User talk:Liji6085

From Wikimedia Commons, the free media repository
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Welcome to Wikimedia Commons, Liji6085!

-- Wikimedia Commons Welcome (talk) 11:30, 13 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

File:Statue of Chief Engineer Jin Hen.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!

Leoboudv (talk) 23:59, 14 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

  •  Comment: There is no FOP in Taiwan for 3D art, only for buildings, so even though the image is free, the sculpture can only be kept if the architect died at least 50 or 70 years ago depending on a country's law. This is unlikely as the subject of the statue died in 1956 or only 57 years ago. So, the sculpture's creator would not be dead for more than 50 or 70 years...since no one knows when the sculpture was even created. Regards, --Leoboudv (talk) 18:36, 15 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • The rule is 50 or 70 years after the artists death depending on the country. In Japan, its 50 years. I don't know about Taiwan. In European countries without FOP, its 70 years. If this was in China, it would be OK, but its in Taiwan. Regards, --Leoboudv (talk) 23:54, 15 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • No. The artist is the original painter or sculptor or architect. (ie. the designer) The photographer just takes pictures of the sculpture. The point here is...no one knows who created the sculpture in Taiwan but since the subject died in 1956, its unlikely the sculptor has been dead for 50 years unless we know his identity. Why does Wikicommons have so many images of the Eiffel Tower in Paris even though France has no Freedom of Panorama. (see the map here)Because FOP ends 70 years after the death of the original designer, painter or architect...and Gustav Eiffel died in December 1923. 70 years after 1923 is 1993...and so images of the Eiffel Tower become copyright free no matter what French laws say about FOP. FOP has an expiry date but the statue design in Taiwan has a modern design and I doubt the sculptor has been dead for 70 years. If this was in China, Vietnam, Burma, India, Malaysia or Singapore, there would be no problem as they have full FOP, but Taiwan--like Japan--follow US law on sculptures. So, they have very limited FOP--basically on landscapes (images of nature) and buildings. Thank You and Goodnight from Canada, --Leoboudv (talk) 09:05, 16 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

提醒

[edit]

如果您的照片,並沒有比原本的圖片來的好(拍攝角度 畫質 檔案大小),就請不要覆蓋別人的作品。 --福克大叔 15:17, 4 May 2013 (UTC)

那我也再次提醒你,你也並非原圖檔的作者,少在那邊恐嚇我,有那個本事就去檢舉看看!!! --福克大叔 16:43, 17 May 2013 (UTC)

Hi Liji6085,
thanks for your changes to the files (adding Category:Haian Range). This is how it should go, whenever somebody knows something more, add or change it.
By the way, I saw that you don't have a User page yet. For us in the community it's nice to have some background info (no facebook like or others), just go as far as you wish.
Best wishes Lord Koxinga (talk) 14:24, 12 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

File:Guang Pi Ba Biao.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!

Leoboudv (talk) 05:12, 23 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

File:Elly Trần 7am.vn (35).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!

Leoboudv (talk) 05:36, 18 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Your recent deletion requests

[edit]

Please stop making mass deletion requests which are a.) obviously not a copyright violation and b.) making false statements like "Uploader has otherwise no contribution" like in this case or in this case. In cases like this you should take a look at the source before starting a DR. Missing EXIF data is not a reason for copyvio.--Wdwd (talk) 19:26, 21 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Unfortunately the user didn't listen Wdwd, I have been closing as kept a pile of invalid DN's. Ellin Beltz (talk) 22:17, 26 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

ridiculous reason for deletion request

[edit]

no EXIF info, unlikely to be "own work". Ianbu (talk) 15:32, 25 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Taroko photo deletion requests

[edit]
no EXIF info, unlikely to be "own work".

That's the most ridiculous thing I've seen all week. When was having EXIF a requirement, and how in the world did you come to the conclusion that no EXIF info ⇒ unlikely own work?

Uploader has otherwise no contribution.

Excuse me – I have over 1600 contributions in Commons alone, including 300+ hand-drawn illustrations each taking on average half a day's work to produce. And you have the gall to state that I've "no contribution".

