User talk:J.Grandgagnage
Our first steps help file and our FAQ 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. You don't need technical skills in order to contribute here. Be bold contributing here and assume good faith for the intentions of others. This is a wiki ‒ it is really easy. More information is available at the Community Portal. You may ask questions at the Help desk, Village Pump or on IRC channel #wikimedia-commons (direct access). You can also contact an administrator on their talk page. If you have a specific copyright question, ask at Commons talk:Licensing. |
| |
(P.S. Would you like to provide feedback on this message?) |
Filnik 23:13, 3 December 2007 (UTC)
Quality Image Promotion
[edit]Your image has been reviewed and promoted
Congratulations! Velo Antwerpen Astridplein.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
|
--QICbot (talk) 05:28, 20 October 2016 (UTC)
Quality Image Promotion
[edit]Your image has been reviewed and promoted
Congratulations! Londenbrug Antwerpen.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
|
--QICbot (talk) 05:21, 30 October 2016 (UTC)
File:Soap Thuis Belgian television.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. |
Zanaq (talk) 14:16, 11 February 2018 (UTC)
Quality Image Promotion
[edit]Your image has been reviewed and promoted
Congratulations! Middelheimpark.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
|
--QICbot (talk) 05:21, 13 October 2019 (UTC)
Quality Image Promotion
[edit]Your image has been reviewed and promoted
Congratulations! Sint-Pieterskerk Sint-Truiden.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
|
--QICbot (talk) 05:32, 29 October 2019 (UTC)
Categorization
[edit]Hallo J.G.G., ik vroeg me af of de files van Alvaro A Novo in een nog aan te maken Category:Photographs by Alvaro A Novo een optie zijn. Ik had DarwIn hierover aangesproken maar die reageerde (nog) niet. Thnks. Lotje (talk) 11:51, 19 January 2020 (UTC)
File:Blackdogriff.ogg 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. |
George Ho (talk) 04:02, 6 May 2020 (UTC)
File:Summertime.ogg has been marked as a possible copyright violation. Wikimedia Commons only accepts free content—that is, images and other media files that can be used by anyone, for any purpose. Traditional copyright law does not grant these freedoms, and unless noted otherwise, everything you find on the web is copyrighted and not permitted here. For details on what is acceptable, please read Commons:Licensing. You may also find Commons:Copyright rules useful, or you can ask questions about Commons policies at the Commons:Help desk. If you are the copyright holder and the creator of the file, please read Commons:But it's my own work! for tips on how to provide evidence of that.
The file you added has been deleted. If you have written permission from the copyright holder, please have them send us a free license release via COM:VRT. If you believe that the deletion was not in accordance with policy, you may request undeletion. (It is not necessary to request undeletion if using VRT; the file will be automatically restored at the conclusion of the process.)
|
Mysterymanblue 00:02, 28 June 2021 (UTC)
Your many recordings
[edit]Hi J.G.G., thanks for all the work you've put into Commons. I think you should note that, unfortunately, Commons does not allow recordings of copyrighted compositions. This generally means that before you upload an audio file to Commons, you need to make sure that the composition you're basing it was published before January 1, 1926 (though there are a few exceptions to that rule). Thanks! Mysterymanblue 00:07, 28 June 2021 (UTC)
- ? The composer of Summertime (George Gershwin) died more than 80 years ago... The duration of copyright in the work has expired 70 years after the death of its author. Or is there something I'm missing (Copyright renewal maybe?) J.G.G. (talk) 14:10, 28 June 2021 (UTC)
- U.S. copyright is kind of weird in that works first published before 1978 are protected for 95 years after creation and works published 1978 and after are protected for the lifetime of the author plus 70 years. See this chart for all its incongruities. So because the music was created and published around 1935, it is actually protected until around 2030. Mysterymanblue 17:52, 28 June 2021 (UTC)
- OK, thanks, I was not aware of this. J.G.G. (talk) 18:15, 28 June 2021 (UTC)
- U.S. copyright is kind of weird in that works first published before 1978 are protected for 95 years after creation and works published 1978 and after are protected for the lifetime of the author plus 70 years. See this chart for all its incongruities. So because the music was created and published around 1935, it is actually protected until around 2030. Mysterymanblue 17:52, 28 June 2021 (UTC)
File:Embraceable-you-tenor-sax-by-JGrandgagnage.ogg 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. |
Ellin Beltz (talk) 18:21, 7 July 2021 (UTC)
File:Astimegoesby-J.Grandgagnage-saxophone.ogg 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. |
Ellin Beltz (talk) 18:21, 7 July 2021 (UTC)
File:A Foggy Day on tenor sax by Julien Grandgagnage.ogg 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. |
Ellin Beltz (talk) 18:22, 7 July 2021 (UTC)
Notification about possible deletion
[edit]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:Almost eureka by Alvaro A Novo.jpg
- File:Half by Alvaro A Novo.jpg
- File:Street coffee by Alvaro A Novo.jpg
- File:Sound the alarm by Alvaro A Novo.jpg
- File:Hates paparazzi by Alvaro A Novo.jpg
- File:Untitled by Jonathan Petit.jpg
- File:Big Brother by Martin Hricko.jpg
Yours sincerely, Ellin Beltz (talk) 18:25, 7 July 2021 (UTC)
- Hm, very strange. I'm pretty sure that eight years ago these photos were placed in the category 'Creative Commons' on 500px, otherwise I would not have uploaded and used them. The photos Alvaro placed on Flickr (like 'Almost eureka by Alvaro A Novo') still are licensed that way. I wonder if it is possible to withdraw CC-BY-SA permission to use for own profit like he probably did. Anyway, I understand these photos have to be deleted. J.G.G. (talk) 12:27, 8 July 2021 (UTC)
- It is not possible to withdraw a CC license; it is irrevocable. So if it was licensed that way when you uploaded it, it is still licensed like that today, even if the photographer has since removed that license from the source webpages. Mysterymanblue 19:29, 8 July 2021 (UTC)
File:Wolelottarosie-intro power chords.ogg has been marked as a possible copyright violation. Wikimedia Commons only accepts free content—that is, images and other media files that can be used by anyone, for any purpose. Traditional copyright law does not grant these freedoms, and unless noted otherwise, everything you find on the web is copyrighted and not permitted here. For details on what is acceptable, please read Commons:Licensing. You may also find Commons:Copyright rules useful, or you can ask questions about Commons policies at the Commons:Help desk. If you are the copyright holder and the creator of the file, please read Commons:But it's my own work! for tips on how to provide evidence of that.
