Commons:OTRS/Noticeboard/Archive 20

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.

Garage de l'Est

Yes check.svg Resolved--Krd 11:20, 10 March 2012 (UTC)


We received on COM:UNDEL a request to restore the following files covered by {{Garage de l'Est}}:

Could you check it's a general permission enough to update the template or should individual files be tagged instead? --Dereckson (talk) 08:26, 7 March 2012 (UTC)

Done by Jim (Jameslwoodward). --Dereckson (talk) 08:36, 8 March 2012 (UTC)

File:Massoud Barzani001.jpg

Yes check.svg Resolved --Krd 07:17, 12 March 2012 (UTC)

Is the cited permission valid for this image? Was the permission issued by Kurdistan Regional Government, who is incorrectly listed as the author in the file description? If so, is there any explanation as to why they should be able to issue licenses for content created by AFP? LX (talk, contribs) 23:46, 6 March 2012 (UTC)

The ticket does not contain a valid permission and the agent told to customer accordingly. --Krd 11:18, 10 March 2012 (UTC)
Thanks. Commons:Deletion requests/Files uploaded by Zirguezi. LX (talk, contribs) 12:36, 10 March 2012 (UTC)


Yes check.svg Resolved --Krd 07:17, 12 March 2012 (UTC)

Hi, I received permission to upload this photo [1] via e-mail. I forwarded my e-mail and her e-mail and the photo to ( could someone please verify it before 7 days and inform me if there is any problem? regards Soheyla Sh (talk) 18:52, 9 March 2012 (UTC)

The email was received and the ticket number is 2012030910011489. MorganKevinJ(talk) 00:44, 10 March 2012 (UTC)
Thanks a lot Morgankevinj. I'm sorry for asking many question but what should I do with the ticket? Is there anything I need to do? regards Soheyla Sh (talk) 09:08, 10 March 2012 (UTC)
The ticket was answered by the OTRS agent; please make the permission sender answer the email. Thank you. --Krd 11:22, 10 March 2012 (UTC)
Thank you Krd. Soheyla Sh (talk) 11:30, 10 March 2012 (UTC)


Does this ticket actually contain a valid permission for the files that Maciejk84 uploaded from both and It seems somewhat unlikely given the two different websites involved, the uploader's history of uploading copyright violations, and the fact that they added the {{OTRS}} tag themselves despite not being an OTRS volunteer. LX (talk, contribs) 20:57, 10 March 2012 (UTC)

Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment The ticket is written in polish MorganKevinJ(talk) 21:22, 10 March 2012 (UTC)
Pictogram voting comment.svg Note from a native speaker All images uploaded by Maciej84 (except File:Wschodnia 2009.jpg and File:Kutno SEZ 0287 panorama.jpg which seem to be self-taken anyway) are covered by this ticket. They are all mentioned in the PDF attachment (a scan) to that ticket, which has been signed by the Head of the Department of Promotion of the Municipal Office of Kutno. odder (talk) 04:49, 12 March 2012 (UTC)

File:Alex Mitchell - journalist.JPG

Hi, I uploaded the file File:Alex Mitchell - journalist.JPG on 2 January 2012 and forwarded permission from the copyright holder to on that same day (subject line: Fwd: Re: Licensing photo of Alex for Wikipedia etc.). I never received a response and today I noticed that someone had mistakenly changed the category from OTRS pending so I changed it back. I would be grateful if you could look into what's going on. -AndrewMitchell36 (talk) 08:20, 12 March 2012 (UTC)

User Esi.us1?

Could somebody please check if there are tickets flying around under the desk for all the uploads by user Esi.us1? Tons of media marked with Permission=permissionOTRS but no ticket info. Special:Contributions/Esi.us1 Thanks! --Hedwig in Washington (MAIL?) 22:51, 12 March 2012 (UTC)

Having check a few samples but didn't find anything matching in the OTRS. Uploads are from November 2010, so if OTRS permission is neccessary, it should be treated as not present. Most pictures are tagged as own work and have a valid license, though. --Krd 20:36, 14 March 2012 (UTC)
✓ Done Thanks! Added categories, removed permissionOTRS --Hedwig in Washington (MAIL?) 18:22, 15 March 2012 (UTC)

#2012022110005751 (ticket en français) / Enrico Campagnola works


I've a question related to the ticket 2012022110005751.

