User talk:Elcobbola/IP

If you've received notices or warnings from me, please ensure you've read them and the guidance and policies referenced therein before asking questions here. While I am genuinely happy to provide elaboration or clarification, a question suggesting guidance has not first been consulted, may not receive a response. Alternatively stated: questions from users who appear not to have read guidance already provided to them may not be answered--this is most often COM:L and COM:VRT. Please read them closely and critically. Please also note the following: Please include links to the pertinent page(s) and/or file(s); Unless otherwise requested, I will respond on this page. Comments that denigrate or otherwise are discourteous, fail to be civil, or to assume good faith may not receive a response. Newly registered and IP editors may leave messages on this page.

Request kind attention & legitimate Action

Sir, Wikipedia facilitates constructive contribution and original creations. In-fact, its guidelines favor fair and genuinely original creation. While copyright issues must be dealt strictly as per rules but fair images and original creations that do not have any copyright issue whatsoever should not be altered/deleted out of prejudice. Sir, the pertinent issue here is copyright violation and license and I humbly request you to check and validate copyright issue of the following original creations that have been incorrectly deleted. As evident, if an image is created by myself during the public event widely attended, no copyright violation issues whatsoever exists for any original creations. If, I had created/taken the picture of a natural landscape/public figures at a public event such as public rallies or functions or public anniversaries; they can be duly released under appropriate license by creator. The following images in question has no proof/evidence of any copyright violation,the said images are my original creation. Please discuss why it should be deleted out of prejudice for a non existent copyright violation! I humbly request you to use your discretion and legitimately examine each of them, it will establish the genuine fact that no copyright issue ever exists with following images and they were my original creation . I had taken the said snaps & entirely own the copyrights for the same. I had uploaded the pictures & released copyrights under suitable license as permitted by policy.These images were systematically uploaded with proper license & copyright info over last 3-4 years. Even if it is somehow proved that some of the other deleted images were not in PD or any newer version located, it does not mean that all the original creations which qualify to exist in wikimedia should be forcefully deleted. I request scrutiny of each of the images and if no evidence/proof of any violation is found, they must be restored immediately.With respect to myself,I am reiterating that, I have taken these images and duly uploaded, is there any evidence against any individual image?.How come original creations of an author be deleted? after verification i am sure admins will find merit in the fact. Please check the following files, one by one carefully and undelete them as there is no copyright issue whatsoever and they are original creation. File:Shri Nitish Kumar Shri Lalu Prasad Yadav offering tribute to eminent statesman Chhote Saheb.jpg
File:Bihar academicians Satyendra Narayan Sinha Jayanti.jpg
File:BJP Lakshmi Narayan Singh SushilModi RamVilas Paswan PMVisit.jpg
File:Bihar Leaders Ravi Shankar Prasad Nitish Kumar Bali Ram Bhagat Raghuvansh Prasad Singh Ram Kripal Yadav paying tribute to Satyendra Narayan Singh.JPG
File:CM NitishKumar paysTribute Chhote Saheb Satyendra Narayan Sinha FirstPunyatithi.JPG
File:Shri Bhairon Singh Shekhawat, The then Vice-President of India being received by Dr. L N Singh on his arrival at Patna Airport in Bihar .jpg
File:A.M. B.Ed. College Gaya.jpg
File:Anugrah Memorial BEd College.jpg
File:Vice President of India Delivers inaugural Satyendra Narayan Sinha lecture.JPG
File:Shekhawat SatyendraBabu.jpg
— Preceding unsigned comment added by 223.176.3.118 (talk • contribs)

Bn bt ec01, uploader of these files, has been blocked indefinitely.   — Jeff G. ツ _{please ping or talk to me} 17:22, 16 August 2021 (UTC)

Sir,

Please allow the following images to be displayed on the Bridgestone Golf Wikipedia page.

• e12 Soft Matte Red
  e12 Soft Matte Red
• e12 Soft Matte Yellow
  e12 Soft Matte Yellow

Also, I uploaded a gallery containing pictures of a variety of Bridgestone Golf products. Bridgestone Golf owns the copyright to these images. I am an employee of Bridgestone Golf. These images are being uploaded at the direction of the CEO of Bridgestone Golf, Mr. Dan Murphy. There is no copyright issue with any of the images that have been uploaded/deleted by moderators, and future uploads of product images.

shcooper1995 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Shcooper1995 (talk • contribs) 18:37, 7 June 2019‎ (UTC)

@Shcooper1995: For each photo, if you took the photo yourself, please upload the full-size original of it per COM:HR, including EXIF metadata. If you did not take the photo, please see Commons:Licensing for why we can't accept it as-is, and have the photographer post Commons:Licensing compliant permission for such work on their website or social media presence or send the photo and permission via VRT with a carbon copy to you. If you can't get a compliant license, the photo may still be uploaded to English Wikipedia in compliance with en:WP:F because we don't allow Fair Use here. See also COM:SIGN.   — Jeff G. ツ _{please ping or talk to me} 17:19, 16 August 2021 (UTC)

