User talk:Jcb/archive/13

Could you apologize for your unfair block of myself?

To put Commons:Administrators'_noticeboard/Archive_59#Block_of_User:Piotrus behind us, could you kindly apologize for the block on my talk page? Then I will archive that section, forget and forgive and we can all shake hands and move on. It is human to err, as long as we learn from that. I would feel better to know that the Commons admin which caused me significant stress realizes his/her mistake and won't do it again. Sincerely, --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus ^Talk 02:31, 1 November 2016 (UTC)

Two weeks ago before even trying to contact me, you started to complain about me in the village pump. Later that day you continued to remove problem tags from your own uploads without fixing the problem, instead of converting to regular DR, despite clear instructions. So of the two of us, I may not be the one who needs to apologize. So better just forget about the incident, instead of asking people to apologize, while completely ignoring your own dubious role in the case. Jcb (talk) 10:16, 1 November 2016 (UTC)

Reverting my work

Hi Jcb,

You reverted my edit. I fixed 300 of the files where you only put in "..." while often valid sources were present in the description field. This is the one case where (because of the language) I have difficulties determining whether a source is mentioned or not. I can not state it is unknown if there simply is a source in the description I'm unaware of. I've spend hours on fixing the files you previously tagged and one of them goes back into the maintenance category and I get an instant revert. If that is how this is going to work than I won't be motivated to fix the other files and re-raise the request to find a different solution which doesn't involve hours of other my (or other people's) time. Basvb (talk) 06:13, 2 November 2016 (UTC)

You should have just let it as it was, I see no reason to have a 12th century work in the maintenance category for files with a source problem. But now you apparently doubt about that, I will nominate the file for deletion. Jcb (talk) 06:50, 2 November 2016 (UTC)

A deletion request is not really constructive as it makes no sense in this case. This file has a source problem, but not a copyright problem. As such there is not reason to delete it and it can safely be kept without a source. The thing that makes this file stand out from the rest is that it is uncertain (for me) whether it has a source in the description or whether the source is unknown to us. So I can't simply add an unknown-template, something which was the resolution in a lot of other cases. Basically we need somebody who understands Alemannisch to resolve the question. Please withdraw your deletion request as it makes no sense. Basvb (talk) 08:08, 2 November 2016 (UTC)

As far as I can see there is no source information in the description field. I will not withdraw the DR as long as the file is in the 'images without source' category. It's rather the forced unneeded polluting of this category than the DR that's not constructive here. Please be aware that the processing of this problematic backlog has almost come to a standstill due to all the unproportional discussions and unpragmatic reverts. Jcb (talk) 08:20, 2 November 2016 (UTC)

Fae seemed to have been able to figure out the sourcing from the description, and has been so kind to feel the source field. The issue which is returning time after time is that it seems that you've set yourself a goal: reducing the backlog of the 'images without sources'-category. In doing so you seem to prioritise emptying this category over improving the files in general. Adding "..." to the source field gets it out of the category, but is not informative in the long term as the goal is to provide the source in the proper field. Nominating files which can easily be kept is not in line with sharing the sum of human knowledge as it is causing the deletion of valid files. The issues with some files in the category cannot be resolved in an easy way, you do however seem to try to do just that (nominating them for deletion is the main example). Where the situation is complex it is better to accept that the issue is complex and can not be resolved easily. That's what I accepted in the case of the Rothwiiler_Wallfahrer.jpg file, it was too complex (due to language) for me to resolve, where somebody else would be able to resolve it. The discussions were not at all disproportional, they were, and seem to still be, necessary because the current way of working by you is far from optimal. By throwing important principles out of the window when it concerns reducing this backlog you're harming the project. The block of Piotrus discussed above being the worst example of how you seem to ignore everything when it comes to reducing this backlog. Please get your priorities straight! Basvb (talk) 09:55, 2 November 2016 (UTC)

This is an unfair and inaccurate observation. As has been pointed out by several users, the 'images without sources'-category is problematic. Thousands of copyright violations go unnoticed, sometimes for over ten years, because this category is so extremely backlogged. It's impossible to resolve this if thousands of files without a real problem keep cluthering this category. Not sure if you are aware that this category is an official admin backlog. In the past months I have spent many hours on this and I have fixed thousands of files. I don't want to say something general about your work, because I know you do a lot of good work, but regarding this particular file I think you are the one with the wrong priorities. This file had no real problem. If you would just not have touched it, several hours from several users would have been saved for more effective work. Jcb (talk) 10:26, 2 November 2016 (UTC)

Can you provide evidence that the category is an "official admin backlog" (it's not on Commons:Admin backlog). It is a backlog which can be worked on by every user. I agree that it is an important backlog. However it is not that important that it allows one to misuse procedures, such as the deletion request in this case (and the blocking of Piotrus before). So the remark on priorities stays valid. This is not an unfair or inaccurate observation. I understand that an observation like this of your behaviour is unpleasant, and for me it is also unpleasant to provide such an observation as I prefer to keep away from conflict and negativity. I do however feel that it is important for you to consider how it comes that your actions have received so much criticism. In general not all criticism is right, but if dozens of people criticise something this is surely a reason to look into that something. Commons indeed has huge backlogs including loads of files which are copyright violations. Sunday I've tagged and nominated 100's of files with Facebook as a source, which is an indicator of potential permission issues. The "images without source"-category is on just that: images without a source, if a file is valid like the file in this case a source is not strictly necessary, it is however still an image without a source. Of course the number of images in the category should be reduced, and the quicker the better. But don't throw common sense out of the window in doing so. I really appreciate the effort and commitment with which you are working on this backlog, but not when it is: above everything else/no matter what the costs are. The point you make about not touching the file saving time applies just as well, if not stronger when combined, to both your revert and DR. Basvb (talk) 18:40, 2 November 2016 (UTC)

See Commons:Administrators' noticeboard/Backlog. And about the amount of criticism, well that has a clear cause, which should be obvious right now. From the moment I closed this DR (two months ago), one particular user has not stopped to do anything he could, to direct everybody's attention to me. Jcb (talk) 20:53, 2 November 2016 (UTC)

Commons:Deletion requests/File:Rothwiiler Wallfahrer.jpg

Hello Jcb, as a courtesy, I closed a DR you nominated as kept. I believe it can be speedy closed as kept because there's no sense to continue it as Fæ has provided the source for the file. If you disagree with my action, I am open and we can discuss about this or ask an independent admin review at COM:AN, but please don't reopen nor renominate the DR on your own. Thanks, ★ Poké⁹⁵ 10:25, 2 November 2016 (UTC)

Thank you. I agree the issue was resolved, so no need to keep it open. Jcb (talk) 10:27, 2 November 2016 (UTC)

Thanks for your response (and you're welcome for your thanks). I hope we would work together constructively in the future. ★ Poké⁹⁵ 10:47, 2 November 2016 (UTC)

blackPanther OS Images

Another thing: all rights of blackPanther OS and the associated content uploaded to Wikipedia are owned by V3ct0r, who edited the images as well (you can see it in history). — Preceding unsigned comment added by Tczgabor (talk • contribs) 22:10, 04 November 2016 (UTC)

Hello, I've updated the license description on the referenced welcome page (http://www.blackpantheros.eu/contact-us/), you should have no problem with it now. Another thing: all images you deleted are property of the developers, none of this content violates any copyright, but then I do think you need to justify your deletions by proving the opposite. I am going to request that the images are restored in UDR. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Tczgabor (talk • contribs) 21:55, 04 November 2016 (UTC)

Hello,

Please read it:

http://www.blackpantheros.eu/contact-us/

There was no copyright violation, you made a mistake. Please restore the pictures. Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by H Miki (talk • contribs) 02:08, 03 November 2016 (UTC)

Hi, 'free usage' is not a valid license, it's very vague. And undeletion requests go via COM:UDR - Jcb (talk) 07:32, 3 November 2016 (UTC)

warning

it is my own work, reupload it please.Kontrola (talk) 17:56, 3 November 2016 (UTC)

Please contact OTRS to establish that, so that the stream of repeated deletions can come to an end. Jcb (talk) 19:14, 3 November 2016 (UTC)

Alexander Gruzberg.jpg

Jcb, it's my first experience in creating a Wiki page for which I need to upload a photo. I uploaded the photo yesterday: https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Alexander_Gruzberg.jpg The creator of the mediafile has sent today an email for release of rights to the file to OTRS. It probably took me more time than it is allowed (2 weeks) to find the creator, write to him and ask him to email to OTRS. It's simply 'cause the 1st try is really time-and-effort-consuming. Is it possible to restore / redelete the photo file? Or what else can I do to restore it? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Neilphi (talk • contribs) 19:07, 03 November 2016 (UTC)

As soon as the OTRS volunteer thinks that there is a valid permission, they will undelete the file. Please be aware this may take several weeks, because OTRS is understaffed. Jcb (talk) 19:16, 3 November 2016 (UTC)

Thank you for the response. Neilphi

Why the deletion ???

Hello I am 11lawpt1 and you deleted one of my image in my sandbox due to copyright violation, however I have received and is authorized by the author of the paper to edit and publish said source, is that not sufficient for a wikimedia commons upload? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 11lawpt1 (talk • contribs) 10:14, 15 November 2016 (UTC)

Hello

You deleted several images upon the argument that no OTRS permission had been received. However, the history of the file indicate that permission was appropriately sent. It provides the OTRS ticket number. And upon checking on OTRS, the permission has indeed been sent and recorded properly.

I am a bit pissed off to be honest because we WERE SUPER careful to get the permissions done properly and had MANY back and fro with Orange so that it would be done right. we actually were not careful enough...sigh

One such example is here [1]. The file was uploaded on the 1st of September. The permission was sent on the 2nd of September. It was recorded on the file. The ticket is Ticket#2016090210007336. It include permission for

• OK https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:WikiChallenge_logo_EN1.png
• OK https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:WikiChallenge_logo_EN1.svg
• https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:WikiChallenge_web_EN1.svg
• https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:WikiChallenge_web_EN1.png
• https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:WikiChallenge_poster_EN1.png
• https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:WikiChallenge_poster_EN1.svg
• OK https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:WikiChallenge_logo_fr.svg
• https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:WikiChallenge_web_fr.svg
• https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:WikiChallenge_web_fr.png
• OK https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:WikiChallenge_logo_fr.png
• https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:WikiChallenge_poster_fr.svg
• https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:WikiChallenge_poster_fr.png

Still, you deleted them on the 6th of October without any warning. Given that the permission had been sent and recorded on the commons page, it sure was difficult to guess that we were expected to do something.

I restored one to try to figure out what the problem was. What is the problem ?

Let me add that not only has OF agreed to release those under a free licence, but File:Orange logo.svg is considered PD. If the issue is that visuals could be trademarked, perhaps we could be informed of the issue before deletion ?

So what is wrong exactly ? Please clarify. Anthere (talk) 12:04, 4 November 2016 (UTC)

@Anthere : Hi, did you read the template? It says "An email has been received at OTRS concerning this file, and can be read here by users with an OTRS account. However, the message was not sufficient to confirm permission for this file. [...] If a valid permission is not provided within 30 days of the first response by an OTRS volunteer, this file will be deleted.". The copyright owner didn't reply to the questions asked by FDMS4. --Thibaut120094 (talk) 13:12, 4 November 2016 (UTC)

Arggg. You are completely correct. My mistake. I present my apologies. Well, on the road again to go digging information to fix that... /me cries Anthere (talk)

No problem. By the way: files may always be undeleted as soon as a proper permission is processed. And yes, our OTRS system is sometimes a mess, leading to unnecessary deletions from time to time. Jcb (talk) 21:48, 4 November 2016 (UTC)

Deletion of contents

Dear Jcb,

Could you please indicate me what should change in my images in order to make sure they are not Advertisement? Could you please also explain to me how I can prove you that I have the right to post these contents?

Thanks in advance for you feedback. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Steph.Ber (talk • contribs) 11:17, 07 November 2016 (UTC)

The files are out of scope. Please don't upload them again. Jcb (talk) 16:47, 7 November 2016 (UTC)

Thank you for the feedback, as the scope is quite large, could you please advise me on the points I have to rework so they will fit the scope?

Mainly we have editable wikitext articles, in which we include illustrations. We don't combine article text and illustrations into an image file. Jcb (talk) 21:43, 7 November 2016 (UTC)

Thank you for the feedback, I understand better now. Could you please indicate me if there was any problem with the two images that have been deleted and that had no text in them? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Steph.Ber (talk • contribs) 14:13, 08 November 2016 (UTC)

Please help yourself getting started, starting from here - Jcb (talk) 16:04, 8 November 2016 (UTC)

Rami Al Ali - Profile Image Deleted

Dear Jcb,

Hope all is well.