Is the permission valid for any Enrico Campagnola works or only for File:Offrande par Enrico Campagnola.jpg ? --Dereckson (talk) 17:13, 14 March 2012 (UTC)

Note: the ticket is in French. --Dereckson (talk) 17:13, 14 March 2012 (UTC)

It seems that all the works of Campagnola are concerned. 18:17, 14 March 2012 (UTC)

File:Sam Harris 01.jpg


Could someone please check whether ticket:2007022610016098 mentioned a specific resolution for File:Sam Harris 01.jpg? Because I uploaded a higher-resolution version than the original, and I don't know whether I should have done that. InverseHypercube 18:47, 14 March 2012 (UTC)

The ticket doesn't mention a specific resolution. --Krd 20:30, 14 March 2012 (UTC)
Thanks. InverseHypercube 21:26, 14 March 2012 (UTC)
Yes check.svg Resolved --Krd 11:52, 15 March 2012 (UTC)

Template:LDS, Template:AlainRioux, Template:AndreiBezmylov

Has there any permission received for images tagged with this custome license templates? If not templates and images should be tagged with no permission. --Denniss (talk) 05:27, 12 March 2012 (UTC)

LDS is under ticket:2011110210009875 -- for some reason it has merged two separate emails of mine into 1. The relevant email for LDS is the email dated/timed "11/18/2011 14:31". The other two, I will have a look thru my email when I regain access to it in the morning -- Gmail has locked me out and I don't have my phone on me to be able to do the sms verification. russavia (talk) 17:38, 16 March 2012 (UTC)
AlainRioux is under ticket:2012031610008051. I'll get to Bezmylov soon. russavia (talk) 18:14, 16 March 2012 (UTC)


As the ticket to File:Tayfun Cora.jpg and File:Burak Yılmaz 17.jpg was added by a non-OTRS 2-files-uploader, could somebody check its validity. Thanks. --Túrelio (talk) 10:27, 15 March 2012 (UTC)

The same goes for File:Onur Recep.jpg . --Túrelio (talk) 10:56, 15 March 2012 (UTC)

Ticket is in the info-tr queue. --Krd 12:45, 15 March 2012 (UTC)
I have asked Mardetanha if they could have a look. Sincerely, Taketa (talk) 22:02, 15 March 2012 (UTC)

Acompanhamento de solicitação

Yes check.svg Resolved

Boa tarde, peço desculpa por o incomodar, mas aconselharam-me a falar com um volutário do OTRS, pelo que vim falar consigo. Acontece que o meu email está demorado a ser respondido e a imagem carregada foi proposta para eliminação apesar de ter sido carregada via OTRS, pelo que eu gostaria, se não se importasse, que fizesse o acompanhamento da solicitação, o pedido diz respeito à seguinte imagem:

Obrigada, Atenciosamente,Shania Twain Portugal (talk)

This is being discussed at Commons:Deletion requests/File:Vanessa como Judy Garland.png so any continued discussion should take place there. However, I have found the ticket which is still open Ticket:2012020510003541, just not in my language. I have noted the ticket number on the deletion request as well. - Rjd0060 (talk) 06:09, 22 March 2012 (UTC)

ticket # 2012030110005251

Could someone please check whether the permission in ticket # 2012030110005251 is valid for the higher-res version without watermark, such as the first version of File:Musee du Leman 19.jpg, or only for the lower-res version with watermark (see second file version), as the uploader has uploaded the latter after the OTRS ticket had been added. --Túrelio (talk) 15:34, 12 March 2012 (UTC)

