User talk:Yann

From Wikimedia Commons, the free media repository
Jump to: navigation, search

/archives 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19

God is busy, may I help you? / Dieu est occupé, puis-je vous aider?

You can leave me a message in English or French, at the bottom. Click here. Yann 22:13, 30 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Load images[edit]

I'm sorry but I haven't understand why the pictures are deleted ... I'll explain the problem: I almost downloaded the images from the official site and I have uploaded to Wikimedia Commons absolutely whitout stealth action ...Simply I would understand if I can't do this. So how can I do? Thank you very much and sorry disorder.

COM:AN[edit]

বাংলা | Deutsch | English | Español | Français | Italiano | Македонски | മലയാളം | Português | Русский | Svenska | +/−


float  Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion at Commons:Administrators noticeboard#User:Yann. This is in relation to an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you.

(File:שלונסקי תמונה 3.jpg)[edit]

Dear Yann,

thanks a lot for the message about (File:שלונסקי תמונה 3.jpg) on the page https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moshe_Lifshits. I found it on the hebrew wikipedia:

"Ha Ya 1938" מאת יעל ויילר ישראל - צילמתי. דרך ויקיפדיה - https://he.wikipedia.org/wiki/%D7%A7%D7%95%D7%91%D7%A5:Ha_Ya_1938.jpg#mediaviewer/%D7%A7%D7%95%D7%91%D7%A5:Ha_Ya_1938.jpg

Most probably I cited it wrong. Do you know how I could use it? Or isn't it possible to use pictures from the hebrew wikipedia on the german version?

Best,

Sasso Hüßelmann

@Sasso Hüßelmann: Hi,
On the Hebrew WP, this file has a license, but I don't know Hebrew, so I can't say if it is OK for Commons. As you didn't add a license when uploading it to Commons, it was deleted. May be ask one of the admins who knows Hebrew. @Hanay: or @Matanya:? Regards, Yann (talk) 17:07, 1 August 2014 (UTC)
Uploaded as File:Ha Ya 1938.jpg. matanya talk 19:47, 2 August 2014 (UTC)

Débloquez mon compte[edit]

Bonsoir
Veuillez débloquer mon compte pour pouvoir continuer mes publication. Hadrajsaid 41.140.101.50 21:43, 2 August 2014 (UTC)

File:Alien in London Film Museum.jpg[edit]

Hi, the file is under UK freedom of panorama. It is the work of artistic craftsmanship which are on permanent public display in London Film Museum. See -> Commons:Freedom_of_panorama#United_Kingdom. Gniewko, syn rybaka (talk) 21:13, 3 August 2014 (UTC)

✓ Done Yann (talk) 05:07, 4 August 2014 (UTC)
OK, Thanks. Be more carefull next time, please. UK FOP is more broader then FOPs in others countries. Regards Gniewko, syn rybaka (talk) 14:53, 5 August 2014 (UTC)

Deletion "keep" rationale makes no sense to me[edit]

Hi, please can you review your closes at Commons:Deletion_requests/File:Vohra_family.JPG and Commons:Deletion_requests/File:Bhagwati_Charan_Vohra.jpg.

{{PD-India}} says " Anonymous works, photographs, cinematographic works, sound recordings, government works, and works of corporate authorship or of international organizations enter the public domain 60 years after the date on which they were first published" (my emphasis). What am I missing? These things have been routinely deleted when nominated in the past. Thanks. - Sitush (talk) 02:23, 5 August 2014 (UTC)

