Commons:Help desk/Archive/2011/01

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


Je suis inscrit sous le régime commun des logins interwiki et Commons me rejette

Translation into (en), since my request in (fr) does not produce any effect :

I am on the SUL program, from my old pseudo fr:Utilisateur:Trassiorf, and for a second time, Commons refuses my login, under the pretense that my login is not quite alright. At the first time, this situation had been cleared by a nice admin (I don't remember who...), but there it goes again. Are there more profound causes, and can anyone remedy that problem for good ?

Someone suggested some bug with my cookies. I logged yesterday onto ru.wikipedia for the first time, and I do have the right cookie, and the right entry into my SUL account, dated both on Dec 29, 2010.

Thanks in advance and a happy New Year ! 12:33, 30 December 2010 (UTC) 11:58, 27 December 2010 (UTC) As-tu essayé User:Trassiorf qui existe, ou Utilisateur:Trassiorf qui n'existe pas sur "Commons"? --Havang(nl) (talk) 12:24, 27 December 2010 (UTC)

Oui, bien sûr, je suis connu par Commons, auquel j'ai pas mal contribué, mais pour je ne sais quelle raison, il me refuse le login. 14:32, 28 December 2010 (UTC)
Looking at Special:CentralAuth/Trassiorf your account looks ok.
You could try to login as Trassiorf at
and then come here to
this way you wont need to login once more. --  Docu  at 12:55, 30 December 2010 (UTC)
It looks now all right. I shall try to upload some pictures onto Commons. Thanks and greetings for New Year Trassiorf (talk) 09:27, 31 December 2010 (UTC)
I succeeded in loading the picture "file:Lindenbaum engourdissement.png" with this method. It is still quite artisanal and risky for non-experts like I am. Trassiorf (talk) 13:29, 1 January 2011 (UTC)

Do we own copyright of commissioned illustrations?

Teacher Plus Foundation has a fairly large (~200) body of illustrations for use in teaching English to Thai students, which we would like to upload. Some of the illustrations were made by teachers, and some by students as part of a contest. We have verbal understanding from all that Teacher Plus Foundation has ownership of the works, and can use them in any way we see fit. In fact, publishing works on the Internet was explicitly mentioned as a "prize" for winning entries of the student competition.

So my questions are:

  1. Is it necessary to get written permission from the authors?
  2. Assuming the answer to (1) is yes, do I need a separate permission document for each work, or can the author sign a single document that lists all works?
  3. Most of the authors don't have email accounts. What is the procedure for submitting hard copies of permission documents? — Preceding unsigned comment added by [[User:|]] ([[User talk:|talk]] • contribs)
Hi, thanks for asking. The question of whether you or the teachers are the copyright holder of these works depends on whether the teachers are employees of the Foundation, the terms of their employment contract, as well as local work for hire law in your country. The work of students is almost certainly not owned by TPF, since the students are of course not employees, and to make matters worse they may not be able to be party to a legal contract as a minor. Just to be safe, I recommend the following procedure:
  1. Obtain a signed license statement (on paper) from each of the authors releasing their works under the free license of your choice (I recommend either the Creative Commons Zero Waiver or the Creative Commons Attribution License 3.0); if a minor student is the author, I recommend also getting a signature from their parent or guardian if possible. The statements should either list the works specifically, or should specify "all works submitted to the [name of contest here]". These statements should be scanned into electronic form.
  2. The Foundation itself should write an e-mail statement releasing any rights it has in the works under the same license.
  3. The images should be uploaded with an {{OTRS pending}} tag. You can seek help from us for this.
  4. You should send your e-mail statement including the above and a list of files to
I realise this is a bit of a hassle, but it should allay any concerns regarding rights to these works. Unfortunately a verbal understanding is not sufficient for our purposes. Let me know if you have any more questions about this. Dcoetzee (talk) 12:35, 1 January 2011 (UTC)

How to change description

I've uploaded an image ( but in the description I wrote, that the minister is the minister of culture, when he in fact is Minister of Economic and Business Affairs (in danish description I would change from Kulturminister to Økonomi- og erhvervsminister). How can I change the description? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Fo2grafen (talk • contribs)

Go to File:Brian-mikkelsen.jpg and click "edit". --  Docu  at 14:16, 1 January 2011 (UTC)

Another suitable image?

Hi! I would like to know if this picture is suitable for upload.

Its a coloured version of this file made by a member of the Axis History Forum. I consider it as a great editing job, and I think it would be a valuable addition to Commons. As it was made from that BA file, could it be avaliable for upload using the same license (CC-BY-SA 3.0)? — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk • contribs) 17:45, 29 December 2010 (UTC)

See the terms of the {{cc-by-sa-3.0}} license; they allow for Derivative works using the same license or an equivalent license (that's what "share-alike" means). The only slight hitch might be that since you did not do the coloring, you cannot decide for the author of the derivative work exactly which equivalent license he or she will choose. That might be unnecessary hair-splitting, though. If the coloring author will declare that his or her derivative work is licensed under {{cc-by-sa-3.0}} (for example in another forum post) then you could link to that declaration. --Teratornis (talk) 00:15, 30 December 2010 (UTC)
CC-BY-SA 3.0 says you must mention the licence. If the editor publishes the work without mentioning the licence, then that is a breach. I think the same licence can be assumed. The hitch I would worry more about is that there may be a separate contract, so that the derivative work is made from a copy under a different licence (but then there would probably be some copyright warnings). --LPfi (talk) 23:12, 1 January 2011 (UTC)

Foreign relations of Israel Map

I attempted today to add an updated map of File:Foreign relations of Israel Map.png, as the current map contains a number of inaccuracies. When I tried to do so, I was notified that, as I am a new user (I had not previusly contributed to WikiMedia Commons, although I am a long-term contributor of WikiPedia), I could not update an existing file, and that I should save the new file under a new name (which I have done File:Foreign relations of Israel Map 2011.png and seek assistance from the Help Desk, to update the file template. Davshul (talk) 01:08, 31 December 2010 (UTC)

It's typically a map not suitable for updates. Please add credits to the initial file to File:Foreign relations of Israel Map 2011.png. --  Docu  at 04:17, 31 December 2010 (UTC)
I find that somewhat strange, as the previous map appears to have already been updated eight times. Davshul (talk) 13:39, 31 December 2010 (UTC)
There is no consensus, but updating political maps is the main thing people object to. The map may have a caption (on some Wikipedia, in some versions) mentioning what date the map represents. It could be used for showing how the relations have changed over time, if maps were uploaded with different names. The current map could be pointed to by a redirect. --LPfi (talk) 23:20, 1 January 2011 (UTC)
The map, as per text, should reflect the current situation, and has been updated and amended, to be consisted with the text and as per discussion page. However, it needs to be uploaded, which I was unable to do, for reasons as discussed above. Davshul (talk) 16:19, 2 January 2011 (UTC)

My father's photographs

I have a large number of photographs taken by my late father, some of which would be appropriate for illustating Wikipedia articles. I am also the executrix of my father's estate (which presumably owns the copyright). Can I upload the photographs(assuming they meet the other criteria)? What category do I upload them under?

I also have a number of pictures of family members (who already have Wikipedia articles), mostly from the '30s, but some from the '50s, with no indication of the photographer, and no indication of copyright. Can I upload those pictures?

Jpg1954 (talk) 04:57, 31 December 2010 (UTC)

For the first part of your question: there are a series of licence tags made for heirs, e.g. {{GFDL-heirs}}, {{PD-heirs}}, oddly I didn't find one for CC. Emailing a permission to OTRS would probably be best. Supposedly, it would be up to the heirs, not the executrix to grant the license (unless your father's will granted it).
How you categorize them depends what topics you could illustrate with the images (see Commons:Categories#Quick guide). --  Docu  at 05:10, 31 December 2010 (UTC)
It is allowed to create an author category, where you put all photographs by your father. The photos should also have topic categories as usual. I hope you can get permission from the other heirs (I'd suggest using PD-heirs, CC-BY or CC-BY-SA). Quite ordinary photos from that time may be valuable (the "no tourist shots" rule does not apply, at least not directly).
The other photographs are problematic, as copyright is not transfered with the physical photo. They can be used by fair use on individual Wikipedias, but not uploaded here before the copyright issues are solved.
Whether the copyright has expired depends on the legislation of the specific juridiction (you didn't tell where your father lived), whether, where and when the photograph has first been published and whether the identity of the photographer can be found. E.g. in Finland copyrights for ordinary photos from that time have expired (but "photographic works" are mostly still protected).
--LPfi (talk) 12:38, 31 December 2010 (UTC)
Thanks. It should be relatively straightforward to get permission from my father's heirs for his pictures. They are mostly of cars and motorcycles, and some of riders/drivers (For instance there is a very nice closeup of Mike Hailwood at the '67 Canadian GP. His wiki article has no picture of him, only one of his bikes.).

Most of his pictures were taken in the US, thogh some were in Canada or UK. Do I need to get separate permission from the heirs for each photograph, or can I get blanket permission for all of his photographs in one email?

With regard to the older photographs, there are two in particular. One was taken in the US between 1931 and 1933 in the US. It is most likely that the photographer was my grandmother, but I have no proof. I don't hold out much hope of tracking down all of her heirs. The other one, taken in 1935 in England, is a formal family portrait (on the occaision of a 50th wedding anniversary) that shows 4 people with Wikipedia articles. That was probably taken by a professional photographer, though there is no name on any of the copies of the picture. As far as I know, none of these photographs have ever been "published", in print or on the web.

Perhaps I should look into uploading them to just English Wikipedia, instead of Commons. Jpg1954 (talk) 17:37, 31 December 2010 (UTC)
ETA that I am having difficulty understanding the copyright rules. According to List of countries' copyright length, the copyright for the UK is either "Life + 70 years" or "50 years after making". The photograph taken in 1935 in England is clearly more than "50 years after making", but may not be more than "Life + 70 years". How do I know which one applies? (I assume the EU rules are not relevant.) Jpg1954 (talk) 18:58, 31 December 2010 (UTC)
Taking your questions in order:
  • Separate permission -- not required. The owner of the copyright can grant a license on "All images taken by X to which I own the copyright, including, without limitation, the following: [list]" or only specific images.
  • US pictures which were not published before 2003 have copyright for the shorter of 120 years after creation or 95 years after first publication. See File:PD-US table.svg.
  • UK rules are explained fairly clearly at Commons:Licensing#Ordinary_copyright
  • And don't worry about not understanding the rules -- they are complicated, often contrary to common sense, and vary widely from country to country.
     Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 15:37, 1 January 2011 (UTC)
It would be very good if the copyright issues were resolved for as many photos as possible, in which case they can be uploaded here. If the images are uploaded as "fair use" on a Wikipedia they are difficult to use on other Wikipedias, images cannot be uploaded for later use and they will be deleted if they at some point are removed from the article. At that point it may be very difficult to get any information that is not gathered now. --LPfi (talk) 22:09, 1 January 2011 (UTC)
It sounds as if the UK picture from 1935 is in the public domain- photographer unknown. more than 70 years since creation.

From what you say, the US photographs from '31 - 33 are still under copyright (1933 + 95 = 2028). But this link
for "Unpublished works <1978 not previously copyrighted or in the public domain" says says "Greater of 70 PMA or until 2003; if published before 2003, greater of 70 PMA or until 2048" There doesn't seem to be a row for "unpublished by anonymous/unknown". File:PD-US table.svg doesn't seem to say anything about "unpublished" work.

At any rate, I'll hold off on the US photos. Jpg1954 (talk) 23:19, 1 January 2011 (UTC)

I am trying to upload the 1935 UK photograph. But I can't figure out what to select for "licensing". None of the options seem to apply to this case - "photograph created by unknown author before 1 June 1957" - "Copyright expires 70 years after creation" (1935 + 70 = 2005) Jpg1954 (talk) 04:57, 2 January 2011 (UTC)
"File:PD-US table.svg doesn't seem to say anything about "unpublished" work." See the last line in the green section -- the last box applies.
There may be a template, but you can just write out "UK Photograph created by unknown author before 1 June 1957, therefore PD, see Commons:Licensing#Ordinary_copyright".      Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 10:58, 2 January 2011 (UTC)
The "Licensing" entry on the upload form is a pull down menu. It doesn't seem to let you enter alternate text.
Jpg1954 (talk) 19:58, 2 January 2011 (UTC)
No, it doesn't, but you can leave it at "none selected" and either enter the text in the permission field or add it by editing the description later (you may get a warning on your talk page, but you have time to sort it out).
As you seem to have more than a few images you might want to use some automated or semi-automated procedure. The "basic" upload page - for advanced users :-) - gives you one text area, where it is easy to paste the code from an earlier uploaded image description.
--LPfi (talk) 22:04, 2 January 2011 (UTC)

public domain file

I recently created an article and wish to upload a portrait photo of the subject. The photo was taken about 1887 and certainly no later than 1889. It is available in a state archives. My understanding is that, because of its age, the photo is in the public domain. However, when I try to upload it to Commons, I'm blocked because I don't have any license number or the name of the person who took the photo. What to do?

