User talk:A1Cafel/Archive 9
This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Notification about possible deletion
Some contents have been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether they should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at their entry.
If you created these pages, please note that the fact that they have been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with them, such as a copyright issue. Please see Commons:But it's my own work! for a guide on how to address these issues. |
Affected:
And also:
- File:Vladimir Putin - Caricature (51118467078).jpg
- File:Vladimir Putin - Caricature (51118554871).jpg
- File:Women's March LA 2019 (31864309817).jpg
Yours sincerely, Yann (talk) 07:39, 3 May 2022 (UTC)
Hello A1Cafel, wondering what this file has in common with Clockwerk Orange. Thank you for your time. Lotje (talk) 20:26, 3 May 2022 (UTC)
- It's obviously someone costumed as one of Alex' droogs. Andy Dingley (talk) 21:36, 3 May 2022 (UTC)
⭐ A file you uploaded is on the main page! ⭐
File:2012年5月21日 金環日食全景.webm, that you uploaded, is on the main page today. Thank you for your contributions to this project. |
//EatchaBot (talk) 00:00, 6 May 2022 (UTC)
Category:Ukraine_solidarity_protest_Cologne_2022-03-04 has been listed at Commons:Categories for discussion so that the community can discuss ways in which it should be changed. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry. If you created this category, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for discussion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with it. If the category is up for deletion because it has been superseded, consider the notion that although the category may be deleted, your hard work (which we all greatly appreciate) lives on in the new category. In all cases, please do not take the category discussion personally. It is never intended as such. Thank you! |
AlanyaSeeburg (talk) 20:23, 6 May 2022 (UTC)
File:President Biden departs Brussels, en route to Poland after the NATO special meeting.jpg has been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether it should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry.
If you created this file, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with it, such as a copyright issue. Please see Commons:But it's my own work! for a guide on how to address these issues. |
219.78.190.126 07:30, 10 May 2022 (UTC)
File:Stand With Ukraine (51957089128).jpg has been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether it should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry.
If you created this file, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with it, such as a copyright issue. Please see Commons:But it's my own work! for a guide on how to address these issues. |
219.78.190.126 16:44, 11 May 2022 (UTC)
Notification about possible deletion
Some contents have been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether they should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at their entry.
If you created these pages, please note that the fact that they have been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with them, such as a copyright issue. Please see Commons:But it's my own work! for a guide on how to address these issues. |
Affected:
Yours sincerely, Magog the Ogre (talk) (contribs) 01:24, 14 May 2022 (UTC)
File:Manif du 1er mai, Madrid -1demayo (8712807381).jpg has been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether it should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry.
If you created this file, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with it, such as a copyright issue. Please see Commons:But it's my own work! for a guide on how to address these issues. |
Strakhov (talk) 14:06, 15 May 2022 (UTC)
I agree to becoming a license reviewer
Hello A1Cafel. I can still remember your request for me to become a COM:License reviewer. Now I am ready to become one. I just read that unlike adminship, inactivity is not a criterion for license reviewer rights removal. Hence it is OK. I want to have it so that I can review some YouTube-derived still images contributed by Pizza16 (talk · contribs). Instead of tagging {{YouTubeReview}} for request, I will be the one to review the images themselves. YouTube videos have explicit indication if these are freely-licensed or not. JWilz12345 (Talk|Contrib's.) 03:23, 20 May 2022 (UTC)
File:ABBA (14162834262).png has been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether it should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry.
If you created this file, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with it, such as a copyright issue. Please see Commons:But it's my own work! for a guide on how to address these issues. |
Túrelio (talk) 06:57, 30 May 2022 (UTC)
Warning
If you continue violating Commons:Talk page guidelines by not including an Edit Summary, I will report you. — Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me 10:07, 26 May 2022 (UTC)
- @Jeff G.: I previously have done so, and I received a thankyou from User:Ldorfman on this, so I don't think leaving an edit summary is necessary. Next time I will try to include it, regards. --A1Cafel (talk) 10:20, 26 May 2022 (UTC)
- No edit summary here either. Hard to understand why a welcome section was added when I've been here for many years. Some kind of irony? --SergeWoodzing (talk) 12:26, 26 May 2022 (UTC)
- I'd agree that those are problem edits (albeit useful too, as the size of these pages is breaking template inclusions), but that's such an intrusive edit to make on a user talk page that really it needs a section added to the user talk page, ideally before setting up archiving. Not just a summary. Andy Dingley (talk) 12:46, 26 May 2022 (UTC)
