User talk:Sreejithk2000/Archive 7

From Wikimedia Commons, the free media repository
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Archive 1 ← Archive 5 Archive 6 Archive 7 Archive 8 Archive 9 Archive 10

Finding and processing duplicates

Hi, I just noticed your question and I think you also asked Multichill why access is denied.

There is a solution to find dupes using the API: [1] then, there is a gaifrom-result, which you simply pass back [2] (this page contains 2 dupes) simply scroll down.

prop=duplicatefiles also allows looking for special titles.

On File:Admiral Lautenbacher, Jose Achache at Joint Press Conference in Geneva.jpg#mw-imagepage-section-duplicates, you can see a new Feature of AjaxQuickDelete: It allows you immediately processing the dupes without having to insert the template. -- RE rillke questions? 11:06, 9 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The new AjaxQuickDelete is awesome. I was using custom script in my common.js but now I have removed it. [3]. Thanks for the new feature in AjaxQuickDelete.
Regarding the API, pardon my ignorance but I could not find how you found that there are two duplicates in this API result: [4] --Sreejith K (talk) 17:09, 9 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Either I processed it or someone else here (S-train_service_B+.png) is another one. One could write a script that iterates over all files easily. -- RE rillke questions? 17:25, 9 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Oh, this one is cool. It was good if we had a bot which makes a gallery of such images in some custom pages possibly in the bot's bots user namespace. I will try to iterate using DotNetWikiBot. jQuery is not my strong area. --Sreejith K (talk) 17:33, 9 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
And there it is. User:Sreejithk2000/Duplicates. Btw, it would have been nice if the new AjaxQuickDelete popup had an option to swap images just like the duplicate handler popup. --Sreejith K (talk) 06:44, 10 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
It's the same popup like the process-dupes one. On exact duplicates the first step (compare files) is skipped. If you want, you can add it to the TO DO-list for AjaxQuickDelete. -- RE rillke questions? 14:08, 11 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

File:1033177_unprocessed.jpg

Helllo, you deleted File:1033177_unprocessed.jpg today, because It was an exact duplicate of another file. There was a difference though. As you could see it has the word unprocessed in its name, and a warning in its description that I would be reverted if someone might improve it in anyway. It was also in a specific directory, Category:Photochrom pictures in their original state stating the same. The reason is, that this image is specifically used on pages that shows the current status of these old photographs. Now that these pages are redirected to the other one we can not be sure of that. Contributors might crop, remove spots, change colour or lightness, etc. and the pages would erroneously show that as the actual quality of that image. So please, undelete that image. Thank you. Jan Arkesteijn (talk) 18:38, 10 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I have merged the descriptions now. Does that look good. Do you still feel the need to restore the first image? --Sreejith K (talk) 18:42, 10 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Yes please, because all the files in the category have identical names, and I don't mind if people want to improve the other image. Jan Arkesteijn (talk) 19:23, 10 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
✓ Done. You may want to put a note on the image page stating that this image should not be deleted as duplicate. --Sreejith K (talk) 04:25, 11 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks. Jan Arkesteijn (talk) 07:34, 11 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Image for Carlus Padrissa

Dear Sir or Mmme, You deleted a picture from Carlus Padrissa for the copyright because the picture is also posted at the Marinsky webpage. The reason why they have the picture is because is the one that Carlus Padrissa uses. You can find it in other pages as in his Vimeo or Youtube page. This picture was made by a friend and we have all the copyright. I'm trying to find the picture but now I can find it. Can you help me, please? Thanks in advance — Preceding unsigned comment added by FdelsB (talk • contribs) 17:28, 11 June 2012‎ (UTC)[reply]

The image is File:Carlus Padrissa - La Fura Dels Baus.jpg. If you can email OTRS and confirm that you own the copyright, OTRS volunteers will restore the image. --Sreejith K (talk) 12:07, 11 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Need Advice

The {{Cc-by-3.0-BollywoodHungama}} states that "All photographs used by this site from Bollywood Hungama parties/events with the exception of screenshots, wallpapers or promotional posters are exclusively created by their own photographers" and only these pictures can be used. On the set pictures don't qualify as parties/events do they?? Boseritwik(talk) 05:45, 12 June 2012 (UTC)‎[reply]

I would assume not. But since the way the site organizes the images is kinda fuzzy, we actually rely on the url if it is not obvious on whether the image is part of a party of event. Even then, I think BollywoodHungama is OK in publishing the images taken by their own photographers in a free license. We can ask them if we think it is not. They have been quite co-operative so far. --Sreejith K (talk) 06:06, 12 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Would you mind checking these two images
File:SRK and Farah on OSO set.jpg
File:SRK Gowariker Swades.jpg

Boseritwik(talk) 06:18 , 12 June 2012 (UTC)‎

✓ Done. Thanks for helping --Sreejith K (talk) 06:22, 12 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

well then this one has to go too.
File:SRK jump.jpg
and i should be thanking you for your help.cheers! Boseritwik(talk) 06:28 , 12 June 2012 (UTC)‎

✓ Done --Sreejith K (talk) 06:31, 12 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

File deleted: Zona_Franca_Bouzas.jpg

Good morning. Last week you deleted the file "Zona_Franca_Bouzas.jpg" in Consorcio de la Zona Franca de Vigo. The photo is property of the Consorcio de la Zona Franca de Vigo (no of this web: http://www.urbanity.es/foro/infraestructuras-gal/15547-puerto-de-vigo-pontevedra-29.html) and it (Consorcio) gave me permission to upload it to Commons. There is no violation of copyright. Please, restore the photo. Thank you. --Natalvarino (talk) 09:01, 12 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The problem is that the file in the forum was posted on 06-ago-2010 while File:Zona Franca Bouzas.jpg was uploaded to commons on 6 June 2012. So to confirm that you own the copyright, you will have to email COM:OTRS confirming that you are the copyright holder and they will restore the file for you. --Sreejith K (talk) 09:09, 12 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Deletion of the... File:10paisa coin.jpg

I want to delete the File:10paisa coin.jpg from Wikimedia commons. I can't take such an action of deleting a file. Thank you for your information.

Now I am trying to add category to my own file. mini//മിനി 06:13, 14 June 2012 (UTC)

The file is already deleted. See Commons:Deletion requests/File:10paisa coin.jpg. Not to worry. --Sreejith K (talk) 06:15, 14 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

please see File:Del Potro Davis 2007.png. Thank you. --Polarlys (talk) 11:00, 15 June 2012 (UTC) PS: Thank you for cleaning the whole category :)[reply]

Deleted. Thanks for helping. --Sreejith K (talk) 11:02, 15 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

File:Schild Moeder Meense.png

Hello,

I own this file and control the website to which you say I copied it from. How can I confirm that I want to make this a public Wikipedia picture?

Greeting JasperD1990 — Preceding unsigned comment added by JasperD1990 (talk • contribs) 16:38, 15 June 2012‎ (UTC)[reply]

If you are the administrator of http://www.moedermeense.be/, please email permissions-commons@commons.org from the websites domain email confirming that you are releasing the image under a free license. The image will be restored once an email is received. --Sreejith K (talk) 11:14, 15 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I mailed, hopefully it will be restored soon.

JasperD1990 — Preceding unsigned comment added by JasperD1990 (talk • contribs)

I appologize, the correct email id is permissions-commons@wikimedia.org. That was silly. Sorry again. --Sreejith K (talk) 11:37, 15 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Doubts regarding OTRS

I just saw the following three images: File:Taapseecf1.jpg File:Amy Jacksoncf1.jpg File:Ileana-cf1.jpg taken from this website as stated in their description. Firstly I did not find anywhere on the website stating that the images are under Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 Unported license.Secondly on checking the file history i saw that the premission otrs tage has been added by the uploader himself.I may be wrong but I don't think he can do that and I think it is a copyright violation. I again state that I am not sure and I maybe wrong here.