I noticed that you had deleted the profile image stating that there is a copyright issue.

https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Rami_Al_Ali_Profile_Image.jpg File:Rami Al Ali Profile Image.jpg

So, I managed to track down the photographer of the image that I used. I asked him if I can use it for this designer and he told me I could.

Please let me add this image that was deleted. I'd like to give this page a face :) Thank you for your understanding.

This is what he wrote me:

Dear Michael (Timepoverty),

It occurred to me that there is some issue or question over the Rami Al Ali images used on his wikipedia page.

I am the photographer that shot the images and I agree and give full permission to use the photographs. The images are under their ownership and I have no commitment towards. Please use them as they need to.

Thank you Saeed Khalifa www.saeedkhalifastudio.com

Hope to hear back from you soon! Best regard, Michael (Timepoverty) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Timepoverty (talk • contribs) 15:21, 10 November 2016 (UTC)

Please contact OTRS. If they find the permission valid, they will undelete the file. Jcb (talk) 16:07, 10 November 2016 (UTC)

Speedy deletion of Dr. Mike S Adams photo

Uh, I as the uploader was not informed as to the speedy deletion prior to the file being deleted. OTRS ticket has been received.[Ticket#2016111010004999] Benkenobi18 (talk) 18:29, 10 November 2016 (UTC)

As soon as the ticket is processed, and OTRS agent can restore the file. Please be aware this may take some time, OTRS has a backlog. Jcb (talk) 18:48, 10 November 2016 (UTC)

Your posssibly erroneous deletion of File:Llanos de moxos1.jpg.png from my User:Smallchief/Sandbox9

I thought I made it clear in putting this map in my sandbox that it was a cropped version of a map that is already posted on Wikimedia as File:Llanos de Moxos.jpg -- and is displayed on the German language article titled Moxos-Ebene. The only alteration I made to the original map was to crop out the German legend.

So, what seems to be called for is that the map should either be removed from Wikimedia and the German article -- or re-added to my sandbox. Please look into this. Smallchief (talk) 16:03, 11 November 2016 (UTC)

It seems that the maintenance robot listed it for speedy deletion, because you forgot to add a license template. I will have a look at it. Jcb (talk) 16:09, 11 November 2016 (UTC)

Thanks for your quick action. I didn't realize that a image already on Wikimedia needed a license. Smallchief (talk) 17:04, 11 November 2016 (UTC)

Deletion of Phaenops aerea

Hallo Jcb, why did you delete the side? There were two pictures, that is, the deletion-criterium was no fulfilled. Besides that the side concerns a biological species, so shurely there will be more pics. --Siga (talk) 16:14, 14 November 2016 (UTC)

The guideline says: "Galleries should not be created if they merely duplicate the purpose of a category.". In this case the category only contained two files and the gallery page was merely a redundant duplicate of the category. Jcb (talk) 16:24, 14 November 2016 (UTC)

I think, that guideline is not very useful, but O.K. If I find an old picture, I'll put that to the category and not to the side, so that you can find the animal with the search-machine. --Siga (talk) 17:02, 14 November 2016 (UTC)

Deletions about PBA

Hello (sorry for my bad English, I can write it in French if you prefer...) You have deleted these two files : File:Le personnel du musée en 1934.jpg File:Coupure du journal Nord-Matin.jpg They were uploaded thanks to a partnership between the Museum and the newspaper, owner of the photos, inside of a wiki-project named WikiMuseum. Certainly there was a mistake about the "own work" or about the licenses but it takes time to teach the rules to our partners in this adventure ! And between the announce of the probable deletion (15:23, 14 November 2016) and your deletion (16:48), there was no time enough for us to correct that. Is it possible that you restore these files and let us a few days so that we correct all the mistakes ? And my other request is : for the further mistakes you will probably notice in this project, could you tell it to User:Lamiot and/or to me before you delete ? We try to make pedagogy towards the conservators and the journalists who discover the wiki-rules (and sometimes a lack of patience...). Thanks ! Best regards. --Cbyd (talk) 18:09, 14 November 2016 (UTC)

I am able to read French, so feel free to write French. I think this problem cannot be fixed by adding the correct information. The problem is that the museum is normally not the copyright holder of such newspaper articles. In case of an article with a picture, we need to receive permission from both the author of the article and the photographer of the picture. Jcb (talk) 19:36, 14 November 2016 (UTC)

Ok, As you may have probably guessed, for many contributors, it was their first upload to commons. Not so easy for a beginner. It would be nice to explain to them clearly why the image is removed, that they are not disgusted to contribute again. Nous sommes bénévoles, et n'avons pas toujours le temps de réagir très vite. --F. Lamiot (talk) 11:40, 15 November 2016 (UTC)

Commons:Deletion_requests/File:100_let_samote-rodovnik.JPG

/// copied from the page on the link - my comment is below ///

File:100 let samote-rodovnik.JPG

<cut out copy of the DR>  Info Yes, I am / was:) an author of the deleted diagram. I have read the book many times and along the reading, I made a genealogy tree, since it is quite difficult to comprehend all the Buendias described in the book. I shared that with wikipedia - I am not sure, who put it to commons / or to spanish wikipedia (not me). I find that the description of the book (in a manner of a famaily tree) could not be problematic within Marquez authorship - or is it? Apparently. Since I am no admin here, I cannot check the Commons history of the deleted file / or add the suitable licence (nobody left a notice for me to do it). I think a genealogy chart is a welcome data for a reader, and it would be a waste not to have it there. Best from Žiga (talk) 20:02, 14 November 2016 (UTC)

PS sorry to write this here, but since I haven't found more suitalbe place, it is going to stay here, until you move it somewhere else. Žiga (talk) 20:08, 14 November 2016 (UTC)

Aha, and, no, Marquez never wrote or published a diagram in such a manner. He just wrote a complex book. A reader must figure it out by himself. I have never heard, that a synopsis of the work (susch as this fam.tree is) would be violation of rights. I am not the author of the book, but the author of synopsis, made as a chart. Any objections? Žiga (talk) 20:12, 14 November 2016 (UTC)

So if I understand correctly, you created the diagram based on information in the book and you put the Marquez name in it? Jcb (talk) 20:23, 14 November 2016 (UTC)

Of course, wouldn't you? So one knows, what the chart is talking about. Besides, I made it ca. 10 years ago, so I did not use family tree template, since there was none. If I would have done it now, there would probably be no title, but only a chart. Somehow in that time I was proud :) of doing the chart, and since it was cited and copied to other non wiki pages, it's ok that my wiki user name stands there too... There are so many publications using my photo material without naming the author (me) or at least wikipedia, where they took the image from. I just don't have time and energy to deal with it, but that is how it goes. As for deleting the material on Commons, if I was in your place, I would have asked the author of the image about the background history before deleting. There is though one Slovenian user Eleassar who does the cleaning for Commons and usually tells me what is going on, before doing some changes / deleting in Commons. Perhaps it would be right if you did so too. Žiga (talk) 02:15, 15 November 2016 (UTC)

Apparently "HeNeverCries" put it back anyway, so there is no sweat anymore. But besides, I see there is some Slovenian text there (I made it for the purpose of wiki-sl at the time, not having a global usage in mind) - so it is not really usable unless being reverted to this one. Thx, bye. Žiga (talk) 02:24, 15 November 2016 (UTC)

 Info this talk was partially copied here: 100 years of solitude family tree. Žiga (talk) 02:30, 15 November 2016 (UTC)

Ok, so this one seems resolved now. Jcb (talk) 16:19, 15 November 2016 (UTC)

File:1 uno.png and File:10 diez.png

These two files nominated by you has been just restored. You're the solely responsible about the removal of them from Wikibooks, Wicktionary and Incubator, and someone should fix that (you maybe?). --Amitie 10g (talk) 00:46, 15 November 2016 (UTC)

Undeleting admin is the primary responsable person to check the delinker log. Jcb (talk) 16:20, 15 November 2016 (UTC)

For your information, I fixed the hunderd of pages affected by the deletion of these files. And, the correct answer for my question above is the CommonsDelinker tool, but you just don't want to take responsibility for your disruptive actions and leaving the dirty job to others (pressing the Delete button take less tan a second). --Amitie 10g (talk) 20:58, 18 November 2016 (UTC)

Stop your erroneous accusations. You are already wasting quite too much of everybody's time with all your mistaken keep votes. Jcb (talk) 23:11, 18 November 2016 (UTC)

What is more time wasting? Voting Keep, or tagging/nominating files without researching, affecting dozens, hunderds and even thousand of pages? You already questionated to use indiscriminately the {{No permission since}} tag, and you're still making DRs without researching. I spend all the day to fix the mess you created, even if it si not my responsibility (if you used Google Image Search, you will found indications that this pepper is part of the GIMP brushes). --Amitie 10g (talk) 00:47, 19 November 2016 (UTC)

File:Flag of Thailand.svg

If you can, may you fix the SVG file with the following update code? <?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?> <svg xmlns="http://www.w3.org/2000/svg" width="900" height="600" viewBox="0 0 9 6"><path fill="#ED1C24" d="m0,0h9v6H0"/><path fill="#fff" d="m0,1h9v4H0"/><path fill="#241D4F" d="m0,2h9v2H0"/></svg> Thanks! User:Zscout370 ^{(Return fire)} 06:16, 15 November 2016 (UTC)

I'm sorry, but I am not familiar with editing SVG files. Jcb (talk) 16:21, 15 November 2016 (UTC)

Commons:Deletion requests/File:ParallelprojektionDPrinzip.jpg

Hi Jcb. I replaced it in a user page, too. --Leyo 08:27, 15 November 2016 (UTC)

Ok, I have deleted the file. Jcb (talk) 16:22, 15 November 2016 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Copyright Watcher Barnstar
	I would like to award you The Copyright Watcher Barnstar because you helped to keep Wikimedia Commons clean from copyright violations. Davidng913 (talk) 03:33, 17 November 2016 (UTC)

Thanks! Jcb (talk) 15:58, 17 November 2016 (UTC)

Please help restore all that you deleted.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/D._C._Douglas — Preceding unsigned comment added by Misterdc (talk • contribs) 09:26, 17 November 2016 (UTC)

For some reason you deleted all the images and formatting I uploaded to my wikipedia page. All pictures were submitted properly as far as I can tell (I am not a genius with wikipedia). All images ARE MINE. I own the rights. I am very bummed I have to start from scratch again. Any way to put them back? Some guy added a horrible picture after you removed all my good ones. - --Misterdc (talk) 09:26, 17 November 2016 (UTC)

You seem to be the depicted person of these pictures. That means that somebody else is the photographer and therefore the copyright holder, unless there is a written document in which they declared to transfer the copyright to you. Please ask the photographers to contact OTRS. Jcb (talk) 16:01, 17 November 2016 (UTC)

Help to revert deleted images?

Hi Jcb,

I'm new at Wikipedia so I hope this is the best way to comment.

I noticed that two images were deleted due to copyright issues:

https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Adam_Savage_SBU_1.jpg https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Daniel_Wood_SBU.jpg

But they are properly attributed with:

"Images on this page may be used under Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0 and GNU Free Documentation License (unversioned, with no invariant sections, front-cover texts, or back-cover texts)."

On the following link: http://focusdesigns.com/media/

Can they be restored?

Thanks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Iwantmp3 (talk • contribs) 23:57, 17 November 2016 (UTC)

 Restored - Jcb (talk) 00:08, 18 November 2016 (UTC)

Special:DoubleRedirects again

While reviewing I noticed this. What is the intention behind this? I am a bit confused. :) -- とある白い猫 ^ちぃ？ 15:35, 18 November 2016 (UTC)

It somehow appeared in Special:BrokenRedirects. I think it's about time to make a list of pages with this kind of bugs. I will try to make a list at User:Jcb/temp2. Please feel free to add any of these cases to the list when you encounter them. Jcb (talk) 15:59, 18 November 2016 (UTC)

I have issued a bug report, see here - Jcb (talk) 17:18, 18 November 2016 (UTC)

Commons:Deletion requests/Files uploaded by Andrija1ss, some images remaining

Hello Jcb,

You closed Commons:Deletion requests/Files uploaded by Andrija1ss and deleted the files, but five images are still remaining. Were they intentionally kept? MKFI (talk) 08:40, 19 November 2016 (UTC)

No. Thanks for the notification. Now they are deleted. Jcb (talk) 16:32, 19 November 2016 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

The Special Barnstar

Thank you so so so so much for deleting all of those files, You my friend are a life saver!, I'm sorry for once again having to take up your time - If there was another way I could do this without taking up anyones time I would happily do it but other than running for adminship I don't think there's any other way ?, But anyway thanks again for your massive help - As always it's extremely appreciated :), Thanks, –Davey2010Talk 17:29, 19 November 2016 (UTC)

Thanks! For future cases feel free to just drop me a note. Although the system worked 45 minutes on the deletions, it just took one minute of my time to start the automated processing. Jcb (talk) 17:33, 19 November 2016 (UTC)

Oh okay, Well I just didn't want to constantly bug/annoy you and thought the other admin would delete without hassle, Anyway thanks again and infuture I'll just come here, Anyway thanks again :), Thanks, –Davey2010^Talk 18:08, 19 November 2016 (UTC)

Sasanian Empire Map sources.

