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.
Hi, I contributed the image of the flamenco guitarist Paco Peña, which appears on his English page. I'm trying to add it to his Spanish page.
I notice that his Spanish page has no picture, but that the code for it has been copied from the English page and commented out; and when I remove the comment characters and use Preview, nothing shows.
So does Spanish Wikipedia (and by extension, others) use a different Commons from the English version?
Done, for unknown reasons commons had a 19 KB thumbnail (transfer 2013) of your 4.5 MB upload to Wikipedia, and Special:Uploadwizard failed to tell me what's wrong. That's the second case in a few hours, where I stumbled over a thumbnail on commons that used to be a real photo on Wikipedia. Do we have some tool to check all transfers from Wikipedia for correct sizes? The bot would need file reviewer rights on Wikipedia. –Be..anyone (talk) 00:17, 1 January 2015 (UTC)
Can I upload my photos that have copyright data in the EXIF?
In my camera I can put an artist name and copyright data in two fields that will go into the EXIF data. Right now I have my name and email address for "artist". For the copyright field, what if I put "Copyright 2015" in there? Would that interfere with the GPL license? Bubba73 (talk) 17:46, 31 December 2014 (UTC)
@Bubba73: No, this does not interfere with any license. (Though, I would advise against using the GPL for photos; we prefer CC BY-SA/GFDL.) Most photos here are in fact copyrighted, and a free license is simply a permission that the copyright holder grants. Anon126 (✉⚒) 00:26, 1 January 2015 (UTC)
Thank you. I've uploaded several photos without this type of EXIF information. I take the default/recommended license. Bubba73 (talk) 04:19, 1 January 2015 (UTC)
The record label there (assuming that is what you are alluding to) should be fine because it is just typography and simple geometry, therefore it would fall under {{PD-ineligible}}. - Jmabel ! talk01:16, 1 January 2015 (UTC)
Website >>www.russee-hammer.info
Hallo in die Runde,
betreibe die Website www.russee-hammer.info die ausschließlich Informationen (Bilder, Berichte, Historie) über Russee beinhaltet. Sie ist werbefrei.
Bei Interesse wäre doch eine Verlinkung auf Eurer Seite "Russee" für die Besucher interessant?!
Hello, I am a "newbie" and I find contributing to Wiki very confusing.
Several years ago I created a Wiki page about my grandfather, Capt. Ernest Emery Harmon.
Over the years I have attempted to share photographs of him, from my family's private collection, in both Wiki Commons, and on his Wiki page. However, I have encountered technical, and copyright issues that have been very frustrating.
My family is in possession of an original portrait of my grandfather which was painted by the famous artist James Lunnon. My photograph of this portrait has been rejected in Wiki Commons, along with other photos (i.e. "Lt. Harmon in cold weather gear")
Please help me understand how I can share these, and other photos of my grandfather in the public domain via Wiki.
Thank you,
Bill Harmon (grandson of Capt Ernest Emery Harmon) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Alexharmon (talk • contribs)
Commons only accepts images that are freely licenced. Although I understand that copyright issues can be frustrating, only images that are released under a free licence, or in the public domain can be hosted here. In most cases ownership of an image, be it a photo or a painting, does not also give the owner copyright (although it may in some circumstances). Some of the media may be in the public domain, especially considering Harmon died in 1933; any photos taken before 1923 are now in the public domain. Do you have dates of when the images were taken, or, the date of death of James Lunnon? If you give us more concrete information we will be better placed to give advice. Also, you have already uploaded a number of images of Harmon that are unused:[1]. ColonialGrid (talk) 14:51, 4 January 2015 (UTC)
Re: "any photos taken before 1923 are now in the public domain", not quite. Any photos published in the U.S. before 1923 are now in the public domain in the U.S., but if first publication was in a different country that may not suffice, and if the photo was never published, things get more complicated. - Jmabel ! talk18:22, 4 January 2015 (UTC)
How to delete a photo: 14:21, 2 January 2015 (diff | hist) . . (-144) . . File:Uittopatsas "Iijoen uitolle" Sanna Koivisto 2003.jpg (current). Can anyone delete it? I can't find any answer. Please, a simple answer, not a link of 10 pages. Regards Ninaras. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ninaras (talk • contribs)
To meet Commons policies, it depends not only on its U.S. public domain status but it may depend also on where the image was first published and who is its author. -- Asclepias (talk) 18:26, 2 January 2015 (UTC)
Thank you for pointing out these files. I have deleted the second file as promotional but File:Yalatrader.png is arguably a {{PD-textlogo}}, so permission wouldn't be necessary. A domain search informs me that the website was only registered in July 2014 and the registered name matches the uploader's username. It is quite probably an advertising spree, especially given that the uploader posted terms and conditions at Talk:Weaving Girl. It could be nominated for deletion if it remains unused but we generally keep PD files if there is some possibility of educational use, although I don't see much educational use if there isn't an article to use it on. Cheers. Green Giant (talk)10:28, 6 January 2015 (UTC)
Thank you. The AfC isn't going anywhere at the moment, but I guess the file's worth keeping just in case it ever gets accepted. BethNaught (talk) 10:49, 6 January 2015 (UTC)
I would like to upload a snapshot of a public figure at a public event. I own a print of the photo but do not recall who took it. I don't believe it was a professional. Can I upload it? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mppage (talk • contribs) 14:01, 11 January 2015 (UTC)
Commons can only accept images that are in the public domain or are licensed for re-use by the copyright holder. By default, the copyright holder is the person who created the photo, and simply owning a copy dos not confer any legal rights. There are a number of other issues to consider, including the date of the photo and whether the copyright holder is alive or dead. If they are dead, then we need to know when they died, because that is used to work out when the photo has/will entered the public domain. Therefore, you will need to find out who took the photo and obtain permission from them or if they are dead, from their heirs. You may need to go through the procedure detailed at COM:OTRS before we can accept the image and their license. Green Giant (talk)14:49, 11 January 2015 (UTC)
The image is part of a book digitized by Google and available for free on: http://babel.hathitrust.org/cgi/pt?id=mdp.39015049794616;view=1up;seq=5
The book was published in 1946 by George M. Fuermann and F. Edward Cranz. The uploaded image is a map created by Jerome R. Ribbons and David M. Landis.
Can you please help me getting a tag? I assume that copyright is not an issue. Otherwise will you please let me know? Thanks!
Why would copyright not be an issue? Something published at that date in the U.S. could very well still be in copyright. You might take this to Commons:Village pump/Copyright where someone can work with you through the facts of the particular case. - Jmabel ! talk18:25, 4 January 2015 (UTC)
Help describing licence on screenshot containing other images
Can someone advise me on the best way to add the required meta data for uploading this file?
It's a screenshot from Histropedia showing a timeline of GLAM institutions in London. I'm wondering whether I need to reference each individual image contained within the screenshot (the images all come from Wikipedia so are all in Commons individually). NavinoEvans (talk) 15:11, 6 January 2015 (UTC)
I was hoping to just upload it as a single still image, without any links (unless this is recommended for the meta data). I may have misunderstood this comment - if you are referring to the timeline itself, it is publicly viewable and does not require a log in to view it, and is published under CC BY-SA 3.0 licence.
