User talk:Dodo

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

Archive of this talk page:
2011: Jan · Feb
2008: Jan · Feb · Mar · Apr · May · Jun · Jul · Aug · Sep · Oct · Nov · Dec
2007: Jan · Feb · Mar · Apr · May · Jun · Jul · Aug · Sep · Oct · Nov · Dec
2006: Jan · Feb · Mar · Apr · May · Jun · Jul · Aug · Sep · Oct · Nov · Dec


Hola Dodo[edit]

Hola, ¿Qué tal si comentamos sobre algunas de las imágenes borradas? Hay algunas que me gustaría recuperar y que pienso que tienen perfectamente cabida en Meta. Me refiero a las que utilizaba en mis páginas de usuario, que eran obras enteramente mías o basadas en imágenes de Meta. Podríamos discutir sobre ellas.

También, las imágenes que estaba subiendo últimamente, sé que pudieran contravenir normas de WikiMedia, pero también, al subirlas se lo comunicaba a los propietarios de los derechos para que ellos decidieran si contravenía o no sus derechos. En ningún caso me han comunicado que estuviese lesionando sus derechos. Aunque en algunos casos podrían mantener sus derechos, en otros sería como negar la existencia de una parte de la historia del arte del siglo XX, y no es que yo quiera compararme, pero la utilización de todo tipo de trabajos para generar una obra no es nada nuevo.

Voy a subir una imagen que pienso que no bulnera ningún derecho, y seguiré subiendo imágenes en espera de que, esta vez sí, me comuniques las que no consideras correcto. Saludos cordiales, Nemo (talk) 21:55, 1 March 2011 (UTC) PD: Lo pasado pasado está, yo doy por bueno mi bloqueo.

Como llevas eso de las vistas a los museos y salas de exposiciones?.--Nemo (talk) 23:01, 1 March 2011 (UTC)
No te parece que sería mejor que habláramos de las imágenes que me has borrado indebidamente? En lugar de entrar en explicaciones sobre la pregunta anterior.--Nemo (talk) 19:44, 2 March 2011 (UTC)

--Has borrado imágenes que eran mías propias, que usaba en mis páginas de usuario, y una fotografía, también mía propia, que aparecía en el artículo de El Parque del Capricho. Estas fotos puedo recuperarlas yo mismo, pero una, que utilicé en mi página de usuario, que existirá un enlace en el historial, me refiero a un primer plano de Marcelino Camacho, también me gustaría que no se perdiera el enlace, y eso no sé como conseguirlo. De todas formas, es la tercera vez que interpelo para recuperar estas fotos y hasta ahora has hecho oídos sordos, y si la primera vez que interpelé, lo hice en EsWikipedia, limitándote a borrar mi apelación, la segunda la tienes ahí arriba, donde por respuesta me has colgado un cartelín en mi página de discusión que me coarta para que yo mismo las vuelva a subir. --Nemo (talk) 02:10, 3 March 2011 (UTC)PD: En cuanto a tu incomprensión sobre la pregunta anterior te paso un enlace, es sobre la técnica del collage.