I left you the sources on the deletion page discussion you recently made.

Now I warn you to NOT delete that image. It will spell DISASTER for the Wikipedians who contributed to that article and there will be massive edit warring over a new Inbox Image.

I know this because I was in one and so were many others before me, going all the way back to a decade ago.

I granted you the exact sources I used for that article and I'm telling you that map is the closest you can get to being the most accurate. It's not as accurate as it should be, hence why I'm making a 2.0 version of it, but as I said on the deletion discussion page, I ma have to leave this up to the map workshop to get the rest done because my life has been quite bus lately.

However, I need to present them that map in order to get anything done should I give this up to the map workshop because they will need a map to base the foundations of making a new one on. A source in particular, which would be that.

Regards, Keeby101 (talk) 23:45, 19 November 2016 (UTC).

Hi, I am not questioning the changes you made to the map. But with all the text you added to the DR, you forgot to answer the basic question the nomination is about: Where did the map come from before you started working on it? Jcb (talk) 00:05, 20 November 2016 (UTC)

File:Topojson shapes-en.svg

You recently deleted this image with the reason listed as "Uploader requested deletion of a recently uploaded unused file". The image has been in use on W:GeoJSON since at least January 2015, the only reason I noticed the removal is because that wiki article being on my watch list. Offnfopt^(talk) 16:43, 22 November 2016 (UTC)

@Davey2010: How come this file ended up in Category:D2? Jcb (talk) 16:46, 22 November 2016 (UTC)

Jcb/Offnfopt - Having typed a reply I've just worked it out - Someone added "D3" as a cat [2]. At somepoint I would've used "D3" for uploading purposes with the Flickr2Commons, I then would've bulk moved everything from "D3" to different categories all the while not knowing this image was even included, I can only sincerely apologize for this bizarre mistake - I check all files before moving so I really can't understand why this was never caught but ofcourse it goes without saying I'll check more thoroughly infuture before moving files, Again my sincerest apologies, Thanks, –Davey2010^Talk 17:07, 22 November 2016 (UTC)

Thanks for resolving this issue, mistakes are bound to happen, just glad it got sorted. Offnfopt^(talk) 18:00, 22 November 2016 (UTC)

Thanks both, for the notification and the explanation. And Davey, don't worry. We all make mistakes. Jcb (talk) 21:46, 22 November 2016 (UTC)

Generosity Crowdfunding Campaign for User:The Photographer

Please excuse me spamming you, which concerns Commons User:The Photographer, who has 86 Featured Pictures. His contributions cover the architecture and culture of Brazil and Venezuela. He has basic photographic equipment: an old D300 camera and 35mm lens, and lives in a poor country where photographic equipment is expensive. The Photographer has recently taken several images using the technique where multiple frames are stitched together to create a high-resolution panorama. However, many times frustrated with the stitching errors that result from trying to take such photos without a proper panoramic head for his tripod. This special equipment permits the camera to be rotated around the entrance pupil of the lens, and eliminates such errors. Having a panoramic head would greatly increase the potential for The Photographer to create sharp high-resolution images for Commons. In addition, the purchase of a fisheye lens would enable 180 × 360° panoramas to be taken, which are a great way to explore a scene as though one is really there.

Please see the discussion about the Crowd-funding campaign on User talk:The Photographer#Generosity Crowdfunding Campaign and visit the Generosity Crowd-funding Campaign page to consider donating. Even a modest donation will make a difference if many people contribute. Thanks. -- Colin (talk) 21:22, 22 November 2016 (UTC)

Comment moderation

Hi Jcb... would you consider moderating your comment inside your vote at Special:Diff/82007775/219374280? Using words like "randomly choosing" and "nonsense arguments" seems calculated specifically to disparage Srittau... and while we both agree that a decision should not be arbitrary, I think your point would be better made without these asides. Also, the fact that an admin makes these kind of throwaway comments sets a bad example for others who are asked to follow the same rules of collegiality. Storkk (talk) 15:50, 25 November 2016 (UTC)

I have changed the wording a bit. Jcb (talk) 15:57, 25 November 2016 (UTC)

Thank you. Storkk (talk) 15:57, 25 November 2016 (UTC)

Can you send me two deleted files

Hi Jcb, You recently deleted File:ASL Name.png and File:American Sign Language ASL.svg. Can you email me the files so that I can make free alternatives to replace them on Wikipedia? Thanks. Wugapodes (talk) 20:25, 25 November 2016 (UTC)

A free version of the whole alphabet is here. I think the easiest way is just to take the A, the S and the L from that set. Jcb (talk) 21:10, 25 November 2016 (UTC)

Hey guys. I've just done this with the WPclipart alphabet. See File:ASL Name.svg (note the SVG, the other version was a blurry white bg png) and File:American Sign Language ASL.svg. --Psiĥedelisto (talk) 10:06, 30 November 2016 (UTC)

Thanks! Jcb (talk) 16:13, 30 November 2016 (UTC)

CC-BY-4.0 Files of the Ministry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science and Technology

 Question Hi, Jcb! I uploaded this file from this website. Because this website is administrated by the Ministry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science and Technology of Japan. They says "This file is licensed under the Government of Japan Standard Terms of Use (Ver.2.0). The Terms of Use are compatible with the Creative Commons Attribution License 4.0 International". Then I uploaded this file and wrote the information (source, URL of the source, author, permission, URL of the license...) and used the template (GJSTU-2.0, LicenseReview, Personality rights, ...). But this file was deleted by Jcb. Could you tell me why you deleted this file ? --Scanyaro (talk) 00:07, 26 November 2016 (UTC)

The license was reviewed by a colleague, who marked it as 'failed'. Please request undeletion at COM:UDR. Somebody with knowledge of Japanese will have to look at this. Jcb (talk) 00:12, 26 November 2016 (UTC)

 Comment Oh, I see! Thanks. ... But I’d never had guessed. Didn't you check the source when you deleted this file? It is written in the source that "リンク・著作権について".... Didn't you check the file information (author, permission, URL of the license...) when you deleted this file? --Scanyaro (talk) 23:26, 26 November 2016 (UTC)

We delete about 2000 files a day with only a few admins, so the amount of research we can do for one file is limited. Jcb (talk) 23:31, 26 November 2016 (UTC)

See also

source and license

• source -> click "リンク・著作権について" -> 文部科学省ホームページへのリンク・著作権について -> click "文部科学省ウェブサイト利用規約" -> 文部科学省ウェブサイト利用規約

usage policy and terms of use

• Director-General of the Minister's Secretariat, 文部科学省ウェブサイト利用規約, Ministry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science and Technology, July 12, 2016. (English Version)
• Government of Japan Standard Terms of Use (Ver.2.0) (English Version)

village pump

• 日本の中央省庁がクリエイティブ・コモンズと互換性のあるライセンスで公開し始めているのですが
• ファイルを削除する場合、投稿者に連絡はこないのでしょうか

my breast photo

How come my breast photo was removed by you. Were they that bad Chick1555 (talk) 13:52, 26 November 2016 (UTC)

It was nominated for speedy deletion. I handled that nomination and agreed with it, after which I pressed the delete button. Jcb (talk) 15:43, 26 November 2016 (UTC)

Commons:Deletion requests/File:No result.jpg

Could you explain why you speedied this screenshot, if it is AutoWikiBrowser, license dunder the GNU General Public License? --Amitie 10g (talk) 17:57, 29 November 2016 (UTC)

The screenshot contained copyrighted software, like Microsoft Windows, and was eligible for speedy deletion for that reason. Jcb (talk) 22:07, 29 November 2016 (UTC)

What non-free elements? As I remember, it Does not contains any non-free elements (and there is broad consensus that the Windows window decoración is bellow the TOO), and, if it actually contains non-free elements, it can be easily cropped rather than making this disruptive, out of process deletion. --Amitie 10g (talk) 23:52, 30 November 2016 (UTC)

@Amitie 10g: , you have been warned several times, e.g. by @Storkk: , to refrain from such insulting language. Please be aware that sooner or later any admin may block you again if you don't stop this behaviour. Jcb (talk) 16:11, 1 December 2016 (UTC)

I apologize for my insulting language. Will You apologize for your bad administrative actions like this? --Amitie 10g (talk) 16:40, 1 December 2016 (UTC)

The deletion was not out of process and apparently I was right about the copyright issue, undeleting admin had to crop the copyrighted elements away. Jcb (talk) 16:42, 1 December 2016 (UTC)

Again, what non-free elements? Them has been already croped out (and it was the right solution, as it is de minimis).--Amitie 10g (talk) 11:54, 2 December 2016 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Admin's Barnstar
	I figured I'd be working my ass off with Fastily gone, but nope! It's good to have another admin who knows what he's doing to share the heavy work with. Have a good one Johan. Start saving up for that Christmas present you were planning on getting me... lNeverCry 10:57, 30 November 2016 (UTC)

• I second this. Great work Jcb! MCMLXXXIX 11:39, 30 November 2016 (UTC)
  • Thanks! Jcb (talk) 16:12, 30 November 2016 (UTC)

Update: Files undeleted by admin Srittau...Please confirm you received this

Hi Jcb,

I'm writing to give you an update on the images that I uploaded, which were deleted due to a misunderstood copyright issue. Please see the following page:

https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Deletion_requests/Files_uploaded_by_MilenaGlebova1989

Please note that I posted in the "Talk" section of the page above, stating that the images were properly attributed under: "Creative Commons Attribution-Sharealike 4.0". This was suggested by Clpo13, (https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Clpo13).

Since the images were deleted despite the proper attribution, I have gone ahead and requested undeletion of the files. It was granted by admin Srittau (https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Srittau).

Please feel free to contact the two admins listed above if you have any concerns about the photos in the future. If you have any other solutions, please be very specific, it would be very much appreciated.

MilenaGlebova1989 (talk) 22:47, 30 November 2016 (UTC)

Apparently you missed this comment yesterday at COM:UDR. Jcb (talk) 22:58, 30 November 2016 (UTC)

File:Fak u dolan.svg

Hi. You have deleted this image as a copyvio, although I had stated on the talk page, that I created it myself. Was any evidence presented, that "Cheezburger, Inc" owns the copyright? The copyright to what? Poorly drawn comic ducks in general? --Watchduck (quack) 17:48, 1 December 2016 (UTC)

Marked by Jonnymoon96 as copyvio, also out of scope. Jcb (talk) 18:54, 1 December 2016 (UTC)

Yes, someone claimed that it was copyvio, and I responded to that claim on the talk page. On that talk page were also the summaries of two regular deletion requests, where the result was keep. --Watchduck (quack) 20:26, 1 December 2016 (UTC)

Both of the times the DR was not handled. The first time because there were too many files in the DR, the second time because it was revoked by nominator. Jcb (talk) 21:34, 1 December 2016 (UTC)

AFAIK a small amount of Personal images is generally accepted. The point here is that the image was no copyvio. Feel free to make a regular DR after restoring it. --Watchduck (quack) 22:35, 1 December 2016 (UTC)

Again: You have deleted an image as a copyvio that was no copyvio. Please restore it and make a regular DR if you think it should not be here for a different reason. I think this is covered by "The uploading of small numbers of images (e.g. of yourself) for use on a personal user page..." (COM:Scope). Greetings, Watchduck (quack) 21:18, 6 December 2016 (UTC)

I am not considering undeletion. Please feel free to go to COM:UDR. Jcb (talk) 22:18, 6 December 2016 (UTC)

WRONG ERAZING - REVERTE IMAGES

I protest against your erazing of my images: you deleated 1) portrait photo of Josef Opitz at my article. I have copyright for it, I published it as illustration of my article (Dana Stehlíková: Josef Opitz v Národním muzeu 1941 - 1945, in: Josef Opitz a umění na Chomutovsku a Kadaňsku 1350–1590. Sborník, eds. Renáta Gubíková — Markéta Prontekerová, s. 55-84. ISBN: 978-80-87898-11-6., all other internet users copyied my photo, but it is only a detail from larger photo of halfigure. 2) Photo of Střešovický hřbitov, I made several photos of it, beceause I live near it, visit it, I fight for reconstruction of its surroundings. Everything is o.k., What do you know about it, about contents ? 3) Photo of Pražské slunce is my own, made legally. 4-6 others too Please, reverte it all! Thank you -- Dobroš (diskuse) 1. 12. 2016, 23:00 (CET) Template:01 December 2016 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dobroš (talk • contribs) 22:01, 01 December 2016 (UTC)

The ones I checked came from different sources. I have no trust that you are indeed the author of all those files. Jcb (talk) 22:07, 1 December 2016 (UTC)

Dear Jcb, Dobroš (Dr Dana Stehlíková) is a well known Czech artist and art historian with a long history of work for different media. Please be cautious and check all the deleted files carefully. Thank you,--Ioannes Pragensis (talk) 08:49, 2 December 2016 (UTC)

Just a question. Was there any OTRS process done in this case?--Juandev (talk) 17:00, 4 December 2016 (UTC)

I did not see a single OTRS received or OTRS completed tag. Jcb (talk) 18:45, 4 December 2016 (UTC)

OK, thx.--Juandev (talk) 23:58, 4 December 2016 (UTC)

Hi.

