User talk:Holly Cheng/Archive2

Datura

I've replied on your question on my discussion page epibase (talk) 18:03, 16 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you

Thank you for removing the private information from the Israel Leavitt, Leavitt Street Sign, Josiah Leavitt, etc. photos. I may have inadvertently put that in there, and I subsequently noticed it there and it sort of worried me. So thank you very much for cleaning that up! Regards, MarmadukePercy (talk) 00:29, 17 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

OTRS ticket

Hi, I see you've added a ticket here. Does this ticket apply to other picture of the YSEE? Namely, I've recently deleted File:Dodekatheic altar 10.JPG and File:Dodekatheic altar 11.JPG but maybe they could have been covered as well? Regards, --Eusebius (talk) 09:09, 5 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hmm, it's a little vague. This picture is called out specifically by the uploader, but the YSEE representative also says, "we give you the permission to publish YSEE photos" from which could be inferred to mean all of them, but I wouldn't count on that. I'll follow up with the YSEE and let you know. howcheng {chat} 17:52, 5 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

OK, thanks a lot. Waiting for input then. --Eusebius (talk) 21:18, 5 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Any news about that? --Eusebius (talk) 07:07, 13 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Nope, no reply yet. :( howcheng {chat} 17:17, 13 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Gallery of user contributions?

Hi, Howcheng. I think I once found a link which displayed a gallery of all the files uploaded by a particular user: I mean to say, this was an automatic function which could be applied to any user, and not a link to a gallery which had been created; but I can't now find it again. If such a thing exists, could you please point me the way to it? Many thanks, Xn4 (talk) 09:57, 8 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

(Sorry Howcheng, your talk page was on my watchlist and I can answer that) The "gallery" tab at the top of any user page on Commons points to that tool: http://toolserver.org/~daniel/WikiSense/Gallery.php When you use the gallery tab, parameters are filled in order to match the corresponding user. --Eusebius (talk) 10:27, 8 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

It's also on the top of a user's contribution history page. howcheng {chat} 17:09, 9 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks to both of you. Strange how you sometimes can't see what's under your nose. Xn4 (talk) 19:57, 16 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

File:JoshDuhamel.jpg

File:JoshDuhamel.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） ∙ +/−

--Kollision (talk) 02:21, 14 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

OTRS terms

Could you be so kind as to check the terms of an OTRS ticket? I'm looking at File:Natalya Raw 2008.jpg which ties back to ticket # 2009021710077321. There have been a number of other images from the same Flickr account uploaded to Commons - the various wrestling images found here, and a couple of those new images have been tagged as permission missing. Is the ticket specific for the Natayla image, or does it cover all of the images on the Flickr account?? Tabercil (talk) 00:00, 20 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

This ticket is valid ONLY for the Natalya image. Nothing else from the Flickr account is covered. howcheng {chat} 00:05, 20 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

And that is why, when I'm trying to get an image from Flickr for use on Wikipedia, I have the license changed on Flickr as opposed to using OTRS - to avoid ambiguity about what's usable. Tabercil (talk) 00:24, 20 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, I prefer that too. The fewer people there are involved, the less chance of error and whatnot. howcheng {chat} 17:17, 20 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

OTRS terms, take 2

Can you check another ticket for me pls? Specificly ticket 2009022110014685 which was used to back File:Vmasaguilera.jpg up. I've found the image on WireImage, so I'd like to know what exactly the ticket says. In the interim, image is up for AFD. Tabercil (talk) 23:39, 21 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Mysterious fontbolding

Hello Mr. Cheng! I has been a while since I had to bother you. Looking at my watchlist page you see a lot of bold-fonted image pages. The bold font keeps coming back again and again, like it shouldn't, even after I have visited those pages. No huge deal, but can anything be done, do you think? Greetings! EmilEikS (talk) 14:57, 30 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hmm, I don't know too much about that. I would ask at Commons:Village pump instead and someone more knowledgeable may be able to assist you. howcheng {chat} 16:13, 30 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Will do, thank you sir! EmilEikS (talk) 17:12, 30 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Tip: Categorizing images

Afrikaans ∙ العربية ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца) ∙ বাংলা ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ dansk ∙ Deutsch ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form) ∙ Ελληνικά ∙ English ∙ Esperanto ∙ español ∙ فارسی ∙ suomi ∙ français ∙ galego ∙ עברית ∙ magyar ∙ íslenska ∙ italiano ∙ 日本語 ∙ ქართული ∙ 한국어 ∙ македонски ∙ മലയാളം ∙ norsk bokmål ∙ Plattdüütsch ∙ Nederlands ∙ norsk ∙ polski ∙ português ∙ português do Brasil ∙ română ∙ русский ∙ sicilianu ∙ slovenčina ∙ slovenščina ∙ српски / srpski ∙ svenska ∙ Türkçe ∙ українська ∙ Tiếng Việt ∙ 中文（简体）‎ ∙ 中文（繁體）‎ ∙ +/−

Hello, Holly Cheng!

Thanks a lot for contributing to the Wikimedia Commons! Here's a tip to make your uploads more useful: Why not add some categories to describe them? This will help more people to find and use them.

Here's how:

1) If you're using the UploadWizard, you can add categories to each file when you describe it. Just click "more options" for the file and add the categories which make sense:

2) You can also pick the file from your list of uploads, edit the file description page, and manually add the category code at the end of the page.

[[Category:Category name]]

For example, if you are uploading a diagram showing the orbits of comets, you add the following code:

[[Category:Astronomical diagrams]]

[[Category:Comets]]

This will make the diagram show up in the categories "Astronomical diagrams" and "Comets".

When picking categories, try to choose a specific category ("Astronomical diagrams") over a generic one ("Illustrations").

Thanks again for your uploads! More information about categorization can be found in Commons:Categories, and don't hesitate to leave a note on the help desk.

BotMultichillT 05:57, 15 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Mahdi Bray.JPG is uncategorized since 14 April 2009.
Image:Jordan Jansen.jpg was uncategorized on 19 January 2012 CategorizationBot (talk) 11:08, 20 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

revoking GFDL licenses

You may want to weigh in on the proposal here to explicitly prohibit revoking licenses on Commons. Kaldari (talk) 18:35, 15 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

70 years after publication?

Dear Mr. Cheng: I do not understand the new template placed today here. If the name of the photographer was published before 1978 the image cannot be used? How, realistically, would one ever know that? Or have I misunderstood what looks like an impossible rule to follow even to the most careful image donor? EmilEikS (talk) 00:29, 19 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I'm sorry, I completely missed this message. However, I'm glad to see you have been able to work this out. howcheng {chat} 22:36, 29 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

OTRS possible mistake?

Hi, regarding ticket number 2421158, it is used to cover Kevin Wigell's File:M51a.jpg, File:M20-Combine1B.jpg, File:CSSP Cygnus Combine1B NR.jpg, and File:CSSP Sagittarius Combine1C.jpg, but I find it strange that it is also used for Tim Hopkins' File:FishingLight.ogv and L A Youland's File:USS Timmerman DD-828 photo-1.jpg. Is there some mistake for the last two files? Thank you. Jappalang (talk) 19:48, 9 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thank for you the notification. These have been corrected (and that's extremely observant of you!). howcheng {chat} 01:49, 10 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Feels like stalking

Dear Mr. Cheng: Pls advise me where I can turn for help with someone who has begun stalking my every move - as if I need personal policing by him here on Commons - and leaves various disruptive commments for the sake of arguing, not for the sake of contributing constructively to WM projects. Sorry to bother you with this trite matter, but I thought maybe you would know where I can turn, as this is beginning to make my work here much less than enjoyable (= untenable). Greetings ~ EmilEikS (talk) 18:38, 11 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I think you are reading too much into this. I am familiar with the user in question and in my experience, he is really only concerned about the Commons project and the correct licensing of media files. One of hte problems he pointed out is that you tend to use the same OTRS ticket for many uploads. I am sure this is just a good-faith mistake on your part, but each ticket is only valid for the items that are covered specifically in that ticket. For example, all of those East Side Story photos I processed for you some time ago, you couldn't use that same ticket number for an unrelated photo. When you have new photos from someone else, you need to follow the instructions at COM:OTRS to get those cleared. Hope that helps. howcheng {chat} 03:43, 12 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! I have corrected all the template errors by now, as far as I know. Has anyone ever kept track of your contributions and followed you around? It's pretty creepy. Here for example he found yet another debate where he can get involved against me (maybe he'll be calling my input there "antics" like he has done before?), but my better judgement tells me he too, being experienced, actually must find the Ohio ID source very weak for the unquestionable naming of a portrait. EmilEikS (talk) 09:17, 12 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Well, your contribution history is accessible by anyone. Also, experience shows us that when a user has a problematic upload, then more than likely, other uploads will also have issues. Please just consider that all users here are acting in good faith; a deletion request should not be seen as a negative mark against you. Everyone makes mistakes and there is definitely a learning curve to getting it right here, so if you look at this as a learning process, that will help. Thanks. howcheng {chat} 17:22, 12 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you Howcheng!

Henry Delforn (talk) 18:13, 14 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Looking for picture of Chinese victims of famine or any Mao-related atrocities. Can you help? Thank you again.Henry Delforn (talk) 18:25, 14 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hmm, I don't too much about the topic (it's been >15 years since I took Chinese history classes in college), but I would browse through Category:History of China to start. Good luck! howcheng {chat} 18:47, 14 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Help... please.

Hi, I, Fcb981, was blocked recently (indefinitely) for being a vandalism only account. I was wondering if you knew how I could potentially go about getting un-blocked. I thought I'd come to you as you are an admin and are also active last I checked since you are still doing POTD over on en.wiki. Anyway, replying on User talk:Fcb981 is probably best. Regards, -Fcb981 -76.115.129.13 23:03, 22 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Looks like I got unblocked quickly, sorry to bother you. I was just somewhat baffled and was trying to find someway to get out of the block. -Fcb981 (talk) 23:34, 22 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

File:Yasmin_Gontijo - File: Yasmin_Perfil

Hello! Thanks for answering my request!Regards --Tiegor (talk) 16:01, 29 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

File:Libyan Airlines TS-IND.jpg

Hi!

They put a request for deletion on this Libyan Airlines photo, even though I already sent permission to the OTRS team. I sent the email again just now, can you please have a look and verify, and remove the deletion tag?

Thanks a lot,

Regards from Libya, Jaw101ie (talk) 07:04, 11 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I replied to you via email. howcheng {chat} 16:41, 11 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Edit warring re: ancient burial mounds

An edit war has begun here with Kuiper (as usual) who reverts edits without discussing (as usual). This just makes me feel like not contributing anymore to WC, just as I sat down now to upload a bunch of really great pictures of historical sites we took in June in Denmark and Sweden. I have been working very hard lately to try to organize all the categories under Category:Royalty of Sweden as well as I can. Can you please help me regain my impetus and desire? At least recommend what to do with this constant rule-breaker Kuiper who is still following me around? There are so many complaints on this guy from ther users too - all the same kind as mine. Basically a sort of personal persecution bordering on stalking, so that he can get his way, but with no sources whatsoever to back him up. He just changes things as he pleases. Can't anybody deal with him? What do we do? Please!

