.jpg " deleted.

If someone would do this I would be most grateful.

Clearly I must be more careful in future.

Weglinde (talk) 19:56, 4 February 2012 (UTC)

I can't make sense of this. If you could link to the other images (using an approach like this -- you'll see what I did when you edit this section) it would help a lot. - Jmabel ! talk 17:38, 5 February 2012 (UTC)

Can't find my Picture.

I recently uploaded a photo entitled 'Lexington, South Carolin Clock,' and I cannot find it. It had been about 6 hours. How long should I have to wait.

Thanks — Preceding unsigned comment added by CampWalterJohnson (talk • contribs) 22:10, 4 February 2012‎ (UTC)

Please see Special:Contributions/CampWalterJohnson and Special:Log/CampWalterJohnson. Apparently, you did not upload a file (or the upload was not completed) with the file name "Lexington, South Carolin Clock,". However, you uploaded a file "Lexington, South Carolina.jpg", which might be what you're looking for. -- Asclepias (talk) 22:21, 4 February 2012 (UTC)

Can any admin have a look at Commons:Village_pump/Copyright#Category:Logos_of_educational_institutions_in_Karnataka? It looks like a whole category of copyvios; I'm not too familiar with Commons noticeboards, so I may just have posted this in the wrong place, excuse me! MikeLynch (talk) 09:30, 5 February 2012 (UTC)

Portrait of an Author

Hey, today I uploaded the portrait of an author on his own wikipedia article. He gave me the photo that he made himself and told me I should upload it for him (he's an old man and not very sure in using the internet and wikipedia). Now I want to know what kind of license I have to chose. It's not my own picture but it is also non of with a common licensing... It's just a private taken picture that the author wants to have next to his article but he's not able to upload it himself. Thank you very much for the help — Preceding unsigned comment added by Permaforst (talk • contribs) 2012-02-06T12:11:13‎ (UTC)

In order to upload images that were not made by you, the author needs to release them under a free license. If they are willing to do this, see COM:OTRS for information on how to confirm the permission to use the image. Ajraddatz (talk) 15:07, 6 February 2012 (UTC)
Note that the person who needs to release the work is the copyright holder of the photo. This may be the author themselves, or it may be the photographer who took the picture. That depends on what country you're in, whether it was a job for hire, what contracts they signed, and so on. If it's a professional work and you can identify the photographer, contact the original photographer and ask them about it too, as they should know better than the author. Dcoetzee (talk) 12:46, 7 February 2012 (UTC)
This section was archived on a request by: Saibo (Δ) 17:29, 11 February 2012 (UTC)

Hi, I´m trying to add my own picture, but I don´t know what to do with the licensy policy... and then the picture is not published in my article... do you know how i should do it? THanks

--Sasisoy (talk) 17:57, 6 February 2012 (UTC)

That's all rather confusingly worded. First things first: when you say "my own picture", are you saying that you are the photographer of the picture you've linked? - Jmabel ! talk 02:03, 7 February 2012 (UTC)
You're claiming that you are the copyright holder of File:Die palm becaouse of red weevil (Rhynchophorus ferrugineus) in Valencia (Spain).JPG, where you list your name as Sara Sánchez López (linked to your username). You are also claiming that you are the copyright holder of File:Thanasimus formicarius 2.jpg and several similar files, where you list the author (you, supposedly) as mwkozlowski (also linked to your username). Searching for "mwkozlowski" on Google points to Marek Kozlowski from Poland. It would seem that some of what you claim to be your own pictures are not actually yours. Could you explain this? —LX (talk, contribs) 14:57, 7 February 2012 (UTC)
All uploads tagged now (2 files weren't) - should be deleted if there is no explanation by the uploader. --Saibo (Δ) 17:26, 11 February 2012 (UTC)
This section was archived on a request by: Saibo (Δ) 17:26, 11 February 2012 (UTC)

This photo (Tschuehly.jpg) shows my uncle, Thomas Schühly. I would like to use this photo for his German Wikipedia entry. As far as I know the photo belongs to himself and it is shown on http://schuehlyfilm.com/. My cousin Mario Schühly - who organizes this page - told me that I could use it for Wikipedia.

The same counts for another photo I uploaded: http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Rainer_Werner_Fassbinder,_Thomas_Sch%C3%BChly,_Horst_Wendlandt.jpg

Now I do not know what sufficient information I could add to the description to have it accepted. :(

--Nschuehly (talk) 19:18, 7 February 2012 (UTC)

The photographer would typically be the copyright holder unless they formally signed away those rights. Being the subject of a photo doesn't normally give you any rights other than personality rights. Do you know who took the photo? - Jmabel ! talk 05:06, 8 February 2012 (UTC)
We would need the permission via e-mail from the photographer (or copyright holder in some cases). Also available in German: COM:OTRS/de. Viele Grüße --Saibo (Δ) 17:15, 11 February 2012 (UTC)
This section was archived on a request by: Saibo (Δ) 17:15, 11 February 2012 (UTC)

i need to make it so that the picture I uploaded won't be deleted for copyright reasons. it is a concer poster and free to the public, what do i do so that it doesn't get deleted??

--BobDylanFan1994 (talk) 20:08, 7 February 2012 (UTC)

Nothing at the source implies that the poster might be freely reusable. Actually, the source website specifies that they do not own the copyright on the images and that "credit goes to their respective agencies and wonderful photographers". So, you would need to find who are the "agencies and wonderful photographers" who own the copyright on this particular poster and convince them to release the poster under a free license. -- Asclepias (talk) 22:42, 7 February 2012 (UTC)
Permission from photographer/poster designer would be needed. You may also want to read about Internet images and the intro of COM:L, thank you for your help! --Saibo (Δ) 17:05, 11 February 2012 (UTC)
This section was archived on a request by: Saibo (Δ) 17:05, 11 February 2012 (UTC)

cannot upload previously deleted file

The file B-ROscGraph2.jpg was deleted 11 April 2010 because no copyright info. I have gotten permission from the owner, used {{OTRS pending}}, but it won't upload anyway. Also some problems with "source" field. 

 I hope this is the right place for my question.

Warren Rauscher Wcrauscher (talk) 22:43, 7 February 2012 (UTC)

If the OTRS permission was sent recently and if it mentioned the filename, then you can leave some time for the OTRS team to process their mail and they should undelete the file if the permission is valid. If you need more information or if you don't have any news from them after a reasonable time (say, two weeks after the permission mail was sent) or if there is some particular urgency for undeleting the file, you can request help at Commons:OTRS/Noticeboard (to get the OTRS confirmation) or at Commons:Undeletion requests (to get the file undeleted). In the "source" field, just tell briefly where the image comes from. From the original upload comments on en.wikipedia and from your above comment, I seem to understand that you originally obtained it from the author, you kept it in your personal archives and then you modified it? -- Asclepias (talk) 23:25, 7 February 2012 (UTC)
This section was archived on a request by: Saibo (Δ) 17:03, 11 February 2012 (UTC)

This pic was provided to me as a member of switch for promotional purposes. The photographer was paid for his services and holds no copyright to the pic. I'm not sure what category that falls into, but the pic is ok for posting.

--Flohism (talk) 01:13, 9 February 2012 (UTC)

This section was archived on a request by: Saibo (Δ) 16:47, 11 February 2012 (UTC)

Hi,

New to wikipedia and wikimedia. I'm trying to create a page about Harold Rubens, and hope to use the photograph from here: http://lib-1.lse.ac.uk/archivesblog/?tag=harold-rubens

I've contacted the LSE, who have told me that the copyright was held by the now defunct London News Agency Photos Ltd. The archivist at the LSE therefore believes that there is no longer any copyright restrictions on the photo.

I'm just wondering what information I need to include in the tag when trying to upload the image to wikicommons? Which tags are appropriate?

Many thanks in advance, Artifice44— Preceding unsigned comment added by Artifice44 (talk • contribs) 2012-02-09T14:00:59‎ (UTC)

In general, companies going out of business in no way terminates copyrights. Normally, some entity acquires such rights. In the (all too common) worst case, the copyright is in limbo: still legally in effect, but with no one who can grant permission, a true "orphan copyright". So it is likely we can't use this. - Jmabel ! talk 16:21, 9 February 2012 (UTC)
Is it really possible for a copyright to be in effect but held by no one? Wouldn't it be completely unenforcable? Dcoetzee (talk) 23:01, 13 February 2012 (UTC)
Held by noone in this case most probably does not apply. The London News Agency Photos Ltd., or LNA for short, got swallowed up by the Press Association according to [3]. So, paimages most likely owns these copyrights today, as far as they're not expired yet. In this case, we'd need to know who the photographer was. And under the URAA it'd be most likely copyrighted in the U.S. (Harold Rubens was born 1918, and although the source given above doesn't date the image, I'd say it was taken and therefore first published after 1923; the boy looks older than 5 years.) Lupo 23:35, 13 February 2012 (UTC)
This section was archived on a request by: Saibo (Δ) 16:49, 11 February 2012 (UTC)

I'm not entirely sure if this illustration is free of copyright, but I think it is. I took the illustration from the digitalized book of Guericke from 1672 which is offered by the Herzog August Bibliothek Wolfenbüttel. (see: http://diglib.hab.de/wdb.php?dir=drucke/34-5-phys-2f) One can download the book for free for private use. But the copyright held by the library prohibits the publication of this digitalized book. Does this also hold for a part of a page as in this case?

--GRrammer (talk) 16:49, 9 February 2012 (UTC)

If the illustration is from 1672, no one holds copyright on it. And merely scanning it does not give a re-publisher any different rights than anyone else. - Jmabel ! talk 01:36, 10 February 2012 (UTC)
I have added a appropriate copyright tag and your additional source information. Thank you! --Saibo (Δ) 16:57, 11 February 2012 (UTC)
This section was archived on a request by: Saibo (Δ) 16:57, 11 February 2012 (UTC)

Annotations

Do you think the annotations on the widely used: File:Nuvola apps edu mathematics-p.svg is anywhere near useful? --Extra 999 (Contact me + contribs) 09:56, 11 February 2012 (UTC)

As much as the only other contribution of this user. -- Asclepias (talk) 10:06, 11 February 2012 (UTC)
To read about what is considered useful and what not, go to COM:ANN. -- RE rillke questions? 10:27, 11 February 2012 (UTC)
This section was archived on a request by: RE rillke questions? 10:27, 11 February 2012 (UTC)

Categorizing "Izabel Santiago.jpg"

Hi. I got the message below and tried to respond to it, but I have the feeling I didn't succeed and don't know what I'm doing. The instruction concerned seems to be:

> You can also pick the file from your list of uploads, edit the file description page, and manually add the category code at the end of the page. > > Category:Category name > For example, if you are uploading a diagram showing the orbits of comets, you add the following code: > > Category:Astronomical diagrams > Category:Comets > This will make the diagram show up in the categories "Astronomical diagrams" and "Comets".

This is the bottom of the bottom of the page, right? And not in... now I don't have an Edit Page link at http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Izabel_Santiago.jpg, but didn't I have one there before?

Anyway, I tried to enter the categories Esperanto, Brazilo, Santiago and "Myar" (a test category), but I don't know if they're effectively entered or not and it doesn't seem that I know how to search by category anyway. So I'm giving up on this, at least for the time being. I only uploaded the photo for it to be used on my deceased wife's Wikipedia page, http://eo.wikipedia.org/wiki/Izabel_Santiago.


Thank you,

Roy McCoy <roymccoy.nl@gmail.com> Rotterdam, NL


Dear Roy McCoy,


The Wikimedia Commons page User talk:Roy McCoy has been changed on 29 January 2012 by CategorizationBot, see http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Roy_McCoy for the current revision.

See http://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Roy_McCoy&diff=0&oldid=28462294 for all changes since your last visit.

Editor's summary: Notifying user of 1 uncategorized image(s)

Contact the editor: mail: http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Special:EmailUser/CategorizationBot wiki: http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:CategorizationBot

There will be no other notifications in case of further changes unless you visit this page. You could also reset the notification flags for all your watched pages on your watchlist.

Your friendly Wikimedia Commons notification system

Hello Roy McCoy, you can add [[:Category:___]] at the bottom of a page. Just find a category that fits the file. As an example, Category:Esperantists would be appropriate in this case. Ajraddatz (talk) 15:59, 5 February 2012 (UTC)
I can suggest three useful ways to search for a category.
  1. Use the usual search mechanism, but include the word "category" as one of your search terms.
  2. Search for an image on a related topic and see how someone else categorized it.
  3. Start with a rather general category that will certainly exist (e.g. Category:Linguists) and try navigating down (or even up) the hierarchy from there.
I hope that helps.- Jmabel ! talk 17:50, 5 February 2012 (UTC)
I find that Google's search is quite a bit more useful than the built-in one, if you are having more issues. Try Googling <topic> wikimedia commons - that works pretty well for me. Ajraddatz (talk) 20:25, 5 February 2012 (UTC)

Hi, uploading newb here, i'm trying to upload a picture from an academic journal. I have written approval from both the author and publishing company, but i have no idea how to write the copyright tag to get it to stay on wiki. article is Gentrification of Vancouver, image is vancouvergentrification, any help is appreciated, thanks — Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.183.103.133 (talk • contribs)

You can tag the file with {{OTRS pending|month=February|day=5|year=2012}} and email permissions-commons[at]wikimedia[dot]org with information on the approval. Feel free to post back if you need any more help :) Ajraddatz (talk) 22:30, 5 February 2012 (UTC)
I believe the file you're actually referring to is File:Vancouver_neighborhood_gentrification.PNG. In order to upload a file here, it is not enough to have permission from the copyright holder - the copyright holder must release the work under a free license (see Commons:Email_templates), and you must submit the e-mail from them to our OTRS permission-tracking system (see instructions at COM:OTRS). If possible, it would be valuable to get a higher-resolution version of this image licensed, because the current version will look terrible when printed on paper. Let us know if you require assistance. Dcoetzee (talk) 22:32, 5 February 2012 (UTC)

--182.6.99.133 05:27, 6 February 2012 (UTC)

Looks probably like {{PD-ineligible}} to me. I'd guess just inside the borders of that. - Jmabel ! talk 06:25, 6 February 2012 (UTC)
Hmm, not sure. IMO, a permission from ICM Registry would be better. Yann (talk) 06:31, 6 February 2012 (UTC)
I am also uncertain. I would consider it potentially borderline, but it may be {{PD-ineligible}}. Dcoetzee (talk) 07:43, 6 February 2012 (UTC)

COMPLAINT

How do i contact wikipedia? THEY NEED TO REMOVE A PHOTO THAT WAS TAKEN WITHOUT MY CONSENT!!!!!! i have already complained before!!! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.21.192.170 (talk • contribs) 6. Februar 2012, 10:06 Uhr (UTCTúrelio (talk) 09:20, 6 February 2012 (UTC))

First you should put a comment on the talkpage of the article where the image is used. If the image is hosted here on Commons, you might also file a deletion request on the image page on Commons. --Túrelio (talk) 09:20, 6 February 2012 (UTC)

http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/

RE COMPLAINT, I WISH THIS PHOTO TO BE REMOVED! IT WAS TAKEN WITHOUT PERMISSION! IT ALSO SHOWS EXACTLY WHERE MY HORSES ARE KEPT AND HOW TO POTENTIALLY STEAL OR INJUIRE THEM, ONE HAS ALREADY BEEN PURPOSEFULLY INJURED! REMOVE IMMEDIATELY!

