User talk:Abzeronow

Welcome to Wikimedia Commons, Abzeronow!

First steps tutorial Our first steps tour and our frequently asked questions will help you a lot after registration. They explain how to customize the interface (for example the language), how to upload files and our basic licensing policy (Wikimedia Commons only accepts free content). You don't need technical skills in order to contribute here. Be bold when contributing and assume good faith when interacting with others. This is a wiki. Getting help More information is available at the community portal. You may ask questions at the help desk, village pump or on IRC channel #wikimedia-commons (webchat). You can also contact an administrator on their talk page. If you have a specific copyright question, ask at the copyright village pump.

Goodies, tips, and tricks Put Babel boxes on your user page so others know what languages you can speak and indicate your graphic abilities. You can find the files you have uploaded in your Uploads. Please sign your name on Talk pages by typing ~~~~. To link to an image page without embedding the image, type: [[:File:Foo.jpg]], which produces: File:Foo.jpg. You may enable gadgets (custom features) for your account. There are several tools to upload files. Have you edited Wikipedia before? This guide might be useful. Made a mistake? Do you want to have a file renamed or moved? Use the move link and wait for an authorized user to rename it. Do you want to have your recently uploaded picture removed? Tag it as {{speedy|reason here}}. For more information read the deletion guidelines.

-- Wikimedia Commons Welcome (talk) 21:30, 1 September 2018 (UTC)

Note: Archive for 2018-1st half of 2019 at User:Abzeronow/Archive1 Archive for 2019 to 1st half of 2023 is at User:Abzeronow/Archive2 Archive for 2nd half of 2023 will be at User:Abzeronow/Archive3 Archive for 2024 will be at User:Abzeronow/Archive4

A barnstar for you!

	The Original Barnstar
	Hi, I award you the Public Domain Barnstar for your research on public domain works to be undeleted. I am going through your list. Happy New Year! Yann (talk) 06:35, 2 January 2019 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Teamwork Barnstar
	Faced with the easy choice of deleting an image or working to correct an error, this user decided that the project could be improved. This generous and honorable action represents the essence of the project. If the project had more souls like Abzeronow's, the quality of the project would increase exponentially. Luizpuodzius (talk) 02:30, 19 May 2019 (UTC)

Congratulations, Dear Administrator!

---

An offering for our new administrator from your comrades...

Abzeronow, congratulations! You now have administrator rights on Commons. Please take a moment to read the Commons:Administrators page and watchlist related pages (in particular Commons:Administrators' noticeboard and its subpages), before launching yourself into page deletions, page protections, account blockings or modifications of protected pages. The majority of the actions of administrators can be reversed by the other admins, except for history merges which must thus be treated with particular care. Have a look at the list of Gadgets (on the bottom there are the ones specifically for admins – however, for example the UserMessages are very helpful too).

Please feel free to join us on IRC: #wikimedia-commons ^webchat on irc.libera.chat. There is also a channel for Commons admins, which may be useful for more sensitive topics, or coordination among administrators: #wikimedia-commons-admin ^webchat.

You may find Commons:Guide to adminship to be useful reading. You can find the admin backlog overview at COM:AB.

Please also check or add your entry to the List of administrators and the related lists by language and date it references.

--Krd 16:30, 3 July 2023 (UTC)

Congratulations! Well deserved Bedivere (talk) 16:47, 3 July 2023 (UTC)

Thanks, Bedievere. Abzeronow (talk) 16:55, 3 July 2023 (UTC)

congrats.... "Let justice be done though the heavens fall". OMG!! is that a better call zaul referance?!! ----modern_primat ඞඞඞ ^TALK 21:06, 3 July 2023 (UTC)

@Abzeronow, congratulations, I hope your addition to the team makes a difference. You are one of the very few "knowledgeable" people here. Heartily congratulations. ─ The Aafī (^talk) 05:34, 4 July 2023 (UTC)

Thanks, although I think there are definitely more knowledgeable people than myself on Commons, and I try to keep learning from people here. I hope you'll be able to join the team soon, Aafi. Abzeronow (talk) 15:20, 4 July 2023 (UTC)

from me too :-) --Rosenzweig τ 05:57, 4 July 2023 (UTC)

Danke. Abzeronow (talk) 15:20, 4 July 2023 (UTC)

Congratulations!!! — Red-tailed hawk _(nest) 18:45, 5 July 2023 (UTC)

Thanks, Red-tailed hawk. Abzeronow (talk) 20:36, 5 July 2023 (UTC)

Entirely as expected -- very few get 100% votes! You may find User:Jameslwoodward/Commons notes for administrators useful -- it overlaps the official page that Krd suggested above. .     Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 14:55, 4 July 2023 (UTC)

Thanks for the link, Jim. Definitely some useful information there. Abzeronow (talk) 15:20, 4 July 2023 (UTC)

Reminder to vote now to select members of the first U4C

You can find this message translated into additional languages on Meta-wiki. Please help translate to your language

Dear Wikimedian,

You are receiving this message because you previously participated in the UCoC process.

This is a reminder that the voting period for the Universal Code of Conduct Coordinating Committee (U4C) ends on May 9, 2024. Read the information on the voting page on Meta-wiki to learn more about voting and voter eligibility.

The Universal Code of Conduct Coordinating Committee (U4C) is a global group dedicated to providing an equitable and consistent implementation of the UCoC. Community members were invited to submit their applications for the U4C. For more information and the responsibilities of the U4C, please review the U4C Charter.

Please share this message with members of your community so they can participate as well.

On behalf of the UCoC project team,

RamzyM (WMF) 23:16, 2 May 2024 (UTC)

Autopatrol rights

Hey, so it's been 3 months since the trial period began and it's about to end like tomorrow, as far as I know, there's been no significant issues, so Id like to know if this role could be made permanent? NorthTension (talk) 22:48, 3 May 2024 (UTC)

@NorthTension:  Done Abzeronow (talk) 22:51, 3 May 2024 (UTC)

Thank you very much NorthTension (talk) 22:53, 3 May 2024 (UTC)

Question about deletion

Hallo, I would like to ask you the reason for the deletion of File:Movie project poster brazil (1985) by nedz d1di9fb.jpg. I am very confused as to which exact licenses are not permitted. Is it possible that you sum it up for me using their names? Thank you and have a great day. Michail Angelos Georgoulas (talk) 18:56, 10 May 2024 (UTC)

We don't accept noncommercial restrictions (NC) or restrictions on derivative works (ND). Abzeronow (talk) 19:00, 10 May 2024 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Admin's Barnstar
	For your work in clearing year-long backlog on User talk:CommonsDelinker/commands/Category moves! 廣九直通車 (talk) 10:20, 13 May 2024 (UTC)

