Commons:Administrators' noticeboard/Archives/Attention 3

From Wikimedia Commons, the free media repository

Jump to: navigation, search
Archive This page is an archive. Please do not edit the contents of this page. Direct any additional comments to this page.
Navigation
Administrators' noticeboard
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20
Vandalism archives
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Attention archives
1 2 3 4 5 6 7
Disputes archives
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 C K
User problems archives
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Blocks & protections archives
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Other links
Talk +/-


Important discussion pages (index)
Nuvola apps edu languages.svg
[graph/hist] Toolserver status
Last update 17:00, 30 November 2009 (UTC)
MySQL rosemary up
MySQL daphne up
MySQL yarrow up
Replag s1 0h 0m 0s
Replag s2 0h 0m 11s
Replag s3 0h 0m 1s
Replag s4 0h 0m 1s
Replag s5 0h 0m 0s
More information...

Contents

Astrogeek images

User:Astrogeek has uploaded some images with suspect tags. All are claimed as "own work" but some of these are clearly doubtful. Image:75713.jpg appears to the be the work of a professional artist and is perhaps some sort of screenshot and carries a clear copyright notice, yet is claimed as "own work" (contrast to this example of user's artistic ability). Image:B39.jpg is claimed as "own work" but appears to be the work of a professional nature photographer. Image:Empty Space Reflecting Nothing At All.JPG seems problematical for other reasons. Image:113432.jpg is claimed as "own work" yet consists primarily of images of copyrighted character Hello Kitty. And so forth. I think all of this users images should be deleted as suspect. Herostratus 14:01, 15 December 2006 (UTC)

Once we get toolserver working, we can delete a whole bunch them because they aren't within the project scope. -Samulili 21:31, 20 December 2006 (UTC)

Deletion request

Hi! Category:Caryatids of Erchtheum and Category:Erchtheum suffer from naming-typositis (see en:Erechtheum). There are now empty and superseded respectively by Category:Caryatids of Erechtheum and Category:Erechtheum. Thanks in advance, Jastrow (Λέγετε) 07:07, 16 December 2006 (UTC)

Done. / Fred Chess 13:49, 16 December 2006 (UTC)

Help needed with speedy deletion

The category for speedy deletion is now located at Category:Copyright violation and contains several hundreds of images. Assistance needed! Thank you. Fred Chess 15:20, 20 December 2006 (UTC)

What are we doing about checking to see if these are in use with the toolserver down? I've been tagging instead of deleting due to the fear of leaving redlinks on various projects. Jkelly 17:49, 20 December 2006 (UTC)
I won't take long hopefully [1]. Can anybody also update the sitenotice to link to the latest toolserv status update? -- Bryan (talk to me) 17:53, 20 December 2006 (UTC)
Jkelly: Right, the toolserver. I guess that the most disrupting deletion could wait. I have also been hesitant about deleting superseded images. But I think that some copyright violations could be damaging to the project if they are allowed... / Fred Chess 19:30, 20 December 2006 (UTC)
I hesitated also to delete without to check usage but I think it's not necessary to wait when pics are copyvios. The red links would be corrected by contributors of each projects quite quickly. Oxam Hartog 21:23, 20 December 2006 (UTC)

Sexual object in new picture

Please have a look at recently uploaded Image:100 4444.jpg from user Waldgeist. Is such a picture necessary? Pilot71 23:36, 20 December 2006 (UTC)

Deleted along with two more uploaded by this user. We have enough penises on the Commons, thank you. Cary "Bastiq▼e" Bass demandez 23:43, 20 December 2006 (UTC)
What is the policy for We have enough ...... on the Commons? Applies this for feet, breasts and pencils, too? --GeorgHH 00:32, 21 December 2006 (UTC)
Rephrase Bastiques reasoning to we have "enough crappy self-taken pictures of penises on Commons". If a genuine contributor comes a long with a real high-quality penis picture we should consider keeping it. COM:DEL and superseded by this pic, its better is more appropriate in general, but with penis pics its reasonable to short-circuit...--Nilfanion 00:36, 21 December 2006 (UTC)
Ack Nilfanion. Penises are a special case subject matter. Frankly, we don't get a lot of attack or amateur foot or pencil pictures. Cary "Bastiq▼e" Bass demandez 16:38, 22 December 2006 (UTC)
This was not the correct place for this debate. --Cat out 21:56, 3 January 2007 (UTC)

Flickr... once and for all

Hi, I've created a summary and set of guidelines on Flickr imagery here. Discussion on what to do with the possibly unfree images would be appreciated on the talk page there. Let's try and sort this out :)--Nilfanion 22:42, 21 December 2006 (UTC)

French speaker needed

Yogifcb (talk • contribs • page moves • block user • block log • upload log) has uploaded several images that I'm not certain he has proper permission of. I think he is doing it in good faith, based on his comment to Image:Zubi 16.jpg, but it should be good to clarify the sitation with him. He has already uploaded eight photos of Pascal Zuberbühler today.

Fred Chess 15:07, 22 December 2006 (UTC)

~Pyb and me are taking care of it. Jastrow (Λέγετε) 15:59, 22 December 2006 (UTC)

Low (talk · contributions)

This user has been uploading only {{logo}}'s. Please speedy delete them all. -- Bryan (talk to me) 20:11, 22 December 2006 (UTC)

please delete these files

the next files have copy right, i know that because it has an airliners.net bar, and the traduction from german to english of the description are: "wenn Sie meinen Namen bei Wikipedia mit hochladen, dürfen Sie das Bild gerne verwenden" (1) and "Ich, Max Teuber hab's mir mal angeschaut und solange mein Name dabei steht, geht das so okay das Bild in Commons hochzuladen" (2)


"if you high-load my name with Wikipedia also, you may use the picture gladly" and "I, max of Teuber hab's me times looked at and so long my name thereby stands, goes okay the picture in such a way into Commons high-loading" (2).

They want that we keep their names , and that thing are use only when there is a "fair use" image.

the files are:

--ROBERTO DAN 07:30, 23 December 2006 (UTC)

This would be really a pity, as they are very high quality pictures. Is there no other solution to this, like asking the creator whether he really released them under the cc-by-sa? -- Bryan (talk to me) 10:51, 23 December 2006 (UTC)
*1.-so, can i cut the airliners.net bar ?
  • 2.-How can we know that (abuot autors), and, if hey wil be the autors, they will upload directly to commons isn´t?. They download that image from airliners.net and put it here.

--ROBERTO DAN 17:58, 23 December 2006 (UTC)

Just only watch the bar, it says:

  • 1.-Copyright stephan wengermeier
  • 2.-Copyright max teuber

and the same in the page in airliners.net [2] and [3]

delete them.

--ROBERTO DAN 18:08, 23 December 2006 (UTC)

This isnt the right place for this. Take it to COM:DEL --Cat out 21:54, 3 January 2007 (UTC)

Christina Aguilera pictures

Hi again. According to this discussion the permission to use the pictures of Christina Aguilera is files in the OTRS. Yet today some of the pictures was deleted, restored and then deleted again. Can somebody please explain what the heck happened? These two seem to be the troubling ones:

Somebody please look into this, as we have very few pictures of Aguilera available, and many wikis are dependent on these free images. --Lhademmor 11:59, 29 December 2006 (UTC)

COM:DEL

Please assit with COM:DEL as it is out of control. Commons:Deletion requests/2006/09 needs splecial care. --Cat out 21:57, 3 January 2007 (UTC)

Claude Monet - fanzösischer Maler des Impressionismus

Auf folgender Seite wird ein Gemälte als Selbstporträt Claude Monet's aufgeführt. Es ist anzusehen im Musée d'Orsay Paris als Porträt des Malers Claude Monet, Artist Pierre-Auguste Renoir 1875


http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Image:Monet_selbstbildnis.jpg

http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Image:Pierre-Auguste_Renoir_112.jpg

Mit freundlichen Grüssen, Gerlinde Krüger

Ok, wir werden es darüber kümmern. Vielen Dank.
Fred Chess 20:45, 4 January 2007 (UTC)

Update

Pls, update with this text this MediaWiki message. The rows were too long to the previous. Thanks!--Darsie 18:10, 5 January 2007 (UTC)

Done. / Fred Chess 00:36, 6 January 2007 (UTC)

PHOTO REMOVAL

Hello,

Earlier today i came across your site and found my Flickr photo (which is tagged ALL RIGHTS RESERVED) on your website.

This is the link: http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Image:Feuerwerk.lila.jpg

Not only do you have my photo on your site, but you also offer people a chance to download various sizes. Which i strictly prohibit unless granted permission or if the person is listed as a "friend" in the Flickr Community.

I was not asked permission from either party to use my photo before it was posted. I am requesting that you remove my photo from your site immediately.


Stellarr 01.05.07

Deleted (by user:Oxam Hartog) / Fred Chess 00:34, 6 January 2007 (UTC)
Your pic is now deleted here. Were are sorry for this trouble. Every day a lot of contributors upload a lot of photos. Photos uploaded here from Flickr are verified to control their license, but this operation can take some time. You can believe than it's not in our philosophy to keep here files no free. friendly Oxam Hartog 00:48, 6 January 2007 (UTC)

question about delation of images with "bad name"

Yerterday I deleted a image of this serie Image:Variantes 01.gif Image:Variantes 02.gif (I deleted the third of them) but I stopped with this question:

These files were uploaded by MogwaiGremlin and modified by François Haffner the renamed files have been uploaded by François Haffner. By this way we lose the history of first uploaded and reference to MogwaiGremlin's work which put his work on GFDL. Is it a problem or not? Or the logical way would be to merge both history in the preserved file?

Now I see an other problem on these files. In the full size, each image is marked © xxx. Isn't it a reason for simple delation?

Thanks our opinion on these two questions (the first question can relate to other files in same case) . Oxam Hartog 00:01, 6 January 2007 (UTC)

In my opinion, it would be sufficient to add to Image:Abalone variantes 01.gif: "Originally upload as Image:Variantes 01.gif", and then delete it. In that way it could at least be confirmed by any administrator.
On the second question, I do not believe that starting position can be copyrighted, much like openings in chess can't be copyrighted.
Fred Chess 00:11, 6 January 2007 (UTC)

Image:15c_green_mosque.jpg updated

This image has been rescanned and uploaded as Image:Balkh_Green_Mosque.jpg. Could somebody move Image:Balkh_Green_Mosque.jpg to Image:15c_green_mosque.jpg?
Bluuurgh 19:24, 6 January 2007 (UTC)

You could upload it under the same file name. Since you didn't, now it's up to you to search all Wikimedia projects for Image:Balkh Green Mosque.jpg and replace every occurrence with Image:15c green mosque.jpg. You can get a listing of any pages linking to the picture here.
However, you might as well upload the new picture using Balkh_Green_Mosque.jpg as file name, then ask for deletion of 15c_green_mosque.jpg; this would save you the link replacements across Wikis. --ColdShine 10:23, 7 January 2007 (UTC)
Well, new accounts can't upload images with the same filename as an existing one...
I've taken care of the request by Bluuurgh.
Fred Chess 12:14, 7 January 2007 (UTC)
maybe i should have pointed out that i placed the original on wikipedia and somebody else put it on wikimedia. i tried to replace the wikimedia image, but as fred chess points out that isn't possible with new accounts. thanks anyway everybody.
Bluuurgh 16:24, 7 January 2007 (UTC)

suspicion of multiples copyvio

User:Iberian boy seems upload only pics not free ([4]. This one Image:Ezspecial.jpg appears be a crop of this one [[5]] but the website don't claim explicitly copyright. for other, it's quite the same thing, it's a hard work to find original pic often the pic is on several website.

Is it possible to delete all pics without fine control? Oxam Hartog 20:07, 7 January 2007 (UTC)

Seems to be already deleted by User:WarX. For people like these I would say delete unless... -- Bryan (talk to me) 16:34, 8 January 2007 (UTC)

Picture of the day 1/26/2007

I'm not reporting this under user problems, because Lycaon only seems to have a problem with me. If you'd like to see why, I'll be happy to provide links to history.

I picked Lycaon's Image:Amphipod anatomy en.svg as POTD for 1/26/2007, and immediately got a comment about it on the POTD talk page relating to the captions. See Template_talk:Potd/2007-01-26. I notified Lycaon on 21 November 2006 that he should upload a version of the image with non-language specific captions here: [6]. He did not respond. We had another matter going on at the same time, and I feel that Lycaon didn't want to dignify the request because it came from me.

Today I finally uploaded the non-language specific version of the image over the original POTD, and Lycaon soon reverted that change and all the others--citing the fact that the numeric-captioned version was not a Featured Picture. I disagree with that assessment.

Please see User_talk:Lycaon#POTD_1.2F26.2F07 and User_talk:Bastique#POTD for the relavent conversations. Please note that contrary to Lycaon's claims, I have not used any admin actions nor have I insulted him. Everything I said to him is right there on his talk page. Cary "Bastiq▼e" Bass demandez 21:26, 8 January 2007 (UTC)

What action are you seeking, if any? In reviewing this, I would agree with your assessment that a non language specific version of the picture seems our best choice if we have one available, and it seems that you made one available (at some effort of your own) after the originator chose not to. The originator should be glad that someone chose to help out, not upset. The other alternative would have been to remove the picture from the POTD rotation I guess... Reverting changes that are improvements doesn't seem helpful to me. But I'm not sure I'd do more than that at this point... if you think history links would provide additional context that is up to you. ++Lar: t/c 21:35, 8 January 2007 (UTC)
Like I said, I fully believe that this is about the fact that I made the requests and the modifications and nothing more. It's completely obvious that I derived the non-language image from his image and yet this user will make great strides, using edits like this: [7], express the contempt he has for my assistance. Cary "Bastiq▼e" Bass demandez 21:38, 8 January 2007 (UTC)

Please undelete Image:Blason_Ville_Namur_vieux.jpg

Please undelete Image:Blason_Ville_Namur_vieux.jpg. It was deleted without a deletion message earlier today. It should have {{PD-BE-gemeentewapen}} as license. Siebrand 18:39, 9 January 2007 (UTC)

Excuse me, but Namur is not a Flemmish municipality, but a Walloon, and such the template does not apply. (Also the naming of the template is incorrect, I'll move it if there are no objections) -- Bryan (talk to me) 19:33, 9 January 2007 (UTC)
Yep, it appears so. Thanks for keeping me sharp. Siebrand 22:51, 9 January 2007 (UTC)

Correction

Please, someone to correct this message and to became only "Метаданни" -like at the talk page.--Darsie 18:37, 10 January 2007 (UTC)

✓ Done Cary "Bastiq▼e" Bass demandez 19:36, 10 January 2007 (UTC)

Relocate a category?

Request moved to Commons:Help desk#relocate_a_category?.

User:Walter Humala

Uncivilised behaviour in a discussion, [8]. That would be ground for 24h block at Swedish Wikipedia. Thuresson 15:22, 11 January 2007 (UTC)

Warn him and if he does again block him. -- Bryan (talk to me) 13:19, 12 January 2007 (UTC)

Request to move picture

Please move the file Image:Maximum_tangentplane_boxedN.png to Image:Maximum_tangentplane_boxed.png and overwrite it (I'm sorry I don't know how to make links to images). Thank you in advance. --Freiddy 09:57, 12 January 2007 (UTC)

Done. --Matt314 16:53, 12 January 2007 (UTC)

Vandilism

This IP address 216.208.8.227 has been doing alot of vandalism recently. Check out his history. 69.117.255.178 20:41, 12 January 2007 (UTC)

He has been blocked by Bastique. / Fred Chess 22:55, 12 January 2007 (UTC)

SVG versus PNG

Hello, I put several png graphs into Wikimedia Commons in December. Why does the system ask me to replace Cobalt 60.png by *.svg, and not about the others?HPaul 22:12, 14 January 2007 (UTC)

This tag, {{svg}} are added by users, not by the software. -- Bryan (talk to me) 22:16, 14 January 2007 (UTC)


Change the name of a file?

The file located here has a bad name, but it's not my picture, so I'm hesitant to make a new file and list that one for deletion. Could someone change the name of the town to "Ellwood City"? Nyttend 04:15, 20 January 2007 (UTC)

There's no other way to rename a file than to upload it under a new name. You can ask the original uploader to do it himself, however. -- Duesentrieb(?!) 10:31, 20 January 2007 (UTC)

Polish speaker needed

Hi! I need a Polish speaker to talk with RenekW (talk · contributions). One of his pictures (Image:Kwadrat test.jpg) is tagged as {{Noncommercial}}; he should be asked whether he is willing to change it for a free license. TIA for your help, Jastrow (Λέγετε) 11:05, 20 January 2007 (UTC)

That image is {{PD-ineligible}} -- Duesentrieb(?!) 11:14, 20 January 2007 (UTC)
All right, I changed the tag accordingly. Jastrow (Λέγετε) 11:20, 20 January 2007 (UTC)

user:207.232.25.34

This user has created a "spam bot" type page - Talk:W/w/index.php (marked for speedy. However this IP has previously "contributed" like this before on Wikibooks and the same page arrived there at the same time. IP is now blocked for two weeks - thought someone might be interested - regards --Herby talk thyme 09:33, 25 January 2007 (UTC)

I blocked them for 2 hours, and protected that page (and the other similar one). pfctdayelise (说什么?) 10:03, 25 January 2007 (UTC)
Thanks - appreciated, now found it on five Wiki's! Blocks vary from indef to two hours, interesting - going to think about that - regards --Herby talk thyme 10:53, 25 January 2007 (UTC)

My error

I have uploaded the wrong Transaero pic off my computer files. It's an airliners.net pic and, of course, copyright so can someone delete it please. The pic is [9] Thanks - Arpingstone 22:05, 25 January 2007 (UTC)

Done. -- Bryan (talk to me) 22:19, 25 January 2007 (UTC)
Many thanks - Arpingstone 20:17, 26 January 2007 (UTC)

Image removed without proper process

Image:Semen2.jpg was an image used in the en.wikimedia article Semen. Last night it has suddenly dissapeared, apparently deleted. I can find no reference to this file, or any discussion of it in the deletion request logs. I believe it was deleted without following the proper process. Could an admin please restore the image as soon as possible. The image was of significant value in that one article. Atomaton 14:23, 27 January 2007 (UTC)

After some review, I find an entry in the delete log, even though it did not appear anywhere else. (recent changes, deletion requests discussion)[10] It has a smart ass edit comment "Cum on now...". This is an apparent deletion without following our process by someone who didn't like the image. The image had been the discussion on the article and gained consensus for use as it is an excellent example of that topic. Atomaton 14:23, 27 January 2007 (UTC)

I think this is action is performed by Danny in his role of member of the Wikimedia Office. This is beyond the jurisdiction of us administrators, so I think it is better to ask him personally. But I could be wrong... -- Bryan (talk to me) 15:16, 27 January 2007 (UTC)

I left a comment on his en.wikimedia talk page, here.. I don't think it is beyond admin action. I think we should discuss it and work it out with him. I am not aware of any wikipedia policy that exempts foundation employees from the policies and guidelines that everyone else follows. I am sure his action was in good faith. Following the etablished process would have clarified what his reasons were. When such a deletion happens, after many people have had long discussions to reach consensus on the use of the image, it harms our perception of Wikipedia as a fair place that follows an established process. Otherwise, we must conclude that there are people above the rules, and that being civil, discussing to gaining consensus according to policy is a waste of our time.

You could return the image, and put it in the requests for deletion queue, and then discussion could occur through the normal procedural channels. As he is a foundation employee, I am sure his opinion would give due weight.

Atomaton 15:49, 27 January 2007 (UTC)

Image restored.
Fred Chess 16:10, 27 January 2007 (UTC)
If Danny was acting in OFFICE capacity, he should have noted it in some way. I also find the image tasteless and disgusting but it doesn't mean I can delete it as I wish... especially if it is being used. / Fred Chess 16:23, 27 January 2007 (UTC)
We have a lot more potentially tasteless photos that could be deleted before that one, for sure. :) --pfctdayelise (说什么?) 06:04, 28 January 2007 (UTC)

This image was discussed on the reviled #wikipedia-en-admins, Danny had "IRC consensus" for the deletion, it is hardly that useful. The reason why it was deleted is this FPC nom on en. For en non-admins, the deletion reason "trolling" is totally accurate.--Nilfanion 12:38, 28 January 2007 (UTC)

User:AllenMcC.

May be worth some attention. Took a chuck off a user page - I reverted it and warned them. They then blanked their talk page. Not strictly vandalism but a heads up --Herby talk thyme 14:12, 28 January 2007 (UTC)

Maybe strike that - could have been a clumsy attempt to copy --Herby talk thyme 14:13, 28 January 2007 (UTC)

Indicios de cambio climático inverso segun M. Wydler

Hi - can I ask any passing admin to look at this one. I marked it as speedy a day or so ago and it was deleted. It has been recreated (marked speedy again). I've no idea whether it is the same IP but may be worth keeping an eye on. Thanks --Herby talk thyme 12:20, 29 January 2007 (UTC)

Deleted and protected. The IPs were not the same, but in the same range, so it is probably the same user. -- Bryan (talk to me) 12:59, 29 January 2007 (UTC)
Thanks --Herby talk thyme 13:20, 29 January 2007 (UTC)

Looks like similar material is now being multiply posted as Climatic inverse change by Manlio Wydler. --Davepape 03:10, 30 January 2007 (UTC)

Same IP range, but it is probably to big to block (255.0.0.0) -- Bryan (talk to me) 10:39, 30 January 2007 (UTC)
Got my talk page spammed by the same person. -- Bryan (talk to me) 19:35, 30 January 2007 (UTC)
I found out the IP range is 200.122.32/19, which belongs to PRIMA S.A. in Argentina, Buenos Aires. A quick google leads me to http://www.ciudad.com.ar/. As I can not read spanish, I am asking whether this is an ISP or an open proxy? -- Bryan (talk to me) 19:51, 30 January 2007 (UTC)
It's an ISP. --Matt314 22:30, 31 January 2007 (UTC)
  • reset

Sorry folks - another one that seems similar. Marked it but Desaparición de los dinosaurios, según M. Wydler...? --Herby talk thyme 11:18, 3 February 2007 (UTC)

I'll write an abuse e-mail to this provider. I guess it is not a good idea to block a whole ISP? -- Bryan (talk to me) 12:04, 3 February 2007 (UTC)

Got a message on my talk [11]. It turned out that he thought we were Wikipedia Commons. I redirected him to Wikipedia -- Bryan (talk to me) 14:04, 4 February 2007 (UTC)

That doesn't seem to have stopped him. Desaparición de los dinosaurios, según M. Wydler is back again. --Davepape 15:17, 5 February 2007 (UTC)
And Climatic inverse change by Manlio Wydler... --Davepape 15:20, 5 February 2007 (UTC)
BTW, my Spanish is extremely rusty, but Commons:Criterio para inclusión appears to lack the section about "Commons does not include text articles". --Davepape 15:26, 5 February 2007 (UTC)
I followed Bryan's example and protected two of these pages. I have tried to talk with this guy but to no avail. Maybe a Spanish speaker should try to reason with him, but I somewhat doubt that the linguistic barrier is the main problem here. Jastrow (Λέγετε) 16:05, 5 February 2007 (UTC)
This user appears to have a dynamic IP and probably hasn't seen your message. Cary "Bastiq▼e" Bass demandez 17:12, 5 February 2007 (UTC)
I am aware of that. I tried to post very quickly in the hope that he would still be on Commons but of course, there is no guarantee of that. Jastrow (Λέγετε) 17:25, 5 February 2007 (UTC)
And temporarily blocking an entire ISP is not an option I suppose? -- Bryan (talk to me) 19:47, 5 February 2007 (UTC)

New "talk" pages

Reviewing the new pages and IP contribs I notice that there are a number of new talk pages (of otherwise legitimate subjects) that have random test type text on. Examples are

Image talk:Flag of Germany (state).svg

Talk:Brad Pitt

Talk:Drainage system of haldia

What is the policy here as far as that sort of minor vandalism is concerned - worth marking as speedy or just ignored? Thanks --Herby talk thyme 19:01, 30 January 2007 (UTC)

I would speedy delete them if I saw them, so feel free to mark them for deletion. Calling it "vandalism" is a bit much, remember experimentation is a hallmark of a wiki... --pfctdayelise (说什么?) 12:54, 3 February 2007 (UTC)
No problem - just getting a "feel" for what is done. Thanks --Herby talk thyme 13:19, 3 February 2007 (UTC)

Picture of the Year issue

Could one or two neutral admins please step in to stop the nasty argument that's developing at Commons talk:Picture of the Year/2006#Order in the gallery? We shouldn't be having public fights that will harm the reputation of this Competition. --MichaelMaggs 17:41, 1 February 2007 (UTC)

Seems to be resolved, putting the ordered link at the bottom of the page is a good compromise IMO. pfctdayelise (说什么?) 12:55, 3 February 2007 (UTC)

OTRS need

192.124.248.150 (talk · contributions) has been tagging several images with an OTRS ticket. I do believe the user has access do OTRS, but I think it should be nice to have someone validate it. It would also reflect better on us to have an admin adding OTRS permission and not an IP-user.

