This help desk is a forum for questions and help on:
How to use Commons
Anyone, from newbie to experienced, can ask a question here. Questions will be replied to here as well. Any answers you receive are not legal advice and the responder cannot be held liable for them.
Resolved sections (marked by {{section resolved|1=~~~~}}) will be archived after two days. Sections with no discussion will be archived after ten days. The latest archive is Commons:Help desk/Archive/2024/12.
In short: What is the best method to request speedy deletion of thousands of copyvios uploaded by a bot?
Context: This deletion request requests deletion of all files in a category of 107 copyvios (107 non-free photos by professional photographer Daniel Cande) uploaded to Commons by a bot Gzen92Bot. The photos are obviously not free at the source. (And that was also already known from previous discussions). Looking at more uploads by that bot, it can be seen that it systematically inserts false claims of CC0 on almost everything it uploads. Sometimes, it falsely tags CC0 files that are public domain by expiration of copyright, which is already bad behaviour but at least it's not too damaging. Often, it falsely tags CC0 files that are not free, which is much worse and potentially much more damaging.
Size of the problem: Searching only for photos by the same professional photographer Daniel Cande, it can be found that the bot created hundreds of categories and uploaded probably tens of thousands of non-free photos by that photographer. It can be expected that looking at more uploads of that bot thousands more copyvios of non-free works by other authors might be found.
Suggestions?: What could be the best practical method to speedy delete those thousands of bot copyvios? Placing copyvio tags on tens of thousands of files, flooding the speedy deletion maintenance category, may not be the most practical method. Another method could be starting a series of hundreds of mass deletion requests, for example each listing the files in one category. But considering the size of the problem, even formatting one or two such mass deletion requests every day, that could take practically a whole year to go through all of it. Also, deletion requests can sometimes wait several months before an administrator closes them, which is not practical for copyvios that should be speedy deleted. Another idea could be to simply notify the problem on the Administrators' noticeboard and let them deal with it as they want. Any other suggestions?
@Asclepias: Given that they are in a category, it is easy for admins to do a mass delete with VFC, especially easy if there is nothing else in the category. Sounds, though, like the more immediate problem is to stop the bot in question from digging an even deeper hole. - Jmabel ! talk06:20, 8 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
History of licensing should be checked. Gallica released some files in the public domain, and later changed the license. Once released in the public domain, they will stay this way. Yann (talk) 18:13, 8 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
From discussions in 2012 and 2013, it seems likely that the photos by Daniel Cande were indeed noted "domaine public" on Gallica at that time. They were probably noted like that until circa the mid-2010s. However, it does not matter that Gallica had ever placed or not public domain notices on those photos on which it never had the right to do so. The matter was examined in this DR in 2017 (if one goes to the essential and skips the secondary discussions that take most of the page). So, it's not necessary to search the internet archives in cases like that. Searching Commons, there are hundreds of categories with photos by the same photographer uploaded by the same bot recently. -- Asclepias (talk) 21:57, 8 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
When we have proof (license review or Internet Archive) that the files were released to the public domain, I don't see any reason to delete them. Yann (talk) 09:03, 9 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Although that is not necessary for a large number of uploads by that bot. Through previous discussions, Commons has developed a reasonable knowledge and consensus about the actual copyright status of many Gallica fonds. It is established that Gallica or BNF cannot release in the public domain works on which it never had any rights (other than a limited permission to simply display those works on its website). That is the case, for example, for the photos by Daniel Cande, that the bot has uploaded to Commons by the thousands and grouped into some 350 categories. It's the same thing with photos by Joël Verhoustraeten, grouped into some 100 categories. It does not matter if Gallica had ever placed or not a public domain notice on works on which it never had the right to do so. Therefore, there is no reason to delay the speedy deletion of such known copyvios, which should be deleted ASAP. By contrast, works that Commons has established might have been validly released to the public domain by Gallica at some point in the past are, for example, photos by Roger Pic, because that photographer ceded his rights to BNF. The bot grouped them in some 350 categories. I would rather keep the photos by Roger Pic, but the difficulty for them might be to prove if they had public domain notices, now some ten years after the removal of those notices from Gallica. It can be noted that apparently the bot started to mass upload Gallica files to Commons after Gallica had already removed most such public domain notices from its pages. They were not CC0 anyway. The bot operator said that there are still inconsistencies between the present non-free notices and some technical parameter, but he should check the notices and should get familiar with past discussions on this subject and with the public domain tags of Commons and understand what CC0 is before launching the bot on mass uploads. -- Asclepias (talk) 21:05, 8 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Hello, the API https://api.bnf.fr/api-gallica-de-recherche used parameter "access", "fayes" = public domain. But yes, sometimes it's not the case. I have already modified the code to use the field "dc.rights" ("restricted use (convention BnF-ADM-xxxx-xxxxxx-xx)") in API returns. I will list all these cases quickly. Gzen92 (talk) 07:28, 9 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Asclepias: The BNF did acquire the copyright of several photographers, including Daniel Cande. That is specifically mentioned in the DR you linked above with a reference. Yann (talk) 09:06, 9 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
What corrective actions can I take to correct all other files? The date of the work is not sufficient and often the author is not indicated. Gzen92 (talk) 15:56, 11 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Dear Sir/Madam,
Kindly give me the copyright to use the following figure in my future textbook. From: https://en.wikipedia.org The diagram is shown in the following: file:///C:/Users/akendoush/Downloads/Sch%C3%A9maDechetsNucleaires_en.svg
Kendoush (talk) 12:30, 10 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Bastique: weird. Trying to work from his string (for a file on his hard drive) I must have done something wrong when I tried to access the file on Commons, then gotten it right when I typed it here.
RUEGO ELIMINEN EL ESCUDO QUE HAN PUESTO EN WIKIPEDIA REFERIDO A TORREGAMONES, NO ES EL ESCUDO ORIGINARIO CREADO EN 2010. YA EXISTE UN ESCUDO APROBADO Y PUBLICADO OFICIALMENTE. GRACIAS ANBALICARION (talk) 21:46, 10 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Paraphrase: user is complaining that the coat of arms (escudo) in es:Torregamones is "not the original created in 2010".
