User talk:Leoboudv

From Wikimedia Commons, the free media repository
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Welcome to the Commons, Leoboudv!
Afrikaans | Alemannisch | asturianu | azərbaycanca | Bahasa Banjar | català | čeština | Cymraeg | dansk | Deutsch | Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ | English | español | Esperanto | euskara | estremeñu | français | Frysk | galego | hrvatski | Bahasa Indonesia | interlingua | Interlingue | íslenska | italiano | Kiswahili | Kurdî | Latina | lietuvių | magyar | Bahasa Melayu | Mirandés | Nederlands | norsk bokmål | occitan | Plattdüütsch | polski | português | português do Brasil | română | rumantsch | Scots | shqip | sicilianu | slovenčina | slovenščina | Basa Sunda | suomi | svenska | Tagalog | Türkçe | vèneto | Tiếng Việt | Zazaki | Ελληνικά | беларуская | беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ | български | Ирон | македонски | нохчийн | русский | српски / srpski | тоҷикӣ | українська | ქართული | Հայերեն | नेपाली | भोजपुरी | मराठी | हिन्दी | অসমীয়া | বাংলা | தமிழ் | മലയാളം | සිංහල | ไทย | ၽႃႇသႃႇတႆး  | မြန်မာဘာသာ | 한국어 | 日本語 | 中文 | 中文（台灣）‎ | 中文（简体）‎ | 中文（繁體）‎ | 粵語 | עברית | اردو | العربية | تۆرکجه | سنڌي | فارسی | +/−
First steps tutorial

Our first steps help file and our FAQ will help you a lot after registration. They explain how to customize the interface (for example the language), how to upload files and our basic licensing policy. You don't need technical skills in order to contribute here. Be bold contributing here and assume good faith for the intentions of others. This is a wiki - it is really easy.

Getting help

More information is available at the Community Portal. You may ask questions at the Help desk, Village Pump or on IRC channel #wikimedia-commons. You can also contact an administrator on their talk page. If you have a specific copyright question, ask at Commons talk:Licensing.

Goodies, tips and tricks
  • Put Babel boxes on your user page so others know what languages you can speak and indicate your Graphics abilities.
  • All your uploads are stored in your personal Gallery
  • Please sign your name on Talk pages by typing ~~~~
  • Use the CommonSense tool to find good categories for your files (then other people can find them too!)
  • To link to an image page, write this: [[:Image:Foo.jpg]], it makes this: Image:Foo.jpg
  • If you're copying files from another project, be sure to use the CommonsHelper
Made a mistake?
  • Did you want to rename or move a file? Simply upload the file again and mark the old one like this: {{bad name|Correct name}}
  • For more information read the full Deletion guidelines
(P.S. Would you like to provide feedback on this message?)


Archive 1 Archive 2 Archive 3

License reviews for Jan Arkesteijn uploads

[edit]

Hi, I have overwritten and redone the license review you added back in April for File:Hermann-Josef Lamberti (2014).jpg (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs). The reason Flickrreview failed was because the image had been digitally changed, including the EXIF data. By overwriting with the digitally authentic original, the automatic review has now worked and I have made a recrop, keeping the colours authentic to the photographer's original choices.

As Jan Arkesteijn has been blocked for similar issues of misrepresenting original works, I suggest following a similar workflow if oddly coloured images from a different Flickr original come up. Thanks --Fæ (talk) 11:07, 10 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

  • I believe all Jan Arkesteijn's images were cropped but came from the same source. That is why I passed them. I'll have a brief look. Wow! Jan's user page is now blocked! I did not know this. Best, --Leoboudv (talk) 19:42, 10 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Comment:

Dear Fæ,

Most (80+%) of Jan's images I reviewed are from librarie mollat below and usually have only 1 image in them by Jan.

  • For this image below, it appears that Jan made the image brighter. Is that a problem...when the license is free?
  • File:Sophie Divry (2018).jpg

That is my only question. Thanks, --Leoboudv (talk) 20:16, 10 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

There are two types of misrepresentation, which has led to some photographs getting deleted and the uploader being blocked at this moment:
  1. Add false colours to original professional works based on personal tastes, which damages educational value per Scope, rather than adding any apparent value. For non-GLAM works this is probably unlikely to cause contention, but could still be debatable if a representative original is never uploaded to Commons
  2. Adding copyright statements to EXIF data which misrepresents the copyright statements at source
In the Flickr cases, reverting to the Flickr original solves any potential debate and the bot-verification provides a nice record of authenticity even if the image is then cropped.
Picking out one of the cases you list (I only looked at two), File:Nina Bouraoui (2016).jpg has a correct claim on the image page text, but the EXIF data on the file includes the statements "Online copyright statement https://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/mark/1.0/" and "Usage terms Public domain" which is clearly false and invalidates your license review. Sorry. Please handle uploads from this user with more caution than normal. --Fæ (talk) 06:16, 11 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Comment: I agree they say PD-Mark in the EXIF but they use CC BY 3.0 for the {{|Youtube}} license according to COM:WHERE LICENSE for this and many other images. I usually verify the Youtube license unless I see something supicious.

For these 2 images below, librarie mollat says the license is CC BY 3.0 in the metadata so I guess I have to file a DR on the first image you mentioned which is PD-Mark.

Best, --Leoboudv (talk) 10:07, 11 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Manual removal of review needed category

[edit]

Hi, thanks for your reviewing of Tasnim works. Can you please manually remove the Tasnimnews review needed category when you perform your review, so that they just don't appear there. Regards. --Mhhossein talk 10:28, 25 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Should I request license reviews for extracted screenshots?

[edit]

I just uploaded File:Lynn Gilmartin Previews WPT Montreal at Playground Poker Club.webm and extracted 15 screenshots from it. I wonder, is a license review for the video sufficient or should I also request license reviews for all the screenshots? - Alexis Jazz ping plz 16:49, 25 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Images from lasvegasvegas.com

[edit]

I'm cleaning up some files from lasvegasvegas.com. What to do with File:Marty Smyth.jpg and File:LizLieu.jpg? - Alexis Jazz ping plz 18:56, 25 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Women in Red Award

[edit]
2018 Autumn Award
Thank you for your help this Autumn. We have loaded over 365 picture of Women from Nigeria as well as others. Your unwavering support and assistance when required have been invaluable. Have a great Christmas when you get there. Victuallers (talk) 11:35, 1 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

image review

[edit]

Hi, would you be able to review this image for me? Regards. ArturSik (talk) 20:25, 18 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Daphne

[edit]

MUM

[edit]

Article on my late mum. --Leoboudv (talk) 20:27, 14 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

A request for License Review

[edit]

Hello! Could you please perform license reviews of the files File:David Johnson at Opal Gallery March 25, 2010.jpg (slated to be on the Main page of Wikipedia shortly) and File:David Johnson at Opal Gallery March 25, 2010 (2).jpg? Thanks, and let me know if you would like me to review any files you've uploaded. --Animalparty (talk) 05:13, 31 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you! --Animalparty (talk) 19:50, 1 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Dominee Gremdaat

[edit]

You had reviewed File:Dominee Gremdaat in 2018 3 (cropped).jpg and other screenshots from the video, so you know the license is correct. Could you please review File:Dominee Gremdaat - SorryJohan.webm? - Alexis Jazz ping plz 15:20, 1 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

File:Alchemilla xanthochlora herbarium (02).jpg

[edit]

This picture has licence CC BY 4.0. Please put it back. See https://www.gbif.org/occurrence/1838164229. Rasbak (talk) 11:05, 3 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Some stroopwafels for you!

[edit]
For helping out with User:Alexis Jazz/DWDD archief! I saw you already had three "Tireless contributor" barnstars, so here's a Dutch treat. - Alexis Jazz ping plz 09:04, 5 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Photo

[edit]

Can you explain me this? Chronus (talk) 00:00, 14 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

(talk page stalker) @Chronus: what is there to explain? Commons does not consider the Public Domain Mark to be a license. There have been discussions about this and the policy so far hasn't been changed. You can ask Flickr accounts that use the PDM to switch to CC0. - Alexis Jazz ping plz 00:08, 14 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Comment: PD Mark is not considered an enforceable license on Commons and the copyright holder can remove or change the license of the image at any time and no one can use it. It is not enforceable...unless it is a US Government image since US Government images are Public Domain by US law. So, this image is not acceptable since it comes from someone's personal account. {{CC0}} or public domain dedication such as this image on flickr is OK for Commons. Best, --Leoboudv (talk) 09:08, 14 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
(talk page stalker) note that PD Mark is also valid for images that are in the public domain due to age. But in any case, images with a PD-Mark need to have the corresponding PD license when uploaded to Commons like {{PD-USGov}}, {{PD-old-auto-expired}}, {{PD-Italy}}, etc. - Alexis Jazz ping plz 13:45, 14 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Linking the original on DRs

[edit]

Commons:Deletion requests/File:Russian Orthodox Church in Antwerpen (Sint-Jozefkerk).jpg

Could you please link the original on Flickr in cases like these? The "bad authors" list is an absolute mess and shouldn't, in and of itself, be considered as a reason for deletion. Thanks to Google I was able to find the source: https://www.flickr.com/photos/centralasian/7935754578/in/photostream/. This Flickr account was blacklisted because of https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Commons:Office_actions/DMCA_notices&oldid=260924975#Igor_Stravinsky.2C_New_York_City_.281946.29. https://www.flickr.com/people/centralasian/ states: "The majority of the photograph in this Flickr stream are of my own 'production'. I post them here to share with the community but also to use them in my blogs, so this stream works as a storage space (these days they call it 'cloud'). At some point I began to gather here not only my own works, but also the images of other people - photographs, artworks, charts, maps, and whatnots. I try to attribute all these works as accurately as I can, but it's not always possible, unfortunately. Too many things are just 'laying there' on the web, unattributed and untitled."

The photo that was deleted here per that DR appears to have been own work. They appear to own at least a Canon EOS 5D Mark II and an iPhone 4. - Alexis Jazz ping plz 15:53, 15 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

  •  Comment: The problem is when people mix their own work with clear flickrwashes (licensed freely) on their account. What can an admin or reviewer do? Thanks for the advice. Best, --Leoboudv (talk) 19:38, 15 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Approval

[edit]
@Leoboudv: Please approve this image https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Jason_Day_actor.jpg --Zabnef (talk) 20:34, 15 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Deletion requests

[edit]

Are you sure of this photographs taken on date?

[edit]

Hi, File:Hygrocybe intermedia (Pass.) Fayod 494229.jpg have Exif date 2014-09-14 but in the {{Information}} find 2014-12-20. You remember the right date? Thanks :-) --Threecharlie (talk) 07:50, 7 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks :-) --Threecharlie (talk) 07:32, 8 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Photos

[edit]

Hello I asked delete five photos that myself uploaded in the category:FS D.342.2000 and a photo in the FS D.342.4000. Please Can you delete?--Marinaio56 (talk) 11:26, 11 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]


About the Albatros D.VII picture. I have searched and found only two pictures of the Albatros D.VII. One is already in the wikimedia commons the other was found here. https://riseofflight.com/forum/topic/33215-curiouser-and-curiouser-albatros-dvii/ Supposedly it's public domain just as the other one but since I could not upload it as such I used the flickr. 

Since I thought they are from the same source and the other was in flickr and belongs to a museum I thought this one was also. I cannot find any more informations about that photo altough since it's one in a kind and the only one of the prototype looking from the front I thought it was a good idea. I apologize for any inconvenience.  --João Silva 7

Some bubble tea for you!

[edit]
Thanks for doing all those license reviews! It's very appreciated! Kaldari (talk) 23:35, 12 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Question

[edit]

Hi. You accepted this file. The fact that the people who made the charts let their work to be PD, does that change the rights about the map behind? I mean are we not obliged to check the status of the original source when we review a DW? Thanks. --E4024 (talk) 03:21, 13 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

File:1973 Calabanga Church.jpg

[edit]

hi thank you, i dont know why the page are missing nor have been lost. but even though i hope dont erase the picture because in my opinion, it is the only photos i saw taken from 1973. sorry :( --ShiminUfesoj (talk) 08:43, 13 March 2019 (UTC)[reply] 

here [[1]] — Preceding unsigned comment added by ShiminUfesoj (talk • contribs) 08:46, 13 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

License review needed

[edit]

Hello, Leoboudv. Category:License review needed is a bit crowded; would you mind giving me a hand in emptying it? Thank you. --Chiyako92 (talk) 18:23, 17 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Notification about possible deletion

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

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

Please remember to respond to and – if appropriate – contradict the arguments supporting deletion. Arguments which focus on the nominator will not affect the result of the nomination. Thank you!
Afrikaans ∙ العربية ∙ беларуская ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца) ∙ български ∙ ပအိုဝ်ႏဘာႏသာႏ ∙ বাংলা ∙ bosanski ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ dansk ∙ Deutsch ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form) ∙ Zazaki ∙ ދިވެހިބަސް ∙ Ελληνικά ∙ English ∙ Esperanto ∙ español ∙ eesti ∙ فارسی ∙ suomi ∙ français ∙ galego ∙ עברית ∙ hrvatski ∙ magyar ∙ հայերեն ∙ Bahasa Indonesia ∙ íslenska ∙ italiano ∙ 日本語 ∙ 한국어 ∙ 조선말 ∙ македонски ∙ മലയാളം ∙ Bahasa Melayu ∙ မြန်မာဘာသာ ∙ norsk bokmål ∙ Plattdüütsch ∙ Nederlands ∙ norsk nynorsk ∙ norsk ∙ occitan ∙ polski ∙ پښتو ∙ português ∙ português do Brasil ∙ română ∙ русский ∙ sicilianu ∙ slovenčina ∙ slovenščina ∙ shqip ∙ српски / srpski ∙ svenska ∙ ไทย ∙ Türkçe ∙ українська ∙ Tiếng Việt ∙ 中文 ∙ 中文（简体） ∙ 中文（繁體） ∙ +/−

Affected:


Yours sincerely, Majora (talk) 14:56, 23 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Image: Wojciech Sadurski.JPG

[edit]

Please, could You delete the first thumbnail (unsuccessful one) of the image and leave only the second one (the latest version). I want to avoid a possibility of vandalism by reverting it.
Thank You very much.

Artur Andrzej (talk) 22:19, 23 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Deviantart

[edit]
@Leoboudv: Hi Leoboudv please approve this image https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Hola_soy_german_by_glamrect.png --Xoaw (talk) 17:34, 7 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Image

[edit]
@Leoboudv: PLease hel me the image that you approved they want to eliminate, I do not know why, please help me https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Hola_soy_german_by_glamrect.png --Xoaw (talk) 02:11, 9 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Flickr reviews

[edit]

Hi! Often Flickr files could not be reviewed by bots because they are downscaled (not the same as cropped). They should be overwriten with the Flickr original, then they can be reviewed by bots again. I saw File:AdelaideClemens2013.jpg and File:Ital food - 01.jpg and did the re-upload.--Roy17 (talk) 18:52, 9 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Foto

[edit]

Saludos!!! Me puedes verificar esta foto por favor, es de un video oficial de YouTube VERIFICADO del tipo Creative Commons. Gracias.