Here is another example of his handywork for the benefit of WC and the Foundation! Embarrassing bordering on shameful.

And here is a great example of the uninformed belligerency of this person - over and over and over again. EmilEikS (talk) 20:04, 12 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

2009072710008743

Just wanted to draw your attention to OTRS ticket number 2009072710008743. It's addressed to you, so I'm assuming you have messaged this person before? Thought I'd let you know rather than asking them for a specific license. J Milburn (talk) 20:21, 4 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Ah yes, Anyang Halla hockey club (see Category:Anyang Halla) has given PD releases for a few photos. I would assume that those terms are still agreeable. howcheng {chat} 20:28, 4 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

2009071410073116

Another ticket addressed to you- I was going to deal with it myself, but I haven't really got any idea what the image is of. I'm assuming you've had dealings with this person? Perhaps you could shed a little light? J Milburn (talk) 11:05, 7 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

This guy is a retired freelance photographer who sends in a lot of random photos from his travels. I'll take care of it. Thanks. howcheng {chat} 17:08, 7 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

File:Sander-jan-klerk bw.jpg

Hi Mr. Cheng! Someone has put a picture on commons while that person didn't have the right. Can you please remove the ticket and the picture? I am the only owner of the picture. Thanks in advance! Sander198 17:08, 9 August 2009 (UTC)

Action?

Hey Howard,

Just out of curiosity, what sort of action did you want to take if you were able to see the ticket? I'm currently in contact with the user via OTRS, and I suspect that he just regrets having uploaded the image (the headers of both the permission, and his new e-mail are a match). The image is currently only in use on nl-wikipedia, so although it's a shame, I guess we can delete the image upon request. Although I do want him to come clean and be clear about his request (e.g. not claiming copyright, but just saying "I regret uploading the picture"). I've made this clear to him in an e-mail (ticket:2009080910012431). m:Mark W (Mwpnl) ¦ talk 12:55, 9 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

As you can see directly above here, I was thinking this was a claim of copyright infringement, so I was going to investigate and delete if necessary, but it looks like you have a handle on things. howcheng {chat} 03:58, 10 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

What is the location where the images you recently added to the Spermophilus beecheyi were taken

Hi, I edit the Spermophilus beecheyi gallery and I like to keep track of where the images are taken. I am both curious about the range of the squirrels and about the differences in appearance of the subspecies.

Would it be possible to provide the location information for these images to their respective files?

Thank you, Dave
--Davefoc (talk) 22:01, 26 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Sure. They happen to be the same park where I get the rest of my squirrel pics. howcheng {chat} 04:22, 27 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

File:Sky Claudette Soto.jpg

Can you please have another look at the email chain for this image upload? There doesn't seem to be any explicit release under CC-BY-SA-3.0, and additionally the release appears to come from the subject of the photo rather than the photographer. Stifle (talk) 13:39, 1 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, you're right. That looks like I did it back when I started doing OTRS, so I guess I didn't do a very thorough job on it. Look at en:Sky Claudette Soto/ †Eros Fire†, I wouldn't object if that article were to be deleted. howcheng {chat} 19:21, 1 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

permission to use images

Dear Howard,

I am writing a book about lagomorphs, with co-author John Seidensticker, for Johns Hopkins University Press, to be published in fall 2010, called "Rabbits: the Animal Answer Guide." We would like to use your images, noted below, in the book.

Although I'm not sure it's necessary given the licenses noted, I am asking for explicit permission to use these images. (I am new to Wikimedia and have gotten conflicting advice about the need to get such permissions; perhaps you can clarify?

Thank you. Regards, Susan Lumpkin, <redacted>

http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Desert_Cottontail_(Sylvilagus_audubonii).jpg

http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Sylvilagus_audubonii_on_rocks.jpg

http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Sylivilagus_audubonii_juvenile.jpg — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.163.191.9 (talk • contribs) 13:20, 2 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Photos for deletion

hi, how are you doing? i was told that several of the photos i have uploaded need permission from the copyright holders in order to stay on wikipedia commons. http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Deletion_requests/Files_from_J929

i have tried to contact the Sathya Sai Baba trust at enquiry@sssbpt.org ( http://www.sssbpt.org/Pages/ShareUs/ShareUs.htm ) (i have sent three emails with no reply) i was wondering if you could help at all to get the proper permission for the photos. i am unsure who the original photographer was and as the pictures are of postcards i know that they are several generations of photos (picture of a picture of a picture...) and not the original photos. (see discussion http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Deletion_requests/Files_from_J929 for explanation)

any help or suggestions is most appreciated.

J929 (talk) 21:52, 6 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

OTRS details sought

Hi there Howcheng. I've noticed you have an OTRS account. Any chance you could check the details of an OTRS ticket for me? It's for this image. The reason I'm asking is because there are a couple of substantially larger examples of this image on the net, and I'd like to know whether the OTRS ticket covers only this particular small-scale image or whether it covers any version of the same image. Thanks, Gatoclass (talk) 23:59, 7 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, it appears to be just for the specific ones uploaded by User:Lordprice. howcheng {chat} 05:59, 8 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, thanks :) I might send them an email to see if I can get their permission to upload a bigger image. Gatoclass (talk) 02:24, 10 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Commons:Language policy

Hi, in an effort to move the Commons:Language policy closer to completion, I have been editing it and cleaning it up for the last few days. I have tried to make the page as neutral and consistent as possible with the relevant policy and guidleine pages that it cross references.

I would appreciate it, as someone who has discussed some of these policies in the past, if you could look at Commons talk:Language policy and contribute your thoughts. This is the version that exists as I am writing it and I am encouraging everyone to consider the "static" page until everything gets sorted out.

Many thanks. Evrik (talk) 17:05, 8 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

File:Cody Robert Judy.jpg

File:Cody Robert Judy.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） ∙ +/−

--71.223.117.243 17:36, 10 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Squirrel pic

Hello Howard! I just want to tell you that your ground squirrel picture (two of them standing behind that stone) is absolutely gorgeous. You're one hell of a photographer! Cheers, Bernie from Germany

Thanks for the kind words. It helps when the subjects are cooperative and sit still while you work. :) howcheng {chat} 06:58, 13 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

File:Wheeler_Bridge.jpg

File:Wheeler_Bridge.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） ∙ +/−

High Contrast (talk) 21:49, 1 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Oops, I forgot to add the OTRS ticket to that one. Restored and added now. Thanks for bringing that to my attention. howcheng {chat} 23:54, 1 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

File:CocaCola_C2.jpg

File:CocaCola_C2.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） ∙ +/−

PhilKnight (talk) 14:51, 6 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Quick OTRS sanity check

Re. OTRS ticket #2389290, can I ask you to check the headers on the requestor's email versus the IP edits on en.wikipedia, and maybe email me back with your thoughts? I have some concerns re. the validity of that request & don't want to say much more on-wiki. I've tried accessing the ticket to leave an internal note but can't :( Thanks, Howard :) - Alison ^❤ 09:58, 8 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, Howard. I've replied to your email - Alison ^❤ 21:20, 8 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

File:Apogon maculatus.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 Filbot, if you need some help about it, ask its master (Filnik) or go to the Commons:Help desk. --Filnik 10:25, 14 December 2009 (UTC)

File:Bodianus rufus juvenile.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 Filbot, if you need some help about it, ask its master (Filnik) or go to the Commons:Help desk. --Filnik 10:32, 14 December 2009 (UTC)

File:Canthigaster rostrata inflated SI.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 Filbot, if you need some help about it, ask its master (Filnik) or go to the Commons:Help desk. --Filnik 10:45, 14 December 2009 (UTC)

Categorization of state court justices

	Hello, Holly Cheng. You have new messages at 208.81.184.4's talk page. You may remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template. asturianu ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца) ∙ български ∙ বাংলা ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ Deutsch ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form) ∙ English ∙ español ∙ suomi ∙ français ∙ galego ∙ हिन्दी ∙ hrvatski ∙ magyar ∙ italiano ∙ 日本語 ∙ ქართული ∙ македонски ∙ മലയാളം ∙ Plattdüütsch ∙ Nederlands ∙ português ∙ română ∙ русский ∙ sicilianu ∙ slovenščina ∙ svenska ∙ Tagalog ∙ Türkçe ∙ 简体中文 ∙ 繁體中文 ∙ +/−

File:Mr&MrsSantaClaus.jpg

Hi, don't you think that the post card is pblic domain ? I believe that it is public domain; it is old enough. - gildemax (talk) 11:10, 24 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

It probably is. It still needs a source, though, so we can verify its PD status. howcheng {chat} 23:22, 25 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I removed the template from the image. If you still believe it should be deleted please open a standard DR. -Nard the Bard 23:25, 25 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

InkHeart & Co socketpuppets and associated uploads

Hi Howcheng, I've opened a case workspace at the OTRS-wiki. I would welcome your comments. --AFBorchert (talk) 11:51, 25 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Furuya Hirotoshi及び、Artist Piano Serviceの画像について

極最近、初めてウィキペディア・コモンズへ画像をアップしました。マスメディア関連の職業柄、取材として同社及び所属タレントの古屋博敏氏に関わり、同時にウィキペディア・コモンズへの画像アップも同社より同意を得てアップしております。しかし、何分コモンズに関しては不慣れなものでしたので、現在削除依頼が提出されております。アーティストピアノサービスへコンタクトし、同社よりpermissions-commons@wikimedia.org へライセンス発行の書面を提出して頂いた状態です。出典のリンクも、全て同社にて行うことに承諾を得ている状況ですが、ここから先の手順について何か不備があると宜しくないので、現況や今後の対策をお知らせいただけないでしょうか？当方も、あくまで仕事で関わった相手より同意を得ておりますので、非常に気を使います。本当に削除されてしまった場合、取引にも影響が出る可能性があり、何とか状況を打開したく思っております。画像は以下となります。よろしくお願いいたします。--Tabo1224 (talk) 07:12, 14 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

再度私のメールアドレスから、同社の使用承諾書を添付して permissions-commons@wikimedia.org へメールを送信しました。--Tabo1224 (talk) 09:14, 15 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

We need your help at the Wikiproject medicine

Hello, Sorry for spaming your talk page, but this is very important. On the behalf of the Wikiproject medicine at the en.wikipedia, I am inviting you to be a part of the discussion going on the project's talk page about Patient images, The discussion started after I obtained a permission to more than 23000 dermatology related images, and about 1500 radiology images. As some editors of the Wikiproject medicine have some concerns regarding the policy of using patient images on wikipedia, and regarding patient consents. Also they believe that common's policy is not so clear regarding the issue. And since you are the experts please join us at this very important discussion -- MaenK.A._Talk 14:22, 20 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Carol M. Highsmith

Hi Howcheng. I changed the tag on File:Carol M. Highsmith self portrait in Willard Hotel.jpg (and the user's talk page) as what seems to be missing is primarily an OTRS ticket with confirmation from the author. Hope this is ok with you. -- User:Docu at 04:32, 24 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Cool, thanks. howcheng {chat} 19:40, 24 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Image tag Permission was granted by Rogue Ales

and email proof of the correspondence was already provided. Do not delete the image.