@Sitush: Please read again. It also says "Photographs created before 1958 are in the public domain 50 years after creation." This is the same as old English law, and probably all English colonies. Regards, Yann (talk) 05:10, 5 August 2014 (UTC)
I think that is ambiguous. And you are the first person who has treated the ambiguity in the "keep" sense. Is there any way that we can get this clarified, bearing in mind that if the copyright law pre-dates 2008 then the ambiguity is even greater? - Sitush (talk) 05:22, 5 August 2014 (UTC)
@Sitush: No, this is clear. FYI, I have a confirmation from a professional lawyer. Regards, Yann (talk) 05:25, 5 August 2014 (UTC)
I'm sorry but I really do not see the clarity. Something enters PD 60 years after first publication but 50 years after creation? If nothing else, that seems back to front because it can't be published before it is created. The only way that the ambiguity might be resolved is if the word "Anonymous" is intended to apply to all of the objects in the sentence but that, too, is ambiguous.
The law changed in 1957, but it is not retroactive. The old law still applies for images created before that date. So images created before 1957 are in the public domain even if unpublished, but images created after 1957 come into the public domain only 60 years after publication. Regards, Yann (talk) 05:43, 5 August 2014 (UTC)
Ah, the "Photographs created before 1958 are in the public domain 50 years after creation, as per the Copyright Act 1911." bit! That sentence is clear, even if the preceding stuff isn't ;) Thanks. - Sitush (talk) 05:54, 5 August 2014 (UTC)
While I'm here, have you any idea what licenses I should use if I upload this from the National Portrait Gallery? I'm aware of {{SourceNPGLondon}}, which I would use for source, and that there is a category for George Charles Beresford but an awful lot of the images in that category don't have a US license and it looks like the UK licenses have changed fairly recently. Thanks, and sorry for mithering you! - Sitush (talk) 05:33, 5 August 2014 (UTC)
No problem. I am happy to help. ;o) {{PD-old-70-1923}} applies. The photographer (George Charles Beresford) died in 1938. Regards, Yann (talk) 05:43, 5 August 2014 (UTC)
... and here we go again :( I've often wondered about the US license for UK works and {{PD-old-70-1923}} is an example of the issue. We don't know if the image was ever published or copyrighted in the US, let alone before 1923. This is a very common situation in my (limited) experience here. In this specific case, the image was not available online last year - there was just a placeholder for it - and it is taken directly from a glass negative. 1923 isn't an issue but do we just assume that such things were published/copyrighted in the US when originating from the UK or indeed anywhere outside the US? I think that is what I've mostly been doing with my uploads. - Sitush (talk) 05:54, 5 August 2014 (UTC)
Yes, I think we most assume that it was published when created. The publication criteria was very low at that time. Even selling a few copies is enough to constitute publication. And unpublished works are in the public domain 70 years after the death of the author anyway. See Commons:Hirtle chart. There was a long debate about a picture of Einstein with a similar situation. It appears it could be in the public domain in the USA for several unreleated reasons, and it was kept. Regards, Yann (talk) 06:05, 5 August 2014 (UTC)
Good stuff, thanks. I've just uploaded the image linked above and added the deathyear parameter to the license. - Sitush (talk) 06:20, 5 August 2014 (UTC)

File:Triumph Dolomite Saloon 1938 R (8308099273).jpg[edit]

Hi Yann, I'm sorry to be a nuisance about this. You deleted the above file. It has been suggested I should ask you, as an admin, if you are able to see if the image was at an earlier stage approved by FlickreviewR and the subsequent adventures (discussed here and here) have just obscured that fact. Can you see if that is so (suggested by WW2censor) and then, if it is so, would you please re-instate the image and its approval. Please tell me if I can find info to help you or assist in any other way. Thanks and regards, Eddaido (talk) 12:00, 5 August 2014 (UTC)

@Eddaido: Hi,
The source ([1]) says "(c) All rights reserved", so we need a permission. Or you could ask the owner to change the license on Flickr. Regards, Yann (talk) 12:37, 5 August 2014 (UTC)
Thanks, that's true. I can understand its a lot of correspondence for you to wade through and comprehend. You realise that twice its been checked and found to be OK? Then something strange has happened to revert FlickreviewR's decision.
I cannot ask the owner of the copyright to change it Again because it is a confusion entirely at the Commons end and his last email to me said that change was the last time he would do it. To tell the truth I won't miss that image but I would miss the derivative that depends on it. Still, if we have a deadlock I guess it has to go. Dear oh dear, Eddaido (talk) 13:07, 5 August 2014 (UTC)
Sorry, but it was never positively reviewed. I think if the owner doesn't want to give a free license, we can't do much. Beside, it is easily replaceable. Regards, Yann (talk) 13:27, 5 August 2014 (UTC)
I guess you mean there is now no record (other than that Flickr2Commons uploaded it) of it being positively reviewed, establishing that was why I wrote to you.
The licence muddle was by Commons. The owner said the second time of flipping the licence would be his last. If you think the image is easily replaceable please tell me how I do that. Regards, Eddaido (talk) 22:42, 5 August 2014 (UTC)

