User talk:Mtaylor848

From Wikimedia Commons, the free media repository
Jump to: navigation, search
Welcome to Wikimedia Commons, Mtaylor848!
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)‎ | +/−

Contents

Tip: Categorizing images[edit]

Afrikaans | العربية | беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ | català | čeština | dansk | Deutsch | Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ | Ελληνικά | English | Esperanto | español | فارسی | suomi | français | galego | עברית | magyar | íslenska | italiano | 日本語 | ქართული | 한국어 | македонски | മലയാളം | Plattdüütsch | Nederlands | norsk bokmål | polski | português | português do Brasil | română | русский | slovenčina | slovenščina | српски / srpski | svenska | українська | Tiếng Việt | 中文 | 中文(简体)‎ | 中文(繁體)‎ | +/−


Hello, Mtaylor848!

Tip: Add categories to your images

Thanks a lot for contributing to the Wikimedia Commons! Here's a tip to make your uploads more useful: Why not add some categories to describe them? This will help more people to find and use them.

Here's how:

1) If you're using the UploadWizard, you can add categories to each file when you describe it. Just click "more options" for the file and add the categories which make sense:

Uploadwizard-categories.png

2) You can also pick the file from your list of uploads, edit the file description page, and manually add the category code at the end of the page.

[[Category:Category name]]

For example, if you are uploading a diagram showing the orbits of comets, you add the following code:

[[Category:Astronomical diagrams]]
[[Category:Comets]]

This will make the diagram show up in the categories "Astronomical diagrams" and "Comets".

When picking categories, try to choose a specific category ("Astronomical diagrams") over a generic one ("Illustrations"). Pro-tip: The CommonSense tool can help you find the best category for your image.

Thanks again for your uploads! More information about categorization can be found in Commons:Categories, and don't hesitate to leave a note on the help desk.

BotMultichillT (talk) 06:00, 27 December 2008 (UTC)

TUSC token 0c960c8e638c1b385757be108caac883[edit]

I am now proud owner of a TUSC account!

Categorization[edit]

Thanks for the comment. I tend to load up images first with any obvious category (or obviously useful) category and add more categories later. So further thanks for doing this for me. The categorization tool I don't find particularly helpful. I was not aware of some because of the variation between e.g. pubs and public houses, religious buildings and places of worship. Chemical Engineer (talk) 19:28, 10 April 2009 (UTC)

File:South Stand at Headingley Stadium.jpg[edit]

Català | Čeština | Deutsch | Ελληνικά | English | Español | فارسی | Suomi | Français | עברית | Magyar | Հայերեն | Italiano | 日本語 | Македонски | Nederlands | Polski | Português | Русский | Slovenčina | Slovenščina | 中文(简体)‎ | 中文(繁體)‎ | +/−


Thank you for providing images to Wikimedia Commons. Please keep in mind that images and other files on Commons must be under a free license and should be useful to the Wikimedia projects. To allow others to use your files, some additional information must be given on the description page. Most importantly:

  • Describe what it is about in a short sentence. (What does the image show?)
  • State the author and the date of creation. If you made it yourself, say so explicitly. If it is from another Wikimedia user, link to the person's local user page. Best to use CommonsHelper.
  • If you did not create the file yourself, state the source you got it from.
  • Add a copyright tag - images without an appropriate license tag will be deleted.
  • Add the image to one or more gallery pages and/or appropriate categories, so it can be found by others. To find out where an image belongs, you can use CommonsSense.

If you copied the file from another wiki, please copy all information given there and say who uploaded it to that wiki. Use CommonsHelper.

It is recommended to use Template:Information to put that information on the description page. Have a look at Template talk:Information for details of the use of this template.

You can edit the description page and change the text. Uploading a new version of the file does not change the description of the file.

Please add as much information as possible. If there is not sufficient information, the file may have to be deleted. For more information, follow the Commons:First steps guide. If you need help or have questions, please ask at the Help desk.

Thank you.

This message was added automatically by Nikbot, if you need some help about it, ask its master (Filnik) or go to the Commons:Help desk. --Filnik 17:55, 5 May 2009 (UTC)

Featured picture candidates[edit]

Hello,

I'm sorry, but I had to oppose to your three nominations. No image of these nominations meets the guidelines for featured pictures. You can find the complete guidelines here. The picture are valuable for the wikipedia, but featured picture means something special. Thanks for supporting the community. MatthiasKabel (talk) 20:25, 21 May 2009 (UTC)

Location of "Main street, Menston"[edit]

Good day Mtaylor,

Been having a viddy at your recent uploads. Have I got the location right here? Ottre 10:47, 31 August 2009 (UTC)

Leeds images[edit]

Hi Mtaylor, thanks for the kind comments and support. I have added more categories etc and have uploaded about 30 Leeds images so far. I took the pics last weekend on a flying visit. Best wishes. Ardfern (talk) 21:45, 19 September 2009 (UTC)

FPC[edit]

Have you read the guidelines for FPC at all, as it was suggested in may by Matthias Kabel? With your recent nominations, you have 10 Featured Pictures Candidates nominations that have unanimously been considered below standard, including 7 FPX! Don't get me wrong, I really do think your hundreds of photos uploads on commons are wonderful, independent of their individual qualities, and I do not question your work outside FPC at all. But, as for FPC contributions, comments like yours here and here indicates that you do have some critical judgment towards photography, which is not reflected at all on your nominations. So, take some time to read the guidelines, to compare your future nominations with existing FPs and to ask questions to regular users (I might be a bit harsh on the FPC battlespace, but I'm really not that bad when you talk with me on the side. I'd help you if you'd ask for it, no problems) before nominating other images, and you'll easily break the spell that overshadowed all your nominations up to now. --S23678 (talk) 01:23, 29 October 2009 (UTC)

Nominations for Featured Picture[edit]

From tim green aka atoach:

I would really appreciate it if you did not nominate any more of my flickr pictures for Featured Picture, and if you withdrew the nominations you have already made.