Boseritwiktalk 11:10, June 15, 2012 (UTC)

As you can see, they all have deletion requests on it and it is under discussion. Most probably they are copyright violations, but we do not have proof to conclude that it is or it is not. --Sreejith K (talk) 11:58, 15 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

OK but the thing was for File:Amy Jacksoncf1.jpg I saw that it was posted on the website on 18 October 2011 but I found it posted here on October 10 2011. And also for File:Ileana-cf1.jpg the picture posted on cinefundas looks cropped cause if you see this is the cinefundas.com pictures and this is another picture i found. clearly the 2nd picture is the full one cause with everything remaining the same you can see more of the actress lengthwise. Boseritwik talk 12:15, June 15, 2012 (UTC)

Commons:Requests_for_rights#Basilicofresco

You might want to have a look at my comment and check this user Special:Contributions/Basilicofresco for rename requests once again... odder (talk) 19:42, 16 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Replied there. --Sreejith K (talk) 05:44, 18 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

File:Malcolm III.jpg

Hi, I just noticed on Wikipedia that you deleted File:Malcolm III.jpg: "(Copyright violation: This is a modern painting, at most ten years old, and is still in copyright)". Was any evidence given that this was a ten year old painting? I can't find a 'deletion request' page, or anyone submitting evidence to have it deleted. I'm pretty sure that the summary of the image itself showed that the artist died before the 1920s.--Brianann MacAmhlaidh (talk) 11:08, 18 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Restored the image and converted the speedy notice to a regular DR. We will require evidence about its age to keep the image here. --Sreejith K (talk) 11:15, 18 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks very much. Understood.--Brianann MacAmhlaidh (talk) 11:35, 18 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

File:Tor logo0.png

I note you are the deleting admin for this image, on legitimate grounds for Commons only.

The image is referenced by an archived, Featured Wikinews article where its use is perfectly acceptable, simply needing a local upload and relatively trivial to draft Fair Use Rationale.

Why do people on Commons never check the usage? Why do people on Commons never contact other projects prior to leaving fugly redlinks? Wikinews has a policy to archive all published articles once a week old. You can't rely on bots cleaning up the mess you create on any language version of Wikinews, and it is generally only through sheer luck that we discover you've damaged our archived content. Can you please restore temporarily to move the image to a local upload? --Brian McNeil / talk 19:37, 19 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Restored temporarily. Let me know when local upload is done. --Sreejith K (talk) 19:40, 19 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
For outright copyright violations, we delete them without replacing its usages in all the projects involved. It is difficult to send a note across all the projects where the file is used. I wish there was an easy way, but we do not have one yet. --Sreejith K (talk) 19:51, 19 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Thanks. It sounds like a trivial task for a bot. I know I'm not the only person that's ended up well-pissed at what seems like a callous policy from Commons — which we generally view as a project supposed to serve all the others. --Brian McNeil / talk 20:04, 19 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I can understand. This is a problem I also face in other projects where I contribute. But unfortunately, I do not have any suggestion for making things easier. If you have any, I am extremely interested to listen. --Sreejith K (talk) 06:36, 20 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Deletion of an image for copyvio

Hello.

One of the image i've uploaded have been deleted "for copyvio". It concerns this image : http://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?page=File%3ASamsung+mobile+phone+E1130+08+package.jpg&title=Special%3ALog .

As a contributor on the french wikipedia, i understand the copyright problems but i've two question : why i didn't been told that there were a problem of copyvio on this special image ? what was the exact copyvio problem (because i could need to upload a similar image...) ?

Thank you in advance. --Absinthologue (talk) 06:28, 20 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

User:Woozz marked it as a copyright violation. I was not aware that he did not inform you. Some users does not put notify the uploaders when they tag copyvios. Its their choice, although I am personally against it. About the image, it was a picture of Samsung mobile phone package and so it is a Derivative work. The package design is copyrighted by Samsung and we will require their permission to host the image here. --Sreejith K (talk) 06:33, 20 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Ok, thank you for this answer. How can I see that User:Woozz has marked it as a copyvio ? And do you have a more clear explenation about the fact that i can take a picture of the phone itself but not the package ? Thanks in advance --Absinthologue (talk) 10:06, 20 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Only administrators can see the history once a file is deleted. So unfortunately, you will not be able to know who tagged it for deletion. But you can always go back to the administrator who deleted it and ask for that information. Although the product packaging is copyrighted, a picture of the phone a welcome image here as long as the screen does not display copyrighted wallpaper or icons. --Sreejith K (talk) 11:37, 20 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Ship

Hi, Sreejithk2000. Which one is better for you ? File:DzKK BG (2).jpg ? File:DzKK BG (59).jpg ? Takabeg (talk)

File:DzKK BG (59).jpg was 920×690 while File:DzKK BG (2).jpg is 1,024×768. I deleted the smaller one and redirected to the other. --Sreejith K (talk) 07:33, 21 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
OK. Thank you. Takabeg (talk) 07:46, 21 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

File:Nieczytelny.JPG

This File is unidentificed and please delete file. Lukasz2 (talk) 09:19, 22 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

✓ Done --Sreejith K (talk) 09:40, 22 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

File:Richa Chadda BW.jpg

Could you have a look at it, whether the An email containing details of the permission for this file has been sent in accordance with Commons:OTRS has been sent.Cause if not its an obvious {{Copyvio}}.Boseritwik talk June 23, 2012 00:52 (UTC)

This file was uploaded just a day before. May be we should give the user a day or two to send the permission. --Sreejith K (talk) 10:11, 23 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Forgot to say that I found no emails in OTRS system about this image. --Sreejith K (talk) 10:12, 23 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Four days passed, no licence and also I guess no permission email.I think you should remove the image.Boseritwik talk June 26, 2012 03:14 (UTC)

✓ Done --Sreejith K (talk) 05:44, 26 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

File:Circball court area.jpg

Please undelete. This file already has a valid cc-by-sa license when it was uploaded. The license was already released by the copyright holder himself through his website (www.circball.com/home (bottom page)using the cc-by-sa license. Even though the file has a copyright notation on it, CCWiki's instructions says to leave the copyright notation intact. Not sure if you were aware of this when it was deleted. Here the quote from CCWiki: "If the work itself contains any copyright notices placed there by the copyright holder, you must leave those notices intact, or reproduce them in a way that is reasonable to the medium in which you are re-publishing the work." '(http://wiki.creativecommons.org/Marking/Users). Therefore this file ought to be undeleted. The uploader already had a valid license through cc-by-sa released by the copyright holder himself, despite a clear © mark. 173.55.4.63 03:45, 23 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Restored and put it up for a deletion debate. I have also copied your comment there. --Sreejith K (talk) 10:09, 23 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
And deleted again. He came by to an undeletion request for this image and was told 3 times to email OTRS stating the proof of permission and refused to do so. The website is CC but the image itself has a copyright notice at the very bottom. User:Zscout370 (Return fire) 14:31, 23 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Oh, I was not aware. Thanks for taking care of this. --Sreejith K (talk) 16:03, 23 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

A kitten for you!

Please let me know what has to be done to save that Photo of Mr. Padmarajan whixh has been nominated for deletion. It was scanned from a photo collection of his nephew who happens to be my friend.

Supran (talk) 08:22, 26 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The photograph requires OTRS permissions. I have replied at Commons:Deletion requests/File:Padmarajan during his early days.JPG --Sreejith K (talk) 08:23, 26 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

File:0x10c-logo.png‎

Why did this logo not qualify for speedy deletion. It is not under a perpetual licence, and there is no proof that it is simple either. C3F2k (Questions, comments, complaints?) 16:59, 26 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Just thought of asking for a second opinion. If another user votes for deletion, I will speedily delete it. The 3D effect looks quite simple to me. --Sreejith K (talk) 18:16, 26 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

File:2011-Sikkim earthquake Shakemap.jpg

That isn't an exact duplicate, since the file was updated, see most recognizable the circles west and souteath of Shilinguri (approx. top of lower centre of the image) (compare to original source). Please restore File:2011-Sikkim earthquake Shakemap.jpg and revert its usages, since File:Terremoto India, 18 de septiembre, 2011 (2).jpg depicts an earlier stand of knowledge. Thanks. --Matthiasb (talk) 12:12, 12 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Restored the image now. You may have a look. They are exact duplicates. --Sreejith K (talk) 12:15, 12 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Okay, I am convinced. Thanks for your help, anyway will have to upload the latest USGS version of the file. Have a nice day. --Matthiasb (talk) 19:39, 26 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy removals