MP3 uploads

Hello. As you can know from Commons:Requests_for_rights/Denied/Autopatrolled/2024#RuzDD, I really want to upload MP3's and I really have good reasons for that but I can't do that as I'm not autopatrolled. As you know, non-autopatrolled users can request overwriting at Commons:Overwriting_existing_files/Requests, is the equivalent of this for MP3 uploading exists? If not, can this be created? I promise I will not upload any copyvio, thank you! RuzDD (talk) 14:33, 13 May 2024 (UTC)

Your edit count is a little better now than it was three months ago so I can see progress as far as that right goes. As mentioned to you previously at the help desk, you can upload in other audio formats without needing the right for it. I can consider temporarily granting you the right so you could upload whichever MP3 files you feel the project needs (provided they are freely licensed or public domain as being pre-1924). Abzeronow (talk) 16:06, 13 May 2024 (UTC)

It's not urgent but I think (also for other newcomers) it'll be very good if a specific MP3 uploading allowing system can be implemented. I really love MP3: It can store mono and stereo sounds in one stream, disrupting it does not prevent it from playing (you can open a MP3 file with notepad and edit it and it should still play), and you can combine two MP3's with just notepad, and MP3 is very compatible, and it supports 8kbps (Vorbis does not). Also, I really like MP3's sound color if it's encoded with a good encoder. Thank you. RuzDD (talk) 16:13, 13 May 2024 (UTC)

Commons:Undeletion requests/Archive/2024-05

In re Commons:Undeletion requests/Archive/2024-05#File:Cyber_tux.jpg -- this is not "personal art", it's an illustration that was being used in an article on the English Wikipedia. Does Commons now have a policy that Wikimedia projects aren't allowed to host their images here anymore? JPxG (talk) 10:57, 26 May 2024 (UTC)

@JPxG: https://commons-delinquent.toolforge.org/?image=Cyber+tux.jpg&action=any&result=any shows no results for usage. It was not in use when deleted. Apologies for a late response. Abzeronow (talk) 19:29, 10 June 2024 (UTC)

The file 1936 Summer Olympics (Berlin) boycotting countries (red).png

There was no way the Soviet Union could boycott the 1936 Olympic Games, because the Soviet Union was accepted into the Olympic movement only in 1951: The Olympic Committee of the USSR was formed on April 21, 1951, and the IOC recognised the new body in its 45th session (May 7, 1951). --Surely-NFI (talk) 18:04, 29 May 2024 (UTC)

I'm not arguing what the facts are, just trying to head off any contention by pointing out that the text on the English Wikipedia article en:List of Olympic Games boycotts states that the Soviet Union did boycott. Abzeronow (talk) 18:09, 29 May 2024 (UTC)

Closure of Commons:Deletion requests/File:Dead Man Walking Jarrell 1997.jpg

I'll admit that I'm far more familiar with English Wikipedia procedures than Wikimedia Commons ones, but was a "withdrawn" closure appropriate on Commons:Deletion requests/File:Dead Man Walking Jarrell 1997.jpg if the nominator was not the only one to support deletion? In that case, despite the update by 2601:5C5:4201:68B0:219E:E7AC:5087:1A8 who found the image in an ArcGIS StoryMap, my delete vote still would've stood because {{PD-NWS}} specifically only applies to files stored on the web servers of the U.S. National Weather Service, whereas the StoryMap is on a domain and servers run by the private company Esri. Ahecht (TALK
PAGE) 15:00, 1 June 2024 (UTC)

Your deletion vote was before it was found on the ArcGIS StoryMap. The byline indicates this was written by NWS Austin/San Antonio, TX and NWS Fort Worth/Dallas, TX and the end credits names those who prepared the StoryMap. Your delete vote said "Delete unless an actual source other than "here's a PDF that doesn't have the image" can be found". I had assumed consensus was to close as keep. If you want to renominate, I won't object, but for all intents and purposes, the StoryMap is a NWS publication. Abzeronow (talk) 21:24, 1 June 2024 (UTC)

Commons:Deletion requests/File:202010 Plateosaurus engelhardti.svg

Hello. I am reaching out to ask that you reconsider your decision to keep File:202010 Plateosaurus engelhardti.svg. Creating a vector graphic equivalent to the existing PNG file is an extremely complex and time-consuming task. The level of detail required for the SVG to match or surpass the quality of the PNG is significant, and it is unlikely that anyone will invest the necessary effort to achieve this in the future. Moreoever, this file is closer to "photograph quality" than, say, a diagram, making PNG the preferred format anyways (see Commons:File types). While COM:DUPE does not technically apply, the SVG file simply is a duplicate of the PNG, and keeping both files is simply redundant. Thank you for your consideration. – Pbrks ^(t • c) 14:12, 4 June 2024 (UTC)

The file is in use by Basque Wikipedia (specifically their children's encyclopedia section). I cannot redirect a svg file to a png so I cannot treat it like a duplicate, so my only option was to keep, as I cannot tell Basque Wikipedia what the best file is. Thanks for letting me know that fixing the problem via overwrite is not feasible. Abzeronow (talk) 17:07, 4 June 2024 (UTC)

Permission to overwrite file

Hello Abzeronow,

would it be possible to give me permission to overwrite the file Datei:Logo 1fc passau.svg (https://de.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Datei:1._FC_Passau_logo.svg)? The logo of the club is an old one and has already been relaunched a few years ago. You can also compare it to the logo on their website https://fcpassau.de

Thanks in advance! Alexmo00 (talk) 12:59, 10 June 2024 (UTC)

@Alexmo00:  Done You can now overwrite this file. Abzeronow (talk) 16:48, 10 June 2024 (UTC)

Thank you very much! I noticed that there is also a second file of the logo (https://de.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Datei:1._FC_Passau_logo.svg). It would be great if you gave me permission for that too so that the old version will not be used by people in the future anymore.