Tu tono hacia mí me parece agresivo e innecesario, creo que en todo momento he intentado un acercamiento. Hoy entiendo que o es esta tu forma general de dirigirte a otros wikipedistas o tú y yo chocamos. Así es que no voy a continuar la polémica contigo y te rogaría que te abstuvieses de seguir mis ediciones en Meta, hay muchos campos en los que trabajar, no creo que te falten temas en los que poder seguir contribuyendo, y deja que otro biblitecario (que no eres el único) se encargue de mis futuras ediciones. En todo caso las normas son las normas y el "sentido común" y "atreverse a editar" son también normas. Por último decir que seguiré aplicando mi sentido común y me seguiré atreviendo a editar con la finalidad de que Meta amplíe sus contenidos, que es lo que a todos nos debería importar. Insisto, deja que sea otro bibliotecario, quizá con criterio diferente al tuyo, el que me fiscalice, piensa que tu criterio no es único. Saludos, --Nemo (talk) 16:50, 3 March 2011 (UTC) PD: Deberías haberte tomado la molestia de mirar las imágenes que me borraste y ser tú mismo el que advirtieras las que borraste indebidamente.Y no habría estado de más que advirtiendo tal error lo hubieses corregido.
Como me has borrado archivos indebidamente, como no sabes que archivos me has borrado indebidamente, como sigues haciendo valoraciones sobre mí, no te considero capacitado para que fiscalices mis ediciones. No soy yo el que tiene que decirte los archivos que me has borrado indebidamente, tú como bibliotecario deberías saberlo y con la misma o parecida presteza que tuviste al borrarlos, ahora deberías restauralos, reconoce tu error. Esa es la única forma de que recuperes mi consideración como bibliotecario, hasta entonces, insisto, tus acciones sobre mis ediciones las consideraré contaminadas por una animadversión hacia mí. No eres el único bibliotecario, otros habrá que juzguen mis ediciones. Yo no soy el único editor ni juzgar mis ediciones la única labor en Meta. --Nemo (talk) 21:38, 3 March 2011 (UTC) PD: Piensa que al tiempo que me borrabas archivos indebidamente, me bloqueaste.
El "bla, bla, bla" sobra y te exijo que lo taches de mi página de discusión. --Nemo (talk) 21:45, 3 March 2011 (UTC)
La "exigencia" no sobra porque lo que te estoy exigiendo es respeto hacia mí. No tienes ningún derecho a faltarme al respeto y vuelvo a exigirte que rectifiques tu actitud hacia mí. --Nemo (talk) 21:50, 3 March 2011 (UTC)

En todo caso termino esta conversación. Restáurame los archivos borrados indebidamente y doy por terminado el tema. --Nemo (talk) 21:52, 3 March 2011 (UTC)

Thank[edit]

Thank for the notice...I trying to learn how to put copyright...It time for me to get it...

Superman-Hulk Statue ???[edit]

Hello

I do not understand why you erase File:Superman Bensonnhurst.jpg (on a wall in the street) and File:Hulk Madame Tussauds 02.jpg (in a museum). I have read Commons:Freedom of panorama, can you put them back or can you explain me why you erase them ?

Greetings --Crazy runner (talk) 22:28, 12 March 2011 (UTC)

In Category:Madame Tussauds London, there are already photographies of statue like the Hulk one that you deleted.--Crazy runner (talk) 07:14, 13 March 2011 (UTC)

I have already read derative work, you mention it when you have deleted my files. 1) You did not delete all the files of Category:Madame Tussauds London or others Category:Madame Tussauds, so can I use them or not ? 2) There are a lot of files on commons about roller coasters, is it forbidden or not ? (ex File:Superman - Ultimate Flight (Six Flags Over Georgia) 03.jpg) --Crazy runner (talk) 13:25, 13 March 2011 (UTC)

you should read Commons:Deletion_requests/Archive/2010/09/09#File:Madame_Tussauds_London_00801_Nevit.jpg.--Crazy runner (talk) 13:35, 13 March 2011 (UTC)

"the ones from London, where COM:FOP applies inside museums"--Crazy runner (talk) 14:11, 13 March 2011 (UTC)

I believe the images in question File:Superman Bensonnhurst.jpg and File:Hulk Madame Tussauds 02.jpg should be undeleted and a formal deletion request be made. --Nevit Dilmen (talk) 21:19, 13 March 2011 (UTC)

Nuggets & Back from the Grave cover arts[edit]

Hello there!

Can you please explain why did you deleted cover arts for Nuggets and Back from the Grave series? Did i uploaded them wrong? How can i upload them correctly?

Thank you, Max

Nominating kept photos for speedy deletion.[edit]

Nominating kept photos for speedy deletion! You have nominated several photos for speedy deletion. They had already been discussed and kept. Please open a new deletion request and change the speedy tags to DR if you believe a renomination for deletion is really needed. --Nevit Dilmen (talk) 20:55, 13 March 2011 (UTC)

