Commons:Help desk/Archive/2012/07

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.

Contents

image info

hello, I would like to be able to take a picture,put it in wikipedia and wiki give me info on the picture. for example i have antiques ia m not sure what they are worth and would like to get info on them by sending my pictures. is this possible? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 198.228.201.148 (talk • contribs) 2012-07-01T03:44:00‎ (UTC)

  • It's not really what Wikipedia is intended for. I'd suggest that it might be more appropriate for you to post you pictures on Flickr or something similar, and then go to appropriate boards that discuss antiques, pointing them at these pictures. Certainly it is not part of Wikipedia's focus to assess antiques. - Jmabel ! talk 07:10, 1 July 2012 (UTC)
    • At 198.228.201.148 and Jmabel: Of course in case Wikipedia itself could have an interest in photos of those antiques you can upload them here. But, yes, uploading otherwise useless photos here just for worth assessment is not in our scope. Cheers --Saibo (Δ) 13:21, 1 July 2012 (UTC)
This section was archived on a request by: Saibo (Δ) 13:21, 1 July 2012 (UTC)

Uploading a headshot photo

Hi, The artist provided me his headshot to upload in an article I wrote about him. His said there is no copyright on it. How do I get it uploaded?

Thank you — Preceding unsigned comment added by Alice Krueser-Lowe (talk • contribs) 2012-07-02T03:05:28‎ (UTC)

Hi Alice, welcome to Commons! We always need the permission (for everyone, for every use - not just for Wikipedia) from the photographer. He can send it via email to our OTRS team. Please see for details and recommended mail text: COM:OTRS.
You should first ask the photographer if he wants to release the image really for everyone's use. Also ask the depicted person if he wants that. Then you can upload the file and place the text (exactly this:) {{subst:OP}} somewhere on the file page (could be in the description. Then the photographer should send his mail mentioning the URL / file name of the image here at Commons. If you still have questions, just ask again below in this section. --Saibo (Δ) 14:12, 2 July 2012 (UTC)
This section was archived on a request by: Saibo (Δ) 14:12, 2 July 2012 (UTC)

Copyright help regarding File:Лизалин Роман Евгеньевич.jpg

--Alenok VRN (talk) 17:26, 2 July 2012 (UTC)

Hi Alenok, What is your question? The source link does not work for me. Is there a license at the source page? Do you know who the photographer is? --Saibo (Δ) 18:22, 2 July 2012 (UTC)
I don't see any mention of any sort of Creative Commons license or any other free license at http://vk.com/photo7085913_282846418?all=1. LX (talk, contribs) 19:18, 2 July 2012 (UTC)
Tagged as copyright violation. LX (talk, contribs) 19:43, 3 July 2012 (UTC)
This section was archived on a request by: LX (talk, contribs) 19:43, 3 July 2012 (UTC)

unable to correct the File heading

I posted several of my photos onto Commons, but on one of them I got the description incorrect. While I have been able to alter the text I have been unable to correct the File heading. How do I do this? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kokoda Bill (talk • contribs) 2012-07-03T11:15:23‎ (UTC)

Hi Kokoda Bill, do you mean the file name (the part behind "File:")? That is called "renaming" here. Please see COM:RENAME for instructions. Ask again here in this section if your still need help. --Saibo (Δ) 17:13, 3 July 2012 (UTC)
This section was archived on a request by: Saibo (Δ) 17:13, 3 July 2012 (UTC)

Copyright help regarding file File:Lv-vārds.ogg

I've found this -- the simple pronunciation of a word in isolation -- at a public website where everything is downloadable. But the website is from the University of Latvia, and it is showing results from a research project. So, even though the file is short and not research-related, I'm unsure about whether or not it can be uploaded here. What's the usual deal with word pronunciation files? --Pereru (talk) 14:42, 3 July 2012 (UTC)

Probably too trivial to copyright. - Jmabel ! talk 15:09, 3 July 2012 (UTC)
If so, does that mean I can upload other word pronunciation files from the same site? There are a couple dozen. --Pereru (talk) 16:52, 3 July 2012 (UTC)
Are sound recordings of speech ever below the threshold of originality? --Stefan4 (talk) 17:00, 3 July 2012 (UTC)
Usually all recordings are protected (usually not as long as other works) - if it can be shown otherwise for that country, fine then. See the last lines by me at User_talk:Saibo/Archive/2011#when_PD_definitions_are_not_so_defined. Cheers --Saibo (Δ) 17:49, 3 July 2012 (UTC)
The term of neighbouring rights for recordings is 50 years according to section 55 (2) of the Latvian copyright law. LX (talk, contribs) 19:59, 3 July 2012 (UTC)
Thanks, have added it also to COM:L. So, the recording above has to be deleted unless we get a permission from the person who recorded. --Saibo (Δ) 21:04, 3 July 2012 (UTC)
OK. Since the person no longer works at that web site, this is probably not going to happen. So let the file be deleted, and I won't upload any others from that source. --Pereru (talk) 06:58, 4 July 2012 (UTC)
Done. Thank you --Saibo (Δ) 12:17, 4 July 2012 (UTC)
This section was archived on a request by: Saibo (Δ) 12:17, 4 July 2012 (UTC)

Impossible to delete own files in Commons?

Does Commons care for uploader's request? I, creator and uploader of this file File:Phul phutuk.ogg requested to delete this file on 24th last month. It took 7 days to get some response. And that admin closed the discussion without giving any chance to comment Commons:Deletion requests/File:Phul phutuk.ogg. I had replied in that post and also that admin's talk page. I got no reply! --Tito Dutta (Send me a message)

Hi Tito Dutta, first of all: please try to keep in mind that we are all (well, very very few not) volunteers here. That includes the admins. The workload is very high and currently it can take months for a deletion request to be processed.
The admin decision in a deletion request is usually never announced in advance - it can be discussed afterwards, if necessary (you have done it correctly - asking on the admin's talk page). Not sure why he did apparently not answer - that can be due to many reasons.
When you uploaded the file at Commons in October 2011 you freely licensed the file. That means that everybody can use it. You cannot revoke that license (see CC FAQ). However, in general it is tried to fulfill uploader/author deletion requests. Deciding if or not is tricky. In your case the file simply was still in use at one of our projects - which means that it seems to be useful. You did not mention any special reason for deletion - so I agree with Yann's decision here (based on the limited knowledge of the case).
Please wait a bit, Yann will surely comment here (I left him a notice). --Saibo (Δ) 23:10, 3 July 2012 (UTC)
I am not sure how CC FAQ is applicable, I am not asking to change license (eg. All rights waived → CC SA 3.0, which is quite difficult I can understand)
There should be an easy option for the uploader to remove his donation! Otherwise donating media to Commons is similar to that room,where you enter easily but can not get out of it.
There is nothing uncanny in that media, but it is a very low quality work! It was one of my very first media uploads to Commons--Tito Dutta (Send me a message) 23:51, 3 July 2012 (UTC)
Thank you for your comments. The CC FAQ (note that I have fixed my link in the comment above) is about revoking licenses (CC by-sa-3.0 → nothing). It is also explained in our FAQ: Commons:FAQ#I_have_uploaded_an_image.2C_can_I_revoke_the_licence_later.3F.
Well, if you donate somebody something - will you get it back if you want it? Not really. Free licenses are, taken strictly, meant that way like you describe: one way (only an entrance but no exit). Once free for all, always free for all.
That explanation why you want to remove it (quality) would have been much better than what you wrote in the deletion request. I understand that.
Aside from the quality, is that a text written by Subhash Mukhopadhyay (the file was included there)? --Saibo (Δ) 01:14, 4 July 2012 (UTC)
The room you can enter easily, but cannot readily get out of is a pretty fair analogy. Once you donate something (actually, grant an irrevocable license rather than 'donate', since you weren't granting ownership in it, just a license to use it), you don't necessarily get to take it back. Some things are like that. Imagine, for example. going to the Red Cross 6 months after the fact and saying "That money I gave you? I want it back."
That said, if the only issue with this was the quality (that is, if there are no problems about the rights to the text itself), and you recorded it yourself, you may be able to make everybody happy including yourself by simply making a better recording of the same and uploading it as a "new version" of the file. - Jmabel ! talk 01:20, 4 July 2012 (UTC)
  • Yes, that was included in that article, I have removed it from the article.
  • You (both of you) have given some good points (following rules of good debate/discussion, I must appreciate your points). But, I also request to concentrate these points.
  • Donating money to Red Cross is not similar to uploading a photo to Commons. Is it so? Then don't say "Upload a media", say "Donate a media" and write in a big banner "You are donating... irrevocable... you may not delete later)
  • There are some links in every page, I don't think too many people read those. Did you read those CC links before uploading your first file?
  • I have got a good lesson Never upload anything in Commons which might be embarrassing later, but the problem is you can't guess today what is going to be embarrassing tomorrow :-).--Tito Dutta (Send me a message) 01:45, 4 July 2012 (UTC)
I wanted to know what text you read in your recording: Is it a poem by this poet? I am asking since in that case we would even delete it if you would be against deletion since it would violate the poet's (or his heirs') copyright. ;-)
UploadWizard says "donate" in its second step on the big button in big letters. The old upload form says "This donation is non-revocable" in bold text (at least in English, but hopefully in all translations). If someone made a mistake (e.g. uploaded the wrong file) deletion requests (simply via {{speedy|reason here}}) are honoured with no problems and without a big delay. --Saibo (Δ) 01:57, 4 July 2012 (UTC)

┌───────────────────┘
Something weird is happening here! I have got a reply here where I am told this file is being used still. An IP address has again added the file in Bengali Wikipedia see this edit. I am reading the time and date in Bengali for you: 3:01 (UTC), 4th July, 2012 edited by that IP address.
Here is details of that IP address:

  • 109.125.128.211 IP address location & more:
  • IP address [?]: 109.125.128.211 [Whois] [Reverse IP]
  • IP country code: IR
  • IP address country: ip address flag Iran, Islamic Republic of
  • IP address state: Esfahan
  • IP address city: Tehran
  • IP address latitude: 32.7026
  • IP address longitude: 51.1537
  • ISP of this IP [?]: Parsun Network Solutions
  • Organization: Pishgaman Tose Ertebatat Tehran Network
  • Local time in Iran, Islamic Republic of: 2012-07-04 19:31

Someone from Iran who never edited in Bengali Wikipedia made his first edit and added that file in that page to stop my deletion? --Tito Dutta (Send me a message) 15:10, 4 July 2012 (UTC)

Why is that weired? That IP may either simply be reading about that file here or could have seen your remove edit in the English article and decided that it would be useful to the Bengali article. However, you did not reply to my question above (which text are you reading?), please do so. --Saibo (Δ) 15:17, 4 July 2012 (UTC)
I am little sad to see you are not finding anything weird here! That IP address has
I was reading a poem of Mukhopadhyay (Phul Phutuk Na Phutuk which is file title).
I have removed that file from Bengali Wikipedia too! --Tito Dutta (Send me a message) 15:36, 4 July 2012 (UTC)
In case that IP address is dynamic that scenario is common. The person could have another IP every day (or even shorter). So that must not be weired.
I am not sure which one would apply, but both Bangladesh and India have a 60 years after the death of the author protection. Subhash Mukhopadhyay died in year 2003. So, the poem is still copyrighted. So you are not allowed to upload a recording of it (COM:DW, about texts). I have deleted the file (it had a length of over 1 minute) therefore. --Saibo (Δ) 15:53, 4 July 2012 (UTC)
This section was archived on a request by: Saibo (Δ) 15:53, 4 July 2012 (UTC)

File:Cne3.jpg

Does anyone know how to tag the older versions for delete? I have tagged some on en:wp but I don't know if the tag exists here. There are actually two up for DR but I fixed them with replacement CC images. File:Wikip1.jpg is the other one. If the older ones are deleted I could probably close the DR on them.--Canoe1967 (talk) 17:56, 5 July 2012 (UTC)

If you want to request the deletion of one or several older versions, you can just open a deletion request like normally (regular DR or speedy DR as the case may require) and specify the versions to be deleted. Or if a DR is already open, specify it in the discussion. That said, in this particular case, why were new files uploaded over the completely different old ones? There is no advantage to it and many problems: 1- They are different images, not small modifications of the same images. 2- They have not very useful filenames, like cne3 or wikip1 (and they are not in use), and there doesn't seem to be a reason to keep those filenames. 3- There is no advantage to keep mixed histories and logs. In short, if the decision is to delete the older images, I think it would be better to delete completely those files cne3 and wikip1, and upload the new images separately under new and better filenames. -- Asclepias (talk) 18:53, 5 July 2012 (UTC)

I agree. I will wait for the original uploader to choose images and file names. This is also mentioned in the DR for the images. They are 'safe' now so there is no real rush.

This section was archived on a request by: --Canoe1967 (talk) 19:50, 5 July 2012 (UTC)

New categorization malfunction

Earlier in the day, I took File:Sign Road Work Ahead.jpg, and replaced one of the categories with Category:Temporary warning road signs in the United States, but when I click on that category, it doesn't show up there. Additionally, somebody else added the Category:Cessna 150 to one of my images(File:Bayport Aerodrome; Hangar behind Fence.JPG), but when you click on that category, my image won't show up there either. I tried purging the images and categories, and that didn't make any difference. ----DanTD (talk) 18:21, 5 July 2012 (UTC)

This is probably related to Commons:Village pump#Database error. LX (talk, contribs) 19:39, 5 July 2012 (UTC)
Seems so. And the same workaround is possible: null-edit the file page (open edit mode, change nothing and save). I did so for the second image: it was not shown in the cat before, but is after my edit. --Saibo (Δ) 20:08, 5 July 2012 (UTC)
This section was archived on a request by: Saibo (Δ) 20:08, 5 July 2012 (UTC)

Bug in displaying 4-plane jpegs on wikimedia?

I got a jpeg-image from administration (Lippe,Germany) which is a high quality reproduction of an official coat of arms. At my private computer it looks with a local viewer fine, also if viewed with firefox over the www. But after uploading it here the black color is displayed as white. :-( See File:Kreis-Lippe-Wappen.jpg Any pointers? Achim1999 (talk) 20:34, 5 July 2012 (UTC)

Highly probably a known bug of the thumbnailer (either it is bugzilla:24854 or a similar one) - the thumbnailer does only work without problems with three component RGB images. Just upload a new version over the original first version. Btw: jpeg is a really bad choice for such graphics (sharp edges, low amount of colors). --Saibo (Δ) 20:59, 5 July 2012 (UTC)
Thx. 1) It was not my file, nor did I demand any specific graphic-format. 2) This motive is of much better quality than any other 'Lippische Rose' on wikimedia! So take care to be fair with your (in this case wrong) judgement. :-/ Achim1999 (talk) 21:20, 5 July 2012 (UTC)
2) Hmm, what? I did not intend to compare it to any other versions. If you did not convert the file from some other lossless format, forget my comment or just think of it in a general remark to others not to use jpeg for this type of graphics. You have placed some note on the file page ("Don't change the file,") - if you want me to I can convert it to png for no distortions in thumbnails. That is just an offer, probably you can do it yourself. :-) --Saibo (Δ) 21:36, 5 July 2012 (UTC)
This section was archived on a request by: Saibo (Δ) 21:36, 5 July 2012 (UTC)

Please help me understand what is going on here!

Please help me understand what is going on HERE.

