User talk:Yann/archives 61

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


Reuploads of copyvio images

Hi Yann, three files just came up in my watchlist that look either exactly the same or similar to the ones that were previously deleted: File:Chantalle Ng 01.jpg, File:Chantalle Ng 02.jpg, File:Chantalle Ng 03.jpg. They should be from the same source as what I had found for the images of the subject uploaded by User:ChantalleNgfanclub. Robertsky (talk) 10:06, 10 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

✓ Done Files deleted, and account blocked for socking. Yann (talk) 10:12, 10 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

A barnstar for you!

The Defender of the Wiki Barnstar
Thanks Yann, sometimes you make decisions that go against what you want, but you have proven to be a human administrator. Wilfredor (talk) 12:25, 10 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello dear Yann

Im sorry but I tried talking to the permision liecense staff and my mentor and I didnt get any answers first time i made a mistake I uploaded my file as my own work which wasnt correct I talked to the copyright holder told him to massage you which he did but we couldnt restore the files and I dont know why Mahdiye amjadi (talk) 14:55, 11 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Deletion of File:S.Pz.Abt.506 Insignia.png

Good evening,

My file, S.Pz.Abt.506 Insignia.png, was recently marked for speedy deletion for the following reason:

Copyright violation; See Commons:Licensing (F1): Non-free logo above threshold of originality

This is my own artwork depicting a military insignia that, to my understanding, has long been in the public domain. It, and the original photographs depicting it which I used as reference for my drawing, are over 80 years old. My understanding is that this symbol, as with similar symbols, is categorized as "official works" by the German government and thus falls into public domain. This is further supported by the fact that other artwork depicting this same insignia, and many others like it, is sold by companies around the world. Similar insignia (for example, that of other military units from the same military and time period) have been present on wikipedia commons for several years, using the same "own work" tag for the license.

In the deletion notice, no evidence was provided to indicate that the insignia is not in the public domain. As such, unless such evidence can be provided, I must ask that the deletion be reverted and my work restored. Thank you for your time and consideration and I look forward to hearing from you.

Best Wishes,

Moose Onyx Moose US (talk) 03:17, 11 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Onyx Moose US: Hi, Sorry, but it doesn't work that way. On Commons, the uploader has to prove that the content is in the public domain or under a free license. Even if you created this yourself, it is a derivative work, so we need the permission from the original creator. If you have such a permission, please see COM:VRT for the procedure. Yann (talk) 08:37, 11 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
My apologies. There has been a misunderstanding; please allow me to elaborate:
The "original creator" of this image is a now-deceased representative of the former German government working in an official capacity. This insignia is a coat of arms of a German Körperschaft des öffentlichen Rechts (corporation governed by public law). According to § 5 Abs.1 of the German Copyright law, official works such as coats of arms and flags are gemeinfrei (in the public domain). Since the Federal Republic of Germany is the legal successor of the Weimar Republic as well as of the "Third Reich" this law is also applicable to flags and coat of arms promulgated before 1945. Furthermore, the insignia is part of a statute, ordinance, official decree or judgment (official work) issued by a German authority or court (§ 5 Abs.1 UrhG).
Please let me know if anything else is needed. Thank you for your time and I look forward to your reply.
Best Wishes, Onyx Moose US (talk) 03:51, 12 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
OK, but copyright expires 70 years after the author's death. So unless you can prove that the author died before 1953, this can't be restored. Yann (talk) 10:02, 13 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Please check my reply again. The copyright law dictates that this insignia is a coat of arms of a government body and therefore has no copyright protections. It has never and can never be copyrighted by anybody because it has been in the public domain since the moment it was created. The author in this case has no impact on the copyright status of the insignia.
If you're curious though, the commanding officer of this military unit (at the time that this coat of arms was registered) was Major Eberhard Willing. He was killed in action on 29 October, 1943. Onyx Moose US (talk) 18:17, 13 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
OK, I undeleted it and created a regular DR instead. Yann (talk) 18:45, 13 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for your help. What is the procedure for having the regular DR removed since the original delete request was issued for copyright? Onyx Moose US (talk) 19:13, 13 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Onyx Moose US: The DR will be closed by another admin after evaluating all the arguments. You can add more there. There is quite a backlog, so it may take some time. Yann (talk) 19:17, 13 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for the information. I have added the relevant information to the thread. Thank you for your time and have a great evening.
Best Wishes, Onyx Moose US (talk) 19:27, 13 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Wasn't Bedivere supposed to disengage

