From Wikimedia Commons, the free media repository

This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

Contents 1 Requested move 2 Logo usage 3 Commons:Stamps/Public_domain#Poland 4 changing upload link for et 5 Mislicensing of images by Forest & Kim Starr 6 Clothing copyvios 7 Rohkmann (talk · contributions) 8 Georgeborg (talk · contributions) 9 Flickr images needing human review 10 File:Flag of the Republic of China.svg color is wrong 11 Category:PD Afghan 12 File:Hamid Karzai with American Special Forces.PNG 13 Image licensing advice 14 HighBeam Research browser hijack from Wikipedia pages? 15 en.wikipedia admin needed 16 Muhammad (SAW) 17 Señor Kruzkin (talk · contributions) 18 Johan Lantz (talk · contributions) 19 Re-use of .jpg files 20 Jbsong's uploads 21 State Religions SVG is incorrect 22 BoomBoomPow (talk · contributions) 23 SUPERSEDING IS NOT ALLOWED 24 Nima Farid (talk • contribs • count) 25 Template loops in transcluded Info Pages 26 Possible copyright violations 27 Attention needed at File:Jeffrey Earl Habay.jpg 28 Blatant copyright infringement/Incumplimiento de copyright evidente 29 half closed deletion request 30 Some bug with the "my preferences" page 31 Possible Copyright Violation in File:Atlantis City wall.jpg 32 Deletions requests... 33 Another Possible Copyright Violation with [Robert Sarmast] article 34 Suspected sock puppets abusing wp and commons 35 Frank15 (talk · contributions) 36 Ricardoaguilarcubillos (talk · contributions) 37 Replacement of content 38 Special:Contributions/Legrain files 39 File:Yohanna.jpg 40 Backlog 41 File:Foto Kikillo FS Zamora - Alberto Peña 2009.jpg 42 Restricting library of pics 43 Incorrect deletion of photo in very timely en:Neda Agha-Soltan article 44 Special:Contributions/78.49.147.105 45 Copyrighted Image (Yohanna Image.jpg) 46 Need an image moved/renamed if possible, else deleted 47 CommonsDelinker is deleting images from en Wikipedia which have not been deleted 48 Files without sorce since May 49 File:H1N1 North America Map.svg 50 Kropki (gra) 51 Directory name's side effect 52 3 files which may require admin speedy deletion for legal reasons 53 Last archiving 53.1 Edit history undeletion 53.2 Commons:Deletion_requests/2009/07/02 53.3 Please change filename 53.4 Please delete this version... 53.5 Undiscussed move reverse

Requested move

Could an admin please move File:Wikimedia UK AGM.jpg to File:Steve Virgin - uploaded to the wrong place. Thanks! AndrewRT (talk) 00:35, 4 May 2009 (UTC)

Not done Regretably moving images is not possible on Commons :( see bugzilla:15842#8 :(( Please upload it under the correct name or place {{rename|targetname.jpg}} on the images page and a bot will do the reupload. --Martin H. (talk) 01:49, 4 May 2009 (UTC)

I've added the template and it still needs an admin to validate it before the bot does the move. Could someone action this please? Thanks AndrewRT (talk) 22:32, 12 May 2009 (UTC)

Logo usage

I believe File:LaurahostsSR.JPG should be speedy deleted because of the numerous FOX News logos and personality rights issues. Thoughts? Opinions? Guidelines? Rules? - ALLST✰R▼^echo _{wuz here @} 05:19, 10 May 2009 (UTC)

logo inclusion is incidental and we don't normaly delete over personality rights. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Geni (talk • contribs) 10:57, 2009 May 10 (UTC)

Please consider Commons:De minimis. --AFBorchert (talk) 11:41, 10 May 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for the clarification.. although I don't believe Commons:De minimis applies here since this isn't "copying of such a trivial nature", the logos are everywhere. Anyway, thanks for the input. - ALLST✰R▼^echo _{wuz here @} 15:30, 10 May 2009 (UTC)

I disagree, DM does apply, as if you took the logos out the image would be just as useful. We often have images where you could crop one bit and get a copyrighted image out of it. -mattbuck (Talk) 16:14, 10 May 2009 (UTC)

That said, in this particular case we could crop quite a few of those logos out without losing anything of the actual subject except Matt Sanchez's left knee. —Ilmari Karonen (talk) 19:24, 12 May 2009 (UTC)

Commons:Stamps/Public_domain#Poland

There is a little bit of edit war about this section. Several Polish admins deleted most of Category:Stamps of Poland without hardly any discussion or links to legal reasons, which is discussed at Commons_talk:Stamps/Public_domain#Polish stamps are copyrighted. I do not like the way it was done or are convinced that it was necessary but until this issue is settled Commons:Stamps/Public_domain#Poland section should be kept out of the document. --Jarekt (talk) 17:36, 12 May 2009 (UTC)

Perhaps we should just leave it there but mark it as disputed, with a link to the discussion? —Ilmari Karonen (talk) 19:02, 12 May 2009 (UTC)

changing upload link for et

hi, how can I change the upload link in Estonian interface. When estonian language is selected, it points to Special:Upload, but it should point to Commons:Upload/et. --WikedKentaur (talk) 13:15, 28 April 2009 (UTC)

•  Done. It will take about 24 hours until the change appears. Lupo 10:12, 21 May 2009 (UTC)

Mislicensing of images by Forest & Kim Starr

There are about 60031 photos taken by Forest & Kim Starr, which are uploaded to Commons.[1] They are mostly hosted by US Geological Survey. The photos, here, are licensed as {{PD-USGov-USGS}}, {{PD-author}}, {{cc-by-sa-3.0}}, or such. These licenses are wrong. The Starrs are not employees of the USGS, and they have licensed their photos under {{cc-by-3.0}}.[2] Can an admin set up a bot to correct the licenses of the Starr photos here? Thank you. Jappalang (talk) 00:13, 9 May 2009 (UTC)

I uploaded all Forest & Kim Starr images a couple of months ago and tagged all current images as dupes. You can find all my uploads at User:Multichill/Starr. Looks like some of the images in the search are low resolution dupes of the images I uploaded. Multichill (talk) 15:32, 14 May 2009 (UTC)

Clothing copyvios

An admin please see the contributions of Mangarefa (talk · contributions) and delete all of those copyvios from comboutique.com. - ALLST✰R▼^echo _{wuz here @} 19:50, 15 May 2009 (UTC)

