User talk:Jcb/archive/26

Commons:Deletion requests/File:11thhourmsnbclogo.jpg

Hi, Johan. I closed the request as keep (ineligible for copyright) and you still deleted the image next day. Do you want to restore the image? In your opinion, what should we do now? Taivo (talk) 19:28, 1 June 2019 (UTC)

I did a mass delete for this user. VFC does not show closed deletion requests, so that I missed this one. Anyway, I don't agree with your conclusion. The image is definitely eligible for copyright because of the color gradients that you will see if you take a closer look at the file. Jcb (talk) 20:51, 1 June 2019 (UTC)

File:FELL'S CAVE ECLAC.pdf

Hi! Last Friday, we have an edit-a-thon with Wikimedia Chile and the United Nations Economic Commission for Latin America and the Caribbean regarding both their history as an organization and the iconic building located in Santiago [1]. We had participation of the architects in charge of the maintenance of the building and lot of them participated writing about the building. It was very sad, and quite embarrassing to be honest, to see with them that you deleted one of the images uploaded by them regarding one of the glyphs present in the building. The glyph is based on the prehistorical image found on Fell's Cave in Pali Aike National Park, and it was engraved on the building as a symbol of the development of Latin America. We chose that glyph because it fell under public domain being based on pre-historical images, being simple drawings and were engraved on a public building; however, you still deleted it only giving a "Copyright violation" mark and not even notifying the uploader. We would appreciate if you can restore the file so we can correct, in case it is needed, the licensing or the information about the glyph. --B1mbo (talk) 20:56, 2 June 2019 (UTC)

The deleted file seems to be a recent drawing based on an older drawing rather than an old drawing itself, so that the public domain claim is doubtful. Apart from that, the file was uploaded without a license and without any information that could be helpful to determine its copyright situation. I don't know how much experienced volunteers you have around at such an edit-a-thon, but some accompaniment of new users may be good if possible. Jcb (talk) 21:17, 2 June 2019 (UTC)

Certainly, we could have been able to check everything if the file wasn't deleted in a few minutes after being uploaded and the user have received a warning. --B1mbo (talk) 22:22, 3 June 2019 (UTC)

Files uploaded by Farhanfaroo

Hi! Looking at Commons:Deletion requests/Files uploaded by Farhanfaroo, it seems you may have forgotten to delete File:Farhan faroo.jpg. Was that the case? ~★ nmaia ^d 06:03, 6 June 2019 (UTC)

No, it was apparently reuploaded from a new account. Deleted again. Thanks for the notification. Jcb (talk) 15:19, 6 June 2019 (UTC)

Deleting all my uploads without warning?

Hello, it appears you have deleted all my uploads without warning? Many of those were maps made by hand which took many hours. Several of them were in featured articles as well. I do not have backups of these maps as I assumed they would not be deleted without any warning. Is there any way to get those maps back? I also uploaded many, many images that were modified from previous images already uploaded, but those too were deleted. Is there a reason there was no warning? Mattximus (talk) 22:39, 6 June 2019 (UTC)

I just noticed you even deleted some graphs I made by hand as well. Some of these images were prerequisites for featured list/article status as well. Mattximus (talk) 22:41, 6 June 2019 (UTC)

You took a lot of pictures from an external website. When I visit the source websites, I come accross texts like '© 2019 California Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.'. In other words: you have been mass uploading blatant copyright violations. Jcb (talk) 22:49, 6 June 2019 (UTC)

Can you give a specific example? The ones from Antbase are all indicated with the correct share-alike copyright tag. Also, I don't really care about the ant-images, I'm mostly concerned about all the graphs and maps you deleted that were my own, or modified from previous images. They took a lot of work, and you deleted them without warning. They were also crucial in the featured lists I have nominated and a bot deleted them from there as well. Is there anyway I can get my maps and graphs back? Mattximus (talk) 22:55, 6 June 2019 (UTC)

Also I copied the format for images such as this: [2]. I used exactly the same website and exactly the same copyright information. Mattximus (talk) 22:59, 6 June 2019 (UTC)

Look closer, since almost all my non-map uploads have been from ant-base, I don't know what you mean by "you have been mass uploading blatant copyright violations.". Mattximus (talk) 23:02, 6 June 2019 (UTC)

You uploaded e.g. this file. Directly below the picture you can read: "© 2019 California Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.". Not sure what could be unclear about that. Jcb (talk) 23:08, 6 June 2019 (UTC)

The line underneath says "AntWeb content is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution License. We encourage use of AntWeb images." Hundreds of other images uploaded by other users such as [3] have uploaded without problem. Mattximus (talk) 23:17, 6 June 2019 (UTC)

If an image has a separate 'all rights reserved' caption, then it's apparently not within their definition of 'AntWeb content'. Jcb (talk) 23:23, 6 June 2019 (UTC)

I assumed that "AntWeb content is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution License. We encourage use of AntWeb images." meant that I was free to use antweb images, as hundreds of other images do. At the very least this was non-malicious. I'm still upset that everything was deleted instead of even warning me so I can copy my graphs and maps. Wikicommons should encourage users and help them if they have ambiguity such as this, instead you have just been rude and dismissive. Mattximus (talk) 23:25, 6 June 2019 (UTC)

Please stop posting here, I am not going to say everything here and at COM:UDR. Jcb (talk) 23:29, 6 June 2019 (UTC)

Unwarranted deletions without warning

Hello,

Without warning, you deleted many files that I uploaded from the USGS and the Aussie Farms Repository, such as this USGS file and this Aussie Farms file despite them having no copyright violation.

The USGS media copyright information can be found here. Note how it says the media is in the public domain.

The Aussie farms information can be found here. Note how it says, "The Aussie Farms Repository is a public repository/gallery for videos, photos, documents and campaign materials (fliers, posters, etc) ... The Repository aims to bring all of this evidence together so that we can all freely view, share, and use it in our efforts towards a common goal." The only way I can interpret that is that the media hosted by the website is in the public domain.

Since there are no copyright violations, please undo those deletions. RockingGeo (talk) 23:37, 6 June 2019 (UTC)

As far as I can see none of the files I deleted was sourced to the USGS website. Several were sourced to 'all rights reserved' external videos and 'publicly available' is completely different from 'Public Domain'. Jcb (talk) 23:42, 6 June 2019 (UTC)

Deletions of files in public domain

Hi, you seem to have deleted 2 pictures on 7 June 2019 for "copyright violation". Those were two pictures of an official law of the Governement of French Polynesia, that are stricly in the public domain and completely free of rights (see lexpol.cloud.pf) as it was explicitely linked and precised in the description. Could you restored the pictures ? Thank you. CocoricoPolynesien

It's hard to believe that this would not be copyrighted by the composer. Even if the composer would have sold the copyright, is there any evidence that works from the Governement of French Polynesia would be Public Domain? Jcb (talk) 21:40, 7 June 2019 (UTC)

It's specifically written here : http://lexpol.cloud.pf/LexpolMentionsLegales.php. Additionnally, all files published by official authorities of the French Republic (that includes the Governement of French Polynesia) are free of rights per article L.122-5 of the Code on intellectual property... The very music sheet that appears in Law 2016-14 is in the public domain by this article. The document can be used virtually everywhere.

A copyrighted work by a third party cannot enter the Public Domain by being e.g. cited in a government document. International copyright conventions prevent that. Jcb (talk) 21:56, 7 June 2019 (UTC)

I acknowledged that. It is written in a press article that the composers gave their copyright to the collectivity. I'll come back when I have the proof, thanks for your time ! Edit: I have a pdf file from the website of the Assembly of French Polynesia that says they relinqueshed their copyrights (www.assemblee.pf/Article/Document/4826?docId=1126050) - Page 2, yellow square

Thanks! I have undeleted the files and documented the copyright situation and the description pages. Jcb (talk) 22:21, 7 June 2019 (UTC)

Please undelete File:États extatiques et méditatifs selon Roland Fischer.jpg which has been suppressed by CommonsDelinker

@Jcb:

My present request of undelating is related to the today action of 8 juin 2019 by CommonsDelinker over the file ( https://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roland_Fischer) , done with the corresponding link https://mail.google.com/mail/u/0/#inbox/FMfcgxwCgzHmrsXDbTMxMBgGJGNQFcJB and more

precisely États_extatiques_et_méditatifs_selon_Roland_Fischer.jpg, supprimé sur Commons par Jcb ; motif : No OTRS permission for 30 days .

I understand that my File:États extatiques et méditatifs selon Roland Fischer.jpg has been suppressed automatically by the robot CommonsDelinker in Commons because OTRS permission was not obtained ""after 30 days"".

Would you please look at my response of may 13th to Arthur Crombez which first asked me to answer to his question regarding this file which he considered as a translated image from the english Roland L. Fischer article.

But my quick answer to his question from " [Ticket#2019050810003241] Re: Demande de Permission OTRS pour le fichier déposé dans COMMONS intitulé File:États extatiques et méd [...] " was not answered later by him even after 30 days.

Let me tell you that this original file is my "personal drawing figure in french" which is not related nor translated from the original english figure in the article Roland L. Fischer (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roland_L._Fischer) that i translated into french in the french Roland

Fischer article ( https://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roland_Fischer ).

The purpose of this original drawing in french File:États extatiques et méditatifs selon Roland Fischer.jpg has been done by myself to illustrate better the french section 2.3 of the Roland Fischer article which is named "Perception de l'hallucination et méditation continuum".

Therefore I am asking you to undelete this file which is an illustration explaining better the french Roland Fischer article for the french readers of the encyclopedia.

Moreover my File:Lettre de Roland Fischer à Pierre Etevenon en 1973.jpg has previouslly been granted with an OTRS file in the french Roland Fischer article.

Cordially. Pierre Raymond Esteve (alias Pierre Etevenon) . --Pierre Raymond Esteve (talk) 07:35, 8 June 2019 (UTC)

As soon as an OTRS agent processes a valid permission, they will take care of undeletion. Currently the ticket is open, so that somebody will take a look at it some day. Jcb (talk) 10:08, 8 June 2019 (UTC)

 Thank you.Jcb pour votre rapide réponse. J'ai recréé ma File:États extatiques et méditatifs selon Roland Fischer.jpg et redemandé une permission OTRS après avoir remis mon illustration dans l'article Roland Fischer en français. Cordialement. --Pierre Raymond Esteve (talk) 18:05, 8 June 2019 (UTC)

Deletion of empty dr page

HI Jcb. Can you delete Commons:Deletion requests/2019/01/08? It's basically empty now, with the exception that there is a user's signature there. 大诺史 (talk) 12:47, 8 June 2019 (UTC)

 Done - Jcb (talk) 14:55, 8 June 2019 (UTC)

Deletion

Hi why did you delete my file, the "traghetto marmorica" it was photo that o took by my self! Francesco Flora (talk) 15:27, 8 June 2019 (UTC)

Most of your uploads were blatant copyright violations. In such a case we just flush the whole batch to be sure. If between all the copyright violations there was one file that was not a copyright violation, don't be surprised when it's flushed with the copyright violations. Jcb (talk) 15:36, 8 June 2019 (UTC)

For me it does not have any Sense, I don't understand why did you delete photo took from My camera. Plus other photos that are took from other website such as the "Quirino" one where I requested personally to the copyright holder to send an e mail to permission commons to allow me to publish those photo.The only photos that you really had to delete were those schreenshot of some Dream Theater shows.--Francesco Flora (talk) 22:01, 8 June 2019 (UTC)

Deletions on 1. June, 21:06

Hi Jcb, I am contacting you because of the deletion of some files about the Lahnwanderweg at the aforementioned date. Concerning these files I was in discussion with the German OTRS-Team. I provided them with information about the creator giving me the task to upload them here but could not give them the standard-form because the creator was on a longer hike abroad at this time. Unfortunately the OTRS-team did not react on the information I provided to them. This led me to the assumption that everything was okay. Unfortunately it was not. A few hours after the deletion I wrote an e-mail to the OTRS-team with still no reaction so far. How can we solve this problem? In the meantime the creator filled out a form that should in my opinion answer all questions. Thanks in advance! Asdrubal (talk) 09:36, 10 June 2019 (UTC)

The ticket is currently open. As soon as an OTRS agent has time to process it, they will take care of undeletion if they think the permission is valid. Please be aware that OTRS has a backlog, because we are heavily understaffed. Jcb (talk) 11:32, 10 June 2019 (UTC)

Thanks! I sent them the creators document. Let's hope this will work. Asdrubal (talk) 19:34, 10 June 2019 (UTC)

In the meantime everything is allright again. Thanks for the advice! Asdrubal (talk) 19:55, 20 June 2019 (UTC)

Great! Jcb (talk) 20:38, 20 June 2019 (UTC)

File:Rabbi Chaim Yitzchak Isaac Landa.jpg

Hello. Why did you delete the file? According to what I understood, ORTS has released rights ... דגש חזק (talk) 17:44, 12 June 2019 (UTC)

The permission in ticket:2019040410008871 was not accepted by the involved OTRS agent. Jcb (talk) 20:37, 12 June 2019 (UTC)

"insect eye" image

Hi. If you look carefully at the history of the Wikipedia page for Compound eye, you will see that one of the editors removed an image of an Eristalinus in 2008 and replaced it with an entirely different image, but they did not rewrite the caption; [this is the edit]. This image was never identified by anyone as belonging to a fly. No one caught this error until now. Please don't revert the change I made to the image file. Thanks, Dyanega (talk) 00:24, 14 June 2019 (UTC)

You are breaking the code so that the page generates several error messages. Please be aware that it's your responsibility to check the result of your edit. If you break something, your edit is likely to be reverted, regardless of the further contents of that edit. Jcb (talk) 05:54, 14 June 2019 (UTC)

User contributions Abu Quatadah

Hi,

Why you have deleted all calligraphic files?— Bukhari (Talk!) 01:45, 15 June 2019 (UTC)

No permission, also no license and no source. Jcb (talk) 15:23, 15 June 2019 (UTC)

He is creating his own pics from application and is my friend on telegram.— Bukhari (Talk!) 00:51, 16 June 2019 (UTC)

Please ask him to contact OTRS. Jcb (talk) 10:57, 16 June 2019 (UTC)

Deleting

Dear Jcb!