Please see [3]. They are the images you deleted earlier today. A representative of the company sent permission. MCMLXXXIX 00:56, 2 December 2016 (UTC)

 Processed - Jcb (talk) 01:04, 2 December 2016 (UTC)

Image

Can this be accepted? I don't think it's in scope, or relevant. I received a permission email for it. [4] MCMLXXXIX 01:49, 2 December 2016 (UTC)

I agree this is out of scope. An OTRS permission cannot prevent a file from being deleted for scope reasons. Jcb (talk) 08:26, 2 December 2016 (UTC)

Abu Ghraib images

I find it almost incredible that you deleted without any substantive comment two photographs that were tagged with the tag used on the famous images of the abuse at Abu Ghraib. Is it your position that CBS News, General Taguba, the U.S. Department of Justice, The New Yorker, the Secretary of Defense, Seymour Hersh, The Guardian, and the Judge Advocate Generals in 11 separate courts martial as well as their witnesses who testified under oath that the people who took those pictures were Department of Defense personnel, testimony that was accepted and used to convict and imprison soldiers, were all in some gigantic conspiracy, and that the images are in fact copyrighted material not created by the military? Are you going to delete all the rest of the pictures from Abu Ghraib? --Descendall (talk) 22:04, 2 December 2016 (UTC)

A PD USgov tag is only valid if the pictures were taken as a part of the official duties of the photographer. I see no evidence for that. Jcb (talk) 22:09, 2 December 2016 (UTC)

Images

Hi Jcb, Sorry to be a pain but is there any chance you could undelete the images at Commons:Deletion requests/Files uploaded by Drleonnorman so I can quickly save them & transfer them to EN please ?, (BTW thanks for deleting all of the D2 crap - I wanted to thank you everytime you deleted them but I figured that'd be annoying but anyway thank you :)), –Davey2010^Talk 02:59, 3 December 2016 (UTC)

@Davey2010:  Done - please let me know when you are ready. Jcb (talk) 17:10, 3 December 2016 (UTC)

Brilliant thanks - Both saved now, Thanks for that - Much appreciated :), –Davey2010^Talk 18:22, 3 December 2016 (UTC)

Images from SDSS

I don't understand because you deleted SDSS images (NGC3550-SDSS.jpg, IC1127-SDSS.gif, Teacup Galaxy - SDSS 1430+13.jpg, .....). Read this at: http://classic.sdss.org/gallery/usage_policy.html (Any SDSS image on the SDSS Web site may be downloaded, linked to, or otherwise used for non-commercial purposes, provided that you agree to the following conditions: You must maintain the image credits. Unless otherwise stated, images should be credited to the Sloan Digital Sky Survey Your use of the image cannot be construed as an endorsement of any product or service If the image is to be used on a Web page, we also ask as a courtesy that you provide a link back to our site at http://www.sdss3.org/.......)

Wikipedia is commercial or non-commercial?--Mylkomeda (talk) 10:55, 5 December 2016 (UTC)

Although Wikimedia/Wikipedia is non-commercial, we only accept images that could be used commercially. See COM:L for our license requirements. Jcb (talk) 16:31, 5 December 2016 (UTC)

Chapecoense

I guess you didn't read my comment. Best regards --Discasto _talk 00:05, 6 December 2016 (UTC)

I did read it, but I feel no obligation to hunt for comparable cases myself. Jcb (talk) 16:12, 6 December 2016 (UTC)

So you decided that a file was a copyright violation (fine) while, at the same time, you consciously left in commons the same copyright violation. Weird :-O --Discasto _talk 18:25, 6 December 2016 (UTC)

Commons:Deletion requests/File:Pablito Rodriguez.jpg

Hi, the closure of Commons:Deletion requests/File:Pablito Rodriguez.jpg only resulted in the deletion of the 2014 upload of the image, but my nomination called for the deletion of the file entirely. Can you give it another look? — ξ^xplicit 05:23, 6 December 2016 (UTC)

I misread the nomination, I did only look at the 2014 file. Fixed. Thanks for the notification. Jcb (talk) 16:14, 6 December 2016 (UTC)

Deletion requests/File:Principles of Lock-in detection.webm

Hi Johan, could you please review again the deletion of Commons:Deletion requests/File:Principles of Lock-in detection.webm? The production was meant for educational purposes, there is no better tutorial on this instrumentation available. Alternatively, would you suggest changes to the video that would then allow it to be published? Thanks! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kara A (talk • contribs) 11:01, 06 December 2016 (UTC)

There is no evidence this video was released into a compatible license by its copyright holder. Jcb (talk) 16:16, 6 December 2016 (UTC)

Hi! Thanks a lot for the feedback - was trying to find out how to make this upload work - could you please review, if this one is now ok [5]?

Yes, this is fine. For Youtube with CC license, we have a separate license template: {{YouTube CC-BY}}. I have added it to this file. Jcb (talk) 16:16, 8 December 2016 (UTC)

Undeletion request:Somme100 pics

Hi, can you review the deletion of the Somme100 pics I uploaded using Flick2Commons please. The pics came from Flickr and were in a public domain album. I wrongly assumed Flickr2Commons would add the correct license automatically but it seems it only added a temporary placeholder license until I could add a different license to indicate why the pics were public domain i.e. using Template:Pd author. As I realised this too late, all 294 images were deleted. If you could take a look, I'd appreciate it. Stinglehammer (talk) 22:53, 6 December 2016 (UTC)

Searching for them and undeletion of so many files would at least take two hours for me, which seems way out of proportion. You probably only spent a few minutes to get the files uploaded. Jcb (talk) 23:23, 6 December 2016 (UTC)

File:Education Minister Ng Chee Meng.jpg

Hi Jcb. Would you mind taking a look at File:Education Minister Ng Chee Meng.jpg when you get the chance? It seems to be a re-upload of a file you just deleted under the same name for lacking proper permission, but it might also be File:Min Ng Chee Meng - Wiki.jpg which you also deleted. -- Marchjuly (talk) 02:08, 7 December 2016 (UTC)

Deleted and uploader warned. Jcb (talk) 21:44, 7 December 2016 (UTC)

Thank you Jcb for checking these files. -- Marchjuly (talk) 22:40, 9 December 2016 (UTC)

Hi again Jcb. Same editor uplaoding the same File:Education Minister Ng Chee Meng.jpg without permission. -- Marchjuly (talk) 11:33, 22 December 2016 (UTC)

Deleted and blocked. The talk page of the uploader is at my watchlist, to make sure that any deletion nomination will attract my attention. Jcb (talk) 17:10, 22 December 2016 (UTC)

Thanks once again for your help with this. -- Marchjuly (talk) 00:01, 23 December 2016 (UTC)

Deleted File:Colts Patent Fire Arms 1945.jpg

What was the subject of the deleted image? A colt-share? I have canceld Cilt shares, may I place photos in WP? -- Hmaag (talk) 10:39, 8 December 2016 (UTC)

It looks like this file. To be honest, I'm afraid this wouldn't qualify for Fair Use. Jcb (talk) 16:20, 8 December 2016 (UTC)

Hasty delations again

Dear Jcb,

I do not understand why you have deleted the files as follows

• File:WidderFélixLeányáról, Magdáról készít portrét.jpg ‎(Missing permission as of 1 December 2016 - Using VisualFileChange.)
• File:WidderFélixBódog Festés közben.jpg ‎(Missing permission as of 1 December 2016 - Using VisualFileChange.)
• File:WidderFLeányával, Magdával a 30-as években a strandon.jpg ‎(Missing permission as of 1 December 2016 - Using VisualFileChange.)
• File:WidderFTerézkörúti műtermében a 30-as években.jpg ‎(Missing permission as of 1 December 2016 - Using VisualFileChange.)
• File:WidderFLeaányával, Magdával a Teréz körúti műteremben.jpg ‎(Missing permission as of 1 December 2016 - Using VisualFileChange.)
• File:WidderFleányával 1916-ban.jpg ‎(Missing permission as of 1 December 2016 - Using VisualFileChange.)
• File:WidderF1971-es kiállításának kapuja előtt lánya, Vihar Béláné (akkori Nemzeti Galéria, ma Néprajzi Múzeum) épülete.jpg ‎(Missing permission as of 1 December 2016 - Using VisualFileChange.)
• File:WidderFfeleségével és leányával 1916-ban.jpg ‎(Missing permission as of 1 December 2016 - Using VisualFileChange.)
• File:ViharBelaNemesNagyÁgnessel.1972.jpg ‎(Missing permission as of 1 December 2016 - Using VisualFileChange.)
• File:ViharBelaésJudit1965-ben.jpg ‎(Missing permission as of 1 December 2016 - Using VisualFileChange.)
• File:ViharBelaCsoóriSándor.IllyésGyula.PierreEmmanuel.SimonIstván.NagyLászló.Fészek70-esévek.jpg ‎(Missing permission as of 1 December 2016 - Using VisualFileChange.)
• File:ViharBelaaz ifjúköltő.jpg ‎(Missing permission as of 1 December 2016 - Using VisualFileChange.)
• File:ViharBela5évesen1913.jpg ‎(Missing permission as of 1 December 2016 - Using VisualFileChange.)
• File:ViharBelaAMalomutca.darabfelvétela rádióbanBéresIlona.DomjánEdit.GombosKati.SinkovitsImre1972.jpg ‎(Missing permission as of 1 December 2016 - Using VisualFileChange.)
• File:Vihar Judi es Óe KenzaburóBp-en 1997-ben.jpg (Missing permission as of 1 December 2016 - Using VisualFileChange.)

and I do not understand the motivation "Missing permission". An e-mail has been being processed in progress which has been sent by the copyright holder, Prof. Dr. Judit Vihar who unfortunately lost her husband early in October and is now mourning him, therefore she may have sent the permission with little delay but the confirmation has arrived about the delivery of the permission e-mail. I think your decision was a little bit hasty and ain't prudent and it can be a little bit rough for a woman in her grief. I know the files can be restored easily, so I would like to ask you for restoring these files without delay. I know and you also know that the OTRS procedures are little bit slow because volunteers do the tasks but if you are aware of that fact why you do delate so fast and hastily. Be attentive and polite to a mourning widow. You also delated Ms. Flóra Kádár's photos hastily in October but fortunately the files got be restored so I was right and the photos can have used legally by Wikipedia. Thank you for your kind attention. Best regards Borgatya (talk) 15:55, 9 December 2016 (UTC)

The files will be restored by the processing OTRS volunteer if they find the permission valid. The deletion was not hasty, it was exactly according to our established process. Jcb (talk) 16:01, 9 December 2016 (UTC)

File "Duplication de l'ADN" requête de suppression

Je ne parle pas anglais et le comprends très mal. Désolé !

Le fichier "Duplication de l'ADN" sur Commons a été créé pour servir d'illustration à une explication dans la leçon de la Wikiuniversité "Acides nucléiques" lors de sa création comme rédacteur.

Je ne trouve pas les causes qui vous amène à vouloir le supprimer ou parce qu'elles sont décrites en anglais, je ne les repère pas.

Ce fichier créé par moi, mis en utilisation gratuite et sans restriction, fait partie et est indispensable à la leçon "Acides nucléiques" de la Wikiuniversité. Le faire disparaître de Commons, c'est le faire disparaître de la leçon en regard de l'explication illustrée par lui : la leçon devient alors inutile. Voulez aussi supprimer cette leçon ?