 Done — Mike.lifeguard 00:55, 21 May 2009 (UTC)

Rohkmann (talk · contributions)

Continues to upload copyvios after warnings. feydey ^(talk) 09:12, 17 May 2009 (UTC)

•  Done. The last remaining image by the uploader discovered to be yet another copyviol via tineye and has been deleted, user blocked. -- Infrogmation (talk) 12:37, 21 May 2009 (UTC)

Georgeborg (talk · contributions)

All uploads, except one photo, are copyright violations. feydey ^(talk) 09:53, 17 May 2009 (UTC)

Someone else handled it, I guess  — Mike.lifeguard 00:55, 21 May 2009 (UTC)

Flickr images needing human review

Moved from AN/UP

I say...are there any trusted users or Admins who might want to tackle this category here ? There's 70+ images waiting to be reviewed. I must confess I have 1 image here too. I hope someone[s] can mark them. Regards, --Leoboudv (talk) 04:43, 18 May 2009 (UTC)

I cleared about 40 of them, if nobody else gets to the rest by tomorrow I'll finish them then. -- Editor at Large • talk 04:00, 21 May 2009 (UTC)

File:Flag of the Republic of China.svg color is wrong

The dispute on the color of File:Flag of the Republic of China.svg has been going on for long time, could any admin offer some help, please? Arilang ^talk 00:31, 22 May 2009 (UTC)

This seems to relate to a discussion at File talk:Flag of the Republic of China.svg. I don't think this needs any admin intervention, as admins here do not have the role of adjudicating on content disputes. The best solution is for anyone who wants different colours to be used to upload a new differently-named version of the flag. Then, it is up to the local wiki editors which of the various versions they wish to make use of. Please have a look also at COM:NPOV which sets out our approach to this sort of issue. It specifically mentions flag colours (this has happened before). I hope that helps. --MichaelMaggs (talk) 12:06, 22 May 2009 (UTC)

Thanks user MichaelMaggs. Arilang ^talk 13:43, 22 May 2009 (UTC)

On further thought, there seems to be a bit of a communication gap between me and admin Zscout370, who is the creator of File:Flag of the Republic of China.svg and the file in under full protection. Is it possible to move it into semi-protection instead?22:51, 23 May 2009 (UTC)

Category:PD Afghan

Please have a look at this category, which was created by User:Geo Swan. They or someone is adding a weird license (Template:PD-Afghanistan), created by User:Sherurcij, to images of men from Middle East that are NOT Afghans and NOT from Afghanistan. I don't understand how does Afghanistan license cover photos of Arab men from other countries. None of the photos were published in Afghan media. The makers, producers, publishers of 20 photos in the category are NON-Afghans and NOT from Afghanistan. Only the 9 paintings are made by Afghans in Afghanistan and are published in that country so those are safe. Sherurcij and Geo Swan uploaded the files of Arab men to Commons. Geo Swan reverted my edits and left an argument on the talk pages.[3] I don't understand what exactly he is saying, I decided to bring the dispute here hoping for someone to help settle this.--Executioner (talk) 19:35, 23 May 2009 (UTC)

File:Hamid Karzai with American Special Forces.PNG

I high-lighted Hamid Karzai in this photo [4] and updated the description page to provide more accurate information. The uploader, User:Sherurcij, is reverting my work so what should I do? I know if I revert back to my version he will start edit-war because I know him from past incidents and conversations. [5] I'm not interested in edit-wars with anyone, I have more important things in life than this. I believe high-lighting Hamid Karzai from the rest of the crowd is useful to quickly identify him. This photo is displayed for readers of the world at w:Hamid Karzai#Former Taliban supporter. I'll appreciate it if somebody helps me out. Thanks!--Executioner (talk) 00:44, 25 May 2009 (UTC)

As this "highlighting" results in a "sort of" different image, it may be better to put the highlighted version in a separate file (such as File:Hamid Karzai (highlighted) with American Special Forces.png). --Túrelio (talk) 06:25, 25 May 2009 (UTC)

Indeed, updates of images with retouched versions require a wide consensus including that of the original uploader. In this particular case, the original image has a value in itself and while the update you would like to make is in itself useful, this does not justify to make the original image unaccessible. Please proceed, as already suggested by Túrelio, by uploading your version with a new filename. You can use this tool to upload your variant and to get your new image correctly linked to the original image as derived work. Regards, AFBorchert (talk) 10:00, 25 May 2009 (UTC)

I did it, thanks.--Executioner (talk) 19:29, 26 May 2009 (UTC)

Image licensing advice

I have a query about the licening status of cover image from the web of the IET/IEE's publiation for Code of Practice For In-service Inspection and Testing of Eletrical Equipment that I would like to add to wikimedia ommons and then eventually wikipedia/portable appliance testing there is currently mentioned in the section training that this is the soure publiation on which knowledge is currently tested via the awarding body exam City and Guilds in ollaboration with the eletrical contracting association and other intetested bodies and approved by the Qualifiations and Curriculum Authority as practically a success in the exam can be achieved by knowlege of the use of this source publication and the book can be taken into the exam as it is an open book examination and a computer based Global on-line assessmrnt (Gola)it seems pertinent that clear referance is made to the exact publication. I can only feel that IET/IEE would be happy to have this image added I personally have no direct connection to IET/IEE but have taught the course I would like to develop this part over a period of time to aid those seekingimformation on this area of the eletrical industry but I am a new contributer and thus finding by way around and over the obstacles and hurdles that prevent additions as much as an answer to this question I needto try to enter the wikipedia mind set which I realise might take sometime and effort. I can only say that for myself some of the things I would like to add and the corrections I would want to make reflect the things that I know interested parties would want to know and inaccuracies that are currently misleading they would want to have set right

I thank you for your attention

Dirk Corrs

Dirkcorrs (talk) 10:31, 30 May 2009 (UTC)

HighBeam Research browser hijack from Wikipedia pages?

When I use English Wikipedia to search for the Wikipedia page of something I want to look up (using the Firefox browser, I currently have version 3.0.10), AND when my search term does not return directly a relevant Wikipedia article but rather the standard "No article title matches" page, with the list of "Showing below results" below . . .

Then quite often, after a few seconds and quite against my will, my browser-page is transformed into a new, detailed page, from HighBeam Research, listing my search-term and some preliminary results to consider, with links up above inviting me to click through to sign up for the "free trial" of HighBeam's services, which apparently sooner or later cost money to use.

