Commons:OTRS/Noticeboard/Archive 18

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

Ideas to help reduce OTRS backlogs

People here may be interested in Commons:Village_pump/Proposals#Ideas_to_help_reduce_OTRS_backlogs. Rd232 (talk) 21:54, 16 November 2011 (UTC)

Commons:Deletion requests/File:Alger FSGPF.jpg

Are there any tickets related to File:Alger FSGPF.jpg in the system? The Permission field on the file description seems to suggest this. If so, it's probably in French. Could you please check and see if some of the points I've listed in Commons:Deletion requests/File:Alger FSGPF.jpg could be cleared up? I would imagine some back-and-forth correspondence will be required. LX (talk, contribs) 15:43, 23 November 2011 (UTC)

File:VIA6506calg1982.jpg,File:CDNbighill1986.jpg and File:VIA6569-890917 Tr71 Trillum, London, Ont 3 FP7A.JPG

The following files where deleted because of lack of OTRS permission. For some reason the emails I sent for all three images did not register. I sent them again when I recieved the notice and contacted the user who posted the notice on my talk page, but the deletion still occurred. I can resend the emails if necessary. I have complete proof of permission and have successfully navigated the OTRS process before. Thanks Samuell (talk) 16:45, 12 September 2011 (UTC)

I've gone through all the emails sent to permissions-commons and permissions-en and have not seen anything for these files. Please resend. – Adrignola talk 01:12, 14 September 2011 (UTC)

The emails have been resent to permissions-commons. Samuell (talk) 02:41, 14 September 2011 (UTC)

Based on the current backlog the emails should have gone thorough the process already, or am I wrong. I am beginning to suspect something is going wrong, but I'm not sure what. Samuell (talk) 00:33, 23 September 2011 (UTC)

We have not seen them. Please send to permissions-commons@wikimedia.org. Remember the dash and that's wikimedia.org, not wikipedia.org. – Adrignola talk 03:39, 23 September 2011 (UTC)

That's where I sent it, but I will resend it. I think there might be another problem. Hopefully it will work this time. Samuell (talk) 22:07, 23 September 2011 (UTC)

If you are attaching the files, keep in mind that we can restore them because they aren't truly gone. So they need not be attached. It may be that the maximum attachment size has been exceeded if you were attaching the images. – Adrignola talk 22:29, 23 September 2011 (UTC)
No, but that's a good idea. I did attach a different text file to each, but the one I checked was 1.3 MB. Samuell (talk) 01:06, 24 September 2011 (UTC)

Okay, still no luck. I think my emails aren't going through. I'm not getting error notices and have had success with OTRS before. I will send them through my work email and see if that changes anything. Any other ideas? Samuell (talk) 18:51, 27 September 2011 (UTC)

Well that didn't work. Can I send them to another address? Can someone forward them for me? It makes no sense to me as to why these emails won't go through. Samuell (talk) 01:14, 3 October 2011 (UTC)

Try permissions-en@wikimedia.org, permissions@wikimedia.org, photosubmission@wikimedia.org, info-en@wikimedia.org – Adrignola talk 13:34, 3 October 2011 (UTC)
I've sent emails to photosubmission. Maybe it will work this time. Samuell (talk) 00:49, 5 October 2011 (UTC)

No luck again. Can I email it to someone and have them forward it? Can I print it out and mail it? Shall I send it as a telegram? Semaphore? Smoke signals? Anything? Should I be worried that these emails aren't going through? Samuell (talk) 20:56, 9 October 2011 (UTC)

These all appear to be from http://www.railpictures.net. Please have the people who uploaded them there indicate a (specific) free license in the "Remarks" below each image here (Pierre Fournier), here (Colin Arnot), and here (Marty Bernard). – Adrignola talk 00:33, 10 October 2011 (UTC)
That's a good idea, but I really don't like bothering people who've donated pictures. I understand that my options are limited here since my emails are lost somewhere between my outbox and and OTRS reviewer. I am beginning to suspect that emails are being deleted by some sort of spam filter. Right now what I think I might do is post the emails and attachments on a friend's server. Would that be acceptable? Samuell (talk) 03:40, 10 October 2011 (UTC)
With your suggestion, I will have to bother each one of them anyway using the contact form on the site to ensure that the email addresses do in fact belong to the users at railpictures.net (since the site does not show email addresses for users). – Adrignola talk 15:42, 10 October 2011 (UTC)
RP.net prescreens all messages and sends confirmation of approval that includes the message. If I sent both that and all conrespondance (including the original message) would there still be a need to check with the RP.net user? I am also sending a test email to OTRS see if a can get any email though. Samuell (talk) 03:01, 13 October 2011 (UTC)

I'm troubleshooting my email problems. I have resent one of the emails. Samuell (talk) 02:11, 19 October 2011 (UTC)

No luck, I'll try something different. Samuell (talk) 04:25, 30 October 2011 (UTC)
Given the ever increasing processing time, could I get a confirmation of receipt? Samuell (talk) 16:42, 10 November 2011 (UTC)
I give up on emailing it in. I'll see what else I can do. Samuell (talk) 23:55, 19 November 2011 (UTC)
Can you provide me with any word/phrase in the emails so I can search the system again? —Pill (talk) 13:37, 3 December 2011 (UTC)

fake news & letter in your website

Yes check.svg ResolvedPill (talk) 12:42, 3 December 2011 (UTC)

Hello,

My question is about the article "Hyderabad CM Burgula Views about merger" with link "http://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Hyderabad_CM_Burgula_Views_about_merger".

I would like to ask you to review the post and the images published. My explanation is, 1. How can a Chief Minister's letter be posted by his son who is not part of the government of Hyderabad, Andhra Pradesh nor India. 2. How the letter is valid when there is no signature of the particular person nor it is on his letter pad. 3. What is the proof that this letter is received by Shri U. N. Dhebar? 4. Where is the reply from Shri U. N. Dhebar or any acknowldgement?

I strongly reject this article and request you to remove it from your blog since publishing fake news will damage your reliability.

