User talk:Bengt Nyman

Welcome to Wikimedia Commons, Bengt Nyman!

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) 22:32, 5 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Princess Estelle Silvia Ewa Mary 2012.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.
Comments Good quality. --Taxiarchos228 11:43, 24 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

COM:AN/U

Deutsch ∙ English ∙ español ∙ français ∙ italiano ∙ magyar ∙ Nederlands ∙ português ∙ sicilianu ∙ slovenščina ∙ svenska ∙ Tagalog ∙ Tiếng Việt ∙ Türkçe ∙ македонски ∙ русский ∙ मराठी ∙ বাংলা ∙ മലയാളം ∙ 日本語 ∙ 中文（简体） ∙ 中文（繁體） ∙ العربية ∙ +/−

Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion at Commons:Administrators' noticeboard/User problems. It concerns intentional duplication of categories.

Direct link to discussion is here. SergeWoodzing (talk) 17:50, 8 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

File:John B. Gurdon 1 2012.jpg

Hi, I nominated this image for deletion because it is flickrwashing. Regards Hekerui (talk) 22:15, 12 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

File:Mo Yan 7 2012.jpg

File:Mo Yan 7 2012.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!

Afrikaans ∙ العربية ∙ беларуская ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца) ∙ български ∙ ပအိုဝ်ႏဘာႏသာႏ ∙ বাংলা ∙ bosanski ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ dansk ∙ Deutsch ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form) ∙ Zazaki ∙ ދިވެހިބަސް ∙ Ελληνικά ∙ English ∙ Esperanto ∙ español ∙ eesti ∙ فارسی ∙ suomi ∙ français ∙ galego ∙ עברית ∙ hrvatski ∙ magyar ∙ հայերեն ∙ Bahasa Indonesia ∙ íslenska ∙ italiano ∙ 日本語 ∙ 한국어 ∙ 조선말 ∙ македонски ∙ മലയാളം ∙ Bahasa Melayu ∙ မြန်မာဘာသာ ∙ norsk bokmål ∙ Plattdüütsch ∙ Nederlands ∙ norsk nynorsk ∙ norsk ∙ occitan ∙ polski ∙ پښتو ∙ português ∙ português do Brasil ∙ română ∙ русский ∙ sicilianu ∙ slovenčina ∙ slovenščina ∙ shqip ∙ српски / srpski ∙ svenska ∙ ไทย ∙ Türkçe ∙ українська ∙ Tiếng Việt ∙ 中文 ∙ 中文（简体） ∙ 中文（繁體） ∙ +/−

88.156.174.162 13:52, 18 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Own work! There should be no licensing problem. I see no reason for deletion.Bengt Nyman (talk) 16:51, 9 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your images on Commons and on flickr

A huge thank you for all your image uploads to Wikimedia Commons and for the generous licensing of your images on your flickr account! The images truly add a value to the Wikipedia articles which they illustrate. Some images are outright stunning. I look forward to seing your future images and hope you will receive the recognition I think you deserve. --Bensin (talk) 21:23, 26 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thank You very much! You make it all worthwhile. Bengt Nyman (talk) 21:45, 26 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Congratulations Mr. Nyman on receiving such an inspiring compliment, well deserved. Rare to see. I'm glad for you, and for me that I'm not the envious type. Sincerely, --SergeWoodzing (talk) 17:24, 27 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

File:Madeira 3291.jpg

File:Madeira 3291.jpg 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.)

Warning: Wikimedia Commons takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing.

Afrikaans ∙ العربية ∙ asturianu ∙ azərbaycanca ∙ беларуская ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца) ∙ български ∙ ပအိုဝ်ႏဘာႏသာႏ ∙ বাংলা ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ dansk ∙ Deutsch ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form) ∙ Zazaki ∙ Ελληνικά ∙ English ∙ español ∙ euskara ∙ فارسی ∙ suomi ∙ français ∙ galego ∙ עברית ∙ hrvatski ∙ magyar ∙ հայերեն ∙ Bahasa Indonesia ∙ italiano ∙ 日本語 ∙ 한국어 ∙ Lëtzebuergesch ∙ македонски ∙ മലയാളം ∙ मराठी ∙ Bahasa Melayu ∙ Malti ∙ မြန်မာဘာသာ ∙ norsk bokmål ∙ Plattdüütsch ∙ Nederlands ∙ norsk nynorsk ∙ norsk ∙ polski ∙ português ∙ português do Brasil ∙ română ∙ русский ∙ sicilianu ∙ slovenčina ∙ slovenščina ∙ српски / srpski ∙ svenska ∙ தமிழ் ∙ тоҷикӣ ∙ ไทย ∙ Türkçe ∙ українська ∙ oʻzbekcha / ўзбекча ∙ Tiếng Việt ∙ 中文（简体） ∙ 中文（繁體） ∙ +/−

Darwin ^Ahoy! 16:30, 9 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hi! You have uploaded a 1991 prized photograph by Alberto Garcia of the Mount Pinatubo eruption (http://albertogarcia.ca/28/mount-pinatubo-1991-eruption/), probably by mistake - Possibly it was in exposition at São Vicente caves, madeira Island, and you photographed it? Best regards, -- Darwin ^Ahoy! 16:32, 9 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

BTW, thank you very much for your photographs, they are truly spectacular! :D -- Darwin ^Ahoy! 16:34, 9 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I photographed it in the Sao Vicente caves. If it violates anything, please feel free to delete it.Bengt Nyman (talk) 16:48, 9 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

It's a derivative work, so it had to be deleted due to Alberto Garcia's copyright. But no worries, it happens every time. :) -- Darwin ^Ahoy! 23:27, 10 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

No problem. Thank You. Bengt Nyman (talk) 06:31, 11 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

File:Don Giovanni 1 2014.jpg

File:Don Giovanni 1 2014.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!

Afrikaans ∙ العربية ∙ беларуская ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца) ∙ български ∙ ပအိုဝ်ႏဘာႏသာႏ ∙ বাংলা ∙ bosanski ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ dansk ∙ Deutsch ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form) ∙ Zazaki ∙ ދިވެހިބަސް ∙ Ελληνικά ∙ English ∙ Esperanto ∙ español ∙ eesti ∙ فارسی ∙ suomi ∙ français ∙ galego ∙ עברית ∙ hrvatski ∙ magyar ∙ հայերեն ∙ Bahasa Indonesia ∙ íslenska ∙ italiano ∙ 日本語 ∙ 한국어 ∙ 조선말 ∙ македонски ∙ മലയാളം ∙ Bahasa Melayu ∙ မြန်မာဘာသာ ∙ norsk bokmål ∙ Plattdüütsch ∙ Nederlands ∙ norsk nynorsk ∙ norsk ∙ occitan ∙ polski ∙ پښتو ∙ português ∙ português do Brasil ∙ română ∙ русский ∙ sicilianu ∙ slovenčina ∙ slovenščina ∙ shqip ∙ српски / srpski ∙ svenska ∙ ไทย ∙ Türkçe ∙ українська ∙ Tiếng Việt ∙ 中文 ∙ 中文（简体） ∙ 中文（繁體） ∙ +/−

Hangsna (talk) 10:22, 3 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Please delete. Bengt Nyman (talk) 18:08, 15 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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.

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!

Afrikaans ∙ العربية ∙ беларуская ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца) ∙ български ∙ ပအိုဝ်ႏဘာႏသာႏ ∙ বাংলা ∙ bosanski ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ dansk ∙ Deutsch ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form) ∙ Zazaki ∙ ދިވެހިބަސް ∙ Ελληνικά ∙ English ∙ Esperanto ∙ español ∙ eesti ∙ فارسی ∙ suomi ∙ français ∙ galego ∙ עברית ∙ hrvatski ∙ magyar ∙ հայերեն ∙ Bahasa Indonesia ∙ íslenska ∙ italiano ∙ 日本語 ∙ 한국어 ∙ 조선말 ∙ македонски ∙ മലയാളം ∙ Bahasa Melayu ∙ မြန်မာဘာသာ ∙ norsk bokmål ∙ Plattdüütsch ∙ Nederlands ∙ norsk nynorsk ∙ norsk ∙ occitan ∙ polski ∙ پښتو ∙ português ∙ português do Brasil ∙ română ∙ русский ∙ sicilianu ∙ slovenčina ∙ slovenščina ∙ shqip ∙ српски / srpski ∙ svenska ∙ ไทย ∙ Türkçe ∙ українська ∙ Tiếng Việt ∙ 中文 ∙ 中文（简体） ∙ 中文（繁體） ∙ +/−

Affected:

File:Don Giovanni 10 2014.jpg

And also:

Yours sincerely, Stefan4 (talk) 00:38, 15 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Bengt, det är bra om du är inloggad när du skriver här så råder det inga tvivel om att det är du själv som skriver det. /Hangsna (talk) 17:57, 15 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Please delete all. Bengt Nyman (talk) 18:06, 15 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Nobel prize 2015

Dear Bengt, thank you for your pictures of the 2015 Nobel prize laureates, they are highly valuable. Just to improve the descriptions, what kind of an event was this? Was it the "get together" at the Nobel museum (as the nobelprize.org site says)? This kind of information helps a lot to understand the story behind a photo and makes it even more valuable in encyclopedic sense. — Yerpo ^Eh? 07:38, 8 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

My Nobel 2015 photographs were taken at the press conferences for the Nobel Prize in Medicine at Karolinska Institutet in Solna on December 6, 2015 and at Vetenskapsakademien in Stockholm on December 7, 2015. Bengt Nyman (talk) 11:02, 8 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Tack för tack för ditt foto av Tu Youyou, --Polarlys (talk) 08:58, 14 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Re: Email

Hi Bengt Nyman, You're welcome :), Happy editing :), –Davey2010^Talk 19:09, 31 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Italic text== Please give images better names ==

العربية ∙ čeština ∙ Deutsch ∙ English ∙ español ∙ français ∙ עברית ∙ italiano ∙ 日本語 ∙ magyar ∙ македонски ∙ മലയാളം ∙ Nederlands ∙ polski ∙ português ∙ русский ∙ sicilianu ∙ slovenščina ∙ suomi ∙ Tiếng Việt ∙ Türkçe ∙ українська ∙ 中文 ∙ +/−

I noticed you've uploaded File:DIMG 7792 (2561709488).jpg and I thought I should draw your attention to a common error. Please give uploaded files meaningful names. Otherwise they are difficult to track and it is hard to tell what the file is about without actually looking at it. I suggest you rename your image with an intuitive name that describes the file itself. Thanks, and happy editing!

Steinsplitter (talk) 14:15, 13 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I noticed that you uploaded hundreds of files from flick'r with generic filenames, you have to give them all better names. --Steinsplitter (talk) 14:25, 13 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

+1. By giving random names, you give work to others. Regards, Yann (talk) 15:15, 13 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

In addition, you need to check the usefulness of the files you upload. Not all files under a free license on Flickr are suitable for Commons. Files need to have an educational purpose. Regards, Yann (talk) 15:24, 13 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Wikimedia Commons is on the wrong track when it comes to the purpose of file names versus file descriptions. There is a industry world standard here which Wikimedia Commons presently violates. I agree that there are a lot of poor quality and non-educational images uploaded to Commons, but I do not see any effort on behalf of Commons to enforce an "educational purpose" which probably should be an administrative "No Thank You" effort rather than a user choice.Bengt Nyman (talk) 15:53, 13 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

If administrators wish to se the original file description without having to open the image page I believe it would be better if the upload tools were designed to display both file name, description and file size under the Commons thumbnail, just as it presently lists file name and file size. Bengt Nyman (talk) 23:19, 13 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

You have to follow wikimedia commons standards and policy's, the American Society of Media Photographers is not relevant at all and has zero influence to wikimedia commons. This is community approved, please also read COM:OWN and COM:POLICY. We don't change policies just because a single user (or the American Society of Media Photographers) believers that they are wrong. I have nothing further to add here, because it leads nowhere. --Steinsplitter (talk) 07:05, 14 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Final recommendation: The blacklisting of common camera file names to satisfy Wikimedias policy about descriptive file names is an impractical solution to the problem. I am suggesting that a Wikimedia filename can be made descriptive WITHOUT LOOSING the trace-ability provided by the original file name. This simply requires adding a description as a prefix to existing filename. I am recommending updating for example flickr2commons with the choice "Add prefix to every filename: [ ]". This will save serious users a lot of time, preserve the file trace-ability and eliminate the negativism of blacklisting. Bengt Nyman (talk) 19:40, 4 March 2017 (UTC)

Recommendations

Wikimedia Commons present blacklisting of camera filenames creates an impractical user work-flow.

