User talk:LX

Welcome to the user talk page for LX!

Are you responding to a message that I left on your user talk page? Please respond there.

Continuing discussions where they started makes them easier to follow. If I wrote something on your talk page, I should have it on my watch list. (If I seem to have overlooked a response, you may remind me here.) If you write something here and expect a response, expect it here (so watch this page).

Sign your posts by typing four tilde characters (~~~~). If you want to start a new discussion on a new topic, place your post at the bottom of the page under == A descriptive heading ==. Please be civil, assume good faith and avoid personal attacks. (See the talk page guidelines.)

Archived discussions are in User talk:LX/Archive.

Copyright

This discussion has been moved back to User talk:TheJoker#File:007LogobyJKR.jpg. Please respect my request to keep discussions where they started. Don't continue discussions from elsewhere on this page, as this makes discussions harder to follow. Thank you. —LX (talk, contribs) 09:05, 18 January 2013 (UTC)

Hi LX

I removed the comment at the Village pump in the support section of the proposal to apologise to Dimitri about the mishandling of his userpage. Please feel free to re-ad support, or something to the discussion section, I didn't re-add the comment there myself, as it seemed on second glance to simply incite. Possibly you could consider the light hearted remarks left by others in the spirit they were written. Not that I'm saying pouring petrol on a bad situation isn't the wikipedia way, but the purpose of the exercise was to put out a fire, rather than start several more. Penyulap ☏ 17:52, 2 February 2013 (UTC)

Sorry, what? On what basis did you think it was appropriate for you to censor my comment on Commons' main discussion board? I don't see any indication that the comment I replied to was in a section reserved for "support" or immune from rebuttal. What exactly are you saying that my comment incited? Is asking others to mellow worse than suggesting that fellow contributors be "hung, shot, and then drawn and quartered"? —LX (talk, contribs) 18:22, 2 February 2013 (UTC)

I'm sorry if I'm misunderstood, I hope you're not upset here, it's hard to tell sometimes. The section with just support in it followed the proposal and then there was another section called discussion right under it. It's easy to make more sections and please feel free.

The expression 'hung, drawn and quartered' is a figure of speech, or at least it has been since the 14th century. It's not meant to be taken literally and I don't think that we actually have the ability on commons to do that to a person. I think it's safer to figure it is used in a deliberately humorous or dramatic manner. I'm not trying to censor your comment so much as save some embarrassment, feel free to take the comment seriously if you really feel strongly about it. The purpose of the exercise is re-affirm the purpose of the project, and to try to fix what has so clearly gone wrong.

How do you feel about it btw ? I mean this whole thing where his photographs are so massively award winning and do you know I finally just checked one of the links just that moment for the first time, and National Geographic, and a bunch of other industry sites feature his work. That's pretty cool. Some people have mentioned that it all comes down to jealousy. Do you think that there could be people who are jealous of all those industry awards ? do you think that might have something to do with all of this drama ?

Where you mention about being mellow, I agree, that's a great idea, how can that idea be applied to the 'drawn and quartered' comment ? or my -(o)-(o)- glaring comment do you figure ? Penyulap ☏ 18:58, 2 February 2013 (UTC)

here is the part that I removed. At first glace, because of the highlighting, it may seem that only your comment was removed, but looking carefully, it wasn't your comment that was removed, it was two comments that I removed, one each from you and canoe1967. That's the 'incite' part, it's not your comment so much as both of them that were going off into that scene from the movie Zoolander where the supermodels are playfully splashing each other with the petrol hoses at the gas station. To sort of help out with keeping the 'support' section about 'support', I took them out. THAT is when I had such trouble finding an appropriate place for them. I still don't know where such comments could go. do you ? Penyulap ☏ 19:11, 2 February 2013 (UTC)

Again, I still don't see anything stating that comments directly following your proposal were immune to rebuttal, and I don't see why I should need to make a separate section to discuss something on a discussion board. I'm more baffled than upset; I'm not used to comments just being removed like that.