I basically wanted to add the image to this month's GLAM newsletter. I actually don't need to show the whole interface, it can just be cropped to the actual events on the timeline only (like this). NavinoEvans (talk) 21:30, 6 January 2015 (UTC)
Done I did the other 2 replacements and deleted the smaller file. I then moved the larger file to the smaller one's title since it's descriptive. Now the large file is used in all the articles the small one was used in. INeverCry07:57, 7 January 2015 (UTC)
Error when try to upload svg: file contains scriptcode (German)
If I want to upload an svg file, I get this error message (and cant upload): Diese Datei enthält HTML- oder Scriptcode, der irrtümlich von einem Webbrowser ausgeführt werden könnte. Which means something like the file contains scriptcode, which could be accidentally executed by a webbrowser. Thats should be true, since its an svg, but not really an helpful error message. Whats wrong? --Don-kun (talk) 19:57, 1 January 2015 (UTC)
On the (German) COM:FORUM an SVG expert thinks that this is related to phabricator:T69044 (English bug discussion started in July 2014.) I'll add a "tracked" here on probation (doing absolutely nothing at the moment, just looking nice and official while hopefully something happens ;-) –Be..anyone (talk) 06:28, 3 January 2015 (UTC)
My father showed me an old black-and-white paper photograph of his own family in his childhood in the early 1950s, and I took a photograph of it. What caught my interest is that the paper photograph is made glossy by including a pattern of very tiny shiny white cells, and my camera neatly photographed every single one.
Now I wouldn't want to just upload the entire image. I don't think my father would give me permission for it, and I feel strongly enough about privacy not to publish photographs of my father. I am reluctant to even publish photographs of myself. But I would still want to illustrate the effect.
So would it be acceptable to make a small crop of the image, showing the tiny shiny white cells in all detail, but small enough not to make the actual subject recognisable, and upload it to Commons? JIP (talk) 21:35, 7 January 2015 (UTC)
Hi. If I took a photograph of a building or a logo, could I upload it without permission from the company? The building is approx. 5-10 years old (same goes for the logo) Dovikap (talk) 21:59, 7 January 2015 (UTC)
What country? And, in the case of a logo, does it consist entirely of text and simple geometric forms, or not? - Jmabel ! talk01:18, 8 January 2015 (UTC)
I’m guessing South Africa … ignore this if i’m wrong. Regarding buildings, I skimmed a few pages at CIPC, and didn’t see anything that explicitly protects architecture, as either artwork or design—nor anything to exclude it either. Our own copyright-summary page says that they rule out FoP for film & video, but are silent regarding still photos. The lack of clarity on these points will likely run afoul of COM:PCP, unless someone can do the legwork to find definitive answers in the legislation, official advice, or case law.—Odysseus1479 (talk) 06:42, 8 January 2015 (UTC)
Pre-War Estonian stamps
I would like to upload an image of one of Estonia's postage stamps with a portrait of President Konstantin Päts, issued in the years 1936-1940. But are pre-War Estonian stamps still copyrighted? If they are, I will have to wait for quite some time, for the designer was Georg Westenberg, who died in 1980. Sijtze Reurich (talk) 12:43, 7 January 2015 (UTC)
Estonia's copyright rules do not mention postage stamps, unless a postage stamp with President Päts's portrait is an "official symbol of the state". That seems a rather dubious interpretation. Sijtze Reurich (talk) 15:09, 7 January 2015 (UTC)
As next stop in this maze of copyright pages I looked at the section for the EU on the same page, and arrived on Simple_photographs with a row for Estonia in a big table, stating that "normal copyright rules apply". For a stamp you might be able to find the name of the artist in a catalog (Michel or whatever) or with a search engine, hoping that the artist died immediately after finishing this work. 1940+70=2010 could be old enough. Or pull an "anonymous" and let others figure out why that's wrong. –Be..anyone (talk) 12:27, 8 January 2015 (UTC)
CC-BY-SA content on T-shirt prints - attribution
Hello, I want to print CC-BY-SA images on T-shirts and sell these T-shirts. There are two ways of attribution I'm thinking about:
Print a sheet of paper that will be given to customers together with T-shirts. This paper will contain the author, license and source informations.
Print the information by smaller letters directly on T-shirts. It would look like: Autor: XXX, Source: Wikimedia Commons, License: CC-BY-SA 3.0 <http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0>
Is the first way OK or should I better use the second one? Is the attribution enough on this way?
Just "Author" may not always be enough (though typically it is). You have to check for whether there is any specific attribution required, which may be specified on the file page for the image.
"Source: Wikimedia Commons" is not really useful or relevant. There would be something to be said for providing a specific URL (among other things, this would document the licensing claim). The individual issues the license, and Commons is just another licensee.
PD images don't legally require attribution, but it's usually considered more intellectually honest to say where they come from and indicate the author if known. For example, anyone now could use any of Matthew Brady's photographs from the American Civil War pretty much any way, but it would still be generally thought appropriate (though not legally required) to indicate that they are Brady's work.
On a website (contains direct link to Wikimedia Commons image): Author: Kim Hansen, source: Wikimedia Commons, license: CC-BY-SA 3.0
On a printed media: Author: Kim Hansen, source: <http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Tingh%C3%B8j_Hammersh%C3%B8j_Kvorning_2010-01-08_edit_filtered.jpg>, license: CC-BY-SA 3.0 <http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0>
I know that there is no warranty that images on Wikimedia Commons were not "stolen" by someone from somewhere. Though I hope that the source information would at least prove that it wasn't me who intended to break the copyright but it was the original uploader instead. I'll also most probably edit images in order to fit T-shirts, add some more graphic crop them or make another Photoshop adjustments. Should I include the word "edited" after the author/source/license information to indicate that I'm using a derivative work or it's not necessary? --109.81.209.19002:48, 9 January 2015 (UTC)
We can't give formal legal advice; can only share our understanding. Here is mine: I agree with Jmabel on the attribution part; but don't think the paper medium is OK. There should be a direct relation with the medium where the work is displayed and the medium where the attribution is provided. People purchase the t shirt will throw away the paper; then there is no possibility that people view that t shirt later see the attribution.
Modification need to mentioned according to CC license terms. It is to protect the integrity/dignity of the original author if the modifications are poor . A detailed instruction on reuse is available in all of my works, under permissions (eg: File:Rhyothemis variegata male of Kadavoor.jpg). Jee03:07, 9 January 2015 (UTC)
Interesting comment. I'm joining this discussion purely out of interest, I have no relation to the OP's project. Per your comments, would supplying the attribution on the T-shirt itself work? JIP (talk) 18:28, 9 January 2015 (UTC)
I am waiting to find out if, in fact, Hans Zatzka's work is now considered in the public domain. He has, in fact, been dead 70 years as of 2015. TKB7117|(talk).
If we assume that his works were first published in Austria, and that Austria follows the EU's copyright terms, I believe there is still one more year to go.
