User talk:MGA73/Archive 28

From Wikimedia Commons, the free media repository
Jump to: navigation, search
Archive This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

new great bot task

Hi, I get your contact data in the IRC. I have a (or two) great task for a bot (maybe yours). There are [1] as you can see many images uploaded from enwp. Most (maybe all) are already deleted although they maybe aren't checked. Can you remove the notices (if already deleted)? Bot task two is a bit more work. As you can see here and

Summary:

There might be more problems... Mabdul (talk) 11:41, 7 June 2011 (UTC)

Hi! To start with I did the first one... Will have to check second one a bit more. --MGA73 (talk) 19:07, 7 June 2011 (UTC)
Update. All the files should be on Commons now.
You asked me to add "tp" to all the rutes. I did not know that template but I just realised it was a simple typo in the name. Will have a look a little later. --MGA73 (talk) 17:00, 8 June 2011 (UTC)
Hey great. Yeah the template is at Template:Convert to SVG, and since they are normally easily replaceable with a svg (and even smaller and in a zoomable way) the should all be tagged... Mabdul (talk) 20:10, 8 June 2011 (UTC)


Hi MGA73. I vaguely recall you once did a request similar to Commons:Bots/Work_requests#Batch_rename. Otherwise, I might just a add rename tags to the files by bot and click through it (220 aren't that many). --  Docu  at 20:22, 10 June 2011 (UTC)
Yes adding a tag with a bot and pressing move would probably be easier. --MGA73 (talk) 17:53, 13 June 2011 (UTC)

Create 2 cats?

Dear MGA73,

Could you please kindly create 3 cats for 'Criminal Minds' and Shemar Moore for these 2 image files? Thank You,

Kind Regards, --Leoboudv (talk) 07:56, 12 June 2011 (UTC)

  • By the way, would you pass this image. Is it a simple enough design or does it display creativity? No one wants to mark it.
  • File:Hizbollah3.tif

Thank You, --Leoboudv (talk) 19:34, 12 June 2011 (UTC)

I created 2 categories. You asked for 3? I also passed the file. --MGA73 (talk) 17:57, 13 June 2011 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment: I managed to create a cat for Thomas Gibson here . But its just not as detailed as the information in your cats for Criminal Minds or Shemar Moore unfortunately. Best Regards, --Leoboudv (talk) 19:20, 13 June 2011 (UTC)
  • Thanks for 'buffing up' Gibson's category. Regards, --Leoboudv (talk) 23:01, 13 June 2011 (UTC)

File:FernandoColundaénCancún.png

Is this a genuine image or a flickrwash? It looks scanned. The flickr account has only 14 images and some may be flickrwashes. I can't tell. Regards, --Leoboudv (talk) 18:38, 15 June 2011 (UTC)

  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment: It looks like Lymantria found the original source. But thank you anyway. --Leoboudv (talk) 19:49, 15 June 2011 (UTC)

File:Timoprazole.jpg

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

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


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

Ed (Edgar181) 16:56, 21 June 2011 (UTC)

I just moved it to Commons but I won't miss it :-) --MGA73 (talk) 16:33, 25 June 2011 (UTC)

File:Blue9.jpg

Pay attention to copyright
File:Blue9.jpg has been marked as a possible copyright violation. Wikimedia Commons only accepts free content—that is, images and other media files that can be used by anyone, for any purpose. Traditional copyright law does not grant these freedoms, and unless noted otherwise, everything you find on the web is copyrighted and not permitted here. For details on what is acceptable, please read Commons:Licensing. You may find Commons:Copyright rules useful. You can ask questions about Commons policies in Commons:Help desk.

The file you added has been deleted. If you believe that the deletion was not in accordance with policy, you may request undeletion.