Please also make use of the proper OTRS tagging template.

Fred Chess 19:07, 4 February 2007 (UTC)

I have emailed the user whom I believe this is and asked him/her to create an account at Commons. Cary "Bastiq▼e" Bass demandez 19:46, 5 February 2007 (UTC)

sir robert lambert harvey,3rd baronet of crown point county of tasburgh

To whom it may concern, the Title of Baronet was passed to my father, Michael Charles Harvey of the united states, who turned the title down because at the time he had no sons.He already had two daughters though, and I am one of them. We have been trying to determine how the title of Baronet of Crown Point can be recieved by my brother Thomas Harvey, who now resides in Arizona. If you can help us with this we will be eternally grateful. We have birth records, and my mother has a letter from Sir Roberts Attorneys stating that my father was to be the heir to the title.We don't know what other proof may be demanded, if any. Please contact me at Cat25@cox.net , Thank you Sincerely, Cathryn Harvey Rhodes

This is definitely the wrong place for your question. Perhaps ask again at en:Wikipedia:Reference desk -- Duesentrieb(?!) 17:40, 6 February 2007 (UTC)

deletion request

can someone delete the old version of this image Image:Freesweep.png. --Pixel ;-) 20:20, 6 February 2007 (UTC)

done. --Matt314 21:03, 6 February 2007 (UTC)

speedy deletion URGENT

I need an admin to delete the Arenabowl1999 image I need to upload it on Wikipedia since it's a sports logo

After poking around a little, I found out that you were referring to Image:Arenabowl1999.gif. The image was deleted by user:Yann about 45 minutes ago. / Fred Chess 01:32, 10 February 2007 (UTC)

Wikimedia logo mosaic

Hi.

There were some images deleted from the Mosaic and I just want to ask all administrators not to delete images linked to this page unless it is absolutely necessary. If this will be necessary please replace the image with one of those found here: Red, Green, Blue, White (those images that are not inserted should be described as "new"). Of course if you are replacing some PNG/JPG with an SVG you don't have choose a new image. After replacing the image please change A-Z galleries accordingly.

BTW you can use DOM Inspector of Firefox to test how a new image will look like. That is if you will do it before deleting the original image.

Thanks in advance, Nux (talk··dyskusja) 18:02, 11 February 2007 (UTC).

Stinkbreath1

I'd like to call attention to the contributions of Stinkbreath1, most of which appear to be copyright violations disguised as "own work" (which seems unlikely given the range of celebrities and artistic styles, including album cover art). —LX (talk, contribs) 18:47, 11 February 2007 (UTC)

Looking at his contribs I do not believe any of his own work claims. I would say delete them all. -- Bryan (talk to me) 19:07, 11 February 2007 (UTC)
Blocked one week. / Fred Chess 09:12, 12 February 2007 (UTC)
I have deleted all his uploads except one. I found one of them on Getty images, which is enough to prove where he got his images from. If he continues uploading copyvios, feel free to impose a longer block. / Fred Chess 17:38, 12 February 2007 (UTC)
I sincerely doubt the last remaining one is legit. The other contributions make it rather hard to assume good faith and believe the user carries an EOS-1D with a clock that's off by two years. —LX (talk, contribs) 02:56, 13 February 2007 (UTC)
Good point, I've deleted the remaining one also./ Fred Chess 22:50, 16 February 2007 (UTC)

Renaming sound files.

I have uploaded several files in Category:Kölsch pronunciation the names of which were not prefixed with "Ksh-M-" (for the language + male voice). I have not found a way to rename them. Uploading them a second time seems uneconomical. Making a page with an image attached a redirect does not seem to do what I expected, see Image:Fodunnß.ogg. Can you help? --Purodha Blissenbach 19:04, 11 February 2007 (UTC)

Unfortunately due to the way the software is designed, uploading them again is the only way to effectively "rename" then. Then the old files can be tagged with {{bad name}} to be deleted. pfctdayelise (说什么?) 05:09, 12 February 2007 (UTC)

Odd dupe images

Image:DSCF0117.JPG & Image:Duguidjames.JPG seem identical. BUT a different person is the "author" in each case? Seems a little odd to me. In addition there is an encyclopedic page that I have marked as speedy more than once today James duguid that has again had the speedy removed by the second uploader. (not currently marked as dupes, not sure where this will go?) Thanks --Herby talk thyme 13:02, 12 February 2007 (UTC)

I deleted the page. Maybe they are the same user? They registered about 3 hours apart from each other. I dunno. pfctdayelise (说什么?) 13:25, 12 February 2007 (UTC)
The "licensing" has changed on the second image too now, should they be marked for deletion? --Herby talk thyme 13:29, 12 February 2007 (UTC)

Unsure if this is "valid" for Commons

Friedrich Kellner. The heading says it all really. Nice page, interesting material but not my understanding of Commons - more Wikipedia? --Herby talk thyme 15:37, 12 February 2007 (UTC)

In fact, there already is a Wikipedia article with basically the same text (and in several languages). Looks like a misunderstanding by the creator as to what galleries here should be like (for organizing images, or as supplements to Wikipedia articles rather than repeats of articles). The Gallery question in Commons:FAQ more-or-less addresses that, and should perhaps be pointed out to the page's creator. --Davepape 06:19, 13 February 2007 (UTC)
Done as suggested - thanks --Herby talk thyme 09:00, 13 February 2007 (UTC)

Hi. I have been in communication with Herby about the Gallery page for Friedrich Kellner. I do apologize for establishing the page with the incorrect format. I have spent the morning changing everything about in order to conform to the proper Gallery format. Please do look at the page and let me know if I need to make further changes. I have also left a similar message for Herby. I do appreciate the help. I am always grateful for advice. And I am keeping my fingers crossed that I did it right this time. I seem to always need to do things twice in order to make them right. I suppose that's part of getting close to being 70 years old. But with your help I will persevere. Thank you. Scott--Rskellner 20:27, 13 February 2007 (UTC)

That looks very good, thank you! -- Duesentrieb(?!)
Gallery page of the month? Looks great! --SB_Johnny|talk|books 02:21, 14 February 2007 (UTC)

Hello once again: after studying the format for gallery pages, and after looking at dozens of other gallery pages, I have now finished the Friedrich Kellner page. It is somewhat more "artsy" than most of the other gallery pages, but that's because I took advange of the main statement in the FAQ:

  • "Galleries are a complement to categories, as another way of displaying media. They allow files to be annotated with captions, shown at better sizes than the category default, organised in tables, etc."

Please take one last look at the page to verify that it is okay, particularly with the way I showed some of the photos "at better sizes than the category default." I'm afraid I may be accused of going overboard, but I believe I've stayed within the rules. If not, I will change things again. Just let me know. Thank you very much. Scott --Rskellner 04:43, 16 February 2007 (UTC)

Delete older version

Admin, please delete the old version of Image:Arnhem spoorbrug.jpg. That one's a copyvio that was replaced with a drawing by the same user. Thanks. Siebrand 10:54, 14 February 2007 (UTC)

Thanks. Siebrand 17:01, 14 February 2007 (UTC)

to add bulgarian in the login page

Please, let some administrator add here bulgarian language. Thanks!--Darsie 13:33, 14 February 2007 (UTC)

done. --Matt314 16:09, 14 February 2007 (UTC)

User talk:72.177.68.38

Not sure if this has been missed by folk but a "request to unblock" this one arrived yesterday. It came to mind as the same request has just arrived on Wikibooks. I'm guessing the answer here will be the same I've given on Wikibooks but someone may wish to deal with it (if you haven't seen it the page on Wikipedia may have an influence on you <g>). --Herby talk thyme 13:59, 14 February 2007 (UTC)

No, I don't think we should let him back in. I don't think he will be useful to us. / Fred Chess 17:12, 14 February 2007 (UTC)

Fake GFDL license at Image:Su-7 wreck.jpg

The Image:Su-7 wreck.jpg is a scan from a Pakistani newspaper from 1971 (or later). Hence, under Pakistani copyright law, it is NOT in the public domain. The uploader User:Yousaf465 has added a fake GFDL license to it. Similarly, he has uploaded a lot of other photos claiming PD, but no source has been mentioned. --Ragib 19:13, 14 February 2007 (UTC)

Removal of used Lage von ...

Hi, could you please restore the, according to you, deprecated, but used on nl.wp dots on maps asap. You removed at least 8, see nl:Wikipedia:CommonsTicker. Please be more thoughtful in the future. Thanks. Siebrand 07:07, 16 February 2007 (UTC)

I think they have all been restored by now. / Fred Chess 22:57, 16 February 2007 (UTC)
Yes, thank you for your help Fred, Matt314 and Rüdiger Wölk. I do hope this type of issues will occur as few times as possible, especially with properly licensed content. We really need the local projects to be able to trust Commons admins to be careful and thourough (?) with the content they are using. Siebrand 00:44, 17 February 2007 (UTC)
Who deleted them? pfctdayelise (说什么?) 01:57, 17 February 2007 (UTC)
User talk:Borheinsieg. Siebrand 12:32, 17 February 2007 (UTC)

Interwiki issue

Please see this thread on the en.wp AN, regarding User:Walter Humala/w:User:Walter Humala. Thanks.--Nilfanion 22:59, 18 February 2007 (UTC)

Advice

And so that I can learn really. I know that there are really inappropriate user names (and I would block them without hesitation on Wikibooks) however a couple of newly created accounts caught my eye - User:Hhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh & User:Lordpoopypants3? Thanks in advance --Herby talk thyme 19:31, 19 February 2007 (UTC)

Lordpoopypants3 (talk · contributions) has been blocked by Yann (talk · contributions) for uploading copyrighted porn. -- Bryan (talk to me) 21:38, 19 February 2007 (UTC)
Hm. Always keep in mind that different cultures might have different standards for what is an "appropriate" username. The only user names I would block on sight are those that attack another user or try to impersonate another user. Everything else, I would wait to see what the quality of their editing is like, see if they're here to stir up trouble or not. Others may disagree with me here. Incidentally, we need a section about this on commons:blocking policy. --pfctdayelise (说什么?) 01:21, 20 February 2007 (UTC)

Dupe image copyright query

Image:DSCF0117.JPG and Image:Duguidjames.JPG were uploaded over a week ago. They seem identical. Both users claimed to be the creators and then an IP amended one of the photos. I have had no response to my enquiry on either user's talk pages seeking clarification. My view would be that they are both copyvios in the absence of better information. However I have not had the experience that would allow me to take that decision on my own as yet - advice welcome - thanks --Herby talk thyme 13:03, 22 February 2007 (UTC)

You might try asking on w:Talk:James_Duguid; there's also a cropped version of the photo there. The people involved probably pay more attention to the article. --Davepape 14:42, 22 February 2007 (UTC)
Interesting - the licensing on the WP image is somewhat shaky I think too - it accredited to one of the user's that uploaded ours BUT that is the one where an IP has amended the license to a magazine, hardly the clarity I would like for a license --Herby talk thyme 15:26, 22 February 2007 (UTC)

Need to delete image

I uploaded one of my images (Dennes Johnson of the Boston Celtics) and through ignorance, didn't realize that there would be free usage of the image. I would like to delete it. How do I do that? Thanks! Steve cavics@aol.com

I'm sorry to learn that you aren't comfortable freely licensing your photography. As a courtesy to you I have deleted the image. Perhaps you might consider donating some other examples of your work under a free license? Jkelly 17:41, 23 February 2007 (UTC)
For the record here, after this exchange happened, I spoke with Steve via telephone and it looks like we've reached an understanding with respect to licensing which is acceptable all around.
Jkelly has my thanks for responding promptly an respectfully. --Gmaxwell 20:40, 23 February 2007 (UTC)

Getting an image in the appropriate place

I uploaded an image (anethumgraveolens.jpg) and would like to get it to this page http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Anethum_graveolens, but I don't know how to do it. Can you help me? Thanks, Meg

It looks like User:Rasbak did this: [12] . pfctdayelise (说什么?) 12:44, 26 February 2007 (UTC)

A deletion request 'Image:SophiaGal.JPG'

I, Riva72, the author of this work, request you to delete this picture immediately as I decided not to release it into the public domain. I do not want the file to remain in the commons depository. Thank you! --Riva72 19:08, 25 February 2007 (UTC)

A request for deletion 'Image:SophiaGal.JPG' and not for the change of the licence type

I (Riva72; the author of this photo ie. this work) request you to delete this picture immediately as I decided (for some reasons) not to release it into the public domain. I do not want the file to remain in the commons depository. I would appreciate your understanding and your direct action. Thank you!.. --Riva72 21:57, 25 February 2007 (UTC)

Ok. The file was deleted. The messages above are redundant. Thank you! --Riva72 10:51, 26 February 2007 (UTC)

Marian Iwańciów

This deletion debate is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

Dear Wikipedia Commons administrators: I request you to delete all the pictures listed below immediately. Ms Iwańciów (the daughter of the artist and the owner of the works whose pictures were taken by me and deposited with the Commons) asked me to remove all the photos from the Commons database as she decided not to release the photos into the public domain and share them under Attribution 2.5 and Attribution ShareAlike 2.5 licences. Today, she also holds the legal rights to the photos taken by me (the Wikipedia Commons user: Riva72). Here, I provide the links to all the photos to be removed:

  1. Image:Mari1.JPG
  2. Image:Mari7.JPG
  3. Image:Mari4.JPG
  4. Image:Mari6.JPG
  5. Image:Mari8.JPG
  6. Image:Mari9.JPG
  7. Image:Mari2.JPG
  8. Image:Mari3.JPG
  9. Image:Mari5.JPG
  10. Image:Larixpolonica.jpg
  11. Image:Puszcza1.jpg
  12. Image:Puszcza2.jpg
  13. Image:Przedburza.jpg
  14. Image:Olesko.jpg
  15. Image:Poczajow1.jpg
  16. Image:Poczajow2.jpg
  17. Image:Poczajow3.jpg
  18. Image:Podkamien1.jpg
  19. Image:Podkamien2.jpg
  20. Image:Podkamien5.jpg
  21. Image:Podkamien3.jpg
  22. Image:Podkamien4.jpg
  23. Image:Mansion.jpg
  24. Image:Galhouse3.jpg
  25. Image:Ruthenianchurch.jpg
  26. Image:Wisent1.jpg
  27. Image:Wisent2.jpg
  28. Image:Big-game hunting.jpg
  29. Image:Horsesketch1.jpg
  30. Image:Horsesketch2.jpg
  31. Image:Horsesketch3.jpg
  32. Image:Horse4.jpg
  33. Image:Horsesketch7.jpg
  34. Image:Horsesketch8.jpg
  35. Image:Horsesketch5.jpg
  36. Image:Horsesketch6.jpg
  37. Image:Szkic1.jpg
  38. Image:Szkic2.jpg
  39. Image:Szkic3.jpg
  40. Image:Szkic4.jpg
  41. Image:Kon1.jpg
  42. Image:Kon2.jpg
  43. Image:Kon3.jpg
  44. Image:Kon4.jpg
  45. Image:Kon5.jpg
  46. Image:Kon6.jpg
  47. Image:Kon7.jpg
  48. Image:Kon8.jpg
  49. Image:Kon9.jpg
  50. Image:Kon10.jpg
  51. Image:Horsan1.jpg
  52. Image:Horsan2.jpg
  53. Image:Szkic5.jpg
  54. Image:Szkic6.jpg
  55. Image:Studyofhorse7.jpg
  56. Image:Horsestudy8.jpg
  57. Image:Malnow.JPG
  58. Image:Szkic7.jpg
  59. Image:Szkic8.jpg
  60. Image:Wilno.jpg

Thank you! --Riva72 10:54, 28 February 2007 (UTC)

Creative Commons licenses are irrevocable, so they are free until the copyright expires. Out of courtesy we might however decide to delete the images. What is the reason that she wants it deleted? -- Bryan (talk to me) 11:01, 28 February 2007 (UTC)
Bryan, these are the personal reasons. I would appreciate if you respected them. 'The copyrights granted to the Commons has expired' - let it be the official reason. Besides, according to the international copyright laws, works by this artist are not in the public domain (at least until 70 years after his death). Thank you for understanding. Have a nice afternoon! --Riva72 11:13, 28 February 2007 (UTC)
We can't delete images on commons per request without a good reason. The free license can't expire. And some of these images were uploaded as far back as September 2006. In addition this is not the place for deletion discussions. See Commons:Deletion requests --Cat out 20:18, 28 February 2007 (UTC)
Some (or is it all?) of these will be deleted as derivative works. Samulili 11:29, 28 February 2007 (UTC)
Samulili: I ask you to delete all the above listed files from the Wikipedia Commons resources database as it was explained by me.. Thx! --Riva72 12:21, 28 February 2007 (UTC)

Closed. Relist at Commons:Deletion requests --Cat out 20:18, 28 February 2007 (UTC)

  • Ok. The files were deleted. The message above is redundant. It can be archived or deleted. Thank you! --Riva72 12:57, 1 March 2007 (UTC)
    This debate is CLOSED. That means DO NOT EDIT regardless of the reason. Also DO NOT ever edit my comments. --Cat out 14:54, 2 March 2007 (UTC)

Your opinion

From Village pump 2007/02/28

Hello, I would like to modify a template which is very used. It is Template:Creator. The goal is to obtain something looking like this test page => Image:José de Ribera 017.jpg. (the test template is here => User:EDUCA33E/test).

If it is visually correct, the goal is to show automatically in template like Template:Painting the Creator sheet (if it exists) with the corresponding artist name.

For example with something in Template Painting like this :

{{#ifexist:Creator:{{{Artist}}}|{{Creator:{{{Artist}}}}}|{{{Artist|-}}}}}

So before I destroy anything ! I would like to have your opinion...(even if I have to put this idea in my pocket.). Regards, EDUCA33E 01:17, 28 February 2007 (UTC)

I think that the test looks great. Very nice work. Jkelly 23:07, 28 February 2007 (UTC)
Looks good to me as well. --MichaelMaggs 18:04, 2 March 2007 (UTC)

So, if no opposition, can an sysop copy/paste User:EDUCA33E/test in {{Creator}} ?
The Template Creator is protected.

(Note : A bot request has been made here for cleaning <br> tag and * lang.) Regards. EDUCA33E 14:17, 1 March 2007 (UTC)

Ugh, the structure is nice, but the colours … could someone please change them to a less obtrusive combination, especially without white on black? Perhaps just some variations of light blue? Thanks a lot --Überraschungsbilder 20:18, 2 March 2007 (UTC)

I have moved the styles to class definitions in MediaWiki:common.css and changed it to a bluish theme. YOu can now fiddle with the colors without invalidating several thousand pages :) But you'll need to shift-reload to see the new colors. -- Duesentrieb ⇌ 14:02, 5 March 2007 (UTC)
Very good... If I can suggest :
See Image:José de Ribera 017.jpg for render example.
Cordially, Educa33e 14:14, 5 March 2007 (UTC)

I like the bluish theme better. in fact I'd rather see it the same purple as the {{information}} box (and museum the same???) I think there's merit in unified color schemes for information. But a box to carry creator info is a great idea, I've been cramming a lot of detail into the one line in the information box and this will be way better. Thanks both of you for some nifty work! ++Lar: t/c 14:32, 5 March 2007 (UTC)

The compactness, compared to the old version, is a big improvement. But personally I think it would read a little better if the birth/death info were transposed. Then the labels can be less wordy. See User:Davepape/Creator for what I mean. --Davepape 15:26, 5 March 2007 (UTC)

Davepape proposal for birth/death info is very very good. I agree with it. Good enhancement.... (but with a width:100% :P )... Cordialy. Educa33e 20:04, 5 March 2007 (UTC)

I think class definitions in MediaWiki:common.css for template is not recommanded. All other wiki must define them in their common.css to keep aspect, order to have default table rendering. Cordially, Educa33e 23:17, 14 March 2007 (UTC)

Image:De Zonnebloem.JPG

I cannot read the description while I find this untagged image. Is it written in German?--Jusjih 11:09, 2 March 2007 (UTC)

I've added a short german and english description. --GeorgHH 21:07, 2 March 2007 (UTC)

English LOCAL category and Commons' COMMON category

Dear ALL English Admins.


Category:Commons maintenance under "Commons-en" is for English LOCAL maintenance. The Wikimedia Commons' common category is Category:Commons maintenance content. Please DON'T mix up; otherwise, it may be difficult to follow the Wikimedia Commons' common Internationalization Rule.


There are some categories in the local one which are supposed to be under the Commons' common categories. Can you please move them for optimization? ( I think it may be beyond my authority; that's why I am asking you here. )

--SantaClaus 19:30, 2 March 2007 (UTC)

Marian Iwańciów II

I am forced to place this message here as I disagree with the user Cool Cat.. The relist should not be at: 'Relist at Commons:Deletion requests' as proposed by this man but at: 'Category:Other speedy deletions' as the presence of the files in question with the commons resources database is obvious copyviolation and the files should be immediately deleted as such.. --Riva72 19:35, 2 March 2007 (UTC)

Firstly I am not a man. I do not see obvious copyviolations (such as TV screen shots and etc). Please stop wasting our time. --Cat out 19:50, 2 March 2007 (UTC)
Can the 'Cool Cat' (the lady user) provide me with the definition or the table of contents what items can apply as obvious copyviolations? The files are not TV shots. They can be treated as this 'etc.' of yours. Are these photos worse to apply for this speedy delete category than the Image:Burabihan.jpg, for example? --Riva72 19:59, 2 March 2007 (UTC)

No, no, no You have uploaded images and said that copyright holder agreed for license (cc-by-sa-2.5). It belive you. Now you have some arguments on pl.wiki and in the same time you try to persuade us, that those images are copyvios. I understand you feel offened and you want your uploads to be deleted, but you cannot revoke free license once aplied, so don't try running around and screaming copyvio on your images hoping someone would delete it. --WarX 19:56, 2 March 2007 (UTC)

To Warx and others: The decision to place the photos here under the 'cc-by-sa-2.5' category was only my decision. As I said earlier, I was granted the permission to take the photos of the works. It was said: photo taken by me (owner's permission granted). The upload of these photos with the commons was the obvious copyvios by me and, therefore, they should be deleted immediately and without such unreasonable and unpleasant discussions.

