User talk:Storkk/Archive 5

Lies Thru a Lens Flickr stream

Hi, Your comment here is rather disingenuous. There is no way these files can be accepted by usual Commons standard. Until proven otherwise with OTRS, I am right to have deleted these files. Regards, Yann (talk) 17:36, 10 July 2018 (UTC)

@Yann: I think your actions in the beginning of Commons:Village_pump/Copyright#Mass_delete_help do show a lapse in judgment and a disinclination to consider alternate viewpoints, but I agree that since opening the DR that may have been less than fair on my part. I apologize for that, and I've modified my comment. Storkk (talk) 17:53, 10 July 2018 (UTC)

This section was archived on a request by: Storkk (talk) 07:31, 19 July 2018 (UTC)

Mellow

I never told anyone to be mellow. I fact, I always hated that essay for that point and am usually loath to cite it. Telling someone who is angry/upset/mistaken to be mellow is a stupid thing to do. Anyone citing that essay to encourage mellowness (a) doesn't understand the essay and (b) is very likely in the middle of a unmellow dispute themselves. I quoted the essay merely for its comments on language issues. That's all I want to say. -- Colin (talk) 06:28, 13 July 2018 (UTC)

OK, noted. Storkk (talk) 08:03, 13 July 2018 (UTC)

This section was archived on a request by: Storkk (talk) 07:31, 19 July 2018 (UTC)

File:Renee+Elise+Goldsberry+Weinstein+And+Netflix+Golden+Globes+After+Party.jpg deletion

I took the liberty of closing the deletion request, hope I did it right. --GRuban (talk) 15:54, 17 July 2018 (UTC)

@GRuban: Sure - the closure looks fine. I would have slightly preferred you sign it, showing who the closure was performed by, but in this case it's not too important. In general though, there's not much point: it's literally 2 mouse clicks for an admin to close a DR in obvious cases, so this would have been one of the first to just be closed immediately when Commons:Deletion_requests/2018/07/11 was ready for processing. Cheers, Storkk (talk) 16:12, 17 July 2018 (UTC)

This is how I usually do it: Commons:Deletion_requests/File:Kochi1-1.jpg or Commons:Deletion_requests/File:中野孝憲.jpg. Storkk (talk) 16:14, 17 July 2018 (UTC)

Thanks, done. --GRuban (talk) 17:26, 17 July 2018 (UTC)

@GRuban: also note that it is technically against the rules to close your own DR if another user has commented on it. I don't think it's a huge deal in this case, but I'd advise against it in the future. Cheers, Storkk (talk) 10:18, 18 July 2018 (UTC)

This section was archived on a request by: Storkk (talk) 07:31, 19 July 2018 (UTC)

Her picture is from like 7 years ago....

All I’m trying to do is give my favorite actress a new picture can you 50 year olds stop riding my dick!!!!! Niyaxm (talk) 20:34, 20 July 2018 (UTC)

@Niyaxm: You are not allowed to take someone else's photograph and relicense it however you want. It doesn't matter how old her picture is, or even if there was no picture to illustrate her article. I will also take this opportunity to remind you to remain civil in your dealings with other editors here. Comments like these could be considered personal attacks. Don't do that. Storkk (talk) 20:45, 20 July 2018 (UTC)

Didn’t know you were my dad....

First of all I didn’t even get the picture from Getty I got it from someone who posted it on tumblr (without the watermark I might add) so I didn’t know it came from Getty and when I found out it did I put his name as the author And linked the Getty page. Second of all unless ur gonna give her a new picture I’m not going to allow a great actress like that to be disrespected. Oh and sorry for fucking cussing at you all mighty king🖕🏽🤴🏽 Niyaxm (talk) 21:01, 20 July 2018 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) @Niyaxm: Don't poke the bear.

More interesting reading material for you! - Alexis Jazz ^{ping plz} 21:08, 20 July 2018 (UTC)

This section was archived on a request by: Storkk (talk) 21:49, 20 July 2018 (UTC)

File:Asim DuttaRoy.png

Hi Storkk. Can you tell whether this file is the same as File:Asim Duttaroy.png which you deleted on June 30, 2016. The uploader is the same, and the file was uploaded about 30 minutes after you deleted to other one. -- Marchjuly (talk) 06:44, 24 July 2018 (UTC)

Different, but likely problematic. Thanks. Storkk (talk) 07:23, 24 July 2018 (UTC)

Thank you for taking a look. -- Marchjuly (talk) 12:12, 24 July 2018 (UTC)

This section was archived on a request by: Storkk (talk) 07:23, 24 July 2018 (UTC)

Reopen deletion request: Arthur Szyk Artwork Images

Hi Storkk,

I would like to reopen this deletion request I submitted on June 13, 2018 regarding the Arthur Szyk artwork images belonging to the Magnes Collection of Jewish Art and Life, UC Berkeley. The Arthur Szyk Society was dissolved when their collection was purchased by the Magnes in April 2017, and their copyright was transferred to the Magnes in the sale.

The Arthur Szyk Society's Wikipedia page confirms the date that they ceased activity: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arthur_Szyk_Society, and the acquisition of the artwork by the Magnes is detailed in several public articles including these: http://news.berkeley.edu/2017/04/03/gift-to-the-magnes-collection-of-jewish-art-and-life/, https://www.sfgate.com/bayarea/article/Magnes-museum-gets-big-collection-of-Jewish-art-11044902.php

Is this enough documentation to substantiate the claim?

Thank you, The Magnes

@Magnes2121: if an author licenses a work under an explicitly perpetual and irrevocable license and then dies, the heirs, in my understanding, cannot revoke that license from the licensee, despite inheriting the full copyright. This seems to my eyes be an pretty analogous situation, however I am not a lawyer. I have raised the matter for wider scrutiny at Commons:Village_pump/Copyright#Corporate_sublicense_survives_corporation?. You are welcome to present your case there as well (though unless you feel I have erred in my summary, it might be wise to take a more passive approach), or follow the discussion and perhaps correct any mistaken assertions that pop up. However you should know that everyone who responds will likely be, just like me, a volunteer here. You can at any point take the route of contacting the paid legal team of the Wikimedia Foundation as I alluded to in the DR. Storkk (talk) 20:48, 11 July 2018 (UTC)

That discussion was archived here. As I suspected, our understanding is that while you may indeed have inherited the copyrights, that does not give you the legal ability to revoke legitimate licenses by the previous licensor. Best regards, Storkk (talk) 13:40, 25 July 2018 (UTC)

This section was archived on a request by: Storkk (talk) 13:40, 25 July 2018 (UTC)

Ошибочное удаления

Добрый день Storkk - File:Станислав Домбровский.jpg - был загружен в соответствии с правилами проекта, с указанием источника который имеет право указывать данную лицензию. Однако вы его удалили. Прошу пересмотреть указанный файл, так как он необходим для иллюстрирования статей в двух википедиях.--Merlin2203 (talk) 10:03, 19 July 2018 (UTC)

It looks like you are correct. I have restored the files. Sorry for the misunderstanding. They do both require a License Review, preferably by a Russian speaker. This will avoid deletions in the future in case the source disappears. Storkk (talk) 10:11, 19 July 2018 (UTC)