They are editing my User page to remove the link to the discussion at the Administrators noticeboard concerning their behavior. RAN (talk) 18:18, 12 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Yes. I wrote a message on their talk page about that. Yann (talk) 10:06, 13 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Arion again...

Arion is continuing to use his talk page for asking other people to help him out with different things, despite being warned about this. It might be time to remove his talk page privileges. --Cart (talk) 01:16, 12 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

+ Extend block "forever". -- Basile Morin (talk) 01:39, 12 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
ArionStar stopped writing on their talk page, so hopefully the issue is closed. However talk page access should be removed if they start again. Yann (talk) 17:51, 14 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

A barnstar for you!

The Special Barnstar
They say a jack of all trades is a master of none, but you might be the exception. Between diligently doing various admin duties (and never losing your cool), being an active and positive presence in the community, and taking high-quality photos for Commons, you do it all. ReneeWrites (talk) 09:23, 14 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Hercules (Seneca)

I am curious why this category as deleted. The only reason given is "per SPEEDY", but the actual reason was not given. --EncycloPetey (talk) 15:28, 16 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@EncycloPetey: It was, and it is still empty. Yann (talk) 15:31, 16 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Being empty is not a reason for speedy deletion, at least according to the list at COM:SPEEDY. --EncycloPetey (talk) 19:07, 16 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, it is. It can be recreated or undeleted as soon as it is not empty any more. Yann (talk) 19:09, 16 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
No, it isn't. The relevant option is C2, which says: "If a category is empty and is obviously unusable, unlikely to be ever meaningfully used", not simply "empty". The relevant category could meaningfully be used. Note that I am not advocating for the creation of empty categories, but the criterion for speedy deletion of such categories is heavily qualified as "unusable" or "unlikely to be ever meaningfully used", and not simply empty. A category about a work of literature by a well-known Latin author, whose works are still being printed, does not fall under those qualifications. --EncycloPetey (talk) 19:38, 16 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Yann's correct, an empty category is not useful. It could eventually be useful, but we can't predict when it will be. Feel free to recreate once there is a file associated with it. Abzeronow (talk) 19:48, 16 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Then COM:SPEEDY needs to be updated to reflect this thinking, because that's not what it says right now. There is a huge difference between "not useful" and "unusable". --EncycloPetey (talk) 20:47, 16 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
It seems to be Yann's personal view. He does report users on COM:AN/U who disagree with him on that.
 ∞∞ Enhancing999 (talk) 21:20, 16 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The reason why you ended up there is completely different and relates solely to your personal behavior. Lukas Beck (talk) 06:03, 17 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Round 2 of Picture of the Year 2023 voting is open!

Read this message in your language

Dear Wikimedian,

You are receiving this message because we noticed that you previously voted in the Picture of the Year contest. Wikimedia users are invited to vote for their favorite images featured on Commons during the last year (2023) to produce a single Picture of the Year.

Hundreds of images that have been rated Featured Pictures by the international Wikimedia Commons community in the past year were entered in this competition. These images include professional animal and plant shots, breathtaking panoramas and skylines, restorations of historical images, photographs portraying the world's best architecture, impressive human portraits, and so much more.

In this second and final round, you may vote for a maximum of three images. The image with the most votes will become the Picture of the Year 2023.

Round 2 will end at UTC.

Click here to vote now!

If you have already voted for Round 2, please ignore this message.