By the way, there were made some mistakes while removing the other file. If you want, you can erase the other versions between the new and the old file. Thanks :) Alexmo00 (talk) 11:08, 16 June 2024 (UTC)

I don't see a reason to delete any revisions on the file. Abzeronow (talk) 16:49, 16 June 2024 (UTC)

Okay, no problem. But could you also give me permission to overwrite the second file of the logo (https://de.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Datei:1._FC_Passau_logo.svg)? Thank you! Alexmo00 (talk) 14:07, 28 June 2024 (UTC)

As above, you can overwrite File:1. FC Passau logo.svg. Abzeronow (talk) 16:42, 28 June 2024 (UTC)

File:Max Fishman.jpg

Please restore the photograph of Max Fishman. File:Max Fishman.jpg It was made by amateurs around 1953-54 for the stand of our conservatory teachers. Since then it has not been published anywhere. All rights to the photograph were given for free use. Comments that I am 90 years old are too exaggerated - I am 86 years old. When the photo was taken I was learning to take photographs. There were many assistants. Max Fishman died in 1985. Why remove a photograph of a person that no one has claimed for about 80 years. Sincerely Levikoan Levikoan (talk) 17:06, 23 June 2024 (UTC)

I said approximately, and I was rounding up from 88. I did not delete it, and yes, 86 would be a plausible age. There are a few options here: 1.) You can contact COM:VRT and provide them the evidence needed to confirm that what you've been saying. 2.) You can make an undeletion request at COM:UDR but they might tell you to contact VRT. I also cannot confirm on-wiki whether the statements you've been making are true (which right now, they definitely could be). To answer the question of "why remove an unclaimed 1950s photo", we care about copyright even if no one else does. COM:CARES. Abzeronow (talk) 17:43, 23 June 2024 (UTC)

Thank you for your advice. Help me please. I clicked on COM:UDR and wrote and received no response. What is VRT I have no idea and what evidence can I give? I am a person of a different generation and I don’t understand much. Proof: A photograph where he, Max Fishman, is approximately 38 years old. Born in 1915. He went through the war, the Gulag, persecution. Sincerely. Levikoan (talk) 18:15, 23 June 2024 (UTC)

This link (which I shortened above) explains what VRT is. https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Volunteer_Response_Team Abzeronow (talk) 18:20, 23 June 2024 (UTC)

Thanks for the link. But I will tell you honestly that all these obstacles take away health. Levikoan (talk) 18:39, 23 June 2024 (UTC)

I sympathize, it's a lovely photograph, hopefully issues can be resolved quickly. Abzeronow (talk) 18:50, 23 June 2024 (UTC)

Thank you. I hope that the photograph of Max Fishman will be returned. There is little health left, just stress. Levikoan (talk) 19:06, 23 June 2024 (UTC)

Block email

Thanks for bringing this to my attention -- the block is gone. .     Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 18:41, 27 June 2024 (UTC)

thanks for the right

Hi,

thanks you giving me the autopatrol right. PDF uploads now work the way I need.

Yours Dirk Hünniger (talk) 15:50, 30 June 2024 (UTC)

Confusing Image Source

I was recently looking at the page for File:Velocity and sea surface temperature in the oceans.png while overwriting it with a better-encoded version, and I noticed something odd. There is a template on the page that says that you personally verified that the file was posted to https://www.nemo-ocean.eu/gallery/ very recently. To put this simply, you now have me wondering if I'm going nuts. When I visit that page, I see no posted images of any kind. The only things that page seems to display are four embedded YouTube videos, and nothing more. I see no images on that page that match the appearance and dimensions of File:Velocity and sea surface temperature in the oceans.png. Could you help me understand what's up? Is that image actually on that page at all? Or am I missing a button or link that I have to click to bring it into view? Obscure2020 (talk) 20:13, 30 June 2024 (UTC)

The colors roughly match those found in the first video around 1:38, and copyright notice says "Copyright: work by Oriol Tintó, Barcelona Supercomputing Center is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License. 2020". Abzeronow (talk) 20:22, 30 June 2024 (UTC)

Thank you for informing me of that. I now have even more grounds to object to your verification template.

1. If an image was originally a frame in a YouTube video, then the source of the image should be stated to be the YouTube video, not some random webpage that happened to embed that YouTube video.
2. File:Velocity and sea surface temperature in the oceans.png was clearly NOT a frame in that YouTube video, for the following three reasons:
   1. The video is clearly of horizontal widescreen dimensions, while the photo is vertical.
   2. The video clearly displays two vertical red lines that overlay the globe at the 1:38 mark, and those red lines are not present in File:Velocity and sea surface temperature in the oceans.png.
   3. The video clearly displays text and logos in the corners of the frame at the 1:38 mark, which do not appear in File:Velocity and sea surface temperature in the oceans.png.

From these findings, we can positively state that the following two things are true:

1. https://www.nemo-ocean.eu/gallery/ is clearly not the original source of File:Velocity and sea surface temperature in the oceans.png.
2. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xmE9t0WYhsA is also clearly not the original source of File:Velocity and sea surface temperature in the oceans.png.

I think you should remove your LicenseReview template until such time that we find a webpage or video online that contains a copy of this image that appears exactly the same as the version that was uploaded to Wikimedia Commons. Obscure2020 (talk) 20:37, 30 June 2024 (UTC)

I've removed it, although it's consistent with being authored by Oriol Tintó in my opinion even if it does not match what is shown in that video. Abzeronow (talk) 21:08, 30 June 2024 (UTC)

Uploader also states he received that image from Tintó in Commons:Deletion requests/File:MSM UVglobe-1024x1024.png Abzeronow (talk) 21:15, 30 June 2024 (UTC)

Alright, thanks for that. So we do have some confirmation of the author of the original image. Until we find another copy of the image online (or perhaps some sort of official licensing statement from Tintó himself), it would be inaccurate to say that we know for certain the licensing of this image. Obscure2020 (talk) 21:21, 30 June 2024 (UTC)

Request

Hi Abzeronow. I uploaded this file false name. Can you delete this file? Thank you. :) -- kızıl message 14:46, 6 July 2024 (UTC)

 Done Abzeronow (talk) 16:17, 6 July 2024 (UTC)

Thank you very much. -- kızıl message 19:44, 6 July 2024 (UTC)

A kitten for you!

Thank you for the quick approval of the design improvements.

Dungeeva (talk) 17:56, 8 July 2024 (UTC)

About a Public domain photo in a web with no CC-BY licence

Hello, In order not to make more mistakes, I ask you. I would like to upload to WikiCommons this photo, which is in public domain. But the web in which the photo is used has no CC-BY. By another web I discover the archive of the image, but there is no information online about it. Can I upload it? Thank you! Mentxuwiki (talk) 07:15, 10 July 2024 (UTC)

Looks like an 1890s photograph judging by the age of the sitter and the clothing. I'd use {{PD-old-assumed-expired}} for it. Abzeronow (talk) 17:29, 10 July 2024 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Admin's Barnstar
	For your tireless work fielding all the requests at COM:OWR. ReneeWrites (talk) 14:36, 11 July 2024 (UTC)

Books & Bytes – Issue 63

The Wikipedia Library: Books & Bytes
Issue 63, May – June 2024

• One new partner
• 1Lib1Ref
• Spotlight: References check

Read the full newsletter

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery on behalf of The Wikipedia Library team --12:16, 18 July 2024 (UTC)

Files uploaded by Smthngnw and Sangjinhwa

Hi, Azberonow. I'm writing here on order to ask for the undeletion of the following images:

This is my first post since the one-month block on Wikimedia Commons was lifted. The situation is complicated.