I've opened a DR, Commons:Deletion requests/. I've left my comments there.--Prosfilaes (talk) 10:21, 6 February 2012 (UTC)

Redundant category

Howdy all--can one of you (with a mop) have a look at Category:Samick Music Corporation and consider deleting it? The category is empty and redundant. Thanks, Drmies (talk) 02:48, 10 February 2012 (UTC)

In general, empty cats can be deleted but I see User:Clusternote has objected to the deletion of this one before; I will contact him (her?) before proceeding. I suspect there's probably been some fighting about moving images in and out of the category. - Jmabel ! talk 06:27, 10 February 2012 (UTC)
Hi, Drmies and Jmabel. Thanks for your gentle discussion.
On my past idea, Samick group is one of the important musical instruments manufacturer/dealer in the world (in truth, they own several stocks of two most famous piano brands), and therefore, I've thought that accurate modeling (categorization) of their organization (Piano company, Guitar company, Brand management, OEM supplying, and dealer network, etc) may be probably useful to visualize their business. (Note that on several other groups, foreign subsidiaries/dealer companies sometimes take individual policies somewhat inconsistent with the parent's policies, and these require individual categorization reflecting their difference) However, I've not yet recognize these difference especially on Samick group, and as a result, that category is still empty.
If you think it should be delete because it is empty, probably it may be rational opinion at now. Possibly in the future, if it would be rationally needed again, it should be re-created. --Clusternote (talk) 11:00, 10 February 2012 (UTC)
Normally, if we don't have media in a category, and we don't have the immediate prospect of media in the category, the category should be deleted. Clusternote, are there images or other media already on Commons that you believe belong in this category? If not, let's delete it and, yes, it can always be recreated later if we have content for it. - Jmabel ! talk 01:39, 11 February 2012 (UTC)
Since I have not yet decided in the matter, I want to hear your opinion.
According to the brand page of their dealer company in the USA, "Samick Music Corp." (SMC), SMC manages several brands including
1. Category:Wm. Knabe & Co. (piano manufacturer, Wm. Knabe & Co.)
2. Category:Silvertone (well known mail order brand in the USA, Silvertone)
3. Category:Greg Bennett Guitars (designer guitar brand Greg Bennett Guitars named after Greg Bennet; possibly it is also referred as Samic Gutiar in the Korea)
and, at least Wm. Knabe & Co. is not enough mentioned on their parent company's web page, "Samic Musical Instruments (korea)" (SMI). Also rest brands seem to be similar status.   And in this case, these categories can be rationally moved under Category:Samick Music Corporation, to appropriately show the situation.
I'm glad if I could read your opinion. --Clusternote (talk) 07:08, 11 February 2012 (UTC)
Clearly appropriate. This is something you could have done at any point in the long slow fight over this, and pretty much settled the matter. - Jmabel ! talk 21:16, 12 February 2012 (UTC)
This section was archived on a request by: Jmabel ! talk 21:16, 12 February 2012 (UTC)

Ranger stations

Is there any category related to ranger stations of the U.S. National Park service? The only thing I see even vaguely related is Category:National Park Service Ranger. - Jmabel ! talk 01:48, 10 February 2012 (UTC)

I guess I'll assume the answer is "no, not yet" and try to fix it myself. - Jmabel ! talk 02:10, 16 February 2012 (UTC)
I've now created several relevant cats including Category:National Park Service ranger stations. - Jmabel ! talk 01:41, 17 February 2012 (UTC)
This section was archived on a request by: Jmabel ! talk 01:41, 17 February 2012 (UTC)

Confusions

Hi all,
I am facing two problems here on Wikimedia. I have contributed 3 pictures on one topic and 12 other on the other one. Basically, I had contributed 3 pictures on a device called triggertrap. They were deleted from Wikimedia. I had sent the written permission to permissions-commons@wikimedia.org for the three pictures of triggertrap. I created this article on Wikipedia and then asked the owner of the pictures and the inventor of the device for their permission to use those pictures on Wikimedia and Wikipedia. But they have been deleted.

Secondly, I have uploaded 12 pictures on TodiCastle. I have re written the whole page on Wikipedia because it needed a lot of improvement. I have even taken permission from the owner and sent an email of the permission to permissions-commons@wikimedia.org, but still I got the same message. I really don't understand why the pictures are now being deleted even after I have sent the permission to permissions-commons@wikimedia.org for both the topics. I really need help. Can anyone please guide me? I have seen the instructions on the guidelines and have added categories to the pictures but I don't understand why are they being deleted. Help Needed !!! Thank you
Inlandmamba (talk) 07:28, 10 February 2012 (UTC)

This section was archived on a request by: Saibo (Δ) 04:02, 13 February 2012 (UTC)

How to undo an image change?

Hello. The file Lima-peru.jpg (not sure how to wikilink here in the commons) got changed recently, and it looks washed out. How do I "undo" the change, or revert it? It's not so straightforward as it is in Wikipedia. Thanks for your help! Hires an editor (talk) 21:36, 11 February 2012 (UTC)

Done, the file was overwritten with a copyvio by Trifg56 (talk · contribs). --Martin H. (talk) 21:41, 11 February 2012 (UTC)
Do do it yourself the next time: at File:Lima-peru.jpg#filehistory in the second column there are revert links - click the one of the version you would like to revert to. --Saibo (Δ) 01:43, 14 February 2012 (UTC)
This section was archived on a request by: Saibo (Δ) 01:41, 14 February 2012 (UTC)

Flickr upload page acting odd

The Flickr upload page I've used previously has changed in a way I don't understand. There is no longer a blank to type the source in or a blank for author or a blank for other misc. information. Is this a permanent change or a bug? (I got to the form following a link on my user page, so I'm sure the difference wasn't due to my going to the wrong page.)

I had uploaded a file at 15:51 UTC on February 10th and it had spaces for source etc. at that time but when I uploaded a file at 23:23 that same day there were no spaces to enter some of the needed information. I wasn't sure what to do so I just filled in all the available blanks and hit upload, but then FlickreviewR complained that there was no flickr link so I used a previous upload I'd done as a model and manually edited in the correct source and author informatiion. Cloveapple (talk) 22:03, 11 February 2012 (UTC)

It was a bug. Sorry about that. It is fixed now; if you go to the upload page and then relaod your browser's cache, it should be OK again. Lupo 22:08, 11 February 2012 (UTC)
Thank you very much. Cloveapple (talk) 22:18, 11 February 2012 (UTC)
I suggest you to use Bryan's or Magnus' upload tools anyway - see Commons:Flickr_files#Uploading_images. --Saibo (Δ) 01:39, 14 February 2012 (UTC)
This section was archived on a request by: Saibo (Δ) 01:39, 14 February 2012 (UTC)

This image is from gifbin.com, and it appears that they allow anyone to post images publicly, but I don't know the exact terms and the copyright status of this image. I think this is fair use and I only wanted to add to the Lightning article by showing the slow motion image of a lightning strike. - M0rphzone (talk) 03:20, 12 February 2012 (UTC)

Fair use images are not allowed on Commons. This image has no license. Yann (talk) 06:47, 12 February 2012 (UTC)
That's the problem I'm asking. Can the license be determined from the sources? Maybe contact gifbin about this image? I think it should be similar to Flickr.. If it is not allowed in the commons, then it is allowed in wikipedia, right? - M0rphzone (talk) 07:47, 12 February 2012 (UTC)
Yes, the best would be to get a permission from the photographer. See COM:OTRS for details. Yann (talk) 07:51, 12 February 2012 (UTC)
If you look in their http://www.gifbin.com/about/ or http://www.gifbin.com/upload/ the image may be from elsewhere - furthermore I do not see a possiblity to contact the uploader. That you would need to do. And no, as far as I know en.Wikipedia would not allow that image for fair use since it is replaceable. Just get a good cam, wait for a thunderstorm and capture! --Saibo (Δ) 01:37, 14 February 2012 (UTC)
This section was archived on a request by: Saibo (Δ) 01:37, 14 February 2012 (UTC)

Why deleted?

My upload: File:DuomoMilanoDetail of (Imaginary?) facade of Milan cathedral.JPG seems to have been automatically deleted even though I reworked the descriptiion page making clear that it was public domain (18th century print). Could you repair that act of deletion,please? --Robert Schediwy (talk) 09:39, 12 February 2012 (UTC)

Restored. A source is needed: did you scan it? From where? Yann (talk) 09:50, 12 February 2012 (UTC)
This section was archived on a request by: Saibo (Δ) 01:26, 14 February 2012 (UTC)

Categories gone

Hi, does anybody know why the possibility to choose categories is gone here [4] when I want to upload any files? Thanks Cobatfor (talk) 17:25, 12 February 2012 (UTC)

I see it on the bottom (like always). Do you have switched off javascript? What is written after this sentence? "
JavaScript is active.
JavaScript is disabled in your browser.

"

Maybe you see some errors in your JavaScript console? If you have Firefox open it by pressing the keys Ctrl + Shift + K. Then open the upload page. Any "errors" there? Also it would be useful to know which browser and skin you use. Cheers --Saibo (Δ) 03:46, 13 February 2012 (UTC)
If the problem persists, visit the upload page and then reload your browser's cache while on that page. Lupo 07:40, 13 February 2012 (UTC)

Thanks a lot, it was a javascript problem of the firefox browser. Cobatfor (talk) 16:36, 13 February 2012 (UTC)

Okay, fine. --Saibo (Δ) 00:31, 14 February 2012 (UTC)
This section was archived on a request by: Saibo (Δ) 00:30, 14 February 2012 (UTC)

Copyright help regarding File:Title page of Méthode facile pour la Viole d'Amour.png

Ich habe das Titelblatt einer PDF-Datei aus dem Internet z.B. http://imslp.org/wiki/M%C3%A9thode_facile_pour_la_viole_d%27amour,_Op.5_%28Milandre,_Louis-Toussaint%29 per Bildschirmabdruck kopiert. Das Original der Datei ist aus dem Jahr 1782. Mit welcher Lizenz darf ich das einbinden und wie wende ich ein Lizenz-Template darauf an?

--Ciorano (talk) 21:41, 12 February 2012 (UTC)

Hallo Ciorano, 1782 is sooo alt, dass sie auf jeden fall gemeinfrei ist. {{PD-old}} wäre okay für's Erste. Siehe Commons:Lizenzvorlagen#Gemeinfreie_Lizenzen_.28Public_Domain.29. Ich habe {{PD-old-100-1923}} eingefügt - das ist am besten. Der Urheber muss bei einer Veröffentlichung von 1782 sicher länger als 100 Jahre tot sein.
Ich habe es mal in der Originalqualität aus den PDF extrahiert. Viele Grüße --Saibo (Δ) 01:22, 14 February 2012 (UTC)
This section was archived on a request by: Saibo (Δ) 01:22, 14 February 2012 (UTC)

uploading a photo from Google images for use in a new biography

I have no idea how to upload a photo of a personality that I found in Google images, in order to use it in a new biography I intend to write. Please help me. Thanks — Preceding unsigned comment added by Λέων (talk • contribs) 2012-02-12T23:38:19‎ (UTC)

Please don't! for more information see Commons:Image casebook#Internet images.  ■ MMXX  talk 01:07, 13 February 2012 (UTC)
This section was archived on a request by: Saibo (Δ) 03:48, 13 February 2012 (UTC)

Transwiki

Hi, As a Wikipedian, I occasionally visit other language's versions of articles currently on the English Wikipedia. Sometimes, the images on those articles are not yet accessible in either the English WP or in Commons. I'm just wondering what the appropriate procedure is to obtain images from other projects. In some cases, their images are far superior to ours, making an image transfer very worthwhile. Thank you. ClaretAsh (talk) 00:51, 13 February 2012 (UTC)

Please see Wikipedia:Moving files to the Commons, I hope that helps.  ■ MMXX  talk 01:00, 13 February 2012 (UTC)
This section was archived on a request by: Saibo (Δ) 03:51, 13 February 2012 (UTC)

how to upload a free photo

Please, explain how practically I can upload a photo that I have taken myself in order to illustrate an article that I intend to write for Wikipedia.--174.92.87.156 06:14, 13 February 2012 (UTC)

Have you read Commons:First steps/Upload form? - Jmabel ! talk 06:30, 13 February 2012 (UTC)
You can also have a look in en:Help:Contents/Images and media if you are happy to read more. :-) --Saibo (Δ) 00:37, 14 February 2012 (UTC)
This section was archived on a request by: Saibo (Δ) 00:37, 14 February 2012 (UTC)

how do i put in the license if i only saved the photo from Google? --Adeleyam (talk) 15:22, 13 February 2012 (UTC)

You can't. Downloading a picture does not make you the owner. I deleted it. Thanks, Yann (talk) 15:50, 13 February 2012 (UTC)
We would need a free license release from the photographer. Please read about Internet images and the intro of COM:L, thank you for your help! --Saibo (Δ) 00:39, 14 February 2012 (UTC)
This section was archived on a request by: Saibo (Δ) 00:40, 14 February 2012 (UTC)

Permission for: EDWARD_PURDY_NEY.jpg

On 9 February 9, Dr. Frank B. McDonald sent an Email to:

permissions-commonswikimedia.org

giving permission for use of this file which I uploaded to Wikipedia-en rather than to Commons. Have you received this Email?