I despise competitions and never enter them; furthermore I do not like self-appointed critics dismissing my pictures in a public forum.

I am sure you meant well but was angry and upset when I stumbled across the fact that my pictures were being dragged over the coals behind my back. Tdgreen (talk) 11:14, 29 October 2009 (UTC)

Category:Churches with spires[edit]

Hi, i saw "your" Category Category:Churches with spires. With which pictures do want to fill the category? I think there are enough others, where the pictures could be categorised. So the Category is not relevant?

Best greetings ;-) --++gardenfriend++ (talk) 21:38, 30 October 2009 (UTC)


File:A view over Halifax.jpg[edit]

Pay attention to copyright
File:A view over Halifax.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)‎ | +/−

--Túrelio (talk) 21:29, 29 November 2009 (UTC)

Public footpaths in Leeds[edit]

Did you intend to create a gallery with this name or did you create it by mistake before creating Category:Public footpaths in Leeds?

  • If you intended a gallery, add some images or it will be deleted.
  • If it's a mistake, then blank it and add {{badname|Category:Public footpaths in Leeds}} and it will be deleted by an administrator. (And don't worry about the mistake --it happens to all of us.). . . . Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talkcontribs) 13:10, 13 April 2010 (UTC)

Blanking[edit]

Hi Mtaylor848,
Thank you for your contributions to Commons. I noticed you blanked Category:2010 in Salford on Commons. I asume you meant for the page to be deleted, but blanking the page is not the right way to do this. I'd like to strongly recommend to use {{speedy|reason here}} and add it on top of the page you would like to be deleted; This way it will be placed on a special list that administrators check regulary for deletion. Without this it might take a long time before it's noticed. Thanks again. 16:42, 19 April 2010 (UTC)–Krinkletalk

Walworth Castle images[edit]

Bother - I'll have to go back and correct all the dates now. Yes, you're right, and I thought I had dated it correctly. I'm copying and pasting the main form for the lot, and there are loads of them (in categories Walworth Gate and Walworth, County Durham). Botheration. But thank you for kindly letting me know before I do any more.Storye book (talk) 12:06, 3 May 2010 (UTC)

All corrected now. Sorry if it caused you inconvenience, and thanks for the timely alert. Storye book (talk) 12:46, 3 May 2010 (UTC)

Fearnville, Leeds[edit]

Hi, I am currently in the process of creating a Wikipedia article about Fearnville in Leeds and I have noticed that you have an image of the view from the Fearnville Fields looking over Seacroft. I was wondering if you have any photos of the Fearnville area that you would allow me to use for my article, or if you would let me use the photo of the view over Seacroft. If you would like to, you can see the article I am creating at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Tomdresser27/Fearnville. Please note that you will not be able to search Wikipedia for it because it is still being designed and information being gathered before it is properly added to Wikipedia, so it is in my userpage section.

Use of Fearnville photo[edit]

Hi Thankyou for allowing me to use one of your photos of Fearnville for my article. I am now getting ready to add it to Wikipedia as an article and I was wondering if you are happy with how I have attributed it to you (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Tomdresser27/Fearnville).

File:Election_poster,_Aire_Road,_Wetherby_(May_2010)_005.jpg[edit]

Pay attention to copyright
File:Election_poster,_Aire_Road,_Wetherby_(May_2010)_005.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)‎ | +/−

Tryphon 19:33, 27 May 2010 (UTC)

File:Official opening of the sailing season and yacht parade on Motława during III World Gdańsk Reunion - 39.jpg[edit]

Dear Friend!

Category:2010 in Poland is overriding for category:III World Gdańsk Reunion. Greetings. --Starscream (talk) 19:52, 3 June 2010 (UTC)

http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Strategic_Airlines_Airbus_A320_VH-YQA_(VHYQAPPH).JPG File:Darmstädter Straße Bickenbach.JPG


File:Radio Leeds car.jpg[edit]

You've uploaded a derivative work We're sorry, but File:Radio Leeds car.jpg has been marked as a copyright violation. Wikimedia Commons only accepts free content, that is, images and other media files that can be used by anyone, for any purpose. Reproductions of copyrighted works are also subject to the same copyright, and therefore this file must unfortunately be considered non-free. For more information, please read Commons:Derivative works and Commons:Freedom of panorama. You can ask questions about Commons policies in Commons:Help desk.

The file you added will soon be deleted. If you believe this file is not a derivative of a non-free work, please explain why on the file description page. In case the file has already been deleted, you may contact the administrator who deleted it or make an undeletion request.


Беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ | Čeština | Dansk | Deutsch | Ελληνικά | English | Español | Suomi | Français | Hrvatski | Magyar | Italiano | 日本語 | Македонски | Polski | Português | Português do Brasil | Русский | Slovenščina | Svenska | +/−

--guerreritoboy (talk) 17:44, 12 July 2010 (UTC)

File:Bus interchange at Leeds Bradford International Airport (24th July 2010) 001.jpg[edit]

Беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ | Български | Català | Čeština | Dansk | Deutsch | Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ | Ελληνικά | English | Esperanto | Español | فارسی | Suomi | Français | Galego | Magyar | Íslenska | Italiano | 日本語 | Македонски | മലയാളം | Nederlands | Norsk nynorsk | Polski | Português | Português do Brasil | Русский | Slovenščina | Svenska | Українська | 中文(简体)‎ | 中文(繁體)‎ | +/−


There seems to be a problem regarding the description and/or licensing of this particular file. It has been found that you've added in the image's description only a Template that's not a license and although it provides useful information about the image, it's not a valid license. Could you please resolve this problem, adding the license in the image linked above? You can edit the description page and change the text. Uploading a new version of the file does not change the description of the file. This page may give you more hints on which license to choose. Thank you.