Best image uploaded? Hi again Yann. Somewhere in my distressed and puzzled reading of the last few days I found a note that someone or something goes back to Flickr to see if the best possible image has been uploaded. Is this what is going wrong? There is a delay between confirmation that the licence was correct and - perhaps some days later - someone or something going back to Flickr and finding the licence now re-set to All rights reserved? Then reverting the previous approval in Commons!

If this is the cause of my problem why can I not be told of it? Eddaido (talk) 06:15, 6 August 2014 (UTC)

Commons:Deletion requests/File:Royal de Luxe Chile.JPG[edit]

Bonjour Yann.

Je viens de voir cette DR et je m'en étonne. Il y a déjà quelques temps, j'avais demandé sur le Bistrot si la suppression de la quasi-totalité des fichiers de la Category:Royal de Luxe serait pertinente et tu m'a répondu "Donc les photos ne peuvent être publiées sur Commons, a moins que l’élément soit de minimis par rapport à l'ensemble de la photo". Je suis donc étonné par le motif (DW of a work of art. Not permanently installed.) de ta DR sur cette seule image et pas les 5 autres de la catégorie ou 95% de la catégorie mère. C'est compliqué, ça me dépasse...

Si tu as une explication pas trop compliquée à comprendre, je suis preneur Smile. Merci. --Llann .\m/ (Lie 2 me ...) 20:15, 5 August 2014 (UTC)

Llann Wé²: Bonjour,
Je suis tombé sur cette image par hasard, je n'ai pas vérifié les autres dans la même catégorie. Ici c'est limite, mais la poupée géante est quand l'élément principal de l'image. Cette image est certainement OK par contre. Cordialement, Yann (talk) 06:57, 6 August 2014 (UTC)
Merci pour ta réponse. En te voyant évoquer le de minimis, je me suis douté que cette image peut effectivement rester, contrairement aux autres de la catégorie. Y a-t-il des pays où ça passe ? C'est surtout ça que j'aimerais savoir, si ça me prend de vouloir faire un peu de ménage...
Llann Wé²: Je ne pense pas qu'il y ait une grosse différence d'interprétation entre les pays à ce sujet. Cordialement, Yann (talk) 14:12, 6 August 2014 (UTC)
Je verrai bien la tournure de cette DR et aviserai mais, en ce moment, je n'ai pas le temps. Merci encore. --Llann .\m/ (Lie 2 me ...) 01:47, 7 August 2014 (UTC)

File: Kosmos Grass.jpg[edit]

Hello Yann,

you deleted our file. I need to upload it again. I already got the permission from the author. He sent it to permissions-commons-de@wikimedia.org on the 4.August 2014. Wikipedia makes it honestly super hard to upload our own pictures. I just have to do my job, but it is very confusing. Mybe you can help me? How can I upload the file again??????

Greetings Oskar Matzerath — Preceding unsigned comment added by Oskar Matzerath (talk • contribs)

@Oskar Matzerath: Hi,
Please do not reupload it. It will be undeleted when the permission is processed. We are all volunteers, and overbooked, so it can take some time. May be you could contact one of the OTRS volunteers speaking German? Regards, Yann (talk) 07:51, 6 August 2014 (UTC)


HI,

honestly why you make this so hard? I posted the permissions on the upload site. Where is the problem?? I cannot understand the difficulties! There is nothing wrong with my files. Why I cannot just post them, so my boss is satisfied? What do I have to wait for? With all the linking it is very confusing, writing the right things in the file description. I'm afraid, that I cannot do it right at all ever! There are no german members by the way. But thanks for the qick reply!