Sreejithk2000, I'm curious as to why you declined the speedy nominations of

‎claiming "Not a copyright violation. Please do not give direct link to images" whilst simultaneously deleting these images (with contained a direct link to the source file - just as those above did):

Providing the link is standard procedure. Further what is your rationale for "not a copyright violation"? The link I provided for File:Eric CHarest-Weinberg.jpg, for example, is the full magazine page from which it was cropped. The uploaded image itself has the watermark "by Davis/Langlois, 2009" (!). The other links are to higher resolution versions than those uploaded (i.e. source links did not obtain the images from the commons), in addition to other factors. Please explain. Эlcobbola talk 13:20, 27 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

We need to know whether the image was first published in commons or outside. We also need to know what is the license under which the website has released the image. Direct links does not help this purpose. I deleted the obvious copyright violations, but removed the tag on others so that the nominator could provide links to the page itself. --Sreejith K (talk) 13:25, 27 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
They were all uploaded to Commons within the last day. Thus any other occurrence is sure to be prior. --99of9 (talk) 13:31, 27 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
We need to know whether the image was first published in commons or outside - that is the reason the links are to higher resolution versions (i.e., they could not have been derived from the low resolution Commons versions), and that is apart from the fact that these were uploaded only yesterday in the same batch as the deleted images. We also need to know what is the license under which the website has released the image - this may be true if the claimed author was not "own work" and the license was not a "self" variant. That these are all on disparate websites and that the uploader has made blatant misrepresentations in the same upload batch demonstrate the licenses are bogus. That is a work is fully copyrighted is the null state. Эlcobbola talk 14:13, 27 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I did not notice the uploaded date. That's stupid of me, I know. But even then, as a good practice, I would encourage you to give links of the webpages where the image is included in; and not a direct link to the image. Special thanks to 99of9 for his attention on this matter. --Sreejith K (talk) 14:41, 27 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Copyrights pictures Karim El Kerem

I´m the owner of the rights of the pictures of Karim El Kerem
Hello, I´m the owner of Karim El Kerem´s pictures. You delete the file Karim 2012 of commons because of the rights of Imdb. I´m the person that upload that page on Imdb. Please I ask you to fix the error.

Regards Tylerdurden87 (talk) 23:23, 27 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Not sure which image are you talking about. I do not see any copyright messages on your talk page. Is the image File:KarimElKerem2012.jpg a copy of the deleted image? --Sreejith K (talk) 08:25, 28 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

About full text of a File deletion

Hi, you deleted File:Sid Vicious promo (crop).jpg, could you send me please the full text of the deletion log? I can't see all of it, it finishes on "I offered to change the licens...". Thank you. --UAwiki (talk) 16:03, 29 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The reason was filled in by User:Ronhjones and it says Photographer contacted OTRS 2012062710007436 - stating that the image was not PD as the Warner Brothers logo had been deliberately cropped out, and he (John Tiberi) still held the copyright. I offered to change the license to CC-BY-SA if he was willing, but he cannot release the image under those terms and requests deletion as a copyright violation --Sreejith K (talk) 18:34, 30 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
OK, thank you. --UAwiki (talk) 00:04, 1 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Removing delete tags is not very clever

Hallo Sreejithk2000, see here. Often newbies or uploaders just don't know it better. In that case here really was a problem - but you seem to have un-tagged the file without looking at it. Cheers --Saibo (Δ∇) 18:45, 30 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The tag was added by an IP. The IP also removed the license. Anyways, I have put a DR on it now to clarify. Thanks for bringing this up. --Sreejith K (talk) 19:01, 30 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Aaah... your action confused me that much that I did not look further down (did not see that there was a license originally). ;-) Have added to the DR. Thank you! --Saibo (Δ∇) 19:42, 30 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Heads-up

Just an FYI - I've started an item at COM:UR which you might want to chime in at Commons:Undeletion_requests/Current_requests#File:Bushra_Ansari1.jpg as you're involved in it... Tabercil (talk) 14:04, 2 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the note. I have shared my views there. --Sreejith K (talk) 06:04, 3 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

deletion of "File:Holdi 2.jpg"

Hello, I am a bloody beginner of Wikipedia. So I do only know some of the rules how to do. We need this picture for our Wikipedia: http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Erdzeichen_(Flughafen_München) because the "Erdzeichen" has a history; the first idea to build it was the Marsh-Spirit (german: "Moosgeist") but the guys of the airport dosen`t like it_ they had fear of the problems of it near the airport. So the "Earth-Sign" was build. We need the picture for documentention of this historical event. Please look at this page and learn the importance of this picture (after we have finished, we also translate it in english and spanish). Our trial for getting it back was:

Summary
Description
English: Marsh-Spirit for the Munich Airport, first trial
Deutsch: Moosgeist für den Flughafen München, erster Versuch
Date 1986-01-18
Source http://www.wilhelm-holderied.de/index.php/erdzeichen.html, Template Template:Wilhelm Holderied
Author Wilhelm Holderied
Permission
(Reusing this file)		 Sandbild
Other versions Sandbild

{{OTRS pending}}

Thank you Hans--Karnehm (talk) 12:53, 3 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Not sure why you messaged me as I see that File:Holdi 2.jpg was deleted by User:Fastily. Now that you have started an undeletion request at Commons:Undeletion_requests/Current_requests#File:Holdi_2.jpg, I think I do not need to interverne here. --Sreejith K (talk) 18:04, 3 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

help

Hy,

I make mistake accidentally - upload new image on existed image, may be you know how to separate them? AfroBrazilian (talk) 20:03, 3 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Give me the file name, I will do it for you. Only administrators can split file history. Alternatively, you can request history split at Commons:History merging and splitting --Sreejith K (talk) 03:43, 4 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
The file name - Cetonia aurata 07.JPG. AfroBrazilian (talk) 18:38, 4 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

File Munich Film Festival

Munich Film Festival

I use the picture in the German Wikinews. There I get the message "deleted from Sreejithk2000". The picture is still there. I made the picture. What's up?--Usien Max (talk) 09:31, 4 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Looks like German Wikinews is using a redirect link, most probably File:Filmfest Muenchen 2012 Melanie Griffith Preistraegerin Lebenswerk CineMerit Award Markus Söder und Verterter des Sponsors Audi.JPG. Can you correct the link there? --Sreejith K (talk) 09:55, 4 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I think the link in Wikinews is correct now.--Usien Max (talk) 12:59, 4 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

universal replace: File:Log_cabin_covered_in_snow.jpg → File:Bunk.jpg

I'm puzzled about this request. Would you mind explaining the reason for this change? The picture appears to show a log cabin in snow, and not a bunk. Thanks. --Auntof6 (talk) 12:06, 4 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

That's not a rename request. They both were the same files and so I deleted one and redirected it to the other. Now I have deleted File:Bunk.jpg and redirected it to File:Log_cabin_covered_in_snow.jpg which is a better file name. --Sreejith K (talk) 12:30, 4 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Richa Chadda

Check if any email has been sent in the OTRS email account if not delete w:File:Richa Chadda Studio Pink.jpg.File is not in wikicommons but wikipedia. Boseritwiktalk 12:54, July 4, 2012 (UTC)

I am not an Administrator at English Wikipedia and I cannot delete the file there. But it will be deleted within 7 days the notice for no permission has been added. In the meantime, if you find this image elsewhere, yo can tag this image for copyright violation. --Sreejith K (talk) 17:48, 4 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

User: Fita > File: Albert Garcia 1949.jpg , File:Escultura05 1.jpg , etc

Sorry,

This 2 last days I've been uploading archives from art works of my own, and I'm seeing as they're beeing erased! Ugh! I don't understand what I'm doing wrong! These are photographs or scans of my own artworks. I put a lot of efforts on uploading and add info to them. Are they really erased? How or What I've to do to do it right?? Help!!