The relevant directive states that the terms "are calculated from the first day of January of the year following the event which gives rise to them." (Art. 8) So, if Zatzka died in December 1945, his death would actually be considered to be on 1 January 1946 for copyright purposes, and his works would only be in the public domain on 1 January 2016.
Neither am I, but I believe you’re correct. The term is variously expressed, but in effect a figure of 50, 70, or 95 years represents its minimum duration, extended to the beginning of the following year, like the “ceiling” function in a programming language. This also means one need only know the year of the event (death or publication) to determine when the term expires.—Odysseus1479 (talk) 02:33, 10 January 2015 (UTC)
Structure of file page
Am I correct that this is totally unnecessary, and that the way I normally lay out the content on my file pages is perfectly acceptable? - Jmabel ! talk17:29, 9 January 2015 (UTC)
I like Jmabel's style, as much as possible in {{Information}} and all cats in one line. After that one bot will split the cats in many lines for its personal business, another bot moves the license from permission= to a separate legalese section, a third bot fixes dates, etc. Let them, as long as it doesn't break anything. –Be..anyone (talk) 16:24, 10 January 2015 (UTC)
Deseo subir imágenes con la autorización de la persona sobre la que voy a escribir un artículo pero no tengo toda la información de derechos que piden. Existe otra manera? Hay demasiada información y francamente no localizo como hacerlo. Supongo que lo mismo afecta para crear galerías.
— Preceding unsigned comment added by Hawwa Morales (talk • contribs)
No, aquí en Commons, no se permite subir imágenes sín derechos. Necesitamos permiso de la persona que posee los derechos de autor. Permiso del subjeto no vale. Si puede obtener este permiso, véase COM:OTRS/es para ver cómo un tercero puede dar permiso. - Jmabel ! talk18:38, 10 January 2015 (UTC)
Further image copyright question
Regarding my earlier question about "Haribo Super Piratos", which was deleted from Commons because of copyright reasons.
I have recently (during the past half a year) amassed numerous types of candy, from Finland, Sweden, Denmark, Austria and France. I'd like to make an ensemble photograph of all of these and upload it to Commons. Is there anything preventing me from uploading it to Commons? JIP (talk) 21:14, 2 January 2015 (UTC)
On the huge policies + guidelines navbox at the bottom of some "official" pages you'll find Derivative works + De minimis in the row for "special cases." The COM:DW guideline explains how to get this wrong and almost never right, and the COM:DM policy explains how to get this right unless you insist on getting it wrong. Draw you own conclusions, but ignore the policy vs. guideline detail in this case. –Be..anyone (talk) 07:15, 3 January 2015 (UTC)
I took a photograph of all the candy anyway. Is there some way I could send it for preview somewhere to see if it is acceptable for Commons? JIP (talk) 19:53, 6 January 2015 (UTC)
I just read that question + answers on another page, please add a link to this section here.Found the "other page" again, it's below in section "Preview" uploads. Uploading to a "less restrictive" site for preview here was a rather odd suggestion, you'd have to upload it again here if all is apparently okay. You could as well upload it here and add a line {{License review}} on the file page, indicating that you're not sure. That's not a general CYA procedure, because it takes time of somebody with the license reviewer right, and there's often a backlog, but a review request is okay for honestly unclear cases. –Be..anyone (talk) 10:45, 8 January 2015 (UTC)
Is it allowed to upload an image to some other site first so it could be "previewed" to see if it's acceptable on Commons? JIP (talk) 19:59, 7 January 2015 (UTC)
If you don't own the copyright for the image, you would then be commiting a copyright violation by uploading it on another site. Flickr and other sites host lots of copyvios; it's up to you whether you feel comfortable possibly violating someone's copyright. I would suggest asking about an image here or COM:VP/C instead and giving as much detail as possible regarding source/author/date/country/etc, rather than uploading it anywhere if you're not sure about the copyright status. INeverCry20:19, 7 January 2015 (UTC)
This is related to the candy packaging question I asked previously. I do own the copyright for the actual photograph, I took it myself. What I'm not sure about is the actual candy packaging, which may contain designs I don't own the copyright to and would not be allowed on Commons. JIP (talk) 20:27, 7 January 2015 (UTC)
The photograph in question is of a collection of various types of candy, all in unopened bags, arranged neatly so that all bags are visible. JIP (talk) 20:30, 7 January 2015 (UTC)
All elements on the packages are plainly visible. No single one takes up a major part of the image, but the whole collection put together takes up the majority. However, none of the designs are quite complex. Pretty much all are textual logos and pictures of the actual candies. It's nothing like the cartoony image of a pirate that was previously deemed unacceptable for Commons. JIP (talk) 20:55, 7 January 2015 (UTC)
Every single photo or drawing on the packaging is of an actual candy or of a plant whose flavour the candy has. JIP (talk) 21:12, 7 January 2015 (UTC)
The photos and drawings are copyrighted, so if they take up a significant part of the overall image, it may be COM:DW. In the end though, the image could be deleted pretty quickly if it turns out to be problematic, so if after reviewing policy you feel it's ok and you want to give it a go, then upload it and we'll see. INeverCry21:22, 7 January 2015 (UTC)
Uploading (a lot) of British Sign Language signs as WebM
I've been keeping a personal dictionary of the signs I've been learning as I've learned British Sign Language (BSL). I personally think it might be useful to have them uploaded to Commons as currently there are no free (in the full sense) BSL dictionaries online. Is this the kind of thing that is allowed in Wikimedia Commons? And are there any special considerations when uploading 300+ files? (Obviously, I will have to manage descriptions etc. for all of them)
That's not only allowed, that's the purpose of commons, if your media has an accepted license. You could look for "wikiversity" categories to check out how similar projects handled this. Unsurprisingly you won't get much help from others busy with stuff interesting for them, and you have to be ready for unhelpful attempts to reorganize whatever you are trying to do before you are ready. It's a wiki, that's always the good and the bad news. –Be..anyone (talk) 06:48, 3 January 2015 (UTC)
We have a woefully under-populated category for BSL, so these would be very welcome. You are definitely allowed to upload your own work, but make sure you license it - we usually recommend multi-licensing your work under both the GNU Free Documentation License (GFDL) and Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike (CC-BY-SA) license (all versions). This allows others to copy, adapt, redistribute, or retransmit your work for any purpose, as long as you are attributed for your contribution and all derivative works (including commercial ones) remain under the free license. Your work is released under both licenses, and re-users can choose which one they wish to use. Finally, your work is released under the newest version of the two licenses, so when the licenses are updated your work will automatically switch to the new version. You can find the full terms of each license at GNU.org for the GFDL and CreativeCommons.org for the CC-BY-SA. (Mostly paraphrased from the standard email messages at OTRS). Green Giant (talk)15:07, 11 January 2015 (UTC)
Another image licence question
Per discussion above, I cropped a small part of a digital reproduction photograph of a paper photograph from the early 1950s, and uploaded it to Commons. Is this image acceptable? What sort of licence should I use? I put Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 Unported anyway, since it's what I use for all my own pictures. Can I change it later?