Presumably it is an issue take up in es-wiki: Commons does not usually try to make determinations as to what version of a coat of arms is preferred, and certainly cannot tell es-wiki to change it. - Jmabel ! talk07:22, 11 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
1. As explained by Usuario:Marcelo on your talk page at es.wikipedia, any image of an escudo is correct as long as it is conform to the text of the blazon.
2. The decision to use an image on es.wikipedia is a decision by the users at es.wikipedia. You can discuss that matter with other users on the talk page of the article at es:Discusión:Torregamones.
3. On Commons, you placed the .png copy of your image under the CC BY-SA 4.0 license, but you released the .webm copy of the same image to the public domain with a CC0 dedication. And the .jpg of the same image at ayuntamiento.es is all rights reserved under the legal terms of that website. That all seems somewhat contradictory.
4. It is quite possible that you are D.A.B.L. as you apparently claim to be. If so, still, to help keep the files on Commons, it might be useful that you provide evidence (see Commons:VRT/es) that you are that person, and that you personally drew that particular digital drawing (the particular image of the .jpg, .png and .webm), and clarify who owns (or owned) the copyright on that particular drawing and what is its actual copyright status.
Sorry I mean like when you go on an article and you scroll down and theres the boxes you can click on to see more information like for example on this article you can click on "history" or "openness" or "policies and content" Красный Октябрь (talk) 12:33, 11 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Красный Октябрь: glad I asked. So this is a question about the English-language Wikipedia, and would best be asked there (possibly en:Wikipedia:Teahouse).
You can always add a subsection by directly editing the Wikitext instead of using the WYSIWYG editor. If you do that on this page you are looking at, you will easily see the markup for subsections, which is the same in all WMF wikis (and all other mediawiki wikis). - Jmabel ! talk19:37, 11 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I think that this question was replied to adequately based on the supplied information. If you have anything to add or a follow-up question please feel free to replace this box with your comment. This section will be archived after two days. 廣九直通車 (talk) 13:09, 21 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Hi! I have been searching for an image (to put on Wikipedia), searching both Wikimedia Commons and Flickr. I have not yet found what I am looking for and I’ve used multiple search terms searched to the end of results, so I presume it is not on these sites. I am wondering if there are other free image sites I could browse besides Flickr that I could submit one of its images to Wikimedia Commons or Wikipedia if I find it there (with similar copyright tags that are compatible with use on Wikipedia/Wikipedia Commons).
So after the fall of the Assad regime in Syria, a prison has been raided by the Syrian people and that prison is Sednaya Prison which is notorious for torturing prisoners.
And there was a video recorded by one of the guards that was found on one of the mobile phones left around, the video captured one of the guards slapping and belittling a prisoner and saying to him in Arabic "You want freedom eh?" multiple times. I feel like that video might be historically significant, would it be acceptable to upload here? GnikehtCommons (talk) 13:46, 11 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
It is not sufficient that a file be important. For upload to Commons it must be released under a free license. Please see COM:L for additional information. GMGtalk16:05, 11 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I think that this question was replied to adequately based on the supplied information. If you have anything to add or a follow-up question please feel free to replace this box with your comment. This section will be archived after two days. 廣九直通車 (talk) 13:09, 21 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
You put a wrong information with the picture of Biden's family wedding picture. It should be Ashley Biden in the picture not Naomi Biden . Naomi Biden already passed away when she is 1 yr old 148.8.132.1516:21, 11 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I have been having a problem recently. When I try to upload an image that I have taken myself, to an article, it doesn't seem to fully upload. It just takes me back to the add media page. Then I try again and it says that the file already exists and I cannot use it. It's in Wikimedia commons when I search it but I am still not allowed to use it. Could you tell me why this is happening and how I figure out my issue?
@AndrewDeAngelo: do I understand that you are using a cross-wiki uploader from the English-language Wikipedia (or possibly another Wikipedia)?
"I am … not allowed to use it" is unclear. Are you somehow being prevented from editing the Wikitext and adding it that way?
In any case, if the image is making it successfully to Commons, it sounds like this is mostly a question for the English-language Wikipedia (or wherever else you are having this problem). - Jmabel ! talk20:07, 11 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Hi @Jmabel no, I went in to edit an article on English wiki and add a picture and when I tried to upload it there, it just kept reverting back to there being no image successfully uploaded. " am not allowed to use it": I then went to the Commons and the picture appeared there but I could still not utilize it in the article that I wanted to. It is a picture I took on my own phone and was not copied or taken from anywhere. AndrewDeAngelo (talk) 15:54, 13 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@AndrewDeAngelo: Once an image is uploaded to Commons, a second copy of it must not be uploaded to Wikipedia. So it's a good thing if Wikipedia did not allow the upload of a duplicate. An image is not to be uploaded to an article, instead it can be displayed in an article. You can review the help pages on Wikipedia about displaying thumbnails, remembering that galleries and infobox pictures can have a different syntax. -- Asclepias (talk) 18:07, 13 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Hi, as the title says, am I allowed to upload and use an image from a university work ?
As the work is published freely on the net I'm not really sure if it's allowed or not.
@Martinlievre: neither "a university work" nor "published freely on the net" give any clue to the answer.
Commons accepts only material that is either in the public domain or free-licensed. Be aware that this is less that 5% of what you will find on the Internet. If you don't know how to determine whether a particular image qualifies, please provide a URL and whatever else would be needed (figure number, etc.) for someone to find the image in question and try to give you an answer. That will work much better than any effort to describe the image. - Jmabel ! talk20:11, 11 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I think that this question was replied to adequately based on the supplied information. If you have anything to add or a follow-up question please feel free to replace this box with your comment. This section will be archived after two days. 廣九直通車 (talk) 13:09, 21 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Help with using an image from French Wikipedia on English wiki
I am wondering if someone could help me with translating an image from the French version of Wikipedia:Verdun Auditorium this is located in the “histoire” section of the French site and it’s the first one displayed.
If Someone could provide me some guidance, that would be amazing!
