User talk:Lymantria/Archive 8

From Wikimedia Commons, the free media repository
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Archive 5 Archive 6 Archive 7 Archive 8 Archive 9 Archive 10 → Archive 13

Categöry:Diphlebia coerulescens

Categöry:Diphlebia coerulescens 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 gallery, 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.

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） ∙ +/−

Tangopaso (talk) 22:51, 24 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

These 3 pictures/video files

Dear Admin Lymantria,

Can you please mark these 3 files please?

Thank You, --Leoboudv (talk) 05:17, 30 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

  • The second image is a problem since the uploader states he/she owns the logo which belongs to an organization in the Republic of Georgia. The only question is whether the logo is too simple to be copyrighted. If it is, the license should be changed a little. Kind Regards, --Leoboudv (talk) 05:19, 30 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
✓ Done I think the logo indeed is too simple to be copyrighted. Kind regards, Lymantria (talk) 07:47, 30 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

File:John H Reagan Monument.JPG

Could you confirm that this sculpture was erected in 1911 and so is PD as it is in the PD for review category. Its an average photo. Best Regards, --Leoboudv (talk) 02:52, 2 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The uploader was notified. Kind Regards, --Leoboudv (talk) 06:10, 2 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

File:Michel Pavić.jpg

File:Michel Pavić.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） ∙ +/−

ChrisiPK (Talk|Contribs) 11:43, 10 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

This DR

Dear Admin Lymantria,

You expertise is requested in the above DR. Can you give a reply please?

  • PS: I am sorry that the Netherlands did not qualify into the World Cup final. I don't know what your team's coach was thinking to get your country's players to play a bit more passively than usual and risk another penalty kick given the Netherlands history in this past tournament. But all the same I would not want to face Germany in the World Cup final after how they destroyed Brazil in the semi-final. I hope you can help in the DR and have a good day.

Best Regards from Metro Vancouver, --Leoboudv (talk) 05:00, 11 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I have given my opinion in the DR. I think the Dutch result in the World Cup is great in the end. The team did have less world class players (but the number grew during this tournament!) than we usually have and two years ago the European Cup resulted in three losses and the gerenal opinion at the start of the tournament was that we would not survive the first phase. So this result is not bad at all!! I am very curious about the final. A big win is often followed by a difficult match, so I am not certain about a German victory. I see Germany as favourite, though. Kind regards, Lymantria (talk) 05:54, 11 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Thanks for your analysis. I did not know about the Netherland's performance at Euro 2012. So this is an improvement then. Thanks for your DR reply. Best Regards, --Leoboudv (talk) 18:09, 11 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

File:Enner Valencia Lastra.jpg

Dear Lymantria,

Is this picture a scan or own work in your opinion? I see several derivative imafes on this flickr account. If you think its is not own work, please fail it. Thank You, --Leoboudv (talk) 04:46, 14 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

PS: I hope Commons can keep this image:

Best Regards, --Leoboudv (talk) 05:18, 14 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I have started a DR on the first image. The second images seems a "de minimis" case to me. I think it can be kept, but I am aware that opinions may be different on that matter. Kind regards, Lymantria (talk) 10:31, 14 July 2014 (UTC) P.S. My prediction on ARG-GER turned out to be correct.[reply]

File:Árvíz Bezdánban 1941-ben.jpg

If you or Natuur12 can, please consider if a Pd-anonymous 70 years tag here applies. If not, please fail it since the original author is unknown. Thank You, --Leoboudv (talk) 04:59, 26 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I passed this statue here. I hope its OK but I don't know. Regards, --Leoboudv (talk) 04:33, 27 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Bee Tribes of the World

Hi, I tried to complete our collection of Category:Images from Bee Tribes of the World from its source website. (Now we have OTRS ticket for their exact permission) I don't know anything about bees classification method and their categorization is nearly impossible for me. It will be great if you can check and categorize them. Thanks. -- Meisam (talk) 11:35, 5 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

(Talk page stalker) I checked the uploads you did at August the fifth, cleaned some of them up and put them into cats. I placed the identified species in the correct articles. The ones determinated at a genus level still need to be put in the correct articles. (excuse my grammar). Natuur12 (talk) 18:14, 5 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
If all (wiki/off-wiki)stalkers were like you, we had no problem in any of Wikimedia projects! Thanks. -- Meisam (talk) 19:21, 5 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Flickr human review

Dear Lymantria,

As you know, we are all volunteers on the Commons project. While Commons has many licensed reviewers, I have noticed that many of them are inactive and don't mark images anymore. When I don't mark images in flickr human review, the backlog seems to grow and grow--and the images are mostly the same unmarked ones that I could not mark earlier. Unfortunately, after September 2, I will have to spend much less time marking images here because I have a job to do in the real world. It is unfortunate that there are not many active reviewers on Commons but if the flickr human review system starts to get overloaded and users ask why their images are not marked, please ask other reviewers to mark images too...or the whole system will break down. I don't know where the other licensed reviewers are sometimes.