Do you need a translation of the phrases used by me? The copyright holder of THIS FILE (not the holder of the work whose picture I have taken). I still notice problems with reading comprehension by the Polish Wikipedia editors.. The decision to delete the files have nothing in common with the petty argument at the Polish wikipedia.

--Riva72 20:05, 2 March 2007 (UTC) + --Riva72 20:11, 2 March 2007 (UTC)
Please use Commons:Deletion requests if you want to have the images deleted. Thuresson 11:40, 3 March 2007 (UTC)
Riva72, you're wasting everybody's time by arguing which process should be used. As I said on your talk page, the mere fact that there this deletion is controversial qualifies it to not be speedy deleted but rather discussed in a deletion request at COM:DEL. If you are right and this photo really isn't free because you never got proper permission from the copyright owner of the works of art of which your photographs are derivatives of then please state that in a deletion request and put your faith in the Commons users' judgements. Yonatanh 12:05, 3 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Thank you for the information. I have just placed the template for a deletion request. Can you inform me, please if I did it correctly? This is the case of: Image:Mari1.JPG. Do I need to place the template at my discussion page? I hope that it is not necessary. Thx! --Riva72 22:07, 3 March 2007 (UTC)
  • The COM:DEL page is available at: [13] --Riva72 07:17, 4 March 2007 (UTC)

Edit on protected template {{de}}

Hi, the "inline" parameter is missing in the {{de}} template. Can a sysop add it ?

|inline={{{inline|}}}

See {{en}} or {{fr}} to compare. Regards, Educa33e 00:25, 4 March 2007 (UTC)

✓ Done hope that didn't hit the job queue TOO hard... (The job queue length is currently 62,643... sigh)... note that the helps between de and fr are not parallel. Which is better, the shorter version of de or the longer one of fr? ++Lar: t/c 14:38, 5 March 2007 (UTC)

There is an error. The | miss.

|3=Deutschinline={{{inline|}}}}}

instead of

|3=Deutsch|inline={{{inline|}}}}}

Cordialy, Educa33e 13:25, 6 March 2007 (UTC)

✓ Done (again, with apologies for not doing it right the first time...) See the talk of the template for a demonstration that it is now working right.. sorry for hitting the job queue twice! ++Lar: t/c 16:15, 6 March 2007 (UTC)
Great ! Thanks very much !
I have update some language template that are not protected to add inline too and default value : {{Tr}}, {{Vi}}, {{Eu}}, {{Fi}}, {{Gl}}, {{Io}}, {{Nn}}....
All language templates must have the inline parameter and default value {{{1|}}}. (But I don't know, if they have it all....)
Cordially, Educa33e 16:51, 6 March 2007 (UTC)

{{delete}}

{{delete}} seems to be screwed up. Not putting the word "Image" where it should. William Avery 23:32, 6 March 2007 (UTC)

I lie. The first symptom was requesting I input a whole bunch more parameters than just the reason. William Avery 23:44, 6 March 2007 (UTC)
Yes. I should have ignored the sarcastic and misleading message beginning "Here is the full syntax again, in case you misplaced it: ..." William Avery 23:49, 6 March 2007 (UTC)
And all images nominated for deletion seem to be in Category:Incomplete deletion requests at the moment. William Avery 08:36, 7 March 2007 (UTC)
it seems like there have been a LOT of changes to this template in the last 3 days or so by several people... I am not sure which change was when this problem first happened but I see it too... ++Lar: t/c 16:39, 7 March 2007 (UTC)

Request for Admin attention: Barack Obama images

The following images used in Wikipedia's Barack Obama article await Admin confirmation of appropriate licensing:

http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Image:Flickr_Obama_Austin_01.jpg cc-by-2.0 http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Image:Flickr_Obama_Springfield_01.jpg cc-by-sa-2.0 http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Image:Barackobamasig.jpg public domain (image is from U.S. Senate web site)

Many thanks! --HailFire 21:11, 7 March 2007 (UTC)

The Springfield one is now done, but I'm unclear that Image:Flickr Obama Austin 01.jpg belongs here, as it is a photograph of random people, and we don't have much reason to think that the photographer had implied or explicit consent to publish a photograph of them. Jkelly 23:12, 7 March 2007 (UTC)
It looks very clearly like a public event, so the people have no reasonable expectation of privacy (that is, consent is not required). IMO. --pfctdayelise (说什么?) 03:20, 8 March 2007 (UTC)
Yes, it was a public event. The following caption and sources accompany the photo where it currently appears on the Barack Obama English Wikipedia article:

Obama supporters at campaign rally in Austin, Texas, on February 23, 2007. Obama drew a crowd of over 20,000 attendees at this Austin appearance.<ref>{{cite news | first=W. Gardner | last=Selby | coauthors= David Rauf | title=At Least 20,000 People Cheer Barack Obama in Austin | date=February 24, 2007 | publisher= | url =http://www.statesman.com/search/content/news/stories/local/02/24/24obama.html | work =Austin American-Statesman | pages = | accessdate = 2007-03-01 }} Full speech in [http://www.news8austin.com/content/headlines/?ArID=179875&SecID=2 text] (''News 8 Austin'') and [http://www.statesman.com/news/mplayer/m/9763 audio] (''Austin American-Statesman''). See also: {{cite web|url=http://www.brightcove.com/title.jsp?title=537018586&channel=353512430 |title=20,000 in Austin, Texas |accessdate=2007-03-01 |date=added February 26, 2007 |format=campaign video |work=Obama for America, Brightcove.com }}</ref>]]

Apart from this photo's merits for inclusion on the Wikimedia Commons, may I ask that an Admin kindly confirm cc-by-2.0 licensing status and make the appropriate changes on the associated file page? Thanks. --HailFire 16:51, 8 March 2007 (UTC)

I'd like to question the third one. An image isn't PD if it comes from a website but only if it is made by a US Federal government employee during his duties. Samulili 07:25, 8 March 2007 (UTC)
A U.S. government employee produced this image and placed it on a server operating within the http://senate.gov domain. No one else would be authorized to do so. --HailFire 11:03, 8 March 2007 (UTC)

System messages in bulgarian

I translated some system messages in bulgarian and put the text of their discussion pages. Please, let some administrator take a look on my contributions from 07/03/2007 and create them, using the texts. --Darsie 08:30, 8 March 2007 (UTC)

Thankyou, Darsie!
I updated all the messages (I think). These two have plurals, check the previous English - maybe you want to change them? MediaWiki:Watchlistcleardone/bg, MediaWiki:Watchlistcount/bg.
BTW, aren't these messages defined in the MessagesBg.php file? See m:MediaWiki localisation for how to help update it.
cheers, pfctdayelise (说什么?) 03:00, 9 March 2007 (UTC)
Hi! Thanks for your help. I think the messages are ok. And the file messagesbg.php was updated in bugzilla. --Darsie 11:24, 21 March 2007 (UTC)

MediaWiki:Noarticletext/fr

There is a mistake in the text:

Il n’y a pour l’instant aucun texte sur cette page ; vous pouvez [[{{ns:special}}:Search/{{PAGENAME}}|lancer une recherche sur le titre de cette page]] ou [{{fullurl:{{NAMESPACE}}:{{FULLPAGENAME}}|action=edit}} modifier cette page].

when you click to modify the page, the namespace appears two times in the URL. This code is better:

Il n’y a pour l’instant aucun texte sur cette page ; vous pouvez [[{{ns:special}}:Search/{{PAGENAME}}|lancer une recherche sur le titre de cette page]] ou [{{fullurl:{{FULLPAGENAME}}|action=edit}} modifier cette page].

(only supress Commons:) IAlex 18:42, 8 March 2007 (UTC)

C'est fait. Jastrow (Λέγετε) 19:20, 8 March 2007 (UTC)

possibly copyvio, but i don't quite understand the rules on this license tag

Someone might want to have a look at Image:Wikipedia-LGBT.png. It showed up on the English wiki today; we've removed it there but it's still showing up on the Polish wiki. It might be fine, it might need speedy deletion, I don't know. I figured this is as good a place as any to get some attention on it. — coelacan — 12:49, 11 March 2007 (UTC)

The Wikipedia logo is copyrighted. Unless approved by the foundation my opinion is to speedy delete this one. -- Bryan (talk to me) 18:09, 11 March 2007 (UTC)

Please do not delete images used on Wikimedia logo mosaic

Hello,

It is the second time in two weeks I have to restore a deleted image that appears on the Wikimedia logo mosaic [14] [15].

It may be because of our brand new CommonsDelinker (great tool btw), some admins may feel they can delete images without checking the usage of all photos. This is not the case. Please always checkusage before deleting. If you are about to delete an image appearing in the mosaic, find another one to replace it *before* deleting the bad one.

And please, do not turn this thread into an endless argument about « why haven't all these images been verified before », I am sure they have been. guillom 14:36, 13 March 2007 (UTC)

Where can I find the CommonsDelinker? I am looking for that for a long time. --ALE! ¿…? 16:31, 13 March 2007 (UTC)
And one more question: Do we have a bot to replace Image A by Image B? This is important for images listed at Commons:Deletion requests/Superseded. --ALE! ¿…? 16:38, 13 March 2007 (UTC)
Agree with Guillom, I did a replacement recently too ([16] ... but I did not replace with a new image, only duplicated with another already in so there is a dup in there). I wonder if we should embed a copy of the mosaic via transclusion in a page named "STOP!!!! DO NOT DELETE THIS IMAGE TILL YOU REPLACE IT IN THE WIKIMEDIA LOGO MOSAIC" so that when people do a whereused the will see that page and maybe think a bit about it? :) ++Lar: t/c 17:15, 13 March 2007 (UTC)

It is simple to determine whether an image is being used on the Mosiac. It's on the image page. You don't even have to do a Checkusage. Please review the image page before deleting an image. Cary "Bastiq▼e" Bass demandez 17:19, 13 March 2007 (UTC)

People that don't know what the mosaic is may not think much of the fact that it is one of the pages that the image is used on. But I did go ahead and create STOP!!!! DO NOT DELETE THIS IMAGE TILL YOU REPLACE IT IN THE WIKIMEDIA LOGO MOSAIC :) ++Lar: t/c 17:28, 13 March 2007 (UTC)
LOL :) --pfctdayelise (说什么?) 00:35, 14 March 2007 (UTC)

Hmmm, so an admin has to look for a similar image if he deletes an image from the mosaic? That can take quite a while. Don't admins have better things to do? I think it would be enough if the admin noted that he/she deleted the image, so someone else could take care of it.

Fred Chess 14:18, 15 March 2007 (UTC)

No, that doesn't take much time, since he only needs to open Wikimedia logo mosaic/Colours gallery and pick up a picture. guillom 15:02, 15 March 2007 (UTC)
Aha, I see.
I personally still wouldn't say that admins are required to do this if they are deleting images that are copyvios or have unknown sources. The mosaic is fun, but I think issues of license and copyright must come first on Commons -- always.
Fred Chess 23:23, 15 March 2007 (UTC)
PS. If admins delete superseded images, I agree that they should replace it in the mosaic... / Fred Chess 23:26, 15 March 2007 (UTC)
I'm new here, but shouldn't there be a link to the appropriate section of the Wikimedia logo mosaic/Colours gallery to pick from? Then as long as the mosaic maintainer keeps a good supply of licensed images in the gallery, the admin would have a link to exactly where to grab one. If the mosaic were to link to redirect pages, then the admin wouldn't have to look for where to stick new new one. Then there could even be a bot that fixes dead links on the mosaic page, perhaps initiated by a link on the photo page. My point is that this shouldn't be difficult (from the standpoint of a person who isn't going to do any of the work).--Dan Hoey 14:18, 16 March 2007 (UTC)

Closing deletion request

Could an Admin consider closing Commons:Deletion requests/Template:PD-UK-unknown, please? There have been no postings for over two weeks, and the proposer, Wikipeder, has not found a single logged-in user who is prepared to support his request. He was similarly unsuccessful in trying to get the Anonymous-Work template deleted in September of last year: details at Commons:Deletion requests/Template:Anonymous work --MichaelMaggs 17:56, 15 March 2007 (UTC)

Edits to {{no license}} and similar

Fred Chess altered this template (and {{no source}}...) to use a housekeeping category with a shorter name for the deletion process. I have no issue with that (which is why I'm posting here as opposed to taking it up with him). However, he neglected to make similar edits to all the language variants of these, which means Image:Arturo Di Napoli.JPG is in the non-existent Category:Images with unknown source as of 8 March 2007 instead of Category:Unknown as of 8 March 2007. I know I could fix this myself, but I'm tired and theres dozens of templates needing fixes.--Nilfanion 00:53, 16 March 2007 (UTC)

request for deletion or replacement of image

In an error message, I was directed to the help desk because my account is too new for me to replace Image:Bill Gosper 2005.jpg which is a picture of Noam Elkies that I accidentally uploaded under the wrong name. I've uploaded Image:Bill Gosper 2006.jpg (the preferable name, since the picture is from 2006) but Image:Bill Gosper 2005.jpg should either be deleted or replaced with a copy of Image:Bill Gosper 2006.jpg. The file Image:Elkies-422739576 3d5344bfff o.jpg may also be deleted, since it is a copy of Image:Noam Elkies 2005.jpg. If there's a way I can do this myself, please let me know.

In summary,

I'd like to delete Image:Bill Gosper 2005.jpg and Image:Elkies-422739576 3d5344bfff o.jpg, or
If deletion is impossible, I'd like to at least replace Image:Bill Gosper 2005.jpg with Image:Bill Gosper 2006.jpg

My apologies for making work for you, and thanks for any help you can provide. -- Dan Hoey 13:30, 16 March 2007 (UTC)

✓ Done - I think. Yonatan talk 16:24, 16 March 2007 (UTC)

Reversion

I haven't found any place to request an image to be reverted to a previous version (and I have tried to do it myself but I do not know how). The image I request to be reverted is Image:Torre Mayor 005.jpg. The original image showed the Angel de la Independencia and the Reforma Avenue in Mexico City as seen from the "Torre Mayor" (hence its name). It was replaced by an image that shows the Lake of Chapultepec. The new image was not taken from the Torre Mayor, but from a helicopter, and it was not taken by User:AlexCovarrubias, but by Oscar Ruiz [17].

Mr. Ruiz had, about a year ago, expressed his intention of uploading his pictures on Wikipedia or Commons and releasing them (even though, because of a very unfortunate misunderstanding they were all deleted, and he abandoned his project). I presume Mr. Covarrubias requested Mr. Ruiz's permission to use his picture (as many other users have in the past with other pictures). However, the image should have been uploaded with a different name, since many projects use the image to show the Reforma Avenue, and not the Lake of Chapultepec.--Dúnadan 04:22, 24 March 2007 (UTC)

✓ Done you can just use the (rev) button next to the old version in the future. Yonatan talk 04:53, 24 March 2007 (UTC)

Rookie error needs admin's attention

I didn't realize you cannot update newer versions of an image (even you if created the image to begin with). Can an admin delete my initial attempt (Image:Kabul City Map.svg) since I decided to use the english wikipedia instead of commons. --MarsRover 06:09, 24 March 2007 (UTC)

✓ Done You can upload a new version of an image over an old one except someone has to be registered for four days before he has the ability to do this. I have uploaded the version from the English Wikipedia over the version you have here and tagged the image on en properly. The next time you need to do this, you probably won't need my help. ;) Also, could you please add the image you used (the CIA one) to your image description page? Thanks, Yonatan talk 06:55, 24 March 2007 (UTC)

Riva72 (talk · contributions) & 213.199.192.60 (talk · contributions)?

This issue relates to one here Commons:Administrators'_noticeboard/Attention#Marian_Iwa.C5.84ci.C3.B3w_II. Ultimately the photos were deleted accepting the fact that Riva was not in a position to give valid license to the uploads. I was left with two concerns.

  1. Riva had mislead Commons which suggested to me that a ban might have been appropriate for a period.
  2. What had occurred seem to bring into question other material uploaded by this user.

Yesterday the IP address edited license details of some of Riva's image pages. I asked them to state what they were doing. They replied with "No comment" which they then blanked so I reverted their edits. I am pretty sure that the IP is the one Riva has edited from.

I'd be interested in comments - thanks --Herby talk thyme 12:41, 24 March 2007 (UTC)

I'm not sure I understand your implication. How has Riva "mislead Commons"? In the past I mean, the IP's behaviour being obviously quite puzzling. Jastrow (Λέγετε) 08:26, 25 March 2007 (UTC)
OK - my understanding was that Riva originally stated that he was able to license the images for Commons (quite a while ago). Subsequently he stated that he had not been in a position to do so (the statements are spread around a bit) - I felt that meant Commons had been mislead? --Herby talk thyme 09:54, 25 March 2007 (UTC)
He was probably misleading (either in saying he had permission in the beginning or in saying he didn't have permission when he asked for them to be deleted - one of them wasn't the truth) but blocks are preventative and not punitive so I'm not sure a ban would help anything. The IP behavior is rather suspicious though. Yonatan talk 10:00, 25 March 2007 (UTC)
Fine - happy with that and maybe call it a heads up rather than anything else - cheers --Herby talk thyme 10:03, 25 March 2007 (UTC)
My understanding is that Riva's first claim (his entitlement to freely license the pictures) was made erroneously but with good faith, as is the case with many uploaders unaware of problems related to derivative works or, more broadly, free licenses. Of course, the IP behaviour somewhat casts a shade over this. Jastrow (Λέγετε) 11:53, 25 March 2007 (UTC)

It seems obvious from the contribs that everyone can see that 213.199.192.60 is Riva72, has Riva72 ever claimed otherwise? --Gmaxwell 13:04, 29 March 2007 (UTC)

legal coordinator

The Wikimedia Foundation is seeking a legal coordinator to handle the day-to-day legal needs of the Foundation and to coordinate outside help. The position can be either a full-time or part-time position, and either telecommuting or office-based. Please apply with CV or resume attached to jobs AT wikimedia.org with subject line "Legal Coordinator".

Wher do I send CV

Application deadline: 7th of april

All candidates will be notified of the hiring decision via email by 20th of april at most.

Responsibilities

-- Coordinate pro bono help, international legal services, legal interns, assistance from the project communities, and outside counsel as necessary

MaxManshel@gMail.com

Image:Muumi.jpg

Hello,

I hope to be at the right place with this question of utmost importance ;)

Can anyone tell me what happened to the Image:Muumi.jpg, which used to illustrate my (Userpage) on the French Wikipedia? It was the picture of a statue, I do not see why it could have been deleted... but it has disappeared for quite some time, now. Thank you, Moumine 09:23, 31 March 2007 (UTC)

It was deleted by Samulili with the comment derivative work;free from 2072 on 11 February - may be best to contact them. Thanks --Herby talk thyme 09:33, 31 March 2007 (UTC)
I think it is relevant to link to Commons:Freedom_of_panorama#Finland: "[..] works of art located in public places cannot be commercially published when they constitute the central element of the picture." / Fred Chess 10:11, 31 March 2007 (UTC)
Now, I understand ! Thanks to both of you for the explanation. --Moumine 08:18, 3 April 2007 (UTC)

Candidate

Hello, I volunteered for Adminship yesterday on Commons:Administrators (maybe the date was a bad choice - this is not an april fool) Micheletb 06:38, 2 April 2007 (UTC)

Cem323 (talk · contributions)

Keeps uploading copyrighted images from www.airliners.net. Anyone want to take a look? feydey (talk) 14:28, 2 April 2007 (UTC)

✓ Done. Thanks to Yonatan. feydey (talk) 16:05, 2 April 2007 (UTC)

Double delete

I uploaded two copies of the same image (Image:165.jpg and Image:Decameron-noble meal.jpg) by accident and tagged one of them for deletion. But instead of just one being removed, both got deleted. Could someone please restore Decameron-noble_meal.jpg?

Peter Isotalo 09:12, 4 April 2007 (UTC)

Undeleted. -- Bryan (talk to me) 09:15, 4 April 2007 (UTC)

Miracleimpuse at Sweetest Day

I've removed original research commentary by Miracleimpulse (talk · contributions) twice now at Talk:Sweetest Day. Talk pages here are not for editorializing or espousing theories about Sweetest Day, right? He was banned from editing these articles on Wikipedia for POV-pushing, and now is bringing it here. Not a dog 16:34, 4 April 2007 (UTC)

I suggest that we ban the user also here from editing this article. -- Bryan (talk to me) 16:43, 4 April 2007 (UTC)
Yeah, I don't know the protocol here. I think its fine to have the scans he's finding related to Sweetest Day here, and he should be allowed to continue to add new scans as appropriate, but the editorializing doesn't seem appropriate. Not a dog 17:27, 4 April 2007 (UTC)
There is no formal protocol about this, but if there is consensus under the community to have him banned from that gallery, I see not reason why we should not. -- Bryan (talk to me) 17:58, 4 April 2007 (UTC)

Template:PD-Art

Hi, I suggested to rewrite {{PD-Art}} a bit (see its talk page). Could someone help?--Kareha 20:26, 4 April 2007 (UTC)

I'm happy to help. It's rather a mess at the moment, and how it's supposed to be used is totally unclear to many users. I note that's it's a protected high-use template. I presume that means it's better to sort out the exact text on the talk page first, and then move across when ready, rather than doing multiple tweaks to the template itself. Or does it not really matter? Anyone? --MichaelMaggs 21:27, 4 April 2007 (UTC)
It does matter, because each edit will add several hundred thousands jobs to the m:job queue. -- Bryan (talk to me) 22:01, 4 April 2007 (UTC)
Question about the job queue: Can we continuously edit without concerning about the job queue if subpage for text have been made and contained as <noinclude> element in the template itself?--Kareha 18:50, 5 April 2007 (UTC)
No we can't. That's why changes should always be done at once. -- Bryan (talk to me) 18:57, 5 April 2007 (UTC)
Thanks, I understand. Then I welcome anyone to edit User:Kareha/PD-Art to improve it, I think it's less problematic.--Kareha 19:55, 5 April 2007 (UTC)

Discussion is now ongoing at User:Kareha/PD-Art. --MichaelMaggs 17:35, 12 April 2007 (UTC)

Captain Scarlet (talk · contributions) replacing his own images

Please look at the user's latest uploads. -- Bryan (talk to me) 19:37, 5 April 2007 (UTC)

Seems that multiple users have reported this: See bottom of COM:AN/V, COM:AN/U and COM:AN/A -- Bryan (talk to me) 19:50, 5 April 2007 (UTC)

Any further discussion will take place on Commons:Administrators' noticeboard/User problems. -- Bryan (talk to me) 20:16, 5 April 2007 (UTC)

And again

User:Ayacop is deleting my categories without comments.[18] I keep getting people saying, oh, other editors shouldn't do that. I keep saying, let's settle the issue and fix comments. I add notes, then users like this come along and do whatever they want without bothering to comment. Isn't it time to settle the issue? KP Botany 22:32, 5 April 2007 (UTC)