Try just entering "Unknown" for the name of the author. It's not needed for an image that old. For the license, select "First published in the United States before 1923". Dcoetzee (talk) 01:36, 2 January 2011 (UTC)
If first published outside USA it may still be under copyright (typically year of death + 70 years). A 24 years old photographer who died as 95 will give copyright to 2030. On the other hand, if the photographer is truly unknown, not just unknown to you, then the term will be 1889 + 70. And photographs may have shorter terms, typically 50 years. Was the photograph published? "Trying" unknown is ok for the robots, but if you "misuse" any keywords you should explain the situation for humans also. --LPfi (talk) 22:18, 2 January 2011 (UTC)

High-Resolution Cloth Textures

I've made a set of high-resolution black and white scans of different types of cloth. I'd like to make them available as public domain textures for other graphic designers. Would this fall under the purview of the Commons? — Preceding unsigned comment added by SpaceToast (talk • contribs) 2011-01-03T00:49:17 (UTC)

Should be okay. Could be used for describing the type of cloth. Be sure to include as much information about the type of cloth as you can. The images are probably even a bit like microscopic images. For me: Upload them. Cheers --Saibo (Δ) 02:32, 3 January 2011 (UTC)

Glary Utilities

I have an article about Glary Utilities I'm not sure about the licensing and other stuff Can someone please give the info about the license of the screenshot and logo? Anish9807 (talk) 06:19, 3 January 2011 (UTC) P.S Can you please give a link to a screenshot online and a link to a logo and the description, copyright info that sort of thing? Anish9807 (talk) 06:24, 3 January 2011 (UTC)

Freeware such as (at least they describe it as freeware) is not necessarily free content, Glary Utilities is not free at all, it is gratis to some extent. See en:Gratis versus Libre. So any screenshots of it will be unfree and not eligible for upload here, see Commons:Screenshots. For the Logo (a tool box with a brush and a screwdriver) this will be also not eligible for upload unless it is published under a free license. See Commons:Licensing. --Martin H. (talk) 12:11, 3 January 2011 (UTC)
Would it be possible to upload the screenshot and the logo with the permission of Glarysoft Inc. (I can e-mail them) If not can someone create an image that says no free image available. By the way how come TuneUp Utilities has their screenshot and logo and its on their article on Wikipedia (search it on wikipedia) I'm not trying to be rude or anything, I just want to know. Anish9807 (talk) 05:36, 4 January 2011 (UTC)

Copyright help

Hello. I added a creative commons public domain license to File:Portrait of Vollon by Carpeaux.jpg. Can someone here please tell me that that is correct? I notice that the terms and conditions for the source is saying that I "respect the intellectual property rights of Birmingham Museums & Art Gallery and will refrain from copying, downloading, transmitting, reproducing, printing, or exploiting for commercial purpose any material contained within the Website". So I would like someone here to tell me that I'm okay. Thank you. -SusanLesch (talk) 21:34, 3 January 2011 (UTC)

The painting is public domain, the painter died >70 years ago. Since this is a reproduction of a 2D work the applicable licensing tag is {{PD-Art}}, see Commons:When to use the PD-Art tag. The correct path in Commons:Upload will be "From somewhere else" with the licensing option "Reproduction of a painting that is in the public domain because of its age".
The license tag selected at the moment is not realy wrong, but also not correct, change it to {{PD-Art}}. Note that PD-Art can not apply to photographs of 3D artwork, here the photographer will enjoy copyrights and the photographic work must have a free license, files like File:Carpeaux - Ugolino And His Sons.JPG (will nominate it for deletion) can be misleading. Note also that the Commons:When to use the PD-Art tag policy is based on U.S. law, the situation in the UK is different, there someone who reproduces a painting can claim copyright protection on their photo. Normaly all files on Commons must be free in the country of origin and the U.S., here as a notable exception Wikimedia Commons policy ignors such copyright claims in the country of origin for the photographic work (here the UK). And p.s.: For advanced editing you can use Template:Artwork with all its features, check some famous paintings for examples, if you like. --Martin H. (talk) 22:37, 3 January 2011 (UTC)
Martin H., thank you so much. I've changed the license to {{PD-Art}} and added Template:Artwork. With apologies to the museum (they paid good money for this in 1960 I would guess), but following the rules here. -SusanLesch (talk) 23:38, 3 January 2011 (UTC)
Youre welcome, well done with the template and all the information. --Martin H. (talk) 23:44, 3 January 2011 (UTC)


Hi, I just wanted to move File:Hercules_Hatra_Iraq_Parthian_period_1st_2st_century_CE.jpg to File:Hercules_Hatra_Iraq_Parthian_period_1st_2nd_century_CE.jpg just to fix the minor mistake in the file's name. I guess something went wrong. Could you help, please ? Thanks. *** in fact *** (contact) 09:54, 4 January 2011 (UTC)

I have undone your edit. To move a file on commons, use {{rename}}. cheers, Amada44  talk to me 10:02, 4 January 2011 (UTC)
Thanks, Could you do it, please ? Maybe I make another mistake. Thanks *** in fact *** (contact) 10:07, 4 January 2011 (UTC)
The image is used in english wikipedia, too. Is it possible to fix it automatically in that project as well? or do I have to fix them manually myself ? *** in fact *** (contact) 10:13, 4 January 2011 (UTC)
I don't see a difference from the original name to the new name. Amada44  talk to me 10:22, 4 January 2011 (UTC)
Yes, pretty small one. In fact "2st" must be "2nd". cheers. *** in fact *** (contact) 10:36, 4 January 2011 (UTC)
ahh, sorry. Okay, so add: {{rename|Hercules Hatra Iraq Parthian period 1st 2nd century CE.jpg|corecting spelling error}} to the image ;) Amada44  talk to me 10:39, 4 January 2011 (UTC)
What about those 5 articles in the english wikipedia that are using this image ? I can fix them there or ... ? Could you please rename it for me ? THANKS. *** in fact *** (contact) 10:43, 4 January 2011 (UTC)
okay, okay. I have done it. a bot does the rename on the english wikipedia. cheers, Amada44  talk to me 10:49, 4 January 2011 (UTC)

Tennessee's Governor's (Executive) Mansion

I am wondering is the images taken by the state of tennessee or a state government are free use pictures or images, since it say courtesy of the executive residence?Bluedogtn (talk) 18:25, 4 January 2011 (UTC)

No, works of US state governments are not generally public domain, although sometimes they are - it depends on state law. I doubt these particular images are public domain. Dcoetzee (talk) 18:33, 4 January 2011 (UTC)

Problem uploading new version

Just tried to upload a non-watermarked version of File:Anatomical-directions-kangaroo.jpg from the original page at en Wikipedia en:File:Anatomical-directions-kangaroo.jpg, but it's not working for some reason. Don't know what I'm doing wrong and I'm an experienced Commons user. Kelly (talk) 21:08, 3 January 2011 (UTC)

It seems to be there. At File:Anatomical-directions-kangaroo.jpg#filehistory, it shows an upload from 20:59, 2011 January 3. --  Docu  at 06:34, 4 January 2011 (UTC)
Kelly -- did you clear your local cache after the upload of the new image? If you don't, you will still see the old one for a while. [Brief explanation -- your browser keeps a copy of everything you look at in a "cache". Usually, if you look at something a second time within a short period, it will use the cached copy rather than go back to the source site for a new one. This works fine except when the source has changed in the interim. To clear your cache on Firefox, use Tools > Options > Advanced > Network > Offline Storage and click on "Clear Now". On Internet Explorer, it is Tools > Internet Options > Temporary Internet Files and click on "Delete Files". In either case this has no negative side effects except the possibility of slowing down your looking at some pages by a small amount.)      Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 14:37, 5 January 2011 (UTC)

File redirect

I would like to have a file redirect. For eg ta:படிமம்:பெங்களூர் வரைபடம்.png to be redirected to ta:File:Bangalore street Map.png (I don't want to rename) . Can you please help how i can achieve this. I want to localise a template (ta:Template:Infobox Indian jurisdiction) which needs these changes. Thanks -Mahir78 (talk) 13:32, 4 January 2011 (UTC)

Go to ta:படிமம்:பெங்களூர் வரைபடம்.png and create that page with #REDIRECT[[படிமம்:Bangalore street Map.png]]. On Commons you please not create such redirect as our project scope is not to support the easy use of infoboxes on all Wikipedias. At best you dont use standard filenames in infoboxes because you will always have problems with them. --Martin H. (talk) 14:54, 4 January 2011 (UTC)
It is not working. Is there any settings to be set in tawiki? thanks. -- Mahir78 (talk) 16:06, 4 January 2011 (UTC)
Hm, though it will work, I remember that I have seen something similar already. But your right, I tested it at ta:User talk:Martin H. and it is not working, I cant help you why. --Martin H. (talk) 16:11, 4 January 2011 (UTC)
You could make a local copy of the file. If your policy on ta: allows it. --Aʁsenjyʁdəgaljɔm11671 14:04, 5 January 2011 (UTC)


I would like to submit an original translation of a medieval Hebrew work in parts, called Sefer Abudarham (to which no one owns the rights). What form do I use?


This doesn't sound like a Commons project at all. Commons is a media repository, not a repository of texts. Maybe Wikisource? But I'm not even sure that's an appropriate place. - Jmabel ! talk 18:32, 6 January 2011 (UTC)
A translation of a medieval work would be accepted on Wikisource. You might want to talk to Administrator Eliyak, who is working on a lot of Hebrew translation right now.--Prosfilaes (talk) 21:38, 6 January 2011 (UTC)

Article "The Flirtations

I note that the the use of the pejorative "all-nigger" is used in this article at its opening. Is/should this be acceptable. Kentonbrown (talk) 21:17, 5 January 2011 (UTC) Kenton Brown.

Vandalism at en:The Flirtations (R&B musical group) removed. Lupo 22:36, 5 January 2011 (UTC)

Commercial Use and Hotlinking


I have researched this topic in the forums and FAQS, and yet cannot identify a clear answer.

A very large demand media company/site has instructed their writing staff (500-1,000 writers) to hotlink to images on Wikimedia servers for all articles written for the company and to frame those images on their site/client content (commercial use). This equates to at least 9 million+ hits/mo. for only one of their client sites. Company wide (across all clients) the usage/bandwidth could be staggering.

Is hotlinking of this magnitude an acceptable practice for commercial applications?

Thank You!


Hotlinking is allowed; see Commons:Reusing_content_outside_Wikimedia#Hotlinking. Wikipedia is itself a very high-bandwidth site and I don't imagine even hotlinking this extensive will be a big problem for Wikimedia servers; and widespread use of free media supports our goals. Dcoetzee (talk) 15:36, 6 January 2011 (UTC)
Agree with Dcoetzee. The more popular Commons get, the better. For issues on bandwidth (which would probably arise nowhere soon), well, if ever things need upgrading, donate for the change. ;) Rehman 15:50, 6 January 2011 (UTC)
Agreed -- though unless the images linked to are public domain, it is best to name the author and license (i.e. conform to the copyright license) on that other site. Also note that images can be modified, renamed, or deleted from Wikimedia -- or even completely changed by a newer upload -- which could affect how they are seen on the hotlinking site. If the site is high profile enough, it could even attract some vandals to do that intentionally. Just a thought so they can gauge the risks :-) Carl Lindberg (talk) 15:57, 6 January 2011 (UTC)

Thank you for your assistance. This was very helpful. I'm glad to know that bandwidth is not an issue, although the fact that the site/company strips attribution (and hyperlinks back to the source page) is still a concern from a copyright standpoint. Hopefully they will review and modify their practices in the future. Thanks again! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kevinvanr (talk • contribs) 11:36, 6 January 2011 (UTC)
If they use our images without attribution -- which can easily be done in a variety of ways, not necessarily on the page with the image, but no more than one click away, they will be in violation of the license on the vast majority of our licensed images. Perhaps you should give us the name -- more than just "A very large demand media company/site" and if you have any connection or contact with them tell them that we will take action if they do so.      Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 00:17, 7 January 2011 (UTC)

For a couple of months now, each file description pages provides code for linking images.
Most of the time, this correctly attributes the images and thus complies with the relevant license. --  Docu  at 02:47, 7 January 2011 (UTC)

Thank you Jim. I omitted the name at this point as I did not want to unfairly taint the reputation of this company if they were in compliance. Could you possible expound upon what is meant by "but no more than one click away"? Does that mean one click to the Wikimedia page where the image originates from any page on another site where the image is visible? KevinVanR (talk) 18:59, 7 January 2011 (UTC)
What I think we require is that the attribution be immediately available. As you know, the practice throughout WMF projects is to have a link to the image file page which has all the details, including attribution. An outside site could also provide it using a mouseover box (aka tool tip label), an attribution line under the image or elsewhere on the page, or a link on the page with a label such as "Sources" or "Attributions". The link doesn't have to be to Commons -- all that is required for a CC-BY license is the name.

     Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 13:04, 9 January 2011 (UTC)

Permission information is now provided

Please, have a look at this page File:King Christian X of Denmark.jpg. I have now provided permission information in Danish and in English. --Fanoftheworld (talk) 03:34, 8 January 2011 (UTC)

The statement isn't sufficient as it doesn't allow modifications. Possibly the image is public domain and could be kept. Would you have the year of death of the artist? --  Docu  at 06:41, 8 January 2011 (UTC)
The painter might be da:Knud Larsen (maler) and File:Aksel Mikkelsen.jpg by the same. --  Docu  at 10:18, 8 January 2011 (UTC)
It is painted by da:Knud Larsen (maler) in 1919. --Fanoftheworld (talk) 17:49, 9 January 2011 (UTC)




I think I uploaded an image that I took showing the Lakeside Gazebo on Lake Caroline at Meadowlark Botanical Gardens.

How I did it still remains a mystery to me. Pretty complicated process you folks have.

I wanted to use that image to illustrate the Wikimedia section on: Meadowlark Botanical Gardens. — Preceding unsigned comment added by WBFolsom (talk • contribs)

Hi, yes you did. It's at File:CherryBlossomsGazeboLakeCaroline.JPG (or to the right side of this section).
To illustrate the Wikipedia article, you can do that by going to w:Meadowlark Botanical Gardens and clicking edit there, then insert the text below and save.
Hope this helps. --  Docu  at 11:47, 8 January 2011 (UTC)

newbie to licensing - need help understanding what's what with the legal jargon

hello. i am a photographer and interested in posting some of my images up on wikimedia commons. since my livelihood is my images and style - i would not want to find all of a sudden my images posted on other people's websites where they may be acting as though it was their image. All this to say - what licensing option do i choose in order to not end up being ripped off. I would be happy to have someone use the image on their website if they reference me and my website. I have read through the licensing section and to be honest it is all above my head - i cant follow all the legalese jargon being used. And would love to understand in plain english what option i should choose. thanks to anyone who can help. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Abritandablonde (talk • contribs) 8. Jan. 2011 (UTC18:28)

You want to use the Creative Commons Attribution License 3.0. This license is an option in the upload form and requires anyone reusing your images to attribute you correctly (by your full name, not necessarily your website, but you may request that they link to that as well). Keep in mind that any image you put online may be illegally downloaded and used without attribution, but you can pursue various legal avenues for correcting such an omission. Dcoetzee (talk) 03:27, 9 January 2011 (UTC)
Yes, Cc-by-sa (full licence) should be what you're looking for. But be aware that reusers will very rarely link to your website. You'll mostly be lucky to find a "Photo: Abritandablonde, CC-by-sa". See some examples. --Martina Nolte (talk) 12:18, 9 January 2011 (UTC)
I recommended cc-by rather than cc-by-sa because the author expressed no particular interest in a copyleft license (and we shouldn't encourage license restrictions that the author has no interest in adopting). Dcoetzee (talk) 17:12, 9 January 2011 (UTC)

Convoluted situation of creation

I have some high quality medical images that I would like to upload. They are photographs of a medical condition that I experienced. They required special equipment to create, thus the person who owns the office and equipment that generated the images is not the same person who actually created the images. (And neither of them went through the uncomfortable process of having the images generated, but I doubt that counts much for copyright! Then again, they are part of my medical records.) In this situation, who owns the images?

Secondly, the people involved were enthusiastic about the idea of the images being on Wikimedia, and had no reservations about releasing the images under a free license, though they didn't think they owned them. They do not, however, have the computer skills necessary to complete the upload. If they do own the images, how do I go about clearing that so that they can be uploaded? Gimme danger (talk) 13:04, 9 January 2011 (UTC)

If the images are of the nature of a chest x-ray -- where the subject is backed against a film on a wall and a button pushed, then our general attitude is that there is no creativity and, therefore, no copyright. If they required judgment in their creation, then generally the person who provided the judgment is the copyright owner. This is not necessarily the person who actually pushed the button. (This all assumes this took place in the USA -- other places may have different rules).
The safest thing to do would be to upload them with the tag {{OTRS pending}} and have the others involved who might have an interest in the copyright follow the procedure at Commons:OTRS. They can say something like
"If I am the copyright holder in the following images: [insert list], I hereby release them for use on Wikimedia Commons and elsewhere under [license]. If I am not the copyright holder, I make no claim that I am."
Note that it is against the law in many countries to claim copyright when you do not, in fact, own it, so the "ifs" are essential here.
     Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 13:32, 9 January 2011 (UTC)
Thank you very much for your explanation. Gimme danger (talk) 06:43, 10 January 2011 (UTC)

Noob upload question

Hi, I've got a copy of the University of East London's new logo (example on this page: [1]) that I've been given permission to upload to replace the old logo that is currently used on its Wikipedia articles ( [2] )- I would like to replace the old logo with the upload of the new logo (so it automatically replaces the old logo), but I'm not sure how best ot go about this. Specific questions are:

1. How to upload it

2. How to replace the old logo with the new logo when I upload it

3. Should I rename the old logo so that it can still be kept on file at WM Commons

4. Licensing - I presume the License that applies to the old logo would be suitable for the new logo.

5. When I upload it with permission from the University, is it enough that I state that I have permission, or do I need some sort of confirmation (copy of an email etc.)?

Apologies for all the questions, I am aware that they may be very basic, but this is my first upload, and I'd like to make sure that I do it correctly. Cheers Darigan (talk) 11:02, 10 January 2011 (UTC)

Question: the old logo is uploaded on the "local" english wikipedia, here you are at "commons". Do you know the difference? and do you want to upload only "locally" or at commons? --Havang(nl) (talk) 11:50, 10 January 2011 (UTC)
Thanks for the reply - Answer, I'm not sure. I'm aware that Wikipedia and Wikimedia Commons are different things, but that they are both part of the Wikimedia Foundation family. I understand (incorrectly?)that many of the pictures used on Wikipedia are drawn from Wikimedia Commons - In your opinion, would uploading it to WP make more sense than to WM Commons? Cheers for the reply Darigan (talk) 13:46, 10 January 2011 (UTC)
I've just identified a straightforward way to update the logo through Wikipedia. Darigan (talk) 13:50, 10 January 2011 (UTC)
An image uploaded on commons is available for all wikipedia's; an image uploaded on a local wikipedia is only available on that wikipedia, but can be transferred to commons if the copyright license is suitable for commons. --Havang(nl) (talk) 16:15, 10 January 2011 (UTC)
Generally you shouldn't upload this over the old version. The old version is still a historically used version, and thus should be kept. Since it's likely fair use at Wikipedia, that would require having both logos on the page, which is likely acceptable if it's a big enough WP page.--Prosfilaes (talk) 20:56, 10 January 2011 (UTC)

can we import "" images on commons?

Can we import "" images on commons? I see that the site text is CC-BY-SA, but I have not found informations about license of images. Someone can help me? Thank you

The CC license applies only to text, the images are not licensed and dont have any source information at all. Klick the file name links below the thumbnails at As long as the images have no copyright holder information and no free license indicated we cant use them here. Apparently, according that the images are uploaded by the same Wikia user but have different quality and different sizes, the Wikia user isnt the author but just uploaded some random webimages to illustrate his Wikia articles, not appropriate for Commons or Wikipedia. --Martin H. (talk) 14:42, 10 January 2011 (UTC)
Generally speaking, copyvios run rampant on Wikia, in both text and images, because no one is interested in policing those projects and the WMF is sufficiently shielded by OCILLA not to care. I wouldn't upload any work from Wikia without independent verification of its copyright status. Dcoetzee (talk) 23:27, 10 January 2011 (UTC)

Correct way to use an image (from an animation)

Hello, I would like to use a screenshot from this animation:

Alter it a little (contrast, saturation, image size...) and use it as icon for a commercial iphone app. I believe the right license would be the creative commons one. Does the license cover that and if so, how may I comply to these attribution requirements:

1. Attribution — You must attribute the work in the manner specified by the author or licensor (but not in any way that suggests that they endorse you or your use of the work).

I couldn't find information how the creator would like me to attribute him

2. Share Alike — If you alter, transform, or build upon this work, you may distribute the resulting work only under the same or similar license to this one.

In which way can I put the resulting image under creative commons? It's just an image within an app...

Thank you for any help.

-- 14:30, 11 January 2011 (UTC)

For images, the Share Alike clause is generally understood to mean "if you modify the image to create a new image you must license that image under the same license" - it's okay to incorporate it into a composite work with a different license like your application. As for Attribution, you need to indicate the author's name and the name of the license at some reasonable location, like in the credits/about box for the software. Dcoetzee (talk) 12:34, 13 January 2011 (UTC)

Image not showing?

Not sure what's going on, but the image I've uploaded will not load. Any ideas?

Wend0144 (talk) 19:12, 11 January 2011 (UTC)

Pretty easy: look in the source code: You have inserted a external bitmap image (ascii_table.png) which cannot be done in this way. Bitmap embedding is disabled for svgs as far as I know. You should create a bitmap image OR a svg.

<image overflow="visible" width="984" height="750" xlink:href="ascii_table.png" transform="matrix(0.7501 0 0 0.7501 0 0)"> </image>

Useful: test your svgs with Commons:SVG_Check before uploading (it will display the svgs like if they were uploaded).
You can create a svg without this bitmap embedding and upload it as a new version. If you do it: Be sure to reload the page in your browser (en:Wikipedia:Bypass your cache). Cheers --Saibo (Δ) 20:11, 11 January 2011 (UTC)

/* Licensing */

I added File:Laskowski Battery Hel 1939.tif Nikbot answered - it's not a valid license. I want to use the some licence as in - but I tried several times, with no result... Please, help me! Vallenty (talk) 14:47, 12 January 2011 (UTC)

Filnik has fixed it now for you. In General: please only use one talk page for one topic.
See Commons:Copyright_tags#Poland or Commons:Oznaczenia licencji. Cheers --Saibo (Δ) 15:22, 13 January 2011 (UTC)

Meacham 50th Anniversary BW.jpg‎

I THINK I have fixed the licensing for File:Meacham 50th Anniversary BW.jpg‎

Will someone please check for me?


Jpg1954 (talk) 19:41, 13 January 2011 (UTC)

Edit categories of an uploaded file

Every question qualifies for RTFM answer, however, reading thousands of pages for finding a single answer may take a lifetime.

I am a newbie and I’d like to know how to edit the categories of an ALREADY UPLOADED image. Thus I have assigned the wrong categories and I need to edit them.