Otter

Original Message -----

From: "Brett Joyce" <bjoyce@rogue.com> To: Cc: "Stacey Maier" <stacey@rogue.com>; "Yasha Renner" <yasha@rogue.com>; "Cheryl Gillson" <cheryl@rogue.com>; "Jack Joyce" <jack@rogue.com> Sent: Thursday, September 20, 2007 8:18 AM Subject: RE: Permission to use copyrighted image

Awotter-

You can use the images from our website. Good luck in your article, please let us know when it's up so we can take a peek. If you have any questions in the meantime, please give me a call- cell: 541-961-0608.

Thanks Brett Joyce

Original Message-----

From: Stacey Maier Sent: Wednesday, September 19, 2007 4:48 PM To: Yasha Renner; Brett Joyce; Cheryl Gillson; Jack Joyce Subject: FW: Permission to use copyrighted image

Stacey Maier Rogue Ales www.rogue.com

For Rogue Bed and Beer reservations please call 541-961-0142 or email stacey@rogue.com

Save the Date! 2nd Annual Brewer's Memorial Ale Fest May 16 & 17, 2008

Original Message-----

From: Sent: Wednesday, September 19, 2007 3:54 PM To: NewportOffice Subject: Permission to use copyrighted image

Dear Rogue:

(apologies in advance for the "boilerplate" format but it explains all the relevant details)

I am one of thousands of volunteer writers for the free encyclopedia Wikipedia. I am currently working on an article related to http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rogue_Ales. Your Half-E-Weizen label of Mo Niemi at http://www.rogue.com/brews.html#halfaweizen would contribute to

information referenced in the article.

Specifically, I would like your permission to use the images at: http://www.rogue.com/brews.html#halfaweizen

in this article: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rogue_Ales and a planned future article on Mo.

One way to give your permission to use the above noted images is to reply to this email with the statement:

I own the copyright to the image mentioned in your email letter and found at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rogue_Ales

I grant permission to copy, distribute and/or modify this document under the terms of the GNU Free Documentation License, Version 1.2 or any later version published by the Free Software Foundation; with no Invariant Sections, no Front-Cover Texts, and no Back-Cover Texts.

Thank you for your time.

Kindly, awotter

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ Wikipedia's image use policy ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

Wikipedia (http://www.wikipedia.org/) is a free encyclopedia that is collaboratively edited by volunteers from around the world. Our goal is to create a comprehensive knowledge base that may be freely distributed and

available at no charge.

Normally we ask permission for material to be used under the terms of the GNU Free Documentation License. This means that although you retain the copyright and authorship of your own work, you are granting permission for all others (not just Wikipedia) to use, copy, and share your materials freely -- and even potentially use them commercially -- so long as they do not try to claim the copyright themselves, nor prevent others from using or copying them freely.

You can read this license in full at: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Text_of_the_GFDL

This license expressly protects creators from being considered responsible for modifications made by others, while ensuring that creators are credited for their work. There is more information on our copyright policy at: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Copyrights

We choose the GFDL because we consider it the best available tool for ensuring our encyclopedia can remain free for all to use, while providing credit to everyone who donates text and images. This may or may not be compatible with your goals in creating the materials available on your website. Please be assured that if permission is not granted, your materials will not be used at Wikipedia -- we have a very strict policy against copyright violations.

We also accept licensing under other free-content licenses like some Creative Commons licenses - see http://creativecommons.org for this.

With your permission, we will credit you for your work in the image's permanent description page, noting that it is your work and is used with

your permission, and we will provide a link back to your website.

We invite your collaboration in writing and editing articles on this subject and any others that might interest you. Please see the following article for more information. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Welcome,_newcomers

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ End Wikipedia's image use policy ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

Please forward the email to permissions-commons@wikimedia.org. It doesn't help if you have a local copy. Thanks. howcheng {chat} 17:42, 11 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

File:Blank US Map with borders.svg

Hi, Howcheng. I'm modifying File:Blank US Map with borders.svg a little bit for a project of mine, and in the course of doing so I noticed that the Atlantic coastline of Maine does not exist as a path in the XML file. Thought you'd like to know. —Bkell (talk) 01:25, 14 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I didn't make the file. User:AMK1211 did, but s/he uploaded it over Image:Blank US Map.svg so my only involvement was to re-upload it under a new name. howcheng {chat} 06:22, 14 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, yes, I see that now. Sorry. —Bkell (talk) 23:44, 14 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

File:Klyuchevskaya ASTER 24feb05.jpg

Hi Howcheng, I have annotated the file. Originalwana (talk) 09:12, 27 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Factory.svg image

Hey Howcheng, I took notice of your File:Factory.svg image. However, I do have a problem with it; this because the image shows a blast furnace and smoke coming out of it. This really doesn't give a good impression towards industry, and gives people a wrong ideology. I would thus like to see this image changed to a new version of the image either without a blast furnace (allot of industries simply don't need one, ie the assembly-sector; see [1]), or to an image where the chimney goes into the ground ([[2]]). An example of this can be found at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Emissionless_biochar_production.JPG KVDP (talk) 18:11, 28 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

All I did was extract this from File:1 9 2 9.svg for use in en:Template:Company-stub. Ideally, there should be icons for both factories with a blast furnace and those without. I am, unfortunately, not good enough of a designer to make something that you want. howcheng {chat} 18:50, 28 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

See my comments at File talk:Factory.svg --Slashme (talk) 16:23, 2 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

File:TrogonViolaceus.jpg

File:TrogonViolaceus.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） ∙ +/−

Pieter Kuiper (talk) 19:56, 13 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

USS Fulton

Hi there Howcheng. Thanks for moving the File:USS Fulton II.png yesterday, but to avoid confusion I suggest the redirect also be deleted as it's still pointing to the wrong ship. Gatoclass (talk) 03:01, 17 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

File:Pedrozamora1994a.jpg

Where do I mail or fax or send letter from Pedro's sister? 66.104.175.147 18:12, 30 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

See foundation:Contact us. Please include the Commons file URL and make sure that the contents of her letter are something similar to Commons:Declaration of consent for all enquiries. If she has access to email, then she can send it to permissions-commons

wikimedia.org. Thanks. howcheng {chat} 18:33, 30 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Owner's rights

A friend of mine who owns two oil paintings that his family commissioned and bought in 1941 has contacted the family of the artist who died in 1968. They say that when a painting has been sold, the owner has the full rights to it and they have nothing to decide about it. What are your feelings about such a thing? Cordially, SergeWoodzing (talk) 16:08, 2 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Legally, from what I know about US copyright law, that's incorrect. If the painting has never been published anywhere (meaning, tangible copies were created for distribution), then that would count as an unpublished work and per [3] the copyright still belongs to the artist's family. If they are not interested in maintaining the rights to those paintings, they should transfer the copyright of the works to your friend via written statement. HTH. howcheng {chat} 16:32, 2 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you! I will try to talk to someone in that family about this again. SergeWoodzing (talk) 18:01, 2 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Marat Safin Picture (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Marat_Safin,_2006.jpg)

Hello Howard Cheng, I am the owner of this picture http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Marat_Safin,_2006.jpg and do not mind it being shared on wikipedia. I am happy to have it open to the public with my cc license.

However, could you please update the Author source as myself (Jacky Cheong) and my new username is Tennis-8.com

Here is my original picture: http://www.flickr.com/photos/demiace/202415183/ but its new home will be at http://www.tennis-8.com

Thanks, Jacky Cheong

Notification about possible deletion

Some contents have been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether they should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at their entry.

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

Please remember to respond to and – if appropriate – contradict the arguments supporting deletion. Arguments which focus on the nominator will not affect the result of the nomination. Thank you!

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

--Wknight94 ^talk 12:07, 19 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

PD-US-not renewed ?

Hi, it doesn't seem to me that {{PD-US-not renewed}} applies to File:San Fransisco Earthquake.jpg and File:Quake.jpg. Wasn't it published in 1906? Thanks. --ChrisRuvolo (t) 14:31, 25 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

No, it was published in Genthe's 1936 book As I Remember. Even the LOC record says it was published "between 1906 and 1942". It might have been published in 1906, but we do have a confirmed 1936 date. This other photo from the same book has the publishing details, and this is the copyright record for it. Regards, howcheng {chat} 16:13, 25 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

This DR

I am just notifying you on this DR because you filed a no permission or image not at source notice here many years ago. (which seems 100% correct) Somehow, someone still passed it even though the flickr and Commons photos are 2 different pictures. I don't know why this happened but the original flickr photo was never deleted. Anyway, Admin High Contrast suggested I file a DR and that he would make a comment. Maybe you can make a vote in the DR...if you wish. Best wishes, --Leoboudv (talk) 02:50, 27 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Error Title

Hi. Could you move File:Avid Anders 2008 cropped.jpg to File:David Anders 2008 cropped.jpg, please? Thank you :) --RanZag (talk) 00:04, 9 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Done! howcheng {chat} 00:05, 9 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Dating photochroms

Just as a heads-up, whenever I use a different date than "ca. 1895" in any of the photochroms, it means I either directly took the date from one of the books I consulted or I interpolated them from other photochroms with similar views and close-by P.Z. numbers. The default dating the LOC uses, "1890-1900" is not only imprecise but also often incorrect, since Photoglob started publishing their photochroms in 1889 and the LOC collection contains a fair number of prints from after 1900. Cheers and thanks for putting in the work. ~ trialsanderrors (talk) 15:05, 9 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

OK, thanks for the info. Since the book information is not included on the image page, I've been going with the LOC description. howcheng {chat} 16:59, 9 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Mississippi River in STATE subcats

Hey Howcheng, what is the policy for moving images to specific STATE subcats of Mississippi River? I just undid two of your edits on my two Dubuque shots, as they show the river in three states. Same with File:Guttenberg_aerial.jpg, which shows both the Iowa as well as the Wisconsin side of the river (I added the Wisconsin category). But for Rivers which along most of their course make up state boundaries this categorization scheme seems... ...not well suited. --Dschwen (talk) 19:12, 9 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

There is no specific policy. I was just thinking that Category:Mississippi River was too crowded. Thanks for the cleanup. howcheng {chat} 19:13, 9 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

BTW, we do have precedent for subcategorization when the rivers span multiple political entities. For example, Category:Danube by country. howcheng {chat} 19:16, 9 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, by policy I did not mean policy in a wikilawyering way, rather what are your personal criteria. Sorry about the potential confusion. --Dschwen (talk) 19:37, 9 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I was just going by what the description on the file was, and what categories the file was previously in. If it said any specific state names, then I subcategorized into the state category. I was going pretty quickly, so I may have missed some. howcheng {chat} 19:39, 9 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, i see, seems reasonable. I guess the only problematic cases are aerial shots, or shots taken in the middle of the river. Those should either be put into multiple categories or the top category. --Dschwen (talk) 19:43, 9 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

File:Block_Kahlo_Rivera_1932.jpg

The Flickr version of this uses some "arty" grayscale correction, so I uploaded two uncorrected versions from the LOC tiff. I believe I did some restoration work on it too (there is a noticeable mark in the middle of the picture), so I'm not sure if the Flickr version should be restored or you want to leave it as it is. I'll leave it up to you. ~ trialsanderrors (talk) 12:19, 23 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I think your new version is fine. My goal for all your restorations is to get them categorized and eliminate duplicates and whatnot. howcheng {chat} 15:55, 23 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Kuiper problem

Dear sir: I do not want to interact with Pieter Kuiper and it seems I will have to leave Commons if he continues to target me and the work of the retired Emil Eikner and contributions of the Southerly Clubs in this and this and this and this and this and this and this manner.

