User talk:Vanjagenije/Archive 1

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.

TUSC token 5251391db59cd9437f0a4e25c6ceaea6

I am now proud owner of a TUSC account!

File:Епархије-3.jpg

На овој карти „Срем“ је остао у латиничном облику. Мислим да то треба да се исправи. --109.93.16.153 16:33, 16 January 2010 (UTC)


File:50dinara_01.06.1990.jpg

Commons-emblem-issue.svg File:50dinara_01.06.1990.jpg has been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether it should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry.

If you created this file, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with it, such as a copyright issue.
Please remember to respond to and – if appropriate – contradict the arguments supporting deletion. Arguments which focus on the nominator will not affect the result of the nomination. Thank you!


Afrikaans | العربية | 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)‎ | +/−

78.186.247.47 10:10, 30 October 2010 (UTC)


Lego minifigure

Hello Vanjagenije, is it discussion ; COM:DW#I know that I can't upload photos of copyrighted art (like paintings and statues), but what about toys? Toys are not art!. --FrankyLeRoutier (talk) 06:42, 6 November 2010 (UTC)

fotografije ambasada

Ne znam koji problem imas pa si glasao da se obrisu sve one slike ambasada (pretpostavljam da stojis i iza IP adrese sa koje je predlozeno brisanje). Zaista smesno, ja imam sve mejlove jos uvek, i fotografije ce nadam se uskoro biti vracene tako da ovim izivljavanjem nista nisi postigao.--Avala (talk) 00:53, 30 May 2011 (UTC)

Picture of the Year voting round 1 open

Dear Wikimedians,

Wikimedia Commons is happy to announce that the 2012 Picture of the Year competition is now open. We're interested in your opinion as to which images qualify to be the Picture of the Year for 2012. Voting is open to established Wikimedia users who meet the following criteria:

  1. Users must have an account, at any Wikimedia project, which was registered before Tue, 01 Jan 2013 00:00:00 +0000 [UTC].
  2. This user account must have more than 75 edits on any single Wikimedia project before Tue, 01 Jan 2013 00:00:00 +0000 [UTC]. Please check your account eligibility at the POTY 2012 Contest Eligibility tool.
  3. Users must vote with an account meeting the above requirements either on Commons or another SUL-related Wikimedia project (for other Wikimedia projects, the account must be attached to the user's Commons account through SUL).

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. From professional animal and plant shots to breathtaking panoramas and skylines, restorations of historically relevant images, images portraying the world's best architecture, maps, emblems, diagrams created with the most modern technology, and impressive human portraits, Commons features pictures of all flavors.

For your convenience, we have sorted the images into topic categories. Two rounds of voting will be held: In the first round, you can vote for as many images as you like. The first round category winners and the top ten overall will then make it to the final. In the final round, when a limited number of images are left, you must decide on the one image that you want to become the Picture of the Year.

To see the candidate images just go to the POTY 2012 page on Wikimedia Commons

Wikimedia Commons celebrates our featured images of 2012 with this contest. Your votes decide the Picture of the Year, so remember to vote in the first round by January 30, 2013.

Thanks,
the Wikimedia Commons Picture of the Year committee


Delivered by Orbot1 (talk) at 10:32, 19 January 2013 (UTC) - you are receiving this message because you voted last year

Re: File:Partisan youth execution.jpg

Hi, I'm not sure why you tagged this as missing evidence of permission. The template clearly states the image from the museum website is public domain. The current URL of the image is at http://digitalassets.ushmm.org/photoarchives/detail.aspx?id=1139996, where it says "Public Domain". Spellcast (talk) 07:43, 11 July 2013 (UTC)

The URLs seem to be dynamic. So if the link isn't working, just go to the search bar on the top of the homepage. Type in the photo number 13356 in the search box to see the image. Spellcast (talk) 08:05, 11 July 2013 (UTC)
I see. You are right. Sorry. Vanjagenije (talk) 16:12, 11 July 2013 (UTC)

Masovno brisanje slika na Commonsu

Čemu toliko zahtevaš da se brišu slike na Commonsu mislim na ovo zadnje? Pozdrav! --Kolega2357 (talk) 22:31, 12 July 2013 (UTC)