File:Pexels-photo-132694.jpg

[edit]

Sorry, Leoboudv, but your changes are totally wrong! You should have get startled with the Pixabay username. This image was copied from Pexels to Pixabay. I think you should revert your changes and do the review for the Pexels source (oh, no, you already had reviewed it). — Speravir – 18:57, 23 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

OK On a general note: During the MaxPixels action recently I actually thought whether we should treat Pexels similarily like Pixabay, especially with own template with LR included (the template exists: {{Pexels-Cc-zero}}), but than I saw that there are not that much images here (at least in cat. Files from Pexels; on the other hand see search results for file: pexels -hastemplate:"pexels-cc-zero") and forgot it. That the license has changed not that long ago I did not know BTW. Did you check with the Wayback Machine? — Speravir – 19:27, 23 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, these sites copy/copied from each other. For this other example the Pexels user is named Pixabay. Actually this user naming is quite good for us I think. In my opinion we should try to give the real source as far as possible for us which can be very hard, you know it yourself. BTW there is also a Pixabay user WikimediaImages, cf. at VP: Pixabay user "WikimediaImages".
Regarding your “I can try if I have the time:”What do you refer to? The template? I would do this myself, I was also partly involved in template {{Pixabay}} enhancement. But do we need it when we have the general {{LicenseReview}}? This said: I do not understand why the Pexels equivalent is not simply named {{Pexels}} (I would favor moving this to this name i.e. vice versa). — Speravir – 22:46, 23 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • I was referring to the fact that I have a job and have to work. That is all. I don't mind why the Pexels equivalent is not simply named {{Pexels}} as long as the image was really CC0 at upload because a new pexels image today is not CC0. That is why we have {{LicenseReview}} for new uploaded Pexel images. Thank You, --Leoboudv (talk) 23:51, 23 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
OK, then we leave it as it is. — Speravir – 02:26, 25 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

File

[edit]

File:Mohamed ElBaradei, Former Vice-President of Egypt, Nobel Peace Prize 2005, Egypt (42112286531).jpg

Is the file free? --Panam2014 (talk) 18:34, 6 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

  • Yes it is. From this Flickr license table the Attribution, Attribution-ShareAlike and Public Domain Dedication licenses are free since there is NO Non-Commercial or No-Derivative restriction. Public domain Mark flickr license images like this are NOT OK since they are not legally enforceable. Best, --Leoboudv (talk) 00:54, 7 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
And about File:Official portrait of Petro Poroshenko.jpg. --Panam2014 (talk) 18:30, 21 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Lil Pump authorship resolved

[edit]

https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Lil_Pump%27s_mugshot.jpg

Are you able to review my upload now that the authorship issue has been resolved? Michael14375 (talk) 11:36, 8 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Your Flickr link?

[edit]

The Flickr account link on your user page doesn't go anywhere useful. --GRuban (talk) 04:33, 11 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I'm sorry to bother you,but can you help me?

[edit]

Seems like nobody handle this matter.

Could you possibly do me a favour? Please help reviewed the picture. Appreciate your help.

Thank you so much!! Maddie Rice (talk) 14:18, 19 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

This images

[edit]
@Leoboudv: your approval is needed for these images File:Thelma Fardin.jpg,File:Hulk in CDMX.jpg,File:Andrés Bustamante.jpg,File:Magdalena Leonel de Cervantes.jpg,File:Cuauhtémoc Billete.jpg,File:Guaicaipuro billete.jpg,File:Luis-Doctor García.jpg,File:Christian Martinoli 2.jpg,File:Ana Serradilla.jpg,File:Cecilio Guzmán de Rojas.jpg,File:Dámaso Pérez Prado.jpg --Xoaw (talk) 17:24, 20 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
This is a sock that has asked for your approval before. Be extra careful when reviewing. - Alexis Jazz ping plz 19:55, 20 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
No need for checkuser
  • No need, because they pass the duck test. Blocks don't deter this user though, they will just register a new account in 2 seconds and carry on. So might as well let them keep this one so license reviewers know what they are dealing with. - Alexis Jazz ping plz 09:44, 21 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
@Leoboudv: Please I need you aprovation File:Duko.jpg,File:Duko concierto.jpg,File:Duko Freestyle.jpg--Xoaw (talk) 22:32, 1 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
@Leoboudv: Please--Xoaw (talk) 22:37, 1 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I hope you like dogs..

[edit]

Can you review these?

As you can see in the file history, FlickreviewR 2 confirmed these as being available with PD-mark in 2018, but the photos have been removed from Flickr since that time. I can't simply revert to that version because there was no PD-template on the page at that time. My best guess is that these dogs are now working for different agencies, or something happened to them causing them to no longer work for the DSS. - Alexis Jazz ping plz 02:55, 21 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

File:Nina Cuso press photo.jpg

[edit]

Hi. Someone thinks this photo is a copyvio. It appears to be by Dan Lecca per http://www.theworldisagirlsrunway.com/2018/02/nyfw-2018-jxy-n-cuso-runway-show-21018.html and https://obviousmag.com/jxy-n-cuso-runway-show-fw-18-nyfw/ ; the source link is dead. It was uploaded by a enwiki-confirmed sockmaster to support en:Nina Cuso, since deleted. Was the permission you saw from Dan Lecca?   — Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me 12:31, 7 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

  • It was from the Ninacuso account and the license must have been valid or I would not have passed it but I can't say if the photographer was Dan Lecca. If the source flickr account is suspicious, it may be safer to delete. (unless there are other photos from this flickr account here to show who took the photographs from this account.) I have no strong feelings here. Best, --Leoboudv (talk) 19:02, 7 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

License Review

[edit]

Please review this images:

*File:Ángela Vázquez .png

✓ Done  JGHowes  talk 00:37, 7 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Community Insights Survey

[edit]

Share your experience in this survey

Hi Leoboudv,

The Wikimedia Foundation is asking for your feedback in a survey about your experience with Wikimedia Commons and Wikimedia. The purpose of this survey is to learn how well the Foundation is supporting your work on wiki and how we can change or improve things in the future. The opinions you share will directly affect the current and future work of the Wikimedia Foundation.

Please take 15 to 25 minutes to give your feedback through this survey. It is available in various languages.

This survey is hosted by a third-party and governed by this privacy statement (in English).

Find more information about this project. Email us if you have any questions, or if you don't want to receive future messages about taking this survey.

Sincerely,

RMaung (WMF) 01:12, 10 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Review request

[edit]

Can you please review [my uploads]? I am new to uploading content, so I am a bit anxious. Still, I believe they are fine and they will pass your scrutiny.—Vaibhavafro (talk) 00:07, 11 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

To reduce your work load, I am providing proof that the Twitter accounts I cited as the source in my uploads belong to the Indian government. [This], [this] and [this] can act as the proof. I would be grateful if you helped. Regards, Vaibhavafro (talk) 00:49, 11 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

An administrator has just approved the uploads! I would be grateful if you could do the final license check.—Vaibhavafro (talk) 15:22, 11 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

 CommentI have asked another user to look at my uploads. No need to bother you now. Relax.—Vaibhavafro (talk) 15:51, 11 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Request

[edit]

Sorry to disturb you again. Can you license review my uploads in the same way in which you reviewed this image.–Vaibhavafro(Talk!) 09:40, 13 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

 Comment:This may just be a formality; other users told me this wasn’t necessary in GODL-India uploads. Still, I would prefer to have it there to give them more credibility. I would be grateful if you did it for me-Vaibhavafro(Talk!) 09:45, 13 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

 Comment:An administrator has confirmed to me that a second review is not needed in GODL-India uploads. So, I may withdraw my request. No need to bother you now. Relax.—VaibhavafroTalk 19:57, 13 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Reminder: Community Insights Survey

[edit]

Share your experience in this survey

Hi Leoboudv,

A couple of weeks ago, we invited you to take the Community Insights Survey. It is the Wikimedia Foundation’s annual survey of our global communities. We want to learn how well we support your work on wiki. We are 10% towards our goal for participation. If you have not already taken the survey, you can help us reach our goal! Your voice matters to us.

Please take 15 to 25 minutes to give your feedback through this survey. It is available in various languages.

This survey is hosted by a third-party and governed by this privacy statement (in English).

Find more information about this project. Email us if you have any questions, or if you don't want to receive future messages about taking this survey.

Sincerely,

RMaung (WMF) 15:23, 20 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Review request

[edit]

Hello Leoboudv, could you please review this uploads? So many days that nobody reviewed them...

Thanks for your time. Best regards!--Docosong (talk) 22:46, 1 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! :) --Docosong (talk) 10:53, 15 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Reminder: Community Insights Survey

[edit]

Share your experience in this survey

Hi Leoboudv,

There are only a few weeks left to take the Community Insights Survey! We are 30% towards our goal for participation. If you have not already taken the survey, you can help us reach our goal! With this poll, the Wikimedia Foundation gathers feedback on how well we support your work on wiki. It only takes 15-25 minutes to complete, and it has a direct impact on the support we provide.

Please take 15 to 25 minutes to give your feedback through this survey. It is available in various languages.

This survey is hosted by a third-party and governed by this privacy statement (in English).

Find more information about this project. Email us if you have any questions, or if you don't want to receive future messages about taking this survey.

Sincerely,

RMaung (WMF) 20:01, 3 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Review

[edit]

Please review this files

@Leoboudv: Please respond--Roman Medellín (talk) 21:08, 17 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Leoboudv: Thank you--Roman Medellín (talk) 16:25, 18 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Leoboudv: Please--Roman Medellín (talk) 16:29, 18 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]


Code issues in User:Leoboudv/common.js

[edit]

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

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

  1. You edited User:Leoboudv/common.js. Glad to see you coding in javascript! Have you ever considered becoming a MediaWiki hacker?
  2. Though, that change appears to introduce 1 new jshint issue — the page's status is now having warnings. Note that invalid or ambiguous code often has unwanted side effects like breaking other tools for you. If you cannot find out how to fix it, I suggest blanking the page for now.
  3. To help you understanding where the issues are, I have aggregated a report here and now. If you have questions, don't hesitate to ask users experienced in javascript writing for help. But do not ask the bot's operators (chronically overwrought) unless you suspect an error of mine. If you prefer not getting spammed by me, you can opt-out reports by adding {{ValidationOptOut|type=all}} to your user page or cmb-opt-out anywhere on your your global user page on Meta. Good luck at Wikimedia Commons and happy hacking!
  1. ISSUE: line 1 character 6: Label 'User' on Majora statement. - Evidence: User:Majora/LicenseReview.js
  2. ISSUE: line 1 character 29: Missing semicolon. - Evidence: User:Majora/LicenseReview.js

Your CommonsMaintenanceBot (talk) at 06:53, 1 November 2019 (UTC).[reply]

Flickr review

[edit]

Hi, I notice you reviewed the license of a picture I uploaded from Flickr. Could I get you to review several others also?

Sorry to bother you but I've been waiting to find a trusted reviewer and get this images done in case they are deleted or otherwise cannot be verified. Would you mind doing it please? ~ R.T.G 22:07, 18 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Great, thanks from Ireland o/ ~ R.T.G 00:47, 19 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Review request

[edit]

Please review this image: . --Gindomarlo (talk) 02:46, 27 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Review request

[edit]

Please review this image: File:Announcer rt rana.jpg.MO-Quotes (talk) 13:20, 13 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Review request

[edit]

Hello Leoboudv, Thanks for reply could you please review this uploads? So many days that nobody reviewed them.

MO-Quotes (talk) 23:35, 13 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I didn't see any notices about free licenses on source pages. File:Tamil Announcer Rt Rana Announcing maha shivaratri Day at the India in Sri Lanka, Consulate General of India, Jaffna.jpg is work of government of India, but proper license tag must be used. --EugeneZelenko (talk) 15:09, 14 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Review request

[edit]

I make this review request because two users mistakenly marked these images as a copyright violation and later admitted their mistake (diff1 diff2)

image 1: File:6ix9ine.jpg.

image 2: File:Vladimir.png. --Gindomarlo (talk) 04:51, 15 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Barnstar

[edit]
The Tireless Contributor Barnstar
I award you this barnstar for your tireless efforts at License Review. JoJan (talk) 16:24, 26 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Amenemhat V

[edit]

Happy holidays Leoboudv. I was wondering what do you think about such a thing. Best wishes, Khruner (talk) 09:18, 28 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I tagged the file as a copyright violation. An uploader may not review his/her uploads and typing in a fake flickr pass is not permitted. Best Regards, --Leoboudv (talk) 19:47, 28 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Just as I thought. BW Khruner (talk) 22:11, 28 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Paul Manly

[edit]

Would OTRS be a proper proof of why it is public domain?--NL19931993 (talk) 22:31, 29 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Wrongly linked

[edit]

Dear Leoboudv, You marked the image File:Lycaena li.jpg I uploaded while I had wrongly linked to the image. I corrected the link. Can you review license again? Thanks. Kind regards, Lymantria (talk) 07:35, 12 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

File:DurletRomain.jpg AND OTHER REVIEWERS???

