Commons:License review/Requests/Archive/2012

This is a closed request for license reviewer status. Do not make edits to it.

Ktr101

Ktr101 (talk · contributions · deleted user contributions · recent activity · logs · block log · global contribs · CentralAuth) (assign permissions)
Reason: I have been pretty sound lately in my edits (I'm truly sorry for those who have to slog through my 300 recent uploads to get to the older ones) and I feel like it would be worth it to have this right so that other users can pay attention to more pressing matters on this site. Kevin Rutherford (talk) 09:16, 3 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Comments

Support - Great Work in file management. --Katarighe (Talk · Contributions · E-mail) 17:19, 3 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Question Do you intend to license-review your own uploads? -- RE rillke questions? 16:28, 4 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- If it is needed, then yes. Otherwise, I was not planning on it only because it would be nice to have someone keep watch over my work. Kevin Rutherford (talk) 22:09, 4 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  - The proper answer to that question was no. Mild oppose. Courcelles (talk) 00:25, 5 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Question Can you give an example of when you would review your own upload? --ZooFari 02:48, 5 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose --Neozoon (talk) 00:30, 5 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose --Gue rillero 01:17, 5 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Not promoted - Tiptoety ^talk 03:37, 5 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

This is a closed request for license reviewer status. Do not make edits to it.

Krd

Krd (talk · contributions · deleted user contributions · recent activity · logs · block log · global contribs · CentralAuth) (assign permissions)
Reason: As an OTRS member dealing with permission issues, I'd like to be able to add the Flickrreview tags when neccessary. Krd (talk) 16:10, 4 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Comments

Support - User looks good in standing. --Katarighe (Talk · Contributions · E-mail) 16:14, 4 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support - Fine for me. -- RE rillke questions? 16:20, 4 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Gue rillero 19:41, 4 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support I don't see any problems, he is a trusted OTRS member. Alpha_Quadrant ^(talk) 22:47, 4 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Supportno doubt --Neozoon (talk) 00:26, 5 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Done Alpha_Quadrant ^(talk) 06:08, 5 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

This is a closed request for license reviewer status. Do not make edits to it.

Materialscientist

Materialscientist (talk · contributions · deleted user contributions · recent activity · logs · block log · global contribs · CentralAuth) (assign permissions)
Reason: While scanning new uploads for copyright violations I sometimes encounter flickr uploads (often without proper flickr links/attribution). While retagging them I can also do flickr review. I work with images as admin on en.wiki. I am rollbacker on Commons with some 3 years of total experience and a few thousand edits/uploads - can't tell right now as the edit counter is not responding. Disclaimer - I had uploaded a couple of flickr-whitewashed images of other users in the past, but I've learned that bit since then :-). I do not post on flickr and rarely transfer images from flickr to Commons - mostly evaluate uploads by others. Materialscientist (talk) 06:49, 22 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Comments

Support seen lots of copyvio marking of uploads, think he knows about copyright --Neozoon (talk) 14:43, 22 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support Trijnstel (talk) 15:10, 22 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support. BTW, you can use the Quick Delete gadget to quickly tag files as copyvios, missing permission or source and notify the uploaders. -- RE rillke questions? 15:32, 22 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Promoted Techman224^Talk 01:54, 24 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

This is a closed request for license reviewer status. Do not make edits to it.

SpacemanSpiff

SpacemanSpiff (talk · contributions · deleted user contributions · recent activity · logs · block log · global contribs · CentralAuth) (assign permissions)
Reason: I've been editing on Commons ever since my copyvio work on en.wiki started including images. I am an admin on en.wiki (where I do a fair bit of copyvio deletions and CCI activity) and an OTRS member (mostly to check permissions, but I sometimes review permissions for new uploads too). I work almost exclusively on India related content (at least as far as copyvios go), and probably about 90-95% of my activity on Commons is in that space while another 5-10% is related to cricket (there's an overlap between the two) and my activity in other areas is likely to be less than 15-20 in total. I work a lot around uploads using {{Cc-by-3.0-BollywoodHungama}} and similar website uploads (Commons:Deletion_requests/File:Amala-paul13.jpg is a current example) and I often mark failures for DR, also OTRS/Flickrwashing of many professional image uploads. I only intend to review Indian images where my familiarity of copyright issues is good, also due to real life demands, I work here only in bursts of a few days and then go offline for a while; if either of these issues pose a problem for getting the user right, then the status quo is fine. —SpacemanSpiff 18:27, 22 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Comments

Support did see the user mark several Flickr uploads as copyvio, (s)he seems to know how to do it --Neozoon (talk) 18:55, 22 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- RE rillke questions? 20:50, 22 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support Careful worker. I'm sure he'll ask for help rather than do dumb things. Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 12:52, 23 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Promoted Techman224^Talk 02:03, 24 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

This is a closed request for license reviewer status. Do not make edits to it.

Ginés90

Ginés90 (talk · contributions · deleted user contributions · recent activity · logs · block log · global contribs · CentralAuth) (assign permissions)
Reason: Hello. I know respect the license terms, and although I made a mistake, I learned how it works. Have much time for review. Thank you. Ginés90 (talk) 17:33, 14 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Comments

Hmmm, you are here since 2011-07 and have ~280 Edits where ~110 are rotate-requests, remaining 170 but no deletion-request. Concluding from your very useful contributions, I understand that you are really interested in license-reviewing. But I would appreciate if you would stay some more time here on Commons. Thanks and keep up good working. -- RE rillke questions? 20:55, 16 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Edited at first as Belb since 2007, but i forget the password, and create this new (and I announced the change in my main wiki).--Ginés90 (talk) 00:36, 17 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

It would be great if you would add this information here, too. Thank you. -- RE rillke questions? 14:49, 22 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Question: Imagine you want to review a file from Flickr.
- What do you compare? -- RE rillke questions? 14:49, 22 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- You have the feeling that the uploader at Flickr is not the real author. What can you use to check this suspicion? -- RE rillke questions? 14:49, 22 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Well, first I check if the license is correct, if the image is a work of a flickr user, as well as see if the picture is a picture of, say, a logotype.

To check if an original work of Flickr user, I analyze the quality and theme of the image, (can be a work by EFE agency or Reuters), I see that other users pictures up, and look in TinEye.--Ginés90 (talk) 16:15, 26 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Done No oppose since 2012-01-14. -- RE rillke questions? 17:45, 31 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

This is a closed request for license reviewer status. Do not make edits to it.

Spyder Monkey

Spyder Monkey (talk · contributions · deleted user contributions · recent activity · logs · block log · global contribs · CentralAuth) (assign permissions)
Reason: I am an experienced user (+15,000 edits, almost 2,000 uploads). I sometimes upload crops of flickr images (e.g. File:Bryce Miller Le Mans drivers parade 2011 crop.jpg and would like to mark them as reviewed. Spyder_Monkey (talk) 02:15, 19 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Comments

You should never mark your own uploads as reviewed. License review is designed to ensure that at least two different editors (or at least an editor and a bot) check the upload. Alpha_Quadrant (talk) 00:52, 20 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose own uploads may not be marked as reviewed --Neozoon (talk) 14:38, 22 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Comment as long as these are cropped versions of already reviewed files, I see no need for duplicating the effort. Of course you should not review files never been on Commons that you uploaded. I had a glad look over lots of your uploads and found very little of them deleted. (there were some transfers from en.wp only) I think you understood now that we cannot host material where derivative works or commercial use are prohibited. It would be nice if you could for example watch the new files for a while and tag obvious copyvios or nominate suspicious files for deletion so we could get a feeling about your knowledge about copyright law / recognition of copyright violations. Thank you. -- RE rillke questions? 15:20, 22 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: If the original file of a cropped version is on Commons, just link to this file. Reviewing own uploads will be prohibited and not just discouraged in future. -- RE rillke questions? 17:45, 31 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Not done. No consensus. Go on contributing useful contents and feel free to ask after some time. -- RE rillke questions? 17:45, 31 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

This is a closed request for license reviewer status. Do not make edits to it.

