User talk:Zscout370/Archive 4

ROC construction sheets

These are quite lovely — why CC/GFDL & not PD? :)

Personal choice. User:Zscout370 ^{(Return fire)} 08:50, 15 December 2008 (UTC)

Flag of California

Good morning! I wanted to let you know that I reverted your recent edit to the California Flag. The meta-data only took a couple KB. I agree that the file is a tad large, but its not that bad compared to the size of some of the other U.S. State Flags. I will try to reduce the contour detail in future versions. Personally, I hope that this version is copied and used all over the Internet. There are so many terrible versions of the flag. The meta-data is valuable - at least for referencing the law code. It took me a long time to create that rendering of the bear. As a result, I hope my hidden signature stays with the file for a long time. :-) Thanks for your help with flag. Have a great day! -DevinCook (talk) 18:00, 24 December 2008 (UTC)

One more thing, water marks in SVG Images are not Ok, so that was one of the things I also removed from in the image. Plus, I been trying to reduce the huge paths, such as the toe nails of the bear and the patches that are on the grass. User:Zscout370 ^{(Return fire)} 20:18, 24 December 2008 (UTC)

Anyways, I am editing the SVG file now by hand, and so far, I managed to get the white field, red band and red star and still under 1 KB. User:Zscout370 ^{(Return fire)} 20:39, 24 December 2008 (UTC)

Its technically not a watermark - since it is not visible in the image. Unfortunately, the bear on the flag is based on an official drawing much like many of the states that use rather complex seals. Simplifying the design needs to be done very carefully. We don't want to create that rather poor "vector" version which simplified the shading to an almost cartoonish level. While I agree that the image could be smaller, we need to work to making it accurate to the official rendering, colors, and California law as a first priority. California has one of the more complicated flags in the Union. This version of the flag is the first fully compliant flag on the Internet as far as colors and proportions. Do you have instant messenger? We should coordinate on this project. Cheers! -DevinCook (talk) 01:07, 25 December 2008 (UTC)

I am not going to change the bear or anything like that, I can promise you that. What I am doing is reducing the amount of code used in the actual image. When I put the code into Microsoft Word, it came out to 158 pages. I managed to make it down to 157 pages. If you want to coordinate, I suggest sending me an email and we can get started. User:Zscout370 ^{(Return fire)} 02:18, 25 December 2008 (UTC)

You are editing it by hand? O.O If that's the case, don't worry about the modifying it for now. Most of the size is do the the complexity of the contours. Many of these can be simplified - in particular the grass plot can be "smoothed" slightly. I can modify it later this week. I am certain I can reduce the file size by about 100kb by carefully removing needless points. All in all, the current size is not a big deal. -DevinCook (talk) 06:50, 25 December 2008 (UTC)

I am still keeping the points the same, but just reducing the amount of code needed to show the element. Take your time. User:Zscout370 ^{(Return fire)} 07:32, 25 December 2008 (UTC)

If the file is opened again for editing, it might undo all your changes. I can run a "simply" algorithm on some of the contours. It is very destructive for complex contours, but might work in the grass plot without damaging its compliance with California law. -DevinCook (talk) 10:50, 25 December 2008 (UTC)

If you know how much time I will spend on the image, redoing what I have done won't be that hard. It's mostly simple copy and paste. If you want to see what I am talking about, see the images I did of the Singapore and Malaysia flags. User:Zscout370 ^{(Return fire)} 02:08, 26 December 2008 (UTC)

Excellent. I didn't want you to lose any work. I noticed you are a college student in your profile? What university are you attending? I'm just curious. My e-mail is flags@devincook.com.-DevinCook (talk) 07:22, 26 December 2008 (UTC)

Email sent. User:Zscout370 ^{(Return fire)} 07:31, 26 December 2008 (UTC)

File:Seal of Phoenix, Arizona.svg

Hi there. I'm quite concerned about the reason you provided in your deletion summary—surely carrying a non-copyright restriction on use is not in and of itself a valid reason for deletion, especially without discussion? Best, Fvasconcellos (t·c) 14:32, 27 December 2008 (UTC)

The flag and the seal were created in 1990, so there is a copyright attached to the image. We have no permission from the city of Phoenix to display their city symbols on here. User:Zscout370 ^{(Return fire)} 09:56, 28 December 2008 (UTC)

File:3dflags ukr0001-0002a.gif

Why did you remove it? It looks like free image: see [1].--Anatoliy (talk) 14:52, 5 January 2009 (UTC)

In the terms we have to follow, they forbid the use of the images for the purpose of "an online gallery or collection of graphics and/or animated GIFs, including collections available on CD-ROM, BBS, FTP, WWW, IRC or any other transfer methods, and may not be sold, distributed, or sublicensed individually or as part of any image archive or collection product." They do not want us to pass it around ourselves and we cannot sell it. Images here have to be used commercially. User:Zscout370 ^{(Return fire)} 19:30, 5 January 2009 (UTC)

Serbian Army

Just letting you know that we acquired a formal GNU release for the Serbian Army website material - here from the Chief of the General Staff cabinet. It should be on OTRS too as soon as the managing administrator of the Serbian wikimedia permissions mail sees it.--Avala (talk) 21:54, 5 January 2009 (UTC)

OTRS ticket 2322089.--Avala (talk) 23:27, 5 January 2009 (UTC)

I am on OTRS, so I can check the ticket out. I assume it is in Serbian? User:Zscout370 ^{(Return fire)} 07:56, 6 January 2009 (UTC)

Ok, the ticket number is 2009010310014354 and once I create the template to attach to the images, I will restore what I have deleted here and EN.WP. Not sure how long it will take, but I assure you it will be done. User:Zscout370 ^{(Return fire)} 08:41, 6 January 2009 (UTC)

OK thank you.--Avala (talk) 16:48, 7 January 2009 (UTC)

Templates created on here and en.wikipedia. User:Zscout370 ^{(Return fire)} 18:25, 7 January 2009 (UTC)

Am I right?

Re: [2]. What do you think? --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus ^Talk 18:40, 15 January 2009 (UTC)

Sorry, but you are not correct in this case. Any specific costume of a character is a derivative work, so cannot be present on here. User:Zscout370 ^{(Return fire)} 19:57, 15 January 2009 (UTC)

So in theory we should delete everything in Category:Cosplay? I find it hard to believe... does it fall under Commons:Fan art? --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus ^Talk 19:07, 18 January 2009 (UTC)

And to my knowledge, most fan art is banned. User:Zscout370 ^{(Return fire)} 08:48, 19 January 2009 (UTC)

You're definitely wrong about this, Zach. Godwin has spoken on this topic.--Elvey (talk) 18:36, 2 November 2009 (UTC)

OK, Godwin spoke and said it was ok. I will live with that, who knows, might provide some photos I have. User:Zscout370 ^{(Return fire)} 18:42, 2 November 2009 (UTC)

File source is not properly indicated: File:Rwanda_coa.png

This media was probably deleted.

A file that you have uploaded to Wikimedia Commons, File:Rwanda_coa.png, was missing information about where it comes from or who created it, which is needed to verify its copyright status. The file probably has been deleted. If you've got all required information, request undeletion providing this information and the link to the concerned file ([[:File:Rwanda_coa.png]]). If you created the content yourself, enter {{Own}} as the source. If you did not add a licensing template, you must add one. You may use, for example, {{self|GFDL|cc-by-sa-all}} or {{Cc-zero}} to release certain rights to your work. If someone else created the content, or if it is based on someone else's work, the source should be the address to the web page where you found it, the name and ISBN of the book you scanned it from, or similar. You should also name the author, provide verifiable information to show that the content is in the public domain or has been published under a free license by its author, and add an appropriate template identifying the public domain or licensing status, if you have not already done so. Warning: Wikimedia Commons takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing. Please add the required information for this and other files you have uploaded before adding more files. If you need assistance, please ask at the help desk. Thank you!

Lokal_Profil 01:49, 7 February 2009 (UTC)

Image request

Could you do me a favor and make "halves" from File:Symbol support vote.svg, File:Cscr-featured.svg and File:Symbol a class.svg? I tried to do so myself, but my GIMP cannot save svgs, crashes on pngs and the best it can do is terrible jpgs or gifs (File:Symbol support vote-half.gif). I requested the half versions on their talks a month or so ago, but nobody replied :( --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus ^Talk 22:58, 9 February 2009 (UTC)

File source is not properly indicated: File:KMT_flag.png

This media was probably deleted.

A file that you have uploaded to Wikimedia Commons, File:KMT_flag.png, was missing information about where it comes from or who created it, which is needed to verify its copyright status. The file probably has been deleted. If you've got all required information, request undeletion providing this information and the link to the concerned file ([[:File:KMT_flag.png]]). If you created the content yourself, enter {{Own}} as the source. If you did not add a licensing template, you must add one. You may use, for example, {{self|GFDL|cc-by-sa-all}} or {{Cc-zero}} to release certain rights to your work. If someone else created the content, or if it is based on someone else's work, the source should be the address to the web page where you found it, the name and ISBN of the book you scanned it from, or similar. You should also name the author, provide verifiable information to show that the content is in the public domain or has been published under a free license by its author, and add an appropriate template identifying the public domain or licensing status, if you have not already done so. Warning: Wikimedia Commons takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing. Please add the required information for this and other files you have uploaded before adding more files. If you need assistance, please ask at the help desk. Thank you!

shizhao (talk) 16:49, 9 March 2009 (UTC)

ROC flag

Hi, me again. I still think the navy blue of the ROC flag is too dark, if you use the last version, the color is little bit light. What you think? Arilang ^talk 15:10, 8 April 2009 (UTC)

I think the 11 November 2008 version is better, what you think? Arilang ^talk 12:30, 9 April 2009 (UTC)

I have not found anything new from November until now, so I wish to keep the colors until we get a wider discussion. User:Zscout370 ^{(Return fire)} 07:58, 15 April 2009 (UTC)

Template:PD-Japan-exempt

Thank you for creating Japanese flag image, File:Flag of Okinawa, Japan.svg. But according to ja:Wikipedia:井戸端/subj/都道府県旗のアップロード and Commons:井戸端/過去ログ3#都道府県旗及び都道府県章のアップロードは問題ないか, flag is not apply "Article 13 of the Copyright Law of Japan". This flag image file must be replace from this template. If you think your flag image don't have copyright, this template may be replaced Template:PD-ineligible at contributor-responsibility.--Knua (talk) 16:35, 15 April 2009 (UTC)

Japanese Flag

Thank you for creating Japanese flag image, File:Flag of Nagano, Japan.svg. But this original source may have copyright. If you think that your flag image is not copyrightable, you can add Template:PD-ineligible at contributor-responsibility. Any untagged images will be deleted.--Knua (talk) 17:46, 17 April 2009 (UTC)

Following files are necessary to be modified.

File:Flag of Yamagata Prefecture.svg File:Flag of Nagano Prefecture.svg File:Flag of Kagawa Prefecture.svg File:Flag of Miyazaki Prefecture, Japan.svg File:Symbol of Ibaraki Prefecture.svg File:Symbol of Kagawa Prefecture.svg File:Symbol of Nara Prefecture.svg File:PrefSimbolo-Okinavo.png File:Symbol of Okinawa Prefecture.svg

Above-mentioned files will be requested deletion soon if not corrected.--Knua (talk) 16:03, 28 September 2009 (UTC)

No, because the Okinawa flags were restored after a deletion request others filed. I expect all to be restored. User:Zscout370 ^{(Return fire)} 16:06, 28 September 2009 (UTC)

File:Flag of Okinawa, Japan.svg

File:Flag of Okinawa, Japan.svg has been marked as a possible copyright violation. Wikimedia Commons only accepts free content—that is, images and other media files that can be used by anyone, for any purpose. Traditional copyright law does not grant these freedoms, and unless noted otherwise, everything you find on the web is copyrighted and not permitted here. For details on what is acceptable, please read Commons:Licensing. You may also find Commons:Copyright rules useful, or you can ask questions about Commons policies at the Commons:Help desk. If you are the copyright holder and the creator of the file, please read Commons:But it's my own work! for tips on how to provide evidence of that. The file you added may soon be deleted. If you have written permission from the copyright holder, please replace the copyvio tag with {{subst:OP}} and have them send us a free license release via COM:VRT. If you disagree that the file is a copyright violation for any other reason, please replace the copyvio tag with a regular deletion request. Warning: Wikimedia Commons takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing.

 

--Knua (talk) 15:42, 22 April 2009 (UTC)

File:Flag of Nagano, Japan.svg

File:Flag of Nagano, Japan.svg has been marked as a possible copyright violation. Wikimedia Commons only accepts free content—that is, images and other media files that can be used by anyone, for any purpose. Traditional copyright law does not grant these freedoms, and unless noted otherwise, everything you find on the web is copyrighted and not permitted here. For details on what is acceptable, please read Commons:Licensing. You may also find Commons:Copyright rules useful, or you can ask questions about Commons policies at the Commons:Help desk. If you are the copyright holder and the creator of the file, please read Commons:But it's my own work! for tips on how to provide evidence of that. The file you added may soon be deleted. If you have written permission from the copyright holder, please replace the copyvio tag with {{subst:OP}} and have them send us a free license release via COM:VRT. If you disagree that the file is a copyright violation for any other reason, please replace the copyvio tag with a regular deletion request. Warning: Wikimedia Commons takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing.

 

--Knua (talk) 15:42, 22 April 2009 (UTC)

Hero of the Soviet Union medal.png

Your variant in the size 30px or less looks foggy--Arachn0 (talk) 07:14, 28 April 2009 (UTC)

Yeah, but I was asked to draw a new version, so I want to use the new version. User:Zscout370 ^{(Return fire)} 14:50, 28 April 2009 (UTC)

Здравствуйте. Загрузите, пожалуйста, новые версии изображений “Hero of the Russian Federation medal.png” и “Hero of the Soviet Union medal.png” под новыми именами. Текущие изображения уже используются во многих шаблонах в русской википедии и их замена существенно ухудшит оформление статей--Ivengo(RUS) (talk) 19:22, 28 April 2009 (UTC)

I saw your reverts, but I see both versions as easy to use. User:Zscout370 ^{(Return fire)} 23:03, 28 April 2009 (UTC)

Flag of Iceland and Flag of Iceland (state)

Hi Zscout, I know you are competent about flags, so I guess I can ask to you: why there are differences about the flags illustrated here: http://eng.forsaetisraduneyti.is/state-symbols/icelandic-national-flag/design and our flags: Flag of Iceland.svg and Flag of Iceland (state).svg? I think in particular about the dimensions: our flags are 7:1:2:1:14:12 while the source reports:

$\mathrm {blue} +{\frac {1}{18}}\mathrm {width} +{\frac {1}{9}}\mathrm {width} +{\frac {1}{18}}\mathrm {width} +2\mathrm {blue} =\mathrm {width}$

that is:

$\mathrm {blue} ={\frac {7}{27}}\mathrm {width}$

$\mathrm {white} ={\frac {1}{18}}\mathrm {width}$

$\mathrm {red} ={\frac {3}{27}}\mathrm {width} ={\frac {1}{9}}\mathrm {width}$

where blue I mean the width of the first blue square, white the width of the first white stripe and with red the width of the first white stripe. LOL, I made my best for make this post easy... --F l a n k e r (talk) 20:44, 19 May 2009 (UTC)

I'm looking at the Prime Minister website now, will probably make changes soon. User:Zscout370 ^{(Return fire)} 21:22, 19 May 2009 (UTC)

I fixed the national flag, still trying to work on the state flag. It looks the same, quite honestly. But I am increasing the size and reducing the code. User:Zscout370 ^{(Return fire)} 21:44, 19 May 2009 (UTC)

Ah, good find! But I'm confused, from http://eng.forsaetisraduneyti.is/state-symbols/icelandic-national-flag/proportion/ we have some dimensions, from http://eng.forsaetisraduneyti.is/state-symbols/icelandic-national-flag/design we have others... Or my interpretation is wrong? --F l a n k e r (talk) 09:01, 20 May 2009 (UTC)

The measurements are the same, but if all else fails, go with the one with the chart at http://eng.forsaetisraduneyti.is/state-symbols/icelandic-national-flag/proportion/. User:Zscout370 ^{(Return fire)} 16:56, 20 May 2009 (UTC)

File:Flag of Corpus Cristi, Texas.png

File:Flag of Corpus Cristi, Texas.png has been marked as a possible copyright violation. Wikimedia Commons only accepts free content—that is, images and other media files that can be used by anyone, for any purpose. Traditional copyright law does not grant these freedoms, and unless noted otherwise, everything you find on the web is copyrighted and not permitted here. For details on what is acceptable, please read Commons:Licensing. You may also find Commons:Copyright rules useful, or you can ask questions about Commons policies at the Commons:Help desk. If you are the copyright holder and the creator of the file, please read Commons:But it's my own work! for tips on how to provide evidence of that. The file you added has been deleted. If you have written permission from the copyright holder, please have them send us a free license release via COM:VRT. If you believe that the deletion was not in accordance with policy, you may request undeletion. (It is not necessary to request undeletion if using VRT; the file will be automatically restored at the conclusion of the process.) Warning: Wikimedia Commons takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing.

 

--Svgalbertian (talk) 00:36, 1 June 2009 (UTC)

File:Canadian Coat of Arms Shield.svg

File:Canadian Coat of Arms Shield.svg 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!

--Nat (talk) 08:54, 14 June 2009 (UTC)

File:Croatia flag large.png

Yes, I saw it that you renamed the image. As I see, the problem with that image on hr:wiki was that many users use this user box ("This user comes from Croatia") on their userpages. Now the problem is solved because CommonsDelinker replaced that image with renamed one. If you check usage of the old one, you will see that isn't in use on hr:wiki at all. Cheers--Ex13 (talk) 08:57, 29 August 2009 (UTC)

File:Chinese-Army-Wuhan-Flag-1911-1928 dots18.svg and 19

This was the Chinese army flag a lot longer than it was the Wuchang rebellion flag (which happened in 1911 only, so the 1928 date doesn't even apply to the Wuhan part). For a flag which has received two separate prominent uses, I see no real problem in providing some indication of both uses in the filename... AnonMoos (talk)

Can we try and get rid of the dashes between the name? User:Zscout370 ^{(Return fire)} 18:30, 5 September 2009 (UTC)

What is the status on this deletion?: "Pierce_County_government.png", has been deleted from Commons

Who says the copyright status is different?The-Traveller-in-Tacoma (talk)

File:Перельман.JPG

Ha, ha, that was fast. I didn't even finish typing my detailed reasoning and it was already gone. Thanks, Pohta ce-am pohtit (talk) 19:52, 7 September 2009 (UTC)

File:Flag of Hiroshima Prefecture.svg

---

There seems to be a problem regarding the description and/or licensing of this particular file. It has been found that you've added in the image's description only a Template that's not a license and although it provides useful information about the image, it's not a valid license. Could you please resolve this problem, adding the license in the image linked above? You can edit the description page and change the text. Uploading a new version of the file does not change the description of the file. This page may give you more hints on which license to choose. Thank you.

This message was added automatically by Nikbot, if you need some help about it, ask its master (Filnik) or go to the Commons:Help desk. --Filnik 16:19, 11 September 2009 (UTC)

Arilang say Hi

Hi, please have a look at File talk:Flag of the Republic of China.svg#Colors used by government websites . Thanks. Arilang Arilang ^talk 10:30, 13 September 2009 (UTC)

Improper deletion

Please restore File:Texas-Tech-University-logo.png. You unilaterally deleted it, even though it was already the subject of a deletion discussion where it was decided that it should be kept. →Wordbuilder (talk) 13:48, 14 September 2009 (UTC)

• Done. User:Zscout370 ^{(Return fire)} 17:57, 14 September 2009 (UTC)

File:Flag of Kagawa Prefecture, Japan.svg

---

There seems to be a problem regarding the description and/or licensing of this particular file. It has been found that you've added in the image's description only a Template that's not a license and although it provides useful information about the image, it's not a valid license. Could you please resolve this problem, adding the license in the image linked above? You can edit the description page and change the text. Uploading a new version of the file does not change the description of the file. This page may give you more hints on which license to choose. Thank you.

This message was added automatically by Nikbot, if you need some help about it, ask its master (Filnik) or go to the Commons:Help desk. --Filnik 02:01, 15 September 2009 (UTC)

Flag of NZ

Regarding the borders: the problem is that I have no specifics on how the borders are rendered by RSVG. I was assuming that the borders in SVG are conventionally placed with the centres on the edge of the shape, so a 2pt border would actually protrude 1pt away from the actual shape (with the other 1pt going into the shape, of course). I think the borders should be quite "thick" looking after drawing the stars the way MCH provides, which incidentally are not convenient for us, hence all the mind numbing code to get the right radius.

