User talk:Ytoyoda

From Wikimedia Commons, the free media repository
Jump to: navigation, search
Welcome to Wikimedia Commons, Ytoyoda!
Afrikaans | Alemannisch | العربية | Asturianu | Azərbaycanca | Беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ | Български | বাংলা | Català | Čeština | Dansk | Deutsch | Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ | Zazaki | Ελληνικά | English | Esperanto | Español | Euskara | Estremeñu | فارسی | Suomi | Français | Frysk | Galego | עברית | हिन्दी | Hrvatski | Magyar | Հայերեն | Interlingua | Bahasa Indonesia | Italiano | 日本語 | ქართული | 한국어 | Latina | Lietuvių | Македонски | മലയാളം | मराठी | Bahasa Melayu | Plattdüütsch | नेपाली | Nederlands | Norsk bokmål | Occitan | Polski | Português | Português do Brasil | Română | Русский | Scots | Slovenčina | Slovenščina | Shqip | Српски / srpski | Svenska | Kiswahili | தமிழ் | ไทย | Türkçe | Українська | Vèneto | Tiếng Việt | 中文 | 中文(简体)‎ | 中文(繁體)‎ | 中文(台灣)‎ | +/−

Contents

My photographs are not to be touched[edit]

I know you are a liar, saying my images are copyvios. These pictures are my stuff that I took in Germany in 2006. It is true that I took those shots of Image:Pele Brazil.jpg when he was in a conference speech. I got the permission to enter and shot this photo.

This image, Image:FranzBeckenbauer.jpg was taken by me after the match between Germany and Portugal. I came to the field and took his shot.

And this one Image:Zidane.jpg, was taken be me watching the match between France and Italy moments before he is sent off after headbutting Marco Materazzi.

Do you understand, Ytoyoda that those are my pictures. 13:33, 14 February 2007 (UTC), Thank You the preceding unsigned comment is by Zillaman (talk • contribs)

Tag[edit]

Why did you tag this Image:Clint Dempsey USA training.jpg for deletion? It has a better resolution than the other. Consider switching the tag. RlevseTalk 11:10, 9 January 2008 (UTC)

Sobre mis imagenes[edit]

¿No tenias otra cosa que hacer que etiquetarme las imagenes?Las imagenes son 100% legales quedate tranquilo que no va nadie preso. Asi que quitale las etiquetas o se las quito yo. Y basta de molestar.

SI AL FAIR USE.--Matyas 23:58, 11 January 2008 (UTC)

Catedraldecameros.jpg and Villanueva1.jpg[edit]

Can't you see the permission here??? Why don't you take a view of both discussions pages here and here?--Pacoperez6 10:33, 19 March 2008 (UTC)

Image:Briancook.jpg[edit]

Image:Briancook.jpg is not updated by me, neither Paugasol.jpg, I don´t understand your advise in my discussion. --Pacoperez6 12:31, 5 June 2008 (UTC)

Your userpage[edit]

Protected it for a while - Zillaman doesn't seem to like you! Gimme a yell if you need extension or anything (or if you find more socks). Cheers! —Giggy 07:55, 3 July 2008 (UTC)

Image Tagging Image:Zbwe2005.jpg[edit]

Thanks for being vigilant, but this was a bot move.

I suggest you take it up with the original uploader on English Wikipedia, otherwise it's a speedy.

Sfan00 IMG (talk) 13:00, 13 August 2008 (UTC)

Hmm, Well it's a speedy then :) Sfan00 IMG (talk) 09:44, 14 August 2008 (UTC)
Deleted Sfan00 IMG (talk) 09:53, 14 August 2008 (UTC)

User Talk:YHYH11#Please upload best quality available[edit]

And also alive to Image talk:Ziv.jpg. Thanks, YHYH11 (talk) 07:27, 11 November 2008 (UTC)

Tip: Categorizing images[edit]

Afrikaans | العربية | беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ | català | čeština | dansk | Deutsch | Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ | Ελληνικά | English | Esperanto | español | فارسی | suomi | français | galego | עברית | magyar | íslenska | italiano | 日本語 | ქართული | 한국어 | македонски | മലയാളം | Plattdüütsch | Nederlands | norsk bokmål | polski | português | português do Brasil | română | русский | slovenčina | slovenščina | српски / srpski | svenska | українська | Tiếng Việt | 中文 | 中文(简体)‎ | 中文(繁體)‎ | +/−


Hello, Ytoyoda!

Tip: Add categories to your images

Thanks a lot for contributing to the Wikimedia Commons! Here's a tip to make your uploads more useful: Why not add some categories to describe them? This will help more people to find and use them.

Here's how:

1) If you're using the UploadWizard, you can add categories to each file when you describe it. Just click "more options" for the file and add the categories which make sense:

Uploadwizard-categories.png

2) You can also pick the file from your list of uploads, edit the file description page, and manually add the category code at the end of the page.

[[Category:Category name]]

For example, if you are uploading a diagram showing the orbits of comets, you add the following code:

[[Category:Astronomical diagrams]]
[[Category:Comets]]

This will make the diagram show up in the categories "Astronomical diagrams" and "Comets".

When picking categories, try to choose a specific category ("Astronomical diagrams") over a generic one ("Illustrations"). Pro-tip: The CommonSense tool can help you find the best category for your image.

Thanks again for your uploads! More information about categorization can be found in Commons:Categories, and don't hesitate to leave a note on the help desk.

BotMultichillT (talk) 06:17, 15 December 2008 (UTC)

Copyright violation[edit]

Hello, I had to delete File:Neckfacebegins.jpg which you had uploaded from Flickr. This was a photo of a poster and it is then considered a derivative work. Only permanently installed works are covered by the so-called freedom of panorama (and only in some countries anyway). If you have any further questions, please contact me. Cheers, Patrícia msg 20:53, 16 January 2009 (UTC)

File:Singsaas 08.JPG[edit]

Thanks for noticing this image, as I had a part in convincing the Church of Norway to license their press images as cc it was rather embarrasing for me that we had one wrongly licensed as GFDL for so long. Just out of curiousity: how come you came across this particular file? Regards, Finn Rindahl (talk) 14:31, 23 February 2009 (UTC)


Category:Xavier Muskateers basketball[edit]

Category discussion notification Category:Xavier Muskateers basketball has been listed at Commons:Categories for discussion so that the community can discuss ways in which it should be changed. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry.