- @SergeWoodzing: The welcome was already there. — Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me 13:27, 7 June 2022 (UTC)
- I see that now, thank you. Should have looked closer. I still object, however, to the automatic archiving function being added without my consent. Would like to remove it, but am afraid to screw things up. Have never learned much about archiving. --SergeWoodzing (talk) 15:32, 7 June 2022 (UTC)
Also problematic is the lack of COM:AGF in making this edit without prior discussion with the user. — Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me 13:25, 7 June 2022 (UTC)
File:Jacinda Ardern 2019.jpg
Dude, i added that image for the crop, i did not overwrite someone else's upload, why did you get it deleted and then create a poor crop with a silly filename?--Stemoc 15:01, 7 June 2022 (UTC)
Commons:License Reviewer
Hi, I just saw your message thanks for trying to help me you can help me become a license reviewer go to the talk page is on Commons:Reviewer i would like to know your opinion on my license reviewer application.– LeonaardoG (talk) 21:10, 7 June 2022 (UTC)
- Comment: What are the requirements to become a Reviewer? I'm 8 years old and my account is active in the Wiki project, please can you help me, I'm waiting for your response regarding my request to become a reviewer. –LeonaardoG (talk) 21:17, 7 June 2022 (UTC)
- @LeonaardoG: The message I gave is to introduce you to the Flickr2Commons tool. This tool moved Flickr images to Commons faster, and it also allows the User:FlickreviewR 2 bot to review the images. If you wish to use it, you just need to go to the url and authorize it (where it says "authorise first"). --A1Cafel (talk) 02:52, 8 June 2022 (UTC)
Please expand when making moves
Next time please link to the CfD or give a more detailed explaination in the move summary, rather than just saying "CfD" and cannot see any CfD on the then Skylines in Hobart category history. Bidgee (talk) 10:27, 14 June 2022 (UTC)
- @Bidgee: CfD link--A1Cafel (talk) 10:28, 14 June 2022 (UTC)
- My point is link to when when making the move. Maybe use in the move summary "in to of per Commons:Categories for discussion/2016/01/Category:Skylines by city". Bidgee (talk) 10:31, 14 June 2022 (UTC)
File:Bernie Chicago Illinois 3-7-20 5633 (49632975498).jpg has been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether it should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry.
If you created this file, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with it, such as a copyright issue. Please see Commons:But it's my own work! for a guide on how to address these issues. |
King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 16:08, 19 June 2022 (UTC)
image reviewer
Could you help me know how many months I can open another discussion about asking for the image reviewer position? I would like to know please explain. --LeonaardoG (talk) 02:58, 20 June 2022 (UTC)
- @LeonaardoG: There is no mention of when to apply for image reviewer again after the previous application was declined. Generally speaking, you should be gaining more experience on reviewing images like catching copyvio and other problems. You should take into account the opposition input last time to avoid doing that again. --A1Cafel (talk) 03:16, 20 June 2022 (UTC)
- Thank you for your kindness when I need help I will need you ok thank you very much for your answer it is very important to ask questions with people with extensive experience In the project. --LeonaardoG (talk) 03:35, 20 June 2022 (UTC)
File:Pääministeri Marinin ja liittokansleri Scholzin tapaaminen 16.3.2022 (51941396612).jpg has been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether it should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry.
If you created this file, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with it, such as a copyright issue. Please see Commons:But it's my own work! for a guide on how to address these issues. |
King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 18:18, 27 June 2022 (UTC)
Valued Image Promoted
Congratulations! The image you nominated was reviewed and has now been promoted as a valued image. It is considered to be the most valued image on Commons within the scope:
Andrzej Duda, presidential portrait.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.
--VICBot2 (talk) 00:21, 28 June 2022 (UTC)
File:Ghost of Kyiv (51988395341).jpg has been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether it should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry.
If you created this file, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with it, such as a copyright issue. Please see Commons:But it's my own work! for a guide on how to address these issues. |
Lord Belbury (talk) 15:27, 28 June 2022 (UTC)
Valued Image Promoted
Congratulations! The image you nominated was reviewed and has now been promoted as a valued image. It is considered to be the most valued image on Commons within the scope:
Presidential portrait of Petro Poroshenko.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.
--VICBot2 (talk) 00:20, 6 July 2022 (UTC)
Notification about possible deletion
Some contents have been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether they should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at their entry.
If you created these pages, please note that the fact that they have been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with them, such as a copyright issue. Please see Commons:But it's my own work! for a guide on how to address these issues. |
Affected:
Yours sincerely, JWilz12345 (Talk|Contrib's.) 02:45, 13 July 2022 (UTC)
Why?