Sincerly Oskar Matzerath (talk)

Renaming[edit]

So, you don’t like my filenames? (No, I am not joking. This is serious.) -- Tuválkin 18:35, 6 August 2014 (UTC)

@Tuválkin: It is much more meaningful like this, and actually this is actually the description at the source. Regards, Yann (talk) 18:48, 6 August 2014 (UTC)
Although it is indeed the original title (which is, by the way, agrammatical and misspelled Maltese), along with «no description yet» — it however is not more meaningful, not in the way a filename is supposed to be: It actually could be the filename of any of the photos in the same topic category, while filenames should be, as a paramout trait, unique. As an admin, you should know this.
As an admin, you should know that contributors such as me, who mostly upload non-own works, put a lot of effort in tedious tasks, making sure all information is accurately copied from the sources, and later checked again for categorization, etc. Almost the only venue for some creativity is the filename — that’s where I chose to put some whim, when I can.
As an admin, you should know that there are millions of filenames in Commons that are equally not “meaningful” but, instead of being the result of individual creativity, they are just serial numbers or UUIDs blindly copied from the original source, stripped of any significance — do you routinely “correct” those, too? As an admin, you are responsible for either mobilize or discourage regular users like me. It is your choice.
-- Tuválkin 19:15, 6 August 2014 (UTC)
@Tuválkin: Hi,
Sorry, if you are not happy with my rename(s), but I think I am right. The purpose of the name is to describe accurately the document. And yes, I routinely rename files when they are misnamed. Regards, Yann (talk) 19:42, 6 August 2014 (UTC)
Thanks for letting me know where you stand on that matter. Want me to suggest some actually misnamed files or you will keep focusing on mine? -- Tuválkin 19:47, 6 August 2014 (UTC)
@Tuválkin: I don't focus on "your" files. I rename them when I come accross them, this time when reviewing files you uploaded from Fotopedia. Actually, if you are not happy, I may stop reviewing these files. There are enough work here to keep me busy. Regards, Yann (talk) 19:57, 6 August 2014 (UTC)
You cannot be serious: I’m typing into Excel information from the source site, doing some basic fact-checking, selecting a filename (much simpler now, if drier, thanks to you, as I leave unchanged stuff like 01-Stade Olympique (6).jpg instead of, say Stade Olympique Montréal (plafond) 2009.jpg), then every 30-40 images pasting the generated wiki-code into Vicuña for upload. That’s hard work and yet it will allow only a minuscule bit of what’s usable in Fotopedia to be added to Commons. Meanwhile you are just making sure I don’t mess up about licenses, using your admin powers. And now you’re “threatening” me you wont review the licensing of these uploads (in time before Fotopedia shuts down, the 10th) because I dared to question your renaming pinciples?! That’s not what I expected from you (although it is “fastly” dropping to the level of hamfisted incivility many admins display)… -- Tuválkin 20:13, 6 August 2014 (UTC)

2gelados2rapazes.jpg → Thai boys eating icecream[edit]

I cannot let this pass unchecked. You renamed a file uploaded by someone else against the relevant policy: You deemed English better suited than Portuguese to label a file, you removed descriptional information (the number of items), you introduced conjectural information (are they both really eating, or merely holding?), and you introduced a problematic statement (are they really Thai?, and/or: do Thai boys need a special ethnic epithet, unlike “regular” boys?). My file name was perfectly good but you had to go against policy to make it «a bit better». I hope you have a better answer this time than to threaten to stop reviewing the licenses. -- Tuválkin 00:29, 7 August 2014 (UTC)