I would like to ask you why you've deleted my photos of Peter Kocák, Ján Bartko and of the church in Malá Tŕňa. You wrote, that there was not any OTRS permission for 30 days. That is not true. I worte an OTRS permission and sent it to Wikimedia Commons e-mail. (you can see a copy of it here) I know that in the EXIF there is wirtten, that author of the photo is PeterHalko, but that I am. I am Peter Haľko. But if it is problem to have a nickname on Commons, tell me about it and I will create a new profile with my true name in.

Yours sincerely
Peter Haľko a. k. a --Petinoh (talk) 13:30, 16 June 2019 (UTC)

An OTRS volunteer responded 30 days ago, asking you to specify a license. We did not receive any answer to that, so that the files were deleted 30 days after our response. Jcb (talk) 14:12, 16 June 2019 (UTC)

Überprüfe dein Tun! - Honi soit qui mal y pense

Dein Bild zum Löschantrag ist leider nicht Nachvollziehbar. Bitte helfe der Welt deine Sichtweise zu verstehen. Danke und liebe Grüße vom - --Lupus in Saxonia (talk) 18:19, 16 June 2019 (UTC)

As far as I can see this has been resolved in the meantime. Jcb (talk) 22:18, 16 June 2019 (UTC)

COM:AN

---

Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion at Commons:Administrators noticeboard#m:Requests for comment/Admin role on Commons (inventing or changing unilaterally the community policies). Not my thread, just notifying. - Alexis Jazz ^{ping plz} 19:01, 16 June 2019 (UTC).

File:Alberta Highway 3.svg

Can you please undelete File:Alberta Highway 3.svg and compare that with File:Alberta Highway 4.svg? If the latter is appropriate, then then former is as well. If it's not appropriate, then Category:Alberta Highway shields needs to be emptied. The only difference between the two files is the number.

Also, I'd dispute the "Recreation of content deleted per community consensus" tag as I see no discussion of the file, let alone "community consensus". Thank you for your consideration. Imzadi 1979 → 03:49, 21 June 2019 (UTC)

I am confused. Something must have gone wrong in the cache of whatever. I am absolutely sure that the version I saw was the same file as what I deleted a day before, a file that was absolutely not PD-ineligible. But looking at the deleted versions, I see that the file you uploaded is quite different from the deleted file and that this one is simple enough for PD. I have restored the file. Jcb (talk) 10:09, 21 June 2019 (UTC)

2 pictures from 1 World war

Hello, I think the two pictures (File:Women working a factory in David Stempel AG in 1918 during world war one.jpg, File:David Stempel AG Sonderproduktion Erster Weltkrieg 1918.jpg) were in the categorys Category:David Stempel AG and Category:Editathon 100 Jahre Frauenwahlrecht HMF-Bildspende and are a donation of pictures from the w:Historical Museum, Frankfurt as well as the other pictures in the Category:David Stempel AG. Also, the authors have not received any notification to do anything about OTRS here. Please look again. Thank you --2003:DE:742:D8AE:919:7ABF:95C:4BC2 04:26, 21 June 2019 (UTC)

We never received any permission at OTRS. Donations are fine, but we must have a proper registration of the donation and the copyright situation. Jcb (talk) 10:17, 21 June 2019 (UTC)

Undeletion request

You deleted File:Jaxson hayes.jpg back in March for good reason. I'd like to have it undeleted, mark it as a crop of File:DIG14403-007 (45265473635).jpg, and license it under {{PD-USGov}} as the original was taken by Jay Godwin, an employee of the LBJ Library, run by the National Archives and Records Administration. BigrTex (talk) 19:45, 21 June 2019 (UTC)

 Done - Jcb (talk) 20:19, 21 June 2019 (UTC)

Wapen van Luxemburg

Goeiemiddag Jcb, sal dit nie beter wees om geskrapte wapens van lande soos dié van Luxemburg met bestaande alternatiewe te vervang nie? Dit skep net onnodige werk vir ander gebruikers! Ek het dit nou vir die Afrikaanse Wikipedia gedoen. Groete. --  SpesBona 10:35, 22 June 2019 (UTC)

Het is goed om te weten dat we hier veel te weinig actieve admins hebben. Het is daardoor doorgaans niet haalbaar om dit soort aanvullende handelingen te doen bij het behandelen van een nominatie. Bedankt in elk geval voor het oplossen hiervan op AF wiki. Jcb (talk) 15:22, 22 June 2019 (UTC)

Aan die einde was dit net 'n verskil van "a" as 'n hoof- of 'n kleinletter, sien bv. hier. Myns insiens kon dit maklik deur die CommonsDelinker gedoen word. Hoe fiks ons dit nou, nadat al die skakels egter verwyder is? Groete. --  SpesBona 21:05, 23 June 2019 (UTC)

Je kunt de verwijderingen opsporen door op de 'delinker log' link te klikken, bijvoorbeeld hier. Jcb (talk) 21:18, 23 June 2019 (UTC)

User:OgreBot/Uploads_by_new_users/2019_May_23_06:00#Gorvzavodru_(145_edits)

Hi. Was removed File:Ri 1.png which was nominated to delete by you. Also is the queue to delete of dozens other images there. BTW is note there that user:Gorvzavodru "has DR notices", but he have not it. These images have licence templates "cc-by-sa-4.0". Also, there is PermissionOTRS 2019051710003466 for book with these images. I self can't add the OTRS templates to images, because then shows the warning that it must do only OTRS member. Please, restore this file and remove other from the deletion queue. --Vladis13 (talk) 05:30, 24 June 2019 (UTC)

The permission was not yet accepted by the OTRS agent. They sent a follow up message, but we never received any response. Jcb (talk) 14:41, 24 June 2019 (UTC)

I contacted the user which uploaded the files, and he contacted the author of the book and illustrations. They said that all OTRS permissions were obtained. Also, the pages of images have license templates "cc-by-sa-4.0". Do I need to do something? --Vladis13 (talk) 16:31, 24 June 2019 (UTC)

They need to respond to our 23 May message. Jcb (talk) 22:01, 24 June 2019 (UTC)

Bilder

Hallo Jcb, ich bitte um Auskunft. Warum hast Du meine Bilder in Wyny Ecu-Wikipedia gelöscht? „Das Bild Wyny-2609.jpg wurde am 15. Juni 2019 um 01:55:35 Uhr von Jcb gelöscht.“ In Deiner Begründung steht: Urheberrechtsverletzung, „auto­matisch gesichtet.“ Der erstellte Wikipedia-Beitrag be­steht unbeanstandet seit 2017, also seit gut 2 Jahren. Meine Erklärung ist: Ich hatte in Commons für das Bild wyny-2609 (Nr. der Fotografin) den richtigen Untertitel (Europid XI, 1998, Holz § Acryl, H 100 cm) einfügen wollen und bei diesem Versuch löschte sich dieses Bild. Mehrere Tage später sollten weitere Bilder eingefügt werden, darunter auch das Bild wyny-2609, aber jetzt gingen alle Bilder verloren. Da gleichzeitig geschehen könnte meine selbstverursachte Löschung und das neue Hochladen im direkten Zusam­menhang stehen. Der Automat sah das gelöschte Bild wyny-2609 als das bereits Vorhandene und das gleiche Bild wyny-2609 als Plagiat an. Die von mir vor 36 Jahren erfundene Kunstfigur ist bei der VG Bild-Kunst, Bonn urheber­rechtlich geschützt. „This File is Licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution International“ (frei verfügbar) Den neuartigen Figurentyp erfand ich bereits im Jahr 1983. Plagia­te mache ich nicht. Die Fotos wurden extra für Wikipedia hergestellt und bisher nicht veröf­fentlicht. Ich möchte Dich bitten, diese Bilder wiederherzustellen. Danke und mit freundlichen Grüßen --Werner wyny (talk) 03:27, 26 June 2019 (UTC)

Please contact OTRS to provide evidence of permission. Jcb (talk) 16:17, 26 June 2019 (UTC)

File

Hi! About this file: https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:A_HABLE%C3%81NY_%C3%A9rkez%C3%A9se_P%C3%A1rizsba,_1867.jpg I have the source of the picture, but the author is unknown. --Heringcápa (talk) 06:26, 26 June 2019 (UTC)

Thanks. Given the age of the image, this is good enough. Jcb (talk) 16:18, 26 June 2019 (UTC)

File: Old Sikh Gurdwara in Shanghai.jpg

sir , I have source of image which is given in file itself as well, when you open source , image appears at no. 2 in image slot of source as there are 3 overlapping images on source. More over this is image of old building more than 100 years old. I do not know who shot this picture but certainly as per its age it should be in public domain .

https://archive.shine.cn/feature/art-and-culture/Sikhs-A-piece-of-history-that-remains-fragmentary/shdaily.shtml Guglani (talk) 13:02, 28 June 2019 (UTC)

For China, yes. For other countries, please be careful, the rules differ from country to country. In many countries copyright expires 70 years after the death of the photographer. Jcb (talk) 14:54, 28 June 2019 (UTC)

Files: Mahmud-Ali Kalimatov (2019-06-26).jpg, Anton Vaino (2019-06-26).jpg and others

Hi! You added a template stating that some media files, I recently uploaded, does not have sufficient information on its copyright status. At the same time, during the download, I indicated the licenses under which they are distributed, adding templates that the images are taken from the websites of the President and the Government] of Russia. The sites themselves also indicate the license under which the media files are distributed (Creative Commons Attribution 4.0). In addition, after your message, I also added a Cc-by-4.0 license to the images. If the cause is still there, could you tell me what is wrong? Mr Savva (talk) 14:01, 28 June 2019 (UTC)

The standard license template is indeed what was needed. Jcb (talk) 14:55, 28 June 2019 (UTC)

File:Tegan Marie.jpg

Hi Johan, I uploaded the file and was in contact with the copyright holder. I know for sure that they sent an email to permissions-commons@wikimedia.org with the release. Is there any chance that you can tell me if this email was ever received from the OTRS team or if there was simply an issue within the process? You can also sent me an email if appropriate. Or is that not the correct address? --Heubergen (talk) 17:14, 28 June 2019 (UTC)

We did receive a message, but it didn't come from the author. We responded to the ticket a month ago, but we never received any answer. Jcb (talk) 17:22, 28 June 2019 (UTC)

Removal of a report on COM:ANU

I know it's futile, but for the record I'm stating it anyway. I'm not stalking you. I have no time for that. I was going over Rodrigo.Argenton's history to determine if he only clashes with Jeff G. and an IBAN might be sensible or if other measures would be better.

As I did that, I came across various users he interacted with, mostly not problematic. And one of those interactions was [4]. As I searched for the title, I strangely found nothing.

Odd. Why notify someone of a report that doesn't exist?

So I checked the page history, in case it had been accidentally removed. And errr, yeah, that. [5]. Based on your response to the notification on your talk page, that wasn't an accident.