If so, can I upload the file directly to commons now?

Thanks Deer*lake (talk) 16:08, 13 February 2012 (UTC)

Yes, you can, and you apparently already did (File:Cloud Chamber Photo of Heavy Nucleus.jpg). I have placed a {{subst:OP}} tag on the file page to indicate that a permission mail will come. Replies from "permissions" can take some days or even weeks depending on the current work load (I cannot look into those emails). Just wait a bit and message them again after some weeks if no one has replied and if no permission tag was added to the file page. General info about that process is at COM:OTRS. Cheers --Saibo (Δ) 00:47, 14 February 2012 (UTC)
Thanks for your reply. I think there may be some confusion here, because the file that I uploaded (File:Cloud Chamber Photo of Heavy Nucleus.jpg) is not the one that I was asking about en:File:EDWARD_PURDY_NEY.jpg. In any case, I will just sit tight for now, and see what happens. Deer*lake (talk) 18:52, 14 February 2012 (UTC)
Oh, I did not see the file name since it was in the heading but not in the text - sorry (I have linked the new file name in your comment). Well, the "permissions" helpers could have problems to find the file if they are only looking at Commons if in the email there is only mentioned the file name but not the full URL (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:EDWARD_PURDY_NEY.jpg). But they will reply if they do not find it. --Saibo (Δ) 21:00, 14 February 2012 (UTC)
Well, the Ney file was deleted by User:Fastily. I realize now that the problem arose because I was unaware of the difference between uploading to en.wikipedia and to wikipedia.commons. To deal with the situation, I propose to upload the file to commons under the name File:Edward_Purdy_Ney.jpg, and then ask Dr. McDonald to Email a new permission (with URL) to permissions-commons.wikimedia.org. Of course, I will tell Fastly, and direct him to this conversation. Does this sound reasonable? By the way, this whole situation also applies to File:Cloud_Chamber_Photo_of_Heavy_Nucleus.jpg Would it muddy the waters to have a new permission sent for this file, or would it be better to wait until it gets deleted and repeat the upload with a new permission? Again, thanks for your help. Deer*lake (talk) 14:47, 15 February 2012 (UTC)
An OTRS verification has appeared on the page (File:Cloud Chamber Photo of Heavy Nucleus.jpg). This resolves the situation for this file. The Ney Image remains in limbo. Deer*lake (talk) 20:04, 17 February 2012 (UTC)
I have uploaded the image again under the name File:Edward_Purdy_Ney.jpg, and under OTRS, pending have asked Dr. McDonald to send another permission Email. Deer*lake (talk) 15:34, 20 February 2012 (UTC)
This section was archived on a request by: Saibo (Δ) 20:57, 14 February 2012 (UTC)

Contact an uploaded

I need to contact the person who uploaded this photo: File:Pk3.png

He/she is listed as unherdable but doesn't seem to have a wiki page.

Any suggestions?

Paul Harral Editor Fort Worth, Texas magazine Fort Worth, Texas — Preceding unsigned comment added by Harral (talk • contribs) 2012-02-13T21:00:45‎ (UTC)

You could try his talk page, or send him a mail: Special:EmailUser/Unherdable. Yann (talk) 21:10, 13 February 2012 (UTC)
This section was archived on a request by: Saibo (Δ) 00:51, 14 February 2012 (UTC)

Brussels Airlines destinations.png laad niet volledig

Toen ik de afbeelding File:Brussels Airlines destinations.png aan het uploaden was kreeg ik een foutmelding dat het uploaden mislukt was. Toch kan ik de afbeelding hier zien, maar het lijkt alsof de afbeelding niet volledig geladen raakt. Moet ik de afbeelding opnieuw uploaden? Alvast bedankt, Lt300 (talk) 21:16, 13 February 2012 (UTC).

(as I saw you can read English I will reply in English; note that I have linked the file in your comment) We currently have problems with our thumbnail servers (there was a technical change the last week - maybe due to that). The file is uploaded completely (you also saw it completely if you had clicked on the file to show it bigger) - I fixed the thumbnail by purging the file page (e.g. done automatically by the "rotate image" link - but be sure to cancel). You should see it correctly now. Cheers --Saibo (Δ) 00:56, 14 February 2012 (UTC)
This section was archived on a request by: Saibo (Δ) 00:56, 14 February 2012 (UTC)

I need the file to be removed. It has no permission for being in Commons. How do I request it's deletion?

--ExcelLied (talk) 17:46, 14 February 2012 (UTC)

Edit the file description page and add {{Copyvio}} to it. —LX (talk, contribs) 18:13, 14 February 2012 (UTC)
This section was archived on a request by: Saibo (Δ) 21:05, 14 February 2012 (UTC)

Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/SpiderGraph chart - Image 2 ?

Dear Help Desk,

I uploaded a new image "Hpqscanooo2a" yesterday (2/13) @22:23 and placed a link & content into my article. I checked it out and only the content came up, w/o an image?? Does it take more time or did I do something wrong?

Thanx, (--deleted email address--) GregLChest (talk) 20:43, 14 February 2012 (UTC)

Hi Greg! Note that I have deleted your email address as it is not needed and would you make prone to spam. Your uploaded file is File:Hpqscan0002a = The Real Estate SpiderGraph - A home-Buying Decision-Making Aid.jpg and it is displaying correctly. It wasn't in your article draft since you typed the name wrong (capitalization of the letter "h"). fixed. Cheers --Saibo (Δ) 21:15, 14 February 2012 (UTC)
This section was archived on a request by: Saibo (Δ) 21:15, 14 February 2012 (UTC)

trying to retrieve the code of the photo I have uploaded

As my pc closed unexpectedly I did not write down the code of the photo I had uploaded. How do I find it in order to use it in an article?--Λέων (talk) 19:55, 16 February 2012 (UTC)

This section was archived on a request by: Jmabel ! talk 01:48, 17 February 2012 (UTC)

All photos that I use for the Kitsikis family belongs to Dimitri Kitsikis. I am responsible for his archives.I would appreciate that no one uses the word "steeling" when unaware. Please put back the photos and answer my question about the third photo. Thanks--Λέων (talk) 20:25, 16 February 2012 (UTC)

  • Please don't ask essentially the same question in a bunch of different sections of this page. You started a discussion above, continue it there. - Jmabel ! talk 01:50, 17 February 2012 (UTC)
  • I assume you mean "stealing". As far as I can see, no one on this page has accused you of anything of the sort. If you are the copyright holder of an image that you have published elsewhere, you will probably have to go through the process described at COM:OTRS to clarify the status of the image. - Jmabel ! talk 01:50, 17 February 2012 (UTC)
This section was archived on a request by: Jmabel ! talk 01:50, 17 February 2012 (UTC)

File:White Argentine.jpg

This is a montage consisting of images of 25 people described in the title as 'White Argentinians'. Is there a policy regarding the appropriateness of classing people by 'race'/ethnicity in this way without any evidence that either they, or any other source, has classified them as such? AndyTheGrump (talk) 02:25, 10 February 2012 (UTC)

Hmm, Commons:Personality rights and Commons:project scope may be relevant. The first since we do not want to violate personality rights - but if that is okay then you may note that Commons is not bound to a NPOV. Hope that helps. If you think we should discuss the deletion of the file, please nominate it for deletion. Note: I have linked the file in your comment. --Saibo (Δ) 04:00, 13 February 2012 (UTC)
Thanks. I'll look into this. One other point has occurred to me though. At least one of the images used in the montage (File:Milagros Schmoll crop.jpg) seems to be licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution 2.0 Generic license [5], which seems to require explicit attribution - I'm not sure whether the montage complies with this requirement? AndyTheGrump (talk) 17:50, 15 February 2012 (UTC)
"Milagros_Schmoll_crop.jpg: David Shankbone from USA" - attribution and link to the original image. That is "okay". Cheers --Saibo (Δ) 03:15, 18 February 2012 (UTC)
This section was archived on a request by: Saibo (Δ) 03:15, 18 February 2012 (UTC)

Trailer for site

Hello!

I am trying to upload the trailer for "Connected: An Autoblogography About Love, Death, & Technology".

I work for the filmmaker and and was just reading the common use laws and am curious if we are able to upload it.

The file is on youtube at www.youtube.com/connectedthefilm

We do have a bit of Getty images included that we paid rights for.

Is this allowable?

Thanks so much,

Haley Seppa — Preceding unsigned comment added by HaleySeppa (talk • contribs) 23:15, 14 February 2012‎ (UTC)

I'm afraid not, because the rights that you paid for almost certainly do not include the right to sublicense the content, so you can't put the video as a whole under a free license as required by Commons. —LX (talk, contribs) 00:06, 15 February 2012 (UTC)
This section was archived on a request by: Saibo (Δ) 03:28, 18 February 2012 (UTC)

Broken file problem

This image File:SB US 41 Hillsborough River Bridge.JPG shows up fine everywhere else, but if I want to look at it directly, only a fraction of is shows. I've tried purging it, resizing it, and replacing it, but nothing works. Why can't I fix it? ----DanTD (talk) 01:22, 15 February 2012 (UTC)

  • Everything works fine for me, it's a problem on your end. Try to clear the cache, to change "http" to "https" (or vice versa), to change browser, etc. Trycatch (talk) 12:26, 16 February 2012 (UTC)
    • It's working fine now for me today too. I did defragment my PC this morning, but I don't know if that made any difference. ----DanTD (talk) 14:15, 17 February 2012 (UTC)
      • No, defragmenting does not help at this problem. Defragmenting just could make your PC a bit faster if you hard drive has not been defragmented for many months. We had some server problems - that surely was the cause (happend to many users). --Saibo (Δ) 03:27, 18 February 2012 (UTC)
This section was archived on a request by: Saibo (Δ) 03:27, 18 February 2012 (UTC)

Accidentally uploaded picture with wrong account

The picture is Hyuganatsu_2.jpg. I started uploading it under my account User:Marubatsu but while I was doing that, I also created an account at the English wikipedia, to write an article about the Hyuganatsu. I didn't realize this would be a universal log-in, so when I pressed the upload button, it accidentally uploaded as Hyuganatsu (although I did the previous steps before creating that account, so it correctly lists User:Marubatsu as the author). Is it possible to move the picture to User:Marubatsu? I'd like to keep all my pictures in one account, for easier reference. Thanks in advance Hyuganatsu (talk) 03:20, 15 February 2012 (UTC)

Just confirming this is the case with this account, if there was any doubt.Marubatsu (talk) 03:34, 15 February 2012 (UTC)
It's actually really hard, almost certainly not worth doing for a single picture. I believe it has to be done by the programmers. May I suggest that you just add the picture to your watchlist? You can do really anything that will mark it correctly except change who it indicates as original uploader. - Jmabel ! talk 17:14, 15 February 2012 (UTC)
Or you could ask for the picture to be deleted for this purpose, then re-upload it. - Jmabel ! talk 17:15, 15 February 2012 (UTC)
That'd be great, how do I ask for it to be deleted?Marubatsu (talk) 00:59, 16 February 2012 (UTC)
Tag it with {{speedy|Uploaded on wrong account, will re-upload once it is deleted}}. - Jmabel ! talk 02:19, 16 February 2012 (UTC)
This section was archived on a request by: Saibo (Δ) 03:24, 18 February 2012 (UTC)

License problems

This image is having multiple licensing templates, File:Tennis ball 01.jpg. Can anyone fix? --Extra 999 (Contact me + contribs) 13:23, 15 February 2012 (UTC)

✓ Done —LX (talk, contribs) 16:08, 15 February 2012 (UTC)
This section was archived on a request by: Saibo (Δ) 03:21, 18 February 2012 (UTC)

What is the copyright status of this image? The source URL, as specified in the image, is showing "This member is no longer active on Flickr" as the Flickr user, the photographer of the image, closed his account. Is the CC copyright tag still valid? So what to do with the image, is it a candidate for deletion? --SupernovaExplosion (talk) 08:10, 16 February 2012 (UTC)

A CC license is forver. We have the FlickrReview bot so that even though a Flickr page goes away, we still have the record of the license.--Prosfilaes (talk) 11:28, 16 February 2012 (UTC)
Also see http://wiki.creativecommons.org/FAQ#What_if_I_change_my_mind.3F Cheers --Saibo (Δ) 03:22, 18 February 2012 (UTC)
This section was archived on a request by: Saibo (Δ) 03:22, 18 February 2012 (UTC)

I donated a photo today and lost it

I just uploaded today a photo of mine February 16 2012 under the title : Statue of Nikos Kitsikis... but then was interrupted and now I cannot find it. What do I do?--Λέων (talk) 16:59, 16 February 2012 (UTC)

It was deleted as a copyright violation. I don't know the details. Talk to Martin H. (talk · contribs), who deleted it. - Jmabel ! talk 01:44, 17 February 2012 (UTC)
See also just below. --Saibo (Δ) 03:20, 18 February 2012 (UTC)
This section was archived on a request by: Saibo (Δ) 03:20, 18 February 2012 (UTC)

Lost uploaded photo

When I will recuperate my photo how do I transfer to the article I have created?--Λέων (talk) 17:18, 16 February 2012 (UTC)

One doesn't "transfer" a photo to an article. It would help a lot if you would give a bit of context (e.g. are you talking about a Wikipedia article or something else? If Wikipedia, which language?). - Jmabel ! talk 01:46, 17 February 2012 (UTC)
Probably the user is missing some of the uploaded images which were deleted for being Copyright Violations. Λέων, please read about Internet images and the intro of COM:L, thanks. --Saibo (Δ) 03:19, 18 February 2012 (UTC)
This section was archived on a request by: Saibo (Δ) 03:19, 18 February 2012 (UTC)

How to change name?