Thank you -Merlin2203 (talk) 10:13, 19 July 2018 (UTC)

This section was archived on a request by: Storkk (talk) 13:42, 25 July 2018 (UTC)

File:BarunSobti.jpg

Hi Storkk. Can you tell if this file is the same as File:Barun sobti.png which you deleted about a week ago as a copyvio. The new file appears to have been uploaded by the same editor a few hours after you deleted the other one. The new file is sourced to Bollywood Hungama so it might be OK to keep per {{BollywoodHungama}}, but I'm not sure if the one you deleted was also sourced to BH. -- Marchjuly (talk) 06:54, 17 July 2018 (UTC)

@Marchjuly: they are different, the other was not sourced to Bollywood Hungama. I'm not sure {{BollywoodHungama}} applies though, since that template explicitly confines itself to photos "of a Bollywood party or event in India", which this does not appear to be. Storkk (talk) 09:32, 17 July 2018 (UTC)

Thanks for checking. Hmmm.... The licensing then on this new file might need to be further discussed via a DR because there's nothing on the source URL which shows it's been released under a {{Cc-by-sa-4.0}} license. -- Marchjuly (talk) 13:19, 17 July 2018 (UTC)

I started Commons:Deletion requests/File:BarunSobti.jpg to see if there's a way to resolve this. -- Marchjuly (talk) 00:16, 18 July 2018 (UTC)

This section was archived on a request by: Storkk (talk) 15:50, 2 August 2018 (UTC)

Protection of my talk

Hello. I don't endorse now protection of my talk pages. I think it is unhelpful now. Please unprotect it. Marshmallych 09:39, 3 August 2018 (UTC)

@Marshmallych: OK - I have unprotected it. I semiprotected it on the assumption that your previous request still stood, and the fact that every time protection ran out your talk page was vandalized again... but if you'd prefer to leave it unprotected, that's fine too. Feel free to request protection again, either here or on COM:ANB. Cheers, Storkk (talk) 12:16, 3 August 2018 (UTC)

This section was archived on a request by: Storkk (talk) 18:48, 15 August 2018 (UTC)

End of copyvios

Hi again Storkk. I was wondering if non-admins can add {{End of copyvios}} to another editor's user talk page. The last two files uploaded by User:Jezyl Galarpe are definitely not "own work" and there's no indication anywhere that they've been released under a CC license that Commons accepts by their respective copyright holders. Mistakenly uploading fair use content as "own work" is a pretty common mistake, but this editor's user talk page is filled with lots of notifications about inappropriate uploads. I'm not sure if they even understand what "own work" means, but I thought one last warning might be warranted. -- Marchjuly (talk) 13:11, 25 July 2018 (UTC)

I don't think I used it myself before I became an admin. To me, the template's wording felt a bit too close to making empty threats on others' behalf... but you may feel differently, especially in obvious cases. Lots of people do, and per Template:End_of_copyvios/doc, the template is intended to be used by all users. I suggest using your best judgment and doing what you feel comfortable with... I've placed it on Jezyl Galarpe's talk page. All the best, Storkk (talk) 13:35, 25 July 2018 (UTC)

Thank you for taking a look at this and adding the template. I agree about the wording/tone of the template; it does seem like something only an admin should be posting since it pretty much implies that the next copyvio uploaded will lead to an immediate block. -- Marchjuly (talk) 00:04, 26 July 2018 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) @Marchjuly: I used to feel the same, had also reported a user on AN to be warned once, only for user T Cells to add the template. Might as well do it myself then.. - Alexis Jazz ^{ping plz} 00:36, 26 July 2018 (UTC)

OTRS

Can u verify Ticket:2018080110003929 for File:Dick Zimmerman.jpg --✝iѵɛɳ२२४०^{†ลℓк †๏ мэ} 11:18, 1 August 2018 (UTC)

Permission appears to be from subject rather than photographer. Storkk (talk) 09:26, 2 August 2018 (UTC)

File:Asim111.png

Hi Storkk. Is this file the same as the one deleted per Commons:Deletion requests/File:Asim DuttaRoy.png? Same uploader and two previous uploads with similar file names have already been deleted. -- Marchjuly (talk) 06:47, 30 August 2018 (UTC)

@Marchjuly: Different file, similar problem: uploader not particularly likely to be copyright holder, and we should require OTRS confirmation of license. Storkk (talk) 09:17, 30 August 2018 (UTC)

Thank you for checking. -- Marchjuly (talk) 20:58, 30 August 2018 (UTC)

Happy holidays 2019! ;-)

Je vous souhaite un Joyeux Noël et une bonne et heureuse année 2019. --Pierre André (talk) 16:06, 24 December 2018 (UTC)

File:Crowd assembled in Occidental Square in front the Occidental Hotel for memorial service for President Hayes (misidentified as memorial for Garfield).jpg

At Commons:Deletion requests/File:Crowd assembled in Occidental Square in front the Occidental Hotel for memorial service for President James A Garfield, Seattle (CURTIS 283).jpeg I wrote, that this seemed to be the same date as an image of a visit by Hayes to Seattle. Some how that resulted in retitling it as a memorial for Hayes, who wasvery much alive and in office in 1878.

I presume you will have no problem with my retitling it (again), appropriately; not sure what is best done with the various redirects at this point though, so you may want to have a look and follow up. - Jmabel ! talk 17:32, 6 February 2019 (UTC)

@Jmabel: Sorry for the added confusion; the situation also wasn't helped by my having both open in different tabs and editing the description of the wrong file to boot. D'oh! Of course, I'd be grateful for any help you could provide in cleaning up my mess. Storkk (talk) 10:50, 7 February 2019 (UTC)

Wrong Image and Right Image

Right use first, checking my watchlist found File:P52 recto.jpg had been replaced by User:Soerfm for color, crop - when the archivist at Ryland specified untouched image and approved on Commons by User:MichaelMaggs. I reverted the image to my upload of 2007. Since you gave access to my own Pope card, I will presume to become a bother not of Discordia but Chaos concerning a long-standing wrong image File:Matthew Paris - William Marshal.jpg. This image is of Richard Marshal, the son of William the Marshal (greatest knight whoever lived). On the talk page for w:William Marshal, 1st Earl of Pembroke as early as 2011 the error was mentioned and nobody changed anything resulting in at least 48 pages that are mislabeled. Question is what happens globally if I replace image with inverted shield of William illustrated by same Matthew Paris with the same file name. It appears I could upload replacement with the different image of shield and epitaph and edit text to match. All captions on every use of new file would not match. I could change the en.wkipedia to fit but what about the other languages. This replacement would be to ease the embarrassment of the author under royal favor, Elizabeth Hallam-Smith CB, who confused the two Earl Marshals on p. 27 of Four Gothic Kings which I traced to the original upload (maybe 2005) referring to discussion on w:User_Talk:Athrash. I could re-enter the present mislabeled battle scene on w:Richard Marshal, 3rd Earl of Pembroke and other pages such as medieval horsemanship.