The user who removed the links from Dmitri's user page (and who has undone that edit and apologised) edits under his full name. I did not find the suggestion that he should be shot particularly humorous. I'd rather we didn't use that kind of hostile rhetoric. If anything, I would have expected that comment to be struck. —LX (talk, contribs) 19:41, 2 February 2013 (UTC)

He didn't say just shot, he mentioned hung, drawn and quartered. There is an article on the topic on english wikipedia. If you really feel he was actually making a death threat then by all means take it to the admin noticeboard, but don't say I didn't do my best to save you the embarrassment of as canoe1967 puts it not knowing "the difference between a firmly worded anecdotal opinion and a death threat.". I tried my best, but some people insist on looking the way they do. Penyulap ☏ 20:40, 2 February 2013 (UTC)

And Sarah Palin didn't really mean for Gabrielle Giffords to get shot in the head when she put a crosshairs symbol on the map of her district and asked supporters to "RELOAD" – it just happened to happen. Even Canoe1967 doesn't seem to suggest the comment was intended to be funny, but rather "firmly worded" opinion. I disagree with throwing such "firm" words around, and I'm not at all embarrassed about that. —LX (talk, contribs) 20:48, 2 February 2013 (UTC)

Going to stop my Wikimedia commons account

This discussion has been moved back to User talk:Whitetararaj#Copyright violations. Please respect my request to keep discussions where they started. Don't continue discussions from elsewhere on this page, as this makes discussions harder to follow. Thank you. —LX (talk, contribs) 16:24, 4 February 2013 (UTC)

Deleting Omegahouse.jpg from Wikimedia Commons

I am asking that you reconsider my request to delete the subject photo, considering that I uploaded it. The picture was originally used for an article on Wikipedia for self-promotion purposes, which is why the article on the fraternity got deleted from Wikipedia. Given this reason, I believe this photo should also be removed. I don't believe there is any value of keeping it here, and as the person who originally took the picture it is my wish to see it removed, especially since the original article linking to this picture got deleted for that specific reason. Victor8698 (talk) 07:01, 11 February 2013 (UTC)

Hi Victor! You've nominated the file for deletion twice. So far, none of the reasons for deletion you've given have been based on our deletion policy. I left a comment on one of those discussions (which you did not respond to), but I was not the one to close either discussion. I suggest you discuss the matter with the administrators who closed the requests. —LX (talk, contribs) 09:24, 11 February 2013 (UTC)

Licence Help

I've recently gained permission from a flickr author to upload his images from flickr. What licence do I need to use please? IJA (talk) 19:46, 11 February 2013 (UTC)

I've replied at Commons:Upload help#Licence help. Please don't crosspost. —LX (talk, contribs) 21:03, 11 February 2013 (UTC)

On models...

Hi LX, from your comment at Commons:Deletion requests/File:Fiat 880 DT tractor.jpg, I gather you have an interest in models, or have at least been somewhat following the outcomes of related discussions. I've tried to assemble thoughts and support at User:Elcobbola/Models and I was wondering whether you’d be interested in giving me feedback. I’m largely hoping to learn whether or not you feel it is clear/understandable/accessible/etc. and, maybe more importantly, whether you think it successfully makes the case. Эlcobbola _talk 17:54, 15 February 2013 (UTC)

I can't claim to have a special interest in scale models, but it is an area that I do come across from time to time when dealing with copyright related matters in general.

A few comments on your essay:

• The essay is a bit US centric. Of course US copyright law always applies to Commons, but other jurisdictions might also be at play, so it's worth noting that copyright laws of other countries are based on similar principles.
• Some of the strongest points are made near the end. An introductory summary should mention that case law and official US copyright registration forms confirm that models are eligible for copyright protection.
• "illegible for copyright" should be "ineligible for copyright [protection]"
• I personally try to avoid linking to policies and guidelines by their page names or shortcuts, so instead of explicitly pointing to COM:UA, I'd link the text "does not protect useful articles." This also shortens the sentence.
• While we're on the topic of the link to that page: the points you make in the background section should really be incorporated in Commons:Derivative works#I know that I can't upload photos of copyrighted art (like paintings and statues), but what about toys? Toys are not art!, which currently reaches the right conclusions for the wrong reasons.
• Do you have a reference for the claim that Mondrian's simple geometric shapes are eligible for copyright protection? If not, bringing up a potentially controversial example might detract from the actual topic.
• In general, the background section might be a bit long. I personally don't mind it, but I'm afraid most of our readers' attention span only stretches so far.
• The case law contains quoted text with nested quotes. The inner quotes should use single quotes.