KP Botany, the Administrators' noticeboards really aren't the proper place to bring this up, especialy with the example you've given (Genisteae, Fabaceae, neither, both?). There were some discussions about this on the TOL page which ground to a halt a few weeks ago -- at least in part due to a lack of civility -- but those discussions will hopefully restart and continue towards some sort of solution. As a rule, administrators are here to use the tools to help things go smoothly (and legally, and according to policy)... we aren't in charge of creating policy, and most admins try to avoid stepping into the middle of editorial disputes unless the situation has become truly disruptive. How, when, and why categories are used has long been a subject of debate on commons, in part because how, when, and why categories are used differs markedly on the various projects we serve. This is a policy issue, not a maintenance issue, and will only become the latter when and if a decision is made on the former. --SB_Johnny|talk|books 02:17, 6 April 2007 (UTC)
And apparantly a decision will never be made. People were not being incivil, and decisions were being made, until you accused people of being incivil out of the blue. But that's fine, I will just follow standard Wikimedia Commons practice and revert whenever and wherever, then. You know, ignore policy since there isn't any, accuse people of incivility when there isn't any. Do whatever I want seems to be the rule on Commons. Once I get into the swing of it, I'm sure things will go much better for me here, and I won't have any issues. KP Botany 03:12, 7 April 2007 (UTC)

Advice required

Placed on my user talk page User_talk:Herbythyme#A_request_to_the_Commons_administrator. This one is not something I feel able to make a decision on given my experience in Commons. I'm not sure it is even as straightforward as the post makes it seem. I'd appreciate help but will not be around much for the next couple of days - thanks --Herby talk thyme 09:14, 8 April 2007 (UTC)

  • Comment: see COM:AN/U#User:Riva72. Riva72 makes continuous efforts to cancel free licenses or otherwise disallow using some images on Polish Wikipedia for personal reasons. A.J. 10:08, 8 April 2007 (UTC)
    After being declared a coward, I have very little to add. -- Cat chi? 13:47, 8 April 2007 (UTC)
Cool Cat, thank you for your voice in this thread. My personal opinion (which was the result of your voice and your attitude towards my request to you which may be read at: [19], [20] and mainly at [21] led to the open debate at The English Wikipedia which can be read here: [22]. In my opinion, the latter discussion is very informative and, thus, worth reading. Smile! The day is really beautiful! :) --213.199.192.60 14:40, 8 April 2007 (UTC) + --213.199.192.60 15:03, 8 April 2007 (UTC)
  • [23] - == riva72 ==
  • No właśnie o to chodzi, że my chcemy sobie zostawić te fotki, a jemu odbija, jak się wkurzę, to poprostu pozabezpieczam cały jego upload i będzie spokój :P --WarX 22:13, 29 mar 2007 (CEST)
TRANSLATION by Riva72: The question is that we want to have (here it equals to: we must have) all these petty photos and he is getting mad. If I get pissed off, I simply will preserve/block all of his uploads and, than, there is quiet. This childish ':P' of his signifies that he lolled his tongue in bliss. --213.199.192.60 21:58, 8 April 2007 (UTC)
Will someone of the Commons administrators be kind enough to translate into English the ABOVE words by the user called warx (translation already provided) as his statement in the adventure or am I to provide it? The words were placed at the Polish Wikipedia by this teenager as his answer to one of his followers. They correspond so nicely to his reasons for my block which I quote from the dispute page in the form presented by Cool Cat: User:WarX has blocked 213.199.192.60 for a year for "papa Riva72, tylko kto cie teraz zrewertuje?" **I am particularly bothered by the block summary being a question and also being in a foreign language. I would welcome a translation. User:Riva72 offered "ByeBye Riva72, who's gonna revert you now?" as the translation on my english talk page. *User:Odder has reverted two of the annons deletion nominations of polish money uploaded by Riva72. - end of quotation. My question: What can be told (how can be explained the action by Odder? --213.199.192.60 20:04, 8 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Please do not stray from the main issue of this thread and do not force me to stray into details myself - I think the aim of this thread is to think over the request of mine which was pasted by Herby above. I ask you to re-read it (User_talk:Herbythyme#A_request_to_the_Commons_administrator) and consider this request as RIVA's (who has become The-Lonely-Fighter-Against-The-Fellowship) final words in the case.

P.S. I want to remind you that allowing me to place the templates described in point nr 1 of my request (the castle in Podhorce case) to the set of six Podhorce castle photos is very dangerous to the Commons as it may become a nice habit. --213.199.192.60 20:27, 8 April 2007 (UTC)

That's really all from me - Have a nice evening. --213.199.192.60 20:40, 8 April 2007 (UTC)

I was involved in large part of that mess and I undersand less and less. Why instead of confusing people more and more didn't you just carry out deletion process as you did before in case of works by Marian Iwańciów? You confuse people pulling out dosens of links, and when they don't react as you expect (vide: Cool Cat) o simply don't understand whats going on, you react with insulting and hostility... You do you expect to get any help this way? You bothered already a couple of commons admins about that problem, and almost all of them suggested Commons:Deletion requests. Well, there are about 100 of them, maybe one of them will make edits againts Commons policies and others won't notice it? Everything is possible... A.J. 20:46, 8 April 2007 (UTC) (PS. Please, forgive me my sarcasm, feel free to theat this as personal attack of mine with all severity, I'm just tired of this. Logging off)

To the user called Ejdzej:

  • 1. Do NOT stray (do not run away) and do not mislead people again while putting the blame on me..
  • 2. You bothered me a long time ago yet..
  • 3. The dozens of links are meant not to confuse but to enlighten people..
  • 4. I wonder who's gonna block you, the respectable administrator..
  • 5. Quotation: and when they don't react as you expect (vide: Cool Cat) as said by the user called Ejdzej. The user called Riva says: actually, there were no reactions only administrative misinterpretations on purpose and escaping.. --213.199.192.60 21:14, 8 April 2007 (UTC)
  • 6. Please talk clearly and.. --213.199.192.60 22:16, 8 April 2007 (UTC)
  • 7. ..to the point as far as the request of mine (linked by Herby) is concerned.. --213.199.192.60 22:16, 8 April 2007 (UTC)

To the administrators (let them be 100 or more):

  • Can you ALL be kind enough to vote FOR or AGAINST the request of mine which was presented above and referred to by Herby. I will be satisfied to see 75% of the administrative voices! You even do not have to give the explanation for whatever reason I bear in mind! Thank you! --213.199.192.60 21:14, 8 April 2007 (UTC)
  • I am preparing deletion requests for all the photos I took and deposited at the Commons and the photos which I uploaded having their author's proper authorization. I will appreciate if you respect my decision and delete all these photos from the Commons depository as I want to leave the Commons forever. Thx. --213.199.192.60 00:53, 9 April 2007 (UTC)
  • The page can be accessed here: [24]. I decided to leave at the Commons depository these photos which are already used by some foreign Wikipedia projects. The photos requested for the removal are not used by any Wikipedias.. This settlement would be OK. --213.199.192.60 02:24, 9 April 2007 (UTC)

Throphy deletion request

  1. Image:FIFA World Cup trophy.png
  2. Image:FIFA Worldcup Copy for Germany 1990.jpg
  3. Image:LC 1.JPG
  4. Image:Deutsche Meisterschale.JPG
  5. Image:Schalke DFBpokal 2001 a.jpg
  6. Image:Stuttgart-vfb-1954-dfb-pokal.jpg
  7. Image:FA Cup's trophy.jpg
  8. Image:Trophylibertadores.jpg
  9. Image:Trophycopabrasil93.jpg
  10. Image:Trophycopabrasil02.jpg
  11. Image:Trophybrasileiro9305.jpg
  12. Image:The Presidents Cup golf trophy.jpg
  13. Image:Copa El País.png
  14. Image:Ligue des champions NB.JPG
  15. Image:Schneider Trophy 2006-08-10.jpg
  16. Image:Vince Lombardi Trophy.jpg
  17. Image:Grey Cup circa 2006.jpg
  18. Image:A Stanley Cup Premiere.jpg
  19. Image:Bague coupe lafleur 79.jpg
  20. Image:Coupe Stanley.jpg
  21. Image:Hhof calder.jpg
  22. Image:Hhof campbell.jpg
  23. Image:Hhof clancy.jpg
  24. Image:Hhof hart.jpg
  25. Image:Hhof jack adams.jpg
  26. Image:Hhof jennings.jpg
  27. Image:Hhof norris.jpg
  28. Image:Hhof vault.jpg
  29. Image:Hhof vezina.jpg
  30. Image:Lady Byng trophy hhof.jpg
  31. Image:Stanley cup closeup.jpg
  32. Image:Stanley cup hhof.jpg
  33. Image:StanleyCup.jpg
  34. Image:StanleyCupAvs2000-01Engraved.jpg
  35. Image:William Webb Ellis Cup.jpg
  36. Image:Webb Ellis Cup.jpg
  37. Image:Memorial Cup Trophy.jpg
  38. Image:Hhof stanley cup.jpg
  39. Image:World Baseball Classic Trophy.jpg
  40. Image:Jules Verne Trophy.jpg

I was asked to process deletion requests made on the above images. I am inclined to delete them all in a week unless I hear anything convincing suggesting the contrary. -- Cat chi? 10:10, 8 April 2007 (UTC)

On a second thought I'll delete them right away. They can be undeleted later if someone comes up with a convincing reason. -- Cat chi? 10:48, 8 April 2007 (UTC)
Please hold on all my images from the HHOF. I am in process of seeking permission from the NHL and linked them to my page where I posted the pictures so they can see them. Getting permission is the best way to avoid problems. -Aude (talk | contribs) 16:44, 9 April 2007 (UTC)
Please hold on Image:Stanley_cup_closeup.jpg too, even though I didn't take that one. Should the NHL come back and say yes to mine, I think they would probably say okay to this one too. -Aude (talk | contribs) 16:53, 9 April 2007 (UTC)
Cool Cat, you are the only one advocating the deletion of these images based on them being derivative works, with the exception of user:Thugchildz who is doing it to prove a point. I don't know what to say except that it is ABSURD to speedy delete images in such a manner. Copyright can only be applied to copyrightable items (such as work of art) and I do not see any compelling reason why these trophies are work of art. / Fred Chess 19:38, 9 April 2007 (UTC)

Most trophies seem to be work of (applied) art to me, and thus copyrightable. We schould get permission, or delete them. No need to rush it though, especially it's easiert to get permission if you can actually show what picture you are talking about. -- Duesentrieb ⇌ 01:09, 11 April 2007 (UTC)

The NHL has replied back to me. They don't object to the images being used on Wikipedia, but they are unwilling to allow the images to be licensed as GFDL or similar license. I explained reasons behind why we use free licenses, and suggested reducing the size of the images to no avail. Since we can't use image that are "permission only" for Wikipedia, I would simply like my images deleted now with the exception of the Stanley Cup images. I'm not comfortable enough with the "drinking vessel" argument mentioned on some of the deletion pages -- too much of a grey area. In the case of the Stanley Cup photos, my reasoning is that the original Cup was created in 1892, and Lord Stanley died in 1908. The copyright on the original cup (in the bank vault) has thus expired. This Stanley Cup is one of two duplicates or replicas -- one created in the 1960s and the second in 1993. According to the Derivative works page, "replicas are copies and not derivative works, which means they're not copyrightable by the person who creates the replica." So, I don't think these Stanley Cups are under copyright either. -Aude (talk | contribs) 16:57, 12 April 2007 (UTC)
Unfortunately, the copyright notice on NHL.com currently reads, "the word mark and image of the Stanley Cup are registered trademarks". Without a doubt, they are referring to the current version, but I am not sure if the original 19th century bowl, which is depicted on Image:Premiere Coupe Stanley 1893.jpg, counts. Zzyzx11 15:19, 14 April 2007 (UTC)
What is the problem? The Empire State Building is also trademark protected (trademark of ESBC, LLC), but we still have pictures of it. / Fred Chess 16:32, 14 April 2007 (UTC)
In the U.S., buildings are covered under "Freedom of panorama", so no problem there. I don't know enough about trademarks to make a judgment regarding the Stanley Cup, and defer to a more knowledgeable admin. At least, I'd like all my own images deleted to be safe. And, asked to have that happen nearly a week ago. How long will it take for my images to be deleted? Please delete them ASAP. -Aude (talk | contribs) 22:43, 17 April 2007 (UTC)
Trademarks and copyrights are two separate issues. Freedom of panorama applies to copyright and not trademark so to us it doesn't really matter if the Stanley Cup(s) are trademarked (although the {{trademark}} template should be added to them) but rather whether the image is free in the copyright sense of the word which it does seem to be. Yonatan talk 00:16, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

Photos of the coin deletion request

In the name of Riva72, the author of the photos linked below, I ask you to finish the deletion request process and provide me with the proper resolution of this deletion-request. Thank you. The humble follower of the administrative example placed this question in this very place. --213.199.192.60 19:42, 9 April 2007 (UTC)

The deletion request started on March 27, 2007 and then it was abruptly stopped by Odder without any explanations. The request was reprised on March 31, 2007. --213.199.192.60 19:42, 9 April 2007 (UTC)

Signed: --213.199.192.60 19:42, 9 April 2007 (UTC)

I see the request at Commons:Deletion_requests/2007/03#March_31. Don't worry, we will get to it. / Fred Chess 19:47, 9 April 2007 (UTC)
Ok. Thank you. :) --213.199.192.60 19:51, 9 April 2007 (UTC)

block request.

Could you please block user:155.232.128.10, who is stalking me (diff) from Wikispecies, where I recently blocked him/her (block log). Thanks Lycaon 12:09, 12 April 2007 (UTC)

✓ Done - blocked for a week. If you feel more would be appropriate feel free to contact me. Cheers --Herby talk thyme 12:26, 12 April 2007 (UTC)

Move request

Not sure if this is the right place to post it, but a need an image I just uploaded moved. Unfortunately the filename for Image:union_station_interior.jpg conflicts with an image of a different Union Station on the English Wikipedia (where I need to use the image). Can someone move this image to "union_station_nashville_interior.jpg" or something similar and drop me a line when that is done. Thanks! Kaldari 20:51, 12 April 2007 (UTC)

Images can't be renamed (silly, isen't it?). Just reload under "Nashville_union_station" & put a {{badname|Image:Nashville_union_station.jpg}} on Image:union_station_interior.jpg, the older version will then be deleted. Michelet-密是力 04:56, 13 April 2007 (UTC)

MediaWiki translations

Hello. There are a few MediaWiki messages translated in greek (MediaWiki talk:Uploadtext/el, MediaWiki talk:License/el and MediaWiki talk:Fileuploadsummary/el by me, User:Geraki has also translated MediaWiki talk:Licenses/el). Could you please copy them to the MediaWiki pages? Thanks a lot --Dada 21:04, 14 April 2007 (UTC)

✓ Done let me know if it worked : ) -- Editor at Large • talk 21:27, 14 April 2007 (UTC)
Works great, thx. I will soon complete the translation of the rest of the links in Commons:Upload. How is the translation of this page done? --Dada 21:57, 14 April 2007 (UTC)
See below Commons:Redesigning_the_upload_form -- Bryan (talk to me) 22:03, 14 April 2007 (UTC)
Specifically the section Using and abusing the uselang parameter -- Editor at Large • talk 22:08, 14 April 2007 (UTC)

Vandalism to user page

User:Calvero has attracted some IP vandalism recently. When it was hit earlier today I semi-protected the page. After that another (quite different) IP hit the talk page so I've semi protected that (I don't like doing this to talk pages at all but if the IP address is going to keep changing there is no point spending time blocking). Heads up as much as anything --Herby talk thyme 06:49, 15 April 2007 (UTC)

Maybe someone could check this

Not my field of expertise but Image:No-ber2.png needs a look I guess. Lots of capital letters always makes me look. Equally it appears to be the user's (User:The Rain Keeper1) first contribution however given the text and the log for the page it is probably User:The Rain Keeper (who is apparently not blocked so why a new name?). Thanks --Herby talk thyme 09:10, 15 April 2007 (UTC)

It has no source, and I have tagged it as such. -- Bryan (talk to me) 10:31, 15 April 2007 (UTC)
The source seems obviously the uploader himself, this is the description made in captial letters. Seems not problematic as far as copyright is concerned. Use of personal image may be another problem, if that kind of image is juged offencive it should indeed be suppressed, PD or not. Michelet-密是力 15:55, 15 April 2007 (UTC)
I guess the fact that it was deleted a couple of days ago and then uploaded again so soon made me wonder, has been edited again with an "explanation". The "offensive image" is correct but the user points to the George Bush one as a comparison (I'll avoid conversations about politicians I think!) --Herby talk thyme 16:00, 15 April 2007 (UTC)
IMHO: suppress both and all images of the same kind. This has nothing to do with the encyclopedic vocation of wikipedia anyway (typical troll-feeding material), and is potentially a problem as far as the right of personnal image is concerned. > dustbin. Michelet-密是力 17:55, 15 April 2007 (UTC)

Destroying categorisation schemes

User:MPF continues uncategorizing images. He claims they're not needed, however, categories ARE the first means of organizing files on commons. (see Commons:Categories).

He has been destructing LOTS of categories organisation lately, moreover, users have request and or reverted him months ago already . He has been request to stop destroying them months ago by some other users I've noticed... e.g.:

Please, find a way to stop this destroying of category structures, as users have spent LOTS of work organising this ! Thanks --LimoWreck 21:55, 15 April 2007 (UTC)

I am just trying to reduce over-categorisation, as per Commons:Categories#Why is over-categorization a problem: "It's often assumed that the more categories an image is in, the easier it will be to find it. Another example: By that logic, every image showing a man should be in Category:Men, because even if you know nothing more about the person you're looking for than that he is a man, you'll be able to find it. The result is that the top category fills up, making it necessary to go through hundreds, or in this case more likely thousands of images to find the one you want." - what LimoWreck is trying to do is exactly that, placing every picture of a Picea (or at least, a random selection of them) in Category:Picea, which is very unhelpful and messy. - MPF 22:03, 15 April 2007 (UTC)
Over-categorisation is about "putting 1 image in about 10 categories". What you are doing is keep removing the 1 and only logical category for lots images. Eg [27], [28], [29], [30], etc... That is NOT desired, and is destroying the hard work of lots of people organisation good category schemes !
Please see User talk:LimoWreck#Cats for more discussion - MPF 00:08, 16 April 2007 (UTC)

The removal of all categories is a clear problem. We can and will debate the merits of various approaches to categories, but we will not allow people to go around removing all of them. --Gmaxwell 00:23, 16 April 2007 (UTC)

Gaynewyorker (talk · contributions)

Let me stress I am not placing this here because I disapprove of the contributions. However I do feel some other folks/admins should maybe take a look at these. One aspect is content but the page naming strategy seems "individual" as well. Thanks --Herby talk thyme 13:56, 16 April 2007 (UTC)

Encyclopedical value may be marginal, but it's not that offensive. Is there a WP policy about that? main problem potentially being: recognisable people. Michelet-密是力 14:12, 16 April 2007 (UTC)
The user just created a vanity page, Gaynewyorker. The file history of Image:Gaynewyorker.jpg is cluttered with keywords such as "gay homosexual homosexuality queer". Either the user thinks Commons uses tags like Flickr, either this is just autopromo. Jastrow (Λέγετε) 20:07, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

Usurping unused user account?

English Wikipedia now has a process for usurping unused accounts. I recently usurped w:User:Sam. I'd like to maintain the same user name on commons, and am wondering if there is any process for usurping unused accounts. If not, where can I start the discussion? Thanks. -- Samuel Wantman 04:31, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

See COM:CHU. (I'm pretty sure this is covered in the FAQ.) pfctdayelise (说什么?)

Better symbol for deleted images in galleries

I allready posted this to Commons:Graphic Village Pump, but since this needs administrator attention it may be placed better in this place.

Order of Smile.svg

Deleted SVG-Image
Order of Smile.png

Deleted PNG-Image
Order of Smile.jpg

Deleted JPG-Image

Deleted or non-existent SVG-images shown in a <gallery> have the above shown icon (blue shape with bezier handles). In contrast to deleted JPG- or PNG-images which just show blank. I find both solutions non-optimal. The SVG-Icon does look like something meaningfull and can accidentaly be held for the actual picture. The empty images could result from a load error or sever cache problem. I would rather prefer to see a clear symbol like a diagonal red bar or a text in several languages that says "image deleted" or "unknown image". My question is now how can we change this and who can do it? I suppose it must be done by an admin? -- Dr. Schorsch 12:37, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

I think we dont need symbols for deleted images, because if an admin delete an image, he/she have to remove the image from all galleries. Second, it is no advantage for the users when they become a symbol/notice, its the same as nothing or the white image is shown - the image is not available. --GeorgHH 14:25, 17 April 2007 (UTC)
I agree that something needs to be changed here. Users need to be able to differentiate between images that have been deleted and those whose thumbnails just weren't rendered properly. The SVG pic could be mistaken for an actual one as well. Yonatan talk 14:28, 17 April 2007 (UTC)
I am pretty sure images with broken thumbs do not appear the same as deleted images. I've seen plenty of both and always been able to tell the difference. I think the broken thumbs cause the image caption to appear higher in the square - there's no blank white bit.
We could probably ask the developers (open a bug report) to change the SVG thing to the same as the other images, ie blank white box, or see if it might be customisable. I agree they should be consistent. pfctdayelise (说什么?) 15:09, 17 April 2007 (UTC)
File:Notavailable.svg
I am not here
For missing images everything is fine as you can see on the right hand side. There is a red link as with all no existant pages. The problem shows up only in a <gallery> section. I think the minimum solution for this problem is to remove that svg-symbol since this can be very misleading. I would still prefer to see (only in galleries) something comparable to the example on the right, since an admin usually can not remove all links on all wikis to a deleted image. This would the active user give a chance to recognize and remove missing images quickly. -- Dr. Schorsch 15:38, 17 April 2007 (UTC)
That's what I meant. You're more than welcome to request this feature from the developers. Regarding images on different wikis, CommonsDelinker is supposed to remove them (but it doesn't from some pages and it's broken at the moment). Yonatan talk 00:07, 18 April 2007 (UTC)
Thank you, that was the imformation I was looking for. I will go there and ask for it. Is the SVG-Icon in galleries part of the software or part of the mediawiki-config? That means: Can it be changed by an admin or do we need to ask the programmers? -- Dr. Schorsch 07:58, 19 April 2007 (UTC)
I put it here: Bugzilla:9637: "SVG symbol for nonexistent image in gallery is confusing". --pfctdayelise (说什么?) 03:58, 20 April 2007 (UTC)

AyumiLove (talk · contributions)

I think an eye should be kept on this user's contributions. Mostly not quite vandalism but reminiscent of Shellabella17 (?sp). Any passing Checkuser may want to look at that (it would be fishing at this stage - I'd do it but!) --Herby talk thyme 13:03, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

I agree, has uploaded the same copyrighted icons as Shellabella17. I have blocked the user for 2 hours since he\she continued uploading them after my warning. Yonatan talk 14:26, 17 April 2007 (UTC)
Under CU investigation now. Will report findings shortly. ++Lar: t/c 14:58, 17 April 2007 (UTC)
I am no expert and I welcome review by someone that knows CU better than I, but I adjudge these two users (AyumiLove (talk • contribs • count • logs • page moves • block log • email) and Shellabella17 (talk • contribs • count • logs • page moves • block log • email) as likely to be socks of the same person, but not absolutely certain. The contribution record is enough, if the pattern continues after this 2 hour block I'd block indef, but that's just me. ++Lar: t/c 15:04, 17 April 2007 (UTC)
If I see him/her come back and continue to violate your policies I'll probably indef block. Yonatan talk 00:06, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

See Commons:Requests for checkuser/Case/Shellabella17 where this has been transfered, at least in part as a test of the new COM:RFCU pages/process. ++Lar: t/c 13:08, 20 April 2007 (UTC)

Image Delete

Hi, I'm requesting the deletion of the Image:Kollogo.gif due to it already exists on commons named Image:Rightswordguy.gif. It also have no use on wikipedia and maybe copywrited. Delete is requested! Arne anka

Please see Commons:Deletion requests, Category:Against policy and Category:Duplicate for the proper methods of requesting deletion of a file. But the file you claimed it was a duplicate of doesn't exist. MECU≈talk 19:38, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

Please delete file history...

http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Image:Steel_Reserve_HG.jpg

Please delete this, under File History:

"(del) (rev) 04:07, 28 November 2005 . . Tw1st (Talk | contribs) . . 280×290 (22,920 bytes) (____ ______, http://www.40ozmaltliquor.com/steelreservehg.html)"

Tw1st is a member of my website, where the image was taken from, but my real name was used as the owner of the image. I just uploaded a newer (better) version of that image, under the name I use with my website (Bruz), replacing the older one, but do not have the authority to delete the older file history (& hence, delete my real name from appearing in search results).