@Gojetsgo55: I'm not sure what you mean by "translating an image." I don't see anything there with text as part of the image. If that was just a false cognate from another language (e.g. Spanish trasladar, "to move"), and you just mean you want to use File:Construction de l Auditorium de Verdun.jpg in the English-language Wikipedia, that image is already here on Commons, and you can use in en-wiki it exactly as you would use any other image on Commons. - Jmabel ! talk03:49, 12 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I am new to Wikipedia, so I have many doubts. In this case, I want to create a new page, and I would like to illustrate it with an old photograph, which no longer has any copyright protection. How can I proceed to place it, and why the platform does not allow me to upload it? Clodomiro Picado (talk) 07:34, 12 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Clodomiro Picado: you triggered an automated filter that stops new users from uploading small resolution images using cross-wiki upload. That said, are you certain that the image is no longer copyrighted? Based on Special:AbuseLog/11117078 this is an image from 1957. That may or may not be copyrighted, depending on country. Also, you have claimed that this image is your own personal work (ie. you held the camera), that it is actually taken in 2024 and the description reads just "h". You can't claim that for on old picture. MKFI (talk) 08:02, 12 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I think that this question was replied to adequately based on the supplied information. If you have anything to add or a follow-up question please feel free to replace this box with your comment. This section will be archived after two days. 廣九直通車 (talk) 13:10, 21 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I want to add some photos of Gayatri Devi in their Wikipedia article because currently this article don’t have any pics of her. Photos are available on Charan Singh Archives see this. I have mailed the archives and i have talked to the chairman that i require photos for her wikipedia article and they mailed me that i can use these photos for Wikipedia and they send me 5 to 6 photos of her in full resolution through G drive. TheSlumPanda (talk) 19:11, 12 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
If Belbury can find justification to delete two of those photos, you can find an excuse for the rest of them. The less of me on this website, the happier I'll be. I'm going to throw a cannister of salt over my shoulder and onto my computer when I'm done with this place. CorpPorPearl (talk) 02:27, 13 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@CorpPorPearl: I assume this is about File:Dylan Thomas Photo at The White Horse Tavern.jpg and File:Andy Rourke Wheatsheaf Mural.jpg. Clearly the latter is a photograph of someone else's copyrighted work; I'm guessing the former is, too, though I'm less certain of the status of the underlying photo. Granger claims to own the copyright, though, and we would need to disprove that for the photo to be acceptable here.
Several of your other uploads look like similar copyright violations (derivative of other people's copyrighted work) so it should be easy enough to get those deleted. I can't do much, though, about the ones where you already legitimately granted an irrevocable license. - Jmabel ! talk05:24, 13 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@ExclusiveEditor: The first upload was to nl.wikipedia. You could try to ask administrators there to look at the page history to know who attributed to this file a OTRS template on nl.wikipedia before it was transferred to Commons. However, the other version of the image, apparently first uploaded to en.wikipedia under the filename Schlechter.png, is tagged as public domain with PD-old, possibly incorrectly since the author is not identified nor the place and year of first publication. If the image is from circa 1910, it does not meet the condition of PD-old-assumed. Given that it is sourced from a website by a person with a name similar to the name under "author" in File:Schlecht.jpg, it is possible to hypothesize that the OTRS communication came from that person, who might have meant to say that he agreed to the use of the image. It might be copyfraud, maybe involuntarily. You can ask at Commons:VRT/Noticeboard about ticket 2007040710018191 to know what it might have said. You could try to research the origin of the image or its early publications. -- Asclepias (talk) 19:20, 13 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Per {{Tasnim}}, "all images without explicitly watermarked attribution to agency photographers are presumed to be outside this [CC-BY-SA-4.0] license." I see no such explicitly watermarked attribution to agency photographers on those photos, so no, you may not upload them here. — 🇺🇦Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me🇺🇦 23:51, 13 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Can I upload the logo of the Irish Communist Party?
I mean, if they are communists, surely the flag belongs to everyone.... However, here on Commons the burden of proof is on the uploader to insure that an image is not subject to copyright. This page seems to indicate that most of the images on the site are fair use, Commons requires that they be freely licensed, so probably not. Just Step Sideways (talk) 21:56, 13 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
This existsI checked the website of the party itself, and ironically these communists have copyrighted the entire site. We do already have at least two user-created images of the current flag though. Just Step Sideways (talk) 22:01, 13 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I don't think there is any particular Communist antipathy to intellectual property rights, except insofar as they constitute the "means of production," which a logo does not. - Jmabel ! talk01:05, 14 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Well, per COM:TOO Ireland, it appears that Ireland isn't using the sweat-of-the-brow rule in the United Kingdom, and this is complicated by a lack of cases. IMO might be on the verge of copyright protection?廣九直通車 (talk) 13:16, 21 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Hi there, there is a B-class Wikipedia article that I'm doing on a particular South African subject and I will need to have about 7 pictures in the whole article, depicting the issues I'm writing about, including newspapers copies, cartoons, etc.
I have not been able to upload pictures that were not taken by me. Can someone please help me, I can send the list like links of the stuff that I wish up on my article. Anybody? ZS Khumalo (talk) 15:00, 14 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks a lot, that will be so helpful. I appreciate. For example the pic contained in these article in the links below. I need to search for more other pics as I write the draft:
I see absolutely no reason to think that any of the images linked above are either in the public domain or free-licensed. @ZS Khumalo: do you have some reason to think any of these would be OK, or is this just shooting in the dark? - Jmabel ! talk04:43, 15 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
In reality I'm new here and I have no actual clue about public domains or licences, unless I'm taken through a guide that will show me which of all the WHICHES is which. The reason I was asking for assistance here for photo uploads uploads is because I truly don't know how to do Wiki Commons, my home is always Wikipedia. ZS Khumalo (talk) 04:24, 16 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@ZS Khumalo: I strongly recommend that if you are interested in uploading anything other than photos you took yourself and that do not show anyone else's creative work (e.g. paintings, texts, etc.), you should at least take 10-15 minutes to skim COM:L and en:Public domain. - Jmabel ! talk21:50, 16 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Hello. I am interested in making a donation (I've been seeing the pop-ups on Wikipedia, asking for contributions), but want it to be matched if possible. Is that something Wikimedia will sometimes do? Sirenxp (talk) 15:43, 14 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I think that this question was replied to adequately based on the supplied information. If you have anything to add or a follow-up question please feel free to replace this box with your comment. This section will be archived after two days. 廣九直通車 (talk) 13:11, 21 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Can I publish and upload a personal photo of myself on Wikimedia?
