User talk:Yann/archives 32

pls see

https://de.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Spezial:Logbuch/block&page=Benutzer%3AHinnerk11 https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Requests_for_new_languages/Wikisource_Eastern_Punjabi and https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T149522 regards -jkb- (talk) 23:35, 30 October 2016 (UTC)

-jkb-: Hi, Thanks for your message. I read about the Punjabi Wikisource in the list. Since I don't understand German, could you please give a short explanation about this issue in the German WP? Thanks, Yann (talk) 23:46, 30 October 2016 (UTC)

oh shit happens, really... it was a copy&paste error, so nothing in the German WP hi hi. See the new link in meta in my message above :-) sorry -jkb- (talk) 23:51, 30 October 2016 (UTC)

see this as well, your oppinion would be welcome. -jkb- (talk) 00:10, 1 November 2016 (UTC)

Autorisation OTRS

Bonsoir, J’ai remarqué que les photos de Mr Roger Dumollard avaient été supprimées de Wikmédia Commons bien que son fils (Roger Dumollard est décédé le 25 août 2015) ait envoyé une autorisation à l’OTRS le 20 avril 2016. Les photos étaient présentes aux liens suivants:

• File:Démolition du Lycée Hôtelier Beauséjour - Challes-les-Eaux, 1995 (1).jpg
• File:Démolition du Lycée Hôtelier Beauséjour - Challes-les-Eaux, 1995 (2).jpg
• File:Lycée Hôtelier Beauséjour - Challes-les-Eaux.jpg
• File:Place de la Liberté - Challes-les-Eaux.jpg

Il en est de même pour la photo du bateau L’Angélique (File:"L'Angélique" - Branne.jpg), pour laquelle j’ai transféré l’autorisation de Mme Guillois le 5 mars 2016, ainsi que pour les photos de Robert Lohmeyer (liens ci-dessous) dont le mail a été envoyé le 2 juin 2016. Serait-il possible de rétablir les images en question?

• File:"Prince" - Port Said, 2008.jpg
• File:"Serena" - Port Said, 2008.jpg

Je vous remercie par avance. Cordialement,--Lev. Anthony (talk) 22:02, 31 October 2016 (UTC)

Lev. Anthony : Voilà, c'est fait. Cordialement, Yann (talk) 23:52, 31 October 2016 (UTC)

Merci beaucoup

Bonne soirée. --Lev. Anthony (talk) 23:58, 31 October 2016 (UTC)

File:Albert Rodida - La Vie Electrique - illustration p169.png

Bonjour Yann, je me suis trompé dans la numérotation de la page, il s'agit de la page 167, peux-tu renommer le fichier en Albert Rodida - La Vie Electrique - illustration p167.png sans laisser de redirection. Merci par avance. Amicalement, Reptilien.19831209BE1 (talk) 12:43, 1 November 2016 (UTC)

 Fait Yann (talk) 13:57, 1 November 2016 (UTC)

File:Nagy László 1972.jpg

From permission: "CC-BY-SA-3.0 under following conditions (mentioned in hu:Template:Balla Demeter-engedély) according to the OTRS permission: portrait by Balla Demeter in the poetic anthology Szép Versek, with exact citation (year of publication, picture number), and size under 300 px in both directions." Hungarikusz Firkász (talk) 16:00, 1 November 2016 (UTC)

Hungarikusz Firkász: Hi, This kind of restrictions is not acceptable. Did you read the discussion on the Village Pump? Regards, Yann (talk) 16:10, 1 November 2016 (UTC)

[1]: Néhány feltöltő nem hajlandó szabadon közzétenni a képe teljes felbontású változatát, különösen a professzionális fényképészek, akik pénzt szeretnének keresni vele. Ilyenkor, ha a képet nem lehet másik, szabad képpel kiváltani, célszerű megkérni a szerzőt, hogy tegye a képe kis felbontású vagy más okból gyengébb minőségű változatát szabad licenc alá.

Az ilyen képekre háromféleképp lehet engedélyt kérni: rávenni a szerzőt, hogy töltse fel a kisfelbontású változatot külön képként, szabad licenc alatt; megkérni, hogy írjon egy megjegyzést a képéhez, "közzéteszem ennek a képnek a 240x180 és kisebb felbontású változatait CC-BY-SA licenc alatt" vagy hasonló szöveggel; illetve íratni vele egy engedélyező emailt (lásd: Commons:OTRS). A harmadik megoldás a legegyszerűbb; az ilyen leveleket egyszerűen továbbítani lehet a permissions-commons@wikimedia.org címre. (Fontos, hogy a levélben egyértelműen meg legyen nevezve a kép, az engedélyezett felbontás és a licenc.) Ha feltöltesz egy ilyen képet, egyértelműen jelezd a leírásában, hogy csak a kisfelbontású változat szabad.

Kizárt, hogy ez csak a flickrre és onnan letöltött képekre vonatkozhat. Hungarikusz Firkász (talk) 16:15, 1 November 2016 (UTC)

Sculptures Alain Nouraud

Bonjour Yann, j'ai pris des photos de sculptures métalliques d'Alain Nouraud disposées dans les allées publiques de la citadelle de Château d'Oléron. Faut-il des autorisations Dacoucou pour les mettre sur wikimedia? Merci d'avance--Amage9 (talk) 15:44, 31 October 2016 (UTC)

Amage9 : Bonjour, Il faut probablement une autorisation d'Alain Nouraud. Cordialement, Yann (talk) 15:47, 31 October 2016 (UTC)

Re Yann, j'ai eu l'autorisation d'Alain Nouraud mais par écrit, bien qu'ayant un site (sans contact) il ne pratique pas par internet. Comment fais-je pour remonter la permission papier. Cdlt--Amage9 (talk) 14:32, 10 November 2016 (UTC)

Bonjour Amage9, Il faut scanner la permission ou la prendre en photo et l'envoyer à permissions-commons-fr@wikimedia.org (prendre soin que le texte corresponde à COM:OTRS/fr). Cordialement, Yann (talk) 16:12, 10 November 2016 (UTC)

Merci Yann, c'est fait.--Amage9 (talk) 17:29, 10 November 2016 (UTC)

Amage9 : C'est bon maintenant. J'ai ajouté l'autorisation à 3 photos. Cordialement, Yann (talk) 09:54, 11 November 2016 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Technical Barnstar
	Merci pour tout le temps consacré ! Amage9 (talk) 09:00, 12 November 2016 (UTC)

Commons:Deletion requests/File:Worms- Wahlplakat der Marxistisch-Leninistischen Partei Deutschlands (MLPD) zur Bundestagswahl 2009 27.9.2009.jpg

The two of us closed this at about the same time, in opposite ways.

I assume you are correct about the two photos, but there is a full sentence of text, so it has a copyright in the USA. I don't know what the EU ToO is for text, but I wouldn't be surprised if it is the same. Nonetheless, I will leave it to you to remove one or the other of our closures. Regards, .     Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 14:14, 13 November 2016 (UTC)

Hi Jim, Well, the ToO is quite high in Germany, so I assume it would pass. Regards, Yann (talk) 14:16, 13 November 2016 (UTC)

File:Very rare tin-glaze Minton majolica, imitation of Renaissance Italian tin-glaze maiolica.jpg

I uploaded this file. I have since submitted an 'undelete' request with the background information and correct 'licence' generated by the Attribution Generator. Hopefully this will work. My problem was that I did not know how to find the correct 'permission' or 'licence' to attach to the upload. Attribution Generator hopefully provides the answer. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Davidmadelena (talk • contribs) 08:50, 11 November 2016 (UTC)

@Davidmadelena: Hi, It doesn't matter who uploaded it, but who took the picture. So it is wrong that you claim it as "Own work", but it is not. Since the file is not deleted yet, an 'undelete' request won't help. EXIF data says the author is David Tulk, therefore we need a permission from him. Please see COM:OTRS for the procedure. Thanks, Yann (talk) 09:47, 11 November 2016 (UTC)

The image is a screen clip saved by me, davidtulk̊madelena.com, David Tulk. The object was produced in 1855. The Victoria and Albert museum took the original photo. The V and A encourage non-commercial use of their images on condition the source is credited thusː © Victoria and Albert Museum, London. Please, what do I do next to get this image approved? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Davidmadelena (talk • contribs)

@Davidmadelena: I think we need a permission for a free license from the Victoria and Albert Museum, who took the picture. Please see COM:OTRS for the procedure. Please note that a non-commercial use is not sufficient here, and that you are not the author, so you shouldn't add your name in the EXIF data. Thanks, Yann (talk) 18:01, 14 November 2016 (UTC)

Commons:Deletion_requests/File:Nenubot.jpg

Bonsoir Comme tu es un des seuls admin à qui j'ai eu à faire, dans le cadre du GLAM avec le muséum, je me tourne vers toi mais n'hésite pas à me réorienter si je m'adresse pas à la personne ad hoc. Voila la situation : un projet de robot aquatique sur Lille, très sérieux et ambitieux, est en gestation avec des ingénieurs, des commoneurs, etc, le tout coordonné sur la Wikiversité par User:Lamiot. Une jeune graphiste a chargé un dessin de petit robot qui pourrait servir de mascotte au projet "Cht'i Plouf".  : https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Nenubot.jpg Mais un utilisateur dénommé : https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/2003:D2:1BE0:5E44:DE9D:18A2:E660:259E a proposé presque de suite la suppression (avec la mention : "Raison pour la demande de suppression : this small robot is out of scope"). Je note que cet utilisateur a peu d'actions sur commons à son actif et je m'interroge sur sa légitimité à proposer ainsi un fichier, si rapidement en plus, à la suppression.