This new browser-page is all-the-more strange in that 1) It wipes out any other tabs I had open, so that the browser is transformed into one single page only showing the HighBeam Research page, and 2) That new one single page does not have what I usually keep at the top when using Firefox, namely the navigation toolbar together with the URL-box. It's just a browser page with that usual blue margin ("title bar"?) at the top of a normal Windows-based window. Very bizarre.

This is all very unwelcome. I have no interest in having anything to do with HighBeam Research; I resent this process taking me away from the Wikipedia pages, and especially resent it wiping out the other tabs I might have open, which makes me have to close this new browser-window and re-start Firefox (which thankfully will bring back my other tabs; I quickly click on the tab showing the Wikipedia page to close it, lest it should once again transition over to the HighBeam Research page).

My question by this point should be evident: Is this all intentional, involving perhaps some arrangement Wikipedia has made with HighBeam Research to automatically take Wikipedia users over to their page when those users have not been able to enter search terms that yield an exact Wikipedia page? Or does this have nothing to do directly with Wikipedia, i.e. is my browser being hijacked during these instances, so that I need to check my computer again and probably clean it up and/or re-install the OS?

Thanks,

Maonl (talk) 08:53, 31 May 2009 (UTC)MAO

This is likely to be something on your computer. I don't get this. --MichaelMaggs (talk) 09:01, 31 May 2009 (UTC)

Sounds like someone has used you computer and gone to a site or downloaded something that has installed a high jacking tool. This tool (CWShredder) which can remove some high jackers but there is another program called HijackThis (a safe tool to remove high jackers but this tool is more for those with very good computer knowledge). Bidgee (talk) 10:33, 31 May 2009 (UTC)

en.wikipedia admin needed

Yesterday I closed down two sockpuppets accounts User:StevenLSears and User:Con2004. They are sockpuppets of the old case User:Lucy Xena. They washed Flickr the following way:

• Upload to Flickr March 30, Upload to wp March 30, Upload to Commons March 30.

Thats a very complicated process, but its true. Evidence is easy to find in several uploadlogs of Special:DeletedContributions/StevenLSears, the images are not on Commons for the first time. I removed all from this Flickr account from Commons, the problem was, that the Flickr information was not transfered to Commons, so it was hard to find them - (en.)Wikipedia administrators are not proper checking image transfers however. I doublechecked all flickrwashed images on Wikipedia for duplicates, see this external linksearch. The uploads are listed by date, the latest are not from the corresponding Wikipedia User w:en:User:LL290368 but from someone else, i cant proof involvement here, so I assume accident. Some 30 images are uploaded by LL290368 always the same day like the Flickr upload. Some of them can be identified copyright violations, i did this work for w:en:File:Tisha Campbell-Martin.jpg and w:en:File:Live From Wishes to Eternity.jpg for example. All Uploads from this Flickr account should be deleted mmediately, the account w:en:User:LL290368 should be closed. I also requested at w:en:Wikipedia:Media copyright questions, thats the wrong place but I dont know how to do correctly. --Martin H. (talk) 10:28, 31 May 2009 (UTC)

• Had a look but not a lot of time. It's being dealt with now at w:WP:AN#Copyvio problems. Thanks for the heads up. --SB_Johnny ^talk 12:29, 31 May 2009 (UTC)
• I've deleted all of the uploads of w:en:User:LL290368 that were linked to that Flickr account. I've also revoked the editing privileges of that account. The English Wikipedia has seen this persistent copyright violator, too. Xe has been blocked under several accounts for copyright violation, long since. (We blocked w:en:User:StevenLSears in July 2008, w:en:User:Lawless fan in February 2008, and w:en:User:Lykus xena in November 2007, for examples.) Feel free to let me know if there are any other copyright violations in this case that should be deleted from the English Wikipedia. Uncle G (talk) 12:35, 31 May 2009 (UTC)

Muhammad (SAW)

I would just like to inform wikipedia that depictions of the Prophet Muhammad (SAW) is offensive to muslims and i hope that in the interest of religious freedom and courtesy you will remove all depictions as they do not help with anything, They serve only to insult and degrade the religion of Islam. Please do the right thing both religiously and morally and remove it. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Lynkedza (talk • contribs) 16:23, 31 May 2009 (UTC)

Please familiarise yourself with the Commons:Project scope. Adambro (talk) 15:57, 31 May 2009 (UTC)

Señor Kruzkin (talk · contributions)

Sock of well known vandal on Simple English Wikipedia. w:simple:User:Mr. Kruzkin, w:simple:User:Mr. Kruzkin 2, w:simple:User:Mrs. Kruzkin, w:simple:User:Mr. Kruzkin 3, w:simple:User:Mr. Kruzkin 4, w:simple:User:Mr. Kruzkin 5. EhJJ (talk) 13:10, 28 May 2009 (UTC)

It's clear that this editor is only here to cause trouble to the community rather then actively participate. The editor has uploaded copyrighted images more then one (Such as File:AndersonJulio.jpg) but also remove tags without addressing the issues (Also adding personal attacks within the edit summary) and also removed this very section. I'm willing to block this editor for indefinitely but I'm interested in what other views the other Admin's have. Bidgee (talk) 04:02, 31 May 2009 (UTC)

I'd have to agree as I'm not seeing any constructive participation. I did leave a warning for the user a short time ago (see here). I haven't looked into the abuse on other projects to ensure the validity of the complaint here however I did notice that the account used here on commons was blocked on the Spanish Wikipedia. - Rjd0060 (talk) 04:15, 31 May 2009 (UTC)

I've indef blocked after they reuploaded the File:AlGoreScreaming.jpg image which was used as an attack image here and on other Wiki's (Looking at this history of the other Wiki listed above as well as the Spanish Wiki) also the file is copyrighted. Bidgee (talk) 21:08, 31 May 2009 (UTC)

Johan Lantz (talk · contributions)

 Done Uploading copyrighted book covers. feydey ^(talk) 18:26, 1 June 2009 (UTC)

Sorted. -mattbuck (Talk) 18:35, 1 June 2009 (UTC)

Re-use of .jpg files

I see a few files that are listed as "free" or "public domain" on the Wikimedia Commons site. Can you use these photos as part of promotional calendar that we are putting together for our clients? These photos would be printed on the physical pocket calendars. Please advise ASAP. Thank you.