Thanks, Domènec Fita — Preceding unsigned comment added by Fita (talk • contribs) 19:40, 5 July 2012‎ (UTC)[reply]

Are you the same person as Domènec Fita i Molat? You will have to email OTRS and confirm this, unless you are in the risk of getting all your images deleted. --Sreejith K (talk) 18:54, 5 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

CERN images

You deleted File:Candidate Higgs boson decay event at CERN LHC, May 13 2012.jpg. CERN has updated their media terms of use. I believe the image I created meets their terms of use, which now freely allows use for educational purposes. Can you clarify why you deleted the image? Egumtow (talk) 18:41, 5 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Point six in their terms of use says The image may not be sold, distributed or otherwise made available for use by third parties. This means the license is non-commercial which Commons does not accept. --Sreejith K (talk) 18:45, 5 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
OK. Do you know if it meets the English wikipedia's standards? Thanks. Egumtow (talk) 19:04, 5 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
If the image can really help the understanding of a Wikipedia article, it could quality to be kept there with a Non-free rationale. --Sreejith K (talk) 06:06, 6 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

File talk:HuffPo American Foundation for Children with AIDS 1.jpg

Did you read the page before deleting it?

The image was in-use on Wikinews, and should've been restored because it was released into the public domain. An overlooked fact that was linked-to from the image's description details! --Brian McNeil / talk 09:28, 6 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

You put the undeletion request at the wrong place. Commons:Undeletion_requests/Current_requests#File:HuffPo_American_Foundation_for_Children_with_AIDS_1.jpg is where it should have gone to. --Sreejith K (talk) 09:36, 6 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Deletion requests of Signatures

Hello, Could you please look into this Commons:Deletion requests/File:Manmohan Singh Signatures.svg ? Is there any way to address the issue ? -- ɑηsuмaη ʈ ᶏ ɭ Ϟ 18:54, 4 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I have no idea on the rules about signatures. But I will email Wikimedia mailing list looking for people who are interested.--Sreejith K (talk) 16:55, 5 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Okay, thank you. Which mailing list ? -- ɑηsuмaη ʈ ᶏ ɭ Ϟ 07:40, 7 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

File:Jacqueline fernandez.jpg

Could you take a look at File:Jacqueline fernandez.jpg. I am getting some kind of internal error and can't even place a corrupt image tag on it. Boseritwik (talk) 06:30 7 July 2012 (UTC)

I see there are a few bugs already available on this issue. Ex: https://bugzilla.wikimedia.org/show_bug.cgi?id=38095. Lets give it some time to get fixed. --Sreejith K (talk) 17:55, 7 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

File:Hauskatze im Schlaf.jpg

Hi Sreejithk2000. What is the purpose in creating these two redirects? These were just erroneous transfers from Wikipedia to Commons. --Leyo 14:09, 3 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I think the script that also takes care about instructing Commons-Delinker when the file are in use created them. -- RE rillke questions? 14:35, 3 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I think the redirects are safe to be deleted now. They were created by the script when I handled the duplicates. --Sreejith K (talk) 18:00, 3 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Ok, both deleted. --Leyo 14:58, 9 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Deletion of Pictures on John K. Watts page

Dear Sir,

This is in regards to Wikipedia Page: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_K._Watts

I am writing as I am honestly very upset and disappointed by some member calling themselves 'The Pope' who questioned and subsequently removed photographs that I published on the 'John K Watts' page. I replied to them advising in the time permitted for a response advising them that I had obtained sufficient permissions and had legal ownership to reproduce, publish and copy these pictures.

This 'The Pope' user refused to withdraw their acquisition and subsequently sought to remove the photographs.

I am allowed and sought permission from all parties involved to publish these photographs. I am John K. Watts' son and I diligently ensured that everything was proof-read and relevant permissions obtained before uploading.

Please can you return these photographs that were deleted and advise the user: 'The Pope' that they were indeed wrong in this case. While I do respect people proof-reading the articles, I do find it frustrating that even after I discussed the matter with them that they still pushed the issue.

My username is Arianajack on the Wikipedia site.

Respectfully,

Jonathon J. Watts — Preceding unsigned comment added by Arianajack (talk • contribs) 12:42, 9 July 2012‎ (UTC)[reply]

I have restored File:JK and Lorraine.jpg and File:JW and Polly.jpg temporarily. You will have to send proof of ownership of the photos to OTRS to confirm that you are the legal copyright holder. The copyright violation tags that Commons, what a lovely place.

something to make TUSC work has added is correct here since the photos you uploaded here were published elsewhere before that. Its your responsibility to prove that it is not a copyright violation. --Sreejith K (talk) 00:00, 11 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

A barnstar for you!

The Copyright Watcher Barnstar
Thank you for changing my pic to commons. i tried to do it. but couldnt. Arun.punnathatta (talk) 16:17, 11 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

File:Portrait Eric.jpg

Hi. You removed the {{Speedy}} tag from this image, but have you read the reason I provided? I'm not requesting removal of the original picture, just the new revisions that shouldn't have been uploaded over the first one, do not have a source, and do not have a license. To quote from the upload form: "If you do not provide suitable license and source information, your upload will be deleted without further notice." (emphasis not mine). That's a speedy deletion reason if I ever saw one. Prof. Professorson (talk) 12:07, 11 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The overwritten file is available as File:The french fashion designer Éric Tibusch.jpg. So this version need not be hidden or deleted. Thought of keeping the history just in case someone wants to verify later. --Sreejith K (talk) 12:10, 11 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I see, thanks for the pointer (also at File:Eric Tibusch par Klaus Roethlisberger.jpg BTW). On that page, the description says that the photographer is Klaus Roethlisberger [5], contradicting the own work claim. I will open a DR. Thanks for your help. Prof. Professorson (talk) 12:19, 11 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Just FYI, Commons:Deletion requests/Files uploaded by Vincentdulcy. Prof. Professorson (talk) 12:23, 11 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
✓ Done Taken care. Thanks for the note. --Sreejith K (talk) 02:14, 12 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Category should not have been deleted

Could you please undelete Category:Otto Friedrich August Busse? Otto Friedrich August Busse (1822-1883) (da:Otto Friedrich August Busse) and Otto Busse (1850-1933) (da:Otto Busse (DSB)) are not the same person, which I have also repeatedly stated in the deletion discussion. --Urbandweller (talk) 10:38, 13 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Temporarily undeleted. If the category remains empty, it will be deleted. Btw, can you give me the link to the deletion discussion? --Sreejith K (talk) 11:52, 13 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Commons:Deletion requests/File:Passeportshakabpa.jpg

Hello,

I've seen your comment at Commons:Deletion requests/File:Passeportshakabpa.jpg regarding the deletion request of file:Passeportshakabpa.jpg.

I'm so clear how to work with Wikimedia Commons and not trusted with copyright laws, so I thought the best is to post a comment on your page.

The passport is from the late 1940ies, but the photograph was taken in the after the passport was rediscovered. I don't think there is anybody claiming copyright on that photograph, and the image is widely available on the web (1 2 3 4 and its use at Wikipedia could possibly be considered as fair use. I'm not sure it should be deleted as a copyright violation. Thanks.--Pseudois (talk) 13:03, 15 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I have updated my comment at Commons:Deletion requests/File:Passeportshakabpa.jpg, so I think it is better not keep the discussion there if there is more to discuss on that nomination for deletion. Thanks,--Pseudois (talk) 15:24, 17 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Ok, thanks. I will check that. --Sreejith K (talk) 16:12, 17 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Duble upload separation

Hy, I said ones to help me separate some image. This images are File:Helix pomatia 01.jpg and File:Cetonia aurata 07.JPG . Pleas help. AfroBrazilian (talk) 19:49, 15 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

✓ Done Your files are now available as File:Helix pomatia 02.jpg and File:Cetonia aurata 08.JPG. Please do the necessary cleanups. --Sreejith K (talk) 00:35, 16 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you! | What kind? What does it mean necessary cleanup? AfroBrazilian (talk) 15:02, 16 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Your files say the Author is Kuebi. You should fix that and the license. --Sreejith K (talk) 16:09, 17 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Photo Deleted File:Bożysław, Zdzisław i Krzesław Kurowscy - 15 sierpień 1939.jpg

Hi Sreejith K,

On Sreejith K (talk) 06:25, 12 March 2012 (UTC)you removed a picture I uploaded. I used the wrong license. The pictures shows my father and his two brothers (the one in the middle, the youngest, is not an officer) in Polish army uniforms just 2 weeks before the 2nd World War broke out. The picture was taken in my grand parents apartment by an anonymous family member. Its is not stamped nor signed. My father dated it August 15, 1939 and gave it to me before his death in 2006.