The long term solution would be to restructure Commons upload tools to where original filenames would be left intact but augmented by a brief description to be shown with Commons image thumbnails, while a more complete description would be shown as present on the image page.

A temporary solution would be to offer a batch-file-renaming feature as part of Commons upload tools.

The present blacklisting of filenames places a barrier in the way of Wikimedia Commons ability to attract quality images. Bengt Nyman (talk) 09:10, 17 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Wikimedia Commons in error

The following resites recommendations of the American Society of Media Photographers:

File naming is an important component of file management. Here are the basic rules and recommendations.

Follow basic computer system rules for file-naming.

Use unique file names for each image.

Avoid incorporating job names or descriptions in file names.

Append file names to distinguish originals from derivatives.

Apply file-naming system consistently.

Never use multiple names for the same image file.

Wikimedia Commons' present practice to demand descriptive file-names unnecessarily violates several of the recommended ground rules for file-naming. Since this is demanded by Wikimedia Commons for the convenience of image administration it would be better if the above rules were respected and that Wikimedia Commons image thumbnail engine(s) were updated to display the requested information, such as image description or part thereof, without violating accepted rules and good practices for file-naming. Respectfully Bengt Nyman (talk) 05:41, 14 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Recommendations

Wikimedia Commons present blacklisting of camera filenames creates an impractical user work-flow.

The long term solution would be to restructure Commons upload tools to where original filenames would be left intact but augmented by a brief description to be shown with Commons image thumbnails, while a more complete description would be shown as present on the image page.

A temporary solution would be to offer a batch-file-renaming feature as part of Commons upload tools.

The present blacklisting of filenames places a barrier in the way of Wikimedia Commons ability to attract quality images. Bengt Nyman (talk) 09:10, 17 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Final recommendation: The blacklisting of common camera file names to satisfy Wikimedias policy about descriptive file names is an impractical solution to the problem. I am suggesting that a Wikimedia filename can be made descriptive WITHOUT LOOSING the trace-ability provided by the original file name. This simply requires adding a description as a prefix to existing filename. I am recommending updating for example flickr2commons with the choice "Add prefix to every filename: [ ]". This will save serious users a lot of time, preserve the file trace-ability and eliminate the negativism of blacklisting. Bengt Nyman (talk) 19:40, 4 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

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.

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!

Afrikaans ∙ العربية ∙ беларуская ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца) ∙ български ∙ ပအိုဝ်ႏဘာႏသာႏ ∙ বাংলা ∙ bosanski ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ dansk ∙ Deutsch ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form) ∙ Zazaki ∙ ދިވެހިބަސް ∙ Ελληνικά ∙ English ∙ Esperanto ∙ español ∙ eesti ∙ فارسی ∙ suomi ∙ français ∙ galego ∙ עברית ∙ hrvatski ∙ magyar ∙ հայերեն ∙ Bahasa Indonesia ∙ íslenska ∙ italiano ∙ 日本語 ∙ 한국어 ∙ 조선말 ∙ македонски ∙ മലയാളം ∙ Bahasa Melayu ∙ မြန်မာဘာသာ ∙ norsk bokmål ∙ Plattdüütsch ∙ Nederlands ∙ norsk nynorsk ∙ norsk ∙ occitan ∙ polski ∙ پښتو ∙ português ∙ português do Brasil ∙ română ∙ русский ∙ sicilianu ∙ slovenčina ∙ slovenščina ∙ shqip ∙ српски / srpski ∙ svenska ∙ ไทย ∙ Türkçe ∙ українська ∙ Tiếng Việt ∙ 中文 ∙ 中文（简体） ∙ 中文（繁體） ∙ +/−

Sorry about this, but I think it's important. Sincerely, Ruff tuff cream puff (talk) 06:00, 21 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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.

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!

Afrikaans ∙ العربية ∙ беларуская ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца) ∙ български ∙ ပအိုဝ်ႏဘာႏသာႏ ∙ বাংলা ∙ bosanski ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ dansk ∙ Deutsch ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form) ∙ Zazaki ∙ ދިވެހިބަސް ∙ Ελληνικά ∙ English ∙ Esperanto ∙ español ∙ eesti ∙ فارسی ∙ suomi ∙ français ∙ galego ∙ עברית ∙ hrvatski ∙ magyar ∙ հայերեն ∙ Bahasa Indonesia ∙ íslenska ∙ italiano ∙ 日本語 ∙ 한국어 ∙ 조선말 ∙ македонски ∙ മലയാളം ∙ Bahasa Melayu ∙ မြန်မာဘာသာ ∙ norsk bokmål ∙ Plattdüütsch ∙ Nederlands ∙ norsk nynorsk ∙ norsk ∙ occitan ∙ polski ∙ پښتو ∙ português ∙ português do Brasil ∙ română ∙ русский ∙ sicilianu ∙ slovenčina ∙ slovenščina ∙ shqip ∙ српски / srpski ∙ svenska ∙ ไทย ∙ Türkçe ∙ українська ∙ Tiếng Việt ∙ 中文 ∙ 中文（简体） ∙ 中文（繁體） ∙ +/−

Affected:

File:Stockholm 0277 (8394152063).jpg

—LX (talk, contribs) 10:28, 3 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

No comment. Administrators to decide. Bengt Nyman (talk) 10:50, 3 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Category moves

Hi Bengt Nyman, When requesting category moves could I ask you in future you provide valid reasons, Here you only put "3" which means nothing to me (or anyone else),
Usually I decline those if the template's been set up incorrectly or no valid reason was given (It was your lucky day today :) ),
Thanks, –Davey2010^Talk 11:04, 3 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I used the recommended command: [{move|new_name|numeric rationale|additional reason}] (use to change the name of a category). 3 is the numeric rationale, Correction is the reason in english for your convenience. See: https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:File_renaming. If this is no longer the correct command for requesting to change/move a category please direct me to the right one. Bengt Nyman (talk) 13:47, 3 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

File:Nobel Laureates 1084 (31372333611).jpg

File:Nobel Laureates 1084 (31372333611).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!

Afrikaans ∙ العربية ∙ беларуская ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца) ∙ български ∙ ပအိုဝ်ႏဘာႏသာႏ ∙ বাংলা ∙ bosanski ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ dansk ∙ Deutsch ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form) ∙ Zazaki ∙ ދިވެހިބަސް ∙ Ελληνικά ∙ English ∙ Esperanto ∙ español ∙ eesti ∙ فارسی ∙ suomi ∙ français ∙ galego ∙ עברית ∙ hrvatski ∙ magyar ∙ հայերեն ∙ Bahasa Indonesia ∙ íslenska ∙ italiano ∙ 日本語 ∙ 한국어 ∙ 조선말 ∙ македонски ∙ മലയാളം ∙ Bahasa Melayu ∙ မြန်မာဘာသာ ∙ norsk bokmål ∙ Plattdüütsch ∙ Nederlands ∙ norsk nynorsk ∙ norsk ∙ occitan ∙ polski ∙ پښتو ∙ português ∙ português do Brasil ∙ română ∙ русский ∙ sicilianu ∙ slovenčina ∙ slovenščina ∙ shqip ∙ српски / srpski ∙ svenska ∙ ไทย ∙ Türkçe ∙ українська ∙ Tiếng Việt ∙ 中文 ∙ 中文（简体） ∙ 中文（繁體） ∙ +/−

Yann (talk) 19:41, 8 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I requested the deletion because of problems with the file. Please go ahead. Bengt Nyman (talk) 19:46, 8 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

File:Nobel Laureates 1088 (30647237334).jpg

File:Nobel Laureates 1088 (30647237334).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!

Afrikaans ∙ العربية ∙ беларуская ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца) ∙ български ∙ ပအိုဝ်ႏဘာႏသာႏ ∙ বাংলা ∙ bosanski ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ dansk ∙ Deutsch ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form) ∙ Zazaki ∙ ދިވެހިބަސް ∙ Ελληνικά ∙ English ∙ Esperanto ∙ español ∙ eesti ∙ فارسی ∙ suomi ∙ français ∙ galego ∙ עברית ∙ hrvatski ∙ magyar ∙ հայերեն ∙ Bahasa Indonesia ∙ íslenska ∙ italiano ∙ 日本語 ∙ 한국어 ∙ 조선말 ∙ македонски ∙ മലയാളം ∙ Bahasa Melayu ∙ မြန်မာဘာသာ ∙ norsk bokmål ∙ Plattdüütsch ∙ Nederlands ∙ norsk nynorsk ∙ norsk ∙ occitan ∙ polski ∙ پښتو ∙ português ∙ português do Brasil ∙ română ∙ русский ∙ sicilianu ∙ slovenčina ∙ slovenščina ∙ shqip ∙ српски / srpski ∙ svenska ∙ ไทย ∙ Türkçe ∙ українська ∙ Tiếng Việt ∙ 中文 ∙ 中文（简体） ∙ 中文（繁體） ∙ +/−

Yann (talk) 19:41, 8 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I requested the deletion because of problems with the file. Please go ahead. Bengt Nyman (talk) 19:47, 8 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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.

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!

Afrikaans ∙ العربية ∙ беларуская ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца) ∙ български ∙ ပအိုဝ်ႏဘာႏသာႏ ∙ বাংলা ∙ bosanski ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ dansk ∙ Deutsch ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form) ∙ Zazaki ∙ ދިވެހިބަސް ∙ Ελληνικά ∙ English ∙ Esperanto ∙ español ∙ eesti ∙ فارسی ∙ suomi ∙ français ∙ galego ∙ עברית ∙ hrvatski ∙ magyar ∙ հայերեն ∙ Bahasa Indonesia ∙ íslenska ∙ italiano ∙ 日本語 ∙ 한국어 ∙ 조선말 ∙ македонски ∙ മലയാളം ∙ Bahasa Melayu ∙ မြန်မာဘာသာ ∙ norsk bokmål ∙ Plattdüütsch ∙ Nederlands ∙ norsk nynorsk ∙ norsk ∙ occitan ∙ polski ∙ پښتو ∙ português ∙ português do Brasil ∙ română ∙ русский ∙ sicilianu ∙ slovenčina ∙ slovenščina ∙ shqip ∙ српски / srpski ∙ svenska ∙ ไทย ∙ Türkçe ∙ українська ∙ Tiếng Việt ∙ 中文 ∙ 中文（简体） ∙ 中文（繁體） ∙ +/−

Affected:

File:Olympus OM-D E-M1 Mark II (31027798025).jpg

And also:

Yours sincerely, Didym (talk) 19:49, 28 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

These are public images released by the manufacturers i question for public information purposes and unrestricted use. Bengt Nyman (talk) 20:47, 28 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

File:600 mm telefoto lens.jpg

File:600 mm telefoto lens.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!