Urgent Attention

A lot of authoritative and forced procedures seems to be compelled upon contributors.Sir, I humbly request your kind attention towards the promotional images series File:B P Mandal 22 the series continues like B P Mandal 14, B P Mandal 16,......and so on NONE of the said images are sourced neither they are in public domain in India! The said subject occupied ministership during 1969-1970 & was Chairman during late 1970s . All the referred pictures taken during his prime years are of 1969-1978, since these pictures are mere 40- 45 years old, They are not in Public domain in India, it doesn't matter who gives the matter, it is important that this issue is very relevant and requires immediate scrutiny with the same speed (albeit minus prejudice) which all the admins showed for even genine images created by bn_bt_ec01. The recent example is, an image which was no copyright issues what so ever and has been sourced correctly is nominated for deletion because SpacemanSpiff ASSUMES that it is not fair, without evidence and without proof about any copyrights violation, the original image is nominated, Why? What is the reason? How come copyright be decided without any evidence just on Assumption. Then it can be assumed that SpacemanSpiff is he'll bent to prove Right as Wrong! Even, pictures of which I was the sold creator and with which no copyright or source issues existed ever were deleted in the bulk! Even PF images that dates back to 1910s--1930s were also no spared! What is this happening sir! On the pretext of something will everything will be decided on whims and fancies? Without evidence and without proof? Or will genuine evidence be sidelined to support incorrect decisions?I leave it upto you to listen to your conscience if it exists! Please take genuine action on the images listed above and undelete wrongfully deleted images! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 223.176.5.245 (talk • contribs) 15:17, 6 October 2015 (UTC)

@Suraj yadav2005: For each photo, if you took the photo yourself, please upload the full-size original of it per COM:HR, including EXIF metadata. If you did not take the photo, please see Commons:Licensing for why we can't accept it as-is, and have the photographer post Commons:Licensing compliant permission for such work on their website or social media presence or send the photo and permission via VRT with a carbon copy to you. If you can't get a compliant license, the photo may still be uploaded to English Wikipedia in compliance with en:WP:F because we don't allow Fair Use here. See also COM:SIGN.   — Jeff G. ツ _{please ping or talk to me} 17:28, 16 August 2021 (UTC)

Provide Evidence & Link

On what basis & merit has the files which were already in public domain as per Indian Copyright Act have been deliberately deleted? If a picture is already in public domain since its copyright has expired and can be reused freely by anyone & everyone , how the contributions made by me over last 4 years deleted entirety, some of which were certainly credibly in public domain?

Suppose there's a picture dating back to year 1917 in India, it is obviously already in public domain since its license has expired but to delete it also among other images justified?

Answer a simple logic,If an author uploads 10 images, 6 out of which are perfectly fine & in accordance with wikimedia policy but 4 have issues, any admin will delete those 4 and may review the already scrutinised 6 but it is highly impractical that all 10 will be deleted!

This is exactly what has been done here, the only pertinent issue was copyright & if copy right was absolutely ok in all PD images Why were they deleted? Does being admin means doing what one may feel like at discretion?

I have to appeal against this incorrect act & complain about some people who don't deserve to be an admin at first place

Provide me with link of higher authorities of wikimedia, where I can file my appeal against this high handiness.

In reason it is written, found higher resolution, pls provide link of any such higher resolution picture! I request you to prove, image by image, what higher resolution images you are talking about? Where you found them? Are they itself derived from Wikimedia upload or images of PD

Bn bt ec01 — Preceding unsigned comment added by 182.66.66.53 (talk • contribs)

Bn bt ec01, uploader of these files, has been blocked indefinitely.   — Jeff G. ツ _{please ping or talk to me} 17:29, 16 August 2021 (UTC)

Query

Can you guide me on how to put an image on my wiki page please? I do not know how or understand the copyright rulese. — Preceding unsigned comment added by MilesCraigwell (talk • contribs)

Please see COM:L. If you have questions about using a wiki--as opposed to this project, the Commons--you will need to ask for assistance there. Эlcobbola _talk 15:24, 14 January 2015 (UTC)

Sock of User:Albianmoonlight

Here's a fresh sock of the beach bum I found: User:Telltelltelltall. There may be others. The single upload is one of his stock photos. 186.89.155.138 02:29, 28 April 2015 (UTC)

Blocked and tagged, also Itakeyoufaraway. Thanks. Эlcobbola _talk 14:55, 28 April 2015 (UTC)

Sro23

If this guy, who's only edits to Commons are to stalk me, continues making it impossible to do constructive editing on Commons, I'm just going to turn to large-scale attacks with sleepers. I already have some waiting. You guys need to make the choice. I can either do good edits, or I can bring on the war. INC Kate Collins (talk) 02:50, 16 September 2017 (UTC)

a3b1

hi Mr. Elcobbola, I am writing to tell you that the user jeff keeps calling her always to remove some file restore requests, I would just like to tell you that the filming files that are continually boycotted by jeff, are slowly being restored,. thanks to the intelligent help of User: Green Giant, who has assessed the dilemma more closely. and that means that the jeff user not only ignores the deleted files, but tries to convince administrators like you, of the complete bad faith of the deleted files, despite the jeff user being a self - validated user. I'm waiting for your answer, good evening--82.50.38.62 17:08, 7 February 2018 (UTC)

iz55

Just wanted to drop a note to say thanks, you had deleted a photo that i uploaded, but i have submitted a ticket through ORTS. [Ticket#2018051010000411]. Thanks so much for guiding me through the process! I want to upload a non-free content for album artwork cover, do i just go through the regular upload proces? {{Help me}}. i don't wanna get in trouble again. thanks! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Iz55 (talk • contribs) 02:14, 10 May 2018 (UTC)