This message was added automatically by Nikbot, if you need some help about it, ask its master (Filnik) or go to the Commons:Help desk. --Filnik 19:39, 24 July 2010 (UTC)

Flickr images[edit]

When you import images from Flickr (or anywhere really) please use the largest available resolution. The image you uploaded here had a much larger version available here. Thanks! fr33kman -s- 17:42, 26 July 2010 (UTC)

File:Tetley's brewery, Leeds (10th May 2010) 008.jpg From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia[edit]

Hello MTaylor, FYI, the referenced image does not show a turbine flowmeter. It is a magnetic flowmeter.

Rgds

Stefan Kranz


  • On closer inspection you're probably right. I shall make the ammendment when I get a minute, but I've a million and one things to do on commons and about a similar number of images to upload. Thank you for pointing out this ommision, I have only worked with turbine meters, orifice plates, venturi tubes and ultra-sonic metering devices before, hense my failure to notice its type. Thanks, regards Mtaylor848 (talk) 15:54, 5 August 2010 (UTC)

Category[edit]

Hi,

It appears that you've added some misleading categories to some of the ultimate pages I've downloaded since most of them are not related with the city of Rome but some distinct cities in Lazio. It would be great if you could double-check that. Bye.--LPLT (talk) 18:15, 9 August 2010 (UTC)

Edinburgh Castle photos[edit]

HI, Yes, the dates in the metadata are correct! The hour is one hour off however. Thus 8h00 (Central European Summer Time) was 7h00 local time. I did not add dates because these are in the metadata. AdMeskens (talk) 16:58, 4 September 2010 (UTC)

please stop spamming with categories[edit]

Hello, please stop spamming old buildings with categories 2010 in... sept 2010 in.. Those are a completely distorted categories for these images. --Havang(nl) (talk) 15:21, 14 September 2010 (UTC)

I sense it as category spamming: please don't do that. 2010 is completely outdated for these buildings; 2010 is used for events, these are buildings, look for appropriate architecture dating categories if you want to put dates. --Havang(nl) (talk) 16:08, 14 September 2010 (UTC)
I know those categories. Do you really think you can filll in by hand such categories? If the wikipedian community wants those, a bot finds date stamps and can add tenth of thousands of images to those categories in a nighttime; but those categories are not for putting picturs by date in it; these are for dated events. Yiou mayt ask a bot, they won't do this the way you do it five or ten at a time. You are wasting your time (and mine). The dates of the pictures are already fully searchable, see e.g. statistics at pages like http://toolserver.org/~reports/?wiki=commonswiki_p&report=wlm_uploaders concerning september uploads wikilovbes monuments, so there is no need for the type of photo date category you apply. Greetings --Havang(nl) (talk) 16:31, 14 September 2010 (UTC)
Mediation is oke for me. Greetings. --Havang(nl) (talk) 16:54, 14 September 2010 (UTC)

2009 in Bristol/Glos[edit]

Hi. I have those images in the Bristol and Glos cats because while the station is called Bristol, it is technically in South Gloucestershire. Also, please leave the dating. -mattbuck (Talk) 16:44, 16 September 2010 (UTC)

Jet2[edit]

Thank you for photographing the Jet2 HQ! WhisperToMe (talk) 18:26, 22 September 2010 (UTC)

  • Yeah, a lot of head offices look rather plain and uninspiring, so people may not know that in fact they have such an important role in a company. AFAIK Ryanair and Easyjet supposedly have spartan HQs. WhisperToMe (talk) 13:31, 25 September 2010 (UTC)

File:Ferry at Birkenhead and ferry at Pier Head - DSC00659.JPG[edit]

Hello Mtaylor848,

Firstly, you've tirelessly added date categories to many photos uploaded by me. Thanks very much for your dedication and hard work!

Regarding this file File:Ferry at Birkenhead and ferry at Pier Head - DSC00659.JPG. I'm not sure what would be the correct date category - it's not straightforward. I don't think "September 2010 in Liverpool" is completely incorrect as I was indeed standing at Pier Head, Liverpool when I took the photo.

However, the ferry on the left of the shot "DFDS Seaways", is at the Twelve Quays ferry terminal in Birkenhead, which is not in Liverpool. (as you may know) The Mersey Ferry on the right of the shot has just departed the Pier Head ferry terminal and is therefore technically in Liverpool, so the cat is correct in that respect.

However, it could be argued that "September 2010 in Merseyside" would be a more appropriate cat for this one as the whole shot is at least in Merseyside (The boundary between Liverpool and Wirral metropolitan boroughs runs along the middle of the River Mersey at this point), but it's not really that important.

I just thought I'd let you know part of the shot is not in Liverpool (so theoretically someone familiar with Liverpool/Merseyside could take it upon themselves to remove your added cat), and also of course I wanted to take the opportunity to thank you for your previous work,

Please leave the cat if you think best, I'm happy to let you decide.

Cheers!, Green Lane (talk) 15:38, 9 October 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for the reply. To be fair, my current description of that image is also potentially misleading as I haven't got around yet to updating the descriptions of this latest set of photos (As usual, I'll probably be doing that in a few days or so). I agree with your decision, Regards. Green Lane (talk) 15:52, 9 October 2010 (UTC)

Manchester September 2010[edit]

You have dated a couple of images from my latest uploads. Special:Contributions/ClemRutter I am uncertain as to how you find your target images, or whether you use a bot. If you are short of new images, then please have a look at my contribution list- there are usually many images taken in one spot in the space of a couple of days- which ought to make hunting a lot easier.--ClemRutter (talk) 23:03, 9 October 2010 (UTC)

Re: montages[edit]