I am trying to keep my real name dis-associated with my website, due to professional reasons.

Thank you for your help!

Done. Jkelly 01:36, 20 April 2007 (UTC)

User:symode09

This user has given us a number of headaches on Wikinews uploading copyright material. I've put a comment on one picture for the Virginia Tech shooting that I suspect is a vio, and - to be honest - I wouldn't trust anything he's uploaded. He cites "Loop Australia" as a source, then gives a link to his blog. Hasn't the first clue about copyright, lied to us initially about being a journalist (he's 15). Also has an account on Wikipedia where it can be seen that he has been problematic too.

I believe all his images should be deleted as inadequately or untrustworthily sourced. --Brianmc 21:43, 22 April 2007 (UTC)

I left him a warning, and will block him if he uploads any more images that are unfree. -- Bryan (talk to me) 13:32, 23 April 2007 (UTC)

What address do I use to send a letter to Al Sharptin concerning a civil right matter?```3:29

I have a family member who is incarcerated and he beleive his civil rights were violated, and would like to send a letter to Al Sharptin, We need an address.

                          Thank You
                              ```
I suggest you try http://www.sharptontalk.net/
Fred Chess 20:03, 24 April 2007 (UTC)

Image update

Hello. I uploaded an image called Pawn_3D_Move.jpg early this morning. I realized later that I made an error in creating the image. (I ommitted two possible moves the pawn could make) I attempted to revise it but was told I could'nt upload an image with the same name becasue my name was to new. I uploaded the fixed image under Pawn_3D_MoveA.jpg.

I was told to request that someone else change the name. Please do so. Thank You.

✓ Done --GeorgHH 21:48, 25 April 2007 (UTC)

Thank You for moving the file. I have linked back to the original file name on the WikiPedia Article. However when I did so the thumbnails still show the ommission. Why is this?

Probably more deletion requests coming in

I added the "Nominate for Deletion" to the toolbar per default to all users (on image pages), so it is now a lot simpler to nominate images. This will probably reflect itself on Commons:Deletion requests. If it turns out that it isn't workable, we'll have to figure out a solution...

Fred Chess 22:16, 25 April 2007 (UTC)

Image deletion

Image:AntiRussianPoster.jpg is in violation of copyright as it potrays the poster, copy rights of which have not been released. I tagged the image, however, there is a revert war going on. A decision by an admin is requested to decide the issue. Thanks.--Hillock65 23:04, 26 April 2007 (UTC)

Deleted, DW -- Bryan (talk to me) 13:37, 27 April 2007 (UTC)

Wikimedia logo mosaic

Please note that a picture included in the Wikimedia logo mosaic has been deleted and needs to be replaced. Nyttend 20:27, 28 April 2007 (UTC)

Fixed. -- Bryan (talk to me) 20:38, 28 April 2007 (UTC)

Wikimedia bug with upload: where to report?

See: Image:Gottlieb-The_Watch.jpg. Newer version is larger, but in upload history both images have the same resolution. A.J. 17:47, 30 April 2007 (UTC)

The place to report these things are bugzilla:. I haven't heard of this bug before actually. / Fred Chess 23:33, 9 May 2007 (UTC)

Ruben86 (talk • contribs • count)

All of this user's uploaded images are clearly professional shots, and after warnings keeps uploading images. Possibly Spanish, could someone note the user and delete the copyvio images. feydey (talk) 19:48, 2 May 2007 (UTC)

Warned & deleted. -- Bryan (talk to me) 20:00, 2 May 2007 (UTC)

Translations

Hello. With the help of User:Badseed and User:Geraki I have prepared some translations:

Could you please move the pages? Thanks in advance. --Dada 14:17, 4 May 2007 (UTC)

Done. If you are sure that everything is ok (including Mediawiki:Licenses/el and others), please leave a message for User talk:pfctdayelise to have her bot update pages. -- Bryan (talk to me) 14:47, 4 May 2007 (UTC)

True information re submitted and needs protection but jpegs don't show up...why?

We just placed information up about NIKKI HORNSBY which jpeg verificational photos do not appear even though uploaded. What did we do wrong? Can you help? ALL this information plus more was submitted year ago and deleted. PLEASE protect it from being deleted since it's true and we can show other sources to verify legit.

Thank you,

CJP Staff

cjpnhrecords@yahoo.com

The page Nikki Hornsby was deleted by an administrator because it was a biography, with no media content. Wikimedia Commons is for hosting images and materials to be used by other projects, not for creating articles or biographies. If Nikki Hornsby falls under notability guidelines you can consider creating an article on Wikipedia; pages on the Commons are only for galleries with limited information. For example of a page here please see Edgar Degas. -- Editor at Large • talk 17:28, 6 May 2007 (UTC)

Secure passwords

For those who do not yet know, on the English Wikipedia several admin accounts were compromised, because they had a weak password. [31] [32]. So all admins, please make sure you have a secure password :) -- Bryan (talk to me) 20:11, 7 May 2007 (UTC)

This is not just an admin issue, all users, even devs and Jimbo, are prone to this. Somebody can easily compromise your account because of a weak password, and will lead to your being blocked.  V60 干什么？ · VContribs 01:00, 8 May 2007 (UTC)
And that you have set an email in it. If your account get compromised or your password invalidated by being weak (sysadmins are trying weak passwords on en:), it's the only way to have it back. Platonides 11:04, 9 May 2007 (UTC)
Brion Vibber has been checking through the passwords of English Wiki admins, and resetting those that were weak... I don't know if we can ask brion to do that for Commons admins too, or if there is another way. I don't think it would be wise to try that ourselves by repeated login attempts.
Commons is not a great target for these kind of vandals (because Commons is hardly heard of by others than nerdy Wikipedians). And additionally, I think that it is unlikely that a kid would spend the necessary time to extreme brute force unless he has access to the decrypted password , so I don't think it is necessary to force people to use an ultra-safe passwords that is "long and use combinations of lower and upper case letters, digits, and symbols." Just make sure you don't use any of these password, or any other common first name.
Fred Chess 16:34, 10 May 2007 (UTC)
Imagine the number of projects you can harm by replacing some heavily used images by goatse... -- Bryan (talk to me) 13:53, 11 May 2007 (UTC)

Image to delete : Image:Igreja de Brie.gif, Image:Interieur Eglise BriectRobert.jpg

Dear admins, File:Igreja de Brie.gif and File:Interieur Eglise BriectRobert.jpg are not free of rights and should be removed from Commons. Regards, M-le-mot-dit 11:10, 12 May 2007 (UTC)

Please use Commons:Deletion requests Platonides 13:35, 12 May 2007 (UTC)

Special:Related changes

The fixed text says "This special page lists the last changes on pages who are linked". It would be more correct to re-phrase that as "This special page lists recent changes on linked pages". --MichaelMaggs 16:42, 14 May 2007 (UTC)

Brief but - I agree! --Herby talk thyme 15:49, 15 May 2007 (UTC)

Image:Photo10.jpg

Hi there. Can someone possibly nuke the above image, plus its history. It's tagged {{db-author}} and is my own userpic. It's been used on the English WP in a stalkery attack (I'm an admin there) so it's time for it to go before it happens again. WP:RBI and all that :) Thanks! - Alison ☺ 15:28, 15 May 2007 (UTC)

✓ Done feel free to let us know if you need any other help --Herby talk thyme 15:34, 15 May 2007 (UTC)
Thanks, Herby. Perfect :) - Alison ☺ 16:25, 15 May 2007 (UTC)

Double delete

I uploaded two copies of the same image (Image:165.jpg and Image:Decameron-noble meal.jpg) by accident and tagged one of them for deletion. But instead of just one being removed, both got deleted. Could someone please restore Decameron-noble_meal.jpg?

Peter Isotalo 09:12, 4 April 2007 (UTC)

Undeleted. -- Bryan (talk to me) 09:15, 4 April 2007 (UTC)

Miracleimpuse at Sweetest Day

I've removed original research commentary by Miracleimpulse (talk · contributions) twice now at Talk:Sweetest Day. Talk pages here are not for editorializing or espousing theories about Sweetest Day, right? He was banned from editing these articles on Wikipedia for POV-pushing, and now is bringing it here. Not a dog 16:34, 4 April 2007 (UTC)

I suggest that we ban the user also here from editing this article. -- Bryan (talk to me) 16:43, 4 April 2007 (UTC)
Yeah, I don't know the protocol here. I think its fine to have the scans he's finding related to Sweetest Day here, and he should be allowed to continue to add new scans as appropriate, but the editorializing doesn't seem appropriate. Not a dog 17:27, 4 April 2007 (UTC)
There is no formal protocol about this, but if there is consensus under the community to have him banned from that gallery, I see not reason why we should not. -- Bryan (talk to me) 17:58, 4 April 2007 (UTC)

Template:PD-Art

Hi, I suggested to rewrite {{PD-Art}} a bit (see its talk page). Could someone help?--Kareha 20:26, 4 April 2007 (UTC)

I'm happy to help. It's rather a mess at the moment, and how it's supposed to be used is totally unclear to many users. I note that's it's a protected high-use template. I presume that means it's better to sort out the exact text on the talk page first, and then move across when ready, rather than doing multiple tweaks to the template itself. Or does it not really matter? Anyone? --MichaelMaggs 21:27, 4 April 2007 (UTC)
It does matter, because each edit will add several hundred thousands jobs to the m:job queue. -- Bryan (talk to me) 22:01, 4 April 2007 (UTC)
Question about the job queue: Can we continuously edit without concerning about the job queue if subpage for text have been made and contained as <noinclude> element in the template itself?--Kareha 18:50, 5 April 2007 (UTC)
No we can't. That's why changes should always be done at once. -- Bryan (talk to me) 18:57, 5 April 2007 (UTC)
Thanks, I understand. Then I welcome anyone to edit User:Kareha/PD-Art to improve it, I think it's less problematic.--Kareha 19:55, 5 April 2007 (UTC)

Discussion is now ongoing at User:Kareha/PD-Art. --MichaelMaggs 17:35, 12 April 2007 (UTC)

Captain Scarlet (talk · contributions) replacing his own images

Please look at the user's latest uploads. -- Bryan (talk to me) 19:37, 5 April 2007 (UTC)

Seems that multiple users have reported this: See bottom of COM:AN/V, COM:AN/U and COM:AN/A -- Bryan (talk to me) 19:50, 5 April 2007 (UTC)

Any further discussion will take place on Commons:Administrators' noticeboard/User problems. -- Bryan (talk to me) 20:16, 5 April 2007 (UTC)

And again

User:Ayacop is deleting my categories without comments.[33] I keep getting people saying, oh, other editors shouldn't do that. I keep saying, let's settle the issue and fix comments. I add notes, then users like this come along and do whatever they want without bothering to comment. Isn't it time to settle the issue? KP Botany 22:32, 5 April 2007 (UTC)

KP Botany, the Administrators' noticeboards really aren't the proper place to bring this up, especialy with the example you've given (Genisteae, Fabaceae, neither, both?). There were some discussions about this on the TOL page which ground to a halt a few weeks ago -- at least in part due to a lack of civility -- but those discussions will hopefully restart and continue towards some sort of solution. As a rule, administrators are here to use the tools to help things go smoothly (and legally, and according to policy)... we aren't in charge of creating policy, and most admins try to avoid stepping into the middle of editorial disputes unless the situation has become truly disruptive. How, when, and why categories are used has long been a subject of debate on commons, in part because how, when, and why categories are used differs markedly on the various projects we serve. This is a policy issue, not a maintenance issue, and will only become the latter when and if a decision is made on the former. --SB_Johnny|talk|books 02:17, 6 April 2007 (UTC)
And apparantly a decision will never be made. People were not being incivil, and decisions were being made, until you accused people of being incivil out of the blue. But that's fine, I will just follow standard Wikimedia Commons practice and revert whenever and wherever, then. You know, ignore policy since there isn't any, accuse people of incivility when there isn't any. Do whatever I want seems to be the rule on Commons. Once I get into the swing of it, I'm sure things will go much better for me here, and I won't have any issues. KP Botany 03:12, 7 April 2007 (UTC)

Advice required

Placed on my user talk page User_talk:Herbythyme#A_request_to_the_Commons_administrator. This one is not something I feel able to make a decision on given my experience in Commons. I'm not sure it is even as straightforward as the post makes it seem. I'd appreciate help but will not be around much for the next couple of days - thanks --Herby talk thyme 09:14, 8 April 2007 (UTC)

  • Comment: see COM:AN/U#User:Riva72. Riva72 makes continuous efforts to cancel free licenses or otherwise disallow using some images on Polish Wikipedia for personal reasons. A.J. 10:08, 8 April 2007 (UTC)
    After being declared a coward, I have very little to add. -- Cat chi? 13:47, 8 April 2007 (UTC)
Cool Cat, thank you for your voice in this thread. My personal opinion (which was the result of your voice and your attitude towards my request to you which may be read at: [34], [35] and mainly at [36] led to the open debate at The English Wikipedia which can be read here: [37]. In my opinion, the latter discussion is very informative and, thus, worth reading. Smile! The day is really beautiful! :) --213.199.192.60 14:40, 8 April 2007 (UTC) + --213.199.192.60 15:03, 8 April 2007 (UTC)
  • [38] - == riva72 ==
  • No właśnie o to chodzi, że my chcemy sobie zostawić te fotki, a jemu odbija, jak się wkurzę, to poprostu pozabezpieczam cały jego upload i będzie spokój :P --WarX 22:13, 29 mar 2007 (CEST)
TRANSLATION by Riva72: The question is that we want to have (here it equals to: we must have) all these petty photos and he is getting mad. If I get pissed off, I simply will preserve/block all of his uploads and, than, there is quiet. This childish ':P' of his signifies that he lolled his tongue in bliss. --213.199.192.60 21:58, 8 April 2007 (UTC)
Will someone of the Commons administrators be kind enough to translate into English the ABOVE words by the user called warx (translation already provided) as his statement in the adventure or am I to provide it? The words were placed at the Polish Wikipedia by this teenager as his answer to one of his followers. They correspond so nicely to his reasons for my block which I quote from the dispute page in the form presented by Cool Cat: User:WarX has blocked 213.199.192.60 for a year for "papa Riva72, tylko kto cie teraz zrewertuje?" **I am particularly bothered by the block summary being a question and also being in a foreign language. I would welcome a translation. User:Riva72 offered "ByeBye Riva72, who's gonna revert you now?" as the translation on my english talk page. *User:Odder has reverted two of the annons deletion nominations of polish money uploaded by Riva72. - end of quotation. My question: What can be told (how can be explained the action by Odder? --213.199.192.60 20:04, 8 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Please do not stray from the main issue of this thread and do not force me to stray into details myself - I think the aim of this thread is to think over the request of mine which was pasted by Herby above. I ask you to re-read it (User_talk:Herbythyme#A_request_to_the_Commons_administrator) and consider this request as RIVA's (who has become The-Lonely-Fighter-Against-The-Fellowship) final words in the case.

P.S. I want to remind you that allowing me to place the templates described in point nr 1 of my request (the castle in Podhorce case) to the set of six Podhorce castle photos is very dangerous to the Commons as it may become a nice habit. --213.199.192.60 20:27, 8 April 2007 (UTC)

That's really all from me - Have a nice evening. --213.199.192.60 20:40, 8 April 2007 (UTC)

I was involved in large part of that mess and I undersand less and less. Why instead of confusing people more and more didn't you just carry out deletion process as you did before in case of works by Marian Iwańciów? You confuse people pulling out dosens of links, and when they don't react as you expect (vide: Cool Cat) o simply don't understand whats going on, you react with insulting and hostility... You do you expect to get any help this way? You bothered already a couple of commons admins about that problem, and almost all of them suggested Commons:Deletion requests. Well, there are about 100 of them, maybe one of them will make edits againts Commons policies and others won't notice it? Everything is possible... A.J. 20:46, 8 April 2007 (UTC) (PS. Please, forgive me my sarcasm, feel free to theat this as personal attack of mine with all severity, I'm just tired of this. Logging off)

To the user called Ejdzej:

  • 1. Do NOT stray (do not run away) and do not mislead people again while putting the blame on me..
  • 2. You bothered me a long time ago yet..
  • 3. The dozens of links are meant not to confuse but to enlighten people..
  • 4. I wonder who's gonna block you, the respectable administrator..
  • 5. Quotation: and when they don't react as you expect (vide: Cool Cat) as said by the user called Ejdzej. The user called Riva says: actually, there were no reactions only administrative misinterpretations on purpose and escaping.. --213.199.192.60 21:14, 8 April 2007 (UTC)
  • 6. Please talk clearly and.. --213.199.192.60 22:16, 8 April 2007 (UTC)
  • 7. ..to the point as far as the request of mine (linked by Herby) is concerned.. --213.199.192.60 22:16, 8 April 2007 (UTC)

To the administrators (let them be 100 or more):

  • Can you ALL be kind enough to vote FOR or AGAINST the request of mine which was presented above and referred to by Herby. I will be satisfied to see 75% of the administrative voices! You even do not have to give the explanation for whatever reason I bear in mind! Thank you! --213.199.192.60 21:14, 8 April 2007 (UTC)
  • I am preparing deletion requests for all the photos I took and deposited at the Commons and the photos which I uploaded having their author's proper authorization. I will appreciate if you respect my decision and delete all these photos from the Commons depository as I want to leave the Commons forever. Thx. --213.199.192.60 00:53, 9 April 2007 (UTC)
  • The page can be accessed here: [39]. I decided to leave at the Commons depository these photos which are already used by some foreign Wikipedia projects. The photos requested for the removal are not used by any Wikipedias.. This settlement would be OK. --213.199.192.60 02:24, 9 April 2007 (UTC)

Throphy deletion request

  1. Image:FIFA World Cup trophy.png
  2. Image:FIFA Worldcup Copy for Germany 1990.jpg
  3. Image:LC 1.JPG
  4. Image:Deutsche Meisterschale.JPG
  5. Image:Schalke DFBpokal 2001 a.jpg
  6. Image:Stuttgart-vfb-1954-dfb-pokal.jpg
  7. Image:FA Cup's trophy.jpg
  8. Image:Trophylibertadores.jpg
  9. Image:Trophycopabrasil93.jpg
  10. Image:Trophycopabrasil02.jpg
  11. Image:Trophybrasileiro9305.jpg
  12. Image:The Presidents Cup golf trophy.jpg
  13. Image:Copa El País.png
  14. Image:Ligue des champions NB.JPG
  15. Image:Schneider Trophy 2006-08-10.jpg
  16. Image:Vince Lombardi Trophy.jpg
  17. Image:Grey Cup circa 2006.jpg
  18. Image:A Stanley Cup Premiere.jpg
  19. Image:Bague coupe lafleur 79.jpg
  20. Image:Coupe Stanley.jpg
  21. Image:Hhof calder.jpg
  22. Image:Hhof campbell.jpg
  23. Image:Hhof clancy.jpg
  24. Image:Hhof hart.jpg
  25. Image:Hhof jack adams.jpg
  26. Image:Hhof jennings.jpg
  27. Image:Hhof norris.jpg
  28. Image:Hhof vault.jpg
  29. Image:Hhof vezina.jpg
  30. Image:Lady Byng trophy hhof.jpg
  31. Image:Stanley cup closeup.jpg
  32. Image:Stanley cup hhof.jpg
  33. Image:StanleyCup.jpg
  34. Image:StanleyCupAvs2000-01Engraved.jpg
  35. Image:William Webb Ellis Cup.jpg
  36. Image:Webb Ellis Cup.jpg
  37. Image:Memorial Cup Trophy.jpg
  38. Image:Hhof stanley cup.jpg
  39. Image:World Baseball Classic Trophy.jpg
  40. Image:Jules Verne Trophy.jpg

I was asked to process deletion requests made on the above images. I am inclined to delete them all in a week unless I hear anything convincing suggesting the contrary. -- Cat chi? 10:10, 8 April 2007 (UTC)

On a second thought I'll delete them right away. They can be undeleted later if someone comes up with a convincing reason. -- Cat chi? 10:48, 8 April 2007 (UTC)
Please hold on all my images from the HHOF. I am in process of seeking permission from the NHL and linked them to my page where I posted the pictures so they can see them. Getting permission is the best way to avoid problems. -Aude (talk | contribs) 16:44, 9 April 2007 (UTC)
Please hold on Image:Stanley_cup_closeup.jpg too, even though I didn't take that one. Should the NHL come back and say yes to mine, I think they would probably say okay to this one too. -Aude (talk | contribs) 16:53, 9 April 2007 (UTC)
Cool Cat, you are the only one advocating the deletion of these images based on them being derivative works, with the exception of user:Thugchildz who is doing it to prove a point. I don't know what to say except that it is ABSURD to speedy delete images in such a manner. Copyright can only be applied to copyrightable items (such as work of art) and I do not see any compelling reason why these trophies are work of art. / Fred Chess 19:38, 9 April 2007 (UTC)

Most trophies seem to be work of (applied) art to me, and thus copyrightable. We schould get permission, or delete them. No need to rush it though, especially it's easiert to get permission if you can actually show what picture you are talking about. -- Duesentrieb ⇌ 01:09, 11 April 2007 (UTC)

The NHL has replied back to me. They don't object to the images being used on Wikipedia, but they are unwilling to allow the images to be licensed as GFDL or similar license. I explained reasons behind why we use free licenses, and suggested reducing the size of the images to no avail. Since we can't use image that are "permission only" for Wikipedia, I would simply like my images deleted now with the exception of the Stanley Cup images. I'm not comfortable enough with the "drinking vessel" argument mentioned on some of the deletion pages -- too much of a grey area. In the case of the Stanley Cup photos, my reasoning is that the original Cup was created in 1892, and Lord Stanley died in 1908. The copyright on the original cup (in the bank vault) has thus expired. This Stanley Cup is one of two duplicates or replicas -- one created in the 1960s and the second in 1993. According to the Derivative works page, "replicas are copies and not derivative works, which means they're not copyrightable by the person who creates the replica." So, I don't think these Stanley Cups are under copyright either. -Aude (talk | contribs) 16:57, 12 April 2007 (UTC)
Unfortunately, the copyright notice on NHL.com currently reads, "the word mark and image of the Stanley Cup are registered trademarks". Without a doubt, they are referring to the current version, but I am not sure if the original 19th century bowl, which is depicted on Image:Premiere Coupe Stanley 1893.jpg, counts. Zzyzx11 15:19, 14 April 2007 (UTC)
What is the problem? The Empire State Building is also trademark protected (trademark of ESBC, LLC), but we still have pictures of it. / Fred Chess 16:32, 14 April 2007 (UTC)
In the U.S., buildings are covered under "Freedom of panorama", so no problem there. I don't know enough about trademarks to make a judgment regarding the Stanley Cup, and defer to a more knowledgeable admin. At least, I'd like all my own images deleted to be safe. And, asked to have that happen nearly a week ago. How long will it take for my images to be deleted? Please delete them ASAP. -Aude (talk | contribs) 22:43, 17 April 2007 (UTC)
Trademarks and copyrights are two separate issues. Freedom of panorama applies to copyright and not trademark so to us it doesn't really matter if the Stanley Cup(s) are trademarked (although the {{trademark}} template should be added to them) but rather whether the image is free in the copyright sense of the word which it does seem to be. Yonatan talk 00:16, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

Photos of the coin deletion request

In the name of Riva72, the author of the photos linked below, I ask you to finish the deletion request process and provide me with the proper resolution of this deletion-request. Thank you. The humble follower of the administrative example placed this question in this very place. --213.199.192.60 19:42, 9 April 2007 (UTC)

The deletion request started on March 27, 2007 and then it was abruptly stopped by Odder without any explanations. The request was reprised on March 31, 2007. --213.199.192.60 19:42, 9 April 2007 (UTC)

Signed: --213.199.192.60 19:42, 9 April 2007 (UTC)

I see the request at Commons:Deletion_requests/2007/03#March_31. Don't worry, we will get to it. / Fred Chess 19:47, 9 April 2007 (UTC)
Ok. Thank you. :) --213.199.192.60 19:51, 9 April 2007 (UTC)

block request.