Iz55, regarding File:Annette Album Art - Nadia.jpg, the OTRS volunteer who processes the ticket will guide you through the process. To give you forewarning, however: note that copyright is generally held by the author (e.g., photographer), not the mere subject, unless transferred by a formal written conveyance. Given that we know the photographer is Nadia Ongkowidjaja, that is the only person from whom we can obtain permission. As I trust you are aware, this is not the person who provided purported permission to OTRS. You will need to remedy this, or the ticket will not be valid. Regarding a non-free album artwork cover, the Commons only accepts free content (COM:L); non-free content is not allowed. Эlcobbola _talk 14:36, 10 May 2018 (UTC)

User talk:Angelgreat

Hello, This is User:Angelgreat on this IP adress, remember when I said to have my talk page access revoked, I changed my mind, can I have it back? 174.97.130.168 (talk) 12:08, 10 July 2018 (CST)

User talk:Angelgreat (again)

Hello, This is User:Angelgreat on this IP adress, remember when you said: Angelgreat, your talk page access will be removed if that happens again. And then I replied Do it then, I want you to revoke my talk page access right now!, Can I please have it back. I will answer the questions User:Guanaco posted. Also, please don't block this ip adress for block evasion, I just want my access restored. 174.97.130.168 (talk) 11:08, 19 September 2018 (CST)

Compromise

User talk:Ssp 1.618 ?

Copyright violations by YerysZ accusation

I do not intend to make anything illegal. Please do help me and tell me how can I prove that I am one of the owners of the rights to these photos? - they were literally or taken by me or by a photographer employed by us. They were published by us, only on the website zuzzo.pl. We wanted to grant a licence for wikipedia, but I am accused of using my own photos illegally. Please do help me how can i sort it out. Thank You. YerysZ (talk) 10:32, 14 August 2019 (UTC)

You have not been accused of using photos illegally. Notifications of copyright violations relate to violations of our policies regarding copyrights, in this case evidence of permission. I have twice pointed you to COM:OTRS ([1][2]), which is where you can find the procedure for submitting this evidence. Эlcobbola _talk 10:43, 14 August 2019 (UTC)

As You may guess I am new to this - thank You for Your patience and for the link to OTRS - i will do my best to follow instructions. Have a nice day.

I have just reuploaded and used a generator to prepare the right email to permissions-commons@wikimedia.org - once again thank You - much appreciate it

@Elcobbola: Take a look at Woodtonua, Yanick.dl and Zuzzo. Something is fishy here. World's Lamest Critic (talk) 21:45, 14 August 2019 (UTC)

Do not understand - yes, we (ma and my friend, and co-worker... or boss... or it is complicated ;P) are responsible for making that Zuzzo profile - it may be deleted since i did not prove i am one of owners of www.zuzzo.pl. But other two mentioned profiles - don't have any idea about them and do not know what is "fishy". The whole idea was - in a bow tie article someone has described the other materials used to make a bow ties - has mentioned wood - and that is fine, that is true, even here in Poland we also have producers of that type - but since we know another one (another unusuall material used) - because we made them out of feathers, and there are also other producers in the U.S., so we wanted to share that information and some of our pictures(no brand was mentioned). Yes - I made it in a wrong way, because i do know a little about wikipedia, but I am going to sort it out (especially next weeek after my hollidays, and getting back access to my "office"). As You can see I do make mistakes, but I do not intend to do anything wrong or "fishy", so i am open to give you any answers you require. Have a nice day - for real - I am gratefull for you help and hints. YerysZ (talk) 07:32, 16 August 2019 (UTC)

@YerysZ: the use of multiple accounts, whether operated by a single person or by multiple related persons, is frowned upon on WMF projects (especially when undisclosed) and is prohibited and sanctionable when such use is in violation or circumvention of policies or in an attempt to confuse or deceive. Because the Woodtonua and Yanick.dl accounts also uploaded bowtie images apparently just taken from the Internet, they are suspiciously similar ("fishy" means "suspicious") to your accounts; that is what is meant by the above. Because the COM:IU issue for which Zuzzo was blocked is an explicit exception (i.e., the creation of an account with a new name is not considered a circumvention of the block) and because you appear to be operating in good faith, I'm not going to make blocks for abuse of multiple accounts at this time (for World's Lamest Critic: from a CU standpoint, Yanick.dl would be stale and Woodtonua has not edited related to the Zuzzo brand/entity; while sufficient evidence for a check of the latter may nevertheless exist based on timing, etc., I don't think we're at a "last resort" and am willing to accept the assertion that YerysZ is unfamiliar with them.) Going forward, YerysZ, please ensure accounts related to you disclose that relationship and do not act in a prohibited manner as described above. Эlcobbola _talk 18:24, 16 August 2019 (UTC)

Added photo from Jacque Gonzales.