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


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

Martin H. (talk) 18:44, 25 June 2011 (UTC)

Unforth

Unforth on flickr has changed all her image licenses on flickr to 'ARR' from 'cc by sa generic' for personal reasons. Can your mga73bot tag all her 167 images here with the regular "flickr change of license' column. I have only tagged one of her images--this one below:

Thank You, --Leoboudv (talk) 06:31, 17 June 2011 (UTC)

✓ Done --MGA73 (talk) 16:33, 25 June 2011 (UTC)
  • Thank You Michael. Its better to be safe than sorry here and to avoid any problems with this user. Regards, --Leoboudv (talk) 08:46, 27 June 2011 (UTC)

your bot MGA73bot on jawp is too fast

Hi, MGA73. My name is 赤の旋律(akasen), and I act as a sysop on jawp. Today I came here to explain jawp's bot rule to you. On jawp, unflaged bots must keep intervals of one minute. More detailed guideline is here. I recommend you to request bot flag.

Sorry for my poor English. Kind regards.--赤の旋律 (talk) 19:55, 26 June 2011 (UTC)

Sorry for my duplicate request. I didn't check your bot's page...--赤の旋律 (talk) 20:52, 26 June 2011 (UTC)
Hi. Once again thank you. I reduced per notice on IRC and just noticed this notice... I will reduce speed further. --MGA73 (talk) 21:48, 26 June 2011 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment: It seems for non-controversial items like tagging photos with flickr change of license or moving user uploaded images from wikipedia to wikicommons, mga73bot's speed should certainly be more than 1 per minute. More like 5 or 8 per minute. After all, its non-controversial. By the way, this image, may need a cat or to be cleaned up. Its a church.
  • File:Maastricht-Tongeren 035.jpg

Thank You, --Leoboudv (talk) 08:51, 27 June 2011 (UTC)

This notice has nothing to do with my work on Commons - I just got the message here because I'm not very active on ja.wiki.
And yes the file and a few hundred others in Category:Files moved from lb.wikipedia to Commons requiring review needs to be checked. I just did not have the time to do so yet. --MGA73 (talk) 16:49, 27 June 2011 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment: My apologies. I did not notice the message was for your work on wikipedia. Best Regards, --Leoboudv (talk) 20:17, 27 June 2011 (UTC)
That's ok :-) --MGA73 (talk) 20:50, 27 June 2011 (UTC)

Deletion request

Re: Commons:Deletion requests/File:Cynomys ludovicianus -Paignton Zoo, Devon, England-8a.jpg. I welcome your opinion of this deletion request and the notice currently on flickr at the site of the original image. Snowmanradio (talk) 00:10, 28 June 2011 (UTC)

The discussion has now ended with a "keep" conclusion. Snowmanradio (talk) 09:55, 28 June 2011 (UTC)
Hi! Sorry that I did not reply. I have just been on vacation and has been busy the last few days after my return. Problem seems to be fixed. --MGA73 (talk) 19:25, 2 July 2011 (UTC)

File:Frisch's_Big_Boy.jpg

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

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


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

Grcampbell (talk) 23:57, 28 June 2011 (UTC)

Thank you for the notice. --MGA73 (talk) 19:30, 2 July 2011 (UTC)

File:Captured Republican prisoners, Hankou.png

Long time no see, can you help to check the grammar, especially the information below? Thank you.--俠刀行 (talk) 13:53, 30 June 2011 (UTC)

It looks ok to me :-) --MGA73 (talk) 19:30, 2 July 2011 (UTC)

File source is not properly indicated: File:USMC LTCOL.jpg

العربية | asturianu | беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ | català | čeština | dansk | Deutsch | Ελληνικά | English | español | euskara | فارسی | suomi | français | עברית | magyar | italiano | 日本語 | 한국어 | македонски | മലയാളം | Plattdüütsch | Nederlands | norsk nynorsk | norsk bokmål | polski | português | português do Brasil | русский | slovenčina | slovenščina | svenska | Türkçe | Tiếng Việt | 中文(简体)‎ | 中文(繁體)‎ | +/−
Warning sign
This media may be deleted.
A file that you have uploaded to Wikimedia Commons, File:USMC LTCOL.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.