Quintucket

Quintucket (talk · contributions · deleted user contributions · recent activity · logs · block log · global contribs · CentralAuth) (assign permissions)
Reason: Sometimes when I'm bored and too lazy to do anything really productive, I like to do simple maintenance tasks at various Wikimedia projects. This, and the fact that I do sometimes run across images that haven't been reviewed, make me feel that it would be useful to have this right. I'm familiar with Commons licensing policy of course, and due to sporadic participation in deletion requests as well, I know about freedom of panorama by country, inclusion of logos, etc. Identifying images on Picasa and Flickr that are likely not taken by the uploader is fairly simple: look for things such as lack of metadata and variations in camera and size, especially within albums. I could say more, but I hope this is sufficient. Quintucket (talk) 20:18, 2 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Comments

Support Techman224^Talk 00:19, 5 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Question would you approve your own uploads? --Gue rillero 01:26, 5 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Of course not. I'm pretty sure that's against policy, but even if it weren't it defeats the purpose, which is to have at least two people confirm the license. —Quintucket (talk) 17:42, 5 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Support Why not? --Katarighe (Talk) 22:15, 5 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Morning Sunshine (talk) 05:11, 6 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Promoted--Morning Sunshine (talk) 05:43, 6 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

This is a closed request for license reviewer status. Do not make edits to it.

Americophile 2

Americophile (talk · contributions · deleted user contributions · recent activity · logs · block log · global contribs · CentralAuth) (assign permissions)
Reason: Hello everybody, I applied three months ago and luckily it was successful, but I was asked to re-apply three months later and now I'm doing this. I am more experienced now and still want to be a reviewer. While I admit that I didn't use my access regularly but I think that I know what I'm doing. I mostly work on images and categories about Iran and try to translate Commons interface into Persian (mostly tags 1 2 3 4 5 6 but I have also translated a gadget so far) and when I feel tired I review one or two Flickr files. I'm totally familiar with license policy, freedom of panorama, derivative works and other important policies and guidelines of the Wikimedia Commons. I know that CC BY-ND, CC BY-NC and more restrictive licenses are not appropriate here. I also want to mention that I'm still blocked on fawp because I was not supposed to get unblocked until 27 March 2012. If you have any other questions or concerns, don't hesitate to ask. Many thanks. AMERICOPHILE 19:41, 16 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Comments

Support MorganKevinJ^(talk) 01:48, 22 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Katarighe (Talk) 21:55, 22 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Done. Seven days: not oppose.--Ginés90 (talk) 17:33, 23 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

This is a closed request for license reviewer status. Do not make edits to it.

Sven Manguard

Sven Manguard (talk · contributions · deleted user contributions · recent activity · logs · block log · global contribs · CentralAuth) (assign permissions)
Reason: I'm experienced with licensing, and ages ago served as one of the primary workers at Wikipedia's Files for Upload page. I've also been approved for OTRS (where I applied for permissions-commons and photosubmissions), however my account hasn't been created yet. I'm asking for this partially because I'm getting back into FfU and between that and OTRS, it'll be good to have so that my work dosen't cause work for other people. Also, it's something useful that I can do on occasions (I'm a backlog gnome style worker by nature). Sven Manguard Wha? 00:57, 22 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Comments

~~Support~~ MorganKevinJ^(talk) 01:49, 22 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Neutral You are not allowed to review your own uploads MorganKevinJ^(talk) 01:55, 22 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

That must be new. I'll keep that in mind. Sven Manguard Wha? 22:38, 22 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

It's been discouraged for a while, but a total ban was only introduced the other day. CT Cooper · talk 00:17, 23 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Support - 30K edits in en wiki and an active contributor there. --Sreejith K (talk) 05:08, 22 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Support - Why not? --Katarighe (Talk) 21:56, 22 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Support I think you can be trusted, the ban on reviewing own uploads only came into effect recently. Techman224^Talk 02:59, 23 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Done. --Ginés90 (talk) 02:07, 24 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

This is a closed request for license reviewer status. Do not make edits to it.

Codrinb

Codrinb (talk · contributions · deleted user contributions · recent activity · logs · block log · global contribs · CentralAuth) (assign permissions)
Reason: Over the past year I've been actively reviewing a large amount of images within the scope of COM:WikiProject Romania and COM:DACIA, trying to add more detail, categories and validating licenses. I've been also maintaining the PD tags and other copyright tags related to Romania. I would like to apply for this role and make official this aspect of my contributions. Thanks. Codrin.B (talk) 16:12, 29 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Comments

Not see any problem. Why not? --Ginés90 (talk) 01:59, 6 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

OK. Not oppose sice 29 feb. --Ginés90 (talk) 01:59, 6 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

This is a closed request for license reviewer status. Do not make edits to it.

Dipankan001

Dipankan001 (talk · contributions · deleted user contributions · recent activity · logs · block log · global contribs · CentralAuth) (assign permissions)
Reason: I'll be requesting the rights so as to review Category:Flickr review needed and remove the backlog that occurs sometimes. I have also uploaded a few above 120 files, which are all properly licensed. I have been putting public public domain pictures from public domain websites into Commons, and therefore, also have a vast experience in managing and reviewing files. Dipankan001 (talk) 09:42, 8 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Comments

Oppose Not yet; please accumulate around 1000 edits in commons. You have to prove that you can do correct judgements regarding licenses. --Sreejith K (talk) 09:53, 8 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I've been here for a while. What matters is not edit count, but the maturity and trust an user can be expected with. Dipankan001 (talk) 10:16, 8 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

According to SUL, I have more than 3.5k edits on all Wikis, excluding Wikia. Dipankan001 (talk) 10:20, 8 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Edits in other Wikis' does not count. You will have to prove your knowledge in Common's policies. This edit shows that you are not yet ready. --Sreejith K (talk) 12:27, 8 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose after requests for Autopatrol and Filemover rights have been denied very recently. --Krd 11:05, 8 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per above --Gue rillero 14:03, 8 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose need more experience --Katarighe (Talk) 16:47, 8 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose. You've had a number of recent problems with copyright, which you've apparently tried to cover up by repeated blanking of your talk page without archiving. I gave you a final warning to stop uploading copyright violations in November, and you've since uploaded another half a dozen files which have been deleted as copyright violations. You do appear to be learning, but there's still quite some way to go. Furthermore, because license reviewing is all about transparency and traceability, the talk page blanking and the stark contrast between how you describe your track record above on the one hand and reality on the other makes it categorically impossible for me to support this candidacy. —LX (talk, contribs) 17:07, 8 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Not promoted Currently, there appears to be strong opposition to this request due to judgment, experience, and policy understanding concerns. Alpha_Quadrant (talk) 17:33, 8 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

This is a closed request for license reviewer status. Do not make edits to it.

Smuconlaw

Smuconlaw (talk · contributions · deleted user contributions · recent activity · logs · block log · global contribs · CentralAuth) (assign permissions)
Reason: I'm a university professor running an ongoing project at the English Wikipedia with students to produce articles relating to Singapore constitutional and administrative law. I sometimes upload content to the Commons from Flickr for use in the project's articles, and it would be useful to be able to confirm that they are properly licensed. — SMUconlaw (talk) 18:39, 22 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Comments

Support --Katarighe (Talk) 12:16, 23 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose It seems common sense that own uploads shall not be self-reviewed. --Krd 13:25, 23 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
It is not only common sense, but it is also explicitly disallowed according to Commons:License review, which candidates are instructed above to read before applying. —LX (talk, contribs) 21:04, 23 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Thanks for pointing that out. I read the policy a while back and was unaware of the 21 February 2012 change. — SMUconlaw (talk) 17:51, 24 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Are you aware of tools:~magnus/flickr2commons.php (not working until tomorrow) or tools:~bryan/flickr/upload? -- RE rillke questions? 17:20, 23 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Yes, I have used the "bryan" tool before. Does that do away with the need for a separate Flickr review? — SMUconlaw (talk) 17:51, 24 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  - These bots are considered being trusted and no additional review is required. (They add the successful-reviewed-template their self.) Of course they can't detect FoP-issues, ... And we can block uploads from specific flickr-accounts for these bots. -- RE rillke questions? 18:10, 24 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    - Ah, gotcha. — SMUconlaw (talk) 19:32, 24 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Not done Too early, do not need the flag. Another may review the images of his two pupils, the main reason for the request. Not consensus. --Ginés90 (talk) 00:02, 25 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

This is a closed request for license reviewer status. Do not make edits to it.