  1. File:Madame Tussauds London 00835 Nevit.jpg‎; 14:45:02 . . (+16) . . Dodo (talk | contribs)
  2. File:Madame Tussauds London 00831 Nevit.jpg‎; 14:44:49 . . (+16) . . Dodo (talk | contribs)
  3. File:Madame Tussauds London 00824 Nevit.jpg‎; 14:44:37 . . (+16) . . Dodo (talk | contribs)
  4. File:Madame Tussauds London 00823 Nevit.jpg‎; 14:44:08 . . (+16) . . Dodo (talk | contribs)
  5. File:Madame Tussauds London 00821 Nevit.jpg‎; 14:43:57 . . (+16) . . Dodo (talk | contribs)
  6. File:Madame Tussauds London 00820 Nevit.jpg‎; 14:43:49 . . (+15) . . Dodo (talk | contribs)
  7. File:Madame Tussauds London 00815 Nevit.jpg‎; 14:43:28 . . (+15) . . Dodo (talk | contribs)
  8. File:Madame Tussauds London 00813 Nevit.jpg‎; 14:43:18 . . (+16) . . Dodo (talk | contribs)
  9. File:Madame Tussauds London 00812 Nevit.jpg‎; 14:43:04 . . (+16) . . Dodo (talk | contribs)
  10. File:Madame Tussauds London 00811 Nevit.jpg‎; 14:42:23 . . (+16) . . Dodo (talk | contribs)
  11. File:Madame Tussauds London 00805 Nevit.jpg‎; 14:42:04 . . (+16) . . Dodo (talk | contribs)
  12. File:Madame Tussauds London 00799 Nevit.jpg‎; 14:41:29 . . (+16) . . Dodo (talk | contribs)
  13. File:Madame Tussauds London 00797 Nevit.jpg‎; 14:41:07 . . (+16) . . Dodo (talk | contribs)
  14. File:Madame Tussauds London 00798 Nevit.jpg‎; 23:16:13 . . (+16) . . Dodo (talk | contribs) (Hulk is (c) by Marvel!)
  15. File:Madame Tussauds London 00801 Nevit.jpg‎; 23:15:43 . . (+16) . . Dodo (talk | contribs) (Shrek is a copyrighted character!)
Please correct me if I'm wrong: your point is that a bunch of touristic, direct-to-family-photo-album shots of the same girl standing besides wax statues at Madame Tussauds London, several of them representing Marvel comic characters[1], are not only completely legal because of UK's FOP, but also have a realistic educational value. And that the proper way to deal with this is to open more DRs... Well, I fully disagree with that, but I see too much heat around this issue, so I won't move a finger again. Regards. --Dodo (talk) 00:22, 14 March 2011 (UTC)
Oh, I nearly forgot: according to this, the exhibition of Marvel Super Heroes at Madame Tussauds London is a "five year deal", so they are not permanently displayed, so UK-FOP does not apply, so... should anybody delete those photos? --Dodo (talk) 00:39, 14 March 2011 (UTC)

Maidenform images[edit]

I spoke to the admin Rillke about the copywrite needs and added in the appropriate tags. He told me to contact you to remove the auto deletes that were put on the images. Thanks in advance.

65.173.243.200 19:07, 14 March 2011 (UTC)

Auto-deletion of images[edit]

Dodo,

   I spoke to admin Rillke, about the images I recently added. I corrected the copywrite and licensing. He told me to reach out to you so you could remove the auto-deletes.

Thanks, Bfoster333 (talk) 19:13, 14 March 2011 (UTC)

User Antmanpym[edit]

... does not stop uploading copyvios. Special:Contributions/Antmanpym --RE RILLKE Questions? 18:05, 16 March 2011 (UTC)

Derivative work[edit]

Maybe you forgot this one and this other one Smile --Warp3 (talk) 03:47, 17 March 2011 (UTC)

File:Légitime Défense le film.jpg[edit]

Can you please undelete the file File:Légitime Défense le film.jpg as we have received permissions from Marion Carnel of Sombrero Films? The OTRS TT # is 2011031010011513 --Sreejith K (talk) 06:29, 18 March 2011 (UTC)

Is there a way to simplify a mass deletion request?[edit]

Especially enumerating all files of a user is very expensive in time. Do you know a JavaScript-solution for doing so? Thanks. --RE RILLKE Questions? 12:18, 18 March 2011 (UTC)

✓ Done: I wrote a script. If you are interested in, here it is: User talk:Rillke/AjaxMassDelete.js. Sincerely -- RE rillke questions? 16:11, 4 July 2011 (UTC)

Reply[edit]