Hello A1Cafel, what are you doing with my photos? I see you presented the image of the Opel Rekord again at VI and then said that it already is rated. You also repeatedly present the Citroën. What's the point? I noticed changes in the calendar date of other photos. Please be so kind and refrain from such gimmicks in the future. Kind regards -- Spurzem (talk) 11:55, 13 July 2022 (UTC)
- @Spurzem: I changed the date because the original nominator probably forgot to put the nomination on the candidate list, so I restarted the nomination. I don't think this is gimmicks. BTW, I'm curious why you re-nominate a file that is already a VI? What is the purpose of doing this? --A1Cafel (talk) 13:55, 13 July 2022 (UTC)
- Do you want to tease me a little? It was you, who incomprehensibly nominated two of my pictures again. -- Spurzem (talk) 14:07, 13 July 2022 (UTC)
- @Spurzem: Initially I don't know your two nominations are already duplicated. I would suggest you redirected to the promoted VIC if you create duplicate nominations. --A1Cafel (talk) 14:31, 13 July 2022 (UTC)
- Again: I didn't nominate anything twice. And I ask you to stay away from my pictures in the future. -- Spurzem (talk) 14:52, 13 July 2022 (UTC)
- @Spurzem: Initially I don't know your two nominations are already duplicated. I would suggest you redirected to the promoted VIC if you create duplicate nominations. --A1Cafel (talk) 14:31, 13 July 2022 (UTC)
- Do you want to tease me a little? It was you, who incomprehensibly nominated two of my pictures again. -- Spurzem (talk) 14:07, 13 July 2022 (UTC)
I really don't understand what you're trying to tell me. My request was and is that you do not present this or that of my photos for the second time for VI again, as happened yesterday. It's best to keep your hands off my pictures. -- Spurzem (talk) 07:13, 14 July 2022 (UTC)
Extra category
Good day. I don't see the need for Category:Halloween_2019_in_Louisiana which you created. The only media were in the category Category:Halloween in New Orleans 2019, which was in the national category. There is zero other content. Do you have some and are about to upload it? If not, it only creates an unnecessary extra layer and makes any users who want to see content go through extra clicks with no added benefit. Puzzled, -- Infrogmation of New Orleans (talk) 15:14, 13 July 2022 (UTC)
- I have uploaded one more video on this. --A1Cafel (talk) 05:01, 14 July 2022 (UTC)
Valued Image Promoted
Congratulations! The image you nominated was reviewed and has now been promoted as a valued image. It is considered to be the most valued image on Commons within the scope:
Icelandic Low.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.
--VICBot2 (talk) 00:20, 18 July 2022 (UTC)
Valued Image Promoted
Congratulations! The image you nominated was reviewed and has now been promoted as a valued image. It is considered to be the most valued image on Commons within the scope:
Announcement of Reiwa as new era name of Japan.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.
--VICBot2 (talk) 00:23, 19 July 2022 (UTC)
Valued Image Promoted
Congratulations! The image you nominated was reviewed and has now been promoted as a valued image. It is considered to be the most valued image on Commons within the scope:
Mourning for victims of 2018 Shanghai knife attack.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.
--VICBot2 (talk) 00:20, 20 July 2022 (UTC)
Valued Image Promoted
Congratulations! The image you nominated was reviewed and has now been promoted as a valued image. It is considered to be the most valued image on Commons within the scope:
Official portraits of George W. Bush as president.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.
--VICBot2 (talk) 00:21, 21 July 2022 (UTC)
Four valued images of St. Anthony's church, Vaddy marked as "Undecided"
I saw that you have marked 4 nominations as "undecided". These 4 nomination pages were never submitted. After I created them on 3 Apr, I noticed that I had mispelt the church name and requested a rename of all the images to St. Antony's church (no 'h'). After the images were renamed, on 4 Apr I created 4 new VIC nom files and submitted those. All four got promoted. I hope that these 4 "undecided" files will not cause any problem? Perhaps it is best to delete them? --Tagooty (talk) 13:46, 24 July 2022 (UTC)
- @Tagooty: If you think deletion is a better option, you can tap {{SDG7}} on those nominations (you can revert my edits too). --A1Cafel (talk) 17:27, 24 July 2022 (UTC)
- Done, thanks. Tagooty (talk) 03:15, 25 July 2022 (UTC)
Valued Image Promoted
Congratulations! The image you nominated was reviewed and has now been promoted as a valued image. It is considered to be the most valued image on Commons within the scope:
Mars by Rosetta.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.
--VICBot2 (talk) 00:20, 26 July 2022 (UTC)
File:Boris Nemtsov "Everything that you think may be used against you" (16496365268).jpg has been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether it should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry.
If you created this file, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with it, such as a copyright issue. Please see Commons:But it's my own work! for a guide on how to address these issues. |
188.123.231.24 18:20, 27 July 2022 (UTC)
Valued Image Promoted
Congratulations! The image you nominated was reviewed and has now been promoted as a valued image. It is considered to be the most valued image on Commons within the scope:
Global cumulative tropical cyclone tracks.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.
--VICBot2 (talk) 00:20, 28 July 2022 (UTC)
⭐ A file you uploaded is on the main page! ⭐
File:強烈颱風“山竹”襲擊香港 (粵語).webm, that you uploaded, is on the main page today. Thank you for your contributions to this project. |
//EatchaBot (talk) 00:00, 5 August 2022 (UTC)
Check file
Hello, @A1Cafel: , I need your help to verify this file: File:Luva de Pedreiro.jpg -- Leonaardog (talk) 00:26, 5 August 2022 (UTC)
- @Leonaardog: Unfortunately I'm not a license reviewer and I cannot review any files. --A1Cafel (talk) 03:42, 5 August 2022 (UTC)
Hello, @A1Cafel: , Unfortunately they deleted the file with Copyvio evidencing but the video file on YouTube has a Commons compatible license. Thank you for your attention. --- Leonaardog (talk) 14:55, 5 August 2022 (UTC)
Valued Image Promoted
Congratulations! The image you nominated was reviewed and has now been promoted as a valued image. It is considered to be the most valued image on Commons within the scope:
First image of a black hole.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.