Becky Winzentsen, RP Office Manager

Hi Becky. It depends on the exact licence - public domain you can use without any kind of restriction, other licences may require you attribute the author, state the licence terms of the image, or various other things. Every image should have a licence tag with exact terms and conditions stated. However, all commons images can be used for any purpose, without informing or financially compensating the copyright holder. -mattbuck (Talk) 18:34, 1 June 2009 (UTC)

"public domain you can use without any kind of restriction" - well, that is only correct in regard to copyright. If a public domain image shows a single identifiable living person, you still have to obey the personality rights. --Túrelio (talk) 12:58, 6 June 2009 (UTC)

Jbsong's uploads

 Done

Three uploads, questionable copyright status. --CopperKettle (talk) 12:18, 6 June 2009 (UTC) See here: Jbsong (talk · contributions)

Images deleted. For your future ref, {{dispited}} doesn't do much on commons, just mark it with npd instead. ---mattbuck (Talk) 12:37, 6 June 2009 (UTC)

I would like to add an image I found for "Nick Calathes" in Wikipedia and change image for "Yohanna"

State Religions SVG is incorrect

Not sure if this is the correct place for me to post. The file 'File:State_Religions.svg' is incorrect as it shows Scotland, Wales & Northern Ireland as having a State Religion. These do not have a State Religion, only England. The SVG is based on 'State Religions.png', which is correct.

I've created a new version, 'File:State_Religions_new.svg', which is correct. Could someone with the authority update the orginal. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Stephen P Simpson (talk • contribs) 14:27, 12 December 2008 (UTC)

 Done, long time ago by someone else. --Martin H. (talk) 12:57, 17 June 2009 (UTC)

BoomBoomPow (talk · contributions)

All uploads to date have either been deleted as copyvios or are tagged as copyvios. Has been warned, but continues to upload since the warning.

Note that I believe this is the commons account of an editor who is indefinitely blocked on en.wiki yet continues to operate sock puppet accounts; I have little confidence that a block will at commons will permanently stop this editor, but it may make tackling its behaviour easier.

Cheers, This flag once was red^propaganda_deeds 18:23, 21 May 2009 (UTC)

 Done - no obvious puppets, thanks --Herby ^{talk thyme} 09:49, 25 May 2009 (UTC)

It looks to me like YesYesYesJAIHO (talk · contributions) is a new sock of BoomBoomPaw - uploads are similar topics, one's already been deleted as a copyvio, I suspect the other upload is also a copyvio but haven't had time to look for it yet, and the uploaded images are being user by socks of the en.wiki user "Nimbley6" - as BoomBoomPaw's uploads were previously. Cheers, This flag once was red^propaganda_deeds 17:34, 31 May 2009 (UTC)

...and BoyzDaQuerchoclate (talk · contributions), based on similar uploads (album and single covers) and the poor spelling at Category:The Macdoanld Brothers. I'm not sure why the sock puppeteer has created a new username; YesYesYesJAIHO (talk · contributions) hasn't been blocked. Cheers, This flag once was red^propaganda_deeds 12:21, 17 June 2009 (UTC)

SUPERSEDING IS NOT ALLOWED

(all caps, i know, this is like the third time i post it here and some people still don't seem to get it)
I'm getting tired of admins not getting the fact that superseding is not allowed. Please stop doing this. Multichill (talk) 08:47, 29 May 2009 (UTC)

Hum, in some cases, superseded images can be deleted I believe (like an unused, low-quality photograph superseded by a similar photograph of the exact same thing, after a decision taken in regular DR). What you point out is superseded images used as source for other images, or where the superseding version is in another format? Also, your title is misleading, it is encouraged, I think, to "supersede" an existing raster with a good quality vector image, that's the deletion which is not allowed, right? --Eusebius (talk) 08:55, 29 May 2009 (UTC)

I believe Multichill is talking about the deletions, not the superseding itself. Of course it's nice to do a vector version of a raster and use that on Wikimedia projects, we shouldn't however delete the raster version because it is notoriously hard for many reusers to use a vector image (copy-paste into a Word document doesn't work, for example). Multichill, here's something for you, relax :). Patrícia ^msg 09:08, 29 May 2009 (UTC)

Yes. I'm talking about the speedy deletions. Take for example File:Wappen Gutenswegen.jpg or File:Wappen burg.jpg. Multichill (talk) 09:11, 29 May 2009 (UTC)

Indeed, a regular deletion process is required for superseded images. There are many non-trivial cases in this area which make a discussion necessary. --AFBorchert (talk) 10:07, 29 May 2009 (UTC)

It seems really strange to me to not delete a manifestly inferior version of a bitmap after a new version is uploaded, especially considering the general slowness of our deletion process. Nevertheless I'll try to stick to this... Dcoetzee (talk) 20:49, 22 June 2009 (UTC)

In response to a thread at AN requesting that more admins step up and do their share of drudgery (now at Commons:Administrators' noticeboard/Archive 14#Admins), I started servicing {{badname}} requests. Not {{superseded}}, {{badname}}. In the very first batch I did, not being experienced in this area, I fell for a misuse of the badname template. The result of my newb error: a nasty, highhanded lecture on my talk page, and some shouting over here for good measure. I certainly won't be making that mistake again... you can guess why. Hesperian 13:16, 29 May 2009 (UTC)

Nima Farid (talk • contribs • count)

copyrighted maps (again)?

• File:Road 65.jpg
• File:Road 7.JPG
• File:Road 9.jpg
• File:Road 49.jpg
• File:Road 44.jpg
• File:Road 78.JPG
• File:Road 55 Location.JPG
• File:Road 71.jpg
• File:Road 86.JPG
• File:Road 96.jpg
• File:Road 48.jpg
• File:Road 59.jpg
• File:Road 16.JPG
• File:Road 79.jpg
• File:Road 64.jpg

-- 85.177.42.26 05:08, 11 June 2009 (UTC)

Yes, much probably copyvios. Yann (talk) 09:53, 12 June 2009 (UTC)

Template loops in transcluded Info Pages

The Info Pages (Category:Info Pages) seem to be messed up in the image pages that are using them. E.g. File:Yamatotrials.jpg, File:Britannic hospital.jpg, File:Sixteen-inch guns of the USS Iowa firing.jpg. Basically, a template loop is detected in their transclusions. Can anyone fix this please? Jappalang (talk) 09:08, 11 June 2009 (UTC)

Possible copyright violations

Monarchians (talk · contributions) has had multiple upload issues on en:Wikipedia, and I notice that many of the images we are deleting were also uploaded here. I don't know my way around Commons well enough yet, but the uploads should probably be checked out by someone who does. (ESkog)^(Talk) 17:50, 11 June 2009 (UTC)

Attention needed at File:Jeffrey Earl Habay.jpg

I uploaded a CC-By image I found from Picasa, and I am not sure if there is something else I should do.