Could you please block user:155.232.128.10, who is stalking me (diff) from Wikispecies, where I recently blocked him/her (block log). Thanks Lycaon 12:09, 12 April 2007 (UTC)

✓ Done - blocked for a week. If you feel more would be appropriate feel free to contact me. Cheers --Herby talk thyme 12:26, 12 April 2007 (UTC)

Move request

Not sure if this is the right place to post it, but a need an image I just uploaded moved. Unfortunately the filename for Image:union_station_interior.jpg conflicts with an image of a different Union Station on the English Wikipedia (where I need to use the image). Can someone move this image to "union_station_nashville_interior.jpg" or something similar and drop me a line when that is done. Thanks! Kaldari 20:51, 12 April 2007 (UTC)

Images can't be renamed (silly, isen't it?). Just reload under "Nashville_union_station" & put a {{badname|Image:Nashville_union_station.jpg}} on Image:union_station_interior.jpg, the older version will then be deleted. Michelet-密是力 04:56, 13 April 2007 (UTC)

MediaWiki translations

Hello. There are a few MediaWiki messages translated in greek (MediaWiki talk:Uploadtext/el, MediaWiki talk:License/el and MediaWiki talk:Fileuploadsummary/el by me, User:Geraki has also translated MediaWiki talk:Licenses/el). Could you please copy them to the MediaWiki pages? Thanks a lot --Dada 21:04, 14 April 2007 (UTC)

✓ Done let me know if it worked : ) -- Editor at Large • talk 21:27, 14 April 2007 (UTC)
Works great, thx. I will soon complete the translation of the rest of the links in Commons:Upload. How is the translation of this page done? --Dada 21:57, 14 April 2007 (UTC)
See below Commons:Redesigning_the_upload_form -- Bryan (talk to me) 22:03, 14 April 2007 (UTC)
Specifically the section Using and abusing the uselang parameter -- Editor at Large • talk 22:08, 14 April 2007 (UTC)

Vandalism to user page

User:Calvero has attracted some IP vandalism recently. When it was hit earlier today I semi-protected the page. After that another (quite different) IP hit the talk page so I've semi protected that (I don't like doing this to talk pages at all but if the IP address is going to keep changing there is no point spending time blocking). Heads up as much as anything --Herby talk thyme 06:49, 15 April 2007 (UTC)

Maybe someone could check this

Not my field of expertise but Image:No-ber2.png needs a look I guess. Lots of capital letters always makes me look. Equally it appears to be the user's (User:The Rain Keeper1) first contribution however given the text and the log for the page it is probably User:The Rain Keeper (who is apparently not blocked so why a new name?). Thanks --Herby talk thyme 09:10, 15 April 2007 (UTC)

It has no source, and I have tagged it as such. -- Bryan (talk to me) 10:31, 15 April 2007 (UTC)
The source seems obviously the uploader himself, this is the description made in captial letters. Seems not problematic as far as copyright is concerned. Use of personal image may be another problem, if that kind of image is juged offencive it should indeed be suppressed, PD or not. Michelet-密是力 15:55, 15 April 2007 (UTC)
I guess the fact that it was deleted a couple of days ago and then uploaded again so soon made me wonder, has been edited again with an "explanation". The "offensive image" is correct but the user points to the George Bush one as a comparison (I'll avoid conversations about politicians I think!) --Herby talk thyme 16:00, 15 April 2007 (UTC)
IMHO: suppress both and all images of the same kind. This has nothing to do with the encyclopedic vocation of wikipedia anyway (typical troll-feeding material), and is potentially a problem as far as the right of personnal image is concerned. > dustbin. Michelet-密是力 17:55, 15 April 2007 (UTC)

Destroying categorisation schemes

User:MPF continues uncategorizing images. He claims they're not needed, however, categories ARE the first means of organizing files on commons. (see Commons:Categories).

He has been destructing LOTS of categories organisation lately, moreover, users have request and or reverted him months ago already . He has been request to stop destroying them months ago by some other users I've noticed... e.g.:

Please, find a way to stop this destroying of category structures, as users have spent LOTS of work organising this ! Thanks --LimoWreck 21:55, 15 April 2007 (UTC)

I am just trying to reduce over-categorisation, as per Commons:Categories#Why is over-categorization a problem: "It's often assumed that the more categories an image is in, the easier it will be to find it. Another example: By that logic, every image showing a man should be in Category:Men, because even if you know nothing more about the person you're looking for than that he is a man, you'll be able to find it. The result is that the top category fills up, making it necessary to go through hundreds, or in this case more likely thousands of images to find the one you want." - what LimoWreck is trying to do is exactly that, placing every picture of a Picea (or at least, a random selection of them) in Category:Picea, which is very unhelpful and messy. - MPF 22:03, 15 April 2007 (UTC)
Over-categorisation is about "putting 1 image in about 10 categories". What you are doing is keep removing the 1 and only logical category for lots images. Eg [42], [43], [44], [45], etc... That is NOT desired, and is destroying the hard work of lots of people organisation good category schemes !
Please see User talk:LimoWreck#Cats for more discussion - MPF 00:08, 16 April 2007 (UTC)

The removal of all categories is a clear problem. We can and will debate the merits of various approaches to categories, but we will not allow people to go around removing all of them. --Gmaxwell 00:23, 16 April 2007 (UTC)

Gaynewyorker (talk · contributions)

Let me stress I am not placing this here because I disapprove of the contributions. However I do feel some other folks/admins should maybe take a look at these. One aspect is content but the page naming strategy seems "individual" as well. Thanks --Herby talk thyme 13:56, 16 April 2007 (UTC)

Encyclopedical value may be marginal, but it's not that offensive. Is there a WP policy about that? main problem potentially being: recognisable people. Michelet-密是力 14:12, 16 April 2007 (UTC)
The user just created a vanity page, Gaynewyorker. The file history of Image:Gaynewyorker.jpg is cluttered with keywords such as "gay homosexual homosexuality queer". Either the user thinks Commons uses tags like Flickr, either this is just autopromo. Jastrow (Λέγετε) 20:07, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

Usurping unused user account?

English Wikipedia now has a process for usurping unused accounts. I recently usurped w:User:Sam. I'd like to maintain the same user name on commons, and am wondering if there is any process for usurping unused accounts. If not, where can I start the discussion? Thanks. -- Samuel Wantman 04:31, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

See COM:CHU. (I'm pretty sure this is covered in the FAQ.) pfctdayelise (说什么?)

Better symbol for deleted images in galleries

I allready posted this to Commons:Graphic Village Pump, but since this needs administrator attention it may be placed better in this place.

Order of Smile.svg

Deleted SVG-Image
Order of Smile.png

Deleted PNG-Image
Order of Smile.jpg

Deleted JPG-Image

Deleted or non-existent SVG-images shown in a <gallery> have the above shown icon (blue shape with bezier handles). In contrast to deleted JPG- or PNG-images which just show blank. I find both solutions non-optimal. The SVG-Icon does look like something meaningfull and can accidentaly be held for the actual picture. The empty images could result from a load error or sever cache problem. I would rather prefer to see a clear symbol like a diagonal red bar or a text in several languages that says "image deleted" or "unknown image". My question is now how can we change this and who can do it? I suppose it must be done by an admin? -- Dr. Schorsch 12:37, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

I think we dont need symbols for deleted images, because if an admin delete an image, he/she have to remove the image from all galleries. Second, it is no advantage for the users when they become a symbol/notice, its the same as nothing or the white image is shown - the image is not available. --GeorgHH 14:25, 17 April 2007 (UTC)
I agree that something needs to be changed here. Users need to be able to differentiate between images that have been deleted and those whose thumbnails just weren't rendered properly. The SVG pic could be mistaken for an actual one as well. Yonatan talk 14:28, 17 April 2007 (UTC)
I am pretty sure images with broken thumbs do not appear the same as deleted images. I've seen plenty of both and always been able to tell the difference. I think the broken thumbs cause the image caption to appear higher in the square - there's no blank white bit.
We could probably ask the developers (open a bug report) to change the SVG thing to the same as the other images, ie blank white box, or see if it might be customisable. I agree they should be consistent. pfctdayelise (说什么?) 15:09, 17 April 2007 (UTC)
File:Notavailable.svg
I am not here
For missing images everything is fine as you can see on the right hand side. There is a red link as with all no existant pages. The problem shows up only in a <gallery> section. I think the minimum solution for this problem is to remove that svg-symbol since this can be very misleading. I would still prefer to see (only in galleries) something comparable to the example on the right, since an admin usually can not remove all links on all wikis to a deleted image. This would the active user give a chance to recognize and remove missing images quickly. -- Dr. Schorsch 15:38, 17 April 2007 (UTC)
That's what I meant. You're more than welcome to request this feature from the developers. Regarding images on different wikis, CommonsDelinker is supposed to remove them (but it doesn't from some pages and it's broken at the moment). Yonatan talk 00:07, 18 April 2007 (UTC)
Thank you, that was the imformation I was looking for. I will go there and ask for it. Is the SVG-Icon in galleries part of the software or part of the mediawiki-config? That means: Can it be changed by an admin or do we need to ask the programmers? -- Dr. Schorsch 07:58, 19 April 2007 (UTC)
I put it here: Bugzilla:9637: "SVG symbol for nonexistent image in gallery is confusing". --pfctdayelise (说什么?) 03:58, 20 April 2007 (UTC)

AyumiLove (talk · contributions)

I think an eye should be kept on this user's contributions. Mostly not quite vandalism but reminiscent of Shellabella17 (?sp). Any passing Checkuser may want to look at that (it would be fishing at this stage - I'd do it but!) --Herby talk thyme 13:03, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

I agree, has uploaded the same copyrighted icons as Shellabella17. I have blocked the user for 2 hours since he\she continued uploading them after my warning. Yonatan talk 14:26, 17 April 2007 (UTC)
Under CU investigation now. Will report findings shortly. ++Lar: t/c 14:58, 17 April 2007 (UTC)
I am no expert and I welcome review by someone that knows CU better than I, but I adjudge these two users (AyumiLove (talk • contribs • count • logs • page moves • block log • email) and Shellabella17 (talk • contribs • count • logs • page moves • block log • email) as likely to be socks of the same person, but not absolutely certain. The contribution record is enough, if the pattern continues after this 2 hour block I'd block indef, but that's just me. ++Lar: t/c 15:04, 17 April 2007 (UTC)
If I see him/her come back and continue to violate your policies I'll probably indef block. Yonatan talk 00:06, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

See Commons:Requests for checkuser/Case/Shellabella17 where this has been transfered, at least in part as a test of the new COM:RFCU pages/process. ++Lar: t/c 13:08, 20 April 2007 (UTC)

Image Delete

Hi, I'm requesting the deletion of the Image:Kollogo.gif due to it already exists on commons named Image:Rightswordguy.gif. It also have no use on wikipedia and maybe copywrited. Delete is requested! Arne anka

Please see Commons:Deletion requests, Category:Against policy and Category:Duplicate for the proper methods of requesting deletion of a file. But the file you claimed it was a duplicate of doesn't exist. MECU≈talk 19:38, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

Please delete file history...

http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Image:Steel_Reserve_HG.jpg

Please delete this, under File History:

"(del) (rev) 04:07, 28 November 2005 . . Tw1st (Talk | contribs) . . 280×290 (22,920 bytes) (____ ______, http://www.40ozmaltliquor.com/steelreservehg.html)"

Tw1st is a member of my website, where the image was taken from, but my real name was used as the owner of the image. I just uploaded a newer (better) version of that image, under the name I use with my website (Bruz), replacing the older one, but do not have the authority to delete the older file history (& hence, delete my real name from appearing in search results).

I am trying to keep my real name dis-associated with my website, due to professional reasons.

Thank you for your help!

Done. Jkelly 01:36, 20 April 2007 (UTC)

User:symode09

This user has given us a number of headaches on Wikinews uploading copyright material. I've put a comment on one picture for the Virginia Tech shooting that I suspect is a vio, and - to be honest - I wouldn't trust anything he's uploaded. He cites "Loop Australia" as a source, then gives a link to his blog. Hasn't the first clue about copyright, lied to us initially about being a journalist (he's 15). Also has an account on Wikipedia where it can be seen that he has been problematic too.

I believe all his images should be deleted as inadequately or untrustworthily sourced. --Brianmc 21:43, 22 April 2007 (UTC)

I left him a warning, and will block him if he uploads any more images that are unfree. -- Bryan (talk to me) 13:32, 23 April 2007 (UTC)

What address do I use to send a letter to Al Sharptin concerning a civil right matter?```3:29

I have a family member who is incarcerated and he beleive his civil rights were violated, and would like to send a letter to Al Sharptin, We need an address.

                          Thank You
                              ```
I suggest you try http://www.sharptontalk.net/
Fred Chess 20:03, 24 April 2007 (UTC)

Image update

Hello. I uploaded an image called Pawn_3D_Move.jpg early this morning. I realized later that I made an error in creating the image. (I ommitted two possible moves the pawn could make) I attempted to revise it but was told I could'nt upload an image with the same name becasue my name was to new. I uploaded the fixed image under Pawn_3D_MoveA.jpg.

I was told to request that someone else change the name. Please do so. Thank You.

✓ Done --GeorgHH 21:48, 25 April 2007 (UTC)

Thank You for moving the file. I have linked back to the original file name on the WikiPedia Article. However when I did so the thumbnails still show the ommission. Why is this?

Probably more deletion requests coming in

I added the "Nominate for Deletion" to the toolbar per default to all users (on image pages), so it is now a lot simpler to nominate images. This will probably reflect itself on Commons:Deletion requests. If it turns out that it isn't workable, we'll have to figure out a solution...

Fred Chess 22:16, 25 April 2007 (UTC)

Image deletion

Image:AntiRussianPoster.jpg is in violation of copyright as it potrays the poster, copy rights of which have not been released. I tagged the image, however, there is a revert war going on. A decision by an admin is requested to decide the issue. Thanks.--Hillock65 23:04, 26 April 2007 (UTC)

Deleted, DW -- Bryan (talk to me) 13:37, 27 April 2007 (UTC)

Wikimedia logo mosaic

Please note that a picture included in the Wikimedia logo mosaic has been deleted and needs to be replaced. Nyttend 20:27, 28 April 2007 (UTC)

Fixed. -- Bryan (talk to me) 20:38, 28 April 2007 (UTC)

Wikimedia bug with upload: where to report?

See: Image:Gottlieb-The_Watch.jpg. Newer version is larger, but in upload history both images have the same resolution. A.J. 17:47, 30 April 2007 (UTC)

The place to report these things are bugzilla:. I haven't heard of this bug before actually. / Fred Chess 23:33, 9 May 2007 (UTC)

Ruben86 (talk • contribs • count)

All of this user's uploaded images are clearly professional shots, and after warnings keeps uploading images. Possibly Spanish, could someone note the user and delete the copyvio images. feydey (talk) 19:48, 2 May 2007 (UTC)

Warned & deleted. -- Bryan (talk to me) 20:00, 2 May 2007 (UTC)

Translations

Hello. With the help of User:Badseed and User:Geraki I have prepared some translations:

Could you please move the pages? Thanks in advance. --Dada 14:17, 4 May 2007 (UTC)

Done. If you are sure that everything is ok (including Mediawiki:Licenses/el and others), please leave a message for User talk:pfctdayelise to have her bot update pages. -- Bryan (talk to me) 14:47, 4 May 2007 (UTC)

True information re submitted and needs protection but jpegs don't show up...why?

We just placed information up about NIKKI HORNSBY which jpeg verificational photos do not appear even though uploaded. What did we do wrong? Can you help? ALL this information plus more was submitted year ago and deleted. PLEASE protect it from being deleted since it's true and we can show other sources to verify legit.

Thank you,

CJP Staff

cjpnhrecords@yahoo.com

The page Nikki Hornsby was deleted by an administrator because it was a biography, with no media content. Wikimedia Commons is for hosting images and materials to be used by other projects, not for creating articles or biographies. If Nikki Hornsby falls under notability guidelines you can consider creating an article on Wikipedia; pages on the Commons are only for galleries with limited information. For example of a page here please see Edgar Degas. -- Editor at Large • talk 17:28, 6 May 2007 (UTC)

Secure passwords

For those who do not yet know, on the English Wikipedia several admin accounts were compromised, because they had a weak password. [46] [47]. So all admins, please make sure you have a secure password :) -- Bryan (talk to me) 20:11, 7 May 2007 (UTC)

This is not just an admin issue, all users, even devs and Jimbo, are prone to this. Somebody can easily compromise your account because of a weak password, and will lead to your being blocked.  V60 干什么？ · VContribs 01:00, 8 May 2007 (UTC)
And that you have set an email in it. If your account get compromised or your password invalidated by being weak (sysadmins are trying weak passwords on en:), it's the only way to have it back. Platonides 11:04, 9 May 2007 (UTC)
Brion Vibber has been checking through the passwords of English Wiki admins, and resetting those that were weak... I don't know if we can ask brion to do that for Commons admins too, or if there is another way. I don't think it would be wise to try that ourselves by repeated login attempts.
Commons is not a great target for these kind of vandals (because Commons is hardly heard of by others than nerdy Wikipedians). And additionally, I think that it is unlikely that a kid would spend the necessary time to extreme brute force unless he has access to the decrypted password , so I don't think it is necessary to force people to use an ultra-safe passwords that is "long and use combinations of lower and upper case letters, digits, and symbols." Just make sure you don't use any of these password, or any other common first name.
Fred Chess 16:34, 10 May 2007 (UTC)
Imagine the number of projects you can harm by replacing some heavily used images by goatse... -- Bryan (talk to me) 13:53, 11 May 2007 (UTC)

Image to delete : Image:Igreja de Brie.gif, Image:Interieur Eglise BriectRobert.jpg

Dear admins, File:Igreja de Brie.gif and File:Interieur Eglise BriectRobert.jpg are not free of rights and should be removed from Commons. Regards, M-le-mot-dit 11:10, 12 May 2007 (UTC)

Please use Commons:Deletion requests Platonides 13:35, 12 May 2007 (UTC)

Special:Related changes

The fixed text says "This special page lists the last changes on pages who are linked". It would be more correct to re-phrase that as "This special page lists recent changes on linked pages". --MichaelMaggs 16:42, 14 May 2007 (UTC)

Brief but - I agree! --Herby talk thyme 15:49, 15 May 2007 (UTC)

Image:Photo10.jpg

Hi there. Can someone possibly nuke the above image, plus its history. It's tagged {{db-author}} and is my own userpic. It's been used on the English WP in a stalkery attack (I'm an admin there) so it's time for it to go before it happens again. WP:RBI and all that :) Thanks! - Alison ☺ 15:28, 15 May 2007 (UTC)

✓ Done feel free to let us know if you need any other help --Herby talk thyme 15:34, 15 May 2007 (UTC)
Thanks, Herby. Perfect :) - Alison ☺ 16:25, 15 May 2007 (UTC)

Backlog on category rename requests

If you have a few hours, please check Category:Requested moves which is backlogged with over 200 category rename requests. You can use User:Orgullobot/commands to issue the move commands and have them taken care of by SieBot. Siebrand 20:21, 18 May 2007 (UTC)

Wikispecies 100,000

Could an administrator please replace the Wikispecies logo with Image:Wikispecies-bio.png as per this outcome of our local poll? The file is now protected. We will give you notice when the file can be reverted to its original later. Thanks. Lycaon 08:58, 23 May 2007 (UTC)

And which is the protected image? Siebrand 09:08, 23 May 2007 (UTC)
Oops sorry. If I'm well informed, it should be Image:Wikispecies-logo.png. Thanks Lycaon 09:41, 23 May 2007 (UTC)
Seems to be a tie between image:Ws_100k_only.PNG and Image:Wikispecies-bio.png Platonides 09:44, 23 May 2007 (UTC)
Wikispecies-logo.png is used on at least 3058 pages in 306 projects. according to CheckUsage. The files have a diferent size and there appears to be a tie in a poll that was only participated in by ~10 users. I think we should not honour this request. Siebrand 10:01, 23 May 2007 (UTC)
If you want to modify the logo on your local project, upload a new version of Image:Wiki.png. Logos of Wikimedia projects are trademarked and must not be modified; temporary usage of a derived logo is tolerated for anniversaries or milestones at the local project scale only. guillom 10:49, 23 May 2007 (UTC)

X mark.svg Not done Siebrand 11:30, 23 May 2007 (UTC)

Pschemp's icons problem

Please help to solve problem with icon reproductions User talk:Pschemp#Your icons images. A.J. 09:22, 28 May 2007 (UTC)

DANGER MAN (talk · contributions)

Is there anyone with a working knowledge of Arabic who could check DANGER MAN's contributions? He tags the images as GFDL; for all I know the info template might say that they're his own work, but to an ignorant Westerner such as myself it seems as if he's just removing no source tags without supplying a verifiable source or permission. Cnyborg 22:36, 30 May 2007 (UTC)

cc-by-2.5-tw and PD-self maps by Netmap (talk · contributions)

In the past week, User:Netmap has uploaded ~225 map related JPG and PDF files. He has licensed most of them {{PD-self}} after tagging or {{tw-cc-by-sa-2.0}} for new uploads. The maps are of excellent quality and extremely detailed for what we are used to. He is using http://makemap.blogspot.com as a source. He has no contributions outside his user page or the image namespace. To me this all smells very fishy. Anyone who can read his language or try to communicate with the user to get some clarity on this issue? Siebrand 10:02, 1 June 2007 (UTC)

Delyan Slavov

The page Delyan Slavov has been deleted three times so far, as well as being deleted from the en: and bulgarian wikipedia. See here for the English wiki voting outcome: This user is promoting himself.

See also: Commons:Deletion requests/Image:Delyan Slavov2.jpg for the request to delete the pictures associated with the article.

The page can be removed (again) and possibly protected from being recreated?