In general, I think it's ready for the project namespace. Good initiative! —LX (talk, contribs) 18:51, 15 February 2013 (UTC)

Good points, all. Thank you for taking a look. "A bit US centric" is being far too kind; it is entirely US-based. This is deliberate, as works on the Commons must be free both in the U.S. and their country of origin. Given that U.S. considerations thus apply to all works, it's the logical first consideration. In an unfortunate sense, it doesn't matter what other countries say, as U.S. law will be the test (as an example of precedent, U.K. law grants copyright to faithful replications of PD works. The U.S., however, does not, so Commons policy is to ignore U.K. law–even for U.K. works). One could perhaps call this imperialist--and I have some sympathy for the notion, not being American myself--but ultimately it’s just simpler to confine discussion to the dominant jurisdiction. If this essay becomes something more formal, I would nevertheless hope others would contribute information from other jurisdictions. Эlcobbola _talk 19:08, 15 February 2013 (UTC)

Right, everything needs to clear US copyright law as a "first hurdle," and when it comes to scale models, US copyright law is pretty much always going to be the most limiting factor. I still think it's worth pointing out that this focus is a deliberate one to avoid objections in cases involving models from other countries. —LX (talk, contribs) 19:30, 15 February 2013 (UTC)

Hi LX, I've tried to implement your suggestions and drastically shorten the explanation to arrive more quickly at the punchline, so to speak. If you're still interested, I would appreciate any feedback you're willing to offer. Эlcobbola _talk 23:22, 4 March 2013 (UTC)

Looks like you've addressed all my comments (except a couple of remaining nested quotation marks in the case law section) and made some other major improvements in the process. I'd say it's even more ready for the project namespace now. —LX (talk, contribs) 18:00, 5 March 2013 (UTC)

Thanks, again. I think I've fixed them now. Эlcobbola _talk 19:33, 5 March 2013 (UTC)

No subject

From Itapirkanmaa:

Insufficient license and not supported by source; source merely says "vapaasti julkaistavissa" (publicly available/freely publishable) and does not articulate whether derivatives are allowed, whether this applies to commercial usage, etc., as required by COM:L. Note user uploaded a similar image (File:Oasisazipods.jpg) saying it was "Copyrighted free use provided that the use is non-commercial" which suggests a failure to understand the level of freeness required by the Commons. Эlcobbola talk 17:42, 15 February 2013 (UTC)

The phase "vapaasti julkaistavissa" means plainly, simply and irrevokably "freely publishable". Who made the other faulty translation for you? By all means publicly declare your expertise in the Finnish language if you are able to read Finnish that well yourself.

Moreover, the picture has ACTUALLY BEEN CLEARED PREVIOUSLY FOR CC by the request of the user Makele-90 (who seems to have some authority somewhere), after he had kindly contacted the originator of the work the Finnish press agency STT. Please contact him.

Regarding the other one of my pictures, I will therefore need to ask my contact person ABB Finland again for a licence in these very words:

"I, Mr/Ms XX, acting on behalf of and as the representative of the ABB corp, who is the legal originator of the enclosed picture, hereby declare for all intents legal and otherwise that the said picture is free for ALL kinds of publication in the entity known as "Wikipedia Commons", this including, but not being limited to, commercial, non-commercial, educational, institutional and private uses. The picture can be resized when and if needed. In all instances, the picture must be accompanied by a written indication to the effect that the copyright holder of the picture is and remains ABB Finland."

What the effing thing is a "derivation" of a picture? Where does it say such licence has to be explicity applied for?

(You will excuse me for having filed for an author account at one of Wikipedia alternatives actually.) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Itapirkanmaa (talk • contribs) 19:50, 15 February 2013‎ (UTC)

Please read the instructions above. You failed to sign and date your post, and you posted it under a heading about the copyrightability of scale models. Your entry seems to have nothing to do with that topic. In fact, I have no idea why you've come to my user talk page to discuss this matter. You seem to be responding to a deletion nomination over at Commons:Deletion requests/File:Azipod, early design with retrofitted fin..jpg, which I've had absolutely nothing to do with. Please keep discussions where they started. —LX (talk, contribs) 20:02, 15 February 2013 (UTC)

one copyvio

please go to my user page becaues I uploaded a photo of the glitch pokemon and its from bulbapedia and needs to be deleted. --Starship9000 (talk) 17:45, 17 February 2013 (UTC)

Only administrators can delete files. If you know of something that's a copyright violation, just edit the file description page and add {{copyvio|Explanation of why it's a copyvio}}. —LX (talk, contribs) 20:24, 17 February 2013 (UTC)

Add this on my talk page:

== [[:File:TenQuestionMarks.png]] ==

{{Autotranslate|1=File:TenQuestionMarks.png|base=Copyvionote}}

Thanks!--Starship9000 (talk) 01:48, 18 February 2013 (UTC)

The only purpose of that template is to let you know that a file has been tagged for deletion. If you're the one requesting the deletion, there's no point in me or anyone else notifying you. Anyway, File:TenQuestionMarks.png does not look like it would be eligible for copyright protection; see Commons:Threshold of originality. (I took the liberty of formatting your message a bit.) —LX (talk, contribs) 17:01, 18 February 2013 (UTC)

A cupcake for you!