Awaiting for your reply & action

Thanks, Prakash — Preceding unsigned comment added by 202.89.111.154 (talk • contribs)

The ticket 2011110710010121 referring to these images is perfectly valid. I'm not familiar with the underlying political issue, which judging by your message may be contentious, but there is no reason to delete them. Asav (talk) (OTRS) 06:25, 23 November 2011 (UTC)

User:Wvk

Yes check.svg ResolvedPill (talk) 13:05, 3 December 2011 (UTC)

Hi, I want to see if these are real OTRS permissions [1], [2], [3], [4] because I feel that User:Wvk's may be putting false information.--Officer (talk) 23:02, 14 November 2011 (UTC)

User:Wvk is an OTRS member, their name is not in the volunteers list @ Meta, but it's verifyed here.  ■ MMXX  talk 23:24, 14 November 2011 (UTC)
Yes, but I don't think that is the question. -- Asclepias (talk) 23:28, 14 November 2011 (UTC)
Apparently Officer doubt that Wvk is an OTRS member, but if Officer is requesting a review of the permissions, then they shouldn't remove the permission templates before an OTRS member approves.  ■ MMXX  talk 23:44, 14 November 2011 (UTC)
Comment: Wvk is indeed an OTRS member, as far as I can see. Chase me ladies, I'm the Cavalry (talk) 00:24, 15 November 2011 (UTC)
Concerning user:Officer look at Special:Contributions/Officer --Wvk (talk) 20:56, 18 November 2011 (UTC)
Wvk, I have 9,230 edits and 1,269 image uploads and out all these about a dozen or so were nominated for deletion since 2006 because I choose to put complete info so that people don't get confused. [5] If you do the same then nobody will nom your uploads. Thank you.--Officer (talk) 19:07, 21 November 2011 (UTC)

File:Alexandre Evgrafov Selfportrait.jpg

Yes check.svg ResolvedPill (talk) 12:42, 3 December 2011 (UTC)

There is an OTRS tag on File:Alexandre Evgrafov Selfportrait.jpg. Now the same user has recently uploaded other artwork by the same artist. Is the OTRS ticket sufficient to cover all of the user's uploads? Thanks. Wknight94 talk 13:16, 15 November 2011 (UTC)

ticket:2011101010002251 refers to File:Alexandre Evgrafov Selfportrait.jpg only. --Krd (talk) 15:42, 15 November 2011 (UTC)
We've received a notice (ticket# 2011111510078857) and are sorting it out now. Please don't remove any images until the matter is resolved. Thanks! Asav (talk) 07:05, 20 November 2011 (UTC)

Ticket:2011012510013229

Yes check.svg ResolvedPill (talk) 13:03, 3 December 2011 (UTC)

Could someone have a look to this ticket and give a comment on Commons:Deletion requests/File:Jozef van den Berg.jpg. It about claiming authorship for an image which had been confirmed to be created b sonebody else. Thx in advance. --JuTa 09:51, 20 November 2011 (UTC)

Er is nog steeds niks gedaan aaan mijn bestand wat verwijdert moet worden, graag zo spoedig mogelijk Commons:Deletion requests/File:Jozef van den Berg.jpg. 29 November 2011 12:32. Helena

I'm working on it and left a note on the deletion request page you mentioned. —Pill (talk) 13:03, 3 December 2011 (UTC)

File:Barryh2.jpg

Though the uploader, Thealize (talk · contribs), had sent a (sort of) permission for this file to OTRS, it has been deleted today without any reference to insufficient OTRS permission (but simply per the default no-permission tag). Did anybody check the permission? Was it dismissed? --Túrelio (talk) 07:47, 24 November 2011 (UTC)

I'm not so sure myself, but I've contacted the volunteer who closed the ticket (ticket:2011110710003184). —Pill (talk) 12:42, 3 December 2011 (UTC)

Could somebody check the status for permissions

I mean these ones in particular

and

have the permissions been confirmed already?--RussianTrooper (talk) 14:30, 25 November 2011 (UTC)

Pictogram voting info.svg Info Tickets are in Russian. Anyone? —Pill (talk) 11:33, 3 December 2011 (UTC)
ah, but since you're just asking about the status, i'll give google translate a shot. in ticket:2011111510037392, the otrs agent asked for confirmation from the site owner (you were cc'ed as far as i can see) on 11/21/2011, but no reply seems to have been received so far. In 2011110310006198, the company was asked for confirmation on 11/06/2011 but no reply has been received as far as i can see. In 2011110310001701, we first sent out a further request to clarify some issues but that issue later seems to have been reconsidered by otrs agents, so the sender was informed on 11/30/2011 that he may upload the images provided that he includes "{PermissionOTRS | 2011110310001701}" (as a personal remark, i don't think that's a good idea given that these days we check whether that tag was added by an otrs volunteer or not). hope that helps, —Pill (talk) 11:56, 3 December 2011 (UTC)

File:John Stewart Bell (physicist).jpg : OTRS ticket check out

Yes check.svg ResolvedPill (talk) 12:42, 3 December 2011 (UTC)

Hi,

I had received CC-BY-SA-3.0 photo of File:John Stewart Bell (physicist).jpg from the owner (Queen's University Belfast). It was November 3. Same day I uploaded the photo to commons and I sent all relevant correspondence at permissions-commons-at-wikimedia.org. Even since the image status didn't change and no answers received to my mail box. I do realize that the OTRS checkout is run by volunteers at their spare time — as the most of any project activity anyway - so I wouldn't expect an immediate reaction. The previous OTRS checkouts took anything from 3 days and up to 2 weeks. Still it is 27 November now and it is close to one month OTRS is pending w/o any further comments and it makes me a bit uncomfortable. --Neolexx (talk) 17:23, 27 November 2011 (UTC)

P.S. The correspondence has been sent November 3, 2011 in two letters: FW: Wikipedia: John Stewart Bell free photo : [1]‏ and FW: Wikipedia: John Stewart Bell free photo : [2]‏. --Neolexx (talk) 20:16, 27 November 2011 (UTC)

I can confirm that we have received correspondence from you, and I have updated the image. The OTRS number is 2011110310005877. Please refer to the email you will now have received for further information. russavia (talk) 20:23, 27 November 2011 (UTC)
"I hope this is OK" in the answer was in the reference to my "Unfortunately I am struggling to find any free photo of you to illustrate the articles. "Free" means here to share (to copy, distribute and transmit the work), to remix, to adapt the work, to make commercial use of the work — while attributing the work in the manner specified by the author or licensor (but not in any way that suggests that they endorse you or your use of the work). Sorry for speaking some "legalese language", I am expressing the CC BY 3.0 license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/) which is only allowed to use freely in the project. Do you have a picture Wikipedia could use in this manner?"
Do I understand properly that I need to ask Prof. Whitaker to send another letter stating explicitly that that "OK" was in reference to the letter he was answering to? If so, what timeline do I have now? --Neolexx (talk) 20:36, 27 November 2011 (UTC)
Yes, you will have to ask Prof. Whitaker to fill out the template confirming that he is releasing under a specified licence. This is so that he confirms for both us and himself that he understands the terms of the licence. russavia (talk) 02:20, 28 November 2011 (UTC)
OK, I will contact them again. --Neolexx (talk) 20:56, 30 November 2011 (UTC)