If you created this category, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for discussion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with it. If the category is up for deletion because it has been superseded, consider the notion that although the category may be deleted, your hard work (which we all greatly appreciate) lives on in the new category.
In all cases, please do not take the category discussion personally. It is never intended as such. Thank you!

беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ | Deutsch | English | español | français | עברית | magyar | italiano | 日本語 | македонски | português | русский | +/−

--Fuzzy510 (talk) 18:40, 6 April 2009 (UTC)

TUSC token 3d2892273a4206f719ed72010b03bd4e[edit]

I am now proud owner of a TUSC account!

TUSC token 1bd554ef4fbb2edd829a8f1400dbd472[edit]

I am now proud owner of a TUSC account!

CRoatian football federation[edit]

Well, the license mentioned in the reply allows usage on wikipedia-due the fact that this is non-commercial. It mentions no commercial usage.

What license then it would be??--Anto (talk) 15:09, 16 May 2009 (UTC)



According to administrators on Croatian wikipedia these photos may be uploaded und this licence: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/ http://hr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Datoteka:10_Kovac_N.JPG

Or I might be wrong?

I think I have seen here on commonse licenses like "allowed to use with mentioning the source-only for this purpose" --Anto (talk) 16:00, 18 May 2009 (UTC)

Well, If the copyright holder would like to restrict the usage of his files-that is his right.

However, uploading on commons would be OK in order to avoid some files multiple times on different wikipedias. (more than 100 languages).-commons is first of all "warehouse " of files for wikimedia projects.

Wikimedia projects are volunteer and non-profit. Since these photos are given for free first of all for wikimedia foundation projects-other usages are not specified. I thinks there should be space for a similar files. --Anto (talk) 15:33, 19 May 2009 (UTC)

Nwtxqt[edit]

I'm opening a deletion request for the rest of his images since I can't find their sources via tineye and they aren't watermarked. However, they're of widely varying sizes and none have camera data in the metadata, so I'm assuming they're all copyvios as well. Unless you're already opening one, of course - just wanted to avoid another editconflict ;) Cheers -- Editor at Largetalk 06:36, 20 May 2009 (UTC)

The more sleuthing you can do the better; if we have lots of examples of his theft there's more of a chance the rest of his contribs will be deleted. If you happen to find more, tag them as copyvios with a source link like you were, and add a copyvionote to his talk page; I'm watching it so I'll find and delete them, and add them to the DR list. -- Editor at Largetalk 07:20, 20 May 2009 (UTC)
I forgot to give you the link to the DR: it's here. Thanks for the sleuthing! -- Editor at Largetalk 05:01, 21 May 2009 (UTC)

Croatian governement website[edit]

http://vlada.hr/

on the bottom wtites:

Sadržaji s ovih stranica se mogu prenositi bez posebne dozvole uz navođenje izvora.

"contents from these pages can be transferred without speacial permission with mandatory source mentioning.


Would thatmatch to this licence (crrative commons 3.0)?? http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/ --Anto (talk) 19:20, 16 June 2009 (UTC)


File:Aston Villa team vs FH August 2008.jpg[edit]

Commons-emblem-issue.svg File:Aston Villa team vs FH August 2008.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)‎ | +/−

--El-Bardo (talk) 14:45, 23 September 2009 (UTC)

File:BF4.PNG[edit]

You marked the file with no source [1]. It has {{PD-self}} and "Own work by uploader". If that is not enough we might as well delete almost every picture on Commons. Please add reason or make a ordenary deletion request. --MGA73 (talk) 13:18, 31 October 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for the message. But in response, I'm clearly not tagging every self-created image. Most of the user's uploads have been deleted for copyright issues, the user hasn't provided any source information other than the claim of PD-self, and the uploads are/were all low resolution/high quality photos taken from angles that most likely required a press pass. In light of that, it didn't seem unreasonable to me to ask for more source information. --Ytoyoda (talk) 23:08, 31 October 2009 (UTC)
User also wrote "Own work by uploader" - that should be enough if it is own work. You may of course ask uploader for further information if you do not trust it really is own work. But when you add "no source" on image it also turns up in a deletion category. Some users prefer to keep their high res images and only upload low res. So it could be own work. I prefer deletion requests when source is not trusted because that way you can give your arguments. If you use a script it only takes 5 seconds more.
Also I moved the debate back to where it started. It makes it easyer to follow :-) --MGA73 (talk) 23:22, 31 October 2009 (UTC)

File:Cowboys Stadium configured for basketball.jpg[edit]

File:Cowboys Stadium configured for basketball.jpg contains far too much copyrighted material to be commons-eligible.

The large screen with the image of the baskeball game dominates the image, and it is almost certainly under copyright.

At reduced size, the image might qualify for fair-use on the English Wikipedia's article about w:Cowboys Stadium, and it might qualify for use in other articles.

Far better than reducing size would be to crop it. I've uploaded a cropped version as File:Cowboys Stadium configured for basketball - cropped.jpg and replaced it in w:Cowboys Stadium. Davidwr (talk) 21:24, 10 January 2010 (UTC)

Correction - I deleted the Gallery from en:Cowboys Stadium entirely, preserving only one image which, like yours, is mis-labeled as free but which, unlike yours, could not be cropped as the image is about the jumbo-screen. I moved it to the relevant part of the article so it clearly qualifies for fair use. Davidwr (talk) 21:42, 10 January 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for letting me know. For what it's worth, the image on the jumbotron screen is filler footage, and not meant for public consumption, but I would understand if you went ahead and nominated the image for deletion. Anyway, thanks for uploading a cropped version and replacing it on English Wiki. --Ytoyoda (talk) 23:35, 10 January 2010 (UTC)

File:France 1930 World Cup.jpg[edit]

The File:France 1930 World Cup.jpg can be freely used : published more than 70 years ago and photographer made an agency. I don't find the right template. Could you amend the description accordingly ? thx, --44Charles (talk) 17:57, 26 January 2010 (UTC)

Flickr image needing correct source[edit]

Hello Ytoyoda. You have uploaded File:Chauncey Billups Nuggets 2009.jpg from Flickr, but the source does not appear to link to the correct image profile on Flickr. Please provide the correct link so that Flickr review can pass. Thank you, ZooFari 17:24, 21 February 2010 (UTC)

Thanks, it was linked to the wrong pic in the same photoset. It's now corrected. --Ytoyoda (talk) 20:35, 21 February 2010 (UTC)
Thanks, review passed. ZooFari 20:44, 21 February 2010 (UTC)
Could you also fix File:Nene boxing out.jpg? ZooFari 20:46, 21 February 2010 (UTC)


Please do not remove problem tags[edit]

Čeština | Deutsch | English | Español | Suomi | Français | עברית | Magyar | Italiano | 日本語 | Македонски | Plattdüütsch | Nederlands | Norsk bokmål | Polski | Português | Português do Brasil | Русский | Svenska | +/−


Nuvola apps important.svg Hi! It has come to my attention that you have removed a warning which says that a file doesn't have enough information about the source or license conditions. Nevertheless, it seems to me that this information is still missing and I have restored the tag. You may either add the required information or, if you think that required information is already given, put the image up for a deletion request so that it won't automatically be deleted. Thank you.