I know if you upload a free flickr picture, you can tag it as such for the flickerreviewbot (or whatever). I can't find a similar one for Picasa pictures. As you can see here, the image is freely licensed. Can an administrator or trusted user do something to certify that this was uploaded properly? --Blargh29 (talk) 21:37, 14 June 2009 (UTC)

Well done, license is ok and the Picasa user is certainly the author. I just saw on Picasa the photo information on the left side and that there is a 600px version. We dont have a review process for Picasa yet. --Martin H. (talk) 10:29, 15 June 2009 (UTC)

Blatant copyright infringement/Incumplimiento de copyright evidente

http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Miarchivo40k.jpg

I think it is pretty obvious, the image has watermarks that say "all right reserved" and the copyright holder's name too.

Creo que es bastante obvio, la imagen tiene marcas de agua que dicen "todos los derechos reservados" así como el nombre del portador de los derechos de autor.--Darolu (talk) 06:20, 15 June 2009 (UTC)

 Done. --Túrelio (talk) 06:51, 15 June 2009 (UTC)

half closed deletion request

Commons:Deletion requests/File:British Aircraft carriers of Invincible class.jpg--85.177.47.53 06:22, 15 June 2009 (UTC)

Some bug with the "my preferences" page

I am seeing

* TypeError: tabs[JSconfig.meta[key].page] has no properties http://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=-&action=raw&smaxage=0&gen=js&useskin=monobook (292)

at the top of the page, and I cannot save the options in my Appearance tab (to be clearer, the interface says they are saved but when I return to the tab, the options are at default again). Jappalang (talk) 12:07, 17 June 2009 (UTC)

• I've notified the maintainer, User:Dschwen. Lupo 12:14, 17 June 2009 (UTC)
• BTW, the "return to default" appears to be a MediaWiki bug. At least when I change the default image preview size, save, and then open (or reload) an image page, it is shown with the size I've chosen. But then, when I re-open the preferences, it shows me again the 320×240px default setting. Lupo 12:16, 17 June 2009 (UTC)
• Should be fixed now. --Dschwen (talk) 14:51, 17 June 2009 (UTC)

Possible Copyright Violation in File:Atlantis City wall.jpg

User:Profsherman claims that File:Atlantis City wall.jpg is "Own work by uploader". However, the figure is clearly part of the "Discovery of Atlantis" web page at Sonar Images of Atlantis figure. Profsherman fails to provide any documentation that he is the either owner of or otherwise connected the "Discovery of Atlantis" web page in a manner that he or she can claim ownership of this figure.Cristellaria (talk) 19:20, 17 June 2009 (UTC)

I nominated it for deletion, I hope we get some feedback from the uploader. Sv1xv (talk) 19:34, 17 June 2009 (UTC)

After I blocked him for edit-warring and personal attacks, he emailed me asking for help. If he is who he says he is, then there is no problem but I don't know what exactly he has to do to - other than change his behavior completely to avoid an indef block, his unblock request was another attack on an editor, and his edits besides being COI were pretty dire, he clearly didn't understand what Wikipedia is. Dougweller (talk) 07:19, 18 June 2009 (UTC)

If he does not want to show his full details on the image description page, he may use the OTRS system. He only needs to send an e-mail message from his business address under his full name and explain the situation. Sv1xv (talk) 08:52, 18 June 2009 (UTC)

Deletions requests...

There's about a six month backlog of deletion requests for images. I posted a request May 14, and it's still there, along with at least 50 requests from May alone, plus stuff going back to January, IIRC. Could an admin or twenty start clearing the backlog? Thanks! MSJapan (talk) 17:03, 18 June 2009 (UTC)

I'll take a look. –Juliancolton | ^Talk 17:35, 18 June 2009 (UTC)

There really ought to be a way to "relist" requests to the most recent log, like they do at enwiki AfD. –Juliancolton | ^Talk 18:19, 18 June 2009 (UTC)

All that's done there is to change which page is transcluded to - why can't the same be done here? Wknight94 ^talk 18:44, 18 June 2009 (UTC)

Another Possible Copyright Violation with [Robert Sarmast] article

I had a few minutes and out of curiousity, I did a Googles image search for "Robert Sarmast". On the first page of the Google Image search results was the image that User:Profsherman claims to be his "Own work by uploader" at File:Robert Sarmast.jpg is exactly the same picture found in Robert Sarmast Biography and Robert sarmast Picture. This appears to be another copyright violation by Profsherman in the [Robert Sarmast] article Cristellaria (talk) 21:43, 18 June 2009 (UTC)

Suspected sock puppets abusing wp and commons

Please see w:Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Sarahjjohnson123. Indef blocked on wp. LeadSongDog (talk) 13:32, 19 June 2009 (UTC)

See Commons:Administrators' noticeboard/User problems#Abdominoplasty also. Both socks and their master have edited here on Commons too. - ALLST✰R▼^echo _{wuz here @} 13:42, 19 June 2009 (UTC)

Frank15 (talk · contributions)

New user is uploading copyrighted photos from panoramio etc. with interesting licensing. feydey ^(talk) 16:10, 20 June 2009 (UTC)

Suspicious uploads, at the very least. Yann (talk) 17:17, 20 June 2009 (UTC)

Ricardoaguilarcubillos (talk · contributions)

Anyone want to go though all the "own work" by the user... feydey ^(talk) 16:27, 20 June 2009 (UTC)

Suspicious uploads, at the very least. Yann (talk) 17:19, 20 June 2009 (UTC)

Replacement of content

Repoulis (talk · contributions) had replaced images, like File:Violinist.jpg and File:Clown.jpg, disrespecting the previous content and upload images that may not be in project scope. This user has a long list of uploaded files missing a license tag. Please check this issue.--Sdrtirs (talk) 16:55, 20 June 2009 (UTC)

Hello, I reverted and deleted his out-of-scope drawings, and warned this user. Yann (talk) 17:01, 20 June 2009 (UTC)

This problem surely resulted from the extremely generic filenames of both images. I've ordered both to be renamed. --Túrelio (talk) 21:27, 20 June 2009 (UTC)

Special:Contributions/Legrain files

This user have uploaded a lot of screenshots of their accounting application, Epicea plus some Windows screenshots (with some copyrighted material like icons) for configuration issues software-related, writing them sometimes on the top of older pictures.