Can I publish and upload a personal photo of myself on Wikimedia? Without problems or not? How do I do that? Also, does it have to be under an open license or can I publish my personal photo under a copyright license? Abdullah Alzowiny (talk) 17:42, 14 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Abdullah Alzowiny: Hi, We require people to be really active before uploading pictures of themselves. "copyright license" doesn't mean anything. We require all content to be under a free license or in the public domain. Please read COM:L. Thanks, Yann (talk) 17:53, 14 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Karmakolle: It should be ok. Maybe you had moved the page to the Commons namespace inadvertently instead of to the main namespace. The difference between the move and the creation of the new page is that the history list of contributions to your draft has been removed when you deleted the Commons page. Depends if you wanted to keep that or not, but probably not, I suppose. The redirection page "User:Karmakolle/Michael Sweerts catalogue raisonné, 1996 Kultzen" is probably not useful either, you could delete it also. -- Asclepias (talk) 19:59, 14 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Hola, subí imágenes en Commons que son con derechos reservados y necesito eliminarlas. ¿Cómo elimino las imágenes? Gracias.
Hi, I uploaded some images on Commons that are copyrighted and I need to remove them. How do I remove the images? Thanks.
I uploaded three images to the Wikipedia Commons page that are copyrighted and I need to remove them.
@Joaquintelchi: Hola, y bienvenido. Los derechos de autor de otros que no dieron su consentimiento sería el problema. Consulte COM:NETC/es y COM:DP/es.
I think that this question was replied to adequately based on the supplied information. If you have anything to add or a follow-up question please feel free to replace this box with your comment. This section will be archived after two days. 廣九直通車 (talk) 13:11, 21 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
من یک آهنگساز خواننده و تنظیم کننده بین المللی موسیقی هستم و سالیان سال هست که تلاش برای داشتم ویکیپدیا کردم ولی هنوز موفق نشدم ، آیا اجازه برای ساخت دارم ؟ ایا ممکنه من هم صفحه خودم رو با کلس مطلب بسازم ؟لطفا من رو راهنمایی بفرمایید Amiryarmusic (talk) 22:16, 14 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Amiryarmusic: There are almost no circumstances where it is acceptable to write about yourself in any of the Wikipedias. If you want something more specific about a particular Wikipedia, you would have to ask on that Wikipedia, not here on Wikimedia Commons, which is a media repository and has no articles at all. - Jmabel ! talk04:59, 15 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Zarefal: this is your first-ever edit (deleted or otherwise) on this site (Wikimedia Commons}}. You have no edits (deleted or otherwise) on the English-language Wikipedia. What site is your question about? I would suggest asking it on that site. - Jmabel ! talk05:02, 15 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Zarefal: you triggered an automated filter that stops new users from uploading small resolution images. Just to be certain, this image is completely you own work as you have claimed? You created the artwork entirely yourself or held the camera and took the photo? MKFI (talk) 09:37, 15 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
minta tolong bahwasanya audio ini ditujukan kepada publik untuk edukasi yang membangun pengetahuan,bukan untuk politik dan kepentingan orang lainnya dan juga file ini tidak melanggar hak cipta Widy Nur Rosid (talk) 09:22, 15 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Hello, I have written permission from a professional photographer to upload an image of a musician. I am not sure how to add this information in and the image is being contested:
"File:Dego, Marc and Ian of 4hero in Dollis Hill Reinforced studio by photographer Mark Alesky.jpg has been listed at Commons:Deletion requests"
I do not know the photographer but I contacted them to see if they would be ok with me uploading the image and they have said yes as long as there are credits provided. I&I22 (talk) 12:56, 15 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I think that this question was replied to adequately based on the supplied information. If you have anything to add or a follow-up question please feel free to replace this box with your comment. This section will be archived after two days. 廣九直通車 (talk) 13:12, 21 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
A lot (if not all) of the files in this category (uploaded in 2022): Category:Collectie glasplaatnegatieven Den Helder 1905-1940 RAA and it's subcategory are duplicates of files already uploaded. I believe all of the older files (uploaded 2018) are in this category: Category:Media from Regionaal Archief Alkmaar. I asked the uploader on her talk page but got no response (yet). There are over 600 400 files and I don't want to put a duplicate template on each and everyone of them by hand. Can this be fixed automatically somehow? Also I don't know which ones (the 2018 or the 2022 files) should be kept as the latter are just slightly larger files.
Hey, I have a question: I noticed that for the of the geochronological unit categories, there seems to be a regular category and a "stratigraphic" category (e.g., Category:Cretaceous would be the regular one while Category:Cretaceous System would be the stratigraphic one), and wondered if the content of these two categories should be placed in one category instead.
Now, I understand that while geochronology and stratigraphy are "equal" to each other, they're not exactly the same; geochronology refers to non-visitable periods of time, while stratigraphy refers to visitable rock formations that refer to certain points in time. Still, it feels like files in the stratigraphic categories (which end in Eonothem, Erathem, System, Series, or Stage) aren't covered as much when they're split in two like that. So I'm asking, can I can unify the appropriate pairs of categories under the geochronological name (using the naming convention of example category above compared to its stratigraphic counterpart) should I find instances of them? — Alex26337 (talk) 18:15, 15 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Can the 1929 film "The Skeleton Dance" be added as a file on this site?
The film was made in 1929 and will enter the public domain on January 1, 2025. Steamboat Willie was added as a file on December 8, a few weeks before it entered public domain. In that case, can the Skeleton Dance film be added as a file on this wiki right now? I already have it on my laptop. CMBGAMER 2018 (talk) 19:55, 15 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I submitted a bio for possible inclusion in Wikipedia in a pdf form that included a professional portarit/photo and got a message saying: File:Mohamad S. Jaafar, MD.pdf has been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether it should be kept or not.
This is my own bio (I wrote it) and the photo was taken by a professional photographer. This photo has been used on many websites such as Linkedin and AAPOS.org.
Kindly clarify the reason for the rejection ("Commons: Deletion") and advise on what remedy is needed. My professional email address is: [SUPPRESSED] and my personal email address is: [SUPPRESSED] Phone number: [SUPPRESSED]. Talloaks2024 (talk) 23:30, 15 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Talloaks2024: please never post your email address or phone number publicly on Commons.
There are almost no circumstances where it is OK to write about yourself on any Wikimedia project (one of the few exceptions is brief autobiographical remarks by active contributors on their user talk page.)
Commons does not host articles.