In March 2012 I was just beginning as a wikipedia contributor and did not understand the licensing system. I should have used {{Anonymous-EU}} as the photographer is anonoumous since 1939 and thus unknown for over 70 year.

Could you please reinstate this picture so that I may publish it again. I do no longer use the Cyberkur login. My current login is Roman Kurowski. Please reinstate it in My Uploads on this loging. Roman Kurowski (talk) 08:10, 16 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I did not delete the image. Also, the image was deleted after a discussion. See Commons:Deletion requests/File:Bożysław, Zdzisław i Krzesław Kurowscy - 15 sierpień 1939.jpg. So it will not be a good idea to restore it without consensus. I have moved your request to Commons:Undeletion_requests/Current_requests#File:Bo.C5.BCys.C5.82aw.2C_Zdzis.C5.82aw_i_Krzes.C5.82aw_Kurowscy_-_15_sierpie.C5.84_1939.jpg Please comment there if required. --Sreejith K (talk) 15:34, 16 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Your inconsequence

You've deleted File:Die Gartenlaube (1899) 0613.jpg, but you didn't deleted File:Die Gartenlaube (1899) 0614.jpg and File:Die Gartenlaube (1899) 0615.jpg, although they all contain stanzas of the same copyrighted poem "Die Mondscheinfee" by Karl Vanselow. Not to forget the matter with Category:Requested fair use deletes.--IusticiaBY (talk) 22:25, 16 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

✓ Done --Sreejith K (talk) 16:08, 17 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Doubt

Do we host images like File:Avaaz Logo ru.png? One is okay i suppose. But there are many of these with tag-lines in different languages. Isn't that advertisement? §§AnimeshKulkarni (talk) 11:01, 16 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

This one is in use, so it is not {{Out of scope}}. The image contains only simple text. So the text is not copyrighted. The logo in itself is just text so that it will come under {{PD-text}}. So it is safe to be retained here. --Sreejith K (talk) 12:11, 16 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Do we keep all versions? There is small change in them all. Just tag line in different languages. §§AnimeshKulkarni (talk) 14:13, 19 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
As long as they are not {{Out of scope}}, we will keep it here. If you feel that any of these has no educational value and has no chance of being used in any Wikipedia article ever, please feel free to nominate it for deletion. --Sreejith K (talk) 14:36, 19 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Hmmm! I see... well... they are used. So i guess its okay to keep. Thanks! §§AnimeshKulkarni (talk) 17:49, 19 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
On a different note, this User talk:Iloveamerika keeps adding same Copy-vio image of his fav actor. He edits the article on English Wikipedia too. & when i revert his edits he messes up with articles i have created. Could you please leave a note for him to not upload copy-vio images here? He wont like it if i do it. §§AnimeshKulkarni (talk) 14:19, 19 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I have left a note on this talk page. For edit warring issues in en wiki, please take this user to Wikipedia:Administrators' Noticeboard --Sreejith K (talk) 14:36, 19 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
No! That's okay. He is new. Would learn over time. Warnings by others have helped. §§AnimeshKulkarni (talk) 17:49, 19 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Time for next doubt. The image File:Priyanka National Awards.jpg is from Bollywood Hungama. The OTRS for it applies for parties & events, i guess. This image is however from "Bollywood Movie Features" section, which is like a news section. I think this image is taken from somewhere else by them. Bollywood Hungama doesnt usually cover National Film Award functions. (I doubt this Page 3 site would be allowed there.) And also, there is a higher resolution image present here. §§AnimeshKulkarni (talk) 18:48, 20 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Tagged it as {{Copyvio}} --Sreejith K (talk) 18:53, 20 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for that. I suppose i should simply be bold and start adding tags that i feel appropriate. §§AnimeshKulkarni (talk) 09:35, 22 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I totally agree. --Sreejith K (talk) 09:38, 22 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I don't see that happening soon. I tagged the image File:Govindsingh.JPG for missing-permission as i found a higher res image of a part of this image here. Plus the original uploader has bad history of being an SPA related to fashion-industry people and has been blocked for sockpuppetry on Eng WP. §§AnimeshKulkarni (talk) 13:22, 22 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
You chose the wrong tag. You should have used {{Copyvio}} instead. --Sreejith K (talk) 18:21, 22 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
The user seems to edit related articles extensively and might be associated with the field, thus having more chances of being the owner of the image. That's why i added permission-wanted tag. §§AnimeshKulkarni (talk) 18:39, 22 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Next one! Sockpuppets! English WP has a notorious user with many established socks CASE. The same user also uploads many of self-promotional images on Commons too. I couldn't find any way to post a report here at Commons. Are these complaints to be registered at Wikipedia itself? I am referring to Hamza Rasheed and Aiza rasheed on Commons. §§AnimeshKulkarni (talk) 11:46, 25 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

You can add a request at Commons:Requests for checkuser or report the user at Commons:Administrators' noticeboard/User problems --Sreejith K (talk) 12:19, 25 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Back after a long time. Do we need such images? File:Dara Singh's funeral 03.jpg. We have no censorship, but .... §§AnimeshKulkarni (talk) 13:44, 16 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Does the image even fall under "party" license of Bollywood Hungama? §§AnimeshKulkarni (talk) 06:48, 17 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Its parties and events, not just parties. --Sreejith K (talk) 16:10, 17 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Okay! Another one.
You must remember i had tagged this image File:India with cross.svg for deletion. But now its corrected. However old image is still seen on Wikipedia articles. Is it because the old version is not deleted yet? §§AnimeshKulkarni (talk) 18:46, 17 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Regenerated thumbnail using the url generated by {{Regenerate thumbnail}}. Seems fixed now. --Sreejith K (talk) 19:05, 17 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Okay! One image was deleted after this discussion: Commons:Deletion requests/File:Ssajikapoormgr.jpg. However its derivative File:Ssajikapoormgr (cropped).jpg still remains. Could you please delete that? You were involved in this discussion. The User:Jcb who closed it doesn't seem to an Admin (don't know how they closed it). Hence asking you to save another DR. §§AnimeshKulkarni (talk) 13:37, 19 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
✓ Done. Jcb used to be an admin but was desysopped recently. Can you add your next messages to the bottom of this talk page. If I get your message and someone else puts another message at the bottom, chances are that I will not see your message. --Sreejith K (talk) 13:47, 19 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Okay! Oh sure! We should also let this archive. §§AnimeshKulkarni (talk) 13:53, 19 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

File:Jhankaar Beats Movie Poster.jpg

How did this movie poster get an OTRS permission tag and also allowed to be used as a free media? Boseritwik (talk) July 22, 2012 01:19 (UTC)

The OTRS permissions came to us from Pritish Nandy communications who are the producers for the movie. The OTRS ticket is valid. --Sreejith K (talk) 01:54, 22 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Rights of Fitz_Roy_Climbing_Wall.jpg

Dear Sreejithk2000,

You deleted the file "Fitz_Roy_Climbing_Wall.jpg" of commons because you assumed a violation of copyrights. It is very good that there are people taking care of Wikipedia's content. However, in that case, there is no reason to worry: I am the photographer of "Fitz_Roy_Climbing_Wall.jpg" and as well the author of that climbing wall - I am that Christoph Schindler the article on mocoloco you are referring to is talking about: http://mocoloco.com/fresh2/2012/07/14/fitz-roy-climbing-wall-by-christoph-schindler.php May I kindly ask you to undo your changes?

Thank you and kind regards Christoph — Preceding unsigned comment added by Christoph2109 (talk • contribs) 09:48, 22 July 2012‎ (UTC)[reply]

✓ Done. You can remove the copyright violation note and explain that you are the owner in the description. --Sreejith K (talk) 04:35, 22 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

File:Marcha de escolares en Santiago.jpg

Hi! I've just seen that you deleted this image. As far as I can read on the log, the image was tagged as a copyvio because at the end of the site says "© 2002-2012 Fotolog, Inc. Fotolog ® y Flodo™". That copyright claim is about the logos of the website, not of the picture which belongs to the uploader. In fact, the same page says "Parts of this site contain the copyrighted content of members and other third parties." Clearly, is not a copyvio.