Et quand cette graphiste, débutante sur Commons, a essayé de charger de nouvelles (autres) images, elles ont été bloquées (avant même la fin du téléversement), avec un message qui dit en gros que si elle retente un chargement elle risque d'être définitivement bloquée. La conséquence prévisible est de perdre une contributrice et j'aimerais élucider les raisons de ces blocages. Et comment agir contre cet utilisateur non identifié dont l'attitude ne me semble pas profitable à l'encyclopédie ?

Le compte utilisé par la graphiste est User:Octo-pulse, un compte qu'elle a dû recréer, n'ayant plus les identifiants de son premier pseudo non utilisé durant qqes années : se peut-il que ce nouveau compte soit par erreur identifié comme malveillant (tel un faux nez cherchant à télécharger un dessin qui ne serait pas fait par lui ?) mais dans ce cas je m'attendrais à un message soit d'un bot, soit d'un admin, c'est curieux que ce soit un 2003:D2:1BE0:5E44:DE9D:18A2:E660:259E qui réagisse ainsi, non ?

Des réponses à https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Deletion_requests/File:Nenubot.jpg sont pour l'instant sans effet.

En résumé, si tu peux me dire la procédure à suivre pour sortir de cette embrouillamini, je t'en remercie par avance. Cordialement--Cbyd (talk) 16:31, 13 November 2016 (UTC)

J'ai fermé cette requête, qui n'a pas lieu d'être. Cordialement, Yann (talk) 16:48, 13 November 2016 (UTC)

Merci !--Cbyd (talk) 16:29, 14 November 2016 (UTC)

Aidez-moi svp

Hi Yann,

I saw that you are involved with OTRS, which I have zero experience with. I normally only upload self-made stuff, but while writing articles of South African plants for af.wiki I often run into missing pictures for the many species they have down there. There is a website iSPOT where South African botanists, birders & other enthusiasts show off their many photographs. One of the more prolific users has this on his personal page:

“

Personal information First Name Anthony Last Name Rebelo Location / Hometown Cape Town Field of Interest Conservation planning research; monitoring; rare species; Proteaceae; plants; alien invaders; public participation; atlasses All my pictures posted are cc-by-sa History Member for 6 years 11 weeks

”

Is there a way to get OTRS permission to upload his pics on basis of the fact that he mentions cc-by-sa? Unfortunately he does not specify a version number. I see that there are email forms, but such things seldom quite cover one's particular situation and I am at a loss how to do this. Could you help me set this up? The page I read this is only accessible if you log in. I could make a screen shot if that helps.

Thanks in advance Jcwf (talk) 23:28, 13 November 2016 (UTC)

Hi Jcwf, You can make a screenshot and send it to permissions-commons@wikimedia.org Please specify the images it concerns. Regards, Yann (talk) 09:50, 14 November 2016 (UTC)

File:Agatha Christie - The Secret Adversary (1922).djvu

File:Agatha Christie - The Secret Adversary (1922).djvu 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!

ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 10:51, 14 November 2016 (UTC)

My UDEL request closure

Yann, thanks for the restoring and the UDEL request closure. So, some files are still deleted, and IMHO there is enough concensus to restore them:

• File:Chromium_OS_Logon_Screen.png - Free software screenshot
• File:Eclipse Installation.webm - Free software video
• File:Azemsha.png - Uploaded to Commons before
• File:The_Little_Marmon_print_ad_February_1927.jpg - Advertsing published between 1923 and 1973 without a copyright notice

If possible, please restore these files at least temporary, in order to correct the license. --Amitie 10g (talk) 13:15, 15 November 2016 (UTC)

Hi Amitie 10g,

I didn't restore these files on purpose. Please read the request at COM:UDR. Could you also check all files to ensure that the source and author are there. Regards, Yann (talk) 14:00, 15 November 2016 (UTC)

• File:Chromium OS Logon Screen.png : See en:File:Chromium OS Logon Screen.png under fair use.
• File:Eclipse Installation.webm : includes Windows UI.

Well, this makes sense. --Amitie 10g (talk) 15:36, 15 November 2016 (UTC)

Hi! Let me correct wrong information

Hi! Can you read the template I'm trying to remove? It says Image by User Sailko supported by Wikimedia CH. I am user Sailko, and that is NOT an image shot by me, so it cannot be supported by Wikimedia CH. An User copied and pasted form another file for mistake. So can I remove it now? Do I have your permission? Secondly, the image was tagged as PD without any evidence of being PD, since it is a photograph of a 3d object. If you know the rules of Commons you should know that is wrong. The image should be deleted. I don't mind, but if we have legal problems it will be your fault now, ok? Bye bye. --Sailko (talk) 06:10, 16 November 2016 (UTC)

Sailko : OK, fine. But that's not a reason to delete the file, let alone speedy delete it. You can create a regular DR if you like. Regards, Yann (talk) 07:16, 16 November 2016 (UTC)

Restoring files with improper source information.

Hi, please make sure you provide proper source information if you undelete such files, or a new DR will be needed. Jcb (talk) 23:42, 14 November 2016 (UTC)

Hi Jcb, All files have a source (except 2 old ones, which would be better handled in a proper DR). The deletion was clearly an error. Thanks, Yann (talk) 23:44, 14 November 2016 (UTC)

That's not true, I had to renominate several files. Jcb (talk) 23:45, 14 November 2016 (UTC)

Jcb: Don't do that, it will only lead you into trouble. Regards, Yann (talk) 23:47, 14 November 2016 (UTC)

Some formatting may be needed, for creating new DRs is just useless editwarring. Regards, Yann (talk) 23:53, 14 November 2016 (UTC)

Please undo your speedy closures. Most of the file have a serious copyright issue, which you didn't address in the closures. Such speedy closures are counter productive. What indication e.g. do you have that the photographer of File:2eStation s-Hertogenbosch.jpg died before 1946? Jcb (talk) 07:15, 15 November 2016 (UTC)

'author=unknown' does not constitute a valid copyright situation for a Dutch postcard. I have not seen many old postcards without an author named at the backside. So without more information on the photographer, we cannot keep the file. And this one is just an example, not the only one with a problem. Please revert your out of procedure action and restore the DRs. Jcb (talk) 10:00, 15 November 2016 (UTC)

Honestly, you have not seen a lot of postcards. Most postcards from that area are not signed, and the photographer is unknown. Only a few photographers added their name on it back then. In addition, the photographer was born before 1880, so the odds that he died before 1946 is quite high. Regards, Yann (talk) 10:05, 15 November 2016 (UTC)

My great grandfather is from around that year and he died somewhere in the late 1960s. At least restore the DRs, there is no valid reason to prohibit a colleague to use the regular DR procedure. If you disagree with deletion, add a keep vote instead. Jcb (talk) 10:15, 15 November 2016 (UTC)

Jcb, you nominated these files the same day that them has been restored (per My UDEL request, and you didn't participated there), first tagged for Speedy by you. So, Nominating them again without proof of copyvio is clearly disruptive. if you're so interested of getting rid PD files, you should start to research before nominating instead of leaving that job to others (as many users and admins filled the missing information); elsewhere, refrain of nominating/tagging files properly sourced. --Amitie 10g (talk) 13:04, 15 November 2016 (UTC)

@Jcb: Frankly, I think you need to be more concerned about not speedily deleting files as no source when the source has been stated on the file page for years. Many of your speedy deletions should clearly go to a DR. Revent^talk 23:51, 14 November 2016 (UTC)

@Yann: So what are you going to do about it now? Many people have asked me to use regular DR rather than {no source} tagging, but now an involved admin is somehow prohibiting that? What procedure do you propose to get the still problematic files deleted if you apparently don't want to see a regular DR? Jcb (talk) 16:17, 15 November 2016 (UTC)

And I am still here at this talk page, because I know you are a good willing colleague and I still hope we can resolve this toghether. Jcb (talk) 16:25, 15 November 2016 (UTC)

OK, fine. Yann (talk) 16:54, 15 November 2016 (UTC)

So what do you propose? Jcb (talk) 21:55, 15 November 2016 (UTC)

This is the list of involved DRs of still problematic files, apart from the one you reopend today:

• Commons:Deletion requests/File:Sargo1960.jpg‎
• Commons:Deletion requests/File:Robert L Dennison.jpg
• Commons:Deletion requests/File:Rezomb.jpg‎
• Commons:Deletion requests/File:Rf-4c-68-0568-zr.jpg‎
• Commons:Deletion requests/File:RibbonO.jpg
• Commons:Deletion requests/File:2CRDUI.jpg
• Commons:Deletion requests/File:3 Velikoe v malom i antikhrist.JPG

I still think the best solution is to just reopen these DRs. Jcb (talk) 22:14, 15 November 2016 (UTC)

Sorry, but no. I reopened one because there is a very tiny chance that it is not in the PD, but others are OK. And other admins agree with me. Regards, Yann (talk) 22:18, 15 November 2016 (UTC)

So what procedure do you propose I use in case of these remaining problematic files? Jcb (talk) 22:20, 15 November 2016 (UTC)

Or maybe we need to discuss them one by one here? E.g. File:Rf-4c-68-0568-zr.jpg. The picture was obviously taken in Germany. What evidence do we have that this would be a US government work? The photographer could be from Germany as well. Jcb (talk) 22:44, 15 November 2016 (UTC)