Hello. I uploaded an image from Flickr using bot and I don't know how to change it's name. Can you help me? It's File:IMG 7355.jpg Dudek1337 (talk) 18:16, 16 February 2012 (UTC)

You can add the rename template to the file page, and an administrator or file mover will rename it for you. Ajraddatz (talk) 18:17, 16 February 2012 (UTC)
See also Commons:RENAME. Cheers --Saibo (Δ) 03:17, 18 February 2012 (UTC)
This section was archived on a request by: Saibo (Δ) 03:17, 18 February 2012 (UTC)

Well, I've posted some pictures here comming from the internet (Ruralbit). The site have a writen policy about the use of the images displayed in in, where is visible: "Pictures obtained from this site can be freely used" http://autoctones.ruralbit.com/index.php?var=1 However, I do not know what to do in order to be accepted in wikipedia.

PS: The site it's in portuguese. --JoseBessa (talk) 02:24, 5 February 2012 (UTC)

Doesn't look free enough for Commons: "Os utilizadores não podem: a) vender, licenciar, alugar ou distribuir nenhuma fotografia disponibilizada..." We require licenses that allow commercial re-use. - Jmabel ! talk 17:43, 5 February 2012 (UTC)
I don't see why that would be a problem; that's just a variant on a copyleft, and we permit the GNU GPL and GFDL, for example.--Prosfilaes (talk) 03:08, 6 February 2012 (UTC)
If you can't sell it, how is commercial use possible? - Jmabel ! talk 01:34, 11 February 2012 (UTC)
No, these terms are fundamentally incompatible with copyleft. The canonical definition of copyleft is the free software definition, which explicitly requires reselling to be permitted. The definition of free culture also requires the freedom to redistribute copies to include the right to sell copies. The GPL and the GFDL both explicitly permit reselling (see sections 4 and 0, respectively). In fact, the terms cited above seem to prohibit all forms of distribution. —LX (talk, contribs) 11:47, 11 February 2012 (UTC)
See also the intro of COM:L. --Saibo (Δ) 03:35, 18 February 2012 (UTC)
This section was archived on a request by: Saibo (Δ) 03:35, 18 February 2012 (UTC)

I uploaded two pictures, File:Skene Ronan hockey card 1 front.jpg and File:Skene Ronan hockey card 1 back.jpg. I made it clear in the choice of file names that these are front and back views of a hockey card. I could even add text in the description to confirm this is so, but I was wondering if there is a link I could set somewhere between the two pictures that would define their relation as different views of the same physical artefact. Saveur (talk) 03:00, 5 February 2012 (UTC)

Use exactly the same link in the description that you just used here! - Jmabel ! talk 17:44, 5 February 2012 (UTC)
I'll do that, that's probably the best way available. (I realize now that the wording of my question was not the best... I meant establishing a relation between the two pictures that would allow, for example, an automatic search of all related photos of the same artefact. Even here, I'm not sure if I'm expressing myself well, but that's OK, the hyperlinks will do.) Thanks, Saveur (talk) 01:50, 7 February 2012 (UTC)
Ah. If you think it merits a category, you can always create one. - Jmabel ! talk 21:11, 12 February 2012 (UTC)
See also Commons:Categories. --Saibo (Δ) 03:33, 18 February 2012 (UTC)
This section was archived on a request by: Saibo (Δ) 03:33, 18 February 2012 (UTC)

Sehr geehrte Damen und Herren! Ich habe einen Wikipedia Eintrag über die Schauspielerin "Sarah Sandeh" verfasst, diese erlaubte mir ein Foto von ihr zu verwenden, welches die Fotografin "Christine Fenzl" von ihr machte. Das Foto ist sowohl von der Fotografin als auch von Sarah Sandeh frei gegeben worden (siehe: http://theaterkontakte.de/profil/sarah_sandeh/galerie.html). Wie muss ich vorgehen damit "das Copyright" anerkannt wird? Mit freundlichen Grüssen, C. di Palma --Carlo Di Palma (talk) 11:46, 6 February 2012 (UTC)

Excuse the bad German. Um Bilder, die nicht von Ihnen gemacht wurden hochzuladen, muss der Autor, um sie unter einer freien Lizenz zu veröffentlichen. Wenn sie dazu bereit sind, siehe COM:OTRS für Informationen darüber, wie die Erlaubnis zur Verwendung des Bildes bestätigen QU TalkQu 12:28, 7 February 2012 (UTC)
Wir bräuchten die Freigabe durch den Fotografen via E-Mail unter freier Lizenz - siehe COM:OTRS/de. Viele Grüße --Saibo (Δ) 03:30, 18 February 2012 (UTC)
This section was archived on a request by: Saibo (Δ) 03:30, 18 February 2012 (UTC)

Deep Blue

I would like to use some of the images on the Dark Blue site set up by Anders Poulsen. At the foot of each page such as this one, there is a statement: "You are welcome to use my pictures as long as you refer to me and send me a copy of your publication." What procedure, if any, would I need to use before I uploaded any of these, apparently freely available, images to Commons for use in Wikipedia articles. I am prepared to get in touch with Anders Poulson but would like to know the position before doing so. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 13:44, 10 February 2012 (UTC)

"send me a copy of your publication" is be a problem. You may contact an OTRS volunteer. Correspondence via OTRS provides more certainty. -- RE rillke questions? 10:25, 11 February 2012 (UTC)
Indeed, that restriction is not compatible with the intro of COM:L. Please refer to COM:OTRS for further help - you need to explain the photgrapher that this restriction is not possible. You can only add it as a clearly voluntary request at the reuser. --Saibo (Δ) 03:37, 18 February 2012 (UTC)
This section was archived on a request by: Saibo (Δ) 03:37, 18 February 2012 (UTC)

Questionable PD-Florida claims

I was looking through Category:PD Florida, and there were a lot of things (paintings, a few photos, some logos and icons), that might not actually be PD-Florida. I'm not well versed in the law behind it, and the template isn't very clear, but some of these just don't feel right. Here are some examples. Sven Manguard (talk) 16:25, 10 February 2012 (UTC)

I am checking a few. The second example has been sent to a deletion request. User:Zscout370 (Return fire) 17:59, 10 February 2012 (UTC)

find the images uploaded recently

I uploaded some images last week and do not know how to find them, so I can send the file names to someone who will use them for articles that he is writing.

Help. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Tjejazz (talk • contribs)

See Special:MyContributions. However, I have doubts if this uploads are realy published under a free license by the copyright holder, they got published elswhere with no free license. --Martin H. (talk) 20:09, 11 February 2012 (UTC)

I think I can use this.

Hello I want create the article USS Housatonic (SP-1697) and I think the picture that I want use is PD Government and/or PD age but her it is if you might take a look http://www.navsource.org/archives/12/1217169701.jpg. Also if it's not to much trouble can someone please uploaded it for me as I don't think I'm proficient in the commons area TucsonDavidU.S.A. 22:38, 12 February 2012 (UTC)

Most likely {{PD-1923}}, given that the text in white at the bottom would have been for some sort of publication purpose. - Jmabel ! talk 03:34, 13 February 2012 (UTC)
I agree, and I've changed the tag on File:USS Housatonic (SP-1697) in The Boston Harbor.jpg accordingly. The photographer does not appear to have been a U.S. Government employee. —LX (talk, contribs) 08:28, 13 February 2012 (UTC)
Here is the link to the original source, the U.S. Navy Naval History and Heritage Command, former U.S. Naval Historical Center, photograph NH 84083. NHHC photos are generally regarded as public domain, in this case it should be {{PD-USGov-Military-Navy}} and {{PD-1923}} as the caption states "Courtesy of the Naval Historical Foundation. Crosby Collection." see [6], although there, I did not find anything on copyright. Cheers Cobatfor (talk) 19:27, 13 February 2012 (UTC)

Zillion years of experience on CAD systems.

I have AutoCAD (snooze) Cadence and Solid Works and an extensive background in many engineering disciplines and Sciences.  Interested in doing needed drawings/diagrams(2D or 3D).  Don't know where to post, but my talk page might be a start. :- ) DCS 00:08, 11 February 2012 (UTC)

Welcome aboard! The graphics lab and their illustration workshop, the graphics village pump and the picture requests page are probably good places to start. The different Wikimedia projects often have their own lists of requested illustrations as well, e.g. en:Category:Wikipedia requested diagram images. —LX (talk, contribs) 12:12, 11 February 2012 (UTC)
This section was archived on a request by: Saibo (Δ) 04:43, 19 February 2012 (UTC)

Slavic people

Hi, some nice & efficient rename-permissioned user that will move Category:Slavic people into Category:Slavic peoples would be blessed. Agreed upon here. Thanx! :) Orrlingtalk 03:25, 11 February 2012 (UTC)

If you believe this is uncontroversial, just make the request at User talk:CommonsDelinker/commands. Otherwise, start a discussion at COM:CFD. - Jmabel ! talk 21:18, 12 February 2012 (UTC)
I'd most like to believe that since it's been more than couple days with no "opposition" and given the rationale stated clear there's no issue for controversy here. Orrlingtalk 20:18, 14 February 2012 (UTC)
You could also use {{Move}} for this task. --Saibo (Δ) 04:55, 19 February 2012 (UTC)
This section was archived on a request by: Saibo (Δ) 04:55, 19 February 2012 (UTC)

Removing image uploaded by mistake

How can I remove an image uploaded by mistake?Manuelvbotelho (talk) 13:21, 12 February 2012 (UTC)

You can't do it yourself, but you can ask here. Yann (talk) 13:49, 12 February 2012 (UTC)
Thanks for your answer. It's good to know I can do it. The question is: how?Manuelvbotelho (talk) 14:25, 12 February 2012 (UTC)
No, you cannot do it yourself. Yann (talk) 14:47, 12 February 2012 (UTC)

Thanks Yann. I uploaded 2 images of photographs of one of my exhibitions, but I realised, by reading the metadata, that they were taken by someone else, although they picture my own works of art. In case this implies I can't use them, please delete them (otherwise please leave them im my Gallery). Here are the files: File:Manuel Botelho CAM FCG 2005 1.jpg File:Manuel Botelho CAM FCG 2005 3.jpg Many thanks.Manuelvbotelho (talk) 15:36, 12 February 2012 (UTC)

✓ Done Yann (talk) 16:08, 12 February 2012 (UTC)
This section was archived on a request by: Saibo (Δ) 04:43, 19 February 2012 (UTC)

SVG upload

Hi all, any ideas on what might be wrong with this upload? At least in my browser, the image does not display. Cheers, Arbitrarily0 (talk) 04:25, 19 February 2012 (UTC)

That is a joke, isn't it? :-D Did you see the file size? And I suspect this is a photo, isn't it? Please tell us how you made this svg and we can help you. Cheers --Saibo (Δ) 04:28, 19 February 2012 (UTC)
Ahh ... oops, not a joke :) It is far too large, I suppose? It is a scanned photo, cropped with Inkscape and saved as a plain svg. Arbitrarily0 (talk) 04:35, 19 February 2012 (UTC)
(EC) Okay, I see it: you seem to have embedded a big image inside the svg. So let me ask you: why did you do that? Did you do it because you've heared svgs are better than anything else? Well, no, not really. Surely not in that case. That is like you wanting to use a Formula 1 car to help you moving between two flats. Please just save the image as png or (highest quality) jpg (preferrably if it is a photo) and upload this. SVG is only superior for drawings made with a computer. To explain: the image is embedded as "png" inside the svg - so there is nothing better - only worse by saving it as svg. Yes, your svg is far too large. However, this since is not a problem with jpeg. With png there is a problem if the pixels are more than 12.5 megapixels. Cheers --Saibo (Δ) 04:38, 19 February 2012 (UTC)
Alright, I re-uploaded it here. I just figured that while I was already in Inkscape to do the cropping, I would just use the default file type. Whoops. It appears that the quality is somewhat less than in the original (which was a pdf) - is this unavoidable? Thanks for your help, Arbitrarily0 (talk) 04:45, 19 February 2012 (UTC)
Ah, it was a pdf. Yes, the way I go is that: import in inkscape, like you did save as svg and then extract the pure base64 encoded png and convert it to a binary png with base64 - maybe that is a bit too technical. Surely there are also other ways. I have uploaded the png (still uploading ...) on top of your (probably) png export; as said that is too big for png at our servers (currently) - you only see it when you click on the image. See Commons:File types. Now editing can be done (cropping, maybe rotating, grayscale). The better way would be: do the scan directly to jpeg but not to pdf.
Just to be sure: Is it right that you are the photographer? Cheers --Saibo (Δ) 05:12, 19 February 2012 (UTC)

Thanks a bunch Saibo - other details continued on talk. Arbitrarily0 (talk) 05:59, 19 February 2012 (UTC)

Moved it to here (by Saibo) to keep it in one place:

Thanks for the help Saibo. Would you suggest any programs that are good for png photo editing? Also, regarding the source; I myself am not the photographer, but the photo was taken by any of several deceased family members, and I now own the rights. Unfortunately I could not think of a better spur of the moment source than {{Own}} - do you have recommendations? I presumed that this type of photo is allowable on Commons, but correct me if I am wrong. Arbitrarily0 (talk) 05:59, 19 February 2012 (UTC)

Hi again, I recommend the open source GIMP for all raster image editing. I suggest to upload a reworked version in grayscale (instead of RGB) and in the jpeg format (but saved in highest quality).
If "Own work" might not be the best explanation like here just write it down in the source field like you did here now. If you have inherited the relevant rights (this also includes sub-licensing like you did by applying a free license to it) you can upload the file here - yes. Some people think that they just need to own the paper copy of a photo to have the rights - not necessarily. But if you have inherited it from the photographer (be sure that he did not just own the paper copy - like a post card) then it is okay. A more explicit statement why you own the rights and that you release the image under free licenses should be made via COM:OTRS - better to avoid any future trouble and to be more sure. Also you know that no private details will be public then. --Saibo (Δ) 13:26, 19 February 2012 (UTC)
This section was archived on a request by: Saibo (Δ) 13:26, 19 February 2012 (UTC)

2 Native American categories

Gooday, this message is adressed to English speakers as a mother tongue and especially North American editors on Commons. I need your assistance, with two small hurdles where my doubts and indecision have to do with the fact that I'm little familiar with American perspectives regarding the Indians as well as with categorization troubleshouting when it comes to obvious Commons irregularities:

Orrlingtalk 15:58, 15 February 2012 (UTC)

This section was archived on a request by: Jmabel ! talk 07:04, 21 February 2012 (UTC)

I didnt understood why do you want to delete this file? I gave you the link to the source. --NikolayKolisnichenko (talk) 12:06, 14 February 2012 (UTC)

You are not the photographer, therefore you are not allowed to publish this image under a free license. Thanks, Yann (talk) 12:35, 14 February 2012 (UTC)
might be PD-UA-exempt, like File:Andrusevich.jpg, but i could be wrong.--Trex2001 (talk) 12:42, 14 February 2012 (UTC)
I don't think {{PD-UA-exempt}} applies to either photo. I've nominated File:Andrusevich.jpg for deletion. —LX (talk, contribs) 18:11, 14 February 2012 (UTC)
thats what i thought--Trex2001 (talk) 08:34, 22 February 2012 (UTC)
This section was archived on a request by: --Trex2001 (talk) 08:39, 22 February 2012 (UTC)

Bondi Beach

Hi. We could use some help with categories. The main one in question is Category:Bondi Beach, New South Wales. Somebody has redirected it so the link from the WP article goes to Category:Bondi Beach, and the Category:Bondi Beach, New South Wales isn't being used at all. It needs to be fixed so the link goes to Category:Bondi Beach, New South Wales, but I can't see how to do it. Merci, Sardaka (talk) 10:57, 21 February 2012 (UTC)

En:Bondi Beach, New South Wales links to Bondi Beach, New South Wales. Redirect corrected. --Foroa (talk) 17:26, 22 February 2012 (UTC)
This section was archived on a request by: --Foroa (talk) 17:26, 22 February 2012 (UTC)

Can't log in

Hi, I normally edit on English Wikipedia as wikipedia:en:User:Bazonka. I also have a dormant Commons User:Bazonka account. However I can't use this because I can't remember my password - instead I have been using this Bazonka2 account here. But this is a pain to use because every time I log in it automatically logs me in to Wikipedia under Bazonka2 which I don't want. I'm also trying to set up a unified login account for Bazonka, but I am unable to do so because (I think) my Bazonka account here is inaccessible.
Can my Commons Bazonka password be reset somehow? If anyone needs to contact me directly rather than on a talk page, then they should be able to email me via my English Wikipedia Bazonka account. Thanks, Bazonka2 (talk) 22:37, 21 February 2012 (UTC)

Special:CentralAuth/Bazonka Ask on COM:BN whether they can rename User:Bazonka to something else to make way to automatically create your account here. If it is not automatically created, ask a 'crat to create a new one and use Special:MergeAccount. -- RE rillke questions? 22:47, 21 February 2012 (UTC)
Thanks. Bazonka2 (talk) 23:18, 21 February 2012 (UTC)
This section was archived on a request by: RE rillke questions? 01:21, 23 February 2012 (UTC)

Bondi Beach Category

Hi. Yesterday, 21 February, I asked a question about Category:Bondi Beach , but now I can't find it anywhere. What happened to it? Sardaka (talk) 07:00, 22 February 2012 (UTC)

This section was archived on a request by: Jmabel ! talk 16:47, 22 February 2012 (UTC)

How to undo an image change?

Hello. I posted something similar to this before. The file Lima-peru.jpg (not sure how to wikilink here in the commons) got changed recently, and it looks washed out. And from what I can see, it's the same username. I suspect it's the same person on wikipedia who is constantly attempting to make the Lima article into a tourist brochure with images, but I can't figure out why they would want to put in a bad image, except to show that it should be changed for being bad, when it was fine before. Anyway, how do I "undo" the change, or revert it? It's not so straightforward as it is in Wikipedia. Thanks for your help! Hires an editor (talk) 20:20, 25 February 2012 (UTC)

Click the link "revert" on the same line as the image version you want to revert to. -- Asclepias (talk) 23:12, 25 February 2012 (UTC)
And after you click that, don't worry if the restored image doesn't immediately show correctly for you, caching issues are common. - Jmabel ! talk 19:02, 26 February 2012 (UTC)
This section was archived on a request by: Jmabel ! talk 19:02, 26 February 2012 (UTC)

Request for deletion

I uploaded the file http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Rotor_cloud_Truckee.jpg from Flickr and I realised that this file cannot be used for commercial use. There is no way that I can delete the file myself (I removed the reference to it in fr.wikipedia.org). Could you delete it. Thanks Malosse (talk) 06:19, 27 February 2012 (UTC)

This section was archived on a request by: Jmabel ! talk 16:41, 27 February 2012 (UTC)

definition of 'alumni'

Hi, do you need to have graduated from a university to be in the category of that universities alumni? Or is just having attended that school enough? tnx --Vera (talk) 10:59, 28 February 2012 (UTC)

Alumnus is most frequently taken to mean a graduate of a school, but it is also used in the wider sense of anyone having attended. I think applying the broader sense is fine for purposes of categorisation on Commons, at least if the person spent any significant amount of time at the school in question. —LX (talk, contribs) 15:31, 28 February 2012 (UTC)
I agree with LX here, and at least in the U.S., so would most alumni associations. - Jmabel ! talk 16:42, 28 February 2012 (UTC)
ok :This section was archived on a request by: Vera (talk) 23:57, 28 February 2012 (UTC)

File:20012012THOMASMEYER0050.jpg

Delete now immediately.--Shatabisha (talk) 17:42, 29 February 2012 (UTC)‎

Actually a move request rather than a deletion request. Sorted. —LX (talk, contribs) 19:47, 29 February 2012 (UTC)
This section was archived on a request by: —LX (talk, contribs) 19:47, 29 February 2012 (UTC)

A photo copy of the author's copyright release was e-mailed to permissions-en@wikimedia.org on 9 Feb 2012. Is this satisfactory or do you need a hard copy? If so, what is the mailing address to which it should be sent?

Rodger Carter 

--hidden email--

RodgerCarter (talk) 13:58, 10 February 2012 (UTC)

  • Email is fine, probably preferred. If you sent to permissions-en rather than permissions-commons, though, this will filter through from the English-language Wikipedia. In any case, allow a few days for the OTRS process. - Jmabel ! talk 01:49, 11 February 2012 (UTC)

If you have further questions and no response after some weeks via email please send an email again or ask here again. --Saibo (Δ) 03:42, 18 February 2012 (UTC)

The photo has been removed without explanation and with no reply from permission-en@wikipedia.org or anyone else. Why are photos removed without contacting the submitter before it is done? A second e-mail and copy of the original copyright released has been sent to permissions, but no reply as of yet. Since the original message was sent 10 days ago it would seem that more than enough time has passed for the copyright release to have been filed and the photo approved to remain in the Dunker submission. Did somebody drop the ball? RodgerCarter (talk) 01:11, 20 February 2012 (UTC)

Quite possibly. The photo was presumably removed because, given lack of clarity about rights that seemed to someone to be a reasonable precaution. It's not thrown away, and can be restored when this is sorted out.
It might help to send an email to permissions-commons@wikimedia.org, since the matter is within Commons. I have no idea how well (or poorly) the people who handle permissions for the English-language Wikipedia and for Commons are in touch with one another. - Jmabel ! talk 01:55, 21 February 2012 (UTC)

Large logs as memorials

Anyone got a good category for this?

I took a picture of something the other day that I am having trouble placing in an appropriate category. Quite a few towns where logging has been historically important place a large (usually old growth) log on display somewhere near the center of town as a sort of memorial to loggers and/or simply memento of the timber industry. This photo is an example of that. Much to my surprise, I can't readily find any similar images, nor can I find a particularly appropriate category. I've put it in Category:Logging in Washington (state) and Category:Monuments and memorials in Washington (state), but there ought to be something specific to large logs as monuments/memorials of this sort, and surely I'm not the first to upload one. Category:Logs is a redirect to Category:Woodpiles, which is clearly not appropriate for this. - Jmabel ! talk 04:27, 13 February 2012 (UTC)

i added "Tree trunks" and "Wood constructions" . This building looks like a carport, maybe we should create logports? .-) --AtelierMonpli (talk) 01:06, 14 February 2012 (UTC)--AtelierMonpli (talk) 01:06, 14 February 2012 (UTC)

Hmm. Your additions are decent, but this is a specific phenomenon that should have a category. As for logports, we usually try to avoid neologisms. - Jmabel ! talk 01:36, 14 February 2012 (UTC)
Maybe create Category:Wooden monuments and memorials‎ as subcategory of Category:Monuments and memorials by material--Trex2001 (talk) 08:38, 22 February 2012 (UTC)
That's a perfectly good idea, and I'd support it, but it still doesn't address a name for this rather specific phenomenon (which apparently doesn't have a name: I've now talked with foresters, timber industry people, and local historians and they all say things to the effect of "Weird. Yeah, there's one in every town around here, but there's no name for them." - Jmabel ! talk 06:13, 23 February 2012 (UTC)
I created the category and assigned the image to it...--Trex2001 (talk) 06:56, 23 February 2012 (UTC)

Macgirlpro

I forget what the best way to reach the admins on this project is, and I always find caches of copyvios at unreasonably late hours when my memory is fuzzy, so can someone please direct an admin to Special:ListFiles/Macgirlpro, all of that user's uploads are likely copyvios. Sven Manguard (talk) 06:45, 14 February 2012 (UTC)

Just create a deletion request for suspicious files. Thanks, Yann (talk) 07:52, 14 February 2012 (UTC)
If you enable the Quick Delete gadget in your preferences, you'll get some useful links in your toolbox for marking files as missing evidence of licensing permission or as an obvious copyright violation. You also have a toolbox button for nominating the file for deletion. All of these methods will bring the files to the attention of the administrators. If none of them seem to fit the needs of a particular situation, you can always use Commons:Administrators' noticeboard (shortcut: COM:ANB). There are also links to more specialized noticeboards on that page. —LX (talk, contribs) 17:04, 14 February 2012 (UTC)

Het bestand is afkomstig van de website van de gemeente Leiden. Ik ging er van uit dat overheidspublicaties in beginsel (her)gebruikt mogen worden (we hebben daar ook gezamenlijk voor betaald), maar kon geen toepasselijke tag vinden. Ongetwijfeld is hier standaard beleid voor, maar ook dat kon ik niet vinden.

Op de website van de gemeente (http://gemeente.leiden.nl/proclaimer-en-privacy/) staat: De informatie op deze site, zowel de tekst als het beeldmateriaal, is en blijft eigendom van de gemeente Leiden, tenzij anders vermeld. Als u informatie uit de website van de gemeente Leiden in uw eigen publicaties wilt overnemen, mag dat alleen met vermelding van de bron. Overname van informatie uit de website die geen eigendom is van de gemeente Leiden mag alleen met toestemming van de eigenaar. Daar lees ik ook geen verbod in. Graag advies. --Met vriendelijke groet, regards, Biccie (talk) 14:05, 18 February 2012 (UTC) {{helpme|nl}}

I can't help you in Dutch, but maybe you can make sense of an English answer, too, maybe with the help of Google's translator...
The correct license for information from www.leiden.nl is {{Attribution}}, but only for works owned by the city of Leiden. For third-party works, you'd need a release from that third party, such as the photographer.
For File:Lammenschanspark.jpg, we do not know if the city of Leiden owns the work and the copyright on the work. I suggest asking the project manager (Chantal Sevink, e-mail listed at http://www.leiden.nl/Lammenschanspark ) about this.
HTH, Lupo 15:19, 19 February 2012 (UTC)
Inderdaad, je moet even opzoeken (bvb door navragen via de website) of de file een eigendom van de gemeete zou zijn en wie is de eigenaar. Uploaden maag alleen maar als de eigenaar accord is of was over 70 jaar geleden gestorven. (De laatste is voor deze file niet van toepassing).--Ymblanter (talk) 18:17, 19 February 2012 (UTC)
Thank you very much for the advice. I will ask the project manager about the ownership of the photograph. Met vriendelijke groet, regards, Biccie (talk) 19:16, 19 February 2012 (UTC)

Properties of *.ogg files

Why doesn’t the info in the Summary tab (right click => properties) of an *.ogg video file remain in place during an upload to Commons? This info transfers during an upload of image files, but does not seem to transfer with an upload to Commons for a video file. In other words, I added a description in the Comments field of the Summary tab, but that info was no longer present when I downloaded the file directly from Commons & viewed the Summary tab. Thanks! FieldMarine (talk) 15:41, 18 February 2012 (UTC)

I do not know what you mean with "summany tab". But usually the files uploaded here are not altered on the upload / download. Maybe the program you use for showing the "summary" tab saves this info differently at video files compared to image files. Cheers --Saibo (Δ) 04:31, 19 February 2012 (UTC)

The summary tab can be accessed through right click => properties on the video file. Also, i've tried this on several computers with different programs & all have the same problem so I'm pretty sure it's not a local computer or program issue. I think it's a glitch. FieldMarine (talk) 19:44, 20 February 2012 (UTC)

How to add copyright info and source to an image?