The thing that puzzles me here is that I don't own the copyright to the original photograph. It was taken by some professional photographer I've never met, and who is possibly dead by now. But I haven't uploaded a derivative work of the whole photograph, only of a small part. Is this licence fine to use then?
Yes, I believe CC license is appropriate. The subject of the uploaded file is the glossy dot pattern photographed by you. Original subject is unidentifiable from this crop so it should fall Commons:De minimis. Furthermore since the original image was taken in Finland in 1950s it is in public domain by now anyway (Commons:Copyright rules by territory#Finland, more than 50 years from the creation of the original). MKFI (talk) 12:45, 10 January 2015 (UTC)
Could someone tell me how to categorise the image? I can tell you further details to help. This is a tight crop of a digital photograph of a paper photograph, originally taken in the early 1950s, well before I was born. The original photograph is a black-and-white picture of a normal Finnish family, taken in a professional photography studio. I have purposefully cropped it so much as to be unrecognisable. The purpose of the upload is to illustrate the pattern of tiny little white dots to make the paper photograph glossy. JIP (talk) 22:57, 10 January 2015 (UTC)
I would have thought somewhere in the Photographs tree, which includes cats for various materials & techniques, but I don’t see one there that obviously fits. Does anyone know the proper term for this particular type of print or process? (The sample here resembles a halftone, but I gather from the above that the dots are a coating or texture of the paper, not part of the image itself.)—Odysseus1479 (talk) 21:59, 11 January 2015 (UTC)
with a cropped border. But I seem unable to get the most recent version to be anything but the original with a large border. I would appreciate it if someone could edit the entry so that a cropped version is shown and explain to me how they did it. -- PBS (talk) 11:10, 11 January 2015 (UTC)
No border for me, and you seem to have re-uploaded it 4 times. I'm guessing that you've failed to clear a cache, so you are still seeing the old image. - Jmabel ! talk20:42, 11 January 2015 (UTC)
How do I edit out blank pages on an upload?
My first upload: File:Goliad Declaration of Independence.djvu
It has a lot of unnecessary pages, because the source did. My goal is to get this on Wikisource. All I really need are pages 9-14; the other pages are just blanks. How do I go about this? Maile66 (talk) 15:43, 12 January 2015 (UTC)
@Maile66: I believe the only way to do this is to edit the file using some external program and upload a new version. I don't have much experience with DjVu files, so I'll leave someone else to take this up. (If you don't get any response here, you can try asking at the photography workshop of the Graphic Lab. Anon126 (✉⚒) 19:33, 12 January 2015 (UTC)
Hello. This takes some special tools, and I've put in a request for that; it should be handled shortly. Thanks for letting us know. Anon126 (✉⚒) 19:35, 12 January 2015 (UTC)
Location Searching
I have a few related of questions:
If you search on a place name is that just a textual search or a search based (also on?)on the geographic footprint for the place name, e.g. San Joaquin Valley?
How does one search based on a range of coordinates (bounding box or are more complex polygons allowed)?
What is meant when it says in reference to a location: "linked to all articles in Wiki" (I think I have the quote right)? Is the commons linked to articles in Wikipedia?
I don't think we have a way to search on geographically bounded coordinates, but using the category tree can do a fair job of simulating that, and categories are present for a lot more images than geocoordinates are.
"linked to all articles in Wiki" is unfamiliar to me. Can you give an example of a page where you see it? There is a phrase "The following other wikis use this file" but that's so different that I'm guessing it is not what you mean. - Jmabel ! talk00:05, 13 January 2015 (UTC)
Regarding coördinates, while it’s true that many (most?) images lack them, there exist Commons layers on OpenStreetMap and Google Maps/Earth. Where images and categories do have geolocation data, there are usually template-generated links to map views from those services, from which you can browse any nearby files. There’s also a gadget (in your user preferences) that adds a Google Maps menu item to category pages.—Odysseus1479 (talk) 05:35, 14 January 2015 (UTC)
Category:Richard Stallman in 2014
Out of curiosity, could I add an external link to a CC-BY-NC video to this category? It begins with a lot of funny "educational" disclaimers, why uploads to YouTube, FaceBook (for images), and similar data kraken would be not okay. –Be..anyone (talk) 10:34, 20 January 2015 (UTC)
The purpose of Commons categories are to collect media hosted on Commons. They're not intended as collections of links to non-free content, and neither is Commons as a whole. —LX (talk, contribs)12:01, 20 January 2015 (UTC)
Hello, could you please help me to link the existing Wikimedia data with the articles about James Gill in the English, French and German Wikipedia? Many thanks, Norbert20:50, 14 January 2015 (UTC)
Hello, there was a small problem, that a Category:James Gill (artist) already existed, had all necessary templates and was already in use. So I simply moved your "new" images into that category as well. That's easier than the other way around. The "Commonscat" template in Wiki-articles allows a parameter to set a specific target category, in this case {{commonscat|James Gill (artist)}} (fixed de, en and fr-articles). You can still get the English article renamed to "James Gill" if you like, the template doesn't care, as long as the category is correctly specified. Please check, if everything is working - you can ping me on en-Wiki or here on my talkpage, if necessary. GermanJoe (talk) 00:36, 15 January 2015 (UTC)
A quick note: the images in question are still being processed by the OTRS-team (maybe something needs clarification), but that's handled by the OTRS-team (not a member). GermanJoe (talk) 00:36, 15 January 2015 (UTC)
I'm trying to find out what I need to do to get Wikimedia Commons to accept photos of notable con man and actor, Steve Comisar, who has an article on Wikipedia. I'm NOT trying to get these photos uploaded on his article page. I'm trying to get these photos accepted into Wikimedia Commons so they will be available to the media through your website. I can see that another person tried to upload a file containing Comisar's photos but they were deleted, and he was told never to try it again. Please advise me how I can do this. There are many other notable people that have many photos on Wikimedia.
— Preceding unsigned comment added by Tauzlynn77 (talk • contribs)
Commons does not care about "notability", as long as the image is educational and/or ideally in use on a Wikimedia project (wikipedias, etc.). Above all there must be a plausible free license such as CC-BY, unless the media is (proven to be) in the public domain. –Be..anyone (talk) 07:09, 15 January 2015 (UTC)
Template breaking, can't figure out why
In the description for this file, (File:Paper production.jpg), the German template (de) begins and ends correctly, but the following English template (en) breaks. What needs to be done to get the English template to display correctly? Frenezulo (talk) 18:00, 18 January 2015 (UTC)
Thank you. Today i learned to run a pybot for that goal. My specific question is how can i extract a contributors uploaded files only i.e., the N files.--THAuzhavan (talk) 07:32, 16 January 2015 (UTC)
i am trying to add the some picture, and this picture is about Asama-Sansō incident. a evidence(firearms) picture(from police). in this case, could you help me how can i upload this file?
(point is, this picture is captured by Japan National Police Agency(So NOT US Government Agency), and this is over the 40 age, and i don't know what license check is needs to image uploading sequence!)