High Contrast (talk) 09:25, 20 March 2010 (UTC)

As happened here. As long as the discussion is not closed the deletion tag must be on the file-site. Thanks for understanding. --High Contrast (talk) 09:27, 20 March 2010 (UTC)
Even though I was undoing my own edit, which I judged to be hasty? --Ytoyoda (talk) 12:24, 20 March 2010 (UTC)

Marshall Faulk?[edit]

Someone on enwiki raised the question of whether the male in this picture - File:Rose McGowan and Mrashall Faulk Kuwait City 100331-N-0696M-281.jpg is actually Marshall Faulk. I tend to agree - it doesn't look like Faulk to me. I also didn't see anything about Faulk on the Flickr pages. Is there something I am missing?--Kubigula (talk) 04:48, 16 June 2010 (UTC)

Cheers. Funny - I keep thinking the guy is an NFL player, but I can't put my finger on who. I guess that's the problem when they wear helmets most of the time.--Kubigula (talk) 04:56, 17 June 2010 (UTC)

Photo of Robert E. Grady[edit]

You removed the photo of Robert E. Grady based upon a possible copyright violation. This photo was purchased from Bloomberg through Getty Images for which I received permission to use as verified by the receipt for $181.00. I also specifically received an email confirmation from WikiMedia to use the photo and went through the process for upload - only to have it removed. —Preceding unsigned comment added by SS Rawls (talk • contribs) 19:48, August 5, 2010 (UTC)

Unless I'm misunderstanding something here, but you might be confused about the image copyright and image use. When you pay a site like Getty Images, you pay for the use, but Getty still owns the copyright (i.e you can't turn around and sell the pictures to other people, and if you want to make additional use, you have to pay more). $181 is awfully cheap for Getty Images to release all rights to the image. Think of it as renting an image, as opposed to owning it. Since the image is still copyrighted to Getty (judging by this) and because Commons doesn't allow copyrighted images, you can't upload it here. Again, I apologize if I've missed anything here. Ytoyoda (talk) 00:33, 6 August 2010 (UTC)
I think there's a serious misunderstanding of the Getty Images copyright. Yes, they do allow for editorial and web use, if you pay their fee. But that doesn't mean they're releasing the image to public domain, which Commons (and most Wikipedia projects) requires. Again, they're selling the license to use the image, not the copyright. Commons images have to be free for use by anyone, for any purpose under any circumstance. --Ytoyoda (talk) 05:39, 10 August 2010 (UTC)

Yes - I am an attorney familiar with the complexities of copyright law. Please see the exchange below in response to my inquiry wherein Getty clearly authorizes the image for web use. I can also attach the licensing agreement. Once the copyright holder has authorized the image for "web use" - it is necessarily available to the public domain - so there is no potential for copyright violation. Unless I'm misunderstanding something here - how do all the other politicians, notable business persons, and contemporaries of Mr. Grady get their images on Wiki?

Hi Patricia-

You can’t purchase the image outright because it’s a rights-managed image. You purchased a correct license to use the copy-righted image. We’ve sold many licenses of images like this for Wikipedia usage, and it’s never been a issue before. You need to find out specifically why Wikipedia won’t let you post the image and show them that the license you purchased gives you the right to use that copy-righted image for the web usage.

Thanks

—Preceding unsigned comment added by 63.233.134.130 (talk • contribs) 15:36, August 10, 2010 (UTC)

First, to answer your question, people have their images up on Wikipedia because photographers essentially donate their work. Just go to the image description of any image and it should tell you who took the photo.
Now, as for this image specifically, as the letter you received from Getty says, You can’t purchase the image outright because it’s a rights-managed image. As in, it's copyrighted. Sure, you can buy the license to use on Wikipedia, but that's not "free" enough for Commons. For an image to be permissible on Commons, it has to be free to use for any purpose, not just editorial or non-commercial. You have to be able to use it commercially. You have to be able to modify it, or combine it with other works. If you look at the image description at Getty, it clearly says, "For editorial use only. Additional clearance required for commercial or promotional use, contact your local office for assistance. Any commercial or promotional use of Bloomberg content requires Bloomberg’s prior written consent." For more about what kind of images are allowed on Commons, take a look at COM:L.
Again, you only bought the license to use on Wikipedia. You did not buy the image and Getty still owns/manages the copyright. Copyrighted images are not allowed on Commons.--Ytoyoda (talk) 21:50, 10 August 2010 (UTC)

Yes - I understand your point and the issue. However - the operative terms are " [a]dditonal clearance" is required for promotional use. I received the additional clearance pursuant to both the licensing agreement and the written consent verifying the same via email correspondence - and specifically authorizing it's use on Wikipedia. The owner of the copyright actually raises the question, in writing, of Wikipedia's refusal to post- so clearly Getty Images doesn't have an issue with it. I would think the written directive from the copyright owner would preclude any legal copyright challenge and serve as a waiver given that it is specifically tailored to the use.

You missed my point - Getty is fine with the image being on Wikipedia. Again, that's not enough for an image to be allowed on Wikipedia. The image has to be free of all copyright. The concern is about the downstream users - other sites that use Wikipedia content. Everything on Wikipedia has to be usable for any purpose by anyone. The letter you received was pretty clear that Getty Images still owns/manages the image and has only authorized use on Wikipedia. Ytoyoda (talk) 04:30, 11 August 2010 (UTC)

Ok. Do you have any suggestions for how I can get a decent photo posted? Most of the contemporary persons apparently use either government issued images (Robert Zoellick, Rob Portman) or photos taken at events (David Rubenstein)- which they must have taken themsmelves. This particular photo is well-suited to accompany the artile because it shows Bob Grady in his role as a speaker and industry expert. Any advice you can provide is most appreciated. Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 63.233.134.130 (talk • contribs) 15:12, August 12, 2010 (UTC)