En tant qu'administrateur vous pouvez modifier dans Commons ses caractéristiques mais ne pas la supprimer. La relecture du fichier "Duplication de l'ADN", ne me permet pas de voir quel est le problème !

Cordialement. H'arnet (talk)

Je ne trouve pas le fichier. Pouvez-vous me donner le nom de fichier, donc je peux regarder? (Je comprends français un peu) Jcb (talk) 16:35, 10 December 2016 (UTC)

Bonjour,

File:Schéma duplication de l'ADN.png

Voilà, le fichier concerné.

Cordialement. H'arnet (talk)

Merci pour le nom du fichier. Vous ne spécifiez pas l'information de l'auteur lorsque vous l'avez téléchargé. Je l'ai corrigé. Jcb (talk) 16:51, 15 December 2016 (UTC)

Repeat offender

Hi.

Do you remember the File:Internet Explorer 11.png which you deleted for copyright violation? Well, the same uploader has uploaded it again, repeating the violation.

Maybe a carefully worded warning from an admin is needed?

Best regards,
Codename Lisa (talk) 10:02, 10 December 2016 (UTC)

 Done - I also put the talk page on my watchlist, in order to block them if they continue. Jcb (talk) 16:37, 10 December 2016 (UTC)

File:Fie Laursen.jpg

Did you check in OTRS? --Palnatoke (talk) 01:00, 11 December 2016 (UTC)

Hi, please use the 'Permission OTRS' link from the left menu next time instead of manually adding some tag. (Enable it in your gadgets if you don't have such a link). If a file remains tagged with {no permission}, it will probably still be deleted 7 days after tagging. Using the correct script will prevent such a deletion. Jcb (talk) 01:12, 11 December 2016 (UTC)

I'll try that. --Palnatoke (talk) 01:41, 11 December 2016 (UTC)

Mannequin Challenge

I have uploaded an audio-less video, and will upload the audio in a separate file. This will give people the chance to mix diff audios into the video. Still, IMO, the file should have not been deleted, I would have gone with "a request for the audio source" approach. If I was a new user, deleting the file might drive me away. --Tarawneh (talk) 09:26, 11 December 2016 (UTC)

I'm sorry, but without any link I don't know what you are talking about. I handle hundreds of files every day. Jcb (talk) 22:18, 11 December 2016 (UTC)

Deletion requests/File:Kazakstan Nuclear power plants map.png

Hi Jcb, I have seen your deletion request Files from ANL are in commun use in nuclear industry pages :

   - https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Lithuania_Nuclear_power_plants_map.png
   - https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Mexico_Nuclear_power_plants_map.gif?uselang=fr
   - https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Pakistan_Nuclear_power_plants_map.png?uselang=fr
   - https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Taiwan_Nuclear_power_plants_map.png?uselang=fr

Are you sure you want to delete all of them ? Is there any discussion about it ?

Regards --Jeshortdi (talk) 13:34, 12 December 2016 (UTC)

I will have a look at the other files. Jcb (talk) 16:26, 12 December 2016 (UTC)

Commons:Deletion requests/Files uploaded by Gyebnr123

Gyebnár István sent a message to OTRS about the files mentioned in the DR above. I thought it'd be appropriate if you handled it. [6] MCMLXXXIX 00:08, 13 December 2016 (UTC)

Thanks for the notification. At this moment, it's a 'Wikipedia only' permission. I have sent a response with explanation. Jcb (talk) 16:14, 13 December 2016 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Copyright Watcher Barnstar
	famous at zh.wikipedia's recent change :p Kegns (talk) 16:44, 13 December 2016 (UTC)

Thank you! Jcb (talk) 16:46, 13 December 2016 (UTC)

File:Vitrail de Kim En Joong.jpg...

Hi.

I didn't use "Speedy delete", I used "Signaler une contravention au droit d’auteur" in the left menu of the file. If the link doesn't work correctly it's not my fault and that's the same if the template writes (in French for me) «Ce fichier viole des droits d'auteurs parce qu'il n'est pas publié sous une licence libre.»... It's a copyvio case, not a licence one, as template says. I used it for 3 files presenting 3 artworks of Kim En Joong (still alive).

I guess you're not supposed to delete the request but to turn it as it should be. I'll talk about that on French Bistro in a few and ping you. Something is not clear.

-- LW² \m/ ^{(Lie ² me...)} 22:40, 13 December 2016 (UTC)

You have to use 'proposer la suppression' instead. As an admin, I can decline a nomination for speedy deletion. 'Copyvio' is one of our speedy deletion procedures. Jcb (talk) 22:45, 13 December 2016 (UTC)

So, why does "Signaler une contravention au droit d’auteur" gives «Ce fichier viole des droits d'auteurs parce qu'il n'est pas publié sous une licence libre.» if there's "Pas de source", "Pas de permission" AND "Pas de licence" options in this left menu? And I didn't ask for a deletion, I just wanted to report a copyvio not a lack of licence (there is a licence, may be not the good one, but there is one). I hope I'll have clearer informations in French t obe sure to understand what's about because English is not my best language... -- LW² \m/ ^{(Lie ² me...)} 23:25, 13 December 2016 (UTC)

We use 'copyvio' only if a picture itself is stolen from somewhere. Cases where a depicted object may cause a copyright problem are considered too complex for speedy deletion and need a regular DR. Jcb (talk) 23:38, 13 December 2016 (UTC)

Global usage

Hi Jcb, thanks for prompt del, unfortunately I was not fast enough to replace it on some other wikis with File:CND badge, 1960s.jpg. How can I find the global usage for a deleted file (First peace badge.jpg)? --.js 22:24, 14 December 2016 (UTC)

See here. Jcb (talk) 22:30, 14 December 2016 (UTC)

CND badge

Hello. The image you deleted had a creative commons licence on the deviant art website permitting not for profit use. I communicated with the image owner, Gea Austen, before uploading it and she was actually very keen for it to be shared. Pelarmian (talk)

We do not accept 'non-commercial' restrictions. See COM:L for our license policy. Jcb (talk) 23:32, 14 December 2016 (UTC)

File:Herrnhuter Moravians.png

Hi, you deleted the file. I had been pointed by user:Steinsplitter to the need to send the assent of the creator to OTRS (permissions-commons@wikimedia.org) and did this. Steinsplitter communicated with me about that and was satisfied with my explanation. Would you mind telling why you delete without communication? Kipala (talk) 13:13, 16 December 2016 (UTC)

Our procedure is that we delete such a file anyway if there is not yet an OTRS ticket in progress. An OTRS agent will be able to undelete the file if a valid copyright situation is established. Please be aware that we have a backlog at OTRS, it may take some time. Jcb (talk) 13:40, 16 December 2016 (UTC)

Need your help!

Hiya Jcb: I was in the middle of saving a file from deletion when you deleted it. Now all that's left is the template info, and I can't get back to the image even to reupload it!! File:Nernst horseback.jpg is the name of the file, we must have just had edit conflict 2 minutes ago! So sorry, but this image is clearly public domain, published before 1915 with a good source and of a notable figure. Cheers! Ellin Beltz (talk) 16:34, 19 December 2016 (UTC)

 Done - Jcb (talk) 16:36, 19 December 2016 (UTC)

Thanks!! Ellin Beltz (talk) 17:10, 19 December 2016 (UTC)

File:Nikolaev commune 2008 stairs 01.jpg

Why the hell did you delete this file? Where is copyright violation? This is a clear abuse of administrative tools. Please restore immediately. If you have any doubts, FFD is at your service. If you need any explanations about freedom of panorama in Russia, you could have asked me before deleting.--Ymblanter (talk) 18:28, 19 December 2016 (UTC)

By leaving the file with {{Do not move to Commons}} on it, you left it nominated for speedy deletion. In the four hours that followed, you didn't do anything about this. If you are so careless that you do not even look at what you uploaded, then do not expect me to spend time to clean up the mess you create. Jcb (talk) 21:12, 19 December 2016 (UTC)

Undeletion request filed, the desysop discussion will be started tomorrow.--Ymblanter (talk) 21:46, 19 December 2016 (UTC)

You don't think people start making fun of you if you start a desysop request for 1 deletion, caused by your own mistake? Jcb (talk) 21:49, 19 December 2016 (UTC)

We will see tomorrow.--Ymblanter (talk) 21:50, 19 December 2016 (UTC)

Here we are, to start with.--Ymblanter (talk) 08:39, 20 December 2016 (UTC)

{{Not-PD-US-URAA}}

At Commons:Deletion requests/Files in Category:Meyers Blitz-Lexikon 2, you said "we don't do URAA deletions. Period." I didn't think that was the case per my nomination statement, but I trust you. I probably missed a discussion somewhere. If that is the case, then the fully-protected {{Not-PD-US-URAA}} needs to be updated to remove the following text: "A review of files is currently underway to verify that this template has been applied correctly to existing files. Files that are copyrighted in the US and that have not been released under a free license will be deleted." Thanks, Ramaksoud2000 ^{(Talk to me)} 00:30, 21 December 2016 (UTC)

I think you missed this one: Commons:Massive restoration of deleted images by the URAA - Jcb (talk) 00:34, 21 December 2016 (UTC)

Thanks for responding so quickly. I was aware of that one, but as mentioned in the nomination statement, Commons:Review of Precautionary principle occurred after, and the close indicated that there is no consensus to host files affected by the URAA. The quote that I quoted was

Given that there are many problems with the way in which the URAA discussion was closed, and given the fact this discussion was originally initiated as a means of resolving the incompatibility between the precautionary principle and the outcome of the URAA discussion, and the fact that the precautionary principle is an official Commons policy, it is my understanding that at this time there is no community agreement to host files affected by the URAA.

Ramaksoud2000 ^{(Talk to me)} 00:58, 21 December 2016 (UTC)

However, if you don't believe that is relevant, then the template needs to be updated. There is an incompatibility between your interpretation and the template. Ramaksoud2000 ^{(Talk to me)} 01:01, 21 December 2016 (UTC)

Hi Ramaksoud2000, There is no consensus about what to do with these files. But all DRs about URAA in 2016 were closed as Kept. That is a kind of status quo we have now. Each new year, many new files are affected. Obviously it would be better than the template reflects the actual situation, but I don't see anyone willing to touch this issue even with a 10-foot pole... Regards, Yann (talk) 14:06, 21 December 2016 (UTC)

I see. Thanks for letting me know. I will look into it. Ramaksoud2000 ^{(Talk to me)} 14:32, 21 December 2016 (UTC)

Media without a license: needs history check

Hi, I noticed that you restored files such as File:Nő orchideával.jpg.jpg, but there is nothing on that page. Did I miss something? Regards, Yann (talk) 17:49, 21 December 2016 (UTC)

For most of the files in Commons:Deletion requests/Files uploaded by Gyebnr123 a redirect to the (renamed) file was nominated instead of the real file. When the OTRS ticket came in, I restored the files from the links in the email message, only to find out that most of the restored pages were redirects to still deleted files. I then undeleted the files and left the undeleted redirects online, mainly because deletion of redirects is sometimes considered controversial and I thought they wouldn't harm. Jcb (talk) 21:53, 21 December 2016 (UTC)

Very well, but what about the category "Media without a license: needs history check" and "Media missing infobox template"? Regards, Yann (talk) 22:57, 22 December 2016 (UTC)

I see. Both categories were placed by a bot. I think this bot normally skips redirects, but the page was probably no longer recognized as a redirect, because MKFI nominated it for deletion (instead of the file itself). I removed the categories. Jcb (talk) 23:05, 22 December 2016 (UTC)

Merry Christmas

	Merry Christmas Jcb/archive!!
	Hi Jcb/archive, I wish you and your family a very Merry Christmas and a very Happy New Year, Thanks for all your help on Commons!    –Davey2010 Merry Xmas / Happy New Year 21:13, 21 December 2016 (UTC)

Thank you! Jcb (talk) 21:53, 21 December 2016 (UTC)

Fixing bad uploads from CommonsHelper

Hi. Please don't do this. It prevents my cleanup bot from recognize the botched transfer from CommonsHelper and performing its own cleanup. Alternatively, you could use my cleanup script on it. Thanks. Magog the Ogre (talk) (contribs) 00:16, 23 December 2016 (UTC)

Magog the Ogre, what else can I do to exclude them from Category:Images without source? One more factor slowing down the handling of this cat will make that I would no longer be able to handle the files fast enough to decrease the backlog. Is the '}}' error there on purpose? If so, could you replace it by something else that doesn't pollute this maintenance category? Jcb (talk) 00:29, 23 December 2016 (UTC)