Here. From This post and firearm evidence image only. My concern is, that photo is May be a captured police. But original source is still unknown... — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ww1541 (talk • contribs)
Unfortunately there is no evidence that any of those images are available under a free licence, a requirement for all images uploaded to Commons; therefore they cannot be uploaded here. As I said, they may be able to be used at English Wiki, but as you have been told in the post Asclepias mentioned, that seems unlikely. The only two options I can see from here is to either link the images in the article using en:WP:Template:External media, or asking the relevant authority to release the media under a free licence, and follow the COM:OTRS procedures. ColonialGrid (talk) 14:01, 16 January 2015 (UTC)
I say no. The years only matter if the work is copyrightable, and I think nothing in these pictures is. The text is informational and not a creative work. The presentation on the record is a standard form for presenting text on labels in this media. Two records have art - the presto record one and the rainbow one. In my opinion these do not pass Commons:Threshold of originality, so I think they should be kept. Nothing here is eligible for copyright in the United States. Blue Rasberry (talk)01:46, 16 January 2015 (UTC)
i just checked that my images stood 8th and 9th positions in wikiloves earth nationals(india).
will i be getting any certificate from you. I was also not notified about it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Srichakra Pranav (talk • contribs)
Oops, ignore the following, it's about the global winners. The winners are listed on Commons:Wiki Loves Earth 2014/Winners. I tried a SoFixIt for ten winners without any global assessment tag, and put 2*5 (of 11 remaining) WLE 2014 winners on QIC, but the QI folks ignored this SoFixIt and just ran their own assessment. #8 and #9 didn't pass as QI, and the WLE folks never added tags for their untagged winners. <shrug />. I like #8+#9.
Maybe on topic for India: There should be a local WLE committee for each participating region on a local Wikipedia or other local sister projects, please ask also on your local Wiki how that was supposed to be handled for India. (I've no clue, sorry.) –Be..anyone (talk) 08:33, 17 January 2015 (UTC)
Kalakukko
I noted that the best picture of a Finnish kalakukko that Commons has, has some weird kind of blue-tinted patch in it. Well, last Christmas, my father bought two kalakukkos: one for himself, the other for me. I brought mine all the way to Colomars, Alpes-Maritimes, France, where I and my family ate it for Christmas dinner. Should I upload photographs of it? Would they be more usable than the photographs of kalakukko Commons now has? JIP (talk) 19:34, 23 January 2015 (UTC)
It looks like we only have two photos in Category:Kalakukko, and I see what you mean about the blue tint in File:Kalakukko.jpg (it's probably just the light, which is also seen on the foil in the top right-hand side of the photo. We can always use more high-quality photos for all subjects. —LX (talk, contribs)19:38, 23 January 2015 (UTC)
I own a logo that I don't want to waive my rights to or allow others to modify and claim it but I want to allow it to be used on the article for my project and there's no option that fits my needs on the 'upload file' form.
— Preceding unsigned comment added by Sunomi64 (talk • contribs)
Any material hosted here must have a free licence (but may require that the author be credited on reuse). In this case, if you are not willing to release the logo on terms such as CC-BY-SA, it may be possible to upload it to the Wikipedia project where the article is hosted instead, for example under a “fair use rationale” on the English Wikipedia—but there are no such exemptions on this site.—Odysseus1479 (talk) 04:21, 18 January 2015 (UTC)
Google translation: Assisting those seeking true / Philosophy printing can help students grow / Fortunately, the love of God, please call Ken Yong deposit
I really have no idea what you're trying to say here, but this looks like just another non-free Internet image. Did you have any reason at all to make you think this was published under a free license by the legitimate copyright holder? Didn't think so. —LX (talk, contribs)11:41, 24 January 2015 (UTC)
"Please do not overwrite this file: any restoration work should be uploaded with a new name and linked in this page's "Other versions =" parameter, so that this file represents the exact file found in the NARA catalog record to which it links. The metadata on this page was imported directly from NARA's catalog record; additional descriptive text may be added by Wikimedians to the template below with the "description =" parameter, but please do not modify the other fields."
For files with this, does the "do not overwrite" apply to annotations, or can those still be added to the file? Ro4444 (talk) 02:15, 25 January 2015 (UTC)
I don't see why anyone would object to annotations, the file itself will still remain untouched with only a layer implemented on top. ColonialGrid (talk) 02:27, 25 January 2015 (UTC)
Hi Everyone. I recently uploaded a slew of illustrations for a book that i've uploaded on Wikisource. The problem is that the file names got copied identically somehow through using the upload-wizard and now i can't match which image goes where in the work. i tried re-uploading but it doesn't allow me since the current images are online. Can someone please do a batch deletion of the files i uploaded so i can re-upload them ths time with proper file names?--Roxette5 (talk) 11:27, 22 January 2015 (UTC)
Comment If the file names are correct, but the images are incorrect they can be overwritten by following the link near the bottom of each file page. Alternatively, if the file names are incorrect, they can be moved through the use of the move gadget (hover the mouse over the 'more' label next to the search bar at the top right of the page) or the use of Template:rename; in both cases just use criteria #1. ColonialGrid (talk) 08:15, 23 January 2015 (UTC)
Jim.henderson is correct. all those files need to be deleted. thank you colonial for the info but in this case the file names are so long and cumbersome that it's just easier to re-upload. can someone please delete those 27 images? thx!--Roxette5 (talk) 08:31, 23 January 2015 (UTC)
Re-uploading protection also looks for matches among deleted files (which is usually a good thing), so it's not likely to help you. You'll just get a slightly different error message, that's all. —LX (talk, contribs)09:35, 23 January 2015 (UTC)
okay. well i'm not putting in the time for that. i guess that means i've ruined the ability for anyone else on wikisource to ever complete that book... that seems like a silly control measure to me but okay. i'll leave it messed up. --Roxette5 (talk) 18:05, 24 January 2015 (UTC)
Sorry to say, but this response appears non-constructive to resolving the problem. It is easier and quicker for you to simply request a file rename for each file (the upload forms are far more complicated and time consuming than using the rename tool). If you do not know how to do that, or do not have the effort, could you at the least say which new name each file should have here so I may move them? ColonialGrid (talk) 02:23, 25 January 2015 (UTC)
a very polite response. i'll try to do it myself. but i still do think this is a little exaggerated. it takes a simple press of a button to delete all my uploads. why not just do what i ask and not give me such a hard time? i'm not saying that to critique per se but honestly to just express what i'm feeling as a new user to Commons. it doesn't leave me with a good vibe for the future. just want you to know. in that sense it's constructive. in any event, i'll rename them... be well. blessings,--Roxette5 (talk) 09:11, 25 January 2015 (UTC)
Sorry, I should mention at this juncture that I am not an admin, I cannot delete files. But I am a file mover, so I can move them for you. And, as LX mentioned, trying to re-upload deleted images can trigger an error message. If you really want to pursue deletion you need to file deletion requests. Instructions for filing a group DR are found at Commons:Deletion requests/Mass deletion request. Sorry that this all appears so complicated. ColonialGrid (talk) 09:43, 25 January 2015 (UTC)
This section was archived on a request by: Roxette5 has placed rename requests on all affected files, which I have now moved to new, suitable names. ColonialGrid (talk) 12:29, 25 January 2015 (UTC)
Editing information about a photo I've uploaded
Noticed that a photo I've upload has a location that is slightly incorrect (the GPS on my camera hadn't updated yet).