Before I tell you, I have to confess what I've hidden so far. In fact, a few months ago, I accidentally uploaded a Eurovision heart logo on Wikimedia Commons with an offensive Nazi symbol that is legally banned in some countries. Therefore, a Wikimedia Commons user submitted the file to the deletion request saying, "Germany used only the black, red, and gold tricolor in Eurovision. The rest of the file is a fictional logo". As a result, files created by other users have also been deleted because of community consensus. In other words, due to my carelessness in uploading files containing offensive symbols for non-educational purposes, even files created by other users that did not contain offensive symbols were deleted. However, the Flag heart symbols of Eurovision gallery has the sentence "Some flags may be proposal" and the Commons:Deletion requests/Eurovision heart-flags article has one user's opinion that "some files may serve educational purposes, even if they do not need to be used within a Wikimedia projects" (per COM:INUSE). A comprehensive look at the aforementioned paragraphs can be interpreted as meaning that even if the symbols are fictional, they do not contain offensive symbols to a particular group or the public and prove useful in an educational scope, there is no need to delete them from the Wikimedia Commons. In addition, the files referred to as undeletion requests were based on flags actually used in former countries and regions and did not include offensive Nazi symbols or similar symbols legally prohibited in some countries.

There is also an error as to why those files were deleted. Other users did not take issue when the Eurovision Heart logo, which was created by applying old flags that had never actually been used even though they had participated in Eurovision like Germany, or the Eurovision Heart logo, which was created by applying old flags from countries and regions that had never actually participated in Eurovision in the past only if both did not contain symbols that were offensive to certain groups or publics, was uploaded to Wikimedia Commons. There's even an article in the Russian Wikipedia (See the Russian Wikipedia entry for Евровидение-1971, Евровидение-1972, Евровидение-1974, Евровидение-1975) that uses the Eurovision heart logo created by applying the old flags of countries and regions that have never really participated in Eurovision, and the Eurovision heart logo created by applying the old flags that have never been used even though they have actually participated in Eurovision. Additionally, the article Commons:Deletion requests/Eurovision heart-flags states that the Eurovision heart version of the flag can be used not only for Eurovision-related purposes, but also to express love for a specific country. Therefore, the claim that it should be deleted because it is not useful for educational purposes is incorrect.

After being blocked from Wikimedia Commons for a month, I have come to reflect on my inexperienced behavior of uploading deleted files again without consultation, and using symbols that are offensive to certain groups or publics for non-educational purposes. I have found that reuploading such deleted files without consultation, or using symbols that are offensive to certain groups or the publics for purposes other than education, could be a bigger reason for punishment later on. Also, I didn't create any sock puppet accounts that were strictly banned from Wikimedia while they were blocked from Wikimedia Commons.

I apologize for the inconvenience caused to users of Wikimedia Commons by my misbehavior. The request for undeletion requires a recusal request to avoid a conflict of interest with the user who proposed deletion or the administrator who decided to delete it, but it is clear that we have no intention of accusing the user. Therefore, I would like to ask you to undelete only the Eurovision Heart logo, which has been found not include offensive Nazi symbols, which are legally prohibited in some countries. Sangjinhwa (talk) 14:17, 18 July 2024 (UTC)

My personal view is that we should not have Eurovision heart flags for countries that no longer existed in 1956, so no Eurovision Prussia flags. Eurovision Saar Protectorate would barely make the cut (reunited with West Germany in 1957). I'd obviously consider East Germany. I'd have to get the OK of @Rosenzweig: and @Pi.1415926535: for this. But honestly, it's not a loss to no longer have these files since it's essentially personal fanfiction and not actually educational. Abzeronow (talk) 15:25, 18 July 2024 (UTC)

I will raise a counterargument. The Soviet Union, which never participated in Eurovision, existed from 1922, before the creation of Eurovision, until its dissolution in 1991. So should the Soviet flag version of the Eurovision heart logo file also be deleted? I don't think this is fair. -- Sangjinhwa (talk) 15:44, 18 July 2024 (UTC)

OK, if the Soviet Eurovision flag is in use, then by policy, it's automatically in scope. If it's unused, it should be deleted. If you have a potential Wikipedia use for Saar Eurovision or East German Eurovision flags, then please tell me. Abzeronow (talk) 15:51, 18 July 2024 (UTC)

I need to explain this part. I looked at the link to the Russian Wikipedia article mentioned above and there was a paragraph that mentioned East German stations where Eurovision was broadcast. The remaining files were deleted due to my carelessness as an active and constructive participant in Wikimedia Commons. Additionally, the COM:INUSE paragraph states, "custom the uploading of small numbers of images (e.g. of yourself) for use on a personal Commons user page is allowed if you are an active, constructive participant on Commons." -- Sangjinhwa (talk) 16:16, 18 July 2024 (UTC)

Thanks for the explanation, I'm inclined to restore the East German ones now. Commons is a collaborative project so I'll wait to see if Rosenzweig and Pi respond. There's no rush on restoring them, so I'll wait a few days before making a decision. Abzeronow (talk) 16:54, 18 July 2024 (UTC)

First of all, I acknowledged that the remaining files were deleted due to my carelessness in uploading files containing offensive Nazi symbols, and the file that caused the cause, that is, the file containing offensive Nazi symbols, was excluded from the request for undeletion. However, there is a sentence in the Flag heart symbols of Eurovision gallery article that says, "Eurovision-style heart-flags, Some flags may be proposal", and I think the issue will be how to interpret this. -- Sangjinhwa (talk) 17:32, 18 July 2024 (UTC)

No, the reason why they were deleted was that the nominator and closing admin felt all were out of scope. Category descriptions don't overule scope. You are not the reason why they were deleted. Abzeronow (talk) 17:37, 18 July 2024 (UTC)

My situation is complicated. To be precise, I acknowledged the negligence of uploading files containing aggressive Nazi symbols that are beyond the educational spectrum, and revealed that I had excluded files containing Nazi symbols from the request for undeletion. Meanwhile, in the case of East Germany, the Russian Wikipedia article stated that there was a paragraph referring to the stations on which Eurovision was broadcast (including East Germany), where the Eurovision heart logo was attached. -- Sangjinhwa (talk) 17:51, 18 July 2024 (UTC)