Instead of going to edit war over a batch edit that could have been pretty serious if Elisfkc had continued, Rodrigo asked for a reversal of those edits. Maybe Rodrigo should have waited a bit longer before posting on ANU, or simply should have posted on AN instead. But abuse of noticeboard? And how do you justify the rollback of a complaint against you and blocking the user who complains? Is there a piece of history I'm missing? - Alexis Jazz ^{ping plz} 19:04, 29 June 2019 (UTC)

The user was blocked over this and not a single admin (or other user) has stated to disagree with the block. This was an ongoing abuse that ended after my intervention. Case closed for me. Jcb (talk) 23:02, 29 June 2019 (UTC)

OTRS confirmation possible reason for deletion?

You say "if they did buy the rights, they will be able to provide the documentation to OTRS." So we expect them to notice the deletion and contact OTRS? I don't think that is good procedure. Nobody said anything on the nominations page about why they could not be assumed to have bought the rights. Do we act in the same way when other institutions release images as "own work"? --LPfi (talk) 20:56, 29 June 2019 (UTC)

Yes, we do. Unfortunately, the overwhelming majority of permissions by GLAMs are mistaken, many institutions think that they are the copyright holder because they have a copy of a work in their archive, which is not true of course. Jcb (talk) 23:05, 29 June 2019 (UTC)

OK. I still think the case is different with a commercial entity – archives have lot of material donated by owners of the copies, while the resort probably has only photos by their own photographers (in this case probably temporary work-for-hire photographers) and by themselves. I think it is unlikely they got the images from the net, especially if copies cannot be found there. --LPfi (talk) 12:49, 30 June 2019 (UTC)

In almost all cases where professional photographers are hired to take pictures, they grant a usage right to their client, which is completely different from a transfer of rights, although this two things are often confused. Jcb (talk) 17:12, 30 June 2019 (UTC)

That might of course be so also in this case. I think however, that the user should have been notified by e-mail and given enough time to answer (I did in fact e-mail them, but have got no answer (yet?)). They cannot be supposed to watch their Commons user page. --LPfi (talk) 19:22, 30 June 2019 (UTC)

That's not how it works and it's not reasonable to expect that, especially when you take into account that we are heavily understaffed. Jcb (talk) 19:37, 30 June 2019 (UTC)

The Complete Lojban Language

Hi Jcb, You should not delete such files and template without a regular deletion request. Regards, Yann (talk) 04:24, 30 June 2019 (UTC)

@Yann: Please take care that the template gets recognized as a license template, you did an incomplete job. The files are in Category:Files with no machine-readable license. Jcb (talk) 09:35, 30 June 2019 (UTC)

 Done There may be a cache issue. Regards, Yann (talk) 11:49, 30 June 2019 (UTC)

Thanks! Jcb (talk) 17:10, 30 June 2019 (UTC)

COM:AN/U

---

Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion at Commons:Administrators' noticeboard/User problems#Jcb. - Alexis Jazz ^{ping plz} 10:39, 1 July 2019 (UTC).

Радовельський храм.jpg

Hello, Jcb! Excuse for troubling. You deleted this file. And I communicated with the copyright holder. They gave me permission. And I sent it to the address permissions-uk@wikimedia.org. Can I download this file again? Or what can I do to use it? Thank you in advance.--Slavkamira (talk)

As soon as an OTRS agent handles the ticket and concludes that the permission is valid, they will take care of undeletion. Please be aware that this may take some time, because OTRS has a backlog. Jcb (talk) 21:41, 1 July 2019 (UTC)

Jcb, Thank you for the clarification! Slavkamira (talk)

File:SHV Logo (2003-2013).svg

Hey. Why did you deleted this file? It has since yesterday a „CC-by-sa 4.0“ license. See: de:Datei:Schweizerischer Handball-Verband logo.svg and OTRS: 2019063010002289. I only forgot to change the templates to the commons style, maybe this is because you didn't see the license. --Malo95 (talk) 15:45, 3 July 2019 (UTC)

The permission was invisible because of the syntax errors. Restored and fixed. Jcb (talk) 15:58, 3 July 2019 (UTC)

undelete this file File:موقع منطقة سبع أبكار.jpg

Hello

File:موقع منطقة سبع أبكار.jpg

undelete it, it is the shapefile of openstreetmap which is free source,

--Abu aamir (talk) 21:57, 3 July 2019 (UTC)

It's not only such a shape file. Please ask the author to contact OTRS. Jcb (talk) 22:20, 3 July 2019 (UTC)

there is no author, I downloaded the shapefile of openstreetmap and then opened it then I added some texts and a polygon. you could have inquired before deleting the file --Abu aamir (talk) 06:59, 4 July 2019 (UTC)

Re: Warning

Please look at your edits. If you disagree with what I said, you could've explained why, but instead you removed my message. I'll be reverting now, please don't do this again.--Kai3952 (talk) 23:36, 3 July 2019 (UTC)

Sorry, I just realized that you are an admin. I wasn't sure if you received "this message", as you haven't replied.--Kai3952 (talk) 00:15, 4 July 2019 (UTC)

Jcb, I have been waiting for your response for almost the last "23" days. I'd like to make sure that you have seen my message because I need your help.--Kai3952 (talk) 18:55, 26 July 2019 (UTC)

Why ?

I've just noticed you deleted File:2006 WC- Swiss gymnast.jpg (and maybe other files I've uploaded from the same Flickr account). I don't understand why you've done that, not why there was no DR... Those files come from the Flickr account of Claudia Applebe, from whom we'd already had a photograph with an OTRS validated authorization, so I would say there is no reason to doubt what she's stating on her own Flickr account ! I also wonder why I wasn't warned on my pdd. Regards. --TwoWings * to talk or not to talk... 15:51, 4 July 2019 (UTC)

Please don't upload files that have Public Domain Mark at Flickr. This is not a valid license, it's actually not a license at all. Jcb (talk) 17:22, 4 July 2019 (UTC)

I just don't get it : there are good reasons to believe this Flickr account is valid, so why can't we just consider these illustrations are PD because the author determined them as PD ? I also don't understand why UploadWizard allows such uploads if it's not valid. --TwoWings * to talk or not to talk... 17:34, 4 July 2019 (UTC)

UploadWizard allows such things to help us detecting these files. If the system disallows them, people start making up all kind of things to get the files uploaded. Please see Template:Flickr-public domain mark about why Public Domain Mark is unacceptable. Jcb (talk) 18:28, 4 July 2019 (UTC)

What I understand of it is that PD mark "requires a specific reason why this image is in the public domain". So I don't understand why it cannot be accepted for the files I'm talking about, since it comes from a Flickr account where the author herself has determined her pictures (those specific pictures) are in public domain. If we considered that this photographer is trustworthy for other files (those with OTRS authorization and those with Commons licenses on her Flickr account like this one), there should be a solution to determine that the PD tag is valid for her pictures. But I don't see the adapted solution here for such a case. Couldn't we consider them as PD-self ? --

(talk page stalker) (not by choice: looks like I forgot to remove this talk page from my watchlist again.. Won't forget this time) @TwoWings: please ask the Flickr user to switch to CC0 for public domain. (alternatively CC-BY or CC-BY-SA are also acceptable) - Alexis Jazz ^{ping plz} 10:15, 5 July 2019 (UTC)

undelete request

The documents I've uploaded, containing extracts from 1906 newspapers piblished in Russian Empire, tagged "Russian Empire" (free to publish), were deleted, which I believe has no reason. Please give a reason or undelete the files. Thanks — Preceding unsigned comment added by Alx90865 (talk • contribs) 08:40, 5 July 2019 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) (and after this I'm unwatching again) @Alx90865: make a request at COM:UR. - Alexis Jazz ^{ping plz} 10:17, 5 July 2019 (UTC)

File:بذل المجهود.png is a free file please undelete it.

File:بذل المجهود.png whas a screensoht a took from the free file on wikisource so please undelete the file. عبد الله الصيدلي (talk) 16:17, 6 July 2019 (UTC)

So between all the copyright violations there was a file that was not a copyright violation? Well, that's your own risk if you upload copyright violations. Jcb (talk) 22:20, 6 July 2019 (UTC)

there is no copyright violation at all; unless if you count two book covers (File:Surgical care at the district hospital.jpg - File:مختصر-المزني.jpg) under fair use a violation, but all my others uploads is free and I give the links to wikisource for each of them in the upload page! look File:إيثار الحق على الخلق.png is from wikisource, File:الإصابة في تمييز الصحابة.png is from wikisource also,File:التحفة العراقية.png is from a wikisource, File:Taqreeb book.png is also from wikisource please reconsider your deletions, thanks in advance. عبد الله الصيدلي (talk) 08:31, 7 July 2019 (UTC)

you had removed all of my pictures from my hometown page without any warning! Why?

I have noticed that you had removed those pictures that I make. I want to know the reason. By the way, I need to edit them many times which does not seem to be any problem. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 90Saeed (talk • contribs) 16:54, 6 July 2019 (UTC)

All the individual pictures used into the collage need source information. Jcb (talk) 22:22, 6 July 2019 (UTC)

File:Hedwig-glas (cropped).jpeg

This is merely a new crop from the "parent" file, which is an open-licence image from the Rijksmuseum. Probably you know the tag appropriate for both images, which I don't, so please add. Thanks. Johnbod (talk) 23:33, 6 July 2019 (UTC)

Oh, the source file is one of those LizzyJongma files without permission from the photographer. Many of these uploads have been deleted in the meantime, many are still waiting to be found and deleted. Jcb (talk) 23:37, 6 July 2019 (UTC)

Nantes Cathedral altar.jpg

Bonjour,

j'avoue ne pas très bien saisir les raisons pour lesquelles vous avez jugé utile de reverter les modifications que j'avais effectuées s'agissant du fichier porté en objet. Nous sommes bel et bien en présence de l'ancien maître-autel de la cathédrale Saint-Pierre et Saint-Paul de Nantes qui constitue pour le Ministère de la Culture un ensemble cohérent formé d'un autel, d'un tabernacle et de deux anges adorateurs.Cet ensemble a d'ailleurs été intégralement classé en 1862 alors qu'il occupait encore le choeur roman de l'édifice, détruit depuis, quand bien même les anges adorateurs sculptés en 1779 par Jean-Sébastien Leysner sont postérieurs de 29 ans à l'autel. Le cliché permet plus d'ailleurs d'appréhender l'ensemble dans sa globalité que dans ses éléments constitutifs et donc de le rattacher à la catégorie "Maître-autel de la cathédrale Saint-Pierre-et-Saint-Paul de Nantes" qui renvoie tant à la fiche générale Palissy qu'aux trois autres détaillant les parties de la construction architecturée. Cette catégorie renvoie également aux objets monuments historiques de Loire-Atlantique, qu'il s'agisse d'autels, de tabernacles ou de statues religieuses. Par votre action, nous avons un fichier qui contribue à alourdir une catégorie, "Interior of Cathédrale Saint-Pierre de Nantes", riche de 181 éléments. Ledit fichier, dont le nom choisi par son auteur est suffisemment évocateur du sujet qu'il entendait photographier, ne fait que présenter un objet classé dans un cadre architectural plus vaste et flou au demeurant. Si vous entendez privilégier la perception du cadre architectural, il convient alors de s'interroger sur la recevabilité d'un fichier qui présente la verrière 00 de la cathédrale, oeuvre de Jean Le Moal, décédé en 2007, et donc soumise à droit d'auteur. Merci d'avance pour votre réponse argumentée.--GO69 (talk) 05:06, 7 July 2019 (UTC)

Your edit made the authorship information invisible. Please always check the result of your edit. Jcb (talk) 10:37, 7 July 2019 (UTC)

• This user merely mislocated a "}}". Why revert instead of correcting, Jcb? -- Tuválkin ✉ ✇ 12:57, 11 July 2019 (UTC)

File:Azola Mlota.jpg

Hi Jcb, You deleted File:Azola Mlota.jpg but an OTRS had been sent with permissions granted under Creative Commons Attribution-Sharealike 3.0 Unported License from the subject himself. All evidence can be provided upon request. Thanks Ceethekreator (talk) 18:53, 7 July 2019 (UTC)

The OTRS agent did not (yet) accept the permission and sent a follow up message 6 June. We never heard back any thing, so that the file got deleted 30 days after our response. Please be aware that permission must come from the copyright holder (=photographer!), not from the depicted person. Jcb (talk) 16:44, 8 July 2019 (UTC)

Digital Globe

I am not sure wether it makes sense to list files to delete by "insource" searches since the nominator surely did not look up wether a file was properly licensed by other means than a general copyright declaration on awebsite. I am not sure especcially with File:Fukushima-1.JPG. Would you please double check it? I have some unclear fragments in my brain that this image was granted by DG via ORTS? If true it might be wrth double check more of those files. I could be wrong, anyway, so if not, please accept my excuse for disrupting. In each case, thanks in advance. --Matthiasb (talk) 01:41, 8 July 2019 (UTC)

As far as I can see, none of the deleted files had OTRS. I have just rechecked all of them. Jcb (talk) 16:49, 8 July 2019 (UTC)

[Ticket#: 2019070910001096]

https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Mash19.jpg please verify this image, ticket:2019070910001096. Author sent previously too many mails but he didn’t get any response, so that last night I added otrs permission, when I came to knew that I'm not an otrs member then I revet my edit. Author today sent again new release note. And he told me, he don’t want to waste more time to sending mails.