[edit]

Hi! How are you doing? Long time since we last talked :-) If you have time could you have a look at this file? Do you agree that it is PD? It can be freely used by everyone and no requirement to credit the author. --MGA73 (talk) 18:41, 21 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you! Perhaps you could review the file? I'm no longer an admin so system will complain if I review :-D --MGA73 (talk) 19:57, 21 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you! I can see that there is a lot of file that need review. Did someone mass upload files or are there just too few reviewers? --MGA73 (talk) 16:36, 22 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah real life takes a lot of time... I will apply so I can help a bit. --MGA73 (talk) 21:42, 22 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Review request

[edit]

@Leoboudv: Please request the review and approval of this images

image 1:

image 2:

@Leoboudv: Please @Leoboudv: Please --Aurelio de Sandoval (talk) 22:05, 21 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Yet another image request

[edit]

Hi. If you have time, please review the following images:

Regards, You've gone incognito (talk ⋅ contribs) 13:54, 8 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Some images to review

[edit]

Dear Leoboudv, I think today I will not do any uploads. Would you be so kind as to look into my uploads of Jan 29? If I have seen correctly, they have not been reviewed yet. Lymantria (talk) 08:05, 9 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you! --MGA73 (talk) 19:42, 9 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Comment: Maybe I should remove most of my last name 'except the B' above but you can get it from this image: File:Early 20th Century Micronesian Armour.jpg from my flickr account Lymantria & MGA73. I am struck by how many users I dealt with have left Commons like JurgenNL who reviewed that very rare image or Russavia or INeverCry or SterkeBak/Abigor who first gave me the license review rights. Sometimes I wonder whether you can trust anyone sadly. There are reliable trustworthy people like Gruban, Christian Ferrer or 1Veertje but then a case like INeverCry appears with all his sockpuppets. It also tells me 'not to get involved in politics' or disputes unless the case I get involved in is crystal clear like this situation Best, Fabian B from Canada --Leoboudv (talk) 21:57, 9 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I had to take a break. I think it is nice to not have to worry about admin stuff for a while. I think reviewers should check the license and look for obvious copyvios. Doing advanced forensic studies is not a part of a license review. The task is to make sure we check the source and the license before image is removed from the source or the license is changed. Anyone can challenge if the source really is the copyright holder but it is stupid to challenge the license once the file is reviewed. Unless ofcourse a reviewer verified a license that is not possible. For example GFDL on Flickr :-)
I hope it gets better once we get the backlogs cleared. Then we have more time to do what we like most. Perhaps we can even help the admins. I hope if they have less work they will make fewer crazy things :-D
Anyway I'm happy you are still around. --MGA73 (talk) 22:21, 9 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Review request

[edit]

Hii @Leoboudv: can you pls review below mentioned file.

File:Lokesh Kanagaraj at The ‘Zee Cine Awards’.jpg Perumalism (talk) 16:26, 13 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

File:Adriano Ciaffi.jpg

[edit]

Hi, now there's the right link. Thank you --Caulfield (talk) 08:08, 18 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Brazil government other file type review needed

[edit]

Hi! I think most of the files in this category can be passed. I checked the first file File:001 - Antonio Sergio de Mattos, CNV-SP.pdf. Do you agree that it looks ok? --MGA73 (talk) 19:01, 24 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

  •  Comment:

I reviewed this image File:001 - Arquivo CEMDP Devanir José, CNV-SP.pdf and the file you mentioned File:001 - Antonio Sergio de Mattos, CNV-SP.pdf and both times the 'Category:Brazil government other file type review needed' does not go away. Hmm! Best, --Leoboudv (talk) 04:48, 25 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi! Thanks a lot. I did not mean that you should review them, I just wanted you to have a look before I started with them. Just ignore the ghostly category. It’s a new thing. A bot will remove the category. The bot is meant to have a check and sort the files to make it easier for reviewers. Yesterday I checked 35 Facebook images. It’s much easier when the bot find and put all images in a category so you can check a lot of similar images, yay! --MGA73 (talk) 06:01, 25 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Working on it. Sometimes it takes looooong time to load the file. There are other categories to check so hope we get more reviewers. --MGA73 (talk) 19:10, 25 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I reviewed most of them. Perhaps you can check the last 4? Links did not work for me for the 3 first and I'm not sure about the last one. --MGA73 (talk) 16:05, 29 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you. That is strange. You did notice that there are often more files at the source and they have numbers like 001, 002 etc.? --MGA73 (talk) 19:57, 29 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Lol yes only 4 more years ;-) Hope you enjoy your day too :-) --MGA73 (talk) 20:05, 29 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Review request

[edit]

Hello @Leoboudv: can you please review below mentioned file.

File:20200224002704!UFC 244 BMFBelt.pngRegice2020 (talk) 21:28, 28 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Old ones

[edit]

Hi Fabian, Would you please have a LR-look at "old" uploads here and here? Thank you. Kind regards, Lymantria (talk) 06:53, 4 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Speaking of old ones perhaps you would like to comment on Commons:Village_pump/Proposals#Acceptance_of_files_from_external_sources_without_a_license_review and Commons:Village_pump/Proposals#Apply_a_default_of_Good_Faith_for_very_old_files :-) --MGA73 (talk) 15:58, 4 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Review Request

[edit]

Would very much appreciate license reviews for the following three files (especially the Grande picture, her current Wikipedia lede photo is awful):

DanielleTH (Say hi!) 02:17, 9 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Leoboudv: Here's Google's cache of the page, if that helps. DanielleTH (Say hi!) 20:33, 9 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Review request

[edit]

Hii @Leoboudv: can you pls review below mentioned file.

File:Vijay At The Jilla 100 days celebrations event 1.jpg
File:Vijay At The Jilla 100 days celebrations event.jpg
File:Ilaiyaraaja and Vikram at the Nadigar Sangam Protest.jpg
File:Vijay at the Nadigar Sangam Protest.jpg
File:Rajinikanth and Vijay at the Nadigar Sangam Protest.jpg
File:H. Vinoth at Theeran Adhigaaram Ondru Press Meet.jpg -- Perumalism (talk) 13:25, 9 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Review request

[edit]

Hi Leoboudv, as far as I can see: This is the first file from the given source. File:Consular Section Chief Mark Marrano überreicht Journalist und DDR-Bürgerrechtler Siegbert Schefke das Visum für die USA.jpg. Is it OK for commons? What you would improve? Regards Mutter Erde (talk) 07:34, 29 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Yes. It is US State Government work. I have reviewed the image. Best, --Leoboudv (talk) 09:51, 29 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you very much. Regards Mutter Erde (talk) 10:51, 29 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
File:Patricia Lacina and Axel Wintermeyer, February 2020.jpg
File:Consul General Patricia Lacina, July 2018.jpg
File:Generalkonsul Jim Herman am Internationalen Tag des Bieres, August 2017.jpg
File:Mirko Reeh, März 2019.jpg
File:Mirko Reeh und US-Generalkonsulin Patricia Lacina, 2019.jpg
File:“Building Bridges” combines traditional images of the Berlin Airlift, 2018.jpg
File:Denise Williams and Marilyn Sorensen with German artist Jasmin Siddiqui, 2018.jpg
File:“Building Bridges” combines traditional images of the Berlin Airlift, 2018.jpg
File:Jasmin Siddiqui with Mrs. Denise Williams and Mrs. Marilyn Sorensen, 2018.jpg
File:60th anniversary of American Junior Year at Heidelberg University, 2019.jpg
File:Former U.S. diplomat Peter Claussen, 2019.jpg
File:Patricia Lacina und Mitglieder der jüdischen Gemeinde Frankfurt, 2019.jpg
File:Patricia Lacina und Dr. Salomon Korn, 2019.jpg
File:Dr. Gerhard Wiesinger, Dirk Nowitzki, Michelle Burton, 2017.jpg
I have corrected the source. Thank you very much. Mutter Erde (talk) 15:27, 31 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Review Request

[edit]

Hi @Leobudv can you review this [|photo], thank you Mars Bott (talk) 13:37, 15 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Review Request

[edit]

Thanks for review my first upload picture :-) Sorry to bother you but could you review me for these two photos? File:Emma_Watson_interview_in_2017.jpg and File:Emma_Watson_in_2016.jpg Mars Bott (talk) 16:36, 17 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you very much, have a nice day!  :-) Mars Bott (talk) 02:37, 18 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Review Request

[edit]

Hi Leobudv, pleese review. Thank you very much. Mutter Erde (talk) 13:08, 20 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Review Flickr

[edit]

@Leoboudv: Please, could you fix and approve these images ?, because the Flickr bot says it needs a human review

A barnstar for you!

[edit]
The Special Barnstar
... you corrected a licence mismatch / photo error I caused while transfering this image. Sorry and thank-you.

https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Caroline_Criado-Perez#/media/Datei:Caroline_Criado-Perez_2019.jpg 

Polimorph (talk) 20:16, 3 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Review request

[edit]

Hi, there. I see that you are a license reviewer. Can you please review the files in this category: User:EatchaBot/Files-requiring-license-review-gallery-uploaded-by/Lefcentreright? All of these files have been taken from YouTube live streams done by w:en:eNCA. They are licensed under the website's free license. You must please click on the link in the "Summary" box because, for some obscure reason, the license of the video is not visible in the archive link. Thanks in advance. Lefcentreright (talk) 21:53, 10 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, again. Thanks for approving the first batch, please review the next batch (I have included time stamps):
Lefcentreright (talk) 21:15, 13 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Lincense Review Request

[edit]

As, I see sir your a license reviewer making an earnest request please can you review the license for the File:Babar_Azam.png, File:Maya Ali (Pexels-Act-erst-acting-jheel-jheel-saif-ul-malook-172719).jpg and File:Karachi Zoo Visit.jpg for me quickly so that it may qualify for their respective articles.Thank You.IMuWal02(talk)

Review request

[edit]

Hi! I hope you're ok. I would like to ask you if you can review the uploads of Contributions/Dru_alexandro. I don't see the permissions, but I don't have the experience to mark them correctly. Greetings. --Vareloco (talk) 02:20, 28 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I really appreciate it, thank you very much. Now I learned how to do it. Greetings from the other end, Chile. --Vareloco (talk) 18:36, 29 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

I believe these images are copyright, but i do not have the tools to find the source.

135.180.67.193 06:11, 29 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

  •  Comment: The first 2 images are on wikipedia, not Wikicommons here. The second 2 images, I cannot say. Not enough evidence. The last image does have some camera metadata. Best, --Leoboudv (talk) 08:18, 29 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

File:Schichany Landschaft.jpg

[edit]

Hi! I moved this file from lb.wiki to Commons. I think it would be better to have another review on the file now that I moved the file. Could you have a look? --MGA73 (talk) 16:59, 5 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks a lot! --MGA73 (talk) 19:02, 8 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Review request

[edit]

Hii @Leoboudv: can you pls review below mentioned file.

File:Natarajan Subramaniam at the Bongu Press Meet.jpg
File:Rajinikanth Felicitates Writer Kalaignanam.jpg
File:Rajinikanth Felicitates Writer Kalaignanam 1.jpg
File:Vani Bhojan At The ‘Oh My Kadavule’ Press Meet.jpg -- Perumalism (talk) 11:10, 8 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Review Request

[edit]

Hi there can you please review the license for File:Maulana Tariq Jamil.pngfor me quickly.Thank You

File:ManuelMarchena2020.jpg

[edit]

I'm reviewing Hard's uploads since I noticed that they'd uploaded a lot of images that were scaled down from the originals available on Flickr. I noticed this image, which you'd done a license review on. The source URL links to a different photo of the same person, and neither Google Image Search nor TinEye can locate the actual source, so I've tagged the image as missing a source. I'm curious what happened here. Since Flickr allows images to be replaced, it's possible the image was replaced since your review back in February. Do you remember reviewing this image in particular, and that the image on Flickr at the time was the same image as is now on Commons? Thanks! --Alex Cohn (talk) 18:05, 11 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Review Request

[edit]

Hi there can you please review the license for following files quickly: File:Abid Ali.jpg, File:Mohammad Hafeez in 2017.png, File:Azhar Ali.png, File:Shaheen Shah Afridi.png, File:Wahab Riaz.jpg, File:Shadab_Khan.png, and File:Imad_Wasim.png.jpg Thank You — Preceding unsigned comment added by IMuWal02 (talk • contribs) 12:47, 12 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

License review

[edit]

Hi, would you kindly review the licenses of the following images?:

Thanks in advance. ArturSik (talk) 17:38, 13 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

That's alright. Thanks a lot. I've got one more if it's not a problem: File:Lady Gaga at 2019 SAG Awards.jpg. ArturSik (talk) 21:15, 13 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Review request

[edit]

Hii @Leoboudv: can you pls review below mentioned file.

File:Pawan at the Vada Chennai Press Meet.jpg
File:R. Parthiban at Thodari Audio Launch.jpg
File:Balaji Sakthivel At The ‘Vaanam Kottatum’ Audio Launch.jpg
File:Aadukalam Naren At The ‘Asuran’ Audio Launch.jpg
File:Samantha at 10 Enradhukulla Teaser Launch.jpg
File:R Sarathkumar at Tamil Film Industry Hunger Strike.jpg
File:Pasupathy at Anjala Audio Launch.jpg
File:Sudha Kongara Prasad at Irudhi Suttru Thanks Giving Meet.jpg
File:RK Selvamani At The Irumbuthirai Success Meet.jpg
File:SA Chandrasekhar at Kanithan Audio Launch.jpg
File:Actor Vadivelu in Eli’s “Talking Eli App” Launch Press Meet.jpg
File:Vani Bhojan at the ‘Zee Cine Awards’.jpg
File:Prabhu at Wagah Audio Launch.jpg
File:Dhanush at Mudinja Ivana Pudi Audio Launch.jpg
File:Ilaiyaraaja at Merku Thodarchi Malai Press Meet.jpg -- Perumalism (talk) 12:58, 17 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Review request

[edit]

Hi there can you please review the license for File:Waseem Badami.png quickly.Thanking you in advance — Preceding unsigned comment added by IMuWal02 (talk • contribs) 18:23, 24 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Photo review

[edit]

Welcome, please check the following pictures Special:ListFiles/Bkhe97 Bkhe97 (talk) 20:53, 26 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Review request

[edit]

Hii @Leoboudv: can you pls review below mentioned file.

File:Rajinikanth, Dhanush and Vivek at Nerupuda Audio Launch.jpg
File:Dhanush at the ‘Asuran’ Success Meet.jpg
File:Dhanush at the Filmfare Awards South 2017 Press Meet.jpg
File:Tovino Thomas At The ‘Maari 2’ Press Meet.jpg
File:Rajinikanth at the Inauguration of MGR Statue 1.jpg
File:Agathiyan at the ‘Kennedy Club’ Audio Launch.jpg
File:Srikanth Deva at Bongu Audio Launch.jpg
File:Rangaraj Pandey at the 12th We Awards 2016.jpg
File:Director Ram at the Aruvi Movie Premiere.jpg
File:Director A Venkatesh at Sandamarutham Audio Launch.jpg -- Perumalism (talk) 14:32, 27 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Review request

[edit]

Hii @Leoboudv: can you please review below mentioned files.

File:Mustafa El Khani 2017.jpg
File:Lilia Al Atrash 2008.jpg
File:Monkey d Dragon.png

Bkhe97 (talk) 13:51, 28 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

License Review Request

[edit]

Hi there can you please review the license for the following files:

File:Iqrar Ul Hassan.png
File:Mehwish Hayat.png
File:Hira Mani.png
File:Asad Shafiq.png quickly.Thanking you in advance. IMuWal02 (talk) 16:44, 28 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

✓ Done --Leoboudv (talk) 19:02, 28 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Review request

[edit]

Hi @Leoboudv: can you please review below mentioned files.