Hi, the only montage that I have made for the commons is File:Sheffield montage.jpg. I used Adobe Illustrator to do it, but you could probably use just about any image editing software package (you might even be able to use something like powerpoint). The most difficult part for me was choosing a selection of photos that would represent the subject well but also fit together nicely in a rectangle. Once I'd chosen the images I downloaded them and loaded them all and placed them in an illustrator artboard, moving around and resizing as needed, and then exporting as a jpg. In order to get all the images to fit some of them are cropped a bit in the montage; particularly the panorama at the top. —JeremyA (talk) 18:09, 12 October 2010 (UTC)

Re: montage images[edit]

Hello! Pretty much along the lines of the advice of the previous poster, all you'd need is a simple image editing program and some patience. I used GIMP, which is open source and freely (as in free beer and speech) available. Having skimmed your user page, I think you'd be more than adept at working with the images since you seem to be into photography! I hope you make a montage of Leeds! Good luck! Tong22 (talk) 08:13, 14 October 2010 (UTC)

File:Specsavers_Opticians,_Horsefair_Centre,_Wetherby_(15th_October_2010).jpg[edit]

Commons-emblem-issue.svg File:Specsavers_Opticians,_Horsefair_Centre,_Wetherby_(15th_October_2010).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 | 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 | Tiếng Việt | 中文 | 中文(简体)‎ | 中文(繁體)‎ | +/−

Grand-Duc (talk) 18:09, 23 October 2010 (UTC)

File:York_Minster_(21st_October_2010)_012.jpg[edit]

Commons-emblem-issue.svg File:York_Minster_(21st_October_2010)_012.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 | 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 | Tiếng Việt | 中文 | 中文(简体)‎ | 中文(繁體)‎ | +/−

Dcoetzee (talk) 01:31, 2 November 2010 (UTC)

File:The_Minster_Shop,_York_Minster_(21st_October_2010)_003.jpg[edit]

Commons-emblem-issue.svg File:The_Minster_Shop,_York_Minster_(21st_October_2010)_003.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 | 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 | Tiếng Việt | 中文 | 中文(简体)‎ | 中文(繁體)‎ | +/−

Dcoetzee (talk) 01:35, 2 November 2010 (UTC)

File:York_Minster_(21st_October_2010)_007.jpg[edit]

Commons-emblem-issue.svg File:York_Minster_(21st_October_2010)_007.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 | 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 | Tiếng Việt | 中文 | 中文(简体)‎ | 中文(繁體)‎ | +/−

Dcoetzee (talk) 01:37, 2 November 2010 (UTC)

File:Banners_at_the_Yorkshire_Museum,_York_(21st_October_2010)_001.jpg[edit]

Commons-emblem-issue.svg File:Banners_at_the_Yorkshire_Museum,_York_(21st_October_2010)_001.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 | 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 | Tiếng Việt | 中文 | 中文(简体)‎ | 中文(繁體)‎ | +/−

Dcoetzee (talk) 01:39, 2 November 2010 (UTC)

File:Lendal_Tower,_York_(21st_October_2010)_001.jpg[edit]

Commons-emblem-issue.svg File:Lendal_Tower,_York_(21st_October_2010)_001.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 | 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 | Tiếng Việt | 中文 | 中文(简体)‎ | 中文(繁體)‎ | +/−

Dcoetzee (talk) 01:42, 2 November 2010 (UTC)

File:Main Street, Cushendun, September 2010 (01).JPG[edit]

Hi Michael - many thanks for notifying me about the corrupted file. Unfortunately I lost the original (due to stupidity) so I have just deleted the file. I see you are having loads of trouble with the copyright police, as am I. This is the kind of policing that has put so many off Wikipedia and it looks as if it is starting to happen here as well. Unfortunately this appears to happen to people that are active, while similar pics by others that have been there for years never get touched. I have added comment to the ridiculous Specsavers proposed deletion. I also note the stupid attack and comments on "spamming" date categories - I've had my share of that as well. It will be interesting to see how much worse this all gets - it certainly doesn't help to maintain enthusiasm or to encourage participation. Best wishes. Ardfern (talk) 22:33, 2 November 2010 (UTC)

Bloomfield Road 1995[edit]

Yeah, 1994 is just my idiotic mistake when I was renaming them. Feel free to change the filenames to 1995 if you want. Kafuffle (talk) 12:30, 9 November 2010 (UTC)

File:Lendal_Tower,_York_(21st_October_2010)_001.jpg[edit]

Commons-emblem-issue.svg File:Lendal_Tower,_York_(21st_October_2010)_001.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 | 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 | Tiếng Việt | 中文 | 中文(简体)‎ | 中文(繁體)‎ | +/−

Powers (talk) 00:16, 15 December 2010 (UTC)

It was worth defending this picture. I wish you a good 2011. --Havang(nl) (talk) 18:46, 28 December 2010 (UTC)

Yourself as well, Mtaylor848 (talk) 10:59, 30 December 2010 (UTC)

Categorising buses by location by year[edit]

Please can you not start recreating these trees? It's serious over-categorisation - we already have branches by year, which are logically subdivided by month, and branches by location, logically sub-divided by lesser and lesser geographic locations. If anyone wants to find a bus in a place in a year they can use the catscan tool to find any combination they like. It isn't feasible to create this manually for all possible combinations, and with it only existing for Leeds and Isle of Wight (both now cleared), it was of little use being woefully incomplete compared to what it would be if done fully with what images we already have.

