User talk:Siebrand/Archive08

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

Contents

Image:Haiku-logo.svg

Did you see Image talk:Haiku-logo.svg before the deletion? --fryed-peach 20:34, 10 August 2007 (UTC)

Yes. Siebrand 09:45, 11 August 2007 (UTC)
Why this image is a copyright violation? --fryed-peach 00:26, 12 August 2007 (UTC)

image:lisunov_li2.jpg

Please restore my image of the Lisunov Li-2; if you'd take the time to READ the SOURCE and LICENCE info, you'll see that it's a soviet-era image with NO COPYRIGHT. The soviet tag was placed at the bottom as instructed; THERE IS NO LICENCE REQUIRED FOR SOVIET-ERA IMAGES! It's wasteful of everybody's time if you go about deleting material with no reason. To me, it's simply vandalism because you're shredding other people's valid contributions without discussion, and requiring us to engage in this assinine dialog which wouldn't be necessary if you'd take the time to look at the damage you're doing before recklessly rampaging through other people's work. Hoserjoe 02:32, 11 August 2007 (UTC)

Hi. I must warn you that I fear that you have a broken keyboard. There are many CAPITAL LETTERS in your reply. This makes reading your message harder.
image:lisunov_li2.jpg has never existed, so I assume you meant to type Image:Lisunov L2.jpg. You tagged {{Sovietpd}}, which redirects to {{copyvio}}. Why? That is what you could sort out here. You can request undeletion at COM:UR. Cheers! 09:42, 11 August 2007 (UTC)
The CAPS likely express my annoyance at your vandalism of my image. You seem to impervious to subtle hints, thus the use of capitals to remind you that what you're doing is ignorant and annoying. Hoserjoe 06:36, 12 August 2007 (UTC)
Ah. So now you are forcing the issue? Sorry, won't play. Cheers! Siebrand 06:54, 12 August 2007 (UTC)

no entiendo nada de lo k me has dicho...

lo k dice en el titulo: no e entendido nada..no se k de los derechos de la imagen..i no se kmas...i don't speak english (se decia asi la frase?) xD

I do not read/speak the language you wrote above. Please find an admin that speaks your language and approach him/her. List. Cheers! Siebrand 06:56, 12 August 2007 (UTC)

Lisunov_L2.jpg

Please restore my Lisunov_L2.jpg image that you improperly deleted! The ignorance of your action is appalling. Hoserjoe 06:57, 12 August 2007 (UTC)

Requests for undeletion can be made at COM:UR. Please {{be civil}}. Cheers! Siebrand 06:59, 12 August 2007 (UTC)

Firenze-duomo.jpg

What'up with that foto? In Flick I read: "cc-by-nc 2.0, this photo is public". Why did you delete it? ----ßøuñçêY2K 13:49, 12 August 2007 (UTC)

Works that cannot be used commercially (Non-commercial Creative Commons restriction) is not allowed here. Cheers! Siebrand 19:17, 12 August 2007 (UTC)

Image:Wavelength-zh.svg

català | čeština | dansk | Deutsch | Ελληνικά | English | Esperanto | español | français | galego | עברית | italiano | 日本語 | 한국어 | lietuvių | Nederlands | norsk bokmål | polski | português | русский | slovenčina | 中文(简体)‎ | 中文(繁體)‎ | +/−


Hello, and thank your for sharing your files with Commons. There seems to be a problem regarding the description and/or licensing of this particular file. Please remember that all uploads require source, author and license information. Could you please resolve these problems, which are described on the page linked in above? Thank you. --Siebrand 05:39, 7 August 2007 (UTC)

Contacted original author, but he did not responded to my request. See This. -- Tomchiukc 19:03, 12 August 2007 (UTC)

About the image Pôr do sol

Hi! I forgot of put the license, but I yet fixed. Thanks for the alert! Felipe1219859 20:20, 11 August 2007 (UTC)

No problem. Cheers! Siebrand 06:54, 12 August 2007 (UTC)
I sent the permission for this image and others images I received for the Jornal do Povo. I hope these images were accepted and their licenses, fixed. Other problems, send me a message. Thanks, Felipe1219859 23:15, 12 August 2007 (UTC)

Erase image immidietly!

Hello! Could you please erase this image Image:Kit_body_3blackstripes.png immidietly since it's neither categorized nor copyright released, (were to quick to send apparently) Erase this when you read it. Thanks! Nil-ber61 15:27, 12 August 2007 (UTC)

I've been trying to reload this file (using new version) with all rights released but it don't seem to have any effect. I give up! Nil-ber61 16:26, 12 August 2007 (UTC)

You must edit the description page to change something afterwards. Uploading a new version does not change the description, only the file. I have fixed it. Cheers! Siebrand 22:00, 12 August 2007 (UTC)

Image:OctavioyMarcoAntonio.jpg

Hi, I saw the message you gave to Husar de la Princesa, that user does not speak english. In that image there is the licence but without a template, in "permision" section he wrote "Cedo todos los derechos", translated into english like "I realise it to public domain", about the prosedence of the image it is the this image edited by an application like MsPaint. Alvaro_QC Bother here 20:20, 12 August 2007 (UTC)

The message is also present in 19 other languages. I see you slapped a {{PD-self}} on the image. That's fine. Cheers! Siebrand 21:58, 12 August 2007 (UTC)

Please delete

Image:Oak Wood of War of Pühajärv 2007 3.jpg, for it has bad name.--Hendrixeesti 20:45, 12 August 2007 (UTC)

Please use {{Badname|CorrectlyNamedImage.ext}} and it will be taken care of. Cheers! Siebrand 21:56, 12 August 2007 (UTC)

Not sure I did a delinker request right

Hi... in this edit I asked that Image:Minneapolis I-35W bridge map.svg be replaced (with another svg to avoid ww III :) per the comments... :) ) and the bot subsequently edited the request out, so I assumed it was going to get done. But CheckUsage shows the image still in use on some wikis. Did I flub up? Or are those wikis not done by the bot and I still have to go do those by hand? You can answer here, I'll watch. Thanks!!!!! ++Lar: t/c 01:16, 13 August 2007 (UTC)

Remember that non-SVG cannot be replaced by SVG. You can see the latest replace commands here. The latest delinks are here. Not sure if it is any help. If you do things according to the documentation, it usually works. If not, try again... Still not: start calling names to Bryan. ;) Cheers! Siebrand 12:14, 13 August 2007 (UTC)
Fairly sure it was an SVG to an SVG ... seem to recall maybe there wree more than 2 wikis using it before, not sure... hence my "does it only do some wikis" question... I will try again. Then plead for mercy with Bryan. :) ++Lar: t/c 11:27, 14 August 2007 (UTC)
Worked this time. I think it was that I had a leading space in the image name on the original request, or else that I had spaces instead of "_" in the replacement image... thanks for your help! ++Lar: t/c 14:23, 14 August 2007 (UTC)

Image:MannheimRheinschanze.jpg

Hi,
First, thank you for your message.
I imported this file during the morning from de: (a French Wikipedia user asked me to help him), but it is already existing with another name. Then I wanted to cancel my import and so I cleared the page (as we do in Wikipedia). I don't know how to do it well on Commons and that's why I'm back this afternoon, but maybe you can help me ?
Thanks for your support. Best regards. Gemini1980 11:57, 13 August 2007 (UTC)

I removed the file for now. Please use {{duplicate|Pre-existingFileName.ext}} in the future. Then things will also be taken care of. Cheers! Siebrand 12:05, 13 August 2007 (UTC)

Image:Hypergonar.jpg & Image:Tireuse Supercontact Volomat.jpg

Hello, Before deleting an image it would be polite first to ask the uploader about it. These imagee were taken from my own photography course. Jean-Jacques MILAN 16:12, 13 August 2007 (UTC)

As you can see on your talk page you have been informed about this on 15 July. From that date on, you have had at least 7 days. If you wish to have the images undeleted, please ask for it at COM:UR. Cheers! Siebrand 16:29, 13 August 2007 (UTC)

Immagini

Ma ho mandato tutte con permissions-it@wikimedia.org per 4 immagini, invece mi ha risposto una per Hal Foster. Non potrò fare niente per caso o ri-proverò mandarVi con permissions-it@wikimedia.org? --Bestione 16:27, 13 August 2007 (UTC)

I'm sorry, but I cannot read Spanish or Portugese. Please ask a native admin your question (languages spoken at COM:ADMIN. Cheers! Siebrand 16:32, 13 August 2007 (UTC)

Re: Image:Weaver_-_Traditional_making_of_linen.jpg

Thank you for the note. I've made the nessasary corrections regarding the licensing of that file. Regards, Poet of the Fall 17:06, 13 August 2007 (UTC)

You're welcome. Nice nick name :) Cheers! Siebrand 19:32, 13 August 2007 (UTC)

Thank you

After what it has been difficult to me to load in commons all the photos on Soria, you delete the photos without previous notice (or at least it is what I believe(create)), thank you for doing to me hardly the work of loading the photos. User:Dgarcia29 21:22, 13 August 2007

It appears that you have been warned about about a dozen pending deletions on 19 July. Please request undeletion on COM:UR and {{Please tag images}} in case of future uploads. The only information given was {{GFDL}} and a short description. We have no way of known where the images came from and who the author was. Cheers! Siebrand 19:40, 13 August 2007 (UTC)

Overzealotry on self sourced pics

I'm concerned about that you are getting a bit carried away with people who have not filling in {{description}} fully - leaving author and source blank. You tagged Image:Ms61renov.jpg as nsd, and I subsequently deleted... erroneously. The uploader had tagged the original image with {{PD-Self}}, and as far as I can tell there is no reason to disbelieve that claim (hence I've restored).

This new description template with the maintenance categorisation for blank sections, should not be viewed as inadequate = not enough info instantly. In this case... the template should have been edited first. If you disbelieve a PD-Self claim - when there is no reason to disbelieve it (this picture isn't anything special IMO), send it to COM:DEL - or mark that you distrust the claim somehow. Please don't just nsd tag it because section 1, paragraph 3(a) was incorrectly filled in.--Nilfanion 20:42, 13 August 2007 (UTC)

Usual practice is that a {{self}}-tag is not enough. Some text in the description (not necessarily connected to {{information}}) *must* declare own work. Also see {{please tag images}}, and most of the other documentation on sourcing that we have. The upload form for own work even does this for the user. I'm sorry, but I'm just not buying all the crap that gets uploaded. Cheers! Siebrand 20:48, 13 August 2007 (UTC)
Yes, there is a lot of crap. However, if they make an assertion of PD-Self (or any other Self) make some sort of rationale as to why you dispute it (low-resolution... press pic... whatever). This will generate needless hostility else. Remember Assume good faith!--Nilfanion 20:54, 13 August 2007 (UTC)
Oh and bear in mind the source requirement in the template only existed on July 7; if an image is uploaded prior to that date, an upload is relatively likely not to have it filled in on a self upload.--Nilfanion 21:15, 13 August 2007 (UTC)
I do assume good faith. I (we) follow process. We give a period of 7 days of warning, we have provide CommonsTickers with warnings on talk pages where images are used, we have a safe delete procedure and COM:UR. Nothing is lost forever and if it's important and/or wanted, we put it back. At least the crap is sifted out. Cheers! Siebrand 21:48, 13 August 2007 (UTC)
We obviously disagree at a more fundamental level. You want the crap deleted and are willing to sacrifice potential good contributors to do so. I would rather keep the contributors, but slow down the detection/deletion of junk. Taken this to the AN for a wider view please comment at: Commons:Administrators' noticeboard#Deletionism... its getting harmful thanks.--Nilfanion 23:02, 13 August 2007 (UTC)
That appears to be quite a biased title for a wider platform... Siebrand 23:04, 13 August 2007 (UTC)
Hmm probably right. If you can think of a suitably neutral title I will not object if you change it.--Nilfanion 23:21, 13 August 2007 (UTC)
Requirements for own work: when to tag and what suffices? That's what we've been talking about in this topic as far as I know... Cheers! Siebrand 23:33, 13 August 2007 (UTC)

Hoxton Tom McCourt Photographs

I have filled in the necessary information on the 3 different photos but just to confirm that these photos are the property of Hoxton Tom McCourt. The photos from 1980 - Image:The 4-Skins in 1980.jpg - and 1983 - Image:Hoxton Tom McCourt in 1983.jpg - were taken by Martin Dean who gave the originals to him to help give the band a start. The photo from 1977 - Image:Hoxton Tom McCourt in 1977.jpg - is a family photograph owned by Tom McCourt. I have used these on my current web-site [1]with the full permission of Tom McCourt since the start of 2004. Tom McCourt has e-mailed me on the 13th August 2007, giving full permission for me to use these on wikipedia and wikimedia commons as he now owns these photographs. These photographs are also freely available on many other web-sites on the skinhead and mod revival scenes.

Hope this is ok. Let me know if you require a copy of the e-mail

Tommy Cassidy

Thanks --The4Skins2004 07:52, 14 August 2007 (UTC)



Backlogs

Hi Siebrand. I added the announcements template to the top of your user talk page. If you know of backlogs, things you cannot complete by yourself and where you need help of others, please inform me on the talk page of Commons:Announcements, so it can be added to the template. Thanks. / Fred J 12:25, 14 August 2007 (UTC)

✓ Done 2 reported. Cheers! Siebrand 13:02, 14 August 2007 (UTC)

Category moves

Humour me - I've not done these!

  1. Is there somewhere that the "proposal" is agreed (or am I in deep trouble if I do some of them!)?
  2. Is there an easy/best way to do it?
  3. Any other advice?

Thanks I'll have a good at some that don't look too controversial - cheers --Herby talk thyme 14:22, 14 August 2007 (UTC)

Awareness of common issues with categorisation is important. Use common sense and category naming guidelines. If you disagree, post a comment on the talk page and leave it for someone else. If no comments have come after a while, remove the rename request because of no consensus. Something like that? Siebrand 18:21, 14 August 2007 (UTC)

There is a missed image

Hello. I am searching an image uploaded by me; the image is Image:Cerroangeles fusilado.jpg.