I still don't feel that any of those files are in project scope and think files of that kind should be restricted to actually participating countries. I'm also not aware of any GDR broadcast stations actually transmitting the song contest. Large parts of East Germany were able to receive West German radio and TV stations though (including their ESC coverage of course), which was not allowed, but done anyway. The East German broadcasters (I'm not even sure if there was more than one) were under control of the ruling Communist regime, and they were opposed to the ESC. The Eastern European countries had their own song contest, the Intervision song contest. --Rosenzweig τ 17:54, 18 July 2024 (UTC)

I agree with you that Eurovision wasn't offically supported by East Germany, and the ruling regime would frown on its people listening, but as say, de facto parts of East Germany would be part of its audience. I also agree with you that in general, files of this kind should be restricted to those who actually participated as files of countries that never participated is fodder for alternate history sites which have tended to dump such files here, and we don't want to encourage such behavior. Abzeronow (talk) 20:53, 18 July 2024 (UTC)

The Flag heart symbols of Eurovision gallery is "a collection of files that have modified the flags of specific countries and regions to match the heart logo used in Eurovision", and it does not matter whether the countries actually participated in Eurovision. Of course, this only applies if it does not contain symbols that are offensive to certain groups or the public and serves an educational purpose. -- Sangjinhwa (talk) 18:25, 18 July 2024 (UTC)

Gallery descriptions don't overrule scope. And you're incorrect about "symbols that are offensive to certain groups", if said symbols are in scope, they would be kept. Commons is not censored. I recently restored files that were clearly derived from Nazi flags but the files were in use when they were deleted and I said that as someone with a Jewish ancestor and Polish ancestry that I found the files repugnant. Abzeronow (talk) 18:33, 18 July 2024 (UTC)

I have been an active and constructive participant in the Commons. Wikimedia Commons also states that for files that are only used by Wikimedia Commons, "An otherwise non-educational file does not acquire educational purpose solely because it is in use on a gallery page or in a category on Commons, nor solely because it is in use on a user page, but by custom the uploading of small numbers of images (e.g. of yourself) for use on a personal Commons user page is allowed if you are an active, constructive participant on Commons." -- Sangjinhwa (talk) 19:31, 18 July 2024 (UTC)

Yes, I think you'd qualify as a substantial contributor so I think it's possible to restore them as allowable personal artwork. We can always disclaim that these are fictitious and that they are allowed under the small number of personal files exemption for contributors. Because of the fictitious nature of these files, I am naturally cautious about the prospect of restoration because we tend to get a lot of fictitious flags that we would need to delete. Abzeronow (talk) 20:53, 18 July 2024 (UTC)

Commons:Deletion requests/Template:Parliament.bg

Dear Abzeronow,

I am contacting you regarding the actions taken to delete the Parliament.bg template (that is already a fact) and all the files using it (in the hundreds). As I cannot state my reasoning on the Deletion request page, I kindly ask for your time and response to the following considerations:

While the National Assembly's terms of use statement is not citing a CC BY license per se, their content and intent closely align with the principles of CC BY. The terms effectively grant the same permissions as CC BY, with the sole requirement being attribution, making them functionally equivalent to a CC BY license in practice. The terms do not mention any restrictions on commercial use or creation of derivative works. In CC licenses, anything not explicitly forbidden is allowed and restrictions are explicitly stated (e.g., NC, ND). The National Assembly's terms (bespoke public use license) follow this logic by stating broad permission with only an attribution requirement. The absence of explicit permission for specific (commercial, adapt) uses in the terms does not equate to prohibition but implies that these uses are permitted, especially given the opening statement allowing free use.

The argument that "for each uploaded file it should be shown it complies with the licensing on Commons to keep the file" is not directly relevant to determining whether the terms are equivalent to CC BY. This is more of a procedural requirement for content management rather than a fundamental aspect of the license terms.

Please let me know if there are some specific actions from our side we could take to prevent the deletions of all the files (images) from Parliament.bg uploaded to Commons and to restore/create a new version of the template.

Thank you very much for your time and cooperation!

Kind regards, Pelajanela (talk) 12:47, 20 July 2024 (UTC)

Re: but implies that these uses are permitted. You are demonstrating a key misunderstanding of the COM:L#Acceptable licenses policy requirements - these conditions must be present, not assumed. It is for a reason that the word must is highlighted many times in the text in bold and italics. You're not the first who tries to declare we can get away with it, but that's not acceptable. Quick1984 (talk) 13:32, 20 July 2024 (UTC)

What is not acceptable, Quick1984, is your claim that I am "not the first who tries to declare we can get away with it" by which you assume and suggest certain incentive from my side and put thoughts and words in my mouth. I understand that people express themselves differently and may put different meanings into their words. I also understand that I may be showing an reprehensible misunderstanding from your point of view - and not just me in this case (I discussed the case with a copyright attorney аmong others). But if I may, I would say that your attitude shows disrespect to Wikimedia Foundation Universal Code of Conduct. Please revise your statement, moderate your tone and demonstrate collegiality and respect for the knowledge and differences in experience of others. Thank you
Pelajanela (talk) 17:35, 20 July 2024 (UTC)

Pelajanela, the consensus was that the terms of use did not conform to the license that was stated with the template. The terms of use were unclear if the photographs actually did fall under a license that only required attribution, and it is not adequately defined what was considered free use of the material (were modifications allowed? was commercial use allowed?) To prevent files that had been licensed under the template from being deleted, it has to be clearly shown that the files are in fact freely licensed in a way that Commons can accept, and right now, it's unclear whether that is actually the case. Abzeronow (talk) 21:30, 20 July 2024 (UTC)

Files

Hello Abzeronow you deleted the file "File:Flag-map of Bolivia, Wiphala & bandera de la flor de Patujú.svg" saying the original one was deleted for copyright reasons, however the original one is requested to be undeleted according to this discussion. Can you restore the file and the original one please? Thanks in advance. Janitoalevic (talk) 20:59, 22 July 2024 (UTC)

@Ellywa: I deleted the DW since the original was deleted, should I restore both? Abzeronow (talk) 16:43, 23 July 2024 (UTC)

If you are agreeing with the discussion on the DR, please undelete those files. Ellywa (talk) 20:07, 23 July 2024 (UTC)

@Janitoalevic: Both have been undeleted per request. Abzeronow (talk) 20:20, 23 July 2024 (UTC)

VRT

Just wondering if this was available in 2006? I think the consensus is not to delete all old files where current tools weren't available. Isn't it? Enhancing999 (talk) 16:51, 31 July 2024 (UTC)

You are correct that 2006 files would have looser standards of permission COM:GOF. However, consensus was to keep the file deleted (two longtime users opposed restoration) and Jim also opposing restoration. Abzeronow (talk) 16:58, 31 July 2024 (UTC)

The question is if the deletion was done correctly (no supervoting, even by longtime users). The result seems to be the arguments there were incorrect and there was no consensus on the scope issue. People seem to refer to Wikipedia discussions which seem to have concluded that the article there was just bad or badly referenced, and might have been improved.