Thanks,
the Wikimedia Commons Picture of the Year committee
MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 17:16, 16 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Update

Hello dear administrator Yann, it's me KhantWiki, the user that you have blocked for 1 weeks with the reason of 'Uploading unfree files after warnings'. I can approve of this because I understand your view points, and I'm really glad that my block is now expired after waiting for 1 weeks. Thank you for sparing editors like me who are genuinely trying to contribute here rather than causing copyright violations on Wikimedia Commons. I really hope that I can contribute freely on Wikimedia Commons again after reading Commons:Licensing without getting into copyright violations again. If I will ever get into a copyright violations situation like this again, I would rather not upload pictures at all. I will be more careful and mindful towards my uploads again. Sincerely, KhantWiki (talk) 19:57, 16 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Apologies

Sorry Yann, I thought we'd known each other long enough that a mild, casual joke wouldn't be out of place. Bastique ☎ let's talk! 21:09, 17 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Tell me why that is

I put up a picture of an Intel Core i5 14400 processor, which was extremely important for a paper I was developing. However, without any apparent warning or reason, that photo was deleted. This deletion caused me problems, since I need it to stay so the page is not horrible. There was no clear justification for this action, you only put that you removed it because it left commons and I went to see and it doesn't seem to have the reason, and I believe there should be more transparency or a system for the recovery of accidentally deleted data. Caio Vitoreti (talk) 18:31, 18 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Caio Vitoreti: Your uploads are copyright violations, as images copied from the Internet without a permission. Even the files which might be OK need a proper source, or they will be deleted. Do not upload anything from the Internet, or you will be blocked. Yann (talk) 21:39, 18 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
How can I put a proper source? Caio Vitoreti (talk) 21:54, 20 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Caio Vitoreti: You can't put a proper source, as you are NOT allowed to upload these files without a formal written permission from the copyright holder. If you have such a permission, please see COM:VRT for the procedure (the copyright holder should send the permission). Yann (talk) 22:04, 20 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
How can I have this permission? I need the urgent photos for the items Caio Vitoreti (talk) 22:43, 20 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Packaging

Hi

Do you have an opinion? And if both should be deleted or not and why. Regards Panam2014 (talk) 12:56, 17 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Panam2014: The Nutella example is quite borderline IMO, but this is not OK without a permission. Yann (talk) 13:44, 17 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Okay. And for Rouiba, is one of the three quite borderline too? Panam2014 (talk) 13:46, 17 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Panam2014: The Nutella may be OK only because the design is a small part of the picture. If the picture focuses on the design, it can't be OK. Yann (talk) 15:21, 17 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
And for File:Le Tartinage De Daronne.jpg? Panam2014 (talk) 00:19, 18 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
And for File:Potdenutella.jpg and File:NutellaDispenser.jpg and File:Mercado de Testaccio. Roma (3420929580).jpg and File:Australiafanta2lpet.jpg and File:Nutella (50995087661).jpg and File:Woman with Nutella - Souq Waqif - Doha - Qatar (33804085443).jpg? Panam2014 (talk) 22:49, 18 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Panam2014: File:Woman with Nutella - Souq Waqif - Doha - Qatar (33804085443).jpg is most probably OK. I deleted some, for the rest please create a regular DR. Thanks, Yann (talk) 08:57, 19 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks. I will do the necessary.
Also. And for File:HK SKD TKO 將軍澳 Tseung Kwan O 坑口 Hang Hau 培成路 18 Pui Shing Road 海悅豪園商場 Maritime Bay Shopping Mall shop 民生 Daily Manson Store chocolate July 2021 SS2.jpg, File:Kinder Schokolade.jpg, File:Sweets 002.JPG, File:P2228067 (6774224272).jpg, File:KinderPinguiproductFoto.jpg, File:2023 Ferrero Rocher (1).jpg, File:Hamoud.jpg? Panam2014 (talk) 10:01, 19 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I deleted some of these. I would keep the rest. Yann (talk) 10:29, 19 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I nominated 3 files mentioned above. Yann (talk) 08:55, 21 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

USAID photos on Flickr

Hello Yann, File:2018 Devolution Conference - Josphat Nanok.jpg is credited "Photo: Mwangi Kirubi/USAID". Template:USAID works are US government works, which overrides the Flickr permission. See Commons:Village_pump/Proposals/Archive/2019/02#Whitelist_for_Flickr_accounts_belonging_to_federal_agencies_of_the_United_States Joofjoof (talk) 05:55, 21 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