Thank You, --Leoboudv (talk) 04:54, 21 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

PS: I passed this image uploaded by an Admin. If you think it is not permitted by Commons, please file a DR. The situation is unfortunate...after September 2, but so many flickr images come into human review and it seems that few other people are marking the flickr images sadly. Kind Regards, --Leoboudv (talk) 08:10, 21 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

  • Dear Leoboudv, As you may have noticed, since about a year my activities on Commons are a lot less intensive than they used to be, due to a busy job in real life. That is unfortunate, but it's the way it is. I will see what I can do today, but if that is not much I will see what I can do next week (I am off this weekend). Perhaps mention a large backlog at COM:AN. Kind regards, Lymantria (talk) 05:56, 22 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
    PS I see that Stefan4 has nominated a couple of Ama la vida images. I will leave those unpassed and see what the DR brings. Kind regards, Lymantria (talk) 05:58, 22 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • I have noticed your reduction in activity here too too but then we are all volunteers here. A few years ago, Admin MGA73 was very active here too at spotting images with potential copyright problems and tagging them for either deletion or getting someone to try to get the images licensed freely (and I managed to save a few by getting the flickr copyright owners to change the license) but I think he too has reduced his activity. Its quite normal as we have busy lives in the real world to lead. Thanks for mentioning that Admin page. I will mention the issue when the backlog gets too much. Kind Regards, --Leoboudv (talk) 07:55, 22 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Dear Lymantria,

Cohen replied to your DR on the cube. Secondly, do you or Natuur12 know if the Admin uploader is right or wrong in this DR...or would you like to make a response. Personally, I am not certain if I would upload these derivative images even if the state owns the copyright as the uploader claims. Now the situation is difficult for everyone. Kind Regards, --Leoboudv (talk) 05:06, 23 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

These images

That DR above against Russavia was kept. Personally, that was a hard case. If you have time, please check to see if these images are really own work as the flickr source account has very few images. Secondly, I am marking fewer images now on Commons. The only person I have not told is Natuur12 . I left a message on the Admin board and if the flickr backlog is always over 1,000 images, I'm afraid one person cannot do much here. Kind Regards, --Leoboudv (talk) 08:23, 9 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I think these images can be passed. Thank you for your message and your care. Kind regards, Lymantria (talk) 05:04, 11 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

File:SHINee Word III in Chile (1).jpg

Dear Lymantria,

Perhaps it is time to delete this image? Just curious. Regards, --Leoboudv (talk) 07:49, 6 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

✓ Done Lymantria (talk) 09:17, 6 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

File:Mdou Moctar Milhões de Festa 2014.jpg

Would it be possible to undelete File:Mdou Moctar Milhões de Festa 2014.jpg ? I have convinced the owner to change the licence. [ https://www.flickr.com/photos/kelavslavoran/14787925571/in/photolist- ] Thanks, Haminoon (talk) 20:26, 6 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

✓ Done Lymantria (talk) 08:40, 7 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

These two images

Dear Lymantria, Feel free to mark these 2 video files if you can?

Best Regards, --Leoboudv (talk) 09:30, 9 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

✓ Done Lymantria (talk) 10:49, 10 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

File:Umm-ul-Banin-Salaam.jpg

This image is from a flickrwashing account but if the text is too simple to be copyrighted, please feel free to mark it. Best Regards, --Leoboudv (talk) 09:24, 11 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

PS: Please consider marking this other video file if you can. Goodnight from Metro Vancouver, --Leoboudv (talk) 09:26, 11 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

This DR

Please feel free to make a comment in this DR if you can. Kind Regards, --Leoboudv (talk) 09:21, 16 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I speedy closed the DR and added the 69149038@N00 account to the blacklist. Kind regards, Lymantria (talk) 13:50, 16 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

These 3 Images

Dear Admin Lymantria,

If you have some time, please consider marking these 3 images here, here and finally this last one

Thank You and have a good day, --Leoboudv (talk) 08:51, 19 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

✓ Done Lymantria (talk) 12:08, 19 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

This image

Dear Admin Lymantria,

If you think this product cover image is not copyrightable, please feel free to pass it. I am not sure here whether the image can be copyrighted. Best Regards, --Leoboudv (talk) 06:18, 21 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I am not sure either, as this is Japanese and I don't know much about Japanese copyright laws... Kind regards, Lymantria (talk) 09:51, 21 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Three images

Dear Lymantria,

If you can, please consider marking these images here, here and here With license review, I'd prefer that a second person mark some of these images that I have also marked--just for a second opinion. Many of the images in License Review are Korean based images which were previously licensed as 'CC BY' as I thought but now this problem occurred and so I am avoiding the Korean images altogether. Best Regards, --Leoboudv (talk) 08:41, 24 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I have marked your three images, the second needed a tiny license adjustment. I am extremely limited in time this week. I will try to dive into LicenseReview next week perhaps. Kind regards, Lymantria (talk) 17:28, 24 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Lindsey McKeon.JPG