Sixa369 (talk) 04:59, 5 July 2012 (UTC)

I have never heard of a rule that says you can't delete stuff from your own talk page. I read the rules as you can remove anything you wish as acknowledgment that you have read it.--Canoe1967 (talk) 05:10, 5 July 2012 (UTC)
I get that the Template:Dont remove warnings, which was used by your correspondent, was for special cases, not for cases like this. Please see the documentation of the template, where that documentation says "please use this template only if you know what you are doing" and the discussion page Template talk:Dont remove warnings. You might direct your correspondent to those pages if necessary. Face-wink.svg -- Asclepias (talk) 05:46, 5 July 2012 (UTC)

Commons:Talk_page_guidelines#User_talk_pages--Canoe1967 (talk) 05:16, 5 July 2012 (UTC)

  • Template:Dont remove warnings should either be deleted or re-worded. It does not follow policy and just scares new users like you. It was discussed on the talk page, but no one ever fixed it.--Canoe1967 (talk) 05:28, 5 July 2012 (UTC)
    Some of us believe it's the guideline that should be changed. Talk page blanking without archiving makes our work here harder, and there's no good reason not to archive. LX (talk, contribs) 08:32, 5 July 2012 (UTC)
    Well, if you archive by copying and pasting discussions from one page to another, you do not 'Preserve the section Entitled "History"', which is a reason to avoid copy&paste archival. On the other hand, there are also other ways to archive a page. --Stefan4 (talk) 09:13, 5 July 2012 (UTC)
    That may have been a valid argument historically (but as long as there is a reference to the original page and its history, I think the requirement is met). These days, though, we use the Creative Commons Attribution Share-Alike 3.0, not GFDL. LX (talk, contribs) 10:13, 5 July 2012 (UTC)
    Actually, comments are available under both licences. --Stefan4 (talk) 10:33, 5 July 2012 (UTC)
    Which means there is no requirement to follow the GFDL terms as long as you comply with the CC terms. LX (talk, contribs) 11:47, 5 July 2012 (UTC)
The first revert was not nice since it even was without a comment while even the deleting user used a comment. Note that the deletion notice really was just a notice - a unneeded template (created by a new user because he thought it would help) was deleted. It was not some copyright violation deletion warning or similar. To add a strong warning without any personal words directly afterwards, after the first removal of a new(!) user is really over the top. But I guess (and hope) Motopark will know that himself when looking back - maybe he (or do I now?!) misunderstood some aspects.
In general, I think it is helpful to other users if rule violation warnings are kept on the talk page - helpful to spot other violations (like wrong "own work" claims) which may be harder to detect otherwise. But, ehm, this notice is really not needed. There was no discussion, no nothing. Usually that notices are be archived, but such notices are also frequently just deleted - and no one cares because many people do that. Per the wish of the user I have removed that stuff now (there are no other wrongly created pages in the contribs and surely won't be in the future). Cheers --Saibo (Δ) 22:30, 5 July 2012 (UTC)

As far as I am concerned, you can mark this as "resolved" unless Motopark want to continue the dispute. Thanks to Saibo and his communications with me via email he has cleared up the problem from my P.O.V. I am new here and know it, but I am a quick learner and had made only one small error and felt that Motopark had over reacted and this was all going to reflect on me as EVIL when in fact I am only trying to help. Saibo told me how I could add the tag for no-index (which I have done), but mentioned that Search Engines might just revert to previous versions or (because of their affiliation with Wikimedia) might just remove the tag. Archiving was mentioned but I really don't know if search engine will follow that as well??? I am still unclear as to whether I can remove things from my Talk page or not...in this instance, for example, whether I can remove my own post that I used to start this "Please help me understand what is going on here!" help desk issue when this is marked as "resolved" so it doesn't reflect badly on Motopark as well. (Trying to be super-civil here). I'd appreciate knowing that.

Kind Regards to All, Sixa369 (talk) 17:47, 6 July 2012 (UTC)

I would like to see other comments but, anyway, here is my comment: usually discussions about one topic are also only held on one page - so if an issue is resolved everybody sees that if he reads the old discussion. Here the discussion is fragmented: if you want to alleviate the effects of the fragmentation just place a link to the other discussions below the discussion part on your page and/or simply write below that it is resolved and fine and all people are happy now.
Search engines do not remove a NOINDEX tag but may simply not respect it. Mirrors may not copy the tag which causes indexation also by search engines which would otherwise respect the NOINDEX tag. Archives are indexed by search engines unless they get tagged with NOINDEX. Currently old page versions are tagged per default with NOINDEX - but that may change in the future. All in all it should be assumed: what is in the internet stays in the internet and can be found - that is especially true with the page histories at Wikis like this one. So, if possible don't struggle to get something off the net, rather avoid to first put it in the net. ;-) If you do not like warning tags on your talk page (may they be true or wrong) be associated with your name, you should go for more anonymity.
Help desk sections shouldn't be removed without good reason. They will be archived. You can change the title if you want or strike some parts of your comment or add a new comment directly afterwards. --Saibo (Δ) 19:02, 6 July 2012 (UTC)
Saibo, I have enjoyed greatly our conversation. It is NOT true that "All in all it should be assumed: what is in the internet stays in the internet." It is true on Wikimedia, but on any other place/website..etc. if you delete a page it will disappear from the internet eventually (unless someone downloads a web page, document or image.) It will disappear from search engines and can certainly be "disappeared" from the website and no longer visible to viewers, even logged-in viewers on a BB will no longer find the deleted message. Here, even a casual, non-logged in viewer can look through the history. I know this stuff.
Anyway, this is my last post and have left my parting message HERE. So I won't be bothering anyone anymore.
Regards,
Sixa369 (talk) 00:40, 7 July 2012 (UTC)
Other pages also get cached by search engines or archived or saved by visitors or, or, or. So if you are concerned with privacy it is reasonable to assume that content stays (somewhere). That is what I was referring to. Sad to see you go. --Saibo (Δ) 01:24, 7 July 2012 (UTC)
This section was archived on a request by: Saibo (Δ) 01:24, 7 July 2012 (UTC)

File:Negret 02.jpg

Was für eine gültige Lizenz soll ich da hinzufügen? Ich habe die Aufnahme selbst gemacht. Der Gegenstand steht in der Öffentlichkeit. Es gibt verschiedene andere Aufnahmen des gleichen Objektes auf Commons.--Koppchen (talk) 10:27, 6 July 2012 (UTC)

Hallo Koppchen, du hast es mittlerweile schon selbst korrekt erledigt. Du hattest beim Hochladen wohl vergessen eine Lizenz auszuwählen (am Ende des Formulars) oder es trat ein technischer Fehler auf. Ich habe nun noch wertvolle Informationen nachgetragen und die Warnung entfernt. Das Duplikat File:Negret_03.jpg habe ich gelöscht. Viele Grüße --Saibo (Δ) 13:56, 6 July 2012 (UTC)
This section was archived on a request by: Saibo (Δ) 13:56, 6 July 2012 (UTC)

Copyright help regarding File:SFLtI.jpg 2

--203.81.175.228 14:29, 6 July 2012 (UTC)

Hello Two Zero Three Eight One One Seven Five Two Two Eight! I didn't catch a question in there. If you have a follow-up question to #Copyright help regarding File:SFLtI.jpg, please post it under that heading. LX (talk, contribs) 15:36, 6 July 2012 (UTC)
(EC) And the question is? I cannot see any news at reddit and also not at the file page. By the way: please continue in the already existing section about this file: #Copyright_help_regarding_File:SFLtI.jpg further up this page. --Saibo (Δ) 15:38, 6 July 2012 (UTC)
This section was archived on a request by: LX (talk, contribs) 15:36, 6 July 2012 (UTC)

Modifying a file to include copyright tag

hello I recently got told that a file i added did not have "sufficient information on its copyright status." Ive tried to change this by uploading a new version of the same file but i dont know where or how to add the copyright tag. The file I added was an original work showing the spanish empire in 1598 but with modified colour that i added. the original file has the this copyright tag "This file is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 Unported, 2.5 Generic, 2.0 Generic and 1.0 Generic license." "You are free:

   to share – to copy, distribute and transmit the work
   to remix – to adapt the work

"

I attributed the work to the original maker of the file. any help appreciated! Cliniic (talk) 18:10, 6 July 2012 (UTC)

You can edit all information on the file page by using the "edit" link on top of the page. You can find the copyright tags there: COM:CT. Tag's code can be copied and then pasted onto the file page (in edit mode). Did that help? If you want more specific help, you should mention the file's name.
You made a modification based on a file which is already at Commons? Then best copy the copyright tag from the edit mode of the source file. --Saibo (Δ) 18:35, 6 July 2012 (UTC)
This section was archived on a request by: Saibo (Δ) 18:35, 6 July 2012 (UTC)

File:Spanish Empire in 1598.png I just picked one of the four licenses that were originally used. I don't no which you wish to license yours under. You can change it if you wish. I also tweaked the source and original creator.--Canoe1967 (talk) 18:46, 6 July 2012 (UTC)

thanks a lot guys! Canoe the license you added is fine thanks! Cliniic (talk) 19:39, 6 July 2012 (UTC)

You are very welcome.--Canoe1967 (talk) 19:43, 6 July 2012 (UTC)

Can I upload photo I took of plaque?

I took a photograph of the Zuytdorp commemorative plaque (in Australia), and would like to upload it, but I'm not sure whether I'm allowed to.

  • I took the photo myself, so hold the copyright of the photo, and am happy to donate it
  • The plaque is in a public place
  • The plaque includes some artwork, so I presume the artwork is copyright and thus my photo is a derivative work.
  • The plaque itself does not mention its "author", but it is known to have been commissioned by the Shire of Northampton in partnership with The Embassy of the Kingdom of the Netherlands. [1]
  • It's not clear to me Freedom of panorama allows me upload the photograph.

Can someone advise whether I can upload the photo, and what if any license I should use? Thanks, Mitch Ames (talk) 03:44, 29 June 2012 (UTC)

COM:FOP#Australia suggests that the Australian law is based on the British law, so presumably the situation in Australia is the same as the situation in the United Kingdom. British law doesn't allow you to upload photos of plaques. Without more information, I would assume that the same also applies to Australia. --Stefan4 (talk) 13:18, 29 June 2012 (UTC)
However, there are a fair number of blue plaque images on Commons... AnonMoos (talk) 03:06, 30 June 2012 (UTC)
On obvious difference between the blue plaques and the Zuytdorp plaque is that the former is a simple text-only statement "joe bloggs lived here" with dates, so might not constitute a "graphic work" for the purposes of the UK copyright. The Zuytdorp plaque includes some graphics - a map of the coastline and depiction of the ship - so could reasonably be deemed a graphic work. Mitch Ames (talk) 00:55, 1 July 2012 (UTC)

Opmerking i.v.m. File:Sintpietersdag.jpg

Ik kreeg een opmerking over de licentie van File:Sintpietersdag.jpg. Deze afbeelding komt een een niet meer bestaande krant uit 1921. Op de plaats waar deze publicatie ter beschikking gesteld wordt, www.historischekranten.be, Copyright & Privacy|auteursrechten|Regels voor gebruik van de krantencollecties lees ik: - Als men auteur en bron vermeldt, mag men korte fragmenten citeren. - Artikels mogen gebruikt of gereproduceerd worden voor onderwijs of wetenschappelijk onderzoek in zoverre zulks geen afbreuk doet aan de normale exploitatie van het werk. Hieruit heb ik geconcludeerd dat de getoonde afbeelding kan gebruikt worden voor een project als Wikipedia/Wikimedia; ik heb echter geen licentiecategorie gevonden waaronder ik dit kan thuisbrengen. Roland Rotsaert --Rotsaert8000 (talk) 05:56, 1 July 2012 (UTC)

I don't understand the questions - but that text (some announcement) may be okay with {{PD-text}} if it is not public domain due to ago. --Saibo (Δ) 13:52, 1 July 2012 (UTC)

Copyright issue: doesn't want it to be freely available for use by anyone

Hi, I have created a page for a living person and he has requested a specific image be used (his own).He owns the image but has given me permission to include it in the article. He doesn't want it to be freely available for use by anyone, simply to add an image to the page for recognition purposes. How can I do this in line with Wiki Commons Rules?

Please reply to my talk page Karendawes (talk) 22:25, 29 June 2012 (UTC)

Replies will be given here - not on your talk page (but I left you a notice this time - please check back here by yourself next time).
Sorry, "He doesn't want it to be freely available for use by anyone" is not compatible with Commons (or Wikipedia's) rules - don't upload. Have a look in the intro of COM:L.
Are any of the images which you have uploaded already with a permission like that? --Saibo (Δ) 00:53, 30 June 2012 (UTC)

No, other images are my own which I'm happy to make freely available. He has now agreed verbally to make the image freely available, just waiting for the written permission to come through. He is sending this directly to wiki commons email address. How long does it take from receipt of the email to the image being accepted? How will I know the email has been received and the image accepted? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Karendawes (talk • contribs) 2012-07-02T11:59:21‎ (UTC)

Thank you for your effort! The process is described at COM:OTRS (but just wait for a reply to his mail as he already sent one). It usually takes some days to some weeks (mails are processed by selected volunteers like nearly everything else here); currently the maximum time is specified with 10 days. You will see it on the file page (the volunteer will place a "permission" tag on the file then) and I think via a reply to the mail. --Saibo (Δ) 14:27, 2 July 2012 (UTC)

Sorry, but could you just clarify that you have received the email from him giving permission as I can't find a permissions tag on the file. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Karendawes (talk • contribs) 2012-07-02T18:21:00‎ (UTC)

Sorry, I cannot (maybe someone else here can) look into the mails (as I said, only some selected users can). Is File:CRHeadshot.jpg the photo we are discussing about? --Saibo (Δ) 18:27, 2 July 2012 (UTC)

Yes it is. Sorry to be a pain. This is my first time at creating a page!!! The owner of the image is in Mexico at the moment and it's difficult to ascertain whether or not he's sent the permission. I don't want to keep asking him about it if he has already sent it. :( — Preceding unsigned comment added by Karendawes (talk • contribs) 2012-07-02T20:09:36‎ (UTC)

Okay. Don't worry - the image will stay here for at least 30 days (before it gets deleted if no email arrived) since Canoe1967 has added the "OTRS pending" tag (short form: {{subst:OP}}) to the image (based on your explanations here). --Saibo (Δ) 23:55, 2 July 2012 (UTC)

Flickr's Creative Commons licensed image – But actually copyright violations!

I have recently started uploading images from Flickr using Flickr bot. I have uploaded this image File:New Theatres Calcutta Logo.jpg. It may sound peculiar, few minutes after uploading I myself reported copyright violation. I found/felt– the person who had uploaded the image in Flickr does not own copyright of this image, he took from somewhere uploaded in Flickr under CC SA license.
In my 1 day experience I can see many Flickr CC licensed images which are actually copyright violation. Using Flickr bot I can upload these to Commons, but can anyone suggest how to handle this trouble? It'll be excellent if someone adds a talkback template in my talk page after replying.--Tito Dutta (Send me a message) 20:46, 1 July 2012 (UTC)

Known problem, users on flickr upload photographs that they not created (Template:Flickrvio) - or even worser: People on Wikimedia Commons start their own flickr accounts to upload files that they not own there and later forward the files to Commons (Commons:License laundering). We collect such bad flickr users at COM:QFI. --Martin H. (talk) 21:01, 1 July 2012 (UTC)
It seems all of those flickr user's may be copy vio. Do the flickrbots have a list of known ones?--Canoe1967 (talk) 21:09, 1 July 2012 (UTC)
Flickr copyright violators should also be listed at User:FlickreviewR/bad-authors. If you add the account there, then User:FlickreviewR won't approve licence reviews. I don't know if the Flickr upload bots use that list, though. --Stefan4 (talk) 22:30, 1 July 2012 (UTC)
Found this list in Martin's page Commons:QFI#Flickr users. I am intersted to learn the image File:New Theatres Calcutta Logo.jpg, I want to change the license to PD-India, as the logo was created in 1931 W:New Theatres, and it qualifies PD-India. Can I delete every think related to Flickr transfer and add PD-India there or I need to upload separately? --Tito Dutta (Send me a message) 21:17, 1 July 2012 (UTC)

If we can be sure it was created before 1952 it should be okay. Can you google an image with a date of creation?--Canoe1967 (talk) 21:57, 1 July 2012 (UTC)

The company (production house) was established in 1931, they created multiple films at that time (before 1951) where the image was used.--Tito Dutta (Send me a message) 22:25, 1 July 2012 (UTC)

You could replace the speedy tag with a regular delete tag or just remove it and see if anyone else adds one. I do believe it is older than 1952 judging by the quality. If you have seen the older movies and they have the logo, I think we can trust your word that it was there. If they really whine you could upload a video clip from an older movie for others to see.--Canoe1967 (talk) 22:37, 1 July 2012 (UTC)

Aside from the copyright question: images like this really should not be JPEG compressed. There is a GIF version at http://ikku.multiply.com/journal/item/73?&show_interstitial=1&u=%2Fjournal%2Fitem, which is a little better. PNG would be a little better yet, and SVG would be optimal. If the logo is kept on Commons, the German Wikipedia's inferior copy at de:Datei:NewTheatresLogo.jpg should probably be deleted. LX (talk, contribs) 22:45, 1 July 2012 (UTC)

Upload Wizard is slow

Split off from #Upload wizard doesn't work 2. --Saibo (Δ) 00:57, 2 July 2012 (UTC)

Screen is freezing every time after clicking on "Next" "Continue" etc! It is taking 2-3 mins to complete an upload! --Tito Dutta (Send me a message) 00:17, 2 July 2012 (UTC)

note: that is Firefox 11 on Linux (form user talk page). --Saibo (Δ) 00:57, 2 July 2012 (UTC)
I can record a short video using screenrecorder video, but it'll be extremely boring since there will be almost nothing to see (only long gap after each click). I have seen your upload log. Recently you have done mostly reverting etc work. So, I am not sure if you uploaded any photo recently (have I missed?). In case you have not uploaded any photo recently why don't you give a try and see if you also feel the problem (if applicable).
Here is a sample image which you can upload. Name the file:Swami Vivekananda Calcutta 1897 Description: Swami Vivekananda in Calcutta, India, 1897. Category:Swami Vivekananda License: Pd Old PD or PD 1923 and PD-India. You can upload any other image but make sure to upload it from Special:UploadWizard--Tito Dutta (Send me a message) 02:37, 2 July 2012 (UTC)
Yes, I did only upload new versions of files (reworked ones) lately.
I will try with upload wizard now (I did not up to now simply because it takes time). It works for me (having "Chunked uploads for files over $1 in Upload Wizard - Increases maximum file upload size from $2 to $3" at Special:Preferences#mw-prefsection-uploads switched on). But: my FF13 also froze two times. First time while I entered text in another tab (while the upload was waiting in completed state). Then I tried again (new upload wizard session) and it froze two seconds after the upload began. Tried a third time and it did not freeze. I tried once with the setting switched off: no freeze. However, that is very unpredictable - not sure if my experience was related to that upload setting. And, most importantly, I got no freezes after the clicks on the buttons.
Note: I uploaded a test file (deleted again) - I did not use your file suggestion.
A video would be best - but also some effort for you. Maybe someone else can reproduce your problem. In the meantime, or always, use the upload forms to upload: Commons:Upload. --Saibo (Δ) 15:00, 2 July 2012 (UTC)

check that it is not simply taking a long time like 5 minutes, less than that, it simply may be running it's search for duplicates, that often takes forever and is quite annoying I have found. Penyulap 03:30, 3 July 2012 (UTC)