The large looking borders I thought were only a visual effect and if were measured with a ruler, would actually turn out to be the right size. ButterStick (talk) 09:50, 16 September 2009 (UTC)

I also talked to some other Kiwis and they think the stars are also thin, but it follows faithfully the construction sheet provided by the government. However, I will try and see if I can find something larger I can look at that they could mail. User:Zscout370 ^{(Return fire)} 17:03, 16 September 2009 (UTC)

Rename

Are you aware of Commons:File renaming?

Of course, I used it before. It is just the files were requested to be renamed long before it was enabled. User:Zscout370 ^{(Return fire)} 17:55, 27 September 2009 (UTC)

But that does not mean that the rename should not follow this. As you can see from the history[3] the "rules" are from March 2009 --MGA73 (talk) 18:02, 27 September 2009 (UTC)

I got a renaming scheme for flags that I follow and, about those two Chinese images, the other user agreed with the name change. User:Zscout370 ^{(Return fire)} 18:04, 27 September 2009 (UTC)

The scheme is fine if it follows the rules ;-) As for the two flags I read "this is ok" as uploader was against. But you are probably right. Nice that you help to rename anyway. Just be careful not to make uploaders angry with no good reason :-) --MGA73 (talk) 18:15, 27 September 2009 (UTC)

File:Flag Rwanda 1962.svg has been renamed. Care to fix the pages that uses this file? ;-) --MGA73 (talk) 14:12, 4 October 2009 (UTC)

Yeah, working on it. User:Zscout370 ^{(Return fire)} 23:00, 4 October 2009 (UTC)

Talk page of Help:Gadget-ImageAnnotator

Hi, could you also restore the talk page of Help:Gadget-ImageAnnotator? Thanks. --  IANEZZ  (talk) 07:12, 5 October 2009 (UTC)

Sure. The deletion was due to me being an idiot using this script. User:Zscout370 ^{(Return fire)} 07:13, 5 October 2009 (UTC)

No problem. Thanks again. --  IANEZZ  (talk) 07:18, 5 October 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for pointing it out to me. User:Zscout370 ^{(Return fire)} 07:23, 5 October 2009 (UTC)

Speedy of File:UK-Navy-OF1.gif etc.

Hello. You deleted this and other files as a speedy. Please note that the template says

"If an image was uploaded with this template after 8 May 2007, it should be tagged with {{subst:nld}}. If the copyright status of images tagged with this template and uploaded cannot be confirmed as free, they should be listed for deletion."

So you can't speedy it. The image was uploaded "22:58, 5 December 2005" so you should file a DR. Will you look at it? --MGA73 (talk) 09:24, 5 October 2009 (UTC)

Your deletions

I just had a look of your recent deletions and want to comment a few (other than the one above):

• 05:50, 1 September 2009 Zscout370 (Talk | contribs | block) deleted "File:Flag of Japan (bordered) 3.svg" ‎ (Wikinews told me to delete it, since there will be no way Delinker can change anything) (view/restore)

 Comment If it is in use, then don't just delete it. Fix it manually or create a redirect.

You cannot edit Wikinews once it has been published; I spoke to the Wikinews and they said go ahead and delete it. User:Zscout370 ^{(Return fire)} 17:16, 5 October 2009 (UTC)

• 05:51, 16 August 2009 Zscout370 (Talk | contribs | block) deleted "File:Cuba.jpg" ‎ (Duplicated of or superseded by: http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Flag_of_Cuba.svg) (view/restore)

 Comment Svg can't superseded jpg-files. There are several reasons for that. One of them is that Commons is not only for wiki-projects and not all users can use svg-files.

For flag images, we are told ONLY to use SVG. If people cannot use SVG, they get the PNG image. User:Zscout370 ^{(Return fire)} 17:16, 5 October 2009 (UTC)

It is important to be careful when deleting. As you know then delinker will remove usage when an image is deleted. So restoring an image is not enough. --MGA73 (talk) 09:36, 5 October 2009 (UTC)

You did not comment the military images above - did you notice? The flag of Japan: a redirect would look better so I made one - it should fix the red link :-) The flag of Cuba: it is fine to use svg but where is it said it is fine to delete non-svg files? Anyway if there is a png then the "deletion link" should have been to this file instead of the svg. That way you should not get funny messages from other admins :-D --MGA73 (talk) 20:46, 5 October 2009 (UTC)

I didn't see the comment until now. However, no admin has given me funny messages at all. The only time I get funny images from admins if I happen to delete stuff from Afghanistan from the Tabliban. But as for the military images, if the template was placed that way since 2007 and it has not been fixed for over two years, I think this is where my favorite policy comes into play. User:Zscout370 ^{(Return fire)} 06:13, 6 October 2009 (UTC)

Yeah it is good to be bold sometimes but the problems with deletions is, that it does a lot of damage if the wrong images are deleted. The main problem is that we are way to few to fix all that needs to be fixed. The problem is, that according to the template the files were safe from deletion until someone added a deletion tag. If you had nominated the images for deletion then others could have seen that is was time to look at them. As you can see here Category:PD tag needs updating there is 8,457 files that need an update. Would you think it is ok to speedy them all? You should restore and open a DR. --MGA73 (talk) 14:20, 6 October 2009 (UTC)

Here is another funny message. Deleting files as superseded is not allowed, see Commons:Deletion requests/Superseded and our deletion policy. Please undelete the erroneously deleted files. Multichill (talk) 18:48, 6 October 2009 (UTC)

That's new to me. User:Zscout370 ^{(Return fire)} 00:31, 7 October 2009 (UTC)

And you must notify uploaders of a deletion request/deletion. You seem to forget that very often. Multichill (talk) 21:04, 12 October 2009 (UTC)

Request for British Chief of the Defence Staff flag

Greetings. Would you be able to create an SVG version of the British Chief of the Defence Staff's flag? See http://www.flags.net/UNKG03.htm for an example. Sadly my Inkscape skills are not up to it. Many thanks. Greenshed (talk) 00:23, 8 October 2009 (UTC)

File:Flag of France.svg

Hi! Your last edits on this file make the French flag look washed out. Both blue and red stripes should be much darker (I can remember similar problems with the Italian flag). Your precedent version was OK, I think you should revert back to it. Jastrow (Λέγετε) 20:41, 10 October 2009 (UTC)

The thing is that I am going from an official source. I was told in the past that RGB should be preferred, then CMYK then Pantone. I will look at the source page again, make some drawings and pick one. User:Zscout370 ^{(Return fire)} 02:37, 11 October 2009 (UTC)

I understand you took your colour values from the Pantone shades published by a French embassy. I suspect the Pantone shades are correct for textiles (real-life flags), but that they do not translate well to the screen. Commons had a similar problem with the Italian flag: the Pantone shade for the white stripe was converted to a light grey (see File:Bandiera della Repubblica Italiana PMS 20060414.svg) and the discussion at File talk:Flag of Italy.svg). Jastrow (Λέγετε) 20:10, 11 October 2009 (UTC)

I was involved in the Italian flag image, so I am familiar. I am not sure if I did Pantone or RGB on here, but I will fix the image now. User:Zscout370 ^{(Return fire)} 20:16, 11 October 2009 (UTC)

I actually used the RGB colors, not Pantone, this time. I will go back to Pantone now. User:Zscout370 ^{(Return fire)} 20:17, 11 October 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for you last version; it looks much more normal now. Jastrow (Λέγετε) 07:23, 27 October 2009 (UTC)

Pantone officially has their colors online now, so we can use those. User:Zscout370 ^{(Return fire)} 07:24, 27 October 2009 (UTC)

File:SLK-Army-OF3.gif

Now you marked these files with no license. Did you not notice the message on the files? It says if files are old you should start a DR? Anyway You should also inform uploader. You should really know that nuking and tagging without warning users is a bad thing! --MGA73 (talk) 05:03, 13 October 2009 (UTC)

He has. User:Zscout370 ^{(Return fire)} 05:05, 13 October 2009 (UTC)

Yes for some of them. But telling uploader will inform him/her that somthing new is happening. If they have chosen to they will also get an e-mail telling that somthing new is up. But that still does not solve the problem that you should have made a DR. --MGA73 (talk) 05:55, 13 October 2009 (UTC)

DR's linger for weeks; the same process will take only 7 days with what I did. User:Zscout370 ^{(Return fire)} 06:00, 13 October 2009 (UTC)

File:Ik-218N&ik-218Avancity GSP.jpg

Hi. Is it a mistake? If so, can you restore? I can't see a valid reason for deleting this file. --Eusebius (talk) 21:20, 14 October 2009 (UTC)

The user has lied about many images he has uploaded. He took many images from different sources and eras and all tagged them as PD Self and PD Serbia Gov. User:Zscout370 ^{(Return fire)} 02:49, 15 October 2009 (UTC)

But in this case there is absolutely no sign of copyvio, and it is insane to delete it because "it is not the work of the Serbian gvt". I nominate for undeletion. --Eusebius (talk) 05:28, 15 October 2009 (UTC)

BTW I suggest you have another look at the criteria for speedy deletion in COM:SPEEDY... --Eusebius (talk) 05:31, 15 October 2009 (UTC)

Having a false license is a criteria for speedy deletion. User:Zscout370 ^{(Return fire)} 05:35, 15 October 2009 (UTC)

No, having a false license warrants a "no license" tag and a 7-day notice (but there is no evidence that the PD-self license is false here). "clear copyright violation" is a criterion for speedy, and it's not the case here. --Eusebius (talk) 07:55, 15 October 2009 (UTC)

talk back

Hello, Zscout370. You have new messages at Raeky's talk page. You may remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

— raeky ^{(talk | edits)} 04:14, 15 October 2009 (UTC)

Hello, Zscout370. You have new messages at Raeky's talk page. You may remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

— raeky ^{(talk | edits)} 04:30, 15 October 2009 (UTC)

{{AntWeb permission}}

[23:13] <+Multichil> As long as you don't remove the cc-by-sa-3.0 template it's probably fine with me ;-)
[23:14] <+zscout370> Multichil, no no no, the license template won't be removed

Did you forget about this conversation? Multichill (talk) 07:59, 15 October 2009 (UTC)

• I matched it according to other templates, like Template:Kremlin.ru, which uses the format I have now. User:Zscout370 ^{(Return fire)} 08:05, 15 October 2009 (UTC)

Canadian Army badges

Hi Zscout, I've noticed the deletion of all the badges of rank of the Canadian Army, but I can't find the discussion about that (I don't know how to find it), so I don't know the reasons. I know that the images comes from http://www.uniforminsignia.net so it can be a copyviol or maybe something different. Since I would make this badges from scratches, I'm interested in the motivations. Can you give me some hints? Thanks a lot, --F l a n k e r (talk) 18:31, 15 October 2009 (UTC)

There wasn't a discussion about the deletion, I became bold and started to clear out these problematic images. As for the Canadian insignia, they might be under Crown Copyright, but I cannot say for certain. User:Zscout370 ^{(Return fire)} 02:50, 16 October 2009 (UTC)

Try to think at least sometime

You have deleted Lietuvosprezidentoherbas3.jpg 08:25, 20 October 2009 and what are the reasons? You stated that this image some from [4], so what? Did the user who uploaded it there draw this image himself thus making it copyrighted or text in the bottom "The President's Flag" made it copyrighted?

At the same delete log you stated that image came from Lithuania website and if you don't understanding Authors law in Lithuania can I suggest you to stop doing bullshit? All state symbols are in PD {{PD-LT-exempt}} and so please undelete image and issue CommonsDelinker to revert his changes. --Justass (talk) 06:21, 20 October 2009 (UTC)

The file was listed in a category that needed a PD tag needing updated and had a lack of source, so even if you tag it with that license, it still would need to be deleted. Use File:Standard of the President of Lithuania.jpg from now on. User:Zscout370 ^{(Return fire)} 06:34, 20 October 2009 (UTC)

PD-flag

Sorry Reisio, but PD-flag has not been a license for a few years now. User:Zscout370 ^{(Return fire)} 03:08, 23 October 2009 (UTC)

That is irrelevant, as it was a license at the time of its inclusion. ¦ Reisio (talk) 11:37, 23 October 2009 (UTC)

Even so, the license is no longer to be used on Wikipedia and must be given a relicense or it will be deleted in due time. Do not revert me again. User:Zscout370 ^{(Return fire)} 16:24, 23 October 2009 (UTC)

So you define 'relicense' as 'mark for deletion'? :p ¦ Reisio (talk) 20:26, 23 October 2009 (UTC)

It is redundant now, so we have to ask the uploaders if they want to relicense. User:Zscout370 ^{(Return fire)} 16:21, 23 October 2009 (UTC)

You don't know what redundant means, and marking a file for deletion is not asking for "relicense". ¦ Reisio (talk) 20:26, 23 October 2009 (UTC)

Mario.png

Hello. Please open a deletion request. It is not the first case, is is not the only one case, and it will not the last. Then i would like to be sure before deleting all this things. ~ bayo or talk 17:37, 24 October 2009 (UTC)

In particular, please see Commons:Undeletion requests/Archive#File:Yoshi.png. The basic issue here is that the source patent does not contain the language required in § 1.71(e), and thus the entire content of the patent (including these images) is in the public domain. Anomie (talk) 01:04, 25 October 2009 (UTC)

News to me. Anyways, restored the image based on the deletion review provided by Anomie. User:Zscout370 ^{(Return fire)} 02:48, 25 October 2009 (UTC)

Thanks! Anomie (talk) 03:27, 25 October 2009 (UTC)

Copyright status: Image:Flag of Uruguay.png

This media may be deleted.

Thanks for uploading Image:Flag of Uruguay.png. I notice that the file page either doesn't contain enough information about the license or it contains contradictory information about the license, so the copyright status is unclear. If you created this file yourself, then you must provide a valid copyright tag. For example, you can tag it with {{self|GFDL|cc-by-sa-all}} to release it under the multi-license GFDL plus Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike All-version license or you can tag it with {{PD-self}} to release it into the public domain. (See Commons:Copyright tags for the full list of license tags that you can use.) If you did not create the file yourself or if it is a derivative of another work that is possibly subject to copyright protection, then you must specify where you found it (e.g. usually a link to the web page where you got it), you must provide proof that it has a license that is acceptable for Commons (e.g. usually a link to the terms of use for content from that page), and you must add an appropriate license tag. If you did not create the file yourself and the specific source and license information is not available on the web, you must obtain permission through the VRT system and follow the procedure described there. Note that any unsourced or improperly licensed files will be deleted one week after they have been marked as lacking proper information, as described in criteria for deletion. If you have uploaded other files, please confirm that you have provided the proper information for those files, too. If you have any questions about licenses please ask at Commons:Village pump/Copyright or see our help pages. Thank you.

User:Zscout370 ^{(Return fire)} 02:57, 25 October 2009 (UTC)

Removing the tag

Why removing the {{FOTWpic}} tag from the following two files:

• File:Split-Dalmatia seal.gif‎
• File:Seal of the Federal State of Croatia.gif

The second file is from http://www.crwflags.com/fotw/flags/hr-yu.html#coa and was made by Janko Ehrlich Zdvořák who did not release it as GNU. Please observe the bottom of his page where he wrote: "Janko Ehrlich Zdvořák copyrights this web-published material."

Hope this helps, also the uploader should be warned not to upload copyrighted materials.-- Bugoslav (talk) 02:30, 26 October 2009 (UTC)

‎:Because I could not locate the files specifically, but I deleted it. Also, did you see my note for the Nova Scotia flag? User:Zscout370 ^{(Return fire)} 03:22, 26 October 2009 (UTC)

If you can't find source then ask the uploader or start a deletion request. You have been told before that: YOU CAN'T JUST DELETE IMAGES YOU DO NOT FIND OK! You'd better start cleaning up... --MGA73 (talk) 10:29, 27 October 2009 (UTC)

The sources were found, the images were copyvios. User:Zscout370 ^{(Return fire)} 17:32, 27 October 2009 (UTC)

Files were uploaded a year ago. Text can be changed on the web. Might have been ok when uploaded. You also wrote "Because I could not locate the files specifically". --MGA73 (talk) 19:16, 27 October 2009 (UTC)

I could not locate the files on FOTW, so that is why I removed the tag. The user added them back in and gave me sources. Also, the first edition of the copyright rules with the non-commercial clause was http://web.archive.org/web/20010424121755/http://flagspot.net/flags/disclaim.html in 2001. User:Zscout370 ^{(Return fire)} 19:21, 27 October 2009 (UTC)

Sorry seems you have good arguments for these two. But you left user with no chance to find replacement or ask for a permission. --MGA73 (talk) 19:28, 27 October 2009 (UTC)

It happens. Anyways, the user has been uploading images from this site constantly, so this is not the first. Also, I do know a lot of the people who draw for that site. The only people that I know from that site that gives images to here is User:Jolle (via OTRS or self uploads) and myself. User:Zscout370 ^{(Return fire)} 19:30, 27 October 2009 (UTC)

File:Sardegna-Stemma.svg

Thanks. I've changed the license, but I've also specified also that I've taken the heads form Flag of Sardinia (alternate).svg that have the same problem. I think (hope!) is a work by Angelo Romano. Cheers, F l a n k e r (talk) 23:38, 26 October 2009 (UTC)

Thanks. I am not sure how many more images that you have done were tagged with that license, but I suggest to change them all. User:Zscout370 ^{(Return fire)} 23:39, 26 October 2009 (UTC)

OK, I'll check my gallery in the next days. --F l a n k e r (talk) 09:43, 27 October 2009 (UTC)

Thanks

Just wanted to thank you for dealing with PD-US-flag. Also I'm new to Commons and wanted to see if its OK to delete File:Flag of the state of Georgia 2001.png which is completely unlinked to. Regards, Awg1010 (talk) 21:38, 1 November 2009 (UTC)

See Commons:Deletion requests/File:Flag of the state of Georgia 2001.png. User:Zscout370 ^{(Return fire)} 21:41, 1 November 2009 (UTC)

Could you replace an out of date PNG with my new SVG?

PNG: File:MIA - Miami International Airport FAA diagram.png SVG: File:MIA - Miami International Airport FAA diagram.svg

Thanks. Once you make the switch, you could delete the PNG. It is no longer valid. Will (Talk - contribs) 08:44, 2 November 2009 (UTC)

Your action is being discussed...

...at Commons:Undeletion requests/Current requests#File:Bonnie_SG.jpg. FYI. Wknight94 ^talk 14:24, 7 November 2009 (UTC)

I had a feeling. However, it was pretty much an OTRS action and the image needs to stay dead. User:Zscout370 ^{(Return fire)} 18:21, 7 November 2009 (UTC)

Do not abuse OTRS as an excuse. It was a simple request by the person in the image. --MGA73 (talk) 18:37, 7 November 2009 (UTC)

OTRS is a reference number to say where the model made the request. User:Zscout370 ^{(Return fire)} 18:42, 7 November 2009 (UTC)

The link is fine... It was the argument that implyed that it hat to be deleted becaus it was "an OTRS matter" I thought was not right. --MGA73 (talk) 19:00, 7 November 2009 (UTC)

Per suggestion the debate has been moved to Commons:Administrators'_noticeboard#Discussion_of_deletion_denied. --MGA73 (talk) 12:03, 9 November 2009 (UTC)

File:Black Sky White Sun.png

Hi Zscout370! This image has you as author? Can you have a look at it an verify that you made it? If did not pass Flickr review. --MGA73 (talk) 21:34, 7 November 2009 (UTC)

File:Emblem of the Kuomintang.svg was the original source, and yes I did it (first sent to en.wikipedia, then here). User:Zscout370 ^{(Return fire)} 18:39, 9 November 2009 (UTC)

DPRK Images

Hello. I've noticed your recent removal of several images uploaded by me, works of the DPRK Government. IF Article 12 of the Copyright law of the DPRK does not apply to photos, how come this is still licenced as a free work and lacks a non-free content template, and the photos I uploaded were removed ? - Tourbillon 18:04, 10 November 2009 (UTC)

I only dealt with the images on the Commons, will look into the en.wikipedia images. User:Zscout370 ^{(Return fire)} 18:36, 10 November 2009 (UTC)

Good Heart Barnstar

For your work in Commons:Deletion requests/File:Bonnie SG.jpg, I award you the Good Heart Barnstar. TJRC (talk) 21:00, 11 November 2009 (UTC)

File talk:Flag of Argentina (mourning).svg

Couls you also participate in this discussion? (I saw your upload comment) Thanks! --ALE! ¿…? 09:29, 13 November 2009 (UTC)

File:Defmoscow rib.png

It's possible, that color scheme is not correct.

