User talk:Philafrenzy

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

Category naming[edit]

Hi, it's cool that you're creating categories for UK stamps by year. What was your reason for choosing year-then-country? Categories like Category:1919 stamps seem to use two different formats, and it's never been clear to me which one should be the standard. Stan Shebs (talk) 18:21, 23 February 2011 (UTC)

I noticed that too, but another user had already created several by year then country and there was no facility to rename them so I decided to stay with that. Incidentally, I also created by reign but capitalised the R of reign by mistake. Do you know how to change that? Thanks. Philafrenzy (talk) 00:40, 24 February 2011 (UTC)

File:God or Anti-God propaganda stamp.jpg[edit]

What country is it from, and why should it be reasonably assumed to be out of copyright? -- AnonMoos (talk) 12:18, 5 April 2011 (UTC)

  • I can't say for sure so I suppose it will have to be deleted unless you can find a better licence. Philafrenzy (talk) 16:16, 5 April 2011 (UTC)
It's not just the country of origin, it's also that the 70 years rule generally applies as 70 years from the death of the author (not 70 years from date of publication -- and by "before Barbarossa" dating, it won't even be definitely 70 years after publication until a month and a half from now...) -- AnonMoos (talk) 17:15, 5 April 2011 (UTC)
OK.Philafrenzy (talk) 22:10, 5 April 2011 (UTC)

Stamps of Poland[edit]

I reverted your entry about polish stamps. Unfortunately it is not correct, See Commons_talk:Stamps/Public_domain#Polish_stamps_are_copyrighted. --Jarekt (talk) 00:01, 20 September 2011 (UTC)

OK, I was thinking about reverting it myself actually as I had just seen the earlier discussion. Is it correct, however, that the stamps are PD from 1994? Philafrenzy (talk) 00:04, 20 September 2011 (UTC)
Every few years we go through big deletions of Polish Stamps. I think previous Deletion covered everything after 1945. I do not thing 1994 made stamps PD that law mostly retroactively removed PD status from Polish works that were PD before. --Jarekt (talk) 00:31, 20 September 2011 (UTC)

File:1976_North_Korea_stamp.jpg[edit]

Commons-emblem-issue.svg File:1976_North_Korea_stamp.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)‎ | +/−

User:Zscout370 (Return fire) 05:44, 8 December 2011 (UTC)

File:1988_stamp_of_North_Korea.jpg[edit]

Commons-emblem-issue.svg File:1988_stamp_of_North_Korea.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)‎ | +/−

User:Zscout370 (Return fire) 05:44, 8 December 2011 (UTC)

File:Kim_Jong-il_on_North_Korean_stamps.JPG[edit]

Commons-emblem-issue.svg File:Kim_Jong-il_on_North_Korean_stamps.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)‎ | +/−

User:Zscout370 (Return fire) 05:48, 8 December 2011 (UTC)


File:1914 Greece educational revenue stamp.jpg[edit]

Deutsch | Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ | English | Español | Suomi | Français | Magyar | 日本語 | Македонски | Plattdüütsch | Nederlands | Português | Русский | Svenska | +/−


Dialog-warning.svg Thank you for uploading images from Wikipedia to Commons. However, the file you uploaded, File:1914 Greece educational revenue stamp.jpg appears to be a scaled down version of the version on Wikipedia. Please reupload the full version of the image. You can then tag the scaled down version with {{duplicate}} to have it deleted.