Can you describe at which step this "search for duplicates" happens? And how do you know it is checking for duplicates? Does it display some message? --Saibo (Δ) 17:43, 3 July 2012 (UTC)

Image to large for preview

Hi, i uploaded a new image. It is larger than 12,5 Mpixels and mediawiki is not able to create a preview. Is there a way to manually create a preview? [2]. Thanks in advance --Duff06 (talk) 13:38, 9 July 2012 (UTC)

The recommended approach is to upload a downscaled version of the file over the full-resolution version, which is what you have already done. LX (talk, contribs) 14:21, 9 July 2012 (UTC)
This section was archived on a request by: LX (talk, contribs) 14:21, 9 July 2012 (UTC)

Copyright help regarding File:SkySQL.png

Hi i try just to put a "LOGO" link in a wiky but its very Hard !!! --Jose.ridolfi (talk) 07:56, 3 July 2012 (UTC)

Could you explain in a bit more detail what you mean by "put a 'LOGO' link in a wiky"? Is there any reason to assume that this logotype is published under a free license? LX (talk, contribs) 19:47, 3 July 2012 (UTC)
Sorry, but we can't help you if you don't reply to follow-up questions. The file has now been deleted, because we can't host copyrighted content without a free license. LX (talk, contribs) 16:32, 14 July 2012 (UTC)
(Edit conflict) Hi Jose, well, in general: we cannot host all the media you find in the Internet. Please read about Internet images and the intro of COM:L. So, we only can host the logo here if it is public domain or freely licensed. It is not public domain due to copyright ineligibility since it contains more than just simple shapes and text (it contains some stylized bird). Do you know that the logo is free to use by everybody for every use (regarding copyrights - trademark rights taken aside)? --Saibo (Δ) 19:49, 3 July 2012 (UTC)
This section was archived on a request by: LX (talk, contribs) 16:32, 14 July 2012 (UTC)

Copyright help regarding File:UlrichWSchiefer2.jpg

Hi! I'm Maria Konstantinidou, I want to change a picture and therefore upload a new one. I put the wrong licensing. The picture is free for use! Ulrich W. Schiefer is the CEO of AtTrack GmbH, the picture is found on www.attrack.de/media. --Maria Konstantinidou (talk) 05:18, 6 July 2012 (UTC)

I don't see any indication that any of the photos you've uploaded (File:Ulrich W. Schiefer 3.3.jpg, File:UlrichWSchiefer2.jpg, File:Ulrich W. Schiefer, Stuttgart.jpg) are in the public domain or published under a license that allows anyone to use them for any purpose. http://www.attrack.de/media/ only says that they're "frei verwendbar für Öffentlichkeitsarbeit" (free for editorial use). See Commons:Image casebook#Press photos. LX (talk, contribs) 10:29, 6 July 2012 (UTC)
Sorry, but we can't help you if you don't reply to follow-up questions. File:UlrichWSchiefer2.jpg has now been deleted, because we can't host copyrighted content without a free license. I've also marked File:Ulrich W. Schiefer, Stuttgart.jpg as missing evidence that the copyright holder has released it into the public domain and File:Ulrich W. Schiefer 3.3.jpg as missing evidence that the copyright holder allows anyone to use it for any purpose. LX (talk, contribs) 16:38, 14 July 2012 (UTC)
This section was archived on a request by: LX (talk, contribs) 16:38, 14 July 2012 (UTC)

Thumbnail view is crashed

This new upload has crashed the thumbnail viewer: File:First colored senator and reps.png. FYI this is a higher resolution upload of this: File:First colored senator and reps.jpg. Thanks Lionelt (talk) 03:01, 8 July 2012 (UTC)

It hasn't crashed; it's just exceeded the size for which thumbnails will be generated. See Commons:FAQ#What resolution should the images I upload be?. LX (talk, contribs) 09:10, 8 July 2012 (UTC)
This section was archived on a request by: LX (talk, contribs) 16:39, 14 July 2012 (UTC)

Nees Search Help

I am looking for pictures of anything related to home organization. Images of closets, kitchen, garage, home office organizing or storage solutions. I can't seem to find a category like that on Wiki. Any assistance is helpful. thanks — Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.7.180.18 (talk • contribs) 03:24, 8 July 2012‎ (UTC)

For example Category:Closets. Please use the search function. --Martin H. (talk) 18:27, 8 July 2012 (UTC)
This section was archived on a request by: LX (talk, contribs) 16:41, 14 July 2012 (UTC)

CC-BY-ND

I tried to search here about this license, but found nothing useful. I have found here a group of nice images, and I want to upload them, but they are licensed under CC-BY-ND and I couldn't figure out whether it fits to commons or not --Abbad_Dira (talk) 14:34, 8 July 2012 (UTC).

That license is not allowed on Commons. "ND" means no derivatives, prohibiting even a simple crop. -- Infrogmation (talk) 14:56, 8 July 2012 (UTC)
Okay. Thanks for fast answer --Abbad_Dira (talk) 15:03, 8 July 2012 (UTC).
This section was archived on a request by: LX (talk, contribs) 16:45, 14 July 2012 (UTC)

Watermark removal

How to remove watermark from this image File:Ragini khaana.jpg --Tito Dutta (Send me a message) 20:42, 8 July 2012 (UTC)

  • It would take a good bit of work with the "clone" tool of GIMP or a similar tool in Photoshop. - Jmabel ! talk 15:00, 9 July 2012 (UTC)
This section was archived on a request by: LX (talk, contribs) 16:47, 14 July 2012 (UTC)

changing an uploaded photo

Hello, I uploaded a photo but is displayed going the wrong direction (sideways). Is there a way to edit the photo so that it displays the right way. Thanks Michael — Preceding unsigned comment added by Michaelsnodgrass (talk • contribs) 20:27, 9 July 2012‎ (UTC)

Use the 'request rotation' button below the image. I don't know if that is better than just over-writing with a correct one.--Canoe1967 (talk) 20:39, 9 July 2012 (UTC)
Yes, do use the request rotation button. Some programs, and in particular Microsoft programs, Apple programs and web browsers, display a lot of images incorrectly. Avoid editing images using any of those programs as you are likely going to get problems with images which are upside-down or sideways. Also do not attempt to rotate an image using any Microsoft or Apple program under any condition as those programs rotate images incorrectly. --Stefan4 (talk) 21:33, 9 July 2012 (UTC)
I second that. If you uploaded an incorrectly rotated image in the first place, you're unlikely to be able to create a correct version with the tools you have. Also, even if you use image editing software that behaves correctly (like Gimp), it will perform another lossy compression of the file when saving, whereas the Rotatebot performs lossless rotation. LX (talk, contribs) 16:54, 14 July 2012 (UTC)
This section was archived on a request by: LX (talk, contribs) 16:54, 14 July 2012 (UTC)

Question about copyright status for photo of wine label

I took a photo of a wine bottle's label specifically for illustrating a Wikipedia article on the winery. Are there any copyright issues involved in uploading the photo? The photo was taken by me, but obviously I don't hold copyright to the label (and, if it complicates things more, the label was of a French wine, so one would presume that the copyright is subject to the rules in France). Any thoughts? I don't want to upload it just to run into problems later. Thanks! Tthaas (talk) 22:14, 9 July 2012 (UTC)

Like any other work, unless it is very simple or first published a long time ago, it is protected by copyright and you can't publish an unauthorized reproduction of it. See also Commons:Derivative works. -- Asclepias (talk) 02:38, 10 July 2012 (UTC)
The label is simple, even in wine label terms (name of the domaine, AOC name of the wine, vintage, and a small drawing of the domaine's winery). Would it be considered fair use to use it as illustration for an article on the domaine itself, if I kept the file on en.wikipedia.org, rather than on Commons? Thanks! Tthaas (talk) 09:08, 10 July 2012 (UTC)
"Simple" in the context of copyright law means plain text or simple geometric shapes. A drawing depicting a winery would almost certainly be above the threshold of originality required for copyright protection. As for the application of English Wikipedia policies, you'd better ask there, but en:Wikipedia:Non-free content#Images is a good starting point. Note the first point there in particular. LX (talk, contribs) 18:16, 10 July 2012 (UTC)
This section was archived on a request by: LX (talk, contribs) 16:55, 14 July 2012 (UTC)

Problem with a file uploaded by me

Hallo. I've recently uploaded a picture of a plant (the File:Sedum dasyphyllum (June 2010).jpg) but... I see the picture rotate and I've requested a rotation of 90°, clockwise. The problem is that the original picture that I have on my pc is "normal", not rotate of -90°.

To explain better how is the normal picture: the plant is growing between two tiles (horizontal), the flowers are vertical. But I'm seeing the tiles in vertical. Thanks for help. --Dэя-Бøяg 14:35, 10 July 2012 (UTC)

The picture has been rotated and now I see it normal, as the original (on my PC). Could somebody control it and see if is it effectively "normal"? Just to avoid an eventual "bug" of my pc that shows to me the picture well rotated (now), and badly inclined to everyone :-) . Sorry for problem, regards. --Dэя-Бøяg 15:34, 10 July 2012 (UTC)
It's correct now. This is the same issue as #changing an uploaded photo four topics above. When you take a photo, your camera stores the pixels that make up the image horizontally. It then inserts information about which way you held the camera into the image. Good image editing software will read this information and ask you if you want to rotate the image. If you do, the image is saved vertically, and the information is reset to indicate that the image no longer needs to be rotated. Bad image editing software will ignore this information and show you the image on its side. When you rotate the image, it won't reset the orientation information, so the image will incorrectly contain information stating that it should be rotated. The result is that good software which respects this information, like the Mediawiki software, will rotate the image again when displaying it. See Commons:Rotation. LX (talk, contribs) 18:51, 10 July 2012 (UTC)
Simply speaking, your computer programs are defective. In order to avoid problems, never edit any images using those programs, and in particular never rotate an image using those programs. --Stefan4 (talk) 22:58, 10 July 2012 (UTC)
Thanks for attention. Anyway, I've understood... Only a think: I haven't used any program to change or retouche that picture. I've simply uploaded it from a digital camera but, for the 1st time, I had that problem. It could be an error of mine: While the picture was loading, I've tried to moved it into a folder, forgetting the ongoing operation. Anyway, thanks again, the problem could be considered resolved. Regards. --Dэя-Бøяg 17:29, 13 July 2012 (UTC)
This section was archived on a request by: LX (talk, contribs) 16:57, 14 July 2012 (UTC)

Journal cover from University of California

I recently posted the cover of a journal published by the University of California, and received an error message. It is in the public domain. Which license should I choose? — Preceding unsigned comment added by JanetByron (talk • contribs) 18:04, 10 July 2012‎ (UTC)

I'm guessing you're referring to File:California Agriculture July-September 2012 issue.jpg. On what do you base the claim that it's in the public domain? http://californiaagriculture.ucanr.org/rights.cfm clearly suggests that it isn't.
Also, regarding File:CaliforniaAgriculture-firstcoverDec1946.jpg, what makes you the copyright holder of that journal page? Are you a legal representative of California Agriculture? LX (talk, contribs) 18:28, 10 July 2012 (UTC)
Sorry, but we can't help you if you do not reply to follow-up questions. Please answer the above questions at Commons:Deletion requests/File:California Agriculture July-September 2012 issue.jpg and Commons:Deletion requests/File:CaliforniaAgriculture-firstcoverDec1946.jpg. LX (talk, contribs) 17:01, 14 July 2012 (UTC)
This section was archived on a request by: LX (talk, contribs) 17:01, 14 July 2012 (UTC)

How can I edit the copyright information?

When I uploaded Rabbis_for_Human_Rights-North_America_square_logo.jpg, I accidentally input the wrong copyright information, and now Wikipedia wants to delete the photo. How can I edit the copyright information?

Thanks! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Aryeh211lion (talk • contribs) 19:38, 10 July 2012‎ (UTC)

You should be able to go to the page, click the "Edit" button at the top of it, and edit it. If you want to use a different copyright tag than what you currently have, you can find a list at Commons:License tags. --Philosopher Let us reason together. 20:25, 10 July 2012 (UTC)
P.S. I've moved your question out of the title heading for clarity. --Philosopher Let us reason together. 20:25, 10 July 2012 (UTC)

Does it qualify for Template:PD-ineligible? I assume it is File:Rabbis for Human Rights-North America square logo.jpg--Canoe1967 (talk) 21:47, 10 July 2012 (UTC)

I think that the top thingie makes it eligible for copyright. --Trycatch (talk) 22:03, 10 July 2012 (UTC)
Agreed. --Philosopher Let us reason together. 23:03, 10 July 2012 (UTC)
I agree as well. @OP, you will may have to have the creator release it under a 'free license' or upload it to any wikipedia you wish to use it in under 'fair use'. Commons does not allow fair use images and some wikipedias don't as well.--Canoe1967 (talk) 04:51, 11 July 2012 (UTC)
This section was archived on a request by: LX (talk, contribs) 17:04, 14 July 2012 (UTC)

File:Mech 06.jpg probably a copyvio (?)

I strongly suspect that File:Mech 06.jpg is a copyright violation — see the corresponding discussion page. Anyone got a chance to look into that? -- Olve Utne (talk) 22:13, 10 July 2012 (UTC)

According to http://www.davemech.org/, L. David Mech is a USGS employee. If the photo were taken as part of his work, it would be {{PD-USGov-USGS}}, but according to http://www.davemech.com/otheranimals/index.html, it was taken on personal time, so it seems the copyright claim is valid. (The fact that the privately taken photos are credited to him under his professional title in http://www.arctic.noaa.gov/essay_mech.html had me quite confused at first!) LX (talk, contribs) 23:11, 10 July 2012 (UTC)
Message tied up in Ribbon.jpg Hello, Help desk/Archive/2012. You have new messages at Commons:Deletion requests/File:Mech 06.jpg.
You may remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

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

Stefan4 (talk) 23:20, 10 July 2012 (UTC)

"Hello, Help desk"? Nice. --Philosopher Let us reason together. 00:48, 11 July 2012 (UTC)
This section was archived on a request by: LX (talk, contribs) 17:05, 14 July 2012 (UTC)

finding uploaded pictures

i have been uploading pictures for a some days but only seem able to find them when i'm logged in. yet, i've noticed that other contributors have added or changed categories in some of these pictures. how can this be?Sundar1 (talk) 09:51, 4 July 2012 (UTC)

If Commons:MyGallery does not work (after clicking the button), you can use Special:MyUploads or tools:~daniel/WikiSense/Gallery.php. -- RE rillke questions? 11:12, 4 July 2012 (UTC)
It is a bit unclear what you mean - what do you mean by "find them"? How do you "find" them?
If you are talking about the search function - it takes some days to update to new files.
Some places to list your uploads are visble at top and on bottom of Special:Contributions/Sundar1. --Saibo (Δ) 11:44, 4 July 2012 (UTC)

(the related part of a longer comment on my talk page --Saibo (Δ) 13:16, 5 July 2012 (UTC)):
wie ich sehe, habe ich mich nicht klar genut ausgedrückt. mit wieder finden meinte ich das finden der bilder auf nomalem wege, in diesem besonderen falle also, wenn ich über "wikipedia:nepal/commons/flüsse in nepal/gandaki river" keine bilder sehe, die ich mit "gandaki river" hochgeladen habe. sie tauchen nur auf, wenn ich eingeloggt bin. die meisten dieser bilder haben auch andere catogorien u. dort sind sie drin, ohne dass ich einloggen muss. --Sundar1 (talk) 10:14, 5 July 2012 (UTC)

Danke für die Präzisierung! Ich verlinke das mal: de:Nepal#WeblinksCategory:NepalCategory:Nature of NepalCategory:Rivers of Nepal‎Category:Gandaki River. Damit deine Fotos in Category:Gandaki River auftauchen, musst du sie in diese Kategorie (Hilfe zu Kategorien) einsortieren. Bei File:Kali Gandaki Valley0441.JPG hast du dies getan, daher taucht jenes Foto in Category:Gandaki River auch auf. Welche Fotos fehlen denn? Bei jenen fehlt dann noch die Einsortierung. Das geht, indem du [[Category:Gandaki River]] (üblicherweise im unteren Bereich) auf der Dateiseite des fehlenden Fotos einfügst.
Beachte, dass aktuell die Kategorieansicht für unangemeldete Benutzer wegen eines Serverfehlers veraltet ist - siehe Commons:Village_pump#Categories_and_being_logged_in.
Kommentiere einfach wieder hier, wenn du magst. Viele Grüße --Saibo (Δ) 13:16, 5 July 2012 (UTC)
hallo saibo, danke für die rückmeldungen auf deiner seite und hier. das problem war nicht, dass die bilder nicht in den richtigen kategorien einsortiert waren, denn sie tauchten dort in der regel nach wenigen minuten auf, sondern dass sie dort nicht einsehbar waren, wenn ich nicht angemeldet war. d. h. andere nutzer müssen wohl einige tage warten, bis sie ebenfalls in den genuss kommen. deshalb komme ich zu dem schluss, dass es eben einige tage dauert, bis hochgeladene bilder für die allgemeinheit sichtbar werden. gestern lud ich beispielsweise eine reihe von fotos in die kategorie "durbar square" hoch, die heute noch nicht drin sind, es sei denn, ich melde mich an. auch bilder, die ich vor 2 tagen für tansen in die kategorie "cities in nepal" hochlud, sind heute nur für mich sichtbar, wenn ich angemeldet bin. ich gehe davon aus, dass sie alle in den nächsten tagen auftauchen. was mich allerdings noch immer wundert ist, wieso jemand sofort nach meinem hochladen schon zugriff auf die bilder hatte u. kategorien ändern o. ergänzen konnte, obwohl ich selbst nur an die bilder rankam, wenn ich mich angemeldet hatte. kann es sein, dass die bilder erst von administratoren gecheckt und freigegeben werden u. das eben einige tage in anspruch nimmt?--Sundar1 (talk) 07:10, 9 July 2012 (UTC)

Interlanguage links to articles from Commons categories

Hello, I tried making interlanguage links to articles from two Commons categories, Category:National Organization for Women (NOW) and Category:American Library Association, but it didn't work. Could someone please fix this? Djembayz (talk) 19:18, 8 July 2012 (UTC)

Spanish wikipedia user talk page awaiting categorisation in commons?

