User talk:Epicgenius

From Wikimedia Commons, the free media repository
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Babel user information
en
zh-2
Users by language

My main user talk page is en:User talk:Epicgenius on English Wikipedia.

Good morning, Epic Genius[edit]

Hey there. Sorry for coming back late, as I've been busy in life nowadays. Just wanted to inform you that I plan on asking for a standard offer sometime next month or so. Also, I need to ask if you can please tell Kew Gardens aka Union Tpke to come here so that he and I can contact one another. Or you can please tell him to contact me at "Your MTA Wiki". I'm known as RollOver at both NYCT Forums and Your MTA Wiki. I really got to inform Kew Gardens aka Union Tpke about some member on NYCTF that repeatedly keeps downvoting his and my posts for literally no reason, so I wonder if he can send that person a private message and telling that person to knock it off. Thanks. JoesphBarbaro (talk) 11:06, 15 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@JoesphBarbaro: Sure, no problem. It's good to hear from you again. epicgenius (talk) 15:00, 15 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Did you just move ~1000 images as a result of a cosmetic category change without prior discussion? Seriously? Also, as if that wasn't enough, you moved the category from a Commons standard-compliant version (Buses of […]) to a somewhat strange style choice of yours. Sigh. What was it that you intended to clarify anyway? That the buses may no longer be owned or operated by MTA Regional Bus Operations? That's fairly obvious and applies to all of the thousands of Buses of […] categories on Commons.    FDMS  4    21:33, 31 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@FDMS4: I apologize if I moved to the wrong title. But the corresponding Wikipedia page is at MTA Regional Bus Operations bus fleet with the redirect under Buses of MTA Regional Bus Operations. So naturally I synchronized the Commons category. It has nothing to do with ownership, but now that I think about it, that can be a problem since this covers the buses of MTA Bus as well as of MTA New York City Bus. So yes, I am serious about this, and I intend to move it back later. epicgenius (talk) 21:46, 31 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks – as far as I know there's a fundamental difference in category naming on Commons and Wikipedia with regards to of vs. appending (Category:People of the United Statesw:Category:American people). Happy to hear category restructuring ideas.    FDMS  4    22:05, 31 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
@FDMS4: Sure, I think what we can do is create redirects to the category from the Wikipedia title (e.g. Category:American people should redirect to Category:People of the United States) so w:Template:Commonscat on any Wikipedia does not redirect to a redlink category. Just a suggestion, though. epicgenius (talk) 21:42, 1 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Thankfully, the (English) Wikipedia Commonscat template now uses Wikidata to determine where to link to when no Commons category name is set. I'm generally fine with such redirects as well, as long as Commons doesn't have to curate (in this case) 120 of them   FDMS  4    22:21, 1 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
@FDMS4: OK, so I guess there is no problem with the commons categories then. Thank you for your help, anyway. epicgenius (talk) 00:30, 2 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

48th Street Bridge Reconstruction[edit]

I created Category:48th Street Bridge Reconstruction (Sunnyside, Queens) back in April 2016. You do know you could've sent many of the recent pictures you uploaded there, right? ----DanTD (talk) 22:17, 14 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@DanTD: Sorry, I didn't know the category existed. My mistake. epicgenius (talk) 22:20, 14 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Metrorail stations[edit]

For quite some time now I wanted to ask you why you've moved most Metrorail station categories from names like Historic Overtown/Lyric Theatre metro station to Historic Overtown/Lyric Theatre (Metrorail station). The latter appears to be common only for some US train stations, while appending the type to the name is AFAIK considered a Commons-wide general standard (at least for Europe). Ethymologically, putting the type in disambiguation brackets IMO doesn't make a lot of sense since for example there is only one subject called Historic Overtown/Lyric Theatre, meaning that the (Metrorail station) disambig should strictly speaking be removed, thereby rendering the category title almost meaningless. Again, I would have appreciated being given the opportunity to discuss this beforehand.    FDMS  4    18:27, 13 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@FDMS4: I think you should see Project:USSTATION and the contentiousness over it. It involves suffixes of US rail stations' articles. Some want to simplify to "XXX Station" or "XXX station", while others want it kept as "XXX (YY system station)". I disagree with this Project:USSTATION somewhat, but it's apparently what enwiki community wants. As for Commons, I thought the commonscats should be similar to the enwiki and other wikis' article titles, to make it less confusing. (I just noticed now that the Metrorail stations' articles were moved some time ago, though.) epicgenius (talk) 18:32, 13 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Nope, see my comment from 2016-05-31 22:05. Any objections to moving them back to the names with the metro station suffix? Personally, I don't find station alone to be descriptive enough (what if there is a filling station at the same location?).    FDMS  4    18:38, 13 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
I don't know. Is there any notable filling station with that name on Commons? We can get to further disambiguation among metros, locations, etc. if "station" proves to be ambiguous and there are two or more "stations" of any type with the same name at the same location. If the Historic Overtown/Lyric Theatre metro station is the only station that has a Commons category, it can be called "Category:Historic Overtown/Lyric Theatre station". epicgenius (talk) 18:44, 13 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Actually, a common scenario is suburban/regional/intercity rail or bus stations using the same name. Also, as I'm only realising now, solely using station would probably conflict with Commons' longstanding practice of using the terms train station and for GBR railway station (or sometimes unfortunately a local-language equivalent thereof).    FDMS  4    19:35, 13 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
It's not that common for metro stations to all share the same name as bus stations, though, unless they run parallel. But if it's Commons practice, then "metro station" is fine. epicgenius (talk) 19:42, 13 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

16:32, 16 November 2016 (UTC)

10:08, 19 December 2016 (UTC)

Category discussion warning

Eiffel Tower illuminated as a memorial to the November 2015 Paris attacks has been listed at Commons:Categories for discussion so that the community can discuss ways in which it should be changed. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry.