Ticket:2011010710008341 (German)

Yes check.svg ResolvedPill (talk) 12:42, 3 December 2011 (UTC)

Would a German speaker please verify the content of this ticket, File:Shiraz 37.jpg uses this ticket, the ticket has been verified by its uploader User:Wvk. as I stressed in this undeletion request, the permission can't be useful when author or publication/public presentation date is unknown. also if permission is from Stockhausen Foundation, why/how it is used for this file.  ■ MMXX  talk 13:13, 29 November 2011 (UTC)

✓ Done took some time to solve the puzzle since this OTRS ticket contains mails about several images but the permission is ok for both images mentioned above --Neozoon (talk) 00:48, 3 December 2011 (UTC)

Golden Rice Image

Yes check.svg ResolvedPill (talk) 12:42, 3 December 2011 (UTC)

Hi,

What are the restrictions on this image? http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Silver+gold.jpg

Thanks —Preceding unsigned comment was added by 109.150.35.86 (talk)

The permission is not sufficient. I have tagged the image as such, and will nominate it for deletion. This will obviously given editors a little bit of time to get the permission in order, but re-use should not take place until such time as the deletion discussion is complete. russavia (talk) 18:10, 30 November 2011 (UTC)

Check an existing ticket, please

Yes check.svg ResolvedPill (talk) 12:42, 3 December 2011 (UTC)

Can someone check ticket:2007042310007055 (probably in German) to see if it only covers de:Datei:Arbeitszimmer Stoiberaha.jpg or if it either verifies that de:Benutzer:Promifotos.de is Alexander Hauk or that he has permission to use/release Hauk's photos? This request is to settle an issue at Commons:Deletion requests/File:Farhad Darya.jpg. Thanks. --Philosopher Let us reason together. 11:07, 2 December 2011 (UTC)

The ticket does confirm the permission for that specific image (and only that one). The sender is the creator. There's no mentioning of any relationship between the user and the Author. --Guandalug 15:10, 2 December 2011 (UTC)
Thanks. --Philosopher Let us reason together. 21:05, 2 December 2011 (UTC)

File:Noah Mills.jpg

Yes check.svg ResolvedPill (talk) 12:42, 3 December 2011 (UTC)

Could you please review permission for this file. I have forwarded the letter of consent from the author to you. I sent it a few minutes ago. Should be an email from Timur Mustafin. Thanks! --Teeemurrr (talk) 19:08, 2 December 2011 (UTC)

The message has been received but not yet worked on (ticket# 2011120210019022). Please also have a look at the /FAQ, thanks! Cheers, —Pill (talk) 12:24, 3 December 2011 (UTC)

File:Star Academy Winner 2008.jpg, File:Nader Guirat Crimea Music Fest.jpg, File:OxyMore.jpg

The files in the section title were uploaded by User:Mona MG and they were marked by me (User:Rsocol) with the {{npd}} tag on November 2. They were deleted by User:Courcelles on November 10, but Mona MG said in my talk page that she had permissions to use the photos. According to her, the email with the permission was sent to permissions-commons@wikimedia.org on November 14, but there was no action until now, despite the undeletion request. Please check what happened to the email with the permissions and advise Mona MG about any further action she needs to do. Razvan Socol (talk) 08:23, 23 November 2011 (UTC)

I've replied on your talk page. —Pill (talk) 17:06, 3 December 2011 (UTC)

File:Rene Morel in 2004.jpg

Can someone please verify the ticket for File:Rene Morel in 2004.jpg? I'm sure this one have one, because I received a copy of it at 20:44, 16 November 2011 (UTC). Armbrust (talk) 18:43, 18 December 2011 (UTC)

Review of livius.org permissions: #2006112210022386 #2007022010005941

A significant number of images from livius.org are included on commons under these permission tickets ((35 with a quick search). However the descriptions for most of these images includes a "permission line" that says: "With permission granted by the authors to download, copy, re-format and redistribute the pictures for use on computers, computer networks or as a printed publication, provided that no fees are charged for their distribution." - This is obviously not an adequate permission for commons because of the "no-fees" clause. So it is important to find out what these permissions given actually says. Because, either we need to delete a significant number of images or we need to update the pages of these images to reflect the actual release so that it does not cause confusion.Ajbpearce (talk) 12:42, 30 October 2011 (UTC)

  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info French-speaker needed here. —Pill (talk) 13:31, 30 October 2011 (UTC)
The French part of the two emails only gives context : the whole permission (which seems inadequate) is in English. Hope this help.--Bapti 16:54, 23 November 2011 (UTC)
  • Just to note that the images have been (temporarily) deleted as a precautionary measure while we wait for a response here.Ajbpearce (talk) 13:04, 5 November 2011 (UTC)
  • Bumping to note that this review is still required, to prevent automatic archiving for being more than 15D old. Ajbpearce (talk) 14:59, 19 November 2011 (UTC)

The problem is that the person who asked for permission added additional requirements to the license: "[...] The term of use of each picture shall be documented such as follows : "GFDL" license, with the added following mention "With permission granted by the authors to download, copy, re-format and redistribute the pictures for use on computers, computer networks or as a printed publication, provided that no fees are charged for their distribution"." This applies to the following images according to the email:

Cheers, —Pill (talk) 13:33, 3 December 2011 (UTC)

Thanks, well that looks like they need to stay deleted then for a badly formed permission. There are a few images with these permission numbers left on the site. But they don't seem to be among those mentioned above. If the permission did not mention them, they would also need to be deleted. Ajbpearce (talk) 14:55, 3 December 2011 (UTC)

Ok, searching for those, I now found another email (ticket:2010090510006664) that contains permission for the following images:

which now specifically states that "I agree to publish them under the free license :Multi-license GFDL, all CC-BY-SA [...] I acknowledge that I grant anyone the right to use these works in a commercial product, and to modify it according to their needs, as long as they abide by the terms of the license and any other applicable laws." and does not impose further restrictions. The email address used is the one listed on http://www.livius.org/mail.html. There appears to be some overlap with the older email, for instance File:Bishapur relief 5 2.jpg was mentioned in both emails. Also, I don't quite see what action has been taken by the OTRS volunteer dealing with the second email. He just asked if this is a "general release" for all material from livius.org, to which the sender pointed out that it is not because there is also material on her site where she is not the rights owner. Hmm. So, to sum up, it appears that there is a valid permission email for the 51 images listed in the new email. Perhaps someone can manage to go through that list and identify deleted files (because if everything else is fine and all information is provided, I see no reason not to restore them) -- I'd normally do it myself but neither am I an administrator here nor, unfortunately, can I find the time these days. Cheers, —Pill (talk) 15:38, 3 December 2011 (UTC)