@Jcb: please reply Biki4343 (talk) 14:22, 9 July 2019 (UTC)

I am not going to dig into this case, an other OTRS agent is already involved. I have tagged the file to keep it online for a while, to grant some time for processing of the ticket. Jcb (talk) 14:59, 9 July 2019 (UTC)

@Jcb: Thank you but but still not, author get any updates,will author send release note Again? Biki4343 (talk) 20:46, 11 July 2019 (UTC)

No, the author needs to be patient. The ticket is open, it will be handled one day or another. Jcb (talk) 21:24, 11 July 2019 (UTC)

Listen here please

Hi, there! How are you? I see that you deleted my image. After a LONG dispute with the government of South Africa, I finally received the proper permission from the government. You don't how difficult it was. My government publishes images under the CC-BY-NC license. I had to basically beg them for changing the license. I received the proper permission. They issued an official government statement declaring that they consent to image being published a free license, here on Wikimedia Commons, Wikipedia and beyond, yet the person who I contacted at OTRS said it was not adequate. Now that I FINALLY received the proper permission, you delete my image. Please restore it and I will happily e-mail you the official statement. Like we say in Afrikaans: "Gee my asseblief 'n regverdige kans." Lefcentreright (talk) 15:43, 9 July 2019 (UTC)

As soon as this is sorted out in ticket:2019060710005052, the OTRS agent will take care of undeletion. Jcb (talk) 16:52, 9 July 2019 (UTC)

Why'd you delete the ferret with lymphoma pic?

Hey man, sorry to bother you, but I noticed you've removed the image of a ferret with lymphoma from the Lymphoma in animals article (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lymphoma_in_animals) and from Commons. May I ask why? I took this picture myself and it is an image of my own ferret, so there's no issues with consent. I'm pretty sure I licensed it under the appropriate licence. Is its quality too poor? Thanks, again sorry for any inconvenience caused. Watermelon-lemon (talk) 10:57, 10 July 2019 (UTC)

If it is your own work, why the web-like low resolution? Jcb (talk) 20:39, 10 July 2019 (UTC)

I took it with my laptop, so the quality was already pretty poor, and then I cropped it a lot so that less of my living room and less of me would be visible. The ferret's face is blurry because she's squirming around. If you like I can take a new one with better resolution. Watermelon-lemon (talk) 00:28, 11 July 2019 (UTC)

That is probably the best option, the quality of the deleted file is indeed poor. Jcb (talk) 14:46, 11 July 2019 (UTC)

• (talk page stalker) @Watermelon-lemon: While a better quality image is always welcome, Jcb should not be editorializing an en.wp article from his authority position as a Commons admin: Since there’s no copyright issue, the only thing (for a Commons admin) to do is to undelete it and restore is transclusion in en:Lymphoma_in_animals. (Sorry, Jcb, but this must be said.) -- Tuválkin ✉ ✇ 14:14, 12 July 2019 (UTC)

This was uploaded between a bunch of copyright violations, so that I don't have much trust in the claim. If a user uploads one own work between a series of grabbed from the web files, but that supposed own work has no exif and a very low resolutions, not many admins are going to trust that. Now that supposed own work has a quality so poor that the file is practically unusable and the uploader offers to take a real picture, then it's obviously the most pragmatic way out. If anything has to be said, it's this rather than some mistaken lecture on the connection between Wikimedia Commons and English Wikipedia. Jcb (talk) 14:41, 12 July 2019 (UTC)

File:Bosum OfBosum'sHele Arms.svg

Hi, you deleted this image due to lack of licence. It was my own work, possibly I forgot to add the licence. Is there any way of looking at the text in the file description, I probably spent quite a lot of effort writing that up. I would like to restore the image, with a licence added. is that possible? ThanksLobsterthermidor (talk) 11:42, 10 July 2019 (UTC)

@Lobsterthermidor: I have undeleted the file and reset the timer. Please add a license within 7 days. Jcb (talk) 20:42, 10 July 2019 (UTC)

@Jcb: Sorry, 7 days was too quick for me! It has lapsed again. What I really want back is the text in the file description, is there anyway to recover that? Maybe you would be able to post it to my talk page? But I have lost the image too, so would like that back if possible. Please be so kind as to try again, thanks.Lobsterthermidor (talk) 17:03, 13 August 2019 (UTC)

Uncompleted deletion requests

Hi. Please see 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6.--NMW03 (talk) 12:47, 11 July 2019 (UTC)

They will be handled one day or another, we have a lot of open DRs that are much older. Jcb (talk) 14:48, 11 July 2019 (UTC)

https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Slipandslide#Copyright_status%3A_File%3ADark_Chamber.jpg

Artist has sent the completed template to OTRS. Keep in mind that I have to upload first in order to obtain the url(s) for the permission template- there should be a better way to do this. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Slipandslide (talk • contribs) 12:18, 12 July 2019 (UTC)

There is a way: when you upload the file, put the following code in the permission field: {{subst:OP}} . Then we know that permission via OTRS is on the way. I see that in the case of this file you already did that, but there is no license. Files without a license get deleted after 7 days, with or without OTRS permission. Jcb (talk) 13:30, 12 July 2019 (UTC)

File:YBC-7289-REV.jpg

Can you please explain why you deleted File:YBC-7289-REV.jpg, a faithful photographic reproduction of a several-thousand-year-old (and therefore public domain) two-dimensional work, as needing evidence of copyright permission? Even if that side of the object is deemed copyrightable (it contains only fragmentary working-out of a mathematical problem) the person who created it has been dead for a couple of orders of magnitude longer than 70 years. —David Eppstein (talk) 17:17, 12 July 2019 (UTC)

This file is not a reproduction of a 2D work ?!? Jcb (talk) 17:26, 12 July 2019 (UTC)

It is, though. It is a clay tablet with two flat sides, on which the only interesting content is the writing on both sides. It is as two-dimensional as an oil painting — on both kinds of objects, the writing surface has nonzero but small thickness and in both cases the thickness is only marginally interesting to the content (the brush-strokes of an impasto oil painting have a three-dimensional shape, as do the quill strokes of a clay tablet, but that should be considered de minimis for the dimensionality of the object). Both kinds of objects are in actuality rather thicker than their surfaces (the canvas of an oil painting is stretched in three dimensions over a frame) but again that's not very relevant. —David Eppstein (talk) 17:33, 12 July 2019 (UTC)

This is not a 2D objects and it is not comparable to paint strokes. For pictures like this, there must be permission from the photographer. Please compare COM:CUR on coins. Jcb (talk) 20:21, 12 July 2019 (UTC)

That is not an argument, it is merely an unsupported assertion. To pick another example: a mural or fresco is a 2-dimensional artwork even though it is incorporated into a 3d object (a building or wall). But if you are insistent that it is not a 2-dimensional work (note: work, not object; it is the inscription, not the chunk of clay, that is relevant here) I will be happy to escalate this to undeletion requests. —David Eppstein (talk) 21:07, 12 July 2019 (UTC)

Not a single admin will agree with you that the three-dimensional clay tablet is a two-dimensional object. And yes, it is relevant that the 'chunk of clay' is three-dimensional. Taking a picture of a 3D object like this generates copyright for the photographer in almost any jurisdiction. Starting an UDR on this is pointless, because every admin will stick to what copyright laws prescribe. Jcb (talk) 21:16, 12 July 2019 (UTC)

Löschung der Gerngroß-Fotos

Nur zu deiner Info, ich hatte eine Info für den LA - die OTRS-Freigabe mit der Ticketnr 2018121810007261 wurde dafür allerdings bereits am 18.12. 2018 geschickt, da muss also was schief gegangen sein. Bitte um Recherche danke K@rl (talk) 09:21, 13 July 2019 (UTC)

As far as I can see, out OTRS robot was unable to connect the files to the ticket, because the file names were abreviated. Let's see if I can prepare a file list for in the ticket and then ask Krd (who is a native speaker) if this ticket can be resolved. Jcb (talk) 12:49, 14 July 2019 (UTC)

Many thanks, now its okay. --regards K@rl (talk) 21:12, 14 July 2019 (UTC)

File:Snatt's - Mariam Coulibaly (cropped).jpg

Hi, this file deleted recently is a crop of another file with OTRS verified. What's going wrong? Thanks! --Yuanga (talk) 14:13, 13 July 2019 (UTC)

What went wrong is that the permission was somehow not added to the crop. Undeleted and fixed. Jcb (talk) 13:07, 14 July 2019 (UTC)

Thanks! --Yuanga (talk) 21:00, 15 July 2019 (UTC)

File:Wojciech Dworczyk.jpg

Hi,

Could you undelete file File:Wojciech Dworczyk.jpg? The proper agreement has arrived some time ago - actually before the file was uploaded, but no one has informed us that it is uploaded. ticket:2019013110010027, cheers. Polimerek (talk) 21:10, 13 July 2019 (UTC)

@Polimerek: I can't find a deleted file with that name? I have retried by copy-pasting the filename directly from the ticket, but I get nothing. Jcb (talk) 13:11, 14 July 2019 (UTC)

I made mistake in word "file". See: https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Wojciech_Dworczyk.jpg

@Polimerek: Oops, I didn't notice that either. I have restored the file. Please process the ticket. Jcb (talk) 14:34, 17 July 2019 (UTC)

#2019012310006388

Hi Jcb,

Could you please restore some of the files you've deleted on 11th July? We want to restore the files which are marked as "No OTRS permission since 31 May 2019". We have an OTRS mail about them. If you restore OTRS ticket #2019012310006388, then I will be very happy.

All of the pages which are uploaded by this user that are currently red are included in this tag

Thank you! --Elmacenderesi (talk) 22:32, 15 July 2019 (UTC)

@Elmacenderesi:  Done - please process the ticket - Jcb (talk) 15:12, 16 July 2019 (UTC)

File:Stopnswopicecave.png

Hey there.

I'm a noob with uploading to Commons, so it's not surprising that I probably made a mistake somewhere with this file... But out of curiosity, what did I do wrong? I spent upwards of two hours looking at guidelines and rules and steps and all that junk. And then some time after the fact, I was told that I missed a step, and didn't specify ownership of the screenshot... but I sent an e-mail and did so like I was told. Said e-mail, or so I thought, was accepted.

How did I screw up uploading Stopnswopicecave.png? What guideline did I violate, and why were my privileges taken away? IceKey8297 (talk) 00:32, 16 July 2019 (UTC)

We responded to the OTRS ticket with additional questions, but never heard anything back. Jcb (talk) 15:14, 16 July 2019 (UTC)

Oh shoot... that was my secondary e-mail that I rarely check... my bad. Although it would've been nice if someone notified me on my discussions page.