I don't know why, it has dissapeared. There is no trace of the image on the archive of deleted files, neither on my discussion. It's an anonymous image of 1936, now on the public domain. And there are several pages linking whith the image. You can see one here Do you know what was the problem? --Preyes 22:37, 3 August 2007 (UTC)

Here is the log. It was deleted because it did not appear to be in the public domain. Cheers! Siebrand 09:21, 10 August 2007 (UTC)
Thank you by your answer; but I've uploaded again the picture, because according to the Spanish law, the intelectual property becames PD after 70 years. On the discussion of the picture you can see the reference to the Spanish Act of Intellectual Property (in Spanish). --Preyes 22:42, 10 August 2007 (UTC)
Someone has already deleted the image twice stating that it is not 70 but 80 years. Please take it up with User:Dodo. Cheers! Siebrand 11:03, 15 August 2007 (UTC)

image:bioespeleotema.jpg

Bueno no hablo ingles pero espero que podamos entendernos, esa imagen me fue proporcionada por la propia persona que la tomo y me permitió colocarla en wikipedia, de echo yo vi la imagen en el blog del autor y le pedí autorización, este no solo me dio autorización sino que me envió la fotografía en una mejor resolución junto a otras mas y mucha información extra para ampliar el articulo en wikipedia ya que el articulo esta discutido por falta de referencias. I have authorization of the author to use the photo. As I clarify that.--Juliopb 01:50, 10 August 2007 (UTC)

Each image *must* have a license. That is not the case for this image. see no mention of a known free license at the blog you linked. If you do not add a valid and free license, the image will be deleted. Cheers! Siebrand 05:52, 10 August 2007 (UTC)
Good I do not speak English but I hope that we pruned to understand to us, that image was provided to me by its owner and it allowed me to place it in wikipedia, of I throw I I saw the image in blog of the author and I requested authorization to him, this not only it gave authorization but that me sent the photography to me in one better resolution next to other but and much extra information to extend I articulate in wikipedia since I articulate this discussed by lack of references. It authorizes to me by means of blog and via email, the comments number 7 of that blog contains the authorization… I mention in English and Spanish .....
""Apreciado Julio Cesar Con mucho gusto le informo mejor y le envío fotografías sobre los Bioespeleotemas. Hay en este blog un articulo sobre estos. Desea esas fotografías u otras también?. Sobre las fotos es suficiente para mi colocar el crédito. Gracias por su atención. mi correo particular es..." ...“Appreciated Julio Cesar By far taste I better inform and him to him shipment photographies on the Bioespeleotemas. It has in this blog I articulate on these. It also wishes those photographies or others. On the photos is sufficient to me be mentioned in the credit. Thanks for its attention. my particular mail is…” The mail I have it but it is omitted to respect his privacy although of being necessary it could give it in private.
I can contact some moderator with speaking spanish? --Juliopb 01:40, 11 August 2007 (UTC)
Please do. See COM:ADMIN for a list of administrators. I have also made a reference on your talk page to a template in Spanish. Cheers! Siebrand 11:07, 15 August 2007 (UTC)

Re Image:Isaac Haight.jpg

With concern to my formerly inadequate description, I've now more fully specified the portrait as a photograph of Haight--who died over 120 years ago in 1886, and so in the public domain--and reuploaded it to Wikimedia Commons (then relinked to the new posting from the new wikipedia article I've created at Isaac C. Haight). :^) Much thanks! --Justmeherenow 01:06, 13 August 2007 (UTC)

I added {{PD-old}} to the image. CHeers! Siebrand 11:16, 15 August 2007 (UTC)

Image:Sergio Gaudenzi.jpg

Hi, Siebrand!

Here are the info about the image:

Source: http://www.agenciabrasil.gov.br/media/imagens/2007/08/07/2025fp2419.jpg/view Author: size=media<a href=http://www.agenciabrasil.gov.br/media/imagens/2007/08/07/2025fp2419.jpg/view?size=media /> License:Creative Commons Attribution 2.5 Brazil [2]

I didn't find the tag for Creative Commons Attribution 2.5 Brazil. What else can I do?Yone Fernandes 02:55, 13 August 2007 (UTC)

We have a tag called {{AgenciaBrasil}}. You can use that. Cheers! Siebrand 11:21, 15 August 2007 (UTC)

Image:Bill Gates mugshot.png

I have listed this at Commons:Undeletion_requests/Current_requests#Image:Bill_Gates_mugshot.png because quite frankly, your claims I lied as to the source and legality of the image are bullshit. This image had just been undeleted with the support of the community, and you do not speedy an image with a possibly valid claim of being PD without informing the uploader, if he is an established user. This is common courtesy. -Nard 03:14, 13 August 2007 (UTC)

✓ Done per COM:UR]. Cheers! Siebrand 06:27, 13 August 2007 (UTC)
Thank you! -Nard 21:55, 14 August 2007 (UTC)

Image:Anouk_teeuwe_in_dauwpop.jpg

what happened to the anouk photo that i uploaded? see -> -"Image:Anouk_teeuwe_in_dauwpop.jpg". Deleted from Commons by Siebrand. (In category Copyright violation; no permission)) that's what i've been asking myself some days.. and one spanish mods from the spanish wikipedia told me to ask it to you, ..so that's what i wanna know. I uploaded the last year a photo from anouk that i toke myself in hellendoorn at the dauwpop festival, i don't know wich law, or copyright permission i've broken, maybe i didn't ask anouk to take that photo..or maybe in holland i can't take photos from dutch artist.. or.... what happened? please, explain me what did i make wrong.. i can swear you that i toke that photo on 25th may 2006, if you want to know i can tell you how was the weather there also that day.. but please, give me an excuse or something to believe that i can't actually use that photo.... that i own. Kind regards from spain.

This image was marked a copyvio by Nard. You licensed {{GFDL-self}} and {{GPL}}, added a website name without a clear source. These are typical signs for copyright violations. Please take it up with Nard and/or request undeletion at COM:UR. {{please tag images}} in case of future uploads. Cheers! Siebrand 19:37, 13 August 2007 (UTC)
so thank you, i'll ask him a.s.a.p., i can't imagine why did he deleted my photo.. ahh!! and about the website, it's my website!!! can i add that tag to the photo on wikipedia? i didn't read any rule like this.. it's true that i haven't seen any photo in wikipèdia tagged, but, i thought that if this photo was made by me, i could tag it. i've got all the copyrights, well, i'm not anouk, but i toke this photo in a free zone, so... in dauwpop i asked if i could take photos and they said clearly that i could. roxer
Best thing to do if fill out the complete template {{Information}} in the image description, as described in {{Please tag images}}. That will enable to you provide all relevant information in a structured way. Cheers! Siebrand 18:37, 14 August 2007 (UTC)
This user contacted me in Spanish on my talk page. The explanation is plain enough, even though, as you say, it appeared to have the hallmark signs of a copyvio. Support undeletion. -Nard 21:54, 14 August 2007 (UTC)
✓ undeleted Please add all relevant information! Siebrand 22:30, 14 August 2007 (UTC)
This seems to be the neverending story LoL .... so now.. what do i have to add to the photo to make it undelectable? (maybe i invented a word xD) As i said i don't want to be deleted again, next year, ... i think i can't edit the copyrights of the photo.. it's quite weird, and i can't barely understand... so if you (any of you, both ) can change the properties or whatever i would be very glad. Sorry both for being so boring, sometimes i get too nervous and i say things like this... sorry again.roxer
Oh, it's this one. Redelete unless a high resolution non watermarked version is uploaded. -Nard 02:05, 15 August 2007 (UTC)
Please upload higher quality and a version without watermarks. Especially the presence of EXIF information from the camera will add credibility. Cheers! Siebrand 11:20, 15 August 2007 (UTC)
ok, so i think you don't trust on me, i'll reupload the photo in HQ, but i want to credit my website!!! and if i don't write it on the photo the tag, then it will be useless for me, i don't get money with my website, if you want to check out, you won't see any banner or anything, so that simple tag could give me more visits, and more people visiting my website. I just wanted to spread the world that i own the spanish website, and that i'm working and having some problems with it. i need some help, just to promote the website, that was all!!! anyway, i'll reupload this photo again. roxer

Please restore Image:Green_College_UBC,_exterior_from_south.JPG

Siebrand, thank you for all your work to keep the Commons tidy. Could you please undelete Image:Green_College_UBC,_exterior_from_south.JPG. I am its creator. I guess I forgot to put a licensing tag on it when I uploaded it, because you tagged it as unlicensed, and then a month later deleted it. My mistake, sorry. It should have the license tag {{self|GFDL|cc-by-sa-2.5,2.0,1.0|author=I, [[User:JimDeLaHunt|JimDeLaHunt]]}}. My other other Green College images on Commons have this license. It also looks like I need to regularly check my Commons account -- I check Wikipedia every day, but obviously messages don't carry from Commons to Wikipedia. I didn't see your message until the image was deleted from the Wikipedia article where I used it. If it's not possible to undelete, then I can upload the file again. Thanks again for your help to Commons. It must be a lot of work. [Duplicated from User talk:JimDeLaHunt to bring it to your attention.] JimDeLaHunt 21:39, 13 August 2007 (UTC)

If I remember correctly, you can activate email on changes to your talk page and/or watchlist in the user prefereces. That'll save you some trouble. I have undeleted the image. Please add a license. See COM:CLIC. Cheers! Siebrand 21:46, 13 August 2007 (UTC)
Thank you for restoring the image. I've added in license info, and deleted the "license missing" tag. Also, thanks for the good idea of getting the wiki to send me email on talk page changes. I've set that up. I appreciate your work on the Commons. JimDeLaHunt 06:55, 15 August 2007 (UTC)
Thanks for your effort. Cheers! Siebrand 11:18, 15 August 2007 (UTC)

3 Images of Hoxotn Tom McCourt

Siebrand

Not sure if you missed my addition on Hoxton Tom photographs or not. I'm new to this and I hope that my message at 07:52 of the 14th August 2007 clarifies the situaiton and allows the use of these photos on wikimedia commons and wikipedia.. The 3 in question are:

- Image:The 4-Skins in 1980.jpg

- Image:Hoxton Tom McCourt in 1983.jpg

- Image:Hoxton Tom McCourt in 1977.jpg


My message was: I have filled in the necessary information on the 3 different photos but just to confirm that these photos are the property of Hoxton Tom McCourt. The photos from 1980 - Image:The 4-Skins in 1980.jpg - and 1983 - Image:Hoxton Tom McCourt in 1983.jpg - were taken by Martin Dean who gave the originals to him to help give the band a start. The photo from 1977 - Image:Hoxton Tom McCourt in 1977.jpg - is a family photograph owned by Tom McCourt. I have used these on my current web-site (http://the4skins.tripod.com/) with the full permission of Tom McCourt since the start of 2004. Tom McCourt has e-mailed me on the 13th August 2007, giving full permission for me to use these on wikipedia and wikimedia commons as he now owns these photographs. These photographs are also freely available on many other web-sites on the skinhead and mod revival scenes.

A copyright note allowing permission to use on http://the4skins.tripod.com/ and on other sites is displayed there.

Hope this is ok and address the issues around the licence and allows the images use of wikimedia commons and wikipedia..

Tommy the4skins2004@yahoo.co.uk

Hope this is ok. Let me know if you require a copy of the e-mail. If not can you suggest how this could be resolved.

Tommy Cassidy

Thanks --The4Skins2004 07:52, 14 August 2007 (UTC)

--The4Skins2004 17:54, 14 August 2007 (UTC)

Please provide proof that a free license was given by the copyright holder. Some additional information can be found in {{no permission since}}. Cheers! Siebrand 11:25, 15 August 2007 (UTC)

Roman Empire/Ancient Rome

Hello, why you changed the Category:Ancient Rome to Category:Roman Empire? This is not correct. Ancient Rome is the whole Rome - Kingdom, Republic and Empire - but Empire is only - Empire. Now there's for example an Undercategory "Category:Roman Kingdom". Please change it back. Marcus Cyron 10:52, 14 August 2007 (UTC)

Both categories you mention appear to be populated and the example you mentioned is no longer there. Has this been resolved or is action still required? Cheers! Siebrand 10:59, 15 August 2007 (UTC)
OK, I'm quiet now ;). Marcus Cyron 12:26, 15 August 2007 (UTC)

Image:Akilathirattu Ammanai.jpg

This is a Holy Book. How ever I took it (it's covering page) as a Photograph and since it's my work. Then can't I release it under GFDL? Pls HELP. - Vaikunda Raja 15:55, 14 August 2007 (UTC)

Even holy books carry copyright. Please provide all required information and the year that it was published in which country. That way we can assess if it is in the public domain or not. Cheers! Siebrand 11:26, 15 August 2007 (UTC)


IMAGES WITOUTH LICENSE

I added license. I have in my screen the image form when I posted it and I have selected the adequate license but this don't appear. The program of the load page is not working many times, and license are deleted, the name of file is retained the previous one, etc... Some times when come back the page, all information is deleted, sometines is not, and sometimes is not but don't work. I believe that the system -that is not dont working now, but already from at less two years- is time that must be changed because for what is not computer expert, fighting against this dificulties is too much. Seems that Commons do all possible for confuse to common (normal) people. Why "Category" don't appear between the fields to open (then is easy to write category in our own language, and then many job for the editors), the licenses don't have explanation or code for include it, and the before quoted mistakes in the program....argggg, seems to be a complot, je je je. Please try to solve at less some of the wrong thiks. --jolle 18:53, 14 August 2007 (UTC)

Hi Jaime. How are things? Haven't seen you around too much lately on this wiki. Rest assured that no one is plotting against you. Please bare in mind that we are a collaborative project and all work is done by volunteers, such as yourself. Programmers, both professional and amateur, are also working a lot to make the MediaWiki product better. We remain a wiki, though, which has a few drawback, but also huge advantages.
I have checked your recent uploads and added a message to your talk page requesting you to choose the file names of your uploads more carefully. You might also want to {{please describe images/es}}, so they can be more easily found. I hope that you'll continue to make an effort to make Commons better. Cheers! Siebrand 11:46, 15 August 2007 (UTC)

Image:ItaliantanksconqueringZeila.png

Hi, Siebrand. It seems that I have made a mistake, while I was in a hurry editing. I hope now everything is OK. Regards.--Brunodambrosio 02:30, 15 August 2007 (UTC)

For this particular image I see no permission for all uses. Please provide it. I have tagged the image {{npd}}. Cheers! Siebrand 11:33, 15 August 2007 (UTC)

Image:Olaus_Magnus_Scandza.gif - What is wrong with PD-old?