This is particularly disturbing, of course, because I supported a recent block against Kuiper here.

I am not asking or expecting you to solve that basic problem, but in regard to the Axén photo three questions perhaps you'd be so kind and help me with:

Is it absolutely necessary for me to interact with Kuiper by replying to him, and will files be deleted because I do not?
Is it normal to file a DR just because "It is not quite clear who the photographer was"?
To whom can I ask the Southerly Clubs to email a copy of Mr. Gästerfält's will?

If you cannot help me with this, will you please advise me how to get help?

Cordially, SergeWoodzing (talk) 19:59, 25 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

First of all, I understand that Pieter Kuiper can be difficult to deal with, but my experience with him is that he is doing what he thinks is best for the project, so the first lesson you need to learn is do not take his actions personally. I saw several times where you or EmilEik accused him of trying to harass you. Now I don't know Pieter personally, but often what happens is that when one finds an upload or contribution by someone to be problematic (in that person's opinion), it's usually a good idea to investigate all of that person's contributions. This ends up looking like harassment in that one person has suddenly taken an interest in everything you've done. What you need to do is simply present your facts without any emotional response (in your writing, whether you get upset behind the keyboard is another thing), and I can see in some cases Pieter has backed down or made appropriate changes where the facts have shown him to be incorrect. Now to answer your questions:

No, you do not have to reply, but it would be beneficial, as there may not be anyone who is willing to step in on your behalf if you haven't made any counter-arguments.
Yes, files are routinely nominated for deletion all the time. If you look through my talk page, I have several deletion warnings myself, and I'm an administrator who knows the rules here.
I don't know that a copy of the will is required, but a representative of Southerly Clubs should send correspondence to our OTRS team declaring that they own all of Mr Gästerfält's copyrights. Unfortunately, the OTRS ticket that you and EmilEik have been citing is limited only to 21 specific images and shouldn't have been reused without a further blanket statement.

Hope that helps. howcheng {chat} 20:37, 25 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you very much! I will text message a board director immediately and notify them of this constructive suggestion. What I know for a fact (or I would not willingly do their work) is that every image contributed that has the SC template is meant to be free according to the exact same terms as the original list (a list which SC assures me they are not aware even exists). Kuiper himself has responded very negatively several times (in Swedish, before they fell out) on Eikner's talk page about too many frivolous DR's at Commons (!) and very positively about the large amount of images that continued to be uploaded under that template (which I believe Kuiper designed!). The issue, as you write, that it "shouldn't have been reused without a further blanket statement" has been completely unknown to us until Kuiper began to argue that recently. So we feel a bit tricked here, having contributed about 980 more images under an OTRS we thought was in order. I will do my darndest to fix this. SergeWoodzing (talk) 20:58, 25 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

PS I am taking ther liberty of posting specimens here of the Southerly Clubs and OTRS templates mentioned above because SC managememt wishes to be able to refer to this page.


	This image comes from the Southerly Clubs of Stockholm, Sweden, a non-profit society which owns image publication rights to the archives of Lars Jacob Prod, Mimical Productions, F.U.S.I.A., Swenglistic Underground (formerly CabarEng), Ristesson Ent and FamSAC. Southerly Clubs donated this picture to the Public Domain. Deputy Chairman Emil Eikner for the Board of Directors, Hallowe'en 2008.

This work is free and may be used by anyone for any purpose. If you wish to use this content, you do not need to request permission as long as you follow any licensing requirements mentioned on this page.

The Wikimedia Foundation has received an e-mail confirming that the copyright holder has approved publication under the terms mentioned on this page. This correspondence has been reviewed by a Volunteer Response Team (VRT) member and stored in our permission archive. The correspondence is available to trusted volunteers as ticket #2010092510008875.

If you have questions about the archived correspondence, please use the VRT noticeboard. Ticket link: https://ticket.wikimedia.org/otrs/index.pl?Action=AgentTicketZoom&TicketNumber=2010092510008875
Find other files from the same ticket:

This work is free and may be used by anyone for any purpose. If you wish to use this content, you do not need to request permission as long as you follow any licensing requirements mentioned on this page.

The Wikimedia Foundation has received an e-mail confirming that the copyright holder has approved publication under the terms mentioned on this page. This correspondence has been reviewed by a Volunteer Response Team (VRT) member and stored in our permission archive. The correspondence is available to trusted volunteers.

If you have questions about the archived correspondence, please use the VRT noticeboard.

Warning: This file is missing essential information needed to confirm validity of the Volunteer Response Team Software (VRTS) ticket.

Cordially, SergeWoodzing (talk) 21:20, 25 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Photography of Shirin Neshat

Hello Howard!
Checking the use of some of my images in different wikipedias - those of Category:Shirin Neshat in particular - I stumbled upon this image, which definitely does not depict her, but is named File:Shirin Neshat.jpg (and is used in her article on ru.wikipedia). I am asking you about it, because you loaded it up to commons and the given source, en:User:Pdouti, does not seem to exist. But there seems to be an OTRS ticket for the picture. Maybe it is some other person with the same name? I'd rather think that it is a mistake. Do you remember where the picture originated? Best regards, Tsui (talk) 23:21, 7 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, this appears to a different person the same name. My apologies, I mistyped the username, it's actually Pdousti, not Pdouti. Here is where the photo was used: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User:Pdousti&oldid=247308793. Regards, howcheng {chat} 00:20, 8 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I see, thank you for taking the time and for correcting the category! Regards, Tsui (talk) 11:08, 8 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Source categories

Dear sir: Am I totally wrong here and if so what should I do about it? I decline to discuss this with the Swedish editors involved (that's all there are). SergeWoodzing (talk) 14:17, 8 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I replied at User talk:Ö. howcheng {chat} 16:21, 8 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Japanese edits

Hi Howcheng,
could you check whether the 3 sequential IP edits of today in File:Wikipedia-logo-ja.png are correct (I don't read japanese). Thanks. --Túrelio (talk) 12:41, 15 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

It was just vandalism, but already reverted by someone else. howcheng {chat} 16:50, 15 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. --Túrelio (talk) 16:55, 15 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

File:Damdin_Sükhbaatar_statue.jpg

File:Damdin_Sükhbaatar_statue.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） ∙ +/−

Pieter Kuiper (talk) 16:04, 16 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry about this. I'm sure it's directly related to your helpful comment here which Kuiper discovered ~~only minutes~~ a few brooding hours before he did this. Same old same old. SergeWoodzing (talk) 08:17, 17 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The usual vilification by SergeWoodzing. I am scrutinizing the uploads of admins by alphabet, and I had come to the H. /Pieter Kuiper (talk) 08:34, 17 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Wowie, what a coincidence! Who's vilifing whom? Scrutinizing? Ok then. SergeWoodzing (talk) 08:37, 17 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

<quote>The usual vilification by SergeWoodzing. I am scrutinizing the uploads of admins by alphabet, and I had come to the H. /Pieter Kuiper (talk) 08:34, 17 October 2010 (UTC)</end of quote> Pieter, in view of the earlier discussions abiout your DR's this has to be considered the continuing of personal attacks. It is worth a block. --Havang(nl) (talk) 10:11, 17 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Well, I am getting tired of his constant attacks. Look at SergeWoodzing's contributions. /Pieter Kuiper (talk) 10:13, 17 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Pieter, What others do, is no excuse for you in your continuing personal attacks. --Havang(nl) (talk) 10:30, 17 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

For once, I responded against yet another attack by SergeWoodzing. Try being unbiased. /Pieter Kuiper (talk) 10:35, 17 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Serge, there are no hard feelings here at all. Pieter was correct in nominating this file for deletion, since his research on the copyright laws of Mongolia make it clear that this is non-free. I have no misgivings about him inspecting my uploads. I am fairly certain that all of my uploads are kosher and if I have made any mistakes, then it's a good thing that someone else is verifying my work. After all, Quis custodiet ipsos custodes? howcheng {chat} 18:04, 17 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I'm glad you feel this is totally neutral and I'm sorry I bothered you about it. I suppose I should assume good faiith here too, no questions asked, no stomach ache involved? SergeWoodzing (talk) 09:25, 18 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, that's correct. Don't assume hidden motives and judge each action on its own merits. Regards, howcheng {chat} 16:26, 18 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Edittools

Hi, what browser and operating system are you using? Possibly emptying your cache could help. --DieBuche (talk) 16:10, 20 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Firefox on Windows. I tried bypassing the cache today when I saw that you had touched edittools, but still no good. I do see the style changes, but the buttons still don't do anything. Thanks. howcheng {chat} 16:12, 20 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Firefox 2, 3 or 4?--DieBuche (talk) 16:42, 20 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.2; en-US; rv:1.9.2.8) Gecko/20100722 Firefox/3.6.8 (.NET CLR 3.5.30729). howcheng {chat} 16:45, 20 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Ah, ok; Found the problem, should be working again. --DieBuche (talk) 17:30, 20 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

That did the job. Thanks! howcheng {chat} 23:09, 20 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

File:Keke_Palmer.jpg

File:Keke_Palmer.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） ∙ +/−

Jcb (talk) 17:19, 16 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Tabby cat

Hi Howcheng,

I was finally able to get a decent "formal portrait" of a domestic cat, with a decent background. What do you think of this one to lead the article in en:WP? Regards, Alvesgaspar (talk) 11:01, 23 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Delegates to the House of Representatives

Category discussion notification

Category:Delegates to the House of Representatives 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 ∙ +/−

You didn't create this particular category, but you did create others being discussed at the CfD, so here's a notification! --Philosopher ^{Let us reason together.} 16:09, 2 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Chargers

Category discussion notification

Category:Chargers 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 ∙ +/−

NVO (talk) 20:13, 1 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

File:Mike_kungl.jpg

File:Mike_kungl.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） ∙ +/−

Kunglfan (talk) 20:14, 27 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

File:Mike_Kungl_1.JPG

File:Mike_Kungl_1.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） ∙ +/−

Kunglfan (talk) 20:15, 27 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

File:Martha_Graham_and_Bertram_Ross.jpg

File:Martha_Graham_and_Bertram_Ross.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） ∙ +/−

shizhao (talk) 19:18, 10 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

CfD for College athletic program categories

Category discussion notification

Categories for college athletic programs have 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 ∙ +/−

--Spyder_Monkey (talk) 06:04, 21 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

File:Sheraton_Doha.jpg

File:Sheraton_Doha.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） ∙ +/−

...Captain......Tälk tö me.. 15:27, 5 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

File:JHJudyMural_AtlantaIL.jpg

File:JHJudyMural_AtlantaIL.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） ∙ +/−

Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 22:33, 9 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

File:Blank_US_Map.svg

File:Blank_US_Map.svg 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） ∙ +/−

Foxnews (talk) 16:36, 27 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

File:USMC_War_Memorial_Night.jpg

File:USMC_War_Memorial_Night.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） ∙ +/−

Brad101 (talk) 19:43, 27 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

File:Leyte Landing Memorial 1.jpg

File:Leyte Landing Memorial 1.jpg have been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether they should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at their entry.