I propose that you stop looking for issues where there is none. Thanks, Yann (talk) 22:46, 15 November 2016 (UTC)

Well, there are issues and you did not address them when reverting the nominations. What's the trouble with reopening these DRs and respecting normal procedures? Jcb (talk) 23:11, 15 November 2016 (UTC)

I saw this edit. Without verifiable source information, it's still possible there is some photographer from Germany. NARA does host (and credit) material with 3rd party copyright holders. Please just restore the DRs and we are done. Till now you have not come up with a single reason to revert the DRs rather than voting in it. And I really don't want this to happen again, so the fact that I insist that you have to undo your erroneous action is not only for the sake of these few files, but also to not have a precedent for the future. Jcb (talk) 06:35, 16 November 2016 (UTC)

So again, what evidence do we have that File:Rf-4c-68-0568-zr.jpg is indeed a US government work and e.g. not the work of a German photographer? Jcb (talk) 07:49, 16 November 2016 (UTC)

What's the plan? Are you going to cooperate, or do you prefer that I recreate the DRs instead? Just ignoring me seems totally inappropriate. You were the one who caused this situation after all. How would you feel if you nominated some files for deletion and a colleague reverted those nominations without even bothering to respond to the nomination reason? You won't be happy I suppose. Jcb (talk) 12:17, 16 November 2016 (UTC)

Sorry Jcb, put adding even 1000s messages here won't help. Several admins have said that you are deleting files without valid reasons, and these are among them. Please drop the case, and look for something else. I value your work, and it would be a pity that you end up on COM:ANU. Regards, Yann (talk) 12:24, 16 November 2016 (UTC)

This is not because of possible wrong deletions, this is about you prohibiting me to file DRs in the first place. Till now, you have not spent a single word in explaning why you would prohibit a colleague to file a regular DR. Apparently you were so emotionally involved, that you even used rollback to remove the notification messages from user talk pages. I took my time to formulate deletion reasons and you apparently did not even read them, you just aggressively reverted the nominations. One of the DRs has finally be partly restored by you (partly, you forgot to add it to the DR day page again), and there Jim has already pointed out that we can't keep that file under our current rules. So I see no reason at all to keep those DRs open for one week, and then leave the decision to an uninvolved (which you are not in this case) administrator. Jcb (talk) 12:38, 16 November 2016 (UTC)

Jcb : But Jim is often too strict. I recently restored several files he deleted. It is quite funny that you only want to see the comments which suit you. And it also seems you that you didn't even read COM:UDR, notably Revent's comments. Yann (talk) 17:59, 16 November 2016 (UTC)

It's true I didn't read the UDR, but that shouldn't be necessary either. Any essential information contributed at an UDR should be updated at the file description page on restoration. Jcb (talk) 22:13, 16 November 2016 (UTC)

LoL, just LoL. Jcb, you are just ridiculing yourself here. Please read the UDR if you want to be taken seriously. Regards, Yann (talk) 22:17, 16 November 2016 (UTC)

I have created a temporary page here to see if we can resolve this mess for the remaining files. You are welcome for constructive contribution at that page. Jcb (talk) 16:44, 16 November 2016 (UTC)

Re Sargo, see http://www.pritzkermilitary.org/explore/museum/digital-collection/view/oclc/908109089 - it's a US Navy image, published on a postcard to commemorate the event. Revent^talk 18:15, 16 November 2016 (UTC)

After the help of several colleagues there are only two problematic ones left: Commons:Deletion requests/File:Rezomb.jpg‎ and Commons:Deletion requests/File:Rf-4c-68-0568-zr.jpg‎, but they seem not resolvable, so they will have to be deleted if we can't find more information than we have now. Well, at least we have good resolutions for most of the files by now. @Yann: after reading User:Jcb/temp, are you prepared to accept a regular DR for these two remaining files? Jcb (talk) 22:13, 16 November 2016 (UTC)

Please respond to the question. Jcb (talk) 23:18, 16 November 2016 (UTC)

Jcb: Stop asking for answers when you don't even do your home work (reading the UDR). It took me 2 mn to find a source for File:Rezomb.jpg‎. From there more information can be found, but I don't speak Russian. So you are juts wasting your time, and mine here. Thanks, Yann (talk) 23:54, 16 November 2016 (UTC)

Where is the reference to an UDR here? I don't see it. You just restored the file, without any comment. And the link to a jpg you added to the other file does not provide any essential information, it's just another copy of that file. Actually it's you who are wasting your time, my time and the time of several other users, by doing an incomplete job at restoration, including three restorations with still unknown copyright situation, and then by refusing to cooperate and even obstructing other users attempts to clean the mess you created. I'm very disappointed in what I have seen the past few days. I hope we soon get back the very valuable Yann we used to know before this week. Jcb (talk) 06:42, 17 November 2016 (UTC)

File:Frogdissectionsm.jpg

This is a pencil drawing, by me, Neal Betts. I drew it. It is owned by me. I granted permission. Thanks, Neal Owen Lonoaia Betts --Neal Betts (talk) 14:59, 16 November 2016 (UTC)

Antwort

Hallo Yann. Kannst du bitte auf meine Antwort Stellung beziehen. Danke SMP123456789 (talk) 20:40, 17 November 2016 (UTC)

OTRS Photo

Hello, what's wrong with my image File:João Guilherme-004.jpg? Because it was posted on OTRS, the author sent an email to the commons, and I am waiting for verification. Yasméssica (talk) 23:50, 16 November 2016 (UTC)

 Done Yann (talk) 08:10, 17 November 2016 (UTC)

File:Pulloxhill - The Church of St James the Apostle - geograph.org.uk - 871581.jpg

I am puzzled by your listing of this file for deletion. The page clearly shows that the file is covered by Creative Commons Attribution Share-alike license 2.0. The Wikimedia Commons page that details allowable copyright is Commons:Copyright tags which shows, under "Old Creative Commons licenses" that "The following licenses have been superseded by more recent versions. They are still available for use." That section specifically lists "Attribution-Sharealike 2.0 English & Wales (based on English law)". Skinsmoke (talk) 16:57, 17 November 2016 (UTC)

Hi Skinsmoke,

The license was removed. I restored it. Regards, Yann (talk) 17:11, 17 November 2016 (UTC)

Thanks for that. I take it everything is OK now. Skinsmoke (talk) 17:13, 17 November 2016 (UTC)

File:Collapse of Con Mine.jpg

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Con_Mine&action=history

I am little irked that this was removed. It is a really good image of the collapse. [2]

I have permission from the pictures owner. please instruct me how to edit whatever forms were needed for permission.

FYI, I just donated $50 to wiki a couple weeks ago. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Garrethjones (talk • contribs)

@Garrethjones: Hi,

This was copied from [3]. We need a formal written permission from the author. See Commons:Village pump/Copyright/Archive/2016/10#File:Collapse of Con_Mine.jpg. Yann (talk) 07:58, 17 November 2016 (UTC)

@Garrethjones: Hi,

Please ask the copyright owner to send a permission for a free license. Please note that it must include any use including commercial. Please see COM:OTRS for the procedure. Regards, Yann (talk) 09:06, 18 November 2016 (UTC)

Commons:Deletion_requests/File:Salamine.png

If you don't refer to an UDR, people will think that you are wheelwarring. So next time you restore a file via an UDR, please make that clear. Jcb (talk) 22:24, 19 November 2016 (UTC)

CA & Perspective

Bonjour J'avoue ne pas trop avoir compris ce qu'il(s) voulaient. Notamment pour l'église Saint-Maurice, enfin si maintenant grâce à toi, j'ai un peu compris. Pour les CA par contre... C'est donc un grand marci comme on dit en Savoie. ;) --B-noa (talk) 14:55, 17 November 2016 (UTC)

Bonjour B-noa,

La correction de la perspective avec Gimp (logiciel libre) est assez facile. La correction de l'abberation chromatique est plus délicate. Il faut installer un plug-in, et il y a des aides sur Internet. Cordialement, Yann (talk) 18:24, 17 November 2016 (UTC)

Bonjour. Grâce à ton travail, la Chapelle de Saint-Gingolf de Giez (VII.2013) a été promue. Merci. --B-noa (talk) 08:20, 20 November 2016 (UTC)

File:Freud - Group psychology and the analysis of the ego.djvu

File:Freud - Group psychology and the analysis of the ego.djvu 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!

ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 22:59, 20 November 2016 (UTC)

Réponse

Salut. Ce fichier est resté en version stable depuis 4 ans, puis ces trolls ont décider de modifier la page sans consensus. Je rappelle que Ms10vc est banni de fr wikipedia et ses compères sont des CAOU occasionnels. Merci de revenir à la verison ante bellium. Je prévois d'annuler le passage en force en cas d'échec des négociations et de l'expiration du blocage. C'est la version ante bellium. Ils sont libres de créer un nouveau fichier mais pas à massacrer celui-ci. Parlez en aux admins Starus, Zivax, Superjuju10. De plus, Ms10vc, banni de fr wiki, détourne son blocage là bas en demandant à ses alliés de poster ses création sur fr wiki. Il faut faire quelque chose. --Pannam2014 (talk) 11:18, 22 November 2016 (UTC)

Generosity Crowdfunding Campaign for User:The Photographer

Please excuse me spamming you. As a regular on Feature Picture Candidatess you will recognise User:The Photographer, who has 86 Featured Pictures. His contributions cover the architecture and culture of Brazil and Venezuela. He has basic photographic equipment: an old D300 camera and 35mm lens, and lives in a poor country where photographic equipment is expensive. The Photographer has recently taken several images using the technique where multiple frames are stitched together to create a high-resolution panorama. However, many times frustrated with the stitching errors that result from trying to take such photos without a proper panoramic head for his tripod. This special equipment permits the camera to be rotated around the entrance pupil of the lens, and eliminates such errors. Having a panoramic head would greatly increase the potential for The Photographer to create sharp high-resolution images for Commons. In addition, the purchase of a fisheye lens would enable 180 × 360° panoramas to be taken, which are a great way to explore a scene as though one is really there.

