User talk:Geo Swan/archive/2009

User Talk:Geo Swan/archive/list

badname

Please don't replace the whole page when you take images. Sometimes an admin will want to review the content - replacing it means extra time fiddling around in the page history. Thanks — Mike.lifeguard | ^@en.wb 23:27, 22 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Okay. I reverted the last two I instances from today... Geo Swan (talk) 23:36, 22 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Commons:Deletion requests/File:Gul Aqa Nahib Saluting Aus Troops.jpg

Hi, I've responded to your comment. There's no evidence that the photo was taken by a US Army officer, and it was taken from an Australian Department of Defence photo gallery. Unlike the US military, the Australian military claims copyright over all its photos, and this is so tagged in the image's metadata and on the website it was sourced from. Nick-D (talk) 23:09, 24 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

TUSC token 41b1ca3b8db0468eee3b033f2bf0d02a

I am now proud owner of a TUSC account!

File:First_20_Guantanamo_captives.jpg

File:First_20_Guantanamo_captives.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） ∙ +/−

J.smith (talk) 16:16, 2 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

File:Downtown Prince Rupert.jpg

català ∙ čeština ∙ dansk ∙ Deutsch ∙ English ∙ español ∙ Esperanto ∙ français ∙ galego ∙ italiano ∙ lietuvių ∙ magyar ∙ Nederlands ∙ norsk bokmål ∙ português ∙ polski ∙ sicilianu ∙ slovenčina ∙ slovenščina ∙ suomi ∙ Tiếng Việt ∙ Ελληνικά ∙ македонски ∙ русский ∙ українська ∙ հայերեն ∙ 한국어 ∙ 日本語 ∙ 中文（简体） ∙ 中文（繁體） ∙ עברית ∙ فارسی ∙ +/−

Thank you for providing images to Wikimedia Commons. Please keep in mind that images and other files on Commons must be under a free license and should be useful to the Wikimedia projects. To allow others to use your files, some additional information must be given on the description page. Most importantly:

Describe what it is about in a short sentence. (What does the image show?)
State the author and the date of creation. If you made it yourself, say so explicitly. If it is from another Wikimedia user, link to the person's local user page. Best to use CommonsHelper.
If you did not create the file yourself, state the source you got it from.
Add a copyright tag - images without an appropriate license tag will be deleted.
Add the image to one or more gallery pages and/or appropriate categories, so it can be found by others. To find out where an image belongs, you can use CommonsSense.

If you copied the file from another wiki, please copy all information given there and say who uploaded it to that wiki. Use CommonsHelper.

It is recommended to use Template:Information to put that information on the description page. Have a look at Template talk:Information for details of the use of this template.

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.

Please add as much information as possible. If there is not sufficient information, the file may have to be deleted. For more information, follow the Commons:First steps guide. If you need help or have questions, please ask at the Help desk.

Thank you.

This message was added automatically by Filbot, if you need some help about it, ask its master (Filnik) or go to the Commons:Help desk. --Filnik 06:38, 21 February 2009 (UTC)

File source is not properly indicated: File:Union Station Toronto 22.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:Union Station Toronto 22.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!

--NuclearWarfare (talk) 01:50, 9 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Re: Could you please explain further...

Sure. The direct source, specifies "NASA Scientific Data Purchase Program, Space Imaging and Lockheed Martin Corporation." This means the following: the image was bought trough "NASA Scientific Data Purchase Program", which is basically an organization that helps researchers acquire information from NASA and other satellite operators. This image is from IKONOS, a satellite owned by GeoEye, formerly Orbview, formerly Space Imaging, founded by Lockheed Martin. It is a commercial satellite and it's images are commercial as well. Not PD-USGov-NASA and not authored by NASA. Unless the ohioview.org or whomever they published this for, bought this image under an explicit license to make it Public Domain, it should normally not be PD. TheDJ (talk) 19:54, 13 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

File:Skol hopper car.jpg

File:Skol hopper car.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） ∙ +/−

--Leoboudv (talk) 08:31, 1 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

2 Important questions for GeoSwan

Dear GeoSwan,

I have 2 important questions for you and I ask that you make a reply onto my talkpage concerning these 2 images. Just tell me the truth...that is all I ask.