✓ Done OK fine. Yann (talk) 08:53, 21 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:1989.09.17 - Acté de décès de Noémie Lidie HUDEBINE.jpg

As far as death certificates in France go, are they above or below the ToO? Inclined to think above, but I wanted your input first. Abzeronow (talk) 19:41, 22 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

No. These are very standard text, and there is no room for originality. I updated the license and the information. Yann (talk) 19:45, 22 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Photo supprimée sur accusation erronée

La photo Francesca Musiani.png a été supprimée à tort. Elle n'a pas été récupérée sur une des pages Web citées et j'ai l'autorisation de l'auteur de la photo (ainsi que du sujet). Merci d'annuler cette suppression. Bortzmeyer (talk) 08:40, 23 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Bortzmeyer: Bonjour,
Merci de demander au détenteur des droits de confirmer l'autorisation de publication via COM:VRT/fr. Ceci est nécessaire pour tout document dont vous n'êtes pas l'auteur, ou publié aupravant ailleurs. Cordialement, Yann (talk) 09:17, 23 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed license

Hi, friend. I think you're free at this moment. So can you review the license for my uploaded photos in categories here:

Category:Wowy

Category:Bùi Công Nam

Category:Soobin Hoàng Sơn

Category:BB Trần

Category:Namcito

Category:Bảo Nhân

Category:Uyển Ân

File:H'HEN NIÊ (cropped).png

File:PHAN THỊ MƠ.jpg

Category:Jarinporn Joonkiat

Category:Lâm Bảo Ngọc

Category:Myra Trần

File:DƯƠNG HOÀNG YẾN.png

Category:Thùy Anh

That's all. Hope you done all of these. Have a nice day. Mickey Đại Phát (talk) 15:37, 23 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Import sur Commons de rééditions de livres publiés initialement il y a plus de 95 ans

Bonjour, @Yann, je suis en train de préparer l'import des ouvrages disponibles de Creator:Colette qui entre dans le domaine public le 1er janvier prochain. Un certain nombre d'entre eux sont des rééditions des années 1960 à 1990 de livres publiés initialement il y a plus de 95 ans. Ces rééditions sont-elles admissibles sur Commons, ou devrais-je plutôt les importer directement sur Wikisource ? Cunegonde1 (talk) 14:56, 25 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Cunegonde1: Bonjour, Si c'est exactement le même texte, il est dans le domaine public. Mais, 1. C'est difficile à vérifier. Il est souvent indiqué « édition mise à jour / augmentée », mais dans le cas contraire, cela demande de comparer le texte d'origine avec l'édition récente. 2. C'est rarement le cas. Il y a souvent des ajouts récents : une préface, une introduction, des notes, etc., qui ne sont pas dans le domaine public. Désolé, c'est un peu une réponse de Normand... ;o) Yann (talk) 15:02, 25 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Merci @Yann, parfois la version d'origine est indiquée, d'autres fois c'est la date de copyright d'origine qui est indiquée, par exemple sur des livres de poche des années 60. Bon, le plus simple pour moi est d'importer sur Wikisource les textes dont je suis certain qu'ils sont DP. Il arrive que j'ai des scans d'origine, mais qui sont tellement pourris, que c'est plus simple d'utiliser un scan plus récent. Merci pour ton aide. Cunegonde1 (talk) 15:48, 25 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:Ubuntu 24.04 Noble Numbat Desktop English.png