Hi. I am finding it difficult to understand your question, but perhaps a pointer: when in doubt, upload a separate image. It's considered very poor form to overwrite an image that isn't an unambiguously clear improvement (e.g. simple edit) of the base image especially if that image is in use on sister projects, and doing so (even more especially when that will likely render the captions incorrect) is likely to be considered vandalism. See COM:OVERWRITE. Cheers, Storkk (talk) 10:46, 31 July 2019 (UTC)

Thanks, I will upload new file under new name and forget courtesies to her honorable Companion of Bath, then find out how to nominate old file (erratum plain and simple) for deletion. - REAL TUBE  | ^Talk 16:52, 31 July 2019 (UTC)

@Realtube: If it's just the filename that's wrong, that can be fixed without a new upload... if the rename is unlikely to be at all controversial, you can use {{Rename}}. If it could be considered controversial by anyone, you can raise the point at COM:VP. Storkk (talk) 18:06, 31 July 2019 (UTC)

Category:Ukranian_pronunciation_of_names_of_cities

Category:Ukranian_pronunciation_of_names_of_cities has been listed at Commons:Categories for discussion so that the community can discuss ways in which it should be changed. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry. If you created this category, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for discussion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with it. If the category is up for deletion because it has been superseded, consider the notion that although the category may be deleted, your hard work (which we all greatly appreciate) lives on in the new category. In all cases, please do not take the category discussion personally. It is never intended as such. Thank you!

GAndy (talk) 18:55, 11 December 2019 (UTC)

صورة : مجلة شعر

مرحبا لا اعلم لماذا حذفت الصورة ؟ اذا هناك مشكلة تعالج، لكن اسلوب الحذف من دون انذار او تنبيه او السؤال، حتى الان لا افهمه. لماذا التعاطي معنا كأننا مجرمون !! عموما، هذه صورة تعود الى العام 1957 تقريبا، وبالتالي مر عليها الزمن، وهي تتوافق مع المسموح به في ويكيبيديا. ارجو اعادة الصورة الى صفحتها في ويكيبيديا: مجلة شعر. Kamel saleh (talk) 23:12, 13 February 2020 (UTC)

File deletion revert request

Hey Storkk, Could this file deletion be reverted? File:Gaganyaan mission poster.jpg

Above file was uploaded to Wikicommons on my request by the author Dean Sumith who took it at an Indian annual event called 'Bangalore Space Expo' back in 2018.

Here is me requesting him on reddit and his kind uploads.

https://old.reddit.com/r/ISRO/comments/9d7p5r/bangalore_space_expo_18/e7klv24/?context=5

Here is the original publish on authors facebook page.

https://www.facebook.com/DeanThePolymath/photos/a.692606260809018/1856351497767816/

Thanks Ohsin (talk) 21:32, 5 January 2020 (UTC)

@Ohsin: please have the copyright holder(s) confirm the license by following the instructions on OTRS. This appears to be a photograph of a poster, so two copyright permissions are likely needed, the designer/copyright holder of the poster itself and also the photographer. In case the photographer is also the poster designer, this should be mentioned clearly in the email to OTRS. Best regards, Storkk (talk) 09:43, 6 January 2020 (UTC)

DotSwifth 2019 video deletion

Hi, I noticed today that you had deleted File:DotSwift 2019 - Janina Kutyn - CATransform3D- You don't need to know them.webm in August 2019. The video is licensed as "Creative Commons Attribution license (reuse allowed)" on YouTube. Is there something else required to host the video on Commons? Also, https://www.dotconferences.com/codeofconduct states, "This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 Unported License." Regards // sikander { talk } 🦖 22:40, 18 January 2020 (UTC)

@Sikander: Hi. The slides are all derivative of Nintendo property. Could you point me to evidence that Nintendo has consented to the license? Please note that we do not host content that relies upon Fair Use exceptions. Cheers, Storkk (talk) 23:03, 18 January 2020 (UTC)

Ah ok, the slides in the video are problematic. Got it, thanks for the clarification. // sikander { talk } 🦖 23:07, 18 January 2020 (UTC)

No worries, have a great weekend! Storkk (talk) 23:09, 18 January 2020 (UTC)

requests/File:مجلة شعر ليلى بعلبكي أدونيس لور غريب يوسف الخال أنسي الحاج فؤاد رفقة خالدة سعيد محمد الماغوط وشوقي أبي شقرا.jpg

مرحبا لا اعلم لماذا حذفت الصورة ؟ اذا هناك مشكلة تعالج، لكن اسلوب الحذف من دون انذار او تنبيه او السؤال، حتى الان لا افهمه. لماذا التعاطي معنا كأننا مجرمون !! عموما، هذه صورة تعود الى العام 1957 تقريبا، وبالتالي مر عليها الزمن، وهي تتوافق مع المسموح به في ويكيبيديا. ارجو اعادة الصورة الى صفحتها في ويكيبيديا: مجلة شعر . Kamel saleh (talk) 22:41, 13 February 2020 (UTC)

Hello. You were indeed notified: Patrick Rogel left you a note on your talk page, which you obviously saw, since you followed the link in that note and commented on the deletion request. In any case, regarding this photo specifically, since it was first published in Lebanon, it would only be in the public domain by virtue of publication date if it was first published before 1949. Since 1957 is after 1949, the photo will be copyrighted until 50 years after the death of the photographer. Best regards, Storkk (talk) 10:03, 14 February 2020 (UTC)

أخي الصورة قديمة جدا، ولا أعرف من صورها حتى أعرف متى مات ! كذلك ليس لها حقوق، كما أعتقد. كل ما في الأمر، أن الصورة تناسب موضوع صفحة : مجلة شعر على ويكيبيديا، وهي عن الاجتماعات التي واكبت نشوء المجلة في بيروت في العام 1957. الرجاء إعادة الصورة لأنها تخدم الموضوع، وهي لا تتعارض مع سياسة النشر في ويكي. --Kamel saleh (talk) 16:59, 14 February 2020 (UTC)

يقول لي باتريك Patrick Rogel راجع من حذف الصورة (انظر الرابط ) ماذا أفعل الآن؟ لقد عجزت، من المسؤول عن حذف الصورة؟ ومن يتخذ القرار بحذف جهد الناس وتعبهم هكذا! وإذا أنا لا أعرف كيف أقنعك بأهمية الصورة، وأنها قديمة جدا، لا يعني هذا أنني أنا على خطأ. صحيح، أنا لست متمكنا من وضع الصور والتحقق منها كما تفعلون أنتم، ومن المؤكد أنني أحتاج إلى مساعدة، لكن لا تكون المساعدة بحذف الصور هكذا. الرجاء إعادة الصورة إلى صفحة مجلة شعر في ويكيبيديا --Kamel saleh (talk) 17:40, 14 February 2020 (UTC)

The importance of the image is not in question. Rather, the image is still copyrighted. It will still be copyrighted until 50 years have passed after the death of the photographer. Please see COM:L for details on our licensing policy. In short, unless the copyright holder has published the image under a Commons-compatible free license, we do not accept copyrighted images - it doesn't matter how important the image is. Some local Wikipedias do allow non-free content under a Fair use exception. At Wikimedia Commons, we do not. Storkk (talk) 17:50, 14 February 2020 (UTC)

إذا كل صورة أريد أن أنشرها هنا ، يجب أن أنتظر 50 سنة كي يموت من التقط الصورة ، هذا يعني، أنت تقول لي، بمعنى آخر : نحن لا نريدك أن تنشر أي صورة ! عموما شكرا لك ، أنتم هنا لا تساعدون أحدا، فعلى العكس تدمرون أي حماس ورغبة لمن يريد العمل والمساهمة في مشروع ويكيبيديا النبيل والعظيم.--Kamel saleh (talk) 18:12, 14 February 2020 (UTC)