General note: the structure of the categories is the greatest mess I’ve seen in my life & I am old enough. Entropy1963 (talk) 10:10, 14 January 2011 (UTC)

There are several tools that make category editing very fast, but a newbie should probably do it by hand. Just click "Edit" at the top of the page and scroll down -- categories are usually toward the end of a file -- until you find the offending cats. Then change as needed or add more. For example, to your beautiful File:Patagonia aerial.jpg, you might enter [[Category:Aerial photographs of Chile]] by simply typing it below [[Category:Patagonia]].
On File:Ushuaia port.jpg, I would remove Category:Photographs of Argentina and Category:Cities and villages as they are both far too general -- Category:Ushuaia will be in both of them, many levels up. I might add the category for the two cruise ships that are visible -- most of them have their own cat, and add a cat appropriate to the red hull A52, if you remember what it is. I would also add Category:Ports and harbours in Argentina.
Our category system is certainly not perfect, but remember that is designed by many committees and, in each case, represents what the interested editors think is the best way to do it. You will see somewhat more sense to it if you get more familiar with it -- and I certainly hope you do because your images are interesting and the aerial is striking.      Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 12:33, 14 January 2011 (UTC)

Thank you for answering. I followed all your recommendations, however, I have another question: in the Category:Patagonia there are 179 files as we speak, varying from people, animals, plants etc. How can I create a subcategory, say Aerial pictures of Patagonia?
Also I have some pictures in Wikipedia. Can I move them here in commons? Or copy them? Entropy1963 (talk) 15:01, 14 January 2011 (UTC)

I find that the easiest way to learn to do things is to look at similar things. For example, we have Category:Aerial photographs of Buenos Aires (note that it is "photographs", not "pictures". Click on "Edit" and look at the text:
[[Category:Aerial photographs of cities|Buenos Aires]]
[[Category:Buenos Aires]]
[[Category:Aerial photographs of Argentina]]
So, type "Category:Aerial photographs of Patagonia" into the search box and click on "create the page". You might then, put the new category into the following:
[[Category:Aerial photographs|Patagonia]] The "|Patagonia" forces it to sort under "Patagonia" rather than under "Aerial" in the parent category.
Since Patagonia lies in both Argentina and Chile, I would not put the new category in either of Category:Aerial photographs of Argentina or Category:Aerial photographs of Chile.
As for your pictures on WP:EN, there is a script available for moving them, but I have found it difficult to use. If I still had the pictures on my hard disk, I would simply upload them to Commons, with the same name as the file on WP:EN. (This assume that they are freely licensed according to Commons requirements, not "fair use" on WP:EN or otherwise problematic.) You can then add the tag {{subst:ncd|image name on Commons}} to the image on WP:EN and it will be deleted. As you probably know, WP article automatically go first to the local files, then to Commons to get images.      Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 16:20, 14 January 2011 (UTC)

Uploading new version of an image

Hello. I'd like to upload a new version of this image. However, the upload software does not allow me to do that at this moment. I get an error message stating that I must upload to a different filename, and then ask here for someone moving the image. Could you please move image file "File:Levante 1135 corretto.png" to "File:Levante 1135.png"? Thank you --LoStrangolatore (talk) 11:59, 14 January 2011 (UTC)

In progress. --Havang(nl) (talk) 12:46, 14 January 2011 (UTC)
✓ Done. Moved files. Please check file descriptions and file use at File:Levante 1135.png and File:Levante 1135 (superseded).png. --Havang(nl) (talk) 13:27, 14 January 2011 (UTC)
Thank you very much! :) --LoStrangolatore (talk) 14:58, 14 January 2011 (UTC)

Please move Frank_McKenna2.jpg to Frank_McKenna.jpg

I was not allowed to replace Frank_McKenna.jpg with a cleaner cropped version, I was directed to upload it as a new image and request a move here. Here is my request that Frank_McKenna2.jpg be moved to Frank_McKenna.jpg. Thanks. - Pictureprovince (talk) 17:42, 14 January 2011 (UTC)

Although Commons:Avoid overwriting existing files is not formal policy, it has a lot of support. I think it applies here. Both the seal on the wall and the name card in front will appeal to some potential users. There is certainly no reason not to keep both.     Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 18:18, 14 January 2011 (UTC)

I don't know anything about how to change/edit something on Wikimedia, but the picture on Hurricane Dora at incorrectly gives the date of the hurricane as 1999 (it was 1964) and incorrectly identifies the ocean as the Pacific (it was the Atlantic). Thank you.

That's because this picture is of the Hurricane Dora that was in the Pacific in 1999.--Prosfilaes (talk) 03:10, 15 January 2011 (UTC)

File:Determinants of Gastric Acid Secretion.png

please speedy delete it. It is the duplicate of File:Determinants of Gastric Acid Secretion.svg. I don't know how to do that here. Thank you.-- ♫Greatorangepumpkin♫ T 21:51, 14 January 2011 (UTC)

Sorry, I cannot read your request since it is completely unreadable due to a big, glowing orange rectangle. Cheers --Saibo (Δ) 22:04, 14 January 2011 (UTC)
Four comments:
  1. Generally we permit similar png and svg files to coexist. I note that the png is somewhat smaller, which may be better for some potential users.
  2. In any event, it is absolutely not a permitted reason for a speedy delete.
  3. The appropriate action would be to tag the file with {{delete}} and follow the instructions there to put it in the ordinary Commons:Deletion requests process.
  4. When you refer to a file on any of the talk pages -- Admin Noticeboard, Help, Village Pump, Undeletion Requests -- wherever -- please put the brackets and colon on it to form a link (as I have done above) -- it makes dealing with your request a little faster.
     Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 14:18, 15 January 2011 (UTC)


This file has been re-directed to File:BSicon_MROADq.svg. Unfortunately, re-directed files do not display on the canal route maps. I was working on replacing the MROADq symbol with the uAKRZq symbol, and have altered lots of maps, but now they all show missing symbols on them. When I had finished, I was going to ask for MROADq to be deleted. Is there any way to get BSicon_uAKRZq.svg back, so that the maps display properly? Then I can finish the task. Bob1960evens (talk) 23:57, 13 January 2011 (UTC)

Actually, image redirects should display properly for exactly this reason -- that without that ability, it would be hard to move or change the name of an image.
I wasn't familiar with this mapping system -- although as a map user, I'm glad you introduced me to it, thank you -- I may be very wrong, but it looks like it is OK, see for example, the A1033 Ennerdale Link bridge on River Hull.
Anyway, if I understand you correctly, you want the permanent file to be File:BSicon_uAKRZq.svg and File:BSicon_MROADq.svg will be deleted once you are finished. Since several active users -- Jacklee, Axpde, and Jeff G. have all had a hand in the change, I suggest you discuss the correct name with them. They seem to think that "MROADq" is better.      Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 12:09, 14 January 2011 (UTC)
Thanks. It was the River Hull article that first alerted me to the problem, as the MROADq symbols do not display - instead I see a square box with a small red cross in the middle, so if you can see it correctly, I do not understand what is happening. I have just looked at the map on another machine, and that displays "unknown route-map component uAKRZq", which completely wrecks the map. Bob1960evens (talk) 23:41, 15 January 2011 (UTC)

Uploading a new version of File:1944 German Military Mark.JPG

I have created a new better version of this file. The have tried to upload it in .png, .JPG, .jpg, .gif, and .tif . The new version is only 2-18 MB depending upon the file type used in the particular attempt. Each time I try, it says "File extension does not match MIME type." Any ideas as to get it upload? All help is greatly appreciated as this is starting to frustrate me. Thanks! Sumsum2010 (talk) 05:44, 15 January 2011 (UTC)

Do you try to overwrite 1944_German_Military_Mark.JPG (which is a jpeg) with a .tif, .gif or .png file? That will not work, the file type must match the file extension, a .tif file can not be uploaded to a .jpg filename. You may convert your .tif to a .jpg and overwrite it over the first upload - apparently you already did this. --01:07, 16 January 2011 (UTC)

Updating license on photo

Hello- I am trying to correct the license on a photo I uploaded to Commons. The picture is of me, but was taken by a friend. It was suggested that I use Creative Commons to select the correct license. I have permission from my friend to use the photo. I am now stuck in how to correct the license on the existing uploaded photo and can not seem to figure it out. Any assistance would be greatly appreciated. B.J.Carmichael (talk) 18:10, 15 January 2011 (UTC)

Since your friend owns the copyright, you must have him or her follow the procedure at Commons:OTRS to give us permission to host the image. Be sure that your friend puts the URL of the image in the e-mail. You may add the tag {{OTRS pending}} to the image -- just click on the "Edit" link at the top of the page and put this on the first line: {{subst:OP}}. You should change the source and author in the description to your friend's name.     Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 11:52, 16 January 2011 (UTC)

Uploading image

I am not able to use some of the images that i have uploaded. Kindly help. How to get images copy right? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sajeevkumarc (talk • contribs) 05:44, 16 January 2011 (UTC)

Please tell us more. What is the exact problem? Which image? And, please sign your comments here by adding four tildes ~~~~ to the end.      Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 11:57, 16 January 2011 (UTC)

Looking at one of your uploads (File:Pagoda and Palms.jpg), it appears that you didn't license the image with a free license (see e.g. Commons:Choosing a license, for a detailed list, see Commons:Copyright_tags#Free_Creative_Commons_licenses).

Once you decided on one, you need to insert the template in the file description page of the image(s). --  Docu  at 06:20, 17 January 2011 (UTC)

problem with jpg rendering?

I got a black box instead of a file when uploading this File:22doperationsgroup-emblem.jpg, is the file corrupt or is there a problem with jpg rendering. The file looks fine when viewed in full resolution. Cheers P. S. Burton (talk) 22:34, 16 January 2011 (UTC)

Looks fine to me. Try clearing your browser cache. Let me know if you're still experiencing this problem. Dcoetzee (talk) 03:24, 17 January 2011 (UTC)
Still looks weird. I try changing both browser and computer. Looks good in Firefox. But in Safari and Chrome it is so dark that it almost looks like a black square. P. S. Burton (talk) 16:07, 17 January 2011 (UTC)

Problem nominated a file for deletion

I'm primarily a Wikipedia user, and came here to nominate a file (File:33c723f62a78838a m.jpg) for deletion, because I believe it to be a copyright violation. I tried following the instructions, but I don't think I've done it right. The deletion subrequest page says that it's still incomplete, although I can't see what's incomplete about it. Second, I used the subst mentioned in the instructions on Commons:Deletion requests/2011/01/17, and when I look at the source my entry looks like it matches the other ones, but instead of a simple list my entry has a big template that doesn't look like it belongs there. Can someone both fix the problem and let me know what I did wrong so that if/when I need to do this again, I can get it right? Thanks very much. Qwyrxian (talk) 02:55, 17 January 2011 (UTC)

Sometimes the deletion request will claim to be incomplete when it is not due to caching bugs. You can fix this by clicking "edit", then replacing "edit" with "purge" in the URL and pressing ENTER. In the deletion request subpage, you accidentally used the "delete" template instead of "delete2". I've fixed this. Next time, click on "Click here to show further instructions" on the deletion template and copy-paste the wikitext under "1." to create the subpage. You can also use the "Nominate for deletion" tool on the left-hand side in the Toolbox to do this all for you. Dcoetzee (talk) 03:19, 17 January 2011 (UTC)
Thanks for the help. You mention that it is correct to use "delete2" instead of "delete"; does that mean that the instructions on [[Commons:Deletion policy#Regular deletion are incorrect, as I believe that it mentions the "delete" template? Or did i misread what those instructions are for? Qwyrxian (talk) 03:29, 17 January 2011 (UTC)
The delete template is placed on the image description page, while the delete2 template is used on the deletion requests subpage. All you need to remember though is to either use the "Nominate for deletion" tool, or use the delete template, then follow the instructions listed on the template. Dcoetzee (talk) 03:46, 17 January 2011 (UTC)

Help with photo upload

I've really not much idea what I'm doing regarding photos! I have a photo I want to use. I've uploaded it here:, its a photo taken in about 1970, there is some information on the back as to what organisation took the photo, but they are no longer in existence AFAICT, I've obviously made a mistake with the licence technmically. Can anyone advise me please, thanks.