@Tuválkin: Are you joking? Yann (talk) 06:31, 7 August 2014 (UTC)
No. -- Tuválkin 20:49, 7 August 2014 (UTC)
Sorry Tuválkin, but you have a poor understanding of what is a good or bad name. I didn't write that out of my hat, I just copied the description at the source (Thai) and described what the image is sbout. We are not here to be creative about file names. You need separating words if you want a search engine to use them. I don't understand why you want to write it in Portuguese, which is completely irrelevant in this context. The author is not from a Portuguese speaking country, and Portuguese is not spoken in Thailand, therefore a Portuguese name is not appropriate for this file. Regards, Yann (talk) 06:49, 8 August 2014 (UTC)
The uploader choses a filename and any renaming of it should follow this strict policy: If you don’t like my filenames but there’s no grounds for renaming based on that policy, back off. That’s what I do for filenames I don’t like. Period.
Since you ask, I can say that I chose Portuguese for this filename (and other languages for other filenames) as a way to create “unusual” / “unexpected” filenames that would less likely be already existing in Commons. That’s one of the ways I try to achieve unique, compact, meaningful filenames with (instead of adding or keeping arbitrary numerals). Yet you talk ex cathedra about my putative «poor understanding» of what a filaname is while revealing your own («search engine to use», really?).
Also problematic is that you confirm and affirm that English is better (more «appropriate») than Portuguese for generic filenames (for what’s worth, there were Portuguese merchants operating in Thailand 200 years before the first English-speaking sailor arrived there, so you’re wrong about this one, even if your basic argument was right). This is not so, per policy: any language is suitable for any filename. (E.g., few months back I had the pleasure of categorizing a set of excellent photos of Lisbon monuments and sights, all filenamed in Russian — I saw no reason to rename them into Portuguese or English, obviously.)
These two specific cases (adding spaces and translation to another language) are explicitly covered in our renaming policy as examples of what should not be done. You’re going against policy and there’s no other way about it.
Your incredibly callous reaction to my complaint (which you seem to have followed up), that you would stop confirming the licenses of these uploads from Fotopedia on a critical deadline, is also tottally unacceptable for an admin. I am truely speechless. -- Tuválkin 15:39, 8 August 2014 (UTC)
@Tuválkin: Sorry to disagree, but using Portuguese for Thai related pictures, or Russian for images of Portugal, just because you fancy it, is not appropriate, and I will rename such files, whether you like it or not. Regards, Yann (talk) 16:23, 8 August 2014 (UTC)
As you well know, that goes grossly against policy, both concerning file moving/renaming and concerning giving to English more proeminence than the strictly necessary minimum for communication. Any such rename you undertake will be undone on the spot and that action of yours against established policy will be dully reported. -- Tuválkin 23:27, 8 August 2014 (UTC)
@Tuválkin: Please do not use the policy to confuse different issues. These are not your files. You are allowed to copy them to Commons because of the license. If you go to Thailand, you take pictures, and you upload them to Commons, you can choose how you name them (within some reasonable bondary regarding the meaning). It is both a matter of politeness and respect for the author, and accuracy for people looking for such files to give proper names. Just copy the name and/or the description from the source, please do not try to be creative. And please note that a name like "2ThaiBoysEatingIcecream" is seen by search engines as just one meaningless words, not 4 words with a number. Regards, Yann (talk) 05:59, 9 August 2014 (UTC)

File:Bella Ratchinskaia.jpg[edit]

Yann, a message for you at File:Bella Ratchinskaia.jpg. --Jarekt (talk) 13:50, 7 August 2014 (UTC)

Thanks, I answered on the user talk page. Regards, Yann (talk) 13:59, 7 August 2014 (UTC)

User Kenny Boyle[edit]

Yann, I'm leaving this hear because you commented on user_talk:Kenny Boyle's talk page, warning them about copyright violations. The backstory is that this is a sock of a reasonably prolific sockmaster on the English wikipedia, TekkenJinKazama. They were indeffed there earlier this year for copyright violations. As it turned out, they had an earlier account Malqrrishh (talk · contribs) that had multiple blocks on en in 2010 for copyright violations and has been indeffed here for socking (and lots of copyright vio warnings on their talk page). After finding this latest sock had uploaded several files on commons, mostly movie posters and promo shots, I did some checking on some of their other accounts. I found several other files that are almost certainly copyright violations where Jin simply claims the work as their own. An example is File:Danny Chan Kwok Kwan.jpg, uploaded by Pappu Guptah (talk · contribs) who has been blocked on en as a Jin sock. Bluntly, there's no way that's not been done by a professional. I'm going to start going through all of Jin's accounts that I know of, looking for files they've uploaded here that might be problematic. What's the best way for me to handle any that I find? Thanks, and sorry for the trouble getting exported over here. Ravensfire (talk) 18:19, 7 August 2014 (UTC)