How is it possible that Special:UncategorizedPages lists es:Usuario Discusión:Alex Filth?

And BTW, File:Barras bravas.jpg appears to have a database problem. -- Mkratz (talk) 20:56, 8 July 2012 (UTC)

Could it be because of this redirect? --Stefan4 (talk) 21:31, 8 July 2012 (UTC)
Hm, looks like a lead, but it's a month old and I don't see anything mimicking a gallery on that user talk page. Do we have a bug?-- Mkratz (talk) 00:55, 9 July 2012 (UTC)

uploading a picture of a portrait I own

I am trying to upload a portrait of Cyrus Leroy Baldridge that is in my house and that I own.

I have uploaded things like this before but am being rejected now.

Jay Mulberry — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jaymulberry (talk • contribs) 14:02, 9 July 2012‎ (UTC)

What is the message you're getting? Please note that owning a copy (even the original copy) of a work that someone else has created usually doesn't mean you hold the copyright – and it never makes you the author of that work. The author is the person who created the work (drew the drawing, painted the painting, or held the camera when the original photograph was taken). The copyright is an immaterial right entirely separate from material ownership of any copies. It is normally held by the author or the author's heirs.
Are you sure that you are the copyright holder of File:IWasThere.jpg, File:NigerianPrincess.jpg, File:Baldridge-HolmeSketch2.gif, File:Baldridge-HolmeSketch.gif and File:Baldridge-TimeAndChance.jpg and that you personally created File:CyrusLeroyBaldridge1918.jpg, File:BaldridgePaintingInSantaFe1970.jpg, File:CyrusBaldridgeOnOneOfTheAlliedFrontsInWWI.jpg, File:CyrusLeroy Baldridge1918InFrenchUniform.jpg, File:CyrusBaldridge-SooChowCanal-PrairiePrintmakers GiftPrint.jpg, File:CyrusBaldridgeUnknownDateProbablyNear1910.jpg, File:CyrusBaldridgeAbout1940.jpg and File:CyrusBaldridgeNigerianPrincess.jpg? LX (talk, contribs) 14:33, 9 July 2012 (UTC)

Forgot to put the license tag. What shall I do now?

Hello! I forgot to put the license tag for the image File:Polypropylene_Carbonate_1.PNG. Realizing this, I clicked go back of the browser and re uploaded it, this time with license tag. But that didn't introduced it into the image's page. So I edited it manually and thus put the license tag. What shall I do now? Will the file get deleted? Vanischenu (talk) 15:01, 9 July 2012 (UTC)

You may simply copy the licence from another file in edit-mode. --Havang(nl) (talk) 17:37, 9 July 2012 (UTC)
Thank you so much. I did the same. I worried that it may get deleted. Now I am going to use it on Wikipedia.Vanischenu mTalk 20:10, 9 July 2012 (UTC)
Yes check.svg ResolvedVanischenu mTalk 20:10, 9 July 2012 (UTC)

Sind diese Dateien Commons-fähig? Datei:Berthold_Pensky.jpg & Datei:Berthold Pensky Ausschnitt.jpg

Hallo, ich arbeite gerade an dem englischen Artikel über das Unternehmen Petrotest. Im deutschen Wikipedia sind die Bilder (http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Datei:Berthold_Pensky.jpg & http://de.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Datei:Berthold_Pensky_Ausschnitt.jpg) eingebunden. Könnte bitte geprüft werden, ob diese Bilder für Commons geeignet sind und ggf. dorthin verschoben werden? Das Foto ist mehr als 100 Jahre alt und es sind keine Lebensdaten des Fotografen auffindbar. Die Reproduktion stammt aus den USA (http://www.loc.gov/pictures/item/2005696308/).--Petrotest (talk) 09:11, 10 July 2012 (UTC)

Parameters passing in autotranslated templates

I thought I knew how this stuff works, but I guess not. I tried converting {{Unidentified header}} to use {{Autotranslate}}, but now the subject and category parameters are ignored. Any idea what I'm doing wrong? LX (talk, contribs) 11:44, 16 July 2012 (UTC)

{{Autotranslate}} accepts numeric parameters only. Other parameters are ignored, except "the base" because it can't guess what kind of paramers will be passed. You have to convert the named parameters into numeric ones. -- Rillke(q?) 11:49, 16 July 2012 (UTC)
And of course autotranslate only passes numeric arguments to the language sub-templates. -- Rillke(q?) 12:05, 16 July 2012 (UTC)
Of course! Must be something funny in the tea today. Thanks mate! LX (talk, contribs) 14:37, 16 July 2012 (UTC)
You are welcome. Tea is a good choice. -- Rillke(q?) 15:54, 16 July 2012 (UTC)
This section was archived on a request by: Rillke(q?) 15:54, 16 July 2012 (UTC)

Copyright help regarding File:SFLtI.jpg

A user on Reddit.com posted a photo via Imgur, and asked the Reddit community to make a photo available via WikiMedia/WikiPedia.

What further steps are necessary to ensure the photograph remains available via Wiki systems?

Thanks! --Floridawhiteguy (talk) 03:26, 29 June 2012 (UTC)

It seems that this is a photo taken in the United States "circa 1919". If you can prove that the photo was published somewhere (for example in a newspaper) before 1923, then that is all you need to do: photos published before 1923 are in the public domain in the United States. If it was published before 1923, just explain where it was published (for example: the name of the newspaper and the date of publication) and add the licence {{PD-1923}}. If the photo was not published before 1923, then it may still be copyrighted for some reason, although it could still be in the public domain, depending on various things. If you can identify the copyright holder (normally the photographer, or, if the photographer is dead, the photographer's heir), you can ask the copyright holder to follow the instructions at COM:OTRS. --Stefan4 (talk) 13:24, 29 June 2012 (UTC)
(parallel answer) Hi thanks for your help! We only host free files (see the intro of COM:L) and need to know why this file is free. Since it is in the US and is before 1923 it may even be already in the public domain. But: it needs to be published before 1923. As the story is visible on reddit there may be doubts that it was published at all until now. So it may not be in the public domain. If a work is not in the public domain we need permission from the photographer / copyright holder for everyone (see COM:OTRS - if needed also possible by clearly mentioning author and license information in the web). Since the donor's (apostrotastrophe) grandparents are depicted they are not the photographer. I am not that knowledgeable about US copyright - but this may be the work for hire case (probably it is not - "if the work is created by an independent contractor or freelancer, ...").
Others here should comment on that US copyright stuff.
I guess that apostrotastrophe knows nothing about that photo's circumstances except that he owns it physically somehow. Cheers --Saibo (Δ) 13:36, 29 June 2012 (UTC)
apostrotastrophe says it is dated 1919 on the reddit site. If the date is stamped on the back of the picture would it qualify for pd 1923? Should someone ask him on the site to upload the back of the picture? File:Wagon pulled by an ostrich.jpg seems the same cart existed in 1920 and maybe the same bird as well.--Canoe1967 (talk) 17:08, 6 July 2012 (UTC)
As Stefan4 and Saibo already explained, it's publication that matters for {{PD-1923}} – not creation. LX (talk, contribs) 20:01, 6 July 2012 (UTC)
It looks like a photo taken by the farm for tourists as the 1920 one looks like the same background, etc. If the images are then sold to the tourists as keepsakes does this count as publishing?--Canoe1967 (talk) 20:16, 6 July 2012 (UTC)
I think your idea is correct, that's what the farm was doing, as strongly suggested by many similar photos found on the web, of which here are only a small sample: [3], [4], [5], [6], [7], [8], [9], [10], [11], [12], [13], [14], [15]. On one photo, we can see one side of a booth, with a sign that reads "Your photo [...]" (the rest is out of the photo field). So it does look like the farm were inviting tourists to sit in the cart, have their photo taken and buy the photos as souvenirs. Yes I think that would count as publication, provided there were no restrictions limiting what the recipients could do with the photos. However, people who posted the pictures on the web had trouble to document the years. In the sample linked here, their estimations range from 1904 to 1930, and most seem to postulate circa the mid-1920s. -- Asclepias (talk) 21:22, 6 July 2012 (UTC)
Commons:Licensing#cite_note-50 gives some hints on what is "publication" in US copyright law. That does not sound like the creation and selling of a single (no "copies") photo for souvenir is a publication. Maybe it is publication - I am not a US-ie. However, we not even have a secured year. --Saibo (Δ) 22:05, 6 July 2012 (UTC)
  • From http://www.copyright.gov/circs/circ01.pdf “Publication” is the distribution of copies or phonorecords of a work to the public by sale or other transfer of ownership, or by rental, lease, or lending." I would say the transfer of ownership counts as publication according to that. I assume that if the subjects had the pictures taken and had to pay for them with in a short time frame this would count as publication. What is the year for PD-us publishing, 1923 or earlier? I would trust apostrotastrophe stating 1919. I don't see a reason why he would just guess at a date. All the other ones from the farm have the dates so the farm itself may have dated the back of them.--Canoe1967 (talk) 20:47, 10 July 2012 (UTC)
    • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment At least for pre-1978 photos, it doesn't seem to matter that it says "copies" in plural. Statues are often considered as published although there is normally only one single copy, so wouldn't a single copy of a photo be enough? --Stefan4 (talk) 22:55, 10 July 2012 (UTC)

We may need a new article. I brought it up here: Commons:Village_pump/Copyright#Definition_of_Publication--Canoe1967 (talk) 04:58, 11 July 2012 (UTC)

  • Based on the above discussion, it appears that this photo was taken in 1919 by an unknown employee of the farm. It is likely that it was never published, or if it can be considered, the Imgur/Reddit posting was the first publication. Based on that, the copyright duration is the shorter of 95 years since the first publication or 120 years since their creation, which gives a copyright expiration date of 1/1/2040. In the meantime, a low-resolution image might be uploaded to English Wikipedia under their non-free content criteria. cmadler (talk) 13:42, 11 July 2012 (UTC)

Copyright help regarding File:Prince Madoc.jpg

Hello. I want to add the copyright status to my file image "Prince Madoc.jpeg." The status should be {{Anonymous work}}. It's skrimshaw. The link to where it came from is listed in its description. Please give me complete information on how to simply add the copyright status so that it does not get deleted. The image provides a great justice to articles it is featured on and I just don't want it disappearing.

--Fidelity6 (talk) 23:28, 9 July 2012 (UTC)

Why do you think that the {{anonymous work}} template would help? It can't be used for Welsh images. --Stefan4 (talk) 23:33, 9 July 2012 (UTC)

It should be {{Anonymous-EU}} Now can someone tell me how to edit the image's copyright? Specifically, what do I press?


Just checking to see if previous was answered.


--Fidelity6 (talk) 03:03, 10 July 2012 (UTC)

  • You edit the licensing exactly like a you edit anything else: use the edit button.
  • By the way, when discussing a template, you can write {{tl|anonymous work}}, producing {{anonymous work}}, instead of {{anonymous work}}, displaying the whole template. - Jmabel ! talk 04:29, 10 July 2012 (UTC)
I disagree. Of course its clear that you describe the drawing with a wrong date, 9 July 2012, but what date is correct? Do we actually have any evidence that this drawing is an old work as claimed above (>70 years) and not some kind of recent illustration? And what evidence do we have that the author is realy unknown and not only not known to the uploader? --Martin H. (talk) 07:48, 10 July 2012 (UTC)
I assume it is not me that you are disagreeing with, although your comment is indented under mine. All I said was technically how to do these things; I made no judgment on whether they should be done in this case. - Jmabel ! talk 15:53, 10 July 2012 (UTC)
correct. --Martin H. (talk) 19:33, 10 July 2012 (UTC)
Also note that {{Anonymous-EU}} doesn't work for Welsh works. {{Anonymous-EU}} says that an anonymous work may be in the public domain even if it is unpublished, but British law doesn't allow unpublished works to enter the public domain, regardless of age, with some exceptions for old photos and old government works. Thus, you need {{PD-UK-unknown}} instead, which requires publication at least 70 years ago, and the publication must have been approved by the copyright holder. The image additionally has to be free in the United States, which requires other criteria (copyrighted if first published between 1926 and 2002 regardless of year of creation, free if published before 1923, usually free if first published in 1923, 1924 or 1925, free if created before 1892 and first published in 2003 or later). --Stefan4 (talk) 13:55, 10 July 2012 (UTC)

Folks, just tell me how to edit the picture I uploaded. It's the only non-exaggerated portrait of Madoc on the internet, and it will be used on Wikipedia regardless of who created it. Just tell me how I can edit the copyright and I'll insert the {{PD-UK-unknown}} status. Thank you.--Fidelity6 (talk) 04:45, 11 July 2012 (UTC)

Sorry, that's not how it works. Unless you can prove that the licence is correct (and that the file additionally is free in the United States), then the file will have to be deleted. See COM:PRP. --Stefan4 (talk) 07:13, 11 July 2012 (UTC)

Deleting a Section

Hi, I recently asked you a couple questions at Wikipedia Commons - Help Desk. They were answered, thank you! The problem is that there is a record of these questions that could be found on Google. How do I delete my sections (with questions) from Wikipedia Commons in such a way that no record is left? Is it possible to do?

  • On the one hand that's kind of confusing: you didn't sign this, and there is no such thing as Wikipedia Commons. There's Wikipedia, in particular the English language Wikipedia, and there's Wikimedia Commons, where you are asking this question. Both are projects of the Wikimedia Foundation.
  • On the other hand: pretty much anything asked here is normally in the permanent record. It would be both very difficult to get rid of your question entirely, because it is on a page with other questions, and we wouldn't want to delete all of the history of the page during the time your question was present. Furthermore, Google often retains copies of things even years after the fact, as does the Internet Archive, and that is not under our control. But presumably if the question appears to be of no general interest, we can arrange not to archive it as usual in whichever Help Desk page it was actually on, or to remove any signature you may have left there, making the question more anonymous to casual observers.
  • I know that may not be all that helpful, but in this case I'm just the bearer of the news. - Jmabel ! talk 19:46, 12 July 2012 (UTC)

Thank you so much for replying, and I'm sorry for the confusion I've caused. I do not have a problem with signing any messages. I have a different problem. I uploaded some images recently, but they were later removed due to copyright issues. However, I asked questions about those images in Wikimedia Commons. And now, my questions are a permanent record of a person who was in the images and who has a very good reputation. What can I do to make sure that the person's name is not associated with my questions asked at the Help Desk? Thank you. Aisupova (talk) 22:59, 12 July 2012 (UTC)

  • Well, you can't completely hide the history of this, but you can make it much less visible to anyone searching casually by changing the name to [name redacted] wherever it occurs. Do make sure to add an edit summary like "Redacting for privacy". - Jmabel ! talk 23:42, 12 July 2012 (UTC)

アップロード完了せず

画像のアップロードがいつまで経っても完了せずフリーズしてます。 お手数ですが解除のほどお願いします。 --Highten31 (talk) 20:01, 12 July 2012 (UTC)

Picture of ads of МММ-2011

I can upload a photo of advertisement of this stuff (en) traffaretted on asphalt: it contains logo, telephone (I can blur it) and motto "So what are u waiting for?". Alternatively I can photo ads still hanging on a wall near my home. The pyramid is already ruined. Can I publish it by rules of Commons? I've readen the FAQ but can't understand is it's Advertisement section or Graffiti, and what to do in both cases. Ignatus (talk) 22:54, 12 July 2012 (UTC)

Cemeteries and graves (Friedhöfe und Gräber/Grabdenkmale)

Viele Orte besitzen denkmalgeschützte Friedhofsbereiche und Grabdenkmale bedeutender Personen, die dort bestattet wurden. Fotos vom Straßenrand (Panoramafreiheit) sind in der Regel nicht möglich oder sinnvoll, daher werden die meisten Fotos im Friedhof selbst aufgenommen. Welche Vorgaben oder Regeln sind zu beachten? Ein zweiter Aspekte beträfe individuelle Grabsteine und Skulpturen - oft sind sie künstlerisch oder originel gestaltet, gibt es auch in dieser Hinsicht Bestimmungen zum Urheberrecht?--Metilsteiner (talk) 10:22, 13 July 2012 (UTC)

de:Wikipedia Diskussion:Bildrechte könnte ein geeigneter Ort für diese Frage sein. Dort gibt es im Archiv eine kurze Diskussion: [16] --Sitacuisses (talk) 12:39, 13 July 2012 (UTC)

How to use a photo on my site?