Ho hum, ok - I will contact the admin who closed by DR and deleted the original 35 images and ask him to undelete as applicable. There are definitely some of those files included in this valid permission (including, frustratingly, I see - the image that I originally noticed had a bad permission and nominated for DR last month, not aware what bit of string I was pulling on :P ) Ajbpearce (talk) 22:34, 3 December 2011 (UTC)

Long exchange of e-mails and pending request

Yes check.svg ResolvedPill (talk) 10:21, 4 December 2011 (UTC)

I have recently received permission via e-mail to use an image from a website. However, the author needed some clarifications and since it was not possible to tag the picture with a Commons-compatible license on the website, I asked him to give me a permission for the file to be used under Creative Commons Attribution 2.0. The exchange of e-mails is pretty long and it's not in English, therefore I want to ask - would it be fine if I simply forward only the last e-mail (translated) with the permission to permissions-commons(at)wikimedia.org ? - Tourbillon 19:55, 12 November 2011 (UTC)

Yes, although we do have many foreign language speakers on OTRS. If you can tell me the language I might be able to give you a more specific email address to use. Stifle (talk) 17:10, 23 November 2011 (UTC)
Well I sent the complete exchange of e-mails with an English translation (from Bulgarian) and the image was uploaded on 15 November, but I still have no response. I noticed that the picture is the only one left in the 15 November OTRS pending category (there were previously some 20 others) and I need it for a FA candidate, so any response is appreciated. - Tourbillon 09:26, 3 December 2011 (UTC)
Hi Tourbillon, we received your email, and "image donor" has just been contacted to briefly confirm that everything is fine (so that we have the permission directly from him), now waiting for a reply. (I'm setting this to "resolved" because the original issue seems to be resolved, feel free to remove it again if you have further questions.) Cheers, —Pill (talk) 19:45, 3 December 2011 (UTC)

Puh, I guess I made a mistake here. Based on the email, I thought you had only given us the translation of the last email, but you've translated everything, right? I'm asking because as I said, I've just asked him for confirmation -- in English. Normally this is no big deal, but since the original correspondence was all in Bulgarian, I fear that it might be confusing now :(. I tried to find an OTRS volunteer who speaks Bulgarian to translate a follow-up, but unfortunately there is none on our list. Do you know if he speaks English? Sorry again, —Pill (talk) 20:01, 3 December 2011 (UTC)

I'm not really certain if the author speaks English. I just wrote him an e-mail to ask if he will have any difficulties with composing a reply in English (in case he doesn't speak the language and does not understand what you sent him). He's usually quick in replies so I think we'll have an answer by 2-3 days. - Tourbillon 20:30, 3 December 2011 (UTC)

Ok, guess we're done here, I've added {PermissionOTRS} to the file page. —Pill (talk) 10:21, 4 December 2011 (UTC)

Great, thanks a lot ! - Tourbillon 10:51, 4 December 2011 (UTC)

I`m worried about the picture((

Yes check.svg ResolvedPill (talk) 23:21, 3 December 2011 (UTC)

Hello, Just a few words of a concern. I`m Russian. I have a very close Brasilian female friend who is dying from crack addiction now. I`m concerned. And I think that the picture on the crack-page of this web-site is objectively too attracting. The woman on the picture looks sexy. The hair, the eyebrows, the nails, the jewelry, the dress... The picture can produce a dangerous effect on crack beginners. I`m a former heroine addict (17 years of being clean) and I know about drugs(( I really want to help. Could you please remove this picture?.. Thank you for the time you`ve spent on reading this mail. Ania

Hi Ania, to which "crack-page" are you referring and to which image (this? File:Smoking Crack.jpg)? --Túrelio (talk) 08:06, 21 November 2011 (UTC)

Images copyright information (Jane Reumert)

Yes check.svg ResolvedPill (talk) 00:45, 4 December 2011 (UTC)

Nov 18 (11 days ago) i sent a request to permissions-commons@wikimedia.org regarding the following images.

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/9/90/Jane_Reumert.jpg http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/2/21/Fglasfiber18a.jpeg http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/0/07/Mg5577a.jpeg http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/3/3b/Mg8474a.jpeg http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/5/51/Mg2673a.jpeg http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/a/aa/Item9.jpeg http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/e/ef/Mg2634a.jpeg http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/e/ec/Eskaller01.jpeg http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/4/4a/Eskaller03.jpeg http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/2/2e/Asaltglasur18.jpeg http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/3/30/Bsaltglasur12.jpeg http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/2/23/Bsaltglasur11.jpeg http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:FiberglassBayeux.jpeg ..

They have now all been deleted and still no response to my request.

What now?

Best regards Apovlsen (talk) 10:10, 29 November 2011 (UTC)

Ticket has been received -- Ticket:2011111810014973 -- permission as is isn't enough, but I have reinstated as there obviously is some permission - I just need to confirm it. You'll note when permission has been confirmed when I add the OTRS confirmed templates to the images, and you will receive email. russavia (talk) 12:27, 29 November 2011 (UTC)
Sounds very good, will you also make sure the images are restored? Best regards Apovlsen (talk) 12:40, 30 November 2011 (UTC)
I have temporarily restored the images to Commons, in order to confirm with the copyright holder that they have given permission, and so they can verify that the images in question are those they are given permission for. Once we receive this confirmation, all will be ok. If no response from the copyright holder is had within a reasonable timeframe -- I'd say maybe 2 weeks from now -- they will need to be deleted until such time as confirmation is received. But all should be good if we get the response we require. Cheers, russavia (talk) 18:29, 30 November 2011 (UTC)
Thank you very good, will you also please rollback the page http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jane_Reumert to the stage before deletion? Did you e-mail Jane Reumert to get the final confirmation, or how are you expecting to get a response from her? Best regards Apovlsen (talk) 14:15, 1 December 2011 (UTC)
The images have been restored on the Wikipedia article page, and an OTRS volunteer has asked the copyright holder for confirmation. —Pill (talk) 00:45, 4 December 2011 (UTC)

Not again!

Yes check.svg Resolved

I posted on the Pump, and above on this very page, about a problem I was having with some images donated to the project from the RAF Museum.

I noted that even though the ORTS message was sent, most of the images did not receive an update noting this, and the single one that did complained about something that was left undescribed. The reviewer did not explain what the problem was, nor did they make any attempt to contact me during the process to explain it.

