User talk:Leafnode

From Wikimedia Commons, the free media repository

Year 2007

Year 2008

Year 2009

[edit] Is this a copyright violation?

Hi. I saw you had given Laurent1291 a warning for uploading copyrighted material. I noticed he had uploaded a TV Network logo, and I find it strange that it doesn't "meet" the criteria for copyright because it is too little stylished. Is this true? Could Image:TVNORGE_logo.png possibly be a free image? 193.157.252.133 09:54, 12 February 2009 (UTC)

There is a very thin line between logos ineligible for copyright and copyrighted material. In this case, I'd lean toward an opinion that this logo is indeed to simple. --Leafnode 13:36, 13 February 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Important proposal

I wrote a proposal for equalizing the different picture formats on FPC Please have a look. Best regards --Richard Bartz (talk) 20:37, 17 April 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Please link images

Hello Leafnode!

Thank you for providing images to Wikimedia Commons. Commons images are used by editors on many projects in many languages. Each image is put into categories. This helps other editors find them. Please add categories to each image you upload.

To add an image to a category, add the following code to the end of the page.

[[Category:Category Name]]

For example, if you are uploading a diagram showing the orbit of comets, add the following to the image description page:

[[Category:Astronomy diagrams]]

[[Category:Comets]]

This will make the diagram show up in the categories: Astronomy diagrams, Comets.

For further information on categories read Commons:Categories.

The CommonSense Tool often helps you find the best category for your image.

Here is a gallery of your images. Please check that each image has a category. If you have any questions, please feel free to ask them at the help desk. Thank you.

BotMultichillT 05:58, 9 May 2009 (UTC)

Image:Gravitational slingshot.svg is uncategorized since 8 May 2009.
Image:Stachledraht DDos Attack.svg was uncategorized on 6 September 2009.

[edit] Formularz "Prześlij plik"

Witam. Czy można/mógłbyś zmienić na stronie http://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:Upload&uselang=plownwork domyślny tekst w okienku "Oryginalne źródło:" z "Praca własna osoby przesyłającej (own work by uploader)" na szablon own, a także dodać w opisie okienka "Data:" zalecany format zapisu daty, czyli rrrr-mm-dd ? Zwykle uploaderzy tego nie zmieniają, tudzież wstawiają datę wg własnego uznania, a potem inni redaktorzy wszystko poprawiają, szkoda na to czasu. Pozdrawiam, --Chrumps (talk) 16:17, 23 May 2009 (UTC)

Komentarz do pola "data" zmieniłem, ale co do źródła nie mam pewności - z kilku języków które sprawdziłem, żaden nie stosuje szablonów w tym miejscu - to jest jeszcze do przedyskutowania. --Leafnode 06:49, 25 May 2009 (UTC)

[edit] TUSC token 570870973d03f5b2c337bf51b899866a

I am now proud owner of a TUSC account!

[edit] Polish rank images

I noticed you have tagged them with the PD-Polish Government template. Ok, however, the images still do not have a source of where they come from. If you can find the sources, great. If not, they still need to be deleted for having a lack of source information. User:Zscout370 ^{(Return fire)} 23:25, 18 October 2009 (UTC)

Most of them have author properly indicated, as they were re-created basing on official design. For the rest, I will work on getting proper sources for them. I'm just letting you know that they are not abandoned :) --Leafnode 05:58, 19 October 2009 (UTC)

[edit] File:MalmsburyCalderHighway.JPG

Any reason why this was deleted without even giving me the chance to fix what any reasonable person could see was simply an oversight in not adding a licence? I have uploaded thousands of my own photographs but apparently my work is to be deleted on sight if unlicenced. Even in commons there is supposed to be some sort of deletion process. If you undelete the file (and let me know what is going on), I will add the correct licence immediately. -- Mattinbgn/^talk 19:07, 19 October 2009 (UTC)

This file was deleted because it was marked with {{no license}} tag for more than 7 days - so it wasn't deleted "on sight". It's a standard procedure, and while if this image was tagged with no license template manually you should be notified about this mistake, omitting to add license tag while uploading file won't leave any notice on your discussion page, but that is the risk. On upload page it is clearly stated "Licensing: none selected (add a license tag in the summary box above, or this file will be deleted)". Mistakes can happen - I've restored the image, tag it, and everything's fine :) --Leafnode 19:24, 19 October 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Re: File:Bur logo 90.jpg

Whether the file is deleted or restored makes little practical difference to processing the OTRS ticket, if/when a valid permission is received we can restore it easily enough. As a practical matter I don't think files should be exempted from Commons licensing policy just because the uploader says they sent a mail to OTRS - the 30 day lag on OTRS pending is probably about right (unfortunately), but so is the 7 day for no license.