Afrikaans ∙ العربية ∙ беларуская ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца) ∙ български ∙ ပအိုဝ်ႏဘာႏသာႏ ∙ বাংলা ∙ bosanski ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ dansk ∙ Deutsch ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form) ∙ Zazaki ∙ ދިވެހިބަސް ∙ Ελληνικά ∙ English ∙ Esperanto ∙ español ∙ eesti ∙ فارسی ∙ suomi ∙ français ∙ galego ∙ עברית ∙ hrvatski ∙ magyar ∙ հայերեն ∙ Bahasa Indonesia ∙ íslenska ∙ italiano ∙ 日本語 ∙ 한국어 ∙ 조선말 ∙ македонски ∙ മലയാളം ∙ Bahasa Melayu ∙ မြန်မာဘာသာ ∙ norsk bokmål ∙ Plattdüütsch ∙ Nederlands ∙ norsk nynorsk ∙ norsk ∙ occitan ∙ polski ∙ پښتو ∙ português ∙ português do Brasil ∙ română ∙ русский ∙ sicilianu ∙ slovenčina ∙ slovenščina ∙ shqip ∙ српски / srpski ∙ svenska ∙ ไทย ∙ Türkçe ∙ українська ∙ Tiếng Việt ∙ 中文 ∙ 中文（简体） ∙ 中文（繁體） ∙ +/−

Sebari – aka Srittau (talk) 19:53, 5 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion requests

I agree with you that those files should be deleted on your request, but could you please start regular deletion requests instead of speedy deletion requests, those files are not recently uploaded and don't qualify for speedy deletion. --Didym (talk) 19:57, 5 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I don't know how to find the files. I requested Speedy Deletion and deleted them from my personal category. Bengt Nyman (talk) 20:23, 5 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Didym: who told you that uploaders can simply revoke their contributions? No, one cannot. If the upload was not very recent, then just 'uploader request' is not a valid deletion reason. Jcb (talk) 20:42, 5 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Jcb: most (but not all) of these files are actually out of project scope and unused. Many also do have personality rights issues. --Didym (talk) 22:16, 5 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

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.

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!

Afrikaans ∙ العربية ∙ беларуская ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца) ∙ български ∙ ပအိုဝ်ႏဘာႏသာႏ ∙ বাংলা ∙ bosanski ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ dansk ∙ Deutsch ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form) ∙ Zazaki ∙ ދިވެހިބަސް ∙ Ελληνικά ∙ English ∙ Esperanto ∙ español ∙ eesti ∙ فارسی ∙ suomi ∙ français ∙ galego ∙ עברית ∙ hrvatski ∙ magyar ∙ հայերեն ∙ Bahasa Indonesia ∙ íslenska ∙ italiano ∙ 日本語 ∙ 한국어 ∙ 조선말 ∙ македонски ∙ മലയാളം ∙ Bahasa Melayu ∙ မြန်မာဘာသာ ∙ norsk bokmål ∙ Plattdüütsch ∙ Nederlands ∙ norsk nynorsk ∙ norsk ∙ occitan ∙ polski ∙ پښتو ∙ português ∙ português do Brasil ∙ română ∙ русский ∙ sicilianu ∙ slovenčina ∙ slovenščina ∙ shqip ∙ српски / srpski ∙ svenska ∙ ไทย ∙ Türkçe ∙ українська ∙ Tiếng Việt ∙ 中文 ∙ 中文（简体） ∙ 中文（繁體） ∙ +/−

Affected:

File:Surf 8467 (23959958054).jpg

And also:

Yours sincerely, Sebari – aka Srittau (talk) 20:35, 5 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Deletion nominations

Hi, if you want your uploads to be deleted, there must be a valid reason. You cannot just revoke your contributions. We only delete files on uploader request shortly after upload. It's vital for a free license that releases cannot be revoked. Jcb (talk) 20:40, 5 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

If you don't stop these nominations NOW, I will make you stop. Jcb (talk) 20:56, 5 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I am requesting deletion of ocean surfing images which are redundant by similarity, not used by any Wikipedia and not needed to generously illustrate the subject of surfing. Bengt Nyman (talk) 21:17, 5 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

These are not valid reasons for speedy deletion. Jcb (talk) 21:22, 5 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Ok. Is it reason enough for some other kind of deletion or washing ? Bengt Nyman (talk) 21:31, 5 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Probably not. The quality is good. We don't know if they are in use outside Wikipedia/Wikimedia and we don't want to put external reusers at risk. Jcb (talk) 21:34, 5 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I thought that reusers external to Wiki had to download, if they wanted a copy of an image.

That's not necessary. But even if they do, what if you decide to change the license at Flickr and then start accusing the reusers of copyright violation? It would be difficult for the victims to show that you are wrong if we delete the files from our servers. I am not saying that you have such plans, but I have seen this scenario happening several times, including hugh bills sent to the reusers by the author. Jcb (talk) 21:53, 5 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I wish to delete some of my older, redundant and substandard images which are not used anywhere. Please tell me if and how we can accomplish this. Bengt Nyman (talk) 22:13, 5 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Please just leave the files alone and forget about it. Jcb (talk) 22:33, 5 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

File:Events 1422 (26345792433).jpg

File:Events 1422 (26345792433).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!

Afrikaans ∙ العربية ∙ беларуская ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца) ∙ български ∙ ပအိုဝ်ႏဘာႏသာႏ ∙ বাংলা ∙ bosanski ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ dansk ∙ Deutsch ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form) ∙ Zazaki ∙ ދިވެހިބަސް ∙ Ελληνικά ∙ English ∙ Esperanto ∙ español ∙ eesti ∙ فارسی ∙ suomi ∙ français ∙ galego ∙ עברית ∙ hrvatski ∙ magyar ∙ հայերեն ∙ Bahasa Indonesia ∙ íslenska ∙ italiano ∙ 日本語 ∙ 한국어 ∙ 조선말 ∙ македонски ∙ മലയാളം ∙ Bahasa Melayu ∙ မြန်မာဘာသာ ∙ norsk bokmål ∙ Plattdüütsch ∙ Nederlands ∙ norsk nynorsk ∙ norsk ∙ occitan ∙ polski ∙ پښتو ∙ português ∙ português do Brasil ∙ română ∙ русский ∙ sicilianu ∙ slovenčina ∙ slovenščina ∙ shqip ∙ српски / srpski ∙ svenska ∙ ไทย ∙ Türkçe ∙ українська ∙ Tiếng Việt ∙ 中文 ∙ 中文（简体） ∙ 中文（繁體） ∙ +/−

Didym (talk) 22:20, 5 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Delete ! Bengt Nyman (talk) 22:27, 5 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

File renaming

Hi there. I've proceeded one of your rename requests. But the second one is not possible. Would you choose a different name? -- Der Fussi 20:40, 5 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Please name the file in question. Bengt Nyman (talk) 21:37, 5 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I can not find the file originally named file: Gustavsberg VII IMG_7785 (33428096824).jpg. I asked that it be renamed to Gustafsberg VII IMG_7785 (33428096824).jpg to correct the spelling (f instead of v) WHAT HAPPENED? Bengt Nyman (talk) 22:10, 5 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

It's here: File:Gustafsberg VII IMG 7279 (34138936201).jpg. Maybe you used the wrong name in your request (cop-and-paste error)? I just pushed the button in the template. Please ask an admin or ask here to resolve this. Because I will go to holiday today. -- Der Fussi 06:53, 6 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

File:Vånö EM1B3047 (35004350210).jpg

Hej Bengt, where did you take this photograph? It would be good to know so we can add a category for the location. Regards, De728631 (talk) 18:37, 3 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Vaxholms Kastell. Bengt Nyman (talk) 18:53, 3 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I see. Thanks a lot. De728631 (talk) 18:56, 3 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

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.

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!

Afrikaans ∙ العربية ∙ беларуская ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца) ∙ български ∙ ပအိုဝ်ႏဘာႏသာႏ ∙ বাংলা ∙ bosanski ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ dansk ∙ Deutsch ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form) ∙ Zazaki ∙ ދިވެހިބަސް ∙ Ελληνικά ∙ English ∙ Esperanto ∙ español ∙ eesti ∙ فارسی ∙ suomi ∙ français ∙ galego ∙ עברית ∙ hrvatski ∙ magyar ∙ հայերեն ∙ Bahasa Indonesia ∙ íslenska ∙ italiano ∙ 日本語 ∙ 한국어 ∙ 조선말 ∙ македонски ∙ മലയാളം ∙ Bahasa Melayu ∙ မြန်မာဘာသာ ∙ norsk bokmål ∙ Plattdüütsch ∙ Nederlands ∙ norsk nynorsk ∙ norsk ∙ occitan ∙ polski ∙ پښتو ∙ português ∙ português do Brasil ∙ română ∙ русский ∙ sicilianu ∙ slovenčina ∙ slovenščina ∙ shqip ∙ српски / srpski ∙ svenska ∙ ไทย ∙ Türkçe ∙ українська ∙ Tiếng Việt ∙ 中文 ∙ 中文（简体） ∙ 中文（繁體） ∙ +/−

Affected:

File:Santa Cruz D81 6824 (32613360826).jpg

And also:

Yours sincerely, Ies (talk) 13:18, 28 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

P.P.S. All my photos of art above were taken in public places open to the public without any restrictions posted as to photography or use. Compare: https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Licensing "Every faithful reproduction of Mona Lisa is considered by Commons to be public domain. See "Exception" in text for details." As far as use in Commons, You be the judge. Bengt Nyman (talk) 14:14, 28 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

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.

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!

Afrikaans ∙ العربية ∙ беларуская ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца) ∙ български ∙ ပအိုဝ်ႏဘာႏသာႏ ∙ বাংলা ∙ bosanski ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ dansk ∙ Deutsch ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form) ∙ Zazaki ∙ ދިވެހިބަސް ∙ Ελληνικά ∙ English ∙ Esperanto ∙ español ∙ eesti ∙ فارسی ∙ suomi ∙ français ∙ galego ∙ עברית ∙ hrvatski ∙ magyar ∙ հայերեն ∙ Bahasa Indonesia ∙ íslenska ∙ italiano ∙ 日本語 ∙ 한국어 ∙ 조선말 ∙ македонски ∙ മലയാളം ∙ Bahasa Melayu ∙ မြန်မာဘာသာ ∙ norsk bokmål ∙ Plattdüütsch ∙ Nederlands ∙ norsk nynorsk ∙ norsk ∙ occitan ∙ polski ∙ پښتو ∙ português ∙ português do Brasil ∙ română ∙ русский ∙ sicilianu ∙ slovenčina ∙ slovenščina ∙ shqip ∙ српски / srpski ∙ svenska ∙ ไทย ∙ Türkçe ∙ українська ∙ Tiếng Việt ∙ 中文 ∙ 中文（简体） ∙ 中文（繁體） ∙ +/−

Affected:

File:Santa Cruz EM1B5554 (32312259650).jpg

And also:

Yours sincerely, Ies (talk) 13:22, 28 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The above photos are all photographs taken by myself of people on the streets of Santa Cruz. THEY ARE NOT PHOTOS OF OTHER PICTURES OR OF ART !! Bengt Nyman (talk) 14:36, 28 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Since Wikimedia Commons policy about publishing photographs has changed due to recent law suit, please guide me to Commons new policy about publishing photographs ! Thank You. Bengt Nyman (talk) 19:20, 4 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

File:Santa Cruz EM1B5589 (32538625072).jpg

File:Santa Cruz EM1B5589 (32538625072).jpg 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.)

Warning: Wikimedia Commons takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing.

Afrikaans ∙ العربية ∙ asturianu ∙ azərbaycanca ∙ беларуская ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца) ∙ български ∙ ပအိုဝ်ႏဘာႏသာႏ ∙ বাংলা ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ dansk ∙ Deutsch ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form) ∙ Zazaki ∙ Ελληνικά ∙ English ∙ español ∙ euskara ∙ فارسی ∙ suomi ∙ français ∙ galego ∙ עברית ∙ hrvatski ∙ magyar ∙ հայերեն ∙ Bahasa Indonesia ∙ italiano ∙ 日本語 ∙ 한국어 ∙ Lëtzebuergesch ∙ македонски ∙ മലയാളം ∙ मराठी ∙ Bahasa Melayu ∙ Malti ∙ မြန်မာဘာသာ ∙ norsk bokmål ∙ Plattdüütsch ∙ Nederlands ∙ norsk nynorsk ∙ norsk ∙ polski ∙ português ∙ português do Brasil ∙ română ∙ русский ∙ sicilianu ∙ slovenčina ∙ slovenščina ∙ српски / srpski ∙ svenska ∙ தமிழ் ∙ тоҷикӣ ∙ ไทย ∙ Türkçe ∙ українська ∙ oʻzbekcha / ўзбекча ∙ Tiếng Việt ∙ 中文（简体） ∙ 中文（繁體） ∙ +/−

Yours sincerely, Ies (talk) 13:26, 28 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

No argument. Bengt Nyman (talk) 13:31, 28 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

P.P.S. All my photos of art above were taken in public places open to the public without any restrictions posted as to photography or use. Compare: https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Licensing "Every faithful reproduction of Mona Lisa is considered by Commons to be public domain. See "Exception" in text for details." As far as use in Commons, You be the judge. Bengt Nyman (talk) 14:11, 28 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

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.