What is the licensing problem with Image:Olaus_Magnus_Scandza.gif? You say here not to ask what is wrong: "There should be a message on your talk page explaining things in detail." Well, the message does not explain anything. The image is old, the same licence information as in other images in Category:Historia de gentibus septentrionalibus. /Pieter Kuiper 06:44, 15 August 2007 (UTC)

@Pieter: You never added a license. I think it says in the upload page that you must add a license from the drop down menu? Please add {{PD-Old}}. Thank you. / Fred J 11:12, 15 August 2007 (UTC)
Thanks Fred. My selections from the drop-down menu often do not 'catch' (Firefox 2.0.0.4, Mac). I had failed to notice that this time, sorry. But I had written PD-Old on the permission field; is that not sufficiently clear? /Pieter Kuiper 16:29, 15 August 2007 (UTC)
To a human it might have been, but the bot didn't find a license template and tagged the image. During time of deletion, this would most probably have been fixed. Cheers! Siebrand 16:31, 15 August 2007 (UTC)

Image:Seelloag.jpg

This image is my own work and it is free for general use, but I see no means how to add that licence (GNU?) - which I already thought to have added - now again. The method is not clear to me.--Pyt 13:45, 15 August 2007 (UTC)

Edit the page of the image and add the text "{{GFDL-self}}". Cheers! Siebrand 13:55, 15 August 2007 (UTC)

Siebot

Something strange here: not only is the comment a bit off the mark, but, more seriously, I am surprised to learn that the Louvre has been relocated to Egypt... Rama 15:04, 15 August 2007 (UTC)

Never too old to learn. Now you know :)
But seriously... When moving categories using the recat bot that are large (40+ items) and it is not the last in the list, a bug is encountered in the bot framework that gives an incorrect edit summary, but a correct edit. Cheers! Siebrand 15:06, 15 August 2007 (UTC)
The bug is not really a concern (anyway, who would I be to criticise people for having bugs...), but the category is a problem: it makes no sense to say that statues on display in the Louvre are in Egypt, even if they are Egyptian. Rama 16:56, 15 August 2007 (UTC)
*nod* I saw that after I had replied. I removed the cat, because it's in an Egypt related cat anyway. Siebrand 18:00, 15 August 2007 (UTC)

Image:CCD Barcode Scanner-2.jpg

Sorry, I've forgot about licence ;) It is my work, and I release the rights. Public domain. --Network.nt 20:14, 15 August 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for the fix. Cheers! Siebrand 22:26, 15 August 2007 (UTC)

Image:Lead pipe Bath.jpg

Thanks for notifying my. I simple forgot to choose the license at all. Fixed now. --Zureks 20:29, 15 August 2007 (UTC)

No problem. Thanks. Cheers! 22:26, 15 August 2007 (UTC)

Image:Esplanade theatre dome.JPG

Wow, your bot is efficient! in my case it was just a typo in the license template. Just a suggestion: Would it not be better if the message you leave in talk pages indicates its auto-generated. Before I realized it was a bot I thought you were just a goofy guy who instead of changing (( to {{ left a long message in my talk page. Otherwise, thanks for the service! --Inkwina 21:56, 15 August 2007 (UTC)

I changed the message a bit. Should be visible soon. Thanks for the tip. Cheers! Siebrand 22:25, 15 August 2007 (UTC)

Image:Caqueza.jpg

This is an unsourced and unlicensed picture your bot hasn't found yet... ;) What's the proper procedure for tagging such an image and notifying the uploader, I seem to remember getting an e-mail with a deletion warning for my first upload some months ago - is this something that happens automatically for new users? Finn Rindahl 22:41, 15 August 2007 (UTC)

Put {{subst:nsd}} and follow instructions on the text that appears after saving. Alternatively, start using MediaWiki:Quick-delete.js. Cheers! Siebrand 05:21, 16 August 2007 (UTC)
Nice... ;) Thank you, Finn Rindahl 10:21, 16 August 2007 (UTC)

Image:Nellie Tayloe Ross.jpg

Hello Siebrand! (ltns) Tell me, what's the verdict here? Gridge 23:12, 15 August 2007 (UTC).

There should be proof the image was published. If there's not, there's no case for the license. Cheers! Siebrand 05:23, 16 August 2007 (UTC)

Image:Cvarela.jpg

Sorry for pestering you again ;) This image has a license not corresponding with it's source (copyrighted wep page [3]) What's the correct procedure here - nominate for deletion, speedy deletion or what...?? Finn Rindahl 23:35, 15 August 2007 (UTC)

{{subst:npd}}. Cheers! Siebrand 05:22, 16 August 2007 (UTC)

Re: Image:Earthquakes in Peru August 16-2007 6-37 UTC.gif

Ok sorry about that. I fixed it all...donno how I managed that. DragonFire1024 07:49, 16 August 2007 (UTC)

Shit happens... :) Cheers! Siebrand 09:38, 16 August 2007 (UTC)

Image Tagging Image:A_414.jpg

Hi! Concerning the tagging of above mentioned image please inform the original uploader and not me, who just made an color enhancement. -- Greetz Sir Gawain 07:49, 16 August 2007 (UTC)

✓ Done I would have appreciated if you had done it. Cheers! Siebrand 09:37, 16 August 2007 (UTC)

using MediaWiki:HotCat.js

I removed MediaWiki:HotCat.js as it seems to have many undesirable side effects and is not that efficient. Sorry for the troubles (that you spotted and corrected). Any better tools for re-catting ? --Foroa 12:38, 16 August 2007 (UTC)

Nee, volgens mij zijn die er niet... Er wordt wel heel hard aan gewerkt om het taggen makkelijker te laten verlopen (zie mailinglist Commons-l). Groet, Siebrand 12:45, 16 August 2007 (UTC)

Commons:welcome log

Hmmm, am I missing something here?? I understood the purpose of these pages was that new users should be removed after their contributions had been reviewed, but I can't see anyone editing these pages except Siebot&co?? Is this some admin-kind of (invisible) whitelisting that I should stay away from, or is it ok if I try to make myself useful and remove users the way I have done today?? Finn Rindahl 14:26, 16 August 2007 (UTC)

Unfortunately very few people do actual checking. Please help! :) Siebrand 20:29, 16 August 2007 (UTC)

re:Image Tagging Image:Elizabeth_Brownrigg_flogging_a_servant.JPG

As far as I am aware, all the illustrators of the Newgate Calendar are anonymous. I though the "200 years old" thing was sufficeint. Since you're a more experienced user perhaps you could suggest what to do in this situation? The Newgate Calendar images are unquestionably in the public domain. one dead president 18:52, 16 August 2007 (UTC)

Please arrange for an authoritative source for the media, so that we can actually verify the author and such. Cheers! Siebrand 20:32, 16 August 2007 (UTC)

3 Images from a 1942 propaganda pamphlet

Hi Siebrand. I am trying to fix the problems with 3 images about the war in British Somaliland during WWII. I have taken the three images (ItaliantanksconqueringZeila.png; ResaGondarUolchefit.jpg and ItalianoffensivesAfrica1940.png) from a war propaganda pamphlet of 1942.I have then photocopied the images on my computer, enlarged and written on it with my software. The old pamphlet is from a fascist organization called "Istituto Luce" (and has no copyright because, for political reasons, since the end of WWII everything related to Fascism in Italy is considered illegal and without "rights"). So, I have placed now the tag "PD-self" in the hope to have everything on track. Regards.--Brunodambrosio 01:17, 17 August 2007 (UTC)

Flag of Nova Scotia

Why in the heck did you delete Image:Flag of Nova Scotia.svg? -- Denelson83 07:02, 17 August 2007 (UTC)

It was argued that the image was not in the public domain. See the log. Cheers! Siebrand 12:57, 17 August 2007 (UTC)

Image:Alisterus.jpg

I don't understand where is the problem . It seems to me than often pictures are bad pictures because it is the 10th or the 20th. Can you explain me ? i'm French. Berichard 10:31, 17 August 2007 (UTC)

Help with the license of old sculptures

Misplaced user comment, left on the user page, moved here by me, Spiritia 12:21, 17 August 2007 (UTC)

What is the correct documentation license for photographs I took of old sculptures? The sculptures are in the public domain because of their age, and the photographs I wish to release into the public domain. Wmpearl 10:46, 17 August 2007 (UTC)

If the sculpture is PD, the copyrights rest with those having made the images. If you are not the one that created the image, you need a written (email also counts as such) permission with an explicit license statement by the copyright holder archived in COM:OTRS. For more information, see {{no permission since}}. Cheers! Siebrand 12:54, 17 August 2007 (UTC)

Image:Wappen_Krefeld_Uerdingen.jpg

The copyright status of the image is clear. The design is in the PD. The technical representation was first published in the German Wikipedia, and there is a link to the appropriate image page where the craftsman can be looked up, as well as the license terms which he used, likely GFDL. --Purodha Blissenbach 12:29, 17 August 2007 (UTC)

Hi Purodha, please link to either the design text or a what you call technical representation of the coat of arms, preferably both. Otherwise the image remains unsourced. Cheers! Siebrand 12:52, 17 August 2007 (UTC)
I simply don't understand, what you are talking of. What is a link good for, when the text saying it's PD is already on the description page, and gives the reason (German copyright law)? There is a link to the source which I copied, i.e. the German Wikipedia. I have no idea, what else could be liked to, so as to provide enough evidence that the image is usable. German Wikipedia does not allow every image from other wikies, including Commons, but Commons possibly not accepting the certainly much more restrictive German Wikipedia terms (other than German public places under de:Panoramafreiheit) is out of my reach. Also, we are talking about a municipality that existed between 1255, and 1929, January 1st. Their coat of arms likely descends from way before 1928, but even if it had been redesigned shortly before the town was formally dissolved into its neighboring city, it is approximately 80 years old or older by now. In other words, we have several reasons to argue that it is PD. What else could I provide?

--Purodha Blissenbach 16:50, 17 August 2007 (UTC)

Image:Delft_brons.JPG

Sorry Siebrand, in mijn haast vergat ik de license in te vullen. Inmiddels gedaan.--Gerardus 12:48, 17 August 2007 (UTC)

Haastige spoed is zelden goed... Groet, Siebrand 12:51, 17 August 2007 (UTC)

Image:Close_Packing.svg

I am having trouble with my first SVG upload. The preview on the image page does not match the svg file when I redownload it and use svg detective. Could you take a look at it for me?Mangledorf 15:15, 17 August 2007 (UTC)

Answered at User talk:Mangledorf Finn Rindahl 16:09, 17 August 2007 (UTC)

PD-ineligible?

Hi Siebrand, I scanned the images image:DR_DV_437.jpg and image:DR_DV_437_Befehl_N.jpg fromout an instruction of the former German Imperial Railways. I count them to public works, because the railways were an administrativ body of state at the time the instruction came into force (1959), not a private company like now. Should I change the license of theese images into {{PD-ineligible}} or another? --Uschu 20:09, 10 August 2007 (UTC)

What makes you think these texts/forms and designs have a free license? Siebrand 22:16, 10 August 2007 (UTC)
Hi Siebrand! Thanks for reaction. I´m a newcomer and got the hint to choice PD-ineligible in wikipedia. Before answering Your question i have to declare, that I just want to illustrate the article wikipedia:Vereinfachter Nebenbahnbetrieb. I ment the images are something like a foto in an encyclopedia.
I thought the license is free because of:
  • The railways were an administrativ body of state at the time the instruction came into force (1959), not a private company like now. That means the instructions are so official as well as laws.
  • The instruction No. 437 from 1959 is 48 years old. It had been changed many times. Since fusion of wikipedia:Deutsche Bundesbahn and wikipedia:Deutsche Reichsbahn this instruction is replaced by new hormonized instructions of the unitedwikipedia:Deutsche Bahn AG. That means, the inbstruction doesn´t have any present-day importence.
  • The instruction wasn´t secret at any time. It had been accessible to every railway-man, apprentice, trainee, teacher, supervisory board or hobby railway friend for instance. There were copies of the instuction and quotations in many books, textbooks, journals etc.
  • I´ve got a piece of the instruction. There´s nowhere any indication of a copy right.
Siebrand, if this would be enough, I would be happy. If I choosed the wrong license, help me to find the right one in my case. Thanks now already! --Uschu 13:04, 12 August 2007 (UTC)
I still do not know, but I think this one is not *that* important that we should invest a lot of time in it. Formally I think these pages are still copyrighted... Cheers! Siebrand 11:10, 15 August 2007 (UTC)
Hi Siebrand, Thank You. Nothing is important and I have no time too. I just wanted to enrich the articles by adding pictures of the article´s objects. I´m new here, what can I do than ask someone. I have a last question to you. Is it good for wikipedia, if I give up the images? Say yes or no and I will do it... or tell me an administrator or mentor, who is interested in clearing my "problem" for WP. After Your answer I won´t keep you busy any more. Cheers! --Uschu 19:53, 15 August 2007 (UTC)
PD-ineligible means that something is too simple to be copyrighted. That is not the case here.
Furthermore, something being created by a german state company does not make it PD. It is likely to be still copyrighted and the copyright is held by its legal successor. Hope this helps, -- Bryan (talk to me) 20:03, 15 August 2007 (UTC)
Hi Uschu. It's not the question at first if Wikipedia can benifit from it. The first question is: Is is free? If the answer is no, we do not want it, however much we would like it to be free. I know not enough of German law to adequately assess the copyright situation. If you would like a more definate answer, you could try asking at Commons talk:Licensing. Cheers! Siebrand 20:04, 15 August 2007 (UTC)
Hi Siebrand and Bryan. Thanks for Your explanations, that helped me to understand better. I will delete the concerned pictures in wikimedia and in the wikipedia article. But at second I will look for the answer if they nevertheless are usable against our today supposition. Cheers! --Uschu 06:51, 18 August 2007 (UTC)

Relicense task for SieBot

Hello Siebrand, I've got a little request to have some work done by SieBot. I recently decided that I want to release all my (personal) contributions to Commons under PD-Self. So far most of them are GFDL-self, and there are several multilicensed. I think it's okay to change a more restrictive license to a less restrictive one, right? In case my request is eligible, I'd like to ask you to run your bot over my images, since they are 273, too much for a manual job :-) Thank you. --Spiritia 06:55, 17 August 2007 (UTC)

Yes. Changing to a more free license is not a problem. I'll do this later today and will reference your edit above in the edit summary. Cheers! Siebrand 09:44, 17 August 2007 (UTC)
Great, thank you. :-) --Spiritia 12:22, 17 August 2007 (UTC)
✓ Done (I think :P) Siebrand 21:36, 17 August 2007 (UTC)

Sammyday

Thanks for your reception .--Sammyday 23:09, 17 August 2007 (UTC)

Tiny error

Hi Siebrand, I just found [4] (incorrect summary) a minute ago. Just in case it's of interest as feedback for your bot. (no need to reply) Greetings --Überraschungsbilder 23:27, 17 August 2007 (UTC)

Known issue, see elsewhere on this page. I'm getting tired of it, too, so I'll start bugging the good coders a bit more :) Cheers! Siebrand 23:43, 17 August 2007 (UTC)

G

There is incomprehensible character string in G. What will you do?210.228.21.40 02:46, 18 August 2007 (UTC)

? Siebrand 09:14, 18 August 2007 (UTC)

Gmina Kodrab.gif

  • what is reason of your revert?--Berserkerus 09:57, 18 August 2007 (UTC)

Image:Satin_bowerbird.jpg

I think this [[5]] is wrong. Image Image:Satin_bowerbird.jpg should be replaced with the later and bigger version Image:Satinbowerbird.jpeg. Also in general if such a bot edit involves editing QI or FP archives it shouldn't be done as it then makes a nonsense of the archive (as that wasn't actually the image evaluated) - so bias it towards keeping the QI or FP version. I don't know what edits need reversing, can you roll back edits concerning this image? --Tony Wills 12:27, 18 August 2007 (UTC) PS the bot leaves a link to commons:User:Siebrand in its edit summaries, that points no where --Tony Wills 12:27, 18 August 2007 (UTC)

Image:SaarLorLux_Summit_Logo.gif

You added the box

no permission since/en|month=August|day=16|year=2007

to the image Image:SaarLorLux_Summit_Logo.gif. Within the discription I declared, that this picture was a self made painting, trying to show the logo of the SaarLorLux summit. As you can see below, I identified myself as the author and released it into the public domain. If I upload a self made image, the declaration of the release of the picture to public domain proves itself. I have to tell you, that in difference to a copy, a repaint of an image is producing a copyright of it´s own. Therefore I am the owner of the copyright of this self made image. I removed your box.--Thw1309 17:27, 18 August 2007 (UTC)

You cannot freely license derivative works without permission from the copyright holder. Please get permission or the image *will* be deleted. Cheers! Siebrand 17:56, 18 August 2007 (UTC)

Re: Image:COA Hungary.png

Hey! I made this picture because the original coat of arms is too tall and it causes a desproporcionality when i put it at the infobox of the country, so i edit the original and save this. If is necessary put an atributtion to the original coat, I'll put it. Thanks!