With respect to File:Bur logo 90.jpg, the file had no license specified on upload and the assertion of permission states: "...use this BuR-logo on wikipedia...". Therefore we have no indication of what free license the file is under if it was tagged with GFDL and OTRS pending I'd say keep it live, as we would have reason to believe the file was GFDL. In this case, there is no on-wiki reason to believe it is freely licensed, we can hardly use it if we don't know the license.

In this case, there was an email sent to OTRS. Summary of the info provided: "Please can I have a pic to use on WP?", "Here's a file". No indication of a license, and I'd be hesitant to call it "permission to use on Wikipedia". I see no reason to restore at this point as the OTRS volunteer working the ticket has +sysop here...--Nilfanion (talk) 00:31, 20 October 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Re: Moje grafiki

Witam

Właśnie też szukałem i rzeczywiście chyba nie ma takiego prawa że tablice muszą być zamazane. Wczroaj wrzuciłem nową wersję zdjęcia POLONEZ 1500 słubice.JPG, POLONEZ MR'83 1.5C.jpg. Czy można usunąć jedną z tych wersji ? --FSO rozmowy kontrolowane 16:27, 24 October 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Re:Images from Lithuanian Ministry of Defense

Hi mate, sure I do. They are available on Wikimedia OTRS system, under the ticket #2009040110056227. Cya, M.K. (talk) 12:23, 26 October 2009 (UTC)

I would love to do that, but I wondering - shouldn't {{OTRS received|id=2009040110056227}} tag must be placed by different editor rather then uploaded, in order to avoid mistakes, etc? M.K. (talk) 12:53, 26 October 2009 (UTC)

I don't know if that is inappropriate, whats why I am asking :) In any case feel free to add those tags. Thanks, M.K. (talk) 15:50, 26 October 2009 (UTC)

Well oky, will do myself. Thanks for the help. M.K. (talk) 16:00, 26 October 2009 (UTC)

Done :) M.K. (talk) 16:08, 26 October 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Template:Photo-by-Wojciechowscy

Nie rozumiem dlaczego zmieniles licencje z {{cc-by-sa-3.0}} na {{cc-by-sa-2.5}}. Pozdrowienia --Jarekt (talk) 12:49, 26 October 2009 (UTC)

Wygladalo to na zmianę ponieważ "{{GFDL<noinclude>|category=</noinclude>|migration=relicense}}" pokazuje na stronach plików {{cc-by-sa-3.0}}. Ale masz racje, strona [1] ma link do {{cc-by-sa-2.5}} wiec zmiana Template:Photo-by-Wojciechowscy jest prawidłowa. Powinieneś wyjasnic tego typu zmiany na Template talk:Photo-by-Wojciechowscy. Dobrze ze jesteś w kontakcie z autorami i ze dodali wzmiankę na temat cc-by-sa na ich stronie. Nie podobało mi się ze Commons zmienilo licencje wszystkich ich plików z GFDL and GFDL+cc-by-sa bez porozumienia z autorami (zakładam ze nikt się ich nie spytał przed zmiana licencji). Pozdrowienia. --Jarekt (talk) 14:36, 26 October 2009 (UTC)

Rzeczywiscie tereny wspinaczkowe sa w Stanach bardzo dobre, ale Tatry czy skalki Pod-Krakowskie, tez sa niezle. Poporzadkowalem troche wszystkie pliki w Category:Photographs by Marek and Ewa Wojciechowscy. Czy moglbys poprawic Template:Photo-by-Wojciechowscy/pl i zamienic Template:Photo-by-Wojciechowscy/Test na Template:Photo-by-Wojciechowscy? Mozna tez skasowac Template:Photo-by-Wojciechowscy-GFDL. --Jarekt (talk) 13:47, 27 October 2009 (UTC)

Dziekuje. Wspomniales ze "dodanie explicite kategorii Category:Photographs by Marek and Ewa Wojciechowscy było niepotrzebne, bo szablon to dodaje". Juz nie dodaje. Dodalem ta kategorie do szablonu z jakis rok temu tymczasowo bo nie chcialem zmieniac kazdego pliku. Teraz mialem okazje to poprawic. Tak przy okazji, jesli korespondujesz z Wojciechowskimi to moze zapytac ich o wieksze wersje tych plikow, a takze wersje bez znakow wodnych. Usuwanie tych znakow wodnych za biera czas i czesto niszczy zdjecia (porownaj File:1 Bielsko Biala 05.jpg z orginalem). Takze http://www.poczta-polska.pl/mw/ twierdzi ze ma 33,244 zfjec a my mamy 1,692. Warto by bylo skopiowac pozostale 31,552 w jakis automatyczny sposob.--Jarekt (talk) 17:22, 27 October 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Thanks.