If you created this category, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for discussion 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. If the category is up for deletion because it has been superseded, consider the notion that although the category may be deleted, your hard work (which we all greatly appreciate) lives on in the new category.

In all cases, please do not take the category discussion personally. It is never intended as such. Thank you!


I'll have to check my program 🍺💲🚬 15:21, 24 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

File:Chuck Close self portrait in tile.jpg has been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether it should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry.

If you created this file, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with it, such as a copyright issue. Please see Commons:But it's my own work! for a guide on how to address these issues.

Please remember to respond to and – if appropriate – contradict the arguments supporting deletion. Arguments which focus on the nominator will not affect the result of the nomination. Thank you!

TLSuda (talk) 22:33, 11 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

18:16, 23 January 2017 (UTC)

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

If you created this file, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with it, such as a copyright issue. Please see Commons:But it's my own work! for a guide on how to address these issues.

Please remember to respond to and – if appropriate – contradict the arguments supporting deletion. Arguments which focus on the nominator will not affect the result of the nomination. Thank you!

Train2104 (talk) 14:22, 14 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

File:Serv chg (8697270614).jpg has been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether it should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry.

If you created this file, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with it, such as a copyright issue. Please see Commons:But it's my own work! for a guide on how to address these issues.

Please remember to respond to and – if appropriate – contradict the arguments supporting deletion. Arguments which focus on the nominator will not affect the result of the nomination. Thank you!

Train2104 (talk) 15:30, 15 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

File:Serv chg (8696173149).jpg has been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether it should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry.

If you created this file, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with it, such as a copyright issue. Please see Commons:But it's my own work! for a guide on how to address these issues.

Please remember to respond to and – if appropriate – contradict the arguments supporting deletion. Arguments which focus on the nominator will not affect the result of the nomination. Thank you!

Train2104 (talk) 15:30, 15 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Please cite a reliable source (i.e. from the MTA) for "Inwood" being an official part of this station's name. If you cannot do so, please do not move the cat again. Beyond My Ken (talk) 18:43, 19 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Sure. Look at the official subway map. Please do not move the cat like you just did with your botched cut and paste move, which I'll be reverting. epicgenius (talk) 19:31, 19 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Also, please refer to the official list of subway stations. There is an entry for "Inwood - 207 St" on the "IND,8th Av - Fulton St" line since "Inwood" is part of the MTA's official name for the station. epicgenius (talk) 19:36, 19 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Ah, it wasn;t a "botched cut-and-paste move" it was a standard move using cat-a-lot. Beyond My Ken (talk) 02:55, 20 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
I see. Sorry for the confusion. The categories were just cut and pasted, so that's what I meant. epicgenius (talk) 12:08, 20 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Category Removing[edit]

I don't understand why I can't remove a category from an image if their are numerous other categories for the same image. The Buses of MTA Regional Operations has alot of images that don't belong. I thought that any user could remove categories as long as there was at least one category for each picture. I don't know why the removal of one or two categories was undid despite the clutter in the category. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Olsen24 (talk • contribs) 21:35, 30 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Replied on Olsen24's talk page. epicgenius (talk) 22:22, 30 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Your VFC installation method is deprecated[edit]

Hello Epicgenius, we are aware that using the old installation method of VFC (via common.js, which you are using) may not work reliably anymore and can break other scripts as well. A detailed explanation can be found here. Important: To prevent problems please remove the old VFC installation code from your common.js and instead enable the VFC gadget in your preferences. Thanks! --VFC devs (q) 16:23, 22 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Pay attention to copyright
File:NYC subway map full @ Hudson Yards.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 also find Commons:Copyright rules useful, or you can ask questions about Commons policies at the Commons:Help desk. If you are the copyright holder and the creator of the file, please read Commons:But it's my own work! for tips on how to provide evidence of that.

The file you added has been deleted. If you have written permission from the copyright holder, please have them send us a free license release via COM:VRT. If you believe that the deletion was not in accordance with policy, you may request undeletion. (It is not necessary to request undeletion if using VRT; the file will be automatically restored at the conclusion of the process.)

Warning: Wikimedia Commons takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing.