Please provide some source (text or image) so that the validity of the image can be determined. Now we have to trust you in uploading a correct interpretation of a nation's coat of arms... Cheers! Siebrand 07:55, 19 August 2007 (UTC)

Image:Bowen, from Flagstaff Hill.jpg

Just curious, was this deleted because the Flickr user changed licenses? If I recall, this was originally uploaded by FlickrLickr, which should have proved that it was licensed OK at the time, and should not have needed to be deleted. If my memory is faulty, then never mind ;-) Carl Lindberg 14:29, 18 August 2007 (UTC)

My bad. Thanks for letting me know. If undeleted it. Cheers! Siebrand 17:01, 18 August 2007 (UTC)
Thanks. Should the FlickrReviewr tag be removed, or replaced with a once-free-but-flickr-changed template? It seems that all FlickrLickr images should never end up in that category, to prevent future mistakes. In any event, thanks :-) I've restored the usage on en-wiki. Carl Lindberg 21:12, 18 August 2007 (UTC)

Image:Aidan_of_Lindisfarne.jpg

Hello, you tagged my upload as deletable for source missing. I put , during upload, the source url... wp:en

Perhaps i'm talking to a bot ?

In case this isnt the case, Here the source again,

PD-AUTH

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Image:Aidan_of_Lindisfarne.jpg&oldid=145361576

So who *is* the copyright holder? There is no source mentioned at the location you have pointed out. Cheers! Siebrand 19:41, 18 August 2007 (UTC)
I saw this as I was stopping by... the artwork is from the en: Lindisfarne Gospels and is nearly 1300 years old. Should be PD-Old, unless there is a short-term publication copyright on the scan itself in the UK, but that would be pretty hard to prove (there seem to be a number of sources for its images nowadays). Carl Lindberg 21:12, 18 August 2007 (UTC)
Thanks. I've fixed the sourcing. -Nard 21:47, 18 August 2007 (UTC)

Public domain

Siebrand, my man, how are you? :)
Tell me, does the images in here are in the public domain? Gridge 21:12, 18 August 2007 (UTC).

"not affiliated with" - I guess the answer is no. Gridge 21:20, 18 August 2007 (UTC).
"Welcome to the White House Museum. This Web site is a private, unofficial, online effort to provide a place to explore the history and heritage of the home of the president of the United States of America. It's not about politics or policy. You will not find information here about assassinations, adultery, or corruption. This site merely celebrates the architecture, history, and cultural significance of the White House in America and abroad. and WhiteHouseMuseum.org is not affiliated with the White House Historical Association, WhiteHouse.gov, or any other part of the US government. You should assume All rights reserved. Permission is required. Cheers! Siebrand 21:44, 18 August 2007 (UTC)


Image:Marisa_cornuarietis_000.JPG

català | čeština | dansk | Deutsch | Ελληνικά | English | Esperanto | español | français | galego | עברית | italiano | 日本語 | 한국어 | lietuvių | Nederlands | norsk bokmål | polski | português | русский | slovenčina | 中文(简体)‎ | 中文(繁體)‎ | +/−


Hello, and thank your for sharing your files with Commons. There seems to be a problem regarding the description and/or licensing of this particular file. Please remember that all uploads require source, author and license information. Could you please resolve these problems, which are described on the page linked in above? Thank you. --Siebrand 13:43, 20 June 2007 (UTC)

Muy bien Señores bibliotecarios y administradores, si lo que quieren es borrar las imágenes por el solo placer de fastidiar bórrenlas. Yo ya me canse de enviar información y de descargar una y otra vez las mismas imágenes, veo que a la gente que colabora si se dedican a fastidiarla, la información de las imagenes que he descargado es igual, similar o mayor a la de otras muchas imágenes presentes en el sistema y no observo que las borren. Les pido que por favor también borren el trabajo no estoy interesado más en el proyecto Wikipedia. Atentamente Luis Ruiz Berti --LRB-Haliotis94 02:30, 19 August 2007 (UTC)

Removing "Goud.png"

On en.wiki I see this message from your bot "Removing "Goud.png", it has been deleted from Commons by Infrogmation because: speedy tagged replaced." You say it is replaces...isn't it better to replace it instead of removing it? Right now your bot is destroying articles because they don't make sense anymore. Please take care of what you are doing. Knurftendans 07:24, 19 August 2007 (UTC)

Please talk to User:Infrogmation. I do not have a solution for you here. Cheers! Siebrand 07:48, 19 August 2007 (UTC)
It appears that the replacement image for this deleted image is Image:Med 1.png. Are you sure that there is nothing that you can do? --After Midnight 11:36, 19 August 2007 (UTC)
I can order CommonsDelinker to replace existing uses of Goud.png by Med 1.png. That does however not change that certain uses have already been delinked. To get those back, manual intervention would be required. There is a log of delinks on this image available. Useful? Siebrand 11:39, 19 August 2007 (UTC)
I am an admin on enwiki - so I can revert the bot there. I can't do anything about other wikis. --After Midnight 11:41, 19 August 2007 (UTC) Or I can do any other enwiki action that you recommend. --After Midnight 11:42, 19 August 2007 (UTC)
OK, so revert the deletes by CD, we wait a bit if there is a replication lag at the toolserver and I'll fire CD to replace the images. Please be aware that CD cannot replace in protected pages/templates (nor delink for that matter), so those have to be resolved manually. Sounds like a plan? Cheers! Siebrand 12:11, 19 August 2007 (UTC)
OK. I've rolled back all of the edits that removed that image. You can please proceed with the next step for the replacements when you are ready and any lag has cleared. --After Midnight 12:31, 19 August 2007 (UTC)
I see that you have fixed this up for all 3 medals. Thanks for all your help. --After Midnight 19:11, 19 August 2007 (UTC)

Image Farnesina.jpg

Dear Siebrand, first of all please apologize my bad english, I'm from Italy. ;) You have to know that in Italy there's not Freedom of panorama, so this photo is a violation of law 633/1941, like the many other already deleted here on Commons and on the Italian wikipedia (where I am sysop) due to the same problem. Please read the object of my last edit on the photo's history for more info, check the links posted by me here, or ask to me or to the user G. Dall'Orto (another one who know the whole story). Bye. ;) --Lucas 09:52, 16 August 2007 (UTC)

ps: when you'll reply me please leave a line here too. Thanks! --Lucas 09:55, 16 August 2007 (UTC)
OK. I've speedy deleted the image. :( Cheers! Siebrand 10:21, 16 August 2007 (UTC)
Ok! see you, bye ;) --Lucas 21:59, 19 August 2007 (UTC)

oops

Hi Siebrand. Sorry about that. I created a new user name to upload my own work, can you advise me of the most open license. I do not want it 'owned' by anyone, especially by default. How do I ensure that my work is fully available and negates any claim to copyright? Regards Cygnis insignis 17:50, 19 August 2007 (UTC)

Declare own work as source in {{Information}}, give Public domain as permission, add {{PD-self|author=I, [[User:Cygnis insignis|Cygnis insignis]]}} as license tag. Cheers! Siebrand 18:01, 19 August 2007 (UTC)
Cheers. Cygnis insignis 16:16, 20 August 2007 (UTC)

Template:LviatourCredit

Thank you for your information and your supports. The problem is now completely corrected thank you --Luc Viatour 19:24, 19 August 2007 (UTC)

De rien. It's not a community project for nothing :) Cheers! Siebrand 09:04, 20 August 2007 (UTC)

Languages

ich schpreche deutsch oder georgisch!!! --Dato deutschland 06:47, 20 August 2007 (UTC)

Excellent. I read German, French and write English and Dutch. Anything in particular you would like to ask? Cheers! Siebrand 09:04, 20 August 2007 (UTC)

No edit...

Hi Siebrand, with 100 images to skip seems that my Bot doesn't make any edit... can I set 50 or 20? (if there are problem I can re-set what you want..). Bye, --Filnik 08:50, 20 August 2007 (UTC)

Hi Filnik. Not editing may be a good thing. That means that the script CommonsDelinker is running is catching everything before your script can edit. If you are worried about if your script works at all, you can lower the number temporarily for testing purposes. Cheers! Siebrand 09:03, 20 August 2007 (UTC)

Dutch Village arms

You put a delete tag on a series of village arms form Friesland province, Netherlands, as no source was indicated. I noticed that all are taken from my site www.ngw.nl, but they are not made by me. On the original pages the books and other sources are mentioned and thus should be taken to Wikipedia. Maybe you should notify the uploader about this ?Knorrepoes 07:05, 19 August 2007 (UTC)

Hoi Knorrepoes. Ik begrijp niet precies wat je wilt zeggen... Groet, Siebrand 22:06, 20 August 2007 (UTC)

Image:Alexander Grant MacKay cartoon.jpg

You notified me on problems on that image, but I'm not original uploader of that image, User:Cloveious is. All I did was uploading version of that image with adjusted levels. I notified him/her about the issue, but I'm bit puzzled why was I warned. --Igno2 10:08, 19 August 2007 (UTC)

Thanks. Siebrand 22:04, 20 August 2007 (UTC)

Bot

Set 100 new images to skip (how you have requested :-)), --Filnik 18:46, 19 August 2007 (UTC)

Let's see how it performs... Cheers! Siebrand 21:55, 20 August 2007 (UTC)

Image:Bischofskonferenz1931.jpg

I think its now made. Can you see?thanksPelagio de Asturias 05:56, 20 August 2007 (UTC)

Well, a photograph from 1931 is not in the public domain like that. Did you create or inherit the image? Who created it? Cheers! Siebrand 21:54, 20 August 2007 (UTC)

Monte Disgrazia

Re this image I have added details here http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Image:Monte_Disgrazia.jpg Is that OK? When I move an image to Commons, where am I supposed to put this copyright info? Thanks. Ericoides 11:01, 20 August 2007 (UTC)

Use CommonsHelper. There is a link in the welcome message on your talk page. Cheers! Siebrand 21:53, 20 August 2007 (UTC)

Mistaken text change [bot]

SieBot just made a very confusing change.[6] That isn't the right template for that speedy deletion criteria, and the link that it changed from isn't a redirect to the link it changed to, so what gave it the idea to do that? EVula // talk // // 14:49, 20 August 2007 (UTC)

I forgot to revert it... Siebrand 21:50, 20 August 2007 (UTC)
Ah, groovy. EVula // talk // // 23:45, 20 August 2007 (UTC)

Image:Brahmika.svg

Hello Siebrand, I just noticed you touched up this image. I'd like to thank you—I'm really bad at this vector stuff, and any help I receive is a blessing. ɪkiɾɔɪd | talk 20:47, 20 August 2007 (UTC)

You're welcome. Cheers! Siebrand 21:50, 20 August 2007 (UTC)


Image Tagging Image:AlfredDreyfus-2.jpg

العربية | asturianu | беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ | català | čeština | dansk | Deutsch | Ελληνικά | English | español | euskara | فارسی | suomi | français | עברית | magyar | italiano | 日本語 | 한국어 | македонски | മലയാളം | Plattdüütsch | Nederlands | norsk nynorsk | norsk bokmål | polski | português | português do Brasil | русский | slovenčina | slovenščina | svenska | Türkçe | Tiếng Việt | 中文(简体)‎ | 中文(繁體)‎ | +/−

Warning sign
This media may be deleted.

Thanks for uploading Image:AlfredDreyfus-2.jpg. I notice the image page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you have not created this media yourself then you need to argue that we have the right to use the media on Wikimedia Commons (see copyright tagging below). If you have not created the media yourself then you should also specify where you found it, i.e., in most cases link to the website where you got it, and the terms of use for content from that page. If the content is a derivative of a copyrighted work, you need to supply the names and a licence of the original authors as well.

If the media also doesn't have a copyright tag, then you must also add one. If you created/took the picture, audio, or video then you can use {{self|cc-by-sa-3.0}} to release it under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike license or {{PD-self}} to release it into the public domain. See Commons:Copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

Note that any unsourced and untagged images will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have uploaded other media, please check that you have specified their source and copyright tagged them, too. You can find all your uploads using the Gallery tool. Thank you. Siebrand 22:57, 20 August 2007 (UTC)


Image Tagging Image:Alvaro_Obregon_headshot.jpg

العربية | asturianu | беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ | català | čeština | dansk | Deutsch | Ελληνικά | English | español | euskara | فارسی | suomi | français | עברית | magyar | italiano | 日本語 | 한국어 | македонски | മലയാളം | Plattdüütsch | Nederlands | norsk nynorsk | norsk bokmål | polski | português | português do Brasil | русский | slovenčina | slovenščina | svenska | Türkçe | Tiếng Việt | 中文(简体)‎ | 中文(繁體)‎ | +/−

Warning sign
This media may be deleted.

Thanks for uploading Image:Alvaro_Obregon_headshot.jpg. I notice the image page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you have not created this media yourself then you need to argue that we have the right to use the media on Wikimedia Commons (see copyright tagging below). If you have not created the media yourself then you should also specify where you found it, i.e., in most cases link to the website where you got it, and the terms of use for content from that page. If the content is a derivative of a copyrighted work, you need to supply the names and a licence of the original authors as well.

If the media also doesn't have a copyright tag, then you must also add one. If you created/took the picture, audio, or video then you can use {{self|cc-by-sa-3.0}} to release it under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike license or {{PD-self}} to release it into the public domain. See Commons:Copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

Note that any unsourced and untagged images will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have uploaded other media, please check that you have specified their source and copyright tagged them, too. You can find all your uploads using the Gallery tool. Thank you. Siebrand 22:58, 20 August 2007 (UTC)


Image Tagging Image:AntonBruckner-2.jpg

العربية | asturianu | беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ | català | čeština | dansk | Deutsch | Ελληνικά | English | español | euskara | فارسی | suomi | français | עברית | magyar | italiano | 日本語 | 한국어 | македонски | മലയാളം | Plattdüütsch | Nederlands | norsk nynorsk | norsk bokmål | polski | português | português do Brasil | русский | slovenčina | slovenščina | svenska | Türkçe | Tiếng Việt | 中文(简体)‎ | 中文(繁體)‎ | +/−

Warning sign
This media may be deleted.

Thanks for uploading Image:AntonBruckner-2.jpg. I notice the image page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you have not created this media yourself then you need to argue that we have the right to use the media on Wikimedia Commons (see copyright tagging below). If you have not created the media yourself then you should also specify where you found it, i.e., in most cases link to the website where you got it, and the terms of use for content from that page. If the content is a derivative of a copyrighted work, you need to supply the names and a licence of the original authors as well.