This picture was uploaded six years ago, when not all the current rules in Commons where in place. We had an authorization by the author [[6]] (in Spanish) and we can ask him for a better authorization (offering a CC licence) but I think that, at the moment, we should restore the image because it is used in several pages at the moment. Thanks for your understanding. --B1mbo (talk) 17:11, 22 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

✓ Done - Restored the image and converted it to a regular DR. --Sreejith K (talk) 17:14, 22 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
For reference, these are the page where it was used and was removed by Commons Delinker. http://toolserver.org/~delinker/?image=Marcha_de_escolares_en_Santiago.jpg&status=&max=100 --Sreejith K (talk) 17:16, 22 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for your help. --B1mbo (talk) 03:32, 23 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

UEFA Maps

Hello! I want to rename my last files, but I understand that only admins can do that. Can you help me and rename File:EURO2012 Group A 02.PNG as EURO2012 Group A.PNG, File:EURO2012 Group A 03.PNG as File:EURO2012 Group B.PNG, File:EURO2012 Group A 01.PNG as File:EURO2012 Group C.PNG and File:EURO2012 Group A 04.PNG as File:EURO2012 Group D.PNG? --Lystopad (talk) 19:52, 22 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

✓ Done --Sreejith K (talk) 20:09, 22 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you! --Lystopad (talk) 07:17, 23 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Private photo

Good morning Sreejithk2000,

I don't understand why my photos are not accepted on wikimedia commons ?

I can understand for the Sète's photo, but for my private photo of players of the MHSC, I don't understand ...

I believe that it's possible to share private photo on wikimedia, I'm wrong ?

Thanhs for you answer here, and excuse me for my poor english.

CONCACAF-Footballeur (talk) 04:40, 23 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The ones deleted were deleted on the grounds that they are copyright violations. The user who put notice on your talk page notified us that these photos were published first in facebook. Which all images among the ones deleted are not copyright violations? Let me know and I will undelete them. --Sreejith K (talk) 05:08, 23 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

File:Institut économique de Montréal.jpg

Why refuse the speedy delete? It's clearly a logo and it's used on http://www.iedm.org/e which states copyright at the bottom... --SamuelFreli (talk) 04:44, 23 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The logo looked quite simple to me and it might come under {{PD-textlogo}}. So thought of asking a second opinion through a DR. --Sreejith K (talk) 04:48, 23 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Distribution Haplogroup R1b Y-DNA version 2.gif was deleted

I wish to ask you the replacement of the file:Distribution Haplogroup R1b Y-DNA version 2.gif, that you have deleted. In this case there is no copyright violation.

This file posted by eupedia.com is a derivative of File:Distribution Haplogroup R1b Y-DNA.svg by User:Crates. This in turn derives from File:R1b-map.JPG by User:Cadenas2008. If a site uses Wikipedia for its updates, then why would we stop Commons do the same for the same site?--Maulucioni (talk) 05:14, 23 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

✓ Done --Sreejith K (talk) 18:49, 23 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Before deleting works transcluded at Wikisource

Gday, today you deleted File:Wittengenstein_-_Tractatus_Logico-Philosophicus,_1922.djvu For future notice, would you kindly do the WSs the favour of telling the respective wiki that is transcluding the work that the work is going to be removed reasonably in advance of the process. It is a right PITA, mighty inconvenient and then a hassle to recover components. Commons does not sit in isolation.  — billinghurst sDrewth 15:38, 26 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I understand your frustration but think about a file which is included in a hundred different projects. How feasible is it for an administrator in Commons to go and notify each and every project? I delete around 100-200 copyright violations every day. Notifying every project will make my voluntary task insane and I would rather stop deletions than putting a notice in every project. But we can think about a bot which can do this. Can you please propose this idea in Commons:Village pump. --Sreejith K (talk) 18:25, 26 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I am not asking for every file, I am asking about for the Wikisources, and most especially for the DjVu files for which there will usually be a corresponding Index: page created at the WS wiki. These djvu files are integral to the work of the Wikisources, in that they are the basis of the transcription work that is done, so by your deletion of that work you actually completely had the work undertaken inaccessible and it remained that way until we were able to get a copy of the djvu local to the servers and reinstalled.

As an administrator here, you need to be cognisant of these other wikis and their needs, and that they push files to be uploaded at Commons. Your undertaking quick deletion of a file that had a history here was entirely problematic, and didn't show the consideration that I would hope that an administrator here would show.  — billinghurst sDrewth 12:21, 1 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

May be next time I can change the {{Speedy}} tag to {{Request fair use delete}} and wait for User:Commons fair use upload bot to upload it to WikiSource. Does that help? --Sreejith K (talk) 06:29, 2 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
That sounds like an excellent approach. Can we document that somewhere too?  — billinghurst sDrewth 14:52, 24 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Taipei flag

Please re-instate File:Flag of Chinese Taipei for Olympic games.svg

Two reasons:

  1. The redirect does not work in some articles, such as nl:WTA-seizoen 2012, causing the flag to be missing, and replaced by a text.
  2. The flag is used for all Olympic sports, not just football.

Thank you for your understanding. Kind regards, Vinkje83 (talk) 18:34, 23 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The first problem is with caching. If you clear the cache, it works fine. See nl:WTA-seizoen 2012 now. The second problem is with the file name. It can easily be renamed. Please suggest a new name using {{Rename}} template or by the Move file action item in your top menu. --Sreejith K (talk) 18:46, 23 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for your to-the-point reply. I already tried to rename the File:Chinese Taipei Football Flag.svg into the original name File:Flag of Chinese Taipei for Olympic games.svg, but this is refused by the software because the redirect sits there. Apparently the functionality of 'rename over redirect' (as we have on nl-wiki) does not work on commons. As you seem to have delete authorization, I would like to ask you to perform above operation which effectively interchanges the file and the redirect. Thanks many times. Vinkje83 (talk) 21:41, 23 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
✓ Done --Sreejith K (talk) 21:44, 23 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Great! That was mighty quick. Thanks a lot. Vinkje83 (talk) 21:47, 23 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Documentation

Hi Sreejithk2000,

Please see Template_talk:Documentation#Import_for_en.wikipedia

Cheers, Jean-Fred (talk) 17:02, 24 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Replied there. Thanks for bring it to my notice. --Sreejith K (talk) 20:18, 24 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

File:Higgs-Boson-March-2011.png

I am curious as to why did you speedy this image? It has so many attributes that don't fit into speedy, such as (i) low originality threshold (not certain this is copyrightable), (ii) it is a press release by Fermilab, which has unclear license [7]. One could argue it does not explicitly grant permission (yet doesn't forbid use), but such matters are for a Commons-wide debate; this problem is known, but I am unaware it is solved for Fermilab. Perhaps I'm missing something obvious, thus asking. Cheers. Materialscientist (talk) 04:28, 25 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I have converted the speedy into a regular DR. --Sreejith K (talk) 13:52, 25 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

File:Smith map.jpg

Hi, I don't get the rational for this deletion, art work restoration doesn't renew copyright. Does the BGS really claim copyright on this map (it's unclear from the comment if the otrs ticket has be opened by a BGS member). Phe (talk) 08:43, 25 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The OTRS email came from BGS asking us to take the photo down. --Sreejith K (talk) 13:54, 25 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Well if it makes the BGS happy, why not, anyway there is another version File:Geological map Britain William Smith 1815.jpg, but it's quite possible you opened a pandora box, many ancient work has been restored during the 20th. Phe (talk) 20:17, 25 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
May be I decided it too fast. I have restored the image and has put it through a regular DR. --Sreejith K (talk) 20:27, 25 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

File:Wiki Loves Monuments Fact Sheet-it.svg

Hello, I restore this file. I kown this is not really good to be shown, but it has the advantage that it could be easily modified by anyone (contrary to the pdf) and translated. As you can see, from the first version of this file, I made the pdf version File:Wiki Loves Monuments Fact Sheet-it.pdf which show nothing wrong. The problem comes from the mediawiki software. Regards, Otourly (talk) 15:19, 26 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

That's fine. What ever you feel appropriate. I deleted it because it had a speedy tag. --Sreejith K (talk) 15:43, 26 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted images