--93.134.196.143 10:36, 19 February 2012 (UTC)

Who created the photograph, where did you get it from, and under which free license enabling you to legally upload the file here did the photographer publish the file? (I assume you are Raei rk editing while logged out.) —LX (talk, contribs) 11:14, 19 February 2012 (UTC)
Which part of my reply gave you the idea that registering another account and simply make up a completely unverifiable licensing claim would be the right thing to do? I see that you also appear to be active on English Wikipedia as Abdulmanaf78. Please don't abuse multiple accounts. —LX (talk, contribs) 12:29, 19 February 2012 (UTC)

cached 280px File:Coletaneasjc.png

Hi. I've noticed that the Commons creates caches of different resolution of each file on usage on Wikipedia, but a problem may have occurred when it generated a 280px cache of File:Coletaneasjc.png, which seems it has been cropped by some reason. That size is used in a template in pt:São José dos Campos, I can't just change the size of the image because that template does not allow it. What can I do for the Common refresh that cache? By the way, would be better for the Common if I upload a jpeg version with lower quality for a smaller file size?--Luizdl (talk) 13:50, 19 February 2012 (UTC)

It looks fine to me. It's probably a local issue on your computer. Try clearing your cache. —LX (talk, contribs) 15:38, 19 February 2012 (UTC)
I've tried clear my cache, use another browser and downloading with wget command, and only the 280px image is cropped, is it possible to be caused by a kind of local mirror in Brazil or something else?--Luizdl (talk) 15:46, 19 February 2012 (UTC)

Help in choosing picture license

Hey,

If I want to upload a photo from a book, what is the license that I should choose ?

And what license do i choose for the picture found here : http://www.presidency.gov.lb/Arabic/PresidentoftheRepublic/FormerPresidents/Pages/CheikhBachirGemayel.aspx

thanks — Preceding unsigned comment added by J10452M (talk • contribs) 15:05, 19 February 2012‎ (UTC)

You seem to be assuming that there is a correct license, and that if you can just figure it out, you can upload anything to Commons. This is not the case. Recently created photographs, whether published online or in a book, are protected by copyright. You cannot upload them unless the photographer published them under a free license (which would be clearly stated). Most photos are not published under a free license. See Commons:Image casebook#Internet images. —LX (talk, contribs) 15:47, 19 February 2012 (UTC)

if the pictures were taken in 1981, can they be used ?? and can you please answer the second question that i mentioned in the first post — Preceding unsigned comment added by J10452M (talk • contribs) 16:08, 19 February 2012‎ (UTC)

Generally: no, not without licensing approval from the copyright holder. The copyright term in most countries is the life of the author plus 70 years. In Lebanon, it's the life of the author plus 50 years. I did answer your second question: Recently created photographs, whether published online or in a book, are protected by copyright. You cannot upload them unless the photographer published them under a free license (which would be clearly stated). Most photos are not published under a free license. See Commons:Image casebook#Internet images. —LX (talk, contribs) 16:19, 19 February 2012 (UTC)

Hi how do you know if the pic is copyright-ineligible?? thanks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Adeleyam (talk • contribs) 15:11, 19 February 2012‎ (UTC)

See Commons:Threshold of originality. The files you have uploaded so far appear to have been photographs from awards ceremonies. Photographs of three-dimensional subjects are pretty much always eligible for copyright protection. —LX (talk, contribs) 15:57, 19 February 2012 (UTC)

Uploading problem

Recently when I was uploading a photo it showed some warning that said "exists-normalized" or something like that, which made me unable to upload any file. What does it mean? Devilreborn (talk) 07:35, 20 February 2012 (UTC)

Regarding this photo (sculpture Dr Charles Mohen by Charles-Adzir Trouillot), the photo is "libre de droits". Reference is made to the "Musée des Beaux-Arts et d'Archéologie" of Châlons-en-Champagne, where this sculpture takes place. I have a mail of free authorization signed by the museum director. Charles-Adzir Trouillot was my ancestor. Sorry for my bad english... Translation in french : Ce cliché du buste du Dr Mohen, signé par mon ancêtre Charles-Adzir Trouillot, est libre de droits. Référence doit être faite au Musée des Beaux-Arts de Châlons-en-Champagne, où l'oeuvre est conservée, et au nom du photographe. Je suis en possession de l'autorisation signée par Mr Pagnotta, Conservateur du Musée. Merci de votre attention.

--Mousquepierre (talk) 10:29, 20 February 2012 (UTC)


Bonjour,
Comme vous le savez probablement, les photos offertes sur le site Wikimedia Commons doivent, entre autres, pouvoir être réutilisées librement par le public en général, y compris pouvoir être modifiées et utilisées commercialement. L'intention du propriétaire des droits d'auteur, de rendre sa photo ainsi librement disponible, doit avoir été exprimée explicitement.
C'est pourquoi, généralement, bien qu'il n'y ait pas de formule obligatoire, Wikimedia Commons suggère fortement d'obtenir du propriétaire des droits d'auteur une déclaration formulée de façon explicite, par laquelle celui-ci offre sa photo selon les termes d'une licence libre connue et bien identifiée, ce qui évite les incertitudes. Pour un exemple d'une telle formulation suggérée, à adapter bien sûr selon les particularités de chaque cas, voir Commons:Messages type#Déclaration de consentement.
Sinon, Commons accepte aussi des déclarations non standard, qui constituent des licences libres sui generis, mais alors il faut que le texte d'une telle déclaration par l'auteur soit suffisamment explicite pour que les réutilisateurs puissent en conclure, sans risque d'erreur d'interprétation, que l'intention réelle de l'auteur est d'offrir sa photo au public en général pour utilisation libre, y compris avec possibilité de modification et d'usage commercial. Donc, tout dépend du texte exact de la déclaration que vous avez reçue, savoir si ce texte est suffisamment clair pour qu'il constitue, sans ambiguïté, une déclaration d'offre sous licence libre de la photo, au sens expliqué ci-dessus. Par ailleurs, il faut aussi bien sûr, que la déclaration soit faite par l'auteur de la photo lui-même ou par une personne à qui l'auteur a explicitement transmis ses droits d'auteur. En l'occurrence, avoir une certitude raisonnable que le conservateur du musée a la faculté de disposer des droits d'auteur sur cette photographie du photographe Maillot, y compris d'en disposer à un point tel qu'il puisse l'offrir sous une licence libre.
À la lecture du texte exact de la déclaration que vous avez reçue du conservateur, si vous estimez que ce texte constitue une licence libre explicite et validement consentie par le possesseur légal des droits d'auteur, alors l'idéal serait que le musée fasse parvenir à Commons une copie de ce texte par courriel selon la procédure OTRS, afin que cette déclaration soit archivée et soit disponible pour consultation future. Les membres de l'équipe OTRS de Commons évalueront alors si le texte est effectivement suffisant pour être considéré comme une licence libre valide. Si oui, la page de l'image sera validée et l'image sera conservée. À partir du moment où le courriel est envoyé, il peut s'écouler quelques semaines avant qu'il soit traité par l'équipe OTRS. Dans l'intervalle, vous devez insérer, sur la page de description de la photo, une explication des conditions de la licence qui correspond fidèlement et le mieux possible au texte de la licence que vous avez reçue (peut-être à l'aide par exemple du modèle Attribution ou du modèle Copyrighted free use provided that, mais c'est votre responsabilité de refléter fidèlement le sens des conditions de la licence que vous reçue) et vous pouvez insérer le modèle OTRS pending et retirer les modèles d'avertissement de licence manquante.
Par contre, si le texte que vous avez reçu dit ou semble dire seulement quelque chose dans le style que vous êtes autorisé à reproduire la photo, libre de droits, cela est probablement insuffisant, puisque cela ne permet pas de savoir avec certitude si l'autorisation d'utiliser la photo est accordée non seulement à vous personnellement mais aussi à n'importe qui, ni si l'autorisation inclut la possibilité de modification et d'utilisation commerciale. Le site web de la Ville de Châlons permet de voir que, du moins pour le matériel disponible sur ce site, y compris certaines photos du photographe Maillot, l'autorisation générale de reproduction n'est pas libre et ne permet que l'usage personnel, non commercial et sans modification [7]. Bien sûr, les mentions du site web ne concernent pas la photo qui vous a été transmise directement et il est parfaitement possible que le possesseur des droits d'auteur accorde une licence libre sur cette photo. Mais les mentions du site web peuvent néanmoins donner une indication qu'il existe une certaine pratique habituelle en ce qui concerne les conditions d'utilisation de certaines photos que ce photographe et d'autres produisent pour la Ville et cela incite donc à une certaine prudence supplémentaire lorsqu'il s'agit d'interpréter une communication particulière comme constituant une licence qui diverge grandement de cette pratique, à moins que cette communication exprime clairement l'intention d'offrir cette photo en des termes qui constituent une licence libre.
-- Asclepias (talk) 18:35, 20 February 2012 (UTC)

universal login

Please see full explanation at my talk page. I received a link from commons which allowed me to log in, and change password. Then I saw a notice "universal login: login once, you're logged in everywhere." But I'm not! I've tried enWP and Wictionary, and neither password will work. I'm afraid to log off here, lest I be right back where I started. HELP, Ragityman (talk) 17:44, 20 February 2012 (UTC)

--88.199.155.76 18:20, 20 February 2012 (UTC)

File:Natalja Iljina.jpg looks like a probable copyright violation and has been marked as such. What is your question? - Jmabel ! talk 07:23, 21 February 2012 (UTC)

The picture supposedly showing Peter Cooper from Stuy town cove park- The picture is still showing Stuy town. - — Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.80.127.15 (talk • contribs)

I can't see any relevance of this comment to File:Natalja Iljina.jpg so I assume you are talking about something else. Could you please link the picture you are talking about? - Jmabel ! talk 07:23, 21 February 2012 (UTC)

permissions on pictures

I've been sending many permission Emails to wikipedia's permissions email(permission-commons at wikimedia.org), and still (after couple of days), the picture which I wish to tag with the right license, was not tagged with the permission i sent by email. I am afraid that the picture will be deleted soon. the picture I am talking about is http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Elisha_Ben_Yitzhak.jpg. please help me, what can i do? (also, I am not sure if this is the right place to ask it since the picture is on the english wikipedia) Thank you.

Since its marked with OTRS pending i dont see a reason why someone should remove it...--Trex2001 (talk) 15:05, 22 February 2012 (UTC)

editing

how do i move the page im
going to edit so i can see it 
while im editing the page. 
also what are the steps to editing. Ps. Thank you for

your support. 

 cheyanne thornton

Sorry, but I really can't even envision the problem you are describing. You obviously managed to edit here to write your question. I suggest that you find someone who can actually sit down with you and work with you on what's going wrong for you, because I doubt we'll get anywhere through an online discussion. - Jmabel ! talk 01:36, 23 February 2012 (UTC)

(Assuming I understand you correctly) The best I can think of is to open whatever you were planning on editing twice, then clicking the 'Edit' link on only one of those windows. You can always use the 'Show Preview' button (next to the 'Save page' button) to view what the edits you've made will look like before saving. I hope this helps. --Kramer Associates (talk) 02:31, 24 February 2012 (UTC)

Request for deletion

I just uploaded a file: Russian artillery in Sejny.jpg, from an old postcard (1915). When I had done that, I saw that the photographer was mentioned on the other side: Erich Benninghoven. So I did a Google query for this man’s dying date, but in vain. As I cannot guarantee that the photographer died more than 70 years ago, the picture will be deleted anyway. So I can as well ask for immediate deletion. So, mods, please delete it now. Sijtze Reurich (talk) 19:07, 22 February 2012 (UTC)

My understanding of copyright law is that if it was published before 1923, then it is now in the public domain, regardless of the date of death of the photographer. Maproom (talk) 10:39, 23 February 2012 (UTC)
Thanks a lot! Then I withdraw my deletion request. The file may be useful as an illustration in an article about the Eastern Front in World War One. Sijtze Reurich (talk) 13:49, 23 February 2012 (UTC)

I summit the address of my website

Dear Madam or Sir, I am a member of the Wikipedia at the address Pierreboisjoli and my account was shot down for a supposed injury against Wikipedia. I red just exactly who I am and, for a free encyclopedia, you are drasticaly non tolerant. Despite I write only the truth, the direction purges my website and don't allied me to explain who I am. I am the Jewish Messiah and it is the truth. There is one who must be Him and it is me. I hope to recover my website and to be wroten as fast as you purge my name. Thank you for your attention Pierre Boisjoli The Divin Consellor The Lord of Lords The Eternal of armies The King of Kings The Prince of peace — Preceding unsigned comment added by 174.94.125.42 (talk • contribs) 21:45, 22 February 2012‎ (UTC)

This is Wikimedia Commons, not Wikipedia. But I guess you already knew that, being omniscient and all. —LX (talk, contribs) 07:09, 23 February 2012 (UTC)

finding an ISA Partner

Sir It would be a great pleasure for me if i get ISA partner (International School Award) British council outside india so that exchange of academic , culture and varied projects can be discussed and mutually shared.