And even though this very page states there is a 15 day backlog for ORTS, the images were deleted again, after only 7 days. Again, without any warning or explanation.

This is beyond the pale.

Maury Markowitz (talk) 15:54, 21 November 2011 (UTC)

Pictogram voting info.svg Info The relevent ticket is 2011110710010121 MorganKevinJ(talk) 16:56, 21 November 2011 (UTC)
Maury, sorry about that. The problem is that there are huge fluctuations in OTRS backlog and that OTRS processing time is hence not always in line with the time limits imposed by the deletion policy. See also our /FAQ. Deleted versions can be restored later if the permission statement is found to be sufficient. Now, concerning the specific case you mention: The OTRS volunteer sent out an email to the copyright owner on Nov. 16 and asked for confirmation (we typically need permission directly from him in accordance with COM:OTRS). Unfortunately, it doesn't look like he replied. —Pill (talk) 14:31, 3 December 2011 (UTC)
Permission confirmed. The image has been restored and the other images have been tagged. MorganKevinJ(talk) 14:52, 5 December 2011 (UTC)

File:Betsy Foxman00.jpg

I've sent a number of emails to Scott Cameron re this image which has not yet received a ticket. I would appreciate some sort of response. cheers Paul venter (talk) 06:21, 2 December 2011 (UTC)

Paul, thanks for your question. Please have a look at our /FAQ -- usually, we cannot possibly process tickets within such a short period of time. That doesn't mean your email is lost somewhere, and you don't have to resend it, it's just that there are many emails and few otrs agents to deal with them :). I have now merged all your tickets to the one you got a reply to (ticket# 2011113010026722), so the OTRS agent in charge gets aware of them. The ticket is still open, and we'll send you a response as soon as possible. —Pill (talk) 12:37, 3 December 2011 (UTC)
Pill, could you explain in simple English why Commons would think that "no restrictions" does not mean the same thing as "public domain"? In my book "no restrictions" means "carte blanche", "do whatever you like", "feel free to suit yourself" etc. I seem to be running up against a brick wall here..... Paul venter (talk) 20:19, 4 December 2011 (UTC)
[i haven't forgotten your question here, but unfortunately, i'm somewhat busy these days with other things, so it might take me till the end of week to respond. perhaps someone else can help your more quickly. apologies & cheers, —Pill (talk) 18:30, 6 December 2011 (UTC)]

Ticket number #2011030410006577

I see that this ticked is used in many files from http://www.mapn.ro. Does it extend to all the files on this site or a specific set of files? Are there any conditions mentioned in the e-mail? Is the sender someone with a mapn.ro email address? Razvan Socol (talk) 14:48, 3 December 2011 (UTC)

The sender is not, but the sender of the forwarded email is. If Google Translate is right, they "agree with free license to use them under Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 ("Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0"), indicating author photo and specify the source." and the permission statement refers to images on "http://www.mapn.ro/fotodb/". But if we need to be sure, we'll have to ask someone with proficiency in Romanian. —Pill (talk) 15:51, 3 December 2011 (UTC)
Pill's assumption is correct. The tickes unambiguously frees all the images from http://www.mapn.ro/fotodb/ --Strainu (talk) 19:09, 3 December 2011 (UTC)
There are a lot of useful photos on that site (for example, the photos of the Ministers of Defence, in http://www.mapn.ro/fotodb/ministrii). Can we consider that the ticket applies to any photo that was or will be posted in http://www.mapn.ro/fotodb, or only to the photos that were available on a certain date? Shouldn't we ask that the copyright notice be changed on the site, so we can be sure that the sender is authorized to release so many photos? Razvan Socol (talk) 06:26, 4 December 2011 (UTC)
The letter is signed by the director of the Public Relations department in MAPN and was sent from that department's email address, so I have no reason to suspect he's not authorized to do that. The wording is unequivocal about the fact that the person understands all the implications of the license (commercial use, the permanent nature of the release etc.). There is no date limit specified in that email. It simply says "the images in the photo gallery of the website http://www.mapn.ro/fotodb/". If you want to be extra safe, we can ask the user for the exact wording of the request, as only the response was included in the ticket. Asking for a license change on the website might be pushing it (personal opinion based on past experiences), but feel free to send them an email. Who knows, you might get lucky. :)--Strainu (talk) 21:14, 8 December 2011 (UTC)

File:Aschmittnerwp.png

Hi, permission has been asked for and received previously 02.12.2011 06:12. Please enter the OTRS brick accordingly. BR Polentario (talk) 17:24, 6 December 2011 (UTC)

I had a rummage and found a previous ticket from you, but it didn't mention that file. Did you get a release for that particular file or for a collection of files? If not, you'll need to get a specific email for that file and send it to us. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 17:37, 6 December 2011 (UTC)
I sent the file with the mail to permissions and Schmittner answered to that. As well the mail exchange explicitely mentions the photo on his webpage which is the one in question. Polentario (talk) 20:01, 6 December 2011 (UTC)
Yes check.svg Resolved--Krd (talk) 20:00, 8 December 2011 (UTC)

Whether photographs are of a certain model, or not

Hi could someone find a way of confirming whether the photographs at Category:Lucinda_Harmony are actually of that model? Ticket no. 2011121310001001 has challenged these as not being her, however I find it hard to compare or find an authoritative source and the photographs there have been released on ticket no. 2007111210016632. One possible comparison site is http://www.modelmayhem.com/1585814. -- (talk) 10:01, 13 December 2011 (UTC)

Category:Hugo Gugg

Yes check.svg Resolved--Krd (talk) 12:36, 17 December 2011 (UTC)

Some paintings have been confirmed to be licensed with the GFDL with the ticket https://ticket.wikimedia.org/otrs/index.pl?Action=AgentTicketZoom&TicketNumber=2011101210008921 Was File:Paestum ,.jpg not among them? This one doesn't have the OTRS ticket yet. --AndreasPraefcke (talk) 16:38, 13 December 2011 (UTC)

Fixed. --Krd (talk) 12:36, 17 December 2011 (UTC)

Images copyright information (Orchidee3)

Dez 09 i sent a request to permissions-commons@wikimedia.org regarding the following images.

http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Nanophotometer.jpg http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Sample_Compression_Technology.jpg http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Low-volume_quantification_step_by_step_2.jpg

Please can you check the status for permissions?