You recently deleted quite a few of my images stating: The MOD's copyright is Crown Copyright, the qualifier "This material may be reproduced for the purposes of non-commercial research or private study and for the purposes of reporting current events only". However here: [8] it says that "We license a wide range of Crown copyright and Crown database right information through the Open Government Licence and the UK Government Licensing Framework" meaning the images you deleted that were from the MOD were allowed, as the Open Government Licence [9] means thats images under Crown Copyright may be distributed under the OGL. So I was wondering may you please revert the MOD images as under British Law they have been legally allowed. Thanks Slytherining Around32 (talk) 13:39, 24 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

As pointed out in the speedy deletion notices the MOD say they are Crown Copyright, and the MOD have been officially delegated by HMSO to licence things as they see fit, in particular "photographs". One Night In Hackney (talk) 13:46, 24 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
One Night In Hackney is correct: MoD images currently appear to not be under the OGL unless specifically released, though this may be clarified or changed. I'll ask for these images to be undeleted if so. —innotata 17:09, 27 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

deletion of rampa

hi, so why have you deleted the image of rampa the film? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Nikihegde (talk • contribs) 15:51, 29 July 2012‎ (UTC)[reply]

Because it was a movie poster and Wikimedia Commons does not accept movie posters unless it is uploaded by the copyright holder. You can upload it to English Wikipedia or other regional language Wikipedias with as a fair-use content. --Sreejith K (talk) 15:29, 29 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

well i am the copyright holder of the movie poster as well. do give me more information — Preceding unsigned comment added by Nikihegde (talk • contribs) 00:28, 30 July 2012‎ (UTC)[reply]

Nice. Please email OTRS confirming that you are the copyright holder and OTRS team will restore the image for you. --Sreejith K (talk) 22:51, 29 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

File:Ju gatsu mikka - WIP.svg

Can you undo your deletion please ?

The upload history of this work file is important for me (something likes "what I do"). Ju gatsu mikka (^o^) appelez moi Ju (^o^) 12:37, 31 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

✓ Done. But as you can see File:Ju gatsu mikka - WIP.svg and File:Chakra-Naruto-diagram-enhanced.svg are exact copies and it is best if we could delete one and redirect to the other. --Sreejith K (talk) 14:20, 31 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Greetings!

I was initially here just to thank you for uploading that lovely photo of Emmylou Harris that graces the infobox now in the userbox at en.Wikipedia!! Finally, one great picture more recent and, yes, she does look lovely here. Thank you!! --Leahtwosaints (talk) 15:39, 31 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Wow, maybe you can help me?

Now that I've seen all your credentials and appreciative tokens on your user page here, you are obviously knowledgeable and since I'm one of those older editors who never really learned anything about computers, so I've been plodding away as best I can in the en.Wikipedia, (a few small additions to other language Wikipedias). My focus is the biographies of musicians Would you consider help me now and then? My knowledge of Commons shows my ignorance here. However, if you glance at the sections in my user page in the en.Wikipedia, once someone either helps me out or shows me how to do things, I'm not that bad! Here, though, I don't even understand how to create categories! Yet, if you see all the photos I've uploaded in my en,Wiki user page, I had to put together an additional list of them all, which is nearly full, IMHO. They are only obtained by emailing every single photographer, teaching them about Creative Commons licenses, getting them to change them, and securing them, I've uploaded now more than 1,750 photographs of musicians.[10] I don't even know how to crop them or removing watermarks, no matter how small, though. I don't know how to get an OTRS license-- got one in 2008 I think, but didn't know what to do with it! Can you help me and also teach me some of these basics when the need comes? --Leahtwosaints (talk) 16:18, 31 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Why not. Put a note here anytime you are looking for help. --Sreejith K (talk) 16:22, 31 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect

As soon as File:Botik-2012-cannon-1715.JPG was not in use yet, I doubt this redirect (with upcase extension) is useful. Maybe you will also remove the redirect page? Thank you.--PereslavlFoto (talk) 22:03, 31 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

✓ Done --Sreejith K (talk) 23:32, 31 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Kangana Ranaut

I've marked this for a rename based on a post on my talk page and the en.wiki name/common name. I don't think it needs a full two week discussion, can you take a look? cheers. —SpacemanSpiff 03:22, 1 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

And there's also an OTRS ticket #2010012110031031 from her publicist regarding the spelling. cheers. —SpacemanSpiff 03:27, 1 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
✓ Done. Btw, which queue is that ticket in? I cant seem to access it. --Sreejith K (talk) 03:55, 1 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Don't know why, but it's in "info-en quality". The publicist claims to represent her and is from Criesse Communications. —SpacemanSpiff 04:02, 1 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

File:Alle tiders duster - Båndet går!.png

Why did you delete File:Alle tiders duster - Båndet går!.png? --Eirik1231 (talk) 18:19, 1 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Restored the image and converted the {{Cover}} tag to a regular DR. --Sreejith K (talk) 18:30, 1 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

File:Ghulam Haider Wyne By Tariq Imran.jpg

I don't understand the reason for deletion. The file was on Flickr with "All rights Reserved", I told the original uploader to change it to "cc-by-sa" on Flickr - and he did so - en:User_talk:Tariq.Imran#Speedy_deletion_nomination_of_File:Ghulam_Haider_Wyne_By_Tariq_Imran.jpg. Once that was completed, the en image was undeleted and moved to commons.  Ronhjones  (Talk) 21:34, 1 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

You can see the deletion rationale and it says "the flickr account has too many flickrwashes. Looking at his file stream at http://www.flickr.com/photos/79579123@N00, I do not think he owns any of the photo he uploaded there. --Sreejith K (talk) 22:24, 1 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Well, I don't see 8 images being enough for a statistically valid appraisal, and I don't care about the other seven anyway, as he has not uploaded them to Wikipedia. He has uploaded lots of other images to Wikipedia and no-one has ever complained - and certainly no image match has ever been found. I only made him add the cc-by to the Flickr as he had uploaded that one to Flickr first. Next time, I'll abandon that idea and ease them through OTRS instead.  Ronhjones  (Talk) 19:27, 2 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Even if this image was added to Commons first, it would have called for a DR. This image looks more like a scan to me, so an OTRS is never a bad idea. --Sreejith K (talk) 19:43, 2 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

User_talk:Sreejithk2000/Archive_7#File:1033177_unprocessed.jpg

Why did you do that again? See User_talk:Sreejithk2000/Archive_7#File:1033177_unprocessed.jpg. Jan Arkesteijn (talk) 10:12, 2 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Oops. Short term memory loss. Completely forgot about it. Apologies. --Sreejith K (talk) 13:59, 2 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I changed its twin a bit, so now they are no identical images anymore. Problem solved, I suppose. Jan Arkesteijn (talk) 15:33, 2 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I saw that. Good that you changed it before I forget about it again. --Sreejith K (talk) 19:39, 2 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

TUSC

I seem to have forgotten my TUSC password, but every time I try to change my password, it accepts it but doesn't allow me to login after that. Do you know where I can go for help on this? (This is required for the toolserver bots usage like cropbot etc). cheers. —SpacemanSpiff 12:51, 3 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Try putting a message like this User_talk:Magnus_Manske/Archive_7#TUSC --Sreejith K (talk) 13:23, 3 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Pictures deleted

Hi. Two or three pictures from the cover of books about native American languages were deleted. I understand now I needed the permit of the author/editorial. She was the one who gave me the pictures. She told me there was no problem with using those pictures. So: how do we do about putting those pictures back? Thanks for your help. --Periergeia (talk) 08:16, 5 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Only thing required is an OTRS permission from the copyright holder. Please ask the copyright holder to email the permissions. --Sreejith K (talk) 14:51, 5 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Please contact the author

Hello. You seem to have written on the wrong talk page... Kind regards Dolledre (talk) 16:56, 5 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

File:Yamada Nishiki rice.jpg says that the file was uploaded by you. --Sreejith K (talk) 21:33, 5 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Wikisource scans

Just noticed you deleted File:Jeremy Hunt S4C October 2010.pdf as being out-of-scope. Can I ask how you came to this conclusion? The file was used as the basis of a text on Wikisource - [11]. COM:SCOPE states "A media file that is in use on one of the other projects of the Wikimedia Foundation is considered automatically to be useful for an educational purpose". Cymru82 (talk) 19:39, 5 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

It was nominated by another user. Anyways, I have restored the image, but it still does not show up on WikiSource. Can you check and do the needful? --Sreejith K (talk) 21:31, 5 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Magazine Covers