This is a help page for difficulties in using Wikimedia Commons. I'm not sure where you'd go for help on this, but not here. - Jmabel ! talk 16:43, 23 February 2012 (UTC)

Using Commons images (19th Century Paintings) in an ebook, ipub or ibook

I wish to use images I've found here on Wikimedia Commons in an ebook, ipub, epub, ibook, etc. These are images of paintings by artists from the 19th century and I believe are copyright expired. I wish to do the right thing. Can you recommend how best to credit Wikimedia Commons in my publication? And to perhaps contribute to the Foundation? If you could direct me to links and text to include, that would be most helpful. Thank you very much. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Donaldjp (talk • contribs) 22:00, 23 February 2012‎ (UTC)

Normally, there would be no need to credit Commons just because we happened to be the host where you obtained a public domain image, though a mention in the acknowledgments of a work is always nice. As for donations: http://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/WMFJA085/en. - Jmabel ! talk 01:33, 24 February 2012 (UTC)
In addition to Jmabel's reply, if you name the specific files you have in mind, we might be able to provide more specific advice. You should also have a look at Commons:Reuse of PD-Art photographs. —LX (talk, contribs) 15:56, 24 February 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for the information and advice! This is a typical image, many others but all are from commons and all are paintings done in the 19th Century. Not necessarily American. http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Bierstadt_Albert_Sailboats_on_the_Hudson_at_Irvington.jpg

changing image

The image for Birmingham roller is incorrect. It is a show roller whereas the true Birmingham roller is a performing pigeon. I have uploaded a true performing roller as starling roller. How do I have the present Birmingham roller image removed? Sertme (talk) 23:48, 23 February 2012 (UTC)

It would help a lot if you would provide links to the images you are talking about so we can sort this out. Normally we don't remove images for being mis-captioned. We just re-caption them. - Jmabel ! talk 01:30, 24 February 2012 (UTC)
 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Birmingham_Roller

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/EarlsRollerPigeonList/photos/album/2128094678/pic/2053430134/view?picmode=&mode=tn&order=ordinal&start=1&count=20&dir=asc

or this url

http://xa.yimg.com/kq/groups/1899420/sn/2053430134/name/n_a

Sertme (talk) 03:15, 24 February 2012 (UTC)

None of those URLs are on Commons, so this would not be the place to discuss their contents. If you want to discuss the content of the English-language wiki page at en:Birmingham Roller, you'd have to do that on the English-language wiki, probably best at en:Talk:Birmingham Roller. The image there is from Commons page File:Birmingham Roller.jpg and has the description "Champion Birmingham Roller at 2008 Queensland State Show (Australia). This bird is owned by Bruno Blaese, and it is a young cock bird." Assuming that's anything like accurate, it's hard to see how it wouldn't be a Birmingham Roller, but you might first discuss the matter with photographer and uploader Graham Manning Gdmanning (talk · contribs). - Jmabel ! talk 16:44, 24 February 2012 (UTC)

Thumbnail and indexing problem

File:Tom-tom 12x8.jpg is listed here as being used on many pages such as w:en:Cabasa on which it does not appear, and there seems to be a problem with its thumbnail at w:en:Wingnut (hardware), which is my immediate concern. Are these strange phenomena related? Is there some sort of database corruption? Andrewa (talk) 10:09, 21 February 2012 (UTC)


The broken thumb was caused by SWIFT. Purged it on Commons. Go to w:en:Wingnut (hardware) and Please purge your browser’s cache. (You only need to do it once.)

Operating
system

Browser
 Microsoft Windows or Linux macOS
Chrome Press Ctrl+F5 or ⇧ Shift+F5
or hold down ⇧ Shift while clicking Reload 		Press ⌘ Cmd+F5 or ⇧ Shift+F5
or hold down ⇧ Shift while clicking Reload
Mozilla Firefox Hold down ⇧ Shift while clicking Reload
(or press Ctrl+F5 or Ctrl+⇧ Shift+R) 		Press ⌘ Cmd+R (reload page) or
⌘ Cmd+⇧ Shift+R (reload page and rewrite cache)
Safari Hold down ⇧ Shift+Alt while clicking Reload
Press Ctrl+R Press ⌘ Cmd+⌥ Option+E (clear browser cache)
or ⌘ Cmd+R (update)
Opera Press Ctrl+F5 or ⇧ Shift+F5
Konqueror
Internet Explorer Press Ctrl+F5

-- RE rillke questions? 10:32, 21 February 2012 (UTC)


The wingnut article is fixed, thank you!

But there still seems to be a very long list of English Wikipedia articles under Usage on en.wikipedia.org on the page File:Tom-tom 12x8.jpg, see also [8] which has a list of 500+ such articles, and those I have checked such as Cabasa are all wrong so far as I can see. What is SWIFT? Andrewa (talk) 06:34, 26 February 2012 (UTC)

Pertaining to the deletion of the Image Map of Kashmir published by The Survey Of India

Hai, Fastily has deleted the image Map of Kashmir published by The Survey Of India.jpg due to license issues. My message at the talk page of Fastily was archived presumably even before Fastily could notice and respond to my message. I would like to inform you that this image is an Indian creation and was published around 1944 by the Survey of India and is thus ipso facto definitely in the Public domain in India since According to The Indian Copyright Act, 1957 (Chapter V Section 25), inter alia government works enter the public domain 60 years after the date on which they were first published, counted from the beginning of the following calendar year (ie. as of 2012, works published prior to 1 January 1952 are thus considered public domain). Therefore the tag

Public domain
This work is in the public domain in India because its term of copyright has expired.

The Indian Copyright Act applies in India to works first published in India. According to the Indian Copyright Act, 1957, as amended up to Act No. 27 of 2012 (Chapter V, Section 25):

  • Anonymous works, photographs, cinematographic works, sound recordings, government works, and works of corporate authorship or of international organizations enter the public domain 60 years after the date on which they were first published, counted from the beginning of the following calendar year (i.e. as of 2024, works published prior to 1 January 1964 are considered public domain).
  • Posthumous works (other than those above) enter the public domain after 60 years from publication date, counted from the beginning of the following calendar year.
  • Any kind of work other than the above enters the public domain 60 years after the author's death (or in the case of a multi-author work, the death of the last surviving author), counted from the beginning of the following calendar year.
  • Text of laws, judicial opinions, and other government reports are free from copyright.
The Indian Copyright Act, 1957 is not retroactive, so any work in which copyright did not subsist when it commenced did not have its copyright restored, and is in the public domain per the Copyright Act 1911.
You must also include a United States public domain tag to indicate why this work is in the public domain in the United States.
 Note that this work might not be in the public domain in countries that do not apply the rule of the shorter term and have copyright terms longer than life of the author plus 60 years. In particular, Mexico is 100 years, Jamaica is 95 years, Colombia is 80 years, Guatemala and Samoa are 75 years, and Switzerland and the United States are 70 years.

العربيَّة | বাংলা | Deutsch | English | français | हिन्दी | italiano | 日本語 | ಕನ್ನಡ | македонски | മലയാളം | मराठी | Nederlands | português do Brasil | sicilianu | தமிழ் | ತುಳು | اردو | 繁體中文 | +/−

is applicable. When I had uploaded the aforesaid image, If I am right, the choice pertaining to public domain in India was then not available! I request you to therefore restore my image so that I can provide details pertaining to the appropriate source and license. Thanks Hindutashravi (talk) 11:47, 21 February 2012 (UTC)

Unfortunately, the US doesn't have the rule of the shorter term, so works published in 1944 in India are still under copyright in the US.--Prosfilaes (talk) 04:00, 22 February 2012 (UTC)
This work is an original creation of the Indian Government and the origin of the work is in India and the author is the Survey of India, The National Survey and Mapping Organisation of India under the Department of Science & Technology of the government of India, and is a scientific department of the government of India, hence other countries like Ethiopia, Guatemala, United States, or Papua New Guinea have no locus standi at all on this issue. Your reference to copyright law in US. is absurd and ridiculous and cannot be countenanced at all. Hindutashravi (talk) 12:57, 22 February 2012 (UTC)
That's not how copyright law works. In India, you have to follow Indian copyright law. In the United States, where the Wikimedia Foundation is, you have to follow American law.--Prosfilaes (talk) 13:08, 22 February 2012 (UTC)
The sole and exclusive author and sole and exclusive publisher of the work is the Survey of India which is a department of the Government of India and this work is an original creation of the Indian Government and the place of origin of the work is in India, so when the Government of India has already abdicated, relinquished, and surrendered the copyright over the work and according to Indian law the work has entered the public domain, then whose copyright is the United States trying to protect? If one were to accept your frivolous reasoning, then there would be no necessity for Wikimedia Foundation to include the tag
Public domain
This work is in the public domain in India because its term of copyright has expired.

The Indian Copyright Act applies in India to works first published in India. According to the Indian Copyright Act, 1957, as amended up to Act No. 27 of 2012 (Chapter V, Section 25):

  • Anonymous works, photographs, cinematographic works, sound recordings, government works, and works of corporate authorship or of international organizations enter the public domain 60 years after the date on which they were first published, counted from the beginning of the following calendar year (i.e. as of 2024, works published prior to 1 January 1964 are considered public domain).
  • Posthumous works (other than those above) enter the public domain after 60 years from publication date, counted from the beginning of the following calendar year.
  • Any kind of work other than the above enters the public domain 60 years after the author's death (or in the case of a multi-author work, the death of the last surviving author), counted from the beginning of the following calendar year.
  • Text of laws, judicial opinions, and other government reports are free from copyright.
The Indian Copyright Act, 1957 is not retroactive, so any work in which copyright did not subsist when it commenced did not have its copyright restored, and is in the public domain per the Copyright Act 1911.
You must also include a United States public domain tag to indicate why this work is in the public domain in the United States.
 Note that this work might not be in the public domain in countries that do not apply the rule of the shorter term and have copyright terms longer than life of the author plus 60 years. In particular, Mexico is 100 years, Jamaica is 95 years, Colombia is 80 years, Guatemala and Samoa are 75 years, and Switzerland and the United States are 70 years.

العربيَّة | বাংলা | Deutsch | English | français | हिन्दी | italiano | 日本語 | ಕನ್ನಡ | македонски | മലയാളം | मराठी | Nederlands | português do Brasil | sicilianu | தமிழ் | ತುಳು | اردو | 繁體中文 | +/−

since the tag, if one were to give countenance to your frivolous reasoning, would be irrelevant , and therefore almost the entire stock of works of inter alia Indian origin which have been uploaded at Wikimedia Commons would have to be summarily deleted! Irrespective of where the Wikimedia Foundation is situate, Wikimedia Foundation purports to be a worldwide global phenomenon and is not restricted to American citizens and the US. Government can and will interfere only in order to protect the copyright violations of works of US. Origin authored and published by American Citizens and where the rights of American citizens are infringed or at stake. Hope nobody lends any credence to your outrageous and innovative claims made for reasons best known to you! Hindutashravi (talk) 05:07, 23 February 2012 (UTC)

Read COM:L and w:Berne Convention for the Protection of Literary and Artistic Works. Rudeness and hostility do not give your claims any more weight.--Prosfilaes (talk) 08:39, 23 February 2012 (UTC)
Look, Prosfilaes, the image is neither an artwork nor painting, music score or book. The image is a cartographical work published by the exclusive owner and author , viz. the Survey of India which is a department of the the Government of India and the source of the work is India. So when the Government of India has already abdicated, relinquished, and surrendered the copyright over the work and according to Indian law the work has entered the public domain, then whose copyright is the United States trying to protect? Look, when the File:IndianSurvey1950map.jpg also similarly published by the Government of India and the sole and exclusive author and sole and exclusive publisher of the work is the Survey of India which is a department of the Government of India and this work is an original creation of the Indian Government and the place of origin of the work is in India, is part of Wikipedia commons, I do not understand, how there can be discrimination vis-à-vis the image I uploaded. Instead of leading me to links, you just reply to my previous queries. My use of words like frivolous or outrageous are meant to express my perception of your views and I do not mean to be rude. Hindutashravi (talk) 05:46, 24 February 2012 (UTC)
The other example you posted is NOT part of Commons, but of the english wikipedia...and not the additional comment there about US law...--Trex2001 (talk) 06:46, 24 February 2012 (UTC)
Besides, This is the work of an Indian Government officer done in his official capacity during the course of the person's official duties and the work is already in the Public domain in India. See the tag below {{PD-USGov-CIA}} pertaining to the United States! When the United States regards the work of a government official done in his official capacity as coming under the purview of public domain, where is the question of considering a similar work done by an Indian Government official in his official capacity during the course of the person's official duties, all the more when the work has already been held to be in the public domain in India, the place of origin of the work, by the government of India the sole and exclusive owner of the said work, as copyrighted? Hindutashravi (talk) 16:26, 25 February 2012 (UTC)
The US government puts its works in the public domain in the US. Whether or not it can enforce a copyright outside the US is an open question, but the US reserves the right to claim one. It does not put the works of other governments in the public domain; even in the US, the works of state and local governmental officials can be copyrighted.
The fact that the law in India puts it in the public domain doesn't prove anything. We have in the US government an example of a government that puts its works in the PD domestically but claims the copyright in foreign nations. The UK has told us explicitly that the expiration of Crown Copyright applies worldwide. We do not know for other nations; we neither know of an explicit claim of copyright exceeding the local limits, nor do we have an explicit release of copyright in foreign nations.--Prosfilaes (talk) 19:01, 25 February 2012 (UTC)
Another aspect is that this image was published purportedly in the year 1944, if not earlier, by the Survey of India at the time when India was still not independent and the Government was British Crown. As such, the tag
Public domain
This work created by the United Kingdom Government is in the public domain.

This is because it is one of the following:

  1. It is a photograph taken prior to 1 June 1957; or
  2. It was published prior to 1974; or
  3. It is an artistic work other than a photograph or engraving (e.g. a painting) which was created prior to 1974.

HMSO has declared that the expiry of Crown Copyrights applies worldwide (ref: HMSO Email Reply)
More information.

See also Copyright and Crown copyright artistic works.