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!

Magog the Ogre (talk) 02:43, 2 July 2011 (UTC)

Well... You may have a point ;-) --MGA73 (talk) 19:31, 2 July 2011 (UTC)

Transfer images

See de:Wikipedia Diskussion:Commons-Transfer per Bot#Mass transfer own work images. Multichill (talk) 10:08, 2 July 2011 (UTC)

Hey. Thats not legal! It is to cool for Wikipedia ;-) --MGA73 (talk) 19:31, 2 July 2011 (UTC)

This DR

If possible, I would welcome an input from another Admin here on Commons FOP rules regarding this picture. Anatoly, an Admin on Commons, says this picture may be kept. So, I'm humbugged sadly. Thank You in advance. If you cannot participate, that's OK too. Best Regards, --Leoboudv (talk) 02:17, 28 June 2011 (UTC)

Hi! Sorry that I did not reply. I have just been on vacation and has been busy the last few days after my return. I agree that this building was/is not eligible for copyright because it is too simple. --MGA73 (talk) 19:26, 2 July 2011 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment: That's OK. Luckily, Lymantria gave an excellent reason to keep the picture. Best Regards, --Leoboudv (talk) 08:00, 3 July 2011 (UTC)

bot move check Harley 1

Hi MGA, there I am again. :-D I do not like killing the original source. In the source the uploader has provided is far more info than in {{own}}. Also I have corrected the author, attribution (the author had never said he wants to be attributed like this) and collapsed the orig log (no reason to clutter the hole page in the source view). http://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=File%3AHarley001.jpg&action=historysubmit&diff=56251763&oldid=56248410

Happy to hear your comments.

Cheers --Saibo (Δ) 21:36, 4 July 2011 (UTC)

File tagging File:Brendan Andolsek Bradley.jpg

Беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ | Català | Česky | Dansk | Deutsch | Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ | Ελληνικά | English | Español | فارسی | Suomi | Français | Galego | עברית | Magyar | Հայերեն | Italiano | 日本語 | 한국어 | Lietuvių | Македонски | മലയാളം | Plattdüütsch | Nederlands | Norsk bokmål | Polski | Português | Română | Русский | Slovenščina | Svenska | Türkçe | Українська | اردو | Tiếng Việt | 中文(简体)‎ | 中文(繁體)‎ | +/−
Warning sign
This media was probably deleted.
Thanks for uploading File:Brendan Andolsek Bradley.jpg. 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 send an email with copy of a written permission to OTRS (permissions-commons@wikimedia.org). This also applies if you are the author yourself.

Please see this page for more information on how to confirm permission, and Commons:Permission if you would like to understand why we ask for permission when uploading work that is not 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 OTRS-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:Brendan Andolsek Bradley.jpg]]) and the above demanded information in your request.

Magog the Ogre (talk) 13:35, 6 July 2011 (UTC)

This DR

Can an Admin like yourself close this DR before the 1 week period is over...when the problem here (the large watermark as you can see on the flickrlink) has been resolved by ZooFari? The nominator has no interest in withdrawing the DR because he doesn't know Common's procedures here. But the problem is fixed as you can see. Its your decision. Thank You Michael, --Leoboudv (talk) 04:33, 7 July 2011 (UTC)

  • Its OK. Someone else acted to close the DR after seeing my note on the nominator's affirmative response on wikipedia. But thank you anyway. Best Regards, --Leoboudv (talk) 06:46, 7 July 2011 (UTC)
Yep but someone did it before me :-) --MGA73 (talk) 06:47, 7 July 2011 (UTC)

This DR

Can you just comment on Common's law here and why this image may or may not be kept? Thank You, --Leoboudv (talk) 19:32, 9 July 2011 (UTC)