Hi Elcobbola. I hope I'm doing this right, I'm new to understanding how to use and upload items to Wiki. I work for Jacque Gonzales as an assistant helping her with various tasks, like updating photos and blog postings. The photos you flagged are owned by her. Is it easier if she creates her own account and uploads them? She asked me to do it so her information can remain private. Please advise and we will amend the photos however they should be to be appropriately categorized to use on Wiki. Thank you, Felicia — Preceding unsigned comment added by FeliciaR22 (talk • contribs) 02:32, 13 May 2020‎ (UTC)

@FeliciaR22: Copyright is held by the author of a work (e.g., photographer), not by the mere subject (Gonzales). Copyright would only be held by the latter if transferred by a formal written conveyance. As we require evidence that the actual copyright holder has freely licensed a given work, either a scan of that document or direct (i.e., not forwarded) correspondence from the authors themselves need to be provided using the process at COM:OTRS. Эlcobbola _talk 14:45, 13 May 2020 (UTC)

Copyright violations

Sorry I was unnaware that NCMEC Images were not free to use, I thought it was a government funded program so I went under the assumption that they were. Perhaps you can help me upload them properly so I can add these updated renditions that I was trying to upload to their respective page. It was not meant to infringe on copyright, but only to help identify unidentified people using more accurate images than previously posted. — Preceding unsigned comment added by doggybag2355 (talk • contribs) 14:32, 19 May 2020 (UTC)

PD-USGov applies only to "work[s] prepared by an officer or employee of the United States Government as part of that person’s official duties." The NCMEC receives partial funding from federal entities, put that does not make it a federal entity itself (nor would even complete funding). Indeed, the website contains the notice "Copyright © 2020 National Center for Missing & Exploited Children. All rights reserved" (which sites of federal entities do not - compare to the lack thereof at www.senate.gov, www.whitehouse.gov, www.nasa.gov, etc.) The NCMEC even says "Neither the U.S. Department of Justice nor any of its components operate, control, are responsible for, or necessarily endorse, this Web site (including, without limitation, its content, technical infrastructure, and policies, and any services or tools provided)." (emphasis mine) As the NCMEC reserves all rights, there is currently no way to upload them properly, as we accept only free works. The NCMEC would have to contact us directly using the process at COM:OTRS to supply permission to license these images. Эlcobbola _talk 18:35, 19 May 2020 (UTC)

Please Read In Full / IMPORTANT

Hello Brother,
I am the one whose account you have closed more than 20 times since last night!
You have been working here for 13 years;
You spent 13 years here;
I am proud of you; But you have a heavy responsibility; The fact that you only delete my image due to stubbornness and close (bann) my account is a clear example of dictatorship; I read your articles. You agree with freedom of speech and oppose any coercion; We are all human beings and no one is superior to the other, but I did not break the rules, and that image belongs to me and my copyright belongs to me;
The New World (the post-Corona world) needs people with big souls and hearts; Let's make each other's hearts happy instead of breaking each other's hearts;
I wish you success and I promise that if you do not block my account,I will not do anything against the law...
Thankful... Wikipedia Best Ever <3
God Bless You/. LoveYouElco (talk) 14:22, 19 June 2020 (UTC)

It's been 2 years

Hello, This is User:Angelgreat on this IP address. I know that what I did 2 years ago was messed up and I regretted it. I have since changed and am willing to follow the rules. Can I please have my talk page access on Wikipedia Commons reinstated? I will tell the truth and nothing but the truth. Please for give me. 174.97.130.168 03:16, 2 July 2020 (UTC)

Deleted photos

Hello there! I work for the Delaware Senate and have been tasked with updating the Wikipedia pages of each of our members. I recently uploaded their official portraits which are public domain and were taken by the Senate Photographer and you deleted them. I do not know how else to upload them, as I do not personally own the copyright, because there is no copyright. Please advise on how to proceed. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Delawaresenaterepublicans (talk • contribs) 20:37, 10 November 2020 (UTC)

@Delawaresenaterepublicans: 17 U.S.C. § 105, which is commonly erroneously invoked for such images, provides that copyright protection is not available for any work of the United States federal government. This is not the case, however, for state governments (with the exception of CA, FL, and MA), which includes Delaware. Indeed, the site you provided as a source for the images explicitly says "© 2015 Delaware General Assembly. All Rights Reserved." Accordingly, it is incumbent on you to provide appropriate evidence that the photographs are indeed in the public domain. As copyright initially vests in the author (photographer, Delaware Senate Photographer), such evidence would include either a) receipt of direct (i.e., not forwarded) permission from the author or b) a copy of the document that transferred copyrights to the Delaware General Assembly/Delaware State Government (or an employment agreement for the Delaware Senate Photographer indicating that intellectual properties generated in the performance of their duties are the property of their employer). Either can be provided using the process at COM:OTRS. Эlcobbola _talk 20:51, 10 November 2020 (UTC)

Thank you for that explanation. We do not keep track of who took the photos. Indeed, the photos are entirely available to the public. We release these photos to the media and require no attribution. These are their official portraits to be used on things, like, say, Wikipedia pages. For this reason, please explain how I can upload their photos without them being deleted. The Delaware Senate owns these photos, so who, if not me, would be allowed to upload them? The staff member in question does not individually hold the rights to these photos.