DreamFieldArts

DreamFieldArts (talk · contributions · deleted user contributions · recent activity · logs · block log · global contribs · CentralAuth) (assign permissions)
Reason: I like to review things on here, and check for copyvios, but this looks like something I'd like to do. Now if I don't use the tool correctly, you know what to do. DreamFieldArts (talk) 00:22, 25 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Comments

Oppose. I'm afraid you have far too few edits to enable others to gauge your understanding of copyright issues and our policies and procedures. Of the few edits you have made, however, one was this removal of a notice for an open deletion discussion in spite of the template's instruction: "Do not remove this tag until the deletion nomination is closed." Please apply again when you have a bit more experience, though. —LX (talk, contribs) 00:58, 25 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose --Katarighe (Talk) 14:58, 25 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Not done. --Ginés90 (talk) 00:24, 2 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

This is a closed request for license reviewer status. Do not make edits to it.

Nasir8891

Nasir8891 (talk · contributions · deleted user contributions · recent activity · logs · block log · global contribs · CentralAuth) (assign permissions)
Reason: I am a contributor of Commons. I have the knowledge about the licenses which are permitted to use in Commons. I am involved with some of the photography clubs, mainly they upload the photos to the Flickr and recently i have discussed with the members and they agreed to contribute theirs photos to Wikimedia Commons. Today i have uploaded two images from Flickr and the other photos will be uploaded soon. So if i get the License reviewer permission then it will be easier for me to contribute easily. thanks -- Nasir Khan Saikat ^{(Talk|Contributions)} 18:48, 28 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Comments

Question If you upload a file from Flickr, should you pass or fail the Flickr review? --ZooFari 23:34, 28 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Question What you will di in case you reviewed a photo from Flickr and after a week you have noticed that the license chaged.Geagea (talk) 16:31, 29 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Neutral --Katarighe (Talk) 16:55, 31 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Not done User has not responded to questions within a reasonable amount of time. theMONO 00:48, 6 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

This is a closed request for license reviewer status. Do not make edits to it.

Ronhjones

Ronhjones (talk · contributions · deleted user contributions · recent activity · logs · block log · global contribs · CentralAuth) (assign permissions)
Reason: On en-Wiki - I do a lot of checking of "free" images (and therefore a lot of tagging of the unfree ones - en:User_talk:Ronhjones/CSD_log/Archive_1). I have moved many images from en to commons (with deletion on en-wiki, as I am an admin as well), including ones with Flickr sources - it would be useful to review these when I move them here. Ronhjones ^(Talk) 22:31, 3 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Comments

Strong support very trustworthy user with over 4000 edits here. Already an admin on en.wp and OTRS member--Morning Sunshine (talk) 05:04, 4 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support Trijnstel_talk 22:14, 4 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Katarighe (Talk) 00:01, 5 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

OK. Ginés90 (talk) 03:32, 5 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

This is a closed request for license reviewer status. Do not make edits to it.

Tomtomn00

Tomtomn00 (talk · contributions · deleted user contributions · recent activity · logs · block log · global contribs · CentralAuth) (assign permissions)
Reason: I see many copyrighted images around. Also, I'm not requesting this for flag collecting, I'm requesting this to help. I've got over 50% of my edits in the File Namespace. Not that this is needed - over 5,200 global contributions, never blocked. --Tomtomn00 (talk) 09:36, 7 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Comments

Oppose Less than ~200 edits. Please try again later when you gain more experience, Sorry --Katarighe (Talk) 12:50, 7 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Question Why did you license a work that is not your intellectual property under cc-by-sa? (I am referring to File:Western Digital SmartWare Logo.png)? Where did you take - the information about/ right to license - this from? -- RE rillke questions? 14:15, 7 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Not done Because of hat collecting all over Wikimedia (several times global rollback and global sysop, but also sysop/crat/rollback rights on small wikis without any edits et cetera, see here for an incomplete list of them). I'd strongly advice you to *stop* requesting random rights now. Trijnstel_talk 15:23, 7 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

This is a closed request for license reviewer status. Do not make edits to it.

とある白い猫

とある白い猫 (talk · contributions · deleted user contributions · recent activity · logs · block log · global contribs · CentralAuth) (assign permissions)
Reason: I am a former commons administrator and have resigned on my own accord. While I was a commons admin I reviewed many images. I have a long history of dealing with copyrighted images and would like this flag to continue helping. -- とある白い猫 ^ちぃ？ 11:58, 7 April 2012 (UTC)

Comments

Support OK, I see no problems --Katarighe (Talk) 12:48, 7 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Question: Yesterday, you retired after you were blocked by Bidgee for some kind of edit-warring, today you want to become a license reviewer and tomorrow perhaps administrator? What's your current mood about Commons and what's your intention for the future? Would you review your own uploads? -- RE rillke questions? 14:08, 7 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- I have been put under intense stress by a certain user lately (intentionally or not) which lead to my less than admirable conduct.
- I just want to do something productive rather than getting stressed out on an edit by edit basis. I am picking an activity I am very confident with my abilities which is assessing copyright which I feel is a better time spent. I have served this community for over half a decade of which over 2 years as an administrator if I recall correctly so I feel I have the necessary experience.
- As for the block I could have gotten it removed should I promise not to reopen a closed entry in COM/UD but I decided a 24 hour cool-off period would be beneficial for commons and myself.
- I do not seek adminship on commons in the near or distant future. I do not believe the community wants to see me as an administrator either.
- I am unsure what you mean by reviewing my own uploads. Do you mean works I created or freely licensed works I copied from Flickr?
-- とある白い猫 ^ちぃ？ 15:03, 7 April 2012 (UTC)
- Thanks for your fast reply. The last question should be about files you uploaded from Flickr (not your own work) without using a tool (e.g. you made a crop of a file from Flickr and uploaded the cropped image to Commons). -- RE rillke questions? 17:45, 7 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  - I wouldn't copy content from Flickr without using a tool (I am too lazy to credit, link and etc manually :)). I would first copy the file as is (without modifications). Should the file need some sort of modification, I'd say it depends on the case. If I am just removing a 2px frame around the picture I see no harm in marking the derivative as OK. I do not have a strong opinion either way. I probably wouldn't rate myself if this is an existing concern. I am unaware of any discussion on this though I did see something about this in a talk page recently. I do not remember where I have seen it though. -- とある白い猫 ^ちぃ？ 18:55, 7 April 2012 (UTC)
- Did you read Commons:License review carefully? If not, please do it now. Thank you. -- RE rillke questions? 20:12, 7 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  - I am among the people who helped draft/create such policies and procedures. :) But yes I did review the link you posted to verify if policy was different. I was unaware of the specialized templates to review Ipernity, Picasa and Panoramio images so it was a worthwhile reading. -- とある白い猫 ^ちぃ？ 20:37, 7 April 2012 (UTC)

Done No opposes since 7 April--Morning Sunshine (talk) 05:29, 12 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

This is a closed request for license reviewer status. Do not make edits to it.

タチコマ robot

タチコマ robot (talk · contributions · deleted user contributions · recent activity · logs · block log · global contribs · CentralAuth) (assign permissions)
Reason: Because I upload images from flickr to commons through my bot, I'd like to have it to have this flag so it can carry the flag as it appears on flickr. -- とある白い猫 ^ちぃ？ 11:58, 7 April 2012 (UTC)

Comments

I do want to point out that I have uploaded about 250 files from flickr using this bot yesterday. I was not aware of this process as like the above case the bot used to be an administrator as well so this was never an issue back then. I use Commons:Tools/Flickrripper. -- とある白い猫 ^ちぃ？ 13:44, 7 April 2012 (UTC)
- We'll discuss this on Commons:Bots/Requests/タチコマ_robot, please. Since it's a bot we can only ensure that licenses, attribution and images match. No concerns as long as the code works as it should. -- RE rillke questions? 20:15, 7 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  - Yes. This was filed before you commented on my talk page. Should it be removed? It can be closed based on the outcome of the linked bot discussion. I am complying as I am instructed on my talk page. -- とある白い猫 ^ちぃ？ 20:33, 7 April 2012 (UTC)

It's a bot using a standard framework and the operator is now a license-reviewer. Let's discuss this on Commons:Bots/Requests/タチコマ robot -- RE rillke questions? 19:10, 12 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

This is a closed request for license reviewer status. Do not make edits to it.