If the media also doesn't have a copyright tag, then you must also add one. If you created/took the picture, audio, or video then you can use {{self|cc-by-sa-3.0}} to release it under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike license or {{PD-self}} to release it into the public domain. See Commons:Copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

Note that any unsourced and untagged images will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have uploaded other media, please check that you have specified their source and copyright tagged them, too. You can find all your uploads using the Gallery tool. Thank you. Siebrand 23:00, 20 August 2007 (UTC)


Image Tagging Image:ArcticFox.jpg

العربية | asturianu | беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ | català | čeština | dansk | Deutsch | Ελληνικά | English | español | euskara | فارسی | suomi | français | עברית | magyar | italiano | 日本語 | 한국어 | македонски | മലയാളം | Plattdüütsch | Nederlands | norsk nynorsk | norsk bokmål | polski | português | português do Brasil | русский | slovenčina | slovenščina | svenska | Türkçe | Tiếng Việt | 中文(简体)‎ | 中文(繁體)‎ | +/−

Warning sign
This media may be deleted.

Thanks for uploading Image:ArcticFox.jpg. I notice the image page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you have not created this media yourself then you need to argue that we have the right to use the media on Wikimedia Commons (see copyright tagging below). If you have not created the media yourself then you should also specify where you found it, i.e., in most cases link to the website where you got it, and the terms of use for content from that page. If the content is a derivative of a copyrighted work, you need to supply the names and a licence of the original authors as well.

If the media also doesn't have a copyright tag, then you must also add one. If you created/took the picture, audio, or video then you can use {{self|cc-by-sa-3.0}} to release it under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike license or {{PD-self}} to release it into the public domain. See Commons:Copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

Note that any unsourced and untagged images will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have uploaded other media, please check that you have specified their source and copyright tagged them, too. You can find all your uploads using the Gallery tool. Thank you. Siebrand 23:04, 20 August 2007 (UTC)

New tool?

(look at your log!) --Polarlys 23:47, 20 August 2007 (UTC)

Large backlog, nice tools: http://tools.wikimedia.de/~magnus/bad_old_ones.php?category=Unknown_-_August_2007&limit=10. It was at 2809 items when I started. No idea how many now :) Cheers! Siebrand 23:52, 20 August 2007 (UTC)
I know, I work on these categories day by day, but not at this speed (whenever my script by-passes the deleting confirmation and closes the window …) --Polarlys 23:53, 20 August 2007 (UTC)
Counter at 2366 now. I though I deleted more. I've had days with 1200 deletions. It's a lot of work :( Siebrand 00:03, 21 August 2007 (UTC)
Have a look on CommonsDelinker’s contributions on pt.wikipedia.org, that’s the main reason … --Polarlys 00:48, 21 August 2007 (UTC)
Yep. Loads of unsource arms of sorts... I guess someone targeted those in his search for unsourced files... Cheers! Siebrand 06:38, 21 August 2007 (UTC)


Disappeared without a trace

Yesterday I saw Commonsdelinker took the following action on http://incubator.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wp/stq/Europa

09:50, 20 August 2007 CommonsDelinker (Talk | contribs | block) m (4,149 bytes) (The file Image:Europa-Lingvoj--RS2006030842.jpg has been removed, as it has been deleted by commons:User:Fred J: derivative work: [[w:commons:Commons:Deletion requests/Image:Australien--Qld--Townsville+Thuringowa--UreinwohnerStämme--RS03)

In fact, this means, that not you cannot see there has been an image on that article. From an esthetic point of view, that’s a fine thing. But also the captions of that image are removed, which may contain information essential for the article. In addition: in the old situation, where a disappeared image left a clear mark, the author of the article could try to replace the missing image by something else.

As I feel, it would be a real improvement when Commonsdelinker also sent a message to the last contributor of the concerning page. Especially in Incubator, the screen Recent Changes renews itself so often, that already after a Wikifree weekend you might miss the removal.

Apart from this, I expect that a file never can be redrawn, once it is ceded to Commons. The one reason for removal is, when it has unsufficient rights. Is that true?--Pyt 07:52, 21 August 2007 (UTC)

I understand your question. However, we do have watchlists, CommonsTickers (something you most definately need on incubator if not already there) and user contributions overviews. IMO this would generate a huge amount of edits (do not underestimate the number of edits CommonsDelinker makes) with very little gain. Cheers! Siebrand 09:34, 21 August 2007 (UTC)

Image:1125316859.jpg

Image deletion warning Image:1125316859.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 image, 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. If the file is up for deletion because it has been superseded by a superior derivative of your work, consider the notion that although the file may be deleted, your hard work (which we all greatly appreciate) lives on in the new file.
In all cases, please do not take the deletion request personally. It is never intended as such. Thank you!

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

This is an automated message from User:DRBot. 08:27, 21 August 2007 (UTC)

User uploads

I've been made aware that Rfcbeach137 (talk · contribs) has been adding that the images he has uploaded are self made, despite being taken from Gibson.com, Fender.com etc.. You warned this user about copyright violations on August 19 and today the user added the spurious self made description. Thanks for your help in the matter.--Alf melmac 08:41, 21 August 2007 (UTC)

Please give a source link for the image, that way I will have a stronger case. Cheers! Siebrand 08:42, 21 August 2007 (UTC)
Will certainly do so in future, Gibson site has no opportunity (one that I could figure anyway) of opening an image in another window (it uses Flash player) so the closest I could get was using search then forwarding through, the American telecaster was from fender.com, the strat from the same sime, diff sub page. Thanks.--Alf melmac 09:06, 21 August 2007 (UTC)
I zapped all his guitar uploads anyway and blocked him for a month. Thanks for letting me know. Cheers! Siebrand 09:29, 21 August 2007 (UTC)

Image:Palmer-Prospector.jpg

Hello, I just received a message regarding an anomaly with this image. I have simultaneously submitted the e-mailed authorization from its author (Barry Palmer) at the required address. Barry Palmer is still living and he is the flex-wing hang glider pioneer, so I am preparing to post a biography stub based on his works, where I will explain his hang gliders, show its images and mention he now builds hovercraft (the 'Prospector' hovercraft image being a design of his). I am grateful to have your feedback on the specific issue regarding this image. Thank you, BatteryIncluded 13:30, 21 August 2007 (UTC)

Re:Image:Nguyen Trai.jpg

Hello,I have described some thing more on this picture.Nguyễn Trãi(1480-1542)was a vietnamese writer and policitian.Is that enough?If not ,please tell me what else shall I do.--Zhxy 519 13:45, 21 August 2007 (UTC)

Sorteren

Hallo

Ik plaats veel beelden van bruggen en sluizen. Die beelden hebben een relatie met de rivieren en kanalen waar ze in of over liggen. Hoe krijgen we een koppeling tussen de die wateren en mijn beelden waardoor een beter overzicht ontstaat ??

mvg

Hans Burger

Dat kan je doen dooe een of meer categorieen aan afbeeldingen toe te voegen. Begin eens in Category:Bodies of water. Kijk in de beschrijving van afbeeldingen hoe je een categorie toevoegt of in de beschrijving van een categorie hoe je een nieuwe categorie aanmaakt. Als je er niet uitkomt, geeft dan een concreet voorbeeld, zodat ik je evrder kan helpen. Groet, Siebrand 17:49, 21 August 2007 (UTC)

Image:Abaque_Gerbert_d'Aurillac.gif

Gerpert d'Aurillac is usually known as Sylvester II he was pope 1004 years ago and he is the author of his abaque (he introduced the abics numbers in médieval occident)! So his abaque is in public domain! Cyberprout 21:16, 16 August 2007 (UTC)

This image in unsourced. I've looked on the internet, trying to find something similar and I could not. Please show us a source for this image so we can chcek this is indeed what you claim it to be. Siebrand 08:52, 22 August 2007 (UTC)

Please check usage of images

You have deleted Image:Brisbane City Night.jpg. I understand why it was deleted, but please make sure it is not being used before you delete. This image was used at pih:Brisbin, and your deletion caused it to orphan. It is easy to check picture usage before deletion using the tab provided, please do this next time and amend pages to make sure you don't leave orphans everywhere.

- pih:User:Pall Mall

Sorry, does not always go right of the delinker has crashed... Get the project a m:CommonsTicker to be able to recognise images that were not delinked... Cheers! Siebrand 19:58, 21 August 2007 (UTC)

Tom Warren photos

I just resent the email on this. Thanks for checking on them. Let me know if you have further questions.Rlevse 11:55, 21 August 2007 (UTC)

You should be able to find this now. Thanks.Rlevse 10:03, 22 August 2007 (UTC)

Smathers gelöschte Bilder

Hallo, du hast letztens Bilder von de:George Smathers gelöscht. Mir ist allerdings nicht ganz klar warum, die sind vor 1964 veröffentlicht worden und sollten doch laut [7] pd sein, oder irre ich mich? Gruß--Ticketautomat 13:16, 21 August 2007 (UTC)

Hi Ticketautomat. I do not now exactly which image you are talking about. They must have had a deletion summary. Most probably a source was missing. Cheers! Siebrand 19:53, 21 August 2007 (UTC)
Its okay when I say it in german? Ich meine alle Bilder, die im Artikel über Smathers zu finden waren. Die Quellen waren angegeben und die Bilder sind allesamt aus den 1950er oder Anfang der 1060er Jahre gewesen. Wo find ich denn die "deletion summary"? Thanks--Ticketautomat 07:34, 22 August 2007 (UTC)
No problem. I read German just fine, just having a hard time replying in it. The deletion summary is in the log for that image. See for example here for the log of one of your deleted uploads. Was this the information you r were looking for? If you need information on a particular image, please let me know about it. Cheers! Siebrand 08:00, 22 August 2007 (UTC)

About Image:Aceras anthropophorum.JPG

Hi, you marked this as "missing permission". I uploaded a bunch of these, all by User:Lumbar, who didn't upload them himself for some reason. Full list here. I suggest we find some singular solution for this, though it strikes me as a bit silly, as the image pages contain a link to the user. When I upload my own images, they only contain a link to me, and that is enough... I will ask Lumbar to set up a general permission page. --Magnus Manske 14:15, 21 August 2007 (UTC)

OK, Lumbar has written a permission here. Will that suffice, if I link it from every page? --Magnus Manske 15:34, 21 August 2007 (UTC)
Yes, unfortunately you will need to link to the permission from every image by that user you have uploaded... Cheers! Siebrand 19:51, 21 August 2007 (UTC)

Image:Constable Salisbury meadows.jpg

Hi! This is my first upload. Is everything all right?Should I add paintings template?more categories? Thank you for your attention!--GLf 16:22, 21 August 2007 (UTC)

Yep. Cheers! Siebrand 20:58, 21 August 2007 (UTC)

Image Tagging Image:SophievW.jpg

العربية | asturianu | беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ | català | čeština | dansk | Deutsch | Ελληνικά | English | español | euskara | فارسی | suomi | français | עברית | magyar | italiano | 日本語 | 한국어 | македонски | മലയാളം | Plattdüütsch | Nederlands | norsk nynorsk | norsk bokmål | polski | português | português do Brasil | русский | slovenčina | slovenščina | svenska | Türkçe | Tiếng Việt | 中文(简体)‎ | 中文(繁體)‎ | +/−

Warning sign
This media may be deleted.

Thanks for uploading Image:SophievW.jpg. I notice the image page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you have not created this media yourself then you need to argue that we have the right to use the media on Wikimedia Commons (see copyright tagging below). If you have not created the media yourself then you should also specify where you found it, i.e., in most cases link to the website where you got it, and the terms of use for content from that page. If the content is a derivative of a copyrighted work, you need to supply the names and a licence of the original authors as well.

If the media also doesn't have a copyright tag, then you must also add one. If you created/took the picture, audio, or video then you can use {{self|cc-by-sa-3.0}} to release it under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike license or {{PD-self}} to release it into the public domain. See Commons:Copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

Note that any unsourced and untagged images will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have uploaded other media, please check that you have specified their source and copyright tagged them, too. You can find all your uploads using the Gallery tool. Thank you. Siebrand 16:37, 22 August 2007 (UTC)

Image categories

Hi there! Wow - that was fast :) Unfortunately, Daniel's tools have maxed out their connection limit & I was about to try later. Don't worry - I'll get to it :) - Alison 17:56, 22 August 2007 (UTC)

Heh :) I was checking recent uploads. It's nice to do that now and then, because people are usually still around and they get instant feedback. You proved me right :) Cheers! Siebrand 18:09, 22 August 2007 (UTC)

Modified User_talk:CommonsDelinker/commands#Move_request concerning Limburg leads to inconsistent moves and naming

--Foroa 08:43, 23 August 2007 (UTC)

Siebrand, vermist iedereen in zijn werkzone probeert de boel uit te kuisen en proper te houden op zijn manier, is het normaal dat we nu en dan op elkaars tenen trappen. Dat is niet persoonlijk bedoeld. Trouwens, een eerste resultaat vind ik dat Juiced lemon al "aanspreekbaar" wordt.

Zoals ik al in User_talk:Wikifalcon#Brugge.2FBruges vermeld heb, ben ik use cases aan het voorbereiden, samen met een aantal voorstellen om de naming te verbeteren. Je zou me wel een plezier doen als je ondertussen mijn voorbeeldcase Bruges (de subcats met Brugge erin) niet massief gaat renamen. In tegenstelling van wat misschien je indruk zou kunnen zijn, probeer ik de problemen te identifieren, op tafel te leggen en te zoeken naar oplossingen. --Foroa 16:43, 23 August 2007 (UTC)

Oke, ik wacht tot jullie eruit zijn. Ik ben overigens voorstander van Engelstalige naamgeving. Reden daarvoor is dat later een i18n engine niet ook weer compleet getrained hoeft te worden. Groet, Siebrand 19:00, 23 August 2007 (UTC)

Bedankt.

Heb je ietwat meer info over dat i18n engine ?

In verband met de (toekomstige) meertaligheid van de wiki geloof ik meer in strenge syntax en structuurregels in de naming dan in arbiraire "taal"regels. Structurele eenvormigheid is gewoon eenvoudiger om te parsen en automatisch te vertalen dan eenvormige engelse cats met veranderende structuur waar onvermijdelijk massa's vreemde woorden opduiken op onvoorspelbare plaatsen. (ik ken daar wel iets van)

Blijft die zaak met de hernaming en herintegratie van Limburg, waar wij nog restanten van de oude situatie hebben, de patchen van Juiced lemon en sinds gisteren jouw voorkeur om het te uniformiseren met het Nederlandse Limburg. In de eerste plaats ziet het er naar uit dat je geen haakjes wil, maar ik weet niet of dat jouw persoonlijke keuze is, of er daar een regel of consensus over bestaat. Ik stel voor dat je iets doet om op zijn minst een beetje vooruit te gaan. Ofwel verander je het op jouw manier, ofwel op JL's manier. Eventueel heb je de moed en tijd om het debat aan te gaan met de commoniteit omtrent die haakjes. Eerlijk gezegd heb ik de voorkeur voor de notatie zonder haakjes omdat ik in mijn voorstel de haakjes zou willen gebruiken voor documentaire doeleinden en om locale (onvertaalbare) namen/talen in te isoleren. Ik heb echter geen idee tot hoeveel veranderingen het verwijderen van die haakjes gaat leiden.