Is it possibly to edit the information on a file you have uploaded?
No problem with Noscript 2.6.9.10 on my box, but the name is grotesque, check out and try (in that order :-) {{Rename}}, one of the reasons 2..6 should do the trick. –Be..anyone (talk) 14:32, 18 January 2015 (UTC)
Is there a way for Wikimedia Commons to automatically gather public domain images, as opposed to someone having to upload them? Bubba73 (talk) 05:57, 19 January 2015 (UTC)
Could you please elaborate? Do you mean to ask if there were a way to automatically scour the internet looking for PD images to be uploaded here, or is there a way to automatically upload a set series of images from another location? ColonialGrid (talk) 12:46, 19 January 2015 (UTC)
Yes, that is what I was thinking about, but have it done automatically, instead of a person having to do get them and upload them. Everything produced by the US Government is OK and there are archives of plenty of PD images. Bubba73 (talk) 23:41, 19 January 2015 (UTC)
There are bots that automatically upload some images, but a mass 'searching' of the internet is probably a bad idea. There are websites that list images as free when they are not (see: COM:FLICKRWASHING); this is especially true when searching for content from national archives of nations with differing copyright rules to Australia. The other problem that arises is that of categorisation, which automated bots and scripts do poorly. Lastly, a human would still need to check the images, performing a check similar to (or exactly) a COM:LR. If there is a particular website or archive that you know of with many PD/free images that you know of, mentioning it all Commons:Bots/Work requests, or using one of the tools at Commons:Upload tools#Transfer tools would be a good idea though. ColonialGrid (talk) 04:50, 20 January 2015 (UTC)
Question from Fisherodjig
My question is can an artist reproduce by hand a pic on here wikimedia i am in particularly interested in the meda songs symbols for my artwork. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Fisherodjig (talk • contribs)
Yes, you can modify and reuse (almost) every image hosted at Commons. However, the result will be a derivative work and will still have to comply with the licence requirements of the original. If you have a specific file in mind and what you would like to do with/to it, we can give a more specific answer, otherwise COM:REUSE should help in generalities. ColonialGrid (talk) 12:49, 19 January 2015 (UTC)
David Wong, Conductor & Businessman, File Has Been Deleted, By Unknown Person
I previously uploaded a Biography file and one photo of David Wong. Today, when I returned to further edit, I discovered the file had disappeared, someone else had deleted it. So, I attempted to re-upload both files and was prevented from doing so with the message "files previously uploaded and deleted". My two questions are: 1. Who deleted the files and why; and, 2. Why am I unable to upload the files again?
If I get permission from the copyright owner of a photo via email with their attached photo release form, can I forward that email to release the photo on the copyright holder's behalf to Permissions - Wikimedia Commons or does the owner have to send the photo release forms themselves? Thank you for your help and advice.
Hi, I'm not sure about if I can upload a photo of the Wise Man's Fear book. I've done the photo.
Can someone help me, please? Thanks --Mikicat✉09:32, 20 January 2015 (UTC)
I was wondering why the photo of Andrew Griffiths author was deleted. The owner/photographer (Brad Newton) sent the photo and the photo release form directly to permissions-commons on May 8, 2014 and again on Jan 15, 2015. I tried to re-upload the photo after the photographer resent his release form on Jan 15, but it won't let me reload the picture because it has been deleted. How can I get this photo back on the page? And what did we do wrong in the first place? Thanks so much for your help and advice.
Ask for an undeletion on COM:UNDEL, and mention as reason that an OTRS-permission is supposed to exist. (Presumably it doesn't, but an undeletion request might help to figure out what's wrong.) Caveat, answered undeletion requests are archived fast, check the archives if your request "vanished". –Be..anyone (talk) 00:20, 21 January 2015 (UTC)
Thank you.
icuraj
iw-links removing
Can we remove extra IW-links from categories with some bot, some are wrong, some are right, because we use wikidata now.--Motopark (talk) 07:26, 21 January 2015 (UTC)
Hello help desk, I just uploaded a photo to which permission was granted to me by the owner. I have uploaded it but am not sure where to send the proof or how to do so. Could someone please tell me the correct procedure and what is required.
Thank you
--Ormigasgetthejobdone (talk) 04:04, 22 January 2015 (UTC)
An official from City News will have to send in a formal release for this photo as explained at COM:OTRS. The release must come from a verifiable @citynews.sg e-mail address. Otherwise this cannot be kept. Lupo05:57, 22 January 2015 (UTC)
File:Anniehaslam-july2010reduced.jpg update with new image
Wikimedia Commons is not a Wikipedia project. All the projects overseen by the Wikimedia foundation, which includes Wikimedia Commons and the different language editions of Wikipedia, are independent projects. We do not dictate to other projects whether they should use one image or another (or a combination). Deletion from Commons is unlikely given the small number of alternative photos and that it is in use by multiple projects. —LX (talk, contribs)11:58, 21 January 2015 (UTC)
But if the photo is clearly better, there is absolutely nothing to stop you from going around & replacing it on the various projects. - Jmabel ! talk17:18, 21 January 2015 (UTC)
LX, Jmabel, File:Anniehaslam-july2010reduced.jpg is no longer in use at any Wikipedia project, and I will propose that it be speedily deleted. This image has caused significant offense to the artist involved, which is a factor that you might consider when answering questions in the future. On the other hand, thankyou for your valuable information. CaesarsPalaceDude (talk) 18:04, 22 January 2015 (UTC)
It might be possible to delete it, but the criteria for speedy deletion are pretty narrow, and I can't think how it would fit any of them. - Jmabel ! talk02:51, 23 January 2015 (UTC)
BTW, there is no need to upload low-resolution copies of images we already have: File:Wendell.jpg. I've deleted and redirected Wendell18.jpg, and replaced the sole usage at ko-Wikipedia. Lupo16:27, 22 January 2015 (UTC)
I would update the image, but I don't know how to edit SVG images, and the image is used in very many pages on different Wikipedias. I wouldn't want to go through them all and see if the captions need editing, particularly because I'm not sure I understand all of the languages. JIP (talk) 19:38, 23 January 2015 (UTC)
Why is the search feature so bad?
