User talk:MoMu - Fashion Museum Antwerp

From Wikimedia Commons, the free media repository
Jump to: navigation, search
Welcome to Wikimedia Commons, MoMu - Fashion Museum Antwerp!
Afrikaans | Alemannisch | العربية | Asturianu | Azərbaycanca | Беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ | Български | বাংলা | Català | Čeština | Dansk | Deutsch | Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ | Zazaki | Ελληνικά | English | Esperanto | Español | Euskara | Estremeñu | فارسی | Suomi | Français | Frysk | Galego | עברית | हिन्दी | Hrvatski | Magyar | Հայերեն | Interlingua | Bahasa Indonesia | Italiano | 日本語 | ქართული | 한국어 | Latina | Lietuvių | Македонски | മലയാളം | मराठी | Bahasa Melayu | Plattdüütsch | नेपाली | Nederlands | Norsk bokmål | Occitan | Polski | Português | Português do Brasil | Română | Русский | Scots | Slovenčina | Slovenščina | Shqip | Српски / srpski | Svenska | Kiswahili | தமிழ் | ไทย | Türkçe | Українська | Vèneto | Tiếng Việt | 中文 | 中文(简体)‎ | 中文(繁體)‎ | 中文(台灣)‎ | +/−

-- Wikimedia Commons Welcome (talk) 13:08, 13 March 2013 (UTC)

File:Decorative motif, mittens and cravat in silk Chantilly bobbin lace, 1850-1910.jpg[edit]

Why it should include "MoMu_-_Fashion_Museum_Province_of_Antwerp,_www.momu.be._Photo_by_Hugo_Maertens,_Bruges"? The current title is short and descriptive. File's description clearly attributes the photographer. Read COM:File naming.—Bill william comptonTalk 12:27, 15 March 2013 (UTC)

File:Jacket and shawl in chintz, skirt in glazed printed cotton, 1770-1800. MoMu - Fashion Museum Province of Antwerp, www.momu.be. Photo by Hugo Maertens, Bruges..jpg[edit]

I'm sure they're highly competent in their own fields, but there's only so much featureless monocolor green background which is reasonably needed -- consult what Commons:Overwriting existing files#Substantial crop or un-crop says about File:Miyasaka Hakuryu II - Tigress with Two Cubs - Walters 71909.jpg (the second image version being a change specifically in accordance with Commons policies). Meanwhile, your filenames for these images are somewhat annoying... AnonMoos (talk) 16:30, 10 July 2013 (UTC)

Can't you come up with something more constructive or useful to do than readding featureless monocolor green background when Commons:Overwriting existing files#Substantial crop or un-crop strongly suggests that you shouldn't? If such images are not allowed to be edited in any particular, then they aren't under a real CC-BY-SA-3.0 license. Maybe you should focus on cutting down the length of the filename to something reasonable... -AnonMoos (talk) 18:28, 7 August 2013 (UTC)
The image is a work of art itself of a well-known photographer. It is oke to create a derivative work, but the original is the complete artwork and should be kept as that is how it is originally published in a paper publication, the way how this photo is taken is where the photographer is known for. Romaine (talk) 12:41, 23 September 2013 (UTC)