Deadstar 13:04, 1 June 2007 (UTC)

✓ Done page now protected in COM:SALT --Herby talk thyme 13:32, 1 June 2007 (UTC)

fractals uploads

Some users as Avi kedmi but also Aliboron (less significafive because without license pics are deleted quickly) upload hardly dozens of fractals pics. for me it's like spam and all of these pics without real interest for project in also big quantity would be deleted or at least listed in deletions request. What is your opinion about that? Oxam Hartog 00:21, 2 June 2007 (UTC)

Uploads by Gonnz

Gonnz is uploading a large number of images, none of which have any source information apart from the uploader claiming to be the photographer using {{PD-self}}, a claim which appears highly doubtful given that the images have been taken with more than 15 different cameras, including some photographs which could only have been taken from aircraft. The user is not responding to questions regarding the problems with the photographs, making it difficult to continue to assume good faith. The problem applies to all the users uploads and has continued despite several requests to clarify the status of the works. I therefore recommend deletion of all the user's uploads and for the account to be blocked. —LX (talk, contribs) 20:20, 20 May 2007 (UTC)

Support deletion, without descriptions and source information these images aren't usable. --GeorgHH 20:49, 20 May 2007 (UTC)
Agree with deletion. User should also be blocked if they continue. -- Bryan (talk to me) 08:09, 21 May 2007 (UTC)
Unfortunately I have to support this move. Please delete the images and block the user. There is no way that someone owns 10 to 20 different cameras. However, it is a pitty because the photos are good. --ALE! ¿…? 11:42, 1 June 2007 (UTC)
✓ Done, blocked and deleted. —LX (talk, contribs) 15:19, 3 June 2007 (UTC)

Image:Smile.jpg

I would like to have someone review Image:Smile.jpg. It seems unlikely that this originated with Fish and Wildlife Services. And if it did, we need to establish who is in the picture. --SVTCobra 14:50, 6 June 2007 (UTC)

We need a source for all images. In this case that could not be verified -> {{subst:nsd}}. Siebrand 14:54, 6 June 2007 (UTC)

How to get password e-mailed?

I have registred yesterday as user "Mir76" and filled an e-mail address field during registration. I have received confirmation e-mail with URL http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Special:Confirmemail/e3bf040098de3d178d68367ea559cb98 in it, so I entered e-mail address correctly and confimation was successful. Now I can not login ('password is incorrect'), nor I can get password e-mailed back to me ('No e-mail address is registered for this user'). Some one can help me? Or should I register again with another username? 212.49.98.189 13:47, 5 June 2007 (UTC) (Mir76)

Strange, indeed, there has probably been something that went wrong. Unless there is a secial reason for you to be linked to Mir76, you may want to register under Mir_76, for instance, and carefully re-do the process. Michelet-密是力 19:39, 6 June 2007 (UTC)
It says that "Mir_76" is looks too like "Mir76" - which is already registred, but when I try to find Mir76 in logs (including creation logs) it says there is no records. So now I am a Commons GHOST :( Can admins erase "Mir76" account? (It is surely me, check the validation URL upper) 212.49.98.189 19:36, 8 June 2007 (UTC) Mir76

Need help with a username creation

I'm trying to create the account SOPHIA to tie in with my en.wiki account. A user has created Sophia but never used it which is why it won't let me do it myself. You can e-mail me the details via my en.wikipedia SOPHIA account - thanks. Sophia.

Please request usurpation on COM:CHU. -- Bryan (talk to me) 18:26, 9 June 2007 (UTC)
Specifically, click the link in this section: Requests to Usurp Account. Cary Bass demandez 19:03, 9 June 2007 (UTC)
I was wrong about the never edited bit - I found an upload log [48] and suspect that means I can't usurp the account. Can the account SOPHIA be created? Sophia.
Solved. -- Bryan (talk to me) 13:09, 12 June 2007 (UTC)

Merge Template:Bild-by to Template:Attribution?

I would like to request any German-speaking admin to determine if Template:Bild-by should be merged to Template:Attribution. I cannot read German, but as I found images with Template:Bild-by uncategorized, I made some changes pending possible merger, so the involved images are now categorized.--Jusjih 15:29, 11 June 2007 (UTC)

Yes, it says the same, i've made a redirect to Template:Attribution. --GeorgHH 18:43, 12 June 2007 (UTC)

Mysterious paranoia against (unwelcome?) sources

Could someone please have a look at this? Vivian G 20:03, 6 June 2007 (UTC)

Things are getting worse. Something NEEDS to be done. Can someone please suggest an appropriate action? Thank you. Vivian G 12:04, 10 June 2007 (UTC)
Like a suggestion? Ban Vivian G as Platini34, Peter_Synderman, Béatrice_Gallimard were banned. See the complete collection of sock puppets at User:Stefan h. --stefan (?!) 10:55, 12 June 2007 (UTC)

What on earth is this stuff doing in an image description page in the first place? Commons does not contain text articles. IMO, the debate about this picture should be only alluded to and the real content transfered in a Wikipedia article. Jastrow (Λέγετε) 11:15, 12 June 2007 (UTC)

It started as link container for Brauns "biometric mozart studies" (Edlinger, Hagenauer, Greuze and Delahaye). For the "early" ones, the spamming started in :en and :de and the image pages there. Then the circus moved to commons. Since then the subject has changed mainly to the Edlinger portrait (probably meant to serve as reference thereafter). At the moment it is quiet in :en, but very busy on :de Karo24 and busy on commons Vivian_G. --stefan (?!) 15:28, 12 June 2007 (UTC)

This stuff does not belong on Commons, but on a Wikipedia article. I suggest removing all but the first three sentences from the image description. -- Bryan (talk to me) 17:54, 12 June 2007 (UTC)

Earlier sockpuppets related to a Mozart debacle were blocked in December see conclusion. Vivian_G (talk · contributions) is a single-purpose account, registering on June 1, only editing Mozart image, and who shows familiarity with the term CheckUser. [49]
I support Stefan's judgement of this dispute.
Fred J 11:32, 16 June 2007 (UTC)

Image:GardarThorCortes-sofa.jpg

I've tried uploading the above file several times, but the file doesn't display properly even though the website says the upload has been successful. Refreshing the page using Ctrl-F5 doesn't work. What's wrong? Cheers, Jacklee 22:45, 15 June 2007 (UTC)

Looks like a bug, or possibly a file problem, to me. The thumb at right image appears as a negative image in my browser. It is linked to the Image page, also a negative image. However, the full resolution version is a positive image.[50] Walter Siegmund (talk) 02:33, 16 June 2007 (UTC)
Please direct questions which don't specifically need the attention of administrators at Commons:Help desk instead. Anyway, the file is corrupt. It won't display at all in Iceweasel. —LX (talk, contribs) 08:16, 16 June 2007 (UTC)
Also a note, the permission is at least very doubtable. It basically is, "Do want to license the image under the GFDL to publish the image on Wikipedia?" "Sure, we give you permission to use the image." They do not seem to understand that the GFDL means that anyone for any purpose is allowed to use the image, including commercial and derivative works. I thus doubt whether this grant is valid. To avoid this, please use when possible the form from Commons:Email templates. -- Bryan (talk to me) 08:59, 16 June 2007 (UTC)

If the image file is corrupt, could an administrator assist me to delete it? Also, I think we can take it that the copyright owner understood the implications of the GFDL. If you look at the e-mail I sent to Believer Music Group on 6 April 2007 which appears at the bottom of the Talk page, I did use a modified version of a Wikipedia e-mail template to request permission for the use of images. The e-mail stated: "I am... writing to you to find out if you are willing to grant permission for the images currently shown in the above Wikipedia article to be used under the terms of the GNU Free Documentation Licence (GNU-FDL, or GFDL for short). This means that although you retain the copyright and authorship of these images, you are granting permission for others to use, copy, and share the images freely, and even potentially use them commercially, so long as they do not try to claim the copyright themselves, or try to prevent others from using or copying them freely (e.g., "share-alike"). You can read this licence in full at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Text_of_the_GNU_Free_Documentation_License. We choose the GFDL because we consider it the best available tool for ensuring our encyclopedia can remain free for all to use, while providing credit to everyone who donates text and images." The copyright owner chose to provide alternative images, but that does not mean it did not know the terms under which those images would be used. Cheers, Jacklee 12:49, 16 June 2007 (UTC)

I've tagged the file for speedy deletion on the basis that it is corrupt. Cheers, Jacklee 12:56, 16 June 2007 (UTC)

Image:Souvenir-Sheet.jpg

Copied from my talk page, as I didn't know how to proceed best... Siebrand 12:21, 18 June 2007 (UTC)
I think it is a copyright violation, but I dont know where to post it. Can you do it for me? The first link in the copyright text "information" links only to the internet-picture of the stamp. The second link "Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Bulgaria" links to the start-page of the ministery. There are every day changing news, but no copyright permissions. Some month ago I wanted to upload pictures from my bulgarian stamp collection, but I found that bulgarian stamps probably have a copyright. (discussion in bulgarian wiki, in the article STAMPS - on englisch language)- Thanks, --RosarioVanTulpe 21:07, 9 June 2007 (UTC)

I have tagged a lot of uploads by this user. Thanks. Siebrand 19:02, 10 June 2007 (UTC)
The Copyrighte problem ist still unsolved - though User:Apcbg added license information and removed the Warning tag. Yes, the Bulgarian Ministery on Foreing Affairs grants Creative Commons License ([51]). BUT obviously they are not the copyright owner for that bulgarian stamp. The copyright owner can only be the Bulgarian Post Office or the Bulgarien Ministery of Communications - I guess. So we would need a Creative Commons License from them. The name of the artist is clearly printed on the stamp (T. Wardzhiev; bulgarian: Т. Барджиев). The copyright is also owned by the artist. --RosarioVanTulpe 19:56, 11 June 2007 (UTC)
I'll bring this to the attention board, as I do not know how to proceed... Siebrand 12:21, 18 June 2007 (UTC)
There is now a letter from the State Agency for Infomation Technology and Communication, claiming to be the sole copyright owner, and granting a the free license. [52] Is the issue solved? / Fred J 17:32, 20 June 2007 (UTC)
Except for the permission not being referenced anywhere: yes ;) 17:45, 20 June 2007 (UTC)

French admin help needed

Could a French speaking admin please take care of this topic (Mezquita de Córdoba) on my talk page? Thanks. Siebrand 11:55, 20 June 2007 (UTC)

Accidentally erased someone else's picture

Hello admins,

I accidentally erased (overwritten) Image:NSU Wankel Spider.jpg, because I was too hasty in ignoring the upload error message. I always get one, because the software adds underscores, but this time it was for real and I noticed that after I hit the upload button...

I don't know how to revert the picture tot the old version, can someone take care of this please? The original picture can be found here

Thanks, Brinkie 07:39, 25 June 2007 (UTC)

✓ Done Siebrand 09:18, 25 June 2007 (UTC)
Senk joe verrie mutch Siebrand ;-) See you Sunday! --Brinkie 09:55, 25 June 2007 (UTC)

Need help going through User:Pacoperez6's contributions

Hi everyone,

I could use some help going through the uploads of User:Pacoperez6, who appears to be transferring a large number of images from English Wikipedia (good) without paying much attention to details like authorship, licensing information, image descriptions, uploading the right version of the image, and categorisation (not so good). So far I've gone through the user's contributions from 11:00, 1 July 2007 through 19:38, 19 June 2007, but as there are four pages of contributions (at 50 per page) and nearly every image needs some corrective action, I could use some help.

Recurring problems I've found so far include:

  • Images from Flickr transferred via English Wikipedia and fraudulently crediting the English Wikipedia uploader as the author (and possibly stating a different license) after transferring here. Please correct such images promptly with an appropriately completed {{Flickr}} information template and tag them for {{Flickrreview}}.
  • Images without source information at English Wikipedia crediting the English Wikipedia uploader as the author after transferring here. Please tag such images with {{nsd}} both here and on English Wikipedia.
  • Licenses being altered in the process of moving images here. Look out for random switches between GFDL, CC-licenses, and PD status and PD images which for some reason got a GFDL tag (or two, or three) slapped onto them in addition to the PD tag. Please correct these.
  • Images missing a clear link to the English Wikipedia source. Please try to find it through the English Wikipedia uploader's contributions.
  • Excessive or incorrect GFDL tags. Often several of them. The correct GFDL tag to use for most GFDL-licensed images from English Wikipedia is {{GFDL-user-en}}, not {{GFDL-self}} (as the latter implies that the transferring uploader is the author). And please, just one of them.
  • Low-resolution image description preview versions of images being uploaded instead of full-resolution versions. After ensuring that all the information and licensing is valid, please upload the full-resolution version under the same name.
  • Missing image descriptions, sometimes even falsely claiming that the original image does not have a description when in fact it does. Please add or complete {{Information}} tags appropriately.
  • Missing categorization. Please add {{uncategorized}} or appropriate categorization.

If I could get a Spanish-speaking user to clearly explain to the user that their carelessness is causing a lot of extra work for others, that would also be great, as I'm not sure the messages in English are getting through clearly. —LX (talk, contribs) 13:07, 1 July 2007 (UTC)

new username

I would like to register a new username, but I get an error saying it's too much like an existing one and I should ask an administrator. Who / where should I ask this?

You can ask here. Admins can create a username for you, if it's appropriate. What name were you trying to use? pfctdayelise (说什么?) 09:03, 23 June 2007 (UTC)
I'd like to use BIANCA - this is the username I have on on Wikipedia. There is a user named BLANCA. 08:04, 25 June 2007 (UTC)
Since user:Blanca has only 3 edits, I don't think it will be a big problem to have a user:Bianca too (as long as you don't write your signature as "BIanca"). I emailed the account w:User:Bianca to finish dealing with this. --pfctdayelise (说什么?) 03:07, 2 July 2007 (UTC)

Please add

This: Template talk:Cc-by-sa-2.5,2.0,1.0/lang. Thank you!--SMP (talk page) 14:14, 29 June 2007 (UTC)

✓ Done, marked so on the talk page as well :) -- Editor at Large • talk 21:40, 1 July 2007 (UTC)

User:Dirk kempen

A look at this user's uploads at [53] shows many images, all which are small and at least two different types of cameras used. As well, he (assumed) seems to always be in the best locations and getting many great images, but it just seems to too good. Anyone else suspect they are all copyvios? MECU≈talk 15:33, 2 July 2007 (UTC)

For me - yes, copyvios. Unless of course he is a professional motorsport photographer with access to balloons over racetracks as well as being at the trackside at the same time! --Herby talk thyme 15:37, 2 July 2007 (UTC)
I second that. Note the street name on Image:Oulton Park Circuit.PNG. These images were clearly taken from a map service and not self-made. The user also claims to be the author of images taken with camera models at least including:
I doubt very much that a professional photographer who uses a $3,500 Nikon D2Xs on 21 February would switch to a Canon EOS 300D bottom rung discontinued consumer SLR which used to sell for under $900 for a shoot on March 27 and then to a $2,600 Nikon D2X (a camera released two years before the D2Xs) on 15 April. The authorship claims are clearly fraudulent. I say delete it all and block the user. —LX (talk, contribs) 18:53, 2 July 2007 (UTC)
✓ Done MECU≈talk 13:21, 3 July 2007 (UTC)

Bot delete SXC images?

There are ~1632 images in Category:Unknown as of 25 June 2007, of which ~1400 are probably going to be deleted because of the SXC problem. Could a bot delete all these images (the SXC ones)? Otherwise it'll take me about ~4 hours. MECU≈talk 15:50, 2 July 2007 (UTC)

There is no need to be in a hurry with deleting these images. Preferably first delete the unused ones (User:Bryan/sxc-list). Maybe we should just make Category:Sxc-warning a sub cat of Category:Unknown, instead of that of 25 june? -- Bryan (talk to me) 16:51, 2 July 2007 (UTC)
I deleted between 1000 and 1100 from that SXC warning cat. I left all images edited within the past 17 days that had explicitely noted the author was contacted (16 in total IIRC). Cheers! Siebrand 10:31, 3 July 2007 (UTC)

Image:Dieu Noel.gif

Hello,

would you mind deleting this picture (without licence) ? Some Ip are using it to vandalize the French wikipedia (where I am sysop fr:user:Poppy). Thanks in advance. Poppy 16:14, 3 July 2007 (UTC)

✓ Done {{no license}}. Cheers! Siebrand 16:28, 3 July 2007 (UTC)
Thanks. Poppy 16:36, 4 July 2007 (UTC)

Scans of Passport Covers

There seem to be a lot of these things proliferating and many of them are marked with pd of gfdl licenses by the scanner as if they owned the copyright of the images. Am I right that the copyright will always remain with the respective country and that the images can only be free if the laws of the particular country make them free? If so, does anyone have any good ideas about how we can go about cleaning this up? This is also an en problem but I thought I should ask the experts first. An example of what I mean is Image:Passaporteportuguês2006.jpg Spartaz 20:25, 3 July 2007 (UTC)

That is correct. In addition to laws potentially placing such official documents into the public domain, they may also be ineligible for copyright protection if the cover does not contain any original work (such as if it only states that it is a passport and the passport holder's nationality). Scanning a document does not create any original work, so such images should never cite the uploader as the copyright holder or author. In other words, passport scans that are not in the public domain should be tagged for deletion, and any passport scans that are in the public domain should be labelled as such, without any other licensing statements attached and without self-attribution. —LX (talk, contribs) 21:10, 3 July 2007 (UTC)

Removing categories from images

Greetings. I'm an admin here on Commons, but I wanted to get some opinions here about whether a block would be appropriate.

There has been a longstanding debate about whether to place images in articles or categorize them so that they are included in category pages. After a long and unpleasant debate, the community consensus was determined to be "both". Here I quote from our policy at Commons:Categories:

Some users are of the opinion that when an image is included in a gallery article, it is sufficient to categorize that article. Others believe that each individual image should be categorized too. The consensus on this issue, as determined by vote, is that both systems are equally valid and should be used concurrently. Do not remove categories just because an image is in a categorized gallery.

Some users, of course, do not want to accept this consensus, and continue to remove categories from images regardless. I recently used automated tools to add appropriate categories to a great number of images, and I have applied for a bot flag. My bot application has proven controversial, and I have stopped adding categories to images temporarily until we figure out what to do there. (Incidentally, any comments would be appreciated.)

One user, Olei (talk · contributions), has taken it upon himself to remove hundreds of categories from images, by reverting the changes I made. When I informed him that removal of image categories was against policy he threatened "If anyone will block me the german community will force an deadmin against you!" He continues to remove these categories undeterred.

I don't think it would be appropriate for me to block him, since I'm so involved. But it seems to me that his actions are clearly against policy, and his threats are inappropriate. If anyone thinks a block is warranted, be my guest. All the best, Quadell (talk) 23:24, 3 July 2007 (UTC)

A block may be warranted, but this should be taked to the Disputes noticeboard. From lots of opinions I have read, be it here, on IRC, or from the mailing list, they should be used concurrently. Categories should be a dump, while galleries have more of the organisational bit to it. (→zelzany - framed) 00:06, 4 July 2007 (UTC)
Please reply at Commons:Administrators'_noticeboard/Disputes#Removing_categories_from_images to not scatter this discussion all over. Siebrand 06:52, 4 July 2007 (UTC)

Commons:By location category scheme

Some sysop must consider to block this article. User Juiced lemon changes unilaterally this proposal page converting a "custom norm" (in his own words) when the debate is not ended and in the talk page there isn't a deep discussing. I was reverting but he re-reverts my actions again and again. --Joanot Martorell ✉ 09:12, 4 July 2007 (UTC)

Images currently in Category:Unknown - No timestamp given

The images currently in Category:Unknown - No timestamp given all have the same problem: (aside from the tagger not having used the nld/nsd and subst) The uploader gave a website and on most of the images put "{{PD}" or completed the tag or used another suspicious tag. As the site is in French, I can't understand. But I don't think these should be labeled "no source" or "no license", but perhaps just routed through regular deletion or a speedy deletion as a copyvio, depending on what a French reading admin can determine. Any help here would be appreciated. MECU≈talk 21:06, 12 June 2007 (UTC)

Hmmm, this concerns the images of German politicians, that were released under a press license? Do you mean German when you wrote French? Or were there other images in the category when you wrote your message? / Fred J 00:33, 16 June 2007 (UTC)
The situation appears to be this: There is a German user who is authorized to give permissions for the images in question, and we are requested to ask for permission before deleting any of these images. [54]
Personally I think that those users who wish to keep the images should do just that, and request a permission to be granted right away.
Fred J 00:38, 16 June 2007 (UTC)
Yes, I meant German, my apologies. So, since we have to ask a user before using an image, that's not free and we can delete? MECU≈talk 13:01, 6 July 2007 (UTC)

cc-by-2.5-tw and PD-self maps by Netmap (talk · contributions)

Because of new activity of the user on my watchlist, a repost of 1 June 2007 that was archived unanswered.
In the past week, User:Netmap has uploaded ~225 map related JPG and PDF files. He has licensed most of them {{PD-self}} after tagging or {{tw-cc-by-sa-2.0}} for new uploads. The maps are of excellent quality and extremely detailed for what we are used to. He is using http://makemap.blogspot.com as a source. He has no contributions outside his user page or the image namespace. To me this all smells very fishy. Anyone who can read his language or try to communicate with the user to get some clarity on this issue? Siebrand 13:46, 4 July 2007 (UTC)

I posted a request to User:Shizhao to look into it. pfctdayelise (说什么?) 02:13, 6 July 2007 (UTC)

Commons:Administrators' discussion index and Commons:Undeletion requests

I have two messages. First, I created Commons:Administrators' discussion index, a three-hourly updated list of discussions that might be of interest to administrators. Secondly, there are too few admins that watch the discussions on Commons:Undeletion requests/Current requests. Cheers, -- Bryan (talk to me) 10:15, 5 July 2007 (UTC)

Wow! How does it work? How does it know when a discussion is active or going on? pfctdayelise (说什么?) 01:56, 6 July 2007 (UTC)

Users editing Ferrol, related pages and categories

I'm checking a lot of users that edited Ferrol gallery (and images categorized in Ferrol related categories). In this subpage there is a list of users, many of them are sockpuppets. Yesterday Lmbuga blocked Phil MacKracking (talk · contributions) (one of his sockpuppets You are a f***ing pussy (talk · contributions) have vandalized Lmbuga's user page). After blocking, a new user Ferrol26 (talk · contributions) begin editing Ferrol gallery including problem images. The behaviour pattern of this (these) user(s) is create a account, after upload two or three images, finally create a new account. Several user's names are names from newspapers, companies, hotels, impersonation of real people... Images are thumbnails without EXIF data, retouched images, copyvios, fake licenses,... Today, I start tagging copyvios and no source pictures from Chevron Texaco (talk · contributions) [55], Barcelo Libunca (talk · contributions) [56], [57], AUDASA (talk · contributions) [58], Turgalicia (talk · contributions) [59] next this (these) user(s) have delete warning templates. Please pay attention to these users to prevent delete warnings over and over again. Thanks. --Prevert(talk) 20:25, 28 June 2007 (UTC)

Requested for check user investigation. -- Bryan (talk to me) 12:50, 29 June 2007 (UTC)
I have done this although I think there may be work still to do. I can't see this is the clearest case I've dealt with - if more info is needed let me know - cheers --Herby talk thyme 16:16, 29 June 2007 (UTC)
That is a really strange case. Although the users edit the same subject, their edit pattern is not unambigious the same... further more, I found that they are related to User:Viajero, who claims to be living in Amsterdam, The Netherlands, the users solely edit pages related to Ferror, Spain. Herbythyme can probably also shine some light on the real physical location of the users...
I currently only blocked You are a f***ing pussy (talk · contributions) for an inappropriate username, and would like some more input before proceeding... -- Bryan (talk to me) 14:05, 30 June 2007 (UTC)
Bryan & I are reviewing some aspects of this by email (it is complicated). However the underlying IP of You are a f***ing pussy (talk · contributions) has been blocked by me as have two other IP where I consider the editing suspicious (there are at least 11 IPs involved!). More on this soon I hope --Herby talk thyme 14:45, 30 June 2007 (UTC)
Thanks. I will continue checking images and users. Greetings. --Prevert(talk) 16:54, 2 July 2007 (UTC)
Please watch or block Youareapaedo! (talk · contributions) for offensive user name and vandalism to Lmbuga user page. Considering the similarities in behaviour with You are a f***ing pussy (talk · contributions), Youareapaedo may belong to the Ferrol sockpuppet club. — Xavier, 10:59, 8 July 2007 (UTC)
  • reset

✓ Done thanks - both blocked and the underlying IP --Herby talk thyme 11:02, 8 July 2007 (UTC)

How were these (Image:1888 OCRR.gif, Image:NYC subway simplified map.png and Image:NYC subway simplified map 50pct-optimized.png) copyvios?