  • I clearly explained the reasons for deletion at the nomination pages. Vanjagenije (talk) 23:11, 12 July 2013 (UTC)
    • Nije te čovek to pitao. Pitao te je a i ja te pitam, koji problem imaš, koja ti je motivacija da uništavaš tuđi trud nekakvim sumanutim kvazipravnim zahvatima? Verovatno bi bio najsrećniji da se obriše cela Vikipedija na srpskom, do te mere ide tvoja mržnja i pokušaji uništavanja projekta. I ako neko drugi ovo čita i misli da sam preoštar - neka pogleda malo istoriju ovog genija, pa da vidi koliko je stvari obrisano samo na osnovu njegovih lažnih kvazipravnih objašnjenja zašto sve to treba pobrisati a na koja su pali neki od administratora. Šteta koju praviš projektu je nemerljiva i nadam se da si makar ti srećan i da te uzbuđuje što ti ove nebuloze još uvek prolaze.--Avala (talk) 15:08, 21 July 2013 (UTC)
      • Izvinite, nisam zaista razumeo šta me je pitao. Hvala što ste mi pojasnili. Dakle, odgovor na vaše pitanje je: nemam nikakav problem. Čini mi se kao da vi imate neki problem sa pravilima koja važe na Commonsu. Wikimedia Commons, kao i drugi Wikimedia projekti imaju svoja pravila. Niko ovde nije nateran da učestvuje, vać se dobrovoljno učlanio. Samim tim je prihvatio pravila koja važe. Onaj ko ne želi da prihvati pravila, ne mora da se učlani. Jedno od najvažnijih pravila je da se na Commons mogu uploadovati samo fajlovi koji su u javnom domenu ili koji su objavljeni pod slobodnom licencom. Naravno da ne mislim da treba da se obriše cela Wikipedia. Ja sam lično napisao mnoge članke, i uploadovao mnoge fajlove. Da mi je jedina želja da, kako kažete, "uništavam projekte" sigurno se ne bih toliko trudio oko toga. Ali, smatram da treba da se obrišu svi fajlovi koji su uploadovani protivno pravilima Commonsa. Optužujete me da uništavam tuđi trud, ali ja uopšte ne mislim da je to što radim nešto loše. Brisanjem fajlova koji su zaštićeni autorskim pravima unapređuje se Wikimedia, i motivišu se članovi da poštuju pravila i da se više potrude da pronađu fajlove koji nisu zaštićeni. Što se tiče toga da li su moja objašnjenja lažna ili prava, mislim da ovde nije mesto da diskutujemo o tome. Administratori svakako nisu nepismeni ljudi, a ako mislite da sam ih ja slagao i da sam izmislio neke podatke, slobodno to napišite u diskusijama prilikom brisanja fajlova, umesto da me ovde optužujete. Vanja / Вања (talk) 16:28, 21 July 2013 (UTC)

Ne misliš da je uništavati tuđi rad loše, kakvu to poruku šalje drugima? Mi ovde svi poznajemo pravila Commonsa. A šta je fajlova koji su zaštićeni autorskim pravom Wikimedija Fondacije jer i to ne može da ide na Commons? --Kolega2357 (talk) 16:49, 21 July 2013 (UTC)

  • Ako neko radi protivno pravilima i narušava integritet ovog projekta, mislim da je sasvim ok uništavati njegov rad. Vanja / Вања (talk) 16:56, 21 July 2013 (UTC)
Ti si taj koji uništava projekat nekakvim kvazipravnim akrobacijama koje smišljaš kako bi opravdao brisanje fajlova koji su inače u potpunosti odgovarajući za Commons. A samo ti znaš zašto to radiš i šta time dobijaš. Nema tog fajla na Commonsu koji sa takvim destruktivnim žarom ne bi uspeo da izdejstvuješ da bude obrisan, samo je pitanje - čemu? Npr. ja sam toliko dugo radio na komunikaciji sa ambasadama Srbije svuda po svetu da nam obezbede fotografije ambasada Srbije koje bi mogli da koristimo ovde na commons. I šta je sad sa tim fotografijama? Sve su pobrisane i to bez ikakvog valjanog razloga već samo zbog tvog nagona ka destrukciji, zato što kako sam kažeš misliš da je ok uništavati tuđi rad. I ovde sad pričaš kako se trudiš da se obrišu fotografije zaštićene autorskim pravima. Čija autorska prava štitiš brisanjem npr. fotografije sa suđenja Draži Mihailoviću? Imaš li neki odgovor? Nemaš naravno, nikakva autorska prava nisu u pitanju nego čisto iživljavanje odnosno trolovanje (person who sows discord on the Internet by starting arguments or upsetting people, by posting inflammatory, extraneous, or off-topic messages with the deliberate intent of provoking readers into an emotional response or of otherwise disrupting normal discussion). Zbog ove tvoje jeftine zabave, da gledaš kako se mi nerviramo, pati ceo projekat a sati tuđeg truda se bacaju niz vodu. Neka ti je na čast.--Avala (talk) 17:16, 22 July 2013 (UTC)
Ova definicija trola koju ste naveli u potpunosti odgovara onome što vi meni radite. Vanja / Вања (talk) 18:04, 22 July 2013 (UTC)