Also apparently the VRT argument was erroneous. Shouldn't a longtime user be aware of that?

It's clear that we could just all give random arguments without trying to evaluate them and then count the number of admin who supervoted, but I think this isn't what we aren't trying to do in WMF projects, isn't it? Would some defeat the point of having discussions in the first place. Enhancing999 (talk) 17:05, 31 July 2024 (UTC)

How are we going to fix this? If Jim violated COM:GOF I guess we need to restore this. Enhancing999 (talk) 07:10, 12 August 2024 (UTC)

File:Premier Donald Tusk – konferencja prasowa dot. wpływów Rosji i Bisłorusi (21.05.2024).jpg

Are you sure about your deletion of this? Looking at the history and the original source it looks fine in source and copyright terms, but like the original uploader of this third-party file vandalized his own page after uploading. Please have a look and let me know what you think. - Jmabel ! talk 06:16, 7 August 2024 (UTC)

The uploader blanked the file and it fit the G7 criteria. I'm not opposed to restoration if that's desired. Abzeronow (talk) 06:21, 7 August 2024 (UTC)

If it had been the uploader's own work I'd agree on the G7, but it's an in-scope image with an appropriate license from a third party. I think it should be restored. Since you were the deleting admin, could you either restore it or say explicitly that it's OK with you if I do? (I think you kind of said that, but explicit is clearer.) Thanks. - Jmabel ! talk 18:18, 7 August 2024 (UTC)

I'll make it explicit, I'm OK with restoration. Abzeronow (talk) 18:30, 7 August 2024 (UTC)

1997 Jerrell tornado

I have had to renominate them famous dead man walking tornado picture because the PD rationale is no longer valid. See the ongoing PD-NWS template debate on te village pump for the reason why it’s no longer valid. WestVirginiaWX (talk) 16:35, 10 August 2024 (UTC)

requsting you to delete few files of mine

Hi, saw that you are a moderator here. I would like for you to delete few of my uploaded pictures. Few of these i would just like to get deleted and some of them are not mine and violate guidelines. Thanks

File:Hyttinen Jari.jpg

File:Bussi 61.jpg (not mine)

File:Houston outlaws wikipedia 2020.jpg (not mine)

File:Juno tupakka taulu.jpg (not mine)

File:Juno tupakka.jpg (not mine) OtsoTA (talk) 18:29, 15 August 2024 (UTC)

The first two are in use, and don't appear to have any issues, so I can't delete those. Filed a DR for the third (courtesy deletion). Will work on the "not mine" ones in a little bit. Abzeronow (talk) 18:42, 15 August 2024 (UTC)

Autopatrol request

Hi, it seems like my autopatrol requests at Commons:Requests for rights were overlooked, so I want them to be fulfilled here. Thanks, Squishyawaylittle6 (talk) 20:06, 18 August 2024 (UTC)

I did not overlook your request, I just hadn't decided on it yet. I'll reply to your request with my thoughts. Abzeronow (talk) 20:16, 18 August 2024 (UTC)

Alright, thanks for the reply. — Squishyawaylittle6 (talk) 20:20, 18 August 2024 (UTC)

Hello

File:Mahathir Mohamad young.png ​ ​This photo was recently nominated for deletion, but it was reviewed on 21 August 2024 by FlickreviewR 2 and was confirmed to be licensed under the terms of the Public Domain Mark. Baginda 480 (talk) 14:30, 21 August 2024 (UTC)

Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad.jpg

​

​

​Another also Baginda 480 (talk) 14:36, 21 August 2024 (UTC)

File:Mahathir Mohamad young.jpg Baginda 480 (talk) 14:37, 21 August 2024 (UTC)

File:Mahathir Mohamad and Siti Hasmah Mohamad Ali.jpg Baginda 480 (talk) 14:37, 21 August 2024 (UTC)

I've replied to each DR. Abzeronow (talk) 17:27, 21 August 2024 (UTC)

I wanna try to overwrite File:Visa policy of East Timor.svg

Hi regarding the request to overwrite the file temporally as the visa policy map is outdated, why is the permissions denied with the following "You cannot overwrite this file" despite you approving it and telling me it is approved? Please try to troubleshoot it as soon as possible (asap) as I wish to upload the updated version asap. TaiwanJapanNovember2018 (talk) 12:43, 30 August 2024 (UTC)

@TaiwanJapanNovember2018: You're not autoconfirmed yet. Just wait 3 more days and you should be able to overwrite the file. Abzeronow (talk) 15:39, 30 August 2024 (UTC)

Alright noted. A huge thank you for addressing my concerns and for your efforts involved. TaiwanJapanNovember2018 (talk) 17:21, 30 August 2024 (UTC)

File:Flag of NATO.svg

Hi. Could you allow overwriting for a bit? I've been asked (my talk page) to upload an improved file (same color, but with the arrows meeting in the center instead of being slightly offset), and I don't see the point of uploading it under yet another file name. Plus, if there's a problem with it, this way it will be easy to revert. Thanks. Kwamikagami (talk) 04:38, 6 September 2024 (UTC)

It's admin-only upload protected. @Mdaniels5757: Abzeronow (talk) 16:33, 6 September 2024 (UTC)

@Kwamikagami I just reduced the upload protection to autopatrol-only, but make sure it's different from the ones that sock puppets were edit warring to have. —‍Mdaniels5757 (talk • contribs) 18:13, 6 September 2024 (UTC)

Okay, done. Don't know if the protection is still necessary. Kwamikagami (talk) 18:24, 6 September 2024 (UTC)

Commons:Administrators' noticeboard/Blocks and protections#User:Khiado do

@Abzeronow:Buenas,por favor bloquea a este usuario AbchyZa22 (talk) 21:43, 9 September 2024 (UTC)