Hey, I saw you recently deleted this for NETCOPYVIO. I wonder what the basis? Ubuntu is free software, and the screenshot was taken by the uploader. Aaron Liu (talk) 10:59, 25 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Aaron Liu: The image displayed is not free. Yann (talk) 11:02, 25 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Isn't it a {{Freescreenshot}}? Aaron Liu (talk) 11:16, 25 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Hi, would you kindly respond? Thanks. Aaron Liu (talk) 17:55, 26 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Aaron Liu: Is the image displayed directly from the installation? Yann (talk) 08:46, 28 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Not sure what that means. The uploader says they installed Ubuntu in a VM and took a direct screenshot, and I see no reason not to trust them. Aaron Liu (talk) 10:58, 28 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
OK fine. Yann (talk) 10:59, 28 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks! I just saw that the file page was vandalized to remove licensing information. Could you check if the user has other deleted contributions? Thanks again! Aaron Liu (talk) 11:20, 28 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I reverted everything, and warned the user. Yann (talk) 11:22, 28 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Commons:Deletion requests/File:Збережена плиточка.jpg

Why did you delete it so fast? It is only first day of nomination. It is photo of tiles in historical building, and human legs are needed to underastand what size of tiles (for comparison). This photo may be useful for article about this building. Anatoliy 🇺🇦 (talk) 16:37, 28 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

OK. Yann (talk) 16:41, 28 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

"Bad faith"

Yann, you are an admin. You presumably know User:Rosenzweig is not acting in bad faith in the Harcourt matter, but you keep making that accusation. Please knock it off. Genuine disagreement is not bad faith on either side. Frankly, given the precautionary principle, he has a damned good case. - Jmabel ! talk 19:09, 28 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Jmabel: Sorry, but I lost good faith with Rosenzweig. In the new nomination, there are images which are obviously OK. How can good faith be assumed when he nominated again the same images with the same wrong rationale? Also grouping several rationales into one DR is bad. But he does it again here. This looks like just a personal war against these pictures. And I am not alone thinking that. Yann (talk) 19:14, 28 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
If you are serious in the accusation that he is acting in bad faith, take it to COM:AN/U and be prepared to make your case. If not, drop it. And certainly a DR is not the place to argue the conduct of any longstanding member of the community. - Jmabel ! talk 19:20, 28 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
This could be done, but I still hope it won't be necessary. I usually look for a reason for keeping an image. When there is none, the image must be deleted. In opposite, Rosenzweig looks for reason for deleting images at all costs. More than that, he has a wrong understanding of copyright and public domain. Copyright is not a black and white story. It is mostly nuances of grays, specially for old pictures. He also pretends to know more than French people how copyright management is done in France. So he is antagonizing dozens of people with his insistence of deletion with bad rationales. All this is simply damaging for the projects. Yann (talk) 19:35, 28 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Sebastian Terteryan

Hi since it seems you handled the other uploads perhaps you can assist with this too: given history of the uploader using images taken by others, this File:Sebastian Terteryan jpg.jpg is somewhat unlikely own work either. I'm unsure how to proceed, there's a similar but not identical here https://www.tiktok.com/@sebtheboxer TherasTaneel (talk) 07:35, 30 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

✓ Done I found the source, deleted. Yann (talk) 09:25, 1 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:Gperez24.jpg

Hola Yann, ¿por favor, me podrías decir exactamente cual es la evidencia que quieres encontrar en la foto para asegurarte que la foto es mía? Yo personalmente saqué esa foto el pasado mes de octubre y en la autoria de la imagen indique que poseo el copyright. No entiendo el motivo por el cual se pone en duda mi autoría, cuando he subido otras fotos de manera similar y no he tenido problemas. Gracias por adelantado. UN cordial saludo, --Hard (talk) 09:19, 1 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Hard: Please upload the original image with EXIF data. This is good portrait by the way. Yann (talk) 09:22, 1 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Hola @Yann, muchas gracias por tu rápida respuesta. Voy a buscar el original y lo subiré directamente a Commons con los datos que comentas. Un cordial saludo, Hard (talk) 09:43, 1 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
<Google Translate>Sube la imagen original con los datos EXIF. Por cierto, es un buen retrato.</Google Translate>