Since you nominated my upload File:Deepika launches double issue of Women's Health 05.jpg for deletion. I would like to bring into your attention the following files

File:Jacqueline launches Women's Health magazine's new cover (1).jpg
File:Jacqueline launches Women's Health magazine's new cover (6).jpg
File:Jacqueline launches Women's Health magazine's new cover (3).jpg
File:Jacqueline launches Women's Health magazine's new cover (4).jpg
File:Jacqueline launches Women's Health magazine's new cover (7).jpg
File:Jacqueline launches Women's Health magazine's new cover (8).jpg
File:Jacqueline launches Women's Health magazine's new cover (2).jpg
File:Shamita Shetty at Audi Magazine India Launch.jpg

Boseritwik (talk) August 7, 2012 13:19 (UTC)

Thanks for the links. I have done the needful for them all. --Sreejith K (talk) 14:41, 7 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Please correct your mistake

Hi Sreejithk2000.

you've deleted Template:Fernsehturm Stuttgart. This is wrong. There is a deletion request on Template:Fernsehturm Stuttgart+. Please restore Template:Fernsehturm Stuttgart and delete Template:Fernsehturm Stuttgart+. Thank you. Regards --Wladyslaw (talk) 16:08, 7 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Oops. My bad. Sorry. --Sreejith K (talk) 18:54, 7 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Fresh Appeal in the light of my own "undo" example combatting vandalism

Hi Sreejith, thank you for the advice of twinkle. In an unfortunate twist, my appeal for rollbacker was turned down by Trijnstel. Although I was dejected and a bit that this was done after much explanation, I've noticed one thing Trijnstel asked for and which I didn't comply in my earlier postings - one example where I've used "undo" button specifically to combat vandalism. I've updated with the example and hope this should satisfy my request. Regards, Hindustanilanguage (talk) 01:28, 12 August 2012 (UTC).[reply]

Some time back, my request for rollback rights was also turned down because I did not do a lot of vandalism combats. But that was before I understood that Twinkle exists in Commons as well. I have been using Twinkle ever since. Now that I am an administrator, I have rollback rights but I still use twinkle. The rollback button is dangerous since it does not ask for confirmation. There is nothing a rollback right can do which Twinkle cannot do. If you want to fight vandalism, Twinkle is more than what you require. But if you want to collect the rollback right just for the sake of it, may be you should wait and re-apply after doing a few vandalism reverts. --Sreejith K (talk) 03:12, 12 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
As always, you are wise, while many like myself are clever. Probably I am an exception to even this. At times I've been argumentative. But when you've no power of your own, your voice is lost in bewilderment. I've abandoned all possibilities - no right-seeking or twinkle.
So I take time out and have an ice-cream instead (joking). Hindustanilanguage (talk) 17:53, 12 August 2012 (UTC).[reply]
I did not understand by your statement "you have no power of your own". What power are you lacking? Dont tell me rollback because I tried to explain my best that if you enable twinkle, you do get rollback rights. --Sreejith K (talk) 18:06, 12 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
All that I meant was, if you read some of my posts - for example, somebody saying you never used "undo" for combatting at all, point at least one incident, etc, etc, and then I show it, it is ignored. Nobody asks if this is solo event, whether more events where there, whether you've combatted vandalism in some other way, etc. Summary judgements are passed. And its ok. Hindustanilanguage (talk) 18:19, 12 August 2012 (UTC).[reply]
Commons:Rollback#How_to_apply_for_rollback_permission says Admins will typically not grant the permission to users whose contributions to Commons do not establish a need for rollback permission on this wiki.. And that's exactly what happened in your case. If a vandal IP/user made a single edit, you can combat it with Undo. Only when you need to revert multiple edits by a single user/IP, you need rollback. Probably, you will have to show an example of that. I would recommend at this point not to worry about Rollback rights at all. Use COM:Twinkle --Sreejith K (talk) 18:56, 12 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Logically, you're right. But if you go by how this was granted to few persons in the past - most recent being Bill William Compton, no assessment of need was done. Further, in my case the criteria was whether I understand or can define vandalism, cite examples on the use of undo, etc, and when this was done, people took a u-turn and said undo is enough, etc. Anyway it doesn't matter much and I don't keep thinking about these things. However, you're not just a good admin but also a good human being. Thank you for the words of encouragement.
As regards to your concern for File:Ramadhan Greetings Image.jpg, AnonMoos, based on my suggestion, uploaded a new version with proper Arabic text display. I was particularly surprised because his contribs included a lot of Hebrew files. Perhaps academically relevant sites likes ours serve a channel for ending global conflicts - Arab-Israel, India-Pakistan, Turkey-Greece, Armenia-Azerbaijan,etc. So long live Wiki Projects!! Hindustanilanguage (talk) 06:29, 13 August 2012 (UTC).[reply]

The Temple Phone Numbers

Dear Sree, i have included the images of Temple phone number to help people to get Pooja Timings. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Thiagupillai (talk • contribs) 22:27, 12 August 2012‎ (UTC)[reply]

I understand your good intentions, but unfortunately that's more like an advertisement and Commons cannot accept such contents. --Sreejith K (talk) 17:02, 12 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Doubt 2

Should we move this category Category:Jism 2, Mumbai, India to simply Category: Jism 2? That way we can have all images related to the film, its promotion, shoot, audio release, awards, etc. in one category. Similar should be the case with following:

§§AnimeshKulkarni (talk) 14:57, 2 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I would agree, I was thinking of doing the same myself. —SpacemanSpiff 15:10, 2 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
So should i nominate all categories for discussion or can admins be bold enough to do it directly? §§AnimeshKulkarni (talk) 15:22, 2 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
For uncontroversial moves, please use the template {{Move}} to request renaming. --Sreejith K (talk) 15:23, 2 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Done! §§AnimeshKulkarni (talk) 15:36, 2 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
✓ Done my part too. --Sreejith K (talk) 16:13, 2 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I have started a discussion at Commons_talk:File_renaming#Renaming_of_non-Roman_script_names. Your and your page stalkers' views will be welcome. §§AnimeshKulkarni (talk) 09:32, 9 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Do you have any possible relief for this User_talk:Animeshkulkarni#Bollywood_Hungama? §§AnimeshKulkarni (talk) 12:14, 20 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

How to remove "exact duplicate" category?

You've incorrectly marked several files (e.g. File:Exoplanet_Comparison_HAT-P-8_b.png) as duplicates. How does one correct that and remove the "hidden" category? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Aldaron (talk • contribs) 20:31, 18 August 2012‎ (UTC)[reply]

Seems that you have fixed it yourself. Thanks. But they are still duplicates. See this --Sreejith K (talk) 15:08, 18 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
That's what made me wonder: where's that coming from? Is that the result of a bot looking at the files? How do I fix that? Aldaron (talk) 23:27, 18 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I compared the files side by side and I do not see any difference. Its the MediaWiki software that is comparing the images and deciding whether they are duplicates. It uses SHA-1 algorithm to compare images. --Sreejith K (talk) 03:29, 19 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Is that something I can reproduce locally (outside of MediaWiki, e.g. with the source files here?). The files are built using the exoplanet radius data and each should be unique, unless there's a bug somewhere. Does "duplicate" simply mean "same pixels". If so that's possible, if the radii used to generate the images are the same, but the images would still not be semantically identical, in which case a policy that flags such images for deletion is pretty stupid. Aldaron (talk) 13:55, 19 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Each image will have a SHA-1 identity. It's like the checksum for zip files. MediaWiki uses SHA-1 to compare the images. For example, you can see the sha1 for the images we are talking about as 1 and 2. As you can see, both the images has the same SHA-1 key. Depending on your operating system you can get tools to find sha1 of a local file. For Windows 7, some tools are listed here --Sreejith K (talk) 15:06, 19 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
The planets do indeed have the same radius (to the precision of the code used to generate the images), so that could be what's going on. Is that enough to cause the SHA-1 identities to be the same? If so, it's a terrible way to check for semantic identity? Aldaron (talk) 23:14, 19 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I am not an expert in this. You probably should ask this at COM:Village pump --Sreejith K (talk) 01:49, 20 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Sreejithk2000/Archive_7&oldid=79130358"