The ticket does mention the file names but not a specific resolution. --Krd 16:39, 12 March 2012 (UTC)
Does this mean it can be safely reverted to the high-resolution version? InverseHypercube 18:49, 14 March 2012 (UTC)
Permission email is from 1 March 2012 and directly refers to the pictures' deletion requests; reduced resolution was uploaded at 7 March, so I'd conclude that the permission was granted for the original version. --Krd 20:41, 14 March 2012 (UTC)
Thanks. Were these files included? File:ML Affiche LémanManiac 2009-2010 c.jpg, File:ML Affiche plonk 2008-2009 c.jpg InverseHypercube 21:35, 14 March 2012 (UTC)
And this one? File:ML R Baradi 28.jpg InverseHypercube 21:50, 14 March 2012 (UTC)
Tickets mentions (amongst others) File:ML Affiche LémanManiac 2009-2010.jpg and File:ML Affiche plonk 2008-2009.jpg (which both seem to have been deleted), but not File:ML R Baradi 28.jpg. --Krd 11:51, 15 March 2012 (UTC)
Okay, thank you. Do you think you could ask about File:ML R Baradi 28.jpg? It was uploaded by the same user and is of the same museum, but I don't want to assume. InverseHypercube 20:02, 15 March 2012 (UTC)
Question sent. --Krd 07:20, 16 March 2012 (UTC)
@InverseHypercube: Did you check that File:ML Affiche LémanManiac 2009-2010 c.jpg vs. File:ML Affiche LémanManiac 2009-2010.jpg and File:ML Affiche plonk 2008-2009 c.jpg vs. File:ML Affiche plonk 2008-2009.jpg contain the same image? If is does not, the OTRS tag is now incorrect as the ticket mentions the other couple of files (which are currently deleted). Thank you. --Krd 07:28, 16 March 2012 (UTC)
Images are tagged now. To be restored:
Could an admin please to this? Thank you. --Krd 16:21, 16 March 2012 (UTC)
Great! Awesome work. InverseHypercube 16:36, 16 March 2012 (UTC)
I guess File:ML Affiche Reve d ocean 2007.jpg is fine as well? InverseHypercube 19:25, 17 March 2012 (UTC)
Yes, File:ML Affiche Reve d ocean 2007.jpg was mentioned in the original e-mail and is ok. --Krd 09:17, 18 March 2012 (UTC)

STOP. There now appeared an e-mail from the copyright holder which got out of sight because it was not correctly merged to the ticket. :-( Please wait, additional clearification in progress. --Krd 20:04, 18 March 2012 (UTC)

I sadly have to report that after merging all relevant emails and additional consultation with the copyright holder, my above statement is wrong and the higher resolution pictures have no permission. There is now a detailed list in the ticket which I try to get sorted as soon as I find an Admin with some spare time. Sorry for the confusion. --Krd 10:15, 20 March 2012 (UTC)
To answer the original question: No, the higher-res images have no valid permission and have been deleted now. Sorry. --Krd 12:27, 22 March 2012 (UTC)
Yes check.svg Resolved --Krd 12:27, 22 March 2012 (UTC)


Ticket is used on many uploads from one photographer from one website, for example File:AURELIA 14-03-2006 CAGLIARI (7).jpg. Recently it was used by an non-OTRS member on a photo from tha same website but from a different photographer, File:Scintu.JPG.

Question 1: Is the use of the ticket at File:Scintu.JPG and File:Aliscafo Montegargano.jpg and File:Pilota bari.JPG covered by the permission?

Question 2: same uploader of Scintu.JPG used the ticket on a files from a very different websites:

Is the use of the ticket on that files covered by the permission? --Martin H. (talk) 21:22, 14 March 2012 (UTC)