Please see the discussion about the Crowd-funding campaign on User talk:The Photographer#Generosity Crowdfunding Campaign and visit the Generosity Crowd-funding Campaign page to consider donating. Even a modest donation will make a difference if many people contribute. Thanks. -- Colin (talk) 13:37, 22 November 2016 (UTC)

File:Countryside with mosque, Pulikkanny, Kerala, India.jpg

File:Countryside with mosque, Pulikkanny, Kerala, India.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!

89.211.78.124 15:26, 22 November 2016 (UTC)

Besoin d'aide pour l'utilisation d'une image

Bonjour Yann, Merci pour votre message. Je souhaite publier une photo libre de droit. Le photographe m'a confirmé son accord à condition d'utiliser, telle qu'elle, la version qui est déjà à disposition sur le site internet d'une maison d'édition. Je ne sais pas utiliser/comprendre les différents niveaux de copyrights. Que me conseillez-vous ? Je vous souhaite une belle journée, Laurence — Preceding unsigned comment added by Laurence Duguet (talk • contribs) 14:52, 23 November 2016 (UTC)

@Laurence Duguet: Bonjour,

Il faut envoyer une autorisation pour une licence libre à permissions-commons-fr@wikimedia.org avec le texte ce trouvant à COM:OTRS/fr#Déclaration de consentement pour toutes les demandes. Prévenez-moi quand cela est fait, je pourrais valider l'autorisation. Cordialement, Yann (talk) 16:12, 23 November 2016 (UTC)

File:Loss of HMS Pathfinder, September 5th 1914 Art.IWMART5721.jpg

Yup, I messed up with Wyllie (1851-1931). I was too focused on the Crown Copyright issue and the 20-year extension that I used the wrong year (1951 instead of 1931). Mea culpa. Glrx (talk) 22:15, 23 November 2016 (UTC)

Category:Ailsworth

You reverted this without explaining, what I was asking was for Category:Ailsworth to be temporary deleted (see COM:GCSD#6 so that Category:Ailsworth, Cambridgeshire can be moved to Category:Ailsworth as I can't find any other uses, note on Wikipedia the move was reverted. Crouch, Swale (talk) 12:38, 25 November 2016 (UTC)

OK, done. ;o) Yann (talk) 12:39, 25 November 2016 (UTC)

Thanks. Crouch, Swale (talk) 13:02, 25 November 2016 (UTC)

image de l'écrivain

Il s'agit d'une photo de l'éditeur de José Tolentino Mendonça des Editions Paulinas afin de promouvoir l'auteur. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Beatattitude (talk • contribs)

@Beatattitude: Bonjour,

1. Il manque la license. 2. Il manque une autorisation du photographe. Voyez COM:OTRS/fr pour la procédure. Cordialement, Yann (talk) 15:08, 25 November 2016 (UTC)

Copyright accusation

I have no idea who you are, Yan , nor don't have any knowledge of who accuses me of copyright violations. Everything I uploaded was done with the full consent of the involved parties. That is all I have to say on this matter.

Parker Robinson. — Preceding unsigned comment was added by 45.64.240.204 (talk) 01:01, 26 November 2016 (UTC)

I have just seen that you have deleted the photo of Liz Hodgkinson on the grounds of Copyright violation, which you clearly do a lot of, given the section Copyright accusation message from Parker Robinson (45.64.240.204).

IT IS NOT A COPYRIGHT VIOLATION! The photo is owned by its subject, who gave me permission to use it! I completed the form at https://tools.wmflabs.org/relgen/ in reply to the email from Permissions - Wikimedia Commons <permissions-commons@wikimedia.org> What the hell do I have to do to stop this happening??

And please UNDELETE this photograph immediately so that it can be restored to the page Liz Hodgkinson! Iph (talk) 04:26, 26 November 2016 (UTC)

Iph : Please calm down and stay polite.

The file File:Liz Hodgkinson.jpg will be restored when the permission is processed. As there is an important backlog, it can take some time. We are all volunteers here. Thanks, Yann (talk) 08:04, 26 November 2016 (UTC)

Ultra Festival Photos

Hi there, photos that I used were recently flagged and deleted on a myriad of Wikipedia pages. I have received permission from the owners of these photos to use said photos throughout these Wikipedia pages. Not sure why they were deleted, I worked very hard on updating these pages and it's unfair to have them deleted. I can provide proof of permission if need be. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Arnold.kevin729 (talk • contribs) 19:18, 28 November 2016 (UTC)

@Arnold.kevin729: Hi,

You didn't answer in the deletion request, and many of your pictures were copied from the Internet. If you are the copyright owner, could you please send a permission via COM:OTRS? Thanks, Yann (talk) 00:06, 29 November 2016 (UTC)

I was given less than a week to respond which is absurd, and I will send the email as suggested.--Arnold.kevin729 (talk) 15:58, 29 November 2016 (UTC)

@Arnold.kevin729: Hi, OK fine. The pictures can be restored once the permission is received. Regards, Yann (talk) 15:59, 29 November 2016 (UTC)

Restoring images

Hi Yann, Can you please restore the following photos, as the permissions have been provided for them: File:Slovo Cirilovo1.jpg, File:Slovo Cirilovo2.jpg, File:Slovo Cirilovo3.jpg, File:Slovo Cirilovo4.jpg, File:Slovo Cirilovo5.jpg, File:Slovo Cirilovo6.jpg, File:Slovo Cirilovo7.jpg (ticket:2016112510014031). Thanks --Filip (§) 21:11, 28 November 2016 (UTC)

Hi Filip, Done. Yann (talk) 11:51, 29 November 2016 (UTC)

Thank you! --Filip (§) 17:16, 29 November 2016 (UTC)

Two files

Revent, Jcb and I agree that we need a new look at:

• File:Rezomb.jpg‎ and
• File:Rf-4c-68-0568-zr.jpg

File:Rezomb.jpg‎ has no source information at all, and while it looks old, looking old isn't enough to keep it on Commons. We also have a much better image of the monument at File:Thombrez.JPG.

File:Rf-4c-68-0568-zr.jpg does not offer any proof that the photographer was a Federal employee whose job it was to take photographs. The source description is wrong on its face because it says, "Image source listed as United States Army Air Forces via National Archives". The United States Army Air Forces went out of existence in 1947, while this is an image from 1968-1991. It could be an official US Air Force photo, a photo by the plane's pilot or crew chief, or a photo by someone else.

I propose, and Revent and Jcb agree, that I open a new DR for each of the two, with the DR comment written as above. If you agree, after I post the DRs, you and the three of us will not comment on the DRs and will let them run their course entirely in the hands of our colleagues. .     Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 15:54, 29 November 2016 (UTC)

Yes, please do. Regards, Yann (talk) 15:57, 29 November 2016 (UTC)

 Done, thanks for your quick response, see Commons:Deletion requests/File:Rf-4c-68-0568-zr.jpg and Commons:Deletion requests/File:Rezomb.jpg. You (Yann), Revent, Jcb and I all agree that we will not comment on the DRs. .     Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 19:52, 29 November 2016 (UTC)

File:Éditions de l'hebdomadaire agricole La Terre de chez nous de novembre 2016.jpg

Since you deleted the file above, you mind seeing if this ticket is accurate? Thanks. [4] MCMLXXXIX 01:06, 30 November 2016 (UTC)

Hi, Yes, fine. File restored. Yann (talk) 01:11, 30 November 2016 (UTC)

Your closure

Can you please say how your closure is not in contradiction with the part of guideline saying: " A model, for example, may have consented to the image being taken for a personal portfolio, but not for publication on the Internet." Please don't say the pics are on flickr since long ago! --Mhhossein ^talk 12:34, 29 November 2016 (UTC)

When a professional photographer sets up in a bathroom, and the model knows this, the bathroom ceases to become a private place -- there is no expectation of privacy. And publication on Flickr is publication on the Internet, period. By long-standing U.S. law, further publication does not violate privacy. That section you mention is a possibility for privacy law in other countries, but not the U.S. Privacy laws vary greatly between countries, so not every possible aspect mentioned in the guideline will be true for all countries. Carl Lindberg (talk) 14:27, 29 November 2016 (UTC)

Carl Lindberg: So, you mean that per U.S. privacy law 'we can assume that a model is consent with her photo on the net'? --Mhhossein ^talk 10:56, 30 November 2016 (UTC)

Mhhossein: For a professional model, generally, yes. They are expecting to be photographed in sessions, so wherever they are, it's not a private place, and no further consent is needed. If there is a prohibition on being published for such photos, that would be a contractual issue between the model and the photographer, not a privacy issue, and unless there is a complaint from one of the parties involved, we would assume that all contractual issues are OK. Most of the COM:PEOPLE guideline is about more normal upload situations -- photos taken of friends and family, or unknown people -- in those cases, the uploader is the photographer, and the publication here is the first publication. In that situation uploaders have a lot more to be aware of, and is where Commons may need to be more careful. A few countries have stronger rights attached to pictures of oneself, which can go well beyond pure privacy, which we may need to take into consideration. But the U.S. does not, and (strictly speaking) that is the only law we absolutely have to follow -- the rest is by policy or community decision, taking all aspects of the photo (and claims/requests by parties involved) into consideration. Professional modeling sessions are pretty far outside the normal scope of that guideline. Carl Lindberg (talk) 15:17, 30 November 2016 (UTC)