--VICBot2 (talk) 00:20, 6 August 2022 (UTC)
Duplicates from MIK
Removing or redirecting duplicate files causes the loss of important data, such as photo descriptions or authorship. These photos are from MIK, have a few authors in file's name or desc. ("J. Nowostawska-Gyalókay" and "K. Fidyk" and "M. Klag" and "P. Knaś"), and I have doubts if the Lollenja could upload these pictures without signing it "by MIK + an author". Other people who made this kind of edits: @EugeneZelenko ; @Túrelio; @Yann (he\she don't make redirect...). Matlin (talk) 10:35, 26 July 2022 (UTC)
- @Matlin: Why duplicates were uploaded in first place? Even if upload script doesn't check existing files on Commons (fix for that must be requested), why duplicates in same batch were not checked? What the point to create redirects if all three files were not used? In future please try to avoid creating work for other people. This is also true for Commons:Derivative works, Commons:Freedom of panorama, Commons:Project scope, etc. --EugeneZelenko (talk) 14:22, 26 July 2022 (UTC)
- @Matlin and EugeneZelenko: IMO keeping redirect of the duplicate files can avoid re-creation of the duplicate files. --A1Cafel (talk) 09:57, 1 August 2022 (UTC)
- Redirects would not solve the problem, because different mass uploaders may choose different templates for file names (observed multiple times in wild). Also the will not prevent importing of duplicates from Flickr or other sources (one case involved Panoramio and Flickr). Enforcing duplicates check is only working solution. --EugeneZelenko (talk) 14:00, 1 August 2022 (UTC)
- @Matlin and EugeneZelenko: IMO keeping redirect of the duplicate files can avoid re-creation of the duplicate files. --A1Cafel (talk) 09:57, 1 August 2022 (UTC)
- Example of uselessness of redirects: File:Solar eclipse (7238227670).jpg and File:DSC 3789 (7238227670).jpg (part of series). Both batches were uploaded by you (in 2017 and 2021). --EugeneZelenko (talk) 14:59, 6 August 2022 (UTC)
File:07 46am Tuesday 31 December 2019 (49392303016).png has been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether it should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry.
If you created this file, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with it, such as a copyright issue. Please see Commons:But it's my own work! for a guide on how to address these issues. |
Yann (talk) 08:23, 12 August 2022 (UTC)
File:12 57pm Tuesday 31 December 2019 (49392302691).png has been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether it should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry.
If you created this file, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with it, such as a copyright issue. Please see Commons:But it's my own work! for a guide on how to address these issues. |
Yann (talk) 08:24, 12 August 2022 (UTC)
Valued Image Promoted
Congratulations! The image you nominated was reviewed and has now been promoted as a valued image. It is considered to be the most valued image on Commons within the scope:
Noble gases in gas discharge tubes.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.
--VICBot2 (talk) 00:21, 14 August 2022 (UTC)
Notification about possible deletion
Some contents have been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether they should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at their entry.
If you created these pages, please note that the fact that they have been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with them, such as a copyright issue. Please see Commons:But it's my own work! for a guide on how to address these issues. |
Affected:
And also:
- File:Bull from behind (46709018762).jpg
- File:Bull Wall Street (6173547669).jpg
- File:Charging Bull (28919670730).jpg
- File:IMAG7199 (34138459952).jpg
- File:New york (9787993752).jpg
- File:New York City (4890606552).jpg
- File:The Wall Street Bull (5934546528).jpg
- File:Wall Street bull (15467605171).jpg
- File:Wall Street Bull (and a bunch of Japaneese) (2783130469).jpg
- File:Where's the bull? (4650882388).jpg
Yours sincerely, C.Suthorn (talk) 09:56, 14 August 2022 (UTC)
VIC Thevally houseboat
When changing Opposed to Discussed, I assumed that it was like QIC. I now see that Discussed in VIC requires support and oppose. Thanks for teaching me something useful! --Tagooty (talk) 02:24, 18 August 2022 (UTC)
Notification about possible deletion
Some contents have been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether they should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at their entry.
If you created these pages, please note that the fact that they have been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with them, such as a copyright issue. Please see Commons:But it's my own work! for a guide on how to address these issues. |
Affected:
Yours sincerely, Xunks (talk) 08:20, 18 August 2022 (UTC)
Valued Image Promoted
Congratulations! The image you nominated was reviewed and has now been promoted as a valued image. It is considered to be the most valued image on Commons within the scope:
Portrait of Mateusz Morawiecki as prime minister.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.
--VICBot2 (talk) 00:19, 20 August 2022 (UTC)
Valued Image Promoted
Congratulations! The image you nominated was reviewed and has now been promoted as a valued image. It is considered to be the most valued image on Commons within the scope:
Jasmin Moghbeli.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.