Lebanon is actually an exception: for most countries, you must wait 70 years, and in some 80 or 100 years. I'm sorry your enthusiasm is curbed for the moment. Hopefully you will be able to find some freely licensed or public domain photos to rekindle your enthusiasm. Storkk (talk) 21:54, 14 February 2020 (UTC)

This section is resolved and can be archived. If you disagree, replace this template with your comment. Storkk (talk) 10:19, 26 March 2020 (UTC)

File:Aplerbeck St Georg IMGP0681 wp.jpg

File:Kontaktflächen eines Prozessors in LGA 775.jpg. — Ирука¹³ 13:50, 20 March 2020 (UTC)

This section is resolved and can be archived. If you disagree, replace this template with your comment. Storkk (talk) 10:19, 26 March 2020 (UTC)

Deleted images

Hi, Storkk - See OTRS Ticket#2020032410007619 - the following 3 files have been properly released under a CC-BY-SA 4.0 and was wondering if you could restore them?

• File:25th_Anniversary_Issue_of_Invention_%26_Technology.jpg

  File:Winter 2020 Issue of Invention and Technology.jpg

  File:Summer 1985 Issue of Invention & Technology.jpg

Best, ^Atsme _Talk 📧 16:34, 25 March 2020 (UTC)

@Atsme: Undeleted. I'm no longer an OTRS agent, so cannot see the ticket. Please complete the OTRS process. Cheers, Storkk (talk) 10:18, 26 March 2020 (UTC)

Tripoli Airport image

@Storkk: Hello. This specific image was taken from a user within Libya. This user is on facebook, and has not claimed any copyrights on the image. The image is therefore in the public domain under CC0 - No copyrights. I placed it under share alike because this image can be found all over the internet. Please remove your nomination for deletions as it has historical significance and does not break copyright claims, and relating to The battle of Tripoli international Airport Biomax20 (talk) 15:17, 1 April 2020 (UTC)

Hi Biomax20. Copyright exists without the need to claim it: everything that is published is copyrighted unless there is an express waiving of copyright. Just publishing it without a license does not imply it is in the public domain, instead it implies all rights are reserved. Storkk (talk) 15:20, 1 April 2020 (UTC)

@Storkk: The image has no claimant registered. Its use is clearly historic and educational. There is absolutely no need to raise copyright violation issue. Here in Libya, we dont even have clear copyright digital laws. Its source is Within Libya. Infact, Patrick posted a Link to a website that copied the image without consent, and infact, all other news sites and re-distributers of the work havent taken consent for the image. Therefore its in public domain, and with all respect, raising copyright violation is a nuisance. Biomax20 (talk) 15:32, 1 April 2020 (UTC)

No. Libya has been a signatory to the Berne convention since 1976. Please see COM:L and COM:CRT/Libya and COM:Fair use. Rather than conducting this conversation in 3 different places, may I suggest continuing this discussion only on the DR page, so that the discussion is centralized. Thanks. Storkk (talk) 15:36, 1 April 2020 (UTC)

Deleted image

You deleted an image I uploaded, File:Theodore Paleologus arms.png, but there was (as far as I could tell) proper licensing information provided. As the image is quite useful for the particular article I was writing, I was wondering if you could either restore it, or tell me why there was "likely a copyright violation" so that I can avoid problems like this in the future. Ichthyovenator (talk) 11:39, 17 April 2020 (UTC)

Hi @Ichthyovenator: . Wappenwiki have a NonCommercial clause in their license. This is not compatible with Wikimedia Commons. See COM:Licensing for more details. Cheers, Storkk (talk) 11:42, 17 April 2020 (UTC)

Oh, yes, I see now. I just saw that it was licensed under Creative Commons and assumed it would be okay, will check more thoroughly in the future! Ichthyovenator (talk) 12:06, 17 April 2020 (UTC)

Deletion of import information on a website re COVID-19

Can you give me the reason why you have deleted this file? And a link to the discussion, please. The only reason given, when taken off the Wikipedia was 'Likely copyright violation; see COM:Licensing.' - I'd like to know Exactly what part of that page. Many thanks Llywelyn2000 (talk) 13:23, 17 April 2020 (UTC)

Hi @Llywelyn2000: You appear to have screenshotted a copyrighted webpage. Could you clarify by what right would you purport to relicense Gompel's intellectual property? If you represent Gompels, please follow the instructions on OTRS so that we can confidentially verify that you are authorised to release Gompel's IP, alternatively, you could amend gompels.co.uk to include a free license. Please see COM:L for licenses we allow. Thanks, Storkk (talk) 13:29, 17 April 2020 (UTC) ... sorry this should all obviously refer to Cwmcafit, the uploader. They would need to clarify how they represent Gompels, and contact OTRS. Storkk (talk) 13:32, 17 April 2020 (UTC)

No i didn't upload.

I asked above:

'The only reason given, when taken off the Wikipedia was 'Likely copyright violation; see COM:Licensing.' - I'd like to know Exactly what part of that page.'

Can you give me that information?

I'd like a link to the discussion before the image was deleted, and a link to the uploader's Talk page informing him of that discussion.

Lastly, no I don't work for Gombel's, I work for Wikimedia UK and I'm involved in the COVID-19 project. Llywelyn2000 (talk) 13:41, 17 April 2020 (UTC)

Yes, I misspoke above, assuming you were the uploader, hence my subsequent edit. No discussion is required to delete obvious copyright violations, see COM:DP#Speedy Deletion. This was not a close call. It was a screenshot of a Gompels.co.uk webpage, and there is no indication Gompels.co.uk have any content which is freely licensed. I don't understand what you mean by "Exactly what part of that page": it is all copyrighted. Storkk (talk) 13:45, 17 April 2020 (UTC)

Thanks for this information. I'm not sure if deleting users' uploads without contacting them is a good thing. I think an explanation would go a long way, and help create a better platform. What I meant with "Exactly what part of that page' was, to which part of COM:Licensing were you referring?" Anyway, I've left a full explanation on the user's talk page so that he understands why it was deleted. Llywelyn2000 (talk) 14:02, 17 April 2020 (UTC)

@Llywelyn2000: The file was tagged as a copyright violation by A1Cafel, who did indeed leave an explanation on the user's talk page: Special:Diff/333308363/412073305. The policy that A1Cafel pointed to was COM:SS, which explains in more detail about screenshots. Cheers, Storkk (talk) 14:10, 17 April 2020 (UTC)

Wonderful! Thanks again! I wasn't aware of Commons:Screenshots, so I'll bring it to his attention. Llywelyn2000 (talk) 14:40, 17 April 2020 (UTC)

Copyright issues with User:Qiushufang

Hello. I am contacting you since you were involved in the identification of several copyvio by the said user (Commons:Deletion requests/File:Armoured Qin general.jpg). There is an ongoing discussion about further cases. Gun Powder Ma (talk) 22:46, 18 April 2020 (UTC)