File:Maysoon Abu Asaad 2015.jpg
File:Ali Kareem 2017.jpg
File:Rana Abyad 2017.jpg
File:Kinda Hanna 2013.jpg
File:Dima Kandalaft 2013.jpg
File:Wafaa Mosalaly 2015.jpg
File:Kholoud Essa 2015.jpg
File:Fayez Kazak 2015.jpg
File:Mohammad Kheir Al-Jarrah 2015.jpg
File:Maan Abdul Haq 2018.jpg
File:Racha ELtaqi 2008.jpg
File:أيمن رضا.jpg
File:Asim Hawat 2013.jpg Bkhe97 (talk) 16:59, 29 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

File:Mertensia virginica.bbg.jpg

[edit]

Can you, please, verify your LR here? There are complaints concerning attribution. Ankry (talk) 19:58, 2 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

  •  Comment: I verify that the image was licensed as CC BY 2.0 Generic as it is now. Ankry If the image is stolen or a flickrwash, (there is no metadata...at the flickr source) then feel free to file a DR though the uploader has no known history of copyvios, I think. I note that the source flickr account only has 72 images but then my own flickr account has only 160 images. Best, --Leoboudv (talk) 23:04, 2 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    • Well, I think that the Flickr license requires attribution and the required attribution never was: "Own work:User:Nafsadh" ;) I do not object the license itself nor I consider this case license laundering. I am sorry if I was not clear in my initial message. Ankry (talk) 05:57, 3 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Comment: That's OK Ankry. Please feel free to change the attribution to Khan "Sadh" N. Mostafa to clear things up. Kind Regards from Canada, --Leoboudv (talk) 09:10, 3 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Request: License review needed, Verifying the images

[edit]

Hi Leoboudv, can you Please help me to check, reviewing and verifying this photos down below; I'm pretty sure all of this pictures is a screenshot that was originally uploaded on YouTube under a CC license mentioned on each of the photos summary and licensing. Their website states: "YouTube allows users to mark their videos with a Creative Commons CC BY license.":

Thanks before, best regards- I Nyoman Gede Anila (talk) 19:15, 10 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Review Request

[edit]

Hello Leoboudv, could you please review the following images.


  • Thank you so much leoboudv

License Review Request

[edit]

Hi Leoboudv, could you please review the following images.

  • Thank you leoboudv.

{{PDMark-owner}}

[edit]

Images with a PD-Mark license that are the flickr owners own work can be reviewed now. Best, --Leoboudv (talk) 01:14, 28 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Flickr

[edit]

Hi. FYI. --E4024 (talk) 18:34, 11 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Review request

[edit]

Hello Leoboudv, requesting following images for review:
[2], [3], [4], [5], [6], [7], [8], [9], [10] , [11], [12], [13], [14], [15], [16], [17], [18], [19]
Gpkp (talk) 18:13, 12 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

  • Thank you Leoboudv. Sorry, there were few mistakes in the requests, few pre-reviewed and few repeated ones. Requesting following images for the review.
--Gpkp (talk) 16:09, 13 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

License Review Request

[edit]

Hi Leoboudv, could you please review the following images

  • Thank you so much Leoboudv.

License Review Request

[edit]

Please review this images

Review Request

[edit]

Hi leoboudv, please review the following images

Best, --Leoboudv (talk) 09:43, 16 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

  • Thanks a lot leoboudv,your help meant a lot to me. next time i will upload all the images with time stamps. sorry for the inconvenience.

Reviewing files per user

[edit]

Hi! I do not know if you have noticed User:EatchaBot/Files-requiring-license-review-sorted-list. It is a list of galleries of files that need a license review for example User:EatchaBot/Files-requiring-license-review-gallery-uploaded-by/Kaldari. I was thinking that it could be fun to work together a few license reviewers. We pick a subpage and try to empty it. To make it easier I think we should start slow with a page of 20-50 files. Let me know what you think and if you know anyone that might find it fun to try just ping them. --MGA73 (talk) 06:35, 18 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi! Thats okay. I'm also busy and do not have time to do lots of reviews. I hope you and your friends/family are safe in this crazy time.

Review request

[edit]

https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:KhamzatChimaev(fighter).png#%7B%7Bint%3Afiledesc%7D%7D A review request is neededKent Bargo (talk) 17:48, 20 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Review request

[edit]

Hello Leoboudv,

Requesting following files for review:

Gpkp (talk) 20:08, 24 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Review request

[edit]

Hii @Leoboudv: can you pls review below mentioned file.

File:S. P. Balasubrahmanyam at the 'Gurkha' Audio Launch.jpg
File:SP Balasubrahmanyam and KJ Yesudas at Abbas Cultural’s Kalaivizha 2017 – 25 Years of Celebrating Art Event.jpg
File:SP Balasubrahmanyam Felicitates KJ Yesudas.jpg -- Perumalism (talk) 09:33, 26 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Review request

[edit]

Hello Leoboudv,
Requesting following files for review:

--Gpkp (talk) 19:14, 27 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Review request

[edit]

Hii @Leoboudv: can you pls review below mentioned file.

File:SP Balasubrahmanyam at Kanithan Audio Launch.jpg
File:SP Balasubrahmanyam at 86th Birth Anniversary of Director K Balachander.jpg
File:SP Balasubrahmanyam Felicitates KJ Yesudas-1.jpg -- Perumalism (talk) 10:03, 28 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Review Request

[edit]

Hi,Leoboudv could you kindly review the following images please

Review request

[edit]

Hello Leoboudv, could you please review following images:

--Gpkp (talk) 10:38, 4 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

  •  Comment: Next time, please give a time stamp like this to locate the video frame Gpkp
  • File:Ramya Pandian.png (@ 1:23 of the source video)

Best, --Leoboudv (talk) 20:24, 4 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

  • Leoboudv, Thank you for the reviews. I thought the page-navigation to locate the video frame would be easy, for reviewing. Requesting review for the following file:

--Gpkp (talk) 04:09, 5 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Review request

[edit]

Hello Leoboudv, Requesting following videos for review:

Regards, --Gpkp (talk) 11:32, 9 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

No source?

[edit]

In this edit you marked a file I license reviewed with no source. The source, the YouTube video https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kqnB76cQSd0 is still up, and still marked Creative Commons. Mistake, or am I missing something? --GRuban (talk) 21:01, 9 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Review request

[edit]

Hello Leoboudv, Requesting following images for review:

--Gpkp (talk) 11:15, 12 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Notification about possible deletion

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

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

Please remember to respond to and – if appropriate – contradict the arguments supporting deletion. Arguments which focus on the nominator will not affect the result of the nomination. Thank you!
Afrikaans ∙ العربية ∙ беларуская ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца) ∙ български ∙ ပအိုဝ်ႏဘာႏသာႏ ∙ বাংলা ∙ bosanski ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ dansk ∙ Deutsch ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form) ∙ Zazaki ∙ ދިވެހިބަސް ∙ Ελληνικά ∙ English ∙ Esperanto ∙ español ∙ eesti ∙ فارسی ∙ suomi ∙ français ∙ galego ∙ עברית ∙ hrvatski ∙ magyar ∙ հայերեն ∙ Bahasa Indonesia ∙ íslenska ∙ italiano ∙ 日本語 ∙ 한국어 ∙ 조선말 ∙ македонски ∙ മലയാളം ∙ Bahasa Melayu ∙ မြန်မာဘာသာ ∙ norsk bokmål ∙ Plattdüütsch ∙ Nederlands ∙ norsk nynorsk ∙ norsk ∙ occitan ∙ polski ∙ پښتو ∙ português ∙ português do Brasil ∙ română ∙ русский ∙ sicilianu ∙ slovenčina ∙ slovenščina ∙ shqip ∙ српски / srpski ∙ svenska ∙ ไทย ∙ Türkçe ∙ українська ∙ Tiếng Việt ∙ 中文 ∙ 中文（简体） ∙ 中文（繁體） ∙ +/−

Affected:


Yours sincerely, Ytoyoda (talk) 15:51, 22 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Review request from Lefcentreright

[edit]

Hello, there. I hope you are doing well. Please review the following photos:

Best, Lefcentreright (talk) 18:03, 23 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you very much. These four also:
Regards, Lefcentreright (talk) 20:31, 26 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Review request

[edit]

I don't normally make specific requests, you're so good about getting to most of my uploads anyway, but I'm hoping to get these two officially stamped, because they were a request from the subject, whom I told to put the license statement on their web page:

They're both from the same image on http://www.elenacastedo.com/index.htm, right side of the page. Thanks! --GRuban (talk) 16:14, 27 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Review request

[edit]

Hello Leoboudv, Requesting following images for review:

Regards, Gpkp (talk) 06:31, 31 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Portrait

[edit]

Please review https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Jackson_Pollock.jpg#%7B%7Bint%3Alicense-header%7D%7D -- Aurelio de Sandoval (talk) 22:16, 5 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Review request

[edit]

Hello Leoboudv, Requesting following images for review:

Regards, Gpkp (talk) 18:26, 6 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Review Request

[edit]

Hi, leoboudv could you please review the following image

Review

[edit]

Please review it:

Review

[edit]

Pleas review it

Review request

[edit]

Hello Leoboudv, Requesting following images for review:

Regards, Gpkp (talk) 18:33, 11 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Review request

[edit]

Hello Leoboudv, Requesting following images for review:

Regards, Gpkp (talk) 20:14, 13 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you Leoboudv, for the reviews. --Gpkp (talk) 04:16, 14 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

License Review Request

[edit]

Hi, leoboudv could you please review the following picture

Review request

[edit]

Hello Leoboudv, Requesting following images for review:

Regards, --Gpkp (talk) 08:18, 18 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Proper check?

[edit]

Hello, I see you checked the licences for images uploaded by Medpro, e.g. File:P16-501 titre 1 (6481841667).jpg. You validated them under the {{PD-art|PD-old-100}} licence, but I believe you are wrong because all images seem to be under {{PD-author|Medpro}} on their Flickr pages. Could you confirm wheter you made a mistake or I am wrong? Veverve (talk) 21:42, 18 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@Sealle: pinging you since you also checked images from this account. Veverve (talk) 21:46, 18 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

There is no matter how the Flickr account owner licensed the images. If they are in the public domain due to age, this is what should be indicated. Sealle (talk) 04:35, 19 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
 Comment: I second what Sealle says. Best, --Leoboudv (talk) 06:18, 19 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Some of those images are pictures of 3D objects which therefore have a to be put under a licence compatible with Commons. Veverve (talk) 11:40, 19 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
So why not giving from the very start an example matching the issue you intend to raise? Sealle (talk) 12:49, 19 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
All those I found on Category:German bibles are, but there may be more: File:D. Abraham Calovii - Biblia illustrata Vet. Testamenti. - Tomus III., Completens Anotata - title page.jpg, File:F16-0061 (33579033356).jpg, File:F16-0089-1 (33750957600).jpg, File:F16-0103 (34426364066).jpg, File:F16-0104 (34549864485).jpg. Veverve (talk) 13:34, 19 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
As for me, I don't feel like being holier than the pope to find here a photographer's copyright beyond COM:DM. Feel free to disagree and crop those pages out as well as to bring this to the Village pump though. Sealle (talk) 13:58, 19 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Review request

[edit]

Hello Leoboudv, Requesting following files for review:

Videos:

Images:

Regards, Gpkp (talk) 05:35, 21 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

File:General Raheel Sharif.jpg

[edit]

Sir Please verify the license for this file as the orignal uploader made it available under wrong license but I changed the license to Attribution one. Please verify it so that it may qualify for Wikimedia commons usage.Thanking you in advance.192.142.152.79 12:20, 30 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Leoboudv

Sir I have found the orignal link as it was first published by ISPR in 2014 at this source which was archived in 2014 according to the third Refrence of the Raheel Sharif's article and ISPR's disclaimer clearly states about cc by sa 4.0 license.Therefore, it may qualify for Wikipedia usage now. I hope you will now remove the deletion tag and verify it quickly today for Wikipedia usage.
P.S. Also see Commons:Deletion_requests/File:General_Qamar_Javed_Bajwa.jpg if you have any concerns about source.Thank You.192.142.152.108 06:39, 2 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Leaboudv

Thank You so much sir! Have a blessed day.192.142.154.0

Review request

[edit]

Hii @Leoboudv: can you pls review below mentioned file.

File:Vikram at Iru Mugan Audio Launch.jpg
File:Nivin Pauly, Sivakarthikeyan and Vikram at Iru Mugan Audio Launch.jpg
File:Vikram and Akshay Kumar Launches Big Deal TV Home Shopping Channel.jpg
File:Vikram at Iru Mugan Success Meet.jpg
File:Vikram at the ‘Kadaram Kondan’ Press Meet.jpg
File:Dhansuh at VIP 2 Success Meet.jpg
File:Lollu Sabha Manohar at English Padam Audio Launch.jpg -- Perumalism (talk) 19:28, 7 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Another review request

[edit]

Hello, there. Please review the following images:

Best, Lefcentreright (talk) 19:14, 8 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Reviewed attribution-gencat

[edit]

Thanks for review images for attribution gencat. i hope you are doing well!--Docosong (talk) 22:09, 10 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Nari Shakti Puraskar Review Request

[edit]

Hi, would you be able to review the licenses for these files?

File:Reshma nilofer naha.jpg File:Pushpa preeya.jpg File:Meenakshi pahuja.jpg

Thank you in advance, Joofjoof (talk) 09:44, 13 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Request: License review, need your verification help for Creative Commons images from Youtube

[edit]

Hi Leoboudv, I need your verification help for some of the images that I was uploaded on commons down below, This images is a screenshot originally uploaded on YouTube under a "YouTube allows users to mark their videos with a Creative Commons CC BY license.". But needs some verification from administrator to approve the licensing:

I would like to uploads more image in the near future, especially the one that originally uploaded on Government sites or YouTube under a CC license. Thank you so much for your help before Leoboudv! --I Nyoman Gede Anila (talk) 04:36, 15 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I was reviewing these when I noticed you asked Leoboudv, so I'll write here so we don't clash. The Netmediatama ones are probably good, Net Mediatama is an Indonesian TV network. However I don't like File:Artika Sari Devi Kusmayadi.jpg. That's an advertisement for ... something ... tooth whitening? That's going to be owned by some kind of beauty products company. The YouTube user in that case shows no evidence of being a representative of a beauty products company, and has other videos of all sorts of different advertisements, including Burger King, Sprite, Game of Thrones... I'm going to nominate that one for deletion. Looking further. --GRuban (talk) 00:03, 15 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Reviewed them all, I think, please ping if I missed any. Most approved, but four nominated for deletion, which is a bit high. @I Nyoman Gede Anila: I advise a bit more skepticism. If a video looks to be professionally made, for example part of an advertisement, or a movie, or a TV program, then you really should take a look and see if you can honestly believe the YouTube channel belongs to the company that made it. If not, they probably do not have the right to release it. If a video is a collation of still photos, that's probably a sign the video maker did not take the photos (otherwise they would have taken videos!) If a video says right on the page that it comes from some other source - I think you can read Bahasa Indonesia, right? - that other source probably owns the rights. --GRuban (talk) 00:39, 15 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Hi @GRuban: & @Leoboudv: Thanks for your update information, now I know which content that can be uploaded on Wikimedia commons. I'm just re-uploads more images from differences sources down below (License verification needed), all screenshoot images originally uploaded on Government sites or YouTube under a CC license. GRuban Thanks a lot for your instructions, I do definitely learn so much from you! --I Nyoman Gede Anila (talk) 22:16, 15 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

review

[edit]

please review https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Sathya_Sai_Baba_2013_stamp_of_India.jpg -- Aurelio de Sandoval (talk) 14:58, 15 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Another review request

[edit]

Hello, Leoboudv. I hope that everything is well. Please review the following photos:

Best, Lefcentreright (talk) 18:40, 16 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Review request

[edit]

Hello Leoboudv, Requesting following images for review:

Regards, Gpkp (talk) 18:24, 21 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

✓ Done now. Best, --Leoboudv (talk) 20:23, 22 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Review request

[edit]

Hello Leoboudv, Requesting following images for review:

You have a quite full and long talk page Leoboudv, maybe you should archive part of it. I wish you happy holidays! Christian Ferrer (talk) 11:44, 24 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Comment: I will consider your suggestion. Christian Ferrer. I have to slowdown in 2021.