--VICBot2 (talk) 00:19, 31 August 2022 (UTC)
Images
Is there any downside to this image not being valuable?
- https://commons.m.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Valued_image_candidates/Major_League_Baseball_logo.svg
- https://commons.m.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Valued_image_candidates/Flag_of_Mexico.svg
- https://commons.m.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Valued_image_candidates/Enrique-camarena1.jpg/Archive_of_previous_reviews --Aurelio de Sandoval (Mensajes aquí please)
- @Aurelio de Sandoval: VI means that the image is the best on the corresponding scope. Unless an editor review it and believe it is the best within the scope, they cannot give a support vote. --A1Cafel (talk) 02:23, 1 September 2022 (UTC)
- @A1Cafel: Please can you tell me what is the impediment or the scope is not good?.--Aurelio de Sandoval (Mensajes aquí please)
- @Aurelio de Sandoval: It's rather vague, I cannot tell you because every nomination has its own problems. --A1Cafel (talk) 02:52, 1 September 2022 (UTC)
- @A1Cafel: Please can you tell me what is the impediment or the scope is not good?.--Aurelio de Sandoval (Mensajes aquí please)
Valued Image Promoted
Congratulations! The image you nominated was reviewed and has now been promoted as a valued image. It is considered to be the most valued image on Commons within the scope:
Announcement of Heisei as new era name of Japan.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.
--VICBot2 (talk) 00:19, 4 September 2022 (UTC)
File:Christmas 2019 Downing Street Decoration (2).jpg has been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether it should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry.
If you created this file, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with it, such as a copyright issue. Please see Commons:But it's my own work! for a guide on how to address these issues. |
Mateusz Konieczny (talk) 11:59, 8 September 2022 (UTC)
File:The roadsides and bus stops of London England UK with notices about Queen Elizabeth - mostly digital billboards but one chalkboard too (52345186772).jpg has been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether it should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry.
If you created this file, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with it, such as a copyright issue. Please see Commons:But it's my own work! for a guide on how to address these issues. |
2001:4453:54A:CA00:C099:89CB:167C:FA1E 23:28, 11 September 2022 (UTC)
Please note that all the files in that category had a WLM permission. I suppose that you already did several careless deletion requests. Let that one be the last one, and check the files you nominate for deletion, one by one next time. Thanks Ruthven (msg) 07:26, 19 September 2022 (UTC)
BOOK OF CONDOLENCE deletion requests
Regarding the deletion requests made to the Flickr images from the Foreign, Commonwealth & Development Office, are you claiming they are not under CC BY 2 as is claimed on Flickr, or that we should just add an attribution line to the info template? If the second why not just add the that? Cakelot1 (talk) 17:27, 19 September 2022 (UTC)
- @Cakelot1: This is a kind of license landuring, which means FCDO is not the copyright holder of those nominated files. The copyright belongs to the stated photographer from PA Media Assignments. Permission from PA Media Assignments is required in this case. You may submit the written permission to VRT after getting the approval from the institution. --A1Cafel (talk) 17:42, 19 September 2022 (UTC)
- Do you really believe that the united kingdom's Foreign, Commonwealth & Development Office didn't commission these images of Foreign and commonwealth dignitaries in government buildings. Cakelot1 (talk) 17:54, 19 September 2022 (UTC)
- Also if the FCDO didn't mean to release these images under CCBY2.0 then why do you think they added a required attribution line to the description, surely this wouldn't be something that they do if they were showing what they knew were not released under a licence that requires that. Cakelot1 (talk) 17:58, 19 September 2022 (UTC)
- Do you really believe that the united kingdom's Foreign, Commonwealth & Development Office didn't commission these images of Foreign and commonwealth dignitaries in government buildings. Cakelot1 (talk) 17:54, 19 September 2022 (UTC)
File:God Save the King - Funeral of Queen Elizabeth II.webm has been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether it should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry.
If you created this file, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with it, such as a copyright issue. Please see Commons:But it's my own work! for a guide on how to address these issues. |
Cakelot1 (talk) 18:35, 19 September 2022 (UTC)
File:Relações Internacionais - Funeral da Rainha Elizabeth II.webm has been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether it should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry.
If you created this file, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with it, such as a copyright issue. Please see Commons:But it's my own work! for a guide on how to address these issues. |
Cakelot1 (talk) 18:38, 19 September 2022 (UTC)
File:NOT FOR PUBLIC -- Deputy Secretary Sherman Participates in a Global Survivor Fund Event (52377321295).jpg has been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether it should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry.
If you created this file, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with it, such as a copyright issue. Please see Commons:But it's my own work! for a guide on how to address these issues. |
218.250.39.169 05:21, 23 September 2022 (UTC)
File:How Many Lives ? Sign in woods in Glover Park (49973965532).jpg has been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether it should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry.