Once my ban has been lifted, can I still claim the image as my own work, even though I did not create the game? IceKey8297 (talk) 15:26, 18 July 2019 (UTC)

No, the real author will have to be creditted and permission from the real author will be needed. Jcb (talk) 15:38, 18 July 2019 (UTC)

I'm confused. Let's start over. What steps am I to take to upload and use a screenshot, that I took, from a game, that I did not create? What license should I give it, and how? IceKey8297 (talk) 17:05, 18 July 2019 (UTC)

You can only upload such a screenshot with a valid permission from the creator of the game. That permission should be sent by the creator to OTRS. Jcb (talk) 17:51, 18 July 2019 (UTC)

Fashion street

Why did you delete these files? OTRS is pending and permission received. Templates were in the summaries. Didn't you see? Restore it please. --Regasterios (talk) 05:38, 16 July 2019 (UTC)

What is the ticket number? Jcb (talk) 15:15, 16 July 2019 (UTC)

2019071210004498. Under discussion. --Regasterios (talk) 16:32, 16 July 2019 (UTC)

@Regasterios:  Done - please process the ticket. Jcb (talk) 20:29, 16 July 2019 (UTC)

Thank you. Please bear with me. I need to agree with the copyright holder about the details. --Regasterios (talk) 09:34, 17 July 2019 (UTC)

The OTRS received template will keep them at least 30 days online. Jcb (talk) 14:33, 17 July 2019 (UTC)

File:Freigut (Zürich) Salon erster Stock.jpg

Hello Jcb. Why did you delete that photograph? My mother, who has the copyright, did send her agreement long, long ago (I stood next to her and saw it). Regards, --Freigut (talk) 10:28, 16 July 2019 (UTC)

Hi Jcb and Freigut; I see that the file had an "OTRS pending" tag since February. Maybe the permission is still stuck in the OTRS queue, which often takes months to process? Gestumblindi (talk) 10:51, 16 July 2019 (UTC)

The current backlog is 125 days, which is a lot, but a ticket from February should have been handled by now, unless it got in some subqueue for another language. Did you receive an autoreply with a ticket number? Jcb (talk) 15:17, 16 July 2019 (UTC)

I don‘t know – my father is deleting his mails very fast ... Well, I will ask my mother to send her agreement again. --Freigut (talk) 15:55, 16 July 2019 (UTC)

Another agreement has been sent today – I'd appreciate the quick undeleting. Thx. --Freigut (talk) 15:22, 19 July 2019 (UTC)

Did you receive an autoreply with a ticket number? Jcb (talk) 19:40, 19 July 2019 (UTC)

De nummer is ticket:2019071910004351. Dank je wel. --Freigut (talk) 06:01, 22 July 2019 (UTC)

Apparently this has been resolved during my absence. Jcb (talk) 20:32, 10 August 2019 (UTC)

Copyright violations

This and this are copyright violations. You should delete them. Thanks.--Dipralb (talk) 00:09, 17 July 2019 (UTC)

They are in a deletion request. No need to contact individual admins. Jcb (talk) 14:32, 17 July 2019 (UTC)

Can these be reinstated

Hi Jcb. On 11 July you deleted File:Charlotte Waters ruin with tank, 1982.jpg and File:Charlotte Waters 1982 NTLib PH0147-0050.jpg because "(No OTRS permission for 30 days)". I wrote to the librarian who gave permission to confirm exactly how and when she'd given her permission, but she's been away for a while, so I have only just heard back from her. She has said: " I emailed/replied to them on 12 June 2019. [and got this response] RE: [Ticket#2019061010010478] release of Charlotte_Waters_1982_NTLib_PH0147-0050.jpg and Charlotte_Waters_ruin_with_tank,_1982.jpg [...]" - but she hasn't heard anything since. Is this a matter of not having enough volunteers to do the admin required within 30 days, or has something else gone wrong? Is is possible for you to reinstate these photographs, or... what happens next? Laterthanyouthink (talk) 03:11, 18 July 2019 (UTC)

I have found the ticket and sent a reply. Restored for now, to give it another 30 days. Jcb (talk) 14:43, 18 July 2019 (UTC)

And verified in the meantime. Jcb (talk) 00:57, 19 July 2019 (UTC)

Deleting my files

Hi. You deleted some of my original photos because OTRS didn't respond to my ticket. I got two approvals from them in the past but this time no one even did answer. And even i forgot what photos were those as you haven't written me anything about that.--Eldar Mansurov (talk) 06:08, 18 July 2019 (UTC)

Do you have file names and/or ticket numbers for me? Jcb (talk) 14:44, 18 July 2019 (UTC)

Jcb, here are my tickets, check out these so we can proceed.--Eldar Mansurov (talk) 11:14, 19 July 2019 (UTC)

I found it. ticket:2019061210003259 is still open and somebody will look at it one day. The permission was not accepted within 30 days after our first human response. As soon as the involved OTRS agent thinks that the permission is valid, they will take care of undeletion. Jcb (talk) 12:52, 19 July 2019 (UTC)

File:Charlotte Waters ruin with tank, 1982.jpg

@Jcb: just to inform you I created a Category:Charlotte Waters, North Territory earlier. You might with to add the image to that category. thank you for your time. :-à Lotje (talk) 14:45, 18 July 2019 (UTC)

 Done - Jcb (talk) 14:49, 18 July 2019 (UTC)

Commons:Deletion requests/File:Batavia situering der gebouwen, 1895.jpg

Hello. Why are you not waiting at least seven days before closing these kinds of DRs? I know they don’t have a license but as admins we can exercise some discretion if it is possible the file might be PD. Something from 1895 could quite easily be hosted in Commons. Cheers. Green Giant (talk) 17:13, 18 July 2019 (UTC)

Seven days without a license is deletion, we have never applied "discration" to that. So if you think that one of our accepted licenses applies (e.g. {PD-old-assumed} can often be applied to files from before 1899), add it. If you doubt about that added license, convert to DR. But don't convert to DR without adding a license template. Jcb (talk) 17:42, 18 July 2019 (UTC)

Ping!

I'm not very good at pinging people and I don't think I really know how. Please see my input here. Thx. --SergeWoodzing (talk) 18:20, 18 July 2019 (UTC)

Yes, I responded their. I put that page on my watch list, so that I will see if you respond there. Jcb (talk) 20:13, 18 July 2019 (UTC)

I am asking you as kindly as I can, for the second time, to stop tagging images I've uploaded for a 7-day delete until you've explained to me what to do. I don't know if you've even read what I've written here. If the Southerly Clubs OTRS does not cover images donated to and/or created by associates of Chairperson Demitz, whom I believe is mentioned on the template and in the OTRS, I need you to explain to me what license should be used, so that the files will not be deleted during the current 6 month perimissions backlog. Though I am an experienced Commons contributor and have acted in good faith for years, is is a totally new problem to me. Will you please explain, before you continue to 7-day tag SC images? Please! --SergeWoodzing (talk) 22:52, 18 July 2019 (UTC)

For every author, we need to have evidence in the ticket that they indeed transferred the copyright to the Southerly Club. The authors that are fine are listed in the template. For other authors: please do not upload the files before you have confirmation from OTRS that they are accepted. Regarding the missing license, please click the word license for more explanation. I have linked this page already several times today. And yes, if I come accross more files without a license, I will tag them. Jcb (talk) 23:12, 18 July 2019 (UTC)

Oh, sorry....

Hey Jcb,

I was converting some files from EAC to rectangular format. I had no Idea that File:Behind the Scenes at the Natural History Museum - 360 Video.webm is a copyvio, I didn't even checked the file-name as there are many EAC format (from Category:EAC Video) video that needs the conversion. -- Eatcha (talk) 18:18, 18 July 2019 (UTC)

No problem. Jcb (talk) 20:16, 18 July 2019 (UTC)

Copyright status: File:Pauly-Wissowa IV A,2, 2259.jpg

hi there, I'm at a loss to understand your notice since both author (died 1945) and book publication (1932) evidence that more than 70 years have passed since. should this not meet with your requirements for being PD-old, then please delete. regards --Pfaerrich (talk) 07:11, 19 July 2019 (UTC)

Yes, PD-old will apply, but you have to add the license template to the image description page. The code that should be added: {{PD-old}} . Jcb (talk) 09:14, 19 July 2019 (UTC)

Signature

Hey, does it need signature? --Mhhossein ^talk 08:17, 19 July 2019 (UTC)

No, this template does not need a signature. Jcb (talk) 09:15, 19 July 2019 (UTC)

Flickr PD

Please can you direct me to the page that outlines the policy on the Public Domain Mark 1.0 (as used on Flickr) and why it cannot be used on Commons? I want to refer to it but the link was on the files you deleted. Thanks. Cnbrb (talk) 09:46, 19 July 2019 (UTC)

Please see Template:Flickr-public domain mark. Jcb (talk) 12:53, 19 July 2019 (UTC)

Ah that's the one. Thanks! Cnbrb (talk) 17:46, 19 July 2019 (UTC)

File:Torgi gorodsk nedv imushestvo MGV79 1906.pdf may be deleted question

The file File:Torgi_gorodsk_nedv_imushestvo_MGV79_1906.pdf you have marked as for possible deletion due to lack or contradictory license info, is a scan of house owners sale list from 1906 public newspaper of Russian Empire. I had a long discussion in Undeletion requests ( [[6]]) , we agreed that using 'PD-Russian-Empire', 'PD-100' or similar tags provide false info because these files contain nothing creative but pure lists, so PD-text would be most relevant.

So I've marked files as PD-text, provided Author and Source as of newspaper title from where I've copied them. After that I've got your warnings as well as warnings of JuTa for 'derivative work' so I'm totally frustrated how can I still use wikicommons. Could you please clarify your warning about lack of license? I agree that 'PD-text' along with source provided are clearly enough.

Currently there is no license at all. What we need here is not PD-text, this is way too much text to be ineligible for copyright. The copyright on the depicted text may be expired though. What we are at least missing is a license from the photographer. This is not a flat scan. Did you take the pictures yourself? Jcb (talk) 12:59, 19 July 2019 (UTC)

I insist that there is no copyright (to be expired). It is not a fiction, nor a story, nor picture. These files are lists of persons, published in more than 100-years old newspapers for official notice (voters etc). So there is no copyright, no derivative in the content of the photos. Yes, I took the pictures myself. What type of license tags do you recommend to use?Alx90865 (talk) 15:59, 19 July 2019 (UTC)

You could e.g. use {{CC-BY-SA 4.0}}, one of our standard licenses for own work. If you paste this code to the image description page, everything should be fine. Jcb (talk) 19:43, 19 July 2019 (UTC)

So, I'm getting contradictory advices from different power users. Is there any way I could keep all these files and continue uploading similar ones?... "I think this should be marked PD-text as this is a non-copyrightable list from an old source. Any CC license or a PD-expired template will be wrong here, as the content is not a copyrightable work": Commons:Deletion_requests/File:Chausy_uezd_prisyazhnye_1907.pdf#File:Chausy_uezd_prisyazhnye_1907.pdf

(talk) 14:43, 29 July 2019 (UTC)

PD-text is only for short simple text, like two or three words. Jcb (talk) 20:34, 10 August 2019 (UTC)

You are being impersonated

They're not doing a very good job though.

I don't believe that's you. Already filed a CU request. - Alexis Jazz ^{ping plz} 11:05, 19 July 2019 (UTC)

Probably an LTA. They are indeed not good at it. I think it's well known that I have no difficulties using my own account when criticizing something. Jcb (talk) 12:47, 19 July 2019 (UTC)

Deletion of File:Walter Frederick Adeney.jpg

Hi, the National Portrait Gallery explicitly releases these smaller versions of images under a CC 3.0 licence (see here), and many of them are available on Commons, so I'm curious as to why you deleted this file with no discussion. As far as I remember, I gave the CC 3.0 licence correctly in the description. Nizolan (talk) 13:36, 19 July 2019 (UTC)

Actually I missed that it's a non-commercial licene, so that's my mistake—apologies! (But you might want to look into all the other images available by that photographer.) Nizolan (talk) 13:40, 19 July 2019 (UTC)

Ok. The author of this picture, Walter Stoneman, died less than 70 years ago. The NC license for the simple act of scanning as applied by NPG is usually ignored, because this act is ineligible for copyright. So these NPG scans are fine for photographers who died before 1949 ({{PD-old}}), or, if the photographer or date of death is unknown, for pictures taken before 1899 ({{PD-old-assumed}}). Jcb (talk) 13:47, 19 July 2019 (UTC)

Yes, I was referring to Stoneman rather than the NPG as a whole—my decision to upload was informed by the fact that there's an entire category for his photos at Category:Walter Stoneman. And thank you for the info. Nizolan (talk) 14:10, 19 July 2019 (UTC)

Ok, I will have a look at them later. I do know that we recently deleted about 100 pictures from Stoneman, these pictures may have been missed. Jcb (talk) 14:13, 19 July 2019 (UTC)

Yeah, it looks like the category has been thinned down a lot since my upload. I clicked through them and the remaining ones largely seem to have special circumstances. Thanks again. Nizolan (talk) 15:39, 19 July 2019 (UTC)

Copyright for UK traffic sign symbols

Hello, I noticed you left a copyright notice on one of the symbols I uploaded. The 10 or so symbols in that folder I have uploaded have all had the copyright information taken from the traffic signs already on Wikimedia commons, and they fall under the same status as the UK road signs. Hence this information shouldn't be wrong and if it is then the copyright for all the UK signs needs to be changed. I do not claim to own the right to these symbols and if it states somewhere on the pages that I do, I wish for that information to be removed. Nathan A RF (talk) 18:30, 19 July 2019 (UTC)

I have no idea why this file was tagged as 'no license'. I see nothing that could have triggered the tagging, something must have gone wrong somewhere. I have removed the problem tag. Jcb (talk) 19:58, 19 July 2019 (UTC)

Commons:Deletion requests/File:Neville chamberlain1921.jpg

I wonder, does Commons:Deletion requests/File:Neville chamberlain1921.jpg qulify to be speedy deletion? -- Geagea (talk) 20:42, 19 July 2019 (UTC)

Strictly it does, although this may be borderline. I think it's good that a DR page is present, because that gave me the opportunity to add it to the undeletion category. Jcb (talk) 20:53, 19 July 2019 (UTC)

I don't think so. Please see Commons:Administrators' noticeboard#Old photo and speedy deletion. -- Geagea (talk) 21:14, 19 July 2019 (UTC)

Photo of Nina Youshkevitch and Zbigniew Kilinski

Hello, Jcb. You tagged this photo for possible deletion, because you questioned the copyright status. The original copyright holder of this image would have been the Polish Ballet (Balet Polski), an institution that became defunct in 1939. The derives from the estate of Nina Youshkevitch, also deceased. I am her sole heir, so the photo belongs to me; and I am releasing it into the public domain. Please remove your objections. Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dancemaven (talk • contribs) 2019-07-21T15:07:46‎ (UTC)

Why did you remove File:Neshan nav logo.png

hello . Why did you remove this image from the warehouse ? The publication of this file is permissible with " fair use " .With respectMobin2008 (talk) 18:46, 21 July 2019 (UTC)

Please see COM:FU, we don't accept Fair Use. Jcb (talk) 19:23, 21 July 2019 (UTC)

Why did you remove File:George_Danezis_2000.