Afrikaans  asturianu  azərbaycanca  Bahasa Indonesia  Bahasa Melayu  català  čeština  dansk  Deutsch  Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎  English  español  euskara  français  galego  hrvatski  italiano  Lëtzebuergesch  magyar  Malti  Nederlands  norsk bokmål  norsk nynorsk  oʻzbekcha / ўзбекча  Plattdüütsch  polski  português  português do Brasil  română  sicilianu  slovenčina  slovenščina  suomi  svenska  Türkçe  Tiếng Việt  Zazaki  Ελληνικά  беларуская беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎  български  македонски  русский  српски / srpski  тоҷикӣ  українська  հայերեն  मराठी  বাংলা  മലയാളം  ပအိုဝ်ႏဘာႏသာႏ  မြန်မာဘာသာ  ไทย  한국어  日本語  中文(简体)‎  中文(繁體)‎  עברית  العربية  فارسی  +/−

Train2104 (talk) 17:32, 8 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

العربية  беларуская беларуская (тарашкевіца)  ပအိုဝ်ႏဘာႏသာႏ  বাংলা  català  čeština  dansk  Deutsch  Deutsch (Sie-Form)  Ελληνικά  English  español  euskara  فارسی  suomi  français  galego  עברית  hrvatski  magyar  հայերեն  italiano  日本語  ಕನ್ನಡ  한국어  lietuvių  latviešu  македонски  മലയാളം  मराठी  မြန်မာဘာသာ  norsk bokmål  Plattdüütsch  Nederlands  norsk  polski  português  română  русский  sicilianu  slovenčina  slovenščina  српски / srpski  svenska  ไทย  Türkçe  українська  اردو  Tiếng Việt  中文(简体)  中文(繁體)  +/−
Warning sign
This media was probably deleted.
Thanks for uploading File:MetroMapEnlarged.png. This media is missing permission information. A source is given, but there is no proof that the author or copyright holder agreed to license the file under the given license. Please provide a link to an appropriate webpage with license information, or ask the author or copyright holder to send an email with copy of a written permission to VRT (permissions-commons@wikimedia.org). You may still be required to go through this procedure even if you are the author yourself; please see Commons:But it's my own work! for more details. After you emailed permission, you may replace the {{No permission since}} tag with {{subst:PP}} on file description page. Alternatively, you may click on "Challenge speedy deletion" below the tag if you wish to provide an argument why evidence of permission is not necessary in this case.

Please see this page for more information on how to confirm permission, or if you would like to understand why we ask for permission when uploading work that is not your own, or work which has been previously published (regardless of whether it is your own).

The file probably has been deleted. If you sent a permission, try to send it again after 14 days. Do not re-upload. When the VRT-member processes your mail, the file can be undeleted. Additionally you can request undeletion here, providing a link to the File-page on Commons where it was uploaded ([[:File:MetroMapEnlarged.png]]) and the above demanded information in your request.

4nn1l2 (talk) 06:35, 13 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

العربية  asturianu  беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎  বাংলা  català  čeština  dansk  Deutsch  Ελληνικά  English  español  euskara  فارسی  suomi  français  galego  עברית  hrvatski  magyar  italiano  日本語  한국어  македонски  മലയാളം  norsk bokmål  Plattdüütsch  Nederlands  norsk nynorsk  norsk  polski  português  português do Brasil  русский  sicilianu  slovenčina  slovenščina  svenska  ไทย  Türkçe  українська  Tiếng Việt  简体中文‎  繁體中文‎  +/−
Warning sign
This media may be deleted.
A file that you have uploaded to Wikimedia Commons, File:Waterproofing installation at the secant wall of the Track A approach structure which transitions trains from surface track to the tunnel below ground. (CH061A, 12-12-2017) (25191183338) (2).jpg, is missing information about where it comes from or who created it, which is needed to verify its copyright status. Please edit the file description and add the missing information, or the file may be deleted.

If you created the content yourself, enter {{Own}} as the source. If you did not add a licensing template, you must add one. You may use, for example, {{self|GFDL|cc-by-sa-all}} or {{Cc-zero}} to release certain rights to your work.

If someone else created the content, or if it is based on someone else's work, the source should be the address to the web page where you found it, the name and ISBN of the book you scanned it from, or similar. You should also name the author, provide verifiable information to show that the content is in the public domain or has been published under a free license by its author, and add an appropriate template identifying the public domain or licensing status, if you have not already done so. Warning: Wikimedia Commons takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing.

Please add the required information for this and other files you have uploaded before adding more files. If you need assistance, please ask at the help desk. Thank you!

Elisfkc (talk) 04:00, 7 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

SVGs[edit]

Hi, I noticed in some of your BSicon uploads there are groups with no attributes, title elements like <title>Layer 1</title>, and IDs like id="svg_2". If you're using Inkscape or similar to draw the files, you should just remove those from the source code before you upload the files. Thanks, Jc86035 (talk) 09:13, 21 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Jc86035: Thank you for the note. I will include these elements for all my subsequent SVG uploads. Is there a specific reason why <title>"Layer 1"</title>, id="svg_2", etc. are discouraged? epicgenius 15:18, 21 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Mostly because they don't mean anything. There's no specific technical need to make BSicons as compact as reasonably possible, but it helps with editing their code. (I usually also re-order all the attributes to a semi-standard order; convert Windows line breaks (CR+LF) to Unix line breaks (LF); and remove spaces before />, though this isn't strictly necessary and no one ever asked me to do it.) Jc86035 (talk) 15:25, 21 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
@Jc86035: I see. So should I just remove these elements, then? epicgenius 15:27, 21 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah, just remove things that doesn't have a practical purpose (though useful/"correct" things like the UTF-8 declaration, indentation, and the main <title> should be kept, I think). Jc86035 (talk) 15:43, 21 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
OK, thanks. epicgenius 15:45, 21 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

11:29, 5 March 2018 (UTC)

12:25, 26 March 2018 (UTC)

File:86thStreet- Chuck Close, Subway Portraits (31374025090).jpg[edit]

Hi Epicgenius. Could you could clarify the copyright status of this file at COM:VPC#File:86thStreet- Chuck Close, Subway Portraits (31374025090).jpg. -- Marchjuly (talk) 11:17, 23 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Notification about possible deletion[edit]

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 see Commons:But it's my own work! for a guide on how to address these issues.