The most straightforward way is to take a picture yourself. Failing that, you can ask his office to release an image of him under GFDL or an equivalent license. Or you can ask a photographer to donate their work to Wikipedia (again, under GFDL) Ytoyoda (talk) 20:47, 12 August 2010 (UTC)

Category:Players of Watford FC[edit]

Hi there. I'm not sure if you'd noticed the pattern, but I made the edits I did very deliberately. For a category as small as Category:Players of Watford FC, it's far easier to manage, browse and use photos when they're all on one page. I'm not normally one for reverting before I initiate a discussion, but I would be grateful if you would consider undoing your edits, in light of the fact that all they have achieved is to make the category less accessible. Regards, WFCforLife (talk) 23:58, 7 August 2010 (UTC)

I was actually going to leave a message on your talk page about this, so thanks for reaching out. I was following COM:C, specifically COM:OVERCAT, the general rule is always place an image in the most specific categories, and not in the levels above those. I appreciate your explanation, but I'm not sure how significantly it helps users find images, especially when player subcategories are perfectly easy to navigate. In fact, it gets confusing when a some player-by-club cats are linked to specific files while others are linked to player subcategories. Unless there's a consensus for overriding a Commons policy, I'd prefer to keep things consistent. --Ytoyoda (talk) 00:53, 8 August 2010 (UTC)
Thanks for the response, and indeed for the link to policy (I'm not a regular around here). I'm still unsure about the application of overcat in this situation. By definition Players of Watford FC are associated with Watford FC, so to categorise a file with both would be overcategorisation, but the same is not necessarily true of, say, Category:Players of Watford FC and Category:Lee Hodson. Nonetheless, I do see your point, and won't revert unless there is wider consensus. That said, I don't quite understand the rationale of one file categories. Could you point me in the direction of the thinking on this matter? Regards, WFCforLife (talk) 20:24, 12 August 2010 (UTC)
Yeah, I don't like those one-file categories either, because they defeat the purpose of categories as navigational aid. I'm wondering if deleting those barely populated categories is an option. Ytoyoda (talk) 20:41, 12 August 2010 (UTC)

Autopatroller[edit]

Hello! I've gone and made you an autopatroller. This means that your edits will automatically be marked as patrolled. I've seen your username come up on my watchlist frequently and you seem to be doing good work. Thanks for all your efforts! howcheng {chat} 16:21, 21 September 2010 (UTC)

TUSC token 9e9a2daf75a707d1c49387d746ceb6bb[edit]

I am now proud owner of a TUSC account!

help[edit]

hi can you help me with the images that i put in commons??(im a newbie here) i can give you the sources and the authors of all images — Preceding unsigned comment added by JozeSlb (talk • contribs) 12:10, December 1, 2010 (UTC)


thanks for aswerhing me how can i prove that the images are not copyrighted?

the gd sesimbra images are not copyrighted: Gdscampeao09-10.jpg ----> was published by me after buying this photo to is photographer(Rosa)

Instalacoes-estadio.jpg/Instalacoes-gimnodesportivo.jpg/Piscina gd-sesimbra.JPG ----> this images can be used by websites if these ones talk about gd sesimbra

Exposiçaosesimbra.JPG ----> this one its not copyrighted (even if was i ask the author before putting the image here, so i have permition)(so no motive for deletion)

Estadiovilaamalia.jpg ----> this is taked from "jornal o sesimbrense" and dont is copyrighted

Equipa gds 67.jpg ----> the author of this already died (i find that one in sesimbra.blogspot.com)

Vilaamalia-apos-obras.jpg ----> this one is from a magazine from sesimbra (a small one) and dont have copyright


the others, from slbenfica are copyrighted but the author information is given in that 3 photos

can you help me??

JozeSlb (talk) 18:06, 1 December 2010 (UTC)


how can i prove the permission????JozeSlb (talk) 20:24, 1 December 2010 (UTC)

im just trying to put the things right but you guys are just making it difficult i have the permissions but i dont know how to prove it can you tell me???????JozeSlb (talk) 20:49, 1 December 2010 (UTC)

File:Fanta_24_Can_Pack.jpg[edit]

Commons-emblem-issue.svg File:Fanta_24_Can_Pack.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)‎ | +/−

LX (talk, contribs) 15:40, 4 December 2010 (UTC)

File:Sunkist_box.jpg[edit]

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

LX (talk, contribs) 16:04, 4 December 2010 (UTC)

Please do not remove correct and relevant categories[edit]

Hello. Please do not remove correct and relevant categories, as you did here. While it is helpful that you added a category, you do not need to delete a correct category in order to do so. Cheers. --Skeezix1000 (talk) 16:12, 15 December 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for your note. I shouldn't have jumped down your throat - I find that people categories are often the subject of nationalist jingoism, thus my knee jerk reaction, but I shouldn't assume that is always the case, nor should I make anyone feel that their good faith edits could be construed as malicious or careless. It would be great if there were separate category trees for places of origin, residence, etc. (for a bit of clarity), but as you know, the current category scheme allows for categorization whenever a person has a substantial connection with a particular location. Thanks again. --Skeezix1000 (talk) 17:17, 15 December 2010 (UTC)

Please don't blank pages[edit]

Hi Ytoyoda,
Thank you for your contributions to Commons. I noticed you blanked Category:D.J. WIlliams on Commons. If you meant for the page to be deleted, blanking the page is not the right way to do this. A simple real-world comparison to illustrate: You removed the entire text of a page from a thick folder, but the then empty, useless page itself remained in the folder.

Please use {{speedy| type reason here }} and add it on top of the page you would like to have deleted; This way it will be placed on a special list that administrators check regularly for deletion. Without this it might take a long time before it's noticed.

For redirects use #REDIRECT[[Target]] or {{category redirect|Targetcategoryname}}. For more information please read Blanking. Thanks again. –Krinkletalk 04:16, 30 December 2010 (UTC)

Don't repeatremove problem tags[edit]

Hi Ytoyoda, User:Editor182 has marked File:Risperdal tablets.jpg as a copyvio several times. Instead of undoing his edits, please nominate it for deletion instead if you believe it's not a copyright violation. Deletion requests have room for discussion. I have now nominated it for you here. Please leave you opinion on the matter there. Do not remove the {{Delete}} tag, this is considered vandalism. –Krinkletalk 19:41, 2 January 2011 (UTC)

Delete an Image Request[edit]

Hi, due to personal reasons, I was wondering if I could respectfully request an image I uploaded to be removed? It would be greatly appreciated and again, personal reason http://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=File:Mickie_James_Smackdown.jpg

Thank you Triggafinga (talk) 03:56, 19 January 2011 (UTC)

Done. You can also tag the image with something like {{speedy|I am the uploader and I want to delete the image}}. --Ytoyoda (talk) 00:59, 21 January 2011 (UTC)
I will keep that in mind. Thanks again Triggafinga (talk) 01:45, 21 January 2011 (UTC)

File:Nokia_N8_in_hand.jpg[edit]

Pay attention to copyright
File:Nokia_N8_in_hand.jpg has been marked as a possible copyright violation. Wikimedia Commons only accepts free content—that is, images and other media files that can be used by anyone, for any purpose. Traditional copyright law does not grant these freedoms, and unless noted otherwise, everything you find on the web is copyrighted and not permitted here. For details on what is acceptable, please read Commons:Licensing. You may find Commons:Copyright rules useful. You can ask questions about Commons policies in Commons:Help desk.