Are they in the Commons project scope? I doubt of they educative value.

Why they've uploaded those pictures is to use on their own wiki, so they use Commons as personal images hosting service. --Dereckson (talk) 21:05, 20 June 2009 (UTC)

File:Yohanna.jpg

Backlog

this is a small backlog for approving users to use MediaMoveBot (Aka Image renaming) Betacommand 12:33, 21 June 2009 (UTC)

File:Foto Kikillo FS Zamora - Alberto Peña 2009.jpg

Hi! This football (soccer) player photo has logos on his shirt, which most probably copyrighted but I'm unsure if it meets Commons:Freedom of panorama, if is needed to add {{trademarked}} or it's a copyvio.--Sdrtirs (talk) 08:19, 22 June 2009 (UTC)

It has nothing to do with freedom of panorama, but de minimis seems to apply in this case. –Tryphon^☂ 08:40, 22 June 2009 (UTC)

Yes, this is de minimis, FoP does not apply. Dcoetzee (talk) 20:45, 22 June 2009 (UTC)

Yes, the Logos are not the problem. This user had uploaded files from 4 or 5 different cameras, I found two of them on other websites and delted them including this one, therefore marked as missing source. --Martin H. (talk) 21:15, 22 June 2009 (UTC)

Restricting library of pics

I gave permission to someone to use my pictures on wikipedia as he wished. (EG http://en.wikinews.org/w/index.php?title=File:Mark_Schwarzer.jpg&filetimestamp=20080905014403#filelinks) However because of changing commercial circumstances, I now wish to restrict that to pictures taken before January 1, 2009.

How do I got about changing my CC approval accordingly?

Thanks,

Kevin Airs 203.214.54.133 04:43, 23 June 2009 (UTC)

Hi Kevin, you don't. CC licenses are irrevocable. Regards, -- ChrisiPK (Talk|Contribs) 12:39, 24 June 2009 (UTC)

Any image which has already been released under a Creative Commons licence is now irrevocably under that licence, so you can't change that. What you can do, however, is stop licencing your new photos under a CC licence. To do that, send an e-mail to permissions-en@wikimedia.org and tell them that the previous agreement won't hold for your future photos. Pruneau^talk 13:34, 24 June 2009 (UTC)

Thanks you for your help, pruneau. Email sent and advice greatly appreciated. ChrisiPK, you were no help at all. Thanks. 124.168.251.93 16:07, 25 June 2009 (UTC)

Incorrect deletion of photo in very timely en:Neda Agha-Soltan article

Later note: The article in question is now called en:Death of Neda Agha-Soltan. I updated the wikilinks below because en:Neda Agha-Soltan is now a different article. --Timeshifter (talk) 11:19, 24 June 2009 (UTC)

This concerns an ultra-high profile article: en:Death of Neda Agha-Soltan

Please see

• User talk:Mardetanha#Neda Agha-Soltan grave site photo was not a copyright violation

The following is copied from there:

File talk:آقا سلطان.jpg

Hello. Did you read the talk page? This is a different photo from the BBC one. People must have visited the grave site, and the uploader said they took the photo. The uploader also wrote a description in the Persion language. The photo was being used on this article page: en:Death of Neda Agha-Soltan. See this version of the article:

• http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Neda_Soltani&oldid=298081372

This is a different photo than the photo in this BBC article:

• http://www.bbc.co.uk/persian/iran/2009/06/090622_mm_neda_soltan.shtml

Look at the top left side of the BBC article photo. It has an additional gravestone than in the photo you deleted here. The photo here is larger, and so the BBC photo can't be a cropped version of this photo.

---

Could another admin please undelete this photo right away, and add back the photo and caption to the article. Please see this diff:

• http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Neda_Soltani&diff=298082011&oldid=298081372

The photo and caption wikitext are in that diff. It goes at the top of the "Aftermath" section. See:

• en:Death of Neda Agha-Soltan#Aftermath --Timeshifter (talk) 08:57, 23 June 2009 (UTC)

The deletion looks legitimate because the image uploaded here is derived from exactly the same photo as the BBC have. It isn't a different photo, rather a different crop of the same photo. The question we need to answer is where does the BBC photo come from. Adambro (talk) 09:09, 23 June 2009 (UTC)

Actually, I'm not sure but I don't think we can really say with any confidence whether this uploader can release this image under a free licence. Adambro (talk) 09:17, 23 June 2009 (UTC)

Please read this article:

Family, friends mourn 'Neda,' Iranian woman who died on video. By Borzou Daragahi. Los Angeles Times. June 23, 2009.

It is very dangerous right now in Iran to speak out concerning her. Relatives and associates are very afraid to publicly talk to the media.

So when someone uploads a photo we should believe them when they say took the photo unless we have proof otherwise. That is what we normally do anyway for almost all other photos uploaded to the Commons. This is not the BBC article photo. The uploader used both Persian and English in their description. That adds some more credibility. So until it is shown that this is a copyrighted photo, then it isn't a copyrighted photo. We shouldn't be discouraging people from uploading at this critical time.

Also, on Wikipedia we can't use Fair Use unless it is a copyrighted photo, or otherwise non-free photo that can't be used on the Commons. Since it is not a copyrighted photo or non-free photo, then we can't use Fair Use.

Normally deletion requests take at least 7 days, and this speedy deletion was unjustified. We need to give this person time to figure out CC licenses. But when there is war/revolution/repression occurring then we need to use our normal weeks-long deletion process.