Dear sir/madam,

I would like to use this photo for my site: (The question is actually in general, so for all other images aswell)

http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:20120505_halanzy52.JPG#filehistory

Would it be okay to use this photo and that when someone's mouse is on the photo, it will not show the title but:

By Jean Housen (Own work) [CC-BY-SA-3.0 (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0)], via Wikimedia Commons

Would that be the right way to the attribution?

Yours sincerely,

Ruud

You don't need to specify own work, but yes, that should be fine. -mattbuck (Talk) 11:33, 13 July 2012 (UTC)

Why does the search for "Disambiguation" in the "Help" section deliver no useful information?

[17] We do have a Category:Disambiguation, but where do I learn in what case and how to create one? --Sitacuisses (talk) 12:07, 13 July 2012 (UTC)

The Help namespace isn't really used that much. Project-specific guidelines and policies are found in the Commons namespace. Our disambiguation practices seem to be very poorly documented indeed, so I think the only way to learn at the moment is by looking at existing examples in Category:Disambiguation. Perhaps you could do that and help improve the documentation situation by writing down your findings? LX (talk, contribs) 14:56, 13 July 2012 (UTC)

video consisting entirely of US Congressional testimony

This is PD, correct? UseTheCommandLine (talk) 03:55, 13 July 2012 (UTC)

  • Depends who shot it. Just like with a photo, copyright normally belongs to the person behind the camera. If that was a federal employee in his or her professional capacity then it's PD. Otherwise, probably not. - Jmabel ! talk 04:56, 13 July 2012 (UTC)
    For example, C-SPAN content is not in the public domain. LX (talk, contribs) 11:16, 13 July 2012 (UTC)

Taken originally from the House or Senate websites though should be PD, yes? UseTheCommandLine (talk) 12:56, 13 July 2012 (UTC)

US government websites frequently host content created by third parties, so that's no guarantee. What matters is whether or not the video was created by a US federal government employee. It would be easier to give a specific answer if you could point to a page containing the video that you have in mind. LX (talk, contribs) 14:44, 13 July 2012 (UTC)

see example here UseTheCommandLine (talk) 14:52, 16 July 2012 (UTC) or perhaps a better example is here UseTheCommandLine (talk) 14:55, 16 July 2012 (UTC)

Right, based on the watermarks in the top right-hand side, it seems quite reasonable conclude that those videos are US Government works in the public domain, restrictive use restrictions notwithstanding. I'm not sure what the legal basis for those are, but I'm fairly sure they're not enforceable on copyright grounds. Perhaps it's about {{personality rights}}, so adding that tag to the file description page would be a good idea. Cheers, LX (talk, contribs) 16:17, 16 July 2012 (UTC)

Answering my own question, I called the US copyright office and they said that yes, the congressional record, i.e. videos etc, is all PD. They even suggested that even if it was broadcast at some point by C-SPAN that since it is essentially the rebroadcast of officially produced government records that it was still PD, and there was some question in my mind about that point.UseTheCommandLine (talk) 15:07, 16 July 2012 (UTC)

This section was archived on a request by: LX (talk, contribs) 07:47, 19 July 2012 (UTC)

Unknown warning: "duplicate-archive"

Dear Helpdesk,

I uploaded a file (that is my own work) and i got a user talk that i had to send an OTRS - so I sent it; but by the time the answer arrived to this OTRS that I just have to send the link of my file and it is confirmed by the OTRS now, I was already out on a holiday; so of course I didn't see this email; and so for this reason i could not send the link.

So, today, again, I tried to re-upload this file, since I already gave the OTRS, and the confirmation for it; but an error message comes, that says: Unknown warning: "duplicate-archive".

So I cannot upload again the file. I tried to rename, but the same error message comes.

Please, help me what can I do to share this picture (I was working a lot to make this photomontage, and to upload and write description to it). Is it possible to undo the delete of the one that was already uploaded?

The file was named: Sant Bani Ashram - Ribolla (This is a mix of more photos.)

I am waiting for your answer, thanks al ot in advance.

dori ‎ -D0rk4.r0l4nd 15:39, 16. July 2012

Please go to COM:UR, click the recycle-button (Crystal Clear mimetype recycled.svg), select by uploader, insert your name, click add, remove the files from the list that should not be restored, insert the reason (including the OTRS ticket number), and request the restoration of your files. -- Rillke(q?) 15:49, 16 July 2012 (UTC)
Thanks a lot!!!
This section was archived on a request by: Rillke(q?) 17:40, 19 July 2012 (UTC)

Adding a license to a picture

I have been uploaded a logo File:OreoLogo.svg to replace en:File:Oreo logo.png.I don`t how and which license to put.Could you help me? Thanx רונאלדיניו המלך (talk) 13:59, 8 July 2012 (UTC)

en:File:Oreo logo.png is clearly marked as non-free. Is there any reason to assume that Kraft Foods allows anyone to use their works for any purpose, as you claim? LX (talk, contribs) 16:43, 14 July 2012 (UTC)

Need help with a very big upload at WP:FFU

Hi, an IP requested an upload of an 1.8GB mpg4; I already converted it to ogg and turned the chuncked uploads on, but it fails (on my side? I tried it in 3 browsers with ~8 times) to upload the video. Can somebody look at en:Wikipedia:Files for upload#Barack Obama and Google+ and do the upload please? mabdul 08:07, 14 July 2012 (UTC)

Copyright help regarding File:Sixtus-III Seppelt.jpg

--91.148.64.103 10:52, 14 July 2012 (UTC) I scanned this file File:Sixtus-III Seppelt.jpg from a book edited in Munchen in 1933, so it is in public domain, I think.--91.148.64.103 10:52, 14 July 2012 (UTC)

Who made the image you scanned and when? Does the book have a Bildquellenverzeichnis (List of image sources)? -- Rillke(q?) 11:32, 14 July 2012 (UTC)

institution template problem

Can someone take a look at an institution template I created. It wont make a box like its supposed to and I dont know why. thanks! Institution:Garros_GaleríaThelmadatter (talk) 15:27, 14 July 2012 (UTC)

I added 2 brackets, did that fix?--Canoe1967 (talk) 16:10, 14 July 2012 (UTC)

Copyright help regarding File:Liuyang.jpg

--180.109.55.197 10:13, 16 July 2012 (UTC)

Do you own the copyright of this image? From where you have collected this image? Okay if it sounds rude, then I'll explain it– have you collected this image from internet, any book, magazine, journal or you have taken this image yourself or this image has been taken by a company you are working in? --Tito Dutta (Send me a message) 10:33, 16 July 2012 (UTC)
Okay, in image details you have mentioned www.news.cn as source! Have they given written permission to upload the image in Commons? Can you provide some details please? --Tito Dutta (Send me a message) 10:38, 16 July 2012 (UTC)
This a copyright violation. I deleted it. Yann (talk) 11:52, 16 July 2012 (UTC)
This section was archived on a request by: LX (talk, contribs) 07:34, 20 July 2012 (UTC)

Category:Silhouettes

The category Silhouettes is a subcategory of Category:Photographs. But this category and the subcategories contain drawings, or the subcategories are categorized as drawings (e.g. Category:Silhouettes of aircraft is a subcategory of Category:Line drawings of aircraft, Category:Silhouettes of ships of Category:Drawings of ships). What should be done about this? Create a category like Category:Silhouette drawings of aircraft for each category? LittleWink (talk) 19:06, 16 July 2012 (UTC)

Hmm, I already of recategorizing 'Silhouettes'. My bet would be Category:Views. But that seems to a mixed category too. It is a subcategory of Category:Places, but not all subcategories are about places. Any suggestions to solve that? A seperate Category:Images by view and rename 'Views' to something which emphasizes a geographical location? LittleWink (talk) 14:12, 17 July 2012 (UTC)
How about placing Category:Silhouettes as a subcategory of Category:Art techniques with separate subcategories for silhouette drawings (also placed in Category:Drawings by type) and silhouette photographs (also placed in Category:Photographic techniques)? LX (talk, contribs) 14:37, 17 July 2012 (UTC)
  • LX's proposal sounds right to me. - Jmabel ! talk 15:27, 17 July 2012 (UTC)
OK, thank you both for your input. I will follow the strategy as described by LX. Cheers LittleWink (talk) 17:54, 19 July 2012 (UTC)
This section was archived on a request by: LX (talk, contribs) 07:34, 20 July 2012 (UTC)

need help,,,please help me please please

I need the answers of the class Algebra 2 sem 1 of apex.please help me to finish my class please. - unsigned

- You've posted on a page for help in working with Wikimedia Commons, not a general reference desk. - No one has a clue what's in your particular class. - Do your own homework. While you're at it, you might want to learn to punctuate and capitalize correctly. - Jmabel ! talk 14:56, 20 July 2012 (UTC)

This section was archived on a request by: Jmabel ! talk 14:56, 20 July 2012 (UTC)

Indian film certificates license!

Are Indian film certificates (for example this) in public domain? --Tito Dutta (Send me a message) 05:54, 15 July 2012 (UTC)

This is too simple to get a copyright, IMO. Yann (talk) 06:05, 15 July 2012 (UTC)
What'll be the license if I upload it in Commons? --Tito Dutta (Send me a message) 06:20, 15 July 2012 (UTC)
I think that {{PD-text}} would do. Yann (talk) 06:40, 15 July 2012 (UTC)

I want to contribute an IMG Photo of a globular shaped Scabiosa columbaria to the corresponding file. Is this possible and how can I do this?

I want to contribute an IMG Photo of a globular shaped Scabiosa columbaria to the corresponding file. Is this possible and how can I do this? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Blue heron (talk • contribs) 15:39, 15 July 2012‎ (UTC)

Hi.. ah.. um.. anyway,
If you want to donate any image to Commons, you can start uploading here: Special:UploadWizard, you can find some good tutorials here Commons:Welcome. I'll try to notify you in your talk page by seeing your name in this page's history! --Tito Dutta (Send me a message) 16:24, 15 July 2012 (UTC)

Odia Wikipedia username is not working for commons

Hi, my Odia Wikipedia username User:Santoshkumar is not working for commons. Can anyone help?--182.68.148.95 15:58, 15 July 2012 (UTC)

What do you mean by "not working"– please explain, see w:Wikipedia:Unified login. I'll not leave any message in your IP talk page, but, I have notified in your Oriya Wikipedia talk page! Please don't reply there, I am not watching it!--Tito Dutta (Send me a message) 16:14, 15 July 2012 (UTC)

My recent edit! Long (or loooooong) description

I have made an edit recently which I want to highlight here– since I am sure about the norm of editing description of other editors' images. In this edit I have deleted a long portion from description– because the description had hundreds of names with all college staffs, members, for last few days I am seeing whatevever I search I get that image– which is not at all related to the search query! Also I have seen some people copy paste the whole article/long portion from Wikipedia. Is it okay to edit these description? Please feel free to revert my edit, if you think it was inappropriate!--Tito Dutta (Send me a message) 19:41, 15 July 2012 (UTC)

I think you did well. A picture description is no place for such a long text, not to mention the copyright issues. Jastrow (Λέγετε) 19:44, 15 July 2012 (UTC)
Well done. That is publicity, not encyclopedic information.--Havang(nl) (talk) 19:46, 15 July 2012 (UTC)
Excellent! Thanks! Face-smile.svg --Tito Dutta (Send me a message) 19:54, 15 July 2012 (UTC)

NEED HELP: HOW TO DOWNLOAD A PHOTO IN THE RIGHT WAY?

Hi there I am very new to this and would like to download some photos to post on my website I am confused and have questions, hopefully someone can help me

1) Some photos do not have the DOWNLOAD button, do i just right click and save it to my hard drive? 2) On those where the DOWNLOAD button appears, when i click on DOWNLOAD, a window opens up with a lot of HTML information, divided into 3 categories : 1 FILE URL, 2 PAGE URL 3 ATTRIBUTION

do i have to insert all those info into my website source page? If so, how do i do that, I cannot access the HMTL source of my website editor, because it is just a click and drag website, So where/how should I include all those info about the photo, if I post it on my website? Alternative, can I just save the photo on my hard drive, then upload it to my webpage and then add the copyright info, clearly, just underneath the photo, when i post it on my webpage? For example, if I would like to download this photo located here http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Blue_Lagoon.JPG

Please, please, can anybody suggest something Sorry, but I have never done this before, so I am not savvy with this photo HTML copyright info insertion, but i want to make sure that the copyright of the artist is respected! Thank you so much in advance Cosmiclight22

Sure, you can save, upload and add the info. Just make sure you include all the information required by the specific license under which you reuse the image. The text of the license in question tells what mentions are required. -- Asclepias (talk) 23:17, 15 July 2012 (UTC)

THANK YOU Asclapias, My other question was How do i insert all those info (URL, Photo URL ) into my Source HTML page, since i do not have any access to it, my editor is only click and drag

Is it enough if I copy and paste the photo on my webpage, and then if I attribute the author just underneath the photo, and also confirm that it is via CC wikimedia commons) and then link that text to the URL of the photo on this site? Yes? Thats all I can do!! Or do i have to do other complicated stuff with the HTML source page? Also, important question : Are all photos with ATTRIBUTION info, allowed to be used on webpages? if the author is attributed underneath the photo, of course? thank you, thank you so much, sorry for my ignorance in all this!!! :-) Cosmiclight22

The automated suggestion of the html code is offered for the convenience of users who prefer to easily copy and paste it. If you don't need, or don't want, to use html code, that's not a problem at all, as long as you can use another method for writing clearly the required attribution and licensing information relating to each image that you reuse on your website. For example, for the image Blue_Lagoon.JPG, you would write something that might give approximately the following result:
Photo: Blue Lagoon, by Dolphins, licensed under CC BY-SA 3.0.
You do not need to write or format it like I did above. You can use any variations on how you word it, where you place the links, etc. But you must include the required mentions, which are: the attribution to the author (in this case, the pseudonym "Dolphins"), the identification of the license (in this case, Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported, or, for short, CC BY-SA 3.0), a link to (or the URL of) that license, and a link to (or the URL of) the place where the author declared the license (in this case, that would be the description page here at Wikimedia). The best is to read the license and form your own understanding of what it requires.
I'm not sure if I understand the last part of your question, but yes in principle all photos which require attribution can be used on webpages, with the required attribution and with the specific licensing information that is associated respectively to each photo. -- Asclepias (talk) 01:51, 16 July 2012 (UTC)

Copyright help regarding File:Afiche película STEFAN VS KRAMER.jpg

This is the Poster for a movie.. and it has been released for anyone to use it.. . How can I put the information so I can use it on Wikipedia page for the movie?--ClaudiaGutierrezH (talk) 01:06, 16 July 2012 (UTC)

Mention any information you have about the file. For example the source if you did not already put it in the file description.
I fixed the formatting errors. I don't know who answered above but it wasn't me. You need to provide a link that shows that it has a 'free license'--Canoe1967 (talk) 01:58, 16 July 2012 (UTC)
Nobody answered above. That was part of an automated hidden message that apparently gets inserted when some users edit the help desk page. You can remove it like you did with the rest of that automated message or you can leave it hidden. -- Asclepias (talk) 02:11, 16 July 2012 (UTC)

Copyright help regarding File:WCWslamboree1998poster.jpg

I don't know how to make the image look copyrighted.

--Kevinestevez162 (talk) 03:55, 16 July 2012 (UTC)

Please see Commons:Choosing a license and Commons:Licensing. Choosing an appropriate license is needed here otherwise it will be deleted. So go through the above pages thoroughly. -- ɑηsuмaη ʈ ᶏ ɭ Ϟ 05:02, 16 July 2012 (UTC)
Hello, You are not allowed to upload images of posters without a written permission from the creator. See COM:DW. Thanks, Yann (talk) 06:21, 16 July 2012 (UTC)

Can someone check this upload?