Tuđi rad bezobzira kakav bio na Commonsu ne treba uništavati nego treba korisnika obavestiti o tome. Lako je tebi da se zakloniš iza administratora koji ne znaju srpski i ne znaju o čemu se radi, no oni nisu krivi nego si ti kriv. Kakvu poruku šalje to što druge korisnike provociraš ovde na Commonsu? Zbog tvoje pristranosti i subjektivnosti je obrisano više od 50 slika koje su javno vlasništvo. Očigledno ti shvataš Wikimedia Commons kao zabavu za isterivanje svoje pravde. Pozdrav i sve najbolje! --Kolega2357 (talk) 18:20, 22 July 2013 (UTC)

So what? It is a copyrights violation.

Then it will be deleted in five days. Adding a speedy delete template after an admin already tagged with no permission is counterproductive. no permission assumes good faith, makes the uploader aware of what the issue is, and gives him/her a chance to fix the issue. I'm trying to be positive here and when in doubt rather try to retain and educate a new contributor rather than just chase somebody away. --Dschwen (talk) 00:31, 27 November 2013 (UTC)

Povodom mišljenja ZIS-a

Čuo sam da si pitao Zavod za intelektualnu svojinu RS da li se slike sa vladinih sajtova mogu smatrati službenim materijalima i dobio negativan odgovor. Ne znam koliko si u ovoj tematici, ali bih želeo da ti napomenem da upravni organ, kao što je Zavod za intelektualnu svojinu, nije ovlašten da tumači zakon. Mišljenje upravnog organa nije pravno obavezujuće. Samo sud tumači zakon i samo mišljenje suda je obavezujuće. Jedan moj kolega je u sudskom sporu upravo sa pomenutim Zavodom, zbog njihovog, kako on veruje pogrešnog, tumačenja Zakona o autorskim i srodnim pravima.

Naime, član 6, paragraf 2 Zakona o autorskim i srodnim pravima Republike Srbije glasi: "Ne smatraju se autorskim delom: 2) službeni materijali državnih organa i organa koji obavljaju javnu funkciju." Dakle državni fotograf dok je na dužnosti ili službeni fotograf ustanove koja obavlja neku javnu funkciju. U tom pogledu Zakon je sasvim jasan. U smislu tumačenja Zakona, mišljenje ZIS-a je podjednako (i)relevantno kao i bilo čije drugo mišljenje. Hvala na pažnji. --Mladifilozof (talk) 00:06, 28 November 2013 (UTC)

Hvala na isrpnom mišljenju. Znam da Zavod nije nadležan da daje tumačenje zakona, to su i sami rekli u pismu koje su mi poslali ([1]). Ali, Zavod ima obavezu da na zahteve fizičkih ili pravnih lica daje mišljenje o primeni pojedinih odredbi Zakona. Ne bih baš rekao da je mišljenje nekoga ko ima zakonsku obavezu da daje mišljenje irelevantno. Vi tvrdite da se državni fotograf dok je na dužnosti može smatrati "organom koji obavlja javnu funkciju". Da li je to tako ja ne znam. U svakom slučaju, kao što ste i sami rekli, vaše mišljenje je irelevantno, jer niste citirali odluku suda koji je jedini nadležan da tumači zakon. Ali, i ako bismo uzeli da ste u pravu, šta time dobijamo? Ako bismo neku fotografiju sa zvaničnog web sajta npr. vlade ili skupštine hteli da proglasimo da je u javnom domenu, morali bismo da dokažemo da ju je načinio službeni fotograf dok je bio na dužnostia, a to je, čini mi se, nemoguće. Vanjagenije (talk) 21:02, 29 November 2013 (UTC)
Slažem se, naravno da slike se slike za vladinih sajtova ne mogu neselektivno preuzimati, ali s druge strane nije nemoguće utvrditi šta je službena publikacija, pa čak i da li je autor slike službeni (zaposleni) fotograf neke ustanove. Što se tiče mišljenja ZIS-a, paralela bi bila da pitaš načelnika policije da iznese svoje tumačenje Zakona o javnom redu i miru, koji je dužan da sprovodi. Svakako da se od njega očekuje da poznaje taj zakon, ali njegovo mišljenje te ne obavezuje. P.S. Ne moraš mi persirati osim ako ti nije gušt. --Mladifilozof (talk) 13:29, 2 December 2013 (UTC)