Why you deleted this image. I take this image from move on kmplayer (Ctrl+Alt+E). This image dont have copyright, please put image again.Manoooood (talk) 12:44, 20 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

A screenshot is still copyright protected as part of the movie as a derivative work. Lymantria (talk) 08:53, 21 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

File:Nola aerugula - licht visstaartje.jpg

The source and author links don't match this white moth image. They link to a different image of a dark moth sitting on a leaf. INeverCry 07:38, 28 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Fixed it, thank you. Lymantria (talk) 08:32, 28 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

PD postcard deleted

Clearly this deletion nomination was for a PD image no matter the Flickr user's licencing so, as I don't see any explaination or summary for your deletion, I'm asking for your thinking process here before requestion undeletion. Ww2censor (talk) 10:34, 11 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

My apologies, I made a too quick judgement. I restored the file, which I think is a dupe though. Kind regards, Lymantria (talk) 11:10, 11 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Being a duplicate is a good reason for deletion but I did not see any summary so had no idea why it was deleted. Thanks anyway. Ww2censor (talk) 17:38, 11 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

USer:ping08

Hi Lymantria,

Ik heb zojuist met deze gebruiker gesproken op IRC en ik denk dat hij/zij nu doorheeft dat zijn/haar gedrag ongewenst is. Ik heb wat uitleg over het beleid gegeven en ik denk niet dat deze gebruiker dit gedrag zal herhalen. Hij/zij wil graag geblokkeerd worden dus wil je ondanks dat de blokkade terecht is met je hand over je hart strijken en hem/haar een nieuwe kans geven? Er zat geen kwade wil achter, enkel onwetendheid. Deze persoon heeft dan ook zijn/haar best gedaan de bron en alles zo goed mogelijk te vermelden. Ik heb ook duidelijk gemaakt dat wanneer jij nee zegt dat ik niks voor hem/haar kan doen. Ik zal de boel dan ook even in de gaten blijven houden voor als het misgaat mocht je overgaan tot deblokkade. Natuur12 (talk) 22:47, 7 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Ik zal het herzien en omzetten naar een blok van 2 dagen. Een maand was toch wel wat lang eigenlijk. Lymantria (talk) 07:46, 8 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Dank! Gebruiker bedoelde het wel goed maar snapte het oprecht niet. Natuur12 (talk) 23:09, 8 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Dan kan hij vanavond weer los :). Lymantria (talk) 12:03, 9 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. Ping08 (talk) 22:33, 9 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

File:Salinon.PNG

File:Salinon.PNG 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） ∙ +/−

GKFXtalk 14:41, 10 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Wrong identification

https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Hadena_bicruris_larva.jpg not what it says it is, corrected to symphyta on original site. It is Tenthredo campestris, see this: http://agrozoo.net/jsp/Galery_one_image.jsp?id_galery_obfuscated=cdeb38e6a499429ebd118ec84d0a7c8b

Thank you, I corrected the image and added your suggested id. Lymantria (talk) 11:33, 18 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Foto's van Waarneming

Hallo Lymantria. Ik zag, dat je wat foto's heb toegevoegd, waarvoor mijn dank. Daaronder https://nl.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elzenpropjeswants#/media/File:Oxycarenus_modestus1.jpg van Waarneming. Heel toevallig is de fotograaf een van de mensen van Waarneming, die ik zo nu en dan vraag om een foto op Wikimedia te zetten voor me. In eerste instantie had hij gezegd, dat ik dat zelf wel mocht doen, maar toen ik op Wikimedia aangaf, dat de foto niet van mij was, werd het me te ingewikkeld. Dus nu mail ik naar de mij bekende fotobezitters op Waarneming. Maar dit gaat natuurlijk veel makkelijker. Kun je me zeggen waar ik op moet letten als ik foto's van Waarneming op Wikipedia zet? Groeten --Thijsdegraaf (talk) 20:16, 25 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Er zijn al heel wat foto's van waarneming.nl hier terechtgekomen en zo ook weer op wikipedia's! Zie: Category:Images from waarneming.nl. Waar je op moet letten: de licentie moet correct zijn. Licenties cc-0, cc-by en cc-by-sa zijn toegestaan, andere (dus met nc en/of nd en al helemaal "copyright") niet. Verder kun je de kunst afkijken voor wat betreft het gebruik van de sjablonen Waarneming.nl, Waarneming.nlUser en plaats je altijd ergens {{LicenseReview}}. Je kunt mij natuurlijk ook vragen een upload te doen of te kijken of je het goed hebt gedaan. Groet, Lymantria (talk) 06:29, 26 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Dank je. Ik zal de volgende keer eens kijken. --Thijsdegraaf (talk) 06:42, 26 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Unfree license