Sridhar1000

Sridhar1000 (talk · contributions · deleted user contributions · recent activity · logs · block log · global contribs · CentralAuth) (assign permissions)
Reason: I have good experience in image uploading and copyright of images

Comments

Oppose and block. Obviously, you can't possibly believe the outcome is going to be any different than it was at Commons:Administrators/Requests/Sridhar1000, Commons:Checkusers/Requests/sridhar1000, Commons talk:Flickr images/reviewers/archive 10#Sridhar1000 or Commons talk:Flickr images/reviewers/archive 10#Sridhar100, so at this point, you're just being disruptive. —LX (talk, contribs) 07:45, 9 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Why you feel that I am not become image reviewer.--P. Sridhar Babu (talk) 09:45, 9 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Sigh. See Commons:Administrators/Requests/Sridhar1000, Commons:Checkusers/Requests/sridhar1000, Commons talk:Flickr images/reviewers/archive 10#Sridhar1000 or Commons talk:Flickr images/reviewers/archive 10#Sridhar100. —LX (talk, contribs) 09:50, 9 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Haaaa............... What is your real opinion. See my uploads, my contribution. Then tell your real opinion. Not depend on others opinion. If you oppose thanks to that?--P. Sridhar Babu (talk) 10:04, 9 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I did give my opinion in Commons talk:Flickr images/reviewers/archive 10#Sridhar100. What on earth makes you think you're going to get a different result by nagging for rights? —LX (talk, contribs) 10:28, 9 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

But that time I am new user. now I got experience in working with images.--P. Sridhar Babu (talk) 10:34, 9 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Your latest two-week block expired just a month before starting this request, your uploaded your latest half-dozen copyright violations two days before starting the request, you were abusing multiple accounts (and blatantly lying about it) no more than half a year ago. You have zero chance of being trusted with license review rights or any other elevated privileges in the foreseeable future (to put it mildly), particularly as you continue to misuse your existing editing privileges. —LX (talk, contribs) 10:11, 10 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Strong oppose Per User:LX what is saying. Are you just hat collecting or not? --Katarighe (Talk) 13:48, 9 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Not done per discussion above. This is just one of hat collecting spree of Sridhar1000. I'd strongly advice you to stop doing this or you will be blocked. However, feel free to ask us if you need for help. Regards--Morning Sunshine (talk) 12:02, 10 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

This is a closed request for license reviewer status. Do not make edits to it.

Trex2001

Trex2001 (talk · contributions · deleted user contributions · recent activity · logs · block log · global contribs · CentralAuth) (assign permissions)
Reason: I mostly review files that come in new, so I am well aware of Commons:Licensing already. In order to extend my reviewing capabilities, i'm applying here for image reviewer right.

Comments

Question What is the purpose of license reviewing? --ZooFari 23:59, 11 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
to ensure that all images uploaded and hosted on Commons do not violate US and international copyright laws (depending on the origin of the file) and are published under a free license for reusability and derivation and possible commercial use.--Trex2001 (talk) 07:09, 12 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Consider the following situation: You've reviewed an image from Flickr successfully. After one month the Flickr-user decided to switch from cc-by-sa 2.0 to all rights reserved. Do we have to delete the file on Commons after we encountered this change of license? -- RE rillke questions? 09:42, 12 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- No, since at the time it was reviewed is was free under cc-by-sa 2.0 and as such, even if the license changes, this does not terminate our license at the time of review and the file can be kept.--Trex2001 (talk) 11:05, 12 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support No worries. -- RE rillke questions? 19:10, 12 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support per answer above--Morning Sunshine (talk) 11:18, 12 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Promoted--Morning Sunshine (talk) 05:13, 13 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

This is a closed request for license reviewer status. Do not make edits to it.

Anna Frodesiak

Anna Frodesiak (talk · contributions · deleted user contributions · recent activity · logs · block log · global contribs · CentralAuth) (assign permissions)
Reason: Because I upload a lot from Flickr and fully understand Commons:License laundering. I also have read Commons:Licensing. Although I have a few notices at User talk:Anna Frodesiak/archives1, those were mostly ages ago, and pertained to logos. I now understand logos are to be uploaded to Wikipedia. Finally, Materialscientist always checks my uploads and passes them. I would like to relieve him of that task. Anna Frodesiak (talk) 05:47, 10 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Comments

Reviewing your own uploads is not allowed, which is stated in Commons:License review#Instructions for reviewers. As it says right at the top of the page, you should have read Commons:License review before adding a request. —LX (talk, contribs) 09:58, 10 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Dang. Must have missed that. Sorry. Anna Frodesiak (talk) 11:08, 10 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

With that in mind, are you interested in volunteering to review other users' uploads, or would you prefer to withdraw the request? —LX (talk, contribs) 12:53, 10 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, I am interested in volunteering to review other users' uploads. Thank you. :) Anna Frodesiak (talk) 14:35, 10 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Don't beat yourself up over that one Anna, I made the same mistake when I applied. The change is relatively new, as well. Sven Manguard Wha? 18:27, 14 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. :) Commons' backroom pages are quite a handful, but it's my fault for not reading more carefully.

Support after having had a look at a random sample of contributions. —LX (talk, contribs) 19:37, 14 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the support. I tend to err on the side of caution with new privileges. Plus, I'm not sure how active I'd be with it. On the upside, looking at users uploads, and I can spot the copyvio pro photos a mile away. The usually stick out like a sore thumb. Anna Frodesiak (talk) 23:18, 14 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Done No opposes since 10 April--Morning Sunshine (talk) 02:26, 15 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

This is a closed request for license reviewer status. Do not make edits to it.

MyCanon

MyCanon (talk · contributions · deleted user contributions · recent activity · logs · block log · global contribs · CentralAuth) (assign permissions)
Reason: Hello everyone, I've raised a lot of pictures, and contributions have approached the 2,913 amendment. I have experience in the appropriate licenses and inappropriate in the Wikimedia Commons. and a lot of auditors they review my photos, including: Rillke, Morning Sunshine, Materialscientist, Leoboudv and others. I hope to become a images review. Greetings to all. --MyCanon (talk) 23:33, 15 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Indeed, I found no problems. Would you refrain from reviewing your own uploads? -- RE rillke questions? 18:56, 16 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  - Hallo Rainer, I'm sorry for the delay, a good question, if the images of my load, I can not review, and if the images loaded by another user, I can review with due regard. Thank you. and Greetings to all the reviewers who have reviewed my own uploads. --MyCanon (talk) 22:46, 16 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    - That's good. Support. -- RE rillke questions? 16:18, 18 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
      - Thanks for support me, Rainer. Best Regards. --MyCanon (talk) 17:26, 18 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Promoted --Morning Sunshine (talk) 04:58, 19 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

This is a closed request for license reviewer status. Do not make edits to it.