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!

Afrikaans ∙ العربية ∙ беларуская ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца) ∙ български ∙ ပအိုဝ်ႏဘာႏသာႏ ∙ বাংলা ∙ bosanski ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ dansk ∙ Deutsch ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form) ∙ Zazaki ∙ ދިވެހިބަސް ∙ Ελληνικά ∙ English ∙ Esperanto ∙ español ∙ eesti ∙ فارسی ∙ suomi ∙ français ∙ galego ∙ עברית ∙ hrvatski ∙ magyar ∙ հայերեն ∙ Bahasa Indonesia ∙ íslenska ∙ italiano ∙ 日本語 ∙ 한국어 ∙ 조선말 ∙ македонски ∙ മലയാളം ∙ Bahasa Melayu ∙ မြန်မာဘာသာ ∙ norsk bokmål ∙ Plattdüütsch ∙ Nederlands ∙ norsk nynorsk ∙ norsk ∙ occitan ∙ polski ∙ پښتو ∙ português ∙ português do Brasil ∙ română ∙ русский ∙ sicilianu ∙ slovenčina ∙ slovenščina ∙ shqip ∙ српски / srpski ∙ svenska ∙ ไทย ∙ Türkçe ∙ українська ∙ Tiếng Việt ∙ 中文 ∙ 中文（简体） ∙ 中文（繁體） ∙ +/−

Affected:

File:Santa Cruz D81 6822 (31841693563).jpg

Yours sincerely, Ies (talk) 13:30, 28 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

You are correct. Bengt Nyman (talk) 13:33, 28 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

P.P.S. All my photos of art above were taken in public places open to the public without any restrictions posted as to photography or use. Compare: https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Licensing "Every faithful reproduction of Mona Lisa is considered by Commons to be public domain. See "Exception" in text for details." As far as use in Commons, You be the judge. Bengt Nyman (talk) 14:10, 28 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hej Bengt! Jag kanske kan räta ut några frågetecken. Skillnaden ligger i det avbildade verkets upphovsrätt. Till skillnad från Mona Lisa skyddas nutida verk av upphovsrätten. För att sprida och licensera avbildningar av nutida verk krävs därför tillstånd från det avbildade verkets upphovsrättsinnehavare. Att det inte finns några skyltar med fotoförbud eller andra restriktioner spelar ingen roll. Det krävs inga särskilda skyltar eller meddelanden om upphovsrätten för att upphovsrätten ska gälla. —LX (talk, contribs) 18:31, 6 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

That means it becomes a question of how old the peace of art is, compared to when generalized copyright went into effect. Maybe you know ? Bengt Nyman (talk) 22:03, 6 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

If I'm not mistaken, this particular painting was created in 2013. The copyright term in Europe is typically 70 years after the death of the author (the painter in this case), so a work from 2013 is obviously going to be copyrighted for many decades. —LX (talk, contribs) 22:26, 6 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Förargligt. Thank You. Bengt Nyman (talk) 00:26, 7 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

File:Nobel Prize 18 2013.jpg

File:Nobel Prize 18 2013.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!

Afrikaans ∙ العربية ∙ беларуская ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца) ∙ български ∙ ပအိုဝ်ႏဘာႏသာႏ ∙ বাংলা ∙ bosanski ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ dansk ∙ Deutsch ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form) ∙ Zazaki ∙ ދިވެހިބަސް ∙ Ελληνικά ∙ English ∙ Esperanto ∙ español ∙ eesti ∙ فارسی ∙ suomi ∙ français ∙ galego ∙ עברית ∙ hrvatski ∙ magyar ∙ հայերեն ∙ Bahasa Indonesia ∙ íslenska ∙ italiano ∙ 日本語 ∙ 한국어 ∙ 조선말 ∙ македонски ∙ മലയാളം ∙ Bahasa Melayu ∙ မြန်မာဘာသာ ∙ norsk bokmål ∙ Plattdüütsch ∙ Nederlands ∙ norsk nynorsk ∙ norsk ∙ occitan ∙ polski ∙ پښتو ∙ português ∙ português do Brasil ∙ română ∙ русский ∙ sicilianu ∙ slovenčina ∙ slovenščina ∙ shqip ∙ српски / srpski ∙ svenska ∙ ไทย ∙ Türkçe ∙ українська ∙ Tiếng Việt ∙ 中文 ∙ 中文（简体） ∙ 中文（繁體） ∙ +/−

Triggerhippie4 (talk) 11:25, 29 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

If this is a duplicate without any usage on any Wikipedia, feel free to delete. If used on a Wikipedia substitute usage before deletion. Bengt Nyman (talk) 11:02, 6 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

File:Nobel Prize 20 2013.jpg

File:Nobel Prize 20 2013.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!

Afrikaans ∙ العربية ∙ беларуская ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца) ∙ български ∙ ပအိုဝ်ႏဘာႏသာႏ ∙ বাংলা ∙ bosanski ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ dansk ∙ Deutsch ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form) ∙ Zazaki ∙ ދިވެހިބަސް ∙ Ελληνικά ∙ English ∙ Esperanto ∙ español ∙ eesti ∙ فارسی ∙ suomi ∙ français ∙ galego ∙ עברית ∙ hrvatski ∙ magyar ∙ հայերեն ∙ Bahasa Indonesia ∙ íslenska ∙ italiano ∙ 日本語 ∙ 한국어 ∙ 조선말 ∙ македонски ∙ മലയാളം ∙ Bahasa Melayu ∙ မြန်မာဘာသာ ∙ norsk bokmål ∙ Plattdüütsch ∙ Nederlands ∙ norsk nynorsk ∙ norsk ∙ occitan ∙ polski ∙ پښتو ∙ português ∙ português do Brasil ∙ română ∙ русский ∙ sicilianu ∙ slovenčina ∙ slovenščina ∙ shqip ∙ српски / srpski ∙ svenska ∙ ไทย ∙ Türkçe ∙ українська ∙ Tiếng Việt ∙ 中文 ∙ 中文（简体） ∙ 中文（繁體） ∙ +/−

Triggerhippie4 (talk) 11:32, 29 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

If this is a duplicate without any usage on any Wikipedia, feel free to delete. If used on a Wikipedia substitute usage before deletion. Bengt Nyman (talk) 11:03, 6 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

File:Nobel Prize 13 2013.jpg

File:Nobel Prize 13 2013.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!

Afrikaans ∙ العربية ∙ беларуская ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца) ∙ български ∙ ပအိုဝ်ႏဘာႏသာႏ ∙ বাংলা ∙ bosanski ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ dansk ∙ Deutsch ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form) ∙ Zazaki ∙ ދިވެހިބަސް ∙ Ελληνικά ∙ English ∙ Esperanto ∙ español ∙ eesti ∙ فارسی ∙ suomi ∙ français ∙ galego ∙ עברית ∙ hrvatski ∙ magyar ∙ հայերեն ∙ Bahasa Indonesia ∙ íslenska ∙ italiano ∙ 日本語 ∙ 한국어 ∙ 조선말 ∙ македонски ∙ മലയാളം ∙ Bahasa Melayu ∙ မြန်မာဘာသာ ∙ norsk bokmål ∙ Plattdüütsch ∙ Nederlands ∙ norsk nynorsk ∙ norsk ∙ occitan ∙ polski ∙ پښتو ∙ português ∙ português do Brasil ∙ română ∙ русский ∙ sicilianu ∙ slovenčina ∙ slovenščina ∙ shqip ∙ српски / srpski ∙ svenska ∙ ไทย ∙ Türkçe ∙ українська ∙ Tiếng Việt ∙ 中文 ∙ 中文（简体） ∙ 中文（繁體） ∙ +/−

Triggerhippie4 (talk) 11:42, 29 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

If this is a duplicate without any usage on any Wikipedia, feel free to delete. If used on a Wikipedia substitute usage before deletion. Bengt Nyman (talk) 11:04, 6 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

File:Nobel Prize 14 2013.jpg

File:Nobel Prize 14 2013.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!

Afrikaans ∙ العربية ∙ беларуская ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца) ∙ български ∙ ပအိုဝ်ႏဘာႏသာႏ ∙ বাংলা ∙ bosanski ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ dansk ∙ Deutsch ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form) ∙ Zazaki ∙ ދިވެހިބަސް ∙ Ελληνικά ∙ English ∙ Esperanto ∙ español ∙ eesti ∙ فارسی ∙ suomi ∙ français ∙ galego ∙ עברית ∙ hrvatski ∙ magyar ∙ հայերեն ∙ Bahasa Indonesia ∙ íslenska ∙ italiano ∙ 日本語 ∙ 한국어 ∙ 조선말 ∙ македонски ∙ മലയാളം ∙ Bahasa Melayu ∙ မြန်မာဘာသာ ∙ norsk bokmål ∙ Plattdüütsch ∙ Nederlands ∙ norsk nynorsk ∙ norsk ∙ occitan ∙ polski ∙ پښتو ∙ português ∙ português do Brasil ∙ română ∙ русский ∙ sicilianu ∙ slovenčina ∙ slovenščina ∙ shqip ∙ српски / srpski ∙ svenska ∙ ไทย ∙ Türkçe ∙ українська ∙ Tiếng Việt ∙ 中文 ∙ 中文（简体） ∙ 中文（繁體） ∙ +/−

Triggerhippie4 (talk) 11:47, 29 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

If this is a duplicate without any usage on any Wikipedia, feel free to delete. If used on a Wikipedia substitute usage before deletion. Bengt Nyman (talk) 11:04, 6 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

File:Nobel Prize 15 2013.jpg

File:Nobel Prize 15 2013.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!

Afrikaans ∙ العربية ∙ беларуская ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца) ∙ български ∙ ပအိုဝ်ႏဘာႏသာႏ ∙ বাংলা ∙ bosanski ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ dansk ∙ Deutsch ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form) ∙ Zazaki ∙ ދިވެހިބަސް ∙ Ελληνικά ∙ English ∙ Esperanto ∙ español ∙ eesti ∙ فارسی ∙ suomi ∙ français ∙ galego ∙ עברית ∙ hrvatski ∙ magyar ∙ հայերեն ∙ Bahasa Indonesia ∙ íslenska ∙ italiano ∙ 日本語 ∙ 한국어 ∙ 조선말 ∙ македонски ∙ മലയാളം ∙ Bahasa Melayu ∙ မြန်မာဘာသာ ∙ norsk bokmål ∙ Plattdüütsch ∙ Nederlands ∙ norsk nynorsk ∙ norsk ∙ occitan ∙ polski ∙ پښتو ∙ português ∙ português do Brasil ∙ română ∙ русский ∙ sicilianu ∙ slovenčina ∙ slovenščina ∙ shqip ∙ српски / srpski ∙ svenska ∙ ไทย ∙ Türkçe ∙ українська ∙ Tiếng Việt ∙ 中文 ∙ 中文（简体） ∙ 中文（繁體） ∙ +/−

Triggerhippie4 (talk) 11:50, 29 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

If this is a duplicate without any usage on any Wikipedia, feel free to delete. If used on a Wikipedia substitute usage before deletion. Bengt Nyman (talk) 11:05, 6 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

File:Nobel Prize 16 2013.jpg

File:Nobel Prize 16 2013.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!