Edit: If we are to change the author to Delaware Senate, I believe it will satisfy your concern. I just referenced multiple Pennsylvania legislators' profiles and this is what they have done. As an employee of the Senate, I am authorized to upload these photos. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Delawaresenaterepublicans (talk • contribs) 22:01, 10 November 2020‎ (UTC)

If the Delaware Senate does not have such documents, or the aforementioned employment agreements, it either a) does not actually own the copyrights or b) lacks sufficient evidence to host them here. Indeed, you say "[t]he Delaware Senate owns these photos" but offer no evidence of the same. What, then, is the basis of that purport? As I indicated, copyright initially vests in the author of a work and cannot be transferred but through a formal written conveyance. It may be helpful to note that ownership of a physical photograph or digital file is entirely distinct from ownership of the related copyright, and that "available to the public" (i.e., accessible, not confidential) is not to be conflated with "public domain" (in intellectual property law, lacking copyright protection). No work in the United States is public domain but by age (expiration of copyright protection), failure to comply with copyright formalities, or by author permission. As these are contemporary photographs, only the latter is applicable; thus, again, evidence of author permission is required. Эlcobbola _talk 22:13, 10 November 2020 (UTC)

Issue with uploaded files

Hi there, what seems to be the issue with the following files? The user who uploaded them owns all of the copyrights.

File:The Reincarnationist Papers -- International Cover.jpg File:D. Eric Maikranz at an event in Boulder Colorado.jpg File:D. Eric Maikranz.jpg File:Crowdsource Reward offer in The Reincarnationist Papers (hi res).png File:Crowdsource Reward offer in The Reincarnationist Papers (web res).png — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2001:16B8:14E8:8900:E138:866B:11C8:3DCE (talk • contribs) 08:59, 26 February 2021 (UTC)

Es wurde schon mehrfach erklärt, deutsche IP. Эlcobbola _talk 17:13, 26 February 2021 (UTC)

File:Amber Van Day - foto.png

File:Amber Van Day - foto.png Hello there, I'm a new user to wiki who just wanted to add Amber on Wikipedia. I talked with her and I've received permission to use her photos as much as I want (on Wikipedia). I'm just kinda lost, and I don't know where should I post the permission. That's why I published the photo three times, but I couldn't find a permission tab where I could send my evidence. There's a screenshot of her allowing me to use her photos https://ctrlv.link/GmoT . Panda12hy (talk) 09:41, 28 February 2021 (UTC)

Please critically review the guidance you've been provided. As of this query, 09:42, 28 February 2021‎, your talk page contains notices with no less than four (!!!) linked references to our licensing policy and indeed the statement "Files may only be uploaded and included if their copyright status meets the conditions stated in our licensing policy." That policy, contains the following:

"All copyrighted material on Commons [...] must be licensed under a free license that specifically and irrevocably allows anyone to use the material for any purpose. [...] In particular, the license must meet the following conditions: Republication and distribution must be allowed. Publication of derivative work must be allowed. Commercial use of the work must be allowed. The license must be perpetual (non-expiring) and non-revocable." (bold and italics in original; underline added)

That statement meets none of those criteria and indeed makes no reference whatsoever of a cc-by-sa-4.0 license, which you've repeatedly purported this image to have. As you've also been advised, acceptable permission must be provided directly by the copyright holder using the COM:OTRS process (we cannot accept forwarded permissions, including this screenshot). Please stop concocting licenses and recreating deleted images. Эlcobbola _talk 15:45, 1 March 2021 (UTC)

Uxia

Hi Elcobbola, could you help me? I have uploaded the following File: Uxía Tizón.jpg and I consider that the rights are clear. I have added the terms of use and a link to the official page of the source. Still, the bot considers that it is not right. Can you look at it? Thanks a lot. --Borjaseob (talk) 16:59, 2 March 2021 (UTC)

Image Removals for FirstPrezzzz1776

Hello Elcobbola,

These photos are own and where given to me to be used by the university. Please put these images back to the UC Hastings page. Thank you.

Carlos Morales Urquiza

Hello Elcobbola,

Please reconsider deletion of file File:The_History_of_an_Architect,_Carlos_Morales_Treviño.pdf, I wrote this book, its the story of my father, it has historic facts that are encyclopedia relevant, all material is registered to my name, some are old scanned family photos, I believe its also a beatiful story of love and generocity that should be available to public, hope you can help on this horrible times, as we all need some hope, Thank you Carlos Morales Urquiza April 10, 2021 — Preceding unsigned comment added by 187.202.168.186 (talk • contribs) 22:21, 10 April 2021‎ (UTC)

While we're well into w:WP:IDHT territory that I would generally not humor with a response, I would invite you to consider the following:

• Your addition of this content on es.wiki was deleted;
• Your addition of this content on en.wiki was deleted, and indeed your conduct resulted in your indefinite block as w:WP:NOTHERE;
• Your addition of this content here on the Commmons was deleted (not by me) and, after your UDR was declined (also not by me), you recreated the content anyway.