Wikipedia does not accept articles in PDF form.
Previously published photos can only be accepted on Commons if they are (1) in COM:SCOPE (this appears not to be) and (2) prior publication shows a free license that clearly comes from the copyright holder (typically the photographer) or the copyright-holder has gone through the process defined at COM:VRT (again, not the case here).
I think that this question was replied to adequately based on the supplied information. If you have anything to add or a follow-up question please feel free to replace this box with your comment. This section will be archived after two days. 廣九直通車 (talk) 13:12, 21 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I have found an openly licensed set of images from trustworthy source on Flickr. Is it fine to upload them using https://flickr2commons.toolforge.org/#/ from a separate account (this one)
I want to do this as previously I also imported relatively large number of photos from Flickr, what made finding photos I took myself in my upload list much harder.
Is such solution (two separate accounts) fine? Or is it forbidden?
And as long as you make sure that (for example) you never use both accounts in the same vote, etc. It's usually wise to consider one your "main account" and to use only that one in discussions, etc. Keep the other(s) to being single-purpose. - Jmabel ! talk21:55, 16 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Hi all, I have a question regarding a failed undeletion request discussion. I try to link it: https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Undeletion_requests/Archive/2024-12, point 57.
I think I missed the timeframe where I could engage in the discussion and no commentator/administrator saw a further clarification I did, and I tried to text/reply to them directly but it was not possible anymore.
My last edit (that maybe no one saw) was the following: "To Jim, KoH and Yann - I hope this is right to edit here (and sorry for the missed hyperlinks). Yes for photographs deleted: the photographers for the artist portraits were family (and I sourced the photos from them and have publications rights), should I maybe just request a written statement from remaining family and provide it to Wikimedia then?
Same goes for the Scans (my own Scans): it was a collection of newspaper entrys that were published at the respective time of the creation of the artwork, I sourced the collected newspaper parts from the artist family (and could provide a statement for that, too). The newspaper publisher does not exist anymore, but I could request a statement from the city that these newspapers once existed and the artworks were published at that time (1920s and 30s).
Does that explain the context and does that work then?."
For anybody better versed with Wikimedia than me: do I post again with my same request on the undeletion page now? Or do I still reach out to any of my commentators instead? Or is there now a new other page/section I have to take things to with my request?
It looks to me like you were asked, " For each image, can you provide a list of authors, when they died, and when the work was published? If it's a photo of a person, the sole author is the photographer. If it's a photo of a 2D artwork, the sole author is the artist. If it's a photo of a 3D artwork, both the artist and photographer are authors." It doesn't look like you provided any specific answers (and the only answer you gave was after the UDR had closed).
I'd suggest that any further undeletion requests each be for a specific image, with the required information (or for a group of images where this information is identical across the set). I'd also strongly suggest trying to do at least the first few one-at-a-time, so you don't end up needing to do the same back-and-forth repeatedly, and learn what is needed.
A copyright owned by a newspaper would not be extinguished just because the newspaper went out of business. There is always some successor entity, though it may be difficult to identify, and the work may be effectively orphaned. However, I looked through about half a dozen of these and didn't see anywhere that a newspaper made any contribution to intellectual property. I might have missed something with a file I didn't look at, but just faithfully copying a 2-dimensional work does not create any new intellectual property.
It looks like you claimed own work on work where you were not the artist, but might be the artist's heir. If you are the heir to the intellectual property, you would need to (1) credit the correct author (not {{Own}}) and use (for example) {{Cc-by-sa-4.0-heirs}} rather than {{Cc-by-sa-4.0}}. Similarly, for an accurate reproduction of a 2-dimensional work, the date should be the date of the work, not of the upload, scan, etc. If you need to distinguish the photo from the underlying work, you have to do something like what I did at File:Bust of Cecilia Cuțescu-Storck by Frederic Storck (1909) - 01.jpg.
I'd also recommend in the future that you use mnemonic file names. File:Scanner-23012514302.jpg gives no one any idea what is the subject matter of the file.
@ArtWriter22: Hi, and welcome. In addition to what Jmabel wrote, "I did not put a hyperlink to the files since they only lead to the wikimedia page where it states that the file is deleted" is exactly the wrong way to go about things; Admins need the links to restore the files. Since that section is closed, statements of the living family members (including yourself), newspaper photographers, and newspaper managers who may hold or may have inherited the rights to those photos including info about the photographers' lifetimes, the photos' publication dates, and the countries should be sent via VRT. There also may be heirs, successors, or assigns for the defunct newspapers, or even for the people. You may put the information about publication, lifetimes, and countries here. Please also use internal links. — 🇺🇦Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me🇺🇦 11:35, 17 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Jmabel: My impression is that if a newspaper published a photo of an otherwise private (unpublished) artwork, in certain non-pma jurisdictions the photographer or newspaper would hold copyright to that photo. — 🇺🇦Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me🇺🇦 11:39, 19 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Jeff G.: That seems a bit bizarre (not necessarily wrong, just bizarre). Do you have any reference for that? Did that lose the original artist any ability to later file for copyright? I can think of all sorts of weird consequences of that. - Jmabel ! talk20:19, 19 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
To what you Jeff G. and you Jmable discuss, I will for now make a note of this and try get to the bottom of things, I am not a heir to the artworks but am in contact with those people and other relevant people that have rights pertaining to/have done research regarding the relevant artists.