Sorry, but you're introducing new concepts inside the guideline. No, the models, be it professional or otherwise, are not determining criterion for privacy or publicity of the place. So, the rest of your comment seems meaningless. The privacy issue matter here for the cases we just discussed. Instead of basing your words on your own speculations which I respect, you'd better link to actual laws or guidelines, just how I did. But, as you were trying to discredit the guideline from the very beginning, you ignored those explicit notes from the guideline page. A photo on commons has spent two steps; 1) photography 2) uploading. The first step is resolved by issuing a free licence and the second step is an issue for photos taken in privacy. Sorry to say that the comment is not accountable to my eyes. --Mhhossein ^talk 17:52, 30 November 2016 (UTC)

Expectation of privacy is the only criteria for if it's a private place. Carl Lindberg (talk) 20:02, 30 November 2016 (UTC)

And merely based on the quality of the photo and pose we can't say she did not have expectation of privacy and the place is hence considered private. Nothing remains!--Mhhossein ^talk 13:00, 1 December 2016 (UTC)

• It's interesting that the closing admin has apparently nothing to say. --Mhhossein ^talk 13:00, 1 December 2016 (UTC)
  • Mhhossein, you are beginning to be annoying. I don't see what I can add to Carl's excellent explanation. Regards, Yann (talk) 15:42, 1 December 2016 (UTC)

Copyright violations

Yann,

I'm new here in Wikipedia. I've uploaded some photos that, apparently, shouldn't have been uploaded, but that's because I was not familiar with your policies yet. However, I am familiar with them now. That's why I'd like to say I'm really sorry for what happened and that it won't happen again ;)

Sincerely yours,

--LucasBitencourt (talk) 18:50, 1 December 2016 (UTC)

Valued image

Bonjour Yann, je m'aperçois que je ne t'ai pas répondu avant clôture à ta question suite à mon vote sur cette page de vote. Pour reprendre le contexte au début, j'ai déjà eu du mal de voir toutes ces tombes, même si l'image est bonne, se voir remettre le Valued image, alors que pour la plupart (sauf si je me trompe) ne possède pas d'article du défunt dans les wikis, on pourrait donc se retrouver avec des cimetières comprenant des centaines de Valued Image ce qui déséquilibrerait je pense la répartition des Valued image, mais je ne suis pas intervenu. Pour le coup de l'image de l'allée, là par contre je n'ai clairement pas compris l’intérêt de l'image. L'allée en elle-même ne présente pas (à mon sens) d’intérêt particulier, donc une photo de celle-ci sans en plus d'orientation manifeste (j'ai plus l'impression que la photo montre le carré de tombes à côté), je ne pouvais pas voter pour l'image. J'espère que tu comprends mes arguments, n'hésite pas à me signaler quelque chose que j'aurais mal compris sur l'image. Olivier LPB (talk) 00:22, 2 December 2016 (UTC)

Bonjour Olivier LPB,

Toutes les photos de tombes que j'ai proposées comme VI sont utilisées dans au moins un article. Il y a des VI pour des choses beaucoup moins notables que des tombes de personnalités. Et je ne comprends pas ton opposition à cette candidature. Une VI est sensée est la meilleure illustration d'un sujet donné, et cette photo illustre parfaitement bien l'aspect général du cimetière. Cordialement, Yann (talk) 00:34, 2 December 2016 (UTC)

Re: File:Rear Admiral KS Venugopal, Principal, INA and Commodore M Goverdhan Raju, NM, Principal Director (Training) interacting with the proud parents during passing out ceremony of Short Service Commission (Pilot) Cadets at INA.jpg

I selected OpenStreetMap instead of Indian Navy in PassLicense by mistake. Fixed. --Amitie 10g (talk) 14:59, 4 December 2016 (UTC)

ticket OTRS #2016112910016549

Hello How do you upload photos in wikicommon File:Vajiralongkorn_Ari_Bus_380-800_(05)_cropped_1.jpg The Government of Thailand accept to use photos [This is a letter to use thaigov.th to wikicommon] --Pitpisit (talk) 20:52, 6 December 2016 (UTC)

@Pitpisit: OK, But are you a member of the OTRS team? If yes, please add this on your home page. If not, please do not add the template yourself. Just add {{OTRS pending}}. The license template was not right. Now that it is fixed, I removed the warning. Thanks, Yann (talk) 22:41, 6 December 2016 (UTC)

I create new template for use Licensing replace old licensing How do you think??? [5] The thai government permit to use photo. So I think I create that and I have treaty to use photo [This is a letter to use thaigov.th to wikicommon] --Pitpisit (talk) 11:51, 8 December 2016 (UTC)

Supposed copyright violation.

I have been targeted once again for supposed copyright violations. This is ridiculous because all of the images I upload I have taken with my own camera and either uploaded directly or edited and then uploaded. I do not know what I have to do to prove to you people that I own these copyrights. I upload these pictures for people I work with in wrestling as a favor to them, I receive no compensation for this and do not know why these pictures keep getting flagged for copyright violations. If someone were to claim to own them that would be one thing, but no one does because I own them! This is beyond ridiculous that someone can say I don't own the pictures because they think I don't. These people do now know me or the wrestlers in the pictures. Any of these wrestlers are easily reachable through our Facebook page at www.facebook.com/nwasupreme. They will all tell you I own the pictures and they have given me permission to post any picture I take. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jasonecohen6 (talk • contribs) 13:20, 08 December 2016 (UTC)

Hi @Jasonecohen6:

All of your images are very small and have no EXIF data. It would help if you upload the original ones. In case of images such as File:NWA Mid America Champion Nic Noble.jpg, there is a copyright on the logo and on the belt. Regards, Yann (talk) 13:25, 8 December 2016 (UTC)

These are the only files I have for the pictures because I use a program to edit and crop the pictures. I will take note of this for the future and just upload the originals, however these are the only copies I have of these pictures because I have deleted the originals to save room on my camera's card and my computer. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jasonecohen6 (talk • contribs) 13:30, 08 December 2016 (UTC)

Warning for copyright violations

Hello, I received this couple of days deletion requests and copyright violation warnings on uploaded images. All of these images are either my own (taken with my camera or phone), or a friend's whom I have cited and who has given me authorization to use his images on Wikipedia. Kindly explain how these are violations, and how this can be fixed. Thank you Taniarw (talk) 11:29, 10 December 2016 (UTC)

Hi Taniarw,

Some of your pictures were published on the Internet, so a formal written is needed. Please see COM:OTRS for the procedure. Regards, Yann (talk) 17:14, 10 December 2016 (UTC)

Commons:Categories for discussion/2016/01/Category:Saint John the Evangelist

Bonjour, J'ai vu que tu as terminé la discussion [Commons:Categories for discussion/2016/01/Category:Saint John the Evangelist]. Il y a une différence entre Jean (apôtre), mélangé avec de:Jean de Patmos, l'auteur de l'apocalypse, et Jean l'Évangéliste, même si les trois sont souvent confondus.

L'iconographie est différente. L'apôtre, « le disciple que Jésus aimait », est représenté très jeune, toulours sans barbe, avec un calice d'où émerge la tête d'un serpent, d'après la légende, il a été brûlé dans l'huile bouillante.

L'évangeliste est toujours représenté en homme mûr, souvent avec barbe, son symbole est l'aigle (c'est l'aigle de de:Jean de Patmos avec qui il est confondu).

La tradition chrétienne attribue à l'apôtre Jean l'Évangile de Jean (elle identifie l'apôtre au « Disciple que Jésus aimait »), ainsi que trois épîtres, et l'Apocalypse, dont l'auteur se présente comme ayant reçu une vision de Jésus-Christ dans l'île de Patmos : c'est le corpus johannique. Cette paternité est contestée, cependant, par un grand nombre d'historiens modernes. Certains de ces historiens assimilent l'auteur de l'évangile dit "selon Jean" à Jean le Presbytre, et non à l'apôtre Jean: (fr:Jean (apôtre))

Die Exegese unterscheidet also den Johannes der Offenbarung sowohl vom Evangelisten als auch vom Apostel Johannes. (de:Johannes (Evangelist)) In der historisch-kritischen Exegese werden der Apostel Johannes und der Evangelist des Johannesevangeliums meist als zwei verschiedene Personen identifiziert, die sich darüber hinaus auch vom Verfasser der Offenbarung des Johannes unterscheiden. (de:Johannes (Apostel))

C'est dommage de tout confondre. Je voudrais rétablir les categories correspondantes. Meilleurs sentiments--GFreihalter (talk) 18:03, 11 December 2016 (UTC)

GFreihalter: Bonjour,

Il n'y avait eu aucun avis contre... En particulier, je n'ai trouvé aucun exemple d'illustrations qui s'appliqueraient à l'un et pas à l'autre. Je ne suis pas contre rétablir la distinction si c'est utile. Cordialement, Yann (talk) 18:12, 11 December 2016 (UTC)

Adding new author and books

New contributor here. Attempting to add an author and her books including book cover images to Wiki. Just having a hard time finding the proper procedures/etiquette. The images are owned by author, so what am I doing wrong?