Autorska prava na području bivše Jugoslavije

Na srpskohrvatskoj Wikipediji smo pokrenuli stranicu sh:Wikipedia:Autorska prava na području bivše Jugoslavije kako bismo rešili pitanje autorskih prava prvenstveno fotografija, ali i ostalih dela nastalih u bivšoj Jugoslaviji. Utvrđivanje opsega javnog dobra će doneti prilične koristi Wikipediji i srodnim projektima, pre svega Commonsu i Izvorniku.

Pošto te zanima tematika autorskih prava rekoh da te obavestim. Pozdrav! --Mladifilozof (talk) 13:29, 2 December 2013 (UTC)

Максим_Олегович_Тимошенко.JPG

Good day!

My name is Dmitriy. Yesterday I have made english version of wikipedia page "Максим Олегович Тимошенко". Many thanks to for your active position and things,that you have done to make page better and clear. But, I am a little bit shocked about situation with photo Максим_Олегович_Тимошенко.JPG. This photo was given to me by owner special to be dowloaded to wikipedia page. After this, this photo was taken by other people,for example to be used at http://ludinaroku.com.ua/archive/person/903. I can not understand one thing - why this photo was deleted without any questions and tryings to find out who is the owner and who take this photo after. Please, help me to put this photo back, there is no copyright violation at all. I can ask author of photo or Mr. Tymoshenko to write letter if it is needed to prove my words.

Great thanks for your assistance. Timosh2011 (talk) 17:13, 17 December 2013 (UTC)

Hi! Wikimedia Commons have very strict rules about copyrights (see: Commons:Copyrights). Commons only accepts files that are either in the public domain or files that are copyrighted, but released under a free license by the copyrights holder. If you upload copyrighted photo (as You did), you have to prove that it was released under a free license by the author/copyrights holder. Commons users and administrators don't have obligation to "examine" the copyrights status of the file, but You, as the uploader, have obligation to prove that the file is released under a free license. Since you are not the author of the photo, you have to prove that the actual author released this photo under a free license, that is, that the author agrees that anyone may use this photo for any purpose, including commercial usage. If you have a letter (or e-mail) from the author of the photo, where he agrees to release the photo under free license, You can use this as an evidence and send it using Commons:OTRS (on that page, you also have an example of how the letter/e-mail should look like). But, remember: the author has to agree to release the photo under FREE LICENSE. This means that anybody can use the photo for any purpose, as only those files are accepted in Commons. If he gives you a permission only to use the photo in Wikipedia/WikimediaCommons, that is not enough! S
So, If you have a permission from the author of the photo, where he agrees to release it under a free license, you should e-mail this permission to the OTRS team. After that, you can remove the "no permission" tag from the photo page. You don't need to wait for the answer from the OTRS team. Than, You should tag the photo with the Template:OTRS pending. If you do not do that, the photo will probably be deleted. Vanjagenije (talk) 19:34, 17 December 2013 (UTC)

File:Beaumont-Hamel Newfoundland Memorial - caribou statue1.jpg

Commons-emblem-issue.svg File:Beaumont-Hamel Newfoundland Memorial - caribou statue1.jpg has been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether it should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry.

If you created this file, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with it, such as a copyright issue.
Please remember to respond to and – if appropriate – contradict the arguments supporting deletion. Arguments which focus on the nominator will not affect the result of the nomination. Thank you!


Afrikaans | العربية | 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)‎ | +/−

Labattblueboy (talk) 04:49, 16 January 2014 (UTC)

File:Beaumont-Hamel Newfoundland Memorial - caribou statue2.jpg

Commons-emblem-issue.svg File:Beaumont-Hamel Newfoundland Memorial - caribou statue2.jpg has been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether it should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry.

If you created this file, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with it, such as a copyright issue.
Please remember to respond to and – if appropriate – contradict the arguments supporting deletion. Arguments which focus on the nominator will not affect the result of the nomination. Thank you!


Afrikaans | العربية | 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)‎ | +/−

Labattblueboy (talk) 04:49, 16 January 2014 (UTC)

Picture of the Year 2013 R1 Announcement

Round 1 of Picture of the Year 2013 is open!