На ленте три продольные оливковые полоски шириной 5 мм каждая и две красные полоски шириной 4 мм каждая. Края ленты окантованы узенькими красными полосками

Оливковые is olive-green in English. See also: http://www.gold-eagle.ru/pic/ribbon_s_060.gif Alex Spade (talk) 18:59, 14 November 2009 (UTC)

Fixing. User:Zscout370 ^{(Return fire)} 04:39, 15 November 2009 (UTC)

Template:PD-US-flag

Template:PD-US-flag 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 template, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with it. Please remember to respond to and – if appropriate – contradict the arguments supporting deletion. Arguments which focus on the nominator will not affect the result of the nomination. Thank you!

--User:Zscout370 ^{(Return fire)} 23:01, 15 November 2009 (UTC)

To bad... Commons:Deletion requests/File:5 -krone fra Danmark.jpg

Hi! Regarding Commons:Deletion requests/File:5 -krone fra Danmark.jpg some of the discussion was if what Commons:Currency#Denmark says is correct. I think not... The webpage of the national bank says "Rendering of coins can, as the notes made in contexts where the coins symbolize economic value. Unlike notes, there is no guidance on the size or the dissolution of reproductions of coins, as long as the coins are not reproduced on material which could be confused with real coins, see the rules on counterfeiting." so I can't see why they should say that if coins are never allowed. Sadly not many gave their opinion on this one. Personally I have problems seeing the difference between DKK and Euro... --MGA73 (talk) 16:57, 16 November 2009 (UTC) I was going for more of the copyright stance, but if yall get any new information about copyright, go ahead and set up a deletion review. User:Zscout370 ^{(Return fire)} 18:42, 16 November 2009 (UTC)

Flag of Kagoshima Prefecture

Thanks for your vigilance in watching for copyright violations, and for removing the offending flag image from w:Ryukyu Kingdom and other articles. I wonder if there is some other version of the flag that is usable in these contexts. This is not the first time I've seen a Japanese prefectural flag taken down from Wikimedia/Wikipedia for copyright reasons, while plenty of national & other flags from around the world, as well as copyrighted and strongly restricted logos continue to be used under the fair use provisions of illustrating or representing the topic at hand, namely w:Microsoft Windows or w:NASA or the w:Flag of the United States.

What can be done to resolve this issue? Thanks. LordAmeth 19:31, 16 November 2009 (UTC)

(If it's not too much trouble, please respond on my Wikipedia User Talk Page, as I don't check Commons very often. Cheers.) LordAmeth 19:31, 16 November 2009 (UTC)

Albanian rank insignia

Hi Zscout, have you noticed how similar are the images in Category:Albanian Army to the ones in www.uniforminsignia.net page? I don't think that theirs images are free... :( --F l a n k e r (talk) 23:20, 17 November 2009 (UTC)

Yeah, they are all copyvios. If you notice any others from that site, tag them all for copyvio. User:Zscout370 ^{(Return fire)} 03:29, 18 November 2009 (UTC)

OK, in fact I think there are some more... --F l a n k e r (talk) 10:20, 18 November 2009 (UTC)

I snagged all of the ones I could last night. User:Zscout370 ^{(Return fire)} 18:31, 18 November 2009 (UTC)

Tip: Categorizing images

---

Hello, Zscout370!

Tip: Add categories to your files

Thanks a lot for contributing to the Wikimedia Commons! Here's a tip to make your uploads more useful: Why not add some categories to describe them? This will help more people to find and use them.

Here's how:

1) If you're using the UploadWizard, you can add categories to each file when you describe it. Just click "more options" for the file and add the categories which make sense:

2) You can also pick the file from your list of uploads, edit the file description page, and manually add the category code at the end of the page.

[[Category:Category name]]

For example, if you are uploading a diagram showing the orbits of comets, you add the following code:

[[Category:Astronomical diagrams]]

[[Category:Comets]]

This will make the diagram show up in the categories "Astronomical diagrams" and "Comets".

When picking categories, try to choose a specific category ("Astronomical diagrams") over a generic one ("Illustrations").

Thanks again for your uploads! More information about categorization can be found in Commons:Categories, and don't hesitate to leave a note on the help desk.

BotMultichillT 06:20, 25 January 2009 (UTC)

• Image:Fale illustracje1a.svg is uncategorized since 24 January 2009. BotMultichillT 06:20, 25 January 2009 (UTC)
• Image:Flag of the United States Federal Reserve Bank.svg is uncategorized since 18 February 2009. BotMultichillT 06:31, 19 February 2009 (UTC)
• Image:Flag of the Kingdom of Croatia.svg is uncategorized since 16 June 2009.
• Image:Flag of Germany 1935.svg was uncategorized on 6 September 2009.
• Image:Commons-banner-ja.svg was uncategorized on 6 September 2009.
• Image:Flag of Belarus (1991).png was uncategorized on 6 September 2009.
• Image:Wiki-commons.png was uncategorized on 6 September 2009.
• Image:Nashville seal.png was uncategorized on 6 September 2009.
• Image:BronzeStar.jpeg was uncategorized on 6 September 2009.
• Image:海軍戰隊長旗 (中華民國).svg was uncategorized on 30 September 2009.
• Image:海軍長旒 (中華民國).svg was uncategorized on 30 September 2009.
• Image:Ensign of the Cruiser Aurora (USSR).png was uncategorized on 31 October 2009 CategorizationBot (talk) 10:59, 1 November 2009 (UTC)
• Image:Vlajka obce Svidník.svg was uncategorized on 1 November 2009 CategorizationBot (talk) 10:57, 2 November 2009 (UTC)
• Image:New Jersey state flag.png was uncategorized on 18 November 2009 CategorizationBot (talk) 11:08, 19 November 2009 (UTC)

File:Boze pravde instrumental.ogg

File:Boze pravde instrumental.ogg 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!

--User:Zscout370 ^{(Return fire)} 04:33, 20 November 2009 (UTC)

Commons:Deletion requests/Images of User:Interfase

Hello. Why did you delete my photoes.? I was the author all of them. --Interfase (talk) 21:56, 21 November 2009 (UTC)

I checked each image; three different cameras, around the same production date. And, with your other uploading problems in the past, I don't believe you. User:Zscout370 ^{(Return fire)} 04:39, 22 November 2009 (UTC)

Yea, I had some problems in the past, but I hadn't experience. And these photoes was made by me and my friends (so with different cameras), and given for me. Anyway I don't want another problems in future. Now I am more careful in my uploads.

And can I write to you for a help in future, if I have any problems? --Interfase (talk) 07:42, 22 November 2009 (UTC)

Yes. User:Zscout370 ^{(Return fire)} 07:51, 22 November 2009 (UTC)

Brazilian Navy

Hi! In regards to photos by the Brazilian Navy, I found File:F_Constituição_(F-42).jpg which says that the Navy lets any photos from its website be reused for any purpose, provided the copyright holder is notified. Does this mean that the files affected by Commons:Deletion requests/File:Air France Flight 447 Empennage removal.jpg could be reuploaded? - There's a possibility that the Agencia Brasil photos originate from the website and therefore can be fairly used in the same way by Wikipedia. There is also a whole category about it: Category:Images from the Brazillian Navy WhisperToMe (talk) 20:40, 23 November 2009 (UTC)

• "As imagens apresentadas não estão sujeitas a Direitos Autorais. Entretanto, se utilizadas, solicita-se citar como fonte o "Centro de Comunicação Social da Marinha"." does not mention commercial reuse or modification. Until we have that, the images will not be restored. User:Zscout370 ^{(Return fire)} 20:45, 23 November 2009 (UTC)
  • It appears, looking at Commons:Deletion_requests/File:Air_France_Flight_447_Empennage_removal.jpg that the request to PatriciaR may never have been actioned, as she has evidently been on break ever since. Perhaps another Pt speaker could pursue it in her stead? Also, please see [5] and [6], noting that the "CENTRO DE COMUNICAÇÃO SOCIAL DA AERONÁUTICA" is the (Brazilian) Air Force Public Affairs Centre. I'm puzzled what the purpose of releases from such an office might be other than to get commercial reuse. Indeed, there were images of press conferences showing navy and air force officers passing out hard copies of releases to the international press. Do we now assume that professional PR organizations are unaware of the existence of wikipedia articles on major subjects such as this, or that they are incapable of objecting? This seems preposterous. LeadSongDog (talk) 21:41, 23 November 2009 (UTC)
    • Someone else can take the cause of emailing the Air Force. User:Zscout370 ^{(Return fire)} 22:21, 23 November 2009 (UTC)
    • It may be possible for the Brazilian Navy to respond to English-language inquiries. After all the Navy has some English content on its website, and due to AF 447 it likely has/had groups of people doing translation assistance. Also part of the reason I brought this up is because the entire category "Images from the Brazillian Navy" is affected by the Brazilian Navy policy. WhisperToMe (talk) 10:20, 24 November 2009 (UTC)
      • As of this moment, I do not plan on dealing with the rest of the Brazilian images. I will look into it, but I am going to need some other eyes on this one. User:Zscout370 ^{(Return fire)} 19:22, 24 November 2009 (UTC)

Need a hand

Hallo! There has been a nomination for deletion for this map: [[7]], here: [[8]]. The editor that proposed the nomination is an old nationalist spa with a block record [[9]], while he 'canceled' without a serious argument my vote, claiming that I'm canvassing. On the other a newly created account for that purpose supported his proposal, which seems very suspicious. Thank you.Alexikoua (talk) 21:56, 2 December 2009 (UTC)

Remember...

... to order replace before you move the file or you will get [10] :-) --MGA73 (talk) 10:07, 3 December 2009 (UTC)

Oops. Oh well, I will never try and do moves again at 3 AM. User:Zscout370 ^{(Return fire)} 20:28, 3 December 2009 (UTC)

Hehe. Ok. I fixed the template. It shows a text you can copy paste to Delinker. But the code did not work. So now rename should be really easy. --MGA73 (talk) 22:20, 3 December 2009 (UTC)

Malta/Monaco

Hello "Zach",

«09:48, 4 December 2009 Zscout370 (Talk | contribs) deleted "File:1 cent coin Mt serie 1.png" ‎ (per Commons:Deletion requests/File:Mon.PNG).»

You made a mistake, Malta it's not Monaco. "File:1 cent coin Mt serie 1.png" is a file's coin of Malta or not Monaco. The law of Malta "Copyright Act", does not include the Maltese coins. the Bank of Malta authorizes the reproduction of currency Maltese: "User is granted permission to make use of the Central Bank of Malta's web pages, save files, distribute and reproduce pages. The However, the source is to be stated and the material not altered or distorted" [11]. Thank you restore the "file:1 cent coin Mt serie 1.png"

Thanks.-- • Hamelin ^{[ de Guettelet ]} • 06:11, 9 December 2009 (UTC)

Yeah, I should never mass delete again at 3 am. Ok, restoring all of the Maltese coins now. User:Zscout370 ^{(Return fire)} 06:33, 9 December 2009 (UTC)

no problem, thanks -- • Hamelin ^{[ de Guettelet ]} • 14:05, 10 December 2009 (UTC)

Coat of arms of Switzerland

Coat of arms (red: #d81e05)

Flag (red: #d52b1e)

Hello! I saw that you have changed the red color of flag of Switzerland for a few days ago. But you have not changed the red color of coat of arms of Switzerland. But why? If you look at the article Switzerland, everyone will see an other red color. — PsY.cHo^!, 17:21, 9 December 2009 (UTC)

 Done User:Zscout370 ^{(Return fire)} 20:32, 9 December 2009 (UTC)

I can not see a different. Now, the red of coat of arms is #d81e05. The flag has got #d52b1e. — PsY.cHo^!, 09:20, 10 December 2009 (UTC)

Both of the images use #d52b1e now. User:Zscout370 ^{(Return fire)} 21:22, 10 December 2009 (UTC)

Why don't you check enwp?

You say that you are an admin on enwp. So why don't you look there to find the author of File:Wrc.jpg instead of leaving a message at a commons user who has not been active fot two years? /Pieter Kuiper (talk) 09:05, 15 December 2009 (UTC)

I did check that one. The image page there said just a PD tag and nothing else. User:Zscout370 ^{(Return fire)} 18:20, 15 December 2009 (UTC)

So uploader said that his work was PD? Right tag is then PD-self. /Pieter Kuiper (talk) 18:29, 15 December 2009 (UTC)

All the tag said was PD; no indication if the uplaoder did the work himself or took it from someone else. User:Zscout370 ^{(Return fire)} 18:32, 15 December 2009 (UTC)

It looks like own work. Clearly not scanned. You did not find it anywhere else. No reason to think this is not PD. Who was the uploader? /Pieter Kuiper (talk) 18:40, 15 December 2009 (UTC)

Old license

If there is a problem with an old deprecated license like this case, why don't you fix the problem instead of doing mass DRs. This is not reasonable. If the image is in scope and has a clear source--ie. the uploader--just change the license. Images uploaded in 2004/2005 did Not need a clear source such as this case I am prepared to AGF but you assume the worst here which is not reasonable given the situation of 4-5 year old photos. Regards, --Leoboudv (talk) 04:04, 16 December 2009 (UTC)

Even if the license is old, there is no author for the image. User:Zscout370 ^{(Return fire)} 04:42, 16 December 2009 (UTC)

• The author is most likely the uploader. The only thing is he doesn't say is "own photo". But as I mentioned, in 2004 and 2005, there was no need for this word at that time since the obsolete PD tag was sufficient. You should AGF here in this case and just update the license tag. I, too, have nominated a few images for deletion only to regret it soon after because I did not AGF on Commons. Thank You, --Leoboudv (talk) 05:26, 16 December 2009 (UTC)

Source of File:Bungyun by Japan 1878.jpg

The file comes from the English Wikipedia, where it was uploaded by User:Jongbhak on March 28, 2005, and tagged as PD-old by User:Sade. --Carnildo (talk) 20:36, 16 December 2009 (UTC)

RE: Antiguo egipto imperios antiguo y nuevo.jpg

No problem with removing this file. Actually, I should have proposed it for removal myself, for the image comes from a photocopy a teacher gave us while studying my career. So, I'm not even sure what its original source is. Excuse me and thank you for your maintenance labour!

Kind regards,

--RedTony (talk) 11:02, 17 December 2009 (UTC)

Nevertheless, I uploaded a svg version based on that very map, so it would be deprecated anyway. --RedTony (talk) 11:06, 17 December 2009 (UTC)

File:Flag of the ICRC.svg

In February 2007, the ICRC contacted the Wikimedia Foundation about their logo as shown in File:Flag of the ICRC.svg. Their argument was that the roundel version of the logo without the letters "ICRC" should be reserved for protective use during ICRC field missions. For indicative use like for example in the Wikipedia where the logo is only an informative illustration, the combination of the roundel with the acronym (written in a specific font style and size relative to the roundel) is the preferred variant. Back then, the Commons file for the logo was changed accordingly to comply with the ICRC's request. The photo shown on the Guidelines on the use of the Red Cross emblem and the name and logo of the ICRC for fundraising purposes page is clearly from field use. On the other hand, check out any (recent) ICRC publication where they always use the roundel logo together with the acronym or the full name below the roundel. --Uwe (talk) 13:46, 17 December 2009 (UTC)

Well, I am sort of familiar with the ticket because I had to ask Bastique to see what copyright they put on the images (PD old was the answer I got). User:Zscout370 ^{(Return fire)} 18:33, 17 December 2009 (UTC)

KMT Emblem

ROC emblem is based on KMT emblem, and the difference is that the sun touches the edge of the emblem or not. There is no perfect KMT emblem on KMT's website now, so modify the image from ROC emblem which has its own law is recommended. I don't often login in Wikimedia Commons, so I reply you long time later..

What project do you use often? Well, I know the ROC emblem is defined, along with the KMT emblem by law. User:Zscout370 ^{(Return fire)} 21:23, 10 December 2009 (UTC)

I usually use Chinese Wikipedia --LHD (talk) 08:38, 18 December 2009 (UTC)

Commons:Deletion_requests/File:Tickle_me_elmo.jpg

Hi! :-) I can’t understand your decision in this particular case. The only content of the image is a toy which is clearly a copyrighted character. Other requests by me from the same period of time and the same subject got deleted because of our guidelines towards such images. Best regards, --Polarlys (talk) 12:36, 21 December 2009 (UTC)

After those DR's were closed, Mike Godwin, our legal head, told us that those images will be fine. I have seen lately other photos of copyrighted toys and objects (except for buildings and memorials) were being kept. I just kept going with what was current accepted practice. User:Zscout370 ^{(Return fire)} 18:40, 21 December 2009 (UTC)

Our current accepted practice is pretty inconsistent then, since similiar DR by me were closed with a different result. Furthermore, I noticed no change in our written guidelines towards such cases. All in all we should revise our guidelines instead of practicing case-law. Merry Christmas, --Polarlys (talk) 20:31, 21 December 2009 (UTC)

I looked at other DR's and I decided to opt for deletion. User:Zscout370 ^{(Return fire)} 21:06, 21 December 2009 (UTC)

File:Flag of Taipei City.svg

No sufficient evidences to support your opinion. --百楽兎 (talk) 13:26, 22 December 2009 (UTC)

The newest copyright law is at here and still puts laws and regulations into the public domain. User:Zscout370 ^{(Return fire)} 16:45, 22 December 2009 (UTC)

Tip: Categorizing images

---

Hello, Zscout370!

Tip: Add categories to your files

Thanks a lot for contributing to the Wikimedia Commons! Here's a tip to make your uploads more useful: Why not add some categories to describe them? This will help more people to find and use them.

Here's how:

1) If you're using the UploadWizard, you can add categories to each file when you describe it. Just click "more options" for the file and add the categories which make sense:

2) You can also pick the file from your list of uploads, edit the file description page, and manually add the category code at the end of the page.

[[Category:Category name]]

For example, if you are uploading a diagram showing the orbits of comets, you add the following code:

[[Category:Astronomical diagrams]]

[[Category:Comets]]

This will make the diagram show up in the categories "Astronomical diagrams" and "Comets".

When picking categories, try to choose a specific category ("Astronomical diagrams") over a generic one ("Illustrations").

Thanks again for your uploads! More information about categorization can be found in Commons:Categories, and don't hesitate to leave a note on the help desk.

CategorizationBot (talk) 10:55, 23 December 2009 (UTC)

• Image:P02D1001-19811019-F000-02.pdf was uncategorized on 22 December 2009 CategorizationBot (talk) 10:55, 23 December 2009 (UTC)

File:Flag_of_Taipei_City.svg

File:Flag_of_Taipei_City.svg 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!

MGA73 (talk) 15:54, 25 December 2009 (UTC)

Hi. I changed speedy to an ordenary DR. Please comment. I do not like the edit war so I would like a third opinion (I can't read the text). Should be possible to find an other user than you who can read the law. If kept and user keeps nomination I'll block. --MGA73 (talk) 16:01, 25 December 2009 (UTC)

I added the actual ROC copyright law to the DR. I am also on IRC now. User:Zscout370 ^{(Return fire)} 16:03, 25 December 2009 (UTC)

As we talked about on IRC

Hi,

I had a first look on the list you sent to me, but I didn't watch all of them yet. I changed the licensing template when the informations given by the uploader were clear enough. As many of them have been uploaded many years ago, I often wasn't able to say if the uploader had right on the picture or not: for example, scans of old postcards do not show when the picture was originaly taken. I also found an obvious copyvio that I deleted.