Hoedanook, ik kijk uit naar een oplossing voor Limburg zodat wij dan ook kunnen proberen een oplossing te vinden voor de Waalse provincies, hetgeen in België niet altijd evident is. --Foroa 07:09, 24 August 2007 (UTC)

Lang verhaal :) Ik zit op mijn werk en heb het druk, dus helaas geen tijd om uitgebreid te antwoorden. Belangrijk om te beseffen is dat het werk dat verzet te worden om tot een gewenst resultaat te komen niet echt relevant is. We hebben bots en die zoemen wel door. Al moeten er een paar miljoen edits voor gedaan worden.
Wat betreft de i18n is [OmegaWiki op dit moment de meest realistische kandidaat: categorienamen worden transparant op basis van taalvoorkeur van de gebruiker getoond. Category:Horses zou dus als Category:Paard getoond worden als je interfacetaal Nederlands is. Als het Latijn is, zou het Category:Equus caballus. Probleempje met de huidige categorisatie is al dat mijn voorbeelden uitgaan van enkelvoud en de huidige categorisatie meervoud is. De software ligt klaar om geintegreerd te worden door de programmeurs, maar die zijn heel erg druk bezig met Single User Logon en het herschrijven van het image backend. Twee projecten die ook erg belangrijk zijn voor Commons. Door het eerste kunnen gebruikers transparant aanmelden bij Commons en wordt Commons beter bereikbaar, het tweede zal ons in staat stellen image redirects te maken en met een druk op de knop afbeeldingen te hernoemen. Ik zal verder in detail ingaan op je voorstel als ik meer tijd heb. Ik vermoed laat vandaag of morgen.
Groet, Siebrand 08:32, 24 August 2007 (UTC)

Trainstations

PS: sorry dat dit zo op je overlegpagina komt... maar je Botje is het eerste "aanspreekpunt". Het is uiteraard niet jouw beslissing, dus als je je persoonlijk aangesproken voelt in mijn commentaar hieronder: niet nodig, het is maar voor het gemak van typen en voor de anderen die er mee bezig zijn. Je bot voert het ook maar uit hé. Zolang die even stil ligt, kan met anderen dit even uitgeklaard worden --LimoWreck 17:34, 23 August 2007 (UTC)

Siebrand, je botmoves ivm de treinstations zijn gewoonweg foutief. De bestaande categorieën "xxx train station" zijn de juiste, want zo HEET het station. Ze kunnen dan wel een subcategory zijn van "Train station in YYY" maar GEEN vervanging. Neem nu het station Gent-Sint-Pieters. Je hebt dit veranderd naar "Train stations in Gent-Sint-Pieters".... zoiets is klinkklare onzin: Gent-Sint-Pieters is helemaal geen stad of dorp, het is de naam van het station. Er is dus geen IN Gent-Sint-Pieters. Laat staan dat er train stationS zijn, er is er maar eentje, en dat heeft die naam. Analoog voor andere trein stations. --LimoWreck 16:58, 23 August 2007 (UTC)

Maw, de namen die gehanteerd zijn van de treinstations zijn de EIGENNAMEN. Zo kan een stad of grote gemeente meerdere treinstations hebben. Eentje met als eigennaam de naam van de gemeente zelf, en bv nog enkele andere. Wanneer je die dingen hernoemt verlies je dus het onderscheid, verlies je eigennamen, gooi je meerdere stations in dezelfde categorie, of introduceert men zelfs "nonsens" zoals in het geval van Gent-Sint-Pieters --LimoWreck 17:05, 23 August 2007 (UTC)

Siebrand, misschien even je bot stilleggen terwijl hij toch buiten adem is. (overwerkt ?)

In feite, en daar had ik ook niet meteen op gedacht, gebruiken wij de naam van het station, en sommige vind je terug op de en:wiki. En als er meer dan een station is, dan kunnen wij er eenvoudig een tweede bijzetten bij die stad, niemand die daarover gaat vallen. Een ander voordeel van de huidige naamgeving is dat ze ook automatisch alfabetisch geklasseerd worden, en dat is mooi meegenomen en moeten wij niet met die pipe argumenten zitten knoeien. --Foroa 17:21, 23 August 2007 (UTC)

Nog zo'n voorbeeldje: Category:Train stations in Dolhain-Gileppe. Ik heb de uitleg gegeven onder de {badname}. Nog even in het NL voor het geval ik aan het zwanzen ben in het Engels:
  1. Er is geen dorp "Dolhain-Gileppe", dus er kan geen station in liggen.
  2. Er draagt een station die naam, dus stations in meervoud heeft geen zin
  3. Het station ligt in de gemeente Limbourg; Station "Dolhain-Gileppe" is de eigennaam van het station...
Vergelijk met Heathrow Airport... dat mag dan wel een "vliegveld in Londen" (dat is alvast een zinnige cat.) zijn, maar men zet het niet als "vliegveld in Heathrow" (hoewel Heathrow in dit geval wel een dorpje is zeker?). Hopelijk het zo overduidelijk ;-) --LimoWreck 17:31, 23 August 2007 (UTC)
Voilà, ter aanvulling: elders op overleg proberen we het ding eventjes uit te klaren. Groeten, en niet te veel op deze lap overlegpaginavervuiling vloeken hé ;-) --LimoWreck 17:57, 23 August 2007 (UTC)


We gaan het oplossen. Geef me alsjeblieft aan wat er gecorrigeerd moet worden, dan voer ik het uit. De commando's kwamen overigens ook van mij... Groet, Siebrand 18:59, 23 August 2007 (UTC)

Gewoon, voorlopig moet er niets verplaatst worden. Zie User_talk:Wikifalcon, ergens onderaan ;-) We lijken ongeveer overeen te komen welke namen steek houden, en welke niet. Eigenlijk zouden er dus haast omgekeerde renames kunnen gebeuren waar nodig ;-) --LimoWreck 19:04, 23 August 2007 (UTC)
En kan je aub die botmoves eens terugdraaien, want iets als [8] is echt onmogelijk... , dat klopt gewoon niet. --LimoWreck 19:06, 23 August 2007 (UTC)
Ik zie dat je inmiddels zelf een bot hebt gevonden. Nog ergens hulp nodig? Siebrand 19:54, 23 August 2007 (UTC)
Niet direct :-) 't is te zeggen, als je enkel kunt bevestigen dat je bot niet automatisch nog ergens die renames weer oppikt; anders blijven we bezig met heen en weer prutsen ;-) --LimoWreck 20:08, 23 August 2007 (UTC)
Als er geen {{move}} templates meer in staan, kom ik ze zomaar niet tegen. Als ze volgens een geldende conventie genaamd zijn, kom ik ze ook niet tegen bij het fixen van alle afwijkende namen binnen een hoofdcategorie. Dank je wel voor je correcties. Probeer samen met JL en Feroa een strakke categorieboom voor Belgie neer te zetten. Groet en succes, Siebrand 05:58, 24 August 2007 (UTC)

Thanks

Thanks for editing my user talk page so I could see the message! Unfortunately, the image had already been deleted (and it was a Featured Picture on the English Wikipedia), but at least there are several more photos of the same subject.--Diniz 21:58, 23 August 2007 (UTC)

Image: Guillotine

I've uploaded this new image Image:Guillotine.jpg, but forgot to check if there were others with the same name. Now apparently there were and so I have accidently overrode the old image. How do I now solve this or can you as Admin do it for me. Sorry for causing such problems!!! On should really not do such things when you are to tired. --Evening.star 23:21, 23 August 2007 (UTC)

OTRS

If you have a chance, could you process the OTRS on the Tom Warren photos? I resent the email to OTRS. TKs.Rlevse 15:58, 24 August 2007 (UTC)

French books vs. Books of France

Hello,

Your bot changed "French books" to "Books of France". These are not equivalent. "French books" here means books in French language. Could you revert that please? Regards, Yann 19:03, 18 August 2007 (UTC)

I cannot find these edits in the past 5000 edits of SieBot. Have you found which admin gave the command at User:CommonsDelinker/commands? Please discuss this, as I do not know which reason that admin, User:D-Kuru[9], had to make the change. I'd much rather you two come to a consensus than to revert at the first request. In the future please reference with links. That saves you and me time. Cheers! Siebrand 19:38, 18 August 2007 (UTC)
Ok, thanks for the answer. Yann 10:51, 26 August 2007 (UTC)

Image:StaffanJacobson.jpg

Can you explain to me how Jacobson took a self portrait under the alias Kalle and then released it under cc? The image was deleted on sv-wiki as a clear copyright violation. Did you even bother checking the discussion? --Bongoman 16:04, 25 August 2007 (UTC)

Image:Cramb.jpg

Hi There

Could you please explain how this is a copyright violation/copyright not explained. This image is from a website my friend runs. He has released the image and says it can be used on Wiki without the need for people to ask for permission to use it. There for it is released free of copyright.

User:Gorilla 21:30, 25 August 2007 (UTC)

Hi

Siebrand, you left three warnings at my talk page on August 16 for three uploaded files. The three files are Image:Priscilla_Owen.jpg and Image:Roe.pdf and Image:ThompsonBaker.JPG

I have tried to address your concerns. Could you please remove the warnings from those images, now? If there's still a problem with any of them, please let me know. Thanks.Ferrylodge 01:27, 26 August 2007 (UTC)

✓ Done Please use the template {{Information}} to de scribe future uploads. Cheers! Siebrand 09:47, 26 August 2007 (UTC)

About CommonsDelinker

Hi! I'm just wondering if it's supposed to do this? Jon Harald Søby 13:58, 26 August 2007 (UTC)

Nope, that was a bug back in June. It has been fixed now. I thought we had reverted all the wrong edits, but apparently not... -- Bryan (talk to me) 14:56, 26 August 2007 (UTC)

Image:Zimbabwe_blank.jpg

Sorry, usually do. Dont know how but I completely missed it that time. Have altered as requested. Mangwanani 18:19, 26 August 2007 (UTC)

Deletion of Epiphone Moderne Image

Siebrand, why did you delete my upload of the Epiphone Moderne Special Edition? The guy who took the picture has a website that states you can use his images but you have to attribute that he took the picture. My description did just that. This proves it:

http://instruments.garyhendershot.com/

Go all the way to the bottom and it clearly states:

It has come to my attention through various sources that a LOT of people have regularly been using my guitar photos and descriptions for their eBay auctions as well as for their own websites. I really don't mind the photo borrowing, but people really should come up with textual descriptions in their own words or at least give credit via footnotes. Thank you.

The picture I used from his site is in the first row at the top, fourth from the left.

http://instruments.garyhendershot.com/Epiphone_Moderne.html

That page includes the picture I used and his description. Please reconsider the deletion. Also, I never said that the image was mine, I just uploaded it and gave him full credit saying his name and linking to his site. That's not copyfraud.

    • Image:Edicto Manuel Lorenzo 8.10.1834 (1).jpg. Ist eigegentlich nicht doppelt denn sie enthält links vollständig den text Real orden. Dagengen rechts nur einen Teil vom Edicto von Lorenzo, der Rest von diesem Edicto ist in imagen Edicto Manuel Lorenzo 8.10.1834 (2) zu sehen. Real orden und Edicto haben versichiedenen Inhalt obwohl sie teilweise im selben Blatt gedruckt wurden.--Cornava 10:48, 27 August 2007 (UTC)

Problem with cropped photo

Can you please help me get this image straightened out? It's merely a cropped version of another image that's already been accepted into Wikimedia Commons. It would be great if you could take a look at the first of these two images, and remove the warning notices.Ferrylodge 15:57, 27 August 2007 (UTC)

✓ Done Finn Rindahl 18:24, 27 August 2007 (UTC)
Thanks.  :-) Ferrylodge 19:03, 27 August 2007 (UTC)

RE: Image:Imagen_de_los_Rostra_en_el_foro_romano.jpg

Problem solved, I had forgotten to explicit the license. I hope everything is now ok. :-) Regards, --Filipo 18:28, 27 August 2007 (UTC)

Thanks. Cheers! Siebrand 19:12, 27 August 2007 (UTC)

Image:Dagobertduck.gif

Image deletion warning Image:Dagobertduck.gif 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 image, 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. If the file is up for deletion because it has been superseded by a superior derivative of your work, consider the notion that although the file may be deleted, your hard work (which we all greatly appreciate) lives on in the new file.
In all cases, please do not take the deletion request personally. It is never intended as such. Thank you!

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

(Message moved from the Siebot talk page, V.) Valentinian (talk) 21:05, 27 August 2007 (UTC)

Obviously a derivative work that should be zapped. Cheers! Siebrand 21:20, 27 August 2007 (UTC)

My Picture "1952er Bastert B SM 51" deleted by your CommonsDelinker Bot

Hey man,

I need to admit that I am pretty damn pissed about your bot.

I put the regarding picture up twice now, and I simply don't see any missing information, ESPECIALLY not about the source, since I took it WITH MY OWN CAMERA USING MY OWN TWO HANDS! I also stated that the whole thing is my own work, so no copyright violations could ever possibly arise.

All I wanted to do is to upload this picture we took at our family reunion last June. And suddenly this bot comes up and tells me this damn picture was not my own. What's that all about!?!

So please, be as kind as to let me know what exactly is the missing information and don't tell me it's the source info.

Regards, Hauke Bastert

All images need a license. Without a license, we cannot use them and they will be deleted. Image:1952er Bastert B SM 51.JPG was deleted because it did not have a license. You uploaded it again and it still does not have a license. So unless you add a license, it will be deleted again. I am not pissed and I do hope you add a license to your work. Thank you for contributing. Cheers! Siebrand 22:47, 27 August 2007 (UTC)

Betawiki

Yes! I still work on Oc version on betawiki! You can commit the changes! With regards! 82.234.82.123 11:27, 28 August 2007 (UTC)

Excellent. Please use my talk page there for Betawiki related issues. Cheers! Siebrand 22:33, 28 August 2007 (UTC)

image replacement

Why did your bot replace an image with an extensive summary, with one which isn't even categorized. I'm not blaming your bot of course, but would like to find out who/what I can. R. Koot 21:42, 28 August 2007 (UTC)

Your guys on en.wp do not want to change the edit message of CommonsDelinker. That's why you didn't get the name of the person giving the replace command. It's somewhere in the history of User:CommonsDelinker/commands. The message to be changed is en:User:User:CommonsDelinker/replace-I18n. See the talk page of that page. Cheers! Siebrand 22:29, 28 August 2007 (UTC)

Bot job?

Could your bot possibly remove

{{uncat}} <!-- Remove this line once you have added categories -->

from some 100 images in Category:Maps of Georgia (U.S. state) - it concerns all images whose name starts with GAMap-doton. They obviously should be moved to some locator map category as well, but apparently there is some discussion on renaming those cats going on so we better wait with that one. Regards, Finn Rindahl 22:16, 28 August 2007 (UTC)

✓ Done Siebrand 22:31, 28 August 2007 (UTC)
Wow, that was fast ;) Thanks, Finn Rindahl 22:33, 28 August 2007 (UTC)

Europe ...