Dear Lymantria, Waswo X Waswo has released the following images under license CC-BY-SA which was earlier under unfree license. Links: https://www.flickr.com/photos/10968869@N08/20769110162/in/photostream/ https://www.flickr.com/photos/10968869@N08/20809703246/in/photostream/ https://www.flickr.com/photos/10968869@N08/20215013043/in/photostream/

Kindly advice Tirutirutiru (talk) 06:32, 27 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

That is nice, I saw your reuploaded one, I restored one and the third I think is new? You can upload it now. Thank you. Lymantria (talk) 08:54, 27 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks a lot, The second I have uploaded. Thank you. The third was also an earlier file - but not getting uploaded now - gives this error https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:India_poems.jpg Please see https://www.flickr.com/photos/10968869@N08/20215013043/in/dateposted/ the image titled India poems - view from humpi temple is being given under free license CC-BY-SA.

Regards, Tirutirutiru (talk) 04:47, 29 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Fixed that one as well. Lymantria (talk) 07:15, 29 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

File:Dijsselbloem verantwoordingsdag 2013.jpg

File:Dijsselbloem verantwoordingsdag 2013.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） ∙ +/−

Qwertyus (talk) 09:16, 2 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

File:NCB Naturalis logo.jpg

File:NCB Naturalis logo.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） ∙ +/−

Hansmuller (talk) 19:09, 21 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

File:Naturalislogo.jpg

File:Naturalislogo.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） ∙ +/−

Hansmuller (talk) 19:12, 21 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmation

Hello. Would you be so kind and helpful to confirm the license and source of that picture:

https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Artur_Szpilka_(Chicago).JPG

Thank you.

Artur Andrzej (talk) 20:48, 18 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

✓ Done Lymantria (talk) 21:09, 18 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Wikidata policy regarding Commons categories wiki categories

Hello Lymantria,

After the discussion - Wikidata policy regarding Commons categories it's comes now to he.wikipedia. I want just to understand if the policy regarding stile the same. There are two parameters related to the connection between Commons to wiki. One of them is P373 which gives the link from he.wiki to commons. For example the edit that you have made her, which give a link to commons category in the side bar (in Hebrew is the right sidebar). And the other one is the link from commons to he.wiki her which reverted late on by User:Cycn. Please correct me if I am wrong but according to Wikidate policies none of them should be exist. Or in other words you may be add the link using P373 but another user might be remove it ant it will be in accordance with the policy of wikidate. -- Geagea (talk) 10:33, 21 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Geagea, You are right about the above. However, on wikidata there is still some disagreement on this. Often a real link will be tolerated, but policy still is it shouldn't be tolerated. Kind regards, Lymantria (talk) 15:39, 28 February 2016 (UTC).[reply]

Commons:Deletion requests/File:Three days without light, day 1.ogv

As you reviewed this file, your input in the discussion would be appreciated?Sfan00 IMG (talk) 12:47, 29 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. Lymantria (talk) 13:05, 29 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

misidentified Erebia styx pictures

Hello, the two Erebia styx pictures that you posted turned out to be misidentified: they actually show an Erebia aethiops specimen (you can see that the original data was corrected on observado.org). How do we go from here (I am new to this) ? Can you correct or delete the pictures ? Is there a simple way of removing them from every wikipedia page they are used in ?--LamBoet (talk) 10:41, 9 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hello LamBoet, I removed the images from pages where they were used incorrectly and renamed the images in accordance with the correct identification. Thank you for mentioning. Lymantria (talk) 12:49, 10 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks much. I have also updated the description fields accordingly. Would you mind also changing the filename of "Erebia styx up.jpg" ? (I am not sure how to do it myself)--LamBoet (talk) 14:41, 10 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Someone was quicker than me. :) Thanks for updating descriptions. Lymantria (talk) 16:13, 10 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Fotograaf onbekend

Hallo Lymantria,

Hoe heb je bij File:Harm Wiersma 1979.jpg de fotograaf achterhaald? Ik was namelijk bezig met het uploaden van afbeeldingen van het NA met een botje (daarbij ontstaan door nieuwe resolutie bij NA soms duplicaten), mijn versie File:Harm Wiersma - Nationaal Archief - 930-4686.jpg heeft bij de bron: fotograaf onbekend. Basvb (talk) 20:04, 15 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Ik kwam het nu ook bij een van mijn oudere geuploade afbeeldingen (File:WK 1981 Wiersma Gantwarg.jpg) tegen, het lijkt erop dat ze de credits van Hans van Dijk weggehaald hebben. Basvb (talk) 20:30, 15 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Toen ik ze heb geüpload stond het er iig nog bij. Fotograafnaam verwijderen dan maar. Groet, Lymantria (talk) 07:59, 16 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Valued Image Promotion

★ Your nomination has been reviewed and promoted ★
Congratulations! The image you nominated was reviewed and has now been promoted as a valued image. It is considered to be the most valued image on Commons within the scope:
Hibbertia selkii flower.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.
review

Notification about possible deletion

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

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

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

Affected:

And also:

Yours sincerely, Ronhjones  (Talk) 20:56, 15 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Protoneuridae

Category discussion warning

Protoneuridae has been listed at Commons:Categories for discussion so that the community can discuss ways in which it should be changed. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry.