Afrikaans ∙ العربية ∙ беларуская ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца) ∙ български ∙ ပအိုဝ်ႏဘာႏသာႏ ∙ বাংলা ∙ bosanski ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ dansk ∙ Deutsch ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form) ∙ Zazaki ∙ ދިވެހިބަސް ∙ Ελληνικά ∙ English ∙ Esperanto ∙ español ∙ eesti ∙ فارسی ∙ suomi ∙ français ∙ galego ∙ עברית ∙ hrvatski ∙ magyar ∙ հայերեն ∙ Bahasa Indonesia ∙ íslenska ∙ italiano ∙ 日本語 ∙ 한국어 ∙ 조선말 ∙ македонски ∙ മലയാളം ∙ Bahasa Melayu ∙ မြန်မာဘာသာ ∙ norsk bokmål ∙ Plattdüütsch ∙ Nederlands ∙ norsk nynorsk ∙ norsk ∙ occitan ∙ polski ∙ پښتو ∙ português ∙ português do Brasil ∙ română ∙ русский ∙ sicilianu ∙ slovenčina ∙ slovenščina ∙ shqip ∙ српски / srpski ∙ svenska ∙ ไทย ∙ Türkçe ∙ українська ∙ Tiếng Việt ∙ 中文 ∙ 中文（简体） ∙ 中文（繁體） ∙ +/−

Triggerhippie4 (talk) 11:53, 29 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

If this is a duplicate without any usage on any Wikipedia, feel free to delete. If used on a Wikipedia substitute usage before deletion. Bengt Nyman (talk) 11:05, 6 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Wiki Science Competition 2017 closes on December, the 15th

Hi, "Wiki Science Competition" 2017 has started

It is a world event.
The upload phase in Asian, American and European countries without juries ends on December 15th. In Africa two weeks later.
Here you can find more details.

This is a manually inserted message for commons users who are also globally active or who have uploaded images related to the competition's themes (science buildings, microscopic images, scientists, wildlife...).

#WSC2017 #WikiScience #WikiScience2017

Wiki Science Competition

You can use a tag for pictures uploaded after November, the 1st. Some countries upload forms are closed, but if the image is related to an open challenge, you can uploaded it there, it's not rigid. Country level division is also to provide some prize, but it is based on good sense.--Alexmar983 (talk) 11:56, 9 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Image problems

Several of your recent uploads are not complete. Maybe you are being too hasty with large files, so they need to be uploaded again. Then change the "flickrevieweR 2" tag to {{Flickrreview}} (with the curly brackets) to get the bot to try again because it cannot see the flickr image based on an incomplete upload. Thanks. Ww2censor (talk) 15:51, 20 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I have heard that this is a recent and known problem with flickr2Wiki uploads. I have no control over how fast this process works. I updated one of the images only to get the same result again. I believe this is a flickr2Wiki bug that needs attention. Bengt Nyman (talk) 16:16, 20 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I uploaded "new" but same version and file size of the all images in question. I believe this is a flickr2Wiki bug that needs attention. Bengt Nyman (talk) 17:01, 20 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

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.

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!

Afrikaans ∙ العربية ∙ беларуская ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца) ∙ български ∙ ပအိုဝ်ႏဘာႏသာႏ ∙ বাংলা ∙ bosanski ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ dansk ∙ Deutsch ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form) ∙ Zazaki ∙ ދިވެހިބަސް ∙ Ελληνικά ∙ English ∙ Esperanto ∙ español ∙ eesti ∙ فارسی ∙ suomi ∙ français ∙ galego ∙ עברית ∙ hrvatski ∙ magyar ∙ հայերեն ∙ Bahasa Indonesia ∙ íslenska ∙ italiano ∙ 日本語 ∙ 한국어 ∙ 조선말 ∙ македонски ∙ മലയാളം ∙ Bahasa Melayu ∙ မြန်မာဘာသာ ∙ norsk bokmål ∙ Plattdüütsch ∙ Nederlands ∙ norsk nynorsk ∙ norsk ∙ occitan ∙ polski ∙ پښتو ∙ português ∙ português do Brasil ∙ română ∙ русский ∙ sicilianu ∙ slovenčina ∙ slovenščina ∙ shqip ∙ српски / srpski ∙ svenska ∙ ไทย ∙ Türkçe ∙ українська ∙ Tiếng Việt ∙ 中文 ∙ 中文（简体） ∙ 中文（繁體） ∙ +/−

Affected:

File:D8E 3722 (8730540253).jpg

Yours sincerely, Discasto _talk 21:07, 26 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Fine with me. Bengt Nyman (talk) 00:07, 27 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Image without license

File:Electrostatic posturing and gravity between 2 Hydrogen atoms. Red dots track electron offsets..webm

dansk ∙ italiano ∙ sicilianu ∙ Deutsch ∙ català ∙ magyar ∙ čeština ∙ português do Brasil ∙ Esperanto ∙ español ∙ português ∙ English ∙ hrvatski ∙ français ∙ Nederlands ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ ∙ norsk nynorsk ∙ polski ∙ galego ∙ íslenska ∙ slovenščina ∙ suomi ∙ svenska ∙ Türkçe ∙ Ελληνικά ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ ∙ български ∙ македонски ∙ русский ∙ українська ∙ മലയാളം ∙ 日本語 ∙ 中文（简体）‎ ∙ 中文（繁體）‎ ∙ فارسی ∙ +/−

There seems to be a problem regarding the description and/or licensing of this particular file. It has been found that you've added in the image's description only a Template that's not a license and although it provides useful information about the image, it's not a valid license. Could you please resolve this problem, adding the license in the image linked above? You can edit the description page and change the text. Uploading a new version of the file does not change the description of the file. This page may give you more hints on which license to choose. Thank you.

This message was added automatically by MifterBot ^{(Talk • Contribs • Owner)}, if you need some help about it please read the text above again and follow the links in it, if you still need help ask at the → Commons:Help desk in any language you like to use. --MifterBot ^{(Talk • Contribs • Owner)} 12:11, 30 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. Added license information. Please check. Bengt Nyman (talk) 12:44, 30 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

File:Sunset over Kanholmsfjärden, Sweden - panoramio - Bengt Nyman.jpg

Hi Bengt. I don't suppose you can recall when you took this great photo. See File talk:Sunset over Kanholmsfjärden, Sweden - panoramio - Bengt Nyman.jpg. -- Chris j wood (talk) 10:39, 19 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Category:La Bohème (Metropolitan Opera 2014)

There are a lot of photos of operas indicating you as the author. Have you really been in the opera house and taken the photos? Or have you just captured them from a television or computer screen? -- Robert Weemeyer (talk) 08:51, 16 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I was commissioned by the local government where I live to capture transmissions from the Metropolitan Opera and publish these images electronically. Upon later legal scrutiny the same body decided to end capture and re-publication of these images. Even if this capture had been done first hand in the Opera House, republication is according to current regulations not advisable. These images should all be deleted from Wikimedia Commons or archived. Thank You. Bengt Nyman (talk) 10:53, 16 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

File:Kastellet 5249 (9098147985).jpg

Hi Bengt. This is a duplicate of your File:Kastellet Vaxholm June 2013 - panoramio.jpg cross-loaded by a different route. The camera locations on the two images differ, but comparison of the image with Google Maps suggest that the camera location on the other image is correct. Hence nominating this one for deletion. If you would prefer the other one kept instead, then please say so on the discussion page (below).

File:Kastellet 5249 (9098147985).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!

Afrikaans ∙ العربية ∙ беларуская ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца) ∙ български ∙ ပအိုဝ်ႏဘာႏသာႏ ∙ বাংলা ∙ bosanski ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ dansk ∙ Deutsch ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form) ∙ Zazaki ∙ ދިވެހިބަސް ∙ Ελληνικά ∙ English ∙ Esperanto ∙ español ∙ eesti ∙ فارسی ∙ suomi ∙ français ∙ galego ∙ עברית ∙ hrvatski ∙ magyar ∙ հայերեն ∙ Bahasa Indonesia ∙ íslenska ∙ italiano ∙ 日本語 ∙ 한국어 ∙ 조선말 ∙ македонски ∙ മലയാളം ∙ Bahasa Melayu ∙ မြန်မာဘာသာ ∙ norsk bokmål ∙ Plattdüütsch ∙ Nederlands ∙ norsk nynorsk ∙ norsk ∙ occitan ∙ polski ∙ پښتو ∙ português ∙ português do Brasil ∙ română ∙ русский ∙ sicilianu ∙ slovenčina ∙ slovenščina ∙ shqip ∙ српски / srpski ∙ svenska ∙ ไทย ∙ Türkçe ∙ українська ∙ Tiếng Việt ∙ 中文 ∙ 中文（简体） ∙ 中文（繁體） ∙ +/−

-- Chris j wood (talk) 10:31, 26 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Ok. Bengt Nyman (talk) 12:52, 26 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Finding something?

Hi Bengt - I've just had 3 emails saying you can't find something? What can't you find? - MPF (talk) 22:37, 28 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

you moved or recategorized some beach birds of mine. Bengt Nyman (talk) 22:56, 28 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

That will be some files where the species was misidentified, which I renamed with the correct species. If you look at the 'missing' file name, it will tell you what it has been moved to. I find it odd though that you can't find them, the wiki software will have renamed them in your contributions list. Hope this helps, let me know if you have any further queries - MPF (talk) 23:20, 28 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Found them; they are Larus fuscus (note the bright yellow legs, and slender bill), not Larus marinus as originally named:

MPF (talk) 23:31, 28 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you, however I was referring to: "MPF moved page File:Surf Calidris minutilla 4541 (3119002868).jpg to File:Calidris alba, San Diego 4541 (3119002868).jpg without leaving a redirect: identity) (undo | thank)." However, thanks to my own User Categories I found them this morning. Question: When an editor moves an image I get a message, I click on the link to the new file, but the image NEVER appears. How come I always have to go to Commons and search for it? THANKS FOR YOUR HELP Bengt Nyman (talk) 10:24, 29 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! Of "I click on the link to the new file, but the image NEVER appears" - I really don't know why that has happened? You should be able to see it with the link to the new name, it is very strange that you can't. It sounds like a software bug to me, it might be worth asking on the MediaWiki notice board? - MPF (talk) 14:53, 29 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

This (link not showing the new page) has been going on for over a year, I just have not bothered reporting it. Thanks. Bengt Nyman (talk) 16:35, 29 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Very odd! I just looked at one of the old filenames, and it said "28 September 2018 MPF (talk | contribs | block) moved page File:Surf Calidris minutilla 4541 (3119002868).jpg to File:Calidris alba, San Diego 4541 (3119002868).jpg without leaving a redirect (identity)" - the link to the new name working OK. Clearly the bug doesn't happen for everyone; I can see it would be extremely annoying when it does happen! MPF (talk) 17:44, 29 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

File:Numenius americanus EM1B0492 (40827509481).jpg

File:Numenius americanus EM1B0492 (40827509481).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!

Afrikaans ∙ العربية ∙ беларуская ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца) ∙ български ∙ ပအိုဝ်ႏဘာႏသာႏ ∙ বাংলা ∙ bosanski ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ dansk ∙ Deutsch ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form) ∙ Zazaki ∙ ދިވެހިބަސް ∙ Ελληνικά ∙ English ∙ Esperanto ∙ español ∙ eesti ∙ فارسی ∙ suomi ∙ français ∙ galego ∙ עברית ∙ hrvatski ∙ magyar ∙ հայերեն ∙ Bahasa Indonesia ∙ íslenska ∙ italiano ∙ 日本語 ∙ 한국어 ∙ 조선말 ∙ македонски ∙ മലയാളം ∙ Bahasa Melayu ∙ မြန်မာဘာသာ ∙ norsk bokmål ∙ Plattdüütsch ∙ Nederlands ∙ norsk nynorsk ∙ norsk ∙ occitan ∙ polski ∙ پښتو ∙ português ∙ português do Brasil ∙ română ∙ русский ∙ sicilianu ∙ slovenčina ∙ slovenščina ∙ shqip ∙ српски / srpski ∙ svenska ∙ ไทย ∙ Türkçe ∙ українська ∙ Tiếng Việt ∙ 中文 ∙ 中文（简体） ∙ 中文（繁體） ∙ +/−

70.183.170.36 19:29, 1 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I see no reason to delete this file. The file does not have a copyright issue since I am the photographer. Rather rename the file to reflect a more correct file name prefix like for example: "Curlew EM1B0492 (40827509481).jpg". Bengt Nyman (talk) 21:48, 1 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

File:Teror 1-2 (32430145457).jpg

File:Teror 1-2 (32430145457).jpg 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.)