Works taken in about 1970 are still under copyright with few exceptions. If I understand English law, the photographer probably held the copyright anyway. Even if/where the corporation held the copyrights, the copyrights of the company would have been sold with the rest of the assets in any bankruptcy case, and if they just dissolved, the owners of the company would have owned the assets.--Prosfilaes (talk) 18:02, 17 January 2011 (UTC)
THanks, so basically, Wikipedia won't accept it anyway?
There may be a place for it on the English Wikipedia, where it could be used under Wikipedia:Fair use. It seems unlikely, though, because the Duke is a well photographed person. Because of its unclear copyright status, it cannot stay here, on Commons -- we do not have Fair Use files..      Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 03:05, 18 January 2011 (UTC)

File:Conna Castle.jpg

This photo was uploaded with a CC 3.0 licence, but was added to an English Wikipedia article with a caption "Courtesy of Lorna Macdonald Photography", suggesting that it belongs to this organisation, is this evidence of a copyright violation? January (talk) 21:23, 17 January 2011 (UTC)

It can be. But her Wikipedia user page, which is soon to be speedily deleted, says " Photography Lorna Macdonald Lorna Macdonald is primarily a portrait and landscape photographer living in Conna in the South of Ireland. Originally from Glasgow, Scotland Lorna moved to Conna in 2007. Having qualified from Glasgow Metropolitan College in photography with awards already under her belt she is now building a reputation in the local area for portraiture and has recently completed her 2nd successful calendar depicting local characters and landscapes. Lorna is available for portrait, weddings and landscape work". So I would say it's almost certainly hers.--Prosfilaes (talk) 21:42, 17 January 2011 (UTC)
I put a {{delete}} on it. It's probably a {{Speedy}}, but I tend to be conservative on such things.      Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 03:14, 18 January 2011 (UTC)
Seems like a case where one should ask for an OTRS permission. --  Docu  at 05:17, 18 January 2011 (UTC)

Wikisource Supplement

As a supplement to a work on Wikisource, I would like to upload a .txt file. The plan is to offer reader multiple options of downloading to read text. I see that it is not currently a supported file type, is this a problem? - Theornamentalist (talk) 02:22, 18 January 2011 (UTC)

No, you cannot upload a txt file. People should just save the wikipage containing the text (e.g. via copy and paste). Or get a Mediawiki addon offering downloads of a wiki page in different formats for wikisource.
By the way: wait some minutes more in the chat and you get help. :-) Cheers --Saibo (Δ) 02:45, 18 January 2011 (UTC)
Copying and pasting gives image markup, and occasionally other undesirable code. I don't see any harm in supporting a .txt file, can this be changed? Regarding the chat, I am having problems with the connection dropping, the chat usually works :) - Theornamentalist (talk) 02:58, 18 January 2011 (UTC)
User <pre></pre> tags to embed the text document on the page. While copying this text, no markups will be copied along with it. --Sreejith K (talk) 03:05, 18 January 2011 (UTC)
(EC) What about saving the text to a wiki page and give users this link (probably via a template getting the name of the wikipage {{download|name}})? download here (save as name.txt).
I see no direct harm in text files. But maybe unnecessary uploads of some. If you want to change policy you should ask at COM:VP. Cheers --Saibo (Δ) 03:13, 18 January 2011 (UTC)
Thank you both; regarding <pre>, a lot of works are located on several or many pages (ie, separation by chapter), so I thought that offering the entire work complete would be easy for users. And about using a separate page to host the plain text, I saw that as creating an unnecessary page, but I guess it can be seen similarly for commons.. - Theornamentalist (talk) 03:28, 18 January 2011 (UTC)
I'd say you can handle e.g. subpages of an article way better than files on a different wiki. If you move an article you could simply include the subpages in the move and have all with a consistent file name. And apparently by using the raw option (at least for me) my browser asks right away for to download it (behaviour might change - therefore the suggestion for a template). By using {{PAGENAME}} or similar variables you would not even need a parameter. Just place the text on a subpage wich needs to be named equally for all articles.
In general: do you really want to copy the whole article text manually for a txt download? A automatic version converting the article to plain text would seem better to me. Similarly as it is done for the pdf download of Wikipedia articles or the printable version (which simply uses a different stylesheet). Cheers --Saibo (Δ) 03:52, 18 January 2011 (UTC)

Request for step by step instructions for uploading svg redraws of jpgs

Where do I find step by step (for noobies) instructions for uploading vector images and replacing pixel images. I have created a few dozen svgs for images I found in the "PNG or JPEG images that should be SVG" and the "" galleries. I cannot find suitable instructions or links to such instructions anywhere. I see a request to change a template for a (pixel) image when a vector image can replace it but do not understand the instructions. I want to help but am stymied as I do not find the path in this forest of information. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Gregors (talk • contribs) 03:17, 18 January 2011 (UTC)

I am having the same problem as the user above. I need understandable instructions on how to upload the new format (png to svg) of an existing image. The new image can not be uploaded using the "Upload a new version of this file" because the "Destination filename" can not be changed. "Upload warning - File extension does not match MIME type". How do you upload the file and link it to the original image file page? Can someone give instructions? I have already asked "Help me" and "Chat", and just got links to "Wikipedia:Images", "Wikipedia:Image use policy", and "Wikipedia:Copyrights". I've already read those pages + tons more, I don't need links. I need instructions!!! Niineta (talk) 11:17, 18 January 2011 (UTC)

Sorry for the confusion. None of us love the upload page, even with many, many uploads under our belts. The problem here is that an SVG is not a new version of a JPG or PNG, it is a new file. I should add that the following is not the official way to do this -- there is a separate script for derivative works -- which this is -- but I have always found it even more difficult. If any of my colleagues can improve on this, please feel free to mark up everything below.

  1. Create the SVG on your computer, usually with the same file name as the JPG, except of course, that the new file will be "oldname.svg".
  2. Go to the old file in your browser and click on "Edit" at the top
  3. In a separate browser window or tab, Click on "Upload file" under "Participate" in the left margin of each page.
  4. Click on "It is entirely my own work" -- it's not your own work, but we'll fix that.
  5. Page down, click on the "Browse" button opposite "Local filename", and find and click on your new file on your computer.
  6. In the "Original source" box, type "[[:File:oldname.jpg]]" Note the preceding colon in ":File", which displays a link instead of the file.
  7. In the "Author" box, type the name of the author of the original file and, "converted to SVG by" and your user name.
  8. In the "Date of work" box put the original date followed by "converted on" and the date of the upload.
  9. In the "Description" box, put an appropriate description of the file, which can certainly be the same as the one on the existing file.
  10. In the "Permission" box, type "see below"
  11. In the "Licensing" box, insert the same license tag or tags that are on the original image. (While technically you could put a more restrictive license on your derivative work, actually choosing that would a matter left to experts, so it is best to simply use the same license(s)). Getting the tag(s) is the reason you have the old file open for editing.
  12. At the bottom, you can add categories, which can be the same as those on the existing image if they are appropriate.
  13. Click on "Preview" at the bottom and check to see that it is as you expected
  14. Click on "Upload file"
  15. Drop a note here along the lines of "How is this? [[:File:oldname.svg]].

Questions? Unclear? Ask here.      Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 12:48, 18 January 2011 (UTC)

Thank you for your help. With some experimenting I was able to upload. Because I was unsure of what I was doing I typed everything into a document. Using copy and paste as I made changes. There were a couple of unexpected areas (eg. the license can only be selected from a drop-down box) I just chose (recommended). I put the original license notation in the "Additional info:" box". Hopefully I won't get deleted, for any mistakes I may have made. I also edited the "original image page" to let them know that the SVG version is available, "vector version available|new image name.svg" (using the double curly brackets) I read this somewhere, so I hope this was appropriate. Niineta (talk) 17:31, 18 January 2011 (UTC)
You did fine, except for one fatal flaw -- the original file, :File:National Association of Girl Guides and Girl Scouts of Armenia 1996.png is not on Commons, but WP:EN, and it is not freely licensed -- it has a fair use tag there. I suggest you upload your SVG on WP:EN and replace the PNG in the article with your SVG. It cannot remain here unless you can show that it is for some reason in the Public Domain, which, apparently, WP:EN thinks it is not. Sorry.      Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 18:16, 18 January 2011 (UTC)
Well, I'm back to square 1. I used the instructions at, It defaulted to Commons. My experience here is one mistake after another, I'm sure I'll soon be qualified to do everything. Anyway I'll try again. Do I have to request them to delete the file, or will that be done automatically? Niineta (talk) 18:58, 18 January 2011 (UTC)

Suggestion to improve wording on the Wikimedia Commons Special Page: Upload File page

Currently the wording on the top of this page says: "All users of files found on Wikimedia Commons must be given the Four Freedoms:"

I would suggest that this wording might be more helpful if it was rewritten to state, 

"All files uploaded to Wikimedia Commons must be properly documented as having been duly released for free use and distribution by anyone as per the Four Use and Distribution Freedoms.  The Four Use and Distribution Freedoms are:"

The current wording seems to me to be somewhat unclear and ambiguous.  Are not the files themselves what we want to have free use of, not the users?  Also, why is this Special Page set up so that it blocks an upload unless the user selects the right license?  This seems to me to be a rather cryptic way of letting a typical user know which license is required.  Why not be more clear instead of setting up a page that appears to encourage users to waste unnecessary time finding out what doesn't work in a round about way.  Why not just simply first state what does work and don't even offer all of the disabled license options?  Thanks,  Scottperry (talk) 09:39, 18 January 2011 (UTC)

  • The first proposal (rewrite...) is fairly unusual for someone with such a long record here. Do you actually read fine print on upload form every time? Well I don't, for a simple reason - it's not there! These so-called "freedoms" don't appear in regular upload worklow. YMMV, but for me they only popup after a glitch - either wrong characters in file name, or something on the receiving end. I call it "fuckup screen". Don't give me useless pep talk, explain the problem! Why was my connection reset? "It's all about freedom"! Brilliant! 
  • Bottomline: if neither the user, nor the site foul up, the user will never see "It's all about freedom" screen.
  • Ideally the whole upload process needs an overhaul, but let's not push the subject, or else "usability gurus" will make it completely unbearable and unusable like that "wizard" thing. NVO (talk) 11:31, 18 January 2011 (UTC)
OK, it never hurts to ask.  Thanks, Scottperry (talk) 15:08, 18 January 2011 (UTC)
Sorry for being rude - "I am a vulgar man but my music is not" - after seeing every third or second upload crash and return to this blue screen of "It's all about freedom"... I recall there were times when uploading 5Mp files one by one was swift and easy, now even a 500k is a fifty-fifty disconnect. NVO (talk) 16:12, 18 January 2011 (UTC)

No longer able to upload duplicate or deleted file?

I am trying to upload Henry Payne's painting from as File:Henry Arthur Payne - Plucking the Red and White Roses in the Old Temple Gardens.jpg. It was previously uploaded here as File:Choosing the Red and White Roses (Payne).jpg and deleted before 2011 because it did not fall into UK public domain until 1 Jan 2011. I am uploading to another more precise and correct name.

However, the upload interface does not allow me to upload the image. The option "Ignore warning and save file anyway" does not work. It returns me to the Upload interface and clears the Source file entry. I have noticed this when trying to upload duplicates as well (to use {{badname}} instead of {{rename}} after uploading a file with an incorrect name). If Commons have decided to stop uploads of duplicates and deleted versions, the interface (and templates) should have been made consistent with the decision. Jappalang (talk) 02:21, 18 January 2011 (UTC)

Strange - if I try to upload this file it gives me a proper error:
"Eine identische Datei dieser Datei (File:Choosing the Red and White Roses (Payne).jpg) wurde früher gelöscht. Überprüfe das Lösch-Logbuch, bevor du sie hochlädst."
However "Lösch-logbuch" (deletion log) should be linked to the relevant log or the entries being directly displayed like at [3]. Especially since the red link displayed link to the upload form which is really contra productive. Somebody reading here is able to do it? Or point me to the relevant message page`
You could request undeletion at Commons:Undeletion requests/Current requests or just wait until an admin comes by here.
However at File:Choosing the Red and White Roses.jpg the same painting is at a bit lower (63%) res with a wrong license. Overwrite it (not sure in this case as the current version has a bit different colors not only lower res) or fix it with your correct description. Cheers --Saibo (Δ) 03:01, 18 January 2011 (UTC)
I did get the warning (English and with the problems as you pointed out), but previously, we could just "Ignore warning and save file anyway" and upload the file; now that option does not do what it says anymore. I know of the other image, but like you said, someone might revert to the previous version simply on the point of "different colours" and I wish to avoid such frivolousness (that and the vague name). Jappalang (talk) 06:46, 18 January 2011 (UTC)
Well, whoever wants to try uploading the image from and resolve the ensuing problem can go ahead. I have uploaded a scan from a book to File:Henry Arthur Payne - Plucking the Red and White Roses in the Old Temple Gardens.jpg instead and would likely not bother with that site's image for the moment. Jappalang (talk) 02:13, 19 January 2011 (UTC)

Uploading new version of an image

Hello, I have created and uploaded new versions of the following graphs (including more recent data). I have a new account and cannot overwrite existing files. Could you please move the following files to their original location.