It is well past time for you to reconsider your behaviour. Again, if you continue to recreate out of scope content, and indeed out-of-process, you will be blocked from editing. We are not here to memorialize your "Dear Dad" or entertain your blatant untruths and ignorance regarding copyrights. Эlcobbola _talk 04:10, 11 April 2021 (UTC)

Marianodelriopr

Hi! You just deleted a bunch of photos I uploaded to wikimedia commons from https://ww2.ceepur.org. This page is a government website and thus any of its contents are available for the use of the public just like portraits of US Senators are available for use in wikipedia documents. Please consider the undeletion of these images. Thank you! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Marianodelriopr (talk • contribs) 03:22, 8 May 2021‎ (UTC)

Works of the United States federal government are public domain because 17 U.S.C. § 105 precludes protection for "work[s] prepared by an officer or employee of the United States Government as part of that person’s official duties." Notwithstanding that you claimed these to be {{Cc-by-sa-4.0}} (!!!), mere hosting on an election site (and a .org at that) is not evidence that these are works were prepared by an officer or employee of the United States Government as part of that person’s official duties. If you have evidence of federal authorship, or can provide a link to a terms page on ww2.ceepur.org that says all works thereon are public domain, I'd be happy to restore them. Эlcobbola _talk 12:31, 8 May 2021 (UTC)

copy rights violation

i think there is no copy rights violation because i took the pictures from public sites and i acknowledge them when uploading. So, please tell me in which way they violate copy rights. thank you — Preceding unsigned comment added by Hako33 (talk • contribs) 19:49, 25 May 2021 (UTC)‎

The explanation can be found in the numerous warnings on your talk page; please read them, COM:L and COM:NETCOPYVIO. I don't, for example, find "everything you find on the web is copyrighted and not permitted here," (bold in original) which appears three times (!!!) on your talk page, to be unclear. Эlcobbola _talk 19:54, 25 May 2021 (UTC)

Copyright violation

Hello, You deleted several uncopyrighted images which are the personal property of my employer, who requested I upload them onto her Wikipedia page. They are not covered by license and I was threatened with a ban despite submitting a undeletion request. Please let me know what the correct steps are to resolve this, I am not experienced in contributing to Wikimedia Commons nor do I have the time to delve into copyright law about this. Thanks — Preceding unsigned comment added by Shubhomb (talk • contribs) 14:42, 16 August 2021‎ (UTC)

The issues and steps "to resolve this" were provided to you at the undeletion request. Copyright initially vests in the author (photographer), not the subject. Copyright, further, can only transfer through an operation of law or a formal, written conveyance. You are therefore required to provide either a copy of such a document or to have the photographer contact us directly (we cannot accept forwarded correspondence). Thus far you have: 1) claimed yourself to be the author--a lie; 2) simultaneously claimed a {{Cc-by-sa-4.0}} license and that they are "uncopyrighted" and "are not covered by license"--entirely mutually exclusive conditions; and 3) failed to disclose that you are being paid for your contributions ("my employer")--a breach of WMF terms of use. This has all been explained to you in the guidance of the UploadWizard (which you used), the notices on your talk page, the instructions and responses at the undeletion request page, and in the "fine print" to which you've agreed every time you've made an edit. If you do not "have the time" to familiarise yourself with the germane issues, or indeed to read information placed directly in front of you, that a block is imminent should not be a surprise. Эlcobbola _talk 15:14, 16 August 2021 (UTC)

Rwemember83

Hi, why is my photo deleted? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Remember83 (talk • contribs) 20:15, 5 October 2021‎ (UTC)

Did you read the notice that was left for you? Эlcobbola _talk 15:06, 6 October 2021 (UTC)

SeanLagged

Hey, the version of page Catalyst Black from an hour ago had an app icon on the sidebar. The game updated their app icon, so I uploaded the new one. You deleted my upload, then proceeded to delete the old app icon. Now there is no icon on the Wikipedia page. How can I properly upload the new app icon? It is public domain. --SeanLagged (talk) 21:17, 6 July 2022 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) @SeanLagged: What makes you think "It is public domain"?   — Jeff G. ツ _{please ping or talk to me} 21:27, 6 July 2022 (UTC)

Truthfully probably the wrong phrase. I work for the company that created the icon. How can I proceed? SeanLagged (talk) 21:28, 6 July 2022 (UTC)

Neither image is public domain (free of copyright); both had falsely purported to be {{Cc-by-sa-4.0}} (which, as a copyright license, is mutually exclusive of being public domain) without evidence of the same. Note that merely being publicly accessible, presumably your meaning, is not "public domain" and is not adequate. If there is an image that you believe meets en.wiki's proprietary non-free content criteria, you may upload it to that project; the Commons, however, does not accept fair use. Эlcobbola _talk 21:30, 6 July 2022 (UTC)