I know you seem to like catting all sorts of things by location and month/year, and I know people have already questioned the reason why. But please realise that for UK buses at least, we already have a very well developed categorisation system with several logical defining branches, and as such there now many many things we could theoretically create specific three way categories for. But it doesn't serve much purpose to create them all, as rather than 5-10 categories per image, we would start getting closer to 25 or even more. That simply wouldn't be maintainable, or even usable. And in that context, year by location isn't as defining and so needed as anything else. Ultra7 (talk) 14:38, 21 May 2011 (UTC)

I would beg to differ. How you search for them is not the same for everyone. I personally find them useful. If you don't they don't harm. If you wish to pursue this I would suggest mediation. Mtaylor848 (talk) 11:24, 22 May 2011 (UTC)

Overcategorisation is considered harmful, period. And the harm is very real - it's no word of a lie that your personal idea of 'useful' here for UK buses could lead to the addition of a ridiculous amount of specific three way categories to every UK bus image, if everybody chose to start implementing their personally desired 3 way intersection system that they happen to also think is useful. There are several equally sensible potential combinations, given there are 7 core branches for every image. I will go wherever you like if you disagree with these basic facts and think this has sufficient benefit for everybody, but do not start recreating these any more unless or until you show others agree with you that they are useful and are not harmful over categorisation. If you do, I will seek administrator intervention. As it is, without showing that agreement, it is simply unnacceptable to have this being implemented by one user for a ridiculously small subset of images such as one city for one or two years. It's pointless. Our category systems are supposed to be universally applied for the benefit of all. If you get the approval for your idea of useful, I'll even request a bot myself to deploy this particular combination fully over the tens of thousands of images it can be applied to. Ultra7 (talk) 12:14, 22 May 2011 (UTC)

These categories were deleted without reasonable consultation. If you see Category:Buses in the United Kingdom photographed in 2010 you can see that such categories continue to exist and are very large and cumbersome given the number of images they contain, ergo I would say it would be sensible to break it down further. This kind of deletion undermines a lot of work done by users and makes it very difficult for anyone to maintain enthusiasm for the project. Your threats of 'administrator intervention' are churlish in the upmost. Mtaylor848 (talk) 13:05, 23 May 2011 (UTC)

I am one of the three editors who have to my knowledge done most work on that system, categorising and recategorising thousands of those images, and designing the system for UK buses per the established general rules and principles for categorisation. So please, if you're going to feel disheartened, imagine what it's like to see someone try and repeatedly create their own little non-standard arrangement inside a whole system they've helped set up, for no other reason apparently than they like it that way. And yes, that category exists, and the same is true for many other parallel years. That's because the UK is the root of the category system, of which year of photographing is just one branch. And if you look at it more, the further subdivision of that category branch is by time, not location, because as I've already said, there is another branch for location, among 7 in all. What you are trying to do is re-unify those two seperate branches further down the line, which is something which is actively discouraged in Commons category systems without a very good reason - because otherwise it simply wastes categorisation effort, makes it less likely other images will be categorised correctly in the first place, confuses the user looking through categories, and duplicates what can already be done using smarter tools like catscan, which cover every possible 3 way combination and more, rather than being limited to your own small decision of what is useful, and over a tiny scope in comparison to all available images.
The 2010 category is large because it was created on its own first, and the sub catting into months only came later - it will be diffused in time, and then even further if necessary - many of those images were all taken on the same day that's for sure. And in parallel, if many of them were taken in the exact same place too, but at different times, and they will further sub-catted in the location branch too if necessary. That's how it works - you subdivide on the same theme for each branch. And then as said, using tools like catscan, it becomes possible to search for every single time division & location combination. What your intervention does though infact is make that harder - people have to remember that there are subcats just for Leeds in 2009/10, and in those cases they have to set it to search down another level, and make sure they aren't getting false positives because an image in there is now in one category but on the same two branches.
Finally, frankly, if you get disheartened at the deletion of two categories containing barely 100 images, please see how annoying it is for you to keep arguing that your personal desires are more important than adhering to the system that actually follows the established rules and conventions of categorisation which are there for the benefit of everybody. And if that disheartens you, I frankly don't think you are serious about putting the amount of work in that would be required to deploy the three way system you are arguing for across all the images it should be applied to, if you did what I asked and showed it was actually needed instead of just insisting you should just be allowed to have it. I've made no threats here, I've only told you what the good practice is, and if you refuse to listen to that or to show how I'm wrong, you don't leave me any choice if you resume, because I'm not going to spend any more time explaining this to you, and I'm certainly not spending any more time deleting it for a third time. The admins (plural) who have deleted these categories in the past were all given full reasons why, the same reasons I've explained above, and they chose to delete without recourse to further consultation, so that should tell you something about whether I'm right or not on the general principles here, as I directly mentioned over-categorisation, the existing system, and things like catscan, in each of the deletion rationales. Ultra7 (talk) 02:37, 24 May 2011 (UTC)

How exactly am I arguing for my personal desires anymore so than you? You seem to imply that you are wasting time explaining something to me that I cannot comprehend. Aside from being profusely arrogant, this seems to miss the point that actually I disagree with your point on several levels of which I have explained. As someone who put much work into this I was not consulted and feel agreived with respects to the issue. I have pointed out to my mind how you are wrong and why my suggestion is more practical. I resent your authoriative tone and agree that any further dialogue with someone as obdurate as yourself would be fruitless, hence my desire to take this to mediation. Mtaylor848 (talk) 14:27, 5 June 2011 (UTC)

File:Posters_displayed_on_the_community_notice_board_in_the_Garden_of_Rest,_Wetherby_(March_2010)_001.jpg[edit]

Commons-emblem-issue.svg File:Posters_displayed_on_the_community_notice_board_in_the_Garden_of_Rest,_Wetherby_(March_2010)_001.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 | 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 | Tiếng Việt | 中文 | 中文(简体)‎ | 中文(繁體)‎ | +/−

Acather96 (talk) 07:15, 19 June 2011 (UTC)

University of Leeds[edit]

Thanks for your support for my images and contributions to the University of Leeds wikipedia page. It's a shame the moderators don't believe that my images are genuine. Unfortunately, I don't get the time to come on and check as much as I used to but the reason the images were small were due to them being my photos from my Facebook page, hence the reason the images are of smaller quality to what the moderators deem "genuine". Sorry I didn't get online in time to argue my case, I have lost the will to battle with them anymore, the crest was one thing but now they are doubting my other images, which as you will agree, have contributed to a better and more thorough article. Just a shame the moderators aren't as tolerant and educated as they lead people to believe.