Are you prepared to declare that these 2 images which you uploaded came from from terry cantrell's now deleted flickr account:

Secondly, can you declare that both these images were licensed on a Creative Commons Attribution Share-Alike license with no 'Non-Commercial' or 'No Derivatives' restrictions on their use when you uploaded them on March 29, 2009? These are two simple questions. Please kindly give me an answer on my talkpage and try to include a link to the 2 images. Thank You, --Leoboudv (talk) 05:26, 2 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Admin MBisanz has decided to pass just those 2 failed images based on the information you gave...and your excellent work here. (ie. your high credibility!) So, they are removed from this purgatory I have seen your excellent photos here and am impressed. Just note that cantrell's images are no longer accessible from his deleted flickr account and I cannot ask Matt in good conscience to pass any more images from this account. Regards, --Leoboudv (talk) 05:11, 3 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Error

I think you made a 2002/2003 error on File:ISN 008 -- Abdullah Gulam Rasoul -- Guantanamo weights.jpg. Sherurcij (talk) 03:09, 6 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Commons:Free media resources/Map

Hello,

Thanks for your input on Commons:Free media resources/Map. Do you have any idea of the copyright status of the maps created with this tool ? Teofilo (talk) 14:15, 24 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

re:Could you please explain further...

There is a exact-duplicate image -->File:Hut Point Moat, Antarctica.jpg Difference with both filename is only "_2". I thought the uploader mistyped filename. Kwj2772 (msg) 13:32, 27 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

File:Gawai_Border_in_Paktia_with_Pakistan.jpg

File:Gawai_Border_in_Paktia_with_Pakistan.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） ∙ +/−

High Contrast (talk) 21:54, 31 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Geo Swan,
could you try to re-upload File:Camp 5 cell block.jpg? --06:36, 3 June 2009 (UTC)

File:Cuban small-eared toad -- Guantanamo.jpg

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 Nikbot, if you need some help about it, ask its master (Filnik) or go to the Commons:Help desk. --Filnik 02:55, 6 June 2009 (UTC)

File:USCG target practice -- Guantanamo -b.jpg

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 Nikbot, if you need some help about it, ask its master (Filnik) or go to the Commons:Help desk. --Filnik 21:40, 10 July 2009 (UTC)

File:Toronto harbour at dusk - epa.gif

Hi... I tagged this image as a copyvio. The license was bad: the image was credited on the source page to the "Metropolitan Toronto Convention and Visitors Association" and was not the work of the EPA. Cheers. Rrburke (talk) 00:16, 8 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

File:Al Qaeda scrapbook 2.jpg

File:Al Qaeda scrapbook 2.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） ∙ +/−

--malo (talk) 21:53, 10 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

File:Al_Qaeda_scrapbook_2.jpg

File:Al_Qaeda_scrapbook_2.jpg has been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether it should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry.

If you created this file, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with it, such as a copyright issue. Please see Commons:But it's my own work! for a guide on how to address these issues.

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） ∙ +/−

Huib talk 04:39, 11 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

reuse of map showing north pole

Hi Geo Swan I wanted to use a version (may put text on top saying 'The Ice Boat' and my author's name Lazlo Ferran) and may shade image slightly for use on a cover of a fiction book that I am publishing on Lulu.com. I do not sell many books - in 5 years I have had one cheque for 30 dollars but I realise I need permission for this image and this is just right for my book. I have struggled to find an image to use. There are some royalty free ones of course but generally they are too modern and real looking and I needed something a bit abstract. Please let me know if there are any terms for me to be able to use this image. Thanking you in advance. Regards

Stephen Munnion

I am not sure which image(s) you are interested in. I recently decided to put all the images I took myself into the public domain. And I have decided to put all the maps I made into the public domain. If I haven't changed the liscensing on the image(s) you are interested in, remind me of the URL, and I will change it.

I appreciate you giving me a heads-up you are interested. If you do end up using it, I wouldn't mind you letting me know when it is published.

Cheers! Geo Swan (talk) 19:50, 17 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, if it is an image I uploaded that someone else made, it is probably in the public domain. Most of the images I uploaded that someone else made are in the public domain. Some of the images I have uploaded here are creative commons. In that case I can help you determine the actual photographer. Geo Swan (talk) 20:05, 17 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

use of your image

Hi Geo Swan

The image is this one. Its an ullustration not a photo: http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Map_of_the_range_of_the_bowhead_whale_centred_over_the_north_pole.gif

I have already used it (being prepared to remove it if you wish, as I was guessing that being in the 'public domain' meant I could use it and this book has been lying around unpublished for 6 years - I had some spare time so I just wanted to get it up. Yours was the only image really appropriate. There will at some point be a Volume II which will use the same image if you don't mind although possibly the book cover might be slightly different.

The book is called The Ice Boat and is at: http://www.lulu.com/kitten2

Ah. Okay, that is not one of my images -- not one I made. I found it, and uploaded it, from a website of the w:NOAA. Any image made by an employee of the the NOAA, in performance of their duties, would automatically be in the public domain. The USA, unlike most other countries, has a policy that the work of the employees of federal agencies is in the public domain. Images made by academics, working under a research grant, on the other hand, would not be in the public domain. And some web-sites of Federal agencies don't clearly mark when they are using images courtesy of someone else, who still retained the intellectual property rights. But, when I uploaded that image, in 2006, I thought it was in the public domain. So, you could credit it to the NOAA.