I think I have messed up something here and the image license got auto-reviewed, I asked an admin in his talk page but have not got any reply (most probably has not come online). Here is the image file File:Aparna Sen in The Japanese wife press meeting.jpg.
In addition is there any page which has tutorial or guidelines to upload images from Bollywood Hungama? --Tito Dutta (Send me a message) 07:53, 16 July 2012 (UTC)

It has not been reviewed yet. You inserted the Template:Cc-by-3.0-BollywoodHungama, which includes the Template:Cc-by-3.0-BollywoodHungama/notconfirmed, which requests a review by a reviewer and adds the file to the Category:Unreviewed files from Bollywood Hungama. That category currently has 2482 files. -- Asclepias (talk) 09:17, 16 July 2012 (UTC)

Upload wizard is slow (from archived discussion)

Here is the archived discussion: Commons:Help_desk/Archive/2012/07#Upload_Wizard_is_slow I think I have found a clue. Everytime in license option I am choosing "Another reason which is not mentioned here" (I often need to use PD-India), upload wizard is getting slow, but if I choose other option (US 1923, Nasa Gov etc), there is no problem in wizard! --Tito Dutta (Send me a message) 09:13, 16 July 2012 (UTC)

UpWiz is testing whether this is a valid license iterating over the categories recursively. -- Rillke(q?) 16:04, 16 July 2012 (UTC)

Why do the images I am trying to upload say "Unknown warning: "duplicate-archive"." ? How can I use these images ?

I have been trying to update the page of the publication I work for - Acta Médica Portuguesa, further to a request of my Editor-in-Chief. It seems, however, that some files are already in your system ? I was able to upload some files, but some others I wasn't, and I really need to publish them on the AMP's Wiki page. How should I proceed ?

Please apologise, for this is my first trial at uploading any contents into the Wiki.

I look forward to receiving your information, Carla de Sousa — Preceding unsigned comment added by CarladeSousa (talk • contribs) 17:45, 15 July 2012‎ (UTC)

Hello, Carla de Sousa,
I can not find any image for "Acta Médica Portuguesa", can you give me the link of the category or page or any two or three images which have been uploaded already! You are saying you can not upload– are you getting any error message? What is that?
And we generally sign using four tildes ~~~~. --Tito Dutta (Send me a message) 18:23, 15 July 2012 (UTC)
Hi Carla! I see that you have uploaded File:CC License.jpg (captioned "CC License Logo for Acta Médica Portuguesa Contents"), File:Licenca CC AMP small.jpg (captioned "Small version of the CC License attributed to Acta Médica Portuguesa") and File:Licencas cc final.jpg (captioned "Final version of the CC license logo attributed to Acta Médica Portuguesa"). Please be aware that {{cc-by-nd-nc}} is not an accepted license at Wikimedia Commons. If that is the license you wish to use for your contributions, we cannot accept them. LX (talk, contribs) 18:42, 15 July 2012 (UTC)

ok, LX I am trying to delete it, but don't know how !

sorry Tito Dutta, I only started yesterday and am trying to make my way through all this that sounds so complicated! CarladeSousa (talk) 20:30, 16 July 2012 (UTC)CarladeSousa

On uploading the banknotes of the Philippine peso

Section 9 of Rules and Regulations on the Reproduction and/or Use of Legal Tender says, "The reproduction and/or use of facsimiles or any illustration bearing the likeness or similitude of legal tender Philippine currency notes referred to in the foregoing section may be authorized by the Governor, BSP or his duly authorized representative, for printed illustrations in articles, books, journals, newspapers or other similar materials and strictly for numismatic, educational, historical, newsworthy or other purposes which will maintain, promote or enhance the integrity and dignity of said note, provided, however, that any such facsimile or illustration shall be of a size less than three-fifths (3/5) or more than one and one-half times (1 1/2) times in size of the currency note being illustrated and that there will be no deviation from the purpose for which the notes will be used."
I want to upload files of the banknotes of the Philippine peso for use in Wikipedia, but though it is not explicitly stated in the rules regarding the electronic reproduction of such banknotes.
I tried to reproduce them by adjusting their sizes using 96 ppi (Windows OS standard). The actual size of the banknotes is 16 cm x 6.6 cm, so I converted 96 ppi into centimeters, that is 37.79 pixels/cm. So the resolution of the banknotes in 96 ppi pixels is 605 x 249. Because they're almost the same size of the actual banknote, I adjusted them into three-fifths of their size, so the size therefore is 363 x 150.
Is it OK to upload those files even if the Bangko Sentral ng Pilipinas does not explicitly say about electronic reproduction? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Tribu akru (talk • contribs) 08:45, 17 July 2012‎ (UTC)

As mentioned in Commons:Licensing#The Philippines, Philippine government works in general are in the public domain, but commercial use of such works require prior approval. This is deemed to be a non-copyright restriction which does not affect Commons. However, the text quoted above states that reproductions of Philippine currency requires authorization, and that authorization may only be granted for specific purposes. That is a non-copyright restriction which, as far as I can tell, does affect Commons and cannot be ignored, because hosting the image on Commons would not be legal. LX (talk, contribs) 09:38, 17 July 2012 (UTC)

Astacus astacus

Hello, I am improving an article about Astacus astacus on Czech Wikipedia and I found some pictures and one video that I would like to use. However, I am not sure about their licences.

It seem these have been published under wrong licences and I am not really sure that I am free to use them in the article. Could anyone tell me whether it is OK to use them? Thank you! --LenaWild (talk) 17:25, 17 July 2012 (UTC)

Autotranslate

The template {{Created with Text Editor}} should enable by the parameter more to replace the second part of the text with something individual. It works well with the English version; but from the other language versions I get always the default text, no matter what I am trying, and I cannot find out. Can I get a hint how to solve this problem? -- sarang사랑 10:02, 18 July 2012 (UTC)

Yes check.svg ResolvedAfter many tests I found out by myself. sarang사랑 07:39, 19 July 2012 (UTC)
This section was archived on a request by: Rillke(q?) 20:53, 23 July 2012 (UTC)

images use

I have two images of Tess Broussard that I want to be used only on her Wiki page without allowing any other usage. Is this possible? - Unsigned

Probably not, and if so it would have nothing to do with Commons. Commons hosts only public domain or free-licensed images.
I'm guessing that by "her Wiki page" you mean en:Tess_Broussard, which is on the English-language Wikipedia, not on Commons. There appears to already be a free-licensed picture of her there, so there is unlikely to be any justification to add an image that is not free-licensed. But if there is (e.g. if the image illustrates something in particular that the free-licensed image does not), you'd need to fill out en:Template:Non-free use rationale for each such image uploaded to the English-language Wikipedia. See en:File:Funkadelic - Funkadelic - album cover.jpg for a good example of the use of that template. - Jmabel ! talk 01:30, 24 July 2012 (UTC)
This section was archived on a request by: Jmabel ! talk 01:30, 24 July 2012 (UTC)

Danish Aerial pPhotography 1930

Hi,

I wish to publish a Danish aerial photography from 1930, which comes from my family. http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:S%C3%B8lyst_Teglv%C3%A6rk_1930.jpg

I am quite sure that copyright has expired.

Which license shal I use, please ? PD-old?

I keep getting the message that the template license has not been filled in correctly. How do I fill it in correctly?

Thanks in advance / Br / Lars Krag

As far as I can see the license is filled in correctly, but the NikBot is slow in removing its warning. So I did that. Night of the Big Wind (talk) 19:46, 17 July 2012 (UTC)
Wait! Is this a "simple photo" (PD 50 years after creation) or a "complex photo" (PD 70 years after death)? See Commons:Village pump/Copyright/Archive/2012/06#Can a photo be dual-licensed .7B.7BPD-Sweden-photo.7D.7D and .7B.7BPD-Denmark.7D.7D? where it seems that da:Københavns Byret has ruled 20 pornographic photos (including this one) as "complex photos". However, it is a court at a low level and there is no thorough evaluation of the difference between a simple and a complex photo. --Stefan4 (talk) 22:18, 17 July 2012 (UTC)
@Stefan4, I used the same argument in another discussion and I may be "stretching that conclusion just a bit too far" (my apologies for not following up on that on the other discussion). According to one of the foremost lawyers on intellectual property and author's rights in Denmark (Peter Schønning), a photograph taken in Denmark is a work (covered in 70 years after the year of the author’s death per §63) when it displays "the author's own intellectual creation and reflects his personality". Though Denmark still suffers from any court decisions on the threshold between a work ("complex photo") and a photo ("simple photo"), I would be very reluctant to discard Schønning's interpretation. Given that the above photo would be a photo and not a work. In kind regards, heb [T C E] 11:46, 19 July 2012 (UTC)

Weird characters on svg thumbnail.

I uploaded the file Methiopropamine metabolism.svg but on thumbnail it shows a big "2", full view doesnt have this problem and it works on my own computer. Obviously, I need to get rid of it. --Harbinary (talk) 13:47, 18 July 2012 (UTC)

You tried to place the small "2" in the expression "NH2". That doesn't work well with the Mediawiki software. If you can read French, there's an explanation on how you can work around that particular problem, on the page fr:Wikipédia:Atelier graphique/FAQ SVG#Certains caractères sont énormes par rapport aux autres. Or you can ask help on the page Commons:Graphics village pump. -- Asclepias (talk) 16:20, 18 July 2012 (UTC)

Lines not properly rendered in png from svg

Hi, I've created an svg file using LibreOffice Draw which contains lines. Unfortunately, when I upload the svg version of this drawing to Commons, it doesn't render properly in png.

See File:Polar_code_decoding_graph.svg (check the preview, then click on it to see the svg directly).

Any idea why this problem occurs or how I can solve it?

Thanks Ajraymond 19:01, 18 July 2012 (UTC)

That comes from a well known librsvg bug: the attribute definitions at the level of the <svg> statement (fill-rule="evenodd" clip-path="url(#presentation_clip_path)" stroke-width="28.222" stroke-linejoin="round") are ignored at some rendering sizes; at some sizes they may be honored. A solution would be to remove them from the svg statement (or let them there, they won't do any harm) and define them as a group statement, prior to the <defs>.
See the test upload of a variation treated as adviced.
Yes check.svg Resolved-- sarang사랑 04:27, 19 July 2012 (UTC)

Requesting deletion of own image?

How do I request the deletion of an image I created? What is the template? Gage (talk) 19:30, 18 July 2012 (UTC)

It depends on why you want it deleted. Free licenses are irrevocable, so provided that the license is valid, files are generally not deleted simply because you changed your mind about your donation. Recently uploaded files may, however, be deleted as a courtesy (see Commons:Criteria for speedy deletion#General reasons). So if you uploaded it less than seven days ago, you can use {{speedy|Uploader request}}. If it's been more than seven days, you can request deletion by using the Nominate for deletion link in the toolbox (on your left-hand side), but in that case, you may have to provide a more compelling reason. Cheers, LX (talk, contribs) 20:13, 18 July 2012 (UTC)

Copyright help regarding File:Crash bandicoot 2 - cortex strikes back.jpg

My Problem is to get more information about the image, only got two pieces of information that is the source and author of the picture.

source:http://geeksforthewin.blogspot.com.br/2011/12/crash-bandicoot-2-cortex-strikes-back.html

author of the picture: DODAMERCENARY

--Binhow2010 (talk) 01:10, 19 July 2012 (UTC)FábioC

This is obviously a copyright violation. The image is not allowed here. --Stefan4 (talk) 07:53, 19 July 2012 (UTC)

its our own image

thats our own image so no worries about any issues, we own the website fullorissa.com — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bulu4uu (talk • contribs) 04:40, 19 July 2012‎ (UTC)

I don't know what your reason for posting at the help desk is, because as far as I can see, nobody has expressed concerns about any issues with the file. That said, perhaps there are a few things that need to be sorted out. Who are "we"? Are there multiple people using the same account? Regarding the image, it looks like a movie poster. Are you actually the author and copyright holder of that movie poster, as you've claimed? If it was published in India in 1950, is there a reason why it would still be protected by copyright? Shouldn't {{PD-India}} apply? And please don't ruin images with watermarks. The watermarks in this image has made it virtually unusable. LX (talk, contribs) 08:30, 19 July 2012 (UTC)

Copyright help regarding File:Station Herkenbosch 1935.jpg

The website where I found the image uses the following disclaimer: http://www.stationsweb.nl/disclaimer.asp The page where I found the imaqe http://www.stationsweb.nl/afbeelding.asp?dir=melickherkenbosch&num=1

What must I do to this image to be published?


--Bonkier (talk) 18:31, 17 July 2012 (UTC)

"The information and images shown here are not protected by copyright unless otherwise indicated. The website is organized according to the principle of Open Access. The shown images and data can be replicated in other publications (printed or digital) provided with an indication of 'Source: www.stationsweb.nl (for digital publications with a link); picture' with photo behind the name of the source such as those on stationsweb is mentioned. The images are deliberately low resolution offered. They can therefore never completely replace the original, so it retains its value for the owner. The site thus offers an inventory of the footage of Dutch railway architecture."
I would say cc-by on images that aren't indicated as copyrighted.--Canoe1967 (talk) 22:30, 19 July 2012 (UTC)
Huh? How on earth did you get to that conclusion? There is no mention of any specific Creative Commons license on the site, and a Creative Commons licenses, being copyright licenses, cannot apply to content which is not protected by copyright. LX (talk, contribs) 07:21, 20 July 2012 (UTC)

Replacing a map

I noticed that the location map for the Ungava peninsula (File:Location_Ungava_Peninsula.png) is drawn with north-west at the top, instead of north. Also it is stretched, by the use of an unsuitable projection. So I have used the Québec map (File:Québec,_Canada.svg) to make a new, conventionally orientated, location map for the Ungava peninsula.

What would be the proper way to upload this?

  1. Replace the existing File:Location_Ungava_Peninsula.png
  2. Upload it as a new image with a new filename, leave a note at File:Location_Ungava_Peninsula.png mentioning its existence, and edit the eight different Wikipedias that use it, to use my new version instead
  3. Something else

Maproom (talk) 18:45, 17 July 2012 (UTC)

4. Put Canada as the center and top of all world maps.--Canoe1967 (talk) 21:25, 17 July 2012 (UTC)
Canada is often deformed due to large scale map projections. You may upload a better map as a new image with a slightly different filename.--Havang(nl) (talk) 17:21, 18 July 2012 (UTC)
Thank you, that is what I have now done. Canoe1967, as a Canadian, would you care to check File:Ungava Peninsula location map.svg ? Are the colours ok? Or would, say, Québec prefer to be light blue instead of light ginger? Maproom (talk) 08:04, 20 July 2012 (UTC)

Copyright help regarding File:North Carolina Power Holdings et. al Bankruptcy.pdf

What do you need in terms of licensing for a Federal Court document downloaded from the PACER system? Best to comment on my talk page. --PhanuelB (talk) 12:14, 19 July 2012 (UTC)

Is this court operated by the United States federal government or by a state government? --Stefan4 (talk) 12:25, 19 July 2012 (UTC)
This is a Federal Court document, and like all such documents it is fully in the public domain. I believe the same to be true of all non-sealed State Court documents. I'm really surprised there isn't a large section here for court documents. Sometimes these documents are available on other sites and sometimes they aren't. --PhanuelB (talk) 13:15, 19 July 2012 (UTC)
US Federal Court documents are not necessarily in the public domain. If that were the case, copyright lawsuits would be rather pointless, as all the evidence would fall into the public domain. This document was not created by the court or any US Federal Government employee, but by a private law firm. LX (talk, contribs) 14:15, 19 July 2012 (UTC)
Documents downloaded from the PACER system are fully in the public domain, including documents such as this one prepared by a legal representative of a party. I quote from the PACER site,
"The PACER system provides electronic access to case information from federal courts across the United States. The information gathered from the PACER system is a matter of public record and may be reproduced without permission. However, the PACER user assumes all responsibility for consequences that arise from use of the data." --PhanuelB (talk) 16:05, 19 July 2012 (UTC)
Public record is not the same as public domain. It only guarantees access to the documents. Under what principle of US copyright law are you saying that works created by private companies would be exempt from copyright protection the minute it's put before a court? Again, please consider the impact of such a (hypothetical) principle on copyright lawsuits. LX (talk, contribs) 16:59, 19 July 2012 (UTC)
I think there are two things we can agree on: (1) This document and all unsealed court documents can be displayed, passed to others, and reproduced without limitation, and (2) This type of party submitted motion might contain content that could not be adopted for other uses without limitation. I note that I don't see other filings here which is telling. I actually asked this very question to a number of people at the Wikimania event in DC last week and everyone said you can already do that at Wikimedia Commons. Many Wikipedia entries could be enhanced by access to certain court filings. Are you saying Wikipedia does not have a place to hold such court records? I'd actually never seen one which is why I asked the question. -- PhanuelB (talk) 18:00, 19 July 2012 (UTC)
Let me put it this way: the fair use applications for public records covered by freedom of information legislation will by necessity be fairly broad, but unfortunately, that doesn't help us here at Commons, as it still doesn't mean that they're in the public domain. English Wikipedia might be a different story. Federal court decisions, on the other hand, should be in the public domain, as they're actually prepared by Government employees as defined by section 105 of the Copyright Act. (We don't seem to have a specific tag for the Judicial branch, but the generic {{PD-USGov}} fits.) LX (talk, contribs) 19:35, 19 July 2012 (UTC)
I don't care if you get rid of the file. There's actually a great site called recapthelaw.org. It requires firefox and is designed to work with the PACER system. After you install their extension and log on to PACER, it will save a copy onto their system of any document you download that they don't already have. If you want to download a file that they already have, you get it for free. That's cool because PACER can get expensive, particularly because it charges for searches. I was really impressed by how well it works. And it takes care of the quite difficult problem of naming files and implementing searches of what they have. You also get a link that will directly open the pdf file. --PhanuelB (talk) 00:22, 20 July 2012 (UTC)