The way I currently see this I can produce solid background research/references/licences for most of the images, and if some of them can't be licensed properly and are then eventually not publishable on Wiki it is also not the end of the world! Thank you both for your insights and help! ArtWriter22 (talk) 18:02, 19 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I think that this question was replied to adequately based on the supplied information. If you have anything to add or a follow-up question please feel free to replace this box with your comment. This section will be archived after two days. 廣九直通車 (talk) 13:12, 21 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The history of File:Mater Christi College, Belgrave.jpg will show that as recently as July '23 I was overwriting files uploaded by others. I like to think that this was constructive. Today, my attempt to replace the horribly dark File:May-Li Khoe and Federico Ardila.jpg with a GIMP-improved derivative got me the response "File overwriting not allowed / You attempted to overwrite a file that was not initially uploaded by you. You currently do not have sufficient permissions to do this." This surprised me. Have I misbehaved since July '23 and thus been kicked downstairs, or have the permissions allotted to users with given statuses been altered? (Or might it have been because I slightly cropped as well as lightened?) -- Hoary (talk) 00:54, 17 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Ah! Got it, Asclepias. So I'd have to be an autopatroller, something this says is for users "who create a high level of quality pages or uploads that do not require patrolling by other users" and also those "who make a large amount of good edits that do not need to be patrolled". If "a high level" means "a high quantity", that's most definitely not me; if it instead means"a high percentage", that, I hope, would include me. -- Hoary (talk) 02:50, 17 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Hoary: I'd say you're a little shy of the number of edits we'd usually want for autopatroller, but I can also see that you've done a lot of good work, including nominating a lot of copyvios for deletion. I'd support you if you want to nominate yourself for autopatroller; let me know. - Jmabel ! talk03:58, 17 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
When I try to upload the East German anthem, unconstructive, when I try to upload a better version of the Chechen anthem, unconstructive, when I try to upload the current Afghan anthem, unconstructive. What to do? Datawikiperson (talk) 09:08, 17 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Datawikiperson: Hi, and welcome. I am sorry to inform you that you have triggered Special:AbuseFilter/192 by trying to upload an mp3 file with insufficient rights. Too many people try to upload audio files that are still copyrighted by the authors, performers, recorders, publishing companies, etc. without proper licenses from those people. Please document fully the sources and licenses of your audio uploads, and request Autopatrol group membership at COM:RFR when you think you are ready (once you have made more than 500 useful non-botlike edits); having that should allow you to upload mp3 files. In the meantime, please reencode that and other audio into Vorbis or Opus and upload them with full documentation as .ogg files. — 🇺🇦Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me🇺🇦 11:44, 17 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
My source claims to use the Creative Commons 4.0 International, and it asks for credit whenever possible. Also do you have to have 500 edits to upload mp3 files? Datawikiperson (talk) 12:00, 17 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Also keep in mind that if you wish to contribute information or files to the site that, unless you state otherwise, they must be able to be shared under the same license as well.” Have a great day! Datawikiperson (talk) 16:22, 17 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Generally, we'd like for those who upload mp3 files to understand the complexities of copyright of sound recordings because it's an area that so many get wrong. Abzeronow (talk) 17:33, 17 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Datawikiperson: if you would provide links to the pages containing the relevant MP3s, I imagine someone here can follow through with uploading, if it is OK to do so. Question on the DDR national anthem, though: Hanns Eisler lived until 1962, wouldn't that anthem be copyrighted through 2032? Is there some particular German law waiving copyright because it was a national anthem? Similar question on the Chechen anthem, though in that case I personally know nothing about its authorship or about the relevant (presumably Russian) copyright law.
Complexities like that are exactly why we generally limit MP3 uploads to people who have done a fair amount of work here without getting in trouble: there are far more pitfalls for recordings than for images. - Jmabel ! talk18:45, 17 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The Varna Public Library has a collection of ~130 historic postcards by Grigor Paskov, depicting noteworthy places in Bulgaria (example item). These will enter the public domain in a couple of weeks, and I am preparing them for batch upload to Wikimedia Commons.
The library catalog includes subject metadata in Bulgarian, and I am trying to map these to appropriate Commons categories. My current thinking is to use an LLM like ChatGPT to guess the closest Commons category name from the Bulgarian terms, then manually review the results. Are there better tools, workflows, or recommendations for efficiently mapping subject metadata to Commons categories? atdt (talk) 14:38, 17 December 2024 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by ATDT (talk • contribs) 14:38, 17 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Atdt: Not answering your question, but in addition to their copyright status in Bulgaria, please do not forget to indicate the copyright status of each postcard in the United States, e.g. "PD-US-expired" for postcards published before 1930 or possibly "Not-PD-US-URAA" for postcards published after 1929, such as the 1934 postcard in your example, unless they had been first published or published simultaneously in the United States. -- Asclepias (talk) 16:07, 17 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I translated the text on an image into Greek. I want to upload the modified image, but the "Upload Wizard" gives me only two options: a) "This work was created by me and everyone is free to use it". b) "This work was created by someone else and it free to share". Well, I can't take the credit for it, just because I have changed a few words, but I can't make the original author responsible for my changes either. What shall I do? Aris Makridis (talk) 15:16, 17 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Aris Makridis: This question is probably to be understood primarily in relation to copyright. So, the first thing is to determine if you estimate that your translation generates or not a distinct copyright to your benefit. If yes, the modified work includes works from both authors and I suppose the answer can be either a or b, and you can adapt whatever might need to be adapted in the description page. If not, the answer would be b. (Or, maybe more smply, you can just avoid such problematic questions by not using the Upload Wizard for this type of situation. But you still have to indicate if you consider yourself one of the authors of the final work or not.) -- Asclepias (talk) 15:45, 17 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The original image is from the user LadyofHats and she has released it in the public domain. I do not claim any rights for the translation. I just want to make the correct attribution out of courtesy and at the same time take the responsibility for the changes. That's all. Aris Makridis (talk) 16:45, 17 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Aris Makridis: You can answer whatever you prefer to the Upload Wizard, what matters is what you actually write in the description page of the file. From what you said, I suppose that what you want to do is to indicate the author of the original, specify that you translated the text in Greek, and use the same PD tag as the original. Basically, the same things that you said here, but formatted to fit into the description page of the file. If you want, you can use the template "Retouched picture" to specify what you changed as compared to the original. -- Asclepias (talk) 17:08, 17 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Some things are basically not well handled with the Upload Wizard. You can either (1) do your best with the Wizard, then go back and edit the file page by hand or (2) use Special:Upload, copy-paste from the file page of the original you are working on, and edit accordingly either before or after uploading. - Jmabel ! talk18:51, 17 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I’m not sure this is the right place to ask, but could anyone who’s able to edit SVG files change the white elements of this image to black and upload a new version of it? Against the light background of infoboxes it can barely be distinguished, and against the default white background of Wikimedia pages in general it disappears almost entirely. Thanks in advance! IvanScrooge98 (talk) 17:29, 17 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I think that this question was replied to adequately based on the supplied information. If you have anything to add or a follow-up question please feel free to replace this box with your comment. This section will be archived after two days. 廣九直通車 (talk) 13:12, 21 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Medo199b: Hi, You can't. First on Wikimedia Commons, we only accept multimedia content, not articles. Then Wikimedia is not a social media, or a place to promote yourself. Please read the information on your talk page. Thanks, Yann (talk) 19:39, 17 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
You can upload files to the English Wikipedia at en:w:Special:Upload. This is a sister project to that site, so we can't answer much in the way of questions intended for there. I'd recommend you read w:en:WP:NFCC and if you still have questions, go to w:en:WP:TEAHOUSE. Local users there are very helpful and you can get help from members of that community (I am not presently one and can't be involved in internal issues there). —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯03:42, 18 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Promotion of a University Page is Valid on Wikipedia with a Do-follow link?