If you merely want an image of the north pole, the commons has lots of others, that are clearly in the public domain. I have made some of them. There is a free tool that makes that easy. The NOAA has an alternate map of the range of the Bowhead whale here. http://www.nmfs.noaa.gov/pr/species/mammals/cetaceans/bowheadwhale.htm

Cheers! Geo Swan (talk) 17:43, 19 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. I will credit the NOAA - Steve

Category:International Women's day

Category discussion notification

Category:International Women's day 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 ∙ +/−

--Diwas (talk) 11:07, 31 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

TUSC token 70dfd90b6e52c9080a8e30c0dd592336

I am now proud owner of a TUSC account! 70dfd90b6e52c9080a8e30c0dd592336 Geo Swan (talk) 01:31, 14 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted image

The image was marked as not having enough copyright information for a month and a half before today. In particular, it links to the original image here, but I don't see there any statement of it being released into the public domain or under a free licence. "released by the family", from the sentence "In this undated photo released by the family of Ahmed al-Darbi on Friday, Aug. 7, 2009, which was provided to them by the International Committee of the Red Cross, Guantanamo detainee Ahmed al-Darbi is seen at Camp 4 of the detention center on Guantanamo Bay Naval Base in Cuba.", is not enough. The word "release" does not mean such thing just by itself: unless there's an explicit mention of details in wich such release is made (such as the licence), then the word in this context just means being published or known to the public. See definitions of "Release" here Belgrano (talk) 20:54, 19 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

It's not needed to go though discussion for all and each image that may be subject for deletion. Many images are marked as not having enough information to confirm their status, for a limited time, and if that time expires any administrator may delete it directly (wich is what took place here). The image had a warning that clearly told that "Unless the copyright status is provided, the image will be deleted seven days after this template was added: (7 August 2009)."; you should have corrected things earlier.

However, considering circumstances, I will restore the image back, but opening a deletion request for it as well. It will be discussed there if the statement in the link site is enough for Commons or not. Belgrano (talk) 15:31, 20 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

File source is not properly indicated: File:Rompehielos_AP_46_Viel.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:Rompehielos_AP_46_Viel.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:Rompehielos_AP_46_Viel.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!

MGA73 (talk) 08:14, 20 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

File:Ahmed_Al_Darbi.jpg

File:Ahmed_Al_Darbi.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） ∙ +/−

Belgrano (talk) 15:37, 20 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

File:Guantanamo_captives_in_January_2002.jpg

~~{{Autotranslate|1=File:Guantanamo_captives_in_January_2002.jpg|base=Copyvionote}}~~Martin H. (talk) 15:37, 20 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I did read the information, "it seems to be..." is guessing on copyright, the corbis page is much clearer on this. I also searched for a military website with this image (army.mil, defenseimagery.mil) but I failed to find it. So per Corbis and COM:PRP. --Martin H. (talk) 15:54, 20 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Ehm, a sourcing to Corbis and guessing on copyright IS obvious. Maybe it is copyfraud by corbis? Then please give correct and complete information. Given a source to corbis and given a copyright claim by corbis the tagging is totaly justified. I did more research: I think you catched a digitally altered version from corbis and they claim copyright on it. The colors are slightly changed, one bright spot is removed. --Martin H. (talk) 16:15, 20 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I fixed the problem with your information. Next time please give all information and something misleading. Thanks, --Martin H. (talk) 16:28, 20 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Next time, if you choose to continue to tag images, I hope you do so more responsibly. The {{Copyvio}} tag clearly says it is only to be used in obvious cases. This case was not only not "obvious" -- your initial concern was highly misplaced. Geo Swan (talk) 16:35, 20 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Maybe you think this photo is famous, so I should know it -- no, i did not know the photo and the story behind it. You must give this information with your upload. If you claim the photograph to someone else as the author you must live with the questions about that. --Martin H. (talk) 16:38, 20 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I don't expect you to be familiar with every image I think is famous. I do expect you to always apply tags in a responsible manner. You didn't do this. The {{Copyvio}} tag is not supposed to be used when you think you have a legitimate doubt about the copyright status of an image. It is only supposed to be used when the image is an obvious copyvio. I established that the image was taken by McCoy with links to other images in the sequence taken seconds earlier or later that were clearly credited to him. Don't blame me that you didn't bother to read the full page. Geo Swan (talk) 16:52, 20 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, I can't think of a way to tell you my reaction to your speculation as to how others could claim credit for an image that is widely recognized as being in the public domain, without seeming to mock you. It is pretty common for wire services to claim credit for PD images. I repeat my encouragement, if you decide to continue applying tags, to do so more responsibly. Geo Swan (talk) 16:44, 20 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Of course I will follow your encouragement. I would also ask you to give better sources. Given