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

Please remember to respond to and – if appropriate – contradict the arguments supporting deletion. Arguments which focus on the nominator will not affect the result of the nomination. Thank you!

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

The same for File:Leyte Landing Memorial 2.jpg Jappalang (talk) 07:25, 25 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you

for finding the Wiley Post image. Its been very hard trying to find images relating to him (even his pressure suit is currently off of display).--Craigboy (talk) 20:21, 9 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

email

Hi Howcheng I emailed you. Thanks.--Mbz1 (talk) 00:30, 26 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

File:Flickr - …trialsanderrors - The great presidential puzzle, political cartoon by James Albert Wales, 1880.jpg

Hi, I see you deleted File:Flickr - …trialsanderrors - The great presidential puzzle, political cartoon by James Albert Wales, 1880.jpg as an "Exact or scaled-down duplicate" of File:Great presidential puzzle2.jpg. I am assuming it was a copy of [4] as I can no longer see our copy. It is clearly not an exact or scaled up/down duplicate of the "restored" version. It is simply an alternative derivative of the image available at the Library of Congress. --Tony Wills (talk) 21:51, 2 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, that's true, but it's close enough that it doesn't matter. For all of Trialsanderrors' restorations, if we have another version that's quite different, I'll keep both files. I just pick that deletion reason because it's expedient. I also delete low-quality versions of the same image with the same reason. howcheng {chat} 22:04, 2 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Firstly they are quite different, one has made an attempt at restoration and the other is much closer to the original. But you are making these descisions outside of the community agreed policy. Deleting low res or other versions is not something that can be carried out under the heading of "duplicate" for expediency! The {{Duplicate}} process is a speedy process that applies to uncontroversial deletions of exact duplicates or scaled up/down versions of existing files (because the wiki software is quite capable of doing scaling itself). All other deletions need to be done under the speedy delete policy or by consensus of the community by a deletion request process. It is not acceptable for anyone to make deletions outside policy. --Tony Wills (talk) 22:42, 2 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, please. You are making mountains out of molehills. Perhaps you missed this detail in the section below: Most of these images are not being used anywhere by anybody. So who is impacted by my unilateral decision to delete the image? Nobody. So why are you picking this fight? howcheng {chat} 22:52, 2 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

First no one here has been given the right to make unilateral decisions outside of policy guidelines - that is why we bother to have a policy. If we want to do things outside the guidelines a little discussion is appropriate first. There have been many discussions over the years, the policy has not changed.

Most of these images are not being used anywhere by anybody is not actually relevant. All that we can actually assert is that there are no current wiki inclusions of these files. They may well have been previously used on wiki projects, be discussed on talk pages and be referenced in various archives and page histories. Deleting them serves no purpose and just means people can no longer easily find out what the image looked like. But that is not the end of the story, users outside of the wikimedia projects (eg the rest of the internet) may be using these files, and may even be referring back to a file here to conform with image licensing (this is also highly relevant to keeping redirects). So I am not asking for a fight, just that you understand why there are particular ways of doing things on Commons :-) --Tony Wills (talk) 23:21, 2 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I know "why there are particular ways of doing things on Commons". I have been an administrator for longer than you have been a registered user. howcheng {chat} 23:28, 2 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

:-) Congratulations for surviving here so long :-), obviously I do not need to explain policy ;-). In the context of the renames of this set of files, I can see why this one appeared easier to process as a duplicate. If this image was just a JPG version of the TIF originals that we have here (ie the TIF converted to a JPG) it would be a little different. But in this particular case it is an alternative processing of the Library of Congress image, and people may well choose to use it over a 'restored' version (which has had degraded bits cloned out). So I appologise if my double set of objections has set me up in a bad light (especially as my second one was based on insufficient information), but please compare the two images more closely, thanks --Tony Wills (talk) 00:12, 3 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Renaming

Hi,

The series of renames/moves such as "File:Flickr - …trialsanderrors - Marguerite Clark in uniform, by White N.Y., 1918.jpg" to "File:Marguerite Clark in uniform, by White N.Y., 1918.jpg" "without leaving a redirect: rm flickr username", are not within guidelines. Refer to Commons:File renaming.

While I agree that long names, and usernames in filenames are not needed, these are not sufficient reasons for a rename. If files are renamed the deletion or suppression of the redirect is the exception (especially for images that have been here for a couple of years), eg for cases of "Remove pejorative, offensive or crude language that would not be appropriate in the file description" or for highly misleading file names. --Tony Wills (talk) 22:16, 2 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I'm sorry you disagree. User:Trialsanderrors was not particularly pleased to have his username in all these files that were siphoned from his Flickr photostream, So as a favor to someone who has contributed so much excellent content to Commons, I promised I would take care of that for him. While the moves do not follow the guidelines that you point to, please remember that it's only a guideline, and not policy. I don't see why you're raising a stink about this. Most of the images aren't even being used anywhere, and when they are, I clean up after myself so that there is no disruption to any project that happens to be using the file (i.e., the only people who would notice anything are those who are scrutinizing the move log, such as yourself). The long and short of it is that there's no point in picking a fight with me. The work I'm doing in this mass cleanup of all these image description pages is a benefit to the project. howcheng {chat} 22:30, 2 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Additional info: Commons:Village pump/Archive/2010/08#Limited opportunity to import hard-to-access PD images from Flickr. howcheng {chat} 22:40, 2 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

If it makes you feel better, you can consider all of these moves as uploader requested. howcheng {chat} 22:55, 2 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, that comes close enough to the criteria of "uploader requested" renames. I did check a couple of file histories to check that it wasn't at the uploaders request. The deletion/suppression of redirects for long standing files is another matter. The right of the user to not have his name associated with the files, is of course significant - it appears that it was was our (as a community) negligence that didn't see those files renamed straight away. Thank you for taking the time to clean this up, and sorry for the mis-understanding. I suppose an edit summary of "rm username at users request" would be good.

I often run across mis-application of the renaming/duplicate processing guidelines and want to ensure that people know what they are. --Tony Wills (talk) 23:04, 2 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

A bit late to the party here, but thanks for all the work you put in. ~ trialsanderrors (talk) 17:30, 8 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Assessments

Your last batch of edits seems to have broken the template when the picture is featured only on one Wikipedia, such as in File:Giulio Romano - Meleager et Atalanta.jpg. Thanks. howcheng {chat} 17:22, 10 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, the code was actually properly categorizing, just spitting the text outside of the box which is probably why I did not notice. This is a very good catch. :) I have corrected the problem. Let me know if you see any other problems. -- とある白い猫 ^ちぃ？ 20:49, 10 April 2012 (UTC)

Library of Congress

I was wondering if you knew anyone with access to LOC. -- とある白い猫 ^ちぃ？ 20:51, 10 April 2012 (UTC)

Do you mean someone who has physical access, or someone who has contacts? User:Dominic is probably a good bet for both. He's currently the Wikipedian-in-residence at the National Archives. It's not the LOC, but he's in DC and he can probably make a connection if you need it. howcheng {chat} 22:54, 11 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

"Photographs by" category moves

1. Moving the images from, for instance, Category:Photographs by Frank H. Nowell to an not-currently-existent Category:Frank H. Nowell and the half-dozen similar moves you sent through seems counterproductive: If there were materials ABOUT the phogographers (such as the ad for Nowell's studio, or a portrait by someone else, then they would be mixed in with the artist's photographs.

2. You did not fill in a description of your request on the edit log, thus making it harder to find.

3. There is no discussion page entry for the move. Nor does a quick search turn up any general policy discussion mandating these moves.

Please explain. Thanks Dankarl (talk) 19:44, 26 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I'm completely in agreement with Dankarl here on all counts, and came here to say much the same. For reference, if any third party is trying to follow this, part of this was this request for bot action. - Jmabel ! talk 23:59, 26 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I was going through Category:Photographers from the United States and seeing a few child categories for "Photographs by XXX", and thinking that doesn't make much sense because the category's children should be people, not photographs. None of these categories that I moved have parent categories for the person, and I wasn't going to create people categories that would be empty except for the child category, because in actuality it's pretty much standard operating procedure to have works by an author in the author's category (see Category:Toni Frissell, Category:Dorothea Lange, Category:Carl Van Vechten, etc etc etc). "Photographs by XXX" categories are not the norm, only being used when we need to depopulate the main category because it's too crowded (see Category:Ansel Adams, Category:Sergey Prokudin-Gorsky). So yes, I chose a solution that took more work to implement, but it's in line with how most photographer categories actually are here on Commons. howcheng {chat} 16:23, 27 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I still think it's a step backwards. Now if someone wants to separate the photographs from related items they must reverse your category move, or if a significant number of non-photograph items have been added, do it by hand. You should have either left well enough alone or have created the parent category for each photographer. The supposed logic of the category scheme should not get in the way of either usability or expandability. Please reverse pending a further, more general discussion.Dankarl (talk) 16:58, 27 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Also, what could possibly be the point of moving 114 files into Category:Frank H. Nowell without even attaching that category to the category tree? - Jmabel ! talk 23:52, 27 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Ah, I was expecting the bot to make the category, like it did for the other ones. howcheng {chat} 01:07, 29 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

So, Howcheng: I take it you still think you went the right way on this, and Dankarl and I still disagree. I presume that you at least agree that at the very least, the categories all should be placed in the category tree, but I also take it you stand by not wanting "Photographs by" categories. Would you mind if we take this to the Village pump & try to get a broader consensus? - Jmabel ! talk 01:16, 29 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Go for it. howcheng {chat} 17:03, 30 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Discussion at Commons:Village pump#"Photographs by" category moves. My apology for the delay in notifying you, I just simply spaced out on doing so, my bad. - Jmabel ! talk 23:26, 1 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

You moved images from Category:Photographs by Shane T. McCoy to Category:Shane T. McCoy. You did so without any prior discussion. Nor did you the bot's edit summaries leave any clues as to who was responsible. I think the consensus at the COM:VP discussion was that (1) you shouldn't have made such sweeping changes on your sole authority; (2) your actions weren't a good idea.
I moved the 157 Shane McCoy images, as per User talk:Foroa#your assistance please.... I didn't have a bot to do it, so it took me hours. Geo Swan (talk) 00:17, 6 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

You should have asked me or another administrator to have User:CommonsDelinker do it. howcheng {chat} 16:11, 7 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

If you are acknowledging these actions were not supported, have you considered using the delinker to roll back all of the actions? Geo Swan (talk) 19:26, 8 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I am not acknowledging that, but neither am I reverting what others are doing. howcheng {chat} 16:23, 9 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Grant Brits Image

Hi Howcheng, I would like to use the image of Grant Brits that you have uploaded to his page for an exhibition however require a high res version. Do you by any chance have one on file that I could use? It is my understanding that this image can be used for any use? Many thanks, Ashleigh

Sorry, File:Grant Brits.jpg is the only version available. I did not take the picture myself; a friend of Mr. Brits did. I merely uploaded it on his behalf. But yes, the image is available to use for any purpose, although you may have to check about relevant personality rights in your jurisdiction. howcheng {chat} 16:14, 7 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks Howcheng.