Best, --Leoboudv (talk) 19:59, 24 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Deletion proposals from User:61.5.71.229

[edit]
  • This images down below also stealing from google, all of this images using fake license, The image has no camera metadata to establish the uplaoder's copyright as he/she has only 1 image on Commons.
  • File:Earth2009press01.jpg(proposed for deletion: image stealing from google and uploaded on Commons Wikimedia using fake license)
  • File:Mpfe146.jpg(proposed for deletion: image stealing from google and uploaded on Commons Wikimedia using fake license)
  • File:MissEarth2017.png(proposed for deletion: image stealing from google and uploaded on Commons Wikimedia using fake license) - nominated for deletion by GRuban (with another)
  • File:Kylie Verzosa's Victory Parade.jpg(proposed for deletion: image stealing from google and uploaded on Commons Wikimedia using fake license) - nominated for deletion by GRuban
  • File:Celine Van Ouytsel durant l'élection Miss Belgique 2020.jpg(proposed for deletion: image stealing from google and uploaded on Commons Wikimedia using fake license) - nominated for deletion by Leoboudv
  • File:Catharina Svensson, Miss Earth 2001.jpg(proposed for deletion: image stealing from google and uploaded on Commons Wikimedia using fake license) - I (GRuban) think this one might be OK; it's clearly a crop, but from a personal photo, where she's standing next to someone in a plaid shirt, I don't think that was a professional photo
  • File:Nicole Faria derivate 2013 000.jpg(proposed for deletion: image stealing from google and uploaded on Commons Wikimedia using fake license) - nominated for deletion by GRuban (with another)
  • File:Miss universe malaysia 2013 2013-10-23 19-09.jpeg(proposed for deletion: image stealing from google and uploaded on Commons Wikimedia using fake license) - nominated for deletion by GRuban
  • File:Melissa Tan, Headshot.JPG(proposed for deletion: image stealing from google and uploaded on Commons Wikimedia using fake license) - This one might be all right. I (GRuban) can't find it elsewhere on the Web, and the uploading user is User:Alexloganlee, who has a few other professional quality uploads of Singaporean models (Melissa Tan is Malaysian, but that's the next country over), and a person of that name is the director of a professional Singaporean modeling agency that represents those models (https://www.instagram.com/alexloganlee/) - if someone is really worried about it, we can send that Alex Logan Lee an email to confirm to OTRS, but it's at least reasonable enough that I'm not going to nominate it for deletion
  • File:Kimberley Leggett- gala night.jpg(proposed for deletion: image stealing from google and uploaded on Commons Wikimedia using fake license) - this is a pose with some person, somewhat grainy, I (GRuban) can believe this is a personal photograph.
  • File:Kimberley Leggett- gala night (cropped).jpg(proposed for deletion: image stealing from google and uploaded on Commons Wikimedia using fake license) - as above
  • File:Uni1965 color.jpg(proposed for deletion: image stealing from google and uploaded on Commons Wikimedia using fake license) - nominated for deletion by GRuban
  • File:Pia Alonzo Wurtzbach in Philippine Terno 2.jpg(proposed for deletion: image stealing from google and uploaded on Commons Wikimedia using fake license) - this is an image by User:Marktanoja78 as 3 images below, who is responding to a deletion nomination. Let's see how that one comes out; having one image deleted or upheld isn't proof these three are bad or good, but are reasonable indicators.
  • File:Pia Alonzo Wurtzbach in Philippine Terno.jpg(proposed for deletion: image stealing from google and uploaded on Commons Wikimedia using fake license) - as above
  • File:Pia Alonzo Wurtzbach in Philippine Terno (cropped).jpg(proposed for deletion: no metadata, image stealing from google and uploaded on Commons Wikimedia using fake license) - as above
  • File:Megan Young.jpg(proposed for deletion: image stealing from google and uploaded on Commons Wikimedia using fake license) - nominated for deletion by GRuban after seeing image on another site; uploader User:Marktanoja78 says they can upload a higher resolution version of this image, which would be good evidence for deleting or keeping.
    Marktanoja78 was able to upload a higher resolution version with EXIF in response to Commons:Deletion requests/File:Megan Young.jpg, so I'm withdrawing that request. That isn't proof he's the photographer of the above three, and he says he can't prove that, but it shows good faith, and is convincing enough to me, at least, that I am not going to nominate the above three for deletion. --GRuban (talk) 13:55, 11 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • File:Miss World 2013 Megan Young 101413.jpg(proposed for deletion: image WAS NOT EVEN FROM GOVERMENT WEBSITE, on METADATA it said from GOOGLE, image stealing from google and uploaded on Commons Wikimedia using fake license) - Yes, Government file, as below, License reviewed by GRuban
  • File:Miss World 2013 Megan Young 101413 (cropped).jpg(proposed for deletion: image WAS NOT EVEN FROM GOVERMENT WEBSITE, on METADATA it said from GOOGLE, image stealing from google and uploaded on Commons Wikimedia using fake license) - as below, License reviewed by GRuban
  • File:Megan Young Miss World 2013 (cropped).jpg(proposed for deletion: image WAS NOT EVEN FROM GOVERMENT WEBSITE, on METADATA it said from GOOGLE, image stealing from google and uploaded on Commons Wikimedia using fake license)- as below, License reviewed by GRuban
  • File:Miss World 2013 Megan Young (cropped).jpg(proposed for deletion: image WAS NOT EVEN FROM GOVERMENT WEBSITE, on METADATA it said from GOOGLE, image stealing from google and uploaded on Commons Wikimedia using fake license)- as below, License reviewed by GRuban
  • File:President Benigno S. Aquino III congratulates Miss World 2013 Megan Young.jpg(proposed for deletion: image WAS NOT EVEN FROM GOVERMENT WEBSITE, on METADATA it said from GOOGLE, image stealing from google and uploaded on Commons Wikimedia using fake license)- as below, License reviewed by GRuban
  • File:Maggie Wilson Metro Channel April 2018.jpg(proposed for deletion: image stealing from google and uploaded on Commons Wikimedia using fake license) - deleted by User:Ellin Beltz
  • File:Maggie Wilson Metro Channel April 2018 (cropped).jpg(proposed for deletion: image stealing from google and uploaded on Commons Wikimedia using fake license) - crop of the above, I'll ping Ellin Beltz
  • File:Maggie Wilson Antarctic Ice Marathon.jpg(proposed for deletion: image stealing from google and uploaded on Commons Wikimedia using fake license) - nominated for deletion by Ellin Beltz
  • File:Maggie Wilson Metro Channel Close Up.jpg(proposed for deletion: image stealing from google and uploaded on Commons Wikimedia using fake license) - deleted by Ellin Beltz

Best again, --Leoboudv (talk) 19:59, 24 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

    • I got pinged at User_talk:61.5.71.229#Comment, but I think I should answer here, since here is where the list is, and because there is no guarantee the IP user will have the same IP when they come back, whereas they may check this talk page again. Sorry for abusing your talk page like this Leoboudv - at least I'll make a new section on it?
Anyway, IP user:
  1. Thank you for working hard to verify our image licenses!
  2. Please make your own user account, so we can communicate with you without straining poor Leoboudv, who already does more license reviews than any human can be expected to. When you do, post on my talk page, and I'll follow up with you there.
  3. As Leoboudv wrote in that comment section, we need to look at these images one at a time, or at worst one related group at a time, related by source or uploader or something. Looking at a bunch of unrelated images is not easy.
  4. General comments: many of your comments do seem correct. I'll go through them one at a time, and will eventually nominate the ones I agree with, which may be most of them, for deletion. But not quickly - I don't have as much energy as the amazing Leoboudv. I help out where I can, though, and I hope I can take this list off his shoulders.
  5. However "stealing from google" isn't really correct - Google doesn't own these images. I know, it's shorthand for "stealing images just found via Google".
  6. The ones where you write "image WAS NOT EVEN FROM GOVERMENT WEBSITE, on METADATA it said from GOOGLE", such as File:Miss World 2013 Megan Young 101413.jpg, are going to be the toughest ones; toughest because we may end up making the wrong decision. From reading the image descriptions, it looks like the uploader did, actually, find images that were made by Malacañang Photo Bureau, which, from https://www.officialgazette.gov.ph/section/briefing-room/malacanang-photo-bureau/ is a government photo bureau. For example, https://orangemagazine.ph/2013/miss-world-2013-megan-young-meets-president-noynoy-aquino/ is such a photo. But it's not quite the same photo, and the link is dead, and since it wasn't license reviewed, we can't prove it, so might end up deleting it. Unfortunately, because I do believe it was likely from a government photo like that one.
  7. So this will be slow work. But, again, thank you. --GRuban (talk) 14:51, 25 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Gazini image nominated for deletion, thank you for pointing out the Instagram post. The other two haven't been forgotten as such, they're just a bit more complicated than they may at first glance seem. For one thing, they're from the same uploader, and the first one, File:Earth2009press01.jpg, is from a series of 20 or so, clearly from the same event. Given that, if they were snarfed from the web somewhere, it should be possible to see where they came from, and I can't quite see them; there are plenty of photos from this specific event, (for example https://www.mykiru.ph/2009/11/miss-earth-2009-press-presentation.html and https://adventuresofabeautyqueen.wordpress.com/2009/11/07/beauty-queens-earthy-18-picks-in-miss-earth-2009/ and https://normannorman.com/2009/11/06/miss-earth-2009-press-presentation/) but not this specific series, and there were clearly multiple photographers present at the event. I may end up nominating them for deletion on general principles (COM:PCP), but I'd hate to be wrong. --GRuban (talk) 21:25, 5 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

File:Nadeem Baig Director.png

[edit]

Sir Please check the license of this image as it seems to be clear copyright violation because the first thing is that YouTube's source license is YouTube CC-BY license and this file is uploaded under wrong license of CC BY SA 4.0. Although, please check the license for this file from its archived source of 2019 given on its file page for clear verification of the license.Thank You.59.103.122.87 17:24, 26 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Seoul photos

[edit]

Hi Leoboudv! I'm looking to revamp the collage at w:Seoul and exploring the available photos. I noticed that File:Seoul cityscape banner.jpg is marked as CC-licensed with you as reviewer, but when I went to extract the larger image at Flickr, it's now all rights reserved. Is it safe to import anyways because of the license I presume it used to have? If there is any way to check license changes there, it'd also be nice to have this photo. {{u|Sdkb}} talk 08:11, 27 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

  • As for this this photo, it CANNOT be used on Commons since it was never uploaded to Commons before the license change. Best, --Leoboudv (talk) 08:41, 27 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Hi, I confirm what said Leoboudv, the banner can be used as we have an evidence (the license review) that it was uploaded here when the license was compatible however the not cropped version can not be uploaded here. As well as the other files that have not currently a free compatible license. We tolerate sometimes to keep a file without a license review if we are sure that the license was compatible at the time of the upload, but usually we don't upload files a posteriori just if it have potentially be published one day under a free license. Christian Ferrer (talk) 15:52, 27 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    Ah, oh well; thanks for the info! {{u|Sdkb}} talk 23:24, 27 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Request for licence review

[edit]

Hello, Would you please carry out a license review for the following images?

Note that the final image has a potential copyvio due to an action performed by another user, please carry out revdel if needed. Thanks in advance! -- Ab207 (talk) 12:59, 27 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you Leoboudv! -- Ab207 (talk) 03:41, 28 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Admin noticeboard

[edit]

This is at COM:AN

Regards, --Leoboudv (talk) 21:11, 27 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Mushroom Observer tool

[edit]

A MO this tool --Leoboudv (talk) 21:15, 27 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

See link above. --Leoboudv (talk) 21:12, 27 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Commons:VIRIN & PD US Government

[edit]

Virins: US Military licenses. --Leoboudv (talk) 21:16, 27 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Mass Deletions through a VFC (Visual File Change)

[edit]

Go here: https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Help:VisualFileChange.js&withJS=MediaWiki:VisualFileChange.js

  • Name the user's name. Click on the user's selected uploads, give the reason and click the Execute bottom button.