Please remember to respond to and – if appropriate – contradict the arguments supporting deletion. Arguments which focus on the nominator will not affect the result of the nomination. Thank you!

Affected:


Yours sincerely, - Alexis Jazz ping plz 07:51, 11 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Latest message for Collaboration team newsletter; Growth team's newsletter invite[edit]

Hello

Sorry to use English if that's not your favorite language.

You are receiving this message because you were reading the Collaboration team newsletter.

The Collaboration team doesn't longer exists. That team was working on building features that encourage collaboration. This is the latest message for that newsletter.

The Growth Team, formed in July 2018, supports some former Collaboration projects. The Growth Team's main objective is to ease new editors' first steps on wikis, through software changes. You can discover all objectives and missions of the Growth team on its page.

If you wish to be informed about Growth team's updates about easing new users first steps, you can subscribe to the new list to get updates. The first message from Growth –with a call for feedback on a new project– will be posted in a few days!

If you have questions or you want to share experiences made on your wiki about new users' first steps, please post them on the team talk page, in any language.

On behalf of the Growth team, Trizek (WMF) (talk) 10:29, 22 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

MTA Regional Bus Routes by borough[edit]

Was there any discussion on splitting off the Category:MTA Regional Bus routes category by borough? Because I'm really glad you did this. My only question is, why are you removing additional borough categories for buses that run through two of them? ----DanTD (talk) 13:25, 26 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@DanTD: There wasn't really a formal discussion. I just decided to split off the routes by borough because the parent category was too long to navigate. Thanks, by the way.
As for removing additional borough categories, I wasn't sure if the routes should only be categorized based on its prefix, like on Wikipedia. For instance, the M60 route has a significant portion in Queens, but has an M-prefix and is only listed on the List of bus routes in Manhattan article. epicgenius (talk) 13:28, 26 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Ahh, but at the same time, the Bx7 only has a single image, and it's in Marble Hill. That really should be filled up with some Bronx images, but either way it makes more sense to me that the M60 should have the additional Queens category, even though it's only added on the List of bus routes in Manhattan article. ----DanTD (talk) 13:36, 26 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]
@DanTD: Sounds good to me. I was more concerned about the number of routes that run through Brooklyn and Queens, which is really high. epicgenius (talk) 13:38, 26 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Queens especially. Yikes! I don't want to defeat the purpose of the split, but I'd still like to make sure the categories reflect the true nature of the way things are. ----DanTD (talk) 13:55, 26 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]
@DanTD: OK. I guess you can add the other categories if you'd like, but I'm not sure about categories like Category:Q58 (New York City bus), which runs for less than 200 feet in Brooklyn. epicgenius (talk) 23:29, 26 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

grange image[edit]

Re: the picture of the Brooklyn Grange you just reverted, it was actually nominated for deletion once before for the same reason. See Commons:Deletion requests/File:Brooklyn Grange Rooftop at Brooklyn Navy Yard 2.jpg. Didn't notice a new [self-defeating] image had been uploaded to circumvent that. — Rhododendrites talk20:43, 23 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Rhododendrites: Yeah. I actually just saw it today while uploading my images of the Brooklyn Navy Yard (I'm Ryan Ng on Flickr). At first I thought it should be deleted if the management wanted it to be deleted, but then I saw the deletion discussion had been closed as keep, and then this "Location owner requested removal" image had been uploaded in its place. Worse, it was actually displayed on the Brooklyn Grange article on Wikipedia for six months, so when I saw it on Wikipedia at first, I thought there was something wrong with the internet. epicgenius (talk) 20:48, 23 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Gah. I tend to be sympathetic when an article subject requests removing an image. In this case, it had been a while and there was at least one instance of it being used based on the free license. Also, it's OHNY! The default is that photography is allowed except when stated explicitly in the guide. The Grange even participated again in 2018 with no such caveat.
Out of curiosity, why do you upload to Flickr first, then transfer? I suppose it's just easier that way with Flickr2Commons? — Rhododendrites talk21:03, 23 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
@Rhododendrites: For the removal, that was I was thinking too. Since the image was already being used and the request was several months after the upload, the image doesn't qualify for any speedy deletion, and any removal request would be very hard unless the image actually poses harm.
And in regards to Flickr, the Wikimedia Commons uploader has a limit of 50 files at a time. With Flickr, I can mass-upload using Flickr2Commons. epicgenius (talk) 21:11, 23 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Stationary Figures[edit]

Heya,

I was happy but surprised to see Category:Stationary Figures. I don't know the background for these -- has the artist released them into a public domain/with a free license?