If you created this file, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with it, such as a copyright issue. Please see Commons:But it's my own work! for a guide on how to address these issues. |
Closeapple (talk) 16:58, 23 September 2022 (UTC)
Please include a summary
When making moves such as this, please include a summary as to why you moved it. Bidgee (talk) 04:42, 25 September 2022 (UTC)
Your TBAN appeal
Hello. I just closed the discussion at ANU which means that you may now create regular DRs again. Please read my summary over there and feel free to get back to me here if you have questions. Happy editing/uploading and good luck with any future DRs. De728631 (talk) 12:43, 31 August 2022 (UTC)
- I'm concerned about this though: User_talk:InterEdit88#File_copyright_status
- re Commons:Deletion requests/File:P1000015 - panoramio Doha Tower.jpg
- Now this is an FoP issue about FoP in Qatar. I note that since your TBAN was lifted you have already submitted a significant number of DRs based on FoP: Commons:Deletion_requests/2022/08/31. However FoP has always been recognised as a complex topic; if an image has to be deleted, then so be it. But we should not be quick to judge other editors for not understanding such rules.
- Your action though was to make a further specific action, "Stop uploading copyright violations, please" and to threaten a block, "users who fail to meet them may be blocked.". Your message as to why you want to block them was itself incorrect, "one or more of your file uploads had missing or false information regarding its source and copyright status."
- I have some sympathy for @InterEdit88: here. They didn't upload this image. The image was uploaded by Commons' own Panoramio upload bot, to File:P1000015 - panoramio.jpg and then further labelled as validly licensed by Panoramio upload bot, with a big green tick mark and everything. All that Inter88 has done here is to extract a cropped image of File:P1000015 - panoramio Doha Tower.jpg from that. I can hardly hold this against Inter88!
- If it's so vital that infringing images like this are hunted down and their wicked uploaders threatened with blocks, then why have you done nothing about File:P1000015 - panoramio.jpg? You've gone after an uploader (who wasn't even the uploader), same as you went after that same uploader two years ago, seeing what you could find to delete: [1] Yet you seem far less interested in cleaning up the content itself.
- This is exactly the sort of behaviour that brought your TBAN. Will it be necessary to reinstate it so soon? Andy Dingley (talk) 17:11, 31 August 2022 (UTC)
- @Andy Dingley: I honestly don't remember what files that I have nominated two years ago, I don't go after anybody's upload and see if they have any problematic uploads. The notice above is a rather mild one. I don't see a big problem here. But this is a good issue to argue whether cropping/modifying other's problematic uploads are also counted as copyvio or not. You may start a discussion at COM:VP. --A1Cafel (talk) 02:32, 1 September 2022 (UTC)
- User:Andy Dingley, this may still be an issue. The again it may not but I have what I consider a dubious nomination on one of my photos with this rationale. I admit that I"m not too familiar with rules on commons so I could be wrong but would you mind taking a look at [[2]]. Any suggestions would be welcome as well. Unbroken Chain (talk) 15:23, 1 October 2022 (UTC)
- @Andy Dingley: I honestly don't remember what files that I have nominated two years ago, I don't go after anybody's upload and see if they have any problematic uploads. The notice above is a rather mild one. I don't see a big problem here. But this is a good issue to argue whether cropping/modifying other's problematic uploads are also counted as copyvio or not. You may start a discussion at COM:VP. --A1Cafel (talk) 02:32, 1 September 2022 (UTC)
⭐ A file you uploaded is on the main page! ⭐
File:Sunrise over Bomb Cyclone - Captured by NOAA GOES East 1-4-2017.webm, that you uploaded, is on the main page today. Thank you for your contributions to this project. |
//EatchaBot (talk) 00:01, 5 October 2022 (UTC)
Do some proofreading before you do deletion requests
You had a photo of a mural in Jerusalem marked for deletion under Yemeni FoP rules, and you misread murals in Iranian Azerbaijan as being in the Republic of Azerbaijan. Take the time to read file descriptions carefully. Thanks. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 08:59, 9 October 2022 (UTC)
Flickr2Commons Videos
Please be careful when uploading via Flickr2Commons, as it is unable to upload videos and instead uploads screenshots like File:-i---i- (29783960893).jpg, File:-i---i- (29783965263).jpg, File:-i---i- (30118773010).jpg, File:-i---i- (30415858275).jpg, File:-i---i- (30415858585).jpg, & File:1 mayo 2018 (40016411710).jpg. Videos are not reviewable by the Flickr Review bot, and these screenshots also confuse it, clogging up the Category:Flickr images needing human review. Thanks, Elisfkc (talk) 17:41, 9 October 2022 (UTC)
File:Enigma+Jazz (49412361147).jpg has been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether it should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry.
If you created this file, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with it, such as a copyright issue. Please see Commons:But it's my own work! for a guide on how to address these issues. |
Sricsi (talk) 15:21, 11 October 2022 (UTC)
File:-i---i- (6128984661).jpg has been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether it should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry.