I have a questions regarding the website url - https://onlinechitkarau.com/ that I want to promote these url via wikipedia pages, and have updated the university page as well. Do I need to create a seperate page for this particluar page? and can I promote content directly from my end. Rahulsharmancs (talk) 05:54, 18 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Okay thanks, I understand it is not good to promote on Wikipedia directly. Then what ways I can promote my content on the wikipedia as it is a valuable to me as i want to showcase information related to Online mba for working professionals. thank you @Aafifor your revert. Rahulsharmancs (talk) 06:23, 18 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
This was working until a few days ago. It should look like blue on the top left, then red on the lower right, but it is now just all red. What happened, and can somebody fix this? Howard the Duck (talk) 23:54, 18 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I think that this question was replied to adequately based on the supplied information. If you have anything to add or a follow-up question please feel free to replace this box with your comment. This section will be archived after two days. 廣九直通車 (talk) 13:13, 21 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
See for instance File:Messages Were Pasted over Light Switches in Portland, and Other Areas of the Pacific Northwest to Remind People of the Energy Crisis. This Same Message Was Used in Advertising in Newspapers and on Television 11-1973 (4271731073).jpg
The source URL is arcweb.archives.gov/arc/action/ExternalIdSearch?id=555429 but that's dead, the new URL being at catalog.archives.gov/id/555429
GOODMORNING,
I WOULD LIKE TO UPLOAD MY SCOTTISH BARONY TITLE AND COAT OF ARMS IN THE WIKIPEDIA ITEM "BARONAGE OF SCOTLAND". ALL TITLES ARE OFFICIALY REGISTERED IN THE BARONY REGISTER AND REGISTER OF SCOTTISH NOBILITY. MY COAT OF ARMS IS REGISTERED IN THE PUBLIC REGISTER OF ALL ARMS AND BEARINGS IN SCOTLAND. WHAT IS THE BEST WAY TO PROCEED. I SEE THAT SEVERAL INFORMATION HAS BEEN ELABORATED BY AUTHOR KELLYCRAK88. DO I HAVE TO CONTACT HIM/HER..?
THANK YOU FOR RESPONDING.
KIND REGARDS
Hi, and welcome. Please stop shouting. You must create an account and login to upload. You may contact users by posting on their user talk pages. — 🇺🇦Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me🇺🇦 11:24, 19 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Slartz: Hi, and welcome. How do you know that "It is a free use picture without any license"? Who snapped the picture? Who is the publisher? In what country or countries do they publish? — 🇺🇦Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me🇺🇦 12:01, 19 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
It was taken by our Dutch publisher, 'MENLU', his name is Menno Ludriks and he snapped it for us. We just didn't publish it yet, so that's why I wanna use it now. Slartz (talk) 12:06, 19 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Slartz: Per COM:Netherlands, The Netherlands joined the Berne Convention 1 November 1912. Since that date, every photo taken there was copyrighted the moment it was fixed in a tangible medium of expression (captured on a film negative or positive). Thus, we need permission via VRT. — 🇺🇦Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me🇺🇦 12:18, 19 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The newspaper article would have to be freely licensed or public domain to be uploaded here. Keep in mind that you don't need to upload an article to cite it on Wikipedia. Abzeronow (talk) 22:04, 19 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Unless we are talking about something a hundred years old or so, the answer is probably "no", and that approaches certainty for most things in the last 70 years or so (though there are some weird exceptions). If you can't work out for yourself whether the article is copyrighted, please feel free to ask a more specific question. - Jmabel ! talk03:16, 20 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Hi, this is the original file that I have uploaded creating it on the Paint.net - File:Telugu Desam Party Flag.png. Today, I have noticed that a similar creating was uploaded today by another user and claiming to be his creation in a different file with the same name adding 2024 at the end and in the same image format that is jpg. I am sure it's the exact copy of my creation. The copied file: File:Telugu Desam Party Flag 2024.png. How do I issue a copyright notice? Which template is used for the same? Please guide me. Thank you 456legend (talk) 01:44, 20 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@456legend, the newer upload is a much larger file, in fact. It would be preferred to have the larger one over the smaller one, but we have no reason to delete either flag, it's acceptable to have multiple images of the same flags here on Commons. It is possible that the user used your image, made it larger, and cleaned it up, and should be crediting you, but there's no way to be certain about that. Bastique☎ let's talk!02:10, 20 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Using Windows, I need to upload groups of photos of the same subject, so the categories and descriptions will be the same, and the name will be the same except for a sequence number.
I used to use Vicuna for this, but I can no longer get it to work. I was advised to download the vicuna zip file, go to the bin folder and run the vicuna.bat file. When I do this, Windows doesn't like it, but I tell it to run anyway. Then a command line screen comes up for a fraction of a second, then disappears, without doing anything.
Is there a way to get Vicuna to work? Is there a Windows alternative that does the same thing?
I need something like an EXE or BAT file to run. I can't run Python code. If I am taken to a list of folders on something like GitHub, I am completely baffled.
Do you start the vicuna.bat file from the file manager by clicking the mouse? Try opening a command shell and enter vicuna.bat from the prompt. You will either see the actual error message, or the program will ask you for some input parameters to run.