1) your sourcing to corbis (you even repeted the copyfraud), given

2) the wording "it seems to be taken by" without any reference or proof or at least a clear wording that the photo was indeed taken by,

3) given a photo on corbis supporting the copyright claim and given

4) that I did not know that photo -

sorry, but following that poor information it was obvious to me. --Martin H. (talk) 16:56, 20 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

File:Rompehielos AP 46 Viel.jpg

Hello, The image is not available on Flickr. It was tagged with "Image has no source and is not from the given flickr account". Do you know the source of this picture? Regards, Yann (talk) 10:46, 24 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

No, the URLs you gave me are not this file. Yann (talk) 22:23, 24 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Could you then retrieve the text metainformation the flickr2 commons bot generated and put it on my talk page?

Sorry, I didn't understand. Which meta information? Where is it? Yann (talk) 22:52, 24 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Never mind. Probably human error on my part. I found File:Rompehielos AP 46 Viel -b.jpg has the right metainformation for that flickr page, so I probably put the wrong image on File:Rompehielos AP 46 Viel.jpg. Geo Swan (talk) 22:58, 24 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

File:Captured documents, Zawar Kili -b.jpg

Wikimedia Commons does not accept derivative works of non-free works such as File:Captured documents, Zawar Kili -b.jpg. It only accepts free content, which is images and other media files that can be used by anyone, for any purpose. Reproductions of copyrighted works are also subject to the same copyright, and therefore this file must unfortunately be considered non-free. For more information, please read Commons:Derivative works and Commons:Freedom of panorama. You can ask questions about Commons policies in Commons:Help desk. The file you added has been deleted. If you believe that this file was not a derivative work of a non-free work, you may request undeletion.

čeština ∙ dansk ∙ Deutsch ∙ English ∙ español ∙ français ∙ galego ∙ hrvatski ∙ italiano ∙ magyar ∙ polski ∙ português ∙ português do Brasil ∙ sicilianu ∙ slovenščina ∙ suomi ∙ svenska ∙ Ελληνικά ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца) ∙ български ∙ македонски ∙ русский ∙ ไทย ∙ 日本語 ∙ Tiếng Việt ∙ 中文（简体） ∙ 中文（繁體） ∙ +/−

--|EPO| ^da: 09:24, 27 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

File:Gawai Border in Paktia with Pakistan.jpg

Hello, This image has a watermark which shows that it wasn't created by the Flickr user. It comes from a news agency. See [1]. Yann (talk) 15:11, 27 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Re: Canadian CG images

The uploader was User:Jimderkaisser, (almost certainly) the same User:Jimderkaisser - your recollection of the facts relating to the image is accurate. Looking at his upload logs here on Commons and on Wikipedia, I'm suspicious of his uploads - a lack of understanding of copyright is clearly demonstrated throughout.

If you feel that the image is his work, feel free to take it to COM:UNDEL. Of course apart from copyright there is another issue: If the image is his own work then its original research, and so of questionable value for WP anyway...--Nilfanion (talk) 23:20, 29 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

User:Rama made about a hundred line drawing illustrating sexual positions. Would you regard those drawings as original research?

Copyright is tricky. I uploaded some images to the English wikipedia I thought were fair use. Some people told me that those images could be replaced, in various ways, including a drawing created by myself.

Thanks for drawing my attention to the upload logs. I agree, they are suspicious. Geo Swan (talk) 04:53, 30 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The "original research" comment in this case is that without sourcing, the image is just a generic small craft in CG livery: Is there any evidence that the image is an accurate depiction of the proposed design? If it isn't accurate, its useless (for WP). If it is accurate where did he get the design from?

That is different from Rama's line drawings, as the fine details do not matter in a depiction of the "missionary position" but do in one of the "Mid Shore Patrol Vessel Project". That said, "original research" is an irrelevance to Commons - all that matters here is the copyright status.