A barnstar for you!

	The Special Barnstar
	Thank you for your LOC upload. :) -- とある白い猫 ^ちぃ？ 00:27, 14 May 2012 (UTC)

ありがとうございました。Takabeg (talk) 02:52, 14 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

FP delist notification

Hallo, thank you for your information. Could you please tell me, why it is not aethiopica? On the description page I wrote:
"Difference of M. aethiopica to M. broderipii: In Melo aethiopica the protoconch doesn't surmount the last whorl or only marginally, in Melo broderipii [5] it does significantly." In the depicted specimen the last whorl does surmount only marginally, and so it is aethiopica in my opinion. Which species is it in your opinion and which character(s) is it based upon? I miss both in the delisting article, the name of an alternative species and the character(s), which lead to to it. I would be glad, if you could tell me something about the correct determination. --Llez (talk) 17:55, 29 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not the person who removed it from the article. I know almost nothing about sea molluscs. You'll want to talk to User:Invertzoo. howcheng {chat} 04:25, 30 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

File:Sindhu Tolani.jpg

File:Sindhu Tolani.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） ∙ +/−

—SpacemanSpiff 07:37, 17 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Commons:Deletion requests/File:Flickr - …trialsanderrors - Toni Frissell, Fado singer in Portuguese night club, Lisbon, 1946.jpg

A tough one. For me it's quite certainly in the PD because it matches the other pictures in she took in Portugal at that time, for which the LOC holds the negatives: http://www.loc.gov/pictures/search/?q=frissell+toni+portugal so likely the negative for this one simply got lost, but of course the LOC doesn't provide any cover for that assessment. ~ trialsanderrors (talk) 14:35, 8 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Photo usage

Hello :-)

I just wanted to say "Thank you very much" for your picture: http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Dingle_peninsula_panorama_crop.jpg

My name is Daniel, i used that picture in my little "travel around the world" puzzle game for android.

When a player sees your image (when completing a level) there is a short sentence describing the location visible on your panorama and also you are credited directly as "Photographer". Hopefully you are fine with that, if you want any changes please contact me directly. :-)

2012-08-08 User Sirleto / Wikipedia User:SirLeto

I'm not the photographer, I just cropped it a little bit. You'll want to say thanks to Steve Ford Elliott. Here's the link to the original photo. Thanks. howcheng {chat} 03:58, 9 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for pointing that out! --Daniel/Sirleto

File:Merengue dancing.jpg

File:Merengue dancing.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） ∙ +/−

76.89.150.155 23:22, 12 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Photochrome prints

Hi Howcheng. Thank you very much for your big work on the photochrome prints of the UK. It's really a great work! I was not abel to do it, because I don't know this country. I continue my work on photochrome prints too. But I have some problem with Germany and all the photos of the United States of America. Can you help me there? If possible... Have a nice day! --DenghiùComm (talk) 10:49, 7 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Luckily, I had a few days at work where I was not so busy, but that has ended. I will try to help with the others when I more time. howcheng {chat} 17:45, 7 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Template:PD-Look

Hi, could you please look at my question on the talkpage? Thanks, Jan Arkesteijn (talk) 22:38, 2 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Photo change request for Chuck Negron

Hi, Could you please switch out the photo on my wiki page? I tried to do it myself, but am not that savvy. The photo that is currently there is not very flattering and very out dated. I have a photo I would like to use, please let me know how I can get it to you. I would greatly appreciate your help in this matter. Thanks, Chuck

No problem. What you want to do is follow the instructions at Wikipedia:Contact us - Licensing (see the third paragraph), and someone will take care of it for you. Best regards, —howcheng {chat} 23:48, 2 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Check your email

Thanks. Delicious carbuncle (talk) 04:47, 16 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

This situation has been resolved by the WMF. Thank you. Philippe Beaudette, Wikimedia Foundation (talk) 05:49, 16 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

File mover rights

Hi!

As you can see here there was some old dispute about file moving and as you can see here a former request failed.

So where is concensus for the new right?

Have you checked the moved DS have made after the rights were granted? Do you agree with all of them?

--MGA73 (talk) 10:02, 17 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I have known DS for a number of years from interacting with him on en-WP and I trust him. All of the moves in the move log since I re-established his rights look good to me. —howcheng {chat} 02:37, 18 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

And trust is the problem... I also know what he thinks about file moving and I don't trust him with the file mover tool. As you can see from the last RfR others did not trust him either and his request was rejected (and it was someone very active on English Wikipedia that closed the request as not done).

I trust that you do know that file move policy is different on Wikipedia and Commons so a user that does good work one place could be a problem the other place. I asume that is why all admins on Commons are not automatically made admins on English Wikipedia and the other way around.

I think it is wrong to change user rights without discussion when the users actions is clearely disputed.

If DS does lot of bad file moves and you do nothing to stop it that will show that you lacks the kind of judgement that admins on Commons is supposed to have so I trust that you keep a close eye on DS and will not think twice before you act if that should happen. --MGA73 (talk) 13:07, 18 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Point of order: DS did not make the request, User:Rzuwig did. —howcheng {chat} 01:47, 19 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hi! I originally posted the following as a separate section, not realizing it had already been brought up.

I noticed some odd file move entries in my watchlist recently, e.g.

00:29, 8 April 2013 DragonflySixtyseven (talk | contribs) moved page File:Advocaat.jpg to File:Dick Advocaat (2007).jpg (Custom reason: this is not a glass of advocaat) (revert)

Clearly, this and several of DragonflySixtyseven's moves do not comply with Commons:File renaming, and recalling Commons:Administrators' noticeboard/User problems/Archive 19#I removed file mover rights for a user and Commons:Requests for rights/Denied/Filemover/2012#DragonflySixtyseven, I was surprized to see DragonflySixtyseven moving files. I see that you reinstated this right on 2013-02-14 at 02:44 (UTC), but see no explanation in your edit summary, no record of a successful request for rights, and no other edits by you at the time that would explain it. Could you shed some light on what's going on please?

Expanding on the above, my specific questions are:

Where did the discussion that prompted the change occur?
Was there any public discussion regarding overturning previously established consensus?
Has DragonflySixtyseven made any promises not to continue with the type of moves that led the right to be revoked? If yes, where? If no, why was this not insisted upon before the right was reinstated?

Thanks, —LX (talk, contribs) 19:31, 8 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I disagree with your contention that some of his file moves are against the guidelines. For the example you cited, it appears your only objection is that he used humor in his edit summary rather than citing "File renaming reason #3: Correct misleading names". To answer your questions, the discussion was held via IRC. There was no public discussion, but he did promise to me privately that he would stick to the file renaming criteria. I agree that some of his file moves in 2011 were iffy, but I have no problem with any of the moves he has done since I restored his rights. —howcheng {chat} 04:07, 9 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

It seems we disagree on what constitutes a "misleading" file name – or rather, that you disagree with the official guidelines. The examples given in our guidelines to explain what constitutes misleading include "MY CUTE MOUSE" for something more correctly described as "Dutch pet rabbit" or "1BIGGest nOSE everS33n" for something more correctly described as "John Doe at concert." By that reasoning, "Advocaat" is not a misleading name for a file depicting someone whose last name is Advocaat. The guidelines specifically state that "As a matter of principle it's best to leave all files with generally valid names at their locations, even if slightly better names may exist" and "files should NOT be renamed only because the new name looks a bit better." Renaming "Advocaat" to "Dick Advocaat (2007)" fits squarely into that definition of files which should not be renamed. So, if DragonflySixtyseven has indeed promised to stick to the file renaming criteria, they've failed to honor that promise.

Given the previous issues, I would have expected the matter to be publicly discussed. I'd like it if we could agree that private IRC discussions are not an appropriate venue for overturning publicly discussed consensus. In light of the above, I also think it would be appropriate to revoke the right again pending a formal rights request. Thanks, —LX (talk, contribs) 06:18, 9 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

While I admit that the move from Advocaat.jpg to Dick Advocaat (2007).jpg was not entirely necessary, I don't think you can deny that the new name is more accurate. Regardless, I think you are approaching this the wrong way. The vast majority of DS's file moves are unquestionably within the guidelines, and there are only a few that are perhaps a stretch. Clearly this user is endeavoring to be a productive member of Commons. Removing his rights and having him jump through hoops to get them back will only engender bad feelings. Thus, it would be far better IMHO to encourage him to be more conservative in his file move choices. I notice that you haven't actually left him a message regarding this point. —howcheng {chat} 15:58, 9 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Both names are accurate; the new name is only a bit more precise. Indeed, it is a better name, but as the guideline explains, that alone is not enough to warrant renaming. This has already been explained to DragonflySixtyseven several times, and failure to acknowledge that was the reason for the revocation of the right, so I'm not sure restating it would do much good, but if DragonflySixtyseven's rights are not restored to their previously agreed state, I'll be sure to discuss DragonflySixtyseven's use of the filemover right with them next. For now, I'd like to stay on the topic of how it was reinstated. I'd like to repeat my question if you think that private IRC discussions are an appropriate venue for overturning publicly discussed consensus. I'm sorry for being so persistent, but openness is kind of a big deal for me. I do appreciate your candour so far. Cheers, —LX (talk, contribs) 17:15, 9 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I agree that public discussion is preferable to private conversation. To sum up what happened, he asked me to move a file for him and I was surprised that a user of his experience and dedication did not have the right to move files. He explained that the right had been revoked at one point. I restored it and explained that he should always try to cite one of the file renaming reasons, so I am a bit disappointed that he continues to not do so. I was unaware of the extent of the controversy, however. Before you have a chat with him, let me try to quietly prod him. As we have had a long history of working together, he may be more willing to listen to me than other Commons admins to which he may have some hostility. —howcheng {chat} 17:51, 9 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, I'm satisfied with that at this point, and if you want to try to handle it for now, that's fine with me. Thanks again. —LX (talk, contribs) 18:16, 9 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

This is ridiculous. Advocaat is a rich eggy liqueur. That photo is not a glass of rich eggy liqueur, a bottle of rich eggy liqueur, a puddle of rich eggy liqueur, or someone vomiting up a stomachful of rich eggy liqueur. It is a photo of a football coach. I should also point out that "advocaat" ia Dutch for "lawyer". But this man is not a lawyer, he is a football coach. The filename is not accurate at all, and is hugely misleading. I'm being hugely fussy about which files I rename and why, and being very careful about what reasons I provide. If you - or anyone - disagrees about any one of the reasons I provide, please come to me directly and we will argue the point -- I will be willing to concede the possibility that I was wrong, if you are willing to concede the possibility that I was right. If you are not willing to do this, then back off, leave me alone, and go do something useful. DS (talk) 20:18, 9 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Location error?