Ticket is in the info-it queue. --Krd 12:45, 15 March 2012 (UTC)
Whom to ask? --Martin H. (talk) 21:51, 15 March 2012 (UTC)
I have asked Trixt if they could have a look. Sincerely, Taketa (talk) 22:01, 15 March 2012 (UTC)
No to both questions. Ticket:2011061410006954 is only for photos by "Cap. Eustachio Patalano" from . The photographer is also the webmaster, but I don't think that he is the copyright holder of all photos from that website. Nevertheless, IMHO this ticket is actually unusable. There is a OTRS operator's final request, still unanswered, for an appropriate free license permission (actually we have a "I allow you to reuse my photos provided that provided the author is properly attributed.", which is more {{Attribution}} then {{PD-self}}). I have asked to Elitre if she could help with this ticket, I believe that we can easly obtain a brand new complete permission. I suggest to tag all images with {{OTRS received|id=2011061410006954|reason=license}} and waiting.--Trixt (talk) 14:23, 17 March 2012 (UTC)
Long story short: some months ago Patalano (author of the pics authorized in that ticket) found out that a user (Sempreblu) was using his pics here without telling him anything. I asked him whether he wanted us to remove those images OR to provide correct attribution, explaining very clearly that free licenses mean no restrictions. On 20/06/2011 21:38:50, he agreed that we could just replace the copyvioler's name with his, like he had already stated before and kept stating later. This means he agreed to the free license that had already been chosen for the images listed in the ticket, and of course we deleted the ones coming from his site but by different authors. This also means that ticket does not authorize further publication of materials as he did not answer to my explicit request of choosing a license to do so. I asked another user of that forum to get that permission from him but he did not manage to, I am not giving it another shot. To recap: the images listed in that ticket and/or uploaded until June 2011 are ok if their author is Captain Patalano, aka Seawolf, in which case they should just point to that OTRS ticket. --Elitre (talk) 15:01, 17 March 2012 (UTC)
Ok, the ticket only covers photos by Patalano uploaded to Commons before the permission date 2011-06-14. This means uploader GiuseppeCeglie (talk · contribs) did it wrong. I deleted the two groups of uploads. Group two: Uploads from random websites such as soccer players of train stations. Group one: uploads from from different photographers. --Martin H. (talk) 21:01, 18 March 2012 (UTC)

File:Alex Mitchell - journalist.JPG

Hi, I uploaded the file File:Alex Mitchell - journalist.JPG on 2 January 2012 and forwarded permission from the copyright holder to on that same day (subject line: Fwd: Re: Licensing photo of Alex for Wikipedia etc.). I never received a response and I was wondering if someone could look into what's going on. I posted here on the noticeboard on 12 March but received no response before my question was archived. -AndrewMitchell36 (talk) 16:34, 20 March 2012 (UTC)

I've tried searching that day and the days around that, but I can't find it. Could you post the exact subject, or could you send in a new ticket. Thanks. Techman224Talk 20:44, 20 March 2012 (UTC)
Thanks for looking into this for me; the subject line I posted above was the exact subject line of the email (Fwd: Re: Licensing photo of Alex for Wikipedia etc.) so since it could not be found under that, I have resent the permission to just now under the new subject line: Declaration of consent for File:Alex Mitchell - journalist.JPG -AndrewMitchell36 (talk) 21:41, 20 March 2012 (UTC)
Still can't seem to find it. Could you send me an email with your email address? That would make it easier for me to locate. Use the EmailUser feature as we don't want your email address published on-wiki for privacy reasons. Thanks. Techman224Talk 04:00, 21 March 2012 (UTC)
I've checked with an OTRS admin, and they can't find it. It must be a problem with your email client. Are you sure it's working? Techman224Talk 17:57, 26 March 2012 (UTC)

Confirmation for File:Emergency Support Team Logo.jpg

I would like confirmation that the OTRS ticket for File:Emergency Support Team Logo.jpg was submitted by someone from the organization's hierarchy with the authority to release their official logo into CC-BY-SA3.0/GFDL. The organization is an EMT team at Washington University of St. Louis.--GrapedApe (talk) 11:37, 22 March 2012 (UTC)

RE: Ticket:2012031310010605: I was the agent who tagged the file. It was a standard release, but per your request I'm going to look into it further. I've emailed the "Administrative Questions" address listed on the organizations contact page (here). Note that all the addresses there use @gmail, as did the initial email that came to us releasing the file (though that email is not listed on the contact page). We'll see what they say. Other agents feel free to/please do confirm my comment here. - Rjd0060 (talk) 18:35, 22 March 2012 (UTC)
The email was send from a gmail account and not a public one. I agree with doublechecking this before accepting the permission. Sincerely, Taketa (talk) 20:38, 22 March 2012 (UTC)
I would agree that we ought to accept a release only from an email that is positively connected to the leadership of this organization. In the interim, while we wait for an official response, would an OTRS volunteer please change the OTRS template on this image to {{OTRS received}}?--GrapedApe (talk) 11:53, 23 March 2012 (UTC)