Why did you remove George_Danezis_2000.jpg, I have written permission from the fellow who took the photograph. Which I will re-add. Thanks

Seems to have been resolved during my absence. Jcb (talk) 20:39, 10 August 2019 (UTC)

undeleting Category:2013 events in Jerusalem

Hello, could ypu please recreate Category:2013 events in Jerusalem? it now has images. DGtal (talk) 10:09, 22 July 2019 (UTC)

 Done Vysotsky (talk) 13:12, 24 July 2019 (UTC)

Thanks. DGtal (talk) 05:43, 31 July 2019 (UTC)

File:Edoardo Salmeri .jpg

Hi,

Could you undelete the file: File:Edoardo Salmeri .jpg. The OTRS agreement seemed to be OK. Don't know why it is deleted. Ticket:2019053110004447. Cheers, Polimerek (talk) 20:30, 23 July 2019 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) @Polimerek:  Done --Ruthven (msg) 07:56, 26 July 2019 (UTC)

TJNAF and JLab

"TJNAF" is a necessary, used, useful, unbroken, and plausible redirect since a Wikimedia Commons Search for "TJNAF" does not produce enough useful results, and it is not obvious without an external search that "TJNAF" refers to the Thomas Jefferson National Accelerator Facility ("JLab" is more common and less ambiguous). I have gone ahead and recreated the redirect for now. If you still feel that it should be deleted, it might be better to create an open debate for a deletion request first. Other synonyms for the TJNAF include CEBAF, Continuous Electron Beam Accelerator Facility, Jefferson Lab, and JLab. Nicole Sharp (talk) 17:46, 25 July 2019 (UTC)

Please do not create cross namespace redirects. Jcb (talk) 20:41, 10 August 2019 (UTC)

Deletion of Oberschlesische_Stahlwerksgesellschaft,_Neue_Grünstr_17_18.JPG

Hi Jcb,

I am not at all amused about your action: Why did you delete my work? - And now it was not restorable. What did you do?

I want you to completely restore the file, when you will be not Out of office for a couple of weeks.

--L-scriptor (talk) 18:29, 26 July 2019 (UTC)

Commons:Deletion requests/Files in Category:Haus Eyl

Hi Jcb, I've filed a DR for a couple of files which you have kept before. I've provided a significantly longer rationale and a joint DR (all the previous DRs were just for individual files). Regards, AFBorchert (talk) 19:17, 31 July 2019 (UTC)

I think it's not good practice to try to get things slipping through during holiday season, in this case resulting into closing contradictory to the outcome of several extensive discussions that we have had about this case. Please be aware that this action will not change anything about the assumed danger of the uploader, because these files are still irrevocably released into a free license and anybody will be able and allowed to host the files, even if they are no longer publicly visible at our servers. Jcb (talk) 20:48, 10 August 2019 (UTC)

Don Bosco

Could you undelete these for a day or two so I can see if I can fix the problem?

• File:Colle donbosco1.jpg (edit · last · history · watch · unwatch · global usage · logs · purge · w · search · links · DR · del · undel · Delinker log)
• File:Casita donBosco.jpg (edit · last · history · watch · unwatch · global usage · logs · purge · w · search · links · DR · del · undel · Delinker log)

Thank you.

Evrik (talk) 15:12, 1 August 2019 (UTC)

Both files state: Author=Animadores Salesianos. Please get permission from the author to OTRS. Jcb (talk) 20:50, 10 August 2019 (UTC)

Deleting my files because no response from OTRS

Hi. You deleted two of my original photos because OTRS didn't respond to my ticket while I have sent the authorization to use my photos twice to the concerned department without ever having any answer from them, please do what is necessary and restore my photos --Johnpoljones (talk) 17:15, 11 August 2019 (UTC)

We actually did respond to the ticket, 30 days ago, asking for additional information. But we never heared anything back. Jcb (talk) 15:59, 11 August 2019 (UTC)

I've been looking at all my mails for the last two months (inbox and spam) and I have no trace of any mail from your service it's been 3 months that I've been waiting for my photos to be validated so it's time to wake up! I just again sent an email to the wikimedia common service with permissions for all my pictures so do your job!! Johnpoljones (talk) 18:08, 12 August 2019 (UTC)

I have resend our response of last month. Please be aware that it is not allowed to reupload deleted files. As soon as a valid permission has been accepted by an OTRS agent, the files will be undeleted. Jcb (talk) 17:09, 12 August 2019 (UTC)

deletion of Michael_Seidenberg.jpg

Hello -- the copyright owner of this file said she emailed a permission form email in to OTRS on July 9th. Was there some sort of problem? Thanks for your time. Jessamyn (talk) 01:03, 13 August 2019 (UTC)

The permission was still not accepted by involved OTRS agent, after several messages from both directions. If the permission is accepted, the OTRS agent will take care of undeletion. Jcb (talk) 14:39, 13 August 2019 (UTC)

thanks. I will try to find another qualifying image. Jessamyn (talk) 21:36, 13 August 2019 (UTC)

User_talk:Tacsipacsi#Information_template

If the source of a PD-Image is unknown/nonsense would it be ok to add Template:Clear {{-}}

? I think that might partly full-fill your and Tacsipacsi's intent.  — Johannes Kalliauer - Talk | Contributions 15:00, 13 August 2019 (UTC)

{{-}} will probably be removed again by maintenance robots, but if the direct source is unknown and the copyright situation is fine anyway, you can either use the name of the original author (who was in fact the first source of the work) or use {{unknown|source}} instead. Jcb (talk) 15:20, 13 August 2019 (UTC)

File:Bosum OfBosum'sHele Arms.svg

Sorry, 7 days was too quick for me! It has lapsed again. What I really want back is the text in the file description, is there anyway to recover that? Maybe you would be able to post it to my talk page? But I have lost the image too, so would like that back if possible. Please be so kind as to try again, thanks.Lobsterthermidor (talk) 17:03, 13 August 2019 (UTC)

This was the description: "Arms of Bosum of Bosum's Hele in the parish of Dittisham, Devon: Azure, three bird-bolts in pale argent two and one (Pole, Sir William (d.1635), Collections Towards a Description of the County of Devon, Sir John-William de la Pole (ed.), London, 1791, p.470: Bosum of Bosum's Hele & Bosum of Churston Ferrers ("Churchton"))" - undeletion of the file is now only possible via the request page, I undeleted the file once informally, I can't do that again - Jcb (talk) 17:18, 13 August 2019 (UTC)

Questioning copyright releases

Jcb, you helped me with an earlier problem, so I was hoping you wouldn't mind helping me with a new question. File:Drooble Log In Screen.png is a screenshot of a copyrighted webpage, but the uploader claims it is their own work, and releases the image under CC-BY-SA. Three questions: 1) In general, do we take these sorts of claims at face value? 2) Even if we do think the uploader is the website owner, do we still require OTRS documentation or something? 3) When I encounter such images, what is the best procedure? Nominate for deletion? Speedy deletion? Some kind of OTRS tag? Thanks! MarginalCost (talk) 14:00, 14 August 2019 (UTC)

1) no, 2) yes, 3) you can click 'report copyright violation' from the tools menu. In this case you could also have pasted {{speedy|advertisement/spam}} to the file description page. Jcb (talk) 14:51, 14 August 2019 (UTC)

File source is not properly indicated

Hi What about this issue?[[7]]. This file uploaded with "PD-RU-exempt|type=documents" template. Can you restore this file? Leksey (talk) 17:31, 14 August 2019 (UTC)

Source information was completely missing, so that it could not be determined whether the license would apply or not. Jcb (talk) 21:37, 14 August 2019 (UTC)

Deleted portraits of Nagy Géza

Hello. Please what in your point of view was wrong with Commons:Deletion requests/Files uploaded by ModestCraftsman considering hu:Nagy Géza (festő) exists? The two files were deleted as out of scope. Thanks for help --Mates (talk) 00:10, 15 August 2019 (UTC)

The two files were apparent copyvio (forgot to add that to the closure statement). Jcb (talk) 14:56, 15 August 2019 (UTC)

About Commons:Deletion_requests/Template:The_Stand_News

Can I obtain the copy of the deleted photo for upload to Chinese Wikipedia? Thank You!--SCP-2000 (talk) 16:04, 15 August 2019 (UTC)

About 50 files got deleted with the template. If you need one of the files, you can find it at their Facbook page. But the files do not meet the requirements of any Wikipedia edition. Jcb (talk) 16:11, 15 August 2019 (UTC)

File:Alexander "Alex" Crow McGeorge.tif

Hi there,

You appear to have deleted the picture: https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Alexander_%22Alex%22_Crow_McGeorge.tif

In fact a permissions document was emailed to permissions-en@wikimedia.org on 30 May, and noted as received. (2019053010001461). A further confirmatory email was then responded to.

Can this photo please be undeleted? It has the relevant permissions document which I am happy to send to you.

Cheers

The permission was not yet accepted. I see that the ticket is currently open. As soon as an OTRS agent accepts the permission, they will take care of undeletion. Jcb (talk) 12:08, 16 August 2019 (UTC)

Commons:Deletion requests/Template:The Stand News

Hi, This is very well OK for Commons. Please restore these files. Thanks, Yann (talk) 04:33, 16 August 2019 (UTC)

The statement is too vague to be acceptable, you are well aware of it. The only reason you start complaining is that you have something personal against me. Jcb (talk) 09:42, 16 August 2019 (UTC)

This is complete bullshit. I have absolutely nothing personal against you. In fact, we used to be in good terms. But since you refuse to play with the rules, I don't see any other solution that to request your de-adminship. Regards, Yann (talk) 15:50, 16 August 2019 (UTC)

Luckely in this case it's rather obvious, also to colleagues, that your ANU post is abusive rather than constructive. Jcb (talk) 21:53, 16 August 2019 (UTC)

Please check and undo deletion of File:Giovanni_Morassutti_by_Teresa_Marenzi-cropped.jpg

Hi Jcb ,

I´ve noticed that you have deleted file : Giovanni_Morassutti_by_Teresa_Marenzi-cropped.jpg and removed it from Wikiquote article. It seems as though the copyright holder has sent an email on April 1st 2019 as @JuTa: should be able to confirm. Can you please check and eventually restore it ? Thanks --Sallustinus (talk) 15:33, 16 August 2019 (UTC)

The OTRS release was pending sind 2019-04-01, but not confirmed yet. The file got deleted after several months waiting for a confirmation. @Sallustinus, perhaps you ask on Commons:OTRS noticeboard for this case. --JuTa 16:28, 16 August 2019 (UTC) Ok @JuTa: , Shall I just ask them to check if the confirmation email is present on OTRS ? Tnx--Sallustinus (talk) 16:34, 16 August 2019 (UTC)Ok . I´ve asked on Commons:OTRS noticeboard . Please check here--Sallustinus (talk) 16:52, 16 August 2019 (UTC)

A colleague found the ticket number in the meantime and we did receive the new message today, so that I could restore the file. Everything should be fine now. Jcb (talk) 22:00, 16 August 2019 (UTC)

Why delete 5 images in a minute without looking at the detail?

Hello,

At 18:02 you deleted 5 pictures that I had uploaded to Wikimedia Commons.

Among these 5 files:

• File:Tour de Bel-Air.jpg ‎ -> A picture taken by me of a historic building. So free license.
• File:Lausanne Wiki.jpg -> A photo montage with royalty-free images from Wikimedia Commons. So free license.

• File:Vortex Panorama CPEV.jpg ‎and File:Lausanne hiver 2017.jpg ‎ -> Two pictures for which I have contacted the rights holders and who have told me that they are free of rights.

• File:Lausanne2020 Yodli Snowboard.pn -> An image for which there was a licensing problem. I am in contact with permissions-fr@wikimedia.org to regularize the image.