Copyright help regarding File:Scumeck Sabottka.jpeg

I don't understand how the licensing works. I've got the picture of Scumeck Sabottka from the fotographer, Florian Richter, who took the photo. He gave us permission to publish the photo on Wikipedia. --Sibylle Breitbach (talk) 13:00, 19 July 2012 (UTC)

Hi Sibylle! You've uploaded the photo to Wikimedia Commons, a repository of free media used by Wikipedia, other Wikimedia projects, and others. Commons only hosts content that can be used by anyone for any purpose. Therefore, permission to publish on Wikipedia is not sufficient for Commons to host the photo. For Commons to host it, the photographer would have to agree to publish the photo under a license that allows anyone to use it for any purpose. If they're willing to do that, please document their permission using our standard form and send it in to our permission archive. Thanks, LX (talk, contribs) 14:25, 19 July 2012 (UTC)
I put a Template:OTRS pending tag on it for now. That should last 30 days.--Canoe1967 (talk) 22:16, 19 July 2012 (UTC)
Please don't use misuse {{OTRS pending}}! It should not be used unless an email containing details of the permission for this file has actually been sent in. The file has been deleted, but will be undeleted if proper permission is received. LX (talk, contribs) 07:26, 20 July 2012 (UTC)

copyright on pictures in out-of-copyright encyclopdia

Is it safe to upload: http://ia700308.us.archive.org/BookReader/BookReaderImages.php?zip=/8/items/newinternational01gilm/newinternational01gilm_jp2.zip&file=newinternational01gilm_jp2/newinternational01gilm_0155.jp2&scale=2&rotate=0

This is part of http://openlibrary.org/books/OL23321556M/The_new_international_encyclopaedia

Presumably all pictures in this out-of-copyright encyclopedia can be uploaded?

Thanks. Samw (talk) 16:03, 19 July 2012 (UTC)

I'm not an expert on this, but I feel like the copyright status of an image is separate from the status of the copyright of the medium it is published in. For this reason, images hosted on en.wiki can be copyrighted even though the 'pedia is released under a creative commons and GFDL license. At the same time, I feel the image is out of copyright due to {{PD-1923}}. Ryan Vesey (talk) 21:51, 19 July 2012 (UTC)
OK, thanks, I'll go ahead and upload it. Samw (talk) 01:26, 20 July 2012 (UTC)

File:PA-176876.tif General George Kitching

For some unclear reason Asclepias has tagged File:PA-176876 (a photo of General George Kitching) with a tag that is has not a valid license in the USA. Point is here that the photo is Canadian and falls under the Canadian copyright laws. According to the Canadian PD-license and the "Library and Archives Canada" ([18]) the photo is free to use. So, why is there an USA-license tag on a free Canadian photo? Night of the Big Wind (talk) 19:42, 17 July 2012 (UTC)

Because copyright law is invariably national. The only thing that says whether a file is in or out of copyright in the US is US law, and since the Wikimedia Foundation is US, it has to follow that law.--Prosfilaes (talk) 22:05, 17 July 2012 (UTC)
Confused now! Is the photo properly licensed or not? Night of the Big Wind (talk) 23:54, 17 July 2012 (UTC)

I brought this up before. LAC clearly states that the copyright expired in Canada as a published crown work (50 years). I added the LAC template to the correct file, your link is off I think. How can it still be copyright in US when it is expired in Canada and probably never published in the US? File:PA-176876.tif--Canoe1967 (talk) 01:33, 18 July 2012 (UTC)

Because works published in a nation that has bilateral copyright treaties with the US get the full length of US copyright. That's just the way it works. We tried not letting foreign works be copyright in the US; you can read some really grumpy comments from Dickens on it.--Prosfilaes (talk) 09:23, 21 July 2012 (UTC)

How to update an existing file?

So I'm looking everywhere, how do you update a file that already exists?

I don't want to upload a new file, just replace the current one by another author.

I have an autoconfirmed wikipedia account, but have never done anything on commons.

thanks, Naapple (talk) 17:54, 19 July 2012 (UTC)

Hi Naapple, go to the file page, choose "Upload a new version of this file" under the file history, and follow the instruction on the new window.Ryan Vesey (talk) 21:47, 19 July 2012 (UTC)
If someone reverts it then follow normal procedure: Edit war with reverts, get all involved blocked, and then seek consensus after all blocks expire.--Canoe1967 (talk) 22:10, 19 July 2012 (UTC)
Canoe, if you're only going to provide bad or sarcastic advice, please refrain from giving any advice at all.
Naapple, you won't find the "Upload a new version" link until you are autoconfirmed here on Commons. Once you are, please be aware of Commons:Avoid overwriting existing files. LX (talk, contribs) 07:31, 20 July 2012 (UTC)
Ok, thanks. I figured being autoconfirmed on wikipedia that I was here as well. I'll look into how to get confirmed, thanks. Naapple (talk) 06:05, 21 July 2012 (UTC)
I looked under file history, the only option there is "Edit this file using an external application (See the setup instructions for more information)"
This tries to open an index.php file. I even did a search on the page for upload with only 2 results: My Uploads at the very top, and "Upload File" in the side nav. Naapple (talk) 02:47, 20 July 2012 (UTC)
What file is it? Ryan Vesey Review me! 03:41, 20 July 2012 (UTC)
http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Republican_Party_presidential_primaries_results,_2012_by_plurality.svg
The file is now up to date by another user, but I'd like to know how in the future. Thanks for you help so far, Naapple (talk) 06:01, 21 July 2012 (UTC)
You could try the 'upload file' in the side nav. It may give you a message that you are not confirmed as a user yet. I can't remember what the criteria are and it doesn't seem to be on Commons:First steps/Account Should we add it?--Canoe1967 (talk) 21:00, 20 July 2012 (UTC)
I believe I am able to upload a file. I went through most of the upload process to check, without actually posting a file. Naapple (talk) 06:01, 21 July 2012 (UTC)
Feel free to overwrite File:Watermark sample.jpg for a test. It is my image and not used anywhere. You can also practice the revert function to bring my image back.--Canoe1967 (talk) 08:06, 21 July 2012 (UTC)

Copyright help regarding File:Logo Meusburger.jpg

Hi I found this picture at the Meusburger Web-Site in the download area and so in my oppinion I can use it and don't need a licence. Also two other pictures wich I use in my artikel. I am wrong? And if not, what I have to do to solve this problem? Please Help :-) Thanks --Zono4huda (talk) 07:38, 20 July 2012 (UTC)

I'm afraid you are wrong. In order to use an image here, you need to have permission to re-use it; the image's mere presence on a download page is not sufficient, as permission to download an image is different from permission to re-publish it. For more information on our licensing requirements, see Commons:Licensing. --Philosopher Let us reason together. 11:40, 21 July 2012 (UTC)

Undisplayed Picture

Why is the File:Hinterland002.tif in it's categories (for example Category:Mittelhessen) not shown? --88.152.214.107 08:47, 20 July 2012 (UTC)

They are appearing to me - at the bottom of the File page. --Philosopher Let us reason together. 11:31, 21 July 2012 (UTC)
I do only see a grey-white chequerboard pattern. --88.152.214.107 20:59, 22 July 2012 (UTC)
I also can see it! --Tito Dutta (Send me a message) 21:02, 22 July 2012 (UTC)

Downloading a video

File:Reagan Space Shuttle Challenger Speech.ogv The current video of Ronald Reagan's Challenger speech has a watermark. I have found a version without the watermark here [19] but I can't get it to download. I'm using online-convert. Any ideas? Lionelt (talk) 10:13, 22 July 2012 (UTC)

If the file is under public domain or creative commons, I can tell you how to download that file! But, they own copyright of it and don't want anyone to download, then I won't! --Tito Dutta (Send me a message) 20:47, 22 July 2012 (UTC)
It was originally created by The White House so is public domain as a work of the US Govt. Thus any attempt to claim a (c) is invalid--even if they put a notice on it.Lionelt (talk) 21:57, 22 July 2012 (UTC)

Copyright help regarding File:Lumps and bumps of Whitley Castle - geograph.org.uk - 1812846.jpg

Hi, I've uploaded a CC licensed image from Geograph but am getting a warning it's not properly filled in as the source.

http://www.geograph.org.uk/photo/1812846

Could you let me know what I need to do to sort this out? Sorry to trouble you with this. Many thanks

--Chiswick Chap (talk) 17:43, 22 July 2012 (UTC)

I can not see any source problem. Where you are getting this warning? You have added a category which dies not exist currently! --Tito Dutta (Send me a message) 20:38, 22 July 2012 (UTC)

Thanks Tito Dutta, I followed a lot of links and found a tag to add. I was confused by the message on my talk page which talked about a template - if it had told me to add a tag it would have been a lot quicker! The new category matches other categories that already exist, and resembles also the category on English Wikipedia, so it or something very similar is surely needed on Commons. Many thanks again for your trouble - Chiswick Chap (talk) 06:29, 23 July 2012 (UTC)

Yes, I saw he message, I do not know about geography.co.uk content's copyright, but, I have not found any problem in the file! --Tito Dutta (Send me a message) 06:45, 23 July 2012 (UTC)

Copyright help regarding File:HomePage2.png

I have been in contact with "Movies.io (on facebook: https://www.facebook.com/moviesio/posts/424561207588762?notif_t=feed_comment), witch gave this file up under a "press kit", but i don't know of any license. Here is the link where i got it: http://movies.io/i/help --Mannni (talk) 00:45, 23 July 2012 (UTC)

  • Press-kit images are not generally sufficiently free in their licensing to be used on Commons. - Jmabel ! talk 02:55, 23 July 2012 (UTC)

Image from de.WP to Commons

I'd like to upload this image from de.WP to Commons, but I do not know much about German language and licenses. Can someone do it for me if it is OK to do it? --JotaCartas (talk) 07:23, 23 July 2012 (UTC)

I have moved it here: File:Pedro boese.jpg --Tito Dutta (Send me a message) 08:59, 23 July 2012 (UTC)
Many thanks. --JotaCartas (talk) 09:02, 23 July 2012 (UTC)
I am personally very much fond of explanations and description, in case you also want to learn how I did this so that you can move images yourself without asking anyone's help, here is details (otherwise ignore this):
  • I also don't know German, I was using Chrome web browser which offers to translate non-English pages to English (in case you are not using Chrome, you can try browser extension or simply go to http://translate.google.com and learn the license and permission of the file. You should not move non free files, but, you can move public domain etc images)
  • Now, use this tool: http://toolserver.org/~magnus/commonshelper.php. Change language code to de or fr or uk or the language's code you are using (generally, it is xx in xx.wikipedia.org). Add new file name (I generally try to give same file name, but you can choose new file name too).
  • Click on Get text, you'll be redirected to Commons. You can download the file to your computer and upload it in Commons.
  • According to the guidelines, if a file is moved to Commons, one needs to add a tag in local project, so that admins can check and delete the local copy if necessary. I don't know German, so I have left message in English in that File's talk page that I have moved it to Commons, hope someone will see it there!
  • Was not it easy?
  • Let me know if you have any question! --Tito Dutta (Send me a message) 09:29, 23 July 2012 (UTC)

copy right violation

hi commons.

this website [20] has stolen my work of Maradona picture which was taken by me[21] and added to wiki for share not for any other else. what can I do in this type of issues since i didn't get any response from them.--Neogeolegend (talk) 20:57, 21 July 2012 (UTC)

What do you mean "not for any other else"? You put a CC-BY on it, meaning it can be used by anyone for any purpose provided they attribute it to you and include the license. They don't seem to be following those rules, though. Given that they're registered in London[22], you could write them a nasty letter, or if you're really concerned have a British lawyer write them a nasty letter.--Prosfilaes (talk) 23:21, 21 July 2012 (UTC)
I am really disappointed with this type CC-BY. I wrote them an email today to credit my name and waiting. That's why people are not uploading to commons, websites would violate their works.--Neogeolegend (talk) 23:51, 21 July 2012 (UTC)
Hi,
Your question is not clear when you say "added to wiki for share not for any other else". What do you mean exactly by that?
  • If you are saying that you never wanted to offer the CC-by 3.0 license to the general public, then that means that you had not accepted the main point of the license. If so, you should request the deletion of your photo from Wikimedia, if you still do not want to offer it under the free license. Note that the request for deletion will not necessarily be accepted.
  • If the website alarabonline does not credit you or does not mention the CC license, or otherwise does not comply with the license, then you have the recourses against copyright violation that the law gives you in the country where the website alarabonline is published. If the website's owner does not reply to you or does not correct the situation, you might want to consult a legal professional of that country, if you think that would be worth the time and money in the circumstances.
-- Asclepias (talk) 00:07, 22 July 2012 (UTC)
Hi,
this is what I meant, I Just want to upload in commons to use in all wikimidia and sisters for example in wikipedia not for any other websites. This is what i understand from this CC-by 3.0. Any How, They didn't credit me or mention cc license, moreover am not from UK I live in UAE. Do you i get some compansation for violation if i consult legal offices in uk?--Neogeolegend (talk) 04:45, 22 July 2012 (UTC)
The license you shared the photo under, CC 3.0, indeed requires attribution to you; any reuse without it is indeed a violation of your copyright. -- Infrogmation (talk) 02:00, 22 July 2012 (UTC)
The creative commons license does not mean it can only be used by Wikimedia and sisters. There is no "Wikipedia only" license. When you release a file under a cc-by license, you give anybody the right to use or modify your image as long as they give you credit. In this case, you can send an email to them stating that they are not in compliance with your license and that they must give you credit. Ryan Vesey Review me! 04:39, 22 July 2012 (UTC)
I contacted them twice by email to credit my name thus no response. There are many pictures on websites but they got this one from english wiki because it's new.--Neogeolegend (talk) 04:45, 22 July 2012 (UTC)
Then I assume you need to learn the copyright law in the country that hosts the website. Ryan Vesey Review me! 05:00, 22 July 2012 (UTC)
It's quite unlikely that you will be able to get financial reward from pursuing legal action. The simple fact is that it's hard in most cases for a copyright holder to do anything about an infringement. Since you do have their address, you can write them a physical letter, which is harder to ignore than an email. It's unlikely to be financially worth it, but if it really concerns you, having a British lawyer write a nasty letter is unlikely to be financially crippling, and they could better advise you as to the possible success and financial reward for pursing legal action.--Prosfilaes (talk) 10:05, 22 July 2012 (UTC)
I want to teach them a lesson for not steal peoples work. I don't know how to write that kind of letter what called nasty and British lawyer for sure needs money for taking action. how to reach the lawyer online because i don't live in uk.--Neogeolegend (talk) 13:41, 22 July 2012 (UTC)
If someone would not respond to my friendly e-Mails, I would send a physical letter with a fee claim via certified mail. If they won't pay and I think they are not insolvent, I would check further steps. If their website's range (my native language, content that could be interesting, ...) would cover my home country, I could try to get them sued here. But it's not easy and requires time and money, yes. A French web-shop selling plant-extracts is currently violating my copyright law, and, we'll see. -- Rillke(q?) 21:16, 23 July 2012 (UTC)

Disputed portrait of Lord Byron

This portrait File:LordByron.jpg most likely does no depict Byron. (Please see "Lord Byron's Image" by Germaine Greer in Byron: The Image of the Poet edited by Christine Kenyon-Jones, published by University of Delaware Press, 2008, pp. 36-38). However, I'm not sure, as othre sources claims that she did indeed paint Byron. What should be done with the image. Is the standard procedure to rename the file and change the file description? Thanks --P. S. Burton (talk) 20:10, 23 July 2012 (UTC)

It should be fine as it is - the description currently clarifies that it may not be Byron, providing an appropriate warning to potential reusers. If you believe the filename is misleading, you can ask for a rename (using {{rename}}), but if it's traditionally believed to be Byron, it could also just be left as it is. --Philosopher Let us reason together. 21:28, 23 July 2012 (UTC)

Copyright help regarding Template:Uwlsubst/de

Diese Datei, das Bild von Prof. Hans Burkardt, habe ich, Wolf-Rüdiger Maurer, im September 2011 fotografiert. Ich bin der Urheber und beanspruche damit alle Urheber und Verwertungsrechte ohne Einschränkung für mich.