And most importantly, we shouldn't be discouraging people in Iran from uploading their photos!!!! --Timeshifter (talk) 09:52, 23 June 2009 (UTC)

Considering the other image this user uploaded (File:Neda2.JPG) is quite clearly a copyright violation, I am less inclined to believe they are in a position to release this image. Adambro (talk) 10:02, 23 June 2009 (UTC)

I suppose quite clearly a copyright violation isn't completely accurate. I don't know who made the video that File:Neda2.JPG is a screenshot of but I suspect it was probably a citizen journalist rather than CNN so their logo doesn't mean that much. However, if the uploader was the copyright holder of that video, why didn't they upload that screenshot without the CNN logo since they'd have the original? Adambro (talk) 10:10, 23 June 2009 (UTC)

Video stills of those videos are everywhere. We shouldn't assume that an uploader's ignorance of all our licensing rules means that some of the stuff they upload isn't their own. They claimed this photo as their own. Did they claim the video still as their own? If so, then that is a mark against their credibility, for sure. --Timeshifter (talk) 11:15, 23 June 2009 (UTC)

Yes, the video screenshot was licensed {{PD-self}} and marked as own work by uploader. –Tryphon^☂ 11:32, 24 June 2009 (UTC)

Special:Contributions/78.49.147.105

This IP (I wonder who's behind it) is using edit summaries to spread links to various discussions about Mutter Erde. I'm not sure what can/should be done about it. –Tryphon^☂ 11:08, 23 June 2009 (UTC)

Guess who's behind it. Looks like he stopped, but should he continue, just block for a few hours (block evasion). Regards, -- ChrisiPK (Talk|Contribs) 11:17, 23 June 2009 (UTC)

Yep, I know who, and I'll follow your advice. Thanks. –Tryphon^☂ 11:25, 23 June 2009 (UTC)

Continued with the same edit pattern; blocked for 6 hours. Feel free to modify the block duration to anything you see fit. –Tryphon^☂ 11:43, 23 June 2009 (UTC)

Copyrighted Image (Yohanna Image.jpg)

If I give the artist the permission template to fill in could I then upload the image which is a promo one or the photographer gives the permission? Could I simply ask for permission from the artist saying I "ARTIST NAME" allow my image etc to be uploaded on wikipedia etc ?—Preceding unsigned comment added by Ashanm10 (talk • contribs) 11:21, 23 June 2009 (UTC) (UTC)

Hi, permission "for upload on Wikipedia" or similar is not sufficient. The photographer needs to give the permission by filling out the permission template (see Commons:Email templates). You then need to send the permission template to OTRS (permissions-commons@wikimedia.org) and upload the image. Regards, -- ChrisiPK (Talk|Contribs) 11:26, 23 June 2009 (UTC)

So that means I cant ask the artist(singer)? I have to ask the photographer? And how about her own photo then which is not promo could I ask only permission from her? --Ashanm10

You always need permission by the copyright holder. When a photographer creates a photograph, he's the copyright holder. He might, however, have sold his copyright to a third person, e.g. a singer who hired him to shoot promotional material. I don't know whether that is the case with your artist, you will have to ask. Regards, -- ChrisiPK (Talk|Contribs) 19:20, 23 June 2009 (UTC)

It's worth noting that this depends on jurisdiction. In Australia, for example, the client automatically gains rights to the photographs barring any other prior agreement. Dcoetzee (talk) 22:01, 23 June 2009 (UTC)

Need an image moved/renamed if possible, else deleted

I used toolserver to automatically upload a file from Flickr, and the bot gave it a name that conflicts with an entirely different image on the English Wikipedia where I intend to use it. (Didn't notice if that process gives you a chance to provide name.) Can the image be moved to another name? I don't know if that's possible, or if it would need to be deleted and reuploaded. It's currently at File:Rock Bridge.jpg and a good name would be something like "Rock Bridge State Park Missouri.jpg". Thanks. Kbh3rd (talk) 03:15, 26 June 2009 (UTC)

As a trusted user for image renaming, I've tagged the image for renaming to File:Rock Bridge State Park Missouri.jpg. Be patient. A bot will handle the process automatically. Cheers. - ALLST✰R▼^echo _{wuz here @} 04:11, 26 June 2009 (UTC)

CommonsDelinker is deleting images from en Wikipedia which have not been deleted

The CommonsDelinker bot has been deleting images [[7]] that were never deleted from commons (deletion request is here). Can something be done about this? Preslav (talk) 08:36, 27 June 2009 (UTC)

The images were deleted, hence the bot sprung into action, but were later restored. We should perhaps add a message on the restore page to ask admins to check the CommonsDelinker logs for any removals it has made so that the admin can revert them. I'll look into adding a link to the restore message. Adambro (talk) 08:58, 27 June 2009 (UTC)

I just checked the recent delink logs and it looks like someone was trigger happy and soon after realized he was wrong: a bunch of images were deleted and undeleted after about half an hour. I assume the resulting mess isn't cleaned up yet. Multichill (talk) 10:38, 27 June 2009 (UTC)

Files without sorce since May

Just noticed the following files have the template indicating lack of sources, but weren't removed in the date ithe template indicated (20 May 2009):

Garavello (talk) 15:30, 28 June 2009 (UTC)

Hi, there is a huge backlog in Category:Unknown. Lots of files still need to be cleaned up, so this is (unfortunately) nothing special. Regards, -- ChrisiPK (Talk|Contribs) 16:15, 28 June 2009 (UTC)

File:H1N1 North America Map.svg

Can someone revert this? File:H1N1 North America Map.svg - The North America map has been overwritten by a map of Mexico. 76.66.193.20 06:19, 29 June 2009 (UTC)

Thanks. 76.66.193.20 08:10, 29 June 2009 (UTC)

Kropki (gra)

Could someone please delete the above. It's a spam page in a East European language. --Kathleen.wright5 (talk) 14:24, 2 July 2009 (UTC)

 Done — Mike.lifeguard 14:27, 2 July 2009 (UTC)

Directory name's side effect

Hi,
I was going to post a msg because one thumb image didn't display while a full resolution is displaying normaly. But I notice the directory of the image was containing "/ad/" in the hierarchy name. In fact, it was blocked by my Firefox extention Adblock Plus, so some images ( all in the "/ad/" directory) will not appears in my browser when this extension is enable. I know that I can disable it (or put " @@|http://upload.wikimedia.org/* " in my filter list), but I think some will not know that this is the cause of the non-display. I just wanted you to know this behavior.
--90.8.6.150 22:45, 29 June 2009 (UTC)

Yes, this seems to happen fairly often, but users generally figure it out. A lot of us use firefox + ABP, so there's generally someone around to point out the likely cause. Thanks for the reminder.  — Mike.lifeguard 14:28, 2 July 2009 (UTC)

I reported this back in 2006 as bugzilla:5402, but it was closed as "WONTFIX". I keep hoping that it might still get fixed some day, perhaps piggybacked on some other changes to the file repository code. After all, the fix is pretty trivial, it would just break a lot of existing links. —Ilmari Karonen (talk) 08:09, 7 July 2009 (UTC)