For the clever catch with the DR of Rumanareaz. §§Dharmadhyaksha§§ {T/C} 10:04, 20 February 2013 (UTC)

Thank you! —LX (talk, contribs) 11:41, 23 February 2013 (UTC)

AN/B post

Hi LX. Can you take another look at Commons:Administrators' noticeboard/Blocks and protections#Juan esteban daza reyes? I can't fathom why Sanandros converted these obvious CSDs of yours to DR. They were all sourced to "internet" and a quick Google search easily found them on skyscrapercity. I'm left scratching my head on this one. INeverCry 21:40, 28 February 2013 (UTC)

I'm as puzzled as you, so I have no good answers. You said pretty much what I was going to say. Thanks for taking care of it. —LX (talk, contribs) 21:44, 28 February 2013 (UTC)

Mr. Nordstrom, important

Hej, jag är journalist och arbetar för en berömd tidning i Turkiet. Som ett team, med mina kollegor, vill vi utveckla biografier av kända personer. Det kan tyckas en upphovsrättsbrott, men det är det inte. Alla bilder är tagna av vårt team, men jag laddar upp dem. Vi bestämde oss för att beskära dem och ladda upp till Flickr. Det finns ingen kränkning alls. Jag kan bevisa hur du vill. Du kan kommunicera med fotografer. Jag ber dig att återställa dem. Najpoznatiji (talk) 17:33, 3 March 2013 (UTC)

Tror du att jag är dum på riktigt eller? Hitta något bättre att göra med din tid. —LX (talk, contribs) 17:39, 3 March 2013 (UTC)

Hi

Hi LX the user Marocdima scan from the books thank's --— Mouh2jijel ^[Talk] 20:07, 3 March 2013 (UTC)

I've reviewed the remaining contributions and nominated some for deletion. If you have additional information to provide, please do so in the deletion discussions. You'll find the links on the user's talk page, starting at User talk:Marocdima#File:Ifni war.jpg. Thanks! —LX (talk, contribs) 17:40, 5 March 2013 (UTC)

Your revert...

I'm honestly impressed how users are threated in this wonderful wikimedia-project. I really hope, you never have problems in any projects here. Thanks for your help! --93.212.89.246 11:59, 9 March 2013 (UTC)

You mean this revert? As it says right at the top of the page, Commons talk:Community portal is only intended for discussions about the contents of the page Commons:Community portal. It is not intended for general questions. General questions left on that page tend to remain unseen and unanswered for quite some time, as evidenced by the three questions above yours, dating back to November of last year. Also, please don't crosspost – especially not without mentioning that you have. —LX (talk, contribs) 12:25, 9 March 2013 (UTC)

Well, I don't know, WHERE to post my question. I'm now trying it here. It would have been helpful to show me where to post it. I'm active since 2005 in various Wikipedia projects, but I don't understand the structure of commons. I'm just trying to get my login back on. --93.212.89.246 13:45, 9 March 2013 (UTC)

Again, it says right at the top: "Posts addressing the general public on Commons are best placed at the Village pump." Commons:Forum is the German language version of that page, so you've found the right place, and you'd already done that by the time I removed your comment from Commons talk:Community portal. Therefore, I didn't think you needed any more help with that part. —LX (talk, contribs) 14:12, 9 March 2013 (UTC)

User:KostastozisT

Hi LX. I've blocked this user for a week. Let me know if the issues continue when he comes back. INeverCry 00:35, 1 April 2013 (UTC)

Good. I'll try to remember to keep an eye out. —LX (talk, contribs) 07:53, 1 April 2013 (UTC)

OTRS

Hi LX. I was wondering, since you had OTRS access in the past, why don't you request it again? It would certainly help us and you. :) Regards, Trijnstel_talk 13:28, 1 April 2013 (UTC)