Anyways, thanks for the support in the past and on the images/crest. I feel I owe you a personal response and explanation, not the "moderators" or rather judging doubters. Take care Mtaylor848, and thank again. --Freedomflag (talk) 12:05, 19 October 2011 (UTC)

Aviation Wikiproject on Commons?[edit]

Hey mate, I've had an idea of starting an Aviation WikiProject on Commons. I have created a page at User talk:Russavia/Proposal where I hope that if other editors think this is a good idea, we can all come up with ideas, etc. Please keep all comments on that page for time being, and if you know of other editors on Commons or on other language projects who might be interested in commenting, coming up with ideas, etc, please let them know of the discussion. Let's see if this could be a workable project. russavia (talk) 23:42, 25 November 2011 (UTC)

I have begun a discussion on airline/aircraft fleet categories at Commons_talk:WikiProject_Aviation#Airline_fleet_categories. Could you provide input there, and if possible, perhaps let projects on other wikis know, because this will assist them in finding relevant materials as well. russavia (talk) 13:42, 7 December 2011 (UTC)

Picture details[edit]

Hi, to help me categorise your images, could you let me know which terminal the Heathrow pictures were taken in? Mtaylor848 (talk) 16:01, 7 December 2011 (UTC)

That should be terminal 3 if I recall correctly. Cheers! Jnpet (talk) 04:53, 8 December 2011 (UTC)

Thanks, regards Mtaylor848 (talk) 10:23, 9 December 2011 (UTC)

Category:Yates's_Wine_Lodge[edit]

Commons-emblem-issue.svg Category:Yates's_Wine_Lodge 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!


беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ | Deutsch | English | español | français | עברית | magyar | italiano | 日本語 | македонски | português | русский | +/−

Auntof6 (talk) 04:01, 13 February 2012 (UTC)

Notification about possible deletion[edit]

Commons-emblem-issue.svg 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 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 | 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 | Tiếng Việt | 中文 | 中文(简体)‎ | 中文(繁體)‎ | +/−

Affected:


Yours sincerely Stefan4 (talk) 22:06, 23 March 2012 (UTC)

Permission to use photo of tree (conifer)[edit]

Dear Mtaylor848, I am Sandra Poon from Pearson Malaysia. May I use photo of conifer tree for school books? Contact me at sandra.poon@pearson.com Thanks

Permission to use photo of conifer[edit]

Dear Mtaylor May I use photo of conifer (tree) for school books? Contact me at sandra.poon@pearson.com Thanks

Sandra Poon Pearson Malaysia

Any of my photographs maybe used subject to the terms of the licence and me being credited, by the name of Michael Taylor (rather than MTaylor848. Cheers, Mtaylor848 (talk) 15:36, 21 May 2012 (UTC)

File:Graduation day, Atrium, University of Bradford (Taken by Flickr user 7th December 2011).jpg[edit]

Беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ | Български | Català | Čeština | Dansk | Deutsch | Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ | Ελληνικά | English | Esperanto | Español | فارسی | Suomi | Français | Galego | Magyar | Íslenska | Italiano | 日本語 | Македонски | മലയാളം | Nederlands | Norsk nynorsk | Polski | Português | Português do Brasil | Русский | Slovenščina | Svenska | Українська | 中文(简体)‎ | 中文(繁體)‎ | +/−


There seems to be a problem regarding the description and/or licensing of this particular file. It has been found that you've added in the image's description only a Template that's not a license and although it provides useful information about the image, it's not a valid license. Could you please resolve this problem, adding the license in the image linked above? You can edit the description page and change the text. Uploading a new version of the file does not change the description of the file. This page may give you more hints on which license to choose. Thank you.

This message was added automatically by Nikbot, if you need some help about it please read the text above again and follow the links in it, if you still need help ask at the ? Commons:Help desk in any language you like to use. --Nikbot 13:36, 16 June 2012 (UTC)

Copyright status: File:Driving in the river, York (Taken by Flickr user 29th May 2012).jpg[edit]

Български | Català | Čeština | Dansk | Deutsch | Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ | English | فارسی | Suomi | Français | Magyar | Italiano | 日本語 | Македонски | മലയാളം | Norsk bokmål | Polski | Português | Română | Slovenščina | Svenska | +/−

Warning sign
This media may be deleted.
Thanks for uploading File:Driving in the river, York (Taken by Flickr user 29th May 2012).jpg. I notice that the file page either doesn't contain enough information about the license or it contains contradictory information about the license, so the copyright status is unclear.

If you created this file yourself, then you must provide a valid copyright tag. For example, you can tag it with {{self|GFDL|cc-by-sa-all}} to release it under the multi-license GFDL plus Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike All-version license or you can tag it with {{PD-self}} to release it into the public domain. (See Commons:Copyright tags for the full list of license tags that you can use.)

If you did not create the file yourself or if it is a derivative of another work that is possibly subject to copyright protection, then you must specify where you found it (e.g. usually a link to the web page where you got it), you must provide proof that it has a license that is acceptable for Commons (e.g. usually a link to the terms of use for content from that page), and you must add an appropriate license tag. If you did not create the file yourself and the specific source and license information is not available on the web, you must obtain permission through the OTRS system and follow the procedure described there.

Note that any unsourced or improperly licensed files will be deleted one week after they have been marked as lacking proper information, as described in criteria for speedy deletion. If you have uploaded other files, please confirm that you have provided the proper information for those files, too. (You can get a list of all your uploaded files using the Gallery tool.) Thank you.