(Haven't been back to Industry City lately, but still plan to take a few pics next time I'm there). — Rhododendrites talk21:02, 10 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Rhododendrites: I'm not sure. I think it's not copyrighted if the artwork is surrounded by the context of something else, e.g. File:23 St-6 Av after ESI Dec 2018 29.jpg. There are three files that I'm not sure about.
Regarding Industry City: it's fine. There's no rush for the images. epicgenius (talk) 01:12, 11 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
For context, I was looking through some local users' contributions, putting together a slideshow of NYC photography by Commons users for Wikiday. I did notice there are several examples of public art caught up in your uploads. Someone with the time and inclination to be more fastidious will likely nominate some of them for deletion. The idea of something being ok because it's part of a larger, more important scene is de minimis. Basically, if an image would be equally valuable without the copyrighted work, and as long as the copyrighted work isn't prominent within the image. The one you've linked is in the gray area. Something like File:23 St-6 Av after ESI Dec 2018 30.jpg would just be a straightforward copyvio if the depicted image isn't documented as public domain or otherwise freely licensed. Do with this information what you will. :) Unfortunately, the US doesn't have a freedom of panorama that covers public art -- just buildings. — Rhododendrites talk02:15, 11 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
@Rhododendrites: Yeah, that's what I figured :-). That sucks, though that there isn't FOP with artwork. epicgenius (talk) 02:33, 11 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
File:Gov't Shutdown (10318640505).jpg has been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether it should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry.

If you created this file, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with it, such as a copyright issue. Please see Commons:But it's my own work! for a guide on how to address these issues.

Please remember to respond to and – if appropriate – contradict the arguments supporting deletion. Arguments which focus on the nominator will not affect the result of the nomination. Thank you!

B dash (talk) 02:44, 27 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Community Insights Survey[edit]

RMaung (WMF) 01:15, 10 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Reminder: Community Insights Survey[edit]

RMaung (WMF) 15:24, 20 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

5 Av 82 St Upper East Side Manhattan?[edit]

This image looks more like it's from 84th Street to me. ----DanTD (talk) 00:00, 3 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

DanTD, it is indeed 84th Street. 82nd Street would place it in front of the Met's steps, which this clearly is not. epicgenius (talk) 00:26, 3 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]
So would you mind if I renamed the picture, or do you want to do it? ----DanTD (talk) 20:33, 4 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
UPDATE: Looks like I ended up doing it anyway. ----DanTD (talk) 22:53, 4 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Reminder: Community Insights Survey[edit]

RMaung (WMF) 20:04, 3 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Important message for file movers[edit]

A community discussion has been closed where the consensus was to grant all file movers the suppressredirect user right. This will allow file movers to not leave behind a redirect when moving files and instead automatically have the original file name deleted. Policy never requires you to suppress the redirect, suppression of redirects is entirely optional.

Possible acceptable uses of this ability:

  • To move recently uploaded files with an obvious error in the file name where that error would not be a reasonable redirect. For example: moving "Sheep in a tree.jpg" to "Squirrel in a tree.jpg" when the image does in fact depict a squirrel.
  • To perform file name swaps.
  • When the original file name contains vandalism. (File renaming criterion #5)

Please note, this ability should be used only in certain circumstances and only if you are absolutely sure that it is not going to break the display of the file on any project. Redirects should never be suppressed if the file is in use on any project. When in doubt, leave a redirect. If you forget to suppress the redirect in case of file name vandalism or you are not fully certain if the original file name is actually vandalism, leave a redirect and tag the redirect for speedy deletion per G2.

The malicious or reckless breaking of file links via the suppressredirect user right is considered an abuse of the file mover right and is grounds for immediate revocation of that right. This message serves as both a notice that you have this right and as an official warning. Questions regarding this right should be directed to administrators. --Majora (talk) 21:35, 7 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

File:86thStreet- Chuck Close, Subway Portraits (31374025090).jpg has been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether it should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry.

If you created this file, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with it, such as a copyright issue. Please see Commons:But it's my own work! for a guide on how to address these issues.

Please remember to respond to and – if appropriate – contradict the arguments supporting deletion. Arguments which focus on the nominator will not affect the result of the nomination. Thank you!

GMGtalk 14:21, 26 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Grand Central Parkway?[edit]

This picture looks more like it's from the Cross Island Parkway rather than the Grand Central Parkway. I would also tell Doug Kerr about this, but I haven't been able to get back into my Flickr account since SmugMug took it away from Yahoo and deleted my password. ----DanTD (talk) 20:31, 4 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@DanTD: Thanks for telling me. I just changed the category. There might be some more images that also need to be changed. epicgenius (talk) 00:06, 5 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Notification about possible deletion[edit]

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 see Commons:But it's my own work! for a guide on how to address these issues.

Please remember to respond to and – if appropriate – contradict the arguments supporting deletion. Arguments which focus on the nominator will not affect the result of the nomination. Thank you!

Affected:


Yours sincerely, Elisfkc (talk) 22:02, 20 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

CfD: College athletics programs[edit]

Hi, I have started a discussion to rename a large collection of categories, one or more of which you may have created or edited. Please see the discussion thread at Commons:Categories for discussion/2020/04/College athletics programs for details. Thanks, IagoQnsi (talk) 04:54, 24 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

File:Bay Parkway Subway Station (cropped).jpg has been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether it should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry.

If you created this file, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with it, such as a copyright issue. Please see Commons:But it's my own work! for a guide on how to address these issues.

Please remember to respond to and – if appropriate – contradict the arguments supporting deletion. Arguments which focus on the nominator will not affect the result of the nomination. Thank you!

Bklynculture (talk) 14:38, 12 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Notification about possible deletion[edit]

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 see Commons:But it's my own work! for a guide on how to address these issues.

Please remember to respond to and – if appropriate – contradict the arguments supporting deletion. Arguments which focus on the nominator will not affect the result of the nomination. Thank you!