Hi Howcheng - I'm wondering if there's a location error in the coordinates for File:American Wigeon pair.JPG? The current location puts them on a childrens' playground with no marshland habitat of the type used by wigeon anywhere near. Could you double-check it, please? - MPF (talk) 16:40, 28 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Ah, the location is slightly off. If you look to the left of the playground, there's an artificial lake that's very popular with both mallards and wigeons. I've updated the coordinates. Thanks. —howcheng {chat} 03:29, 29 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! I did actually see that small pond but discounted it as it isn't exactly typical wigeon habitat ;-) I presume they (the wigeon at least) are captive origin birds then, not wild? - MPF (talk) 22:19, 5 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I think they are wild, actually. I know wigeons are migratory and these guys are not here year-round. The pond has also been home to Muscovy Ducks, domestic Chinese Geese, and some other white domestic ducks. The Mallards and white ducks are almost always at the pond, but the others only show up occasionally. —howcheng {chat} 22:47, 5 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

File:Adolf Hitler in Nuremberg 1923 cph.3a15028.jpg

File:Adolf Hitler in Nuremberg 1923 cph.3a15028.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） ∙ +/−

Rosenzweig τ 21:19, 4 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

CAF

FYI, File:Mitsubishi A6M6C Zero.jpg and other one you reverted are already sub-categorized below the CAF category via Category:N712Z (aircraft), which makes the files over-categorized now. Cheers LittleWink (talk) 21:53, 16 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

OK, thanks. —howcheng {chat} 04:10, 17 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

File:1980 Summer Olympics bronze medal.JPG

File:1980 Summer Olympics bronze medal.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） ∙ +/−

Eleassar ^(t/p) 23:55, 17 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

File:Border-Gavaskar Trophy n Airtel Cup.jpg

File:Border-Gavaskar Trophy n Airtel Cup.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） ∙ +/−

LGA _talk^edits 07:40, 2 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Your reversion at File talk:CocaCola C2.jpg

Hello, Howcheng! Please see the addition at the bottom of the DR page to which I linked—outside the closed discussion box and dated a couple of months later—where the decision to keep the file (presumably by retroactively including it with the others on the page) is noted. It appears that the file had been in limbo ever since its 2007 nomination. The link in the notice before I changed it (and is again now) just goes to the file page itself, so does not disclose why it was kept. Note that I found the above page from a redirect of the file’s DR, which someone had created for good reason. Unless you can supply a link to a more specific or relevant discussion, I think the Keep decision at the group DR above is what the notice should reference.—Odysseus1479 (talk) 02:21, 10 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Wat phra keaw ramayana fresco.jpg

Hi Howcheng.

The other day you uploaded File:Wat phra keaw ramayana fresco.jpg. Could you please have a look at the description, there is a "parameter missing"?

BTW, Thai murals are no "fresco", as they are applied to a completely dry sunstrate.

Greetings --hdamm (talk) 12:34, 19 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I fixed the license. I did not originally name the file myself, but had downloaded it from someone else. Thanks. —howcheng {chat} 17:22, 19 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

File:Danny Williams boxer.jpg

File:Danny Williams boxer.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） ∙ +/−

Oleola (talk) 00:52, 2 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

File:Danny Williams boxer.jpg

File:Danny Williams boxer.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） ∙ +/−

Oleola (talk) 15:36, 2 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

File:CocaCola C2.jpg

File:CocaCola C2.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） ∙ +/−

Steinsplitter (talk) 15:58, 28 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Author source question

Hi Howard,

This question isn't particularly urgent since it's almost certainly a PD U.S. govt photo either way, but out of curiosity, how did you find that Wanetta Ayers was the author of File:UnalaskaAlaska.jpg? The fhwa.dot.gov site doesn't seem to give any authorship or date information at all, and I can't find another official source of the photo that has metadata. I'm also curious how solid the January 2006 date is. That's the date that's in the EXIF, but it looks like the date was added by Photoshop, so it's presumably the date the image was last processed, not necessarily the date of the photo. --Delirium (talk) 20:27, 18 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

On the old the byways.org site (which doesn't exist anymore), there was a "media library" section that had more information than the standard image description page, and that's where I picked up the creator data and other bits. —howcheng {chat} 22:47, 18 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

VanVechten

Can I ask the intent of this change ? Usually we keep that type of metadata in the Information template. It doesn't have much to do with a license (although PD is a statement as to why something is believed to have expired copyright). —TheDJ (Not WMF) (talk • contribs) 22:22, 1 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The {{PD-Van Vechten}} template actually transcludes the {{Information}} template. See File:Joe Louis by van Vechten.jpg for how the finished product looks, compared to [6]. Personally, I don't think the template should do anything more than the licensing statement, but if it's going to include the other stuff, we might as well do it correctly. —howcheng {chat} 22:27, 1 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

File:Leon Dabo cropped.jpg

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

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

Please remember to respond to and – if appropriate – contradict the arguments supporting deletion. Arguments which focus on the nominator will not affect the result of the nomination. Thank you!

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） ∙ +/−

— Racconish^📥 15:27, 10 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

File:Leon Dabo.jpg

File:Leon Dabo.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） ∙ +/−

— Racconish^📥 15:30, 10 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

File:Twin Sisters, San Jacinto.jpg

File:Twin Sisters, San Jacinto.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） ∙ +/−

Anon126 (✉ ⚒) 19:14, 10 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

File:Duchess of Windsor by Toni Frissell cph.3b14693.jpg

File:Duchess of Windsor by Toni Frissell cph.3b14693.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） ∙ +/−

Kelly (talk) 06:38, 23 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Code issues in User:Howcheng/common.js

Hi Howcheng, I am a bored bot (this is kind of a computer program) that is watching the recent changes and tapping buttons like I did now.

Curious about the reason? Possibly not but I will tell you anyway:

You edited User:Howcheng/common.js. Glad to see you coding in javascript! Have you ever considered becoming a MediaWiki hacker?
Though, that change appears to introduce 3 new jshint issues — the page's status is now having warnings. Note that invalid or ambiguous code often has unwanted side effects like breaking other tools for you. If you cannot find out how to fix it, I suggest blanking the page for now.
To help you understanding where the issues are, I have aggregated a report here and now. If you have questions, don't hesitate to ask users experienced in javascript writing for help. But do not ask the bot's operators (chronically overwrought) unless you suspect an error of mine. If you prefer not getting spammed by me, you can opt-out reports by adding {{ValidationOptOut|type=all}} to your user page or cmb-opt-out anywhere on your your global user page on Meta. Good luck at Wikimedia Commons and happy hacking!

ISSUE: line 39 character 74: 'pname' used out of scope. - Evidence: var l=addTab("http://" + location.hostname + "/w/index.php?title=" + pname + "&diff=cur&oldid=prev", 'last', '');
ISSUE: line 55 character 20: Use '!==' to compare with ''. - Evidence: if(!r && r != '') return;
ISSUE: line 63 character 38: Script URL. - Evidence: addTab('javascript:replace()', 'replace', 'ca-replace', 'Regexp replace for the edit window', '');

Your CommonsMaintenanceBot (talk) at 20:15, 29 July 2015 (UTC).[reply]

Oahu

Thanks for your help sorting through these files. I've never even visited Hawaii, but I've been going about it as best I can. - Themightyquill (talk) 18:06, 26 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I was just there a few weeks ago. I cleaned up Category:Hawaii (island) and then got it in my head to do Oahu too. —howcheng {chat} 22:45, 26 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

File:GeorgeEastmanHouse.jpg

File:GeorgeEastmanHouse.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） ∙ +/−

Hop on Bananas (talk) 21:09, 28 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

You have been randomly selected to take a very short survey by the Wikimedia Foundation Community Tech team!

https://wikimedia.qualtrics.com/jfe/form/SV_3wl7zNEQdp6z9Vb

This survey is intended to gauge community satisfaction with the technical support provided by the Wikimedia Foundation to Wikipedia, especially focusing on the needs of the core community. To learn more about this survey, please visit Research:Tech support satisfaction poll.

To opt-out of further notices concerning this survey, please remove your username from the subscription list.

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 20:51, 15 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Notification about possible deletion

Some contents have been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether they should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at their entry.

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

Please remember to respond to and – if appropriate – contradict the arguments supporting deletion. Arguments which focus on the nominator will not affect the result of the nomination. Thank you!

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

Affected:

File:CocaCola C2.jpg

Yours sincerely, — Racconish^☎ 19:26, 26 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Little help

Can you please add (Category:Moscow) at OrgeBot page to upload images to (User:Stolbovsky/Recent uploads/Moscow). I cannon do this :( //Stolbovsky (talk) 11:39, 16 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
- @Stolbovsky: Done! —howcheng {chat} 16:40, 16 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  - Thank you so much! —Stolbovsky (talk) 18:46, 16 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Women with fur hats

Hello Howcheng, thank you for yor help. But please be careful with new categories, if you are not an expert for the special field. The upper category "fur hats" already was bad, when is a hat a hat, a cap a cap and so on? Who will decide and keep it up? I think, the categories "Fur headgear" and "Male fur headgear" with some lower categories are enough (look there). But thank you for your good intentions, regards from Germany to California. --Kürschner (talk) 19:38, 29 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah I started that and then decided this was too big of a task for me to handle. :) —howcheng {chat} 19:40, 29 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Bain copyright notice

Why did you delete this category without notifying me or placing under discussion? Category:Bain copyright notice are different from ordinary Bain images in that the copyright insignia was placed directly on the image, altering their copyright status. Please restore. --Richard Arthur Norton (1958- ) (talk) 17:31, 30 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

There's still no need for a separate category based solely on license tag. If you prefer to use {{PD-1923}} over {{PD-Bain}}, then go for it, but regardless of the existence of the copyright symbol, the images still come from the LOC Bain collection and they are PD. —howcheng {chat} 17:37, 30 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I disagree, Corbis is also claiming copyright for a large tranche of the Bain images. Knowing which ones have a copyright notice and which ones have been published is important in determining competing claims. There should have been a discussion about this. --Richard Arthur Norton (1958- ) (talk) 22:13, 30 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

You could have mentioned that in your first comment. I'll recreate the category as a hidden category and add it back to those images that were already in there. —howcheng {chat} 23:21, 30 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

File:Saff el-Dawaba2.jpg

Dear Howcheng,

Could you just mark this image for a friend of mine please? I marked all of this user's other uploads during the flickrbot shutdown 2 days ago. I hope you can help. Thank You, --Leoboudv (talk) 06:36, 9 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Done. —howcheng {chat} 07:00, 9 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thank You so much. Kind Regards, --Leoboudv (talk) 08:16, 9 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Zero Akagi Dec1941.jpg