Consider using CommonsHelper to provide the correct image description and licensing tags. Thank you,

Magog the Ogre (talk) 00:58, 17 January 2012 (UTC)

Don't think this is right. The image is quite large actually. No longer available on Wikipedia anyway. Philafrenzy (talk) 09:29, 17 January 2012 (UTC)

File:Stamp Jamaica 1870 1sh QV.jpg[edit]

While I don't own one, nor have seen one of these stamps, maybe you have, but your increased contrast looks rather overdone to me. I agree that the original sandafayre image may be a little dark I think you have gone too far. Maybe a slight increase in brightness would have been better rather than increased contrast. Of course, if you have compared it to an original I accept your new image as an improvement. Cheers Ww2censor (talk) 03:42, 28 April 2012 (UTC)

I changed it to a mid level, trouble is it's not a particularly good scan in the first place, and really you can barely see the variety anyway. I will try to put a bit more Jamaica up. Philafrenzy (talk) 11:15, 28 April 2012 (UTC)

File:1859 60c lilac stamp Uruguay.jpg uploaded new version[edit]

Hello Philafrenzy, I made a higher res scan and just uploaded an improved version of this file. Arno-nl (talk) 09:52, 9 September 2012 (UTC)

Nice scan. I improved the contrast a bit. Philafrenzy (talk) 11:00, 9 September 2012 (UTC)
Wow, amazing. Arno-nl (talk) 11:52, 9 September 2012 (UTC)

Re:File:Estampilla de Austria 1973 000.jpg[edit]

Ok si esta estampilla esta en derecho, entiendo que debe borrarse, sin embargo entiendo que las estampillas austriacas están libres de derechos de el año 1975. También llama mi atención que si una estampilla de 1973 esta en derecho como señala quien sometió a consulta de borrado no halla visto que hay estampillas más recientes y que están bajo la misma licencia y que entonces todas deberían ser borradas. Hago referencia a la siguiente lista:

Para mayor comodidad revisar Category:Stamps of Austria by year

También seria comveniente revisar:

Sorry, I won't be able to reply unless you can post this in English? Thanks. Philafrenzy (talk) 01:22, 3 January 2013 (UTC)

File:Treasures in Focus Stamps.jpg[edit]

Commons-emblem-issue.svg File:Treasures in Focus Stamps.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)‎ | +/−

UserB (talk) 15:08, 2 April 2013 (UTC)

SEEKING PERMISSION TO USE ONE OF YOUR IMAGES[edit]

Dear Philafrenzy

We are visual artists and academics who are currently working on a chapter in a book entitled ‘The Photograph and the Album’ (published by MuseumsEtc http://museumsetc.com/blogs/news/7422776-forthcoming-the-photograph-and-the-album). We are also contributing to the editorship of this volume.

Our chapter is examining the role that the internet plays in acting as a 'giant photograph album'. We have taken this principle and have begun to look for images, searching – as many of us do – under our own names, curious to find out what images appear. The following image came up in relation to one of our surnames: Miller's Green Gloucester with Parliament Room and Cathedral http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Miller%27s_Green_Gloucester_with_Parliament_Room_and_Cathedral.JPG

We are interested in using the image in our chapter and want to confirm that you agree that we can do this in line with the statement that appears in Wikimedia Commons which is as follows:

“You are free: to share – to copy, distribute and transmit the work to remix – to adapt the work Under the following conditions: attribution – You must attribute the work in the manner specified by the author or licensor (but not in any way that suggests that they endorse you or your use of the work).”

To be clear about our use of the image, it will appear as part of a sequence of images for which we will provide full captions and acknowledgement (in reference to the information which appears on the webpage provided above).

We hope you are willing to give permission and would appreciate if you would confirm this via this email - r.miller@salford.ac.uk . We would also be very grateful if you could inform us of any other parties from whom we should seek permission in reference to this image, if you are aware of any such parties.

If you are willing to give us permission please confirm the text you would like us to present in relation to the image to satisfy the condition of attribution. We would appreciate it if you could respond by Friday May 3rd.

Thank you for your consideration & please don’t hesitate to contact us if you have any questions.