Affected:

And also:

Yours sincerely, Buidhe (talk) 16:22, 17 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

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

If you created this file, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with it, such as a copyright issue. Please see Commons:But it's my own work! for a guide on how to address these issues.

Please remember to respond to and – if appropriate – contradict the arguments supporting deletion. Arguments which focus on the nominator will not affect the result of the nomination. Thank you!

A1Cafel (talk) 09:32, 5 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

File:Beach 36th Street (9642813020).jpg has been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether it should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry.

If you created this file, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with it, such as a copyright issue. Please see Commons:But it's my own work! for a guide on how to address these issues.

Please remember to respond to and – if appropriate – contradict the arguments supporting deletion. Arguments which focus on the nominator will not affect the result of the nomination. Thank you!

Vcohen (talk) 07:35, 31 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

File:Beach 36th Street (9642814732).jpg has been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether it should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry.

If you created this file, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with it, such as a copyright issue. Please see Commons:But it's my own work! for a guide on how to address these issues.

Please remember to respond to and – if appropriate – contradict the arguments supporting deletion. Arguments which focus on the nominator will not affect the result of the nomination. Thank you!

Vcohen (talk) 07:36, 31 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Jamaica Savings Bank in Elmhurst[edit]

I've posted this message on the NRHP list in Queens talk page, but the Roadside Architecture website claims the 1968-built former Jamaica Savings Bank Elmhurst branch was on the National Register of Historic Places. I don't see much evidence of that, but I wouldn't mind grouping the pics you took in a separate category. I notice some of them also have the Chase Bank next door. ----DanTD (talk) 16:36, 17 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@DanTD: Thanks for the comment. As you mentioned on the NRHP list in Queens page, this building was an official NYC landmark, but that status was later revoked. I don't know about NRHP status, but it would be really interesting if it is on the NRHP too. But I think at the moment, only the original bank is on the NRHP, if I remember correctly. epicgenius (talk) 16:54, 17 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Old private company bus[edit]

This isn't about any images of buses in Wikimedia Commons, but do you remember which private bus company in NYC had this color scheme? ----DanTD (talk) 00:05, 3 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

DanTD, I'm not sure, but I did post on Discord, asking around about this. epicgenius (talk) 14:04, 3 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Pay attention to copyright
File:USA licenseplate New York (cropped).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 also find Commons:Copyright rules useful, or you can ask questions about Commons policies at the Commons:Help desk. If you are the copyright holder and the creator of the file, please read Commons:But it's my own work! for tips on how to provide evidence of that.

The file you added has been deleted. If you have written permission from the copyright holder, please have them send us a free license release via COM:VRT. If you believe that the deletion was not in accordance with policy, you may request undeletion. (It is not necessary to request undeletion if using VRT; the file will be automatically restored at the conclusion of the process.)

Warning: Wikimedia Commons takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing.

Afrikaans  asturianu  azərbaycanca  Bahasa Indonesia  Bahasa Melayu  català  čeština  dansk  Deutsch  Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎  English  español  euskara  français  galego  hrvatski  italiano  Lëtzebuergesch  magyar  Malti  Nederlands  norsk bokmål  norsk nynorsk  oʻzbekcha / ўзбекча  Plattdüütsch  polski  português  português do Brasil  română  sicilianu  slovenčina  slovenščina  suomi  svenska  Türkçe  Tiếng Việt  Zazaki  Ελληνικά  беларуская беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎  български  македонски  русский  српски / srpski  тоҷикӣ  українська  հայերեն  मराठी  বাংলা  മലയാളം  ပအိုဝ်ႏဘာႏသာႏ  မြန်မာဘာသာ  ไทย  한국어  日本語  中文(简体)‎  中文(繁體)‎  עברית  العربية  فارسی  +/−

Regards, AntiCompositeNumber (talk) 21:32, 25 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

File:High Line Nov 2019 03.jpg has been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether it should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry.

If you created this file, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with it, such as a copyright issue. Please see Commons:But it's my own work! for a guide on how to address these issues.

Please remember to respond to and – if appropriate – contradict the arguments supporting deletion. Arguments which focus on the nominator will not affect the result of the nomination. Thank you!

Filetime (talk) 06:11, 30 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

File:High Line Nov 2019 14.jpg has been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether it should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry.

If you created this file, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with it, such as a copyright issue. Please see Commons:But it's my own work! for a guide on how to address these issues.

Please remember to respond to and – if appropriate – contradict the arguments supporting deletion. Arguments which focus on the nominator will not affect the result of the nomination. Thank you!

Filetime (talk) 06:11, 30 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Copyright undetermined[edit]

Hi Epicgenius, I am wondering if you could help us understand the situation with the copyright on this file: File:Coty - Building Charm Center-New York World's Fair 1939-1940.jpg, uploaded from NYPL : [60], stating this : "The copyright and related rights status of this item has been reviewed by The New York Public Library, but we were unable to make a conclusive determination as to the copyright status of the item. You are free to use this Item in any way that is permitted by the copyright and related rights legislation that applies to your use." Now, on this DPLA site [61] it says 'Copyright Undetermined' (same image) , then on the Library of Congress [62], it indicates that in case of Copyright undetermined, it is up to the public to investigate what the copyright status might be. Any input you could give to help us understand the matter on this deletion page [63]? Thanks, (and sorry to bother);) --DDupard (talk) 16:33, 15 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