If you created this category, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for discussion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with it. If the category is up for deletion because it has been superseded, consider the notion that although the category may be deleted, your hard work (which we all greatly appreciate) lives on in the new category.

In all cases, please do not take the category discussion personally. It is never intended as such. Thank you!

čeština ∙ Deutsch ∙ English ∙ español ∙ français ∙ italiano ∙ magyar ∙ Nederlands ∙ português ∙ polski ∙ sicilianu ∙ slovenščina ∙ Tiếng Việt ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца) ∙ македонски ∙ русский ∙ українська ∙ ತುಳು ∙ ಕನ್ನಡ ∙ ไทย ∙ עברית ∙ 日本語 ∙ 中文 ∙ +/−

Jee 16:39, 12 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

File:Grand National (Pleasure Beach, Blackpool) 02.jpg

File:Grand National (Pleasure Beach, Blackpool) 02.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） ∙ +/−

Ahecht (TALK
PAGE) 19:21, 30 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Parsonsia_diaphanophlebia

Category discussion warning

Parsonsia diaphanophlebia has been listed at Commons:Categories for discussion so that the community can discuss ways in which it should be changed. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry.

If you created this category, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for discussion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with it. If the category is up for deletion because it has been superseded, consider the notion that although the category may be deleted, your hard work (which we all greatly appreciate) lives on in the new category.

In all cases, please do not take the category discussion personally. It is never intended as such. Thank you!

čeština ∙ Deutsch ∙ English ∙ español ∙ français ∙ italiano ∙ magyar ∙ Nederlands ∙ português ∙ polski ∙ sicilianu ∙ slovenščina ∙ Tiếng Việt ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца) ∙ македонски ∙ русский ∙ українська ∙ ತುಳು ∙ ಕನ್ನಡ ∙ ไทย ∙ עברית ∙ 日本語 ∙ 中文 ∙ +/−

Mark Marathon (talk) 23:55, 19 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

{{Interwiki from Wikidata}} vs {{VN}}

Hello,
You should know that {{VN}} does the same thing as {{Interwiki from Wikidata}}.
But {{VN}} does much more things: retrieving and displaying vernacular names from the 2 attached wikidata items + checking the presence/validity of multiple properties on the 2 attached wikidata items.
The problem is that {{Interwiki from Wikidata}} (and its equivalent in {{VN}} ;-)) are quite expensive.
So I ask contributor to add only {{VN}} to biology categories and galleries to same wikipedia server CPU.
Best regards Liné1 (talk) 10:28, 10 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Noted. Thanks. Lymantria (talk) 10:55, 10 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

File source is not properly indicated: File:Bathysolen nubilus.jpg

العربية ∙ asturianu ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ ∙ বাংলা ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ dansk ∙ Deutsch ∙ Ελληνικά ∙ English ∙ español ∙ euskara ∙ فارسی ∙ suomi ∙ français ∙ galego ∙ עברית ∙ hrvatski ∙ magyar ∙ italiano ∙ 日本語 ∙ 한국어 ∙ македонски ∙ മലയാളം ∙ norsk bokmål ∙ Plattdüütsch ∙ Nederlands ∙ norsk nynorsk ∙ norsk ∙ polski ∙ português ∙ português do Brasil ∙ русский ∙ sicilianu ∙ slovenčina ∙ slovenščina ∙ svenska ∙ ไทย ∙ Türkçe ∙ українська ∙ Tiếng Việt ∙ 简体中文‎ ∙ 繁體中文‎ ∙ +/−
Warning sign
This media may be deleted.
A file that you have uploaded to Wikimedia Commons, File:Bathysolen nubilus.jpg, is missing information about where it comes from or who created it, which is needed to verify its copyright status. Please edit the file description and add the missing information, or the file may be deleted.

If you created the content yourself, enter {{Own}} as the source. If you did not add a licensing template, you must add one. You may use, for example, {{self|GFDL|cc-by-sa-all}} or {{Cc-zero}} to release certain rights to your work.

If someone else created the content, or if it is based on someone else's work, the source should be the address to the web page where you found it, the name and ISBN of the book you scanned it from, or similar. You should also name the author, provide verifiable information to show that the content is in the public domain or has been published under a free license by its author, and add an appropriate template identifying the public domain or licensing status, if you have not already done so. Warning: Wikimedia Commons takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing.

Please add the required information for this and other files you have uploaded before adding more files. If you need assistance, please ask at the help desk. Thank you!