The file you added has been deleted. If you believe that the deletion was not in accordance with policy, you may request undeletion.

Wikimedia Commons takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing.


Afrikaans | العربية | Asturianu | Azərbaycanca | Беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ | Български | Català | Čeština | Dansk | Deutsch | Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ | Zazaki | Ελληνικά | English | Español | فارسی | Suomi | Français | Galego | עברית | Magyar | Հայերեն | Italiano | 日本語 | 한국어 | Македонски | മലയാളം | Malti | Plattdüütsch | Nederlands | Norsk nynorsk | Norsk bokmål | Polski | Português | Português do Brasil | Română | Русский | Slovenčina | Slovenščina | Svenska | ไทย | Türkçe | Tiếng Việt | 中文(简体)‎ | 中文(繁體)‎ | +/−

Hydrox (talk) 01:47, 8 February 2011 (UTC)

CfD for College athletic program categories[edit]

College athletic program category discussion notification[edit]

Category discussion notification Categories for college athletic programs have been listed at Commons:Categories for discussion so that the community can discuss ways in which it should be changed. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry.

If you created this category, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for discussion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with it. If the category is up for deletion because it has been superseded, consider the notion that although the category may be deleted, your hard work (which we all greatly appreciate) lives on in the new category.
In all cases, please do not take the category discussion personally. It is never intended as such. Thank you!

беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ | Deutsch | English | español | français | עברית | magyar | italiano | 日本語 | македонски | português | русский | +/−

--Spyder_Monkey (talk) 06:03, 21 May 2011 (UTC)

File:Woody.Allen.band.jpg[edit]

Commons-emblem-issue.svg File:Woody.Allen.band.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)‎ | +/−

     Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 15:07, 26 May 2011 (UTC)

Category:Greg_Popovich[edit]

Category discussion notification Category:Greg_Popovich has been listed at Commons:Categories for discussion so that the community can discuss ways in which it should be changed. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry.

If you created this category, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for discussion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with it. If the category is up for deletion because it has been superseded, consider the notion that although the category may be deleted, your hard work (which we all greatly appreciate) lives on in the new category.
In all cases, please do not take the category discussion personally. It is never intended as such. Thank you!

беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ | Deutsch | English | español | français | עברית | magyar | italiano | 日本語 | македонски | português | русский | +/−

Lpdrew (talk) 18:52, 6 June 2011 (UTC)

User:Spinerod[edit]

Hi. I've noticed that you tagged a couple of images by Spinerod as possible copyvios and nominated them for speedy deletion. This user has uploaded a large amount of images related to the Philadelphia Union, and I believe that all his image contributions need to be reviewed because they are suspiciously high-quality and may all be copyvios if indeed these images that were nominated are. Just a heads-up. If you need to reach me, I'm not often on Commons, so you can leave a message here. Thanks. Killervogel5 (talk) 20:42, 28 August 2011 (UTC)

Check[edit]

Hi! Please check here. Thanks! —Preceding unsigned comment was added by 184.82.68.57 (talk) August 31, 2011 (UTC07:03)

You mean this Flickr stream? I have to say, it looks a little fishy. The profile description, "A Photographer for News Agencies of Japan and Getty Images. I'm decided to publish some of my pictures in Flickr to use in other internet places freely," worries me a little, because once a photographer publishes a photo with Getty and other news agencies, he can't just take back the copyright. And for example, this photo of Shunsuke is from this Getty photo, which certainly isn't free. I'd hate to upload all these photos and find out they're all copyrighted. Plus, the photos are too small and lossy to be really useful. If he had uploaded less compressed, high resolution versions, then it'd be more helpful.
So thank you, but sorry, I won't and can't upload these photos. --Ytoyoda (talk) 11:55, 31 August 2011 (UTC)
You right! But I create a user in Flickr and send a comment to him/her and wanted he/she to tell us about those images. size and resolution isn't very important. License and free use is more important. If he/she tell us about him/her pictures and we become sufficient that those are free images please upload those. We need them. —Preceding unsigned comment was added by 184.82.68.57 (talk) August 31, 2011 (UTC12:52)
Size and resolutions are VERY important! Because the larger the image, the more use it'll have on Wikipedia. They're too small to be used for anything other than thumbnails. But more importantly, I don't think the images are free (also, it's weird that some images are really cleaned up while other are very lossy). Unless the photographer wants to upload better versions and send an Commons:OTRS email, I'm going to pass. Ytoyoda (talk) 14:11, 31 August 2011 (UTC)
The person who asked this above - open web proxy, so I can report this - is the person who created that flickr account. And who is operating a number of other flickr stealing accounts. With embarrassing claims, see http://www.flickr.com/people/parmida/ or http://www.flickr.com/people/66578220@N07/ with the same comment: "I'm decided to publish some of my pictures in Flickr to use in other internet places freely." This are fake accounts, created by one of the worst person that our projects have to deal with, and given that he is pushing 200 files (the maximum for gratis flickr accounts) to his flickr: He is putting some efforts and time into this creepy vandalism. I noted your entry at COMT:QFI, thanks for beeing careful and keeping an eye out for copyvios. --Martin H. (talk) 18:02, 15 September 2011 (UTC)

File:Andrea Petkovic Miami 2011.jpg[edit]

Hi, please check this. It seems to be a copyright violation. See here or here. Sorry. :( --Regasterios (talk) 13:18, 4 September 2011 (UTC)

It looks that way - thanks for catching that. I'm sorry too! --Ytoyoda (talk) 02:52, 5 September 2011 (UTC)

Talkback[edit]