Seems like the Noticeboard has things well in hand. FWIW, I agree with Taivo in this matter. Storkk (talk) 09:41, 19 April 2020 (UTC)

Commons:Deletion requests/File:IronException 2b2t Spawn Render July 2019.png

Hi, could you explain how this extremely large and complex 3D structure is considered too simple for copyright? And also where's the evidence of permission from the authors of the work? In this case, the players of the game that produced the 3D structure. Thanks.--BevinKacon (talk) 17:24, 24 April 2020 (UTC)

I don't believe I ever said it was too simple for copyright; and if I did, I did not intend to. What I did say is that the render was independently done by someone using nobody else's copyrighted material (e.g. textures). I don't believe this is still in dispute, but please correct me if I am mistaken. Could you clarify whose copyright you believe is being infringed? Your only stated argument on the DR was demonstrably incorrect, namely that it was "a screenshot from an unfree game". Given that this was the only keep vote, I would appreciate clarity on your updated objection. Thanks, Storkk (talk) 19:45, 24 April 2020 (UTC)

Looks like unfree minecraft textures, and not the free ones provided with the program which are listed at [1] based on the color being very different, and matching the game.--BevinKacon (talk) 20:22, 24 April 2020 (UTC)

So how did you interpret this? Storkk (talk) 09:41, 25 April 2020 (UTC)

Impossible to say, as the canvas size setting is showing 960x540, different from the file uploaded. Even so, changing the colors of a complex 3D object would just create a derivative of the original work.--BevinKacon (talk) 18:11, 25 April 2020 (UTC)

So stipulating for a moment that IronException did not lie about their methods and subsequently create an elaborate coverup, i.e. they are not using Minecraft textures, and they have rendered each tile as a 1x1 uniformly colored pixel, can I ask again whose copyright you believe is being infringed? Storkk (talk) 18:35, 25 April 2020 (UTC)

The players that created the 3D structure. Where's their permission?--BevinKacon (talk) 18:46, 25 April 2020 (UTC)

For that, I was persuaded by the COM:DM argument raised in the DR as well as the analogy raised in the DR comparing it to a satellite image of a city. If you believe I have erred, feel free to re-open the DR. I'd suggest setting a firm set of goalposts, however, and arguing clearly why you believe the arguments raised were incorrect. I don't think it's worth either of our time to hash out a relatively arcane situation in a 4-month old DR on my talk page. Storkk (talk) 19:52, 25 April 2020 (UTC)

Deletion requests/File:Max Moreno.jpg

Hi, Storkk

How are you?

I realized that it was asked the deletion of a photo I uploaded. Well, I followed the instructions on OTRS to confirm that I'm the photographer. I was wondering if you could keet it once I have the copyright to use it.

143.0.116.182 23:58, 1 May 2020 (UTC) Mariana Cordeiro

Hi Mariana. We host only files that are freely licensed so that anybody can use them (see COM:L). The rights holder of a photograph is usually the photographer, and not the subject of the photo... so the photographer should follow the instructions on OTRS to confirm that the photo is freely licensed. An OTRS agent will then tag the file and the deletion request will be closed. Storkk (talk) 09:30, 2 May 2020 (UTC)

from dvirlanger

Hi Storkk, Sorry about the files loaded, which appear as violations. I was uncertain as to what consitutes a violation and what doesn't. It appears to be that any powerpoint product I produce myself is fine. Also, I was unaware that stating a company name would cause it to be a violation. So I am learning with time. However, I don't know how to "delete" a file that is a violation. So, what i did is remove all the code and pressed "publish changes". Is this the way to go?

Thanks, Dvir Langer — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dvirlanger (talk • contribs) 07:57, 4 May 2020 (UTC)

Hi @Dvirlanger: Only administrators can delete files, however you can tag files as {{copyvio|1=rationale}} to flag them to administrators. Stating a company name does not cause a file to be a violation, however using someone else's intellectual property does. So, for example, taking a screenshot of Google maps (copyright Google), and overlaying some lines on it, does indeed make it a violation of Google's copyright. We have lengthy explainers at, for instance, COM:L and COM:DW which you may wish to read. Storkk (talk) 08:04, 4 May 2020 (UTC)

In this file, for example, where did the rendered city scene come from? Storkk (talk) 08:06, 4 May 2020 (UTC)

I'm not sure as to the origin of the picture upon which I sketched, but it could be by Yeffe Noff Ltd., which is the metropolitan transit authority, and therefore it might be prohibited. Again, please keep in mind that only now I'm beginning to be familiar with what is allowed or disallowed. It seems that the best thing to do is just to delete the file, and I will resketch on something that is open, e.g., File:MerkazitHaMifrtaz b.jpg, which is presented under - https://he.wikipedia.org/wiki/%D7%9E%D7%A8%D7%9B%D7%96%D7%99%D7%AA_%D7%94%D7%9E%D7%A4%D7%A8%D7%A5.

Please confirm that I can use the above file. Thank you very much, Dvir Dvirlanger (talk) 08:33, 4 May 2020 (UTC)

@Dvirlanger: Yes, you can use that file as long as you abide by the license. In this case, as you can see from the file page, the photo is licensed under {{Cc-by-sa-4.0}}. Please read the license first, and make sure you abide by its terms. Essentially, you can use the photo as the basis of your work as long as you license your work under the same license, and also credit Alexey Bogoslavsky. Storkk (talk) 09:23, 4 May 2020 (UTC)

FYI Storkk, used my last upload, -- https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:ListFiles/Dvirlanger&ilshowall=1; credit to background image provided in "caption" and "description" fields. Dvir Dvirlanger (talk) 12:22, 4 May 2020 (UTC)

I've edited it to show how this is frequently done. Cheers, Storkk (talk) 12:25, 4 May 2020 (UTC)

Thank you much. exectly what's needed... :) Dvirlanger (talk) 13:12, 4 May 2020 (UTC)

Temporary Undeletion

Dear Storkk,

Hope you are doing well, could you please undelete the following images as we have recieved OTRS permission at ticket:2020050810005479

• File:Windows in the Sky.jpg
• File:Ahf windowsinthesky office.jpg
• File:Summertime Departures.jpg
• File:The Hunter (By the Seaside Window) EP Cover.jpg

Thanks --✝iѵɛɳ२२४०^{†ลℓк †๏ мэ} 15:33, 8 May 2020 (UTC)

@Tiven2240:  Done Please continue with your investigation. As an aside, please add a colon to the start of the File: links in order to link them rather than display them in the future. Thanks. Storkk (talk) 08:38, 9 May 2020 (UTC)

Deletion request: Franz Wilhelm Kaiser.jpg

Hi, Storkk The photograph was taken by my wife who gave me the permission for free use. I have added this information. - See Ticket#: 2020051310005361. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Franz-W.89 (talk • contribs) 12:28, 13 May 2020 (UTC)

@Franz-W.89: Thanks. An OTRS agent will confirm, and then update the File page and the Deletion discussion. Storkk (talk) 12:48, 13 May 2020 (UTC)

Request to close Commons:Deletion requests/Files in Category:Zhang Daqian

Hi Storkk. Since you have closed this DR, would you mind closing this one as well, as they were the same batch of images nominated for the exactly the same reason? Thanks. --Wcam (talk) 13:27, 14 May 2020 (UTC)