The file you added has been deleted. If you have written permission from the copyright holder, please have them send us a free license release via COM:VRT. If you believe that the deletion was not in accordance with policy, you may request undeletion. (It is not necessary to request undeletion if using VRT; the file will be automatically restored at the conclusion of the process.)
|
Nunabas (talk) 18:38, 8 November 2022 (UTC)
File:BixBeiderbecke-Copenhagen.ogg 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. |
Hekerui (talk) 14:45, 27 January 2023 (UTC)
File:Sint-Martinuskerk in Groot-Gelmen.jpg
[edit]Hallo,
Ik heb net uw prachtige foto op Genanet gebruikt, met de noodzakelijke meldingen: https://www.geneanet.org/cimetieres/collection/226882-oud-kerkhof-groot-gelmen Zeg me AUB of het correct is, anders zal ik de foto vanuit Geneanet laten verwijderen en maar wachten totdat ik persoonlijk ter plaatse ga om foto's te maken. Normaal neem ik zelf de illustratiefoto's van de kerkhoven waar ik foto's zelf heb opgeladen, maar dit is een speciaal geval: splitsing van iemand anders foto's die foutelijk aan de nieuwe begraafplaats werden toegewezen. Het gaat niet over een unieke situatie als meer dan een kerkhof in een deelgemeente gelocaliseerd is, sommige gebruikers denken dat het toch geen verschil maakt, "het gaat toch over dezelfde deelgemeente".
Met vriendelijke groeten,
Pierre-Yves Lambert (meer dan 15.000 grafstenen en monumenten op Geneanet opgeladen sinds maart 2021, meestal in de provincies Vlaams Brabant, Antwerpen en Limburg, sinds juni 2022 meer gericht naar de oudste grafstenen binnen en rond kerken, bv. de begijnhofkerken in Hoogstraten en Brussel) Minorities observer (talk) 10:01, 2 August 2023 (UTC)
- Is zo prima hoor, mvg, J.G.G. (talk) 11:50, 2 August 2023 (UTC)
- Dank u vriendelijk ! Minorities observer (talk) 20:07, 2 August 2023 (UTC)
Copyright status: File:Adam-and-eve-6121381.jpg
[edit]Copyright status: File:Adam-and-eve-6121381.jpg
This media may be deleted. |
Thanks for uploading File:Adam-and-eve-6121381.jpg. I notice that the file page either doesn't contain enough information about the license or it contains contradictory information about the license, so the copyright status is unclear.
If you created this file yourself, then you must provide a valid copyright tag. For example, you can tag it with {{self|GFDL|cc-by-sa-all}} to release it under the multi-license GFDL plus Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike All-version license or you can tag it with {{PD-self}} to release it into the public domain. (See Commons:Copyright tags for the full list of license tags that you can use.) If you did not create the file yourself or if it is a derivative of another work that is possibly subject to copyright protection, then you must specify where you found it (e.g. usually a link to the web page where you got it), you must provide proof that it has a license that is acceptable for Commons (e.g. usually a link to the terms of use for content from that page), and you must add an appropriate license tag. If you did not create the file yourself and the specific source and license information is not available on the web, you must obtain permission through the VRT system and follow the procedure described there. Note that any unsourced or improperly licensed files will be deleted one week after they have been marked as lacking proper information, as described in criteria for deletion. If you have uploaded other files, please confirm that you have provided the proper information for those files, too. If you have any questions about licenses please ask at Commons:Village pump/Copyright or see our help pages. Thank you. |
This action was performed automatically by AntiCompositeBot (talk) (FAQ) 12:05, 20 September 2023 (UTC)
Quality Image Promotion
[edit]Your image has been reviewed and promoted
Congratulations! Tienen Begijnhof 3 Ruïnes van de Paterskerk uit de 13e eeuw.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
|