Books & Bytes – Issue 64

The Wikipedia Library: Books & Bytes
Issue 64, July – August 2024

• The Hindu Group joins The Wikipedia Library
• Wikimania presentation
• New user script for easily searching The Wikipedia Library

Read the full newsletter

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery on behalf of The Wikipedia Library team --16:35, 11 September 2024 (UTC)

Bulgarian Parliament files

Hi, I could help undelete these (I think I deleted quite a lot), but how do you get the list of deleted files? Thanks, Yann (talk) 09:07, 13 September 2024 (UTC)

User talk:Dbalinov has them. Under the July 19, 2024 messages. Abzeronow (talk) 16:14, 13 September 2024 (UTC)

Naval Jack of Brazil

Hi, have you moved the page of the old 3:4 file yet? Could you help me replace all the uses of the previous file with the new one? Feitidede (talk) 00:53, 26 September 2024 (UTC)

Yes, 3:4 flag has been moved, I'll need to see if CommonsDelinker has done the move for Wikis on that before I use universal replace for your file. Abzeronow (talk) 15:37, 26 September 2024 (UTC)

@Feitidede: your request is now in the universal replace queue. Abzeronow (talk) 18:19, 26 September 2024 (UTC)

Thank you so much. I think the last edit to be done is to this french page. https://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mod%C3%A8le:Country_data_Br%C3%A9sil. The army flag should use the vector version and the Naval Jack still needs to be changed. Feitidede (talk) 18:26, 27 September 2024 (UTC)

File:Cameron Rowland in front of audience at Columbia GSAPP (cropped).jpg

File:Cameron Rowland in front of audience at Columbia GSAPP (cropped).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. Please remember to respond to and – if appropriate – contradict the arguments supporting deletion. Arguments which focus on the nominator will not affect the result of the nomination. Thank you!

66.108.48.178 16:50, 2 October 2024 (UTC)

Bot check

It's wonderful seeing another admin doing ancient bot check reviews. Bastique ^{☎ appelez-moi!} 19:58, 8 October 2024 (UTC)

Yes, I've been slowly making a dent in the ancient bot check reviews over the last six months. I occasionally find undetected FOP issues or other issues too. Abzeronow (talk) 20:02, 8 October 2024 (UTC)

Yeah, all of my Deletion Requests come from my reviews. Bastique ^{☎ appelez-moi!} 21:02, 8 October 2024 (UTC)

Undeletion request

I disagree with you deleting the costumed files at Commons:Deletion requests/Files uploaded by Sahaib because I said twice that I wanted there to be more discussion on this. What happens to files in Category:Characters at Disney Experiences?, shouldn't each image have been discussed individually and more in depth. I am considering requesting that these files be undeleted or creating a request for comment to discuss this topic. Sahaib (talk) 07:13, 14 October 2024 (UTC)

Update, I have created a request for comment at Commons:Requests for comment/Costumed character files. Sahaib (talk) 07:29, 14 October 2024 (UTC)

Round 2 of Picture of the Year 2023 voting is open!

Read this message in your language

Dear Wikimedian,

You are receiving this message because we noticed that you previously voted in the Picture of the Year contest. Wikimedia users are invited to vote for their favorite images featured on Commons during the last year (2023) to produce a single Picture of the Year.

Hundreds of images that have been rated Featured Pictures by the international Wikimedia Commons community in the past year were entered in this competition. These images include professional animal and plant shots, breathtaking panoramas and skylines, restorations of historical images, photographs portraying the world's best architecture, impressive human portraits, and so much more.

In this second and final round, you may vote for a maximum of three images. The image with the most votes will become the Picture of the Year 2023.

Round 2 will end at 28 October 2024, 23:59:59 UTC.

Click here to vote now!

If you have already voted for Round 2, please ignore this message.

Thanks,
the Wikimedia Commons Picture of the Year committee
MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 17:09, 16 October 2024 (UTC)

File:SuShi-Portrait.jpg

Concerning Commons:Deletion_requests/File:SuShi-Portrait.jpg:

Did you verify the public domain status per the source? ...considering user Bastique made no comment on having checked the source or any comment on the file's status. Additionally, the provided (direct link to some online) image citing it also provides nothing on it. The only thing asserted was that it is a portrait of Xiang Yu. That was an unceremonious closure without clarity.

Secondly, for the source, why are you using a machine translation of the title, without the actual original title? That's bad referencing.

Thirdly, you haven't read the deletion discussion fully. It concerns two Wikimedia Commons files. -- Cold Season (talk) 21:14, 22 October 2024 (UTC)

The style of the work is not 21st century, and is consistent with the Qing era. You're the only one expressing doubt that it was, and I, like Ellywa, found that there wasn't significant doubt about this being a public domain file. I will expand upon my close in the DR shortly. I'm using machine translation because I cannot read or write Chinese, I would be happy if someone fluent in Chinese put it the original or improved upon the translation given. Abzeronow (talk) 16:46, 23 October 2024 (UTC)

I see that you are not a unbiased admin.

(1) Assumptions that it looks old (which is what you are making here) is not a valid per Wikimedia policy. Modern artists are able to paint in different art styles.

(2) You have not consulted the reference that you are citing.

(3) Discussion are not a vote.

I will therefore reopen the nomination. --Cold Season (talk) 10:10, 25 October 2024 (UTC)

Your deletion of the File:أطفال قتلى في هجوم حزب الله.jpg

Hi. Before I'll start an appeal of your deletion could you please explain what rules have you considered when you have committed the action of deletion? Thank you. Regards, Oleg (talk) 04:26, 8 November 2024 (UTC)

COM:PCP, there was significant doubt about it being an own work. Abzeronow (talk) 16:39, 8 November 2024 (UTC)

Thank you for the reply, but I was looking for what facts led you as a sysop to assume that there was significant doubt about it being an own work? Thank you. Regards, Oleg (talk) 16:00, 9 November 2024 (UTC)

No EXIF, resolution is rather low for a cellphone or camera photo, blurred here vs. unblurred on Twitter, and consensus in the discussion was that authorship claim was not credible. Abzeronow (talk) 17:15, 9 November 2024 (UTC)

Thanks. Do we both agree that all those points are secondary and do not prove that the uploader is not the creator of the photo, or do you think otherwise? (The EXIF data is not required, the resolution wasn't really too low and there is no older version of this image found in any of the other sources). Plus consensus in the discussion is not present as several people gave strong arguments against deletion and we need to consider pure facts and not amount of people saying one way or another. Do you agree? Thank you. Regards, Oleg (talk) 18:38, 9 November 2024 (UTC)