Deutsch ∙ English ∙ Español ∙ français ∙ italiano ∙ Nederlands ∙ polski ∙ português ∙ sicilianu ∙ slovenščina ∙ suomi ∙ Türkçe ∙ македонски ∙ русский ∙ українська ∙ മലയാളം ∙ 한국어 ∙ 日本語 ∙ 简体中文 ∙ 繁體中文 ∙ العربية ∙ +/−

is also applicable since the work was created prior to 1962 by the the Crown Government Of United Kingdom, i.e. the predecessor government of independent India. Netaji Subhas Chandra Bose did attempt to forcibly throw the English out of India and had sought the help of Nazi Germany and Imperial Japan and the Azad Hind Fauj or the Indian National Army did forcibly liberate parts of eastern India and in a glorious display of patriotism planted the Tricolour National flag on 18 April 1944 at Moirang in Manipur in the liberated part of India, but the INA was unable to throw the English out of the rest of India up to the international border of India with Persia along the Sarhad in Baluchistan province in western India. Therefore the aforesaid tag for the United Kingdom is also applicable as the predecessor Government of independent India was the British Crown and the expiry of Crown Copyrights applies worldwide and hence the image is in the public domain! Hindutashravi (talk) 05:48, 26 February 2012 (UTC)

Okay, so according to [9] this is {{PD-UKGov}}. You can take it to Commons:Undeletion requests and ask for it to be undeleted. Note that for all your bluster, your initial claim was wrong; the laws of India were not the relevant ones here.--Prosfilaes (talk) 04:56, 28 February 2012 (UTC)

New username unble to rewrite file

Hi, can someone replace File:Kirjanpito.jpg with File:Kirjanpito new.jpg because my username is too new. Only size (margins) has been changed.--Opacommons (talk) 16:21, 24 February 2012 (UTC)

This is what the system tells me:

"Upload error

A file with this name exists already. You can't upload a new version because your account is too new. Please go back and upload the file under a new name. Once you've done that, you can ask someone at the Help desk to move your file to the name you want."

I also cannot find help text about how long I have to wait, so currently I am visiting here daily, to look for a answer to my question, and to try if time limit has gone.--Opacommons (talk) 15:24, 26 February 2012 (UTC)
Ok now.--Opacommons (talk) 14:46, 27 February 2012 (UTC)

I am attempting to figure out the proper copyright tag to use with a photograph of a member of the Michigan House of Representative. My assumption is that, as a work of the Michigan government, particularly of the House, it is in the public domain.

--Aaronjbaylis (talk) 02:24, 25 February 2012 (UTC)

Probably not, unless Michigan has some specific law on this that I don't know about. Generally, work of U.S. state governments is not in the public domain. The policy of placing federal government works in the public domain does not apply to state governments at all. - Jmabel ! talk 07:07, 25 February 2012 (UTC)
The website disclaimer http://www.house.michigan.gov/disclaimer.asp states 'Use of the photographs is granted for non-profit use.' which makes it work for commons i guess.--Trex2001 (talk) 06:41, 27 February 2012 (UTC)
You guess wrong. Please read the introduction to Commons:Licensing. —LX (talk, contribs) 08:52, 27 February 2012 (UTC)

File:Oliver Publicity Photo 2012a.jpg

Moved from User talk:Kobac#Oliver Publicity Photo 2012a.jpg

I've added a file (Oliver Publicity Photo 20212a.jpg) to the Wikimedia Commons that you deleted on Feb 16th, 2012. My company owns this photo, and I'm not sure what I need to do in order to not have red flags raised going further.

Please contact me with an explanation of the correct way of uploading photos that my company owns to the Wikimedia Commons

Thank you — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jpoindex (talk • contribs) 20:19, 23 February 2012‎ (UTC)

You uploaded the photo with the information that you are the photographer. The first step is to upload photos with true information, not to just klick "own work" in the upload wizard. If you do so you will be asked to provide written permission from the copyright holder, but thats the second step already. --Martin H. (talk) 13:08, 25 February 2012 (UTC)

File:A F Blackmore.gif - I Have given this file from the blakemore website. I am citing the website as the source of this image. There is no copyrights page on the website so don't know if I am breaking them. I uploaded the pic to add to an article of the same company. So what have I done wrong?

--Wikishagnik (talk) 18:59, 25 February 2012 (UTC)

What you have done wrong is to upload an image without providing evidence that you have the right to do so. Maproom (talk) 10:50, 26 February 2012 (UTC)

New Images

Moved from User talk:Kobac#New Images

Hello Kobac,

You wrote me a note explaning that Im not uploading my photo on the Goyard page. These images are my photos. Can you explain me what should I do? Thank you for your help. Superstudio


Hello Kobac, I am working on the Goyard page and I want to use the Goyard logo. How can I use it to present the brand? I owned the images that are on the page Thank you Superstudio (talk) 14:43, 26 February 2012 (UTC)

Are you an author and copyright holder of Goyard logo? And what about this copyrighted photo? Kobac (talk) 14:48, 26 February 2012 (UTC)

Thank your for your help. I shot the photos for Goyard and Im working on their page. Can you help me with the logo, I found this page on non free logo but I dont understand it. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Logos#Uploading_non-free_logos Thank you for your time

  • The Commons' and Wikipedia's rules are different, so you can upload non-free logo to en-wiki, but you can't do it here. Unfortunately, I don't know the rules about uploading the non-free illustrations (not logos) to en-wiki. Kobac (talk) 20:40, 26 February 2012 (UTC)

I am trying to find a solution and I really need your help. Can you please tell me how Louis Vuitton up loaded their logo http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Louis_Vuitton_Logo.svg? Goyard wants their logo on the top of the page. Thank you so much

This image only consists of simple geometric shapes and/or text. It does not meet the threshold of originality needed for copyright protection, and is therefore in the public domain. Although it is free of copyright restrictions, this image may still be subject to other restrictions. See WP:PD#Fonts or Template talk:PD-textlogo for more information.

— {{PD-textlogo}}
Goyard logo is not so simple like LV's logo, but we can try to apply this principle to it. Anyway, the copyighted images of bags must be deleted. Kobac (talk) 10:02, 27 February 2012 (UTC)

Kobac, it is not simple, what should i do with the Goyard logo? Should I do a new up load? Chanel, Hermes International all the brands have a logo on their page. Can you please explain me the process. Regarding the photos I have the copyrights and Goyard wants to have the photos to present the auction, it was for a fight against cancer. I do not understand why I cannot use these images if I have the copuright. Do we need a letter from Goyard. Maybe my questions might sound stupid but I asked for help and you are the only one who is giving me your support. Thank you Superstudio (talk) 11:45, 27 February 2012 (UTC)

I didn't understood how the copyrighted images of bags can help for a fight against cancer?
Please, use our help desk for any questions. Kobac (talk) 11:57, 27 February 2012 (UTC)

I will go on the help desk but I dont understand why you dont want to help me/teach me when you are the expert and I asked for your help. Regarding the image, the bags are sold in an auction and all the moneys goes to fight cancer. Thank you Superstudio (talk) 13:00, 27 February 2012 (UTC)

Garage de l'Est

Hello all. I have already posted at the administrator's notice board, looking for help, but have received zero response. I am looking for help with a series of photos: back in the easy-going days of 2006 or so, the owner of a classic-car shop in the Netherlands promised a now retired user that they could upload any and all car photos from their website. Category:Photographs from the Garage de l'Est contains all the photos uploaded since, currently to the tune of 87 shots, many of which are in use in several dozen articles across WP. User:Lymantria correctly pointed out that it wasn't really a good license, so I again contacted Mr. Stedehouder, the owner of the firm in question. He responded immediately and sent me a response, which is still languishing in OTRS. Nonetheless, it currently looks as if a good chunk of these pictures are going to be deleted anyhow, as User:Kobac has begun tagging all of them with lacking links to the images. This is true, and since many of them have been up for nearly six years already, naturally they are no longer all available.

Anyhow, what I am looking for is an admin or trusted user of some sort who can go over these images with me. I will look up any image which is still available on the site, or of which there is a shot in the same series (often they archive one shot of particularly interesting cars, but not always the same one as was uploaded here).

As for the ones of which there is no record, I suggest each one is dealt with individually on the basis of the following:

  • Background - most of the photos are shot in and near the garage, and most backgrounds are easily identifiable
  • Subject - is it a car which is likely to have been offered by them, in light of their other vehicles?
  • Image size - I have not seen any images above 675 x 506 pixels
  • lighting - is it taken in Northern Europe or in a tropical zone?
  • original uploader - trustworthy or maverick?
  • Camera info, when available

Thankful for any help, Mr.choppers (talk) 14:47, 27 February 2012 (UTC)

Hi there! I have illustrated a portrait of a living person (Jeremy Lin) based on an Associated Press photograph. Can I upload that? Thank you! Siggy O'Hara

Nope. It's a derivative work of a copyrighted work. - Jmabel ! talk 16:46, 27 February 2012 (UTC)

redirecting a category

How do we redirect a category? Category:Australian Aboriginals should say Australian Aborigines, because "Aboriginal" is the adjective and "Aborigine" is the noun.

Sardaka (talk) 08:45, 28 February 2012 (UTC)

That's not true; there are many, many uses of aboriginals as a noun as you can see if you check books.google.com. Wiktionary lists Aboriginal as both an adjective and a noun, and it doesn't seem to have been edited since copying from the 1913 Webster's Unabridged. Both forms have many thousands of hits on books.google.com, and the better one is not a simple grammatical question.--Prosfilaes (talk) 09:33, 28 February 2012 (UTC)
This particular is something you should take up at COM:Categories for discussion if you are interested in making a change. The technicality of a cat redirect is to use {{Redirect category}} but it would not be appropriate for you to make this particular change unilaterally. - Jmabel ! talk 16:40, 28 February 2012 (UTC)

No PREVIEW button in the upload form

As it happened already several times, actually no PREVIEW button appears in the standard upload form. What happened again? Without PREVIEW I suspend my uploads! -- Хрюша ?? 09:09, 28 February 2012 (UTC)

hi, i upload a few of images but it says that licenses are not valid, what am i do?

thanks en.inverary23 --94.38.228.180 11:15, 28 February 2012 (UTC)

Hi, please read up on copyright. By default, pictures are protected under copyright. If you find images on the internet, as here it seems to be the case, than they are still owned by the original author, and can't be published on wikimedia commons and will be deleted. --Vera (talk) 14:09, 28 February 2012 (UTC)

Messed up preview for File:Lenny_Henry_in_The_Comedy_of_Errors_2011.jpg

The full resolution image looks fine, but all the previews look weird. What's wrong? --Bensin (talk) 06:37, 28 February 2012 (UTC)

Just a guess - could this image be using CMYK colour, instead of RGB? I think CMYK can produce these black stripes when used here. Maproom (talk) 18:57, 28 February 2012 (UTC)
And you are right. See Help:JPEG#Color model -- RE rillke questions? 20:54, 28 February 2012 (UTC)
OK. Thanks! --Bensin (talk) 06:36, 29 February 2012 (UTC)

After Austrian Law the term of a copyright for a picture ends 50 years after it was published. This picture was published in 1960.

--Streamsinthedesert (talk) 10:28, 28 February 2012 (UTC)

The copyright status of the image must be mentioned on the description page, by means of a status template. There should also be a link or some sort of reference provided to verify where and when the photo was first published. However, unfortunately, if this photo was first published in Austria in 1960, it is not in the public domain in the United States and cannot be hosted on Wikimedia Commons. (For some details, you can see en:Template:PD-Austria.) -- Asclepias (talk) 16:02, 28 February 2012 (UTC)
This is not a simple photograph but a photographic work. It is under copyright in Austria until 70 years after the death of the photographer. Lupo 21:17, 28 February 2012 (UTC)

Hi it seems I made a mistake when classifying this image and am not sure how to fix it. I have permission to place this image on wiki commons from the creator and would like update this.

Thankyou

--Elliottwalton (talk) 04:21, 29 February 2012 (UTC)

Made a mistake and registered a second time with another name - what to do?

Hallo! I am sorry I made a mistake. I registered in Wikimedia Commons under the Username DinkumEn (talk) 07:17, 29 February 2012 (UTC) a few days ago. It was not what I wanted to do as I am already registered here for more than a year with the Username Dinkum. I was trying to register in Wikipedia in English and made the mistake. Please, can you help me to close this account and believe me it was an error made in good faith.DinkumEn (talk) 07:17, 29 February 2012 (UTC)

There's really no problem here. It's perfectly permitted to have more than one account as long as you don't use them in a deceptive manner. There's no such thing normally as closing an account once it's been used, just don't use the new account any further. If you want to make it clear that your edits there are from the same account, just add a notice to that effect on your user page. It's no big deal. - Jmabel ! talk 16:00, 29 February 2012 (UTC)

Uploading Flickr file

I'm trying to upload the file [[10]] using flinfo and I get the error message " The file you uploaded seems to be empty. This might be due to a typo in the filename. Please check whether you really want to upload this file." I'm unsure how to resolve this.

Thanks! Jallenby (talk) 18:26, 29 February 2012 (UTC)

Does Flickr Upload Bot work for you? -- RE rillke questions? 20:27, 29 February 2012 (UTC)

Can't get description to appear

I can't figure out why I can't get the description present in the source text to appear on File:Reagan and Todd.jpg. What am I doing wrong? Gildir (talk) 20:31, 29 February 2012 (UTC)

Better now? This has to do with how templates and their parameters work in the Mediawiki software. The link that you added contained equals signs (=), which makes Mediawiki think that everything before the first equals sign is a parameter name used by the {{En}} template. The trick is to add a "1=" to explicitly pass everything into the first nameless parameter instead. If all of this means nothing to you, don't worry too much about it. :-) —LX (talk, contribs) 20:40, 29 February 2012 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Commons:Help_desk/Archive/2012/02&oldid=969696887"