Leoboudv (talk) 09:01, 12 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Leoboudv: : I corrected the source. Thanks for noticing. Lymantria (talk) 09:08, 12 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

This category

Dear Lymantria,

With 3600 files suddenly in this category...from 984 on Sunday night/Monday morning, I don't have time to mark much images and I have to work too. This is unbelievable. Goodnight, --Leoboudv (talk) 09:41, 22 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

There are many bot uploads by BartBotje. IMHO beautiful work. I don't have much marking time either, but I might find a way to mark at least a good part of those bot uploads over this weekend. Kind regards, Lymantria (talk) 09:52, 22 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

This DR

Can this DR be closed as keep? Thank You, --Leoboudv (talk) 19:15, 23 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

✓ Done. Lymantria (talk) 19:27, 23 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

This DR

Dear Lymantria,

It might be time to close this DR as delete unless you know of a reason to keep this image. Please feel free to carefully read the DR first. Best, --Leoboudv (talk) 07:42, 29 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

File:North waziristan clearence.jpg

This image doesn't say if it is free just that it requests attribution so I don't know if Commons can use it. If you think it is insufficient permission, please file a DR. If not, please pass it. Best and Goodnight, --Leoboudv (talk) 09:47, 6 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Passed this one, changed the way of attribution in accordance with the disclaimer. Lymantria (talk) 14:21, 6 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

File:Mount Yamantau.jpg

This image has no source as it was deleted. However, there are many other images from the source's panoramio account...Tsibin K. Does that mean that it should be tagged as no source...because there is no conclusive proof this partcular photo was free? PS: The file was uploaded with an Upload Wizard program but I don't know if it proves the image was free at upload. Best, --Leoboudv (talk) 09:27, 7 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I filed a DR on this one. I think it should be deleted. Luckily all entries of the category you mention have been reviewed. Here I found a solution. Lymantria (talk) 10:31, 7 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

This license

This license from my University (UBC) is not free. Neither is this version. Many Canadian Universities don't license images freeely sadly unlike US Universities. I failed 4 images. Other images from this author were free and I passed them all. --Leoboudv (talk) 08:48, 12 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

File:Asashio en Chihaya afgemeerd op berth S in Kure, -3 mei 2011 a.jpg

Do you know how to mark picasa images that are now uploaded on google like this? I asked this question on the admin noticeboard but no one knew the answer. Best, --Leoboudv (talk) 22:28, 8 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

No, I'm sorry. I think it has to be marked "no permission" or filed in a DR. Lymantria (talk) 05:31, 9 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

If it is OK and was cc by sa 3.0 at upload, please feel free to mark it. Goodnight, --Leoboudv (talk) 08:19, 9 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

License {{Cc-by-sa-3.0}} is irrevokable. So such image can be marked, although at this moment the license is withdrawn. Lymantria (talk) 09:41, 9 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Thank You. That was what I needed to here. Sometimes I'm scared to mark images as other users tell me I shouldn't have marked the photo. I just got a message congratulating me on my 100,000 edit on Commons. But with my job, I will have to slow down soon. I'm 44 and the cost of living is very expensive in Metro Vancouver. Many people here can't afford to even rent homes or condos or townhomes and s0 they sleep in their cars as the vacancy rate is les than 1% for rental properties. Best, --Leoboudv (talk) 18:50, 9 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Re:File:Synanthedon polaris4.JPG and other BOLD Sytems images

I received a truck-load of alerts that a large number of BOLD systems images I uploaded will be deleted, because there is no proof they were released under the licence I stated under the image. I have checked a few of those images, and they seem to be gone from BOLD, so indeed: there is no way to verify the licence. However: they were present on BOLD under that licence at the time I uploaded them (sometimes several years ago). I understand as no other the back-logs at Wikipedia projects, and have respect for people working through them, however: checking licences this long after the actual upload will result in images being deleted, which should be kept (since if they were checked sooner: you would have seen that it WAS released under this licence). In other words: I would urge you to not stick to the protocol which states you need to be able to verify the licence for these BOLD images, since I swear on the life of who-ever you want that these are not copyright infringements. These kind of things are really discouraging for people trying to actually do some good work on Wikipedia. Sorry for my rant, but really needed to get this off my chest. Ruigeroeland (talk) 12:55, 24 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I really understand your feelings on this part. However, I noticed many of your uploads from BOLD indeed did not have License reviewed (it was not questioned by you for those 500+ images) while the majority did. I do my best to find sources and sometimes I do find them while they at first glance seem to have disappeared. Still, we cannot keep the images if we cannot be sure that two pairs of eyes (uploader and reviewer) have checked the license. Sorry, mooier kan ik het niet maken. Lymantria (talk) 13:47, 24 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
And in at least one case, I checked the license at BOLD and found it (now) not suitable for Commons (CC-BY-NC-SA). Lymantria (talk) 14:06, 24 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Comment: I found 4 images by Ruigeroeland where the original source no longer existed with internet archive but there is too many images for one person to deal with. They prove the 4 images like this were No Rights Reserved. But if the weblink is still alive but the photo is deleted then internet archive does not work. There are still more more images of his to be reviewed. No wonder Ruigeroeland is sad. I assume there are 100-150 images left to be reviewed. Very sad.