Image:1888 OCRR.gif and Image:NYC subway simplified map.png were deleted as copyvios. But the first was published in 1888 and I made the second from scratch. --SPUI 07:38, 10 July 2007 (UTC)

Undeleted. -- Bryan (talk to me) 08:56, 10 July 2007 (UTC)
Can you get Image:NYC subway simplified map 50pct-optimized.png too, and restore it to en:New York City Subway? I'm somewhat retired, but I had to come out for this. Thanks a lot. --SPUI 14:14, 10 July 2007 (UTC)
This is a really nice map. It's a shame not to have it around. Can you address the assertion that got it deleted, that it's a copyvio of this map: [60] and or this one:[61] ?? To my untrained eye it's significantly different... not the same image at all. I'm not sure why it got tagged. You drew it yourself, (as you have done for many many other maps) maybe from those sources, but that's not a copyright violation per se. Do you have the original source file or did you draw it directly as a PNG? This probably is the wrong place to discuss this I guess but it started here. ++Lar: t/c 14:29, 10 July 2007 (UTC)
Note, Commons:Undeletion_requests is probably the more formal place to discuss this... so I posted there. See Commons:Undeletion_requests/Current_requests#:Image:NYC_subway_simplified_map_50pct-optimized.png ++Lar: t/c 14:39, 10 July 2007 (UTC)

Problem tag reverts

Could someone else please take a look at Special:Contributions/Avetik so that it doesn't seem like I'm on a personal crusade here? Several of the uploads are missing evidence that the authors agreed to the specific licenses stated, and the uploader has repeatedly removed the {{npd}} tags without adding the necessary information. I'm not personally in the mood for revert ping-pong. —LX (talk, contribs) 23:08, 11 July 2007 (UTC)

Looking at Image talk:Kaliontzidis.jpg, he/she seems to think that "No problem, I dont mind one bit, seeing as you asked, feel free..." is enough documentation for CC-BY-SA; at Image:KEMENCC1.jpg he claims to have permission from same author, but there the license i GFDL, not CC-BY-SA, so it seems arbitrary which license has been used. He has also added {{PD-old}} to an image from 1957 (clearly incorrect license). I'm sure there'll be a problem; on the image talk page I've mentioned he/she is hiding behind «good faith» (which just isn't enough in 50 years' time, when very few of us can expect to be active here). If you can be bothered to start reverting. I'll be reverting some of his changes now. I also gave him a warning, so that if there's a revert war he can be blocked at once if necessary. Cnyborg 01:25, 12 July 2007 (UTC)
Thanks for your assistance. I had some dialogue with the user on my user talk page, and I think I managed to convey the importance of securing explicit and unambiguous permissions, so hopefully this can be resolved without such drastic measures. —LX (talk, contribs) 05:47, 12 July 2007 (UTC)

please erase Image:Maccabiah17.JPG

i want to upload better pic. don't know if this is the place to ask that.. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by דרדס (talk • contribs) at 12:42, 12 July 2007 (UTC)

This is not a bad place to ask. but if you have a better image, (the same except for image quality, size, etc.) and you want the same name to be used, just upload it yourself, using the same name. As long as you are an "established" user, the system will allow it. If you are not established yet, wait a few days and do it, or if you are in a really tearing hurry and it's really really important, upload a new image with a slightly different name, and ask here for it to be replaced by someone, giving both names. Best, really, to just wait a few days if you are new, though. Don't forget to give the source for the image (if you took it yourself, say that) And don't forget to sign your posts, you can sign with ~~~~ ++Lar: t/c 18:01, 12 July 2007 (UTC)

Username change

I am wondering if someone could change my username. I'm known as Steinninn on many Wikimedia projects, and this is the first place I've come across where it is taken. I've already uploaded a few pictures when I noticed that Steinninn has not uploaded or changed any pages. I suspect that I made a user acount and forgot the password a long time ago (in a galaxy...) Is it possible to delete that user and move my work into that username? Thanks --Steinninninn 04:40, 13 July 2007 (UTC)

Best to discuss at COM:CHU. You can probably usurp the account. pfctdayelise (说什么?) 04:54, 13 July 2007 (UTC)
That was quick. Thanks. Done and done. Thanks for the help in the passed to. Your a real hero. --Steinninninn 05:02, 13 July 2007 (UTC)

Category:Other speedy deletions

Some advice please - I am very reluctant to mention "categories" and "deletion" in the same sentence but! There are now some hundreds (900+ maybe) of category deletions in this category. The reason given is :Reverting User:Polbot -- Ies. I am informed that they may not all be appropriate for deletion though. I'm happy to make a start but would prefer not to encouter the wrath of some parties who might not agree. Thanks --Herby talk thyme 11:21, 13 July 2007 (UTC)

Speedy deletion

All images uploaded by Unitstage are copyvio. He told me that they are from http://www.cagliaricalcio.net/ So, I request speedy deletion. Thanks --Trixt 01:30, 14 July 2007 (UTC)

Account creation help

I would like to create an account with username User:AA (as that is what I use on the English Wikipedia). However, there is already a similar account User:Aa and I am asked to seek the help of an admin. That account was created in October 2005 and has no contributions. Could somebody please assist me? Thanks. AA 22:45, 17 July 2007 (UTC)

As above I would like to use my WikiWriter username (from English Wikipedia) in commons but was prevented because Wiki writer already exists - can I be helped?

User:AA ✓ Done -- Bryan (talk to me) 19:08, 18 July 2007 (UTC)

rename Image:Cannnots de secours.jpg

Can you please rename Image:Cannnots de secours.jpg in Image:Canots de secours.jpg (with 1 n). thank you ! KoS 20:37, 19 July 2007 (UTC)

User:Siebrand

http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Siebrand#Commons:Freedom_of_Panorama It's no argument to simply repeat the deletion request. The picture is in Germany as the country of origin legal and has not to be deleted until a WMF decision on the FREEDOM OF PNAORAMA question exists --Historiograf 16:17, 20 July 2007 (UTC)

I don't understand why you feel necessary to report Siebrand's actions here. You can voice your disagreement on COM:DEL. Jastrow (Λέγετε) 17:54, 20 July 2007 (UTC)
It is in process to start a deletion request in case of a disagreement on media being allowed or not allowed. This is clearly the case as you removed the tag {{derivative}}. Please make your case at Commons:Deletion requests/Image:2006mai saffig 023.jpg as you have done now. Cheers! Siebrand 18:51, 20 July 2007 (UTC)

My first upload

Hi,

I've just uploaded an image which is at en.wikipedia, and I'm not sure if I did all steps in the right way. Could someone with experience check all the info.
I would appreciate a "welcome" box at my user talk page.
I would appreciate someone telling me the special code for quick help, I used the standard and got a lifesaver ?!


Thanks !! --CrazyMomo 23:32, 19 July 2007 (UTC)

  • Ok, I have checked and corrected your upload. / Fred J 08:07, 23 July 2007 (UTC)

User:WarX and the restoration of Image:Svalbard Flag.svg

I deleted this image following Commons:Deletion requests/Image:Svalbard Flag.svg. Two days later WarX restored it with the comment "Do not cut heads when you have a headache!!!". [62]

I have been discussing it with him on his user talk page (and mine), but it appears he doesn't care about the copyright issue. He is arbitrary circumventing a deletion process that was open for 4 months. I think this is a really bad way for an administrator to behave. Also, this happened in March, but he didn't tell me anything, I only found out about it today when being informed about it by some other user.

Fred J 22:42, 20 July 2007 (UTC)

Re-deleted it per consensus at Commons:Deletion requests/Image:Svalbard Flag.svg. If anyone disagrees with that consensus, they need to follow the proper procedures and explain their reason for disagreeing (and by explain, I mean something more relevant than the undeletion edit comment) at COM:UR. In this particular case, what they need to address is why this is not a copyright violation. —LX (talk, contribs) 08:28, 21 July 2007 (UTC)
Image was deleted when Commons Delinker was not working, so I decided to undelete it, cause it broken at least pl.wiki article (and probably more). Deleting images when they are directly mentioned in article body (not only in image caption) without any contact with community is very-very bad idea. --WarX 09:48, 21 July 2007 (UTC)
Commons Delinker wasn't working because the tools server was down, meaning the semi-manual method of using CheckUsage wasn't working either. Are you suggesting we should not delete any copyright violations during such times unless we want to manually check over 700 projects completely manually?
What you should have done if you were concerned about the appearance of articles linking to the image, of course, is to delink the image yourself. Maintaining Wikipedia articles is not the responsibility of Commons editors. If it were, we couldn't delete copyright violations without reading the entire body of all of the articles in any of over 250 languages which may link to them.
But that's all beside the point. The point is, it was done with contact with the community at Commons:Deletion requests/Image:Svalbard Flag.svg, where anyone had the opportunity to object to the deletion request for over three months. It was your undeletion which went against the consensus of this debate which was done without contact with the community. I'd like to remind you that when you became an administrator, you agreed to "respect consensus of the Commons' users." —LX (talk, contribs) 10:36, 21 July 2007 (UTC)

Deletion request

Please, delete Image:Chloroxyrrhepes virescens,jpg.JPG. I did not notice the typo in time. I have already uploaded the same image under the correct name. Thanks. ChriKo 20:51, 22 July 2007 (UTC)

  • ✓ Done Please tag images like this as {{badname}} for next time. Thanks --Digon3 talk 01:22, 23 July 2007 (UTC)

Image:ElixirVermelhoMyldon12.gif

Hello.

I just uploaded that image. It's from an old book, possibly 18th century or earlier, from an unknown author (anonymous, that is). Siebrand 13:21, 23 July 2007 (UTC) left a note stating there is a problem with it, but I can't figure out which problem is it, so that I could correct it. Siebrand is out, and so is who should replace him/her. Can you give me an hint on what's going on, so that I correct the problem? Xyzt1234 17:24, 23 July 2007 (UTC)

Oh-oh. We might have been editing at the same time, as I just uploaded it twice in an attempt to edit it's information. At any rate, I did add the copyright as Public Domain these times, but also added source (Mylius version of Pretiosissimum Donum Dei), author (Mylius) and date (1628 if I'm still right) information to it, yet the changes don't show up, except for Public Domain. Xyzt1234 18:13, 23 July 2007 (UTC)

User:Javier Donoso

User:Javier Donoso (Talk) has re-uploaded a copyvio at Image:Renée Zellweger.jpg. This is as well as w:Image:Renée Zellweger.jpg.

The talk page shows this is not the first such incident. William Avery 12:25, 23 July 2007 (UTC)

Deleted. —LX (talk, contribs) 19:19, 23 July 2007 (UTC)

Category:Coats of arms of Austria in History

Multiple categories were created with the format "Coats of arms of X in History". IMO this is not correct English, basically that category collects historical coat of arms of that region or country. Any suggestions on a rename? thank you. Gryffindor 08:53, 24 July 2007 (UTC)

It's also incorrect capitalisation (as far as I know, history has not been promoted to a proper noun). If the contents are intended to be historical coats of arms, I unimaginatively suggest Category:Historical coats of arms of X. —LX (talk, contribs) 18:24, 24 July 2007 (UTC)

Tabs at top of Special:Contributions for IP users are interpreted as if the user name was "Talk" rather than the IP Address.

Looking at http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/127.0.0.1 (for example), the "gallery" link is to http://tools.wikimedia.de/~daniel/WikiSense/Gallery.php?wikifam=commons.wikimedia.org&img_user_text=Talk instead of http://tools.wikimedia.de/~daniel/WikiSense/Gallery.php?wikifam=commons.wikimedia.org&img_user_text=127.0.0.1 , the "orphans" link is to http://tools.wikimedia.de/~daniel/WikiSense/OrphanImages.php?wiki=commons.wikimedia.org&img_user_text=Talk instead of http://tools.wikimedia.de/~daniel/WikiSense/OrphanImages.php?wiki=commons.wikimedia.org&img_user_text=127.0.0.1 , and the "untagged" link is to http://tools.wikimedia.de/~daniel/WikiSense/UntaggedImages.php?wiki=commons.wikimedia.org&img_user_text=Talk instead of http://tools.wikimedia.de/~daniel/WikiSense/UntaggedImages.php?wiki=commons.wikimedia.org&img_user_text=127.0.0.1 .

I was directed here by the resolution "These tabs are added by custom JavaScript that has nothing to do with us. Talk to the Commons admins who maintain those scripts."

The bug's URL is 10657 Tabs at top of Special:Contributions for IP users are interpreted as if the user name was "Talk" rather than the IP Address.

Please fix this bug. Thanks!   — Jeff G. (talk|contribs) 18:02, 24 July 2007 (UTC)

"Copyrighted Package"

See Commons:Village_pump#"Copyrighted_Package"... we have a new user who has tagged a lot of images for speedy. I'd ask that we not actually delete these until it's clear what the right thing to do. Please participate in the VP discussion, I think that's the best place to sort out what to do. Thanks. ++Lar: t/c 10:47, 25 July 2007 (UTC)

OsamaKBOT

http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/OsamaKBOT

This bot removes “empty fields” from the information template, so that we get fancy things like {{DATE}} instead and it’s harder to add information without the name of the special field. All in all: useless. What do you think? I blocked him for 30 minutes to bring it up here. --Polarlys 17:01, 28 July 2007 (UTC)

If the empty parameters are omitted, then we have raw template code. So yes, it is useless, and I will be in the process of reverting. (→O - RLY?) 17:05, 28 July 2007 (UTC)
Commons:Bots/Requests for flags/OsamaKBOT 2. Adding „own work“ is a great idea as well. --Polarlys 17:17, 28 July 2007 (UTC)

User:Pogrebnoj-Alexandroff

An IP added templates for speedydeletion to a lot of uploads by User:Pogrebnoj-Alexandroff (http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/216.194.61.143). He is blocked, I don’t know the situation here (blocked because of uploading unfree images after warnings). --Polarlys 10:38, 28 July 2007 (UTC)

I noticed it & was unsure. For what it's worth it is not the IP associated with the user. Having said that much of the user's contributions that remain look very questionable to me but I am not a licensing expert at all. --Herby talk thyme 10:58, 28 July 2007 (UTC)
The IP also tagged User talk:Pogrebnoj-Alexandroff for speedy deletion as a copyright violation, which was clearly incorrect. Even if the user is the legitimate copyright holder (and most or all of his uploads appear to be taken with the same camera, a Panasonic Lumix DMC-FZ50, so this doesn't seem too unlikely–most of the user's copyright violations were caused by taking pictures of non-free works), I am still a bit concerned about the uploader's assertion that his uploads may not be printed or used for other projects. Of course, the free licenses which he has issued are irrevocable, but if statements which contradict those licenses are made in the course of uploading the content, those licenses probably hold little value. —LX (talk, contribs) 11:45, 28 July 2007 (UTC)
Hum - ok, one of the ones I looked at was Image:Almaty zoo hipo.jpg which has no extended data and it was the same for a couple of others - I didn't go through all of them. The licensing issues is another matter again - if they were valid in the first place --Herby talk thyme 11:52, 28 July 2007 (UTC)
I've tried to find the metadata for some of the images, and I couldn't find any. It is possible that these are copyrighted and the user uploaded these as copyvios. (→O - RLY?) 15:40, 28 July 2007 (UTC)
Please also see Commons:Requests for checkuser/Case/Pogrebnoj-Alexandroff. Thanks!   — Jeff G. (talk|contribs) 21:37, 29 July 2007 (UTC)

two images need to be deleted ASAP

Image:Penis 14 year old boy.JPG and Image:Penis 14 year old boy withdrawn foreskin.JPG are said to be of a 14 year old boy. These two images fall under the category childporn and should be deleted ASAP. --Denniss 13:40, 29 July 2007 (UTC)

✓ Done and thanks for bringing them to our attention --Herby talk thyme 13:42, 29 July 2007 (UTC)

Removal of Deletion-template -- request Page Protection

Hi,

The creator of this category Category:Walloon Region -- User:juiced lemon keeps reverting and removing the Delete template with the link to the discussion [63]. The template is placed correctly, a clear link to the central discussion is provided (note that two completely analogous pages are concerned), a rationale is provided. Can this page be locked so the template is kept until the delete debate is closed?

Regards --Teeceematiek 19:10, 31 July 2007 (UTC)

Not protected but I have warned the user that this sort of action is unacceptable & I will consider a block if it is removed again --Herby talk thyme 07:13, 1 August 2007 (UTC)
Ok - for those who want it the background is that another category was added to a deletion discussion 24 hours after the discussion had started without consensus - I see that as wrong and have removed it with suggestions on how to proceeded - see my comments here. I will watch the proceedings with interest. Please bear in mind Commons has to be a collaborative project to work and I will do all I can to ensure that happens - thanks --Herby talk thyme 08:14, 1 August 2007 (UTC)

Image:Order Zasługi RP.jpg and Image:Order Zaslugi RP.jpg

This image was deleted as a copyvio (Commons:Deletion_requests/Decorations_by_User:Andros64). The uploader restored it. --Polarlys 11:46, 1 August 2007 (UTC)

Re-deleted. Uploader instructed to use COM:UR and cautioned not to overrule the consensus of the deletion discussion. —LX (talk, contribs) 20:27, 1 August 2007 (UTC)
It’s as always our fault again (see the discussion), spicked with some accusations. --Polarlys 12:54, 2 August 2007 (UTC)
My remarks were addresed to an activity of one, particular person in this case ( guess -who?) , not to the whole community :) So we, the king :)) . Keep smiling and easy Polarlys. Big Brother is watching you too. :))) (George Orwell , not myself)
Best regards Andros64 13:20, 2 August 2007 (UTC)
You may find that remaining civil gets you better results than other methods of persuasion, thanks --Herby talk thyme 13:25, 2 August 2007 (UTC)
Agreed with Herby. The entries on-wiki may need to be protected so that they cannot be re-uploaded again, if you are going to re-upload. If you really think these aren't copyvios, state your case at undeletion requests, not here. Thanks, (→O - RLY?) 07:10, 3 August 2007 (UTC)

Virus

I think I've found a virus in an image! Help! It's in Image:Immagine quadripolo 01.sxd. 79.73.237.242 12:18, 30 July 2007 (UTC)

What makes you think this file contains malicious code? My recently updated antivirus software scanned it without detecting anything. Jastrow (Λέγετε) 12:54, 30 July 2007 (UTC)
Possibly the "Warning: This file may contain malicious code, by executing it your system may be compromised" which someone thought it'd be a good idea to slap on every file of some certain mimetypes. Of course, if you're running on an insecure setup, you could get a virus even from a jpeg if it manages to induce a buffer overflow, so I'm not sure what the purpose of the warning is. It's not the first time I've seen someone interpreting this text as "This file probably contains a virus." —LX (talk, contribs) 13:24, 30 July 2007 (UTC)
This warning was added by IP:79.73.237.242 him/herself. SXD files are produced by OpenOffice.org Draw; they're not nearly as common as Office filetypes, maybe that's what frightened the anon indeed. Jastrow (Λέγετε) 13:35, 30 July 2007 (UTC)
I didn't add the "malicious code" warning! i saw it, it alarmed me, i posted to here and the other administrators board. Just a good faith user who was alarmed by something that i thought looked like a virus 79.73.237.242 13:50, 30 July 2007 (UTC)
Sorry, I misread the file history *and* LX's message. However, you did delete the licence tag from the description page. Why? Jastrow (Λέγετε) 14:11, 30 July 2007 (UTC)
Another version of this image (without the overly zealous warning, apparently hardcoded) is Image:Immagine quadripolo 01.jpeg.   — Jeff G. (talk|contribs) 17:00, 31 July 2007 (UTC)
The text comes from MediaWiki:Mediawarning. Should we change it? If so, what should we change it to? —LX (talk, contribs) 20:18, 31 July 2007 (UTC)
How about the following?   — Jeff G. (talk|contribs) 21:23, 2 August 2007 (UTC)

Warning: This file may contain malicious code, by executing it your system may be compromised. This warning is based solely on the extension or mimetype.

I object to the run-on sentence in the original and the modified version. I'm not sure that warnings of this sort are helpful. Either they scare people into not opening any files or people ignore them. In the former case, the files in question might as well be deleted. In the latter case, the warning is useless. It might be better to request that people note any problems on the file talk page. I suggest the following. Walter Siegmund (talk) 02:45, 3 August 2007 (UTC)

Warning: Files with the extension or mimetype of this one may contain malicious code. Though rare, executing such files may compromise your operating system. Please note any apparent problems on the file talk page.

I suggest the following modification to yours.   — Jeff G. (talk|contribs) 11:01, 3 August 2007 (UTC)

Warning: Files with this extension or mimetype are capable of containing malicious code. Though the occurrence of this problem is very rare, execution of such files could compromise your system. Please note any apparent problems on the file talk page.

Anything is an imrovement over the existing text. How about we point users to COM:ANB instead, though? Notices on image talk pages are more likely to be overlooked, and if we ever were to distribute malicious code, fixing it should be a top priority. —LX (talk, contribs) 14:52, 3 August 2007 (UTC)
Sure, but spelling it out is even better.   — Jeff G. (talk|contribs) 17:26, 4 August 2007 (UTC)

Warning: Files with this extension or mimetype are capable of containing malicious code. Though the occurrence of this problem is very rare, execution of such files could compromise your system. Please note any apparent problems on Commons:Administrators' noticeboard.

Change of userid

Hi!

I want to change my id "RomanNose" to "rosp" if it's possible, as I've done at the Swedish wiki I hope this is the right place to ask for it

Thanks in advance --RomanNose 07:16, 2 August 2007 (UTC)

Hej Rosp! Have a look at Commons:Changing username. —LX (talk, contribs) 17:09, 2 August 2007 (UTC)
Hej själv! Thankx a lot --RomanNose 19:44, 2 August 2007 (UTC)
This was sorted. ++Lar: t/c 23:29, 4 August 2007 (UTC)

Move image request Image:LocationSouthAmerica2.png to Image:LocationSouthAmerica.png (user account too new)

I have uploaded an edited version of Image:LocationSouthAmerica.png as Image:LocationSouthAmerica2.png. The current version includes Panama as part of South America which, according to Xpeditions Atlas and various other sources including the World Factbook's own map of South America, is in fact part of North America. I simply downloaded and edited this file myself to exclude Panama from the South America shading. --Snoopen82 08:14, 14 August 2007 (UTC)

This sounds like a reasonable request. Neither https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/reference_maps/south_america.html nor https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/reference_maps/pdf/south_america.pdf (the same file that is in https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/download/download-2007/south_america.zip) is specific about where the border between South America and North America lies, while w:Panama says Panama "is the southernmost country of Central America" and "a transcontinental nation which connects North and South America." Image:LocationSouthAmerica.png is used on at least 1330 pages in 123 projects per CheckUsage. I uploaded the replacement image to Image:LocationSouthAmerica.png and marked Image:LocationSouthAmerica2.png as a duplicate.   — Jeff G. (talk|contribs) 18:09, 16 August 2007 (UTC)
Retrieved from "http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Administrators%27_noticeboard/Archives/Attention_3"