If you created this file, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with it, such as a copyright issue. Please see Commons:But it's my own work! for a guide on how to address these issues. |
JopkeB (talk) 12:12, 18 October 2022 (UTC)
File:-i---i- (6128984543).jpg has been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether it should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry.
If you created this file, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with it, such as a copyright issue. Please see Commons:But it's my own work! for a guide on how to address these issues. |
JopkeB (talk) 12:13, 18 October 2022 (UTC)
File:Secretary Pompeo Departs from Muscat, Oman (49565219033).jpg has been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether it should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry.
If you created this file, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with it, such as a copyright issue. Please see Commons:But it's my own work! for a guide on how to address these issues. |
JWilz12345 (Talk|Contrib's.) 17:58, 21 October 2022 (UTC)
Notification about possible deletion
Some contents have been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether they should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at their entry.
If you created these pages, please note that the fact that they have been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with them, such as a copyright issue. Please see Commons:But it's my own work! for a guide on how to address these issues. |
Affected:
And also:
- File:Grand Mosque Muscat (46086234111).jpg
- File:Grand Mosque Muscat ... central chandelier (44270097340).jpg
- File:Muscat (45375664065).jpg
- File:Sultan Qaboos Grand Mosque (45551091514).jpg
- File:Sultan Qaboos Grand Mosque (46224359912).jpg
Yours sincerely, JWilz12345 (Talk|Contrib's.) 12:37, 22 October 2022 (UTC)
File:Arc de Triomphe, Wrapped, Paris (51549547634).jpg has been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether it should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry.
If you created this file, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with it, such as a copyright issue. Please see Commons:But it's my own work! for a guide on how to address these issues. |
Ralf Roletschek 11:27, 24 October 2022 (UTC)
Child abuse material
You recently nominated files for deletion as suspected child abuse material. Suspected child abuse material should not be taken to DR, but rather reported directly to the Wikimedia legal team. I have reported the files you nominated to the legal team. Brianjd (talk) 13:08, 26 October 2022 (UTC)
CC-by-3.0-it
Hi, can you explain better what's the problem with the licensed pictures CC-by-3.0-it? What do you mean with the phrases "IMO this falls under the otherwise circumstances"? And what does it mean that images released under that license cannot be published here? What should the template published in 2011 be used for, for the aesthetics of the site? Zio27 14:51, 28 October 2022 (UTC)
- @Zio27 I assume you are referring to Commons:Deletion requests/Files in Category:Giorgia Meloni in 2022. The argument there is the same as in Commons:Deletion requests/File:Conte Toti Bucci 2020.jpg, which resulted in deletion. Material on that site is usually licensed under a CC BY license, which is fine for Commons. But there is an exception: the CC BY license notice doesn’t apply where otherwise stated. The commentators think that the nominated files fall within this exception.
- That means that the nominated files are not CC BY, but rather CC BY-NC-SA, which is not acceptable on Commons. Brianjd (talk) 15:08, 28 October 2022 (UTC)
Child pornography (again)
You are still nominating files for deletion as suspected child pornography. Please stop doing this. Commons:Administrators' noticeboard says:
- Do not report child pornography or other potentially illegal content here; e-mail legal-reportswikimedia.org instead.
It even has a page notice that says:
- Do not report depictions of child sexual abuse or other potentially illegal content here; e-mail legal-reportswikimedia.org instead.
I think if it is wrong to report at the AN, then it is also wrong to report at DR. Brianjd (talk) 08:31, 29 October 2022 (UTC)
Notification about possible deletion
Some contents have been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether they should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at their entry.
If you created these pages, please note that the fact that they have been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with them, such as a copyright issue. Please see Commons:But it's my own work! for a guide on how to address these issues. |
Affected:
Yours sincerely, Elisfkc (talk) 01:29, 31 October 2022 (UTC)
File:Russia + Fascism = Ruscism (51911310536).jpg has been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether it should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry.
If you created this file, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with it, such as a copyright issue. Please see Commons:But it's my own work! for a guide on how to address these issues. |
Kursant504 (talk) 21:13, 3 November 2022 (UTC)
Foto from Dubai
Hi, I wanted to understand if yours is a mission or a crusade? If everyone thought like you there would be no commons image of Arab countries. But are you sure you are doing the right thing? Greetings Mario1952 (talk) 14:34, 7 November 2022 (UTC)
- Hi Mario1952. Your recent uploads violated COM:FOP UAE. Photographing a creative works, including buildings, is a kind of derivative work and required a permission from the copyright holder. Otherwise, it is a copyright violation. Freedom of panorama (FOP) is the "exemption" of the permission from the copyright holder. Unfortunately, UAE does not have Commons-acceptable FoP. For those images that can stay on Commons, they are either old enough to be in PD, or fulfill the de minimis concept, which means the building is not the subject of the photo (incidentally included). --A1Cafel (talk) 16:39, 7 November 2022 (UTC)
Hi
Hi A1Cafel! Thank you so much for adding the public domain tag to files I uploaded. I was adding the tag and a specific category manually, it would probably take longer. Thanks again! Edu! (talk) 03:03, 9 November 2022 (UTC)
File:Solar Eclipse (51691040124).jpg has been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether it should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry.