I appreciate that. The reasons are mainly that it makes a lot less sense without being an administrator and that it potentially comes with a lot of the same problems as long as Commons policy is to ignore key aspects of copyright law in the jurisdiction I'm in. —LX (talk, contribs) 14:19, 1 April 2013 (UTC)

thanks

Thanks so much for the feedback on the Welcome to Commons draft! I've done a big set of revisions based on the feedback so far; if you have a chance, please take a look and let me know if you notice anything else that can be improved. We're hoping to have the text more or less set by a week from now, so that the designer can get started building the layout.--Sage Ross (WMF) (talk) 18:05, 3 April 2013 (UTC)

The recent changes look good from a quick glance. Things are a bit busy at the moment, but I'll see if I get more time to have a closer look in the next few days. Thanks, —LX (talk, contribs) 11:21, 4 April 2013 (UTC)

Special:PermanentLink/93310533#File:J Devil (Jonathan Davis).jpg and File:Killbot.jpg Permissions

LX to answer your questions and concerns on the Killbot.jpg, Korn, 2013.jpg, and the J Devil (Jonathan Davis).jpg's from the OTRS Noticeboard. All 3 files are owned solely by Killbot, Jonathan Davis, and Korn. The photographers (Terrance Blanton, Deven Taylor, and Rick Wenner) were hired to take those photos but the copyrights are owned by each of the respective artists. Prospect Park, the manager for each of the artists, authorized me to release those photos to the Commons. As the emails indicate from Brian Simpson from Prospect Park. Sebastien Paquet is Korn's photographer and has sent OTRS an email authorizing me to release those photos for him and Korn. These are busy people and they have given me the permissions to post them for them so that Wikipedia has current photos of the artists. I am a close personal friend of Jonathan Davis' and try to help get things added to Wikipedia that normally never get updated due to the permissions needed to get them uploaded and released properly. Tell me what you need so I can provide OTRS with what is necessary to undelete the files and so they will not be deleted yet again. I have provided emails on all files directly from the proper releasing authorities so tell me what's needed to fix this and I'll get it done. Nbcwd (talk) 00:56, 4 April 2013 (UTC)

Hi! I see that you've already received replies at Commons:OTRS/Noticeboard#Image:Killbot.jpg and Image:J Devil (Jonathan Davis).jpg and that the deleted files (except File:Korn NYC.jpg) have been restored. My main concern was some discrepancies with the file description pages, which have now been fixed. Basically, our file description pages should always credit the correct authors, and the author of a photograph is still the photographer even if they don't hold the copyright (which could happen if it's a work made for hire or a copyright transfer was made in writing). The OTRS folks should make sure that the information on the file description pages match the information they've received via e-mail when they mark a file for which the permission has been verified. When I asked them to do that, I guess some other issues turned up. Good to see that's now been resolved! —LX (talk, contribs) 18:11, 4 April 2013 (UTC)

Yes, thankfully it's all taken care of now...I think! ;) I decided not to provide more information for the Korn NYC.jpg as that photo was from 2011 and they have since taken a recent band photo which is the Korn, 2013.jpg. I will be uploading more photos of the members to use on their individual Wikipedia articles soon and HOPE I now have the right method to do it so that the photos are cleared for use on Wikipedia. I only upload ones that are owned by Korn and all of their members/projects as those are the only ones I'm authorized to upload per their management. Thank you again for all your help! Nbcwd (talk) 13:12, 5 April 2013 (UTC)

Plcoopr

Thank you for the information I hope I got this right Yes...I think they are on there way to being deleted, rightfully so. I will read the polices again to see if i can get a deeper understanding. I am trying to become a responsible editor of Wikipedia.Plcoopr (talk) 18:51, 7 April 2013 (UTC)

File:Interior view of Stockholm Public Library.jpg

If you think that Swedish FOP does not cover building interiors as in this case, please kindly file a deletion request. I ask you only because you are experienced in Swedish FOP matters, unlike me. Every country's FOP is different. Best Regards, --Leoboudv (talk) 05:02, 8 April 2013 (UTC)

•  Comment: On second thought, you can ignore my message. I did not know that the architect Gunnar Asplund died in 1940. So, images of the building would be in the public domain anyway. Sorry to disturb you. --Leoboudv (talk) 05:06, 8 April 2013 (UTC)