@Wcam: those appear to be in Hong Kong, and I'm not sure the TOO isn't higher in HK than in China/Taiwan, since it's based on UK law. Not sure enough to close. Storkk (talk) 13:44, 14 May 2020 (UTC)

Hong Kong is only where the auction took place so I don't think HK's law should apply. The creator was based in China and Taiwan so these should be the country of origin. --Wcam (talk) 13:56, 14 May 2020 (UTC)

@Wcam: what were their publication histories prior to the auction? Storkk (talk) 13:57, 14 May 2020 (UTC)

Regarding File:Golden Horse Awards inscribed board by Zhang Daqian 20131120.jpg, the exhibition took place in Taipei [2], and the writing "金馬獎" refers to en:Golden Horse Awards, a film festival and awards in Taiwan. It is beyond reasonable doubt that the country of origin for this work is Taiwan. Regarding the other image I could not find any info regarding its publication prior to the auction in a Google search, and I do not believe the burden of proof is on me. --Wcam (talk) 14:13, 14 May 2020 (UTC)

This should be on the DR, not my talk page. It is the central question for the DR, so rather than having the closing admin poing to a Permalink of my talk page, please make these facts clear there. Storkk (talk) 16:20, 14 May 2020 (UTC)

Deletion error I think

thumb|Screenshot from a similar video of the same actor I notice that you deleted this file Cynthia in MTV Shuga in May 2020.png despite the picture being taken from a YouTube video with a creative commons license. This was flagged at the deletion discussion. Could you check this please? The original file was flagged in error by @Patrick Rogel: . Victuallers (talk) 22:16, 22 May 2020 (UTC)

@Victuallers:  Done. In future, to contest a speedy deletion please consider replacing the speedy deletion template with the delete template. It helps minimize errors when we have huge backlogs and >99.99% of youtube page screenshots are unambiguously copyright violations. This one is likely still at least questionable if not problematic, despite having been license reviewed, but it should have a full DR. Storkk (talk) 22:37, 22 May 2020 (UTC)

re

Sorry but I don't know what happened. I just left #{{s}}~~~~ at the bottom of the page. This is my first time voting here, so if there's something wrong, I feel sorry. --Rowingbohe♬(Talk/Work) 13:30, 4 June 2020 (UTC)

File:Pandit Soumendu Lahiri.jpg

Dear friend, Hope you're fine. As I'm directed to contact you regarding the issue of the photo as mentioned in the subject line, I here explain the matter.

As I developed the page"Sur Piyasi Music Academy", there the person in the photo Pandit Soumendu Lahiri is the principal, I, with his permission collected the photo from his Facebook page (https://www.facebook.com/Sur-Piyasi-Music-Academy-114091290339376/).

According to him the photo was taken as a selfie, so he is the photographer and the copyright holder.

He authorized me verbally to use it in Wikipedia and allowed the work to be a free media as per wiki copyright rules. So dear friend please tell me what more should I do... and help me in this regard

Thank you, wish you fantastic days ahead Arindam Chandra, 15 June 2020 Arindamchandra123 (talk) 20:32, 14 June 2020 (UTC)

The photographer should confirm with OTRS. Thanks, Storkk (talk) 15:13, 18 June 2020 (UTC)

Deletion Request:

https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Eva_Haverkamp-Rott_in_Regensburg_(2019).jpg

The copyright seems to be questionable. Merci!--Enrico Verma (talk) 09:43, 1 July 2020 (UTC)

May I point you to COM:DR. Please raise a deletion request wherein you explain what questions you have regarding the copyright. Cheers, Storkk (talk) 09:57, 1 July 2020 (UTC)

Question

I want to ask that is this had done? Thanks :) --RuiyuShen 08:38, 5 July 2020 (UTC)

Question from Arapaiaya

Hello Stork, no idea how to use WikiCommons I want to update an image https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Ara_Paiaya_Film_Director.jpg to only have this corrected image available https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Ara_Paiaya_Film_Producer.jpg can you please help? Feel to contact me via my offical facebook page http://www.facebook.com/arapaiaya Thanks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Arapaiaya (talk • contribs) 18:44, 11 August 2020 (UTC)

Hello @Arapaiaya: . First, the copyright holder needs to follow the instructions on OTRS to confirm that the file is correctly licensed. Note that the subject of a photo or Wikipedia article generally has no editorial say over which photo, presuming it is correctly licensed, is used for the depiction. You're in a bit of a bind, because if you confirm that you are the copyright holder, and thus the file you wish to keep is correctly licensed, that necessarily implies that this file is correctly licensed, since you uploaded it and applied an irrevocable license to it. The editorial decision concerning which file to use is not yours to make. Best regards, Storkk (talk) 19:06, 11 August 2020 (UTC)

Note also that if you do nothing, both files are likely to be deleted... however re-uploading files that were deleted by community consensus will likely get the uploading account blocked, and the file re-deleted immediately. Storkk (talk) 19:08, 11 August 2020 (UTC)

Thanks for the detailed info. Both images being deleted is fine. Arapaiaya (talk) 19:34, 11 August 2020 (UTC)

File:Colonel Stan Shumovsky.jpg

Hello, Storkk. Why has this portrait, which was extracted from the Soviet archive, been removed? In the USSR, copyright was not recognized, the author of this portrait cannot be found. Эрнест мл. (talk) 12:20, 23 August 2020 (UTC)

Hi @Эрнест мл.: If it was from 1944, it could not have been published prior to 1943, so regardless of whether the author was truly anonymous or not, it would not have been PD in Russia or other ex-Soviet states in 1996, meaning that it is subject to COM:URAA. In any case, it is likely the author was not anonymous and so the point is moot. For more information, please see {{PD-Russia}} or ask on COM:VPC. In all cases, if you upload a photo sourced from the web without a copyright tag, the image is subject to speedy deletion as a copyright infringement. Cheers, Storkk (talk) 23:34, 23 August 2020 (UTC)

Hi @Storkk: . This is the official photo for the personal file. It is in the state archive. No copyright at the time of such works in the USSR was not supposed. This means that the authors relinquished the right, the customers did not keep records of them. The other case, reports of the war for papers. In any case, after payment to the photographer, the image belonged to the "organ" that ordered the portrait for the file. No exceptions. Your attempt to turn the current legislation into the past is not fruitful. You deprive the article about the person of his only image. Эрнест мл. (talk) 06:51, 25 August 2020 (UTC)

If you feel I have made an error, please request a COM:REFUND. Storkk (talk) 09:16, 25 August 2020 (UTC)

Hi @Storkk: . I feel. But Wikipedia is not bots. I believe that every person has will and even common sense. You have to have the courage to correct mistakes to improve the content of Wikipedia. It's you, not COM:REFUND, who makes the flocks depleted and replaces old customs with new laws. It's not just this photo that you will delete. In addition, to hold a new discussion, someone else must see the photo. The authors of the American book, as we see, limited themselves to indicating the archive from which the portrait was taken. Although other photos are in the book with authors. But your requirements are more formal. Эрнест мл. (talk) 14:48, 25 August 2020 (UTC)

I disagree with each point of your reasoning, and I do not believe I have made an error, and thus will not be restoring the photo. Storkk (talk) 08:20, 26 August 2020 (UTC)

The facts:
1. You call a portrait in your personal file an author's work and extend modern foreign laws to the Soviet past.
2. You found insufficient to indicate the state archive where the file is kept, although American publishers of books about the hero were satisfied with this.
3. You removed the only image of the hero from the article, mentioning only those characteristics that the bot is capable of recognizing. I am not at all sure that you have understood the essence of what is happening, it is not obvious from you already written.