Ralgis

Ralgis (talk · contributions · deleted user contributions · recent activity · logs · block log · global contribs · CentralAuth) (assign permissions)
Reason: Whenever I can, I monitor new files. I'm also familiar with licensing policy. I know I will be able to help Commons and Commons user even more with this flag. Thank you. Ralgis 23:13, 16 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Comments

Support I see that this user has many good contribution in copyvio fighting, appears to have some knowledge of copyright issues so reviewer bit is useful for him/her--Morning Sunshine (talk) 05:31, 17 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Your contribs look good. Thank you! Do you see a possible problem with File:Anonymous - Bradley Manning.jpg? And if so, what problem could arise? -- RE rillke questions? 16:30, 18 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Hello, Rillke. The only problem I see there is that the photograph includes an identifiable person, and the commercial use of that photo may be ilegal in some jurisdictions if that person doesn't allow it. Also, someone could use the picture to defame the reputation of the identifiable person. This is why the summary includes the {{Personality rights}} template: to prevent this kind of usage. As for the license, there is no problem, because CC BY 2.0 is a valid license that allows reproduction and commercial use of the picture. Ralgis 18:52, 18 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  - I forgot how this mask was named (Guy Fawkes mask), so I had to search a while. Commons:Deletion requests/File:Wikipedia Anonymous.png and Commons:Deletion requests/File:Anonymous at Scientology in Los Angeles.jpg show at least the problem of Commons:Image casebook#Costumes and cosplay. I don't say, this photo must be deleted now, but one has to expect that someone may nominate it for deletion. -- RE rillke questions? 21:16, 18 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  - And of course the big photo of Bradley Manning could be subject to copyright. -- RE rillke questions? 21:18, 18 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- I see. What I understand, is that those Guy Fawkes masks are, indeed, copyrighted, and they can not be considered de minimis on File:Anonymous - Bradley Manning.jpg. Ralgis 01:22, 19 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Promoted No opposes since 16 April --Morning Sunshine (talk) 04:20, 21 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

This is a closed request for license reviewer status. Do not make edits to it.

Shovon76

Shovon76 (talk · contributions · deleted user contributions · recent activity · logs · block log · global contribs · CentralAuth) (assign permissions)
Reason: I have fairly good understanding of the copyrights issues and can actually contribute in the process whenever I get time. Thanks! Shovon76 (talk) 19:19, 17 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Comments

Thanks for your interest in volunteering. We appreciate this an if you got more experience, please re-apply. 11 edits are not considered enough. So I have to Oppose. Sincerely -- RE rillke questions? 19:41, 17 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose for now. I suggest that you develop experience by commenting on deletion requests and reviewing the uploads of new users for copyright violations. MorganKevinJ^(talk) 20:26, 17 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Not promoted. Morgankevinj gave some valuable hints. -- RE rillke questions? 16:15, 18 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

This is a closed request for license reviewer status. Do not make edits to it.

Mr.choppers

Mr.choppers (talk · contributions · deleted user contributions · recent activity · logs · block log · global contribs · CentralAuth) (assign permissions)
Reason: Having uploaded over a thousand images from Flickr, Picasa (and even Ipernity!), I feel that I am by now competent enough to review others' efforts. I am fully aware of the dangers of Flickr washing and also would never attempt to review my own uploads. Cheers, mr.choppers (talk)^-en- 06:41, 24 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Comments

Support After having a look at some images uploaded by you. I don't see any problem. Trijnstel_talk 16:27, 28 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

No opposes for 5 days (since 24 April) and no problems with user so I close as Promoted--Morning Sunshine (talk) 14:07, 29 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

This is a closed request for license reviewer status. Do not make edits to it.

L145826

L145826 (talk · contributions · deleted user contributions · recent activity · logs · block log · global contribs · CentralAuth) (assign permissions)
Reason: Reason I've been uploading so many photos from Flickr. I also uploaded a photo that I took by myself. Now, I would like to be an reviwer. I like to help Wikipedia and it's so good for me. I hope you understand me! — Preceding unsigned comment added by L145826 (talk • contribs) 01:03, 28 April 2012‎ (UTC)[reply]

Comments

Oppose Sorry, but you only have 27 edits on Wikimedia Commons at the moment, and 32 in total. Besides, several images you uploaded were deleted because of copyright violation and an unfree Flickr license. I don't think it would be wise to give you reviewer rights now. Please gain more experience and try it again later. Trijnstel_talk 16:23, 28 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, that's right. I'll get more experience. L145826 (talk) 22:51, 28 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Not done Not enough experience for now and user understands that. Thanks for helping though! Trijnstel_talk 19:13, 29 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

This is a closed request for license reviewer status. Do not make edits to it.

Benoit Rochon

Benoit Rochon (talk · contributions · deleted user contributions · recent activity · logs · block log · global contribs · CentralAuth) (assign permissions)
Reason: I'm requesting to be a license reviewer because I'd like to help with reviewing Flickr uploads. As an active contributor to Commons, I am familiar with Commons licensing policy and I understand what type of Flickr CC licenses are permitted on Commons. I also have basic understanding about FOP and have read the relevant guidelines. If anyone has a question, please feel free to ask. Thank you. Benoit Rochon (talk) 17:06, 12 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Comments

Support I have confidence in your judgment regarding licenses. Trijnstel_talk 17:39, 12 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Promoted --Morning Sunshine (talk) 02:19, 15 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

This is a closed request for license reviewer status. Do not make edits to it.

Abigor

Abigor (talk · contributions · deleted user contributions · recent activity · logs · block log · global contribs · CentralAuth) (assign permissions)
Reason: I would like to help with the big backlog of files that need to be reviewed. I used to be a flickrreviewer so I know the drill Huib talk ^{Abigor @ meta} 16:10, 19 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Comments

Neutral I know you were an active and trusted user before all problems, but due to that I can't fully support you now. Trijnstel_talk 20:18, 19 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose, makes senseless renaming edits! --Randy43 (talk) 22:25, 19 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose - confidence totally gone, not to be trusted again. MoiraMoira (talk) 07:17, 20 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose - was a trusted user before problems, but these problems cross-wiki drained my trust in this user completely TBloemink _talk 07:18, 20 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Withdrawn by Abigor, see here. Trijnstel_talk 18:08, 20 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

This is a closed request for license reviewer status. Do not make edits to it.

Calestyo

Calestyo (talk · contributions · deleted user contributions · recent activity · logs · block log · global contribs · CentralAuth) (assign permissions)
Reason: Mainly when uploading my own Flickr images and if I find time to help with reviewing other Flickr uploads Cálestyo (talk) 12:18, 19 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Comments

See Commons:License review#Instructions for reviewers, third sentence: "…image-reviewers may not review their own uploads…". --Krd 12:47, 19 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose As you only have 30 edits in three years time. Please gain more experience before requesting this right. Trijnstel_talk 20:17, 19 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Not promoted --Morning Sunshine (talk) 06:14, 22 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

This is a closed request for license reviewer status. Do not make edits to it.

Coekon

Coekon (talk · contributions · deleted user contributions · recent activity · logs · block log · global contribs · CentralAuth) (assign permissions)
Reason: I have sufficient experiences for reviewing licences. I am fimilar with the copyright policy in Commons. Therefore, I want to obtain this right to assist licencs reviews Thank you. Coekon (talk) 00:17, 29 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Comments

Not done. The user withdrew his request. Trijnstel_talk 11:49, 4 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

This is a closed request for license reviewer status. Do not make edits to it.

Aa1bb2cc3dd4ee5

Aa1bb2cc3dd4ee5 (talk · contributions · deleted user contributions · recent activity · logs · block log · global contribs · CentralAuth) (assign permissions)
Reason: I would like to help with the backlog of files that need to be reviewed. I have basic understanding about FOP and the Licensing policy. Aa1bb2cc3dd4ee5 (talk) 22:38, 7 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Comments

Support Fine by me. Trijnstel_talk 22:52, 7 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Looks like done by Morning Sunshine (talk · contribs). odder (talk) 20:50, 14 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

This is a closed request for license reviewer status. Do not make edits to it.

C3F2k

C3F2k (talk · contributions · deleted user contributions · recent activity · logs · block log · global contribs · CentralAuth) (assign permissions)
Reason: I would like to help out with the review backlog. I am familiar with freedom of panorama, de minimis, and what licences are accepted. C3F2k (Questions, comments, complaints?) 21:49, 15 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Comments

Neutral - Only around 500 edits. Which category would you be interested in if you get license reviewer status? --Sreejith K (talk) 05:23, 16 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose - Bad timing after having started Commons:Administrators/Requests/Jameslwoodward (de-adminship) just a few moments ago. Please come back later. --Krd 09:21, 16 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I'm sorry okay. But just what does that have to do with this. Can you please explain. C3F2k (Questions, comments, complaints?) 14:28, 16 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The license reviewer role entails two main themes: understanding and applying policies and common practices on the one hand and interacting in a collegial manner with other contributors. You have so far exhibited a tendency for calling for extraordinary measures against other contributors and injecting needless drama. Speaking for myself, I'd say that's relevant. —LX (talk, contribs) 18:53, 16 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose - Lack of experience. Ices2Csharp (talk) 23:13, 16 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Not promoted Armbrust (talk) 16:10, 18 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

This is a closed request for license reviewer status. Do not make edits to it.