Macaca nigra selfie's[edit]

What should we do with the author/copyright holder metadata on these pictures? I'm just worried in case they're a media timebomb. George8211 (talk) 19:15, 7 August 2014 (UTC)

@George8211: What are you worrying exactly about? US law is very clear about this case. There isn't anything that Commons cannot handle about this issue. You should worry about real issues, not this buzz from a guy who looks for more money. Regards, Yann (talk) 19:26, 7 August 2014 (UTC)

Thanks--wise words. George8211 (talk) 19:28, 7 August 2014 (UTC)

Dear Yann, having read some of the media reports concerning this image, I was intrigued and read through the deletion debates. I was shocked to read some of your own comments, which seem to show scant regard for other people's opinions, calling them 'apprentice laywers' and 'padawan-laywers', and as you just did above in your reply to George8211, actually libel David Slater as 'a guy who looks for more money.' I am suspicious of your true motives in this particular case, and of your ability to fairly adjudicate this deletion discussion, if you are going to be so dismissive of other contributors' views, and of one of the interested parties in the dispute who is not allowed to represent themselves here on Wikipedia. I am making an Appeal request (as per https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:DEL), asking you to reconsider your decision on the grounds I have set out, which I feel require you to recuse yourself from the discussion and allow other administrators to chair --Ethdhelwen (talk) 20:03, 7 August 2014 (UTC)


Hi Yann. I'm afraid I cannot see a reason to fully protect File talk:One-of-the-photos-taken-b-013.jpg. The image page itself, which has seen far more problematic edits in the last hours, is only semi-protected, so I'd say that should suffice for the talk page too, although even that seems a bit extreme for exactly one IP comment you've removed from that talk page. Could you perhaps reconsider your decision? darkweasel94 20:09, 7 August 2014 (UTC)

Hi Yann. Please consider unprotecting the page File_talk:Macaca_nigra_self-portrait_(rotated_and_cropped).jpg also. This is a talk page and the reason you give is "unproductive rant", but I can see more rational discussion than rant, and very interesting discussion too. Now it is impossible to respond to points made. Meerta (talk) 22:24, 7 August 2014 (UTC)
Sorry guys, but this is all a monkey business. ;o) We have enough of silly comments on the DR and the talk pages by people who have no understanding of copyright law. Commons is not a forum for such people. You should worry about real issues, not about this buzz by a greedy photographer, who called us Nazi and Communists (at the same time, sic). There is only one reason he makes such a fuss about Commons hosting these images: money! money! money! Regards, Yann (talk) 06:39, 8 August 2014 (UTC)
It may seem like a small issue but it's Wikipedia, a powerful organisation, which surely wants to keep in line with the law and present a reputable image deciding off its own bat what's in copyright or not. This sets a bad precedent and could discourage photographers from getting images in unusual ways. I don't think what he called whoever should come into it. I don't think a lot of people contributing to the discussion understand the ramifications of copyright law in every relevant country. I posted a link on the page about that. I'll take this to the next stage in the process. People should be allowed to discuss freely. Meerta (talk) 09:37, 8 August 2014 (UTC)

File:Romain Rolland au balcon, Meurisse, 1914.jpg[edit]

Commons-emblem-issue.svg File:Romain Rolland au balcon, Meurisse, 1914.jpg has been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether it should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry.