I understand, of course, that the conversation with you is over. You did not start it. Эрнест мл. (talk) 11:32, 26 August 2020 (UTC)

I think you may misunderstand the criteria that media need to satisfy in order to be hosted here. It is not relevant that the image is important for the article. It is likewise not relevant what US publishers think (they are free to disregard effects on their re-users, and they are free to weigh the probabilities of copyright being pursued). We keep only media that we are confident can be used by anybody for any purpose, and specifically which are free to use both in the country of origin and the US. Whether anybody would bother to pursue copyright infringments, or whether (e.g. for orphan works) the actual copyright holder is even known or knowable is also irrelevant except as it pertains to dates when anonymous works enter into the public domain. We also do not host all media that are technically permissible: since we must manage >60 million files with a couple dozen active adminstrators, for practical purposes we maintain relatively rigid rules and apply the COM:Precautionary principle, and the burden is on the person wishing to keep or restore a file to show that the file is free beyond a reasonable doubt. If you wish to have this re-examined by another party, please bring this up at COM:Requests for undeletion. Storkk (talk) 13:01, 26 August 2020 (UTC)

File:AI-generated virtual moviestar Ornella Muti, displayed on a phone screen, a detail of Joseph Ayerle's videoartwork "Un'emozione per sempre 2.0". animated GIF.gif

Hi Storkk,

can you please restore that file? We have permission from the creator at OTRS.

Thank you, --Mussklprozz (talk) 08:07, 4 October 2020 (UTC)

Meanwhile  Done by User:Reinhard Kraasch --Mussklprozz (talk) 16:52, 5 October 2020 (UTC)

File:Ned Luke.png possible undeletion

Hi there, you deleted File:Ned Luke.png on 10:10, 6 August 2020 with the explanation "Likely copyright violation; see COM:Licensing. If you are the copyright holder, please follow the instructions on OTRS". The source of the photograph was this video which has been released under a valid creative commons license (Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 Unported). A similar file sourced from the same video has also been nominated for deletion (File:Shawn Fonteno cropped 2.png). I was wondering if this could be undeleted. Regards Spy-cicle (talk) 16:23, 29 October 2020 (UTC)

About the discussion of WikiMirror

Hello sysop, in June you brought up this discussion about setting a edit filter for WikiMirror.

I'm the maintainer of it, and I come here to explain that I have fixed this bug. Editors will not encounter this bug who use the build-in editor (such as 2013, 2017, VE and WikiEd) and third-party tools (such as Twinkle, Wikiplus) now. --AnYiLin^Talk 13:21, 16 November 2020 (UTC)

Thanks for fixing the bug! Storkk (talk) 21:17, 14 December 2020 (UTC)

Copyright?

Hi Storkk, I'm not sure why [3] and [4] were deleted?

This is what Museum of Fine Arts says; Images of artworks the Museum believes to be in the public domain are available for download. --HistoryofIran (talk) 16:02, 14 December 2020 (UTC)

--HistoryofIran (talk) 16:02, 14 December 2020 (UTC)

@HistoryofIran: You may be right: I visited the page, noted no indication of a free license and clicked on "License Image", which brought me to a page which definitely doesn't imply the images are freely licensed. I did not try clicking Download. I am going to restore both and remove the copyvio tags, under the rationale that it's MFA's collection, and if they know of no restrictions on their images of ancient works, then there are none (the only rights would be theirs). I think Hanooz may have followed my process as well, which works the vast majority of the time -- unfortunately MFA's site layout doesn't make image licensing super obvious. I think it would be worthwhile, given this, to have a MFA-specific license template. Storkk (talk) 21:09, 14 December 2020 (UTC)

@HistoryofIran: also, thank you for clarifying! Storkk (talk) 21:21, 14 December 2020 (UTC)

@HistoryofIran: On re-reading the download page, I think I need to nominate them for deletion. I read their statement as referring to underlying works (in this case the sculpture and the coin) being in the public domain. This is clearly true due to the age of the items. Photographs of those works they make available for download, but their terms are non-commercial. So unfortunatley, I don't think we can keep them. Storkk (talk) 21:28, 14 December 2020 (UTC)

Notification

Hello. I would like to notify you about this subject as you have shown in the past an interest in it. Gun Powder Ma (talk) 04:01, 7 January 2021 (UTC)

Please participate in the Universal Code of Conduct consultation on Wikimedia Commons!

Dear Storkk

Thank you for your hard work to create the sum of all knowledge that is freely sharable to every single human being across the world. As our diverse community grows, we need a guideline that will help all of our work collectively and constructively where everyone feels safe, welcomed, and part of a team. That is why the Wikimedia movement is working on establishing a global guideline called the Universal Code of Conduct, often referred to as UCoC.

After the months-long policy consultation, we have prepared a policy (available in many languages) that has been ratified by the Board of Trustees. We’re currently in the second phase of the process. During this round of consultation, we want to discuss the implementation of this policy. As a member of the functionary team of Wikimedia Commons, your opinion on enforcement is of great value. We want to hear from you on how this policy can be enforced on the Wikimedia Commons community and what might be needed to do so. There are a few enforcement questions so you can easily outline your answers based on them. Please do not hesitate to bring any more questions/challenges you think are not yet discussed.

The discussion is taking place on Commons:Universal Code of Conduct consultation. You can also share your thoughts by replying to this message (Please ping me so I get notified), posting your message on my talk page. I am aware that some thoughts cannot be expressed publicly, so you can always share your opinion by emailing me as well.

As a valued member of the Commons community, please share your thoughts, ideas, and experiences that relate to UCoC. Let us know what needs to be improved so we can build a more friendly and cooperative space to increase editor engagement and retention of new users.

Wikimedia projects are governed by you. So, it is you who needs to step up to ensure a safe, comfortable, and pleasant working environment.

Let me know if you have any questions.

Thank you! Wikitanvir (WMF) (talk) 10:18, 5 February 2021 (UTC)

Please take a short survey regarding UCoC

Hello Storkk,

I would like to inform you that we now have a survey in place to take part in the UCoC consultation. It is not a long one and should take less than 10 minutes to complete. You can take the survey even if you have already participated in the on-wiki consultation. It has a different set of questions and allows you to participate anonymously and privately.

As a member of the Commons functionaries, your opinion is especially essential. Please click here to participate in the survey.

You are still welcome to participate in the on-wiki discussions. If you prefer you can have your say by sending me an email. You can also drop me an email if you want to have a one-to-one chat.

Thank you for your participation! Wikitanvir (WMF) 13:54, 12 February 2021 (UTC)

Pouvez-vous restaurer mon droit à renommer, s'il vous plait ?