Bluerasberry

Bluerasberry (talk · contributions · deleted user contributions · recent activity · logs · block log · global contribs · CentralAuth) (assign permissions)
Reason: I have a need to upload some flickr pictures not owned by me and I would like to verify myself that they are appropriately licensed according the guidelines at Commons:Flickr files. Blue Rasberry (talk) 16:40, 28 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Comments

Have you read Commons:License review#Instructions for reviewers? —LX (talk, contribs) 16:51, 28 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Not done - Hardly 600 edits. Not enough experience. --Sreejith K (talk) 10:44, 4 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

This is a closed request for license reviewer status. Do not make edits to it.

Nyttend

Nyttend (talk · contributions · deleted user contributions · recent activity · logs · block log · global contribs · CentralAuth) (assign permissions)
Reason: I've uploaded tons of freely-licensed Flickr images (and always been careful to apply the correct license tag), and I'd like to be able to skip the problems resulting from bot-unreadable images, such as the issues I mentioned at Commons:Help desk/Archive/2012/03 about File:Armiesburg historical marker.jpg. Additionally, I've several times uploaded images from Flickr that needed PD templates (such as Armiesburg, which needed a template to mark the PD status of the subject of the image, or File:Miami County Courthouse clock and Justice.jpg, which the uploader had marked as PD) and thus each of those meant time away from another reviewer. I don't separately log my uploads from Flickr, but you can find them by going to Category:Other people's pictures by User:Nyttend; most black-and-white images and most courthouse photos in that category are PD-USGov images, but a large percentage of the residue are from Flickr. Nyttend (talk) 01:23, 15 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Comments

*I wasn't paying attention and transcluded this here. If you have comments or questions, please go to Commons:License review/requests. Nyttend (talk) 01:29, 15 July 2012 (UTC) (Struck this comment and copied (below) the comment I think Nyttend was trying to add here. --Philosopher ^{Let us reason together.} 05:42, 15 July 2012 (UTC))[reply]

I'm very confused by the various page transclusions; I did not mean to create either two or three sections with this request! If you have questions or comments, please notify me on my talk page, since I'm not sure at which pages I'll need to look. Nyttend (talk) 01:32, 15 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Philosopher, thanks for the help. It seemed that part of this page was transcluded onto the main rights request page, but I couldn't find the code that was doing the transcluding, and I couldn't find any non-transcluded text either. This is why I'm not requesting a more technical type of user right :-) Nyttend (talk) 18:55, 15 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Question You know, that if you receive this permission, than you can't review you own uploads per COM:LR? Armbrust (talk) 21:24, 15 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

What? That's rather absurd, but since consensus holds that it's a good idea for me to waste other people's time, never mind, since people with over 9300 uploads can't be trusted to understand licensing. I was requesting this for Flickr uploads for the same reason that an en:wp user might request w:Wikipedia:Autopatrolled. Nyttend (talk) 16:34, 16 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Trust, but verify, as they say. The main reason for this rule is that if the licensing is ever contested, having the license verified by someone other than the uploader gives us a better leg to stand on. If you feel like your uploads are wasting other people's time (which you shouldn't), you can always review a corresponding number of other people's files to "make up for it." —LX (talk, contribs) 17:02, 16 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Do you still intend becoming license-reviewer? We would appreciate any help. -- Rillke^(q?) 13:44, 17 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, not interested; I'm either busy with uploading or busy with projects away from Commons. Nyttend (talk) 21:41, 22 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Not promoted then. Please keep up the good work though! Trijnstel_talk 22:12, 22 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

This is a closed request for license reviewer status. Do not make edits to it.

David1217

David1217 (talk · contributions · deleted user contributions · recent activity · logs · block log · global contribs · CentralAuth) (assign permissions)
Reason: I have been working on identifying images with copyright problems in the upload log, and have 250 edits now locally. I have over 4,500 edits on en.wiki (although I know that doesn't have much sway here) and I understand (fairly well) Commons's policies. I know which licenses are acceptable for use here, and I will be careful to not allow files that have been license laundered. Thank you for your consideration, David1217 (talk) 03:38, 27 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Comments

Done looked through your contribs and liked what I saw. Keep up the good work, Sven Manguard Wha? 04:49, 27 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
While I was pleased by your detection of problems among the new files, I think the last 2 days of intensive work making the major part of your nearly 300 contributions are not enough. You have the user right now, so please prove you're able to use it. Thank you and good luck. -- Rillke^(q?) 06:37, 27 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

This is a closed request for license reviewer status. Do not make edits to it.

Cekli829

Cekli829 (talk · contributions · deleted user contributions · recent activity · logs · block log · global contribs · CentralAuth) (assign permissions)
Reason: I have been working on identifying images with copyright problems in the upload log, and have 9,200 edits now locally. I have over 93,200 edits on az.wiki and I understand (fairly well) Commons's policies. I know which licenses are acceptable for use here, and I will be careful to not allow files that have been license laundered. Thank you for your consideration, ►Safir yüzüklü Cekli^mesaj 10:42, 31 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Comments

Comment Thank you for offering to serve as a license reviewer. You are really a very competent user both here and on other projects. However, I'm a bit concerned about your indefinite block on hy.wiki. Could you, please tell us more a about it. Regards--Morning Sunshine (talk) 12:49, 31 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support. See Commons:Requests for rights/Approved/Rollback/2011#Cekli829 about your concern. Geagea (talk) 14:03, 31 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you Geagea for the link. I Support this--Morning Sunshine (talk) 15:08, 31 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Done Armbrust (talk) 08:07, 2 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

This is a closed request for license reviewer status. Do not make edits to it.

Mlpearc

Mlpearc (talk · contributions · deleted user contributions · recent activity · logs · block log · global contribs · CentralAuth) (assign permissions)
Reason: I would like to become more involved here at Commons, I am actively moving files from ENWP and believe I can work my way into helping with this area. Mlpearc (powwow) 04:30, 2 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Comments

Question Do you plan to review your own uploads? MorganKevinJ^(talk) 03:09, 3 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

A. Wouldn't you consider that a gross conflict of interest ? plus I am not nor do I run a bot so no. Mlpearc (powwow) 03:27, 3 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Done Armbrust (talk) 08:36, 4 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

This is a closed request for license reviewer status. Do not make edits to it.

GrapedApe

GrapedApe (talk · contributions · deleted user contributions · recent activity · logs · block log · global contribs · CentralAuth) (assign permissions)
Reason: I see that there is a backlog of images to be reviewed and I feel that I can help. I'm a relatively experienced Commons editor and I am familiar with the rules of CC and PD.--GrapedApe (talk) 13:57, 5 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Comments

Support. You seem to have sufficient experience for this tool. Thanks for helping! Trijnstel_talk 14:29, 5 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Question Have you read COM:LR (own uploads, etc.)? --Aa1bb2cc3dd4ee5 (talk) 14:41, 5 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Yes, I have read it. No, I won't be reviewing my own uploads.--GrapedApe (talk) 15:28, 5 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Then

Support --Aa1bb2cc3dd4ee5 (talk) 15:33, 5 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Promoted Morning Sunshine (talk) 02:07, 7 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

This is a closed request for license reviewer status. Do not make edits to it.