Very best regards Rosie Miller & Jonathan Carson r.miller@salford.ac.uk

Replied by email giving permission today. Philafrenzy (talk) 00:13, 26 April 2013 (UTC)

File:Stamp-UK 1955 Castle definitives.jpg[edit]

I always understood the Castle series were the GB high value definitives of the 1950s, so I was surprised to see this edit. Am I missing something? Can you please explain? Ww2censor (talk) 21:42, 12 July 2013 (UTC)

They are in category Wilding Series, which is a sub-category of the definitives, though until I read the article on Wikipedia I must admit I had never thought of them as Wildings, but I guess they are as they use the relevant Wilding portrait. Thanks. Philafrenzy (talk) 21:56, 12 July 2013 (UTC)
Ok, it's curious how we perceive some things like this. BTW, were you thinking of contributing to the Signpost interview about the philately project? I did not get time yet. The one contributor has rather little to say and I am surprised that Stan has not done a piece yet either. Cheers. Ww2censor (talk) 09:32, 13 July 2013 (UTC)
Yes I have been meaning to do it. I am aware of the existing contribution. Philafrenzy (talk) 10:37, 13 July 2013 (UTC)
If I get a chance I will try to contribute either today or tomorrow. BTW, I should commend you on your extensive contributions to the Philately Project on the enwiki. Ww2censor (talk) 13:46, 13 July 2013 (UTC)
Thank you, and the same to you! Philafrenzy (talk) 13:50, 13 July 2013 (UTC)

Category:Stamps_of_the_United_States_1978-1980[edit]

Commons-emblem-issue.svg Category:Stamps_of_the_United_States_1978-1980 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 | +/−

76.254.37.226 17:50, 27 July 2013 (UTC)

Category:Stamps_of_the_United_States_1981-1990[edit]

Commons-emblem-issue.svg Category:Stamps_of_the_United_States_1981-1990 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 | +/−

76.254.37.226 17:51, 27 July 2013 (UTC)

File:Argentina 1952 10p postal savings stamp.jpg[edit]

Commons-emblem-issue.svg File:Argentina 1952 10p postal savings stamp.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)‎ | +/−

Gunnex (talk) 00:53, 25 February 2014 (UTC)

File:De Administrando Imperio Dumbarton Oaks edition.jpg[edit]

Pay attention to copyright
File:De Administrando Imperio Dumbarton Oaks edition.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)‎ | +/−

Marcus Cyron (talk) 14:56, 5 March 2014 (UTC)

Deletion requests/File:Congo 139 1967.JPG[edit]

Hello Philafrenzy I was quite surprised when I saw your delete requests for a bunch of files of stamps I uploaded in Commons. For two reasons. First of all because those files were pictures I took of stamps. I think stamps are not under the copyright laws because they are useful objects. They are made for charging a letter or postcard, that is, for paying a postal service. They are not made for being an artistic object like a film, a book, a painting or a statue. Second reason is that I paid for those stamps... they are mine. I photographed my stamps. The artist got paid when he made his drawing for the postal service. The postal service got paid when they sold the stamps to their users. So... the copyright is already paid. This is my point of view. Best regards. Towiki60 (talk) 18:31, 16 March 2014 (UTC)

I understand your point of view and wish you were right as then I could upload all of my collection. Unfortunately it is the law that counts and in most countries postage stamps are copyright the artist or the relevant national Post Office for a long time after issue. There is more guidance here: https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Stamps/Public_domain Philafrenzy (talk) 19:57, 16 March 2014 (UTC)

File:Fakes Forgeries Experts No. 13.jpg[edit]

Pay attention to copyright
File:Fakes Forgeries Experts No. 13.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)‎ | +/−

Randykitty (talk) 18:12, 22 April 2014 (UTC)

File:Richard Carnac Temple 1850-1931.jpg[edit]

Pay attention to copyright
File:Richard Carnac Temple 1850-1931.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 may soon be deleted. If you believe this file is not a copyright violation, please explain why on the file's talk page.


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)‎ | +/−

Sitush (talk) 17:44, 22 July 2014 (UTC)

File:Richard Carnac Temple 1850-1931.jpg[edit]

Commons-emblem-issue.svg File:Richard Carnac Temple 1850-1931.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)‎ | +/−

Yann (talk) 18:02, 22 July 2014 (UTC)