Best, --Leoboudv (talk) 21:19, 27 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Review request

[edit]

Hello Leoboudv, Requesting following images for review:

Regards, Raphael Figueira (talk) 23:53, 6 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Review request

[edit]

Hello Leoboudv, Requesting following images for review:

Regards, Raphael Figueira (talk) 09:35, 7 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Review request

[edit]

Hello Leoboudv, Requesting following images for review:

Regards, --Gpkp (talk) 07:15, 8 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Notification about possible deletion

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

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

Please remember to respond to and – if appropriate – contradict the arguments supporting deletion. Arguments which focus on the nominator will not affect the result of the nomination. Thank you!
Afrikaans ∙ العربية ∙ беларуская ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца) ∙ български ∙ ပအိုဝ်ႏဘာႏသာႏ ∙ বাংলা ∙ bosanski ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ dansk ∙ Deutsch ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form) ∙ Zazaki ∙ ދިވެހިބަސް ∙ Ελληνικά ∙ English ∙ Esperanto ∙ español ∙ eesti ∙ فارسی ∙ suomi ∙ français ∙ galego ∙ עברית ∙ hrvatski ∙ magyar ∙ հայերեն ∙ Bahasa Indonesia ∙ íslenska ∙ italiano ∙ 日本語 ∙ 한국어 ∙ 조선말 ∙ македонски ∙ മലയാളം ∙ Bahasa Melayu ∙ မြန်မာဘာသာ ∙ norsk bokmål ∙ Plattdüütsch ∙ Nederlands ∙ norsk nynorsk ∙ norsk ∙ occitan ∙ polski ∙ پښتو ∙ português ∙ português do Brasil ∙ română ∙ русский ∙ sicilianu ∙ slovenčina ∙ slovenščina ∙ shqip ∙ српски / srpski ∙ svenska ∙ ไทย ∙ Türkçe ∙ українська ∙ Tiếng Việt ∙ 中文 ∙ 中文（简体） ∙ 中文（繁體） ∙ +/−

Affected:


Yours sincerely, A1Cafel (talk) 03:08, 12 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

File:Bunyodkor Stadium.jpg

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

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

Please remember to respond to and – if appropriate – contradict the arguments supporting deletion. Arguments which focus on the nominator will not affect the result of the nomination. Thank you!
Afrikaans ∙ العربية ∙ беларуская ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца) ∙ български ∙ ပအိုဝ်ႏဘာႏသာႏ ∙ বাংলা ∙ bosanski ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ dansk ∙ Deutsch ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form) ∙ Zazaki ∙ ދިވެހިބަސް ∙ Ελληνικά ∙ English ∙ Esperanto ∙ español ∙ eesti ∙ فارسی ∙ suomi ∙ français ∙ galego ∙ עברית ∙ hrvatski ∙ magyar ∙ հայերեն ∙ Bahasa Indonesia ∙ íslenska ∙ italiano ∙ 日本語 ∙ 한국어 ∙ 조선말 ∙ македонски ∙ മലയാളം ∙ Bahasa Melayu ∙ မြန်မာဘာသာ ∙ norsk bokmål ∙ Plattdüütsch ∙ Nederlands ∙ norsk nynorsk ∙ norsk ∙ occitan ∙ polski ∙ پښتو ∙ português ∙ português do Brasil ∙ română ∙ русский ∙ sicilianu ∙ slovenčina ∙ slovenščina ∙ shqip ∙ српски / srpski ∙ svenska ∙ ไทย ∙ Türkçe ∙ українська ∙ Tiếng Việt ∙ 中文 ∙ 中文（简体） ∙ 中文（繁體） ∙ +/−

A1Cafel (talk) 03:17, 12 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

File:French Beach Karachi.jpg

[edit]

Sir can you please review the license for this image? Thank You.Wallu2 (talk) 11:42, 14 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Review request

[edit]

Please review it:

--Telovg (talk) 22:19, 14 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Review request

[edit]

Hi, I've heard you are a reviewer, could you please review these two files;

--Limorina (talk) 11:47, 18 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

File:Demetrios I of Constantinople.jpg

[edit]

Good day. I don't understand why this template was added to this file. This is my own work and I give permission to use it under this license. I would be grateful if you could help and remove this template. RC-1841 (talk) 10:15, 27 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

All files in one letter or each separately? RC-1841 (talk) 13:09, 28 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Big fungi

[edit]

Hi, for a big fungi this is a big one! @Strobilomyces: isn't it?  :) Christian Ferrer (talk) 20:38, 1 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, that's a really big fungus. We don't get mushrooms like that in the woods where I live - and happily not too many termites either. I don't know why we are talking on user:Leoboudv's page, but no doubt there is some reason. Strobilomyces (talk) 21:35, 1 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@Strobilomyces: I first thought of Leoboudv when I saw this big fungi, as he uploaded a lot of fungus image, and I had not finished marking the message that I thought about you too. I guess Leoboudv too have no such mushrooms in British Columbia  :) Christian Ferrer (talk) 21:42, 1 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@Christian Ferrer: : No we don't have such big mushrooms at all in British Columbia, Canada. Best, --Leoboudv (talk) 11:25, 2 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

File:Πατριάρχης Δημήτριος.jpg

[edit]

Good day. This file was created based on another Wikimedia file. In the photo editor, I likened the features of Patriarch Bartholomew, depicted in the original, to the features of Patriarch Demetrius. No other file is used here. I am neither the author nor the author of the original file, so I cannot respond to the template. What do you advise as an administrator? RC-1841 (talk) 21:38, 7 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

It use this File: Varfholomey (2019-01-05) 25 (cropped).jpg RC-1841 (talk) 21:39, 7 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The close situation with this File:Demetrios I of Constantinople.jpg, that was uploaded to the Wikimedia by me RC-1841 (talk) 21:41, 7 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

O. Excuse me.RC-1841 (talk) 22:07, 7 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]


PLEASE DELETE THIS 3 IMAGES It's obvious Copyright violation!!! and block this violator Sirika karipoon! this images was not a free commons images at all!! It was uploaded so many years/weeks before he uploaded on commons.wikimedia.org.

please delete all of this images and block the violator.--180.253.163.254 17:04, 10 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Help

[edit]

Hello, I hope you are well. I came here to ask you if you could assist me on how I can get a current photo of Dua Lipa current that has a proper license, I uploaded a photo and marked the image as "license laundering ". As I see that you know about the subject, I would like to ask you about how I could get a legal image to upload Commons. Alexismata7 (talk) 14:42, 14 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Review request

[edit]

Please review it:

--Telovg (talk) 20:38, 14 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

License review

[edit]

Please review the following files. Thanks in advance.

-- Ab207 (talk) 05:46, 15 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Image review

[edit]

Hi Leoboudv, could you please review this images with CC-license from YouTube. Thank you - Dimma21 (talk) 07:20, 20 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for reviewing the previous images. I need your help again to review these image which has CC and PD-IDGov license. Thank you. - Dimma21 (talk) 06:27, 3 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

License review needed - Lukewon

[edit]

Hi Leoboudv, please help me review this images (both raw and cropped) from government websites and Youtube video with Creative Commons Attribution license (reuse allowed and source stated in every images page). Please help me for the license review, Thank you before...--Lukewon (talk) 08:59, 1 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

License review needed

[edit]

Hi Leoboudv, could you please review this images with CC-license from YouTube [I have double-checked these images taken from YouTube before I uploaded them]. Thank you in advance.–Fandi89 (talk) 15:55, 3 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

File:Crane Machine Symbol.svg

[edit]

Greetings! Sir! Can you please review the license for this image so that it may qualify for usage. Thank You.Wallu2 (talk) 09:39, 6 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Wallu2: ✓ Done I "stole" this one from Leoboudv :-) --MGA73 (talk) 14:33, 7 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@MGA73: Thank You.Wallu2 (talk) 14:56, 7 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Review request

[edit]

Hello Leoboudv, Requesting following images for review:

Gpkp (talk) 07:19, 7 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

License review needed

[edit]

Hi Leoboudv, could you please review this images with CC-license from YouTube [I have double-checked these images taken from YouTube before I uploaded them]. Thank you in advance.–Fandi89 (talk) 11:47, 7 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Please delete this all illegal screenshot image and Block the uploader!

[edit]

Please delete this all illegal screenshot image, It's obvious Copyright violation, this screenshot images was NOT a free commons images on YouTube. The violator User:Wikimejjj was kept uploading illegal images since March 9, 2020. Please delete this image, It's obvious Copyright violation and block the violator User:Wikimejjj to stop him from uploading illegal contents on wikimedia commons!!--36.74.118.122 12:50, 9 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

License review

[edit]

Hi Leoboudv, I need your help to review these image which has CC and PD-IDGov license. Thank you. - Dimma21 (talk) 14:27, 9 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

License Review

[edit]

Greetings! Sir! can you please review the license of following images:

Thank You.Wallu2 (talk) 02:44, 16 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Review request

[edit]

Hello Leoboudv, Requesting following images for review:

-- Gpkp (talk) 18:08, 16 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Image review

[edit]

Hello! Could you please perform license reviews of the files below. Thanks - Dimma21 (talk) 06:04, 17 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

License review

[edit]

Hi, can you review the license for these images with Creative Commons Attribution license (reused allowed) from YouTube. Thank you in advance.–Fandi89 (talk) 15:10, 17 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

File:Lantern.lamp.svg

[edit]

Greetings! Sir! can you please review the license for this image. Thanking you in advance.Wallu2 (talk) 18:10, 17 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Image review

[edit]

Please review this images

And this please

Review request

[edit]

Hello Leoboudv, Requesting review for following images:

--Gpkp (talk) 08:14, 21 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

OTRS requirement

[edit]

Hi Leoboudv, i just want to ask since you are expert on license review. I just recently got notification from Aspects about OTRS permission requirement for this file which the license is already reviewed by you, otherwise the file will be deleted. I want to ask did Commons need the OTRS permission for this kind of work since the YouTube video is already has CC-license? If it's not, can you remove the tag so that the file will not be deleted. It will be great and helpful. Thank you - Dimma21 (talk) 01:25, 24 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you Leoboudv. Cheers, --Dimma21 (talk) 15:11, 24 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Regarding a request in Wiki

[edit]

Hello Leoboudv, Requesting your suggestion on this: [54]. Does the image:[55] has eligibility to be uploaded under the mentioned licenses? Your opnion is valuable, depending upon which I can accept or decline the long-pending request. Thank you. --Gpkp (talk) 13:38, 24 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Request for image license review

[edit]

Hi Leoboudv, can you review the license for the images below. Thank you in advance.–Fandi89 (talk) 01:19, 29 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I just noticed that the first two is reviewed by GRuban.–Fandi89 (talk) 00:44, 5 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Review please

[edit]

Leoboudv please review this files 

*✓ Done I've been really busy with my real life work and can review less often. I hope you understand. Best, --Leoboudv (talk) 04:21, 8 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Review please

[edit]

Please review this images

License review needed

[edit]

Hi Leoboudv, could you please review this images with CC-license from YouTube. Thank you.––Fandi89 (talk) 05:20, 15 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

License review needed

[edit]

Hi, Leoboudv. Please review the following images:

Best, Lefcentreright (talk) 20:15, 14 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

License review needed

[edit]

Hi, Leoboudv. Please review the following images from Pixabay:

Best, --Solomon203 (talk) 13:01, 19 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Review Request

[edit]

Hi,Leoboudv could you kindly review the following images please

License Review

[edit]

https://commons.m.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Vani_Bhojan02.jpg — Preceding unsigned comment added by Tuttesnaveen (talk • contribs) 11:30, 17 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

License Review

[edit]

Hi,Leoboudv could you kindly review the following images please File:Vani Bhojan Fashion show.jpg — Preceding unsigned comment added by Tuttesnaveen (talk • contribs) 14:00, 19 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

License review needed

[edit]

Hi Leoboudv, can you verify the license for these images below:

–Fandi89 (talk) 06:57, 26 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Review request

[edit]

Hii @Leoboudv: can you pls review below mentioned file.

File:Vijayalakshmi Agathiyan at Chennai 600028 – 2 Press Meet.jpg
File:Ashok Selvan at the Aruvi Movie Premiere.jpg
File:Ashwin Kakamanu At The Thiri Audio Launch.jpg
File:Fans Celebrate Baasha Re-Release.jpg
File:Suresh Krissna at the Masala Padam Audio & Trailer Launch.jpg
File:Actor Nizhalgal Ravi at Ponniyin Selvan 2D Movie Press Meet.jpg -- Perumalism (talk) 17:20, 6 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

License review needed

[edit]

Hi Leoboudv, can you pls review below mentioned file: File:2020 inauguration of Alexander Lukashenko.png TagMorgan (talk) 15:45, 16 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Notification about possible deletion

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

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

Please remember to respond to and – if appropriate – contradict the arguments supporting deletion. Arguments which focus on the nominator will not affect the result of the nomination. Thank you!
Afrikaans ∙ العربية ∙ беларуская ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца) ∙ български ∙ ပအိုဝ်ႏဘာႏသာႏ ∙ বাংলা ∙ bosanski ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ dansk ∙ Deutsch ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form) ∙ Zazaki ∙ ދިވެހިބަސް ∙ Ελληνικά ∙ English ∙ Esperanto ∙ español ∙ eesti ∙ فارسی ∙ suomi ∙ français ∙ galego ∙ עברית ∙ hrvatski ∙ magyar ∙ հայերեն ∙ Bahasa Indonesia ∙ íslenska ∙ italiano ∙ 日本語 ∙ 한국어 ∙ 조선말 ∙ македонски ∙ മലയാളം ∙ Bahasa Melayu ∙ မြန်မာဘာသာ ∙ norsk bokmål ∙ Plattdüütsch ∙ Nederlands ∙ norsk nynorsk ∙ norsk ∙ occitan ∙ polski ∙ پښتو ∙ português ∙ português do Brasil ∙ română ∙ русский ∙ sicilianu ∙ slovenčina ∙ slovenščina ∙ shqip ∙ српски / srpski ∙ svenska ∙ ไทย ∙ Türkçe ∙ українська ∙ Tiếng Việt ∙ 中文 ∙ 中文（简体） ∙ 中文（繁體） ∙ +/−

Affected:


Yours sincerely, Ytoyoda (talk) 14:34, 23 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Review request

[edit]

Please review it:

--JessePinkman (talk) 19:10, 25 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

File:Boletus pinetorum 474529.jpg

[edit]
File:Boletus pinetorum 474529.jpg has been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether it should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry.

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

Please remember to respond to and – if appropriate – contradict the arguments supporting deletion. Arguments which focus on the nominator will not affect the result of the nomination. Thank you!
Afrikaans ∙ العربية ∙ беларуская ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца) ∙ български ∙ ပအိုဝ်ႏဘာႏသာႏ ∙ বাংলা ∙ bosanski ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ dansk ∙ Deutsch ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form) ∙ Zazaki ∙ ދިވެހިބަސް ∙ Ελληνικά ∙ English ∙ Esperanto ∙ español ∙ eesti ∙ فارسی ∙ suomi ∙ français ∙ galego ∙ עברית ∙ hrvatski ∙ magyar ∙ հայերեն ∙ Bahasa Indonesia ∙ íslenska ∙ italiano ∙ 日本語 ∙ 한국어 ∙ 조선말 ∙ македонски ∙ മലയാളം ∙ Bahasa Melayu ∙ မြန်မာဘာသာ ∙ norsk bokmål ∙ Plattdüütsch ∙ Nederlands ∙ norsk nynorsk ∙ norsk ∙ occitan ∙ polski ∙ پښتو ∙ português ∙ português do Brasil ∙ română ∙ русский ∙ sicilianu ∙ slovenčina ∙ slovenščina ∙ shqip ∙ српски / srpski ∙ svenska ∙ ไทย ∙ Türkçe ∙ українська ∙ Tiếng Việt ∙ 中文 ∙ 中文（简体） ∙ 中文（繁體） ∙ +/−

--Abalg (talk) 20:30, 22 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Review Request

[edit]

Hii @Leoboudv: can you pls review below mentioned file.