Pymouss Let’s talk - 14:17, 26 December 2009 (UTC)

Thanks. User:Zscout370 ^{(Return fire)} 19:02, 26 December 2009 (UTC)

{{PD}}

This is a deprecated license tag. Since the images you made are clearly marked as such, I am changing the license tag so they do not get deleted. Do not revert. User:Zscout370 ^{(Return fire)} 19:01, 24 December 2009 (UTC)

The template states "if you add it to an image after Monday October 10 2008". For media I uploaded, it was added well before that, so there is no problem. Do not unnecessarily and pointlessly alter license tags. ¦ Reisio (talk) 19:12, 24 December 2009 (UTC)

" Note: This tag is obsolete, and if you add it to an image after Monday October 10 2008, it is liable to be tagged as {{nsd}} or {{npd}} as appropriate – this will result in deletion after 7 days." that is the full message. Because it was uploaded before that date, it will not be deleted. However, we been told to relicense the images in the category. User:Zscout370 ^{(Return fire)} 19:14, 24 December 2009 (UTC)

I really don't care that your heretofore unjustified actions are at the behest of some unnamed persons, for unnamed reasons. I see no reason to alter the license tag at this time. ¦ Reisio (talk) 19:42, 24 December 2009 (UTC)

Files uploaded before 2008 still need adequate licensing or they are subject to deletion, just not speedy deletion. -Nard the Bard 19:05, 26 December 2009 (UTC)

The works are done by Reisio and stated as such on the page, so that is not in dispute. But either when I choose PD-self or PD-author|Reisio, always reverted. User:Zscout370 ^{(Return fire)} 19:07, 26 December 2009 (UTC)

Obvious answer, but it would be making a en:WP:POINT, nominate them for deletion on the grounds the author is refusing to freely license them. -Nard the Bard 19:08, 26 December 2009 (UTC)

They are freely "licensed". ¦ Reisio (talk) 21:27, 26 December 2009 (UTC)

I get yelled at for sending images to DR, I get yelled at when I relicense images correctly. I will lose anyways. However, what I am doing now is I am using auto wiki browser to sort through the images (at the moment, I am finding works by the US Government) and I will save those images for last (unless someone wants to redo what I did). User:Zscout370 ^{(Return fire)} 19:11, 26 December 2009 (UTC)

I agree this license is obsolete and it should be replaced. Now we just have to find out how. I see there is a debate on User talk:Reisio. Images should not be deleted if they are in scope. --MGA73 (talk) 12:14, 27 December 2009 (UTC)

If we clean out the rest of the PD images we could change the category to "Files by Reisio" :p -Nard the Bard 16:42, 27 December 2009 (UTC)

I am not going to have them deleted because we know the author, we know the source and he said here and his talk page those images are public domain. Just trying to see if either PD-user or PD-self will be something me or others pick. User:Zscout370 ^{(Return fire)} 17:48, 27 December 2009 (UTC)

File:Flag of America 19 10.svg

Don't think that there's any intended difference in appearance; it was an experiment in minimal SVG coding, as discussed at File_talk:Flag_of_the_United_States.svg#SVG_version_discussions... AnonMoos (talk) 09:53, 29 December 2009 (UTC)

Ok. Would it be alright if I replaced all uses of it and have it deleted? User:Zscout370 ^{(Return fire)} 09:54, 29 December 2009 (UTC)

Well, somebody should figure out whether the SVG code in that file is better than the SVG in the current U.S. flag file; once that's done, it will have served its purpose... AnonMoos (talk) 09:58, 29 December 2009 (UTC)

Mass DR nominations

Hi Zscout. Would you please create an AN thread regarding this? I think it's good if we shed some light around this matter. Best regards, — Kanonkas // talk // e-mail // 12:42, 29 December 2009 (UTC)

I will come up with something. I am going to hold off on DR's except when it comes to obvious copyvios. User:Zscout370 ^{(Return fire)} 19:49, 29 December 2009 (UTC)

• That would be greatly appreciated! Your mass DRs is slowly turning from a potentially small problem to a large problem as I noted on Kanonkas' talkpage. Only copyvios should be deleted. Sadly, some (now absent) uploaders in 2005/2006 give excellent descriptions of the photos which they take but forget to say 'own work' or 'my photo.' But they should not be punished for this omission especially if they have uploaded many images or the photo has good metadata. Besides, if the uploader knows exactly what the picture shows, it is not really a large step to accept that it is indeed their own work. Surely, one can AGF and just update the license as pd-self in such cases? Regards, --Leoboudv (talk) 01:29, 30 December 2009 (UTC)
  • I have been trying to fix what I can. Almost every chance I can, I scan the category using autowikibrowser for either works done by certain users, with certain words, from certain Wikis and fix them. I probably fixed about...1000-1500 images (and who knows what else). Now, I am scanning the category for images coming from Australia. The ones I cannot fix, I usually send to DR to let others figure them out (either because they are on a Wiki that I have no sysop rights at or if I do, nothing was even present there about source or authorship). Many of the times, it has to take a DR to have more eyes to look at it (which is what I was told to do). User:Zscout370 ^{(Return fire)} 02:34, 30 December 2009 (UTC)

Mr Fireman!

i want to call you that name. Jarocristian (talk) 14:39, 5 January 2010 (UTC)

Commons:Administrators'_noticeboard#Sockpuppet of User:Imbris

Your comment is appreciated. Happy new year! --Martin H. (talk) 01:52, 1 January 2010 (UTC)

This is something old, but, you must have read wrong or you didn't understand this part well. It said that it is not turquoise color that is greenish, is the blue-est turquish color getting a bit darker. This doesn't mean Navy blue. If you want it just a little darker I completaly accept it, but not blue, or worst, navy blue. Thanks, Ricardo P. (talk) 06:18, 3 January 2010 (UTC)

I am so sorry, That's an acceptable color for the flag. I so much thank you for the bluer touch, I think I saw the flag a little bot *too* blue haha. Greetings, Ricardo P. (talk) 06:23, 3 January 2010 (UTC)

The first edit was just to reduce SVG code. I kept the color because I saw the law. However, after I did some digging, I found the Gov pages that ask for a darker blue to be used. I have no stake in what shade it should be, but I am looking to help settle this dispute once and for all. User:Zscout370 ^{(Return fire)} 06:39, 3 January 2010 (UTC)

The color was the intermidiate one you did before it was reverted, navy blue was an old rule for the flag, but when It changed no body cared. Trust me, I'm Honduran and I know this for a long time. I did a bigger explanation here. Greetings, Ricardo P. (talk) 20:34, 6 January 2010 (UTC)

I am from the USA, but flags are my life. I just want to help get this right and stop the edit war. User:Zscout370 ^{(Return fire)} 04:24, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

Hey, Just came from reading your message. Look, in Commons, I'm the only "known" Honduran yet I've seen. Also, I had a question. Are Images for messenger permitted in Commons, Thanks, Ricardo P. (talk) 02:27, 9 January 2010 (UTC)

If they are under a free license. Pretty much, that was snipped from MSN, so I will delete it. User:Zscout370 ^{(Return fire)} 04:30, 9 January 2010 (UTC)

Outdated license of File:Erie L-1 2601.jpg

Hi, Zscout370.

BotMultichillT requested me to replace "ouldated license" of File:Erie L-1 2601.jpg, which User:Morven first uploaded to en wikipedia by with PD license and I uploaded to Commons. But I don't know what to do to update its license because I am not the original uploader. Please help　me. Should I put speedy-delete tag to that image? --miya (talk) 23:57, 8 January 2010 (UTC)

Since it is a US photograph before 1923, it will be public domain by age. You should use {{PD-US}}, but I will change it for you. User:Zscout370 ^{(Return fire)} 04:32, 9 January 2010 (UTC)

Thank you!!!--miya (talk) 23:37, 9 January 2010 (UTC)

Number in PD needs update

Hi! Just saw that there was 3,192 files in Category:PD tag needs updating a little more than the 2,800 you mentioned :-) Perhaps some of the images needed to be poked to be categorized correctly. --MGA73 (talk) 10:30, 9 January 2010 (UTC)

I am still not sure how there is the 3000 count, but I will look at that soon. User:Zscout370 ^{(Return fire)} 18:01, 9 January 2010 (UTC)

re: PD replacement request

Regarding your requests for PD clarification, I'm not really active on this project these days, and I am not going to have the time to read up on how to properly taxonomize images. Also, the last image surely has sufficient information for tagging, and I've already discussed the first one with you. -- Phyzome is Tim McCormack 20:59, 9 January 2010 (UTC)

The first image I left alone. The other images mentioned at your page, I noticed there are 3 images that were made in the US before 1923. Because of that, I tagged them as {{PD-US}}. User:Zscout370 ^{(Return fire)} 07:06, 10 January 2010 (UTC)

Please help replace this outdated license

Hello,

As you could see, these images were only transferred by me from local Wikipedias, namely:

• File:Reszel_zamek1.jpg -> from [12]
• File:James Joule.jpg -> from [13]

so I'm not in position to change anything on my own. The first one author's page is missing and the second one's own page is no longer there, so it needs investigation to get to their respective authors. - Kocio (talk) 12:12, 10 January 2010 (UTC)

I am a sysop for the English Wikipedia. I went ahead and checked the second image there and it turns out it is public domain due to age. User:Zscout370 ^{(Return fire)} 18:07, 10 January 2010 (UTC)

old license {{PD}}

I painted File:Logo Jagiellonia Bialystok.svg with en:File:Jagiellonia.png from the english Wikipedia as the original picture. Now the image is under {{PD}}. Can I turn it to {{PD-ineligible}}. Or what else is the correct license? Thanks for help --Bobi211 (talk) 13:25, 10 January 2010 (UTC)

You had it as PD self, but the way you did the template was incorrect. It should have been {{PD-self}}. I went ahead and fixed it for you. User:Zscout370 ^{(Return fire)} 18:10, 10 January 2010 (UTC)

Photos in pd

http://www.direito.usp.br/ New site with the photo in pd Jurema Oliveira (talk) 17:47, 10 January 2010 (UTC)

Lack of copyright notice does not mean the images are in the public domain. Copyright is automatic now. User:Zscout370 ^{(Return fire)} 18:10, 10 January 2010 (UTC)

PD w:en

The images are not of my own. Were transferred to the commons from the existing version at the time, the English wikipedia, which at the time were tagged as PD.

--chico (talk) 20:48, 10 January 2010 (UTC)

See your talk page. User:Zscout370 ^{(Return fire)} 22:20, 10 January 2010 (UTC)

{{PD-User}} instead of outdated license {{PD}}

Hello, this picture I loaded up to Commons from WP-Catalan is {{PD}}-licensed by WP-Ca-User Andreube. Because of User talk:Watzmann#Please help replace this outdated license I wanted to replace {{PD}} by {{PD-User}}, but I can't get the right syntax for correct linking to Ca-User-Andreube. Can you help me?
Watzmann (talk) 21:23, 10 January 2010 (UTC)

{{PD-user-w|ca|wikipedia|Andreube}}. User:Zscout370 ^{(Return fire)} 22:15, 10 January 2010 (UTC)

Flag of San Antonio

Did this person ever e-mail OTRS? See Commons:Deletion_requests/2009/06#File:Flag_of_San_Antonio.2C_Texas.svg_.26_File:San_Antonio_Texas_Flag.png -- Avi (talk) 00:24, 11 January 2010 (UTC)

Not to my knowledge. User:Zscout370 ^{(Return fire)} 00:48, 11 January 2010 (UTC)

Coat of Arms Template

Hi Zscout, there is a discussion at Template talk:Coat of Arms that could use your input; either as someone familiar with heraldry, or your opinion as an admin, or a combination thereof. If your interested, your opinion would be appreciated. Wine Guy (talk) 20:15, 22 January 2010 (UTC)

Why delete cricket flag?

Hi Zscout. Why did you delete the West Indies cricket board flag? If the logo is copyrighted then how come the England and Wales cricket board logo can be shown on both the ECB article page and the England cricket team page even though one could probably argue that it should only be on the page of the ECB article? Also there are many, many variations of the flag you deleted (a number of them have different shades or red/maroon and some have varying numbers and shades of stripes in varying locations) and since these have been used at different times in test matches then surely it can't be as bad as you think?72.27.215.34 06:30, 28 January 2010 (UTC)

If it is copyrighted, then it can be uploaded on the English Wikipedia. User:Zscout370 ^{(Return fire)} 16:26, 28 January 2010 (UTC)

Well why not do that then?72.27.10.247 16:42, 28 January 2010 (UTC)

I will do it later. User:Zscout370 ^{(Return fire)} 19:18, 28 January 2010 (UTC)

logo for Democratic Progressive Party.

Could you make the logo for Democratic Progressive Party? Because The logo of en:Democratic Progressive Party is non-free image now. If you make the free image, I could use the image in the other language site of wikipedia.Tinystui (talk) 13:52, 28 January 2010 (UTC)

No, it will become a derivative work of a copyrighted image and still will be non-free. User:Zscout370 ^{(Return fire)} 00:21, 29 January 2010 (UTC)

Flag of Honduras

Thanks for your attention. It definitely looks like the Honduran flag I've seen all my life now. Anyway, this comment is to ask you what to do with the file called "Flag of Honduras Blue Turquoise.svg" File:Flag of Honduras Blue Turquoise.svg created by another user and which can be seen in several articles on the Spanish Wikipedia. Is this use justified? Should it be deleted? As I've said before, there's no source for this flag and there isn't anything that looks like this on the Internet. Plus I don't think we can (or should) have two "current Honduran flags" files. Since you are a moderator here on commons, I hope you can take charge of it or tell me what's best to do. By the way, I guess the Honduran naval ensign should be changed too, right? Escorpión Canalla (talk) 20:11, 18 January 2010 (UTC)

Yes. I will think about making the changes soon, but tied up at my home project now, the English Wikipedia. User:Zscout370 ^{(Return fire)} 21:27, 18 January 2010 (UTC)

So question: should the file mention above be removed or that's out of your competence? Escorpión Canalla (talk) 20:11, 18 January 2010 (UTC)

It should be replaced, but not deleted. It should be renamed to reflect the historical nature of it. User:Zscout370 ^{(Return fire)} 21:50, 18 January 2010 (UTC)

I see your point, but that's not a historical flag. That's just the current flag with a different colour because of a misunderstanding of the law. Why is it the current flag? Because of the stars. Those stars are in the flag only from 1949, and from 1949 we have had only the dark blue (or blue turquoise) coloured one. That's why I'm asking. Escorpión Canalla (talk) 22:34, 18 January 2010 (UTC)

Ok. Let me think about this and I will come up with a solution. User:Zscout370 ^{(Return fire)} 01:04, 19 January 2010 (UTC)

Hey Zcout, I just wanted to tell you that this website is about Cuba's Flag, not Honduran. I created the Turquoise Flag because there was reverting, and Spanish Wikipedia had decided making that flag the flag they were going to use in the Honduran article and in the Wikiproject Honduras. Right now, there has not been much of activeness at discussion, and when this is clearly decided, changes will be made. Until now, lets leave everything how it is. Greetings, Ricardo P. (talk) 03:20, 19 January 2010 (UTC)

Right, but what I am getting at is if the flag is that color and other states use that exact same color (Cuba and Chile) then it gives me an idea that it is a dark shade. User:Zscout370 ^{(Return fire)} 05:39, 19 January 2010 (UTC)

I'm sorry to get into this again, but I'd like to say that if there has always been reverting even with the flag this user created for the Spanish Wikipedia, that means that there has never been consensus nor on the English nor on the Spanish Wikipedia. Ricardo P. you should understand that you can't come up with a colour no one has ever seen, not even you, and that you've choose (the code) on your own. Escorpión Canalla (talk) 13:30, 19 January 2010 (UTC)

If I can give you too some experience; finding a color for flags is pretty hard. Even when we do find the official colors, trying to use it will be hard. For example, I just received a document from the Israeli Embassy about their flag. In their documents, they state Yale Blue as the required shade for their flag. The folks at en.wikipedia seemed confused and even dismissive about it because they found it out that a government would state a shade. Another example is the Swiss; even though we have the official RGB colors for the flag for web use, people still want to use Pantone (which we also have an official shade for, but harder to define and implement). User:Zscout370 ^{(Return fire)} 16:20, 19 January 2010 (UTC)

I am making the changes on es.wikipedia now, but it will be done at a slow pace. User:Zscout370 ^{(Return fire)} 05:00, 24 January 2010 (UTC)

Spanish Wikipedia isn't Commons, so any decision here will not be decided in Spanish Wikipedia, Since we already have a conclusion. I now you did research like in spanish wikipedia, but, spanish wikipedia went a lot farther, including direct government calls and mediation during midnight. We didn't only found the exact flags color, but false accuses from user ECanalla. Comparisions were found to be really different from the Blue Turquoise Flag and the navy blue flag. User Taichi from spanish wikipedia will explain you in detail the discovery while I find links from Honduran Ip's, counting how many are ok with the blue turquoise flag and who aren't. With not much to say, I dissmiss myself. Ricardo P. (talk) 06:09, 24 January 2010 (UTC)

I spoke to him on IRC. It was agreed that while the Cuban colors were too dark, but they did ask me to go back to Pantone 285 Coated. They appreciated the research I did. I wish I did catch you in #wikipedia-es to talk this over. User:Zscout370 ^{(Return fire)} 06:55, 24 January 2010 (UTC)

Please, Ricardo P., I'm getting fed up with your accusations and your threats. If you can't mention my name with respect, then I'd like you not to do it. User:Zscout370, you're a sysop and I'd like you to tell me how to proceed or if it would be justified in case this user doesn't stop talking down to me.

Anyway, I've tried a new way now. I've sent four different flags of Honduras that we can find here to different official organizations to see what's their opinion about it. I still can't believe this has gone so far, since we can see in real life what colour the flag is, but still would go for really different or even new ones. Anyway, I'm glad to see that Ricardo P.'s invented flag has been ruled out. ECanalla (talk) 12:12, 24 January 2010 (UTC)

Taichi is going to monitor this on es.wikipedia, I will try and focus on it here. I just want you two to just avoid each other from now on. As for the images, I changed them over at es.wikipedia with the approval of Taichi. User:Zscout370 ^{(Return fire)} 19:39, 24 January 2010 (UTC)

Hi there. I was just wondering why the Honduran flag is constantly being changed. Why cant it simply be left the way it was as of, say, November 11th 2009? Don't you believe the color is still too light? Please look into this since, you seem to hold the power to change it. Thank you! User:Oak27 (talk) 8:36, 25 January 2010 (UTC)

Oak, this is what the Spanish Wikipedia decided because of lack of sourcing for a specific shade. I will not change it unless a specific shade (like Pantone 285) is mentioned by the Honduras Government. User:Zscout370 ^{(Return fire)} 02:08, 26 January 2010 (UTC)

Sorry to bother you again, but I just had a few points. First, is this website I found, showing Honduras' official flag. http://www.crwflags.com/FOTW/flags/hn.html#Symbolism Secondly, I just wanted to respond to your comment about a mentioning from the government of Honduras. Well the flag that flies outside of the UN and the flag that flies outside the Presidential Palace are both that same blue flag that used to be on Wikipedia circa November 11th 2009 . [Its not like Im lying to you, Im Honduran! :)] I also know that this decision wasn't completely yours, so hopefully you could pass along my comments to others as well. Thanks! User:Oak27 (talk) 9:38, 29 January 2010 (UTC)

What Taichi wanted was a sourced value and the book I used, and the color we have now, is the only thing we got. Darker than one shade, lighter than the other. So it is something in between we can use in the meantime. User:Zscout370 ^{(Return fire)} 03:33, 30 January 2010 (UTC)

Please keep comments on talk pages

Ricardo P. (talk) 05:51, 24 January 2010 (UTC)

• I think your life expectancy just got reduced to about 30 seconds... -Nard the Bard 05:55, 24 January 2010 (UTC)

Umm....if it is about the Honduras flag image, it always have been on that talk page or mine. User:Zscout370 ^{(Return fire)} 06:03, 24 January 2010 (UTC)

OMG, I dont know how that happened. I'm sorry for it. Ricardo P. (talk) 17:25, 30 January 2010 (UTC)

File:Flag_of_Taipei_City.svg

File:Flag_of_Taipei_City.svg 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!