As for fair use, the rule is simple really: If its possible to get a free replacement, get that replacement. Drawing your own image is an appropriate way of doing so, in some contexts.--Nilfanion (talk) 10:21, 30 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. Geo Swan (talk) 13:12, 30 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

note

Will this image will be in the public domain next January 1st? Geo Swan (talk) 07:04, 30 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

{{Information
|Description=S.S. Noronic burning at Pier 9, Toronto September 17, 1949 City of Toronto Archives Fonds 1244, Item 1518
|Source=http://www.toronto.ca/archives/
|Date=1949
|Author=unknown
|Permission={{PD-Canada}}
|other_versions=
}}
[[Category:Steamships of Canada]]
[[Category:Toronto]]
These wikipedia images of the SS Noronic had their fair use status challenged. I think they will all enter the public domain next January 1st. Geo Swan (talk) 07:22, 30 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Ditto

Freedom of Panorama, Canada

http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/COM:FOP#Canada Geo Swan (talk) 16:37, 1 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

File:Captured documents, Zawar Kili -b.jpg

File:Captured documents, Zawar Kili -b.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） ∙ +/−

--Liftarn (talk) 21:40, 11 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Commons:Requests for checkuser/Case/Geo Swan

Please take note of the above. Cheers, Tiptoety ^talk 07:31, 17 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, he may keep arguing, but nothing will be done. -- Drini 16:33, 20 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

File:Canadian_troops_in_Afghanistan.jpg

File:Canadian_troops_in_Afghanistan.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） ∙ +/−

High Contrast (talk) 18:03, 28 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

File:Segera Afghanistan.jpg

Critically evaluate Flickr licenses

File:Segera Afghanistan.jpg has been marked as a copyright violation. You may have preserved the information shown on Flickr correctly when transferring the image here, but the Flickr uploader is not the copyright holder of this image. Either the image was created by someone else, or it is a derivative of someone else's work. As stated in Commons:Licensing, only the copyright holder may issue a license, so the one shown on Flickr is invalid. Always remember to critically evaluate Flickr licenses. Photostreams with professional-looking photographs, album covers, posters, and images in a wide range of styles or quality taken by many different cameras often indicate that the Flickr uploader either does not understand or does not care about copyright matters. See Commons:Questionable Flickr images for a list of known bad Flickr users.

Deutsch ∙ English ∙ magyar ∙ português do Brasil ∙ italiano ∙ norsk ∙ norsk bokmål ∙ português ∙ français ∙ македонски ∙ slovenščina ∙ suomi ∙ українська ∙ svenska ∙ sicilianu ∙ 中文（臺灣） ∙ +/−

—LX (talk, contribs) 22:07, 30 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

File:Celebrating Internation Womens' Day in Kandahar.jpg

Critically evaluate Flickr licenses

File:Celebrating Internation Womens' Day in Kandahar.jpg has been marked as a copyright violation. You may have preserved the information shown on Flickr correctly when transferring the image here, but the Flickr uploader is not the copyright holder of this image. Either the image was created by someone else, or it is a derivative of someone else's work. As stated in Commons:Licensing, only the copyright holder may issue a license, so the one shown on Flickr is invalid. Always remember to critically evaluate Flickr licenses. Photostreams with professional-looking photographs, album covers, posters, and images in a wide range of styles or quality taken by many different cameras often indicate that the Flickr uploader either does not understand or does not care about copyright matters. See Commons:Questionable Flickr images for a list of known bad Flickr users.

Deutsch ∙ English ∙ magyar ∙ português do Brasil ∙ italiano ∙ norsk ∙ norsk bokmål ∙ português ∙ français ∙ македонски ∙ slovenščina ∙ suomi ∙ українська ∙ svenska ∙ sicilianu ∙ 中文（臺灣） ∙ +/−

—LX (talk, contribs) 22:25, 30 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

File:Kunduz,_Bedenke_bevor_Du_denkst....jpg

File:Kunduz,_Bedenke_bevor_Du_denkst....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） ∙ +/−

High Contrast (talk) 22:18, 1 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

File:HighRezButNeedsWork_-_Khadr_AA_Care.jpg

File:HighRezButNeedsWork_-_Khadr_AA_Care.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） ∙ +/−

High Contrast (talk) 20:31, 3 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

File source is not properly indicated: File:Uncropped_Medical_Treatment_of_Omar_Khadr.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:Uncropped_Medical_Treatment_of_Omar_Khadr.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!

High Contrast (talk) 20:36, 3 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

File:Khadr_receiveing_AA_care.PNG

File:Khadr_receiveing_AA_care.PNG has been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether it should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry.

If you created this file, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with it, such as a copyright issue. Please see Commons:But it's my own work! for a guide on how to address these issues.