@SeanLagged: Please have the designer or authorized representative of the company post Commons:Licensing compliant permission for such work on their website or social media presence or send the image and permission (or copyright transfer authorization paperwork) via VRT with a carbon copy to you.   — Jeff G. ツ _{please ping or talk to me} 22:09, 6 July 2022 (UTC)

Not a sockpuppet

Why was I blocked from editing and uploading even after not being doing anything wrong as you claim that I'm sockpuppet this is some misunderstanding my account Please unblock my account User:Derivativesofit. I was blocked for the thing I did not even commit ImNotSockpuppetof (talk) 17:52, 10 August 2022 (UTC)

On JWilz12345

Good morning dear Elcobbola from hereat Philippines, with all respect, I state that I just received a notice from JWilz12345; thus, I brought the matter for the full review of Commons Administrators in view of the history of edit wars and enmity between this Pulilan, Bulacan editor JWilz12345 and User:Judgefloro who has long bee on Wikibreak due to COVID illness and personal reasons and later blocked; I deeply understand that you work hard herein and is a great contributor to Commons and other Wikis; please understand my predicament in view of the false accusations of JWilz12345, please Fact Check the valid accusations; IN THE LIGHT OF THE FOREGOING, I certify and state that I am not a DUCK or SOCK of any and all those mentioned by JWilz12345 (from Pulilan, Bulacan barangays) and I will faithfully and legitimately follow all Commons rules with advise of some editors and 2 administrators, HOPING for you kind action on the matter, and very sincerely yours Beeveevee (talk) 02:12, 3 November 2022 (UTC).

User: Nellaireb

Hello, I'm sorry I didn't see your messages and that's why I kept uploading the photos you've been deleting. But I was wondering why because those photographs have been repeatedly edited by different users on various social media platforms, so I thought they would fall under "Public Domain". So what would the copyright be? Nellaireb (talk) 17:27, 15 November 2022 (UTC)

Public domain means, with respect to copyright, "no intellectual property right protection." It is not to be conflated with "publicly accessible" ("those photographs have been repeatedly edited by different users on various social media platforms"). Copyright subsists upon creation, so all works should be presumed to be "all rights reserved" unless there is evidence to the contrary. Please see COM:L and COM:NETCOPYVIO. Эlcobbola _talk 17:35, 15 November 2022 (UTC)

You deleted this pictures

Elcobbola,You deleted the pictures I worked so hard to make, and now they are completely gone, and I apologize if you think I violated the copyright, but no malice. On the contrary, your deletion of these pictures is tantamount to destroying my efforts, can you now restore these pictures to their original state? 朱律安 (talk) 18:07, 18 April 2023 (UTC)

"[T]he pictures I worked so hard to make" -- you didn't make a single one of them; rather, you stole them from random websites and lied about their license status. Your "efforts" on the Commons have exclusively been to disrespect our reusers, our volunteers, and legitimate rights holders. Please review COM:L and COM:NETCOPYVIO and note you will be blocked if you upload another copyright violation. Эlcobbola _talk 18:44, 18 April 2023 (UTC)

Useless

Long-term abusers are useless. DioRoadRollarDa (talk) 15:37, 24 October 2023 (UTC)

What time do you go to bed?

Just out of curiosity, it's not like I plan to do anything whatsoever with that information. 180.242.57.76 15:10, 5 November 2023 (UTC)

It appears they never sleep, instead keeping one eye open.   — 🇺🇦Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me🇺🇦 01:25, 31 March 2024 (UTC)

User:Ferret

Ferret (talk · contribs) keeps repeatedly reverting for misuse of manual of style and administrator abuse on Wikipedia. 2001:4452:16B:1900:9DBF:381D:27DD:7C64 14:02, 22 March 2024 (UTC)

@AntiCompositeNumber This is SwissArmyGuy. This /32 probably needs a global block so I can stop getting pings from Meta and Commons about my admin abuse everytime I block a new proxy and revert them. Well, one could wish they'd simply stop. I guess collateral is high. -- ferret (talk) 14:06, 22 March 2024 (UTC)

@Ferret: Please stop, are you trying to abuse or threaten me on Wikipedia like I said earlier, also please ignore about AntiCompositeNumber's actions. 2001:4452:16B:1900:9DBF:381D:27DD:7C64 14:24, 22 March 2024 (UTC)

I'm not abusing you. You are Arbcom banned. You are not allowed to edit English Wikipedia. It's that simple. You will be re-blocked and reverted every single time. -- ferret (talk) 14:31, 22 March 2024 (UTC)

@Ferret: Arbcom banned means "abuse" on every Wikimedia community, can you show me that? 2001:4452:16B:1900:9DBF:381D:27DD:7C64 14:53, 22 March 2024 (UTC)

I don't even know what you mean. I have never taken a single action against you except on English Wikipedia, where you are banned. -- ferret (talk) 14:57, 22 March 2024 (UTC)

@Ferret: Obviously I'm not banned, you must know how to abuse some users on any Wikimedia projects, just like Brianna Wu from the Gamergate scandal. 2001:4452:16B:1900:9DBF:381D:27DD:7C64 15:02, 22 March 2024 (UTC)