  No problem. As for the general case, Swedish copyright law states that "buildings may be depicted freely." I don't see anything that limits it to building exteriors. I'd say the only potential complicating factor would be decorative elements that are not an inherent utilitarian part of the building, like gargoyles. —LX (talk, contribs) 16:57, 8 April 2013 (UTC)

Advocaat

Background: User talk:Howcheng#File mover rights (permanent link)

There is a significant difference between advocaat and Dick Advocaat: one is for drinking, and one is for hiring to run your football team. Having a photo called "advocaat.jpg" is stupid and wrong, because if an idiot wants to upload a photo of a glass of rich eggy liqueur, that idiot will call it "advocaat.jpg", and all the articles about the football coach will be altered, and many people will be upset. And there are many idiots who upload photos to Commons without taking the time to consider the possibility that a filename may already be in use - consider this list of the first thousand filenames that are used by multiple files and the only difference is capital letters, and of which there are over twenty thousand.

There are many files that I don't rename even though much superior filenames are possible, because I don't see any justification for renaming them other than "well, this name is better". Before I act, I must judge that there is an actual serious potential for confusion -- filenames that do not have actual meaning might as well be worthless garbage. Names should be meaningful and without ambiguity. Commons is not a museum exhibit where flaws and errors must be enshrined and preserved for all eternity. I rename files if they need to be renamed, because they are not properly distinguishable from other files. File:African Bush Elephant.jpg and File:African bush elephant.jpg are completely different, but I can't think of a reason to rename either of them, so I've left them untouched. On the other hand, I renamed "African Civet.JPG" to "Habitat range of the African civet.jpg" because, although it is indeed pertinent to the African civet, the filename implies that (like "African civet.jpg") it is a photo of an African civet, but it is not. It is a map. When people try to write articles, and they use filenames in wikicode, and they make tiny little mistakes by (for instance) using capital letters for file extensions... they freak out. They clutter the help channels and the help forums and the help e-mails and they even call people who edit Wikipedia and they say WHAT'S WRONG THIS ISN'T THE PICTURE IT'S SUPPOSED TO BE WHY IS IT DIFFERENT SOMEONE VANDALIZED IT I CAN'T FIGURE THIS OUT I QUIT and then they're gone.

I support making Commons more usable by humans. I am pro-human. Commons is meant to be used, not to be worshipped in eternal unchanging perfection glory hallelujah praise Jimbo.

What is the difference between "After.jpg" and "AFTER.jpg"? Don't look at them, just tell me. What about "Abies koreana 02.JPG" and "Abies Koreana 02.jpg"? Or "90 mile Beach.JPG" and "90 mile beach.jpg"? Now explain that to your grandmother over the phone while she's trying to edit a page and getting all flustered because it's the wrong picture.

"Aberdeen street.jpg" is a street in Aberdeen, Scotland. "Aberdeen Street.jpg" is a street named "Aberdeen Street" in Hong Kong. If you honestly believe that neither of these filenames should be changed -- or if you believe that they should be changed but that Policy Does Not Allow It -- then you're not part of the solution, you're part of the problem. If you have any questions about other specific filemoves I've made, feel free to ask, and I'll give you a more detailed explanation of why I did it. Otherwise... back off, leave me alone, and go do something productive. DS (talk) 20:54, 9 April 2013 (UTC)

I agree that filenames should be meaningful, unambiguous and useful to humans. Many of the original names of files that you have renamed would not be accepted for new uploads, and that's a good thing.

Our file renaming guidelines provide for moving files with completely meaningless or misleading names. The examples it gives for completely meaningless names are "22785u9ob807b3c4f4" and "DSC 1342", and misleading names are exemplified with "MY CUTE MOUSE" for something more aptly named "Dutch pet rabbit" and "1BIGGest nOSE everS33n" for something more appropriately described as "John Doe at concert." It explicitly states that files should not be renamed simply because the new name looks a bit better. A filename consisting only of the depicted person's surname (like File:Advocaat.jpg or File:Gusenbauer.jpg) is far from ideal, but it is neither misleading nor completely meaningless. Adding the person's given name is an example of "the new name looks a bit better."

Now, I don't believe in following guidelines blindly. There are exceptions to almost every rule, and there is nothing wrong with dealing with unusual cases with a bit of uncontroversial pragmatism. However, routinely deviating from agreed standards is not a good thing in a collaborative project. Doing so indicates that either the guidelines should be changed, or that what you're doing is against consensus. Indeed, renaming files on the basis that their names are too general has recently been proposed, and consensus is clearly unfavorable: Commons talk:File renaming#Too general names.