I know this probably has been asked a million times but what's up with the search? It usually yields few results, while even the VisualEditor (wikipedia beta editing tool) can find like 10 times more results Tetra quark (talk) 05:29, 23 January 2015 (UTC)
If you're looking for help rather than just to complain, it might help if you tell us what you're searching for and how. I wasn't aware that the Visual Editor had anything to do with searching (I don't use it), but if you like it, it can be enabled in your preferences. —LX (talk, contribs)09:40, 23 January 2015 (UTC)
Search can often find some very relevant media, but equally so, will not show all relevant media. Try using the category trees and looking in specific categories for images. As LX said, if you state what you are looking for we may be able to render some assistance, if you simply wish to complain there is little we can do. ColonialGrid (talk) 09:50, 23 January 2015 (UTC)
Andromeda Galaxy is a gallery. If you search instead of go directly to that (admittedly not very useful page), you'll get a little over 300 results, including Category:Andromeda Galaxy, which is probably the most useful, as you can explore the category tree from there, as ColonialGrid mentioned above. I'm guessing you got tripped up by the silly default behavior of the little search box (for some reason, if there's a gallery page matching your search string, it seems to go directly to that instead of searching, which is almost never what you want). Just go to Special:Search instead. —LX (talk, contribs)15:47, 23 January 2015 (UTC)
PD India
Can images which are in public domain in India, but not in USA uploaded on Commons? Per Indian Copyright Act, works enter PD 60 years after original publication date. I want to upload a few movie posters and screenshots. Thanks.--Skr15081997 (talk) 11:02, 23 January 2015 (UTC)
Uploads of non-U.S. works are normally allowed only if the work is either in the public domain or covered by a valid free license in both the U.S. and the country of origin of the work.
We have a POTY banner on cywiki which needs translating. can someone link me to it please! ASAP! Otherwise the community will go beserk. Please also warn in future as happens on Translatewiki. Thanks. Llywelyn2000 (talk) 16:50, 23 January 2015 (UTC)
Sorry to bother you, but it seems that the file I uploaded just now has a duplicate already here. I get a confusing message about that. See File:Furus High School.jpg It says on en.wiki: "The following file is a duplicate of this file (more details):
File:Furus High School.jpg from Wikimedia Commons".
Thanks, EChastain (talk) 20:04, 24 January 2015 (UTC)
I can't find any duplicates here on Commons. Of course, when you transfer an image from English Wikipedia to Commons, the file on English Wikipedia is a duplicate until it is deleted; that's to be expected. —LX (talk, contribs)20:07, 24 January 2015 (UTC)
I uploaded a svg file with UploadWizard, but was not allow to name it same image name but different extension like: Original:Image_of_me.jpg
New: Image_of_me.svg
Had to save new image with different name, like Image-of-me.svg.
How to save images so that name is same but extension different?--RicHard-59 (talk) 16:24, 25 January 2015 (UTC)
For someone who knows their way around templates:
I created the {{PD-HT}} template, and added a parameter {{{2}}} that I want to either call on {{PD-old}} or {{PD-US-not-renewed}} using if clauses. I tried to document what the template needs to do, but I'm not getting it to work properly. Would very much appreciate any help. CFCF (talk) 19:52, 22 January 2015 (UTC)
Hi, I just uploaded 2 files to Commons from the Hebrew Wikipedia. These are low-quality scans of the title page of books published in 1849 and 1865. I would like to add a license about their copyright being expired since they are more than 100 years old, but I'm not sure how to do that.
I have inserted {{PD-old-100-1923}}. It should be safe to assume that whoever created those title pages has been dead for at least 100 years by now. When moving a file to Commons, do not forget to add he:Template:NowCommons to the file information page on Wikipedia so that Wikipedians know that the file has been moved to Commons. --Stefan4 (talk) 20:30, 26 January 2015 (UTC)
Yes, at the Hebrew Wikipedia file page. The file can then be deleted locally and this enables the Commons file to be viewed instead. Green Giant (talk)09:35, 27 January 2015 (UTC)
Muhammad
I was wondering whether the Muhammad depictions page here needed to be deleted considering our guidelines on moral objections which state that "They find a reflection in the wording of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, Article 12:[1]"No one shall be subjected to arbitrary interference with his privacy, family, home or correspondence, nor to attacks upon his honour and reputation." Muhammad himself opposed visual representations of himself and his followers (Muslims) reject them too because it harms his reputation. The keyword here being reputation because Muslims fear it could result in the adulation. 80.44.178.24113:04, 27 January 2015 (UTC)
"Our guidelines" that you quote are not our (Commons') guidelines, but those of English Wikipedia. Like the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, it is generally understood to be concerned primarily with living persons. Our related guideline, Commons:Photographs of identifiable people, makes that more explicit.
If you are offended by depictions of Muslim characters (many of which were created by Muslim artists), don't look at depictions of Muslim characters created by Muslim artists. —LX (talk, contribs)15:06, 27 January 2015 (UTC)
I don't personally find it offensive but I do have family members who find it offensive. From my perspective it seems that Wikimedia is behaving in a manner that large sections of our communities would find disrespectful. 80.44.178.24121:06, 27 January 2015 (UTC)
If your family members are offended by depictions of Muslim characters, your family members should avoid looking at depictions of Muslim characters. If they want to impose made-up rules on themselves, they can do that all they want, but if they're offended by the fact that the rest of the world don't want to join them, then they're trying too damn hard to find something to get offended by. What's disrespectful is trying to erase our common cultural heritage and restrict freedom of speech. —LX (talk, contribs)22:12, 27 January 2015 (UTC)
Scanned image of old photos
Hello, I scanned a photo of my hometown from the 1890's. While the scanned image is my creation, the photo itself isn't. Considering the age of the photo, the photographer is long since gone and unknown. I found this photo at the Museum of West Louisiana (in Leesville, LA), which was among a collection of old photos. MY QUESTION(S) IS: Can this scanned image of the photo be uploaded to Wikimedia Commons? If so, then what tags (ie Public Domain, Copyright or Free Use, etc) would need to be applied? Avazina (talk) 14:54, 27 January 2015 (UTC)
As you can see at Commons:Copyright rules by territory#United States, the copyright term in the United States mainly depends on the date of first publication, rather than creation or death of the author. Depending on when the photo was first published, it may still be protected by copyright for several decades to come. —LX (talk, contribs)15:31, 27 January 2015 (UTC)
The photo has never been published, except on social media (ie Facebook) by me. The photo has been kept as part of a collection of old photos at a local museum and winds up in the occasional displays about communities in Vernon Parish. QUESTION: What Licensing Tags need to be applied to the image so it won't get tagged for deletion? Avazina (talk) 15:38, 27 January 2015 (UTC)
Hi
I want to report this over zealous person who deletes will nilly what HE considers to be correct.
I am furious at his high handed attitude ( Better than thou) He needs to be curtailed.