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） ∙ +/−

High Contrast (talk) 20:46, 3 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

File:Uncropped_Medical_Treatment_of_Omar_Khadr.JPG

File:Uncropped_Medical_Treatment_of_Omar_Khadr.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） ∙ +/−

High Contrast (talk) 21:33, 3 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

File:Afghan_Aerostat.jpg

File:Afghan_Aerostat.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） ∙ +/−

Zaccarias (talk) 17:56, 4 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

New categories

I have created:

Category:Humanitarian aid in Afghanistan Category:Development aid in Afghanistan

Both are listed in 2001-present war in Afghanistan. So I have removed this categories from the images which belonged to those cats. (Of course those pictures with soldiers on it are also listed in subcategories like "United States Army in Afghanistan".)--Zaccarias (talk) 22:48, 11 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

also new: Category:Afghan War (2001-present) casualties ------Zaccarias (talk) 12:38, 13 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

File:US Army builds a road in Paktia Province.jpg

The source of [this image] that you uploaded is wrong - the image does not appear there. Please correct that grievance. Thanks in advance. --High Contrast (talk) 18:24, 14 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

fixed, image is identifiable from the EXIF information. --Martin H. (talk) 18:49, 14 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

FP Nomination

Nomination Notification

G'day! I love File:Compliant Guantanamo captive is allowed to stroll the exercise yard.jpg, that you've uploaded to Commons, so I've nominated it for Featured Picture status. Its nomination is at Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Compliant Guantanamo captive is allowed to stroll the exercise yard.jpg. Best of luck! Sarcastic ShockwaveLover (talk) 10:48, 12 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Rotate

If you need to rotate an image as I did here for you, type in the rotate code and either 90, 180 or 270. Here its 180 degrees. The Rotatebot will do it in about 5-6 hours time. Regards, --Leoboudv (talk) 09:05, 16 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

What I do is I save a new file of that image with the right orientation. So, the revised image is saved in say File.15545, etc (2).jpg and you would upload this revised file and not the original one to Commons. It works for me. But if you have a problem, just use the Rotatebot and type in 90, 180 or 270 degrees. Regards, --Leoboudv (talk) 03:10, 18 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Could you please explain...

I just uploaded File:Castle overlooking the Danube.jpg. I looked in Category:Castles, to see which subcategory was appropriate. I don't know which country it is in, only that it is on the Danube -- a river that drains a dozen countries. If there had been a Category:Castles by River, I would have looked in there for a Category:Castles on the Danube. But there is no Category:Castles by River. There was a Category:Castles by continent, which only contained one subcategory, Category:Castles in Africa. I decided I would add File:Castle overlooking the Danube.jpg to Category:Castles in Europe. When I did so I saw you had deleted it.

But the entry you left in the deletion log was of no help to me, since it merely said "empty".

May I request you leave more detailed notes in the deletion log in future?

Thanks! Geo Swan (talk) 18:05, 19 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The deletion was back in April 2008, so it's quite possible the category was empty back then. You created it again today, and it has not been deleted by anyone since then. I guess you misread the log. –Tryphon ^☂ 18:37, 19 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I responded to Tryphon's comment at User talk:Tryphon#WRT your recent comment.... Geo Swan (talk) 22:30, 19 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

O.o. I was cleaning the Category:Castles, so I guess Category:Castles in Europe was empty then... Consequently, I deleted it without a more detailed notes than "empty" in the deletion log...

Juste be bold : if you think a such category is currently needed, juste create-it !--Bapti ✉ 16:34, 20 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

File:Major_Michelle_Mendes.jpg

File:Major_Michelle_Mendes.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） ∙ +/−

High Contrast (talk) 23:26, 21 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Pangnirtung

I realize that Pangnirtung is way the heck in the middle of nowhere, and you'll note that I proposed to keep File:Visiting students get outdoor lessons in Pangnirtung -a.jpg. But anything local in File:Visiting students get outdoor lessons in Pangnirtung -b.jpg is out of focus in the background. I just don't see anything in the pictures I proposed to delete as useful in scope, and the photographer asking for deletion is enough to make it a clear delete for me. In any case, since there was no note at User talk:Lindsayterry, I left one for her.--Prosfilaes (talk) 14:54, 24 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I advised the original photographer, via flickr-email, when I first initiated the deletion discussions.

You are correct, you did argue for keeping one of the images. I missed that. Sorry.

I amended the description of File:Students tour Nunavut.jpg, drawing attention to the stilts to protect the permafrost under the buildings.

WRT the swimming photos that water would have been at zero degrees, which I think lifts them out of mundane images of swimming...