The reason that our guidelines for renaming files are this conservative is not to exhibit flaws, but that renaming files can cause problems which outweigh the benefits of a slightly better name. As far as I can see, the biggest such problems are bugs in the Mediawiki software, particularly bugzilla:35721 and bugzilla:22390. I would not be surprised if the guidelines are relaxed if/when those bugs are resolved.

Until that happens, I'd ask that you focus on uncontroversial examples (like File:22651715 b765764f49 b.jpg and File:P3240003.jpg) for a start and rely on the standard renaming rationales. You'd still have plenty of work to do for quite some time. —LX (talk, contribs) 11:31, 11 April 2013 (UTC)

Help

Background: User talk:Martin H.#Questions (permanent link)

Hi Alex. Since you seem to be more interested in helping me than Martin I thought I'd come to you for help instead.

Ok, so it turns out I was mistaken, the person on the Russian Wikipedia never uploaded their pictures to Commons, just the Russian Wikipedia. But the pictures are the property of the user that uploaded them and they put them on free use. How can I put their pictures on Commons? --TheShadowCrow (talk) 01:15, 10 April 2013 (UTC)

It would help greatly if you'd specify which files you're asking about. As for the general case, again, see Commons:Moving to Commons. —LX (talk, contribs) 11:36, 11 April 2013 (UTC)

I tried doing it myself, but couldn't. Here are the files.

• ru:File:Robert Arzumanyan.jpg
• ru:File:Valeri Aleksanyan.JPG
• ru:File:Walter Poghosyan.jpg
• ru:File:David Manoyan.jpg
• ru:File:Karen Muradyan.jpg

I think the names should stay the same out of respect to the photographer. --TheShadowCrow (talk) 13:08, 11 April 2013 (UTC)

Yes, as long as the original filename is sensible, it's best to keep it the same when transferring to Commons. Then the local version can be deleted without needing to update articles where it's used.

You say that you weren't able to transfer the files. Which method did you use, and which problems did you encounter? I'd recommend Commons Helper or Commons Helper 2 after confirming your identity. —LX (talk, contribs) 13:35, 11 April 2013 (UTC)

My screen just crashed. I think it's working now, assuming I uploaded this file correctly. File:Robert Arzumanyan.jpg --TheShadowCrow (talk) 16:13, 11 April 2013 (UTC)

Yes, all the required information is there, but you should add some categories to the file – Category:Association football players from Armenia maybe and probably a few others. Sorry for the slow response; I'm on a business trip at the moment. —LX (talk, contribs) 21:48, 14 April 2013 (UTC)

Alright no problem and thank you. --TheShadowCrow (talk) 00:25, 16 April 2013 (UTC)

Help

Hello LX,

This User removes sana stop warning messages indicating that the page on which it was affixed does not contain enough information (like here: File:Ifni-Sahara Maritime Province Registration Ensign.gif and here: File:Tramway Casablanca Ligne 1.PNG.

In addition, it distorts the map loading Expre as their version (File:Morocco-Ottoman Empire relations.jpg, Release: October 16, 2010 at 23:59 and version: July 13, 2012 at 02:06 (mistakes on purpose)... and many others

Thank you.

--— Mouh2jijel ^[Talk] 08:22, 14 April 2013 (UTC)

File:Ifni-Sahara Maritime Province Registration Ensign.gif has a copyright tag, explaining that it is too simple to be protected by copyright, so I'm not sure why you think that it missing any information. I can't make sense of the speedy deletion rationale "load after a removing" that you've given for File:Tramway Casablanca Ligne 1.PNG, but obviously, it's being disputed, so instead of edit warring, I'd suggest you take it to a regular deletion discussion. In any case, I have no powers beyond your own, so I'm not sure what you want me to do. You'd be better off discussing it with Omar-toons directly, and if you need help from an administrator, use Commons:Administrators' noticeboard. —LX (talk, contribs) 22:01, 14 April 2013 (UTC)

Thank you LX, I ask your help because I know you have the best experience as administrators. thank you too --— Mouh2jijel ^[Talk] 16:50, 15 April 2013 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Copyright Watcher Barnstar
	For all the hard work you do on Commons. Thank you! Steinsplitter (talk) 17:15, 10 May 2013 (UTC)

Thanks! —LX (talk, contribs) 20:15, 10 May 2013 (UTC)