Best regards Orchidee3

Orchidee3 (talk) 10:46, 14 December 2011 (UTC)

Dear all,

the pictures mentioned above have been deleted now. As mentioned I have forwarded a copy of the email from the copyright holder to permissions-commons@wikimedia.org on Dez 09 2011. Up to now I didn't get a confirmation and the pictures have been deleted. What else can I do?

Thanks for your help Orchidee3 (Orchidee3 (talk) 09:12, 19 December 2011 (UTC))

Your request has been received and will be processed soon. Please do not reupload the images, they will be restored if there are no further questions. Thanks, →Nagy 11:05, 19 December 2011 (UTC)

Dear Nagy, I'm still waiting that the pictures are uploaded again. Do you have new information for me or are there further questions?

Thanks Orchidee3 (Orchidee3 (talk)) 01 January 2012

Cinefundas OTRS

This is another problem ticket I've come across now. According to ticket:2011020710001425 they are releasing all their images on CC-BY-3.0 license. However, from their website it is clear that they do not own the copyright of many images and quite a lot of them are user uploads where they assume that the user owns copyright based on the disclaimer. This is identical to the case of Kollywoodtoday where after similar loopholes were found we deleted their images. Relevant discussion of Kollywoodtoday is at Commons:OTRS/Noticeboard/Archive_12#File:Sneha_Actress.JPG and Commons:OTRS/Noticeboard/Archive_14#Please_check. —SpacemanSpiff 06:04, 17 December 2011 (UTC)

  • e.g File:Amala-paul13.jpg is sourced to [6] which has an upload date of Jan 9, 2011. But the same image was available elsewhere [7] earlier, and it was part of a portfolio shoot [8], the other images of which are not all present on Cinefundas. I'm not sure what the process is for these (would a DR suffice, should we invalidate the OTRS ticket as there are lots of images credited to this ticket etc) and would appreciate suggestions. Almost all the images I've seen have been stripped of their exif data. We had a similar case on en.wiki (Bollywoodblog) where we had to delete all images from that OTRS ticket. cheers. —SpacemanSpiff 09:39, 17 December 2011 (UTC)
If Cinefundas does not have the copyright for the photo then the OTRS is ofcourse not valid. I can not remember how it started but it was probably something with a user that was in contact with Cinefundas and got them to send a perission to OTRS and asked me if I could check the ticket. I will think about it and see if I can remember who it was. If the user has contact with Cinefundas then perhaps (s)he could ask if they could explain the example mentioned above. --MGA73 (talk) 17:36, 17 December 2011 (UTC)
This does seem like another Bollywoodblog case of a website generously allowing us to use what isn't theirs to allow using (or even to use themselves). I'd delete the lot preemptively and stop using the ticket as a valid permission. Coren (talk) 15:01, 18 December 2011 (UTC)

File:ROGER.jpg

Français  ; Fichier:ROGER.jpg avec la licence cc-by-sa-3.0 J'ai envoyé un mail le 15/11/2011 avec l'autorisation pour ce fichier. Peut être y a t-il eu une erreur d'envoi de ma part.

Je viens de ré envoyer ce mail avec l'autorisation ce 22/12/2011. no OTRS permission since|month=December|day=19|year=2011


Je viens de remettre OTRS pending en attendant que le nouveau mail avec l'autorisation soit traité. Pouvez-vous faire traiter ce mail avant la supression du fichier.
Merci (Artnord (talk) 14:51, 22 December 2011 (UTC))

Your message has been received and will be processed soon, even if the image gets deleted we will be able to restore it. Thanks for your patience (otrs:2011122210010225). →Nagy 15:08, 22 December 2011 (UTC)

Check a strange ticket please

Hey there. Can someone please check ticket #2010072810031703 and see if that really allows File:MFAHWatkinBuilding.jpg to be licensed under the Apache-2.0 license? It seems awfully strange. Cheers, Sven Manguard (talk) 08:23, 23 December 2011 (UTC)

Hi Sven Manguard, the ticket is valid. We have an email from an mfah.org adres confirming the release of amongst others MFAHWatkinBuilding.jpg under the Apache-2.0 license. Sincerely, Taketa (talk) 19:35, 23 December 2011 (UTC)

http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Capo_Gallo_Oblada_melanura.jpg

Yes check.svg ResolvedPill (talk) 21:22, 26 December 2011 (UTC)

It says cc by sa. Clicking link of source, popup - everything is copyrighted.

The ticket is in Italian, so we need an Italian speaker to confirm the permission. The relevant ticket is 2008041910012671. russavia (talk) 02:23, 28 November 2011 (UTC)
I have asked for help from Vituzzu, an Italian OTRS agent, on their talkpage. Sincerely, Taketa (talk) 20:48, 11 December 2011 (UTC)
Artículo bueno.svg Confirmed! --Vituzzu (talk) 13:34, 12 December 2011 (UTC)

File:Duvalier.jpg source/author

Yes check.svg ResolvedPill (talk) 21:22, 26 December 2011 (UTC)

As I get completely no response (whyever) at User_talk:Platonides#File:Duvalier.jpg please could someone else add source and author at File:Duvalier.jpg? Thanks. Cheers --Saibo (Δ) 23:19, 30 November 2011 (UTC)

{{done}} Ezarateesteban 23:24, 30 November 2011 (UTC)


Pictogram-voting-question.svg Question Okay thanks! That's what I imagined ... So could please someone confirm here that the person who gave the permission had the rights to give permission? I just have the feeling (I cannot look in OTRS) that this is doubtful here - seems to be just a photo collected from somewhere. Physical ownership of the paper print doesn't make ownership of copyrights. Cheers --Saibo (Δ) 14:56, 1 December 2011 (UTC)
if google translate is not wrong (ticket is in spanish), the sender claims to have inherited the image ("we have the paper originals"). but at least from google's translated version i can't really see whether that's because they inherited copyright or just the physical object. (but if the former is the in fact true, i don't understand why the author field states "unknown"). confused, —Pill (talk) 11:45, 3 December 2011 (UTC)

ping - DR? Saibo (Δ) 00:51, 12 December 2011 (UTC)

So be it... Commons:Deletion requests/File:Duvalier.jpg--Saibo (Δ) 22:22, 19 December 2011 (UTC)

Polish ticket (skijumping.pl)

Yes check.svg ResolvedPill (talk) 21:22, 26 December 2011 (UTC)

A batch of images very deleted because of the supposed invalidity of ticket 2007032510013279. Nobody in the deletion discussion seemed to understand Polish (conclusions made based on machine translation), so I would like someone to take a look again. As I understand it the rights owners were willing to release the images but no GFDL or CC-* licence was mentioned. Some notes on Polish Wikipedia are linked from the deletion discussion.