Message tied up in Ribbon.jpg Hello, Ytoyoda. You have new messages at Eagles247's talk page.
You may remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Asturianu | Беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ | বাংলা | Català | Čeština | Deutsch | Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ | English | Español | Suomi | Français | Galego | हिन्दी | Magyar | Italiano | 日本語 | ქართული | Македонски | മലയാളം | Plattdüütsch | Nederlands | Português | Română | Русский | Slovenščina | Svenska | Türkçe | +/−

About my pictures[edit]

Hi Ytoyoda! About my pictures. All of those pictures that I was upload is my own work with my own camera but Image of Hadi Aghily was a work of my friend and thanks that delete this Because when I was upload it I don't know about anothers' pictures. But Image of Carlos Queiroz in Indonesia is my own work. See this facebook image. It's my facebook acount. I upload this image on November 14 in facebook and goal published my picture in their website in November 17. I upload again my pictures with your alow because I think there are free. Thanks for your helping. AlirezaKarami (talk) 08:52, 8 December 2011 (UTC)

If your friends took the photos, then they have to contact the Wikimedia Foundation releasing all copyright to the images - I can give you instructions on how to do that. Also, that Facebook link isn't public - I can't see it.
And that doesn't explain you've claimed images from Dan Tennant-Ralphs and ISNA as yours. --Ytoyoda (talk) 16:58, 8 December 2011 (UTC)

About the picture "Day-midnightlace"[edit]

I just received your message telling that this picture will be deleted because of the lack of a better information or better source about the holder of the copyrights. I am, by far, not an expert about all that, but I put on description that the picture is a 'publicity photo' and why is considered public domain. Besides, the picture was taken from 1923 and 1963. I don't know if this problem is because of the license I put. If we see the page, we'll see a contradiction. In the license is written: "The person who associated a work with this deed has dedicated the work to the public domain" and in the description, is there: "Publicity photos (star headshots) have traditionally not been copyrighted. Since they are disseminated to the public, they are generally considered public domain". I believe I put the wrong license.

You understand what I mean? I really would like to know if the picture is already going to be deleted, if without a source or if there's any other way to save it. Maybe, changing the license, I don't know.

Please, I would really appreciate your help. Thank you, already.

File:Le Gillette Stadium .jpg[edit]

Pay attention to copyright
File:Le Gillette Stadium .jpg has been marked as a possible copyright violation. Wikimedia Commons only accepts free content—that is, images and other media files that can be used by anyone, for any purpose. Traditional copyright law does not grant these freedoms, and unless noted otherwise, everything you find on the web is copyrighted and not permitted here. For details on what is acceptable, please read Commons:Licensing. You may find Commons:Copyright rules useful. You can ask questions about Commons policies in Commons:Help desk.

The file you added has been deleted. If you believe that the deletion was not in accordance with policy, you may request undeletion.

Wikimedia Commons takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing.


Afrikaans | العربية | Asturianu | Azərbaycanca | Беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ | Български | Català | Čeština | Dansk | Deutsch | Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ | Zazaki | Ελληνικά | English | Español | فارسی | Suomi | Français | Galego | עברית | Magyar | Հայերեն | Italiano | 日本語 | 한국어 | Македонски | മലയാളം | Malti | Plattdüütsch | Nederlands | Norsk nynorsk | Norsk bokmål | Polski | Português | Português do Brasil | Română | Русский | Slovenčina | Slovenščina | Svenska | ไทย | Türkçe | Tiếng Việt | 中文(简体)‎ | 中文(繁體)‎ | +/−

High Contrast (talk) 00:46, 9 April 2012 (UTC)

My images[edit]

Hi, the contact to find out the reason why the pictures I uploaded were deleted and violating copyrights. Yet the author has released photos of a public domain and the Bot Flickr uploaded successfully, why all this? Appearance as soon as an answer, preferably here. Thanks a lot, look to your reply soon. Devil90 (talk) 11:46, 14 April 2012 (UTC)

File:Tyler, the Creator with Pharrell Coachella2011 0350.jpg[edit]

Беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ | Български | Català | Čeština | Dansk | Deutsch | Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ | Ελληνικά | English | Esperanto | Español | فارسی | Suomi | Français | Galego | Magyar | Íslenska | Italiano | 日本語 | Македонски | മലയാളം | Nederlands | Norsk nynorsk | Polski | Português | Português do Brasil | Русский | Slovenščina | Svenska | Українська | 中文(简体)‎ | 中文(繁體)‎ | +/−


There seems to be a problem regarding the description and/or licensing of this particular file. It has been found that you've added in the image's description only a Template that's not a license and although it provides useful information about the image, it's not a valid license. Could you please resolve this problem, adding the license in the image linked above? You can edit the description page and change the text. Uploading a new version of the file does not change the description of the file. This page may give you more hints on which license to choose. Thank you.

This message was added automatically by Nikbot, if you need some help about it please read the text above again and follow the links in it, if you still need help ask at the ? Commons:Help desk in any language you like to use. --Nikbot 03:37, 13 May 2012 (UTC)

I don't know how to put the license![edit]

Hello! I've try to upload several Gerard Piqué's photos but it always has problems. Wikimedia Commons ALWAYS reject my pictures by saying that it's not ok. Please help me upload these pictures, because the photos in Wikipedia about him are very poor. Thanks for your help!

File:Marlins Park East Plaza.jpg[edit]

Commons-emblem-issue.svg File:Marlins Park East Plaza.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)‎ | +/−

24.190.185.169 00:34, 25 July 2012 (UTC)

File:Robin Van Persie vs Swansea 2011.jpg[edit]

Pay attention to copyright
File:Robin Van Persie vs Swansea 2011.jpg has been marked as a possible copyright violation. Wikimedia Commons only accepts free content—that is, images and other media files that can be used by anyone, for any purpose. Traditional copyright law does not grant these freedoms, and unless noted otherwise, everything you find on the web is copyrighted and not permitted here. For details on what is acceptable, please read Commons:Licensing. You may find Commons:Copyright rules useful. You can ask questions about Commons policies in Commons:Help desk.

The file you added may soon be deleted. If you believe this file is not a copyright violation, please explain why on the file's talk page.