Why did you delete everything at once without checking? Why this haste to delete everything without even contacting me?

• • I see a file with a Fair use rationale and several files that are taken from a website. Deletion is standard practice in such cases. Please ask the authors to contact OTRS. If the permission is valid, an OTRS agent will take care of undeletion. Jcb (talk) 18:53, 17 August 2019 (UTC)

• • • What about the first two that were made by me? Can't you cancel your manipulations? --Noldo18 (talk) 19:37, 17 August 2019 (UTC)
      • Go to OTRS. If you want to have any positive result there, you should change your attitude. In general people are less likely to help you if you attack them. Please take into account that we are all volunteers here. Jcb (talk) 19:53, 17 August 2019 (UTC)
        • Are you kidding ? You seem very sensitive to feel attacked for that. You have acted with haste and now "not my business". What a joke... --Noldo18 (talk) 20:53, 17 August 2019 (UTC)

Deleted files from magazines without copyrights notice

Hello Jcb,

I saw that you deleted the files that have been flagged as copyright infridgment. I asked questions under the reauest as is:

       Hello All, I find no notice on copyright for Inside Wrestling as per https://www.ebay.ca/itm/Inside-Wrestling-June-1973-Sex-Symbols-Superstar-Graham/232935271986?hash=item363c062e32:g:skEAAOSwjXZbo~rj . Can somebody advise, please? Thank you in advance. --CoffeeEngineer (d) 21:56, 27 May 2019 (UTC)

           Hello Again, and for Wresting Revue the same https://www.ebay.com/itm/Sept-1973-9-73-WRESTLING-REVUE-Yukon-Eric-Kowalski-Gorgeous-George-Ray-Stevens/372382236842?hash=item56b3b600aa:g:85YAAOSwrFxbWg-F

       And for Wrestling Annual, I have that https://www.ebay.fr/itm/GREAT-shape-Wrestling-1974-Magazine-WWF-ladies-annual-Andre-BLOOD-Albano-Ladd/323678885991?hash=item4b5cc3d867:g:FJEAAOSwS4Vb6wx9:rk:19:pf:0

As they are already not available on Commons anymore, I prefer to ask you.

Best regards, --CoffeeEngineer (talk) 18:37, 18 August 2019 (UTC)

The difficulty is that it's unknown whether the pictures at the covers have been published earlier, possibly with a copyright notice. Nominator pointed at this specific problem, but the nomination was in French, so I can imagine that you missed this. Jcb (talk) 20:14, 18 August 2019 (UTC)

Appreciation is in order

Dear Jcb: Looking through some previous interaction I felt that I'd like to thank you sincerely for several instances of kind attention and assistance in the past. I hope we will continue to find constructive solutions, and I'm sorry again for anything that has seemed disrespectful. Best wishes, --SergeWoodzing (talk) 12:18, 19 August 2019 (UTC)

Undeletion request

Hello, you recently deleted a swedish public domain (mark 1.0) photo titled "Aspuddens_skola_flygfoto_(1950).jpg". I had uploaded it to Commons after finding it at the following web page: https://digitaltmuseum.se/011015010707/aspudden-flygfoto Please undelete it, or let me know if something prevents its use on Commons, or if one could change its license: https://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/mark/1.0/deed.en Kopare (talk) 13:02, 20 August 2019 (UTC)

Public Domain Mark is not a valid license, please see here for more information. Jcb (talk) 14:44, 20 August 2019 (UTC)

Ok, so may I upload it again if I add the "PD-Sweden-photo" header that states the reasons why the photo is in the public domain?

You can request undeletion here, while stating correct licensing information. Jcb (talk) 15:57, 21 August 2019 (UTC)

Unsure of which copyright tag to use

I see you've put https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:6ix9ine%27s_mugshot.jpg up for deletion, that's fine. I just want to know which copyright tag to use for Texas mug shots, Florida mug shots use this copyright tag below. Which one should I use for Texas mug shots? {{PD-FLGov}}

The problem is that in most states in the US, works from local government agencies are not PD. Florida is an exception to that and there are a few more. Jcb (talk) 09:51, 23 August 2019 (UTC)

So which copyright tag do I use so it won't get deleted? Michael14375 (talk) 10:42, 23 August 2019 (UTC)

I am afraid that the file will be deleted anyway, because as far as I know the work of this local police department is not PD, so you won't find an applicable license. Jcb (talk) 12:58, 23 August 2019 (UTC)

Ok, thanks for letting me know. Michael14375 (talk) 16:49, 23 August 2019 (UTC)

Trombone.jpg

Dear Jcb,

All of a sudden Trombone.jpg was removed from wikt:nl:trombone. As I cannot find a deletion request, all I know is that it somehow must have violated copyrights, because that's in the subject line of the removal. Could you give me a clue what constituted the infringement and more importantly: is there a way we could get prior notification about the need to replace a picture? --MarcoSwart (talk) 09:20, 25 August 2019 (UTC)

This file was grabbed from a website. In case of obvious copyright violation the standard procedure is to delete a file immediately. Jcb (talk) 09:25, 25 August 2019 (UTC)

File:Varada Acorazado España, Ferrol 1913.jpg

Hola Jbc:

Soy un usuario retirado; Por favor, no molestar con problemas referentes a Wikipedia o a Commons. No estoy interesado en nada que tenga que ver con este maldito proyecto.

Dear Jbc:

I am a retired user; please do not bother with problems regarding wikipedia or commons. I'm not interested in anything that has to do with this damn project.

Atentamente Sincerely Takashi kurita (talk) 19:08, 25 August 2019 (UTC)

Puedes parar las notificaciones a través de correo electrónico aquí. Jcb (talk) 19:15, 25 August 2019 (UTC)

logo fggcbida

Hey why did you remove a logo of Federal Government Girls College Bida, what is that for, I hate what you did, pls revert the logo back ( Wazirinbida (talk) 22:05, 26 August 2019 (UTC))

Please don't upload copyright violations. Jcb (talk) 14:30, 27 August 2019 (UTC)

N222 w1150 (35399250546).jpg

Why did you delete File:N222 w1150 (35399250546).jpg? What does "PDM" mean? The source says the file is public domain, as does the instance on BHL. --NessieVL (talk) 16:42, 27 August 2019 (UTC)

The source says Public Domain Mark. This is not a valid license, actually it's not a license at all. Please see here for more information. Jcb (talk) 16:47, 27 August 2019 (UTC)

@Jcb: The source also says it was published in 1897. It wasn't a spurious label, it was accurate. --NessieVL (talk) 21:08, 29 August 2019 (UTC)

You did not bother to click the link in my previous message apparently... Jcb (talk) 21:11, 29 August 2019 (UTC)

Hall of Fame jpg

Hallo Warum wurde das Handball Hall of Fame Logo entfernt? Cele4 (talk) 10:43, 28 August 2019 (UTC)

Sehe Commons:Deletion requests/File:LogoHallOfFame.png - Jcb (talk) 15:06, 28 August 2019 (UTC)

Help with deletion request / communication

Hi! Here you closed the discussion two hours after my edit on the issue and my pinging of Patrick Rogel. Sorry if I hi-jacked the discussion, but I thought the subject header might well cover my case as well. I don't have any axe to grind with anyone, I'm just trying to get Patrick Rogel to reply to my request and the requests from others regarding a deletion request he started. I he cannot help us, maybe you could? Or maybe you could point me to someone else that could help us? All the best wikigreetings. --Paracel63 (talk) 12:55, 29 August 2019 (UTC)

@Paracel63: I launch dozens of deletion requests per day and please excuse me if I don't follow every ones. Concerning the specific discussion you're refering to I didn't reply to your sollicitation because I've nothing to add to what I've already wrote. Everyone is volunteer here and Administrators as well so please wait one of them has time to close this discussion. --Patrick Rogel (talk) 13:30, 29 August 2019 (UTC)

@Paracel63: I am keep-closing the DR, because PD-Sweden is fine for these files after all. But if you state that a title like "Problematic user - Patrick Rogel" 'covers' your case, then you are really at the wrong track. This is not how we cooperate here. Patrick is a highly valuated volunteer here. Almost all his DRs lead to deletion. A 100% success rate for DRs is highly unlikely and not needed. The whole point of a DR is that people can respond to the nomination, which may lead or may not lead to different insights by closing administrator. Please refrain from becoming personal when disagreeing on a DR. Post your arguments in the DR and don't abuse COM:AN/U for it. Jcb (talk) 14:34, 29 August 2019 (UTC)

Thanks for getting back to me. And thanks for helping to solve this issue, Jcb. Sorry if I didn't follow the correct protocol here (I'm willing to learn the right way to do it the next time around). My concern was that this DR would not be left out in the cold, as Patrick Rogel didn't respond to any of the (at least) four times the other people in the discussion tried to get his attention. To me that didn't seem like a good sign. Neither did the silence following my attempt at getting his attention with contacting him at his discussion page. The many (to say the least) unanswered requests for contact on that particular discussion page didn't strike me as constructive either. From looking at this user contribution history I gather that Patrick Rogel do a lot of useful things on Wikimedia Commons. And, yes, we are all volunteers her, but I think the notion of not leaving an initiated discussion/request in a state of limbo would be a better way of doing things. Again, I'm sorry if I stepped on someone's toe. And I dearly hope the other people waiting for answers at Patrick Rogel's discussion page will get theirs in due time. Next time around, I will not wait for him to get back to me, rather try to find another person less overburdened with DR work to help me out. All the best. --Paracel63 (talk) 20:20, 29 August 2019 (UTC)

The best thing to do is just to post your arguments in the DR without expecting someone particular to respond. In the end an administrator will come and will read what everybody wrote and draw his own conclusion. Some DRs will stay open for a longer time than others, but in the end not a single DR will be forgotten. Jcb (talk) 21:04, 29 August 2019 (UTC)

Copyright status: File:1942 Robert Beill.jpg

This is a copy of the photo to Robert Beill military document from around 1942 year (over 77 years ago), which was stored in the RAF Northolt Polish Air Force archives (UK). The copy of this photo was handed over to Poland some years ago and was published several times (it doesn't matter where and on which internet pages). According to Polish (and I'm sure for other too) copyright regulations, this type of photo for documents (made under strict regulations) is not legally a work, as it does not contain any creative elements. Therefore, it is not even subject to the Copyright law. Please change the decision and withdraw this decision, that this file could be deleted. ~~

All files at Commons need a valid license, please see COM:L. Also your claim that this would not be a work is not in line with copyright regulations. Jcb (talk) 15:44, 29 August 2019 (UTC)

Let's please study the full description of this photo: https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Charles_Lindbergh_1925.JPG and compare it with the Robert Beill (and his several collegues from Bomber Squadrons) photo. The most probably, this photo was made by any soldier (or worked for) of RAF or the Polish Air Force and therefore is in public domain today (plus over 77 years ago!).

It is difficult to understand why the photograph of the person about whom is the entry in the encyclopedia(wikipedia) is to be so protected. This is, after all, against the interests of this person - long dead, when in many cases it is the only visual image/photo after him. Iszkowski (talk) 16:52, 29 August 2019 (UTC)

I hope you don't expect me to end up in some philosophical discussion about the existence of copyright laws. Jcb (talk) 17:24, 29 August 2019 (UTC)

Sorry, I don't expect from you any philosophical discusison, of course. I expect the change of your decision about this photo, according to Charles Lindbergh photo case as an equivalence example. Otherwise, who from wikipedia team (staff or volunteer) can help me to find the appropiate procedure to publish such type of photos on wikipedia site. I have some other similar. Iszkowski (talk) 17:22, 30 August 2019 (UTC)

You must add a license, otherwise the file will be deleted. That's not my decision, that's our policy. Jcb (talk) 17:53, 30 August 2019 (UTC)

File:1965 war.jpg

I see that File:1965 war.jpg was deleted. I'm not sure if you're aware, but the conclusion at Commons:Deletion requests/File:1965 war.jpg was 'kept'. May I know why was it deleted then? —Sarvatra (talk, contribs) 02:34, 30 August 2019 (UTC)

cc User:Gbawden who concluded the DR. —Sarvatra (talk, contribs) 02:36, 30 August 2019 (UTC)

Hi. Jcb deleted the file for not having a license after I closed the DR. I will restore it Gbawden (talk) 06:05, 30 August 2019 (UTC)

The file still does not contain a machine readable license. This will have to be added, or the file will be deleted again. Jcb (talk) 08:27, 30 August 2019 (UTC)

File:דמיטרי צ'ובחין.jpg

File [[8]] has valid licence (PD-israel), and Author and Source fields are filled. But I still see the warning. What is the problem?