By themselves, no they do not prove that the uploader is not the creator but together the circumstantial evidence suggests they aren't the author. EXIF data would prove their claim, and that can be handled confidentially at VRT. The only ones who wanted to keep were yourself and BilledMammal, the other opinions were either delete (including Bastique, another sysop) or skeptical of the claim (Infrogmation). You are free to request undeletion at COM:UDR, I'll stay out of that discussion. Abzeronow (talk) 18:51, 9 November 2024 (UTC)

I appreciate your well argumented response. Have a good day. Thank you. Regards, Oleg (talk) 14:16, 10 November 2024 (UTC)

Commons:Deletion requests/Films by Yasujirō Ozu

Hi, You closed it as Kept but the files are deleted. Did you mean Deleted? Yann (talk) 22:28, 11 November 2024 (UTC)

Fixed. Thanks for letting me know. Abzeronow (talk) 22:31, 11 November 2024 (UTC)

Note that the "Kept" files were deleted by @Bastique: while closing Commons:Deletion requests/Files uploaded by Vojo Milo. I guess it was a mistake. Günther Frager (talk) 22:36, 11 November 2024 (UTC)

I guess it was a mistake of the script and I wasn't careful enough checking below the DR I was working on! I'll have to be more attentive of that in the future. Bastique ^{☎ let's talk!} 04:20, 12 November 2024 (UTC)

Books & Bytes – Issue 65

The Wikipedia Library: Books & Bytes
Issue 65, September – October 2024

• Hindu Tamil Thisai joins The Wikipedia Library
• Frankfurt Book Fair 2024 report
• Tech tip: Mass downloads

Read the full newsletter

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery on behalf of The Wikipedia Library team --12:50, 12 November 2024 (UTC)

Commons:Deletion requests/File:Matterhorn-250px.jpg

If you insist on hosting this version, I think you need to fix the credits.

Do you have a bug reports about any problems with redirects? Túrelio routinely redirects duplicates I identify. If you found issues and there is no report, please file one.
 ∞∞ Enhancing999 (talk) 08:46, 15 November 2024 (UTC)

Infobox added to file from the other version. Abzeronow (talk) 16:38, 15 November 2024 (UTC)

File:Coat of Arms of Walter Scheel (Order of Isabella the Catholic).svg

Template added, fyi. GerritR (talk) 20:57, 23 November 2024 (UTC)

Merchandise Giveaway Nomination – Successful

A Wikimedia t-shirt!

Hey Abzeronow,

You have been successfully nominated to receive a free t-shirt from the Wikimedia Foundation through the Merchandise Giveaway program. Congratulations and thank you for your hard work! Please email them at merchandisewikimedia.org and they will send you full details on how to accept your free shirt. Thanks!

On behalf of the Merchandise Giveaway program volunteer coordinators,

-- janbery (talk) 14:48, 30 November 2024 (UTC)

Happy to hear this. _Regards, Aafi ^(talk) 15:04, 30 November 2024 (UTC)

Thanks, I'll e-mail them later today. Abzeronow (talk) 16:41, 30 November 2024 (UTC)

License check

@Abzeronow:Hi,please check the license (File:Inflammatory pathway communication with skeletal muscle.jpg) (google translator) AbchyZa22 (talk) 08:43, 2 December 2024 (UTC)

 Done Abzeronow (talk) 16:48, 2 December 2024 (UTC)

Commons:Deletion requests/File:Logo text Air France (1990).jpg

@Abzeronow:Buenas,esta foto debería ser removida o quedarse (por favor cierra el DR)? AbchyZa22 (talk) 17:51, 2 December 2024 (UTC)

I'll close it as keep in a few days. Abzeronow (talk) 17:59, 2 December 2024 (UTC)

Orphaned timed text

You recently deleted File:Hatikva vocal.ogg can you also delete the associated timedtext files ? —TheDJ (talk • contribs) 15:10, 16 December 2024 (UTC)

@TheDJ:  Done Abzeronow (talk) 16:58, 16 December 2024 (UTC)

Flag of Syria

Hi

What do you think about my two proposal? Panam2014 (talk) 00:29, 19 December 2024 (UTC)

Hello

Hello, can help me upload this image??

https://www.facebook.com/share/p/Gu5H3xFBds6sfvwJ/

Meetings continue in Vladivostok.

Prime Ministers Dr. Mahathir Mohamad and Narendra Modi discuss ways to diversify India-Malaysia cooperation for the benefit of people in both countries. 2402:1980:824C:18D7:0:0:0:1 10:37, 21 December 2024 (UTC)

That image isn't obviously acceptable for Wikimedia Commons, and probably isn't usable here. See COM:LICENSING. To use it you would have to obtain a clear statement that it was published under a free licence. That would probably also require identifying the photographer, or their employer. Andy Dingley (talk) 12:35, 21 December 2024 (UTC)

But it is come from PMO India 2402:1980:824C:18D7:0:0:0:1 12:39, 21 December 2024 (UTC)

We don't know that. We just have a copy on Facebook. We would also need some statement from PMO that 1) it's an image they hold the rights to, and 2) that they freely license this to everyone. Andy Dingley (talk) 21:36, 21 December 2024 (UTC)

I agree with Andy. Abzeronow (talk) 21:37, 21 December 2024 (UTC)

Ok

https://www.flickr.com/photos/freegaza/3777758700

https://www.flickr.com/photos/freegaza/3731697896

https://www.flickr.com/photos/freegaza/3776945467

Can you help me upload this three Images?? There all come from Flickr. 218.208.8.70 21:41, 21 December 2024 (UTC)

thank you very much!!! 218.208.8.70 21:44, 21 December 2024 (UTC)

• All three of these have a clear copyright and licence statement (things on Flickr will do) and they're all CC-by-sa,2.0 which is an acceptable free licence for Wikimedia Commons. So they're all good. They should ideally have a photographer credited by name (which I can't see) but I would regard a credit to the Free Gaza movement (linked to their Flickr page) as acceptable, with the photographer listed as unknown.

However there are editors on Commons (some of whom would be doing this out of political bias, sad to say) that that would be reason to delete them, so they might get put through a deletion request. If I see DRs like this, I oppose them. But I'm in a minority. Andy Dingley (talk) 22:14, 21 December 2024 (UTC)

I would also oppose such a DR since they are in scope and have educational value. (I also have a small amount of Jewish ancestry from the side of the family that lived in Poland). I might upload them later. Abzeronow (talk) 22:19, 21 December 2024 (UTC)

Well, Flickr uploader is on the blacklist (since they had some unfree photos licensed as free). Abzeronow (talk) 00:16, 22 December 2024 (UTC)