Afrikaans | العربية | Asturianu | Azərbaycanca | Беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ | Български | Català | Čeština | Dansk | Deutsch | Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ | Zazaki | Ελληνικά | English | Español | فارسی | Suomi | Français | Galego | עברית | Magyar | Հայերեն | Italiano | 日本語 | 한국어 | Македонски | മലയാളം | Malti | Plattdüütsch | Nederlands | Norsk nynorsk | Norsk bokmål | Polski | Português | Português do Brasil | Română | Русский | Slovenčina | Slovenščina | Svenska | ไทย | Türkçe | Tiếng Việt | 中文(简体)‎ | 中文(繁體)‎ | +/−

PierreSelim (talk) 07:15, 2 August 2012 (UTC)

File:Brendan Rodgers at Rogers Centre 20120721-10.jpg[edit]

Commons-emblem-issue.svg File:Brendan Rodgers at Rogers Centre 20120721-10.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)‎ | +/−

Dudek1337 (talk) 22:30, 14 August 2012 (UTC)

You are wrong and mean[edit]

You are really wrong and evil by marking my files for speedy deletion and for saying they violate copyrights you are wrong and what is it don't you have better things to do? Those are my files and don't violate any copyright. You don't know what you are talking about, and if you insist I'm going to report you. Pay attention to what you do because you are not right. You are making a big mistake. What's your problem?! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Frog890 (talk • contribs)

Okay. Feel free to report me. Ytoyoda (talk) 02:05, 1 September 2012 (UTC)


Leave my files alone, it does not affect you. Who told you have any authority? And the file you erased I bought that picture from Getty images so I am free to use it. Do you even know what Getty images is check it out and then you'll see how wrong you are. So what are you going to do you will also erase Getty images pictures from every site that act the same way when they buy the pictures? And I clearly wrote that the copyright was from Getty's and even the photographer, didn't you read it. How you think most of Wikipedia images are obtained, nobody is complaining! I'm not violating any rights. Honestly find yourself something more productive to do. Be positive instead of negative. And the picture of Trevor Moore is mine I edited it also and that video is completely free for everybody, IFC is really open to share online, talk to them and ask them is they feel I'm violating any copyrights go ahead. Don't just act on an impulse. The Trevor Moore show picture is completely free for anyone to use it, it is all over the place, ask Trevor himself if he thinks I'm violating his copyrights he owns it and he is happy to share ask him here @itrevormoore Don't destroy people's work and time invested just because you pretend to know best. Thank you for understanding. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Frog890 (talk • contribs) 20:10, August 31, 2012‎ (UTC)

I don't think you understand copyright. I suggest you take the time to read Commons:Licensing. I think you're conflating "publicly available" with "freely licensed". Ytoyoda (talk) 02:04, 1 September 2012 (UTC)

Ok tell me you is the admin who erased it and just leave my files alone ok. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Frog890 (talk • contribs)

I'm not sure how you expect to get anywhere by insulting me, but hey, different strokes for different folks. Anyway, I didn't erase your file. You can see who deleted it by clicking on the old file link, like File:Zach Cregger 2012.jpg. And I'd be more than happy to leave your files alone if you stop uploading other people's copyrighted work. Promise. --Ytoyoda (talk) 02:27, 1 September 2012 (UTC)

Look I don't want to fight over this with you, this supposes to be a sharing community don't behave like this instead you could have advice me don't be so radical. I already changed the license tags, that was my mistake. But I assure you I'm not violating any copyrights or intending to get in touch with the people I told you so you see I'm just trying to help and collaborate. Please open your mind and understand the situation. Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Frog890 (talk • contribs)

Again, I strongly urge you to read Commons:Licensing. I know you don't think you're violating copyrights, but when you use other people's photographs or screenshots or music or words, you are violating copyright. Almost all intellectual property you find is copyrighted - Commons is a place for the very few that isn't. What you uploaded - title cards, commercial photo agency photos, screenshots - that stuff is all copyrighted. --Ytoyoda (talk) 02:47, 1 September 2012 (UTC)

Yes I read it that is why I know it, don't be so presumptuous. I know what I'm talking about, you don't own the truth. Look, that screen shot is taken from a public video that is free to use and that image I altered it to improved the quality it is my own work the same thing with the other one the owner released it publicly ask him. Ask IFC. Why can't you understand? I'm respectful of the copyright. This is very old material nobody cares. The authors love the person involved and want him to have it and use it. This is just a profile no one is hurting anybody. Leave them alone. And if you care so much ask these people personally tell them you think I'm violating their rights, go ahead please do it. You are overreacting and giving importance to something that has none. I am an honest user I just want to help. I know what I'm doing and I'm not trying to hurt anyone. Besides this has no commercial usage there're are no profits for anyone or anyone is taking advantage of the people involved. The WKUK is on syndication, that video has no currency or commercial use whatsoever. The Trevor Moore show has been canceled for years and years and nobody has any usage or right over that picture except for Trevor Moore he even posted it himself on his facebook to share it with his fans. Come one dear open your mind let it go let my files be, understand what I'm trying to say. Do your research verify by your own hand I'm not violating any copyrights. This is old stuff with no commercial use whatsoever. This is granted to the general international public. I wish you the best.

Altering another person's work does not transfer the copyright to you (see Commons:Derivative works). Anyway, it's not up to you to decide what's worthless or not, and that's irrelevant to the question of copyright. It's another person's work and the copyright hasn't been released or expired, then it doesn't belong here. Commons is a place for free files, not stuff that you think is old enough and no one cares.
Also, please stop conflating making something available and licensing for reuse. --Ytoyoda (talk) 03:43, 1 September 2012 (UTC)

Can you rechecked my files please[edit]

Please I urge you to review my files. Check the fickr license and you see it is the same. And Remove the deleting order. Thanks.

WHERE, WHEN, HOW?[edit]

I am not sure if I should be replying here. But I don't follow you. Where and when you told me to change the license. How can I do it? Where I do it? Which one I should use? And I don't think I should as I am sure I use the right one it was the recommended one on that wizard?! Do you work here? Are you certain you know what you are talking about? I saw you review my file and you are the one who wants to delete. I am just asking you to re checked it I think you made a mistake. I have them on flicker as Attribution-NoDerivs Creative Commons It is the same I'm posting here.