--Troutmanjeff (talk) 18:46, 11 December 2016 (UTC)

Hello, please see com:OTRS : the author (himself) have to prove that he want to publish in a free licence. --Framawiki (please notify) (talk) 18:51, 11 December 2016 (UTC)

İçərişəhər DTMQİ icazə vərəq

File:İçərişəhər DTMQİ icazə vərəq 2.jpg and File:İçərişəhər DTMQİ icazə vərəq 1.jpg pictures belong to me. Picture 2 is the second part of the first letter. These letters have been sent to me by "İçərişəhər" rule is allowed.--samral ^talk 13:16, 28 March 2015 (UTC)

@Samral: Hi,

The pictures belong to you, but the copyright belongs to İçərişəhər. We need a permission from him/her. See COM:OTRS for the procedure. Also I am not sure this is in COM:SCOPE. Regards, Yann (talk) 13:24, 28 March 2015 (UTC)

Letter to be sent to me deyil means that its copyrights belong to me? My name goes even contains.--samral ^talk 13:31, 28 March 2015 (UTC)

@Samral: Hi,

It doesn't matter what the letter contains. The copyright always belongs to the person who wrote it. Regards, Yann (talk) 13:40, 28 March 2015 (UTC)

The text in that picture already given permission to use the picture of me in Vikipedya administration that governed by the "İçərişəhər".--samral ^talk 19:02, 28 March 2015 (UTC)

Yann is it not similar?--samral ^talk 13:38, 12 December 2016 (UTC)

There are 2 issues here: the purpose of the letter, and its copyright. If this letter is a permission, it should go to OTRS, not on Commons. Actually File:Kremlin authorisation-Russian.pdf should not be on Commons. The copyright belongs to the author. In the case of the Russian letter, it is an official document from the government, so there is a special exception. Regards, Yann (talk) 15:56, 12 December 2016 (UTC)

İçərişəhər DTMQİ icazə vərəq 1&2 is also the official documentary. And there is also a permit. What is the problem?--samral ^talk 07:44, 13 December 2016 (UTC)

Confidentiel

Bonjour Yann, J'ai essayé de t'envoyer un message en privé mais je n'ai rien trouvé sur ta page. Peux-tu m'écrire sur ce lien IRL où tu trouveras mon adresse Email...et cela me permettra en retour de te faire part de certains points à connaitre...Merci d'avance--zivax-Discuter (talk) 11:38, 13 December 2016 (UTC)

Bonjour Zivax, Tu peux m'envoyer un message ici : Special:EmailUser/Yann (lien dans la colonne de gauche). Cordialement, Yann (talk) 11:45, 13 December 2016 (UTC)

Merci--zivax-Discuter (talk) 11:54, 13 December 2016 (UTC)

Copyright violations Contes d'ailleurs

Bonsoir

Je viens de recevoir deux messages m'informant que La page Contes d'ailleurs/La fée des eaux sur Wikiversité a été modifiée le 13 décembre 2016 par CommonsDelinker, voir https://fr.wikiversity.org/wiki/Contes_d%27ailleurs/La_f%C3%A9e_des_eaux

et que La page Contes d'ailleurs/La fiancée du Nil sur Wikiversité a été modifiée le 13 décembre 2016 par CommonsDelinker, voir https://fr.wikiversity.org/wiki/Contes_d%27ailleurs/La_fianc%C3%A9e_du_Nil

Or https://fr.wikiversity.org/wiki/Sp%C3%A9cial:Envoyer_un_courriel/CommonsDelinker Cet utilisateur a choisi de ne pas recevoir de courriel de la part d'autres utilisateurs.

Les "Contes d'ailleurs" édités en lien avec les films d'animation de Jacques Grandclaude bénéficient d'une autorisation écrite de reproduction CLE International avec le concours du C.I.E.P. de Sèvres, maquette/illustrations c.9.i.atelier graphique. OTRS ticket:2015092410006413.

Merci d'avance de vos conseils. --Als33120 (talk) 22:06, 13 December 2016 (UTC)

@Als33120: Bonjour,

CommonsDelinker est un robot, donc non, il ne reçoit pas de courrier. ;)

J'ai restauré les images et ajouté les permissions.

À l'avenir, dans ce genre de cas, vous pouvez ajouter {{OTRS pending}} dans le champ "Permission" des images pour éviter une suppression. Cordialement, Yann (talk) 22:19, 13 December 2016 (UTC)

Merci et merci pour le conseil.--Als33120 (talk) 00:24, 14 December 2016 (UTC)

Revision of File:Flag of Embera-Wounaan.png

Hi Yann, I saw the result of the RfD of this file, but I'm very surprised, because the file (in context, the file description) is a hoax. Embera-Wounaan is a Panamanian territory, the Chocó Department is a Colombian territory; in few words, isn't the same place. This file is connected to Panamanian topics, not in Colombian topics, so this file don't need a SVG version because the territory don't have a proper flag and also Embera-Wounaan isn't the Chocó Department. I beg you for a revision of your decision because I think this is a big mistake. Thanks. --Taichi (talk) 01:13, 14 December 2016 (UTC)

Hi Taichi,

The policy of Commons is that we keep files if there are used and there is no copyright issue. You could either remove it from the articles and renominate it, and/or rename it (with {{Rename}}), so it is clear what it represents. Regards, Yann (talk) 10:35, 14 December 2016 (UTC)

Hi Yann, well I listed with {{Rename}} and removed the file except in Arabic and Urdu Wikipeidas, because the script and orientation. Regards, --Taichi (talk) 17:21, 14 December 2016 (UTC)

OK, renamed. Yann (talk) 17:23, 14 December 2016 (UTC)

copyright violations Bettina Cirone

the photos belong to Bettina Cirone: I am her assistant. Bettina owns the copyright of all photos. I can have her sign an affidavit if needed? — Preceding unsigned comment was added by 2604:2000:D144:8D00:D58D:A109:58A1:F8E0 (talk) 17:32, 14 December 2016 (UTC)

Hi, Please send a permission via COM:OTRS. Regards, Yann (talk) 17:34, 14 December 2016 (UTC)

Hi.

Since you deleted the files mentioned in this ticket, could you handle it? Thanks. [6] MCMLXXXIX 01:01, 16 December 2016 (UTC)

 Done Regards, Yann (talk) 01:09, 16 December 2016 (UTC)

File:Concepting.png

Re-upload? MCMLXXXIX 01:23, 16 December 2016 (UTC)

 Done Deleted and warned. Yann (talk) 09:05, 16 December 2016 (UTC)

Reversion of deletion without discussion

Hi Yann. You restored File:Bateau_maison_-_20150802_11h22_(10667).jpg among others that I had deleted, without discussion. My understanding is that these are usually shells over a vehicle, meaning that they should be treated like parade floats. The underlying vehicle as a utilitarian object may not be copyrightable, but the shell would almost certainly be. I was also given to believe that one should not simply revert an admin action without discussion. Could you clarify your position on these matters? Storkk (talk) 12:28, 16 December 2016 (UTC)

Sorry, but you deletion was an error. This is a vehicle, like a car, and there is no copyright on that. The house behind is just a hut. Regards, Yann (talk) 12:30, 16 December 2016 (UTC)

I'm sorry, but the raft itself I would agree... the picture is of the shell on top of the raft. I will request confirmation on VPC... the other point is that if you think I have made an error, courtesy would suggest contacting me about it, rather than simply reverting. Storkk (talk) 12:35, 16 December 2016 (UTC)

Please no deletion during discussion

Hello Yan, please stop deletion of the pictures which are in discussion here: User talk:Krd#Uploads von Freigut. Many of them are rightly given free for Commons. Thank you. --Freigut (talk) 14:14, 16 December 2016 (UTC)

Sorry, but I don't think so. Copyright lasts for 70 years after the photographer's death, and these are not 70 years old, so a permission is needed. Regards, Yann (talk) 14:28, 16 December 2016 (UTC)

But that is what I'm doing in these days. Some of the photos have already been restored, others will be. Regards, --81.62.97.206 17:54, 16 December 2016 (UTC)

Suppression d'image "Affiche officielle, 2015.jpg"

Bonjour Yann, Une image, dont nous possédons tous les droits et la créations a été supprimé de la page : "13 décembre 2016 à 20:13 Yann (discussion | contributions) a supprimé la page File:Affiche officielle, 2015.jpg (Copyright violation, see Commons:Licensing) (global usage; delinker log)" . Cette image est l'affiche du film, dont nous souhaitons créer la page wikipedia. Merci de nous éclairer sur la procédure à suivre afin de la remettre en ligne. Bonne journée, — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bienoubien (talk • contribs) 15:18, 16 December 2016 (UTC)

@Bienoubien: Bonjour,

Pour être publiée sur Wikimedia Commons, cette image doit être sous une licence libre. Et pour tout document publié auparavant, il faut une autorisation écrite formelle de la part du détenteur des droits d'auteur. Voyez COM:OTRS/fr pour la procédure. N'hésitez pas à me contacter si vous avez des questions ou besoin d'aide. Cordialement, Yann (talk) 16:02, 16 December 2016 (UTC)

Commons:Deletion_requests/File:Scuba_diver1.jpg

Hi, I can understand that you reopened this DR, but you didn't add it to Commons:Deletion_requests/2016/12/16 again, see Special:WhatLinksHere/Commons:Deletion_requests/File:Scuba_diver1.jpg, so that the DR will never be handled. Please be aware that DRs are most of the time archived within 15 minutes. Jcb (talk) 21:24, 17 December 2016 (UTC)

OK, done. Yann (talk) 21:30, 17 December 2016 (UTC)

Commons:Deletion requests/File:Ranbir, Jack arrive diwali Bash.jpg

It's a long time since I saw you last. I do not know what you judged from your explanation. Please explain this issue in detail once again. Though you are an administrator, please do not refuse to talk like before.--Y.haruo (talk) 14:16, 16 December 2016 (UTC)

Hi, I think you didn't understand what the Bollywood Hungama permission is for. It covers all pictures made by their photographers (this excludes posters, film stills, and pictures made outside India). And there is no privacy issue when famous people come into public place. Regards, Yann (talk) 14:25, 16 December 2016 (UTC)

Is the place that you judged as a public place a premises ?--Y.haruo (talk) 15:05, 16 December 2016 (UTC)

For what we want here, everywhere outside is a public place. Please read en:Expectation of privacy. Regards, Yann (talk) 15:08, 16 December 2016 (UTC)

That does not answer my question and it is not necessarily written that the outside is public space. I think in a question whether you used wikipedia page without using the official guidance of Commons. It may be general one in India, but BH puts watermarks in photographs of other people, and feigns self-possession and it does not supervise even the administrator strictly. I fear being sued.--Y.haruo (talk) 15:07, 18 December 2016 (UTC)

File:Liz_Hodgkinson.jpg

Yann, WHY did you delete Liz_Hodgkinson.jpg from Commons "because: Copyright violation"??!!