Hi Howcheng. That photograph appears with this orientation in the original source, the Naval History and Heritage Command. Alonso de Mendoza (talk) 15:21, 17 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Alonso de Mendoza: OK, thanks for checking on that. —howcheng {chat} 16:40, 17 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Re:File:Jes2015.JPG

Re:File:Jes2015.JPG

(ping User:Basvb) Hi! Could I ask what was the exact reason for deleting this file? I can't see why would its relation to the topic (a human face, I guess) fail nor how does it relate to any case of vandalism. We have a large list of articles that now are lacking a proper picture because of this deletion. Regards, Peter Bowman (talk) 00:35, 7 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The image depicts an unidentified youth actor (at least according to its description, it is also possible it is an image of a non-notable person calling himself an actor). The image was used on 88 pages which did not seem to be related to the image in any way. This made me suspect that the uploader just dumped the images on random pages. If however you say that the image was just describing a general face on these pages then I've made a mistake in nominating it. @Peter Bowman, what is the easiest way to see the previous usage? I looked at CommonsDelinkers edits but couldn't find it there. I would like to look into it a bit more thoroughly. Basvb (talk) 09:16, 7 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, Basvb, thank you for your answer. You should be able to rapidly locate its former usage on this listing, just look at the latest CommonDelinker's edits marked with the "Jes2015.JPG" filename. Those pictures illustrated the meaning of the Polish word "twarz", which corresponds to "face". The editor that placed them there used to thoroughly search Commons' archives and the latest uploads to pick the most suitable picture, and later use it in a large number of articles that represent the same topic. While I don't recall what exactly was depicted there, I'm pretty sure the user that uploaded the file and the one that placed it on several plwiktionary's pages are not the same person. Moreover, I personally patrolled most or all of his edits (of the editor) and marked them as correct (FlaggedRevs). As I see it, either the deleted file might be restored and the CommonsDelinker's edits reverted, or I could restore/pick the previous image that was used to describe the meaning od "face" (wikt:pl:Special:Diff/4765610, Media:Boy Face from Venezuela.jpg), probably the second option is the most straightforward to accomplish. In either case I wanted to state that this wasn't an act of vandalism on plwiktionary as it could be interpreted in the deletion request. Best regards, Peter Bowman (talk) 13:29, 7 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Peter Bowman: I have restored the image. —howcheng {chat} 16:14, 7 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for the restore. Given the explanation this was quite the oversight from me (a case of 80+ uses has to be vandalism) and I should've checked the articles more thoroughly. Nice that you catched this mistake Peter Bowman. Basvb (talk) 18:22, 7 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

moose picture

Hi! Normally I would do the search myself but here In China some link don't work. So sorry if I ask you directly but you were the uploader in 2008 (maybe from enwiki?) of this picture. One user left a detailed explanation in a userpage stating it is a fake. I have to say that at a closer look the picture looks a little bit unnatural. Since it is used in many articles, I though that it is worth to check the claim... Do you remember anything after so many years?--Alexmar983 (talk) 11:30, 18 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The photo came from the US government. I don't see why anyone would think it is fake. —howcheng {chat} 06:43, 20 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

He clearly stated it comes from NBII, but he pointed out that a lot of details are odd. One I don't understand (it's a comment about the scratch of a tyre) , but as far as I can see the contrast of the animal is unnaturally neat, the shadow of the deer is much darker than the shadow of the tree. I am not an expert but if you don't have any additional detail I would like to post the doubt it on the village pump. --Alexmar983 (talk) 15:05, 20 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

It's possible the photo was retouched, but otherwise I have no details about it. Sorry. —howcheng {chat} 16:07, 20 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

ok, let's show it at the village pump at let's decide. I am just worried that if someone can prove it's "retouched", it is bad publicity. We used on many articles for years...--Alexmar983 (talk) 03:04, 21 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Done.--Alexmar983 (talk) 03:15, 21 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think it particularly matters. We use retouched photos all the time. —howcheng {chat} 09:40, 21 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Help

Can you check Commons:Deletion requests/File:Oplet pekanbaru.JPG? Thanks. Aldo samulo (talk) 05:34, 13 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Help

Are you able to move the following files File:Ruang Keberangkatan SULTAN SYARIF KASIM II PEKANBARU.JPG, to a more appropriate name, namely File:Ruang Kedatangan SULTAN SYARIF KASIM II PEKANBARU.JPG? Because it displays the file's arrival hall but there is error in the file name so that the names are written the departure lounge. I beg to be moved to avoid mistakes when the information is used. 36.84.229.114 03:15, 22 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Notification about possible deletion

Some contents have been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether they should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at their entry.

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

Please remember to respond to and – if appropriate – contradict the arguments supporting deletion. Arguments which focus on the nominator will not affect the result of the nomination. Thank you!

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

Affected:

File:Larry O'Brien Championship Trophy.JPG

Yours sincerely Эlcobbola _talk 03:54, 22 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

File:Burning Man 2015 Art (21065318514).jpg

File:Burning Man 2015 Art (21065318514).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） ∙ +/−

Kaldari (talk) 02:19, 29 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Category:U.S._Fish_and_Wildlife_Service_Northeast_Region

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Northeast Region 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 ∙ +/−

Elisfkc (talk) 19:30, 29 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

File:DowntownNelsonBC.jpg

File:DowntownNelsonBC.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） ∙ +/−

Magnolia677 (talk) 23:22, 13 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

VARSITY CUP

Hi, I was checking OTRS ticket:2016032910006682 and maybe you can clarify me what happened with Commons:Deletion requests/File:FNB Varsity Cup logo.png. Was the file identical to File:VARSITY CUP PRIMARY LOGO 1-1 CMYK 150719 FAC1.jpg? Thanks --Ruthven (msg) 11:35, 17 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Ruthven: No, the deleted file is a 650x120 banner ad. It does include File:VARSITY CUP PRIMARY LOGO 1-1 CMYK 150719 FAC1.jpg, but also stuff like "Follow us on social media!" If you're interested, I'll email a copy to you. —howcheng {chat} 19:32, 17 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you, but there is no need. Now I understand: the wrong file has been uploaded. I'll put the two in the ticket on Commons, and close it. Thank you very much for your help! --Ruthven (msg) 19:45, 17 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Photo-phylles 2017

Hi,

I just found lots of interesting pictures of plants on your pages.

I suggest you have a look to this website http://www.jjmilan.sitew.fr/#accueil.A

We would be honoured if you accept to participate! It's completely free.

Best regards Jean-Jacques MILAN (talk) 22:06, 16 December 2016 (UTC) (administrator of the french Wikibooks)

Seattle/Hawaii

This and other similar edits seem wrong to me. This was a performance in Seattle, so why move it from Category:Hula in the United States to Category:Hula in Hawaii? Am I missing something? Any problem with my moving these back? - Jmabel ! talk 16:37, 10 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Jmabel: Oops, my bad. I must have clicked too many photos when using Cat-a-Lot. Thanks. —howcheng {chat} 17:32, 10 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Flickr Public Domain mark

Hi, please do not upload files from Flickr which have the Public Domain Mark license, like File:Boats for hire. (31529759440).jpg. This is not an accepted license. Jcb (talk) 16:30, 25 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Jcb: The photographer puts almost all of his photos under CC-zero. I'm sure it was just an error on his part. I've written to him and will send his reply to OTRS. —howcheng {chat} 17:58, 25 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Again, do NOT restore this file as long as it is licensed as Public Domain Mark at Flickr. This is an incompatible license. Jcb (talk) 17:35, 26 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

An example of our established practice: Commons:Deletion requests/File:2017 King Cakes from Bywater Bakery.jpg (there are hundreds of cases like this) - Jcb (talk) 17:36, 26 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

This guy has >7,000 photos uploaded to his Flickr account. It is unrealistic to ask him to go through his photo stream to find the ones that he set to PD instead of CC-zero and change the licenses on each of them. I'm covering it with a blanket statement to be stored at OTRS instead. —howcheng {chat} 18:32, 26 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, but please do not restore the file before the OTRS ticket is complete. 18:38, 26 January 2017 (UTC)

Will do. Thanks. —howcheng {chat} 19:00, 26 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Notification about possible deletion

Some contents have been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether they should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at their entry.

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

Please remember to respond to and – if appropriate – contradict the arguments supporting deletion. Arguments which focus on the nominator will not affect the result of the nomination. Thank you!

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

Affected:

File:Tokyo Dorompa.jpg

Yours sincerely, G I Chandor (talk) 00:54, 19 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hawaii

I just wanted to let you know that your continued efforts to organize images & categories from Hawaii have not gone unnoticed. Good work. - Themightyquill (talk) 22:37, 25 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

File:Police carrying woman, March on Washington 1963 ppmsca.03192.jpg

I don't understand your revert here. Why is it not need? Mitchumch (talk) 08:42, 31 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Mitchumch: Because Category:March on Washington for Jobs and Freedom is already a member of Category:Civil Rights Movement, so by definition the image already belongs in the Civil Rights Movement category. Does that make sense? Please read COM:OVERCAT for more details. Thanks. —howcheng {chat} 16:47, 31 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

VK Cheong

Hi, In 2009 you uploaded some 20 photos attributed to this photograper, on an OTRS ticket. Here they are. They are all items described as Chinese antiquities, mostly Tang dynasty pottery, photographed with a crude background of white card, wrapping paper or newspaper. In some part of what looks like a small crowded storeroom can be seen. I am pretty certain all these items are modern fakes. Do you know anything about the photographer? Some are used in significant articles. I think they should all be deleted. Thoughts? Johnbod (talk) 13:56, 19 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Johnbod: I have no other information beyond what's in the tickets. If you have evidence they're fakes, please feel free to nominate for deletion. Thanks. —howcheng {chat} 17:10, 19 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Commons Conference project

Hello

I'm writing you as one of the most active Commons users right now. Since a while now, the idea of a dedicated Commons conference has been floating around. But since the last Wikimania concrete steps have been taken to actually make it happen next year. If you're interested in participation or maybe willing to help organize the first ever Commons Conference, I invite you to check out the project page and leave your comments; or just show your support for the idea, by signing up.

Cheers,

--Touzrimounir (talk) 22:17, 6 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

File:Yellow-billed loon- ryan askren USGSresize (15650948934).jpg

File:Yellow-billed loon- ryan askren USGSresize (15650948934).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） ∙ +/−

Offnfopt^(talk) 18:15, 3 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The user you blocked

Hi. Thanks for blocking the racist. I think you should also revdel this edit summary and other similars if there are any. All the best. --E4024 (talk) 07:35, 31 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Have you seen this for example? --E4024 (talk) 07:38, 31 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

User:Guanaco took care of that. Thanks. —howcheng {chat} 16:53, 31 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hi,

I got a written consent from Dr. Angela Kepler (Hawai) to use the foto banananredsap but should give her credit: Angela K. Kepler and add "Pacific-Wide Consulting" if there is room. She published this foto in a chapter on fe'i bananas in the World of Bananas in Hawaii: Then & Now (2011). www.bananas-hawaii.com.

User:Brunk-Tan

@Brunk-Tan: . Please follow the procedures described in Commons:OTRS. —howcheng {chat} 07:59, 9 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]