Original name -> Temporary name: "File:Airbus-boeing ordercomparision.png" -> "File:Airbus-boeing ordercomparision 2010.png", "File:Airbus-boeing_deliverycomparison.png" -> "File:Airbus-boeing_deliverycomparison_2010.png", "File:Airbus-boeing combinedcomparison.png" -> "File:Airbus-boeing combinedcomparison 2010.png"

Thanks! --Thefroyo (talk) 13:57, 18 January 2011 (UTC)

In general, for changes like this we prefer to keep the old images and simply title the new ones appropriately. A rename may be in order for the older images, to indicate that they end in prior years. Powers (talk) 22:26, 18 January 2011 (UTC)

change the display photo of Jeanne Beker on Wikipedia


I represent Jeanne Beker and she would like me to change the display photo of her on Wikipedia. Am I able to do this? And how would I go about doing that?


Evan — Preceding unsigned comment added by Egesualdi (talk • contribs) 2011-01-18T18:27:47 (UTC)

Go to Commons:Upload and upload a new picture and then replace the file name in her article by the file name of the new photo. If you did not shoot the photo by yourself the photographer need to release it under a free license. See COM:OTRS. Cheers --Saibo (Δ) 21:13, 18 January 2011 (UTC)


Seems this file is to be deleted ? I thought is was Public Domain because it relates to Charles Dickens ( died 1870 ). Please do what is necessary. Thanks for helping. --Forstbirdo (talk) 19:47, 18 January 2011 (UTC)

File:VIVO DE NIA SINJORO JESUO.pdf Appears to be a translation made by en:Montagu C. Butler who died 1970, therefore it is possibly not public domain. --Martin H. (talk) 20:59, 18 January 2011 (UTC)
(EC) File:VIVO DE NIA SINJORO JESUO.pdf (please link your files when asking). Yes, it would have been deleted until someone adds a valid license template. I added some information and a template now. Please have a look at it (in the edit mode).
@Martin: There is no content made by the translator visible. ;) Cheers --Saibo (Δ) 21:06, 18 January 2011 (UTC)
True, I just saw that pdf file format was selected and thought its a whole book. --Martin H. (talk) 21:11, 18 January 2011 (UTC)

Using Images On Monetized Website


I publish articles on a monetized website i.e. my website provides free content to readers but to pay for this I use Google Adsense and other monetization sources. Can I use images from wikimedia on my website?

Thank you.

message sent Tues. Jan. 18,2011 7:59 PM CST

Yes. See Commons:Reusing content outside Wikimedia for conditions. --EugeneZelenko (talk) 15:48, 19 January 2011 (UTC)

Uploading remake of existing file

There is an illustration which I believe is File:Eratosthenes' method for determining the size of the Earth.GIF I thought it was not very clean so I redrew it as an svg and exported that as .png (I seem to remember some problems with svg being proprietary code?) I try to use the form for uploading a "derivative work from the commons" (link on It took four tries and I even started writing this message before it worked, and finally did not get a red box with "File does not exist" After going through several pages with all too little help for a first time user I eventually get to the upload page. There a green box tells me that the destination file name does not exist! (which it turns out might be a good thing?) Help and guidance here would be wonderful. In general there is room for guiding text for us seldom time users. I would appreciate information on what to expect when and how far along in the process I have come (or rather how much is left) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Gregors (talk • contribs) 2011-01-14T10:13:16 (UTC) (+linked file name)

Dummy timestamp: 10:13, 14 January 2011 (UTC)

Copyright of Certificates

Hi, Malayalam Wikipedia has an image uploaded currently as File:Ravi_3.jpg. The file is self-explanatory and it is the photograph of the certificate given to the movie Elippathayam at the BFI London Film Festival in 1982. I am not sure what copyright applies here. Can any one help me understand whether the image can be kept in wikipedia? --Sreejith K (talk) 17:03, 19 January 2011 (UTC)

The question is, on what license this image can be kept in wiki. The uploader is not sure about the correct free license that needs be be used for this upload. --Shijualex (talk) 01:32, 20 January 2011 (UTC)
If the question is whether the image can be kept where it is, you must ask at Malayalam Wikipedia, as the various Wikipedias have different rules.
If the question is whether the image can be moved to Wikimedia Commons, that is, here, then the image at the top is a problem. In order to keep it on Commons, we will have to see that the image is free of copyright. It could well be PD-old, but you will have to prove that, by finding the painting somewhere and showing that the artist has been dead for seventy years. Although you might be able to get a license from the London Film Festival, that will not be sufficient, as they may be infringing the artist's copyright. We are more careful here than many commercial users.      Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 20:36, 20 January 2011 (UTC)
Regretably Category:London in art does not have it, also tineye did not find the extracted painting and a google search on 'london painting'.... too much, but I not found it. --Martin H. (talk) 21:23, 20 January 2011 (UTC)
Since the image is on top of a certificate given by a prestigious firm, I feel that they have bought the copyright from the artist. I can only assume this, but it is generally the case. So if we can get a proof that British Film Institute owns the copyright of the image, can the image be moved to commons? When someone gets an award from an Institute like this, do they just pass on the award or does they release the copyright of it as well? --Sreejith K (talk) 03:28, 21 January 2011 (UTC)
The image is probably PD, but "probably" is not good enough for us. If it is not PD and the British Film Institute licensed its use, it is almost certain that they licensed it only for use on the certificates and that they have no right to grant a free license such as the one we would require. It is very rare for an image user to actually buy all rights to an image when a very limited license would be enough.      Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 15:10, 21 January 2011 (UTC)

Deletion of files

I am affraid I have massed up quite a bit and uploaded quite a bunch of files from Flicker only afterwords to realize that they were actually under an unauthorized license (see here for an example). Now I am uncertain of which prodedure to follow. Should I do something myself (and if so how do I identify them most easily, I think they are all from one flicker member) or will it be fixed automatically? Sorry about the screw-up and inconvenience.Ramblersen (talk) 23:24, 20 January 2011 (UTC)

For images from flickr we have a review system, that system already found File:Ny Carlsberg Glyptotek - Monument to Victor Hugo.jpg and others licensed under a NC ND license on flickr. This will be deleted soon. Im sorry for your work. You may use a tool like Flinfo or some of the flickr upload bots that will deny uploading if the license isnt free. See Commons:Flickr#Tools. --Martin H. (talk) 23:32, 20 January 2011 (UTC)

Renaming a category

I added a Category:Greyhounds in Art, then put it in a subcategory, category:Dogs in Art, which does not exist, only category:Dogs in art.

Now I cannot remove Dogs in Art.

What should I do, what should I have done, aside better typing? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Henrytow (talk • contribs) 2011-01-21T00:17:13 (UTC)

(linked and fixed spelling in cat name --Saibo (Δ) 02:08, 21 January 2011 (UTC))
Category:Dogs in Art did never exist. Category:Greyhounds in Art is now a subcategory of Category:Dogs in art. Everything is fine.
I have added Category:Greyhounds in Art now to your File:Aelbert Cuyp, Starting for the Hunt.JPG by editing this file description page (use the edit button on top of the file's page - do not upload a new file version to try to do it: it does not work). Cheers --Saibo (Δ) 02:13, 21 January 2011 (UTC)
"Art" is usually written without caps at Commons. Thus Category:Greyhounds in Art would be named "Category:Greyhounds in art". To rename it, you can request it at User talk:CommonsDelinker/commands‎‎. For more information on renaming categories, see Commons:Rename a category. --  Docu  at 07:35, 21 January 2011 (UTC)
Using CommonsDelinker/commands is maybe a bit too complicated for one asking here and since the category only had 2 members the move is easily done manually. Done now. Cheers --Saibo (Δ) 14:58, 21 January 2011 (UTC)

Deleting category

I made a mistake in the name of this category: Calvary in Katowice Panewnikach. Can somebody just cancel this category? I will be grateful. --Abraham (talk) 10:19, 21 January 2011 (UTC)

{{Speedy|I made a mistake in the name of this category}}. Deleted it however. --Martin H. (talk) 11:36, 21 January 2011 (UTC)

File:Carthage jail front entrance.jpg

There is an issue with File:Carthage jail front entrance.jpg that I have no idea how to fix "the right way" (not even sure what the right way would be in this case). The problem is described at File talk:Carthage jail front entrance.jpg.-- 17:46, 21 January 2011 (UTC)

Unless someone wants to figure out what went wrong, the easiest way might be to delete it ({{speedy}}) and transfer it once more. --  Docu  at 18:18, 21 January 2011 (UTC)
I didn't bring the image over; am I alowed to hang that template on the image, especially as it's now being used on a non en.wp article? -- 22:31, 21 January 2011 (UTC)
Maybe it's better to reupload first. You could move both images to Commons once more and then replace the uses of File:Carthage jail front entrance.jpg. --  Docu  at 08:07, 23 January 2011 (UTC)

Twitter picture for WP bio

I want to add a picture to the Wikipedia article for W:Cheng Jianping. The picture from her Twitter profile is all over the internet ( and this site lists the photo as CC Attribution 3.0. Can someone help me determine if this is ok to use and/or help me upload it? Thanks, Ocaasi (talk) 21:35, 21 January 2011 (UTC)

done Ocaasi (talk) 10:48, 22 January 2011 (UTC)
Im in doubt if this is correct. The article (following the source chain) may be is published under CC but an image that the article writer copied from Twitter is unlikely validly licensed. The license must come from the copyright owner, not from someone who is reusing the image in an CC licensed blog. --Martin H. (talk) 12:41, 22 January 2011 (UTC)
Someone else uploaded it, but is there a general status for twitter profile pics? Ocaasi (talk) 00:26, 23 January 2011 (UTC)
Anything special for twitter? Not to my knowledge.
Unless you have a clear licensing statement (under a a free license accepted here) by the real photographer you cannot use it here. However, maybe you can upload the unfree image under a fair use claim to en.wikipedia if there is no other and you urgently need it. ... as I know see seems to be done already: en:File:Cheng_Jianping.jpg Cheers --Saibo (Δ) 01:16, 23 January 2011 (UTC)

The delete template and wiki code

Could someone knowledgeable on the subject please read and comment here? Thank you.--Rockfang (talk) 04:51, 22 January 2011 (UTC)

The sample linked there was deleted. You'd need to ask an admin. --  Docu  at 08:05, 23 January 2011 (UTC)
Thank you.--Rockfang (talk) 15:45, 23 January 2011 (UTC)

Uploaded image remains BLANK

I have uploaded the image File:Charles Stewart Parnell in 1885.jpg four time. The upload gets confirmed and it is licenced correctly, but image remains BLANK,
What can the reason be. Have asked on my talk page, but get no reaction. Thank you and Greetings.Osioni (talk) 16:30, 23 January 2011 (UTC)

I have no problem seeing it. Maybe try en:Wikipedia:Bypass your cache (Ctrl+F5) while on the image page File:Charles Stewart Parnell in 1885.jpg? --Martin H. (talk) 16:33, 23 January 2011 (UTC)

Stryder - watermark

I have messed up a little bit, I wanted to crop out the watermark in this picture but instead of over writing it as suggested in the template I uploaded the cropped version to another page here, I tried to over write the cropped pic but ;;derivative upload seems not to want to do it now, can someone tidy it up for me please, thanks. Off2riorob (talk) 17:59, 23 January 2011 (UTC)

Uploading it under a different name is just fine, especially when a substantial portion of the image is removed. I linked the cropped image and removed the {{watermark}} tag. Dcoetzee (talk) 01:53, 24 January 2011 (UTC)
Ah, OK, it is good to keep the original upload, the template seemed to be telling my to over write, I'll bear that in mind, thank you. Off2riorob (talk) 16:23, 24 January 2011 (UTC)

Uploading File to Wikipedia Article

Hi. I am trying to create a new wikipedia page on a science topic and have successfully uploaded a diagram I created into Wikimedia Commons. I can't figure out how to add it to the new Wikipedia article though. Do I need to be an "autoconfirmed user" to do so? If so, how can I become one? Thanks, Alpheratsztar — Preceding unsigned comment added by Alpheratzstar (talk • contribs) 14:05, 24 January 2011 (UTC)

See en:Wikipedia:Picture tutorial how to add images to articles, that tutorial explains how to insert pictures into Wikipedia articles using wikitext. --Martin H. (talk) 14:31, 24 January 2011 (UTC)

