User talk:Multichill/Archives/2016/March
This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
File:US Army 51980 Aloha spirit on display at floral parade.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. |
—howcheng {chat} 18:11, 7 March 2016 (UTC)
File tagging File:Surianto.jpg
This media was probably deleted.
|
Thanks for uploading File:Surianto.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:Surianto.jpg]] ) and the above demanded information in your request. |
Smooth_O (talk) 11:59, 10 March 2016 (UTC)
File:Subportalen Zuidoost-Europa.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. |
Zoupan (talk) 09:26, 12 March 2016 (UTC)
Same image without Wikidata
Hi. I appreciate that User:Multichill/Same image without Wikidata is "work in progress" and it is a very good idea, but it has just wasted my time since it includes files you have already dealt with (see my contributions preceding this post) and has lots of obvious false matches which I imagine you have recognised while adding the good matches.
My suggestion would be either to add instructions saying "please remove items you have dealt with" or similar, or add further action buttons which would do that automatically. In particular, to avoid duplicate edits of files, the "add" buttons should remove the corresponding entry from the list. --Mirokado (talk) 23:47, 12 March 2016 (UTC)
Perhaps an easier approach to the duplicate edit problem would be for your "little script" to check for an existing wikidata entry before making the edit. That is one of the first things I would do in such a script. --Mirokado (talk) 23:51, 12 March 2016 (UTC)
- @Mirokado: sorry about that. I'm still testing and that's one of the things high on my list to improve. I generated a fresh list and I'm going to bed now so feel free to play around with it. Multichill (talk) 23:59, 12 March 2016 (UTC)
File:Nl-The X-Files-article.ogg has been marked as a possible copyright violation. Wikimedia Commons only accepts free content—that is, images and other media files that can be used by anyone, for any purpose. Traditional copyright law does not grant these freedoms, and unless noted otherwise, everything you find on the web is copyrighted and not permitted here. For details on what is acceptable, please read Commons:Licensing. You may also find Commons:Copyright rules useful, or you can ask questions about Commons policies at the Commons:Help desk. If you are the copyright holder and the creator of the file, please read Commons:But it's my own work! for tips on how to provide evidence of that.
The file you added has been deleted. If you have written permission from the copyright holder, please have them send us a free license release via COM:VRT. If you believe that the deletion was not in accordance with policy, you may request undeletion. (It is not necessary to request undeletion if using VRT; the file will be automatically restored at the conclusion of the process.) Warning: Wikimedia Commons takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing.
|
Matt (talk) 22:41, 16 March 2016 (UTC)
WLANL overwrites
As part of the cleanup of Jan's odd overwrites, I am "correcting" some WLANL images (but not many). As an example File:WLANL - karinvogt - Jan Steen, de Luitspeelster.jpg has now been changed to a colour-correct a high resolution version, though not the smaller originally uploaded version from Flickr. Obviously splitting the files or creating new image pages would be much more work, so I think this outcome is probably the best. Let me know if you feel there is a solution that could be realistic in terms of available volunteer time for this sort of tricky non-automatable housekeeping and investigation. Thanks --Fæ (talk) 13:31, 17 March 2016 (UTC)
File:Laurel & Hardy dancing.gif has been marked as a possible copyright violation. Wikimedia Commons only accepts free content—that is, images and other media files that can be used by anyone, for any purpose. Traditional copyright law does not grant these freedoms, and unless noted otherwise, everything you find on the web is copyrighted and not permitted here. For details on what is acceptable, please read Commons:Licensing. You may also find Commons:Copyright rules useful, or you can ask questions about Commons policies at the Commons:Help desk. If you are the copyright holder and the creator of the file, please read Commons:But it's my own work! for tips on how to provide evidence of that.
The file you added has been deleted. If you have written permission from the copyright holder, please have them send us a free license release via COM:VRT. If you believe that the deletion was not in accordance with policy, you may request undeletion. (It is not necessary to request undeletion if using VRT; the file will be automatically restored at the conclusion of the process.) Warning: Wikimedia Commons takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing.
|
Psychonaut (talk) 21:16, 19 March 2016 (UTC)
File:Laurel & Hardy dancing.gif 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. |