If you created this file, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with it, such as a copyright issue. Please see Commons:But it's my own work! for a guide on how to address these issues. |
Brianjd (talk) 12:26, 9 November 2022 (UTC)
File:Donald Trump (24267946943).jpg has been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether it should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry.
If you created this file, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with it, such as a copyright issue. Please see Commons:But it's my own work! for a guide on how to address these issues. |
58.153.119.90 02:25, 13 November 2022 (UTC)
RivièreBeemer.jpg
Affected:
Bonjour, le fichier RivièreBeemer.jpg est libre de droit comme en fait foi la résolution du conseil d'administration Interaction Qui ltée que vous trouverez ci-dessous. Cordialement --TaconSite (talk) 15:16, 14 November 2022 (UTC)
Il s'agit d'un duo d'artistes québécois.Les droits concernant les photographies du duo d'artistes Interaction Qui appartiennent à Interaction Qui ltée. Ces photos sont libres de droit comme en fait foi cette résolution de l'organisme.
RÉSOLUTION EXTRAIT DU PROCÈS-VERBAL PROPOSITION No : 2015-11-15
Du Conseil d’administration Interaction Qui Ltée tenue à Alma le 15 septembre 2015 INTERACTION QUI LTÉE 3135 rue des Mésanges Alma (Qc) G8B 5V3 La présente assemblée fut convoquée suivant les règlements de la corporation et il y a quorum. Dépôt des documents du duo d’artistes Interaction Qui aux fonds d’archives de la Société d’histoire du Lac-Saint-Jean
CONSIDÉRANT que le duo d’artistes Interaction Qui (Alain Laroche et Jocelyn Maltais) va dissoudre leur association le 30 septembre 2015;
CONSIDÉRANT que les documents (textes, photographies et vidéographies) appartiennent de droit à l’organisme Interaction Qui ltée; CONSIDÉRANT que les documents (textes, photographies et vidéographies) sont actuellement entreposés dans les locaux de Interaction Qui ltée ;
CONSIDÉRANT que Interaction Qui ltée ne possède pas les services d’accessibilité à ces documents ; CONSIDÉRANT qu’il est important de permettre aux chercheurs et personnes intéressés par la carrière artistique du duo d’artistes Interaction Qui de consulter et d’utiliser les documents (textes, photographies et vidéographies) à des fins d’information publique; CONSIDÉRANT qu’il est important de conserver de façon pérenne les documents (textes, photographies et vidéographies) du duo d’artistes Interaction Qui;
EN CONSÉQUENCE, Il est proposé par M. Jocelyn Maltais, secondé par, Mme Claire Maltais, et résolu à l’unanimité de déposer les documents concernant le duo d’artistes Interaction Qui (textes, photographies et vidéographies) aux fonds d’archives de la Société d’histoire du Lac- Saint-Jean. Ces documents pourront être consultés et utilisés pour fin de travaux de recherches et d’information sur le duo d’artistes Interaction Qui. Cependant les auteurs devront citer les sources. Tous les documents sont libres de droit.
Vraie copie certifiée Raymond-Marie Lavoie secrétaire-trésorier Copie déposée aux archives de la Société d'Histoire du Lac-Saint-Jean, Alma, Québec, Canada
Merci de prendre en considération cet avis.--TaconSite (talk) 15:16, 14 November 2022 (UTC)
You categorised this as {{Nsdr}}, which I copied to the original DR Commons:Deletion requests/Files uploaded by Inkedman. I then noticed that the original DR was all about copyright, not nudity and sexuality. Can you explain this categorisation? Brianjd (talk) 02:24, 18 November 2022 (UTC)
Notification about possible deletion
Some contents have been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether they should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at their entry.
If you created these pages, please note that the fact that they have been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with them, such as a copyright issue. Please see Commons:But it's my own work! for a guide on how to address these issues. |
Affected:
And also:
- File:Doha skylines and Museum arches.jpg
- File:Museum of Islamic Art (5395477989).jpg
- File:Museum of Islamic Art - Doha, Qatar (16318575778).jpg
- File:Museum of Islamic Art, Doha (5243493261).jpg
- File:Museum of Islamic Art, Doha (5243493961).jpg
- File:Museum of Islamic Art, Doha (5243495131).jpg
- File:Museum of Islamic Art, Doha (5243499947).jpg
- File:Museum of Islamic Art, Doha (5244080168).jpg
- File:Museum of Islamic Art, Doha (5244085752).jpg
- File:Museum of Islamic Art, Doha (5244089120).jpg
- File:Museum of Islamic Art, Doha (5244093486).jpg
- File:Museum of Islamic Art, Doha (5244100596).jpg
- File:QATAR at Museum of Islamic Art Doha.jpg
Yours sincerely, JWilz12345 (Talk|Contrib's.) 11:32, 20 November 2022 (UTC)