I did the response to the copyright question fully. The copyright is clearly Liz Hodgkinson who personally gave me her permission to use it. She owns the photo; it is of her; she displays it on her website on a page labelled "photos for download" anyway. I was in regular email touch with her about the new Wikipedia page and using the photo. I said this when asked by the Wiki machine about the photo when I up[loaded it.

What the hell do I have to do to convince you that there is NO VIOLATION? Iph (talk) 14:24, 18 December 2016 (UTC)

Hi Iph, Since you are not the photographer, you need provide a formal written permission, as explained on your talk page. Please see COM:OTRS for the details. Regards, Yann (talk) 15:17, 18 December 2016 (UTC)

Hallo

Du kannst alles löschen, was ich gemacht habe, auch die komplette Wikipedia Artikeln, mit meiner Profil. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Munkhzaya.E (talk • contribs) 17:36, 18 December 2016 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Munkhzaya.E (talk • contribs) 17:58, 18 December 2016 (UTC)

@Munkhzaya.E: Hi, We don't delete articles and user pages, unless there are copyright violations. Regards, Yann (talk) 19:15, 18 December 2016 (UTC)

File:Malcolm Wilson (Governor of New York).jpg

I'm not impressed by your deletion of this photo. I thought I explained the circumstances and addressed the copyright questions you recently raised about this and a few other photos. If you thought the explanation wasn't sufficient, it seems to be that more discussion would have been in order, not a preemptive deletion.

I work diligently to make sure there are no copyright or license issues on the photos I add. If you have any questions about any of my other additions to Wikimedia Commons, I'd appreciate the chance to resolve them before you take action.

Respectfully,

Billmckern (talk) 00:22, 19 December 2016 (UTC)

@Billmckern: Hi,

The fact that you purchase the picture doesn't make you the copyright holder. Seeing the date, it may be in the public domain if it was published without a copyright notice, or if the copyright was not renewed, but you need to prove that. Last you have had a warning for 7 days to which you didn't answer. Regards, Yann (talk) 01:05, 19 December 2016 (UTC)

Help

How can i delete the file i upload, please help me. — Preceding unsigned comment added by OZiefOx (talk • contribs) 15:07, 30 June 2016 (UTC)

clichés du musée magnin

Bonjour,

Suite à vos messages, je vous précise, comme notre stagiaire vous l'a indiqué, et que confirme ce copyright : © RMN-Grand Palais (musée Magnin) / Michel Urtado, que les clichés des oeuvres du musée Magnin sont effectués par des photographes de l'Agence photographique de la Réunion des musées nationaux car en tant que musée national, nous travaillons avec les services de la RMN.

Je vous informe par ailleurs que l'Agence photographique de la RMN met ces clichés à disposition de tous sur son site : http://www.photo.rmn.fr/C.aspx?VP3=SearchResult&VBID=2CO5PCDIV27VA&SMLS=1&RW=1440&RH=707

Je vous remercie donc de conserver notre nom d'utilisateur et de restaurer nos clichés.

Je suis à votre disposition pour tout autre éclaircissement. Cordialement.

Hélène Isnard Documentaliste Musée national Magnin, Dijon tél : 03 80 67 11 10 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Musée Magnin Dijon (talk • contribs) 12:20, 27 July 2016 (UTC)

Bash Bug Logos

The logos I uploaded were given to me directly by the creators, or taken from public locations. The Bashinga one was created by me. I have no issue with them begin deleted, I was simply trying to curate as many as possible that were generated from the event. Currently there is a logo on the page That is not one of the ones created during the event. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shellshock_(software_bug)#/media/File:Shellshock-bug.png — Preceding unsigned comment added by Edprevost (talk • contribs) 02:52, 25 October 2016 (UTC)

Images soumis aux droits d 'auteur

Bonjour,

Je voudrais m'excuser des erreurs que j' ai commis lors de l' utilisation d'images soumis à des droits d' auteur. Je ferai plus attention à l'avenir . Merci de m' avoir prévenu. Doucet Ryan — Preceding unsigned comment added by DOUCET ryan (talk • contribs) 19:47, 21 November 2016 (UTC)

Commons:Deletion requests/File:Olej na płótnie 90x130 2013 DO ZWYCIĘSTWA AŻ PO KRES.jpg

This image is a scan (photo?) of a painting! The whole thing is a painting. It's not a "cuban view" or anything, but a single piece of art, not permanently displayed in public. So I even don't know why you brought the FoP argument at all :) Even it name is "oil on canvas 90x130 For victory until the end" and on pl-wiki it was labeled as a work of Klaudia Świątczak - Pjanka, that why I asked for a permission. Pleas reconsider. Masur (talk) 15:25, 19 December 2016 (UTC)

OH, I see. OK, deleted. Yann (talk) 17:14, 19 December 2016 (UTC)

Video transcoders

Hey. I didn't see what you said on IRC until much later. elukey and Joe repurposed a couple of jobrunners to videoscaling, which basically doubled the capacity, and also nailed down a couple of bugs in how tasks were being started.... basically, the server was assuming that any transcode that did not report completion in 300 seconds had, in fact, completed, and started a new one. But yes, hopefully new uploads won't break the system now, it just needs time to catch up. Revent^talk 07:01, 20 December 2016 (UTC)

Revent, thanks for your message.

So what do we do now? There are files not transcoded (e.g. File:El Real Madrid ofreció la Undécima a los madridistas.webm, File:The President Welcomes the Chicago Blackhawks, 2015 Stanley Cup Champions.webm, mentioned on VP). Resetting transcode only produces "Added to Job queue [INVALID] ago". Regards, Yann (talk) 10:36, 20 December 2016 (UTC)

the message was not sufficient to confirm permission for this file.

Hi,

Many of our photos (for example File:Αρχηγείο επανάστασης - Γουδί 1909, σπίτι Νίκ. Ζορμπά.jpg ) got the following message:

"An email has been received at OTRS concerning this file, and can be read here by users with an OTRS account. However, the message was not sufficient to confirm permission for this file. This may, among other reasons, be because there was no explicit release under a free license, or the email address that the permission came from is not associated with the location where the content was originally published. For an update on the issue, please contact the user (Yann) who added this template to the page, or someone else with an OTRS account, or the OTRS noticeboard. If a valid permission is not provided within 30 days of the first response by an OTRS volunteer, this file will be deleted. Please do not file an additional deletion nomination for permission reasons.

Note to OTRS volunteers: If the email contains sufficient confirmation of the validity of the license, please replace this template with {{PermissionOTRS|id=XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX}}"

Can you please inform us why the above message is appearing.

Thank you — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ένωση Δημοκρατικού Κέντρου (talk • contribs) 11:18, 20 December 2016 (UTC)

@Δημοκρατικού Κέντρου: Hi,

That will be fixed when the OTRS volunteers valid the permission. There is over 2 months backlog, so please be patient.