--Hans-Peter Schramm (talk) 20:13, 23 July 2012 (UTC)

Guten Abend, Hans-Peter Schramm, daran dass Du der Photograph bist, hat bisher auch keiner gezweifelt. Allerdings musst Du Dich anmelden, die Dateibeschreibungsseite bearbeiten und {{Remove this line and inse......}} mit einem Lizenzbaustein ersetzen. Auch sehe ich, dass es größere Probleme in der Wikipedia gibt. Eventuell solltest Du lieber den Einstieg in die Wikipedia mit einem Sach-Artikel wagen. Biographien lebender Personen sind oftmals sehr umstritten, aber das ist Dir sicher auch schon aufgefallen. Außerdem wäre es hilfreich, wenn Du die Genehmigung der abgebildeten Personen an permissions-commons@wikimedia.org senden könntest. Grüße -- Rillke(q?) 21:42, 23 July 2012 (UTC)

First Motion Picture Unit--need NARA version

File:FMPU camera crew 1944.jpg I'd like to obtain a larger version of the camera crew photo at right, at least 1500px. The original is at National Archives and Records Administration (NARA). How do I locate this image at NARA? Thanks, Lionelt (talk) 13:25, 22 July 2012 (UTC)

Search in Google, try Google's search by image and see all sizes and version of that photo. That's all I can understand at this moment. Tell me if it does not help!
And please link a file in discussion in this format [[:File:FMPU camera crew 1944.jpg]] (that means just add a colon before the word file--Tito Dutta (Send me a message) 20:52, 22 July 2012 (UTC)
No additional sizes returned by Google. I think I need help on how to find it at NARA.Lionelt (talk) 22:00, 22 July 2012 (UTC)
  • 1 Is higher resolution, but cropped a lot.--Canoe1967 (talk) 22:23, 23 July 2012 (UTC)
Thanks, prefer not-cropped, and twice the pixels. Lionelt (talk) 07:37, 27 July 2012 (UTC)

Copyright help regarding File:Logo Meusburger.jpg

Hallo, ich habe vor kurzem meinen ersten Eigenen Artikel bei Wikipedia eingestellt Meusburger_Georg. Ich hatte drei Bilder bei Wikimedia Commons eingestellt, die ich auf der Firmen Web-Site im Downloadbereich [23] gefunden habe. Diese sind unter der Rubrik Presse und Logo. Also dachte ich sie verwenden zu können. Aber irgendwie muss ich da etwas falsch gemacht haben. Kann mir hier jemand einen Tip geben? Vielen Dank schon einmal im Voraus. Gruß--Zono4huda (talk) 05:35, 26 July 2012 (UTC)

Deine Frage wurde bereits oben beantwortet. Die Fotos sind nicht frei und können in Wikipedia nich verwendet werden. Robot Monk (talk) 08:37, 27 July 2012 (UTC)

Delete my account

Hi! I want to delete my account. How can i do it? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Michael.wendwessen (talk • contribs) 13:47, 22 July 2012‎ (UTC)

From a technical standpoint, I'm afraid that's not possible. See w:Wikipedia:Delete_account#Deleting_and_merging_accounts -FASTILY (TALK) 05:52, 24 July 2012 (UTC)
This section was archived on a request by: LX (talk, contribs) 18:01, 3 August 2012 (UTC)

Flaw in the Upload Wizard!

I uploaded a file using the Upload Wizard and the following message showed up: This file was previously uploaded to this wiki.

The problem is that no one can get to the original file - the Upload Wizard doesn't offer clickable image as the old uploader. So I was forced to use the old uploader to find out the name and location of the original image. This isn't kosher and I advise you to repair it as soon as possible. --Kohelet (talk) 20:50, 22 July 2012 (UTC)

I added a crappy fix. I don't forward bugs about UpWiz to bugzilla any more for the reasons mentioned in bugzilla:37993. I just notified them that I did a something. This fix won't work in older browsers (including IE 6-8) since they are using iframes in UpWiz. -- Rillke(q?) 22:14, 23 July 2012 (UTC)
This section was archived on a request by: LX (talk, contribs) 18:12, 3 August 2012 (UTC)

Adding public domain image

Hi, today I added

Karpman Drama Triangle

to the Karpman Drama Triangle wikipedia page. Is there a risk of this image being deleted as I don't think I have the correct tag for it.

Eric Karpman — Preceding unsigned comment added by 63.197.5.195 (talk • contribs) 22:12, 23 July 2012‎ (UTC)

I think I fixed it.--Canoe1967 (talk) 22:33, 23 July 2012 (UTC)
This section was archived on a request by: LX (talk, contribs) 18:15, 3 August 2012 (UTC)

Adding an original picture

I want to upload a picture that I took 3 days ago. Can some one please tell me how to do that in 5 steps or less!!!!! Everything I try gives me an error message! This part of Wiki needs to be greatly DUMBED DOWN!!!! I am not the most educated person around. But I can usually figure out how most things work. This is absurdly frustrating!

The upload wizard gives errors if not completed properly I think. You could try Commons:Tools/Commonist or if it is just the one image then overwrite this one File:BLP transit.jpg and I can re-upload it for you.--Canoe1967 (talk) 22:31, 23 July 2012 (UTC)
Canoe, advising users who aren't autoconfirmed to overwrite images (which they can't do) is not particularly helpful advice. LX (talk, contribs) 18:42, 3 August 2012 (UTC)
Hi Anne-Marie! (I guess that is your name based on the file description of File:James Allen at the head of the Mark Trail Wilderness in the Chattahoochee National Forest.JPG, which I see that you successfully uploaded 10 minutes after posting here.) I'm sorry you thought the upload process was too complicated. Since you don't mention which error messages you got, it's a bit hard to say what the problem was.
I can promise you that we haven't intentionally made the upload process more difficult than it needs to be just so that we can keep the dumbed-down five step instructions to ourselves. Unlike sites like Flickr, Facebook and Imageshack, we're a non-profit project with educational goals, we care about the rights of authors and of our users, and we have very limited access to expensive lawyers. This means that we have to require a bit more information of our uploaders to ensure that content here can be legally hosted and that it is correctly described. If the upload instructions could be made any simpler without endangering those principles, we'd make them part of the upload process. LX (talk, contribs) 18:42, 3 August 2012 (UTC)
This section was archived on a request by: LX (talk, contribs) 18:42, 3 August 2012 (UTC)

Copyright help regarding File:Classified document on Resolute desk.jpg

I am confused about the copyright on this particular photo. I was hoping to use it for a book cover that would be sold commercially. Your entries say it is in the Public Domain and can be used for any purpose, but the Metadata says: A classified document is framed by shadows on the Resolute Desk in the Oval Office during a meeting with Kenyan professor Wangari Maathai, Oct. 5, 2009. (Official White House Photo by Pete Souza) This official White House photograph is being made available only for publication by news organizations and/or for personal use printing by the subject(s) of the photograph. The photograph may not be manipulated in any way and may not be used in commercial or political materials, advertisements, emails, products, promotions that in any way suggests approval or endorsement of the President, the First Family, or the White House. Author Pete Souza Copyright holder This official White House photograph is being made available only for publication by news organizations and/or for personal use printing by the subject(s) of the photograph. The photograph may not be manipulated in any way and may not be used in commercial or political materials, advertisements, emails, products, promotions that in any way suggests approval or endorsement of the President, the First Family, or the White House.


It is marked as CC-PD-MARK that says:

Public Domain Mark 1.0
No Copyright
This work has been identified as being free of known restrictions under copyright law, including all related and neighboring rights.
You can copy, modify, distribute and perform the work, even for commercial purposes, all without asking permission. See Other Information below:
Other Information
  • The work may not be free of known copyright restrictions in all jurisdictions.
  • Persons may have other rights in or related to the work, such as patent or trademark rights, and others may have rights in how the work is used, such as publicity or privacy rights.
  • In some jurisdictions moral rights of the author may persist beyond the term of copyright. These rights may include the right to be identified as the author and the right to object to derogatory treatments.
  • Unless expressly stated otherwise, the person who identified the work makes no warranties about the work, and disclaims liability for all uses of the work, to the fullest extent permitted by applicable law.
  • When using or citing the work, you should not imply endorsement by the author or the person who identified the work.

— Preceding unsigned comment added by Goldiebeth (talk • contribs) 00:14, 25 July 2012‎ (UTC)

In what country (or countries) will you distribute the book? The template PD-USGov, used on this image's description page, explains the analysis of the Wikimedia community about the status of such images in the United States by referring to section 105 of the U.S. Copyright Act. However, for professional legal advice, you should consult a professional legal counsel. -- Asclepias (talk) 00:54, 25 July 2012 (UTC)
This section was archived on a request by: LX (talk, contribs) 18:49, 3 August 2012 (UTC)

Most likely NOT in the public domain?

I saw that the file File:Postcard Gross-Rominten - Berlin 1904.jpg has been tagged "This file is most likely NOT in the public domain". Well, the postcard has been sent in 1904, 108 years ago. The designer of the postage stamp was Paul Eduard Waldraff, who died in 1917, 95 years ago. The portraitee on the postage stamp was Anna Führing, who died in 1929, 83 years ago. I scanned the postcard and uploaded it, so that anyone can use it. So I cannot see any reason why this file would NOT be in the public domain. Sijtze Reurich (talk) 08:13, 25 July 2012 (UTC)

You could write those informations on the description page of the file and insert the corresponding public domain status tags and remove the template PD-German empire stamps. (The tagging of the file would also be easier if you did not claim a copyright on a scan of public domain documents.) -- Asclepias (talk) 12:18, 25 July 2012 (UTC)
I've changed it to {{PD-old}} - MPF (talk) 12:51, 25 July 2012 (UTC)
It would be better to correct the Author field when doing that (with the info Sijtze gave), and to use a more specific PD-old tag ({{PD-old-auto}} is handy). I've done so now. Also, you need to provide a US PD tag - which is easily done with works published before 1923 with {{PD-old-auto-1923}}. Finally, the postcard needs its own license tag - I've added {{PD-text}}. Rd232 (talk) 14:23, 25 July 2012 (UTC)
{{PD German stamps warning}} is applied automatically by certain license templates which are no longer valid. See Commons:WikiProject Public Domain/German stamps review. Feel free to help out with others in Category:German stamps review! Rd232 (talk) 14:23, 25 July 2012 (UTC)
Thanks a lot! I already thought that the "not in the public domain" tag was a mistake. kind regards Sijtze Reurich (talk) 14:37, 25 July 2012 (UTC)
This section was archived on a request by: LX (talk, contribs) 18:50, 3 August 2012 (UTC)

Namespace shortcut

Is there a namespace shortcut for things in the commons namespace? Ryan Vesey Review me! 16:24, 25 July 2012 (UTC)

[[COM:]]. If you want an inter-wiki version, [[Project:]] works on [[Commons:]] here, Wikipedia: there, etc. --Philosopher Let us reason together. 17:10, 25 July 2012 (UTC)
Thank you. Ryan Vesey Review me! 18:08, 25 July 2012 (UTC)
This section was archived on a request by: LX (talk, contribs) 18:50, 3 August 2012 (UTC)

Copyright help regarding File:Kissred logo.jpg

Sir, I uploaded two image files and have teh permission from the owner, How do I go about attaching the copyright permission from the owner for these files, to prevent these being deleted

KissakiRobin

--KissakiRobin (talk) 18:51, 25 July 2012 (UTC)

Tag them with {{OTRS Pending}} then follow the instructions at w:Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials. I cannot seem to find a similar instruction page on commons. Ryan Vesey Review me! 19:08, 25 July 2012 (UTC)

Commons:OTRS has the steps as well.--Canoe1967 (talk) 01:12, 27 July 2012 (UTC)

This section was archived on a request by: LX (talk, contribs) 18:58, 3 August 2012 (UTC)

Can I upload these

Since I've messed this up in the past I just want to confirm before I waste my time uploading these images. There's a set of flickr set images from the Israeli Government Press Office, some of which would be helpful for the articles I'm writing on Israeli wineries. They're all released under CC BY-NC-SA 2.0. Can I upload them all to the commons? (or better yet is there a bot I can just feed the URL to?) What exactly should I put as the license? TIA - Bachrach44 (talk) 12:14, 26 July 2012 (UTC)

They're not commercial (NC), so no, you can't upload them.--Prosfilaes (talk) 15:10, 26 July 2012 (UTC)
This section was archived on a request by: LX (talk, contribs) 18:59, 3 August 2012 (UTC)

Copyright help regarding File:Kissakilogo big.jpg

The above logo was created by me and I own the copyright and give permission for it and http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Kissred_logo.jpg to be placed on the Wikipedia website.

What else do I need to do? Thank you - Vince Morris

--Kissakikai (talk) 19:07, 26 July 2012 (UTC)

If you are the creator/copyright holder then you can add a license to it. If not they have to email Commons:OTRS. Make sure they include the file name so they can find it. I added the OTRS pending for now.--Canoe1967 (talk) 01:22, 27 July 2012 (UTC)
This section was archived on a request by: LX (talk, contribs) 19:02, 3 August 2012 (UTC)

Copyright help regarding File:Vernon Davis in 49ers Uniform.jpg

I will soon be obtaining direct permission to publish this image to WikiCommons on behalf of the copyright holder. What do I have to do to ensure that it isn't removed, and how do I indicate such useage?

--Nozark (talk) 22:29, 26 July 2012 (UTC)

Follow the recommendations detailed at Commons:OTRS. -- Asclepias (talk) 23:31, 26 July 2012 (UTC)
This section was archived on a request by: LX (talk, contribs) 19:03, 3 August 2012 (UTC)

Error on Map

http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Black_%25_by_U.S._state_1900.svg On this map that I made using Inkscape the "framework" map and the colors that I filled the various states and territories with don't match completely, as especially evidenced by looking at the New York/Connecticut coastal area on my map. This is not occurring on the version of this map that I saved on Inkscape and I don't know how to fix this error. I hope I am being clear enough in explaining my problem. Futurist110 (talk) 05:06, 27 July 2012 (UTC)

The bitmap image you embedded in the SVG -- the background grey states that are showing through -- was originally 2000x1237; that's a 1.6168:1 ratio of width to height. In the SVG, though, the image has been resized to about 783x581. That's about a 1.5:1 ratio. If you'd kept the original aspect ratio, the bitmap would be much shorter for the given width. It appears that the renderer used here on Commons -- as well as the one in Firefox, based on viewing the SVG natively in my browser -- doesn't allow for aspect-ratio changes in embedded bitmaps, so the bitmap shows up at it's original, squatter ratio. Is the bitmap really necessary? It kind of defeats the point of creating an SVG map. I'd suggest either simply deleting the bitmap image from the SVG, or recreating the map using one of our many SVG maps of the United States. File:Blank US Map.svg is a popular one. Powers (talk) 19:20, 27 July 2012 (UTC)

Improved version of File:Energy_density_DE.svg

Please move "Energy_density_DE1.svg" to "Energy_density_DE.svg".

It is a slightly improved version (axes title made readable), but my account is too new to do this myself. --Neutronenspalter (talk) 13:10, 29 July 2012 (UTC)

  • ✓ Done. Thank you for your contribution! -- Powers (talk) 19:28, 29 July 2012 (UTC)

How to rotate text in table column headers?

I just uploaded File:B._Everett_Jordan_Lake_map.svg and would like to include the legend from its source in the image description. How can I rotate text for column headers (like this [24])? -- Ke4roh (talk) 02:48, 30 July 2012 (UTC)

License

Dear Sir,

I am trying to create a page for Abul Kalam Azad, an Internationally know artist. I am using images from his facebook that he is freely sharing. I also have taken written permission from Mr. Abul Kalam Azad to use his images and article about him. Could you please help me with the right process to upload and create a page on Abul Kalam Azad.

Thankyou,

Tulsi — Preceding unsigned comment added by Tulsi swarna lakshmi (talk • contribs) 13:51, 30 July 2012‎ (UTC)

Hi Tulsi! Wikimedia Commons (this site) is a repository of free media used by Wikipedia, other Wikimedia projects, and others. Commons only hosts content that can be used by anyone for any purpose. Therefore, permission for you to use an image in an article is not sufficient for Commons to host the photo. For Commons to host an image, the copyright holder would have to agree to publish the image under a license that allows anyone to use it for any purpose. If the copyright holder is willing to do that, please document their permission using our standard form and send it in to our permission archive. Please note that for photographs depicting people, the copyright holder is typically not the people depicted, but the photographer. Thanks, LX (talk, contribs) 14:43, 30 July 2012 (UTC)
If the copyright holder is not willing to release the images under a license that allows anyone to use them for any purpose, they cannot be uploaded here on Wikimedia Commons; but it may still be possible to upload them to English Wikipedia (Urdu Wikipedia, etc.; the rules for each may be different) using a slightly more restrictive licence, that allows their use there. Maproom (talk) 16:49, 30 July 2012 (UTC)