This file is a copyright violation for the following reason: Google Earth

Warning: Wikimedia Commons takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing.

Afrikaans ∙ العربية ∙ asturianu ∙ azərbaycanca ∙ беларуская ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца) ∙ български ∙ ပအိုဝ်ႏဘာႏသာႏ ∙ বাংলা ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ dansk ∙ Deutsch ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form) ∙ Zazaki ∙ Ελληνικά ∙ English ∙ español ∙ euskara ∙ فارسی ∙ suomi ∙ français ∙ galego ∙ עברית ∙ hrvatski ∙ magyar ∙ հայերեն ∙ Bahasa Indonesia ∙ italiano ∙ 日本語 ∙ 한국어 ∙ Lëtzebuergesch ∙ македонски ∙ മലയാളം ∙ मराठी ∙ Bahasa Melayu ∙ Malti ∙ မြန်မာဘာသာ ∙ norsk bokmål ∙ Plattdüütsch ∙ Nederlands ∙ norsk nynorsk ∙ norsk ∙ polski ∙ português ∙ português do Brasil ∙ română ∙ русский ∙ sicilianu ∙ slovenčina ∙ slovenščina ∙ српски / srpski ∙ svenska ∙ தமிழ் ∙ тоҷикӣ ∙ ไทย ∙ Türkçe ∙ українська ∙ oʻzbekcha / ўзбекча ∙ Tiếng Việt ∙ 中文（简体） ∙ 中文（繁體） ∙ +/−

Roy17 (talk) 17:36, 7 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I believe it is free requiring only attribution: https://www.google.com/permissions/geoguidelines/ Bengt Nyman (talk) 20:34, 7 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I see that The Wikimedia Commons page File:Teror 1-2 (32430145457).jpg has been deleted on 8 April 2019 by Túrelio. I assume that clarification has been or will be received from Google Earth overriding the impression given by: https://www.google.com/permissions/geoguidelines/ that with proper attribution the file(s) are free to use and re-publish. Please advise so that I/we know for future applications. Bengt Nyman (talk) 07:12, 8 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hej Bengt! Google Earth and Google Maps content is not free. Those guidelines apply to {{non-commercial}} use and fair use, and as you know, One of the first links from those guidelines is to the actual terms and conditions. As you can see, those are completely non-free, prohibiting all sorts of conduct which would be allowed if the content were free. See also Commons:Copyright rules by subject matter#Maps & satellite imagery, where Google Earth and Google Maps are listed explicitly as not acceptable for Commons. —LX (talk, contribs) 07:55, 8 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your clarification that Commons will only host content that is free for any use. Thank You. Bengt Nyman (talk) 08:40, 8 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Barry_C._Barish

Barry C. Barish 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!

čeština ∙ Deutsch ∙ English ∙ español ∙ français ∙ italiano ∙ magyar ∙ Nederlands ∙ português ∙ polski ∙ sicilianu ∙ slovenščina ∙ Tiếng Việt ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца) ∙ македонски ∙ русский ∙ українська ∙ ತುಳು ∙ ಕನ್ನಡ ∙ ไทย ∙ עברית ∙ 日本語 ∙ 中文 ∙ +/−

RexxS (talk) 15:08, 19 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

You will find my answer at the appropriate place. Bengt Nyman (talk) 17:06, 19 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

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.

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!

Afrikaans ∙ العربية ∙ беларуская ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца) ∙ български ∙ ပအိုဝ်ႏဘာႏသာႏ ∙ বাংলা ∙ bosanski ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ dansk ∙ Deutsch ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form) ∙ Zazaki ∙ ދިވެހިބަސް ∙ Ελληνικά ∙ English ∙ Esperanto ∙ español ∙ eesti ∙ فارسی ∙ suomi ∙ français ∙ galego ∙ עברית ∙ hrvatski ∙ magyar ∙ հայերեն ∙ Bahasa Indonesia ∙ íslenska ∙ italiano ∙ 日本語 ∙ 한국어 ∙ 조선말 ∙ македонски ∙ മലയാളം ∙ Bahasa Melayu ∙ မြန်မာဘာသာ ∙ norsk bokmål ∙ Plattdüütsch ∙ Nederlands ∙ norsk nynorsk ∙ norsk ∙ occitan ∙ polski ∙ پښتو ∙ português ∙ português do Brasil ∙ română ∙ русский ∙ sicilianu ∙ slovenčina ∙ slovenščina ∙ shqip ∙ српски / srpski ∙ svenska ∙ ไทย ∙ Türkçe ∙ українська ∙ Tiếng Việt ∙ 中文 ∙ 中文（简体） ∙ 中文（繁體） ∙ +/−

Affected:

File:Casablanca NZ7 3869 (46218716195).jpg

And also:

Yours sincerely, 大诺史 (Talk/留言/토론/Discussion) 09:11, 27 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Neither of these three shots are Panoramas in the sense of being composed by several individual photographs. They are all single photographs taken in a public place of a public building and cropped to highlight the object in question. I am aware of the customs in Morocco where snake handlers and street entertainers expect to be paid for photographs of their way of making a living, however, I am not aware of any general rules in Morocco prohibiting the photography of the outside of a mosque. There were no signs posted on or near the property prohibiting the photography of this subject. I see no reason to prohibit or delete these three photographs. Bengt Nyman (talk) 10:09, 27 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Community Insights Survey

Share your experience in this survey

Hi Bengt Nyman,

The Wikimedia Foundation is asking for your feedback in a survey about your experience with Wikimedia Commons and Wikimedia. The purpose of this survey is to learn how well the Foundation is supporting your work on wiki and how we can change or improve things in the future. The opinions you share will directly affect the current and future work of the Wikimedia Foundation.

Please take 15 to 25 minutes to give your feedback through this survey. It is available in various languages.

This survey is hosted by a third-party and governed by this privacy statement (in English).

Find more information about this project. Email us if you have any questions, or if you don't want to receive future messages about taking this survey.

Sincerely,

RMaung (WMF) 01:13, 10 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Reminder: Community Insights Survey

Share your experience in this survey

Hi Bengt Nyman,

A couple of weeks ago, we invited you to take the Community Insights Survey. It is the Wikimedia Foundation’s annual survey of our global communities. We want to learn how well we support your work on wiki. We are 10% towards our goal for participation. If you have not already taken the survey, you can help us reach our goal! Your voice matters to us.

Please take 15 to 25 minutes to give your feedback through this survey. It is available in various languages.

This survey is hosted by a third-party and governed by this privacy statement (in English).

Find more information about this project. Email us if you have any questions, or if you don't want to receive future messages about taking this survey.

Sincerely,

RMaung (WMF) 15:23, 20 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you, but I do not wish to participate in the survey. Bengt Nyman (talk) 17:05, 20 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! National Day of Sweden 2015 7900.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.
Comments
Very noisy. Repairable? --Steindy 17:25, 17 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Support Good quality: Flag with sharp details. --Axel Tschentscher 06:25, 18 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

--QICbot (talk) 05:27, 21 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Location?

Hi Bengt - do you have any more detail for where you took File:Ekorre 8218.jpg, please? I'm looking for a good quality pic as close as possible to the species' type locality (Uppsala) to use on the wikispecies page, and this is the best candidate yet. Thanks! - MPF (talk) 17:38, 15 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Said pictures of a Sciurus vulgaris were taken in Vaxholm, 10 km northeast of Stockholm, Sweden. Bengt Nyman (talk) 18:58, 15 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Excellent, thanks! - MPF (talk) 22:35, 15 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

File:Puerto de Mogán 2016 13.jpg

File:Puerto de Mogán 2016 13.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!

Afrikaans ∙ العربية ∙ беларуская ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца) ∙ български ∙ ပအိုဝ်ႏဘာႏသာႏ ∙ বাংলা ∙ bosanski ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ dansk ∙ Deutsch ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form) ∙ Zazaki ∙ ދިވެހިބަސް ∙ Ελληνικά ∙ English ∙ Esperanto ∙ español ∙ eesti ∙ فارسی ∙ suomi ∙ français ∙ galego ∙ עברית ∙ hrvatski ∙ magyar ∙ հայերեն ∙ Bahasa Indonesia ∙ íslenska ∙ italiano ∙ 日本語 ∙ 한국어 ∙ 조선말 ∙ македонски ∙ മലയാളം ∙ Bahasa Melayu ∙ မြန်မာဘာသာ ∙ norsk bokmål ∙ Plattdüütsch ∙ Nederlands ∙ norsk nynorsk ∙ norsk ∙ occitan ∙ polski ∙ پښتو ∙ português ∙ português do Brasil ∙ română ∙ русский ∙ sicilianu ∙ slovenčina ∙ slovenščina ∙ shqip ∙ српски / srpski ∙ svenska ∙ ไทย ∙ Türkçe ∙ українська ∙ Tiếng Việt ∙ 中文 ∙ 中文（简体） ∙ 中文（繁體） ∙ +/−

213.225.89.2 10:05, 30 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

File:Teror, Gran Canaria (32434720647).jpg

File:Teror, Gran Canaria (32434720647).jpg 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.)

This file is a copyright violation for the following reason: unfree Google content

Warning: Wikimedia Commons takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing.

Afrikaans ∙ العربية ∙ asturianu ∙ azərbaycanca ∙ беларуская ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца) ∙ български ∙ ပအိုဝ်ႏဘာႏသာႏ ∙ বাংলা ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ dansk ∙ Deutsch ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form) ∙ Zazaki ∙ Ελληνικά ∙ English ∙ español ∙ euskara ∙ فارسی ∙ suomi ∙ français ∙ galego ∙ עברית ∙ hrvatski ∙ magyar ∙ հայերեն ∙ Bahasa Indonesia ∙ italiano ∙ 日本語 ∙ 한국어 ∙ Lëtzebuergesch ∙ македонски ∙ മലയാളം ∙ मराठी ∙ Bahasa Melayu ∙ Malti ∙ မြန်မာဘာသာ ∙ norsk bokmål ∙ Plattdüütsch ∙ Nederlands ∙ norsk nynorsk ∙ norsk ∙ polski ∙ português ∙ português do Brasil ∙ română ∙ русский ∙ sicilianu ∙ slovenčina ∙ slovenščina ∙ српски / srpski ∙ svenska ∙ தமிழ் ∙ тоҷикӣ ∙ ไทย ∙ Türkçe ∙ українська ∙ oʻzbekcha / ўзбекча ∙ Tiếng Việt ∙ 中文（简体） ∙ 中文（繁體） ∙ +/−

BevinKacon (talk) 20:17, 18 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I can not comment since you deleted the image before I had a chance to see which one it is. Bengt Nyman (talk) 21:40, 18 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Satellite image from Google application.--BevinKacon (talk) 21:50, 18 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I wish to see the image for myself before you singlehandedly judge and delete on your own !! Bengt Nyman (talk) 21

54, 18 February 2020 (UTC)

File source is not properly indicated: File:Norrberget NZ7 1919 20 (49658876672).jpg

العربية ∙ asturianu ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ ∙ বাংলা ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ dansk ∙ Deutsch ∙ Ελληνικά ∙ English ∙ español ∙ euskara ∙ فارسی ∙ suomi ∙ français ∙ galego ∙ עברית ∙ hrvatski ∙ magyar ∙ italiano ∙ 日本語 ∙ 한국어 ∙ македонски ∙ മലയാളം ∙ norsk bokmål ∙ Plattdüütsch ∙ Nederlands ∙ norsk nynorsk ∙ norsk ∙ polski ∙ português ∙ português do Brasil ∙ русский ∙ sicilianu ∙ slovenčina ∙ slovenščina ∙ svenska ∙ ไทย ∙ Türkçe ∙ українська ∙ Tiếng Việt ∙ 简体中文‎ ∙ 繁體中文‎ ∙ +/−

This media was probably deleted.