  • ✓ Done --MGA73 (talk) 19:37, 9 July 2011 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment: Thank you. I asked for some response from Admin Herby for the first time on his talkpage yesterday but he never responded. He edited to Jcb instead. When DRs come to complex foreign law, I am lost. MBisanz always said FOP issues gave him a headache...and I can see why. Best Regards, --Leoboudv (talk) 21:19, 9 July 2011 (UTC)
  • The uploader made a brief reply to your response in the DR. Just to let you know, --Leoboudv (talk) 18:59, 10 July 2011 (UTC)
  • Thanks for your reply. Best Regards, --Leoboudv (talk) 05:59, 11 July 2011 (UTC)

File:Tour_Perret_Amiens.jpg

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

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


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

Eusebius (talk) 07:20, 12 July 2011 (UTC)

File:Lielvārdes luterāņu baznīca 2000-05-20.jpg

I've marked several images from panoramio all from this account above. Many are 18th or 19th century manors where the architects are dead for 70 years....and because there are other images of the same building here from other contributors. (I managed to find info on a few manors online) But when it comes to churches, I usually mark them based on good faith...but this case is a problem. There is a year date of '1932' at the top of the building and this is likely the date of erection of the church logically speaking. In this case, if you agree, would you care to file a formal DR since Latvia has no FOP. One has to assume the architect died in 1940 to keep this...which seems much too tight. Unless Stalin shot the architect by 1940 as was his policy to many Baltic intellectuals after he occupied their countries between 1939-1941, we have to assume he was still alive by 1940, right? Its your decision. Thank You, --Leoboudv (talk) 08:54, 13 July 2011 (UTC)

File:Athanasios Orphanides.jpg

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

The file you added has been deleted. If you believe that the deletion was not in accordance with policy, you may request undeletion.

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


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

January (talk) 10:18, 13 July 2011 (UTC)

Good work spotting that :-) --MGA73 (talk) 12:35, 14 July 2011 (UTC)

File:JamesJabaraTombstoneMar2011.jpg

Would you pass this 1966 art or gravestone? No one has wanted to mark it and I don't know if 1960's US law makes it copyright free or not. See who uploaded it. Nehrams is very reliable but on this art, I don't know the law. Best Regards, --Leoboudv (talk) 06:42, 14 July 2011 (UTC)

Hi Leoboudv. You never stop working :-) That is nice. I think it is ok. It looks like a ordenary "symbol" so I would not call it a derivative work. Anyway it should be send to a DR if someone else thinks otherwise - it is not a speedy deletion. --MGA73 (talk) 12:35, 14 July 2011 (UTC)
  • I don't know why but it seems sometimes that only a few Admins flickr review images nowadays. I don't even touch this strange 100+ image catalogue as I don't have license review. (I only mark flickr, panoramio & picasa images) Thanks for marking the above image. Regards, --Leoboudv (talk) 19:21, 14 July 2011 (UTC)

Tagging files that contain NoCommons

Hi MGA73. Your bot has been tagging lots of files that transclude NoCommons (see also this list). Probably most of these files can be deleted on de.wikipedia, but a bunch might not be eligible to remain on Commons. As these files need an indeep assessment before they can be deleted locally, I would prefer if your bot puts them in a separate category. What about adapting de:Vorlage:NowCommons and create a subcategory of de:Kategorie:Datei:NowCommons? --Leyo 12:43, 12 July 2011 (UTC)