It isn't a feature, it's a bug in CommonsHelper, and unfortunately the bot maintainer isn't doing much anything about it (thought we had contacted him about this, my fault). If I had time I would write my own bot to replace it, but I don't have time for now. Anyway, you can run toollabs:magog/cleanup_multi.php over the category. Magog the Ogre (talk) (contribs) 21:18, 23 December 2016 (UTC)

I'm sorry, but this is undoable. I come accross many errors of this type and most of them have been there for years. If I come accross such an error, I will just fix it. Jcb (talk) 22:00, 23 December 2016 (UTC)

But you're not fixing it. The page is still utterly broken for templates. Magog the Ogre (talk) (contribs) 00:27, 24 December 2016 (UTC)

When I started working on this maintenance cat, I could decrease it with about 2000 files a month. Since then, some of our known nett negative querulants have done everything to disturb the maintenance work, by undoing my edits, by posting ridiculous keep votes in DRs to which I had to respond in order to prevent a keep closure by a still-half-asleep colleague, by overflowing the noticeboards with double posted uninformed complaints, etc. Now we have reached the point that this cat has increased the past month, although I have spent many hours on it. And then you come with a request that would slow down the work significantly again, because I would have to monitor all files with this error to see if your maintenance bot would fix it (which won't happen in most cases, most files have been around with this error for years), or I would have to spent time on using some script I don't understand. I don't want to disturb your work, but what you are asking me would seem the last step to really make this necessary maintenance work undoable. Jcb (talk) 00:44, 24 December 2016 (UTC)

My bot will fix it after 24-48 hours anyway. Can you just wait to fix the files or is that too difficult? Magog the Ogre (talk) (contribs) 03:35, 24 December 2016 (UTC)

There is no way for me to know whether your bot will fix the file or not. I come accross lots of files where the error already exists way more than 48 hours. If I have to keep track of all files with this specific error for 48 hours, then I will be monitoring about 25 files at any time only for this aspect. I'm sorry, but I can't manage that. Jcb (talk) 08:52, 24 December 2016 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

Thank you! Jcb (talk) 02:01, 23 December 2016 (UTC)

File:Falla_Nou_Campanar_2007.jpg

Why did you delete this file? FoP in Spain applies.--TaronjaSatsuma (talk) 12:40, 23 December 2016 (UTC)

It got deleted when deleting a mass copyvio upload. The first version was a copyvio. Something went wrong, this file should not have been affected by the deletion. I have restored it. Thanks for the notification. Jcb (talk) 13:41, 23 December 2016 (UTC)

Nice. Thanks.--TaronjaSatsuma (talk) 15:58, 23 December 2016 (UTC)

review: Libre art music score file

Hi, You have deleted the Márton Bujdosó's Libre art music score file, which is uploaded, OTRS-permitted, signed etc by the original music of the Author, Hungarian composer, Mr. Márton Bujdosó. It was a big mistake, please review the discussion and undelete it: (https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Deletion_requests/File:...read_the_unshapeable_shock_night..._%28Gerard_Manley_Hopkins%29.pdf) SZERVÁC Attila (talk)

Apart from the fact that there was no OTRS verification, OTRS is only about permission/copyright. This file was deleted for being out of scope. Jcb (talk) 22:34, 23 December 2016 (UTC)

Hello :) This file is not out of scope, because this work illustrated the composer, Mr. Márton Bujdosó article on Hungarian Wikipedia:

https://hu.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bujdos%C3%B3_M%C3%A1rton

and he also sent an OTRS-permission email to permission-commons@wikimedia.org SZERVÁC Attila (talk) 22:47, 23 December 2016 (UTC)

The file was judged to be out of scope by Ellin Beltz and deleted. Then you reuploaded the file out of procedure, after which I judged the file to be out of scope. OTRS will not permit you to upload out of scope files. Jcb (talk) 22:53, 23 December 2016 (UTC)

Files illustrated a Wikimedia Article about a composer are not out of scope IMHO:

The aim of Wikimedia Commons is to provide a media file repository:

that makes available public domain and freely-licensed educational media content to all, and

that acts as a common repository for the various projects of the Wikimedia Foundation.

The expression "educational" is to be understood according to its broad meaning of "providing knowledge; instructional or informative".

Am I right? Restore it, please :) SZERVÁC Attila (talk) 23:00, 23 December 2016 (UTC)

I have reviewed the various diffs on the file. There was no COM:OTRS from a composer, it was a handwritten copy claimed as "own work" |source={{own}} |author=[[User:BUJDOSÓ Márton|BUJDOSÓ Márton]]. So if it's by the notable in the wiki article, we'd need COM:OTRS to retain because the uploader is not the composer. But it was claimed as "own by SZERVÁC Attila" who is in this photo https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:434Ahad.png (according to the photo caption at https://hu.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bujdos%C3%B3_M%C3%A1rton). This shows two separate people. So the handwritten pdf score of music was not the own work of the uploader, because it was a musical piece attributed to Márton Bujdosó, handwritten by the uploader and that is - like I said in the deletion close, like someone drawing a copyrighted work of art and uploading it as "own work". We can't keep it. I would oppose undeletion without clarification and OTRS from Mr. Bujdoso who may have written the work - and may or may not have handwritten the copy we had of it. I do not find any indication that OTRS was received for this pdf file. Ellin Beltz (talk) 03:06, 24 December 2016 (UTC)

So: The .ogg file is IN SCOPE of the Wikimedia. Right. (BTW: Manning was a poet, the Composer is Mr. Márton Bujdosó). Well, right. 2: As I remember The Original Author: Mr. Márton Bujdosó uploaded this 2 files and sent an OTRS permission on nov25/26 So this is clarification and OTRS from Mr Bujdoso as You want. Please, restore it, thank You very much! :) :) SZERVÁC Attila (talk) 05:39, 24 December 2016 (UTC)

Re:'disruptive'

Yes, I already warned and I know that. But, you has also been questionated to tag everything without a valid source, without providing proof of copyvio (and this includes two files used in hundred of pages), even files with a valid source. I'm not harrassing you, I'm just telling what I'm thinking about your actions (including administrative ones), and I'm not the only who agree that some of your recent actions are disruptive, or at least, unproductive. --Amitie 10g (talk) 23:09, 23 December 2016 (UTC)

Merry Christmas!

	Merry Christmas, Jcb/archive!
	Hi Jcb/archive, although we have disagreements in the past, I would like to thank you for all your valuable contributions on Commons. This help fulfill the number 1 goal of Commons: To be a free, educational media repository for everyone. I wish you and your family a merry Christmas and a happy new year.    ★ Poké95 01:09, 24 December 2016 (UTC)

Thank you! Jcb (talk) 01:14, 24 December 2016 (UTC)

Sleutelhangers en pins

Hoi Jcb, Bedankt voor de heads up. Ik heb een antwoord in het Engels geschreven over de sleutelhangers en pins. Ik zal de komende dagen de acties van jullie afwachten en met uploaden en fotograferen van sleutelhangers stoppen tot er meer duidelijkheid is. Zoals daar beschreven is mijn enige doel om (wat ik denk) zinnige content toe te voegen aan commons om deze te verrijken. Groetjes en prettig dagen, Alfvanbeem (talk) 08:51, 24 December 2016 (UTC)

Prima. Jij ook fijne feestdagen gewenst! Jcb (talk) 22:01, 24 December 2016 (UTC)

File:Kerry_Blue_Terrier.jpg

Hello Jcb, where teure any deletion discussion about this photo? I'm asking, because I'm the einer of the rights. THX a Lot & nice Xmas! hilarmont \\ talk, talk, talk 10:50, 24 December 2016 (UTC)

It got somehow deleted by mistake when deleting an earlier mass copyvio. I have restored the file. Thanks for the notificiation. Jcb (talk) 16:10, 24 December 2016 (UTC)

Best Wishes!

Best Wishes, Jcb/archive! Hi Jcb/archive, I wish you all the best for the Holidays and a Happy New Year 2017. Yann (talk) 18:57, 24 December 2016 (UTC)

Thank you! Jcb (talk) 22:00, 24 December 2016 (UTC)

Category:Bangkok Hospital

Hi. The reason I requested deletion of Category:Bangkok Hospital was that I had renamed it to Category:Hospitals in Bangkok due to a misunderstanding of its original scope. What I plan to do is have the new Category:Bangkok Hospital page deleted, so that Category:Hospitals in Bangkok can be moved back there. The new Category:Hospitals in Bangkok can then become the container cat. I admit that this changes nothing practically, but I wanted the edit history to reflect the original authors' intention. --Paul_012 (talk) 20:29, 25 December 2016 (UTC)

If you want to use a speedy deletion tag, please make sure the cat is empty. If you want something more complex to be done, please ask at the Administrators'_noticeboard and somebody will help you. Jcb (talk) 20:55, 25 December 2016 (UTC)

File:Siddaramaiah.jpg and File:Siddaramaiah1.jpg

You deleted the file File:Siddaramaiah.jpg because it was a copyright violation of http://www.newskannada.in/wp-content/uploads/2015/07/Siddaramaiah.jpg. This link is not opening for me, but its URL tells me that it was uploaded in 2015, while File:Siddaramaiah.jpg has been on Commons since 2013. Therefore I think you should restore File:Siddaramaiah.jpg and its derivative File:Siddaramaiah1.jpg. Indopug (talk) 03:58, 26 December 2016 (UTC)

I see, I have restored the files. Thanks for the notification. Jcb (talk) 12:00, 26 December 2016 (UTC)

Thank you! Couple more things: could you delete the old versions of File:Siddaramaiah.jpg, those are definitely copyvios. And could you restore the derivatives File:Siddaramaiah (cropped).jpg and File:Siddaramaiah at a rally.jpg? Indopug (talk) 03:56, 27 December 2016 (UTC)

 Done - Jcb (talk) 11:08, 27 December 2016 (UTC)

Deleted file/image in spite of arguments?

Yesterday you deleted the file Umeå_gamla_brandstation.jpg, which I uploaded with the photographers permission about a week ago. It puzzles me, since there is an ongoing discussion at my Talk page: User_talk:Mickeno where I have done my best to explain and provide necessary information and code – but still has not received a proper answer. Isn't {{PD-Sweden-1969}} enough to put the file in the public domain? Or do I need to provide a tag like this, which is also completely correct (the image was first published outside the US before 1 March 1989 (without copyright notice), was not published in the US within 30 days, and was in the public domain in Sweden before the URAA date. {{PD-1996|se|January 1, 1996|author's permission}} -- Mickeno (talk) 10:59, 26 December 2016 (UTC)

It had no license template on it. If this is not fixed within a week after upload, we always delete the file. If you have adequat information to fix the situation, please feel free to bring it to our undeletion request page. Jcb (talk) 12:03, 26 December 2016 (UTC)

Awesomeman5555

Hi Jcb. Would you mind taking a look at the comments posted at User talk:Awesomeman5555#File:Hit1049border.png and User talk:Awesomeman5555#File tagging File:TheBorders Hit1049 logo.png? Maybe you can think of a better way than me to help explain COM:L to this editor because they seem to be having problems. Thanks in advance. -- Marchjuly (talk) 02:46, 27 December 2016 (UTC)

 Done - Jcb (talk) 11:04, 27 December 2016 (UTC)

Thank you Jcb. -- Marchjuly (talk) 00:15, 28 December 2016 (UTC)

My talk page

According to official policy I can request deletion of my talk page. Why you reverting this? [7] --Ragimiri 13:41, 27 December 2016 (UTC)

Yes, in case of renaming of your account, you can request speedy deletion of the old user talk page (which will be a redirect to your new user talk page, generated at the moment of renaming) - Jcb (talk) 13:47, 27 December 2016 (UTC)

Revdel

Hi Jcb, Hope all is well, Could you possibly do me a favour please ?, Could you revdel this if possible please?,
Unfortunately I was pretty angry with the editor and without thinking I said the above in the heat of the moment and it's something I honestly regret saying so I was wondering if it could be revdelled,
It goes without saying I shan't use that word again,
Anyway I hope you had a great Xmas :), Thanks, –Davey2010^Talk 22:56, 27 December 2016 (UTC)

 Done - Jcb (talk) 22:59, 27 December 2016 (UTC)

Brilliant thank you so much!, –Davey2010^Talk 23:54, 27 December 2016 (UTC)