Which license to use for authorized photo from a museum

Which license should I select for a photo sent to me by email from a French museum giving me authority to use the photo in Wikipedia provided I use the following credit; Musée départemental Arles antique. Maquette de Denis Delpalilo. Cl. Michel Lacanaud--Tvbanfield (talk) 19:43, 17 January 2011 (UTC)

It's not up to you to choose the license; the museum must choose a free license and send an e-mail to OTRS explaining same. Powers (talk) 20:33, 17 January 2011 (UTC)
Since the museum is concerned about attribution, I think the Creative Commons Attribution License 3.0 is a good choice. However you must get an additional e-mail from the museum explicitly releasing the image under that license. Permission to use the work on Wikipedia is not sufficient. For more details see Commons:OTRS. Dcoetzee (talk) 00:13, 18 January 2011 (UTC)
In cases like this it would be helpful if we suggested the text to be used in writing to the museum, and exactly what we want them to write back to OTRS.(Yes I have read OTRS#Declaration of consent for all enquiries) I a thinking of a page Help:Draft OTRS letter to museum offering an image and similar ones when we get other queries here- probably they will be similar and the existing suggestion could be templated and included. For the editor, they just need something they can cut and paste- and the recipient really needs something that has been done for them.--ClemRutter (talk) 01:03, 18 January 2011 (UTC)
Now that I stop to think about it, for most works donated by a museum, the museum would not be the sole copyright holder. It would either be {{PD-Art}} or copyright the original artist. The exception is photographs of three-dimensional works like sculptures. I'd have to know more about the work in question to offer advice here. Dcoetzee (talk) 03:53, 18 January 2011 (UTC)
The photo is of a 3 dimensional model built by a Denis Delpalilo. In the email from the museum, they asked for credits to be: ""Musée départemental Arles antique. Maquette de Denis Delpalilo. Cl. Michel Lacanaud"" Since it is in France, I thought maybe the license ""Paternité 2.0 Générique (cc BY 2.0) might work. I have found a Commons template in French that I will send back to the Museum once we figure out what license will work.--Tvbanfield (talk) 20:22, 19 January 2011 (UTC)
Take care that the french legal text for the fr version might not be applyable to a Museum - by/2.0/fr/legalcode - attribution in this version can only work with physical persons. I think this might be because attribution is a moral right and that non physical person can't pretend to moral rights in the french law, as moral rights cannot be transferred. Esby (talk) 21:35, 19 January 2011 (UTC)
Esby, appreciate your advise. I am really struggling with getting this photo into Commons. first because my French is not good enough and second, because I don't know how to get through the complex process of selecting a license and uploading a file for someone else. The Arles museum does not seem to have anyone with WIKI skills. Is there anyway you can help the Arles museum or me to get it done?--Tvbanfield (talk) 19:58, 20 January 2011 (UTC)
If you forward me your communications with the museum so far, including any media they've sent you, at, I would be happy to assist in the contribution. Dcoetzee (talk) 01:34, 25 January 2011 (UTC)

list of astronomy space terms and definitions

list of astronomy terms and definitions like active galactic nucleus acoustic waves in order all words — Preceding unsigned comment added by [[User:|]] ([[User talk:|talk]] • contribs) 24 January 2011 (UTC)

And the question is? - Jmabel ! talk 07:12, 25 January 2011 (UTC)

deletion of file

one file is on deletion process since january 14. what is the delay for deletion to happen is it normal it is taking some time? nothing seem to happen on the deletion discussion page ... — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jderr (talk • contribs) 06:09, 25 January 2011 (UTC)

  • First, please sign all your posts with four tildes ~~~~.
  • Second, when you ask this kind of question, please give us a link to the file.
  • I assume you are asking about File:GLOBAL_pourouma.ogv , which you have tagged twice with {{delete}}. Since you didn't explain the reason for the request -- just "error on uploading the file" -- I suspect that Admins have been passing over the file since listening/watching a 102 second OGV file takes time, software, and hardware that some of us don't have. Since the DR backlog is large, non-controversial deletes like this might take some time.
  • In the future, when you make an upload mistake, use {{Speedy}} instead of {{delete}} as it will probably go faster and uses fewer of our limited human resources.
  • ✓ Done I have deleted the file and closed the DR.      Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 11:23, 25 January 2011 (UTC)

Speedy delete this please

per G7 (I requested deletion): File:US Open 2009 cropped2.jpg-- ♫Greatorangepumpkin♫ T 16:07, 25 January 2011 (UTC)

First: Could you please change your signature - it's very distracting. Second: just use {{Speedy|reason here}} if it's eligible for speedy deletion. Cheers --Saibo (Δ) 16:16, 25 January 2011 (UTC)

File:Cryptococcus fagisuga.jpg

I have updated the source information for this file. Is it OK now? Cwmhiraeth (talk) 06:32, 23 January 2011 (UTC)

Sourcing is done fine, but the file description page still lacks a license template. It appears that the conditions of use of that website aren't compatible with Commons though.
You'd need to try to contact them and ask them to license the image in another way. Permission should then be sent to Commons:OTRS. --  Docu  at 08:04, 23 January 2011 (UTC)
Thank you. I will do what you suggest and report back here. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 14:18, 23 January 2011 (UTC)
I have had no response from the website owner so no license for this image is forthcoming. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 07:25, 28 January 2011 (UTC)

Image rotation request

Could someone please rotate the image found at 90 degrees to the left? Because of the size of the original it came in "on its side". Usually someone (or something) comes along and resolves this issue. I myself do not really know what steps to take (and can't find any that it's been done on among my uploaded files). If you'd rather teach a man to fish on this one, I'm more than willing. Thanks . .

Just add {{rotate|270}} (i.e. 270° to the right, clockwise) to the file description page. It will then be rotated by a bot in a few hours. If it was done this way with your previous images, you should find the edits through the file's history tab (the upload history only shows the old and new version of the file itself). --LPfi (talk) 22:07, 25 January 2011 (UTC)
Sadly User:Rotatebot is inactive (see its log linked on the user page) since ten days and it's master seems not to have time to fix it currently. 255 images waiting for rotation. Tag it and wait except you do need it urgently rotated now. ;) Cheers --Saibo (Δ) 01:22, 26 January 2011 (UTC)
I've now written my own RotateBot and it will work fine for JPEG files (I didn't bother implementing PNG/SVG cause they're not as common). I'm clearing out the backlog as fast as my bandwidth allows and I'll keep it running until RotateBot's return. Dcoetzee (talk) 04:50, 26 January 2011 (UTC)
Awesome! :-) Cheers --Saibo (Δ) 20:24, 26 January 2011 (UTC)
Hmm - something went wrong. Now the files were rotated twice ... User:Rotatebot/Log. Cheers --Saibo (Δ) 14:32, 27 January 2011 (UTC)
Woops, I turned my bot off now that RotateBot is back. Dcoetzee (talk) 15:20, 27 January 2011 (UTC)
It probably happened as rotatebot fetches a series of images (before your bot run), rotates them and then uploads them one by one (after your bot run). --  Docu  at 11:44, 28 January 2011 (UTC)

Having account in en.wikipedia, can't login here

Dear friends, while I have an account in English Wikipedia (user:Arseni), and while login page here claims that I should be able to login with this account here (or rather actually that I should be already logged in by the moment I load this site if I am logged in in en.wikipedia), actually I can't log in here. It does not recognize my password. What can I do about it? Thank you in advance! 00:42, 26 January 2011 (UTC)

You do not have a global account and in several other wikis and in Commons your username is already taken. If it is not you having registered here using this name it is someone else. In this case you cannot use this account name here.
You could register a new account name. Best take one which is currently not used in any wiki.
Or (recommended except you want to have a new account name at enwp) you could take over the account here at commons since the account has never edited here. Should be done at Commons:Changing_username/usurp_requests.
Maybe I have missed a detail somewhere but I think this is the way it is. Cheers --Saibo (Δ) 01:17, 26 January 2011 (UTC)


If I wish to crop an image I have uploaded to remove an ugly black tag, should I upload a new version and ask for the original one to be deleted? Cwmhiraeth (talk) 07:32, 28 January 2011 (UTC)

It would help if you told which image it is. Is it File:Take-all.jpg? In this case, if you remove the black box, I think it is probably best to just upload your new version over this one, which will remain available as an old version. The black box version has little chance of being preferred for actual use, but there is no compelling reason to delete it either. (You can use the link "upload a new version of this file".) -- Asclepias (talk) 13:06, 28 January 2011 (UTC)
Please register an account with Forestryimages and download their full-resolution image, not this reduced resolution version you uploaded. Please also use the {{Forestryimages}} template to indicate the source and number e.g. {{Forestryimages|5356746}}. Dcoetzee (talk) 14:21, 28 January 2011 (UTC)
Assuming it is indeed File:Take-all.jpg, I have cropped the bottom off the image. Maproom (talk) 14:58, 28 January 2011 (UTC)
It was indeed the File:Take-all.jpg so thank you for cropping it. I note what you say about registering an account with Forestry Images and will do as you suggest. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 18:06, 28 January 2011 (UTC)

Not existing categories

The following Files are in Categories who don't exist. What is to do? lg --Temporaer (talk) 11:39, 28 January 2011 (UTC)

See Commons:Categories#Creating_a_new_category. --  Docu  at 11:42, 28 January 2011 (UTC)

Please delete my photos or block my account

I want my account deleted or blocked.

Ive asked you previously to delete or block my Westonci/Kha lilullah account, but it seems all youve done is move my Khal ilullah Yousuf files and moved them all to the Westonci files. lilullah_You suf/Backyard

And no i do not have my password or email because my stupid brother changed both the password of my account and the email address and says he doesnt remember the password . He says the password is something like "asdfhjhbvjdfvshdbvjshbvjshbvhf" and so he doesnt remember the password.

For god sake just delete my photos or account or block my account, Ive been asking you many times now and theirs no conspiracy to delete my account, there just a bunch of pictures of clouds and walls. I understand you need the password to protect people accounts.

But what more proof do you need that this is my account. Heres my Facebook account with my highschool ID card with my name K halilu llah Yo usuf and my highchool name Weston C.I.

And there is also pictures of me in my backyard, the same backyard that the photos were take in.

For god sake i have ocd and cant stand this stress, please just delete my account or block it. If i new in the beginning that I couldnt delete my own images i would have never uploaded anything at all.

I have blocked the account and I have no problem with deleting all unused images (some are used, they should be keept.) Other opinions? Amada44  talk to me 20:41, 29 January 2011 (UTC)

I can only repeat what I last said: A user KY (abbr. used intentionally) was never registered. YOU created a page of that name, a page in the userspace of an unregistered user. This connection was of course visible in Google, but it was not us who created it but you beacause with your own hands you created the gallery page User:KY/Backyard calling it after your own name outside your allowed userspace User:Westonci/... . I moved this back already, the connection with your name is removed by that move action. As long as you not create more connections between your identities this shouldnt be any problem, there is no reason to delete the images. If you want to have User:Westonci/Backyard deleted - that gallery, not the media files - this would be no problem. -Martin H. (talk) 20:56, 29 January 2011 (UTC)

Yes i would appreciate if you would delete the gallery for User:Westonci/Backyard and Westonci/gallery

I deleted this pages. --Martin H. (talk) 22:55, 29 January 2011 (UTC)

The pictures are still online

This site is very confusing

Does deleting the gallery pages means that photos are gone from searches?

Because I can still find my photos through google search, and i wanted them deleted.





















File:Cumulus_toronto_June_2008-17.JPG — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk • contribs) 30. Januar 2011, 03:15 Uhr (UTC)

Just a heads up, you should log in to make this request.--Theda (talk) 03:42, 30 January 2011 (UTC)
See #Please delete my photos or block my account above. --  Docu  at 04:44, 30 January 2011 (UTC)

Deleting my photos

I want my account deleted/blocked or all of my photos deleted.

Ive asked you previously to delete or block my Westonci/Khal ilullah account, and it was successfully blocked. ullah_You suf/Backyard

And no i do not have my password or email because my stupid brother changed both the password of my account and the email address and says he doesnt remember the password. He says the password is something like "asdfhjhbvjdfvshdbvjshbvjshbvhf" and so he doesnt remember the password. If you have access to the password of the account Westonci you will see the password is something like "sfgwersdghgcvbfnyiyunfghfjsfg". You'll also notice that the account has been inactive for a long time.