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


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

Christoph Braun (talk) 15:45, 9 August 2014 (UTC)

Deletion of File:Bhartiben Shiyal.jpg[edit]

Hi yann, the file you have deleted is the pic of indian politician. The photograph itself was taken from the website of the concerned politician. Its public pic. There is no copyright involved. If u want I can add more info in file. please again host the file. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rajeevsingh007 (talk • contribs)

@Rajeevsingh007: Hi,
All documents have a copyright by default. Therefore you are not allowed to upload them here unless you have a permission from the photographer. If you have a permission, see the procedure at CO:OTRS for sending it. Regards, Yann (talk) 18:31, 9 August 2014 (UTC)
@Yann:

CO:OTRS this page is in french. give the link to english page. Rajeevsingh007 (talk) 18:55, 9 August 2014 (UTC)

@Rajeevsingh007: Sorry, one letter missing. ;o) Here COM:OTRS. Regards, Yann (talk) 19:05, 9 August 2014 (UTC)

Away for 2 weeks[edit]

Hi,

I am away for 2 weeks. Do not expect an answer before August 26th. In case or urgency, please contact other admins at COM:AN. Regards, Yann (talk) 11:07, 10 August 2014 (UTC)

Bonjour,

Je suis absent pour deux semaines. N'attendez pas de réponse avant le 26 août. En cas d'urgence, merci de contact le bureau des admins ou le Bistro. Cordialement, Yann (talk) 11:09, 10 August 2014 (UTC)

Copyright pictures[edit]

Dear Yann,

Thank you for your message about my copyright violation. I had no idea and I'm very sorry. Is there any way to take the pictures back or do something about it? I've always added the correct source and author to the information of the uploaded files.

Please let me know if there is anything I can do.

Regards,

Monicaua, 10 August 2014 19:56

Valued Image Promotion[edit]

Cécile Sorel, par Reutlinger.jpg
Your nomination has been reviewed and promoted
Congratulations! The image you nominated was reviewed and has now been promoted as a valued image. It is considered to be the most valued image on Commons within the scope:
Cécile Sorel.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates‎.
Geneviève Lantelme, Les Modes, 1905-06.jpg
Your nomination has been reviewed and promoted
Congratulations! The image you nominated was reviewed and has now been promoted as a valued image. It is considered to be the most valued image on Commons within the scope:
Geneviève Lantelme.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates‎.

Valued Image Promotion[edit]

Eva Nansen 1897.jpg
Your nomination has been reviewed and promoted
Congratulations! The image you nominated was reviewed and has now been promoted as a valued image. It is considered to be the most valued image on Commons within the scope:
Eva Nansen.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates‎.
Fridtjof Nansen LOC 03377u-3.jpg
Your nomination has been reviewed and promoted
Congratulations! The image you nominated was reviewed and has now been promoted as a valued image. It is considered to be the most valued image on Commons within the scope:
Fridtjof Nansen, 1890.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates‎.

/* Copyright violations */[edit]

Hello Yann, Thank you for your messages about my copyright violations of the uploaded pictures. Sorry did not respond sooner since I just noticed the messages. Honestly I really didn't think it would be a problem for me to upload these pictures to Wikimedia Commons since these pictures were taken by friends of our group and it is solely for supporting the same subject we created in Wikipedia. But I appreciate your friendly reminder and won't do anything until I get your response. Now my concern is if I can be a representative to upload some other pictures taken by my friends with their permission. What kind of proof do you need from me to allow my uploaded pictures stay here safe and sound? Please keep me updated at your convenience. Thanks!

Warm regards,

2004novel 08/15/2014

Suppression de Bernard WERBER par Michel Restany.jpg[edit]

Bonsoir Yann, Je ne comprends pas la suppression de la photo représentant Bernard Werber. Il me semble qu’à l’époque de son versement, une autorisation en bonne et due forme avait été envoyée par le photographe Michel Restany à l'équipe OTRS.  : Visiblement, il y a un souci…. Aurais-tu la gentillesse de voir de quoi il en retourne et corriger le tir le cas échéant ?

Merci et cordialement, --Claude Truong-Ngoc (talk) 21:12, 16 August 2014 (UTC)

File:Indian Independence Day at the Red Fort.jpg[edit]

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

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


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

Harshanh (talk) 02:01, 17 August 2014 (UTC)

A cheeseburger for you![edit]

Cheeseburger.png I think you're not on a diet, so I thought I'd share with you this burger Wilfredo R. Rodríguez H. (talk) 13:15, 20 August 2014 (UTC)