But you need to fix the description of your files: for File:Αρχηγείο επανάστασης - Γουδί 1909, σπίτι Νίκ. Ζορμπά.jpg, "Date" should show the date when the picture was taken and/or published, not when you uploaded the file; "Source" and "Author" are also wrong: this is not your own work, and you are not the author. Thanks, Yann (talk) 11:30, 20 December 2016 (UTC)

Suppression de photo

Bonjour Yann, Je suis bien l'auteur de la photo que j'ai posté cet après-midi sur l'article "Jean-Patrick Capdevielle" et que vous avez supprimé sur Commons pour "viol de copyright" https://fr.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Jean-Patrick_Capdevielle&action=history Merci de m'indiquer la procédure à suivre pour rétablir cette contribution. Cordialement — Preceding unsigned comment added by JuliliB (talk • contribs) 20:08, 21 December 2016 (UTC)

@JuliliB: Bonjour,

Une copie antérieure est disponible à [7], attribuée à Catherine Beudaert. Il faut donc que Catherine Beudaert envoie une autorisation pour une licence libre. Voyez COM:OTRS/fr pour la procédure. Cordialement, Yann (talk) 20:37, 21 December 2016 (UTC)

Moving files with OTRS permission from local projects to Commons

Hi Yann. I personally started a collaboration of the week in Turkish Wikipedia with the aim of moving all files that were uploaded to Turkish Wikipedia with OTRS permission. Within the project, editors moved more than 80 files in three days. I saw that you sent a warning to one of the participants of the project. I noticed that he didn't add a proper license for some of the files that he moved and I tried to fixed them, but I also see that you also warned him about not adding OTRS permissions to the files that he moved unless he is an OTRS member. Would that create a problem? We also heve that kind of contributions which are slightly different from the other ones. Have a nice day.--Rapsar (talk) 20:44, 21 December 2016 (UTC)

@Rapsar: Hi,

OK, I see. Hakan Duran's uploads did look suspicious as they were uploaded via UploadWizard (e.g. File:NGC 1491.jpg). In case of File:Istanbul Chamber of Commerce Seal 2010 OTRS.jpg, it shows Transferred from tr.wikipedia, so fine. Regards, Yann (talk) 20:54, 21 December 2016 (UTC)

Thanks for your quick response. So it seems that we don't have any problem now, do we? Also, how can we move files like the second one? That way looks better.--Rapsar (talk) 20:57, 21 December 2016 (UTC)

Yes, it is OK. In case of massive transfers like this, it is usually good to post a message to the OTRS noticeboard. Regards, Yann (talk) 21:01, 21 December 2016 (UTC)

Merry Christmas

	Merry Christmas Yann!!
	Hi Yann, I wish you and your family a very Merry Christmas and a very Happy New Year, Thanks for all your help on Commons!    –Davey2010 Merry Xmas / Happy New Year 21:13, 21 December 2016 (UTC)

Photo Chef Frédéric Simonin

Bonjour Yann, normalement le Chef Frédéric Simonin a renvoyé le formulaire pour permission d'utilisation de sa photo. File:ChefFrédéricSimonin.jpg Est-ce OK ? Merci d'avance. Cordialement--Amage9 (talk) 16:53, 21 December 2016 (UTC)

@Amage9: OK, validé bien que Frédéric Simonin n'ait pas signé le mail. Cordialement, Yann (talk) 20:57, 21 December 2016 (UTC)

Merci Yann, je vais quand même faire une relance à FS pour qu'il signe. cordialement--Amage9 (talk) 08:27, 22 December 2016 (UTC)

Beaune Hospice Courtyard (Western side)

Hi Yann,

Thank you for your support in helping to select an image in the MVR runoff for the scope Beaune Hospice Courtyard (Western side). Will you please withdraw your vote for one of the images so that the other becomes a clear winner, otherwise neither is selected.

Best Regards, Martinvl (talk) 16:54, 22 December 2016 (UTC)

OK, done. Yann (talk) 16:57, 22 December 2016 (UTC)

Thanks - my choice too! Martinvl (talk) 17:12, 22 December 2016 (UTC)

Note

Hi Yann,

I want to let you know that I started a thread here. Please, note that this is not about your conduct but about what should be acceptable per COM:SCOPE. Thank you. Wikicology (talk) 21:04, 22 December 2016 (UTC)

Bouteilles

Bonjour Yann,

En cherchant autre chose aujourd'hui, je suis tombé un peu par hasard sur Commons:Deletion requests/Files in Category:Koskenkorva viina bottles. Puis, en me demandant pourquoi deux de ces cinq fichiers conservés avaient des liens rouges, je trouve Commons:Deletion requests/File:Salmari.jpg et Commons:Deletion requests/File:SalmiakkiKoskenkorva.jpg. Et là, je vois que tu as décidé de supprimer ces deux fichiers en décembre 2014 après que Jim a décidé de les conserver en janvier 2014. (C'est un peu le monde à l'envers.) Cela dit, n'étant pas admin, je ne peux pas voir les deux images actuellement supprimées et je ne peux donc pas me faire une idée personnelle pour savoir si la meilleure décision était celle de les conserver ou celle de les supprimer. Mais la différence entre vos deux décisions sur les mêmes images suscite une interrogation.

En regardant les trois autres fichiers de la première demande, qui sont visibles, à mon humble avis la décision de conservation de Jim est correcte pour File:Koskenkorva50cl.jpg, dans la lignée de s:Ets-Hokin v. Skyy Spirits, Inc. qui s'applique à ce type de situations (photo d'une bouteille entière, peu importe l'étiquette qui se trouve dessus) comme il l'indique dans sa décision, et je dirais probablement correcte pour File:Koskenkorva Valhalla.JPG (j'hésite pour File:Koskenkorva Valhalla backside.JPG parce que c'est du texte, mais peu importe, car ma question ne concerne pas ce fichier).

Il s'agirait donc de savoir si les deux fichiers File:Salmari.jpg et File:SalmiakkiKoskenkorva.jpg, qui avaient été conservés pour la même raison que les trois autres, avaient quelque chose de spécial qui les distinguerait pour être subséquemment supprimés. Pour soutenir les deuxièmes demandes de suppression sur ces deux fichiers, il faudrait que le demandeur de ces deuxièmes demandes démontre pourquoi il pense que la décision précédente de conservation de ces deux fichiers était mauvaise et pourquoi ces deux fichiers n'entrent pas dans les critères de Ets-Hokin v. Skyy (par exemple si les photos ne montrent pas les bouteilles entières). Or, le demandeur de ces deuxièmes demandes (qui d'ailleurs par l'ensemble de son oeuvre donne l'impression d'être une sorte de fanatique) a simplement fait une vague référence à Com:Packaging et à Com:DW, ce qui me semble nettement insuffisant pour justifier ses demandes de renverser la décision précédente de conservation. Ta décision dans ces deux cas se limite à dire «as above».

Donc, je me demande si tu accepterais de prendre une minute pour regarder à nouveau ces deux fichiers et vérifier s'ils devaient vraiment être supprimés.

(N.B.: Ça ne me dérange pas que ces deux fichiers soient conservés ou supprimés. Ils ne présentent pas d'intérêt particulier. C'est juste que j'ai noté ce cas après avoir vu un autre cas relatif à Commons:Deletion requests/File:A bottle of Budweiser.JPG, où le fichier conservé par cette décision a plus tard été supprimé (par un autre admin) apparemment robotiquement sans réfléchir et sans même une nouvelle discussion. C'est plutôt cet autre cas qui m'a interpellé, parce que j'étais intervenu dans la discussion qui avait mené à la conservation. Mais tu n'étais pour rien dans cet autre cas et je vais probablement le soumettre à un autre admin.)

Merci d'avance, -- Asclepias (talk) 18:22, 23 December 2016 (UTC)

Bonjour Asclepias,

Dans ces deux cas, la photo ne montre pas la bouteille en entier. File:SalmiakkiKoskenkorva.jpg est vraiment de mauvaise qualité (flash), et pour File:Salmari.jpg, le focus est clairement sur l'étiquette plutôt que sur la bouteille entière. Donc ma décision me semble logique. Cordialement, Yann (talk) 00:04, 24 December 2016 (UTC)

Ok, alors tout est bien. Merci d'avoir pris le temps de vérifier. -- Asclepias (talk) 00:20, 24 December 2016 (UTC)

Merry Christmas!

	Merry Christmas, Yann!
	Hi Yann, although we have some disagreements in the past, I would like to thank you for all your valuable contributions on Commons. This help fulfill the number 1 goal of Commons: To be a free, educational media repository for everyone. I wish you and your family a merry Christmas and a happy new year.    ★ Poké95 01:26, 24 December 2016 (UTC)

Here is proof for Young Skeptics

Yann, I do have permission to use the file File:Young_Skeptics_Lesson_1_Fact_vs_Opinion.webm which you deleted on Dec 16th 20016 from the article en:Young Skeptics. The permission came on Dec 9th, so when Kevin Davis was referring to all media on the web page that file, Young_Skeptics_Lesson_1_Fact_vs_Opinion.webm was on the page. Below is a copy of the email he sent to permissions-commons@wikimedia.org and cc myself Phil. Is it possible to restore the file or should I upload it again? Thanks Ph2500 (talk) 20:11, 23 December 2016 (UTC)

@Ph2500: OK, fixed. Yann (talk) 23:56, 23 December 2016 (UTC)

Thanks and have a happy holidays Ph2500 (talk) 18:02, 24 December 2016 (UTC)

Happy holidays! 2017! ;)

		* * * * * * * Happy Holidays 2017 ! * * * * * * *
		* Merry Christmas! Happy New Year! * Joyeux Noël ! Bonne année! * Frohes Weihnachten! Frohes Neues Jahr! * Счастливого Рождества! С Новым годом! * ¡Feliz Navidad y próspero año nuevo! * Щасливого Різдва! З Новим роком! -- George Chernilevsky talk 17:49, 24 December 2016 (UTC)

File:Daily Record.jpg

Hi, you deleted a file that was not a copyright infrigement. All imagery including the film still on the front page is under my copyright, since I'm the copyright holder of the movie and all its stills. In addition I took this picture of the newspaper in person. Yes, the website says copyright 2016, but this is not from the website, it is a picture from the printed Newspaper and the shown images on that page are entirely my property that I provided Daily Record only for this article.

However it is too late now and I have to upload it again. What can I do that this won't happen again?--K100VV (talk) 19:16, 24 December 2016 (UTC)

Hi K100VV,

Since this was published before being uploaded to Commons, we need a formal written permission from the copyright owner of the picture and the newspaper. Please COM:OTRS for the procedure. And do not upload it again. Thanks, Yann (talk) 20:14, 24 December 2016 (UTC)