百楽兎 (talk) 01:52, 30 January 2010 (UTC)

File:Bayrak 03.gif

The deleted file File:Bayrak 03.gif is my own work and is available on the web for more than 15 years. --Nevit Dilmen (talk) 12:05, 30 January 2010 (UTC)

It is also available in pages like http://erol-cargo.com/torok/ ... You can see the comment in the gif file itself with GIMP. That proves the origin of file. In the best case it is a copyviolation but who violated the copyright? Those Who used the file without mentioning the source or me who created the file? --Nevit Dilmen (talk) 12:23, 30 January 2010 (UTC) Just finding an instance of a file on the web should not suffice for deletion. --Nevit Dilmen (talk) 12:39, 30 January 2010 (UTC)

Please talk directly to User talk:Zscout370, who deleted the file. If he does not restore the file within a few days, get back to me and I will restore it. Thanks for bringing this to our attention. --h-stt !? 10:04, 31 January 2010 (UTC)

This is not the first time that one of my images was deleted due to supposed copyviolation. There are many pages on web who use my images and other images from wikipedias without appropriately attributing the source. Admins should be familiar with this and be carefull while deleting images without notice or discussion. --Nevit Dilmen (talk) 10:50, 31 January 2010 (UTC)

Zscout, if you look at Nevit's contributions, it's obvious that he does professional-quality graphics like this, and mostly related to Turkey. - Jmabel ! talk 19:21, 31 January 2010 (UTC)

It is restored. User:Zscout370 ^{(Return fire)} 23:03, 31 January 2010 (UTC)

"Pierce_County_government.png"

What is the status on this deletion?: "Pierce_County_government.png", has been deleted from Commons

Who says the copyright status is different? -- #TTiT# ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ • The-Traveller-in-Tacoma •

Hello, Zscout370. You have new messages at Zscout370's talk page. You may remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Talk back

Hello, Zscout370. You have new messages at WikiLaurent's talk page. You may remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Hello

Please restore these images: File:Hero of the Russian Federation medal for template.png and File:Hero of the Soviet Union medal for template.png. They uses in some templates in ru-wiki. Current version of «File:Hero of the Russian Federation medal.png» and «File:Hero of the Soviet Union medal.png» disharmonises with other images in infobox. For example. Sorry for my English--Ivengo(RUS) (talk) 22:19, 29 January 2010 (UTC)

Please answer me--Ivengo(RUS) (talk) 20:47, 2 February 2010 (UTC)

The images will not be restored. User:Zscout370 ^{(Return fire)} 06:29, 3 February 2010 (UTC)

I was asked about these images. Could you please explain you position in more details? Personally, I see value in having both 2D and 3D variants of award. And I also think it's good idea to have consistent colors in award and band images. --EugeneZelenko (talk) 15:38, 6 February 2010 (UTC)

The ribbon colors were carried over to the new image, so those are the same. The color pattern while might be different, but it is very improved over the first image (used for the templates) and does not have the transparency issues that caused the revert war over the present image. User:Zscout370 ^{(Return fire)} 19:06, 6 February 2010 (UTC)

Flag of Portugal

Hi, Zscout370.

To me, any official source will do. Check out my message at Boicote's talk page. Cheers. --Bluedenim (talk) 19:37, 5 February 2010 (UTC)

Let's hope he admits he's wrong. --Bluedenim (talk) 20:20, 7 February 2010 (UTC)

I did managed to open that EPS file using Ghostscript (I do not use Photoshop) and I copied the colors from there from what I can tell. The very dark colors I picked because it was the Pantone shades from the Pantone site (that is what it was before, so kept it the same). Ideally, I would like for all of the flags to use RGB when officially stated, but we do not even have that for many images. I just wish I can harmonize them all, but it will have to take a lot of effort. User:Zscout370 ^{(Return fire)} 03:14, 8 February 2010 (UTC)

Russian coat of arms

Hello! I saw your edits of Russian coat of arms and have to say that you improved it well! Colours is a main headache! At least now it looks much better! But I still believe that it isn't perfect. Even more, I think that this awful "logo" duplicated by many sites may be redrawed to looks closer to this variant: http://eng.kremlin.ru/images/main_logo.jpg (as you can see the shape is the same, maybe black stroke is superflous? Or this one on the official Rus. President site: kremlin.ru see in header? It's just awersome, looks much closer to real coat of arms in Kremlin! See the discussion page of this file. So I need your advices and some support in case if I will made new version with gradients and more smooth view in small thumbs' sizes. I can include this coat of Moscow in its centre. Maybe we shall use red colour from here? --WWay (talk) 02:19, 17 February 2010 (UTC)

Colors are still an issue for many of the symbols we have on here. We have a user begging to change the color of the Russian flag because "neon" is not acceptable (even though the only thing officially stated about the colors is that Pantone will be used on flags). If you also see above, we have users who will revert images because or some reason, even though I am taking orders from the governments themselves. About the Russian arms, while I do see darker shades used on the physical arms, but there are a lot of times where certain colors are used in web applications and files. I do not have any sources about what colors should be used, so I really do not want to make a change at this time. User:Zscout370 ^{(Return fire)} 02:24, 17 February 2010 (UTC)

File tagging File:Google_Buzz_logo.png

This media may be deleted.

Thanks for uploading File:Google_Buzz_logo.png. This media is missing permission information. A source is given, but there is no proof that the author or copyright holder agreed to license the file under the given license. Please provide a link to an appropriate webpage with license information, or ask the author or copyright holder to send an email with copy of a written permission to VRT (permissions-commons@wikimedia.org). You may still be required to go through this procedure even if you are the author yourself; please see Commons:But it's my own work! for more details. After you emailed permission, you may replace the {{No permission since}} tag with {{subst:PP}} on file description page. Alternatively, you may click on "Challenge speedy deletion" below the tag if you wish to provide an argument why evidence of permission is not necessary in this case. Please see this page for more information on how to confirm permission, or if you would like to understand why we ask for permission when uploading work that is not your own, or work which has been previously published (regardless of whether it is your own). Warning: unless the permission information is given, the file may be deleted after seven days. Thank you.

 

shizhao (talk) 12:24, 23 February 2010 (UTC)

It is probably going to be PD-text; I only cropped it to remove the bubble logo. User:Zscout370 ^{(Return fire)} 15:08, 23 February 2010 (UTC)

Swiss flag

"we don't work for the swiss government / aren't we trying to represent _real_ flags" Well, the main focus that is being driven now is the accuracy of the flag images, especially national flags. I been told to use RGB or Hex colors, then CMYK, then Pantone. We know the RGB colors, we know the hex colors. They should be used. User:Zscout370 ^{(Return fire)} 05:23, 16 February 2010 (UTC)

We know the colors for the real flags… I don't see how we need any others. ¦ Reisio (talk) 07:30, 16 February 2010 (UTC)

We do, but if you take a look at this page, the Canadian Government states the Pantone colors (both colors used by the Swiss). However, the Government also stated that when being used on computer screens, #ff0000 should be used. The Swiss state the exact same thing, so why can't we have any sort of uniformity here? User:Zscout370 ^{(Return fire)} 07:33, 16 February 2010 (UTC)

Uniformity would be making each file look like a real flag would look, and not having a strangely different standard for a handful of countries that happen to think different colors should be used online. Our job is not to cater to every codified proviso of these governments, it's to make a comprehensive collection of realistic, authentic renderings of real-world flags. ¦ Reisio (talk) 10:15, 16 February 2010 (UTC)

But if a government tells us to draw it a certain way, then we need to do it. We had to fix the Swiss image before because of the wrong size of the background in ratio to the cross. You didn't see it as codling to the Swiss Government. User:Zscout370 ^{(Return fire)} 02:25, 17 February 2010 (UTC)

"But if a government tells us to draw it a certain way, then we need to do it."

No, we absolutely do not. You should know better than most that even a nation's own government often fails at properly constructing or depicting its own flag. Furthermore, in the cases of Switzerland and Canada, they have given only one way to draw the flag, and two ways to color it — one color for actual flags which actually represent the nations in the physical or real world, and another color for flags that do not exist except in this digital realm through which we are conversing now.

"We had to fix the Swiss image before because of the wrong size of the background in ratio to the cross. You didn't see it as codling to the Swiss Government."

Indeed. Making an image to (a single, official, real) specification is not codling. Making a version that does not represent any tangible object is, and also does not represent anything. Are we compiling fact or fiction? Reality or fantasy?
I have no problem with there being another copy of this file with another color, and for that copy to be placed on any number of articles on the Swiss flag, and for there to be text next to it saying "The Swiss (via FOO law/regulation) dictate the shade of red to be represented thusly in online reproductions.". The standard file names, however, should represent flags of the world, and not the internet. ¦ Reisio (talk) 10:08, 17 February 2010 (UTC)

So users can pick? There is no picking when you protect a page you flagrant troglodyte. ¦ Reisio (talk) 04:45, 24 February 2010 (UTC)

Hi Zscout370

Does your inane appeasement know no bounds? You can't tell another Italian goofball even when I spell it out for you? You cannot please everyone and be right, it is impossible. What in the hell is more important to you, gratifying every last whiner and ignoring long time contributors, or serving the project? (As if one even has to ask). ¦ Reisio (talk) 04:40, 24 February 2010 (UTC)

Neither. User:Zscout370 ^{(Return fire)} 05:15, 24 February 2010 (UTC)

Tip: Categorizing images

---

Hello, Zscout370!

Tip: Add categories to your files

Thanks a lot for contributing to the Wikimedia Commons! Here's a tip to make your uploads more useful: Why not add some categories to describe them? This will help more people to find and use them.

Here's how:

1) If you're using the UploadWizard, you can add categories to each file when you describe it. Just click "more options" for the file and add the categories which make sense:

2) You can also pick the file from your list of uploads, edit the file description page, and manually add the category code at the end of the page.

[[Category:Category name]]

For example, if you are uploading a diagram showing the orbits of comets, you add the following code:

[[Category:Astronomical diagrams]]

[[Category:Comets]]

This will make the diagram show up in the categories "Astronomical diagrams" and "Comets".

When picking categories, try to choose a specific category ("Astronomical diagrams") over a generic one ("Illustrations").

Thanks again for your uploads! More information about categorization can be found in Commons:Categories, and don't hesitate to leave a note on the help desk.

CategorizationBot (talk) 11:03, 24 February 2010 (UTC)

• Image:服喪の町並み.jpg was uncategorized on 23 February 2010 CategorizationBot (talk) 11:03, 24 February 2010 (UTC)

{{fact|Good idea?}}

imho we may move the file to ...(Textile Pantone)... and add a note such as "colours may looks strange on monitor since they are for textile printing" or similar
(pasted from the irc, I'm Vito@freenode, yestedary we dealt with this issue and I'm too lazy to express my idea in a better way ;) ). --Vituzzu (talk) 00:34, 25 February 2010 (UTC)

I already set off a file storm with just a rename, but we already mentioned it is textile Pantone in the file description. This is the only official Pantone shades I have for Italy is for textile. User:Zscout370 ^{(Return fire)} 03:35, 25 February 2010 (UTC)

That's clear, I'm just trying to make people stop shouting ;) --Vituzzu (talk) 20:01, 25 February 2010 (UTC)

Flag sizes

Hi. I often see you in the flag image histories. You've resized the images several times, but not to the same size, and I can't see any kind of consistence. It seems like there aren't predefined laws for these images but I sure will meet somebody who knows better. I will arrange some of flags and I would like to see the objections in advance.

Please tell me, as an admin of the Commons, where can I read the "rules" of making flags? Or, if there aren't rules, what are the standards? Or who have the control over the flag image files and able to inform me in detail? Thanks. - Orion 8 (talk) 04:21, 25 February 2010 (UTC)

There is really no rule or standard when it comes to sizes. Some of the sizes I pick because it matches a construction drawing I have or I just think it looks better bigger. User:Zscout370 ^{(Return fire)} 04:25, 25 February 2010 (UTC)

All right. And of other attributes? Or if it's easier, who are the "prime citizens" which I should ask about the flag principles, conventions, directions. I thoroughly would like to prevent an undoing war, because that is a distressing experience for a thougthful editor. What I am. :-) - Orion 8 (talk) 08:15, 25 February 2010 (UTC)

The only thing I can think of is really colors. I personally use the guides that governments pass out, so if they say to draw in RGB or Hex, I will do it. Some use Pantone, but I will give you a link later to use. User:Zscout370 ^{(Return fire)} 19:23, 25 February 2010 (UTC)

Okay, the color problem will be eliminated, because none of the Hungarian historical flags has standardized colors, not even the present official flags, unfortunately. The other components, if I've read you precisely, are judged by the thoughtful editors' discretion, and that's good. Thank you for your help, and see you at the flags. :-) - Orion 8 (talk) 02:38, 26 February 2010 (UTC)

I been trying for a while to get the Hungarian colors down pat, but no one has really said anything. The Hungarian Olympic Committee gave red as Pantone 032 and Pantone 355 for green, but I would not take much stock into that (since this Beijing 2008 Olympic flag protocol guide book has some errors in them). User:Zscout370 ^{(Return fire)} 03:33, 26 February 2010 (UTC)

Please help replace this outdated license

Hi, i have recived a message with that headline at my discussion page from BotMultichillT about the image File:Reedrelay.jpg, but that is not my original work, it was created by Sonett72 at en.wikipedia and moved here by me in order to use it at da.wikipedia. I guess you have to contact him in order to change the licence? --Bisgaard (talk) 21:27, 4 March 2010 (UTC)

I admin en.wp, so I am able to look at it myself. User:Zscout370 ^{(Return fire)} 02:45, 5 March 2010 (UTC)

I received the same message (copy below). The photo listed is my photo. I donated it to the public domain, and I see when I edit File:Guat2004 0426 112812ruins.JPG that the {{PD-self}} label is already on it. So, I do not see what else I can or should do. r3 (talk) 02:45, 7 March 2010 (UTC)

3 Please help replace this outdated license

Hello!

Thank you for donating images to the Wikimedia Commons. You have uploaded some images in the past with the license {{PD}}. While this was a license acceptable in the early days of Wikimedia, since January 2006, this license has been deprecated and since October 2008 no new uploads with this license was allowed.

The license on older images should be replaced with a better and more specific license/permissions and you can help by checking the images and adding {{PD-self}} if you are the author or one of the other templates that you can see in the template on the image page.

Thank you for your help. If you need help feel free to ask at Commons talk:Licensing or contact User:Zscout370.

The images we would like you to check are:

* File:Guat2004 0426 112812ruins.JPG

The template was changed by another user in late February. User:Zscout370 ^{(Return fire)} 03:12, 7 March 2010 (UTC)

Coat of arms of Switzerland

Hello! I have seen that you have uploaded an additional flag of Switzerland (Pantone). Is it possible that you upload also an alternative coat of arms (Pantone)? — PsY.cHo, 14:13, 6 March 2010 (UTC)

If you can wait for about 9-10 hours, I can upload one. User:Zscout370 ^{(Return fire)} 14:41, 6 March 2010 (UTC)

File:Coat of Arms of Switzerland (Pantone).svg. User:Zscout370 ^{(Return fire)} 03:14, 7 March 2010 (UTC)

Thank you. — PsY.cHo, 19:24, 7 March 2010 (UTC)

The Hungarian flags

Hi. My friend, you've just made your stomp amongst the Hungarian flags. The flags of my nation, and the files what I made fully complete last year. First: Hungary has two official flags declared by law. The state flag and the civil flag. I think that the Hungarian Wikipedia community is the proper forum to decide which one should represent our country on the international wiki sites, but this decision is still not made. Because the content of the flag_of_Hungary file can alter in the future, there is a separated flag_of_Hungary_(state) file for the state flag. Months ago another editor of the Commons ordered to me to create a separate file for that. I had made it. So now, what was the problem with that again? If I refer to an other version of the Hungarian flags as the "state" flag then I want to link to this file, and not anywhere else. Shall I hurt you with this?

And the much bigger problem. There are two different "civil" flags of Hungary. The offician civil flag and the civil ensign. If you don't know what ensign means then please fine somewhere a dictionary and see. But for those editors who have not any dictionaries I have written the exact purpose of the flags. Like this:

national flag of Hungary. This is the official civil flag of Hungary.

civil ensign (naval flag) of Hungary. This is the official civilian naval ensign of the Republic of Hungary

See the difference? And now you have deleted the official flag of my country because have an uncontrollable changing intention over the flag files. I didn't say a word when you have replaced all the files with a reduced code (and changed the color of one of the files with that) although I really don't understand why that work worth some hundreds of bytes by files. Just to be the latest one to edit the flags? Never mind, I have to bear the editing fever of wiki mates. But please, if you do not read the descriptions then why do you feel to have editing and crawling in the flag pile? Please tell me, how many other ways do I have to descript or advertise which flag is used for which purpose? As I must not change the light of an image without the permission of the author of the file, I see that, I don't know why, everybody can and may reedit hundredth time for the flags. I'm stuck, I can't follow this.

You made changes without being interested the opinion of the editors touched by this file. Right. I could undo those changes as sure I will do that sometime. But you have deleted the civil flag's file which I can not undo now. Now I ask you to undo the deletion to spare the work for me to enter the whole thing again. I hope you will do that. And say something to me about this evergreen problem.

The only difference is that there is a grey bar in the center to outline the white; with the flag having a green and red border, it makes it useless. Also, the files will be redirected. We already stated on Flag of Hungary that this is the state flag, the Civil ensign is the civil flag. User:Zscout370 ^{(Return fire)} 04:27, 6 March 2010 (UTC)

Right. You say that one of the flags is useless? So what? Why does it have to be deleted? There are other useless images in the Commons, too, variants of the same picture. As I've heard from other editors, there is not useless images in the Commons.

Who are that YOU who stated (?) that the civil naval flag has to be the official national flag? What will be the procedure if a new law will change one of those flags and a lot of links refer to the naval flag as our national flag?

You have stated. Where can I read, ask, tis and the other statements. I have already asked this some earlier, do you remember?

What that means the files WILL BE REDIRECTED? Without descussion, without doubt?

- Orion 8 (talk) 14:49, 6 March 2010 (UTC)

We are starting a standardization. As for redirection, the name "Flag of Hungary (civil)" will be redirected to "Civil Ensign of Hungary" so if either name of the image is used, it will still show an image. User:Zscout370 ^{(Return fire)} 03:11, 7 March 2010 (UTC)

I have to ask again, I see. Do you know the difference between the national flag and the civil ensign? What do you want to do if they are different? Who are that "we"? Where are those standards discussed, declared, readable, how can I suggest changes? What if I do not want to follow your "standard", because I am also a wiki editor? We have already talked about these, you should have say something about your standard, don't you feel it? - Orion 8 (talk) 21:07, 7 March 2010 (UTC)

Hi Zscout370,
in case you haven't seen already, I just want to notify you, there is also a thread about the same problem on my talkpage. As I'm not active in the flag/COA-"business", I've suggested to Orion 8 that he puts an outline/explanation about which of the currently available flag images on Hungary on Commons are needed and for which purpose on File talk:Flag of Hungary.svg, so that thereafter we can think what to put on each image page to prevent more unnecessary or even deleterious dupe-speedies as with this image. --Túrelio (talk) 22:33, 7 March 2010 (UTC)

The two main flags that I know of is the state flag (1x2 ratio, currently used at Flag of Hungary.svg) and the 2x3 ratio flag (which is at the Civil Ensign of Hungary.svg file). What you guys decide over what file to use is up to you, but it is useless to have 2 or 3 images, in SVG, of the same flag with the same colors, ratios, etc. User:Zscout370 ^{(Return fire)} 22:35, 7 March 2010 (UTC)

I thought to have made clear, I am not "you guys". I'm admin like you and I was "dragged" into this when working on the dupe-backlog. As obviously neither you nor I are users of the images, it seems to be appropriate to halt any further admin action on these files and wait until Orion 8 has explained his (or the :hu community's) wishes about the flags on the above mentioned talkpage. --Túrelio (talk) 22:50, 7 March 2010 (UTC)

Everything is already done before you came here. User:Zscout370 ^{(Return fire)} 01:14, 8 March 2010 (UTC)

File:Flag of Osaka Prefecture.svg

---

There seems to be a problem regarding the description and/or licensing of this particular file. It has been found that you've added in the image's description only a Template that's not a license and although it provides useful information about the image, it's not a valid license. Could you please resolve this problem, adding the license in the image linked above? You can edit the description page and change the text. Uploading a new version of the file does not change the description of the file. This page may give you more hints on which license to choose. Thank you.

This message was added automatically by Nikbot, if you need some help about it, ask its master (Filnik) or go to the Commons:Help desk. --Filnik 04:37, 10 March 2010 (UTC)

Snagged it. User:Zscout370 ^{(Return fire)} 04:44, 10 March 2010 (UTC)

Image:Regione-Basilicata-Stemma.svg

Hi Zscout370! You have deleted an image (right) which I converted to svg and very soon after that it was uploaded again by User:F l a n k e r. He used the file which I had made. This is a little odd. Also that you have deleted the file wihtout notifing me. Whats going on? Amada44 (talk) 08:43, 10 March 2010 (UTC)

It was missing a license. User:Zscout370 ^{(Return fire)} 16:49, 10 March 2010 (UTC)

yea great, it had {{PD-Flag}}. Anyhow, you shouldn't have deleted it without notifying me!! Can you restore it please! Amada44 (talk) 19:33, 10 March 2010 (UTC)

Swiss flag/shield colour

Can I chime in on a very similar situation I was involved in wrt official RGB vs Pantone (File:Flag of Australia.svg (RGB) vs File:Flag of Australia (converted).svg (Pantone)), with outcome of main file going to official spec and other colour system(s) getting their own file(s). Help:SVG got notes about this (end of the FAQ re. PANTONE) from me in anticipation of this situation.