Ok, en:User:SwissArmyGuy. -- ferret (talk) 15:14, 22 March 2024 (UTC)

@Yann: please take an action for temporarily block Ferret for 1 week for making serious attacks against me. 2001:4452:16B:1900:9DBF:381D:27DD:7C64 15:19, 22 March 2024 (UTC)

 Not done 2001:4452:16B:1900:0:0:0:0/64 globally blocked. Yann (talk) 19:08, 22 March 2024 (UTC)

Why deleted

Hi, I'm a little confused about how this works. The Trump image was a modified version of another image on Wikimedia Commons that was in the Public Domain and the Nicole Shanahan file was from a website that cited a Creative Commons license. Was I misinterpreting that this was allowed? Was there another policy that was violated? MonsterMash51 (talk) 00:56, 21 April 2024 (UTC)

You indicated the Shanahan image to be "by {{Unknown|author}}" with an ilpfoundry.us source. The Chronicle of Philanthropy credits it to Bia-Echo Foundation, as does Worth Magazine, and none of the Chronicle of Philanthropy, Worth Magazine, or Bia-Echo have a free license. Marie Claire credits "Hearst Owned", and the Huffington Post has the earliest appearance of this image, and the only one with intact metadata, and is similarly all rights reserved. Licenses may only be applied by the actual rightsholder. Why, despite all of the contrary evidence, do you believe ilpfoundry to be the rightsholder (and thus all other sites misrepresenting status) and not merely license laundering?

For the Trump image, the sole source you provided was a Getty link indicating it to be rights managed. I don't know what the other Commons image is. Эlcobbola _talk 01:58, 21 April 2024 (UTC)

Thanks for explaining. I did a Bing search of her name and filtered for free to use and that came up and didn't go any deeper.

The other Commons image for Trump was just: File:Donald_Trump_AFPI_Portrait_Cropped.jpg MonsterMash51 (talk) 02:15, 21 April 2024 (UTC)

That image is also a copyright violation. Per the Library of Congress, "The Economist Group dedicated to the public all rights it held for the photographs in this collection upon its donation to the Library." (underline added) This photo is not part of that collection. The uploader, who has a history of copyright violations, appears to be under the misapprehension that {{PD-CQ Roll Call}} applies to all CQ-Roll Call, Inc. images everywhere. This is not true per the above and, indeed, use of Getty as a source rather than the LoC (notice template assertion of "This work is from the Congressional Quarterly or Roll Call portion of the CQ Roll Call photograph collection at the Library of Congress" (underline added) is not true.) Эlcobbola _talk 14:04, 21 April 2024 (UTC)

Incorrect reference of potential copyright infringement

You referenced an image from an incorrect source, thenationaltriallawyers.org. This website used the image from www.goudarziyounglaw.com, which is our website and have rights to use our own attorney headshots. Please reconsider your decision. Sethzindler (talk) 15:18, 11 June 2024 (UTC)

The thenationaltriallawyers.org site was used as an example to demonstrate previous publication, a condition requiring additional evidence of permission. That site was not asserted to be a "correct source," and it need not be. You misrepresented yourself to be the author and have provided no evidence that the genuine author (with whom copyright initially vests) has a) granted the purported cc-zero license or b) transferred copyright to Goudarzi & Young, LLP and that you are authorised to license IP on that firm's behalf. The Commons, further, is not a venue for "attorney advertisement," (self-)promotion, or digital marketing. There is nothing to reconsider. Эlcobbola _talk 15:30, 11 June 2024 (UTC)

Clarification on deleted images

Why was the pictures i uploaded deleted? All Omani government published media and data is free to share except pictures of the head of state and the royal emblem. https://opendata.om/wp-content/uploads/2021/06/Open-Data-Policy-EN-June-2020.pdf CircleJump (talk) 19:52, 20 June 2024 (UTC)

You used a license template for (certain) UK government works, which, of course, does not apply to Omani governments work. I have restored the images for you to provide proper licensing and sourcing as needed. Эlcobbola _talk 20:22, 20 June 2024 (UTC)

The Omani OGL copyright tag is

but there is no template page for it....will I have to create one myself?

https://www.moheri.gov.om/userupload/Policy/Open%20Government%20Licence.pdf CircleJump (talk) 21:02, 20 June 2024 (UTC)

You may well need to create a new template, as not even COM:OMAN references the potential for this licensing. Another option would to use {{PD-because}}, with reference to that document or this page. Эlcobbola _talk 13:56, 21 June 2024 (UTC)

Sorry I'm typing the reply again. So it should be (PD-because|*link to document*)? CircleJump (talk) 06:19, 22 June 2024 (UTC)

So it would be {{ *link to document*}}? CircleJump (talk) 06:16, 22 June 2024 (UTC)

Apologies, separate from the syntax, it was a bad suggestion on my part: OGL is a free license, not a condition of being in public domain, so {{PD-because}} is improper. I do think a new template would be best. Comparison of {{OGL}} (UK) and {{OGL-C}} (Canada) should give you a good idea on how to change language/graphics/etc. based on country. Эlcobbola _talk 11:11, 22 June 2024 (UTC)