PS: If LymaBot can still detect any panoramio images that have Not been marked, now may be the time to run it and tag them with panoramioreview since according to this Notice Paroramio will be retired very soon in November 2017. Best, --Leoboudv (talk) 09:02, 28 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

File:Trichromia carmen.JPG

I think for this unsourced image, the [deleted] source is in this internet archive link...where it would be the first picture which has a 'No Rights Reserved' license. PS: I placed a lot more no permision tags on the uploader's images where I cannot find a source. He maybe has 100 images left to be reviewed now. Goodnight, --Leoboudv (talk) 09:14, 29 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Yes it is! Nice save! Thank you. Lymantria (talk) 11:27, 29 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

File:Macrosoma conifera.jpg

The source for this image which I tagged as no source might be here from this 2012 Internet archive capture but just check to be sure before you pass it....since they are a bit smaller here. Its a pity that the uploader could not be designated as a trusted uploader since I think the images he uploaded were free at upload years ago but are now deleted on BOLD as of 2017. The rest of his images that will be deleted like this are heavily used. Its unfortunate. I have marked all the BOLD images now. Best, --Leoboudv (talk) 00:56, 31 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

  • I don't think if Internet archive can help anymore since when I check there for the other no permission images, there is either no web page or the original uploaded image is already gone. As far as I know, the license in the 3 Internet archive images above are either CC BY or No Rights Reserved so the uploader knows copyright. Best Regards, --Leoboudv (talk) 01:15, 31 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
    • Thank you very much. This saves three images. The first I managed to find an actual "record" at BOLD systems showing the "No rights reserved". The smaller size is not a problem, but is due to the website technique used. I am aware that User:Ruigeroeland knwos copyright, although he made some uploads with various licenses that really had only one license. But also, in some cases, he uploaded a NC image. So, we cannot assume his total correctness. But agreed, it is sad. Lymantria (talk) 06:38, 31 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

File:Puerulus mesodontus female (Oo 75647).jpg

If this image is free, pls consider marking it as the uploader marked many of your images. I don't know the license. Best, --Leoboudv (talk) 09:42, 4 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I don't quickly see any permission. Have you asked the uploader? Lymantria (talk) 10:13, 4 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
I asked Ruthven, and passed the image. Lymantria (talk) 14:26, 4 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

File source is not properly indicated: File:Chrysoblephus gibbiceps2.jpg

العربية ∙ asturianu ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ ∙ বাংলা ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ dansk ∙ Deutsch ∙ Ελληνικά ∙ English ∙ español ∙ euskara ∙ فارسی ∙ suomi ∙ français ∙ galego ∙ עברית ∙ hrvatski ∙ magyar ∙ italiano ∙ 日本語 ∙ 한국어 ∙ македонски ∙ മലയാളം ∙ norsk bokmål ∙ Plattdüütsch ∙ Nederlands ∙ norsk nynorsk ∙ norsk ∙ polski ∙ português ∙ português do Brasil ∙ русский ∙ sicilianu ∙ slovenčina ∙ slovenščina ∙ svenska ∙ ไทย ∙ Türkçe ∙ українська ∙ Tiếng Việt ∙ 简体中文‎ ∙ 繁體中文‎ ∙ +/−
Warning sign
This media may be deleted.
A file that you have uploaded to Wikimedia Commons, File:Chrysoblephus gibbiceps2.jpg, is missing information about where it comes from or who created it, which is needed to verify its copyright status. Please edit the file description and add the missing information, or the file may be deleted.

If you created the content yourself, enter {{Own}} as the source. If you did not add a licensing template, you must add one. You may use, for example, {{self|GFDL|cc-by-sa-all}} or {{Cc-zero}} to release certain rights to your work.

If someone else created the content, or if it is based on someone else's work, the source should be the address to the web page where you found it, the name and ISBN of the book you scanned it from, or similar. You should also name the author, provide verifiable information to show that the content is in the public domain or has been published under a free license by its author, and add an appropriate template identifying the public domain or licensing status, if you have not already done so. Warning: Wikimedia Commons takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing.

Please add the required information for this and other files you have uploaded before adding more files. If you need assistance, please ask at the help desk. Thank you!