The point for that ramble (!) was that there are a few common questions which repeat themselves over and over again. Could there be somewhere where these arguments are categorized and collated, in the manner of

Q. There is an official RGB specification and an official [other colour system, e.g. CIE, PANTONE...] spec. Which one should have the main title Flag of X? A. [Lengthy explanations and links to other similar situations] Therefore if RGB colours are explicitly defined for use on computer screens, RGB colours receive preference, and other colour schemes should have a qualified title (e.g. Flag of Foo (Pantone C).svg ).

Before the "each situation is unique", the underlying issues are mostly the same. Granted, the number of pages where this kind of thing could be applied is finite, but it could save a lot of hot air from users not so acquainted with past discussions on WMC. :D ButterStick (talk) 12:56, 10 March 2010 (UTC)

Some users just want Pantone and Pantone only, some of the RGB shades do match the Pantone shades, such as the case I found with Bulgaria and the US. There are only three flags that I personally know of that demands a different RGB shade to be used online and those are Australia, Canada and Switzerland. All of those use the RGB shades. User:Zscout370 ^{(Return fire)} 16:50, 10 March 2010 (UTC)

Copyright question

I noticed you deleted a number of flags with the rationale that they were copyright violations from http://www.crwflags.com/ I was just wondering how it is that this website can claim copyright for a non-creative reproduction of a historical flag. Just curious. Guettarda (talk) 04:12, 14 March 2010 (UTC)

They have a license that prevents their images from being used commercially. However, we are able to use their sources and make images on our own. User:Zscout370 ^{(Return fire)} 04:13, 14 March 2010 (UTC)

Speedied PD files?

Hi, since you did these deletions, a comment by you at this discussion would be appreciated. Regards, Paradoctor (talk) 11:56, 14 March 2010 (UTC)

Matter seems settled as far as you are concerned. Sorry for the interruption. Paradoctor (talk) 15:53, 14 March 2010 (UTC)

Someone asked me above about these files. A lot of files from FOTW cannot be used here because their authors do not allow their use here and the images will have a non-commercial use restriction. I do draw flags for both FOTW and for here so we can make brand new SVG files or very large PNG files. I do suspect that more images like this will be found in the future, so this is just round one. User:Zscout370 ^{(Return fire)} 17:13, 14 March 2010 (UTC)

Commons:Deletion requests/File:Galegos de soa.jpg

Bad english: File:Galegos de soa.jpg is a copyvio. Two of the images of the derivative work are mines and GFDL - the derivative work are PD. Are you adinistrator realy?--Lmbuga ^{gl, pt, es: contacta comigo} 17:16, 14 March 2010 (UTC)

Other images are Cc-by-sa-2.1, ...--Lmbuga ^{gl, pt, es: contacta comigo} 17:19, 14 March 2010 (UTC)

Ok. Yes, I am an admin. User:Zscout370 ^{(Return fire)} 17:20, 14 March 2010 (UTC)

Do you know what mean "sa" and what a derivative work is?--Lmbuga ^{gl, pt, es: contacta comigo} 17:21, 14 March 2010 (UTC)

Yes and yes. User:Zscout370 ^{(Return fire)} 17:22, 14 March 2010 (UTC)

I can't say what I want in english:

Español: Inconcebible. La licencia GFDL y las licencias Cc-by-sa obligan a que las obras derivadas sean compartidas con la misma licencia. Procedo a denunciarlo

--Lmbuga ^{gl, pt, es: contacta comigo} 17:24, 14 March 2010 (UTC)

Ok, so it was an oversight. It happens. User:Zscout370 ^{(Return fire)} 18:22, 14 March 2010 (UTC)

No problem. Sorry & thanks--Lmbuga ^{gl, pt, es: contacta comigo} 20:25, 14 March 2010 (UTC)

Español: Es usted un incompetente. La licencia cc-by-sa-2.1 no ofrece las condiciones con las que yo obligo a compartir mis imágenes exactamente (GFDL). La imagen tiene que ser borrada. Por favor actúe y bórrela. Párese además a mirar si hay más licencias incompatibles. Mis imágenes o las obras derivadas de mis imágenes tienen que manifestar todos y cada uno de los datos incorporados como datos de la imagen de origen, y no es el caso. Bórrela

--Lmbuga ^{gl, pt, es: contacta comigo} 20:37, 14 March 2010 (UTC)

The license Cc-by-sa-2.1 it is not the same that GFDL--Lmbuga ^{gl, pt, es: contacta comigo} 20:40, 14 March 2010 (UTC)

If the lincense Cc-by-sa-2.1 is the same of Cc-by-sa-3.0, you must be delete all my images, because my images are only GFDL--Lmbuga ^{gl, pt, es: contacta comigo} 20:41, 14 March 2010 (UTC)

File:Naval Jack of Argentina.svg

---

There seems to be a problem regarding the description and/or licensing of this particular file. It has been found that you've added in the image's description only a Template that's not a license and although it provides useful information about the image, it's not a valid license. Could you please resolve this problem, adding the license in the image linked above? You can edit the description page and change the text. Uploading a new version of the file does not change the description of the file. This page may give you more hints on which license to choose. Thank you.

This message was added automatically by Nikbot, if you need some help about it, ask its master (Filnik) or go to the Commons:Help desk. --Filnik 01:38, 16 March 2010 (UTC)

Thank you

very much for your quick help. まちがいに気がついたときには、頭のなかが真っ白になって、あせりました。でも、返事をしてくれたのが、知っている人だったので、嬉しかった。ほんとうにありがとうございます。See you at en WP. Best regards. Oda Mari (talk) 07:21, 20 March 2010 (UTC)

大丈夫。User:Zscout370 ^{(Return fire)} 07:30, 20 March 2010 (UTC)

We need your help at the Wikiproject medicine

Hello, Sorry for spaming your talk page, but this is very important. On the behalf of the Wikiproject medicine at the en.wikipedia, I am inviting you to be a part of the discussion going on the project's talk page about Patient images, The discussion started after I obtained a permission to more than 23000 dermatology related images, and about 1500 radiology images. As some editors of the Wikiproject medicine have some concerns regarding the policy of using patient images on wikipedia, and regarding patient consents. Also they believe that common's policy is not so clear regarding the issue. And since you are the experts please join us at this very important discussion -- MaenK.A._Talk 14:24, 20 March 2010 (UTC)

Flag of India

I have been observing the recent reversion war with regards to the Flag of India. I would appreciate it if you could voice your concerns at en:WP:GL/I so that an amicable solution can be achieved to this issue. Thanks! --JovianEye (talk) 03:39, 2 April 2010 (UTC)

The issue is simple; the "SVG validation code" is introducing uneven elements to the flag and it is bloating a lot of code. We have crisp and even numberd with the version we had. SVG validation is not a requirement on the Commons, it never has been. User:Zscout370 ^{(Return fire)} 04:01, 2 April 2010 (UTC)

Ukraine flag

Hi Zscout370,
are you sure about that? The yellows are different. Which one is correct? --Túrelio (talk) 06:34, 31 March 2010 (UTC)

Well, I am trying to get rid of the various images that do not cite official documents or just guess and migrate to the one image that is set out by law and by government documents. User:Zscout370 ^{(Return fire)} 06:36, 31 March 2010 (UTC)

Ok, but the one that would be deleted here, is sourced to the "official web site of the President of Ukraine". Personally, I've no interest in these flags and no knowledge which one is right. Only, I would like to avoid a repeat of the recent trouble about this hungarian flag. --Túrelio (talk) 06:43, 31 March 2010 (UTC)

The website has changed for the President, so that information was just based on photographs and guessing colors (no actual Pantone shades). So the document I got and used for the colors for the main flag image, it is correct according to the Ukrainian Wikipedians who seen this. I was also tasked at en.wp to solve the image issues. There won't be a repeat because the issues are different. (With that one user from Hungary, it feels that anyone touching the flags of his country is not doing it right or something, but I knew what I was doing). User:Zscout370 ^{(Return fire)} 06:50, 31 March 2010 (UTC)

Greetings, Zscout370. I have noticed you've changed the blue color of Ukraine's flag. But where did you find out that the blue has to be Pantone 2935C? Where is it specified? The document you have provided doesn't specify Pantones, it just says that the colors are dark blue and yellow. In my personal opinion, 2935C is too light and it should be 286C. You can compare flags of Ukraine and European Union on this picture. Here is the former Ukraine President with the national flag on the left side. It is obviously darker than 2935C. Regards, UP9, 11:42, 1 April 2010 (UTC)

A Ukrainian user who was able to see the document told me. However, we need to start using official sources for flag colors instead of guessing. This document is produced by the Ukrainian Government, so we need to use it. User:Zscout370 ^{(Return fire)} 16:58, 1 April 2010 (UTC)

I agree that we need to start using official information when we see it but not when some Ukrainian user said it. I don't trust this information in regards to Pantone 2935C because I've seen two examples of the official flag in real life, I know how Pantone 2935C looks like as I'm a designer. The flag looked much darker. I also agree that the current light blue color at Wikipedia page is too light and any darker color would be closer to the official color. Regards, UP9, 8:52, 2 April 2010 (UTC)

It also depends on the frabric too. However, all Pantone shades need to come from http://www.pantone.com/pages/pantone/colorfinder.aspx since that is directly from Pantone company itself. User:Zscout370 ^{(Return fire)} 17:04, 2 April 2010 (UTC)

I'm holding the Pantone fan in my hand and it's directly from Pantone company :) I told you I'm a graphic designer. Pantone 2935 C is too light for the flags I've seen. I would say it should be 286 C. Have you seen the official flag of Ukraine in real life or on pictures? Regards, UP9, 12:26, 3 April 2010 (UTC)

I seen the pictures, trying to get actual cloth flags. User:Zscout370 ^{(Return fire)} 17:17, 3 April 2010 (UTC)

Pieter Kuiper

Please see Commons:Administrators'_noticeboard/User_problems#Behavior_by_User:Pieter_Kuiper. Thank you for your time, -- Cirt (talk) 03:05, 5 April 2010 (UTC)

Flag of the Netherlands

Hello! Your latest version of the flag of the Netherlands is downright wrong! It is upside down.... The red part should be on top, the blue part at the bottom. Please correct a.s.a.p. Thanks, Lexw (talk) 07:23, 6 April 2010 (UTC)

Hey, I've reverted for now. It was brought up on COM:AN, just to let you know. Killiondude (talk) 07:37, 6 April 2010 (UTC)

Not surprised. Yeah, my typo on the colors, but I do not understand why this code works for me on my computer (and used in several images) but does not display for one user. User:Zscout370 ^{(Return fire)} 17:21, 6 April 2010 (UTC)

And again: the latest version is not correct, you can not leave out some headers of the SVG file... -

Erik Baas (talk) 00:37, 7 April 2010 (UTC)

Flag of Russia.svg

Please read this: Flag of Russia.svg. - Erik Baas (talk) 09:48, 6 April 2010 (UTC)

Read and fixed. User:Zscout370 ^{(Return fire)} 17:21, 6 April 2010 (UTC)

Not. Again, please see [14] - Erik Baas (talk) 00:40, 7 April 2010 (UTC)

belated thanks

thanks for converting my old quarto images to PD-self licenses. (though that's technically inaccurate; I was one of two wikimedians working on those pages, and together we agreed to release them under such a license :-) –SJ+ 17:58, 8 April 2010 (UTC)

Not a problem (it was probably done automatically with that image, so I just changed it and left it alone). User:Zscout370 ^{(Return fire)} 18:07, 8 April 2010 (UTC)

Revert for Image:Flag of the ICRC.svg

I thought you were familiar with the OTRS ticket regarding the design of the ICRC logo image? --Uwe (talk) 20:12, 5 April 2010 (UTC)

Only with claims to copyright, not the pattern. User:Zscout370 ^{(Return fire)} 20:17, 5 April 2010 (UTC)

As I've written before, check the design of the logo on the ICRC's website, check any recent publication of the ICRC (PDF or printed documents). The roundel logo without the acronym should be reserved for protective use in field situations. I've contacted User:Bastique for help on clarifying this issue. --Uwe (talk) 20:24, 5 April 2010 (UTC)

I am speaking to Cary too. User:Zscout370 ^{(Return fire)} 20:33, 5 April 2010 (UTC)

Considering this upload and your reference to the OTRS ticket in the respective upload information: Can we change the Image:Flag of the ICRC.svg back to the version with the roundel & acronym? Also, the previous version was in a format resembling a flag to have it in line with other red cross related symbols, see the gallery International Red Cross and Red Crescent Movement. --Uwe (talk) 19:53, 12 April 2010 (UTC)

If I can be honest with you completely, I still looked everywhere I can find and I do not see that a full logo is used on a cloth flag. I still believe that logo itself is correct, but not sure about the pattern. When I was able to get a glimpse of the OTRS ticket, it was just the logo design was not correct, nothing about a flag. User:Zscout370 ^{(Return fire)} 22:49, 12 April 2010 (UTC)

As far as I know, the ICRC has no rules or recommendations about the dimension or format. The first issue with the current version of the file is that the previous version was similar to the other images at the top of the gallery International Red Cross and Red Crescent Movement. It's now out of line with the other other "Flag_of_the_....svg" images as far as dimension is concerned. The other remaining issue is that the file still shows the roundel only, while the ICRC has asked for using the full logo (roundel & acronym). Bac in February 2007, the image Image:Flag of the ICRC.svg was specifically changed to comply with that request. --Uwe (talk) 14:46, 14 April 2010 (UTC)

It seems that flags of the ICRC only feature the roundel and are squares in shape ([15]), but the actual logo or emblem has the abbreviation too ([16]). However, changing the shape of the flag image here has caused problems, because many pages that use the "flag" image actually feature it to show the logo or emblem, which is incorrect and illegitimate, as it is a protective sign in the same manner a plain red cross is. Do we really have any use for the flag version without the abbreviation? Writing [[Image:Flag of the ICRC.svg]] should produce the version with the abbreviation, because that image is used so extensively to represent the emblem/logo. And remember to use {{IHL Symbol}} where applicable. --Sa^Mi ✉ 18:39, 14 April 2010 (UTC)

User_talk:Mariah-Yulia

I've granted an unblock, as there doesn't seem to have been malice. I'll monitor her for a while. Adam Cuerden (talk) 20:36, 6 April 2010 (UTC)

I know there was not malice, but the user just kept going so the only way to stop uploads is with a block. Alright, I will monitor too. User:Zscout370 ^{(Return fire)} 20:54, 6 April 2010 (UTC)

Understood. However, it's been, what, two months? Let's see if she's learned her lesson in that time =) Adam Cuerden (talk) 15:16, 7 April 2010 (UTC)

So far, so good. She's asking first if she's uncertain. =) Adam Cuerden (talk) 22:26, 9 April 2010 (UTC)

I think the main image she is asking about is an animated flag of the Ukraine. I asked a few people that I knew if they could draw it, but they never got back to me. So, I made an image using Gimp and seeing if that works. User:Zscout370 ^{(Return fire)} 16:41, 15 April 2010 (UTC)

File:EKV-D66.jpg

File:EKV-D66.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!

Quibik (talk) 19:57, 14 April 2010 (UTC)

File:EKV_symbols.jpg

File:EKV_symbols.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!

Quibik (talk) 21:06, 14 April 2010 (UTC)

Tip: Categorizing images

---

Hello, Zscout370!

Tip: Add categories to your files

Thanks a lot for contributing to the Wikimedia Commons! Here's a tip to make your uploads more useful: Why not add some categories to describe them? This will help more people to find and use them.

Here's how:

1) If you're using the UploadWizard, you can add categories to each file when you describe it. Just click "more options" for the file and add the categories which make sense:

2) You can also pick the file from your list of uploads, edit the file description page, and manually add the category code at the end of the page.

[[Category:Category name]]

For example, if you are uploading a diagram showing the orbits of comets, you add the following code:

[[Category:Astronomical diagrams]]

[[Category:Comets]]

This will make the diagram show up in the categories "Astronomical diagrams" and "Comets".

When picking categories, try to choose a specific category ("Astronomical diagrams") over a generic one ("Illustrations").

Thanks again for your uploads! More information about categorization can be found in Commons:Categories, and don't hesitate to leave a note on the help desk.

CategorizationBot (talk) 10:54, 15 April 2010 (UTC)

• Image:Louis Theroux at Nordiske Mediedager 2009.jpg was uncategorized on 14 April 2010 CategorizationBot (talk) 10:54, 15 April 2010 (UTC)
• Image:Louis Theroux and Anne Lindmo at Nordiske Mediedager 2009.jpg was uncategorized on 14 April 2010 CategorizationBot (talk) 10:54, 15 April 2010 (UTC)

Incorrect SVG files

Why don't you even give an answer to my remarks about the errors in SVG files ? - Erik Baas (talk) 23:28, 14 April 2010 (UTC)

HELLO ???? - Erik Baas (talk) 22:23, 15 April 2010 (UTC)

Thanks!

Thanks for this flag! — Mariah-Yulia • Talk to me! 21:18, 19 April 2010 (UTC)

Error in File:Construction sheet of the Japanese flag no text.svg

The "3/5" scale on the right is very confusing, because it's 3/5 of the height, which is 2. So to make the units consistent, it should be 6/5 = 1.2. Probably better to just multiply all the dimensions by 5 and make it 15 wide, 10 high, with a 6 unit diameter circle in the middle. (I'd edit the SVG myself, but I can't figure out how to upload the result without creating an account.) 71.41.210.146 02:19, 20 April 2010 (UTC)

Those of the numbers that were given in the 国旗国歌法 so that is what I used. User:Zscout370 ^{(Return fire)} 02:39, 20 April 2010 (UTC)

Er, I'm not saying that the numbers are not faithfully copied from the source material, just that the numbers "2" and "3" are using one set of units, while the value "3/5" is using another. Without additional text (which the source document provides, but the svg does not) the mixed units are very confusing. It's quite reasonable to perform some routine calculations to convert to common units. Alternatively, you could write "2×3/5" or some such. 71.41.210.146 03:05, 20 April 2010 (UTC)

The second alternative is covered with File:Construction_sheet_of_the_Japanese_flag.svg. The no file is to help those who want to translate files into different languages or already have the construction explained on their wiki article. User:Zscout370 ^{(Return fire)} 03:28, 20 April 2010 (UTC)

Image:Flag of the ICRC.svg

For your information: I have changed most of the projects to use Image:Emblem of the ICRC.svg instead of the Flag of the ICRC, to effectively resolve the dispute here. Thanks for creating the Emblem image, btw! --Sa^Mi ✉ 22:19, 21 April 2010 (UTC)

Ok, that is fine. User:Zscout370 ^{(Return fire)} 02:29, 22 April 2010 (UTC)

File:Alam-Pedja_logo.png

File:Alam-Pedja_logo.png has been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether it should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry. If you created this file, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with it, such as a copyright issue. Please see Commons:But it's my own work! for a guide on how to address these issues. Please remember to respond to and – if appropriate – contradict the arguments supporting deletion. Arguments which focus on the nominator will not affect the result of the nomination. Thank you!

Quibik (talk) 12:23, 27 April 2010 (UTC)

File:MOSCAT WELCOME WALL.jpg

Hi. You added a missing-permission-tag to this file. What am I not seeing? There is nothing obvious to be wrong with the data in the information-template and I could not find any copyvio-hits on tineye or google. -- Cecil (talk) 12:56, 3 May 2010 (UTC)

Every thing the user uploaded was taken from somewhere else or not his to claim at all. I do not trust his uploads. User:Zscout370 ^{(Return fire)} 15:35, 3 May 2010 (UTC)

Copyright status: File:Hammer and sickle.svg

This media may be deleted.

Thanks for uploading File:Hammer and sickle.svg. I notice that the file page either doesn't contain enough information about the license or it contains contradictory information about the license, so the copyright status is unclear. If you created this file yourself, then you must provide a valid copyright tag. For example, you can tag it with {{self|GFDL|cc-by-sa-all}} to release it under the multi-license GFDL plus Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike All-version license or you can tag it with {{PD-self}} to release it into the public domain. (See Commons:Copyright tags for the full list of license tags that you can use.) If you did not create the file yourself or if it is a derivative of another work that is possibly subject to copyright protection, then you must specify where you found it (e.g. usually a link to the web page where you got it), you must provide proof that it has a license that is acceptable for Commons (e.g. usually a link to the terms of use for content from that page), and you must add an appropriate license tag. If you did not create the file yourself and the specific source and license information is not available on the web, you must obtain permission through the VRT system and follow the procedure described there. Note that any unsourced or improperly licensed files will be deleted one week after they have been marked as lacking proper information, as described in criteria for deletion. If you have uploaded other files, please confirm that you have provided the proper information for those files, too. If you have any questions about licenses please ask at Commons:Village pump/Copyright or see our help pages. Thank you.