Image:Flag of European Union.svg: "This image has been universally replaced by Image:Flag of Europe.svg by CommonsDelinker."
I might be wrong, but I thought the European Union doesn't cover the whole European continent. --32X 00:14, 29 August 2007 (UTC)

It's a matter of practicality. The other image was used much more often. Cheers! Siebrand 06:45, 29 August 2007 (UTC)

Categories

Hi! Please look at "What links here", when you delete categories, cause... Strona główna has red link to dead category. regards Przykuta 05:00, 29 August 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for the tip. I only rarely do that... Cheers! Siebrand 09:55, 29 August 2007 (UTC)

Batalha

Thank you for warning. I Have repaired it.--Tomáš Páv 08:39, 29 August 2007 (UTC)

You're welcome. Have fun. Cheers! Siebrand 09:55, 29 August 2007 (UTC)

More job for Siebot

Same as above (removing uncat), images starting with FLMap-doton in Category:Maps of Florida. Finn Rindahl 09:41, 29 August 2007 (UTC)

✓ Done Siebrand 09:54, 29 August 2007 (UTC)

Image:PortraitGirl2005-1.jpg

I see you have deleted Image:PortraitGirl2005-1.jpg and replaced it with Image:PortraitGirl2005-1a.jpg, despite the 'kept' decision [[10]]. I would be grateful if you could undelete it, and restore the [[11]] , [[12]] changes to the Quality Images Candidates archives. I don't know whether you noticed but I pointed out previously, it is not appropriate to edit the archives, it makes a nonsense of the evaluations when an image is replaced with a different one. So I have 3 requests:

  1. do not delete non exact duplicates without discussion
  2. do not edit QI or FP archives
  3. let me know that you have seen this request!

Thanks :-), --Tony Wills 12:13, 29 August 2007 (UTC)

There's little use in keeping both the kept Featured picture Image:PortraitGirl2005-1a.jpg and the quality image Image:PortraitGirl2005-1.jpg. I have briefly restored the deleted image, downloaded it and uploaded it as an older version of the featured picture. Cheers! Siebrand 13:06, 29 August 2007 (UTC)
Ughh! They are different images! There is no point in deleting it at all, apparently it doesn't even save space. Please, restore the images as they were, your tidiness although admirable is missing the point. A different version was made QI than was made FP, QI and FP are separate and quite distinct Image:PortraitGirl2005-1a.jpg was not voted to QI and Image:PortraitGirl2005-1.jpg was not voted to FP. QI and FP candidates each often have subtle changes and revisions, it is appropriate to keep all revisions and have them visible to the archived discussion (so moving it to a revision of the other doesn't help (as it can not be linked to), and in fact will cause confusion if anything. So thanks for your prompt response, but please, please restore the images and the archives as they were :-) :-) --Tony Wills 13:25, 29 August 2007 (UTC)

Welcomelog

What's up with Commons:Welcome log/2007/08/29, no new users today? ;) Finn Rindahl 12:50, 29 August 2007 (UTC)

Probably something wrong at the toolserver. I'll fire up the script later today when I get home and take care of the backlog. Thanks for letting me know. Please check users from an older day. There's enough work to be done :) Cheers! Siebrand 12:57, 29 August 2007 (UTC)

Deletion of Image:QuanzhouLaozi.jpg

Hi!

I noticed, that you have deleted the image QuanzhouLaozi.jpg, because Dupe of Image:Laozi statue in Quanzhou.PNG.

It is true, it is the same image. However, it is a different format, namely JPG, which is the format of choice for photographic images. In fact, when you zoom in the PNG-image on a region with high contrast, you can even see artifacts that clearly show that the image originally was a JPG image, and furthermore, the JPG of the image is only about 1/4th of the size of the PNG image.

Therefore, I would recommend to undelete the JPG-version of the image and delete the PNG version instead, or otherwise to keep both, and afterwards to run SieBot to replace the image in the different wikipedias again.

Cheers --Olenz 12:42, 29 August 2007 (UTC)

I double checked things. The images were exactly the same and of the same resolution. No need to swap things. Thanks for the comment, though. Cheers! Siebrand 13:01, 29 August 2007 (UTC)

Yes, I said that they were the same image. But they are different formats, with the one that is left being roughly four times as large, but the same quality. This has the consequence, that all pages that include the image significantly grow in size and cause significantly more net traffic.

Citing from Commons:File_types#Images: This also means that if you want to upload a lossless PNG of a photo for editing and archival, but want to use JPEG thumbnails in articles, you have to upload a (full scale) JPEG version manually. This means to me that it is correct and useful to have a full scale JPG copy of a PNG image.

Therefore I will upload a JPEG copy.

--Olenz 13:08, 29 August 2007 (UTC)

Please don't. It will be replaced and deleted again. You shoudl not worry about network traffic. Cheers! Siebrand 13:10, 29 August 2007 (UTC)

But I do worry about network traffic, and please let myself decide whether or not I should. I do not see why an image should not be replaced or at least supplemented with an equivalent with the same quality but 1/4th the size. Furthermore, please explain to me, why there is the above cited phrase on Commons:File_types#Images. Is it void? Then it would probably be useful to remove it from the page?

--Olenz 13:29, 29 August 2007 (UTC)

Do whatever you please. I do not feel like engaging in futile arguments. Cheers! Siebrand 15:05, 29 August 2007 (UTC)

I also have a few slight objections to the deletion of File:QuanzhouLaozi.jpg, as it was not actually a duplicate of the image that was used to replace it. Though Image:Laozi statue in Quanzhou.PNG might be a better image of the statue, with better resolution, the incident shading and coloration of the previous image better gave one the impression of a somewhat neglected and well-weathered stone figure resting in a field. While the replacement focuses more specifically on details of the statue, it gives one less of a sense of the statue having become a part of the landscape. I'm not greatly concerned about the removal of the older image, but feel it should have remained available. ~ Kalki 19:15, 29 August 2007 (UTC)

The images were an exact copy in a different file format. No difference in size. You may be talking about a different case (?). Cheers! Siebrand 19:58, 29 August 2007 (UTC)

Though I have no strong concern on the matter and it is conceivable that someone had "upgraded" the older image with a different image, identical to the newer one, I recalled the image to be from a slightly different angle, and with different lighting conditions. A google search as of 2007·08·30 13:55 UTC confirms this, still showing the previous image in its cache, though it is not available here for enlargement: Google Image search for QuanzhouLaozi.jpg. This search also shows the same image in slightly larger size being used at a German language site, so it might be a case of having been a non-free image, if the original uploader was not its author. ~ Kalki 14:08, 30 August 2007 (UTC)

STOP!!!! DO NOT DELETE THIS IMAGE TILL YOU REPLACE IT IN THE WIKIMEDIA LOGO MOSAIC

Hi, would you please fix the Wikimedia logo mosaic by finding images to replace Image:Cowberries_for_sale_in_Stockholm.jpg and Image:Betel_leaves_at_market_in_Bangalore.jpg which you deleted ?? Much appreciated. Right now it has gaping holes. ++Lar: t/c 10:21, 30 August 2007 (UTC)

This stuff does not pop up in the tools we use, only the number of uses. Who added these images to the mosaic anyway!? :) I'll take a look at it. Cheers! Siebrand 11:54, 30 August 2007 (UTC)
I dunno who added them... there were a lot of people involved in that neat project toward the end. Presumably they thought the licenses were OK based on assertions by the uploaders. I wonder if the tools could be modified to take a list of usages from somewhere that would suggest further review is required? meaning if the image is on anything in the list, don't automatically act, but ask the human for advice? That may be more trouble than it's worth of course... but I bet there are other places where this is an issue as well? Thanks for taking a look. ++Lar: t/c 13:33, 30 August 2007 (UTC)
You could ask User:Magnus Manske to add something in BadOldOnes that will warn for this. But I think that would create a precedent we would not like. Eventually every page in Wikimedia would go on the list and we'd be back to square one without automated tools, having a huge mess. I think I'll go for the occasional above message on my talk page... :) Cheers! Siebrand 13:41, 30 August 2007 (UTC)

New message (from userpage)

Thank you for your meaasge, please find enclose a copy of the e-mail from Dr Jim Al-Khalili

Dear Ray

Thanks very much for your email and sory for the delay as I have just returned from holiday. Well it's very nice of you to be making my wiki entry a little more snazzy. I have atached a few photos, not because of vanity but so that you can choose the most appropriate file size/resolution for the webpage. Feel free to use more that one if you really go to town(!) All are my own photos/publicity shots so no problems with permission.

Let me know if I can be of help and thanks again.

Regards

Jim


Hope this answers your quireis. regards Ray


J. S. Al-Khalili CPhys FInstP Hon.FBAASc

Professor of Physics
Professor of Public Engagement in Science
EPSRC Senior Media Fellow 
     
www.al-khalili.co.uk

the preceding unsigned comment was added by Ray Yallop (talk • contribs) to your userpage, moved here by me Finn Rindahl 13:41, 30 August 2007 (UTC)

More work...

I dont have the time to check older uses today, to busy finding more work for Siebot ;) There are a lot more locatormaps, incorrectly tagget {{uncat}} and crowding that already overcrowded category. Apparently there was some sort of bug when siebot(!) moved this stuff from en:wiki.

For all of these, remove

{{uncat}} <!-- Remove this line once you have added categories -->

I'm sure there's more, but this was as far as I got for now...

It's almost depressing trying to do some tidying up around here, there seems to be endless backlog's everywhere. Glad there are bot's running the most tedious work. Finn Rindahl 13:28, 29 August 2007 (UTC)

✓ Done
Isn't it fun to work on huge backlogs?! I do some stuff in Category:Images without source. ~45k category members. It has got to be done some day... Glad I can help. Cheers! Siebrand 15:28, 29 August 2007 (UTC)
A rather perverted idea of fun but I'm starting to get caught in this special kind of pervation too ;) I'm hoping to skim through the rest of Media needing categories later tonight, and expect there will be lot's more like the above. Is there any better way to put the syntax of such bot-job requests to make it easier for you to cut&paste? Regards, Finn Rindahl 21:17, 30 August 2007 (UTC)

Image:Nuclear artillery test.jpg

This image should NOT be deleted! Though similar, It is obviously NOT a duplicate of Image:Nuclear artillery test Grable Event - Part of Operation Upshot-Knothole.jpg; the two images are not merely cropped differently but represent two separate points in time of a nuclear explosion, as can be clearly be determined by the difference in the glow in the explosion cloud. ~ Kalki 13:39, 30 August 2007 (UTC)

Image tagged for deletion, taken a few seconds later.
Other image
I agree. Thanks. Siebrand 21:05, 30 August 2007 (UTC)

BetaWiki

Hi there,

maybe you could take a look at incubator:User talk:Siebrand. MF-Warburg(de) 14:07, 30 August 2007 (UTC)

✓ Done Siebrand 05:31, 31 August 2007 (UTC)

Wikipedia Signpost

The Wikipedia Signpost

Volume 3, Issue 35 27 August 2007 About the Signpost

WikiWorld comic: "Helicopter parent" News and notes: Court case, BJAODN, milestones
Wikipedia in the news Features and admins
Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News The Report on Lengthy Litigation

Archives  |  Newsroom  |  Tip Line  |  Single-Page View Shortcut : w:WP:POST

Delivered by HermesBot II 17:12, 31 August 2007 (UTC)


Image Tagging Image:Pope-adrian6.jpg

العربية | asturianu | беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ | català | čeština | dansk | Deutsch | Ελληνικά | English | español | euskara | فارسی | suomi | français | עברית | magyar | italiano | 日本語 | 한국어 | македонски | മലയാളം | Plattdüütsch | Nederlands | norsk nynorsk | norsk bokmål | polski | português | português do Brasil | русский | slovenčina | slovenščina | svenska | Türkçe | Tiếng Việt | 中文(简体)‎ | 中文(繁體)‎ | +/−

Warning sign
This media may be deleted.

Thanks for uploading Image:Pope-adrian6.jpg. I notice the image page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you have not created this media yourself then you need to argue that we have the right to use the media on Wikimedia Commons (see copyright tagging below). If you have not created the media yourself then you should also specify where you found it, i.e., in most cases link to the website where you got it, and the terms of use for content from that page. If the content is a derivative of a copyrighted work, you need to supply the names and a licence of the original authors as well.

If the media also doesn't have a copyright tag, then you must also add one. If you created/took the picture, audio, or video then you can use {{self|cc-by-sa-3.0}} to release it under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike license or {{PD-self}} to release it into the public domain. See Commons:Copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

Note that any unsourced and untagged images will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have uploaded other media, please check that you have specified their source and copyright tagged them, too. You can find all your uploads using the Gallery tool. Thank you. Alex Spade 17:40, 31 August 2007 (UTC)

Please stop

your action with replacing Image:Flag of USA.svg with Image:Flag of the United States.svg. We don't want to see attributes like the United States when hovering with the mouse over the flag symbol. --213.155.231.26 11:19, 30 August 2007 (UTC)

See also en:Wikipedia:Accessibility --213.155.231.26 11:30, 30 August 2007 (UTC)
The image is being orphanded as it is both a duplicate and against the naming convention of Wikimedia Commons for flags. It would also be nice if you identified yourself. The option {{ #switch: }} may enable you to do some magic in your templates. Cheers! Siebrand 11:53, 30 August 2007 (UTC)
As said elsewhere (Helpdesk and your NL discussion the United States is not a valid name. It's either USA or United States. Here EOD, let's continue on your NL-discussion page. --213.155.231.26 20:33, 31 August 2007 (UTC)
Let's not. As you've heard elsewhere already: this is how it is. If you insist on duplication, cause it on your home wiki. Cheers! Siebrand 22:14, 31 August 2007 (UTC)

Thank you for expressing your opinion

Thank you for your expressing your opinion at Commons:Administrators/Requests and votes/Jeff G.!   — Jeff G. (talk|contribs) 11:28, 31 August 2007 (UTC)

You're welcome. As far as I know it is not done to thank participants in a running RfA. Cheers! Siebrand 18:04, 2 September 2007 (UTC)

Image:Pos2.jpg

Hi. I just noticed that this image was deleted, and I was wondering what it was that was wrong with it. Thanks. Guettarda 14:58, 31 August 2007 (UTC)

(I assume this is an image I uploaded?) Guettarda 15:05, 31 August 2007 (UTC)

Ok, "what links here" says not. Hmm. Thought it was another image (saw it removed from w:Port of Spain; now I need to figure out how it got there and how the image I thought it was disappeared from the article). Sorry about that. Guettarda 15:08, 31 August 2007 (UTC)
The image was not licensed and thus removed. Cheers! Siebrand 18:05, 2 September 2007 (UTC)

Image:Cramb.jpg

Hi There

Could you please explain how this is a copyright violation/copyright not explained. This image is from a website my friend runs. He has released the image and says it can be used on Wiki without the need for people to ask for permission to use it. There for it is released free of copyright. Please can you get back to me.