DDupard, thanks for the message. It appears that the image was published during the 1939 World's Fair (it says 1935-45, but I highly doubt it was published before 1939). Per COM:US it falls under the rules for media first published during 1926–63. Generally, it would be public domain only if it was published "without [copyright] notice, or with notice but not renewed within 28 years of first publication".
To prove this is copyrighted (or disprove such), you need to find that there was not only a notice, but that the copyright was renewed within 28 years after it was published (i.e. before 1973). If there wasn't any copyright renewal notice, it could be public domain. Similarly, if they waited until 1974 or later to renew, then it could also be public domain. However, the presence of a copyright renewal on or before 1973 can indicate that the image is still copyrighted. Someone would have to research this matter and see if a copyright notice and a renewal was ever published along with this image. I hope this helps. Epicgenius (talk) 16:57, 15 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks Epicgenius, it does help. Quite a sleuth job ! ;). Anyhow thanks for the pictures on the Rockefeller Apartments.--DDupard (talk) 17:20, 15 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Pay attention to copyright
File:Times Sq Dec 2021 17.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 also find Commons:Copyright rules useful, or you can ask questions about Commons policies at the Commons:Help desk. If you are the copyright holder and the creator of the file, please read Commons:But it's my own work! for tips on how to provide evidence of that.

The file you added may soon be deleted. If you have written permission from the copyright holder, please replace the copyvio tag with {{subst:OP}} and have them send us a free license release via COM:VRT. If you disagree that the file is a copyright violation for any other reason, please replace the copyvio tag with a regular deletion request.


  • This file is a copyright violation for the following reason: derivative work of Paramount+
Warning: Wikimedia Commons takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing.

Afrikaans  asturianu  azərbaycanca  Bahasa Indonesia  Bahasa Melayu  català  čeština  dansk  Deutsch  Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎  English  español  euskara  français  galego  hrvatski  italiano  Lëtzebuergesch  magyar  Malti  Nederlands  norsk bokmål  norsk nynorsk  oʻzbekcha / ўзбекча  Plattdüütsch  polski  português  português do Brasil  română  sicilianu  slovenčina  slovenščina  suomi  svenska  Türkçe  Tiếng Việt  Zazaki  Ελληνικά  беларуская беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎  български  македонски  русский  српски / srpski  тоҷикӣ  українська  հայերեն  मराठी  বাংলা  മലയാളം  ပအိုဝ်ႏဘာႏသာႏ  မြန်မာဘာသာ  ไทย  한국어  日本語  中文(简体)‎  中文(繁體)‎  עברית  العربية  فارسی  +/−

Di (they-them) (talk) 01:56, 9 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Notification about possible deletion[edit]

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 see Commons:But it's my own work! for a guide on how to address these issues.

Please remember to respond to and – if appropriate – contradict the arguments supporting deletion. Arguments which focus on the nominator will not affect the result of the nomination. Thank you!

Affected:

And also:

Yours sincerely, C.Suthorn (talk) 09:56, 14 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

File:Times Sq Sep 2021 20.jpg has been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether it should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry.

If you created this file, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with it, such as a copyright issue. Please see Commons:But it's my own work! for a guide on how to address these issues.

Please remember to respond to and – if appropriate – contradict the arguments supporting deletion. Arguments which focus on the nominator will not affect the result of the nomination. Thank you!

A1Cafel (talk) 03:39, 14 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

File:Times Sq Sep 2021 09.jpg has been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether it should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry.

If you created this file, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with it, such as a copyright issue. Please see Commons:But it's my own work! for a guide on how to address these issues.

Please remember to respond to and – if appropriate – contradict the arguments supporting deletion. Arguments which focus on the nominator will not affect the result of the nomination. Thank you!

A1Cafel (talk) 03:40, 14 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

File:Times Sq Nov 2021 56.jpg has been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether it should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry.

If you created this file, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with it, such as a copyright issue. Please see Commons:But it's my own work! for a guide on how to address these issues.

Please remember to respond to and – if appropriate – contradict the arguments supporting deletion. Arguments which focus on the nominator will not affect the result of the nomination. Thank you!

A1Cafel (talk) 03:41, 14 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

File:Times Sq Nov 2021 58.jpg has been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether it should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry.

If you created this file, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with it, such as a copyright issue. Please see Commons:But it's my own work! for a guide on how to address these issues.

Please remember to respond to and – if appropriate – contradict the arguments supporting deletion. Arguments which focus on the nominator will not affect the result of the nomination. Thank you!

A1Cafel (talk) 03:41, 14 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

File:Reopening of 28 St on the 6 Line (45850903505).jpg has been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether it should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry.

If you created this file, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with it, such as a copyright issue. Please see Commons:But it's my own work! for a guide on how to address these issues.

Please remember to respond to and – if appropriate – contradict the arguments supporting deletion. Arguments which focus on the nominator will not affect the result of the nomination. Thank you!

A1Cafel (talk) 02:56, 26 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

File:Reopening of 28 St on the 6 Line (46766096361).jpg has been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether it should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry.

If you created this file, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with it, such as a copyright issue. Please see Commons:But it's my own work! for a guide on how to address these issues.

Please remember to respond to and – if appropriate – contradict the arguments supporting deletion. Arguments which focus on the nominator will not affect the result of the nomination. Thank you!

A1Cafel (talk) 02:56, 26 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

File:Reopening of 28 St on the 6 Line (32890358858).jpg has been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether it should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry.