2012 Picture of the Year: A pair of European Bee-eaters in Ariège, France.

Dear Wikimedians,

Wikimedia Commons is happy to announce that the 2013 Picture of the Year competition is now open. This year will be the eighth 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 (2013) 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 most popular image in each category will continue to the final. In the final round, you may vote for just one image to become the Picture of the Year.

Round 1 will end on . Click here to learn more and vote »

Thanks,
the Wikimedia Commons Picture of the Year committee

You are receiving this message because you voted in the 2012 Picture of the Year contest.

Picture of the Year 2013 R2 Announcement

Round 2 of Picture of the Year 2013 is open!

2012 Picture of the Year: A pair of European Bee-eaters in Ariège, France.

Dear Wikimedians,

Wikimedia Commons is happy to announce that the second round of the 2013 Picture of the Year competition is now open. This year will be the eighth 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 (2013) 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 were 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.

There are two total rounds of voting. In the first round, you voted for as many images as you liked. The top 30 overall and the most popular image in each category have continued to the final. In the final round, you may vote for just one image to become the Picture of the Year.

Round 2 will end on . Click here to learn more and vote »

Thanks,
the Wikimedia Commons Picture of the Year committee

You are receiving this message because you voted in the 2013 Picture of the Year contest.

This Picture of the Year vote notification was delivered by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 19:22, 22 February 2014 (UTC)

Picture of the Year 2013 Results Announcement

Picture of the Year 2013 Results

The 2013 Picture of the Year. View all results »

Dear Vanjagenije,

The 2013 Picture of the Year competition has ended and we are pleased to announce the results: We shattered participation records this year — more people voted in Picture of the Year 2013 than ever before. In both rounds, 4070 different people voted for their favorite images. Additionally, there were more image candidates (featured pictures) in the contest than ever before (962 images total).

  • In the first round, 2852 people voted for all 962 files
  • In the second round, 2919 people voted for the 50 finalists (the top 30 overall and top 2 in each category)

We congratulate the winners of the contest and thank them for creating these beautiful images and sharing them as freely licensed content:

  1. 157 people voted for the winner, an image of a lightbulb with the tungsten filament smoking and burning.
  2. In second place, 155 people voted for an image of "Sviati Hory" (Holy Mountains) National Park in Donetsk Oblast, Ukraine.
  3. In third place, 131 people voted for an image of a swallow flying and drinking.

Click here to view the top images »

We also sincerely thank to all 4070 voters for participating and we hope you will return for next year's contest in early 2015. We invite you to continue to participate in the Commons community by sharing your work.

Thanks,
the Picture of the Year committee

You are receiving this message because you voted in the 2013 Picture of the Year contest.

Delivered by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:59, 26 March 2014 (UTC)


filmfann pictures about the Ventura Film Festival

These are my photos. I took them at a public place (hence they are public domain or my intellectual property) and I have written/legal permission from the festival and people in the photos to post them online, could you remove your nomination for speedy deletion to save a bunch of trouble?Filmfann (talk) 20:59, 22 May 2014 (UTC)filmfann

Please hands off my photos! These are my photos that are being used in other places too, I took these pictures and own the copyrights to them.

Example: filmfreeway.com is a 3rd party site not an offical site and is using them as well, you can also see them in the vcstar.com and other places.

Anyway please un-delete them. Filmfann (talk) 21:11, 22 May 2014 (UTC)filmfann

Hi! Unfortunately, you'll have to prove that those photos are your own work. They are currently published at a web site that is copyrighted. If those photos are your own work, why don't you upload them in full resolution with EXIF data. Those files you uploaded are obviously downloaded from here. If you are the author, why don't you upload original files? That would be the way to prove the authorship. Anyway, Wikimedia Commons is very strict in copyrights. The photos will be deleted if you are unable to prove that you are the author. I can't delete them, because I am not an administrator. I just proposed them for deletion, but administrator is going to review my proposition and your appeal and to decide on deletion. Vanjagenije (talk) 21:14, 22 May 2014 (UTC)


my photos are passing the "simple check list" here: https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Copyright_rules#Simple_checklist

could you please respond and remove the nomination for deletion? Filmfann (talk) 21:14, 22 May 2014 (UTC)filmfann

I responded, but you removed my comment ([2]). I hope you did not intend to do that. Vanjagenije (talk) 21:17, 22 May 2014 (UTC)