User talk:Dmitrismirnov

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

User talk:Dmitrismirnov/Archive-01

File:William Blake Enoch Lithograph 1807.jpg[edit]

Are you sure that's a "lithograph" (rather than a copperplate engraving)...? -- AnonMoos (talk) 09:45, 1 February 2013 (UTC)

Sure. This is informatiom from G. E. Bently JR Book and also here: Dmitrismirnov (talk) 09:48, 1 February 2013 (UTC)
Then it's Blake's one and only lithograph (out of thousands and thousands of engravings), and should be be explained as such. AnonMoos (talk) 13:09, 1 February 2013 (UTC)
See you've added something now; however, the text from the website is presumably copyrighted, and should not be added here... AnonMoos (talk) 13:11, 1 February 2013 (UTC)
You have exaggerated information. William Blake created Engravings: 434 commercially published, 388 published by Blake, 48 unpublished = all together 870 engravings only. This is Info from G. E. Bently JR Book "Blake Records" 2nd Edition 2004 Dmitrismirnov (talk) 17:15, 1 February 2013 (UTC)
But every single page of one of his books like "Milton" was an engraving, many of them with different "states" etc. I thought it would add up to more... AnonMoos (talk) 01:05, 2 February 2013 (UTC)
Of course, you are right! Dmitrismirnov (talk) 06:56, 2 February 2013 (UTC)

File:Antoine-Léonard Thomas.jpg[edit]

Pay attention to copyright
File:Antoine-Léonard Thomas.jpg has been marked as a possible copyright violation. Wikimedia Commons only accepts free content—that is, images and other media files that can be used by anyone, for any purpose. Traditional copyright law does not grant these freedoms, and unless noted otherwise, everything you find on the web is copyrighted and not permitted here. For details on what is acceptable, please read Commons:Licensing. You may find Commons:Copyright rules useful. You can ask questions about Commons policies in Commons:Help desk.

The file you added may soon be deleted. If you believe this file is not a copyright violation, please explain why on the file's talk page.

Afrikaans | العربية | Asturianu | Беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ | Български | Català | Čeština | Dansk | Deutsch | Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ | Zazaki | Ελληνικά | English | Español | فارسی | Suomi | Français | Galego | עברית | Magyar | Italiano | 日本語 | 한국어 | Македонски | മലയാളം | Plattdüütsch | Nederlands | Norsk nynorsk | Norsk bokmål | Polski | Português | Português do Brasil | Română | Русский | Slovenčina | Slovenščina | Svenska | ไทย | Türkçe | Tiếng Việt | 中文(简体)‎ | 中文(繁體)‎ | +/−

AndreasPraefcke (talk) 10:06, 3 April 2013 (UTC)

High Resolution Blake Image[edit]

I have a question about File:The Book of Urizen copy G object 3.jpg - its metadata says it's from the Blake Archive, but I can't find any scans that high resolution on the Blake Archive page. I'd really like to see if I can acquire higher resolution scans of more Blake pages - can you explain how you got such a high resolution version of that object and whether the method is usable on other Blake texts? Thanks. 04:13, 9 May 2013 (UTC)

For example, go here:
on the left you see the window Show Me... Image Enlargement Illustration Description Textual Transcription
go to the window for Image Enlargement and look what you see... Dmitrismirnov (talk) 07:16, 9 May 2013 (UTC)

William Blake Archive GLAM activities[edit]

Hello, I just noticed that you have done a considerable amount of work uploading and cleaning up content related to Category:William Blake. I am currently acting as a Wikipedian in Residence / Intern with the William Blake Archive. I am organizing the activities from English Wikipedia at w:en:Wikipedia:WikiProject Poetry/William Blake, but a big part of the project is cleaning up the metadata and files related to Blake here on Commons. Would you be interested in helping? I could really use additional help from such an experienced Commons contributor. Check out what I am doing so far at w:en:Wikipedia:WikiProject Poetry/William Blake/Updates/Update 1. If you have any ideas or would like to organize activities either here on Comomons or another language that would be awesome as well! Sadads (talk) 19:44, 23 August 2013 (UTC)

Thank you for your message. I do what I can and I'm happy to help if I can. Dmitrismirnov (talk) 10:07, 24 August 2013 (UTC)

Copyright status: File:Blake manuscript - Notebook 60b - Let the Brothels of Paris be opened.jpg[edit]

català | čeština | dansk | Deutsch | Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ | English | français | magyar | italiano | македонски | മലയാളം | 日本語 | norsk bokmål | polski | português | română | русский | suomi | svenska | +/−

Warning sign
This media may be deleted.
Thanks for uploading File:Blake manuscript - Notebook 60b - Let the Brothels of Paris be opened.jpg. I notice that the file page either doesn't contain enough information about the license or it contains contradictory information about the license, so the copyright status is unclear.

If you created this file yourself, then you must provide a valid copyright tag. For example, you can tag it with {{self|GFDL|cc-by-sa-all}} to release it under the multi-license GFDL plus Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike All-version license or you can tag it with {{PD-self}} to release it into the public domain. (See Commons:Copyright tags for the full list of license tags that you can use.)

If you did not create the file yourself or if it is a derivative of another work that is possibly subject to copyright protection, then you must specify where you found it (e.g. usually a link to the web page where you got it), you must provide proof that it has a license that is acceptable for Commons (e.g. usually a link to the terms of use for content from that page), and you must add an appropriate license tag. If you did not create the file yourself and the specific source and license information is not available on the web, you must obtain permission through the OTRS system and follow the procedure described there.

Note that any unsourced or improperly licensed files will be deleted one week after they have been marked as lacking proper information, as described in criteria for speedy deletion. If you have uploaded other files, please confirm that you have provided the proper information for those files, too. (You can get a list of all your uploaded files using the Gallery tool.) Thank you.

Yours sincerely, Jarekt (talk) 16:50, 20 September 2013 (UTC)


Thanks for your work uploading images on Blake, but I'm afraid your categorization of these is rather chaotic. In particular:

a) Categories should only be added at the lowest appropriate levels. You are duplicating images at several levels of the same tree, which leads to over-large and unusable categories. The main Category:William Blake has over 1100 images, the great majority duplicated in sub-categories. 100 or fewer is probably the ideal number, containing things that have no appropriate sub-category, & maybe a sampling of key images. Equally the sub-categories need reducing to say 10-15. I suspect most of these are duplicated at lower levels.
b) You are mostly ignoring the institutions to which the images belong, which is an important part of categorization, or putting them in the wrong categories there. I have set up Category:William Blake in the British Museum and Category:William Blake in Tate Britain and part-filled them. Categories should also be set up for Yale, the British Library and any other key collections.
c) British Library Additional MS 49460 - Notebook by William Blake should be given a category, included in Category:British Library Additional Manuscripts. At the moment the contents seem scattered over several rather randomly named categories, which should all be parented by this. Are there other similar "by manuscript" categories missing?

Let me know if you want to discuss how you can do this. Johnbod (talk) 15:53, 27 September 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for your help. The Category:British Library Additional MS 49460 - Notebook by William Blake is very useful as well as some other your suggestions. To organize so many files logically is incredibly difficult task. And it is great that you have a clear idea how to do this. I try my best for making it convenient and searchable. But I do not think that the reducing of the categories can really help. Dmitrismirnov (talk) 16:05, 29 September 2013 (UTC)