:) –Juliancolton | ^Talk 13:32, 3 November 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Sorry?

You don't have to be sorry. Your vote seems honnest, and I'm in the same struggle as you for a better FP level. But as for describing Machu Picchu as a pile of ordinary rubbles... yes, that IS a profanity! Cheers. --S23678 (talk) 12:07, 4 November 2009 (UTC)

About self-nominations, I think it's a necessary evil since, at least for people like me, FPC is probably the biggest motivation I have at making the best possible pictures. Since I am aiming at high standards in my voting as well, I'm not making a lot of friends here... (same as you, as I can see). So, I doubt anybody will ever nominate one of my pictures for that reason. So, no self-nomination = no contributions on commons, for me. --S23678 (talk) 22:52, 4 November 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Image File:Papio hamadryas Warsaw ZOO.jpg, which was nominated by you for Quality Image status, was reviewed and has now been promoted. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates‎.

[edit] Jersey_granate.svg

whtat's the problem about it?--Mpiz (talk) 12:45, 4 November 2009 (UTC)

and the only solution at this problem is delete it?--Mpiz (talk) 15:25, 4 November 2009 (UTC)

if it is a big problem delete it again or rename it--Mpiz (talk) 08:58, 5 November 2009 (UTC)

Laboratorio grafico of it.wiki will change the format--Mpiz (talk) 09:33, 5 November 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Possible nominations

Following your coment on self nominating, I'd like you to give your opinion on these pictures. I think there could be at least 1 possible FP among them, but I'd like some external advices. Mbz1 already gave me his opinion on these ones as well. If you have time as well, you could have a look at my recent pictures of Peru (in "Cuzco" and "Machu Picchu" sections, the other pictures are a lot older), to see if there's one worth nominating. Thanks --S23678 (talk) 04:49, 6 November 2009 (UTC)

File:124 - Machu Picchu - Juin 2009.jpg

File:99 - Machu Picchu - Juin 2009.jpg

File:93 - Machu Picchu - Juin 2009.jpg

File:103 - Machu Picchu - Juin 2009.jpg

File:102 - Machu Picchu - Juin 2009.jpg

File:100 - Machu Picchu - Juin 2009.jpg

[edit] File:32-Taxpn-US-Marines-Soldiers.jpg

File deletion warning

File:32-Taxpn-US-Marines-Soldiers.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.
In all cases, please do not take the deletion request personally. It is never intended as such. Thank you!

Sv1xv (talk) 21:23, 13 November 2009 (UTC)

[edit] A couple of Tadorna ferruginea

Hello. Thank you for your remark "Left-bottom duck's head almost blends with the background. Generally objects do not pop out of the background enough" about the File http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Featured_picture_candidates#File:A_couple_of_Tadorna_ferruginea.jpg . There is an alternative here. May I please ask you to take a look at it, if you have a time? Best regards --Michael Gäbler (talk) 20:26, 15 November 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Sundeep Malani.jpg

Hi, i uploaded an image of Indian film director, Sundeep Malan, with his permission. He has sent evidence of his permission to wikimedia commons yesterday. However, an OTRS ticket has not been issued as of now. As an OTRS volunteer, could you please verify whether he did in fact send it. Thanks. Joyson Noel (talk) 07:39, 16 November 2009 (UTC)

Thanks a lot. Joyson Noel (talk) 08:50, 16 November 2009 (UTC)

Could you please also do the same for File:Tony DSouza.JPG. He has given evidence of his permission a couple of days back, but an OTRS ticket has not been issued so far. Thanks. Joyson Noel ^{Holla at me} 03:25, 22 November 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Piłsudski

Niestety... Gdybym miał, nie byłoby problemu, ale postanowiłem najpierw wykadrować - no i klops. Wolf (talk) 17:09, 18 November 2009 (UTC)

Jeśli zostawiłeś coś z efektów mojej pracy, to popełniłeś NPA, pomijając mojego nicka <ironiczny chichot>

Wolf (talk) 18:14, 18 November 2009 (UTC)