Leoboudv (talk) 05:51, 8 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Best, --Leoboudv (talk) 06:08, 8 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

File:Orocrambus abditus male.jpg, File:Uresiphita ornithopteralis male LCR.jpg & other images

Someone uploaded a lot of images of moths with titles starting from L to O and P and U for license review but I cannot access this website. Maybe you can mark them if you have the time. Just for your information. --Leoboudv (talk) 02:48, 10 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I will dive into it. Source page is very large and takes a long time to load. I found the images there and marked them. Lymantria (talk) 06:27, 10 November 2017 (UTC) - edited 08:46, 10 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

This User Ambrosia

Ambrosia uploaded a bunch of images on November 11 for your information. Best, --Leoboudv (talk) 06:20, 12 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Perhaps I'll wait again for a couple of days to act on these uploads. But I will. Lymantria (talk) 07:11, 12 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

This comment about KOKUYO

As an Admin feel free to let User Dicasto know if KOKUYO's uploads are OK or not. I think an experienced Admin like you may know the answer. Best, --Leoboudv (talk) 19:33, 13 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Amphiprion chrysopterus1.jpg

Hey, can you please provide me with the link showing the copyright status of the file? Many thanks. --Mhhossein talk 06:58, 15 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Follow the source link, below the photograph it says "License: No rights reserved". That can be interpreted as {{Copyrighted free use}}. Lymantria (talk) 08:05, 15 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for the comment. However, per my findings the copyrights of the photo belongs to "Moorea Biocode" and is licensed under "CC BY Attribution-Noncommercial-ShareAl" (see this link). So, there needs to be some modifications to the licensing terms of the photo. Regards. --Mhhossein talk 13:36, 15 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
I cannot help but to have found the image at the given source under the given license. It more often happens that different licenses are presented at different places. If you feel the license given at BOLD systems is not correct, but should be NC, perhaps you should file a deletion request. But I stand by "no rights reserved". Lymantria (talk) 13:44, 15 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
I know that there can be such mistakes and that you just found the image with the mentioned license. However, I think the photo is not free and I'll file a DR. Thank you for your feedback on my comments. --Mhhossein talk 12:34, 17 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

File:Eupithecia extensaria occidua BMNH(E)1822348.jpg

Is the license cc-zero or cc by 4.0? The source indicates cc-zero. Best, --Leoboudv (talk) 03:14, 17 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Secondly, I don't know if the image below is 2D art (looks like 3D art) but can it be passed as a 1903 image?

Regards, --Leoboudv (talk) 03:20, 17 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, Leoboudv. Thank you for all your efforst in License Reviews!
Concerning File:Eupithecia extensaria occidua BMNH(E)1822348.jpg: text is CC-0, image has a seperate license CC-BY-4.0. See also Commons:Deletion requests/Files uploaded by Llivermore.
Concerning File:Fadogia fuchsioides.jpg: This is not 2D art, and also it clearly contains elements that are modern (one is even dated 2006).
Lymantria (talk) 06:51, 17 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Dear Lymantria,
Thank You for your experience here. When I clicked on the first image, I did see the note at the bottom saying it was licensed as cc by 4.0 I missed that and passed the image. It can be very easy to miss due to the web page design. I filed a DR on the second image. Best, --Leoboudv (talk) 08:28, 17 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

File:Amphiprion chrysopterus1.jpg

File:Amphiprion chrysopterus1.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） ∙ +/−

Mhhossein talk 12:39, 17 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Invitation for felicitation program of Wiki Loves Monuments 2016 - Nepal

Wiki Loves Monuments 2016 in Nepal Invitation for felicitation program of Wiki Loves Monuments 2016 - Nepal

Dear Lymantria, It’s our pleasure to invite you to Wiki Loves Monuments 2016 - Nepal winners awarding ceremony on 17th December, 2016 at Masala Cottage, 2:00 pm onwards. We would like to ask few minutes of your time to provide your details here. Your contribution as a contributor made Wiki Loves Monuments 2016 - Nepal possible. We’d like to have a privilege of having you there.

Kind regards,

The Wiki Loves Monuments 2016 in Nepal Team

WLE Invitation

Wiki Loves Earth 2017 in Nepal Wiki Loves Earth 2017 in Nepal


Hi Lymantria, We would like to invite you to participate in Wiki Loves Earth 2017 in Nepal competition during 1 May to 31 May, 2017 and share your great and valuable images with the whole world. We would like to ask a few minutes of your time before you start upload your valuable images from 1 May, 2017. Please use this new survey to submit your mailing address.

Kind regards,
The Wiki Loves Earth Team

File:Korapat Kirdpan in Game of Teens 01.png & File:Korapat Kirdpan in Game of Teens 01 (cropped).png

Dear Lymantria,

Would you consider passing or failing these 2 image? The youtube license is valid but the text clearly says "screen capture from promotional video for Game of Teens." It looks like a derivative but perhaps the youtube video should be viewed. Best, --Leoboudv (talk) 07:20, 18 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Image is visible in the Youtube video. I marked the image. Lymantria (talk) 13:19, 20 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Lymantria/Archive_8&oldid=372583449"