~★ pikolas ^{[[mia diskuto]]} 23:59, 4 May 2010 (UTC)

Singapore flag

Hi Zscout370. Please follow this link:
http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Graphic_Lab/Illustration_workshop#Colour_corrections_for_Singaporean_symbols
maybe others will change the colors too. - Greets McSush (talk) 05:33, 4 May 2010 (UTC)

In supplement to this, as I am the original requester, I can provide several photos showing that while Singaporean Law may say one, they clearly don't practice it, and use a much darker shade of red. I can have those ready for you by tomorrow afternoon(it's 1:51am my time, quite late), if you're willing to hold off reverting until then. Fry1989 (talk) 05:52, 4 May 2010 (UTC)

As I told you, FOTW is not correct at all when it comes to the Pantone color. When you look at http://www.crwflags.com/fotw/Flags/sg.html it says "The approximate shade of red proposed by Album des Pavillons 1990 is Pantone 186c, equivalent to Y 80 - M 90 - K 5." This book is from 1990 and they were taking a guess at the Pantone. I have official emails, official books and official websites connected to the SG government that states Pantone 032. The books were published in 2001, so I take a book from the SG Government over this website. User:Zscout370 ^{(Return fire)} 06:11, 4 May 2010 (UTC)

Yes, a website that itself is inconsistent. I have also provided photographic evidence on the Grahpic Lab page regarding the fact that the Government itself doesn't follow this suggestion, therefore making it, at best, semi-official. Fry1989 (talk) 00:18, 5 May 2010 (UTC)

I see your point, but even if the 186 information is sorta true, it is from 1990. These books and regulations were published in 2001. The 2001 colors take precedence over the 1990 guess. User:Zscout370 ^{(Return fire)} 06:09, 5 May 2010 (UTC)

Okay, I emailed a representative of the Singapore Government for the National Herritage Board regarding the colours of the flag(I can provide you with a copy if you wish). Now, the email does confirm Pantone 032, but I am still having a problem with this because, while Pantone 032 is pinkinsh, all copies I see on Singaporean Government websites, as well as the copy in my email are more of a red. Because of this I did some research on Pantone 032 and found a sub-unit of the colour labled Pantone 032c, which matches all versions I've seen on the websites, and recievded in email. For this reason, I'd like to ask that you edit the Singaporean Flag, and it's derivatives to 032c Fry1989 (talk) 00:49, 6 May 2010 (UTC)

No. The Pantone color for 032 Red comes from http://www.pantone.com/pages/pantone/colorfinder.aspx?c_id=13050 and all of the Pantone flags are using the shades from http://www.pantone.com/pages/pantone/colorfinder.aspx because those are published by the Pantone Corporation themselves. User:Zscout370 ^{(Return fire)} 05:46, 6 May 2010 (UTC)

The problem with the Pantone site regarding red, is when you type it into the search, it gives you a dozen or so reds with the suffix 032, and while they're all supposed to be different, on-screen they display as the exact same shade. That is why I have given you a seperate source for 032c. Do the research yourself, but don't just brush off my suggestions without double-checking things. This is atleast the second time you've sourced something that is inconsistent, whereas I have not. Fry1989 (talk) 19:10, 6 May 2010 (UTC)

All of the flags that use Pantone here is using the above Pantone website. Plus, just because the actual flags might look this way or that way, we only have Pantone 032 to go on and we have the shades from the Pantone Company. The images are not changing. User:Zscout370 ^{(Return fire)} 19:13, 6 May 2010 (UTC)

well it's unfortunate you're so ingnorant and close-minded, you really are doing a disservice to the Commons by be being such. Fry1989 (talk) 19:23, 6 May 2010 (UTC)

Ryan_2.png and Elesis_Render

But..this images are public domain. Roger360 (talk) 19:46, 7 May 2010 (UTC)

Because you can see it and download it does not mean public domain. The drawings are copyrighted by the game designers. User:Zscout370 ^{(Return fire)} 06:51, 8 May 2010 (UTC)

Commons:Deletion requests/File:020731chammergraphics.jpg

Thanks for your defense of my innocence here.

A complete aside -- it's wonderful how Wiki leads from one thing to another. You ask on your User page

Did you know that masters of Singapore-registered ships are subject to a fine of S$1,000 if they do not hoist the Red Ensign (pictured) before entering or leaving port?

The same flag is used by visiting ships as a courtesy flag, usually at the starboard spreader. However, if you say just "Red Ensign" to almost any mariner, he or she will assume you mean the British Red Ensign, which is the flag of the British merchant marine and, defaced, of a number of Britain's former and current colonies. I would probably say "Singapore Civil Ensign" or "Singapore Merchant Ensign".

That led me to note that you're a major contributor of flags. I have at least 25 of your creations on my user pages, so I owe you a "thank you" for them, also. . . . . Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk • contribs) 09:40, 10 May 2010 (UTC)

The Red Ensign link was supposed to go to the article on the Singapore Merchant Ensign, but I am glad you like the work I done. User:Zscout370 ^{(Return fire)} 18:15, 10 May 2010 (UTC)

Sorry, I wasn't clear -- it does link to the Singapore Red Ensign -- but I might have said:

Did you know that masters of Singapore-registered ships are subject to a fine of S$1,000 if they do not hoist the Red Singapore Civil Ensign (pictured) before entering or leaving port?

. . . . Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk • contribs) 21:42, 10 May 2010 (UTC)

Flag of Honduras

Hi, I've seen you did some modifications on Honduran flag and I have proposed a colour change in the discussion page of the file. I would like to know your opinion on the proposition. Thank you! --HansenBCN (talk) 11:43, 14 May 2010 (UTC)

Commons:Deletion requests/File:Millenium Tower Bucharest.jpg

I agree with you, that the image shold be used commercially. U've made the picture myself and because an unsigned vandal put a deletion tag on randomly more the 100 pictures invoking and article of the law who does not exist, i do not understad why dou you agree to delete the picture?

I reread the Romanian law that you cited; apparently that website you cite has the commercial clause at G instead of H. This still means that we need the author's permission for use of the photo commercially, which we don't have. Plus, the building is the main focus of the photo. User:Zscout370 ^{(Return fire)} 17:33, 19 May 2010 (UTC)

File:Flag of Yamaguchi Prefecture.svg

---

There seems to be a problem regarding the description and/or licensing of this particular file. It has been found that you've added in the image's description only a Template that's not a license and although it provides useful information about the image, it's not a valid license. Could you please resolve this problem, adding the license in the image linked above? You can edit the description page and change the text. Uploading a new version of the file does not change the description of the file. This page may give you more hints on which license to choose. Thank you.

This message was added automatically by Nikbot, if you need some help about it, ask its master (Filnik) or go to the Commons:Help desk. --Filnik 09:00, 19 May 2010 (UTC)

File:Seal of California.svg

Just let you know there has been some talk about the image you created. There are some issues with embeded images, and it could use your clean up magic. Keep up the good work! --Svgalbertian (talk) 02:30, 21 May 2010 (UTC)

I am working on it. User:Zscout370 ^{(Return fire)} 02:39, 21 May 2010 (UTC)

I fixed the staff somewhat, but the two embedded PNG images deal with the colored background of the seal (the sky and sea). User:Zscout370 ^{(Return fire)} 03:22, 21 May 2010 (UTC)

Please re-insert photos: Deriashnyj.jpg and Khotkevych_quartet.jpg. to article regarding Peter Deriashnyj - permission was given when requested on 2/04/2010.

Copyrighted images from specific user

Hello. The user Jamen Somasu has a history of uploading copyrighted images as public domain files on Wikipedia. I have reason to believe that the other images that he has uploaded are also copyrighted and do not belong to him. [17] [18] [19] I am aware that this user is from Costa Rica and I highly doubt he has gone to South American countries and taken pictures of trophies or trophy galleries. Therefore, the remaining images that he has uploaded are more than likely copyrighted work. Thank you for your attention. --MicroX (talk) 00:35, 26 May 2010 (UTC)

I will check these out when I have time. User:Zscout370 ^{(Return fire)} 06:36, 26 May 2010 (UTC)

File:Michael remark.PNG

---

There seems to be a problem regarding the description and/or licensing of this particular file. It has been found that you've added in the image's description only a Template that's not a license and although it provides useful information about the image, it's not a valid license. Could you please resolve this problem, adding the license in the image linked above? You can edit the description page and change the text. Uploading a new version of the file does not change the description of the file. This page may give you more hints on which license to choose. Thank you.

This message was added automatically by Nikbot, if you need some help about it, ask its master (Filnik) or go to the Commons:Help desk. --Filnik 21:01, 31 May 2010 (UTC)

bih flag and coa

Why does the flag and coa of bih differ in color? [20] [21] --PRODUCER (talk) 13:57, 13 June 2010 (UTC)

I focused on the flag image, not the coa images. Anyways, I can try and fix it soon. User:Zscout370 ^{(Return fire)} 06:39, 14 June 2010 (UTC)

File:Vaabenskjold Qualen.jpg

---

There seems to be a problem regarding the description and/or licensing of this particular file. It has been found that you've added in the image's description only a Template that's not a license and although it provides useful information about the image, it's not a valid license. Could you please resolve this problem, adding the license in the image linked above? You can edit the description page and change the text. Uploading a new version of the file does not change the description of the file. This page may give you more hints on which license to choose. Thank you.

This message was added automatically by Nikbot, if you need some help about it, ask its master (Filnik) or go to the Commons:Help desk. --Filnik 07:38, 15 June 2010 (UTC)

Flag of Switzerland

You used the wrong colors for the Swiss flag. Sure gouverment regulation may state that for online use (websites, eg) the colour can be plane red. But that doesn't change the colours of the real flag.

BTW: I thing you should stop changing the colours of flags. For eg Poland proovs that the most common flag isn't always the "official" flag.--Drieskamp (talk) 17:40, 16 June 2010 (UTC)

Well, whenever we are told the web colors for a flag, we try and use them (and in the case of Switzerland, we do; however, we still have the Pantone colors to comparison and use on articles). As for stop changing the flag colors, the simple answer is no. The long answer is this; I been studying flags for over 10 years. I been collecting diagrams, construction charts and other information when it comes to flag colors. Many times, we get it wrong on here, so I try and fix it as much as possible. As for the Alaska flag, the Alaska Government told me about the official colors of the flag, and we use them. User:Zscout370 ^{(Return fire)} 07:43, 17 June 2010 (UTC)

The real Swiss flag is not the one that is currently shown. Wikipedia is spreading wrong information. We have to show the most used and official flag, not the web friendly flag. The Swiss Government design manual is just a guideline for internal use (eg the Swiss gouvernment, where Wikipedia doesn't belong to). I suggest a construction like Polands flag: the most used, most known and most official version onder the name 'Flag of Switzerland.svg' and your web friendly version onder the name 'Flag of Switzerland (official web version).svg'.--Drieskamp (talk) 00:09, 20 June 2010 (UTC)

Then it will go against what current Wikipedia practice is. We use the web friendly colors as the "main" image, which is the same for Poland, Italy, Canada, Bulgaria, USA, Georgia and several other national flags. People can use the Pantone image as they wish, but as I said, if the Swiss Government said to use these colors online, then I will take their regulations and use it. User:Zscout370 ^{(Return fire)} 07:30, 20 June 2010 (UTC)

Also, when we do use Pantone shades, we use http://www.pantone.com/pages/pantone/colorfinder.aspx to standardize the colors (so we do not fight over what programss created what shade). Also, I find it odd you told me not to use Pantone for the Alaska flag, yet telling me to use Pantone for the Swiss flag. All I ask is for some consistency. User:Zscout370 ^{(Return fire)} 08:36, 20 June 2010 (UTC)

File:Flag_of_Wakayama_Prefecture.png

File:Flag_of_Wakayama_Prefecture.png has been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether it should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry. If you created this file, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with it, such as a copyright issue. Please see Commons:But it's my own work! for a guide on how to address these issues. Please remember to respond to and – if appropriate – contradict the arguments supporting deletion. Arguments which focus on the nominator will not affect the result of the nomination. Thank you!

User:Zscout370 ^{(Return fire)} 20:49, 19 June 2010 (UTC)

File:Civil Ensign of Switzerland.svg

The website of the Federal administration of Switzerland or the PDF document (page 4) there says that the logo of Switzerland must be in #ff0000. Now, I have found the File Civil Ensign of Switzerland.svg which uses a color of Pantone. Can you change the color? — PsY.cHo, 12:35, 24 June 2010 (UTC)

I had it changed to that shade before, but was reverted by users who always demand for "real flags" and use the Pantone shade. User:Zscout370 ^{(Return fire)} 19:19, 24 June 2010 (UTC)

Chilean Arms

Yes, I am aware of that version, it's also on the Commons here, However, surely someone like yourself, who tends to pay attention to detail, would know that it is a modern government wordmark, and not the legally-binding Arms of the Republic as adopted in legislation over a century and a half ago. Fry1989 (talk) 01:57, 25 June 2010 (UTC)

Right, just gives us some vector artwork to base our image off of. I still have some questions about the arms and I am hoping I am getting the anwsers soon. User:Zscout370 ^{(Return fire)} 02:30, 25 June 2010 (UTC)

Hello there

I know we've had our differences, however I'm hopping we can let those be in the past. I am currently having an issue with a user, Xavigivax, who is refussing to allow any changes or updates to his files, in this case the Coats of Arms of Singapore, Senegal and Kenya. I have politely asked him numerous times to stop, and also explained to him that files by users on the Commons are updated and improved upon by other users all the time, that this is how the Commons works, but he refuses to accept it. For Singapore, I was forced to upload the more accurate version of the Coat of Arms seperately because he refused to let it be uploaded over his, and for the other two, he won't even allow simple colour corrections. Can you please explain to this user that this isn't an attack on their file or skills, but that the Commons is a place to share and improve files. Fry1989 (talk) 21:55, 29 June 2010 (UTC)

Differences happen, I am not too worried. Anyways, about the Singapore emblem, all copies MUST be deleted because it is not free at all. I will look at the Kenya and Senegal images and see what I can do. (BTW, the 3D coat of arms is not really accepted or works for a lot of images, but many we have taken from PDF documents or what not, they are all 3Dish. I will try and fix those too). However, I must tell you that I am going to be away from my main rig from June 30th until July 5th, so I will probably not have time to work on it. User:Zscout370 ^{(Return fire)} 02:17, 30 June 2010 (UTC)

Alright then, thank you for taking a moment on this. Since Singapore's will have to be removed, I will uploaded it as non-free on the Wikipedia English. I'm going attempt to mend this issue with the other user if I can, it appears his biggest problem is just that I'm not specific enough with my updates. Thanks again. Fry1989 (talk) 03:36, 30 June 2010 (UTC)

The user you talked about said that blazons, in theory, are out of copyright and showed the Commons page. While it gives some idea of what happens, but those are mostly for arms that are older than dirt. Singapore just became a country in 1965. I have asked the National Heritage Board before about the Coat of Arms being used on the Commons and their conditions are not acceptable for the Commons, but alright for en.wp and for other fair use. Make an SVG version and it looks very crude, but if we match it towards the legal image, then off it goes as a copyvio. There is a user by the name of JackLee: he is from Singapore and he would be the best to get advice on just what to do. User:Zscout370 ^{(Return fire)} 10:14, 30 June 2010 (UTC)

Coats of arms

Please, read this: Commons:Coats of Arms and restore the file File:Coat of arms of Singapore.svg. This is not an emblem, it's a coat of arms and this is different. The copyright affects to the official design. My version it's free, because it's an heraldic interpretation of the description, not a simply copy of a design. All the states have this kind of use restrition and there are a lot of free versions of the COA. Regards! --Xavigivax (talk) 07:05, 30 June 2010 (UTC)

I read above that you will be away until the 5th. I'm going to ask to another admin to restore the file. For any question, please, talk to me in my talk page. Thank you! --Xavigivax (talk) 07:13, 30 June 2010 (UTC)

No, the images will not be restored. The government of Singapore claims copyright to the drawing and description of the coat of arms and I have asked their government before to have their arms on the Commons; they said no. User:Zscout370 ^{(Return fire)} 09:47, 30 June 2010 (UTC)

As for the whole vacation thing, I could still reply to messages (just not sure how the wifi is in Chicago) but when it comes to images itself, I won't be able to help mediate a situation between you and Fry (the issues I had with Fry were flag related; blazons are just something I rarely work on). User:Zscout370 ^{(Return fire)} 10:10, 30 June 2010 (UTC)

First, excuse me for my poor English. I will talk with Lokal_Profil, another admin likes you but with experience with blazon and knowledge of heraldry (it's a rare hobby, there are more fans in vexillology than in heraldry). I think that you are wrong/confused with the coat of arms of Singapore. This goverment, like almost all, can copyright his COA's design, but not my COA's design. I will explain also the heraldic bugs in the others files that you don't let me change (Senegal and Kenya) to restore my version. I think that before you set up the restriction you should talk to me. --Xavigivax (talk) 14:35, 30 June 2010 (UTC)

Hi there Zscout. Just letting you know that the coat of arms by Xavigivax has been restored, most likely by Lokal_Profil(I'm assuming, since Xavigivax said above that he would talk about this with Lokal_Profil in your abscence). I'm not saying this to have them re-deleted by you, but to suggest that you and your fellow Admins perhaps discuss this issue, as to whether Singapore can't copyright a free version, as Xavigivax says. Clearly there's disagreement on that, since they were restored. I'll respect whatever decision is made regarding the Arms and their allowance(or not) to be on Commons. Fry1989 (talk) 01:33, 9 July 2010 (UTC)

The log shows me "(show/hide) 07:08, 2 July 2010 Rastrojo (talk | contribs | block) restored "File:Coat of arms of Singapore.svg" ‎ (18 revisions and 6 files restored: an own design can't be copyrighted) (global usage; delinker log)" The problem is that this is not his own design, it is derived from the coat of arms of Singapore in nearly every element (plus the design he had anyways was wrong with the silver star and crescent, it is supposed to be white according to SG law). I went ahead and redeleted it as a derivative work. As for Lokal, I have not spoken to him about this and the arms were never restored by him. To Xavigivax, while I work on flags more than coat of arms, that still does not make me blind to copyright issues. The page you showed me was a guideline, but most of the time, the blazon affects arms that are older than dirt. Even when copyright is not in question, accuracy is my goal. User:Zscout370 ^{(Return fire)} 06:05, 9 July 2010 (UTC)

Hi Zscout. You said: (plus the design he had anyways was wrong with the silver star and crescent, it is supposed to be white according to SG law) this says to me that you don't know the heraldry rules. Heraldry is not like vexilology. "White" or "silver" is a way to say the tincture en:Argent and there are not a correct RGB value to represent it, because heraldry is older that any modern system to represent colours. I'm not copying a COA, I'm representing my own version according to the heraldry rules. You said that I copied nearly every element, but is not true, I used a shape of escutcheon like: File:Escudo de armas de Bernat Bellvey.svg or File:Escudo de armas de los Cardona.svg, I used same the colour palette that hundred of COA that I designed. I used this stars for dozens, I have it saved in my local files. The crescent I did it whith two cercles, one upon the other and with the difference, and then, a line in his interior like: File:Croissant d or.svg or File:Escudo de Fontanars dels Alforins.svg or File:Escut d'Olius.svg. The lion is not the same, it's similar but not the same, compare the tail or the mouth for exemple. The tiger has the same body of the lion with little differences, the official copyrighted design the tigger has different body of the lion. There are two palm branches below the supporters that is not blazoned and I put it because the official has it. The design is very different. The banner is similar, but is not the same. Of course that the result is similar, because is not an invention is a representation of a crescent with 5 stars and a lion and a tigger in the supporters with a banner below. I will advise the user Jacklee, that seems that you have more trust in him that in me. --Xavigivax (talk) 07:10, 9 July 2010 (UTC)

I am going by what the SG Government tells me, and if they say their arms cannot be on here due to copyright, then it cannot be here. The main issue between you and I, with just the arms design itself, is I am trying to comply with what SG law has established. In government publications that I have, they call the stars and crescent moon white, not silver and not argent and there is no official blazon (just a description). User:Zscout370 ^{(Return fire)} 07:30, 9 July 2010 (UTC)