Animeshkulkarni

Animeshkulkarni (talk · contributions · deleted user contributions · recent activity · logs · block log · global contribs · CentralAuth) (assign permissions)
Reason: I have, for now, been on Commons for a fair amount of time. I have identified and tagged many files for copyvio. My primary focus after gaining reviewing rights would be clearing the 2000+ backlog on Category:Unreviewed files from Bollywood Hungama. §§AnimeshKulkarni (talk) 16:20, 10 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Comments

You know, that according to COM:LR you can't review files, which you have uploaded? Armbrust (talk) 10:31, 11 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Oh yeah! I know. General concept of "Conflict of Interest". §§AnimeshKulkarni (talk) 11:12, 11 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Support. One advice though: please merge your account here + on the English Wikipedia and create a SUL account via Special:MergeAccount. Trijnstel_talk 12:52, 11 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Done! Thanks for the tip. §§AnimeshKulkarni (talk) 15:34, 11 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Promoted Armbrust (talk) 16:39, 11 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

This is a closed request for license reviewer status. Do not make edits to it.

Wdwd

Wdwd (talk · contributions · deleted user contributions · recent activity · logs · block log · global contribs · CentralAuth) (assign permissions)
Reason: I would to ask for review rights. I'm working in the OTRS team, mainly permission-de and permissions-commons-de queue, and on commons-transfer (de-wp). I am familiar with freedom of panorama and about commons licences that are accepted.--Wdwd (talk) 18:43, 14 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Comments

Support Lymantria (talk) 22:16, 14 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Krd 05:39, 15 August 2012 (UTC) Active OTRS agent, obviously qualified.[reply]
Support --Neozoon (talk) 19:08, 15 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Done --Sreejith K (talk) 19:42, 15 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

This is a closed request for license reviewer status. Do not make edits to it.

Albacore

Albacore (talk · contributions · deleted user contributions · recent activity · logs · block log · global contribs · CentralAuth) (assign permissions)
Reason: I am familiar with Commons licenses, what is and what is not allowed on the Commons. I have uploaded several files from Flickr, and know the licensing requirements and what to look for from Picasa and Panoramio as well. Albacore (talk) 18:08, 20 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Comments

Oppose - Less than 200 edits in Commons --Sreejith K (talk) 21:49, 20 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Not promoted Armbrust (talk) 18:06, 22 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

This is a closed request for license reviewer status. Do not make edits to it.

Sanandros

Sanandros (talk · contributions · deleted user contributions · recent activity · logs · block log · global contribs · CentralAuth) (assign permissions)
Reason: I'm right now since 6 years active on Commons and I advise people both on com:Forum and on de:wp:uf. Sanandros (talk) 03:23, 21 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Comments

Support very experienced user--Morning Sunshine (talk) 02:57, 22 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Done Armbrust (talk) 18:11, 22 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

This is a closed request for license reviewer status. Do not make edits to it.

Vensatry

Vensatry (talk · contributions · deleted user contributions · recent activity · logs · block log · global contribs · CentralAuth) (assign permissions)
Reason: I've been here for almost two years and familiar with the commons licenses. Besides, I have uploaded a fair amount of files from Flickr and Bollywoodhungama. I've also tagged numerous copyvio files for deletion. Having this right would enable me reduce the backlog of un-reviewed files. —Vensatry _{(Ping me)} 07:50, 27 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Comments

Support You have less than 500 edits, but I think that could be something for u after checking your history.--Sanandros (talk) 08:31, 27 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Comment Boilerplate (i.e. no preexisting assumptions) question: Are you aware that you are not allowed to review files you yourself uploaded? Sven Manguard Wha? 15:33, 27 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Yes. I'm a reviewer at en.wiki and very much aware that I shouldn't review my own uploads. —Vensatry _{(Ping me)} 16:12, 27 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Promoted User:Armbrust (Local talk - en.Wikipedia talk) 09:06, 29 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

This is a closed request for license reviewer status. Do not make edits to it.

Coentor

Coentor (talk · contributions · deleted user contributions · recent activity · logs · block log · global contribs · CentralAuth) (assign permissions)
Reason: I upload a lot of images from commons, normally from three of four sport-related accounts which license properly the photos. If I became a license reviewer We would safe a lot of time to the already reviewer users who have to check out most of my uploads.Coentor (talk) 18:54, 6 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Comments

Question Do you plan to review your own uploads? --Aa1bb2cc3dd4ee5 (talk) 18:58, 6 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
At least mines. I'll be happy to help other people, if I have time for doing it.--Coentor (talk) 19:03, 6 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Have you read Commons:License_review#Instructions_for_reviewers? What does it say about reviewing own uploads? --Sreejith K (talk) 19:12, 6 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Ooops... no, I didn't. Well, then I should cancel the request. Thanks for the advice.--Coentor (talk) 19:20, 6 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Request withdrawn. Trijnstel_talk 22:48, 11 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

This is a closed request for license reviewer status. Do not make edits to it.

Ecemaml

Ecemaml (talk · contributions · deleted user contributions · recent activity · logs · block log · global contribs · CentralAuth) (assign permissions)
Reason: I've been a commons administrator for five years. Before that I was also a reviewer. No complaint about my work in commons was raised during my time as admin. I resigned last June, as I was expelled from the Spanish Wikipedia (nothing related to images, copyvios or licencing management). Therefore, I didn't want to contribute to the Wikimedia projects any more. However, I've not been able to leave the project and, in order to be more useful, I'd like to retake my role as reviewer. Thanks Ecemaml ^{talk to me/habla conmigo} 07:43, 27 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Comments

Done Glad to have you back with us. odder (talk) 07:51, 27 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support Yea ok come on board--Sanandros (talk) 09:07, 27 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Thanks for your trust. --Ecemaml ^{talk to me/habla conmigo} 12:41, 27 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Assigned by Odder on 07:51, 27 September 2012 (UTC). Trijnstel_talk 20:36, 27 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

This is a closed request for license reviewer status. Do not make edits to it.

Elisardojm

Elisardojm (talk · contributions · deleted user contributions · recent activity · logs · block log · global contribs · CentralAuth) (assign permissions)
Reason: I have uploaded photos from Flickr and Panoramio with licenses allowed in Commons and I wanted to work reviewing this kind of photos. I'm user in Panoramio and Administrator of group of WLM Spain 2012 in Flickr. Bye, Elisardojm (talk) 16:52, 4 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Comments

Would you review your own uploads, if you receive this right? User:Armbrust (Local talk - en.Wikipedia talk) 19:47, 4 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

What means own uploads?, uploads from my own photos or uploads that I made from photos from other authors?. If it means uploads from my own photos then the answer is no, of course. If it means uploads that I made from photos from other authors then the answer is, isn't it allowed?. Bye, --Elisardojm (talk) 21:50, 4 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

It's not allowed to review all of your own uploads, which means copies of photos of others and your own photographs. Trijnstel_talk 21:56, 4 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, I see, then I think that I can't use this permission, sorry for this wasted time and thanks for the comments. Bye, --Elisardojm (talk) 07:17, 5 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

You are, however, welcome license-reviewing other people’s uploads. -- Rillke^(q?) 08:57, 5 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Not promoted User:Armbrust (Local talk - en.Wikipedia talk) 18:47, 9 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

This is a closed request for license reviewer status. Do not make edits to it.

Elisardojm

Elisardojm (talk · contributions · deleted user contributions · recent activity · logs · block log · global contribs · CentralAuth) (assign permissions)
Reason: I think that it's very important that licences of photos in Commons to be well reviewed. Elisardojm (talk) 12:54, 23 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Comments

Are you aware that you may not review your own uploads? Trijnstel_talk 16:35, 23 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, it's at: "Please note that as of 21 February 2012, image-reviewers may not review their own uploads unless the account is an approved bot." :) Bye, --Elisardojm (talk) 08:43, 24 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Support--Sanandros (talk) 12:27, 24 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Question How can you find out whether a digital image source is reliable (is not lying about the source and author)? -- Rillke^(q?) 20:18, 24 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I can search it on Google images and verify if there are other sources and author. Bye, --Elisardojm (talk) 00:20, 25 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Also metadata are often providing good hints. If you e.g. don't know the software that was used it's beneficial to look it up so one can assess whether it is a web-scaler, or sometimes even the author or copyright attributes are unaltered. BTW we have gadget "Google image search" and "Tineye" for reverse image lookup. Good luck &

Support -- Rillke^(q?) 09:28, 25 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, metadata sometimes can be useful too. Thanks!, --Elisardojm (talk) 11:33, 25 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Promoted --Morning ☼ (talk) 09:53, 25 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

This is a closed request for license reviewer status. Do not make edits to it.