Bonjour @Storkk: I choose you because I’m french and my english is not good, so I hope you will understand ! Thanks in advance for your patience.
A french user I appreciate and work with (we were in the french Wikiconcours 2021, équipe 14) is now working on the Category:Tractatus de herbis and has created many sub-categories, among which Chapters in Tractatus de Herbis. He should have wrote "de herbis" instead of "de Herbis". The 7th of June, I wanted to help him renaming this page: being afraid of using tools I didn’t knew, and therefore making a mistake I couldn’t repair, I preferred to move one by one, manually, all the 58 pages "De a… in Tractatus de Herbis". The result is:

Date	Modifications des droits	Acteur	Résumé
2021-06-07 15:34		Abuse filter	Autopromotion automatically delayed by abuse filter. Rule description: Pagemove throttle for new users
2020-09-07 00:08	+utilisateur autoconfirmé		Automatique

Would you please understand that "autopromotion" is really not what I aimed to do, and give me back my rights ? There are many pages to rename with "…de herbis" (more than 50 in the letter A by now), I really would like to take a part of this job, User:Tricholome is OK with that, and I’ll promise I’ll use Cat-a-lot to move the files. I may hope I can avoid terrible mistakes and finally use it properly. Please give me a second chance to try !
Thanks a lot for your kind comprehension and help. Punctilla (talk) 00:09, 9 June 2021 (UTC)

Hi Punctilla. I am not very active at the moment, and have never dealt with categories much. I suggest you post your request on COM:AN so that other more active administrators can take a look. From my quick look, it would seem to me that uppercase "H" would be preferable, so I suggest explaining in detail why you believe lowercase "h" is appropriate. Sorry I can't be of more help. Best regards, Storkk (talk) 15:42, 11 June 2021 (UTC)

Bonjour Storkk, thanks a lot for your suggestions. Je vais suivre vos conseils. Best regards, too. --Punctilla (talk) 16:33, 12 June 2021 (UTC)

How we will see unregistered users

Hi!

You get this message because you are an admin on a Wikimedia wiki.

When someone edits a Wikimedia wiki without being logged in today, we show their IP address. As you may already know, we will not be able to do this in the future. This is a decision by the Wikimedia Foundation Legal department, because norms and regulations for privacy online have changed.

Instead of the IP we will show a masked identity. You as an admin will still be able to access the IP. There will also be a new user right for those who need to see the full IPs of unregistered users to fight vandalism, harassment and spam without being admins. Patrollers will also see part of the IP even without this user right. We are also working on better tools to help.

If you have not seen it before, you can read more on Meta. If you want to make sure you don’t miss technical changes on the Wikimedia wikis, you can subscribe to the weekly technical newsletter.

We have two suggested ways this identity could work. We would appreciate your feedback on which way you think would work best for you and your wiki, now and in the future. You can let us know on the talk page. You can write in your language. The suggestions were posted in October and we will decide after 17 January.

Thank you. /Johan (WMF)

18:11, 4 January 2022 (UTC)

Uhmmm

My image, "example of an ironic and surreal meme" was deleted for apparently being "non-derivative", could you further elaborate on how it was copyrighted? I got it from https://fun107.com/wareham-puffer-fish/, however I dug deeper and found out the origin was posted on Facebook. Is there any rule for not using posts from social media? Pink Saffron (talk) 00:54, 19 February 2022 (UTC)

Hi @Pink Saffron: . Yes, anything posted online is copyrighted. Unless there is an explicit free license attached, it is not freely licensed. We only accept media that has been explicitly freely licensed or has fallen into the public domain for other legal reasons, usually due to age. Please see Commons:Copyright_rules for more information. Cheers, Storkk (talk) 20:25, 19 February 2022 (UTC)

May I recreate the image using a different picture? The original file used for the "Internet memes" page was a very helpful example and it would be a waste for a page losing a valuable description. Pink Saffron (talk) 16:39, 21 February 2022 (UTC)

@Pink Saffron: If you created the original photograph, or you use a freely (i.e. Commons-compatible) licensed base image, then that would indeed satisfy copyright concerns. However, please keep in mind that images need to also fall within our scope. Cheers, Storkk (talk) 11:15, 22 February 2022 (UTC)

Duplicated image

I've come across a picture Image:Bahaullah.jpg that is a cropped and low quality copy of Image:Bahaullah from miller.jpg. It has been nominated for deletion, but was not. I'm not very familiar with reasons for cropped versions being allowed. It's only used in one article. I wonder, since it's not only cropped, but of a very poor quality, that it might potentially have valid reasons for deletion. I'm contacting you since you ruled in favour of keeping it, back in 2016 Commons:Deletion_requests/File:Bahaullah.jpg --Steinninn ♨ 03:50, 28 March 2022 (UTC)

Hi. The general rationale is twofold: 1) we do not dictate which image a sister project may find the most useful editorially, that is up to them 2) As a media repository, we serve a wider audience than just our sister projects. There would not seem to be a compelling reason to break any direct links they might have. It seems to me that this situation is precisely what the {{Superseded}} tag is for, and I don't see any benefit to deleting the superseded file. Storkk (talk) 10:29, 28 March 2022 (UTC)

Sound Logo

Hello,

I am messaging you because a contest for a sound logo for Wikimedia is being developed and your opinion as a Wikimedia Commons admin is appreciated. My team would like to know if it is possible for the top finalist sound logos in the contest to have attribution temporarily hidden from public view until all the votes are final? The idea is to let the public judge the sound logo contestants based on the merit of the logo, not the person or people who made it. Again, any feedback is appreciated.

Thank you,

VGrigas (WMF) (talk) 18:15, 17 June 2022 (UTC)

Round 1 of Picture of the Year 2022 voting is open!

2022 Picture of the Year: Saint John Church of Sohrol in Iran.

Read this message in your language

Dear Wikimedian,

Wikimedia Commons is happy to announce that the 2022 Picture of the Year competition is now open. This year will be the seventeenth edition of the annual Wikimedia Commons photo competition, which recognizes exceptional contributions by users on Wikimedia Commons. Wikimedia users are invited to vote for their favorite images featured on Commons during the last year (2022) to produce a single Picture of the Year.

Hundreds of images that have been rated Featured Pictures by the international Wikimedia Commons community in the past year are all entered in this competition. These images include professional animal and plant shots, breathtaking panoramas and skylines, restorations of historical images, photographs portraying the world's best architecture, impressive human portraits, and so much more.

For your convenience, we have sorted the images into topical categories. Two rounds of voting will be held: In the first round, you may vote for as many images as you like. The top 30 overall and the two most popular images in each category will continue to the final. In the final round, you may vote for just three images to become the Picture of the Year.

Round 1 will end on 1 May 2023, 23:59:59 UTC.

Click here to vote now!

Thanks,
the Wikimedia Commons Picture of the Year committee

You are receiving this message because you voted in the 2021 Picture of the Year contest.

Delivered by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 09:16, 20 April 2023 (UTC)

De-adminship warning

Dear Storkk. I am writing to inform you that you are in danger of losing your admin rights on Commons because of inactivity.

If you want to keep your adminship, you need both to sign at Commons:Administrators/Inactivity section/Aug-Sep 2023 before 13 September, and also to make at least five further admin actions in the following six months. Anyone who does not do so will automatically lose their rights.

You can read the de-admin policy at Commons:Administrators/De-adminship.

Thank you! -- CptViraj (talk) 19:33, 12 August 2023 (UTC)