Hola de nuevo, @Yann: , acabo de subir la foto. Espero que todo esté correcto. Muchas gracias por tu ayuda. Un cordial saludo, --Hard (talk) 14:15, 1 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Hard: File:Gperez2024.jpg n'est pas l'image originale, mais une version très réduite, et sans EXIF data. Si vous ne pouvez pas importer l'image originale, merci d'envoyez une autorisation via COM:VRT/es. Cordialement, Yann (talk) 14:20, 1 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
<Google Translate>File:Gperez2024.jpg no es la imagen original, sino una versión muy reducida, y sin datos EXIF. Si no puede importar la imagen original, envíe permiso a través de COM:VRT/es.</Google Translate> Yann (talk) 14:20, 1 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Hola Yann,
Acabo de enviar el correo:
Por la presente declaro que soy el titular de los derechos de autor exclusivos de Gperez2024.jpg [1].
Consiento publicar dicha obra bajo la licencia libre Creative Commons Reconocimiento-CompartirIgual 4.0 Internacional (BY-SA-4.0).
Reconozco que concedo a cualquiera el derecho a usar la imagen en un producto comercial, así como a modificarla de acuerdo a sus necesidades.
Soy consciente de que siempre retendré los derechos de autor de mi imagen, así como el derecho a ser reconocido como autor según los términos de la licencia elegida para mi obra. Las modificaciones que otros hagan a la imagen no me serán atribuidas.
Soy consciente de que la licencia libre sólo afecta a los derechos de autor, y me reservo del derecho de emprender acciones legales contra cualquiera que use esta obra violando cualquier otra ley, como restricciones de marcas registradas, libelo o restricciones geográficas específicas.
Reconozco que no puedo retractarme de este acuerdo, y que la imagen puede o no ser almacenada permanentemente en un proyecto de la Fundación Wikimedia.
(He firmado con mi nombre real (Hard)]
1 de noviembre de 2024.
Espero que esté todo correcto. Muchas gracias por tu ayuda!. Un cordial saludo, Hard (talk) 14:31, 1 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Hard: This should be sent to permissions-es@wikimedia.org. Thanks, Yann (talk)
@Yann: si, disculpa por no incluir el destinatario en mi mensaje. El mensaje que te envié lo había enviado a la dirección que me señalaste. Gracias de nuevo. Un cordial saludo, --Hard (talk) 14:42, 1 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Yann: ya está solucionado. MUchas gracias por tu valiosa ayuda, sin la cual posiblemente no habría podiso solucionar este asunto. Un cordial saludo, --Hard (talk) 14:48, 1 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

2014 in Occitanie

Bonsoir, un grand merci pour ton aide. Your request is malformed m'a été d'un grand secours pour ne pas comprendre en quoi elle était malformée. En tant qu'enseignant, j'apprécie autant de pédagogie. Bonne soirée. --Birdie (talk) 17:08, 1 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Revert

I'd love to know how exactly a multi-paragraph section explaining what "Monuments historiques" are with a "see also" and "External links" section isn't "encyclopedic content." I guess I could just renominate it for G1 since it only has a single image but the whole thing really just comes off as pointlessly nitpicky and I'm sure you'd come up with some other reason to revert it anyway. Adamant1 (talk) 19:37, 1 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

BTW, I don't really care if you revert me but I would like an explanation and/or for to tell me what I should use instead if G2 isn't valid. --Adamant1 (talk) 19:42, 1 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I recently had a logo removed and a copyright strike added, but the logo was just plain text. Could you please help me to understand how that TV show logo was above the threshold of originality when the Amtrak logo on the Commons:Threshold of originality page is not? I genuinely don't understand what I did wrong, or how I misunderstood what the threshold is. Additionally, isn't the logo able to be retained for the namesake Wikipedia article (here) since there isn't a copyright free replacement? Thank you in advance for clarifying this. Pastelitodepapa (talk) 08:21, 2 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Pastelitodepapa: Hi, The text might be OK, although there is a complex 3D effect, but the background is certainly not. Yann (talk) 08:35, 2 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oh okay, if I remove the background to just show the text logo for the show would that be okay with Wikimedia standards? Or is the simple vertical text drop-shadow enough originality to merit copyright? It doesn't look like a complex 3D effect to me to be honest. If not, am I able to upload the original image I had to Wikipedia to use just on its specific page since there isn't a copyright-free substitute for the show's logo of poster as is done on this Wikipedia page of another TLC show for instance? I'm just trying to understand how to do this all correctly. Thank you again. Pastelitodepapa (talk) 08:58, 2 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Pastelitodepapa: Not sure, you better ask on COM:VPC to have a second opinion. Yann (talk) 09:09, 2 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I saw that you deleted the following photos :