If sufficient permission never was given, it would perhaps be worthwhile to continue negotiations. That would be much easier for someone having access to the original correspondence or at least some summary of it and contact addresses.

--LPfi (talk) 07:28, 5 December 2011 (UTC)

I have asked for help from Odder, a Polish OTRS agent, on their talkpage. Sincerely, Taketa (talk) 20:38, 11 December 2011 (UTC)
The ticket in question was received in March 2007 (see the first 8 digits) according to the then-accepted procedures. However, there isn't any mention of any licence, and there is no information that the copyright holder (editor-in-chief of http://skijumping.pl) agrees to use the pictures from his website for commercial purposes (so we could use the {{Copyrighted free use provided that}} template). We cannot determine if his agreement applies to all uses of those images, or was thought to be for Wikipedia purposes only, as the Wikipedian who forwared the agreement didn't include his introduction e-mail (as we do now). Having said that, I agree with the deletion and hope that there would be someone interested in having all those images back :-) Regards, odder (talk) 12:00, 12 December 2011 (UTC)

Russian language picture File:T-killah 2.jpg

Работа получена мной по электронной почте от правообладателя google translates as "The work received an e-mail me from the copyright holder". If there is any Russian speaking person wanting to do it, I think it would be good to explain to the uploader how he could register the content of the e-mail as an OTRS ticket. Teofilo (talk) 14:43, 14 December 2011 (UTC)

From what I can see, the issue is dealt with in ticket:2011122010016527. —Pill (talk) 21:26, 26 December 2011 (UTC)

File:NarutoStormGenerationXbox360.jpg

Yes check.svg ResolvedPill (talk) 21:22, 26 December 2011 (UTC)

OwdneyTissu (talk · contribs · page moves · block user · block log · upload log) claims that an e-mail containing details of the permissions for this file's licensing have been sent to OTRS. Given that the uploader got the file from Google rather than from the copyright holder, given that they do not know what license the supposed permission granted, and given that they also pretended to be a license reviewer, and given that all their other uploads were blatant copyright violations, I'm suspecting that the OTRS claims are false, and that the uploader is simply trying to get another blatant copyright violation in under the radar. Was anything actually sent in? LX (talk, contribs) 15:11, 16 December 2011 (UTC)

I see no relevant email in the OTRS system. I'd say the claims are false. Regardless, the file has sense been deleted. Cheers, Tiptoety talk 07:17, 17 December 2011 (UTC)

File:Rene Morel in 2004.jpg

Yes check.svg ResolvedPill (talk) 21:22, 26 December 2011 (UTC)

Can someone please verify the ticket for File:Rene Morel in 2004.jpg? I'm sure this one have one, because I received a copy of it at 20:44, 16 November 2011 (UTC). Armbrust (talk) 18:43, 18 December 2011 (UTC)

Done. --Krd (talk) 20:32, 18 December 2011 (UTC)

Another 2 files

Yes check.svg ResolvedPill (talk) 21:22, 26 December 2011 (UTC)

Hi! I have another 2 files, which weren't verified yet:

  1. File:ISIS Magazine The Go Issue November 2011 cover.png permission was sent at 21:39, 18 November 2011.11.18 (UTC),
  2. File:Mirus Futures logo.png permission was sent at 19:26 22 November 2011 (UTC).

Regards, Armbrust (talk) 17:02, 19 December 2011 (UTC)

✓ Done, thanks. →Nagy 07:24, 20 December 2011 (UTC)

File:Heemskerck, WEF van 1868.jpg

Yes check.svg ResolvedPill (talk) 21:22, 26 December 2011 (UTC)

I've send you 7 mails. In one of them you will see the permission (File:Heemskerck, WEF van 1868.jpg) User:Henk Obee06:39, 20 December 2011 (UTC)

Your message has been received and will be processed soon. Regards, →Nagy 07:30, 20 December 2011 (UTC)

File:Эппле жанна.jpg

Yes check.svg ResolvedPill (talk) 21:22, 26 December 2011 (UTC)

Could somebody with OTRS access check the ticket as it had been added by the uploader himself. --Túrelio (talk) 07:32, 20 December 2011 (UTC)

The ticket number is valid and the file has been released under the licenses mentioned on the description page. Regards, →Nagy 07:37, 20 December 2011 (UTC)
Thanks for the very fast reply. --Túrelio (talk) 07:48, 20 December 2011 (UTC)

File:Attack on Mangalore Pub Protest by NSUI.ogv

Yes check.svg ResolvedPill (talk) 21:22, 26 December 2011 (UTC)

Could someone please check if OTRS permission has been received for this? Joyson Prabhu Holla at me! 08:51, 20 December 2011 (UTC)

There is some correspondence with Daijiworld Media available, however the video above has not been mentioned so far. I would be very thankful if you could request another statement of permission regarding this file. Thanks, →Nagy 15:27, 20 December 2011 (UTC)

Two permissions

Yes check.svg ResolvedPill (talk) 21:22, 26 December 2011 (UTC)

Hi!

About File:Riku Rantanen.jpg and File:Timo Rantatorikka.jpeg: I've sent permission couple of months ago. It's id is #2011080310006971 (it's written in Finnish). Kirjakas (talk) 12:16, 20 December 2011 (UTC)

Your last message has been received, I'm sure the ticket will be processed soon. Regards, →Nagy 15:37, 20 December 2011 (UTC)

Around the Rings permission

Yes check.svg ResolvedPill (talk) 21:22, 26 December 2011 (UTC)

I don't understand why the pictures bellow have been tagged for deletion. The copyright owner itself (Around the Rings) sent the permission letter to permissions-commons@wikimedia.org, so did I.

Regards; Felipe Menegaz 17:48, 20 December 2011 (UTC)

There is currently a backlog in the OTRS, the ticket number has been added to the files above. →Nagy 18:18, 20 December 2011 (UTC)

Confirmation request for http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Oakley_sunglasses.jpg

Yes check.svg ResolvedPill (talk) 21:22, 26 December 2011 (UTC)

Hello,
I already received an OTRS ticket:2011121210011654 for this picture, do I also need a confirmation from an OTRS agent to use it in the Wikipedia pages?
Thanks, Michele Laterza (talk) 10:55, 22 December 2011 (UTC)

No, it can be used in any Wikipedia article now. Regards, →Nagy 15:00, 22 December 2011 (UTC)

Ticket #2011122010020021

Yes check.svg ResolvedPill (talk) 13:07, 28 December 2011 (UTC)

Could someone please handle this ticket? The picture appears on the creator's Flickr stream: [9]. Cheers. Badzil (talk) 02:20, 28 December 2011 (UTC)

Fastily took care of it. Badzil (talk) 12:58, 28 December 2011 (UTC)

NZ Labour Party photos

I have obtained permission to use quite a lot of campaign photos from the NZ Labour Party. I have uploaded these images in small batches, and forwarded the permission email each time I uploaded a batch of the photos. The earliest was around the 22nd November 2011. Now, I haven't received any confirmation from OTRS and the "This file is missing evidence of permission" is appearing on these images.