Will you please exercise due diligence before making such inane requests? It is partially such behaviour that is driving away editors.

cmglee (talk) 22:43, 28 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This website is a gorvernment web of R.O.C. Taijiang National Park manages these places, so I think the infomation from this web is more official and correct .

And this website of Ministry of the Interior,R.O.C ,also suggests that "四草" should be translated as "Sicao".--祥龍 (talk) 03:38, 30 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

"Sihcao" is old version by Tongyong Pinyin(通用拼音), "Sicao" is new version by Hanyu Pinyin (漢語拼音).--祥龍 (talk) 06:08, 30 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I just tried trnslating the word by suggestion of R.O.C gorvernment. If you know the better way to translating the word, just do it. I have done my best to tell you why I did it, but it looks like failed. I'm sorry for my poor English skill. --祥龍 (talk) 09:24, 3 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

My translation refers to Ministry of the Interior ([1]), Ministry of Education ([2][3][4]) and Ministry of Justice ([5]), Republic of China (Taiwan). Do you have better references can tell me for improving my translation ?--祥龍 (talk) 09:40, 3 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Always welcome:)--Stang 10:21, 23 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Share your experience and feedback as a Wikimedian in this global survey

[edit]
  1. This survey is primarily meant to get feedback on the Wikimedia Foundation's current work, not long-term strategy.
  2. Legal stuff: No purchase necessary. Must be the age of majority to participate. Sponsored by the Wikimedia Foundation located at 149 New Montgomery, San Francisco, CA, USA, 94105. Ends January 31, 2017. Void where prohibited. Click here for contest rules.

Your feedback matters: Final reminder to take the global Wikimedia survey

[edit]

(Sorry to write in Engilsh)

العربية  беларуская беларуская (тарашкевіца)  ပအိုဝ်ႏဘာႏသာႏ  বাংলা  català  čeština  dansk  Deutsch  Deutsch (Sie-Form)  Ελληνικά  English  español  euskara  فارسی  suomi  français  galego  עברית  hrvatski  magyar  հայերեն  italiano  日本語  ಕನ್ನಡ  한국어  lietuvių  latviešu  македонски  മലയാളം  मराठी  မြန်မာဘာသာ  norsk bokmål  Plattdüütsch  Nederlands  norsk  polski  português  română  русский  sicilianu  slovenčina  slovenščina  српски / srpski  svenska  ไทย  Türkçe  українська  اردو  Tiếng Việt  中文(简体)  中文(繁體)  +/−
Warning sign
This media was probably deleted.
Thanks for uploading File:CaratCheung 2009.jpg. This media is missing permission information. A source is given, but there is no proof that the author or copyright holder agreed to license the file under the given license. Please provide a link to an appropriate webpage with license information, or ask the author or copyright holder to send an email with copy of a written permission to VRT (permissions-commons@wikimedia.org). You may still be required to go through this procedure even if you are the author yourself; please see Commons:But it's my own work! for more details. After you emailed permission, you may replace the {{No permission since}} tag with {{subst:PP}} on file description page. Alternatively, you may click on "Challenge speedy deletion" below the tag if you wish to provide an argument why evidence of permission is not necessary in this case.

Please see this page for more information on how to confirm permission, or if you would like to understand why we ask for permission when uploading work that is not your own, or work which has been previously published (regardless of whether it is your own).

The file probably has been deleted. If you sent a permission, try to send it again after 14 days. Do not re-upload. When the VRT-member processes your mail, the file can be undeleted. Additionally you can request undeletion here, providing a link to the File-page on Commons where it was uploaded ([[:File:CaratCheung 2009.jpg]]) and the above demanded information in your request.

User who nominated the file for deletion (Nominator) : 182.239.88.246.

I'm a computer program; please don't ask me questions but ask the user who nominated your file(s) for deletion or at our Help Desk. //Deletion Notification Bot (talk) 01:21, 27 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

File:Statue of Chief Engineer Jin Hen.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!

JWilz12345 (Talk|Contrib's.) 17:03, 11 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]