Barbara Parker politician page

Dear JCB, Barbara Parker is my boss. I'm her Chief of Staff. I'm trying to upload photos to her page, and it looks like you're deleting them for some reason. All photos on this page belong to us. There is no copyright violation. I don't care if anyone else uses these photos. Please restore the photos. Alex Katz — Preceding unsigned comment added by Triceratops2016 (talk • contribs) 00:20, 28 December 2016 (UTC)

Please ask the copyright holder (the photographer, not the depicted person) to contact OTRS - Jcb (talk) 00:28, 28 December 2016 (UTC)

I have

extended the block for Htoo htoo (talk · contribs) to indef, the sockmaster just finished knitting another one, Kyi linn (talk · contribs). I assumed you don't mind being steamrollered by me. --Hedwig in Washington ^(mail?) 07:34, 28 December 2016 (UTC)

No problem! Jcb (talk) 10:53, 28 December 2016 (UTC)

poster images

Dear JCB, I am a Portuguese film director and I have been trying to fill the gaps of information about my movies on wikipedia but I have found myself trapped in a copyright problem that honestly I cannot understand. I am not violating any copyright law since the information and pictures I have uploaded are from my films and about my films. I personally supervise every article and photo upload and I guarantee you that they are all free of use. Can you please tell me what do I have to do to get these deletions canceled, please. I am currently using username Ba3499 And I am hereby sending you the link with the files I am writing about https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Ba3499?markasread=4106656#File:Operation_Autumn_by_Bruno_de_Almeida.jpg I am looking forward to hearing from you as soon as possible. Best regards

Please contact OTRS. Jcb (talk) 15:36, 28 December 2016 (UTC)

File:Romero 3designers.jpg

Hey Jcb, File:Romero 3designers.jpg was deleted as "missing source" but the file was listed as the uploader's own work. Wanted to see what your thought here was czar 21:09, 28 December 2016 (UTC)

The file seems to have a permission problem rather than a source problem. The uploader is apparently one of the depicted people. So it is not own work and the photographer is not mentioned. Jcb (talk) 22:40, 28 December 2016 (UTC)

Right, but shouldn't permission problems go to discussion? Could have been tripod, work for hire, etc. czar 01:12, 29 December 2016 (UTC)

I think the notification to the uploader is sufficient. The uploader is the only one who can explain the situation. In my experience with depicted people listing themselves as the photographer about 99% just does not have a clue at all about copyright. Many people think that they are the copyright holder of any picture depicting them. Jcb (talk) 01:51, 29 December 2016 (UTC)

File:BJP 1970s unknown date.jpg

Hello Jcb. Just to let you know, the image at File:BJP 1970s unknown date.jpg, which you deleted, has a related OTRS ticket here: ticket:2016122810000387. Mz7 (talk) 06:26, 29 December 2016 (UTC)

Thanks for the notification. The ticket seems invalid for them moment, I have sent a response. Jcb (talk) 09:06, 29 December 2016 (UTC)

Re:Speedy deletion requests

Español: Hola Jcb. Un placer hablar contigo.
Estoy en desacuerdo. Las botellas de cerveza son el motivo principal de esas fotografías. Su aparición en la imagen no es casual, ni accidental, ni mínima. La aparición de las botellas (y sus etiquetas) es intencionada. Las botellas son el objetivo del fotógrago. Son obras derivadas y son violaciones de copyright evidentes.
En todo caso, si tu consideras que es más apropiado hacer un DR, debes transformar el aviso de copyvio en un DR, no desacer mi edición sin más. No debes dejar el fichero como estaba.
Por mi parte, no te preocupes, voy a dejar de revisar esos ficheros. Te lo dejo a ti.
Gracias. Un saludo. --. HombreDHojalata.^talk 09:22, 29 December 2016 (UTC)

Una botella es un objeto de use. Tenemos que considerar caso por caso. Por ejemplo los imágenes en la botella pueden ser de minimis. Demandamos un DR normal en este tipo de casos. Jcb (talk) 09:30, 29 December 2016 (UTC)

Por los motivos que ya te he explicado, en los casos que he marcado "copyvio" es sumamente evidente que no es de aplicación de mínimis. Las etiquetas ocupan la parte central de la imagen. Las botellas son el objetívo intencionado de la imagen y ocupan la mayor parte de la imagen. Las imagenes, de gran resolución, incluyen las etiquetas. Las etiquetas son obras de unos autores que tienen unos derechos. Argumentar, por tu parte, que podría ser de aplicación de minimis me parece un absurdo. La aparición de las etiquetas no es mínima, ni accidental, ni casual, ni inevitable. De minimis (por favor, léase) no puede ser de aplicación en estos casos, pero me parece que eso tú ya lo sabes.

En todo caso. Como ya he dicho. Desacer mi edición, sin más, no soluciona el problema. Si consideras que no son de borrado rápido y prefieres una evaluación lenta, caso por caso, deberías transformar el aviso de copyvio en una propuesta de borrado y no desacer mi edición sin más. Eso no soluciona nada y el problema persiste. Y es evidente que hay un problema, porque casi todas las fotografías especifican {own} y {CC-BY-SA}, cuando, en realidad, son obras derivadas, y eso no consta en ninguna parte. Como sabes, hay que especificar, quién es el autor de la obra original, qué licencia tiene, cuándo se publicó por primera vez... etc, y todo eso corresponde en primer lugar al usuario que cargó la imagen. En caso contrario y por principio de precaución, las imágenes deben ser imediatamente borradas. --. HombreDHojalata.^talk 10:27, 29 December 2016 (UTC)

En mi expericiencia, si yo hago las transformaciones, el usuario no va a cambiar su manera de marcar y yo voy a tener que continuar corrigirlo para siempre. Jcb (talk) 10:35, 29 December 2016 (UTC)

Bienvenido al club. En mi experiencia, si tu simplemente desaces lo que yo hago (cuando es evidente que hay un problema), el problema persiste, yo me frustro y tu le haces un flaco favor al proyecto. Si no quieres asumir un trabajo, deja que lo haga otro, pero no desagas lo que es correcto por evitarte a ti mismo presuntas labores futuras. Y sí, yo no voy a cambiar mi manera de actuar. Cuando considere que hay violación de copyright evidente (según las políticas del proyecto), marcaré como copyvio y un administrador debería evaluar. Borrará, pasará a propuesta o rechazará el borrado por un motivo razonado, pero no desará sin más, creo. Si tú no quieres asumir ese trabajo, deja que lo haga otro. Hay más administradores.

Happy new year. --. HombreDHojalata.^talk 11:11, 29 December 2016 (UTC)

Si tu no quieres seguir las reglas de Wikimedia Commons, nosotros vamos a encontrar manera para tratar con eso. Tú eres el problema en este caso. darkweasel94 esta esplicando el mismo en Commons:Deletion requests/File:2012 Wien 0222 (8102862417).jpg. Jcb (talk) 11:23, 29 December 2016 (UTC)

Si realmente crees que soy yo el que no sigo las reglas y que yo soy el problema, no hay nada más que discutir. Un saludo. --. HombreDHojalata.^talk 11:40, 29 December 2016 (UTC)

Arnaud Courlet de Vregille

Hello Jcb, as I told to Lutheraner in his page, every pictures about Arnaud Courlet de Vregille are under WikiCommon licence (pseudo "Drapé"). Please can you restore them ? Thank you very much.

--Drapé (talk) 10:00, 29 December 2016 (UTC)

Please provide evidence of permission via OTRS. Jcb (talk) 10:02, 29 December 2016 (UTC)

File:AGSS-555Dolphin.jpg

Dear Jcb, could you be so kind and explain to me why you write messages on my talk page about images of which I am neither an author nor I have uploaded them? Thanks in advance for your answer! --Roberta F. (talk) 12:18, 29 December 2016 (UTC)

I have no idea. These notifications are being placed automatically by the nomination script. Could it be possible that you did the transfer from EN-wiki to Commons back in 2009? Jcb (talk) 12:22, 29 December 2016 (UTC)

Deletion of files from mil.ru

Jcb, you deleted the following files:

• File:Sukhoi Su-33 launching from the Admiral Kuznetsov.jpg
• File:Air-to-air with Russian Air Force Sukhoi Su-34.jpg
• File:Air-to-air with a Tupolev Tu-160.jpg

with the summary «per nomination - see watermark left bottom.», but,

• The deletion rationale mentions that the original source is not related to http://mil.ru, but, http://xn--80ahclcogc6ci4h.xn--90anlfbebar6i.xn--p1ai (cyrillic-encoded for http://мультимедиа.минобороны.рф) is the russian version of http://mil.ru, and even, I checked the image at both domains, and them are found at both domains (changing the domain and keep the URI).
• You mentioned «see watermark left bottom», but, as I remember, there aren't any watermark in any of these files (and normal users are unable to see the watermark as the files are visible only to the administrators)
• And, no proof of publication elsewhere provided (that is mandatory to support your deletion summary)

Therefore, please explain your administrative action and provide proof to support it. --Amitie 10g (talk) 15:54, 29 December 2016 (UTC)

All three files had a clear watermark, with the names of the photographers. Jcb (talk) 16:24, 29 December 2016 (UTC)

There are two photographers: Igor Rudenko and Vadim Savitsky, they are both employees of subsidiary organizations of the Ministry of Defense. Links to the source to mil.ru site were given, the authors' names are listed. There was absolutely no reason to delete the files. May you restore them? — putnik 08:28, 30 December 2016 (UTC)

I am not acting on a request by Russavia. It's well established what his position is regarding Wikimedia/Wikipedia projects. Jcb (talk) 09:37, 30 December 2016 (UTC)

• Russy's possision may or may not be one thing, but the rest of us users on Commons (and policies) still have our own positions and ask demand that you restore files which you have deleted in error, despite what a banned user thinks of it. This is not a request by Russy, but demands by multiple users and admins of Commons. (t) Josve05a (c) 09:55, 30 December 2016 (UTC)
• If you don't want to restore the files by Russavia's request (which is totally valid as a banned user), then, I request the restoration of these files in addition of the several admins as Josve05a mentioned above (consider my first message of this thread as an implicit restoration request. --Amitie 10g (talk) 11:37, 30 December 2016 (UTC)

I've already restored the remaining two files. Enough of this. Both are from Mil.ru, and files from that domain are licensed under {{Mil.ru}}. Given that the original source URL was the cyrillic version of the site, I can understand the original deletion request, but it's no longer valid. Mil.ru and минобороны.рф are mirrors, and the cyrillic URL should be added to {{Mil.ru}} as an alias. — Huntster (t @ c) 11:42, 30 December 2016 (UTC)

Josve05a, there no way to demand that an administrator takes a certain action. I have every right to not act on a request and you are fully aware of that. We have COM:UDR. I have deleted these files in good faith and I am sure you know that. There is no place here for your bad faith assumptions. Jcb (talk) 11:44, 30 December 2016 (UTC)

Come now, Jcb, that's nonsense and well you know it. When you delete a file in good faith, you take some responsibility for that file, so when other members of our community point out any errors in your deletion, we expect you to take responsibility and rectify any errors you make, such as, in this case, undeleting the file(s). If you're not prepared to restore any files when asked by members of the community in good standing, then don't take the initial actions of deleting the files. Ignoring Scott/Russavia is perfectly acceptable but ignoring your fellow editors and administrators who are all in good standing is not. Nick (talk) 11:54, 30 December 2016 (UTC)

I am not acting on a Russavia request. I am not even reading it. And this discussion is closed now. Jcb (talk) 12:03, 30 December 2016 (UTC)

THIS DISCUSSION IS CLOSED

proposed deletion of File:Seradovaci navestidlo mechanicke 1.jpg

Hi Jcb, the photograph "Seradovaci navestidlo mechanicke 1.jpg" was likely made by User:PetrS., I'll notify him on Czech Wikipedia. Regards from Prague, JanSuchy (talk) 16:59, 29 December 2016 (UTC)

Ok, thanks. He can respond here: Commons:Deletion requests/File:Seradovaci navestidlo mechanicke 1.jpg. I have that page at my watchlist. Jcb (talk) 17:43, 29 December 2016 (UTC)

Can Petscan help detect image usage?