Exception in thread "main" java.lang.UnsupportedClassVersionError: cuploader/frames/FIntro has been compiled by a more recent version of the Java Runtime (class file version 55.0), this version of the Java Runtime only recognizes class file versions up to 52.0
at java.lang.ClassLoader.defineClass1(Native Method)
at java.lang.ClassLoader.defineClass(Unknown Source)
at java.security.SecureClassLoader.defineClass(Unknown Source)
at java.net.URLClassLoader.defineClass(Unknown Source)
at java.net.URLClassLoader.access$100(Unknown Source)
at java.net.URLClassLoader$1.run(Unknown Source)
at java.net.URLClassLoader$1.run(Unknown Source)
at java.security.AccessController.doPrivileged(Native Method)
at java.net.URLClassLoader.findClass(Unknown Source)
at java.lang.ClassLoader.loadClass(Unknown Source)
at sun.misc.Launcher$AppClassLoader.loadClass(Unknown Source)
at java.lang.ClassLoader.loadClass(Unknown Source)
at sun.launcher.LauncherHelper.checkAndLoadMain(Unknown Source)
I don't know what to do about that. Bubba73 (talk) 05:19, 21 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I have just signed in to common to update a world map image after correcting its corresponding table. It says You cannot overwrite this file on its page, no explanation why. Also system is not convenient to use. why not have a ui where world maps can be auto updated by their corresponding table? Ronenfes (talk) 08:03, 20 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I didn't understand much of this message. I'm a Wikipedia user for years, not sure why I need a separate account. Anyway I just updated the table. Someone else many will update the image in the future. Ronenfe (talk) 11:29, 20 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Jmabel: Sorry, I didn't notice until after I posted that message that there was no such log entry; not being confirmed explains the OP. However, my response could have applied four days later. — 🇺🇦Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me🇺🇦 22:58, 20 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Ronenfe: There's nothing here about a "separate account." You have no prior edits on Commons, and we don't generally give people the open-ended ability to overwrite images here until they specifically have a fair amount of Commons experience, because even experienced Wikipedians often don't understand COM:OVERWRITE.
As far as I can see, neither you nor Jeff G. say what file this was about, so I can't move this forward at all without further information. The real upshot of his message is in the last sentence: "You may also request an exception for a particular file at COM:OWR." So that would be where to ask permission to overwrite one particular file. - Jmabel ! talk18:17, 20 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Ronenfe/Ronenfes: But that quasi-duplicate would have a limited use. In this case, it's better to update the existing file, as you wanted. You can request an ad hoc exception at COM:OWR as mentioned. Or, as you said, someone will update the file, which is updated regularly. -- Asclepias (talk) 19:50, 20 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, it's ok. I just gave a feedback about it. Should mention in the message that, and should be a plugin which you can edit in the editor. Ronenfe (talk) 19:56, 20 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I've temporarly made Ronenfes a confirmed user (since it's an alt. account of Ronenfe). They should be able to overwrite that file since it already had the template. Abzeronow (talk) 21:06, 20 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Hi there. I just tried uploading a photo that is mine that I wish to add to Barbara Weisberg's Wikipedia entry. I used the upload wizard but the error I received said: it could not be determined if the file was suitable. I spent hours trying to figure out what the problem is but I guess I need a very specific explanation for that file if you are able to help. I would very much appreciate it. The filename is barbaraweisbergphoto. JoClarke100 (talk) 14:55, 20 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
When you say "a photo that is mine" do you mean you took the photo and own the copyright, or do you mean something else? I ask because I see we are Commons:Deletion requests/File:DavidBlack.jpg still trying to sort out the status on an earlier photo that you claimed as "own work" but 2 days ago wrote "The photo was taken by his wife in their home," and said you would sort it out through VRT. I assume that you have not yet done that, since the file page is not marked with {{Permission pending}}. (I also wonder about your assertion that the photo was taken on the day you uploaded it; please make sure to be accurate about that as well.)
I'm not expert on these logs, and I'm not sure what tool you used to try to upload. If you used something other than Special:UploadWizard here on Commons (e.g. if you were cross-wiki uploading from the English-language Wikipedia) and if you took the photo yourself, then please try Special:UploadWizard. If you did not take the photo yourself, please be more careful to accurately describe your uploads in terms of authorship and date, and to go through the COM:VRT process for third-party materials (and, again, use Special:UploadWizard).
@Jmabel: The page linked from the "details" link in the filter log provides information, e.g. in this case the upload attempt was with the Upload Wizard. The triggered filter is for small files by accounts with less than 25 edits. -- Asclepias (talk) 20:29, 20 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The filename extension was jpg. I should have included it. At this point, I have removed the photo of David Black; I believe the second Barbara Weisberg photo never made it in. I will address this issue when I have more time. I really appreciate your comments. The more important concern is the article on David Black - hoping it gets approved this go-round. JoClarke100 (talk) 01:09, 21 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@JoClarke100: Was "File:BarbaraWeisbergPhoto.jpg", that you attempted to upload on 20 December 2024, the same photo, maybe of a smaller size, as File:BarbaraWeisberg.jpg deleted on 17 December 2024? If so, please do not upload multiple copies of a file. When the problem is settled, the existing file can be undeleded. -- Asclepias (talk) 20:29, 20 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I'm trying to update the page for Northrup Field https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Northrop_Field because the image in the info box is not of the same Northrup Field that the article is subject of. I couldn't find a good image existing on wikimedia, but I found this (https://umedia.lib.umn.edu/item/p16022coll175:4519) on the University of Minnesota library's website. It was taken in 1904, so from my understanding it should be public domain. Am I correct in assuming this, and is this image okay to upload to wikimedia for use on wikipedia? Mitchp10 (talk) 18:34, 20 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Please delete the following file TGD cover.jpg. I designed it and would like to upload it again and insert it into the article on "Satan from the seventh grade" Korntrans (talk) 20:05, 20 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
How do I overwrite the article and add the image. When I want to upload it know there is a warning the image is already uploaded in wiki files and I cannot add it to the article. Korntrans (talk) 13:09, 21 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@WinninginJapan1999: This appears to be an account created only 3 minutes before you posted this here, so I have no idea what to make of "the admins and the filter keep brushing me off!" It does look like in that three minutes a filter prevented you from creating Category:Diagrams of speed limit signs, which would have nothing to do with creating a gallery page. Can you tell me how this would differ from the existing Category:Diagrams of speed limit road signs?
I think that this question was replied to adequately based on the supplied information. If you have anything to add or a follow-up question please feel free to replace this box with your comment. This section will be archived after two days. Jmabel ! talk07:27, 21 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
.jpg){kind=link}
.png){kind=link}
_-_01.jpg){kind=link}
Done - Jmabel ! talk 07:27, 21 December 2024 (UTC)