Hi Leyo! I had to stop the bot before the task ended because I had problems getting the bot to skip files with a de:Vorlage:NowCommons/Mängel so it is not active at the moment. The idea was to tag all files that is on Commons. NoCommons does not always mean that the file can not be on Commons it just means be carefull. I think it would be a good idea to make a change of NowCommons so it is possible to add a "|keeplocal=yes" or "|delete=no" or something like that to get files in a special (sub)category. You are welcome to move the discussion to de-wiki so the local Wikipedians will notice :-) --MGA73 (talk) 14:17, 12 July 2011 (UTC)
I put a notice to de:WD:COMT.
My idea was to have them in a separate category before they are reviewed by an admin, i.e. to separate this files from normal NowCommons files (recently transferred, no NoCommons tag). BTW: RevoBot that tags such files skips everything with NoCommons. --Leyo 14:26, 12 July 2011 (UTC)
Okay yeah telling admins to be carefull is probably a good idea. --MGA73 (talk) 14:37, 12 July 2011 (UTC)
We had discussed the issue with NoCommons here: de:Wikipedia_Diskussion:COMT#Vorlage:Commonsf.C3.A4hig_automatisch_an_geeignete_Lizenzvorlagen_heften. Probably we should continue this discussion. Maybe the MGAbot should tag files with noCommons at least with nowCommons/Mängel? The problem with with is that it will flood this cat. Not touching the noCommons files for now would be a good idea. Viele Grüße --Saibo (Δ) 15:42, 12 July 2011 (UTC)
I did a few more as a test. Some "NoCommons" are added via templates and not directly so a few was tagged anyway. So I'd probably skip this project for some time. --MGA73 (talk) 21:02, 15 July 2011 (UTC)

User Paris 16

Can you order flickrreviews (by your mga73 bot) for images which this user uploaded in 2011 and 2010...which were not marked by the flickr review bot? He uses many of his images on Vietnamese wiki which suggests he is Vietnamese which means he likely doesn't understand English and just uploads images without any {{flickrreview}} at all. This and this are classic examples images uploaded without any flickrreview by Paris 16. He has many such images--too many for 1 person to keep track off.

Secondly, I'm concerned about this image: File:Louis Vuitton, Champs-Elysées 2.jpg

  • Did the uploader type in a fake flickrpass in my name? I think I would have corrected the license version if I marked it but the image history shows no other edits--apart from the initial one. Today, I doubt it would even pass FOP in France since its in the interior of a modern building--but maybe I didn't recognise the FOP problem at the time. But I checked for any possible derivative images which I may have marked from this flickr account...and found nothing so far. Best Regards, --Leoboudv (talk) 02:52, 16 July 2011 (UTC)
I will have a look later. It is not that easy because the user sometimes add a review by himself... I could add a {{flickrreview}} to all of his uploads to be sure. If the file is free then all that happens is that the file is reviewed again and if it is unfree we can check if the original review really was added by a trusted user. But we really need someone to talk to the user. --MGA73 (talk) 08:56, 16 July 2011 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment: By last count, I saw at least 50 images uploaded by this user in 2011 without a {{flickrreview}} This excludes images where I ordered a flickrreview on his behalf since its too much for 1 person. Only a bot can tag these 50+ images with the flickrreview mark. You had done this before for this user's pictures in 2010. Best Regards, --Leoboudv (talk) 19:19, 16 July 2011 (UTC)
  • Dear Michael, All you have to do now is to ask your mga73bot to order {{flickrreview}} for images that Paris 16 uploaded from flickr in 2011. So, just set a range from today through to January 1, 2011 and you will find the images where Paris 16 uploaded images from flickr without undergoing a flickrreview. Its amazing that he can still upload images without undergoing a review. But then what do I know? I predict your bot will find 45-50 images at least. Those images uploaded in 2011 need to be marked.

PS: The best way to communicate with Paris 16 is to get a Vietnamese user to contact him. This person may help: he was just given file mover rights here and is very good with flickr licenses. I know his excellent work and he's Vietnamese, I think. Thank You, --Leoboudv (talk) 01:51, 17 July 2011 (UTC)