A file that you have uploaded to Wikimedia Commons, File:Norrberget NZ7 1919 20 (49658876672).jpg, was missing information about where it comes from or who created it, which is needed to verify its copyright status. The file probably has been deleted. If you've got all required information, request undeletion providing this information and the link to the concerned file ([[:File:Norrberget NZ7 1919 20 (49658876672).jpg]]).

If you created the content yourself, enter {{Own}} as the source. If you did not add a licensing template, you must add one. You may use, for example, {{self|GFDL|cc-by-sa-all}} or {{Cc-zero}} to release certain rights to your work.

If someone else created the content, or if it is based on someone else's work, the source should be the address to the web page where you found it, the name and ISBN of the book you scanned it from, or similar. You should also name the author, provide verifiable information to show that the content is in the public domain or has been published under a free license by its author, and add an appropriate template identifying the public domain or licensing status, if you have not already done so. Warning: Wikimedia Commons takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing.

Please add the required information for this and other files you have uploaded before adding more files. If you need assistance, please ask at the help desk. Thank you!

Elisfkc (talk) 18:52, 23 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I was able to find the source and correct two of your other images (File:Norrberget NZ7 1914 15 (49666091827).jpg & File:Norrberget NZ7 1924 25 (49664120372).jpg) but not this one. --Elisfkc (talk) 18:53, 23 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. All three files were deleted from Flickr by mistake and later uploaded again by myself with cc logo Attribution 2.0 Generic (CC BY 2.0), the same license as all my other photos. Bengt Nyman (talk) 19:54, 23 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

File:Sandström NZ7 2377 (49924294366).jpg

File:Sandström NZ7 2377 (49924294366).jpg 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 may soon be deleted. If you have written permission from the copyright holder, please replace the copyvio tag with {{subst:OP}} and have them send us a free license release via COM:VRT. If you disagree that the file is a copyright violation for any other reason, please replace the copyvio tag with a regular deletion request.

Warning: Wikimedia Commons takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing.

Afrikaans ∙ العربية ∙ asturianu ∙ azərbaycanca ∙ беларуская ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца) ∙ български ∙ ပအိုဝ်ႏဘာႏသာႏ ∙ বাংলা ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ dansk ∙ Deutsch ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form) ∙ Zazaki ∙ Ελληνικά ∙ English ∙ español ∙ euskara ∙ فارسی ∙ suomi ∙ français ∙ galego ∙ עברית ∙ hrvatski ∙ magyar ∙ հայերեն ∙ Bahasa Indonesia ∙ italiano ∙ 日本語 ∙ 한국어 ∙ Lëtzebuergesch ∙ македонски ∙ മലയാളം ∙ मराठी ∙ Bahasa Melayu ∙ Malti ∙ မြန်မာဘာသာ ∙ norsk bokmål ∙ Plattdüütsch ∙ Nederlands ∙ norsk nynorsk ∙ norsk ∙ polski ∙ português ∙ português do Brasil ∙ română ∙ русский ∙ sicilianu ∙ slovenčina ∙ slovenščina ∙ српски / srpski ∙ svenska ∙ தமிழ் ∙ тоҷикӣ ∙ ไทย ∙ Türkçe ∙ українська ∙ oʻzbekcha / ўзбекча ∙ Tiếng Việt ∙ 中文（简体） ∙ 中文（繁體） ∙ +/−

--Red-back spider (talk) 11:52, 23 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

This is not a WEB image. This picture was taken by myself as indicated !! Bengt Nyman (talk) 12:24, 23 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Removed Sandström logo. DO NOT DETELE IMAGE !! Bengt Nyman (talk) 13:36, 23 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Princess

I think Princess is probably a bad name for this category, as it's quite generic and is bound to fill up with all sorts of other detritus. Perhaps you could include the boat's ID number or something? -mattbuck (Talk) 23:07, 23 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed, requesting change to Princess boats. Bengt Nyman (talk) 23:29, 23 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

File:Teror 2-2 (32430145367).jpg

File:Teror 2-2 (32430145367).jpg 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.)

Warning: Wikimedia Commons takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing.

Afrikaans ∙ العربية ∙ asturianu ∙ azərbaycanca ∙ беларуская ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца) ∙ български ∙ ပအိုဝ်ႏဘာႏသာႏ ∙ বাংলা ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ dansk ∙ Deutsch ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form) ∙ Zazaki ∙ Ελληνικά ∙ English ∙ español ∙ euskara ∙ فارسی ∙ suomi ∙ français ∙ galego ∙ עברית ∙ hrvatski ∙ magyar ∙ հայերեն ∙ Bahasa Indonesia ∙ italiano ∙ 日本語 ∙ 한국어 ∙ Lëtzebuergesch ∙ македонски ∙ മലയാളം ∙ मराठी ∙ Bahasa Melayu ∙ Malti ∙ မြန်မာဘာသာ ∙ norsk bokmål ∙ Plattdüütsch ∙ Nederlands ∙ norsk nynorsk ∙ norsk ∙ polski ∙ português ∙ português do Brasil ∙ română ∙ русский ∙ sicilianu ∙ slovenčina ∙ slovenščina ∙ српски / srpski ∙ svenska ∙ தமிழ் ∙ тоҷикӣ ∙ ไทย ∙ Türkçe ∙ українська ∙ oʻzbekcha / ўзбекча ∙ Tiếng Việt ∙ 中文（简体） ∙ 中文（繁體） ∙ +/−

Yours sincerely, BevinKacon (talk) 14:50, 15 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

That is an image from Google Earth. Please handle according to your latest policies. 15:36, 15 August 2020 (UTC) Bengt Nyman (talk) 15:39, 15 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Please filter out such images before import from Flickr. --EugeneZelenko (talk) 14:03, 16 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

File tagging File:Galdar, Gran Canaria (33499946268).jpg

العربية ∙ беларуская ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца) ∙ ပအိုဝ်ႏဘာႏသာႏ ∙ বাংলা ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ dansk ∙ Deutsch ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form) ∙ Ελληνικά ∙ English ∙ español ∙ euskara ∙ فارسی ∙ suomi ∙ français ∙ galego ∙ עברית ∙ हिन्दी ∙ hrvatski ∙ magyar ∙ հայերեն ∙ italiano ∙ 日本語 ∙ ಕನ್ನಡ ∙ 한국어 ∙ lietuvių ∙ latviešu ∙ македонски ∙ മലയാളം ∙ मराठी ∙ မြန်မာဘာသာ ∙ norsk bokmål ∙ Plattdüütsch ∙ Nederlands ∙ norsk ∙ polski ∙ português ∙ română ∙ русский ∙ sicilianu ∙ slovenčina ∙ slovenščina ∙ српски / srpski ∙ svenska ∙ ไทย ∙ Türkçe ∙ українська ∙ اردو ∙ Tiếng Việt ∙ 中文（简体） ∙ 中文（繁體） ∙ +/−

This media was probably deleted.

Thanks for uploading File:Galdar, Gran Canaria (33499946268).jpg. This media is missing permission information. A source is given, but there is no proof that the author or copyright holder agreed to license the file under the given license. Please provide a link to an appropriate webpage with license information, or ask the author or copyright holder to send an email with copy of a written permission to VRT (permissions-commons@wikimedia.org). You may still be required to go through this procedure even if you are the author yourself; please see Commons:But it's my own work! for more details. After you emailed permission, you may replace the {{No permission since}} tag with {{subst:PP}} on file description page. Alternatively, you may click on "Challenge speedy deletion" below the tag if you wish to provide an argument why evidence of permission is not necessary in this case.

Please see this page for more information on how to confirm permission, or if you would like to understand why we ask for permission when uploading work that is not your own, or work which has been previously published (regardless of whether it is your own).

The file probably has been deleted. If you sent a permission, try to send it again after 14 days. Do not re-upload. When the VRT-member processes your mail, the file can be undeleted. Additionally you can request undeletion here, providing a link to the File-page on Commons where it was uploaded ([[:File:Galdar, Gran Canaria (33499946268).jpg]]) and the above demanded information in your request.

Yours sincerely, BevinKacon (talk) 17:27, 19 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

File:Cygnus cygnus A7R00742 (51391751589).jpg

File:Cygnus cygnus A7R00742 (51391751589).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!

Afrikaans ∙ العربية ∙ беларуская ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца) ∙ български ∙ ပအိုဝ်ႏဘာႏသာႏ ∙ বাংলা ∙ bosanski ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ dansk ∙ Deutsch ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form) ∙ Zazaki ∙ ދިވެހިބަސް ∙ Ελληνικά ∙ English ∙ Esperanto ∙ español ∙ eesti ∙ فارسی ∙ suomi ∙ français ∙ galego ∙ עברית ∙ hrvatski ∙ magyar ∙ հայերեն ∙ Bahasa Indonesia ∙ íslenska ∙ italiano ∙ 日本語 ∙ 한국어 ∙ 조선말 ∙ македонски ∙ മലയാളം ∙ Bahasa Melayu ∙ မြန်မာဘာသာ ∙ norsk bokmål ∙ Plattdüütsch ∙ Nederlands ∙ norsk nynorsk ∙ norsk ∙ occitan ∙ polski ∙ پښتو ∙ português ∙ português do Brasil ∙ română ∙ русский ∙ sicilianu ∙ slovenčina ∙ slovenščina ∙ shqip ∙ српски / srpski ∙ svenska ∙ ไทย ∙ Türkçe ∙ українська ∙ Tiếng Việt ∙ 中文 ∙ 中文（简体） ∙ 中文（繁體） ∙ +/−

116.48.224.220 04:24, 18 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Flickr keeps loosing files. Your search for copyright status should be done when accepting the image, not later. Bengt Nyman (talk) 10:02, 18 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

File:Spartacus 22 2013.jpg

File:Spartacus 22 2013.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!

Afrikaans ∙ العربية ∙ беларуская ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца) ∙ български ∙ ပအိုဝ်ႏဘာႏသာႏ ∙ বাংলা ∙ bosanski ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ dansk ∙ Deutsch ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form) ∙ Zazaki ∙ ދިވެހިބަސް ∙ Ελληνικά ∙ English ∙ Esperanto ∙ español ∙ eesti ∙ فارسی ∙ suomi ∙ français ∙ galego ∙ עברית ∙ hrvatski ∙ magyar ∙ հայերեն ∙ Bahasa Indonesia ∙ íslenska ∙ italiano ∙ 日本語 ∙ 한국어 ∙ 조선말 ∙ македонски ∙ മലയാളം ∙ Bahasa Melayu ∙ မြန်မာဘာသာ ∙ norsk bokmål ∙ Plattdüütsch ∙ Nederlands ∙ norsk nynorsk ∙ norsk ∙ occitan ∙ polski ∙ پښتو ∙ português ∙ português do Brasil ∙ română ∙ русский ∙ sicilianu ∙ slovenčina ∙ slovenščina ∙ shqip ∙ српски / srpski ∙ svenska ∙ ไทย ∙ Türkçe ∙ українська ∙ Tiếng Việt ∙ 中文 ∙ 中文（简体） ∙ 中文（繁體） ∙ +/−

2.99.126.18 18:57, 18 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Please delete entire gallery. Bengt Nyman (talk) 20:44, 18 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

File:A7R04867 (51957702865).jpg

File:A7R04867 (51957702865).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!