Eleassar

Eleassar (talk · contributions · deleted user contributions · recent activity · logs · block log · global contribs · CentralAuth) (assign permissions)
Reason: I'd like to help with reviewing files as I'm doing a general cleanup of images and categories related to Slovenia. I have a good understanding of Commons policies and copyright in general as well as plenty of experience. I also see myself as communicating fairly and politely with other users. I have read the instructions about reviewing. Eleassar ^(t/p) 09:09, 6 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Comments

Done; sure, thanks for helping! odder (talk) 06:45, 8 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

This is a closed request for license reviewer status. Do not make edits to it.

Ktr101

Ktr101 (talk · contributions · deleted user contributions · recent activity · logs · block log · global contribs · CentralAuth) (assign permissions)
Reason: I have been Wikipedia for over five years and have become very familiar with copyright rules. Recently, I have also begun uploading Flickr images that are acceptable on this site, and I would like to be able to help with the reviewing of new images, since I have a good idea on what is and what isn't acceptable on this site. Kevin Rutherford (talk) 23:27, 18 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Comments

- Done Although I should say, just so it's clear, that you cannot review your own uploads. Sven Manguard Wha? 19:21, 22 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

This is a closed request for license reviewer status. Do not make edits to it.

Titodutta

Titodutta (talk · contributions · deleted user contributions · recent activity · logs · block log · global contribs · CentralAuth) (assign permissions)
Reason: I am interested in image licensing, image copyright issues. I want to start with reviewing BollywoodHunhama, FilmiTadka, Flickr images. Yes, I know I can not review my own uploads. Thanks! Tito Dutta (Send me a message) 20:08, 19 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Comments

- Done Sven Manguard Wha? 19:23, 22 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

This is a closed request for license reviewer status. Do not make edits to it.

Willy Weazley

Willy Weazley (talk · contributions · deleted user contributions · recent activity · logs · block log · global contribs · CentralAuth) (assign permissions)
Reason: Hi, as a OTRS volunteer, I end up getting in touch with several new images, and edit other coming from flickr. Becoming a reviewer would make my job much easier and agile. +PrinceWilly 16:55, 23 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Comments

Done King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 20:47, 23 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

This is a closed request for license reviewer status. Do not make edits to it.

Rrburke

Rrburke (talk · contributions · deleted user contributions · recent activity · logs · block log · global contribs · CentralAuth) (assign permissions)
Reason: I'd like to help out with Category:Flickr images needing human review. I have 47K edits on EN since 2005, and about 2600 here. --Rrburke (talk) 15:46, 29 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Comments

Done King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 09:05, 2 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

This is a closed request for license reviewer status. Do not make edits to it.

SarahStierch

SarahStierch (talk · contributions · deleted user contributions · recent activity · logs · block log · global contribs · CentralAuth) (assign permissions)
Reason: I'm a long time Commonist, I work in the open culture sector and work closely with Creative Commons professionally. I have nominated content in the past for deletion based on copyright issues, and I have worked closely with cultural organizations to negotiate the release of content under correct free licenses. I'm also a Flickr user (and occasional Picasa) and quite aware and educated about how the website works. I'm also an OTRS agent, handling Commons and image permissions for Wikipedia. Thanks! Sarah (talk) 18:35, 7 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Comments

Done, thanks for volunteering Sarah! odder (talk) 22:43, 7 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

This is a closed request for license reviewer status. Do not make edits to it.

V0nNemizez

V0nNemizez (talk · contributions · deleted user contributions · recent activity · logs · block log · global contribs · CentralAuth) (assign permissions)
Reason: Hello :) i want to join the reviewteam... i have a lot of sparetime when im not at work so i want to help outV0nNemizez (talk) 11:03, 14 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Comments

Oppose – sorry, but 43 edits (half of them made in the last two days and the other half made during three days in June 2010) is not really enough to get the experience needed for license reviewing. Based on your recent edits, it looks like you're still learning how some of our processes work, so keep doing that and ask again later. Cheers, —LX (talk, contribs) 16:51, 14 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose - your help is welcome but get some more experience first groetjes --Neozoon (talk) 20:01, 14 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Question Should we interpret this edit which removed this request as {{Withdraw}}? -- Rillke^(q?) 16:15, 15 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Not done --Morning ☼ (talk) 00:24, 16 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

This is a closed request for license reviewer status. Do not make edits to it.

HrAd

HrAd (talk · contributions · deleted user contributions · recent activity · logs · block log · global contribs · CentralAuth) (assign permissions)
Reason: I use to upload images via the Flickr upload bot, but sometimes I crop them before upload so they need human revision. I am a free-images photographer with experience in Flickr so I know how does it works. Also, I'm one of the most active user of the Rail Wikiproject on Spanish Wikipedia and I review the images that other users upload to rail articles in that Wiki. HrAd (talk) 21:32, 23 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Comments

Do you plan to review your own uploads? --Aa1bb2cc3dd4ee5 (talk) 21:42, 23 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Yes, but I think it's better first to get experience reviewing the uploads of others, because if I make an error it's easy to be reverted if the error is made in the image of another uploader.--HrAd (talk) 22:11, 23 December 2012 (UTC) I read that the police was changed in February and that's no longer possible. It loose utility for me but I think I still could help.--HrAd (talk) 22:14, 23 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose - your experience on Commons is not enough at this time. However, it looks like your edits are good - come back when you have more experience. Mono 01:33, 24 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Lack of edits but your edits are good. --cyrfaw (talk) 12:23, 24 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Not done Mono 20:42, 25 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

This is a closed request for license reviewer status. Do not make edits to it.

Nemo bis

Nemo bis (talk · contributions · deleted user contributions · recent activity · logs · block log · global contribs · CentralAuth) (assign permissions)
Reason: I review license information only occasionally, but I regularly import images from Flickr and I'd like to use the UploadWizard to that purpose; if this is not a good reason to request the right, discard my request. My knowledge of licenses and copyright matters is quite good thanks to my years of activity in Wikimedia projects, in the chapter Wikimedia Italia and in a few (hundreds?) deletion requests: it's surely minor compared to our Commons' colleagues', but I know my limits and I'm not afraid to ask and defer decisions to more experienced people. Nemo 12:09, 24 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Comments

Support Why not? --cyrfaw (talk) 12:23, 24 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Question Do you plan to review your own uploads? Mono 15:17, 24 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
It's clearly invalid, so no. Most of my flickr imports pass the bot review, but for the others I'd be able to compensate the reviewers' time I "consume" with some reviews of others' uploads. Nemo 00:11, 25 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support Mono 04:49, 25 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support No concerns. Trijnstel_talk 15:00, 25 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Shanmugamp7 ^(talk) 16:26, 25 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Done Mono 03:34, 26 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Commons:License review/Requests/Archive/2012

Ktr101

Krd

Materialscientist

SpacemanSpiff

Ginés90

Spyder Monkey

Quintucket

Americophile 2

Sven Manguard

Codrinb

Dipankan001

Smuconlaw

DreamFieldArts

Nasir8891

Ronhjones

Tomtomn00

とある白い猫

タチコマ robot

Sridhar1000

Trex2001

Anna Frodesiak

MyCanon

Ralgis

Shovon76

Mr.choppers

L145826

Benoit Rochon

Abigor

Calestyo

Coekon

Aa1bb2cc3dd4ee5

C3F2k

Bluerasberry

Nyttend

David1217

Cekli829

Mlpearc

GrapedApe

Animeshkulkarni

Wdwd

Albacore

Sanandros

Vensatry

Coentor

Ecemaml

Elisardojm

Elisardojm

Eleassar

Ktr101

Titodutta

Willy Weazley

Rrburke

SarahStierch

V0nNemizez

HrAd

Nemo bis

Navigation menu

Search