I suspect that this is just because there is a backlog in handling permissions, but could someone confirm that these emails have been received please. I have a few more that I plan to upload and it would be a pain if someone deletes them in the mean time due to some technicality.

See my contributions for a full list of uploaded images. One example is Christine Rose.png. --Sir Anon (talk) 05:38, 28 December 2011 (UTC)

Hi Sir Anon, the emails did arrive (6 over the past weeks) but, as you guess, have not yet been processed because of the backlog. As long as you tag the images with {{OTRS pending}}, I think there shouldn't be any problems here on Commons. Apologies for the delay, —Pill (talk) 11:44, 28 December 2011 (UTC)
Ah, just saw the problem. I've added {OTRS received} to the older images, so they won't be deleted before the ticke has been processed. —Pill (talk) 12:21, 28 December 2011 (UTC)

OTRS for File:Edinboro logo.png

Yes check.svg ResolvedPill (talk) 11:16, 1 January 2012 (UTC)

Would someone please double check the OTRS ticket on File:Edinboro logo.png? I'd like to make sure that the release was made by someone with an official college email address who would have authority to make that kind of release. I'm just double checking because colleges get very cranky when their logos are used.--GrapedApe (talk) 00:02, 1 January 2012 (UTC)

The ticket did come from an Edinboro University address, however I cannot find him in their campus directory.-Mys 721tx (talk) 00:13, 1 January 2012 (UTC)
Did the email have his job title? Maybe below the signature line?--GrapedApe (talk) 03:10, 1 January 2012 (UTC)
He didn't include his job tittle in the ticket. Based on the information given by the university website about him, I believe that he should have the authority to license this image.-Mys 721tx (talk) 04:01, 1 January 2012 (UTC)
Thanks for checking that out. I was concerned about the diff where the ticket was added ([10]) that said "(OTRS permission added by non-OTRS member)." Kinda weird.--GrapedApe (talk) 04:29, 1 January 2012 (UTC)
I guess that's because the notice is displayed only if the OTRS volunteer editing here has previously been assigned to a special user group here on Commons. So there might be delays. Cheers, —Pill (talk) 11:15, 1 January 2012 (UTC) (Although, actually, I don't quite understand that. Because obviously it would mean that all OTRS-related edits from the time before we had this new system are tagged with "(OTRS permission added by non-OTRS member)." -- but that is not so. So why are my old edits not tagged wile Jimmys' are?)

Category:Nancy Kwan and File:Lee C. Bollinger awarding the 2003 Pulitzer Prize to Jeffrey Eugenides.jpg

Would an OTRS agent check the emails I sent regarding the images at Category:Nancy Kwan? Some of the images were tagged as missing permission and will be deleted within seven days. Also, would an OTRS agent check the email I sent with regard to File:Lee C. Bollinger awarding the 2003 Pulitzer Prize to Jeffrey Eugenides.jpg? The emails were sent in early December. Thanks, Cunard (talk) 00:39, 4 January 2012 (UTC)

Only regarding the second issue: I've just added a pointer to the email on the image page, so there shouldn't be any risk of deletion for the time being. But please note that we're currently quite backlogged (see the figure in the intro to this page), so it may take some time until a response will reach you. Cheers, —Pill (talk) 19:28, 4 January 2012 (UTC)
Thank you for adding the OTRS ticket number to the Jeffrey Eugenides file. Would you add the OTRS ticket numbers to the Nancy Kwan files tagged by Special:Contributions/FSII? I am afraid those images will be speedy deleted after seven days. See my conversation with Fastily (talk · contribs) here. Cunard (talk) 01:54, 5 January 2012 (UTC)

Three files needing verification

Yes check.svg ResolvedFor the time being. —Pill (talk) 19:15, 5 January 2012 (UTC)

Hi! I have another 4 files, which weren't verified yet:

  1. File:Rotational Molding.jpg permission was sent at 15:42, 19 December 2011 (UTC),
  2. File:Breathe With Me (group).jpg permission was sent at 21:39 23 December 2011 (UTC),
  3. File:Mold graphics into rotationally molded parts.jpg permission was sent at 23:18 23 December 2011 (UTC),
  4. File:Rotomolded parts.png permission was sent at 18:33 30 December 2011 (UTC).

Regards, Armbrust (talk) 12:56, 4 January 2012 (UTC)

Hi Armbrust, I left a note on the image pages indicating that an email has been sent. So there's no risk of deletion for the time being. Please note, however, that there's currently a huge backlog (see the intro to this page), so it may take some time, unfortunately. Cheers, —Pill (talk) 19:22, 4 January 2012 (UTC)
Thanks. Armbrust (talk) 14:25, 5 January 2012 (UTC)

File:Meryl Streep by Jack Mitchell.jpg

Yes check.svg ResolvedPill (talk) 19:15, 5 January 2012 (UTC)

Does the ticket by any chance contain the year when the picture was taken, or a useful link?--Ymblanter (talk) 18:46, 5 January 2012 (UTC)

It does not. --Krd (talk) 19:02, 5 January 2012 (UTC)
Ok, thanks.--Ymblanter (talk) 19:12, 5 January 2012 (UTC)

Abdulhadi Alkhawaja.jpg

Yes check.svg Resolved

This work is a cropped version of (Nabeel Rajab along with Abdulhadi Alkhawaja at a pro-democracy march.jpg), so I have copied the OTRS permission details from original work to the new work. However after the edit I noticed it said in the edit summary "OTRS permission added by non-OTRS member". So I'm hoping it's all fine and I haven't done something wrong. Bahraini Activist (talk) 10:05, 31 December 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for informing, it is totally correct added. An alternative would be (as I did a few min ago) to add the image under "other versions". (the best on both image pages) mabdul 18:00, 9 January 2012 (UTC)

Is OTRS really "fit for purpose"?


RFC - OTRS 2012

I've created Commons:Requests for comment/OTRS 2012. I think it best if users contribute their views there again, copying and pasting if necessary, rather than someone attempting to move everything. Rd232 (talk) 18:21, 9 January 2012 (UTC)