Following Commons:Deletion requests/Files uploaded by Circusdivas where some images in use were deleted, I am wondering whether Petscan: may be usable to identify used or unused images from a list. I cannot say that I have looked at its capabilities in that regard, but thought it worth mentioning as a means to help us out as admins. If it cannot do it at the moment, then we may be able to ask Magnus to issue an update that could give us that capability. Anything to make our tasks easier.  — billinghurst sDrewth 03:19, 30 December 2016 (UTC)

Thanks! I will have a look at it. Jcb (talk) 09:42, 30 December 2016 (UTC)

help

what's autoconfirmed user? Zejjon (talk) 04:38, 30 December 2016 (UTC)

Somebody who has been around here for some time, I think it's 4 days after account creation. Jcb (talk) 09:44, 30 December 2016 (UTC)

Exhibition/Exhibitions

Hallo Jcb.

gerade hast Du die Weiterleitung von Exhibition auf die Kategorie Exhibitions gelöscht. Ist es nicht Usus auf Commons Weiterleitungen/Redirects von der Singular- auf die Pluralform anzulegen oder zu belassen (Tree --> Trees, Automobile --> Automobiles, a.s.o.)? Yours sincerely --Hystrix (talk) 17:32, 30 December 2016 (UTC)

It was nominated for speedy deletion by Allforrous. Normally when we see a speedy nomination, we only look if the category is empty. I have restored the old versions, so that you can see what happened. I have no problem with the redirect. NeverDoING has recreated it in the meantime. Jcb (talk) 20:48, 30 December 2016 (UTC)

Heraldiek

@Jcb: thank you for your recent deletion of the Baroness Berners COAs of which I wholeheartedly approve (which were meant only to be temporary visual aids to help Bear17, one of Wiki's finest heraldic designers, presently preparing the Berners coat of arms (quartered) for Wiki's permanent benefit).

Nonetheless it is opportune that you got in touch, because no doubt together we can help improve Wiki far better than single-handedly! Should I wish to post heraldic sketches in the future at the behest of a Wiki graphic designer, ie. so as to aid in the creation of correct such images, is there a better way of doing so (for instance, perhaps a "temporary common file")? Please see Projet:Blasons by way of reference (so as to satisfy yourself that these images were not posted elsewhere & were for the sole purpose as described above).

Perhaps you will also be interested to know that I used to work at the College of Arms, as well as having been a regular contributor to Burke's & Debrett's Peerage publications? (all of whom would provide excellent testimony should Wiki so require). Since I have a most solid grounding in the law of arms, I trust that my knowledge and enthusiasm about heraldry can be harnessed to good effect for the improvement of Wiki's pages.

Looking forward to hearing and co-operating further in the future.

All best wishes, and a Happy New Year, L'honorable (talk) 21:12, 30 December 2016 (UTC)

Actually I am just a passer-by when it comes to heraldry, but we do have a project group for it, see Commons:WikiProject Heraldry. There you will find colleagues who are interested in this subject. Jcb (talk) 21:20, 30 December 2016 (UTC)

& regarding the provision of a temporary file so as to indicate how an image should look? Is there such provision on Wiki? Many thanks your prompt reply too! Best, L'honorable (talk) 21:28, 30 December 2016 (UTC)

Temporary files are difficult in general, because our Licensing policy demands that all files at our servers have an eternal non-revocable free license. Jcb (talk) 21:43, 30 December 2016 (UTC)

Ah, so what I did just there (which I know is definitely not good practice) was about the most effective way of giving Bear17 & Ssire a glimpse of how this particular, rather complicated, coat of arms should look? You understand my meaning - not trying to subvert the system, simply trying to find the most effective way of sending sketches to fellow Wikipedians where requested & required... L'honorable (talk) 21:50, 30 December 2016 (UTC)
PS. is there an internal messaging system?

@Jcb: could I also bring to your attention an image uploaded by me?
I know that this COA is not genuine, insofar as were it to be challenged in the English courts it would not stand up to scrutiny. But so far as my many communications on Wiki have gleaned I still cannot quite understand what is good & what is not (apart from the fact that I now prefer to request for heraldic images to be made for Wiki purposes). However this COA was at one time sanctioned by the College of Arms (subsequent events changed that though) and the image is also far too old to be subject to copyright laws. But, and this is a big BUT, it still does not make the COA totally correct (ie. pure). Nonetheless, as far as I understand it, Wiki is not so bothered about the correctness of any blazon (& there are many many which are utterly incorrect) but solely to do with whether there is any financial exposure through law to the display of any said image? In order to point out the "obvious mistake" in this Eyre COA, it is simply that it displays an Earl's coronet (whereas although the Eyres at one time laid claim to the earldom of Newburgh, they never succeeded to the title, it passing in due course to an Italian family). So, given that no-one is going to bring a claim to the incorrect representation of these arms (since there is no financial benefit for any party), where does that leave us? Trust you can see where I am coming from. Best, L'honorable (talk) 22:26, 30 December 2016 (UTC)

I am not so familiar with heraldry. At Wikimedia Commons we basically only worry about copyright. If local wikis wish to use your version of the COA, it's your own work and it has a proper free license, then anything is fine. Especially here at Commons we do not bother about the factual correctness of a COA. Jcb (talk) 22:32, 30 December 2016 (UTC)

Understood & when it comes to creating heraldic images specifically for Wiki, is there any means by which one can communicate internally with fellow Wikipedians as the situation may require? Many thanks. L'honorable (talk) 22:39, 30 December 2016 (UTC)

Communication usually goes via talk pages and user talk pages, like here. Jcb (talk) 22:42, 30 December 2016 (UTC)

Cool, so how does one upload an image for temporary view on to a Talk Page? L'honorable (talk) 22:43, 30 December 2016 (UTC)

In principle you cannot upload something temporary here. Jcb (talk) 22:45, 30 December 2016 (UTC)

OK - let me rethink this. So when I was asked by the excellent Wiki heraldic artist to provide a sketch, by what means was I supposed to do that? L'honorable (talk) 22:47, 30 December 2016 (UTC)

I don't know, I am not familiar with heraldry. Jcb (talk) 22:49, 30 December 2016 (UTC)

@Jcb: OK - much appreciate your advice & before we adjourn perhaps I could ask you how to comply with the following alert «  Please verify that the reason given above complies with Commons' licensing policy » in respect of the said Eyre COA? Many thanks again, L'honorable (talk) 00:16, 31 December 2016 (UTC)

Could you please ask in the Help_desk? I don't know what you are talking about. I have tried to help you, but I have no clue why you are at my user talk page in the first place. I am not a member of the Heraldry project and I will not be. Please be aware that every single edit to this talk page is interrupting my work, 16 times for the past few hours. Jcb (talk) 00:22, 31 December 2016 (UTC)

I only came to you because you deleted (quite correctly) the Berners COA sketches, so I assumed you must have an interest in the subject. Not to worry, I'll try to fathom it out myself & at least I have learned something. Many thanks. Best, L'honorable (talk) 00:28, 31 December 2016 (UTC)

I have deleted about 16.000 files in the past 30 days regardless of their subject. Jcb (talk) 00:31, 31 December 2016 (UTC)

Anyway, all the best for 2017, and please do not hesitate to contact me as necessary. Best, L'honorable (talk) 00:36, 31 December 2016 (UTC)

- the Berners arms are now sorted! Cheers. L'honorable (talk) 16:27, 7 January 2017 (UTC)

@Jcb: is it possible to remove the typo (Aa) & rename this COA : Escudo Señorial de la Casa Mayor de Villegas.jpg  ? Dank je, L'honorable (talk) 17:39, 7 January 2017 (UTC)

For rename requests, use {{Rename}} - Jcb (talk) 17:42, 7 January 2017 (UTC)

Thanks - think that does it - hope I used right procedure. Cheers. L'honorable (talk) 18:02, 7 January 2017 (UTC)

¡Muchas gracias! L'honorable (talk) 18:28, 7 January 2017 (UTC)

@Jcb and Jameslwoodward: hi there, and I contact you because you have been so helpful & knowledgeable on Wiki procedures, so I trust you don't mind my seeking your advice again. This is in relation to various images which I uploaded being nominated for deletion by Discasto : they are listed at User talk:L'honorable. This seems to me quite bizarre not least in the case of Commons:Deletion requests/File:Major Gerald Loxley AFC.jpg I own the picture & have released its rights; furthermore in all the other cases they are also too old to be subject to copyright and in any event such honours and decorations legally-speaking in respect of image rights do not belong to anyone other than the Crown, State or sovereign entity by whom they were awarded. Before getting embroiled in what could be become a big argument, which I do not fancy ! have you any clue what Discasto is thinking of by deleting these most eligible images?! Many thanks & looking forward to hearing at your convenience. Best, L'honorable (talk) 19:14, 10 January 2017 (UTC)
PS. the only thing I can think of is that I must have applied the wrong licence. At the very minimum all the others than the two which I actually own are available to use for educational purposes (although I can imagine that there could be aggravation, were someone to use the said images for commercial advantage - but again I repeat these images are not subject to copyright laws and as to why the images I own have been deleted it beats me)!

In case of a deletion nomination, please respond at the nomination page. The admin who takes the decision will look there, not here. Jcb (talk) 22:23, 10 January 2017 (UTC)

No probs - thanks! L'honorable (talk) 22:42, 10 January 2017 (UTC)

Happy New Year, Jcb!

Happy New Year!

Jcb, a new year is like a blank book, the pen is in your hands. It is your chance to write a beautiful story for yourself! Happy New Year 2017. Hedwig in Washington ^(mail?) 18:19, 31 December 2016 (UTC)

Thank you! Jcb (talk) 18:26, 31 December 2016 (UTC)

Happy New Year, Jcb!

Happy New Year!

Jcb,
Have a prosperous, productive and enjoyable New Year, and thanks for your contributions to Commons. –Davey2010 ^{Merry Xmas / Happy New Year} 20:47, 31 December 2016 (UTC)

Thank you! Jcb (talk) 21:21, 31 December 2016 (UTC)

Het Beste voor 2017, Jcb

Het Beste voor 2017.
L'honorable (talk) 21:33, 31 December 2016 (UTC)

Dank je! Jcb (talk) 21:59, 31 December 2016 (UTC)

@Jcb: perhaps you could help me be unblocked by Nederlandstalige Wikipedia, qv. Overleg gebruiker? This was in consequence of English Wiki, which block has now been lifted. Please advise whether you can assist and needless to say I shall be more than happy to co-operate however required. Many thanks & looking forward to hearing. Best, L'honorable (talk) 05:27, 7 January 2017 (UTC)

I have left a message to blocking admin. Jcb (talk) 11:33, 7 January 2017 (UTC)

They will not unblock you at NL-wiki. After all the communication difficulties they think it's better you only come at projects where you understand the language. Jcb (talk) 12:52, 7 January 2017 (UTC)

@Jcb: it is very good of you to make the approach - thank you. May I make a suggestion? Given that my ability to write Dutch is practically nil! but I can understand much of the written word, I therefore have next to no intention of making many edits to Dutch Wikipedia. I am sure we can all agree that this is sensible! However, and this is a big however! I can spot from time to time glaring errors on Dutch Wiki and have no recourse to remedy them at the moment, so how about they unblock me BUT place me under a supervision order to which person I can make my suggestions as may be appropriate? (Needless to say & this won't happen I can assure you, were I to contravene such an understanding they always have the comfort of being able to sanction me immediately & this I know would then be forever.) So this way I won't violate the Dutch text but can continue to help improve its content... Does this sound reasonable - I don't want to make fool of myself nor annoy the Dutch editors but it would seem a shame not to be able to contribute in any shape or form; what do you think? Many thanks again & all the best, L'honorable (talk) 16:12, 7 January 2017 (UTC)
PS. just by the by, my cousin is married to a Dutch lady, not that this will help much with regards to editing Wiki, but it does explain how I have gleaned a very limited understanding of the language..! Anyway, perhaps some sort of supervisory system could work to everybody's advantage - dank je!

I think for now NL wiki community won't accept such a construction. But if you stay out of trouble at other projects for e.g. the next 6 months, it may be worth trying then. Jcb (talk) 16:35, 7 January 2017 (UTC)

No probs - thanks advice & I suppose if I spot something absolutely horrendous perhaps I can let you know (don't worry it won't be regular!!). Cheers, L'honorable (talk) 17:01, 7 January 2017 (UTC)
PS. just a thought could NL-wiki at least unblock my Talk page?

I cannot help you with this. I am not very active at NL wiki. Jcb (talk) 17:06, 7 January 2017 (UTC)

No probs - you've already been a great help so thank you. If you could let me know who to contact, I'll make a very polite and small representation from Wiki Commons or from En Fr or Es Wiki whichever is better. At least then there is a line of communication which doesn't need to get you involved - many thanks again. Best, L'honorable (talk) 17:09, 7 January 2017 (UTC)
PS. & I shall follow your sage advice to wait 6 months or so, but at least it would be good to have the door ajar, so to speak..!

There is an email address here. Jcb (talk) 17:11, 7 January 2017 (UTC)

Much obliged & do let me know if I can ever help you at all. Best, L'honorable (talk) 17:14, 7 January 2017 (UTC)