  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment: I'm sorry about the whole Abigor situation but on the Paris 16 images, can you just order your mga73bot to add flickrreviews to just his 2011 flickr image uploads? I think it won't take your quick bot more than a few minutes to add this tag to Paris 16's flickr pictures from 2011. Best wishes, --Leoboudv (talk) 22:49, 17 July 2011 (UTC)
  • About 86 new images to be reviewed from Paris 16 this year alone. That's a record. I was way off. Thank god for bots...and for your help. Cheers, --Leoboudv (talk) 09:14, 18 July 2011 (UTC)
You are welcome. Sorry it took so long. I hope we got them all. --MGA73 (talk) 11:32, 18 July 2011 (UTC)
By the way my bot requested review for 137 images :-) --MGA73 (talk) 16:57, 18 July 2011 (UTC)
  • That's OK. 137 images? I guess someone will have to talk to this user soon. Best regards, --Leoboudv (talk) 19:42, 18 July 2011 (UTC)

Poking bot

Can you please run the bot to "poke" the images in Category:Incomplete deletion requests - missing subpage again? There's over 670 files there. Train2104 (talk) 14:30, 19 July 2011 (UTC)

✓ Done now "only" 79 :-) --MGA73 (talk) 15:59, 19 July 2011 (UTC)
It would be nice if this bot could run on a specified frequency (daily?) Train2104 (talk) 23:52, 19 July 2011 (UTC)

File source is not properly indicated: File:3rdMarineDivision.gif

العربية | asturianu | беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ | català | čeština | dansk | Deutsch | Ελληνικά | English | español | euskara | فارسی | suomi | français | עברית | magyar | italiano | 日本語 | 한국어 | македонски | മലയാളം | Plattdüütsch | Nederlands | norsk nynorsk | norsk bokmål | polski | português | português do Brasil | русский | slovenčina | slovenščina | svenska | Türkçe | Tiếng Việt | 中文(简体)‎ | 中文(繁體)‎ | +/−
Warning sign
This media may be deleted.
A file that you have uploaded to Wikimedia Commons, File:3rdMarineDivision.gif, 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.

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!

Magog the Ogre (talk) 20:39, 19 July 2011 (UTC)

File source is not properly indicated: File:3RadBnNew2.jpg

العربية | asturianu | беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ | català | čeština | dansk | Deutsch | Ελληνικά | English | español | euskara | فارسی | suomi | français | עברית | magyar | italiano | 日本語 | 한국어 | македонски | മലയാളം | Plattdüütsch | Nederlands | norsk nynorsk | norsk bokmål | polski | português | português do Brasil | русский | slovenčina | slovenščina | svenska | Türkçe | Tiếng Việt | 中文(简体)‎ | 中文(繁體)‎ | +/−
Warning sign
This media may be deleted.
A file that you have uploaded to Wikimedia Commons, File:3RadBnNew2.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.

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!

Magog the Ogre (talk) 21:43, 20 July 2011 (UTC)

File tagging File:Seadream2.jpg

Беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ | Català | Česky | Dansk | Deutsch | Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ | Ελληνικά | English | Español | فارسی | Suomi | Français | Galego | עברית | Magyar | Հայերեն | Italiano | 日本語 | 한국어 | Lietuvių | Македонски | മലയാളം | Plattdüütsch | Nederlands | Norsk bokmål | Polski | Português | Română | Русский | Slovenščina | Svenska | Türkçe | Українська | اردو | Tiếng Việt | 中文(简体)‎ | 中文(繁體)‎ | +/−
Warning sign
This media was probably deleted.
Thanks for uploading File:Seadream2.jpg. 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 send an email with copy of a written permission to OTRS (permissions-commons@wikimedia.org). This also applies if you are the author yourself.

Please see this page for more information on how to confirm permission, and Commons:Permission if you would like to understand why we ask for permission when uploading work that is not 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 OTRS-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:Seadream2.jpg]]) and the above demanded information in your request.