File:Vani Bhojan at PuthuYugam Interview.jpg
File: Vani Bhojan at PuthuYugam Interview 1.jpg
File:Vani Bhojan at PuthuYugam Interview 2.jpg Puppywae (talk) 15:10, 26 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Review request

[edit]

Please review license of this file: File:Mirosław_Baka_2017.jpg. Michalg95 (talk) 15:46, 14 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Review request

[edit]

Can you review File:Yusuke Shirai in 2020.jpg? This is my first YouTube upload so I would like to make sure I did it properly. Link20XX (talk) 13:29, 25 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Review

[edit]

Dear Leoboudv, Thank you for all your license reviews! If you perform a new round of reviews on uploads of mine, would you please consider File:Limnephilus bipunctatus 38542733.jpg? You seem to have overlooked that one last time. Many thanks! Lymantria (talk) 12:54, 29 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Review request

[edit]

Hi. I was hoping you could review this photo. Thanks. ArturSik (talk) 23:24, 12 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Review request

[edit]

Hii @Leoboudv: can you pls review below mentioned file.

File:SS Rajamouli, Ram Charan, Alia Bhatt, N.T.Rama Rao Jr. At The RRR Press Meet in Chennai.jpg
File:N.T.Rama Rao Jr. at the RRR Press Meet in Chennai.jpg
File:Santhanam at the ‘A1’ Press Meet.jpg -- Perumalism (talk) 22:14, 16 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Review Request

[edit]

Hi, Please Review my work please

File:JeffreyGKitingan.jpg

Teh Ais Lemon (talk) 03:15, 5 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Review request

[edit]

Hii @Leoboudv: can you pls review below mentioned file.

File:Suriya and Karthi Sivakumar at Sivakumar’s 75th Birthday Celebration & Coffee Table Book Launch.jpg
File:Karthi Sivakumar at Nenjil Thunivirunthal Audio Launch.jpg
File:Suriya and Karthi Sivakumar at Knack Studio Launch.jpg
File:AR Rahman At The ‘Marvel Anthem’ Launch.jpg
File:Gautham Menon at Dhuruvangal Pathinaaru Success Meet.jpg
File:AR Rahman at the KM Music Conservatory Press Conference.jpg
File:AR Rahman and Virat Kohli at Premier Futsal Press Meet.jpg
File:R Sarath Kumar At The Vaanam Kottatum Audio Launch.jpg
File:Mani Ratnam, AR Rahman & Vairamuthu at the Chekka Chivantha Vaanam Audio Launch.jpg
File:Mani Ratnam at the Oh Kadhal Kanmani aka OK Kanmani Audio Success Meet.jpg
File:R Sarath Kumar and Radhika At The Vaanam Kottatum Audio Launch.jpg
File:Mani Ratnam and Suhasini At The Vaanam Kottatum Audio Launch.jpg
File:Mani Ratnam, Bala, Vetrimaaran and C Premkumar At The Gollapudi Srinivas National Award 2019.jpg -- Perumalism (talk) 18:14, 24 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Review request

[edit]

Hi,@Leoboudv: I hope you might give a fair review to this picture.

File:I01 shiva-priya-anand-at-the-kasethan-kadavulada-movie-launch-photos-0004.jpg

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/0/0d/I01_shiva-priya-anand-at-the-kasethan-kadavulada-movie-launch-photos-0004.jpg
Thank you. -- Fazran fayad (talk) 11:20, 31 January 2022 (UTC) / TFETalk..! 22:24, 31 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the License Reviews!

[edit]

I saw so many today, very impressive!--GRuban (talk) 13:12, 7 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Review request

[edit]

Hi Leoboudv. Could you review the following images? They were already checked by FlickreviewR2, but still need a manual [Human] review: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23. CFA1877 (talk) 17:06, 3 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@CFA1877: ✓ Done for most. I did not stamp the following images from Trainiac, because I'm not at all sure that Flickr user owns the copyright to these old images, and I am also not at all sure that they know for a fact that these images are in the public domain: 4, 6, 20, 21, 22. The others are mostly modern outdoor views taken by professional photographers that show from their Flickr account this is something they do often, so I can believe they own the copyright to these images. Trainiac's Flickr account seems to be a compilation of train images from different times and places, so I suspect Trainiac doesn't own these images. If I'm wrong, and the Trainiac account belongs to a railroad museum or a famous photographer who is known to have traveled the world since the 1950s taking photos of trains, please say. --GRuban (talk) 14:20, 9 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

File:Emma Mackey MTV UK, January 2019 2.jpg

[edit]

Hi, Could you please review this image? Thanks ArturSik (talk) 21:25, 3 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

✓ Done If you could write when in the video the screenshot comes from, that would help. --GRuban (talk) 02:55, 6 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Haven't edited since February?

[edit]

Is everything all right? --GRuban (talk) 02:53, 6 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Glad to know you are all right. You did a lot for the Commons. Thank you.--GRuban (talk) 01:05, 22 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

License Review Request

[edit]

Hey, @Leoboudv I was wondering if you could review this file for me please? I used --> this file that you recently reviewed as a guide on how to structure and upload images that are available for use under CC. Could you take a look at it, please?


Thanks so much! Elbe202 (talk) 01:46, 28 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Review

[edit]

Hi

could you review File:مصطفى مدبولي ومصطفى الكاظمي - لقطة من مؤتمر بالعراق بتاريخ 31-10-2020.png? Panam2014 (talk) 13:12, 23 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Review Request

[edit]

Hello Leoboudv, I contacted a user on Pixabay for a photo ([57]) but I didn't know that this plateform change its licencing works. The Pixabay licence since 2019 is not compatible with commons, however this user mention that he's agree to share his photo with CC0 licence. He wrote a comment on the photo page (under his profil). Is it possible to upload it with a valid Pixabay review? Thank you.--Glabb (talk) 10:15, 6 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

File:356 S Mission.jpg

[edit]
File:356 S Mission.jpg has been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether it should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry.

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

Please remember to respond to and – if appropriate – contradict the arguments supporting deletion. Arguments which focus on the nominator will not affect the result of the nomination. Thank you!
Afrikaans ∙ العربية ∙ беларуская ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца) ∙ български ∙ ပအိုဝ်ႏဘာႏသာႏ ∙ বাংলা ∙ bosanski ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ dansk ∙ Deutsch ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form) ∙ Zazaki ∙ ދިވެހިބަސް ∙ Ελληνικά ∙ English ∙ Esperanto ∙ español ∙ eesti ∙ فارسی ∙ suomi ∙ français ∙ galego ∙ עברית ∙ hrvatski ∙ magyar ∙ հայերեն ∙ Bahasa Indonesia ∙ íslenska ∙ italiano ∙ 日本語 ∙ 한국어 ∙ 조선말 ∙ македонски ∙ മലയാളം ∙ Bahasa Melayu ∙ မြန်မာဘာသာ ∙ norsk bokmål ∙ Plattdüütsch ∙ Nederlands ∙ norsk nynorsk ∙ norsk ∙ occitan ∙ polski ∙ پښتو ∙ português ∙ português do Brasil ∙ română ∙ русский ∙ sicilianu ∙ slovenčina ∙ slovenščina ∙ shqip ∙ српски / srpski ∙ svenska ∙ ไทย ∙ Türkçe ∙ українська ∙ Tiếng Việt ∙ 中文 ∙ 中文（简体） ∙ 中文（繁體） ∙ +/−

19h00s (talk) 02:34, 28 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Review

[edit]

Hi

Best wishes for 2023.

Could you review File:Sadiq Ameen Abu Ras.jpg and File:Yosra Mahnouch, Fujairah TV - May 31, 2019.jpg? Panam2014 (talk) 21:06, 25 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

File:Margaret at Party Fashion Night 2022.jpg

[edit]

Hi, Could you please review this image? Thanks :) ArturSik (talk) 16:43, 9 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Review

[edit]

Hey!

Could you please review these images for me? File:TINI 2021 01.png and File:TINI 2021 02.png

Thankss Giozinha (talk) 22:17, 27 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

License review for Youtube Media

[edit]

Could you please review these files? I was looking through some of the files I uploaded years ago and some of the creative licenses provided have been removed from the videos. https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Fivio_in_2020.jpg https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Blueface_in_Feb_2020.png https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:24kgolden_in_2020.png https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:GLC_in_2012.png Shoot for the Stars (talk) 21:57, 1 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Review request

[edit]

Hi Leoboudv. An Instagram friend took some nice pics and I requested that he share them on Wikipedia. He doesn't want to have to deal with signing up or VRT hassles etcetera, so instead he uploaded them to Flickr (cc-by-sa-2.0). One is publicly accessible, but for the other three photos he gave me private links as he doesn't want to have four photos of the Ford P100 in a row in his curated stream. Therefore Flickrreviewer cannot find the image; I can share the private urls with you if you could review the licenses of the photos. I asked at the Village Pump and they suggested VRT, but VRT only knows how to do VRT and cannot help in a meaningful way.

These are the photos:

Thank you for your time, mr.choppers (talk)-en- 15:07, 2 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Mr.choppers, this is done and I've inserted a note on all of these files. Please make sure it is consistent. I have confirmed the licenses of these files and passed them. Best, ─ The Aafī (talk) 16:43, 2 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks @The Aafi, everything looks great. Thanks Leoboudv for the use of your space :). mr.choppers (talk)-en- 19:11, 2 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

File:Casablanca Mosque Sea Morocco Travel Architecture.jpg

[edit]
File:Casablanca Mosque Sea Morocco Travel Architecture.jpg has been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether it should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry.

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

Please remember to respond to and – if appropriate – contradict the arguments supporting deletion. Arguments which focus on the nominator will not affect the result of the nomination. Thank you!
Afrikaans ∙ العربية ∙ беларуская ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца) ∙ български ∙ ပအိုဝ်ႏဘာႏသာႏ ∙ বাংলা ∙ bosanski ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ dansk ∙ Deutsch ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form) ∙ Zazaki ∙ ދިވެހިބަސް ∙ Ελληνικά ∙ English ∙ Esperanto ∙ español ∙ eesti ∙ فارسی ∙ suomi ∙ français ∙ galego ∙ עברית ∙ hrvatski ∙ magyar ∙ հայերեն ∙ Bahasa Indonesia ∙ íslenska ∙ italiano ∙ 日本語 ∙ 한국어 ∙ 조선말 ∙ македонски ∙ മലയാളം ∙ Bahasa Melayu ∙ မြန်မာဘာသာ ∙ norsk bokmål ∙ Plattdüütsch ∙ Nederlands ∙ norsk nynorsk ∙ norsk ∙ occitan ∙ polski ∙ پښتو ∙ português ∙ português do Brasil ∙ română ∙ русский ∙ sicilianu ∙ slovenčina ∙ slovenščina ∙ shqip ∙ српски / srpski ∙ svenska ∙ ไทย ∙ Türkçe ∙ українська ∙ Tiếng Việt ∙ 中文 ∙ 中文（简体） ∙ 中文（繁體） ∙ +/−

A1Cafel (talk) 08:56, 26 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

YouTube licence for screenshots

[edit]

I saw that you regularly verify YouTube licences for screenshots. I would like to know how you do it. How do I check if a YouTube video has the CC licence? Jay (talk) 10:51, 5 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  •  Comment:

These 2 CC licenses are acceptable on commons.

https://www.flickr.com/photos/29471479@N07/4553068173/ CC BY SA 2.0 Generic

https://www.flickr.com/photos/governortomwolf/25301736727/in/album-72157663529194977/ CC BY 2.0 Generic

Also PD-Mark images below are OK for Commons if they are own work by the flickr account owner: https://www.flickr.com/photos/monchotoronto/51866572470/

They must have this license tag: {{PDMark-owner}}

Best, --Leoboudv (talk) 11:35, 15 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

(talk page stalker): Jay, you may find this particular section of this page very useful for determining such licences that are sometimes a bit difficult to find unless you know exactly where they are. Ww2censor (talk) 13:29, 15 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you! Jay (talk) 18:12, 15 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Old license review on the Italian senate website

[edit]

Hi @Leoboudv some years ago you made a revision for some photos from the Italian senate, and I'm challenging it on this deletion request. Maybe you would like to join the discussion. To be clear the webpage had a CC-BY logo and I think you based your decision on that, however, I found that the terms an conditions page stated (and states) something different. Thanks. Günther Frager (talk) 18:00, 1 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Review

[edit]

Hi

Could you review :

Panam2014 (talk) 11:17, 23 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

True source have been added for File:Abdul Aziz bin Habtoor3.png
Also please review :
File:Al Maissari.png
File:Mehdi Al Mashat4.png
File:Mehdi Al Mashat3.png
File:Mehdi Al Mashat6.png
File:Sammad Memorial.png
File:Mehdi Al Mashat5.png
File:Mehdi Al Mashat7.png
File:Ahmed Awad bin Mubarak.png
File:Al Zubaidi.png
File:Muhammad Al Atifi.png Panam2014 (talk) 17:24, 29 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Review

[edit]

Hi,

could you review:

Daniel Schröder (talk) 12:24, 17 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Review request 22 November 2023

[edit]

Hi! Could you review the new portraits of the Spanish ministers?

Basque mapping (talk) 17:06, 22 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

File:Uyghur girl in Turpan, Xinjiang, China - 20050712.jpg

[edit]
File:Uyghur girl in Turpan, Xinjiang, China - 20050712.jpg has been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether it should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry.