Yes, you would think the stupid ad-blockers would be fixed by now. Multichill (talk) 18:09, 7 July 2009 (UTC)

3 files which may require admin speedy deletion for legal reasons

These 3 files are nommed for deletion process, but posting here in case admins think they qualify for quicker admin intervention (speedy deletion) for (USA) legal reasons. Tagged them for speedy but was removed (hence the current deletion noms)

• Commons:Deletion requests/File:Briefs-20080618.jpg
• Commons:Deletion requests/File:Penispic.jpg
• Commons:Deletion requests/File:Puertoricanteenager.JPG

Thank you. Wp0490 (talk) 07:32, 7 July 2009 (UTC)

What a strange hit and run account. Multichill (talk) 18:12, 7 July 2009 (UTC)

From my viewpoint the two nude ones are speediable & I have deleted them, the "pants" one I've commented on tho others may see it more clearly. Thanks for the posting --Herby ^{talk thyme} 18:40, 7 July 2009 (UTC)

However.... A nod to Multichill's comment. Looking at it myself & probably should be reviewed. --Herby ^{talk thyme} 18:53, 7 July 2009 (UTC)

Curious how this inspires naming creativity --Foroa (talk) 19:48, 7 July 2009 (UTC)

ok i'm wondering why i'm being linked into this conversation by foroa? i don't see the connection; if he's implying that the user is a sockpuppet of me, he's waaaaay off base, the user is trying to delete media i'm trying to categorize in a manner that can be taken seriously. as for: User:Wp0490 i noticed him 2 days ago & asked at the help desk re: how to handle a suspected sock puppet (since the help info for the subject is hopelessly tangled with links that direct back to wikipedia, instead of here). last time i checked, i still hadn't gotten a useful reply. Lx 121 (talk) 17:07, 8 July 2009 (UTC)

or is foroa admitting that he's the sockpuppet? o__0 Lx 121 (talk) 17:18, 8 July 2009 (UTC)

Please answer at the COM:HD if you dont find my answer helpful. Otherwise you wont get a better one. --Martin H. (talk) 19:38, 8 July 2009 (UTC)

Am not making any more content-namespace edits, but was checking up on the status of the VfD's and noticed the 2nd mentioned VfD was closed as delete but not deleted to seek 2nd opinion, and has now been archived off of the VfD requests page. I am not new to Wikimedia projects or their editing methods, but at the time did not want to attach these CSD's or VfD's to my normal Wikimedia-projects username. I will not be making any further deletion noms, so Lx can rest easy and stop accusing me of being some censorship sockpuppet. My motive is not censorship but avoiding unwanted legal attention for the uploaders and any re-distributors of the content (not sure if WMF would even be liable here though I am not a lawyer). Teenagers can and have been charged in the US for sharing such pictures, even though they themselves are minors. Some months ago in the US media, high schoolers were charged for re-sending underage topless pics of a schoolmate using their cell phones ("sexting") -- and could potentially have to register as sex offenders the rest of their life. Any value to the project is not worth the risk of disrupting the uploaders' lives just because one day they decided to upload a self pic to Wikimedia. If this is ignored this time around, the proverbial shit will eventually hit the fan someday for Commons accumulating such images. When the images are obviously of underage persons, there is no reason to keep it. If Commons cannot police this issue itself, one day Jimbo or WMF Legal may have to do it for them. And just because this was a "hit and run" account does not nullify the issues. This is my last edit on this account, it was a SPA which has fufilled its purpose (though i dispute the murderous cries of "sock" since it was not malicious edits or in areas I have formerly edited). bye. Wp0490 (talk) 22:01, 8 July 2009 (UTC)

Last archiving

This page is for any user to request administrator attention. Please feel free to post a new request. Remember to sign and date all contributions, using "~~~~", which translates into a signature and a time stamp.

Admins: once you've dealt with a request, please make a note of it to save other admins the time.

Edit history undeletion

Would someone undelete the history of Category:Ticino and Category:Lake Zurich? I'd like to see how it was renamed. -- en:User:Docu/User:Docu 18 June 2009

Commons:Deletion_requests/2009/07/02

Someone has taken Commons:Deletion requests/File:Marilyn-by Cronenweth.JPG out of this list Commons:Deletion_requests/2009/07/02 (This DR was the very first). I have no idea, who has done that and for what reason. Also I couldn't find a track in the history 79.194.89.208

 Done See the version history. archived to Commons:Deletion requests/Archive/2009/07/02. --Martin H. (talk)

Please change filename

Need help to change the filename File:A Group of Yound American Artists of the Modern School, c. 1911.jpg to File:A Group of Young American Artists of the Modern School, c. 1911.jpg (typo: "young" not "yound") or is there a possibility to move pictures like Wikipedia-articles? Thanks ,--telrúnya. 02:43, 10 July 2009 (UTC)

To correct the name of a file, please use {{Rename}}. Walter Siegmund (talk) 04:54, 10 July 2009 (UTC)

Thank you, --telrúnya. 09:36, 10 July 2009 (UTC)

Please delete this version...

Hi there, I'd need an admin's help in order to delete the first version of File:Montage Bordeaux 1.jpg, which contains a copyrighted picture, File:Bordeaux Fontaine.jpg (you can delete this one right away also, by the way). I replaced it with a free one, available under CC-BY-SA-2.0-fr. The author of the copyrighted file asked us to remove it as soon as possible via OTRS ticket #2009071210010401. Sorry if it's not the right place to ask, but since it's kind of a special request, I thought you wouldn't mind too much. Thanks in advance ! Alchemica (talk) 11:13, 12 July 2009 (UTC)

N.B. : I couldn't check usage of the original picture File:Bordeaux Fontaine.jpg, since the toolserver is locked down due too too many connection problems today. Alchemica (talk) 11:17, 12 July 2009 (UTC)

 Done I hope tho things are rather s l o w today :( Regards --Herby ^{talk thyme} 12:09, 12 July 2009 (UTC)

It worked just fine, thanks a lot ! Alchemica (talk) 12:14, 12 July 2009 (UTC)

Undiscussed move reverse

If an administrator could take the time to close the following discussion: Category_talk:Requested_moves#Category:Z.C3.BCrichsee_.3D.3E_Category:Lake_Zurich. -- User:Docu at 14:51, 18 July 2009 (UTC)