They received a copyright violation because they are indeed on the INaturalist site but the author of these photos: Esteban Prat is a very good friend of mine, we see each other often and the latter authorized me (written proof to support) to use these photos. How can I do so that the photos are not deleted? Best regards JeSuisTropSalty (talk) 16:39, 2 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@JeSuisTropSalty: Please ask the author to change the license on INaturalist. Non commercial licenses are not accepted on Commons. Then you can ask for undeletion on COM:UDR. Yann (talk) 16:52, 2 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Probably sockpuppets

Hi Yann,
I found a group of probable puppets.

Similar uploads (out of scope) on similar topics. Also, there are similarities in usernames.
With best regards, -- George Chernilevsky talk 14:24, 4 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:Aspects of twentieth century painting, 1963.pdf

File:Aspects of twentieth century painting, 1963.pdf has been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether it should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry.

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

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

Omphalographer (talk) 03:31, 6 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

help

Hi @Yann. I'm a bit confused here. One of the two files shows Instagram reel as a previous publication but has enough EXIF data & quality but I doubt it being own work. What would be your advice in such cases? There's one more upload and that's also unlikely own. My mind says DR, but I'd want to hear from you. Regards, Aafi (talk) 13:25, 9 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Aafi: Yes, I agree that this seems a bit suspicious. A VRT permission is needed IMO. Yann (talk) 15:06, 9 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
ok. I started a DR. Regards, Aafi (talk) 16:50, 9 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:John ('Jock') Middleton Campbell, Baron Campbell of Eskan.jpg

Was there a convincing reason to delete this image? Two hours ago, I replaced the {{Copyvio}} with an ordinary {{Delete}} as per instructions and explained at the talk page that the image (in that limited form) is released under Creative Commons license by the UK's National Portrait Gallery. I return now to find that you have deleted it anyway. What have I missed? JMF (talk) 13:29, 9 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@JMF: Commons:Deletion requests/John ('Jock') Middleton Campbell, Baron Campbell of Eskan seems entirely broken. Regards, Aafi (talk) 14:50, 9 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@JMF Hi, The license at source is CC-BY-NC-ND-3.0 which is not acceptable on Commons. This is a photograph by Godfrey Argent (1937-2006), so it is still under a copyright. And yes, your deletion request is broken. Yann (talk) 14:58, 9 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Video files

Hello Yann, I had uploaded 19 videos of music production company:Saregama Carnatic Classical at Youtube, all licensed under: ‘Creative Commons Attribution license (reuse allowed)’ (mentioned in the bottom of description page of source). But somebody has nominated it for deletion without checking. Could you plz resolve the files? All listed in this category:Category:Videos of M. S. Subbulakshmi.
--Gpkp (talk) 17:00, 9 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Gpkp: The files are not deleted yet. You can contest the speedy deletion request to a regular one, and explain why they should be kept. I agree that a speedy DR is not the best anyway, as there is a free license at the source. However I am not sure if the license is valid. What is the relation between the YT account and the music authors? Yann (talk) 17:08, 9 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you Yann. --Gpkp (talk) 17:22, 9 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Saregama is the offical owners who published and sold the music/songs of the authors under their Record label. They now own a Youtube account where they are uploading few of their music under free-license: ‘Creative Commons Attribution license (reuse allowed)’.
--Gpkp (talk) 17:47, 9 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Yann, this file: File:Srinivasa Thiruvenkata Carnatic Song with Lyrics M S Subbulakshmi Carnatic Vocal.webm is deleted. Is it possible to undelete it? It was free licensed by the official publishers of the music in Youtube. --Gpkp (talk) 18:06, 9 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
OK, done. Yann (talk) 18:28, 9 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you Yann. --Gpkp (talk) 06:37, 11 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Yann/archives_61&oldid=961935828"