Gorilla 23:55, 31 August 2007 (UTC)

There is no link to the source image, no link to the permission. It is unsource. Please provide the *required* information. Cheers! Siebrand 18:03, 2 September 2007 (UTC)

Image:US_LGBT_civil_rights_August_2007.svg

Image:US_LGBT_civil_rights_August_2007.svg: This image is my own original work. I have added the category Self-published work to the image page and a note in the description clearly outlining that it is my own work. I hope that resolves the concern you left on my talk page, and I took the liberty to remove the tag you left on the image page. --Slyguy 00:40, 1 September 2007 (UTC)

Looks OK. THanks. Siebrand 18:02, 2 September 2007 (UTC)

Audibert-Lavirotte

Hi, thanks for writing me. Of course I have to insert a clearer licence status in my new uploaded image. But there's a problem: I uploaded the image by using the form "It' from another Wikimedia project". In that form I didn't find any way to insert a valid licence message. How can I insert a licence about the expired copyright after 70 years ? (sorry for my english, I'm italian)... Please reply me about this problem... Bye! Luc106

Problem solved

OK, I have solved the problem. I've uploaded a new version of the file (Image:1896_Audibert-lavirotte.jpg), with a slightly different name and a valid copyright status. So, please, remove the original file. Its original name was Image:Audibert-lavirotte.jpg... Thank you very much. Bye bye! Luc106

These are the questions I like best :) Cheers! Siebrand 18:02, 2 September 2007 (UTC)

Image:Candelora-1994.gif

Ciao Siebrand, Salvatore Quartarone is my father, what kind of evidence does commons need for the licence? And about the watermark, he wants to keep it. If it isn't possible, you can delete the image... :) Let me know! ;) --Roberto 12:06, 1 September 2007 (UTC)

We need a license from the copyright holder. If he died and you are his heir, please note so. There is not connection between your username and the family name Quartarone. Please provide all relevant information at the image description page. Cheers! Siebrand 17:58, 2 September 2007 (UTC)

Image:West-euv-logo.jpg and Image:Kw-heinsberg-logo.jpg

Hello,

Could you please delete this two pictures on commons and therefor upload those on the german WP-Site with the correct License?

{{Bild-PD-Schöpfungshöhe}} {{Logo}}

If necessary, you can answer on?:

http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Benutzer_Diskussion:Ratheimer

Thanks

I'm sorry, but I am not going to upload any images to de.wp. You could do that yourself. I have tagged the images as {{copyvio}} and expect them to be deleted soon. Cheers! Siebrand 18:01, 2 September 2007 (UTC)

Opinion

Hello Siebrand. Please help me here. Gridge 02:00, 2 September 2007 (UTC).

✓ Done Siebrand 17:55, 2 September 2007 (UTC)

Image:Tsunami by hokusai 19th century.jpg

The newer version of that file is a duplicate of Image:The Great Wave off Kanagawa.jpg. But in the file history there is a different version that was incorrectly overwritten. The old version was actually voted Featured Picture and selected Picture of the Day in 2005. Can you restore the old version? /81.231.248.85 09:29, 2 September 2007 (UTC)

hello

Thank you for your message, but if you can speak to me in french, its better. I'm 12 years old,and i'm not very good for put pictures.I think i have forgeten the licensing??? sorry.Now is it good for the picture of the pont du Côney? --E2 14:51, 2 September 2007 (UTC)

All message templates have a translation. Please click Francais for your language. I am unable to write in French... Cheers! Siebrand 16:26, 2 September 2007 (UTC)

Deleted uniform parts

Hi, some of the baseball uniform parts were deleted (i.e., ), yet they are used for almost every spanish article on baseball teams (templates), making them quite distorted. Should we expect them to remain deleted or should we edit the template? --Bobjgalindo 18:03 24 ago 2007 (CEST) (¿Wh ... ?)

All media should have author, source, permission and license information. All media that have missing legal information are deleted. I know it is annoying that this possibly disturbs articles, but that is unavoidable. Please assess the copyright status of images before using them to avoid this. Cheers! Siebrand 06:06, 3 September 2007 (UTC)

Message from Edweisch

Misplaced comment, moved here from your user page by me. --Spiritia 19:36, 27 August 2007 (UTC)

Guten Tag, das Bild "Kirche Schönborn" ist aus der Chronik: Schönborn N/L in seiner Entwicklung vom Kloster- zum Industriedorf." Der Autor Horst Firme ist mit der Veröffentlichung einverstanden.Edweisch 11:37, 27 August 2007 (UTC)

Please link to the full image, also containing the extension. I hate to have to go on a wild goose chase. Cheers! Siebrand 06:07, 3 September 2007 (UTC)

File:Lac Tempe

Hello Siebrand, so far, what I have is an email from the author, Lionel Labosse (labosse.lionel@free.fr), allowing me to use it. I don't know how to formalise this, Djoehana 03:49, 29 August 2007 (UTC)

Please see {{No permission since}}. Cheers! Siebrand 06:08, 3 September 2007 (UTC)

Risaralda Map

Hello

Saludos amigo, he recibido varios de tus mensajes sobre los mapas de Risaralda, Marsella y Risaralda, Pereira, pero mi ingles es un tanto pobre, ¿será que me podrias traducir a español lo que me quieras decir?

--Julian act 04:54, 29 August 2007 (UTC)

I am sorry, but I do not speak Spanish. Please also add a link to the image you wish to discuss so I know what you are/may be talking about. Cheers! Siebrand 06:09, 3 September 2007 (UTC)

Image Tagging Image:Cape_cervicale.jpg

Oh this picture is mine... I forgot to up licence informations ??? Strange... I repared this so I hope it's all right now... I think the model for informations didn't exist at the moment i uploaded the picture. I will check for my other pictures if there's the same problem. Thanks for telling me. Ceridwen 14:20, 31 August 2007 (UTC)

Thanks. Cheers! Siebrand 06:11, 3 September 2007 (UTC)

Flag of Serbia

Shall I insert {{duplicate}} in the better version or in the "badname version"? And who replaces the image? --Kuemmjen 11:41, 2 September 2007 (UTC)

I've seen your bot replaced the image. Thank you! May you delete the "old" image? --Kuemmjen 11:46, 2 September 2007 (UTC)
Please don't we have tools for that and I will delete it when I am sure it is not used anymore. Cheers! Siebrand 16:27, 2 September 2007 (UTC)

Thank you! --Kuemmjen 21:44, 2 September 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for processing my delete request

Thanks for removing my badly named upload Image:Kelmscott.jpg. --Peter cohen 23:04, 2 September 2007 (UTC)

No problem. That process works well. Cheers! Siebrand 06:03, 3 September 2007 (UTC)

Image:IMGP3677.JPG

Please delete, it's a duplicate Kgrr 08:25, 3 September 2007 (UTC)

Please use {{duplicate|Image:NameOfImageToBeKept.ext}}. Cheers! Siebrand 13:10, 3 September 2007 (UTC)

STOP AGAIN!

Please don't change Image:European flag.svg into Image:Flag of Europe. There is no Flag of Europe. Europe is a continent and consists of much more states than the European Union. If you need to remove duplicity, the correct name is Image:Flag of European Union. And please, do not only cheer at me, you know that I am right. --213.155.231.26 10:43, 3 September 2007 (UTC)

I have no idea who you are. There is consensus about the flag name...1 Cheers! Siebrand 13:09, 3 September 2007 (UTC)

Thanks

Hi Siebrand. Thank you for deleting Tsunama by Hokusai. Oda Mari 14:11, 3 September 2007 (UTC)

No problem. Cheers! Siebrand 16:12, 3 September 2007 (UTC)

Image:Wappen Judenburg.jpg

Hi. Please help me to fix the license of the image above. Gridge 21:09, 3 September 2007 (UTC).

I fixed the info using commonshelper, but the license-question remains, {{Wappenrecht}} {{Bild-PD-Amtliches Werk}} on German wiki Finn Rindahl 21:24, 3 September 2007 (UTC)
Thank you. Gridge 12:36, 5 September 2007 (UTC).

Image:451px-Helmcken Falls 2006 Ben W Bell.jpg

Hi, I received a notification about this image. My only involvement with the image was adding it to Category: Waterfalls of British Columbia. The author of the image is referred to in the summary. Although the image is not currently in use, it is worth keeping if the licensing confusion can be revolved. The problem is, I don't know how to sort that out and for that reason I ask for your help. --KenWalker 22:57, 3 September 2007 (UTC)

A strange change of picture in bg.wikipedia

Hello, in Bulgarian Wikipedia, in the article about pencils CommonsDelinker changed the pic of the pencils with one of a mountain peak. Strange! :) --Neva 14:58, 4 September 2007 (UTC)

Hello, Siebrand. I noticed a strange replacement made by CommonsDelinker in BG WP. It's already corrected locally, but please check what has happened on the other sister projects. --Spiritia 15:04, 4 September 2007 (UTC)

It looks like D-Kuru messed up, see here and here for damage done. I'll fix it... Cheers! Siebrand 14:27, 5 September 2007 (UTC)

==Image:Thevenin_to_Norton2.PNG==

Sorry, I modified license description. origin of picture is en:Image:Thevenin_to_Norton2.PNG. thz. --Hoenny 15:33, 4 September 2007 (UTC)

User_talk:Sir_Gawain#Split_walloon_and_Flemish_regio

Hallo, Siebrand, zoals al elders gezegd ben ik een compleet document aan het uitwerken omtrent de commons, en dat vraagt nog 60 tot 80 uur werk. in tussentijd vraag ik gewoon wat kalmte en rust, zodat ik kan verder werken.

Ik wacht ook nog steeds op je naming suggesties vermits je de move requests van de Limburgse provincies veranderd, dan geblokkeerd en dan weggehaald hebt. De eigenlijke vraag is: wat wil jij als naming vermits je niet akkoord lijkt te gaan met de JL voorstellen. --Foroa 14:42, 4 September 2007 (UTC)

Precies om die reden wil ik overleg op een centrale pagina. Los van mijn eigen mening, laat je op deze manier de gelegenheid voor een brede discussie met dito consensus liggen. Dit is een wiki, hier *moeten* we samenwerken om tot resultaat te komen. Ik hoop dat je meer dan 60 uur opsluiten helpt, maar vrees het ergste. Groet, Siebrand 05:09, 6 September 2007 (UTC)

Boodschap begrepen. Bedankt. --Foroa 06:35, 6 September 2007 (UTC)

Sorry

Hellow: I have put an image of A. Ketèlbey in wikimedia commons and you has send me an message. I'm new in that and I don't know what do, please, help me. Thank you!

Please sign messages on talk pages with ~~~~. I have no idea who you are... Cheers! Siebrand 14:35, 6 September 2007 (UTC)

My images

I am going to use tact, but I am very angry you deleted my images, they all had the source listed on the page, they are all from the Calgary Herald and the Edmonton bulletin and the date they were published, it was in the Template Listed beside Source, It took me a lot of work to dig through the news papers extract and scan those. You will undelete them at once.--Cloveious 03:17, 6 September 2007 (UTC)

If possible, please add a link to the source image, or describe how you came about the image. Sourcing is very important to check on both validity of the provided description as determining copyright status. Please remain civil. I have removed part of the comments on your user page. Cheers! Siebrand 14:38, 6 September 2007 (UTC)

Image:Albert_Edelfelt-Augusti.jpeg

Hello,

I'm not the author of this picture Image:Albert_Edelfelt-Augusti.jpeg You have to warn the first author or the first uploader before to delete the picture. Thx.--Patricia.fidi 11:22, 6 September 2007 (UTC)

✓ Done Siebrand 14:33, 6 September 2007 (UTC)

Image:Flag of the Kingdom of Yugoslavia (civil).svg.png

Image:Flag of the Kingdom of Yugoslavia (civil).svg.png--This image is taken from English Wikipedia. So I don't understand what the problem is. --Godfroid23 12:44, 6 September 2007 (UTC)

Please use CommonsDelinker when copying images from other wikis. The information about the image is very incomplete. Cheers! Siebrand 14:22, 6 September 2007 (UTC)

Hi, I know why did you remove my logotype because it hasn't license. I will send my logotype again, but with license. --Michael Peter Fustumum 13:37, 6 September 2007 (UTC)

Thanks. Siebrand 14:21, 6 September 2007 (UTC)

Image:Albert Edelfelt - Sven Duva.jpg

This is obviously a mistake on your part. This is by the Finnish artist Albert Edelfeldt and the image description page is quite clear about that. Thuresson 14:23, 6 September 2007 (UTC)

Hi Thuresson. To determine that this is indeed the work the is claimed, please add a source. We require all media to be sourced. Cheers! Siebrand 14:34, 6 September 2007 (UTC)
The image description page has all the information you require. You may go to your local public library and borrow a copy of The Tales of Ensign Stål. Thuresson 18:16, 6 September 2007 (UTC)

CommonsDelinker

The Bot is needed in correction, if it's possible. Sometimes, the image, which was deleted from Commons, has a normal (non-free) copy in local wiki under same name. See this [13]. This is not first time. Sorry, I cann't give you previous diff (I don't remeber in which article it was). Remove such image from the article - you (your bot) make it candidate for unnecessary speedy deletion as orphaned fair-use. Alex Spade 21:16, 6 September 2007 (UTC)

Well, you just added the image to ru.wp. It was probably a timing issue. Not really a problem as far as I am concerned. Cheers! Siebrand 22:30, 6 September 2007 (UTC)

Adolph Diesterweg

Adolph Diesterweg died 1866. I would say its extremely unlikely that this pic is still under copyright.--Tresckow 21:33, 6 September 2007 (UTC)

Could be. Add a source and we're in the clear. Please remember that we not only need sources to be able to verify a copyright status, but also to determine the correctness of the information give with media. Cheers! Siebrand 22:27, 6 September 2007 (UTC)

Image:Image-UN_Swords_into_Plowshares_Statue.JPG

Hello there. I just want to know why you deleted this image which is my own work. I photographed it myself, therefore I am the copyrightholder and contributor of this image. I would like you to undelete it. If you can't, kindly let me know on my talk page so I could upload it from my camera again. I was even requested by an editor at Wikipedia to move this image to commons. I believe deletion was unnecessary. Thank you. - Dragonbite 06:45, 7 September 2007 (UTC) And please note that this image is definitely NOT A DERIVATIVE WORK. I took the image myself! User:Polarlys is mistaken in this matter! - Dragonbite 06:58, 7 September 2007 (UTC)

Please plead your case at undeletion requests. Cheers! Siebrand 11:05, 7 September 2007 (UTC)

Your complaint

under the picture from which you complain the lack of a satisfying licence is the information that it was taken around 1900 and that meant that its copyright has expired Antifaschist 666 11:32, 7 September 2007 (UTC)

Request for your input

Hi Siebrand. Please give your input on Commons:Undeletion_requests/Current_requests#Unjustly_deleted_through_incompetence. Thank you. / Fred J 12:14, 7 September 2007 (UTC)