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

Please remember to respond to and – if appropriate – contradict the arguments supporting deletion. Arguments which focus on the nominator will not affect the result of the nomination. Thank you!
Afrikaans ∙ العربية ∙ беларуская ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца) ∙ български ∙ ပအိုဝ်ႏဘာႏသာႏ ∙ বাংলা ∙ bosanski ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ dansk ∙ Deutsch ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form) ∙ Zazaki ∙ ދިވެހިބަސް ∙ Ελληνικά ∙ English ∙ Esperanto ∙ español ∙ eesti ∙ فارسی ∙ suomi ∙ français ∙ galego ∙ עברית ∙ hrvatski ∙ magyar ∙ հայերեն ∙ Bahasa Indonesia ∙ íslenska ∙ italiano ∙ 日本語 ∙ 한국어 ∙ 조선말 ∙ македонски ∙ മലയാളം ∙ Bahasa Melayu ∙ မြန်မာဘာသာ ∙ norsk bokmål ∙ Plattdüütsch ∙ Nederlands ∙ norsk nynorsk ∙ norsk ∙ occitan ∙ polski ∙ پښتو ∙ português ∙ português do Brasil ∙ română ∙ русский ∙ sicilianu ∙ slovenčina ∙ slovenščina ∙ shqip ∙ српски / srpski ∙ svenska ∙ ไทย ∙ Türkçe ∙ українська ∙ Tiếng Việt ∙ 中文 ∙ 中文（简体） ∙ 中文（繁體） ∙ +/−

212.154.56.32 03:40, 15 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

License review

[edit]

Hi. Could you please review this one for me File:DODA - Dorota Rabczewska. 100 lecie Pruszkowa. Koncert Riotka Tour. 28.05.2016 (3).jpg. Thank you :) AlicjaBalicja (talk) 11:14, 6 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Fish images

[edit]

Why are you flagging File:Cujabola.png and File:Macrodon ancylodon.jpg? Both images are taken from FishBase which clearly lists their copyright status as CC-BY not CC-BY-NC? Quetzal1964 (talk) 13:02, 24 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I see that but if you open an image tagged for NC you see (I have bolded the difference) "Copyright: Image can be freely copied and altered but may be used only for non-commercial purposes. Original author and source must be properly acknowledged," (e.g. https://fishbase.us/photos/ThumbnailsSummary.php?ID=54# CAPAPE.JPG) rather than "Copyright: Image can be freely copied and altered, as long as original author and source are properly acknowledged." I think that its a bug or mistake in Fishbase and the tag on the website matches the copyright statement seen when you click on the image. Quetzal1964 (talk) 13:17, 24 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

License review req

[edit]

Hi! Sorry to bother you, when possible, could you review the screenshots in Category:Images from Déluge? They're some major Italian actors and singers. Thank you in advance! Cavarrone (talk) 23:25, 12 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Apparently you reviewed everything, impressive work, thank you very much and I apologize for my lack of attention in Fresi's pics! I should had rechecked my work before asking for a review! Keep it up the great work. Cavarrone (talk) 07:39, 13 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:Gong Minzy in 2018.png

[edit]

Hi, Leoboudv. Please review my upload as well. And it's better to archive your talkpage. Taivorist (talk) 13:05, 13 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Please re-review

[edit]

Hello Leoboudv; Flickr user Shankar S was removed from the list of bad Flickr users; would you mind re-reviewing File:Tempo Matador school bus, Pune.jpg and File:Tempo Trax early version.jpg? Thank you, mr.choppers (talk)-en- 16:08, 16 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Rewiew req

[edit]

Hi, when possible, could you review this new set of Vimeo screenshots? It should not be the case, but let me know if there are wrong source links, and I'll fix them ASAP.

Thank you in advance! Cavarrone (talk) 00:18, 20 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  •  Comment: I will review what I can as I have another project. Thank You, --Leoboudv (talk) 02:19, 20 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    No problem, let alone you alreedy reviewed almost all of them (and they were so many!), when I write "when possible" it is implied "if possible", I expect the review being carried in a week or more, and there is no rush nor precedence over other stuff you're working on (I apologize if I disrupted it). I bother for a review request of the Vimeo images as noticed that the archived pages don't show the license (example), so these images are a more delicate affair than YouTube screenshots. And in general I noted a massive backlog in license reviewing, with images waiting for a review even for 2-3 years, so even if you take 1-2 weeks to review them it is still a great improvement. Thank you very much for your valuable work. Cavarrone (talk) 07:23, 20 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Review request

[edit]

Hello Leoboudv, Greetings!
I am requesting you to review this file:  File:Sudha Belawadi (2002-03).jpg
   Source of the file is: [58]
   Timing is: 00:18:56
Regards,
--Gpkp (talk) 15:38, 12 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Thank you Leoboudv. I've few more requests. Are these empty-categories eligible for deletion?:
Category:Files of Agra Fort with bad file names‎
Category:Images from WLF 2021 India with bad file name‎‎
Category:Images from WLF 2022 India with bad file name‎‎
Category:Images from WLM 2018 with bad file name‎
Category:Images from WLM 2019 with bad file name
Category:Images from WLM 2020 India with bad file name
Category:Images from WLM 2021 India with bad file name
Category:Images from WLM 2022 India with bad file name
Category:Images from WLM 2023 India with bad file name
--Gpkp (talk) 06:00, 13 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:Starbucks cup with lights behind.jpg

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

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

Please remember to respond to and – if appropriate – contradict the arguments supporting deletion. Arguments which focus on the nominator will not affect the result of the nomination. Thank you!
Afrikaans ∙ العربية ∙ беларуская ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца) ∙ български ∙ ပအိုဝ်ႏဘာႏသာႏ ∙ বাংলা ∙ bosanski ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ dansk ∙ Deutsch ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form) ∙ Zazaki ∙ ދިވެހިބަސް ∙ Ελληνικά ∙ English ∙ Esperanto ∙ español ∙ eesti ∙ فارسی ∙ suomi ∙ français ∙ galego ∙ עברית ∙ hrvatski ∙ magyar ∙ հայերեն ∙ Bahasa Indonesia ∙ íslenska ∙ italiano ∙ 日本語 ∙ 한국어 ∙ 조선말 ∙ македонски ∙ മലയാളം ∙ Bahasa Melayu ∙ မြန်မာဘာသာ ∙ norsk bokmål ∙ Plattdüütsch ∙ Nederlands ∙ norsk nynorsk ∙ norsk ∙ occitan ∙ polski ∙ پښتو ∙ português ∙ português do Brasil ∙ română ∙ русский ∙ sicilianu ∙ slovenčina ∙ slovenščina ∙ shqip ∙ српски / srpski ∙ svenska ∙ ไทย ∙ Türkçe ∙ українська ∙ Tiếng Việt ∙ 中文 ∙ 中文（简体） ∙ 中文（繁體） ∙ +/−

A1Cafel (talk) 04:05, 14 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

A barnstar for you!

[edit]
The Tireless Contributor Barnstar
For all your work reviewing files. Keep up the wood work! MGA73 (talk) 16:07, 17 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Review request

[edit]

Hello Leoboudv,
Please review: File:Javagal Srinath (Feb, 2023).jpg (@00:14 of source vid)
--Gpkp (talk) 15:56, 19 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you Leoboudv
--Gpkp (talk) 07:24, 20 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Admin Noticeboard

[edit]

This is the link to the Admin Noticeboard. Best, --Leoboudv (talk) 22:19, 20 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

{{PD-anon-expired}} another license Best, --Leoboudv (talk) 20:42, 28 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

a question for you on my talk page

[edit]

Leoboudv, I'm bringing this to your attention. Please, see my comments and a question for you on my talk page: User talk:Ooligan#Public Domain images (PDM) photos from flickr. Thank you, -- Ooligan ( (section header added) talk) 17:03, 23 April 2024 (UTC) --Ooligan (talk) 23:49, 24 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Any tool?

[edit]

Hello Leoboudv, I wanted to ask you whether you know any tool which lists down all the images/videos which a user has reviewed ?
--Gpkp (talk) 17:06, 3 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Dear Gpkp,

Image review

[edit]

Hello Leoboudv, request you to review following files: (I've mentioned timing in the corresponding files)

Image review

[edit]

Hello Leoboudv, request you to review following file:
File:Saeed Anwar (Jan, 2023).jpg (Thumbnail of the source Youtube video)
--Gpkp (talk) 07:36, 24 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Image review

[edit]

Hello Leoboudv, request you to review following files:
(I've mentioned timings in corresponding files..)

Image review

[edit]

Hello Leoboudv, request you to review following files:

Review request

[edit]

Hi, would you kindly review the licenses of the following images?

--125.230.86.181 03:36, 14 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

All images were uploaded 12 years ago or even longer. I'm even more surprised that their licenses were never reviewed. I don't know what the hell is going on Commons.--125.230.86.181 03:45, 14 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

English Wikipedia

[edit]

Hi! I noticed via fa.wiki that there are also some mushroom photos on English Wikipedia. For example: en:File:Geastrum_elegans_25989.jpg and en:File:Geastram australe 28538.jpg. I have not checked how many there are but I wonder if you could check the license? --MGA73 (talk) 06:34, 11 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  •  Comment: This file is licensed as CC BY SA 3.0 here: en:File:Geastrum_elegans_25989.jpg and can be transferred to Commons. The second image cannot be transferred to Commons because Noah Sigel once had a Mushroom Observer account but then he deleted it....perhaps because he did not want his images licensed freely? It does not exist anymore on the given link. Images by Noah Siegel on Commons on Mushroom Observer today are mostly by the US Forest Service today which are all PD. Best MGA73, --Leoboudv (talk) 20:48, 11 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • I KNOW Noah Siegel had a personal Mushroom Observer account because I had to type in a few passes for images that Raeky uploaded from Siegel's account like This image I gave my reason in the image talkpage long ago. If I click on the link it says the source is deleted. Only Noah Siegel deleted his account at Mushroom Observer. Admin Lymantria mentioned this Commons policy in a separate DR on another Noah Siegel image that Raeky uploaded. I had not known that trusted users could review images before February 2012...so my comments here were a mistake. If not, another Noah Siegel image would be lost. But Raeky is a rare trusted user. Best, --Leoboudv (talk) 21:36, 11 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Okay I moved the first one to Commons: File:Geastrum elegans 25989.jpg. Perhaps you can review and find a category?
I will look for other files like this later. If you happen to find any you can just move them to Commons and review them. As long as you are not the original uploader I do not think it qualify as a self review. --MGA73 (talk) 10:14, 14 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
And by unreviewed you mean a link like this mushroom https://petscan.wmflabs.org/?psid=28655194 just for inaturalist like this https://petscan.wmflabs.org/?psid=28911458 ? Sadly it seems that it does not work because some users upload their works both on Commons and on inaturalist. --MGA73 (talk) 10:23, 14 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Review

[edit]

Dear Leoboudv, Now that you are active again, would you mind and review (part of) images linked from User:Lymantria/Review needed? Many thanks in advance! --Lymantria (talk) 17:12, 16 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Free flickr images

[edit]

Here are albums of Free Flickr images. Best, --Leoboudv (talk) 22:00, 27 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Files on en.wiki

[edit]

Hi! There are a few files on en:User:MGA73/sandbox. Perhaps you could have a look? If they are free they should be moved to Commons and reviewed. If they are not free they should be nominated for deletion. No hurry. Just if you have some time to spare one day. --MGA73 (talk) 12:05, 1 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. I moved File:Arorae.JPG to Commons. I will nominate the rest for deletion. --MGA73 (talk) 12:36, 2 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I nominated the unused for deletion. en:File:Geastram australe 28538.jpg and en:File:Psilocybe galindoi.jpg seems to be the only files of their kind. But it seems that the last one may not be what it is named so I do not know which kind it is or if there is a replacement. Can you find any replacements online? --MGA73 (talk) 13:03, 2 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The last one is at https://mushroomobserver.org/7919 it is just rotated. --MGA73 (talk) 13:05, 2 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you. I wonder what the license on https://mushroomobserver.org/7919 is. Can you see it? Not a big deal just wonder if uploader was right about the license. --MGA73 (talk) 19:41, 2 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Wow this is really easy: User:Kaldari/iNaturalist2Commons. See Category:Geastrum australis. --MGA73 (talk) 19:53, 2 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I can't see that page. But just to be sure: I'm talking about en:File:Psilocybe_galindoi.jpg where you wrote "No online source" but when I click https://mushroomobserver.org/7919 I see the photo File:Tampanensis.stipe.001.jpg you also see but below the photos I see 8 smaller photos and number 5 is https://images.mushroomobserver.org/1280/14338.jpg but I can't see the license. --MGA73 (talk) 15:56, 3 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you. I moved it to Commons as File:Psilocybe galindoi.jpg. --MGA73 (talk) 19:11, 3 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks a million! --MGA73 (talk) 21:14, 3 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Image review

[edit]

Hello Leoboudv, Greetings! request you to review following files:

Thank you Leoboudv. Are you having free time and willing to review more files? --Gpkp (talk) 02:41, 21 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]


File:Lariz20220624.jpg

[edit]

Hola Leoboudv, la foto es mía. La saqué hace un par de veranos. ¿Me puedes explicar el motivo por el que hay dudas sobre su autoria?. Me sorprende que habiendo subido un buen número de fotos, estén poniendose en duda, mi autoria. Un cordial saludo, --Hard (talk) 07:25, 24 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

ArrangedLicenseReview template

[edit]

Hi! I have noticed that you have reviewed some files but a temporary template was not removed. So I removed it from files like here Special:Diff/950915975. But I wonder why it was not removed. Per MediaWiki:Gadget-LicenseReview.js#L-146 it is listed as a template to remove. Do you use another script? MGA73 (talk) 09:58, 30 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Not related: Can you see videos on vimeo like File:Jan Cuny at NCWIT Summit 2012.jpg and File:Carol Frieze at NCWIT Summit 2012.jpg? --MGA73 (talk) 11:10, 30 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Yes there are too many files to review. I was looking at those two files because I wanted to clear User:EatchaBot/Files-requiring-license-review-gallery-uploaded-by/GRuban. I was thinking perhaps it would go faster if I review files uploaded by one user instead of picking random files. So thank you for reviewing those files.
Another thing. I wonder what to do with files uploaded years ago where the video are no longer available. Should be delete them? Should we create a template saying that they were uploaded and claimed to be under a free license but the source is now dead so we can't review them. But we decided to keep them because we have no reason to believe the claim was not correct. I think it is bad to have hundreds (or thousands) of old files we can't review. They should somehow be removed from the category. --MGA73 (talk) 12:47, 31 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Comment: You can do this solution only if the source is still freely licensed and/or the uploader has a good record of many other reviewed video files. If the source is non-existent and the uploader does not upload many videos, they may not understand licenses...and it may be safer to delete unless it is by an experienced uploader such as GRuban who knows about licenses. Best Regards, --Leoboudv (talk) 23:23, 31 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I asked at Commons:Village_pump#Almost_400k_files_need_license_review and hope someone will come up with some good ideas. I think we can save files from experienced users but right now we have no template for it. So all we can do is remove the template ne add a note on talk page or edit summary or perhaps the file description page. --MGA73 (talk) 05:43, 1 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Files review

[edit]

Hello Leoboudv, request you to review the videos of: Category:Videos of M. S. Subbulakshmi.
--Gpkp (talk) 18:30, 7 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

iNaturalistReview

[edit]

Please let the bot review the files. If there is an actual error you can review the files manually, but if it's just being slow let the bot handle it. If the bot isn't reviewing anything, then report it on User talk:iNaturalistReviewBot. Thanks, AntiCompositeNumber (talk) 15:35, 13 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Leoboudv&oldid=956686297"