Afrikaans ∙ العربية ∙ беларуская ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца) ∙ български ∙ ပအိုဝ်ႏဘာႏသာႏ ∙ বাংলা ∙ bosanski ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ dansk ∙ Deutsch ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form) ∙ Zazaki ∙ ދިވެހިބަސް ∙ Ελληνικά ∙ English ∙ Esperanto ∙ español ∙ eesti ∙ فارسی ∙ suomi ∙ français ∙ galego ∙ עברית ∙ hrvatski ∙ magyar ∙ հայերեն ∙ Bahasa Indonesia ∙ íslenska ∙ italiano ∙ 日本語 ∙ 한국어 ∙ 조선말 ∙ македонски ∙ മലയാളം ∙ Bahasa Melayu ∙ မြန်မာဘာသာ ∙ norsk bokmål ∙ Plattdüütsch ∙ Nederlands ∙ norsk nynorsk ∙ norsk ∙ occitan ∙ polski ∙ پښتو ∙ português ∙ português do Brasil ∙ română ∙ русский ∙ sicilianu ∙ slovenčina ∙ slovenščina ∙ shqip ∙ српски / srpski ∙ svenska ∙ ไทย ∙ Türkçe ∙ українська ∙ Tiếng Việt ∙ 中文 ∙ 中文（简体） ∙ 中文（繁體） ∙ +/−

219.78.215.135 02:48, 3 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. 09:18, 3 April 2022 (UTC) Bengt Nyman (talk) 09:18, 3 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

File source is not properly indicated: File:A7R04867 (51957702865).jpg

العربية ∙ asturianu ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ ∙ বাংলা ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ dansk ∙ Deutsch ∙ Ελληνικά ∙ English ∙ español ∙ euskara ∙ فارسی ∙ suomi ∙ français ∙ galego ∙ עברית ∙ hrvatski ∙ magyar ∙ italiano ∙ 日本語 ∙ 한국어 ∙ македонски ∙ മലയാളം ∙ norsk bokmål ∙ Plattdüütsch ∙ Nederlands ∙ norsk nynorsk ∙ norsk ∙ polski ∙ português ∙ português do Brasil ∙ русский ∙ sicilianu ∙ slovenčina ∙ slovenščina ∙ svenska ∙ ไทย ∙ Türkçe ∙ українська ∙ Tiếng Việt ∙ 简体中文‎ ∙ 繁體中文‎ ∙ +/−

This media may be deleted.

A file that you have uploaded to Wikimedia Commons, File:A7R04867 (51957702865).jpg, is missing information about where it comes from or who created it, which is needed to verify its copyright status. Please edit the file description and add the missing information, or the file may be deleted.

If you created the content yourself, enter {{Own}} as the source. If you did not add a licensing template, you must add one. You may use, for example, {{self|GFDL|cc-by-sa-all}} or {{Cc-zero}} to release certain rights to your work.

If someone else created the content, or if it is based on someone else's work, the source should be the address to the web page where you found it, the name and ISBN of the book you scanned it from, or similar. You should also name the author, provide verifiable information to show that the content is in the public domain or has been published under a free license by its author, and add an appropriate template identifying the public domain or licensing status, if you have not already done so. Warning: Wikimedia Commons takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing.

Please add the required information for this and other files you have uploaded before adding more files. If you need assistance, please ask at the help desk. Thank you!

Elisfkc (talk) 18:20, 13 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Go ahead. Bengt Nyman (talk) 19:29, 13 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

'Aquila chrysaetos' photos

Hi Bengt - I fear they were all misidentified! Two were Buteo buteo, identifiable by their wing pattern, and the rest were all juvenile Haliaeetus albicilla, identified by their heavy bills, and wing and tail structure. Let me know if you need any more information. Hope this helps! - MPF (talk) 22:34, 17 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

All four pictures are of the same bird. Buteo buteo is not a possibility. Juvenile Haliaeetus albicilla is a possibility but unlikely based on the wing shape. Bengt Nyman (talk) 22:55, 17 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

There were 6 pictures :-)

Buteo buteo - File:A7R01076 (51398263346).jpg and File:A7R01099 (51399000599).jpg (compare File:A7R01330 (51416021814).jpg, which you identified correctly, and may be the same individual :-))
Juvenile Haliaeetus albicilla - File:NZ8 1228 (52947948471).jpg, File:NZ8 1212 (52947352002).jpg, File:NZ8 1227 (52947351857).jpg, File:NZ8 1229 (52948092059).jpg (and yes, these are all the same bird)

Hope this helps! - MPF (talk) 23:07, 17 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not move discussions initiated on your talkpage to my talkpage. See your own talkpage for discussions requested by you and started on your page. And please undo any mistakes and deletions that your confusion may have resulted in. Bengt Nyman (talk) 23:49, 17 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Paintings by Eva Dahlerus

Hello! A big thank you for your many contributions to Wikimedia Commons, and for so generously releasing your photographs under a free license. I very much appreciate your work. However, I have doubts about the pictures in Category:Eva Dahlerus. Even though you are the photographer, we would need approval from the paintor that the depicted patings are free too. --Bensin (talk) 18:36, 7 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. I am asking Eva Dahlerus and I will be back with her answer. Bengt Nyman (talk) 19:06, 7 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Great! You may want to go via Commons:Volunteer Response Team and create a VRTS ticket that we can refer to from each image. --Bensin (talk) 18:16, 8 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Sounds good. Still no answer from Eva D. Bengt Nyman (talk) 21:07, 8 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Ordagrant svar från Eva Dahlerus: "Självklart kan du visa dina foton av mina målningar! De är rätt gamla vid det här laget men vem vet kanske nappar någon. Jag målar fortfarande och ställer ut då och då. Eva. Bengt Nyman (talk) 20:33, 9 August 2023 P.S. You seem to know VRTS, I do not. Good Luck. (UTC)

Hello again! The requirement to add images to Wikimedia Commons is not just permission to show them. For example, the current license for the image File:D5D_4722_(6206573807).jpg is said to be CC-BY, which means anyone can do pretty much anything with it, even make prints and sell them and make money without having to ask or pay the creator (in this case the paintor). This is not necessarily a bad thing for a creator. Many do this to spread their work or simply to preserve their work for posterity, but it is important that the creator accepts this. That is why a VRTS ticket is a good solution. The VRTS team should have an established way to handle cases like this. You don't need to do this yourself, you may simply ask them for help in creating a ticket that covers the paintings in question and then have the creator (painter) respond to an e-mail that the VRTS team sends her from the ticket system. She can then respond and acknowledge she accepts use of the uploaded works under the conditions stipulated in the license in question. --Bensin (talk) 20:57, 22 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Bensin, You started this questioning. You contact the VRTS team. I will not. Bengt Nyman (talk) 21:13, 22 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

File:20130525 Stockholm 4548.jpg

For such far-reaching changes, please upload a derivative work under a new name. -- Jakubhal 10:45, 25 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Miserable photo of a beautiful city. You might consider uploading a properly processed one. Bengt Nyman (talk) 11:40, 25 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I agree. Nymans changes were a great improvement. --SergeWoodzing (talk) 11:51, 25 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

As I mentioned earlier, if you feel there's room for improvement, I'd kindly suggest uploading your edit as a separate derivative work. The extent of the changes you made really places it in that category. While beauty and style can be subjective, I personally preferred the warm late afternoon ambiance of my original. Nonetheless, I appreciate your effort and passion. All the best in your future endeavors. -- Jakubhal 12:35, 25 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

File:Årsta 810 0927 Fylla förekommer tyvärr fortfarande i samband med vår fantastiska svenska midsommar (27799751242).jpg

File:Årsta 810 0927 Fylla förekommer tyvärr fortfarande i samband med vår fantastiska svenska midsommar (27799751242).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!

Afrikaans ∙ العربية ∙ беларуская ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца) ∙ български ∙ ပအိုဝ်ႏဘာႏသာႏ ∙ বাংলা ∙ bosanski ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ dansk ∙ Deutsch ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form) ∙ Zazaki ∙ ދިވެހިބަސް ∙ Ελληνικά ∙ English ∙ Esperanto ∙ español ∙ eesti ∙ فارسی ∙ suomi ∙ français ∙ galego ∙ עברית ∙ hrvatski ∙ magyar ∙ հայերեն ∙ Bahasa Indonesia ∙ íslenska ∙ italiano ∙ 日本語 ∙ 한국어 ∙ 조선말 ∙ македонски ∙ മലയാളം ∙ Bahasa Melayu ∙ မြန်မာဘာသာ ∙ norsk bokmål ∙ Plattdüütsch ∙ Nederlands ∙ norsk nynorsk ∙ norsk ∙ occitan ∙ polski ∙ پښتو ∙ português ∙ português do Brasil ∙ română ∙ русский ∙ sicilianu ∙ slovenčina ∙ slovenščina ∙ shqip ∙ српски / srpski ∙ svenska ∙ ไทย ∙ Türkçe ∙ українська ∙ Tiếng Việt ∙ 中文 ∙ 中文（简体） ∙ 中文（繁體） ∙ +/−

LevandeMänniska (talk), 23:01, 15 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Please act in accordance with present Wikimedia policy. Bengt Nyman (talk) 23:24, 15 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Source of derivative work is not properly indicated: File:Spartacus 25 2013.jpg

العربية ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ Deutsch ∙ English ∙ español ∙ hrvatski ∙ italiano ∙ slovenščina ∙ Tiếng Việt ∙ беларуская‎ ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ ∙ русский ∙ ไทย ∙ မြန်မာဘာသာ ∙ ပအိုဝ်ႏဘာႏသာႏ ∙ 日本語 ∙ 中文（简体）‎ ∙ 中文（繁體）‎ ∙ فارسی ∙ +/−

This file may be deleted.

A file that you have uploaded to Wikimedia Commons, File:Spartacus 25 2013.jpg, is a derivative work, containing an "image within an image". Examples of such works would include a photograph of a sculpture, a scan of a magazine cover, or a map that has been altered from the original. In each of these cases, the rights of the creator of the original must be considered, as well as those of the creator of the derivative work.

While the description page states who made this derivative work, it currently doesn't specify who created the original work, so the overall copyright status is unclear. If you did not create the original work depicted in this image, you will need to specify the owner of the copyright.

Please edit the file description and add the missing information, or the file may be deleted. If you created the original content yourself, enter this information as the source. If someone else created the content, the source should be the address to the web page where you found it, the name and ISBN of the book you scanned it from, or similar. You should also name the author, provide verifiable information to show that the content is in the public domain or has been published under a free license by its author, and add an appropriate template identifying the public domain or licensing status, if you have not already done so. Please add the required information for this and other files you have uploaded before adding more files. If you need assistance, please ask at the help desk. Thank you!

A.Savin 10:29, 15 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Please delete ! Bengt Nyman (talk) 12:14, 15 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Larus michahellis atlantis at Playa del Confital (47206133632) 2 March 2019.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.
Comments
Support Good quality.--Tournasol7 16:19, 10 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

--QICbot (talk) 05:32, 13 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

FP Promotion

★ This image has been promoted to Featured picture! ★

The image File:Larus michahellis atlantis at Playa del Confital (47206133632) 2 March 2019.jpg, that you uploaded is now assessed as one of the finest pictures on Wikimedia Commons, the nomination is available at Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Larus michahellis atlantis at Playa del Confital (47206133632) 2 March 2019.jpg. Thank you for your contribution. If you would like to nominate, please do so at this nomination page.

/FPCBot (talk) 05:01, 16 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! A pink rose in Sweden (June, 2022).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.
Comments
File name and description need to be fixed. Otherwise very good --MB-one 08:19, 12 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Done File renamed and description added --Gpkp 11:00, 12 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support Good quality. --MB-one 19:34, 14 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

--QICbot (talk) 05:31, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

User talk:Bengt Nyman

Quality Image Promotion

COM:AN/U

Thank you for your images on Commons and on flickr

Notification about possible deletion

Nobel prize 2015

Re: Email

Recommendations

Wikimedia Commons in error

Recommendations

Notification about possible deletion

Notification about possible deletion

Category moves

Notification about possible deletion

Speedy deletion requests

Notification about possible deletion

Deletion nominations

File renaming

Notification about possible deletion

Notification about possible deletion

Notification about possible deletion

Wiki Science Competition 2017 closes on December, the 15th

Image problems

Notification about possible deletion

Image without license

Finding something?

Notification about possible deletion

Community Insights Survey

Reminder: Community Insights Survey

Quality Image Promotion

Location?

File source is not properly indicated: File:Norrberget NZ7 1919 20 (49658876672).jpg

File tagging File:Galdar, Gran Canaria (33499946268).jpg

File source is not properly indicated: File:A7R04867 (51957702865).jpg

'Aquila chrysaetos' photos

Paintings by Eva Dahlerus

Source of derivative work is not properly indicated: File:Spartacus 25 2013.jpg

Quality Image Promotion

FP Promotion

Quality Image Promotion

Navigation menu

Search