Dodo,

  1. YOU were the one that brought a selective conversation from the past to the current discussion, you opened the door to that. So don´t complain about getting some of your own medicine.
  2. YOU were the one that established the tone years ago.
  3. Censorship is just that, censorship. I don´t know why you have a problem with that. Just read the good, old plain dictionary definition. No need to modyfy or adapt the meaning to fit sensibilities. It applies here, in China, in Spain, in Canada....
  4. In light of our past exchanges, I do not trust either your motives or your judgement.
  5. I upload what I consider valuable images that cost me time and money, and release them into the public domain. I do this in good faith and with enthusiasm, and respecting the intellectual rights of others, in the same manner that I expect mine to be respected, so I do not take lightly attempts to censor them. As an author, I know the law, its spirit and its limits.
  6. Perhaps, as some have suggested in your own talk page, you should fine tune your approach. Maybe you should approach the authors before making DRs.
  7. Dealing with me is easy, you talk easy to me, I respond easy, you talk hard to me, I respond hard.

Regards, --Tomascastelazo (talk) 13:27, 4 July 2011 (UTC)

PS. And what is FUD???

Reposted from my talk page...

No, it was you the one that spread the FUD in any discussion, deletion poll, etc you are involved. And you always seem to take it personally: "So don´t complain about getting some of your own medicine." Is that the proper tone here, or in any other Wikimedia project? I doubt it. Censorship is what happens when you are not allowed to express yourself. Here we have a free content repository: if a given file is not free, according to the Commons' rules, its deletion simply *cannot* be considered censorship. This is not a (mass) media, so freedom of speech & censorship do not apply here. Unless you claim the right to upload files which do not follow the current guidelines, of course. Do you? I don't care whether you trust me or not: you are not required to do so. You need however to trust the community and its rules. So please stop you personal attacks (that is what I have asked you politely) and start discussing constructively. I don't care if your photos cost you time or money: those things have nothing to do with their copyright status! OTH please don't ask for respect if you are not willing to give it to the people who try to ensure the legality of the uploaded files. You are wrong: I didn't started the DR, but I approached you about the issue. At the DR, I left an easy comment and a reasoned vote. Your answer? "With this type of mentality and inquisition-like behaviour" ... "A visit to your talk page or ecemaml clearly points out to what could be interpreted as either nasty, or incompetent behaviour, or both. Complaints about you abound. you, ecemaml and I had a nasty run in in the past, and I personally question your imparciality in this issue." Ahem. Regards. --Dodo (talk) 14:11, 4 July 2011 (UTC) PS. Easy question, harsh response. Am I the problem here? Really?

Dodo, We could have a long academic discussion on several points, but lets start with Censorship: According to the link you provide above, Censorship is the suppression of speech or other public communication which may be considered objectionable, harmful, sensitive, or inconvenient to the general body of people as determined by a government, media outlet, or other controlling body. So in this case the image is the "public communication", it is objectionable at some level (this is because it may be considered a copyvio or whatever), for it is proposed for deletion (this is the suppression part), and the proposer is an admin (this is the controlling body). So you see, anyway you want, right or wrong, ethical or not, legal or not, reasonable or not, we have all of the elements of censorship. You don´t like the term, but it is what it is. It may be that your interpretation of censorship pushes your buttons, as attempts of censorship push mine. So we are at best, under the effect of our interpretations. Regards. --Tomascastelazo (talk) 15:05, 4 July 2011 (UTC)


and one more thing... why would I want to spread female urination devices around??? --Tomascastelazo (talk) 15:08, 4 July 2011 (UTC)

Oh, right. Uploading files here is a public communication, so deleting them is censorship. Sure. You know the rules. You accept them explicitly when you hit the upload button. There are established processes to ensure their fulfillment. Most of them involve public discussion of several related and unrelated people. Then an admin executes the resulting decision. And that is censorship. Huh? Dodo

A photograph, in the large context of the discipline, is a form of speech. You may read a little bit about photography in the works of Pierre Bourdieu 3in his work "La fotografía, un arte intermedio" or Susan Sontag 4 in "On Photography". That may expand a little your perception of what photography is. Inevitably, you will arrive to the conclusion that photography is a form os speech. And as a form of speech, a photograph is a form of communication, public and private, and as such, subject to acts of censorship. --Tomascastelazo (talk) 16:23, 4 July 2011 (UTC)