Please Stop.[edit]

Can you please leave me alone I find your attitude not healthy. Please erase your comments and communication from my talk page you are free to do the same with mine from yours. I don't want anything to do with you ever again in my life you are a very negative force. You are in general very wrong. I truly wish you to get a real remunerated job and a real life in the outside real world to live because certainly this is not. I am really sorry and sad for you. I have to files and you being acting crazy over them as if I was some user with a million violating ones. There are proper ways to communicate and you are unaware of that. If I replied angry to you I sincerely apologize but you provoked it with your extremist intransigent answer. You are very presumptuous. You ruined my yesterday and my today I won't aloud you to do it again. Please understand and leave alone forever. And if you see my files let another user checked them. Leave me alone I don't want to hear or read anything else from you. This is my right and your obligation to respect me. Please leave me alone. Please don't reply I'll forget you exist please do the same thing with me. Thank you. Good bye forever.--FR9 05:16, 2 September 2012 (UTC)

Copyright status: File:Joe Johnson over John Salmons.jpg[edit]

български | català | čeština | dansk | Deutsch | Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ | English | فارسی | suomi | français | magyar | italiano | македонски | മലയാളം | Bahasa Melayu | 日本語 | norsk bokmål | polski | português | română | slovenščina | svenska | 中文(繁體)‎ | +/−

Warning sign
This media may be deleted.
Thanks for uploading File:Joe Johnson over John Salmons.jpg. I notice that the file page either doesn't contain enough information about the license or it contains contradictory information about the license, so the copyright status is unclear.

If you created this file yourself, then you must provide a valid copyright tag. For example, you can tag it with {{self|GFDL|cc-by-sa-all}} to release it under the multi-license GFDL plus Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike All-version license or you can tag it with {{PD-self}} to release it into the public domain. (See Commons:Copyright tags for the full list of license tags that you can use.)

If you did not create the file yourself or if it is a derivative of another work that is possibly subject to copyright protection, then you must specify where you found it (e.g. usually a link to the web page where you got it), you must provide proof that it has a license that is acceptable for Commons (e.g. usually a link to the terms of use for content from that page), and you must add an appropriate license tag. If you did not create the file yourself and the specific source and license information is not available on the web, you must obtain permission through the OTRS system and follow the procedure described there.

Note that any unsourced or improperly licensed files will be deleted one week after they have been marked as lacking proper information, as described in criteria for speedy deletion. If you have uploaded other files, please confirm that you have provided the proper information for those files, too. (You can get a list of all your uploaded files using the Gallery tool.) Thank you.

Jarekt (talk) 13:10, 25 October 2012 (UTC)

Do not post any photoes of active J-League footballers and coaches on JAWP, please![edit]

Hello from Japanese Wikipedia. Thank you for editing in JAWP, but I'm sorry I had to revert some of your edits.

In Japan, L-League Photo (the company which administrates all rights relating to J-League) strictly prohibits us from using photos, logos and emblems in JAWP. Moreover, unlike many other countries, Japanese copyright act does not have any clause about fair use system.

I ask you, therefore, not to post any photos:

  1. of J-League players and coaches.
  2. of footballers wearing uniforms of J-League clubs, or cloths on which we can easily see the logos or emblems of J-League clubs.

If you have any questions, please come to my JAWP talk page and ask me. Thank you and best regards.--Ohtani tanya (talk) 07:43, 12 January 2013 (UTC)

File:Tokyo Metro Fukutoshin Line Shibuya.jpg[edit]

Commons-emblem-issue.svg File:Tokyo Metro Fukutoshin Line Shibuya.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)‎ | +/−

콩가루 (talk) 17:22, 17 May 2013 (UTC)

File:Javier Morales RSL 2009.jpg[edit]

Commons-emblem-issue.svg File:Javier Morales RSL 2009.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)‎ | +/−

Gunnex (talk) 13:45, 27 June 2013 (UTC)

Category:Salif_DIao[edit]

Commons-emblem-issue.svg Category:Salif_DIao has been listed at Commons:Categories for discussion so that the community can discuss ways in which it should be changed. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry.

If you created this category, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for discussion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with it. If the category is up for deletion because it has been superseded, consider the notion that although the category may be deleted, your hard work (which we all greatly appreciate) lives on in the new category.

In all cases, please do not take the category discussion personally. It is never intended as such. Thank you!


беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ | Deutsch | English | español | français | עברית | magyar | italiano | 日本語 | македонски | português | русский | +/−

Dudek1337 (talk) 20:53, 26 July 2013 (UTC)

Notification about possible deletion[edit]

Commons-emblem-issue.svg Some contents have been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether they should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at their entry.

If you created these pages, please note that the fact that they have 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 them, 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)‎ | +/−

Affected:


Yours sincerely, LGA talkedits 11:10, 21 December 2013 (UTC)

Re: Hey, you probably saw that I edited a lot of the images you uploaded[edit]

Thank you for your tips, i'll be careful! Merson

about File:Brad-gosse-image.jpg[edit]

hey,

Can you please give me two days to resolve this issue we are having? fact it photo is of Brad Gosse located at http://www.bradgosse.com/pic/bradgosse.jpg and the license for this image is at http://bradgosse.com/pic/license.txt

If you can lead me some time than I can convince owner to explain everything by an email at permissions-en@wikimedia.org

regards, vishal

Que pasa???[edit]

Hola señor, Por que me borro la las fotos de Boys Over Flowers, ya acepto que me haya borrado las de Alexis Sanchez por que eran de internet, pero las fotos de los Boys Over Flowers yo las habia hecho bueno eso adios saludos... --Boys Over Flowers = Casi El Paraiso... (talk) 21:23, 3 June 2014 (UTC)

Fix Your Mistake[edit]

You have incorrectly identified the license associated with certain images and wrongly nominated them for deletion. File:Yogi-Ferrell.jpg and File:Cody-Zeller.jpg are available to share (to copy, distribute and transmit the work) and to remix (to adapt the work). Specifically, the work's creator has given them a license of "Attribution-NonCommercial 2.0 Generic" and the work is appropriately labeled as such here. These have the correct license attached to them and should not be deleted.--YHoshua (talk) 12:46, 4 June 2014 (UTC)

Notification about possible deletion[edit]

Commons-emblem-issue.svg Some contents have been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether they should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at their entry.

If you created these pages, please note that the fact that they have 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 them, 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)‎ | +/−

Affected:

Yours sincerely, darkweasel94 05:29, 7 October 2014 (UTC)

Category:24th Street Station (Philadelphia)[edit]

You have presented no evidence that this was ever called "24th Street Station."
It is not called that by HABS; in George Thomas's catalogue of Furness's works; or in Michael Lewis's biography of Furness. Philadelphia Architects and Buildings calls it "Baltimore & Ohio Railroad Station"[2] and my 1901 Bromley Atlas calls it "B & O Station." I even asked my 93-year-old uncle – who lived 2 blocks away and shipped off to World War II from the station – and he said he'd NEVER HEARD the name "24th Street Station" used for this.
If you cannot present evidence for this name, I must conclude that it is a fantasy. == BoringHistoryGuy (talk) 21:16, 31 October 2014 (UTC)