Another question: I scanned myself and uploaded a file of the old photo (with expired rights). Who is the "authour" of the file? Myself, for creating the file, or the photographer? Do I need to mention both? Zyakov (talk) 07:18, 30 August 2019 (UTC)

The author is the photographer. Scanning a picture does not make you the author. Jcb (talk) 08:30, 30 August 2019 (UTC)

Mosaics in the Zoloty Vorota.jpg

Hi, you've deleted File:Mosaics in the Zoloty Vorota.jpg. It's not OTRS fraud (At least I didn't know about it). Please look at the page Category:Zoloti Vorota Metro Station: "Files in this category depict a work by the architect Anatolii Krushynskyi which is copyrighted. The copyright owner provided permission to license images of this work under Creative CommonsAttribution 3.0 Unported Licence." I just copied this permission. And after that could you restore a file?

Sincerely yours, Rasal Hague (talk) 07:31, 30 August 2019 (UTC)

You added a PermissionOTRS template to the file and you are not an OTRS agent. Don't do such a thing again or you will find yourself blocked. Jcb (talk) 08:32, 30 August 2019 (UTC)

Thank you!! I wrote I didn't know about it. Sorry! And why I will do such a thing again? I just ask you to restore that file. Could you? Thanks! Rasal Hague (talk) 08:52, 30 August 2019 (UTC)

I am not assisting you in this. Just be happy that you did not get blocked over it. Jcb (talk) 08:55, 30 August 2019 (UTC)

:D As Socrates said: "Speak so that I may see you." Good luck Rasal Hague (talk) 09:50, 30 August 2019 (UTC)

Deletion request Artworks OTRS

Hi Jcb, thanks for helping me and giving me time to fix this (7 days). I thought I was doing the right thing, because when i uploaded the file it said to put the OTRS submission in the source field. So i'm currently asking all the artists to send a mail to the OTRS system. The photo's i've used are made by the artists themselves, but also published on the website of www.musiom.nl (What do i need to put in the source field to fix this?

A.kalteren (talk) 17:09, 30 August 2019 (UTC)

At least several pictures are obviously not made by themselves: the pictures depicting them. In the source field you need to put the source, that is, where you got the files from (e.g. received from the photographer). Jcb (talk) 15:32, 30 August 2019 (UTC)

Ok! I changed one for now [Richard Smeets], is this how u ment it? If thats good I will also change the other ones. Ofcourse I will ask the photographer to send permission aswell. A.kalteren (talk) 17:44, 30 August 2019 (UTC)

Yes, that's the way. Also please be aware that the 'author' field should contain the name of the photographer, not the name of the depicted person. Jcb (talk) 15:54, 30 August 2019 (UTC)

Ok, will do. I'll let u know when i changed them all. Thank you! A.kalteren (talk) 17:56, 30 August 2019 (UTC)

I've changed the source (and author in some cases) of all the works that were flagged. I hope this is sufficient enough. In the case of the photographs made of the artists, i will also ask the photographer to give permission by OTRS. Look forward to your reaction and i hope the flag can be deleted! A.kalteren (talk) 21:12, 30 August 2019 (UTC)

Thanks! I will remove the problem tags. Can you take a look at the Hans Janssen and Theo Schouten files? (You can find them here) I did not tag those files, because they were already in the OTRS process, but they have the same problem. Jcb (talk) 19:18, 30 August 2019 (UTC)

Haha, just did! I missed those in the row, so I went to check on them. Filled in the same information as at the other ones. Is the OTRS process going to be alright now?A.kalteren (talk) 21:20, 30 August 2019 (UTC)

Today I responded to both artists. Both tickets will need a permission from the photographer as well, but I think he is already in CC of my response, so I think this will probably be in order soon. Jcb (talk) 19:27, 30 August 2019 (UTC)

Good to hear! One more question. I accidently uploaded the wrong picture (a cut-out) from one of the artworks of Albert Niemeyer. He asked if i could remove it and upload the new one. So I uploaded the new one, but is there a way I can delete the old one? Or should I wait for the permission date to expire? This is the one that needs to be deleted: Albert Niemeyer - Warhol A.kalteren (talk) 21:40, 30 August 2019 (UTC)

In principle we can delete files on uploader request without formalities if the file is uploaded less than 7 days ago. I have deleted the file. Jcb (talk) 19:51, 30 August 2019 (UTC)

Thank You! A.kalteren (talk) 23:30, 30 August 2019 (UTC)

It went wrong again.. the picture didn't load well. Could u delete the next one aswell? Or is there a other place where i should ask this? The work that needs to be deleted is: link A.kalteren (talk) 21:0, 31 August 2019 (UTC)

 Done - you can also add {{Speedy|Uploader request}} to the file description page. That should work as well. Jcb (talk) 20:34, 31 August 2019 (UTC)

File:Katarzyna Nowak.jpg and File:Katarzyna Nowak 2.jpg

Hi,

Could you undelete the files: File:Katarzyna Nowak.jpg and File:Katarzyna Nowak 2.jpg? A proper OTRS agreement has just been sent: Ticket:2019072310009776. Cheers, Polimerek (talk) 20:36, 30 August 2019 (UTC)

@Polimerek:  Done - please process the ticket - Jcb (talk) 20:38, 30 August 2019 (UTC)

Photo Georges Biard

Bonjour, j'ai importer ces photos: File:Anne Le Ny fête du cinéma 2019.jpg, File:Bérengère Krief fête du cinéma 2019.jpg, File:Chantal Ladesou fête du cinéma 2019.jpg, File:Emmanuelle Devos fête du cinéma 2019.jpg, File:Frédéric Chau fête du cinéma 2019.jpg, File:Marilou Berry fête du cinéma 2019 2.jpg, File:Marilou Berry fête du cinéma 2019.jpg, File:Medi Sadoun et Marilou Berry fête du cinéma 2019.jpg, File:Nicolas Duvauchelle fête du cinéma 2019.jpg, File:Raphaël Personnaz fête du cinéma 2019.jpg

J'ai resollicité le photographe hier qui va envoyé la confirmation de ces photos si ce n'est déja fait, merci de retirer les bandeaux de suppression. Cordialement --NinoDu21 (msg) 23:36, 30 August 2019 (UTC)

We did not (yet) receive anything at OTRS. As soon as a valid permission is handled by an OTRS admin, they will take care of undeletion. Jcb (talk) 21:46, 30 August 2019 (UTC)

File:To the Witches' Revels.jpg

Would you please undelete this file? An OTRS email was sent at its upload, and I would be happy to add those details. In the future, a simple notice on a user's talk page would prevent the need to delete and then undelete. --Usernameunique (talk) 22:35, 30 August 2019 (UTC)

As soon as a valid permission is processed by an OTRS agent, they will take care of undeletion. Jcb (talk) 22:36, 30 August 2019 (UTC)

Jcb, now that the file has been restored, it is clear that, in fact, I had already added the OTRS pending template. Going forward, when such is the case, it would be significantly more helpful to reach out to a uploader and tell them that there is a problem with the ticket (here, the first email did not go through), than to delete the file without notice. --Usernameunique (talk) 16:14, 4 September 2019 (UTC)

That may be nice if we would have plenty of staff, which we don't have. What you ask would add an unreasonable extra workload for an already way too small team of volunteers. Jcb (talk) 16:18, 4 September 2019 (UTC)

Even if you immediately delete such files—which I do think is problematic—it would hardly take an inordinate amount of time to cut and paste a notification onto the uploaders' talk pages, who can then respond accordingly. Your own talk page is a history of the confusion generated by the refusal to do so. --Usernameunique (talk) 23:50, 4 September 2019 (UTC)

Snapchat

Why do you think the Snapchat logo passes the threshold of originality? Benjamin (talk) 01:29, 31 August 2019 (UTC)

Why do you think it doesn't? Jcb (talk) 08:30, 31 August 2019 (UTC)

Löschung der Bilder im Artikel über die Künstlerin Edith Meyer von Kamptz

Hallo Jcb,

die von dir veranlasste Löschung der Bilder in meinem Artikel über die Künstlerin Edith Meyer von Kamptz hat mich sehr befremdet! Ich hatte bereits vor einigen Tagen mitgeteilt, dass ich die Bilder, für die ich die Veröffentlichungsrechte besitze (!), bei OTRS mit einer offiziellen Einverständniserklärung gemeldet und die Antwort erhalten hatte, die Dateien verwenden zu dürfen (Ticket#2019082410002368 - Einverständniserklärung (Rechte-Inhaber))! Insofern erscheint mir die Löschung nicht gerechtfertigt. Ich möchte dich also bitten, die ursprüngliche Version des Artikels mit den vollständigen Abbildungen wiederherzustellen!

Beste Grüße --H. B. Vollmer (talk) 09:44, 31 August 2019 (UTC)

Thanks for the notification. The OTRS process was handled incompletely. Everything should be fine now. Jcb (talk) 10:00, 31 August 2019 (UTC)

Panisea

@Jcb: Request: Rebuilding of Panisea and synonyms. Pictures are available. Orchi (talk) 13:39, 31 August 2019 (UTC)

Orchis patens subsp. canariensis

@Jcb: Request: Rebuilding of Orchis patens subsp. canariensis and synonyms. Pictures are available. Orchi (talk) 13:39, 31 August 2019 (UTC)

Tropidia formosana

@Jcb: Request: Rebuilding of Tropidia formosana and synonyms. Pictures are available. Orchi (talk) 13:39, 31 August 2019 (UTC)

@Orchi: I have undeleted the pages, but please make sure to add specific pictures. Don't use the two pictures that you have been adding to hundreds of gallery pages, that's pointless of course. Jcb (talk) 16:14, 31 August 2019 (UTC)

File:IBM 360-44.5.jpg

Here's a copy of the correspondence with User:Hiàn regarding this series of photos. She suggested I contact you. Note that I am not the original uploader of these photos. I'm not sure Ken is a registered user, and may not know the byzantine complexities of licensing.

For God's sake, stop already with the deleting already!! Here is the email Ken sent me when he uploaded these photos. Please note the statement "photos of the Model 44 _for Wikipedia_," i.e. the LCM gave permission for use of these photos. Complete note follows...

Thank you!

On 7/1/19 5:10 PM, Ken Shirriff wrote: > Hi Peter! I received 5 photos of the Model 44 from the Living Computer Museum and uploaded them to wikimedia: > https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:IBM_360-44.1.jpg > https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:IBM_360-44.2.jpg > https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:IBM_360-44.3.jpg > https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:IBM_360-44.4.jpg > https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:IBM_360-44.5.jpg > > Ken > > On Wed, Jun 19, 2019 at 5:25 PM Ken Shirriff <ken.shirriff@gmail.com> wrote: > > Update: I got 3 photos from the Living Computer Museum approved, but then realized they sent photos of the Model 65, not the Model 44. So I'll see if I can get some good Model 44 photos from them. > > Ken > > On Mon, Jun 3, 2019 at 8:58 AM Peter Flass <Peter@iron-spring.com> wrote: > > Great! Thank you. It looks pretty much like a lot of other 360s, but it would be nice to have a photo for completeness. > > Pete > > On 6/2/19 5:05 PM, Ken Shirriff wrote: >> Hi Peter! Just an update - I talked to the Living Computer Museum and they're working on getting some better photos of the Model 44 for Wikipedia. >> >> Ken >> >> On Mon, May 27, 2019 at 8:50 AM Peter Flass <Peter@iron-spring.com> wrote: >> >> Ken, I'm interesting in using the photo of the S/360 M44 at >> http://static.righto.com/images/ibm-360/ibm-360-44-lcm.jpg for the >> corresponding Wikipedia article. What is the copyright status? I see >> it's from the Living Computer Museum, is it your own photo? Would you be >> willing to give permission? Thanks. >> >

Peter Flass (talk) 21:53, 30 August 2019 (UTC)

Hi there Peter Flass. Unfortunately CommonsDelinker is not a human, so you'll have to contact the administrator that deleted the files (I'll point you to c:User talk:Jcb). As for the reason behind the deletions, I'll give a quick guess as to why the files were deleted (though as a disclaimer, I am not an OTRS volunteer). You do appear to have gotten permission to upload the photos, however it appears that you hadn't emailed the OTRS team. Generally, photo permissions should go through them (they can be likened to designated volunteers) as their role is to verify whether permission is credible. Thus, I suggest you leave a note on the OTRS noticeboard or email the OTRS team to proceed any further. Should you have further questions about OTRS, there's a handy guide detailing the system. Best regards, and let me know if you have any questions. Hiàn (talk) 22:17, 30 August 2019 (UTC)

Hiàn is right. Permissions should be sent to OTRS, but we never received anything. So please make sure that the permission goes to OTRS. As soon as an OTRS agent handles a valid permission, they will take care of undeletion. Jcb (talk) 20:38, 31 August 2019 (UTC)