Of course, "FUD" stands for Fear, uncertainty and doubt. Are you trying to make a joke or something? --Dodo (talk) 16:00, 4 July 2011 (UTC)

Uff!!! I´m glad that´s it! I was trying to figure out how to distribute FUD hotdogs over the internet!!!!--Tomascastelazo (talk) 16:23, 4 July 2011 (UTC)

I'm not discussing whether photography is a form of expression or not. I'm just trying to say that Commons is not a public agora that anyone can use to express her/himself: it's a media repository with a set of known rules. Do you want to call their fulfillment "censorship"? OK, then do it. But it's as absurd as complaining about a traffic ticket when you violate the speed limits.

In any case, I really do not want to keep discussing these things with you. I just came to this talk page to ask you to stop making personal attacks and spreading FUD (now you know what it is, right?) every time a file uploaded by you is put into question. That's all. Regards. --Dodo (talk) 16:55, 4 July 2011 (UTC)

You call absurd my pointing out a case of censorship, yet you do not contemplate as absurd the call for deletion based of alleged copyvio. Could the judgement to call for the deletion be absurd? The moment you identify or label a file as a copyvio, you also elevate it to speech or communication, for there can be no copyvio if the image does not communicate something. I find your arguments rather short in general, with narrow interpretations of key concepts. One characteristic of media is its graphic nature. Through graphics we can synthetize concepts and ideas, much more effectively than with descriptive words, hence the expression "a picture is worth a thousand words". So it is practically impossible to load media devoid of some content to communicate, something to express. Photographs always describe, hence communicate something. A picture of an insect communicates, at the basic level, a physical description of the insect, or it could also descrive a behaviour, or even the interest of the observer in its shape, colors, environment, or aesthetics!!! A picture is, after all, when taken by a human, a way to express the perception of the world, for her/himself to others, therefore as an act of self expression. If you render a photograph as a collection of pixels devoid of its communication or meaning, then, by extension, no copyvio can occur, for it would just be a series of unconnected pixels or dots that communicate nothing, and then we wouldn´t need a thing called Commons. And I will have the last word: zyzzyva. --Tomascastelazo (talk) 18:19, 4 July 2011 (UTC)

DR[edit]

Dodo, If you have DR requests for my work in the future, I ask for you to communicate with me before you make the DR so we can discuss your concerns civily. If after arguing for or against, you still want to nominate for DR, so be it. I upload based on experience and knowledge with regards to intellectual property. Regards. --Tomascastelazo (talk) 19:23, 4 July 2011 (UTC)

Dodo

  1. I don´t know, but discussing possible solutions is a way to preempt discord.
  2. A while, but you were the one who took the deletion flag on this one, I only responded to the arguments.

I really much rather spend my time on constructive endeavors than to involve myself in conflict, however, some things are argued on principle. Censorship pushes my buttons, as well as flawed evaluation criteria that shoots down valuable material. --Tomascastelazo (talk) 21:45, 4 July 2011 (UTC)

I can appreciate the work you do, and I may be unfair in some ways. Start again? --Tomascastelazo (talk) 21:45, 4 July 2011 (UTC)

fotos[edit]

Hola, Rastrojo. perdona por recurrir aquí, pero al ver que eres de los pocos que hablan español, recurro a ti. Hace tiempo, dos usuarios siempre suben fotos que podrían pasar por normales, ya que al ser de lucha libre, muchas son desde las gradas y pueden pasar como fotos que uno mismo ha sacado. Pero ya se borraron muchas en el pasado de estos mismos usuarios, también sacadas desde las gradas y me gusaría sabes si hay alguna manera de ver la veracidad de las fotos de los usuarios Wwebatistavskofi y Sonly. Lo que siempre me extraña es la falta de información y que, a pesar de ser fotos de eventos en estados unidos, lo poco que pongan sea en español, así que me gustaría saber si son fraude o no de alguna manera. Aparte, también creo que esta tiene copyright File:Mark Henry World Heavyweight Champion.jpg ya que está sacada desde la rampa, algo inaccesibele para un fan. Y esta directamente dice que es de WWE.com Air Boom (Kofi Kingston and Evan Bourne as Tag Team Champions.jpg Muchas gracias por tu tiempo --Techarrow (talk) 13:50, 16 November 2011 (UTC)

De-adminship warning[edit]

This talk page in other languages:

Deutsch | English | español | français | italiano | 한국어 | മലയാളം | português | português do Brasil | +/−

Dear Dodo. I am writing to you to inform you that you are in danger of losing your adminship on Commons because of inactivity.