And please for god sake just delete my photos or account or block my account, Ive been asking you many times now and theirs no conspiracy to delete my account, there just a bunch of pictures of clouds and walls. I understand you need the password to protect people accounts.

But what more proof do you need that this is my account. Heres my Facebook account with my highschool ID card with my name Kh alilullah Y ousuf and my highchool name Weston C.I.

And there is also pictures of me in my backyard, the same backyard that the photos were take in.

For god sake i have ocd and cant stand this kind of stress, Wiki commons is so darn confusing, please just delete my account or block it. If i new in the beginning that I couldnt delete my own images i would have never uploaded anything at all. — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk • contribs)

Please see #Please delete my photos or block my account above. --  Docu  at 04:44, 30 January 2011 (UTC)

I realize im repeating the above

I realize im repeating the above, but the pictures are still online. As i mentioned in the previous post.

The previous administrator didnt take the photos down. You guys are really getting me frustrated, I just want all my photos down from the internet. Do you guys think I have some kind of secret motive trying to take down a bunch of random pics of by backyard?

Listen i have OCD and you guys are making my life miserable, im simply requesting these pictures taken down, what more proof do you need that this account was mine?

-May 17, 2008 4:10

January 29, 2011

What a coincidence? Im in the same backyard as the one in the photo im trying to take down. Why are you mmaking this so complicated. — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk • contribs) 30. Januar 2011, 05:58 Uhr (UTC)

Who do i need to speak to?

so are you guys going to delete my photos or what? Who do i need to speak to get these photos off the internet?

why is this still up? — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk • contribs) 30. Januar 2011, 07:11 Uhr (UTC)

We are discussing this now. Try to be patient. --Túrelio (talk) 10:03, 30 January 2011 (UTC)
The unused images have been deleted. The few remaining have to wait. --Túrelio (talk) 15:28, 30 January 2011 (UTC)

One more photo to be deleted

Yes check.svg Resolved

Ive recently asked you guys to take down all of my photos from my Westonci account, as well as to block my Westonci account.

However there is still one photo remaining

Im asking kindly that you take it down.

Appears to have been done. - Jmabel ! talk 00:35, 3 February 2011 (UTC)

Anybody their?

So is anyone going to respond to my request?

Its gone now. If you can still see it, it is probably in your browser's cache. Try again from another machine. Can you read also the text beneath the edit box. It is not normal to undelete freely uploaded work see Terms of Use but as a favour... Yes, there are lots of people there but ...
...pop over for a coffee some time. --ClemRutter (talk) 15:54, 1 February 2011 (UTC)

Deletion of category

I would like to delete Category:Steinway grand piano - 2008 Summer Olympics opening ceremony in Beijing, China. The reason is written at Category:Steinway grand piano - 2008 Summer Olympics opening ceremony in Beijing, China. Will somebody please help me, I am doing something wrong. --Fanoftheworld (talk) 01:49, 30 January 2011 (UTC)

I added {{speedy|empty category}} there. --  Docu  at 04:45, 30 January 2011 (UTC)

Please, Delete File:Corsaire_Adan_Danse_enregistrement_spectacle.ogg

I'm very sorry, the correct file is -- File:Le Corsaire Adan Danse enregistrement spectacle Forban.ogg. But file format - File:Corsaire Adan Danse enregistrement spectacle.ogg did not obtain. Please, Delete, it was a technical error. The correct file is used here: Corsair. Merci -- 02:03, 30 January 2011 (UTC) -- User talk:Betsi Jane--Contributions (Otria) (I forgot the password here)

If you are trying to delete "File:Corsaire Adan Danse enregistrement spectacle.ogg" because you uploaded the incorrect file, you could proceed as follows:
Go to that page, and on the left side, in the toolbox, you will find a "Nominate for deletion" link. It will open a deletion request where you could mention that the correct file was later uploaded as "File:Le_Corsaire_Adan_Danse_enregistrement_spectacle_Forban.ogg". --  Docu  at 04:40, 30 January 2011 (UTC)
Thank you, done, I think 14:25, 30 January 2011 (UTC)

link a .jpg image ( Peppin Point.JPG ) from wiki commons to a wikipedia article (Lake Eildon )

I have uploaded a .jpg image to wiki commons, but need to know how to link it to an article in Wikipedia(Lake Eildon gallery )? JohnsonL623 (talk) 08:00, 30 January 2011 (UTC)

See meta:Help:Images_and_other_uploaded_files#Gallery. --  Docu  at 09:23, 30 January 2011 (UTC)

Creating a subcategory???? Help please.

I have uploaded a picture for Plaza de Armas of Santiago de Chile. I put this picture in the category:Santiago de Chile. I also created the category:Plaza de Armas (Santiago de Chile).
How can I make the category Plaza de Armas (Santiago de Chile) a subcategory of the Santiago de Chile category???? The command [[Category:Santiago de Chile|Plaza de Armas (Santiago de Chile)]] didn’t work. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Entropy1963 (talk • contribs) 11:02, 30 January 2011 (UTC)

The History shows that your first try was correct. Adding
[[Category:Santiago de Chile|Plaza de Armas (Santiago de Chile)]]
is exactly correct, including the sorting.
Is it possible you were confused by the fact that it does not appear on the first page of Category:Santiago de Chile? Since there are two pages of images in that category, the subcategories that are late in the alphabet appear on the second page. It's an easy mistake to make -- it has happened to me recently.      Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 11:14, 30 January 2011 (UTC)

It looks you are right!!! I didn't see that there was a second page in the category Category:Santiago de Chile. :)
Thanks Entropy1963 (talk) 11:27, 30 January 2011 (UTC)

Actually, there was already one at Category:Plaza de Armas de Santiago de Chile. --  Docu  at 11:30, 30 January 2011 (UTC)


Ich habe ein Bild hochgeladen und nun die Meldung erhalten, dass es nicht einer Kategorie zugeordnet ist. Würde ich ja gerne machen, aber wie geht das? Muss ich das Bild nochmals hochladen oder kann ich die Kategorie bei den existierenden Bild ergänzen? Wenn ich auf die Schaltfläche category klicke, tut sich nichts. — Preceding unsigned comment added by DianaW (talk • contribs) 2011-01-30T14:54:07 (UTC)

Du musst die Bildbeschreibung bearbeiten und eine Kategorie hinzufügen wie in der Information beschrieben, füge also folgenden Wikitext der Seite hinzu: [[Category:Portraits of Writers]]. Achtung: Eckige Klammern, nicht geschweifte [4]. --Martin H. (talk) 15:58, 30 January 2011 (UTC)
Das ist alles ganz toll in dem Text beschrieben der auch in der Meldung auf deiner Diskussionsseite beschrieben ist: Commons:Kategorien. Danke für deine Mithilfe! Viele Grüße --Saibo (Δ) 17:09, 30 January 2011 (UTC)

William-Adolphe Bouguereau (1825-1905) - The Proposal (1872)

I just uploaded a new copy of this file, to a different filename, because the colors were different for whatever reason. However, I noticed something:

William-Adolphe Bouguereau (1825-1905) - The Proposal (1872) 2.jpg
William-Adolphe Bouguereau (1825-1905) - The Proposal (1872).jpg

They're facing different directions. Does anyone know which one is facing the original direction?--Prosfilaes (talk) 19:11, 28 January 2011 (UTC)

Here's what it looks like hanging in The Met. Powers (talk) 23:51, 28 January 2011 (UTC)
all at g.images look to the left, too Cheers --Saibo (Δ) 00:30, 29 January 2011 (UTC)
See also --  Docu  at 01:13, 29 January 2011 (UTC)
Okay, I'll flip it losslessly when I get back to my home computer and upload over it.--Prosfilaes (talk) 05:35, 29 January 2011 (UTC)
Colors of reproductions of paintings are always tricky to assess, but in this case, I'm not convinced at all. I wonder if we need that other version. --  Docu  at 08:37, 29 January 2011 (UTC)

I think this is what you mean, but I'm not positive. I would:

  • Keep the original version (the image on the right)
  • Reverse the new version (on the left) and upload over it.

As Docu says, colors are tricky, so keeping both colors is probably good.      Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 11:10, 29 January 2011 (UTC)

I know the argument works both ways, but in this case the colors of the image on the left side seem unlikely to be reproducing the ones of the painting. The main reason to keep that version, IMHO, is that its resolution is substantially higher than the one of the image on the right side. --  Docu  at 12:31, 29 January 2011 (UTC)
The orange-colored copy also misses parts of the painting at the bottom and top. -- Asclepias (talk) 12:43, 29 January 2011 (UTC)
I've uploaded the flipped version. I have no particular emotional attachment to this file, but it is substantially larger than other one.--Prosfilaes (talk) 04:20, 31 January 2011 (UTC)

Using images

I would very much appreciate some help. I have uploaded two images: File:Rood screen 2.jpg File:Rood-screen.jpg These are taken from the book "Wood Carving" by Alan Durst. This book is out of print now and was one of "The Studio" How to do it series. It was first published in 1938. I uploaded the images to use in a Wikipedia article I am keen to leave the images in the article as they really do show the quality of Durst's work. I could of course travel up to Holy Cross church and take some photographs but want to avoid that and the old photographs are perfect. Clearly I do not want to infringe any rules. How can I change my upload descriptions to keep everyone happy? Weglinde (talk) 10:30, 30 January 2011 (UTC)

Hmm, works by Alan Durst are still copyrighted as he died in 1970. However, photos of his works that are permanently located in the public according to the freedom-of-panorama terms of UK's copyright law, might be o.k. But then there's also the copyright of the photographer. So, for the above mentioned images you have to check, 1) do they violate Durst's copyright or do they fall under UK FOP? 2) who is the photographer? is he/she dead since >70 years or did he/she release these photos under a free license? --Túrelio (talk) 10:43, 30 January 2011 (UTC)

It is not clear from Durst's book who took the photographs; he may have taken them himself. Hope I can use these two photographs as they do represent the best of Durst's qualities as a woodcarver and I am anxious to avoid travelling up to Woodchurch to take a picture! What do you think? Is there a way around this? Weglinde (talk) 15:39, 30 January 2011 (UTC)

Any further thoughts on this?

Weglinde (talk) 13:56, 31 January 2011 (UTC)

Let's start from basics. I'm going to cover the same ground as Turelio did above, but in different words, which may be more helpful. I must add, though, that I think my colleague covered it pretty well, and that, perhaps, he gave you news you didn't want to hear.
There are two copyrights of concern here:
  • The copyright in the wood carvings themselves, which is still in force, as Durst died in 1970.
  • The copyright in the photographs.
The first is probably OK, since they are in the UK, where indoor works "permanently situated in a public place or in premises open to the public" may be used here notwithstanding their copyright. I believe that a church qualifies as "premises open to the public" for that purpose.
The second is much harder. In order to show that UK photographs are usable on Commons, you would have to show that either:
  • The photographer died before 1940, or
  • The photographer has issued a license that is acceptable to us.
The first is possible, but not likely, given that the book appeared in 1938.
The second is unknown.
So, without further information, they fall within our rules of a copyright violation and may be deleted on sight.
     Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 14:18, 31 January 2011 (UTC)

Direct link to pronunciation files

I'm trying to use pronunciation files like File:En-us-available.ogg in flashcard software for language learners. I will comply with copyright rules, but I need a way to link directly to each file. Does such a way exist?--Brett (talk) 18:18, 30 January 2011 (UTC)

What do you mean "a way to link directly to each file"? If you're worried about attribution, I'd just put a "About this module" page that listed all the files, their creators and had hyperlinks back to the Commons page. If you want to load them from the server, I wouldn't recommend that; why not just keep them with the program? Files on the server can moved or be deleted, and the program is more portable if it doesn't have to depend on a fast connection.--Prosfilaes (talk) 19:37, 30 January 2011 (UTC)

Different Photos in category when logged in

Today I noticed that some photos of a category are only shown when I was logged in, in particular here [[5]]. When I'm logged in I see 8 pictures, If I'm not logged in I see 5.

Is this normal, or not?

Do other people have the same experience?

Is it a bug or does this have a reason?

Halvar nl (talk) 22:06, 31 January 2011 (UTC)

Probably a temporary cache problem. I can confirm it (8 logged in, 5 logged off). I did a purge of the categories page: now 8 logged in and logged off. Usually just waiting some time should help. Cheers --Saibo (Δ) 22:15, 31 January 2011 (UTC)
Thanks! Halvar nl (talk) 22:19, 31 January 2011 (UTC)