--  Docu  at 08:36, 23 July 2011 (UTC)

Mass DR on these images

Dear Michael,

Please can you file a mass DR on these images below by the same uploader? The uploader had initially asked for a few images to be deleted in the images talkpage...but he didn't nominate them correctly. Instead he said something like "I am the author, I would never upload them here" in the image discussion page of some of the images. "Since they are not used, please delete them." The problem was...he used the same Commons account that uploaded the images to make this statement to say this which made me think he IS the author and copyright owner...since he has direct access to the Commons account. Prior to July 23, 2011 when he made this request, the last activity on this Common's uploader account was in January 2008. Here are the images:

Its hard to say if it is a copy vio or not since the metadata reveals 3 different cameras: Fuji, Canon and Blackberry. However, the 2 Fuji cameras are of the same model now I notice. I discussed the problem here with Adrignola and he is waiting for my next move. BUT, I don't know how to file a mass DR...unlike you when you did so to Mac9 or Urban's images years ago. Can you file the mass DR please? This has to be done by someone. Maybe you can read the now deleted talkpage message by this uploader? Regards, --Leoboudv (talk) 23:03, 24 July 2011 (UTC)

  • PS: Unless you can verify the OTRS permission message, it may be time to close this DR as delete. The DR has been sitting here for 2 weeks but the images with the unprocessed OTRS tickets have been here 5 to 8 weeks which is excessive. But please file the mass DR first above. Thank You, --Leoboudv (talk) 06:07, 25 July 2011 (UTC)
Hi! I started the mass DR and commented on the OTRS DR. The OTRS looks like a "Yeah you can use all files if you..." but we should have that in writing. --MGA73 (talk) 10:15, 25 July 2011 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment: Thanks for your help on the mass DR. On the OTRS DR, while I would like to AGF, the fact that the OTRS tickets have not been processed for so long (5 to 8 weeks) suggests to me that something is really wrong here. There is either permission or there is not. It is good that you flickrmailed the copyright owner...but if she did not give permission, she may not be happy with wikipedia and allow any of her images to be used again sadly when Nehrams2020 contacts her. Best Regards, --Leoboudv (talk) 02:40, 26 July 2011 (UTC)
  • Nehrams2020 replied in the DR and he is not happy. He says there has never been any broad permission for these images by the copyright owner. Just to let you know. I believe he wants them deleted too. Best Regards, --Leoboudv (talk) 03:01, 28 July 2011 (UTC)
Hi! Have been on a short vacation. I closed the DR now. --MGA73 (talk) 18:41, 6 August 2011 (UTC)

File:Convolute vernation.jpg

Would you be willing to flickrmail this female flickr copyright owner and ask if she would make this image either 1. public or 2. confirm if the license was "Attribution ShareAlike Creative Commons" or CC BY SA Generic--as flickr calls this license. I know that her name is Linda (as I edited it) because we have several of her images like this which passed flickrreview with this name and on the CC BY SA Generic license on Commons...before she made her images private as she said in her flickr profile sometime in 2010. Just curious. If not, one should file a DR here even though it was likely uploaded on a cc by sa generic license on wikipedia initially. Maybe its best to point out to her that she receives attribution as the author...if she is unhappy that the image was uploaded without her knowledge. Best Regards, --Leoboudv (talk) 05:04, 30 July 2011 (UTC)

Wow what a nice picture. I send a mail :-) --MGA73 (talk) 18:41, 6 August 2011 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment: Thanks for getting the flickr user to make the image public under a 'cc by sa generic' license. I agree: this photo is "a keeper." Best Regards, --Leoboudv (talk) 22:32, 7 August 2011 (UTC)

File:Batmilk.jpg

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

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


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

77.184.57.241 07:45, 9 August 2011 (UTC)

File:Church_of_Jean_d'Arc_in_Rouen,_France.jpg

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

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


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

Croquant (talk) 13:58, 10 August 2011 (UTC)

File:O2-CO2.jpg

Commons-emblem-issue.svg File:O2-CO2.jpg has been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether it should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry.

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


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

Yikrazuul (talk) 11:19, 14 August 2011 (UTC)