As you noted on User talk:Lindsayterry her request for deletion is basically a courtesy request. In her email she argued they should be deleted due to "personality rights" -- but she didn't really explain this argument for deletion. Geo Swan (talk) 17:49, 24 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

File:Canadian_troops_in_Afghanistan.jpg

File:Canadian_troops_in_Afghanistan.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） ∙ +/−

High Contrast (talk) 07:45, 26 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

File:Iranian_police_beat_a_bound_captive.jpg

File:Iranian_police_beat_a_bound_captive.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） ∙ +/−

Justass (talk) 23:12, 1 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

File:Paris train station -a.jpg

File:Paris train station -a.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） ∙ +/−

--Benchaum (talk) 07:21, 2 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Uploaded Edmonton Skyline pic

Hi, I appreciate you uploading my pictures, but one of them I have already uploaded myself at much higher resolution. I am going to mark it as a duplicate, and also note the existing category [[Category:Edmonton skylines]], rather than [[Category:Edmonton Skyline]].

You uploaded: http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Edmonton_Skyline_at_night_-a.jpg

Already uploaded: http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Edmonton_Skyline_from_South_Side.jpg

Darren Kirby (talk) 19:38, 4 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Ah. Okay. I never forget a face, or at least I never used to forget a face. IDs are another matter. Since you are on both flickr and the commons I will try to remember your flickr ID, and skip uploading any of your images -- as you would have uploaded the images yourself, if you thought they fit here.

I used to inform some of my favourite flickr contributors when I uploaded their images. But I didn't use to do so in every case. I started doing so about a month ago, and have had the unpleasant experience of learning that some flickr contributors don't understand the CC liscenses they applied to their images. One guy asked me whether I thought I was doing him a favor, and admonished me for not asking for explicit prior permission. Another contributor asked me to delete a bunch of images, and left a note at Category:Pangnirtung that she had withdrawn her CC and considered all her images "all rights reserved".

Your flickr ID is "bulliver", correct?

Cheers! Geo Swan (talk) 21:48, 5 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hi! Yes I am 'bulliver' here, on wikipedia, and flickr. In fact, if you see a 'bulliver' anywhere on the internet it is probably me.

Sorry you had a bad experience with some slow-witted flickr people. I can assure you I understand full-well the intent and purpose of the CC-BY-SA license and license my pics accordingly. I understand you don't have to inform me of uploads, but it is a courtesy I appreciate. I generally will notice eventually from my flickr referrer logs anyway.

I don't want to stop you from uploading my images. I have thousands of them, and I don't always think to upload them here. What you can maybe do instead is check the gallery on my user page. I always post any pics I've uploaded there.

Cheers to you, and thanks!

Darren Kirby (talk) 01:36, 6 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

OK. Cheers! Geo Swan (talk) 04:12, 6 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Re:Could you please explain...

Sorry ,I click a wrong reason, should be "uploader reqest", changed.--Fanghong (talk) 08:02, 9 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

File:A Bucuresti street scene -h.jpg

File:A Bucuresti street scene -h.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） ∙ +/−

Sorry about this but the FOP problem is unfortunate. Luckily there is full FOP in Canada unlike the US (except for buildings) and virtually none in Romania. --Leoboudv (talk) 23:04, 15 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

File:A Bucuresti street scene -d.jpg

File:A Bucuresti street scene -d.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） ∙ +/−

--Leoboudv (talk) 23:07, 15 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The thing is I don't know if its a street scene or copyrighted under FOP. Under FOP, the architect of a building must be dead for 70 years for the photo of his/her work to be hosted here. Of course, if the building is just a small part of the picture than COM:DM applies and it can be kept. Best to let the community decide here in the 2 DRs. I won't file any more DR's on your photos. Just those two as I want other people to make a reply here. As an aside, there is no FOP in all the former Soviet states. Thank You, --Leoboudv (talk) 01:29, 16 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Deprecated License

Hello. Thank you for uploading Image:A falcon eats a pigeon, near Toronto harbour.jpg, however the license that you have uploaded it under has been deprecated. Please could you select a new free license that describes the rights of the image correctly? If you are not able to do this, the image will be be deleted in 7 days.

For more information on licenses that can be used on Wikimedia Commons, please see Commons:Licensing. If you have any questions, please ask at the village pump. Thank you for your patience and consideration. This is an automatic message by Nikbot.--Filnik 21:01, 18 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Freedom of Panorama

This is the rule on Romanian FOP Basically all sculptures, buildings, art work where the architect has not been dead for 70 years is not permitted on Commons due to the absence of FOP in Romania since the law there prohibits Commercial use of any such photos taken here. Of course, pictures of nature, people or pictures where the building/sculpture, etc forms only a small part of the photo is acceptable. Some countries like mainland China, Vietnam, Malaysia, India, Pakistan, Israel, Egypt, Germany, Canada, the UK, Spain, most of Latin America, etc have Full FOP. So the law is different from one country to another country. But Italy, France, Belgium, Greece and all the former Soviet states have no FOP. So, there are no pictures of modern buildings or artwork from those states permitted here. Regards, --Leoboudv (talk) 04:55, 19 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Images of new cars, trains, planes, trucks, etc are exempt from FOP laws since they are considered utilitarian. So, Commons can host them. Regards, --Leoboudv (talk) 05:55, 19 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