JuTa 00:43, 8 July 2012 (UTC)

File:Billboards at Leeds Bradford International Airport (24th July 2010) 001.jpg[edit]

Commons-emblem-issue.svg File:Billboards at Leeds Bradford International Airport (24th July 2010) 001.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 | 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 | Tiếng Việt | 中文 | 中文(简体)‎ | 中文(繁體)‎ | +/−

-mattbuck (Talk) 16:00, 13 July 2012 (UTC)

File:Whitehouse Lane, Leeds Bradford International Airport (24th July 2010).jpg[edit]

Commons-emblem-issue.svg File:Whitehouse Lane, Leeds Bradford International Airport (24th July 2010).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 | 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 | Tiếng Việt | 中文 | 中文(简体)‎ | 中文(繁體)‎ | +/−

-mattbuck (Talk) 16:00, 13 July 2012 (UTC)

Category:Aircraft_by_airline[edit]

Commons-emblem-issue.svg Category:Aircraft_by_airline 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!


беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ | Deutsch | English | español | français | עברית | magyar | italiano | 日本語 | македонски | português | русский | +/−

Mormegil (talk) 12:18, 14 July 2012 (UTC)

Talkback[edit]

Message tied up in Ribbon.jpg Hello, Mtaylor848. You have new messages at Jetstreamer's talk page.
You may remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Asturianu | Беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ | বাংলা | Català | Čeština | Deutsch | Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ | English | Español | Suomi | Français | Galego | हिन्दी | Magyar | Italiano | 日本語 | ქართული | Македонски | മലയാളം | Plattdüütsch | Nederlands | Português | Română | Русский | Slovenščina | Svenska | Türkçe | +/−

--Jetstreamer (talk) 19:44, 21 July 2012 (UTC)

File:Pakistan International Airlines Airbus A310 at Leeds Bradford Airport (taken by Flickr user 2nd July 2011).jpg[edit]

Беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ | Български | Català | Čeština | Dansk | Deutsch | Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ | Ελληνικά | English | Esperanto | Español | فارسی | Suomi | Français | Galego | Magyar | Íslenska | Italiano | 日本語 | Македонски | മലയാളം | Nederlands | Norsk nynorsk | Polski | Português | Português do Brasil | Русский | Slovenščina | Svenska | Українська | 中文(简体)‎ | 中文(繁體)‎ | +/−


There seems to be a problem regarding the description and/or licensing of this particular file. It has been found that you've added in the image's description only a Template that's not a license and although it provides useful information about the image, it's not a valid license. Could you please resolve this problem, adding the license in the image linked above? You can edit the description page and change the text. Uploading a new version of the file does not change the description of the file. This page may give you more hints on which license to choose. Thank you.

This message was added automatically by Nikbot, if you need some help about it please read the text above again and follow the links in it, if you still need help ask at the ? Commons:Help desk in any language you like to use. --Nikbot 19:58, 23 July 2012 (UTC)


Message tied up in Ribbon.jpg Hello, Mtaylor848. You have new messages at Russavia's talk page.
You may remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Asturianu | Беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ | বাংলা | Català | Čeština | Deutsch | Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ | English | Español | Suomi | Français | Galego | हिन्दी | Magyar | Italiano | 日本語 | ქართული | Македонски | മലയാളം | Plattdüütsch | Nederlands | Português | Română | Русский | Slovenščina | Svenska | Türkçe | +/−

Category:British_Library,_Thorp_Arch[edit]

Commons-emblem-issue.svg Category:British_Library,_Thorp_Arch 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!


беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ | Deutsch | English | español | français | עברית | magyar | italiano | 日本語 | македонски | português | русский | +/−

Andrew Gray (talk) 09:55, 31 July 2012 (UTC)

Category:Glashoughton[edit]

Shouldn't this be at Category:Glasshoughton? ghouston (talk) 03:00, 13 September 2012 (UTC)

Yes, my mistake. Mtaylor848 (talk) 11:57, 14 September 2012 (UTC)

File:Election poster, Aire Road, Wetherby (May 2010) 004.jpg[edit]

Pay attention to copyright
File:Election poster, Aire Road, Wetherby (May 2010) 004.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)‎ | +/−

Vera (talk) 15:49, 20 December 2012 (UTC)

File:Seacroft community councillor surgery notice.jpg[edit]

Pay attention to copyright
File:Seacroft community councillor surgery notice.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)‎ | +/−

Vera (talk) 15:50, 20 December 2012 (UTC)

File:Leeds Story, Leeds City Museum (11th July 2012) 007.JPG[edit]

You've uploaded a derivative work We're sorry, but File:Leeds Story, Leeds City Museum (11th July 2012) 007.JPG has been marked as a copyright violation. Wikimedia Commons only accepts free content, that is, images and other media files that can be used by anyone, for any purpose. Reproductions of copyrighted works are also subject to the same copyright, and therefore this file must unfortunately be considered non-free. For more information, please read Commons:Derivative works and Commons:Freedom of panorama. You can ask questions about Commons policies in Commons:Help desk.

The file you added will soon be deleted. If you believe this file is not a derivative of a non-free work, please explain why on the file description page. In case the file has already been deleted, you may contact the administrator who deleted it or make an undeletion request.


Беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ | Čeština | Dansk | Deutsch | Ελληνικά | English | Español | Suomi | Français | Hrvatski | Magyar | Italiano | 日本語 | Македонски | Polski | Português | Português do Brasil | Русский | Slovenščina | Svenska | +/−

And also:

Yours sincerely, Vera (talk) 15:54, 20 December 2012 (UTC)

File:Displays at the Farewell to Arms? exhibition at the Royal Armouries in Leeds (24th June 2010) 002.jpg[edit]

Commons-emblem-issue.svg File:Displays at the Farewell to Arms? exhibition at the Royal Armouries in Leeds (24th June 2010) 002.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 | 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 | Tiếng Việt | 中文 | 中文(简体)‎ | 中文(繁體)‎ | +/−

Vera (talk) 15:54, 20 December 2012 (UTC)

File:BBC screen, Millennium Square, Leeds (4th May 2010).jpg[edit]

Pay attention to copyright
File:BBC screen, Millennium Square, Leeds (4th May 2010).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)‎ | +/−

Vera (talk) 15:56, 20 December 2012 (UTC)

File:Advertising board on Woodhouse Lane, Leeds (4th May 2010) 002.jpg[edit]

Pay attention to copyright
File:Advertising board on Woodhouse Lane, Leeds (4th May 2010) 002.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)‎ | +/−

Vera (talk) 15:57, 20 December 2012 (UTC)

File:Advertising board on Woodhouse Lane, Leeds (4th May 2010) 001.jpg[edit]

Pay attention to copyright
File:Advertising board on Woodhouse Lane, Leeds (4th May 2010) 001.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)‎ | +/−

Vera (talk) 15:57, 20 December 2012 (UTC)

File:LMU Beckett Park campus 002.jpg[edit]

Pay attention to copyright
File:LMU Beckett Park campus 002.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)‎ | +/−

Vera (talk) 16:03, 20 December 2012 (UTC)

File:Bramham conservation area appraisal notice.jpg[edit]

Commons-emblem-issue.svg File:Bramham conservation area appraisal 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 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 | 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 | Tiếng Việt | 中文 | 中文(简体)‎ | 中文(繁體)‎ | +/−

And also:

File:BBC screen, Millennium Square, Leeds (4th May 2010).jpg[edit]

Commons-emblem-issue.svg File:BBC screen, Millennium Square, Leeds (4th May 2010).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 | 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 | Tiếng Việt | 中文 | 中文(简体)‎ | 中文(繁體)‎ | +/−

Vera (talk) 16:13, 20 December 2012 (UTC)

Notification about possible deletion[edit]

Commons-emblem-issue.svg 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 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 | 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 | Tiếng Việt | 中文 | 中文(简体)‎ | 中文(繁體)‎ | +/−

Affected:

And also:

Yours sincerely, Stefan4 (talk) 21:43, 15 January 2013 (UTC)

Greenwich[edit]

I should point out, Greenwich was not a royal borough in 2011. -mattbuck (Talk) 14:15, 9 February 2013 (UTC)

I am aware of this. But then this raises the issue of categorising before that. For pre-1974 years do we categorise under places like Cumberland and the West Riding of Yorkshire? A tag to move it had been placed there sometime ago by someone other than myself and it seemed that if a decision were to be made it should be made soon. Mtaylor848 (talk) 17:27, 9 February 2013 (UTC)

Copyright status: File:Wetherby town centre map 1824.jpg[edit]

Български | Català | Čeština | Dansk | Deutsch | Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ | English | فارسی | Suomi | Français | Magyar | Italiano | 日本語 | Македонски | മലയാളം | Norsk bokmål | Polski | Português | Română | Slovenščina | Svenska | +/−

Warning sign
This media may be deleted.
Thanks for uploading File:Wetherby town centre map 1824.jpg. I notice that the file page either doesn't contain enough information about the license or it contains contradictory information about the license, so the copyright status is unclear.

If you created this file yourself, then you must provide a valid copyright tag. For example, you can tag it with {{self|GFDL|cc-by-sa-all}} to release it under the multi-license GFDL plus Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike All-version license or you can tag it with {{PD-self}} to release it into the public domain. (See Commons:Copyright tags for the full list of license tags that you can use.)

If you did not create the file yourself or if it is a derivative of another work that is possibly subject to copyright protection, then you must specify where you found it (e.g. usually a link to the web page where you got it), you must provide proof that it has a license that is acceptable for Commons (e.g. usually a link to the terms of use for content from that page), and you must add an appropriate license tag. If you did not create the file yourself and the specific source and license information is not available on the web, you must obtain permission through the OTRS system and follow the procedure described there.

Note that any unsourced or improperly licensed files will be deleted one week after they have been marked as lacking proper information, as described in criteria for speedy deletion. If you have uploaded other files, please confirm that you have provided the proper information for those files, too. (You can get a list of all your uploaded files using the Gallery tool.) Thank you.

And also:

Yours sincerely, JuTa 22:28, 4 July 2013 (UTC)

Oops wrong county - thanks![edit]

Thanks for the correction on the East Didsbury railway station file - I might have missed that mistake otherwise. This is what happens when I've only got one eye on the computer and I'm totally distracted with other tasks! I've now corrected all other files from that set. I just used the "cat-a-lot" gadget which allows instantaneous category correction on a large number of files, avoiding having to manually correct each one - very useful. Thanks anyway for your help, Cheers! Rept0n1x (talk) 17:19, 8 July 2013 (UTC)

York Railway Museum[edit]

Hi Martin, since you have taken photos at the York Railway Museum I thought you might like to know about our editathon and backstage pass there on the 19th October. Regards Jonathan Cardy (WMUK) (talk) 14:34, 9 October 2013 (UTC)

Category:Cycling_in_the_East_Sussex[edit]

Commons-emblem-issue.svg Category:Cycling_in_the_East_Sussex 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!


беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ | Deutsch | English | español | français | עברית | magyar | italiano | 日本語 | македонски | português | русский | +/−

Daemonic Kangaroo (talk) 14:35, 16 October 2013 (UTC)

Copyright tag removal[edit]

I assume the part of this edit that removed the Geograph copyright tag was a mistake, for the image I found in Category:Media without a license: needs history check today. Please be more careful when editing such image details because it could well have been deleted for lack of a licence except that I reviewed the history, found the problem and fixed it. As an experienced editors you will be aware that using the preview button before saving will allow you see nothing important has been removed. If you intentionally removed the licence then please tag it for deletion as missing a licence. You may want to review it. Ww2censor (talk) 11:03, 10 January 2014 (UTC)