If you want to keep your adminship, you need both to sign at Commons:Administrators/Inactivity section within 30 days of today's date, and also to make at least five further admin actions in the following six months. Anyone who does not do so will automatically lose administrator rights.

You can read the de-admin policy at Commons:Administrators/De-adminship.

Thank you Trijnstel (talk) 21:45, 2 February 2012 (UTC)

Re:Leyenda[edit]

Lo siento, acabo de comprobar que no tengo la leyenda. Incluso dudo que hubiese leyenda, pues la habría fotografiado; claro que es posible que me despistase, aunque extraño, pues siempre pienso en que las fotos puedan ser útiles.

He estado mirando imágenes de internet y la única imagen general comentada que he encontrado, aunque de muy mala calidad, es esta.

No es fácil que vuelva a pasar por allí proximamente, me queda bastante a desmano (quizás más de 160km de distancia). Si tengo oportunidad y el río no está crecido, me acercaré. Si el río estuviese crecido, estimo que la piedra en que están esos azulejos estaría sumergida.

Si te interesa mucho el tema, podrías solicitar información al Centro de interpretación Aquae Querquennae] En ese enlace está el teléfono. Cuando yo fui (creo que en domingo), estaba cerrado.

Un cordial saludo--Miguel Bugallo 22:42, 20 March 2012 (UTC)

saludos[edit]

comentario para precisar: la foto es el curso del rio Tepalcatepec al entrar a la Laguna de la Presa del Infiernillo En ella se ve el nivel muy bajo de la Laguna y el curso del rio aparece, es una vista que repite año con año y es muy bella, al igual que lo es cuanto se cubre de agua en su totalidad

Flag deletion discussion[edit]

Hi there. This is just to notify you that File:Austr.Aborig.png has been nominated for deletion. As you were involved in an earlier deletion discussion over the same design, I would appreciate your insight on the same concerns. The discussion is at Commons:Deletion requests/File:Austr.Aborig.png. Osiris (temp) (talk) 04:44, 3 April 2012 (UTC)

Template:Potd/2012-07-03 (en)[edit]

Hi Dodo - I am just letting you know that I changed the wording in today's POTD description to "Japanese," as the word you used is generally considered as a pejorative term. Thanks for helping out with POTD! Logan Talk Contributions 04:21, 3 July 2012 (UTC)

Dodo just copied the description from the file page, he didn't introduce the term. See Talk:Main_Page#Picture_of_the_day_wiki_link. --99of9 (talk) 01:14, 4 July 2012 (UTC)

File:Griffin.JPG[edit]

Commons-emblem-issue.svg File:Griffin.JPG has been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether it should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry.

If you created this file, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with it, such as a copyright issue.
Please remember to respond to and – if appropriate – contradict the arguments supporting deletion. Arguments which focus on the nominator will not affect the result of the nomination. Thank you!


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

FunkMonk (talk) 10:38, 24 September 2012 (UTC)

Hi Dodo ![edit]

I mention you at AN/U. Penyulap 01:26, 8 April 2013 (UTC)

File:Goat.jpg[edit]

Commons-emblem-issue.svg File:Goat.jpg has been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether it should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry.

If you created this file, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with it, such as a copyright issue.
Please remember to respond to and – if appropriate – contradict the arguments supporting deletion. Arguments which focus on the nominator will not affect the result of the nomination. Thank you!


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

Splintercellguy (talk) 13:55, 28 August 2013 (UTC)

Notification about possible deletion[edit]

Commons-emblem-issue.svg Some contents have been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether they should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at their entry.

If you created these pages, please note that the fact that they have been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with them, such as a copyright issue.
Please remember to respond to and – if appropriate – contradict the arguments supporting deletion. Arguments which focus on the nominator will not affect the result of the nomination. Thank you!


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

Affected:

Martin H. (talk) 19:38, 5 July 2014 (UTC)