AFAIK, this image File:Romanian Parliamentary Palace (Casa Poporului).jpg will fail Romanian FOP (if someone files a DR) since Caucescu was still building it in 1989...and the photo focuses primarily on this one building. The architect cannot be dead for 70 years here. Two images including this one in this category has been nominated for DR. As I stress, if the building is Not the main focus of the photo (or doesn't occupy say 40-50%) of the picture, it likely can be kept. I can't comment on the rest of the photos on your list but some are of older buildings, or just purely street views with 1 or 2 buildings in the photo...so, they should be OK. Regards, --Leoboudv (talk) 20:52, 20 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

File:Mountain passes of Afghanistan.png

hallo! Please can you help me? The colour of this card

are bad to read. can you change the colour? Roll-Stone

Those aren't the colours I usually use. I must have been experimenting.

I'll see what I can do. Give me a few days. Geo Swan (talk) 14:08, 30 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

As times go by...??? --62.226.177.183 18:17, 12 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

May I remind you we are all volunteers here, doing this work in our spare time?

The tool I used to create that basic image is extremely easy to use. If you can't wait for me to get around to it, let me encourage you to simply recreate the map. I left the geographic coordinates of the passes right below the image. Just plug them into the map creation form's box for user added locations -- along with other passes whose coordinates you know, and Bob's your uncle.

For this particular map I slightly darkened everything inside Afghanistan. That was a lot of work. I may have the base map, with the dots, with Afghanistan shaded, but it was on my previous computer, since retired. I haven't fired it up, to look for the preliminary image. I don't have the tool I used to darken Afghanistan on my new computer either.

The basic image generation form will automatically generate captions to the user supplied locations, using the names you tell it, in a black, courier-like font. I don't use the default font anymore. Th map creation form has a button that lets a user generate a map with dots at the user supplied locations, but no text. I then use the free w:irfanview program to add text.

If you want to recreate a replacement, with text in black, and you don't mind using the courier text, you could recreate this map in about ten minutes. Knock yourself out. Geo Swan (talk) 18:41, 12 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Commons:Deletion requests/File:Masturbation10.jpg

I'm not sure what you wanted the final form of your comment to be, but I rolled back the last change, as it deleted other poster's comments and I got the impression it might have been an accidental change and you really wanted the previous version to stand.--Prosfilaes (talk) 01:13, 29 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Wikimedia conferences ... or, more woody!

It has struck me that a source of good penis pictures could come from a Wikimedia conference. You would have available a variety of ages and ethnicity and a controlled environment for pictures, which could be used trusting that all privacy issues are dealt with and all the models' anonymity protected. And, of course, you would have a useful supply of blackmail material to win your next flame war. (-: I'm not sure it could be seriously pulled off, but it's one idea to get better pictures.--Prosfilaes (talk) 21:19, 29 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I have never been to a wikimedia conference. Are you saying that they are populated by dicks? That is bad news. :(

If I went to one, and I was asked to volunteer to drop my drawers and stand up for a gallery of images that represented a truer cross-section of the general populace, and I really trusted that the pics would anonymous, I would volunteer. I don't think I could guarantee the standing up aspect however.

Cheers! Geo Swan (talk) 14:45, 30 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I've never been to a Wikimedia conference unfortunately, and no comment about presence of dicks other than the completely literal was intended. I just don't think we're going to get a good cross-section of humanity with ethnicity and age information with good pictures, without something intentional happening.--Prosfilaes (talk) 15:26, 30 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

User talk:Geo Swan/archive/2009

badname

TUSC token 41b1ca3b8db0468eee3b033f2bf0d02a

File source is not properly indicated: File:Union Station Toronto 22.jpg

Re: Could you please explain further...

2 Important questions for GeoSwan

Error

re:Could you please explain further...

reuse of map showing north pole

use of your image

TUSC token 70dfd90b6e52c9080a8e30c0dd592336

Deleted image

File source is not properly indicated: File:Rompehielos_AP_46_Viel.jpg

File:Gawai Border in Paktia with Pakistan.jpg

Re: Canadian CG images

note

File source is not properly indicated: File:Uncropped_Medical_Treatment_of_Omar_Khadr.JPG

New categories

FP Nomination

Rotate

Could you please explain...

Pangnirtung

Uploaded Edmonton Skyline pic

Re:Could you please explain...

Deprecated License

Freedom of Panorama

File:Mountain passes of Afghanistan.png

Wikimedia conferences ... or, more woody!

Navigation menu

Search