My post about the Raymond Mays V8 is about the only car made in this style that I own and have original work with. My printer is broken so rather than scan I photograghed the photo with my I phone then sent to my computer then uploaded it. I shouldn't have to give my reasons to this chap. Its an affront to Wikipedia that he is allowed to do this
Regards
Stewart Wilkie — Preceding unsigned comment added by Tentenths (talk • contribs)
I assume that this post is regarding a DR opened on one of your photos by Ronhjones. I am however having trouble with exactly where or how you want assistance. Could you please elaborate on how you require assistance? People routinely photograph works which they do not own the copyright to and upload to Commons, this is often dealt with through a DR; this case is no different. You state that you own the original work, do you own the photograph, or did you actually take it with a camera yourself? If you only own the work, but did not take the original photo, do you know who took the photo and if they release it under a free licence? ColonialGrid (talk) 16:38, 27 January 2015 (UTC)
Uploading Album Art
I'm looking to upload an album cover that was published on the artists (musician) Facebook page. Do I need permission from the musician? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Boris514 (talk • contribs) 18:40, 27 January 2015 (UTC)
If the album cover is original enough to merit copyright protection (most album covers are, but plain covers with the name of the artist and album in a simple typeface may be be ineligible for copyright protection), then you will need permission from the legitimate copyright holder to publish the album cover under a copyright license that allows anyone to use it in modified or unmodified form for any purpose, including commercial purposes. The copyright holder may be the musician, the person/persons that designed the cover and/or took any photos used on it, or the record label, depending on the contracts signed. —LX (talk, contribs)18:52, 27 January 2015 (UTC)
DEFAULTSORT override
I just added a DEFAULTSORT template to Category:Shlomo Ben Ami, as to the best of my knowledge his surname begins with the letter B. My edit was saved, but showed a warning in red letters: Warning: Default sort key "Ami, Shlomo Ben" overrides earlier default sort key "Ben Ami, Shlomo". According to the edit history, the "A" sort key was added in an edit on 24 March 2010 by User:JarektBot, and here I'm trying to correct it but don't understand the override mechanism. Explanation will be appreciated by yrs. truly, Deborahjay (talk) 20:06, 27 January 2015 (UTC)
As pointed out on the En.Wikipedia help desk, [6] this image [7] is mirrored - flipped left to right - and needs correcting. The mirroring is obvious if you view it at full size after flipping in an image editor, as you can see the name 'Diana' and the name of the sculptor 'Jean Goujon' on the label on the pedestal. A Google search for 'Jean Goujon diana statue' will also find photos confirming that our image is reversed. I'd make the change myself, but I'm not sure of the best way to do it. AndyTheGrump (talk) 22:37, 27 January 2015 (UTC)
What do I do here other than add pictures. What's the purpose of this place? - Shady Skater — Preceding unsigned comment added by Skate Shady (talk • contribs)
I'm sorry, but in order to host it here, we'd really need more info than what's provided there, such as the original source and the reason it's (supposedly) in the public domain. Commons:Licensing requires all files to have source information that helps others verify that the content is free both in the source country and in the United States. This source doesn't really do that. It may well be free, but we can't host it unless it's verifiably free. —LX (talk, contribs)22:59, 30 January 2015 (UTC)
I uploaded this photo and asked the author to get in touch with OTRS for giving the lisence, but the photo is not created by the author to whom I talked, according to the metadata. The author is not Aghil Tohidian, and he is Mehdi Jedari. So please remove this photo. Thanks. Mhhossein (talk) 14:12, 31 January 2015 (UTC)
Hi, I'm wondering (for if ever the problem occurs) what is the best way with solving disputes here. I know some people can be pretty hardheaded (including me) So, how can the problems be solved without any giant issues? Know what I mean?Skate Shady (talk) 15:49, 31 January 2015 (UTC)
Depends on the nature of the dispute. I've been known to bring something to Commons:Village pump for a third (and more) opinion. If you to that, make sure to inform the other party, and try to describe the dispute as neutrally as possible while encouraging the other party to clarify if you have misstated his/her view. - Jmabel ! talk16:48, 31 January 2015 (UTC)
I had uploaded an image in Wikipedia commons which is my own work. The image now needs to be removed from wikipedia commons as the artist has requested for I have only uploaded the image . It is my own work. Why cant I request for its deletion. the same as the posture is wrong and it is hampering her reputation. As I was s unable to retrieve my password I was giving the request from other ids. Now I have retrieved my password and requesting for its deletion after logging in.
But it has been threatened to block my user id if I give any delete request for this image. Why the threatening of blocking my access when I am requesting for deletion from the same user id from where it was uploaded.
Hi. Today I added a logo for a sports team for which I created a Wikipedia page. That logo is taken from team's website and when uploading the image I stated that it's copyrighted and I gave the source. After ~1-2 hours that image was deleted. The thing is that when I took that image from their website I edited it so the image would have "clear" background and cropped the logo. So I would like to know what I need to do in order to upload that image again. Thanks in advance. Sabbatino (talk) 16:08, 27 January 2015 (UTC)
Without you being specific about what logo I can't give you an absolutely definitive answer, but in general copyrighted sports logos are not acceptable on Commons. We allow only public-domain and free-licensed material. If the Wikipedia page is on the English-language Wikipedia (which I'm guessing from the language in which you are writing) then you can probably upload it on the English-language Wikipedia (not on Commons) under their guidelines for non-free images. See en:Wikipedia:Non-free content and en:Template:Non-free fair use.
I'm not sure why you mention you editing it to produce a clear background, or what you think that has to do with the case. Changing the background on a copyrighted image in no way changes the fact that it is a copyrighted image. - Jmabel ! talk17:11, 27 January 2015 (UTC)
Comment User:The N gamer & User:Dbgameface hasting on instagram are 2 more David Beals socks. INeverCry 08:32, 5 January 2015 (UTC)
Done, for unknown reasons commons had a 19 KB thumbnail (transfer 2013) of your 4.5 MB upload to Wikipedia, and Special:Uploadwizard failed to tell me what's wrong. That's the second case in a few hours, where I stumbled over a thumbnail on commons that used to be a real photo on Wikipedia. Do we have some tool to check all transfers from Wikipedia for correct sizes? The bot would need file reviewer rights on Wikipedia. –Be..anyone (talk) 00:17, 1 January 2015 (UTC)
. A detailed instruction on reuse is available in all of my works, under permissions (eg: File:Rhyothemis variegata male of Kadavoor.jpg). Jee 03:07, 9 January 2015 (UTC)
Resolved
–Be..anyone (talk) 20:33, 26 January 2015 (UTC)
![7 File:Uittopatsas "Iijoen uitolle" Sanna Koivisto 2003.jpg](#File:Uittopatsas_"Iijoen_uitolle"_Sanna_Koivisto_2003.jpg){kind=link}
_as_seen_in_article_Citynews.sg.jpg){kind=link}
![14:48, 2 January 2015 (UTC)](https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Help_desk/Archive/2015/01#c-Túrelio-2015-01-02T14:48:00.000Z-File:Uittopatsas_"Iijoen_uitolle"_Sanna_Koivisto_2003.jpg){kind=link}
![[2]](https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Special:Undelete/File:D%26B%27s_Golf_Course.jpg){kind=link}
![[3]](https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:Undelete/File%3AD%26B+golf.jpg){kind=link}
![[4]](https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:Undelete/File%3AGolf+course+at+D%26B.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
,_Trenton_(Mercer_County,_New_Jersey).jpg){kind=link}
_as_seen_in_article_Citynews.sg.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
![[7]](https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:S03_06_01_020_image_2536.jpg){kind=link}