If you created this file, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with it, such as a copyright issue. Please see Commons:But it's my own work! for a guide on how to address these issues.

Please remember to respond to and – if appropriate – contradict the arguments supporting deletion. Arguments which focus on the nominator will not affect the result of the nomination. Thank you!

A1Cafel (talk) 02:59, 26 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]


Notification about possible deletion[edit]

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 see Commons:But it's my own work! for a guide on how to address these issues.

Please remember to respond to and – if appropriate – contradict the arguments supporting deletion. Arguments which focus on the nominator will not affect the result of the nomination. Thank you!

— Preceding unsigned comment added by 19h00s (talk • contribs) 16:42, 3 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Notification about possible deletion[edit]

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 see Commons:But it's my own work! for a guide on how to address these issues.

Please remember to respond to and – if appropriate – contradict the arguments supporting deletion. Arguments which focus on the nominator will not affect the result of the nomination. Thank you!

Affected:

And also:

Yours sincerely, Epicgenius (talk) 17:29, 3 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]


Notification about possible deletion[edit]

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 see Commons:But it's my own work! for a guide on how to address these issues.

Please remember to respond to and – if appropriate – contradict the arguments supporting deletion. Arguments which focus on the nominator will not affect the result of the nomination. Thank you!

--19h00s (talk) 16:35, 14 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Notification about possible deletion[edit]

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 see Commons:But it's my own work! for a guide on how to address these issues.

Please remember to respond to and – if appropriate – contradict the arguments supporting deletion. Arguments which focus on the nominator will not affect the result of the nomination. Thank you!

Affected:

And also:

Yours sincerely, Ellywa (talk) 21:23, 23 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Notification about possible deletion[edit]

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 see Commons:But it's my own work! for a guide on how to address these issues.

Please remember to respond to and – if appropriate – contradict the arguments supporting deletion. Arguments which focus on the nominator will not affect the result of the nomination. Thank you!

Affected:


Yours sincerely, — Red-tailed hawk (nest) 04:32, 9 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Round 1 of Picture of the Year 2022 voting is open![edit]

2022 Picture of the Year: Saint John Church of Sohrol in Iran.

Read this message in your language

Dear Wikimedian,

Wikimedia Commons is happy to announce that the 2022 Picture of the Year competition is now open. This year will be the seventeenth edition of the annual Wikimedia Commons photo competition, which recognizes exceptional contributions by users on Wikimedia Commons. Wikimedia users are invited to vote for their favorite images featured on Commons during the last year (2022) to produce a single Picture of the Year.

Hundreds of images that have been rated Featured Pictures by the international Wikimedia Commons community in the past year are all entered in this competition. These images include professional animal and plant shots, breathtaking panoramas and skylines, restorations of historical images, photographs portraying the world's best architecture, impressive human portraits, and so much more.

For your convenience, we have sorted the images into topical categories. Two rounds of voting will be held: In the first round, you may vote for as many images as you like. The top 30 overall and the two most popular images in each category will continue to the final. In the final round, you may vote for just three images to become the Picture of the Year.

Round 1 will end on UTC.

Click here to vote now!

Thanks,
the Wikimedia Commons Picture of the Year committee

You are receiving this message because you voted in the 2021 Picture of the Year contest.

Delivered by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 09:15, 20 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Round 2 of Picture of the Year 2022 voting is open![edit]

Read this message in your language

Dear Wikimedian,

You are receiving this message because we noticed that you voted in Round 1 of the 2022 Picture of the Year contest, but not yet in the second round. Wikimedia users are invited to vote for their favorite images featured on Commons during the last year (2022) to produce a single Picture of the Year.

Hundreds of images that have been rated Featured Pictures by the international Wikimedia Commons community in the past year were entered in this competition. These images include professional animal and plant shots, breathtaking panoramas and skylines, restorations of historical images, photographs portraying the world's best architecture, impressive human portraits, and so much more.

In this second and final round, you may vote for a maximum of three images. The image with the most votes will become the Picture of the Year 2022.

Round 2 will end at UTC.

Click here to vote now!

Thanks,
the Wikimedia Commons Picture of the Year committee

Delivered by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 07:45, 5 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Wiki Loves Monuments in the United States 2023[edit]

Hello! In 2021, you contributed to Wiki Loves Monuments in the United States. Thanks to people like you, it was a great success with over 500 people contributing over 5,500 photos of cultural and historic sites from all over the country. Hundreds of these photos now help illustrate Wikipedia articles, improving our open knowledge about United States history, culture, and heritage. You can see the top-ten winners of the US competition here.

While the United States did not participate in Wiki Loves Monuments in 2022, I'm pleased to say that we're back for 2023 through the month of October! I'd like to welcome you to participate once again in the event. Check out our 2023 event page for more information.

Once again, thank you for participating in Wiki Loves Monuments 2021, and we hope to see you again in this year's event! If you have any questions, please leave them on the event talk page.

Thanks, ~Kevin Payravi (talk) 09:12, 13 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Notification about possible deletion[edit]

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 see Commons:But it's my own work! for a guide on how to address these issues.

Please remember to respond to and – if appropriate – contradict the arguments supporting deletion. Arguments which focus on the nominator will not affect the result of the nomination. Thank you!

Affected:

And also:

Yours sincerely, A1Cafel (talk) 03:19, 18 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]