Then you should erase all the designs of the COA created here in commons, because all the state or simple municipalities has this kind of use restrictions. I don't understand why you have this behavior with this COA and not with the rest and why you don't trust in the criteria of another admin that restore the file. Remember that I follow the heraldry knowledge, white or silver are ways to say the tincture argent, one of the two metals in heraldry. I recommend you that read the article en:Argent. The other is Or that you could say yellow or gold, but this is the same. You said that you work on flags. In vexilology, there are a lot of colours, but not in heraldry. The flags consider different tone colors for white or silver, File:Paleta final Taller.svg, but not in heraldry, there only there are Or, Argent, gules, azure, vert, sable and purpure, we also have orange. Technically, the description of the COA of Singapore is not correct and show a lack of heraldry knowledge. The description is not corresponding with the design. The shield is not red, is gules, the figures are not white, they are argent the description says lion and tiger, but not say that this animals are guardant, the palm branches are not described... You could ask to the admin Lokal_Profil that also created a lot of COA. Xavigivax (talk) 07:51, 9 July 2010 (UTC)

I sent Lokal an email before you wrote this reply. No, not all coat of arms of nations will be deleted because either the arms are older than dirt, the copyright term has passed or the arms are not protected by copyright at all. I done a few coat of arms myself for nations, based on official drawings. As for Singapore, regardless about the copyright, we have to go with what they call for the design. If they want the stars and crescent moon white, then we have to use white, not silver or argent. Ok, so they broke the heraldry rules, but that is what is established in law. User:Zscout370 ^{(Return fire)} 08:05, 9 July 2010 (UTC)

Here there are a difference between you and me. You had designed some COA based on drawings, I had designed more or less a thousand of them and I use the description for do it, not a existing drawing. The heraldry is an universal system, Singapore can not change this. If the law of Singapore says that 2+2 is 5, you will change the article about mathematics?. --Xavigivax (talk) 08:20, 9 July 2010 (UTC)

National coat of arms usually has a description that is set down in law and it is followed. So if Singapore law calls for white, they will get white. Then this is something we have to agree to disagree on since a lot nations will not follow the correct rules of heraldry when it comes to colors or designs. User:Zscout370 ^{(Return fire)} 08:50, 9 July 2010 (UTC)

Remember that I'm doing a correct heraldic and free interpretation of the description. None of my design are a copy of an official design, for this reason you can remove it. Unlike the flags, one description produces multiple design. And all are correct while this design follows the heraldry rules. For exemple: this File:Armes Rocaberti.gif, this File:Armes Rocaberti.svg or this File:Blason famille Rocaberti.svg are the same COA, but the design is different, or File:Escudo de Alfonso XII (toison).png and File:Escudo de España 1874-1931 con toisón.svg, differents designs for the same coat of arms, both are correct, another example of free heraldic interpretation of a blazon: File:FranceArmsofAlfonsoDukeofAnjouCadiz.jpg and File:Armoiries Alphonse de Boubon, duc de Cadix.svg. You should understand the differences between heraldry and flags. Xavigivax (talk) 09:31, 9 July 2010 (UTC)

I do understand that difference, but one thing that I do to draw with my graphics, regardless it is arms or flags, is accuracy. I been trying for years to get construction diagrams for various flags and I managed to get a few others for the coat of arms of some nations. It took me a while to finally make an SVG version of the PR China arms, which is no easy feat. I rarely deal with the historic coat of arms, so I am not going to argue with you on those. It is just the modern coat of arms/seals of nation-states I just strive to be accurate on. I was working with another Spanish speaking user, B1mbo, to fix the arms of Chile (I disagree with the 3D look on the national arms, but lacking legislation, I will let it stand). User:Zscout370 ^{(Return fire)} 17:54, 9 July 2010 (UTC)

Hello, Xavigivax and Zscout370. You've asked me to comment on the situation. Here are my thoughts:

• Singapore is one of those countries where national emblems such as the National Flag and National Coat of Arms are not in the public domain. Therefore, the copyright in the National Coat of Arms is held by the Government of Singapore. Under the Singapore Copyright Act, the copyright in an artistic work made by or under the direction or control of the Government other than an engraving or a photograph lasts for 70 years from the end of the calendar year in which the work was made: see "Commons:Licensing#Government works". The National Coat of Arms appears to have been made in 1959. Therefore, it will enter the public domain from 1 January 2030.
• As the National Coat of Arms is still subject to copyright, any drawing which is a direct copy of it cannot be uploaded to the Commons as it would be an unauthorized derivative work. The official version of the Coat of Arms appears in the First Schedule of the Singapore Arms and Flag and National Anthem Rules (Cap. 296, R 1, 2004 Rev. Ed.) and looks like this: "File:Coat of arms of Singapore.jpg" (this file is used in the English Wikipedia under a fair-use justification).
• However, as pointed out in "Commons:Coat of arms" and "Wikipedia:Copyright on emblems", there is a difference between a slavish copy of an emblem (e.g., one pulled off the Internet) and a version of the emblem that has been redrawn based on the emblem's blazon. It seems to me that if the redrawn version is not too similar to the official version, then it will not breach the copyright in the official version. The First Schedule of the Rules states: "The National Coat of Arms of Singapore or State Crest consists of a shield on which is emblazoned a white crescent moon and 5 white stars against a red background. Supporting the shield shall be a lion on the left and a tiger on the right. Below the shield shall be a banner with the words 'Majulah Singapura' inscribed on it." I suppose this is the blazon of the coat of arms, although it is not expressed in traditional heraldic language.
• From what I remember, Xavigivax's redrawn version of the Coat of Arms is not identical to "File:Coat of arms of Singapore.jpg". Therefore, it could be argued that it does not breach the Government's copyright in the Coat of Arms. Yes, one could say that the redrawn coat of arms is "inaccurate" because it does not look exactly like the official version that appears in the Rules. However, it may be useful to have a freely licensed version available in case fair use of "File:Coat of arms of Singapore.jpg" is unavailable. Whenever Xavigivax's drawing is used in an article, a caption can be added to explain that it is a redrawn version based on the blazon of the Coat of Arms, which is why it does not look exactly the same as the official version.

I hope this is helpful. If you would like more opinions, I suggest you leave messages at "Commons talk:Licensing" and "Commons:Village pump" inviting people to participate in this discussion. — Cheers, JackLee ^–talk– 19:27, 9 July 2010 (UTC)

I think that JackLee has explained it perfectly. I've restored it. Best regards ;) Rastrojo _(D•ES) 11:55, 10 July 2010 (UTC)

Then what I did is I moved to image to state that this is the blazon (not the official image) and matched the image to the blazon mentioned by the SG Government. I believe this is a fair compromise. User:Zscout370 ^{(Return fire)} 17:11, 10 July 2010 (UTC)

It's a pity that you don't see the difference between a coat of arms and an emblem. You must to be accurate with an emblem. With a coat of arms, you only must interpretate a blazon (a text). White is not a colour in a coat of arms. The file name of the COA of Singapore now is not correct. Blazon is the art of explain a coat of arms. Exemple: File:Coat of arms of Iran.svg this is not a coat of arms, neither File:Coat of arms of Sudan.gif is not a coat of arms. Your great seal has a coat of arms inside: argent, six pallets gules, a chief azure. Any shape of a shield, with tone colours that are similat to silver, white, red and blue, with this representation of vertically stripes and the 1/3 of the width aprox. on the top in blue is your coat of arms. Anyway, thank you. --Xavigivax (talk) 07:20, 12 July 2010 (UTC)

Well, a lot of countries call emblems coat of arms, so we have to go with the flow. With Singapore, if the blazon is public domain, then that is what we can only use on the image. The palm branches were not mentioned in the blazon, so off they went. Plus, I spoke to the SG Government and they told me white, not argent or silver, for the shield devices. We have to follow that. As for the naming, I made sure it was named (blazon) so if other people want to challenge the deletion, it won't happen. This also tells users that if they want a full image of the arms, they need to pray that their project allows fair use. User:Zscout370 ^{(Return fire)} 07:30, 12 July 2010 (UTC)

If you wish to use the term blazon more accurately in the file name, you could rename the file "(blazon version)". Just a thought. — Cheers, JackLee ^–talk– 08:33, 12 July 2010 (UTC)

It is named Coat of Arms of Singapore (Blazon) and I seen other coat of arms images where the name blazon is put in front and the filename in French. User:Zscout370 ^{(Return fire)} 16:58, 12 July 2010 (UTC)

There are differences between French language and English language. The correct traslation of blason Singapour is coat of arms of Singapore, not Singapore's blazon. I've seen bad translations, for exemple here: File:Shield of Singapore.svg, would be more accurete this: "Coat of arms of Singapore without external ornaments.svg". The word shield in French is écu, but the shield is a defensive weapon where the blazon was represented. Your use of the term "blazon", in my opinion is not correct. The translation in Spanish of blason Singapour would be escudo de armas de Singapur or simply escudo de Singapur, but not Blasón de Singapur. Xavigivax (talk) 10:21, 14 July 2010 (UTC)

I know in English, Blazon is the term that we use to describe the written description of the arms. User:Zscout370 ^{(Return fire)} 16:03, 14 July 2010 (UTC)

If I understand Xavigivax's point, he is suggesting that calling the file "Coat of arms of Singapore (blazon)" is not very accurate because blazon refers to the verbal description of the coat of arms and not to its visual representation, which is why I suggested that "(blazon version)" (i.e., meaning that the image is a version based on the blazon) might be more precise. However, to me this is not a big issue. — Cheers, JackLee ^–talk– 18:28, 14 July 2010 (UTC)

Flag of Ohio

Hi, that's great, I couldn't figure it out. From all the pics I've seen, Ohio's flag uses the same colours as the USA national flag, therefore the stripes on Ohio's should be the same as the stripes on the US flag. Fry1989 (talk) 04:42, 10 July 2010 (UTC)

Ok, on it. User:Zscout370 ^{(Return fire)} 04:46, 10 July 2010 (UTC)

Thanks alot, I just couldn't get the a handle on it. Fry1989 (talk) 05:01, 10 July 2010 (UTC)

Open Inkscape, Edit, XML Editor. Go to the defs, then click on the patterns and replace the code. You can also edit it in Notepad to find #ff0000" and replace it with the code. User:Zscout370 ^{(Return fire)} 05:03, 10 July 2010 (UTC)

File:UK Royal Coat of Arms.svg

Can you please label that file as superceded by File:Royal Coat of Arms of the United Kingdom.svg, it's protected so I can't do it myself. Fry1989 (talk) 00:56, 20 July 2010 (UTC)

I know it is a better drawn version, but if I recall, the UK Arms also has the same issue as the Canadian one. Because both had updates since the 1950's, the new versions will have to have copyright protection. I did list the other file as another one people can use, but don't feel easy replacing all uses yet. User:Zscout370 ^{(Return fire)} 02:11, 20 July 2010 (UTC)

Need help with approving two new images

Greetings from Liberty, Missouri,

I am basically new to uploading images. I have two new images that I would appreciate you helping me get approved for a Wikipedia article. James Arminius 2.jpg and James Arminius 3.jpg (category: Jacobus Arminius). I obtained them off of a blog from friend of mine. I don't know if written permission is necessary since both these pics are older than 70years and thus public domain. If I need to get official permission from him, that will not be a problem. Thanks for your time.ClassArm (talk) 17:36, 21 July 2010 (UTC)

If they are public domain due to age, then you do not need his permission. But you do need to cite his blog as the source of the images. User:Zscout370 ^{(Return fire)} 19:41, 21 July 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for getting back with me so quickly. I believe I need an administrator to clear these images of their present tags. It says that I have insufficent copyright status but I believe that I have provided the proper information. If you think I have as well, could you please change the tag so I can use them? Here are the images: http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:James_Arminius_2.jpg http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:James_Arminius_3.jpg

Thanks again!ClassArm (talk) 20:09, 21 July 2010 (UTC)

I appreciated your quick response. Take care,ClassArm (talk) 23:17, 21 July 2010 (UTC)

Flag and CoA of Ecuador (SVG)

A new user, Enriquearteaga, has uploaded new versions. I reverted them, feeling they were inferior to the standing versions we have, however afterwards, the user reverted back and left a message on my discussions page claiming he works for the office of the Ecuadorian Presidency (a questionable claim, if you ask me). Not only does his version of the CoA have some major differences, but his version of the flag also has a 2:3 ratio, instead of the 1:2 in law. I don't really have the time or will to be in a dispute over it, and was wondering if you could look into it.

The ratio of the national flag is in doubt. As pointed out by me at http://flagspot.net/flags/ec.html#over, I wrote in August of 2009 "On page two of this document, the ratio of the national flag is mentioned as 2:3 ratio. However, we and others have the ratio at 1:2, along with several photographs in this document. I looked up the law mentioned in the document, Resolución No. 24-047, yet the only thing that is mentioned is the drawing of the coat of arms. Zachary Harden, 22 August 2009"). At FOTW, there is a decree to make the flag 1x2, but I have not seen anything. I emailed the user, but I think the ratio should be 2x3, lacking any other documentation to the contrary. User:Zscout370 ^{(Return fire)} 20:27, 21 July 2010 (UTC)

Confirmed by the Ecuador Government to have a 2x3 ratio, changed image to reflect it. I am still asking them about the colors for the flag, but I am using the PDF file as my source for the colors. User:Zscout370 ^{(Return fire)} 02:27, 22 July 2010 (UTC)

File:Flag_of_Minsk.svg

File:Flag_of_Minsk.svg 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!

--110.55.16.159 04:13, 27 July 2010 (UTC)

File:Medal_francysk_skaryna_rib.png

Hi there! somebody marked the file you have uploded as dublicate. its not an exact duplicate so maybe you can sort it out. Amada44  ^{talk to me} 16:44, 27 July 2010 (UTC)

Just went ahead and deleted it. User:Zscout370 ^{(Return fire)} 00:34, 28 July 2010 (UTC)

File:Flag_of_San_Francisco,_California.png

File:Flag_of_San_Francisco,_California.png has been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether it should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry. If you created this file, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with it, such as a copyright issue. Please see Commons:But it's my own work! for a guide on how to address these issues. Please remember to respond to and – if appropriate – contradict the arguments supporting deletion. Arguments which focus on the nominator will not affect the result of the nomination. Thank you!

Svgalbertian (talk) 18:38, 28 July 2010 (UTC)

Flag of Malawi

The URL you provided in your edit summary didn't work for me, and you shouldn't make such changes without 1) Creating a "File:Flag of Malawi 1964-2010.svg" image for the previous flag and 2) (Since you regularly edit at English Wikipedia), relatively quickly changing the English Wikipedia article so that both old and new images have useful captions, and the same image isn't diplayed twice. Sorry to revert, but too many necessary elements were missing... AnonMoos (talk) 20:23, 30 July 2010 (UTC)

Working on it right now. User:Zscout370 ^{(Return fire)} 20:39, 30 July 2010 (UTC)

File:Flag of the Philippines.svg

So, it seems you were just behind my feet. Apparently the flag was deleted in some weird way or something like that. I started to notice that on Wikipedia because they were showing the filename but not the image on the article about the Spratly Islands. Thank you for restoring everything back. =) Allan kuan1992 (talk) 22:17, 1 August 2010 (UTC)

I am an administrator, so I checked the deleted edits and found nothing. Plus, I keep all vector files I did on my computer. I am talking to the deleting admin to see what happened. User:Zscout370 ^{(Return fire)} 22:18, 1 August 2010 (UTC)

Contributions of User:Sahapon-krit hellokitty

Dear Zscout370,

Please check the contributions of User:Sahapon-krit hellokitty. He often uploaded image files of various flags and proclaimed that are his works. In fact, many files he uploaded were copied form various flag websites (it can be considered as copyright violation), the quality is quite low or very low because they were resized to the large image. Also, some image were fictious flag which are not exist in history (mainly come from http://www.alternatehistory.com/) and some were duplicated with SVG flag which also exitsted in Wikimedia commons.

--Xiengyod (talk) 05:12, 2 August 2010 (UTC)

I am taking a look right now. One I checked came from FOTW, and I am sure others were taken from there. User:Zscout370 ^{(Return fire)} 04:14, 3 August 2010 (UTC)

Olá

Olá você é um Administrador aqui,se for tudo bem eu só quero somente saber quem são os Administradores.

Obrigado pela atenção.

KnuxD (talk) 23:17, 5 August 2010 (UTC)

Yes, I am one. User:Zscout370 ^{(Return fire)} 23:18, 5 August 2010 (UTC)

If you want to know who is a sysop, take a look at Special:ListUsers/sysop (that's what I understand you want). Diego Grez ^{return fire} 23:24, 5 August 2010 (UTC)

File:Order Friendship of Peoples.jpg

File:Order Friendship of Peoples.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!

--AFBorchert (talk) 23:14, 6 August 2010 (UTC)

Removal of protection

Hello. Recenty, User:Lokal_Profil, an admin, put the Arms of Kenya and Arms of Sengal under protection, after reverting my changes. I can only assume he did this at the behest of User:Xavigivax, who complains to him whenever I make any changes, no matter how minor, to his files. I hav explained to Lokal Profil on his talk page thet the Arms of Kenya's shield reflects the National Flag of Kenya, and therefore the bars should be white, not grey, however he said that in the rules of heraldry, gray or white are equally ok. After that, I gave him evidence, in this case the website of the Kenyan Embassy in Paris, that explicitly says the shield uses the colours of the national flag, which means white is the proper choice. He hasn't responed since, and I am therefore asking that you remove the protection on these two files. My reasons are A: protection is usually mean't to stop vandalism, and I am not a vandal. B: I have evidence that my proposed changes are correct, whereas both the admin and the user who complained to him have no evidence to the contrary. C: the only reason the admin put them under protection was to stop me from making any changes, because the original uploader complained, but this is a public place, and files are open to edits by other users, as needed. I see no reasonable explainaion as to why these two Arms should be put under protection. Thanks for your time. Fry1989 (talk) 23:37, 7 August 2010 (UTC)

I'll talk to him and see what I can find. User:Zscout370 ^{(Return fire)} 02:22, 8 August 2010 (UTC)

Thank you Fry1989 (talk) 03:54, 8 August 2010 (UTC)

Right, thanks for that link. As you said, it doesn't mention the colours of the Coat of Arms, but as I mentioned before, the Kenyan Embassy website says it's the same as the flag. http://www.kenyaembassyparis.org/about-kenya/national-symbols Fry1989 (talk) 17:05, 13 August 2010 (UTC)

Tip: Categorizing images

---

Hello, Zscout370!

Tip: Add categories to your files

Thanks a lot for contributing to the Wikimedia Commons! Here's a tip to make your uploads more useful: Why not add some categories to describe them? This will help more people to find and use them.

Here's how:

1) If you're using the UploadWizard, you can add categories to each file when you describe it. Just click "more options" for the file and add the categories which make sense:

2) You can also pick the file from your list of uploads, edit the file description page, and manually add the category code at the end of the page.

[[Category:Category name]]

For example, if you are uploading a diagram showing the orbits of comets, you add the following code:

[[Category:Astronomical diagrams]]

[[Category:Comets]]

This will make the diagram show up in the categories "Astronomical diagrams" and "Comets".

When picking categories, try to choose a specific category ("Astronomical diagrams") over a generic one ("Illustrations").

Thanks again for your uploads! More information about categorization can be found in Commons:Categories, and don't hesitate to leave a note on the help desk.

CategorizationBot (talk) 19:37, 10 August 2010 (UTC)

• Image:Independent candidate icon (TW).svg was uncategorized on 9 August 2010 CategorizationBot (talk) 19:37, 10 August 2010 (UTC)
• Image:MIL-STD-2161A (AS).pdf was uncategorized on 9 September 2010 CategorizationBot (talk) 11:03, 10 September 2010 (UTC)

Chile

A Coat of Arms always must follow the heraldry rules. If you want, change the star colour, but only one tone colour for a tincture. The images that you link to me have the same bugs. There are others that have a correct represtentation: [22] [23] for exemple. The day that you understand heraldry you will stop to do this mistakes. Ask to someone that knows heraldry and will explain the same. The version that is in he official page have beginner's bugs. They draw lines vertically and horizontally with colours and this lines only are used to draw a COA in black and white, it's a system to know what is the real colour when tecnically is not possible to paint. This it's only product of the ignorance, the same that do Fry89 to draw a star with two colours. Xavigivax (talk) 06:56, 25 August 2010 (UTC)

Well, as I told you, not many countries follow the rules of heraldry anymore and that is something you also need to understand. User:Zscout370 ^{(Return fire)} 17:35, 25 August 2010 (UTC)