File:Elizabeth Emanuel.jpg

Does the OTRS permission for this specifically give permission for the current 500 × 401 version, or does it also cover the higher resolution version in the history? January (talk) 18:10, 22 March 2012 (UTC)

The permission verifies that the uploader is the creator of the image and has the rights to it. As the first file was also uploaded by the owner of the image, you can assume it was also given out under the licence. Sincerely, Taketa (talk) 20:44, 22 March 2012 (UTC)
The larger resolution image was deleted meanwhile, so this seem to be resolved here. --Krd 17:21, 26 March 2012 (UTC)
Yes check.svg Resolved --Krd 17:21, 26 March 2012 (UTC)


Could someone please check this ticket for File:Cove Dilek Peninsula National Park Guzelcamli Aydin Turkey.JPG, as it was added by the uploader. --Túrelio (talk) 07:24, 25 March 2012 (UTC)

The ticket does not apply. The ticket is about another file on the website. Earlier discussion on this ticket (Commons:OTRS/Noticeboard/Archive 11) concluded that the ticket only applies to the one file and not to the whole website. Without a more explicit permission by the author this ticket can not be used for File:Cove Dilek Peninsula National Park Guzelcamli Aydin Turkey.JPG. I will inform the person that send the email to us in this ticket via email, remove the ticket from the file, and leave further action regarding the file to others. Sincerely, Taketa (talk) 17:36, 25 March 2012 (UTC)
search for 2008032610018431 brings more. --Martin H. (talk) 23:40, 25 March 2012 (UTC)


With 890914, did Haluk Özözlü permit our uploading all his images in ? Or this ticket lists several files ? Cf. Images of Haluk Özözlü).Takabeg (talk) 03:16, 26 March 2012 (UTC)

The ticket seem to be not valid at all. Main part is in Turkish, though, so maybe a native speaker should take care of this. --Krd 17:30, 26 March 2012 (UTC)

File:Council of Europe Palais de l'Europe aerial view.JPG

Does the OTRS permission for this specifically give permission for the reproduction of the building (No COM:FOP in France)? Bulwersator (talk) 18:11, 23 March 2012 (UTC)

Copyright holder contacted to get confirmation. --Krd 18:09, 27 March 2012 (UTC)

Files with no OTRS ticket

I tagged File:Douglas Tait Land Of The Lost 09.JPG‎ and File:Jack Mitchell.jpg‎ for speedy as needing evidence of permission earlier this month. User:X4n6 has repeatedly removed the tag with edit summaries that show he doesn't understand what is required. So far as I can tell, there is no OTRS email confirming the release of these photographs. One was listed has having come from Flickr, but the photo is not there now. Rather than continue to go back and forth adding the tag, would somebody here please confirm that these files do not have permission and delete them? They both were tagged well over a week ago and the uploaders were notified. Thank you. Novaseminary (talk) 04:49, 26 March 2012 (UTC)

First image was a copyvio from so deleted as such. As for the second image, there is an entire group of images by Mr. Mitchell given for permission at 2011042610001163 but that ticket did not include the image of Mr. Mitchell. User:Zscout370 (Return fire) 17:05, 26 March 2012 (UTC)
Zscout370, I'm very sorry you were drawn into the forumshopping that User:Novaseminary has been waging for months to delete the Wikipedia:Douglas Tait BLP, which I oppose. First, the File:Douglas Tait Land Of The Lost 09.JPG photo was licensed in the public domain and sourced to Flickr, not IMDB, so there is no copyvio and it should be restored until the author is contacted to fix the licensing. I don't believe there was a need to rush delete it and would request that you reconsider until this is resolved. But the broader issue however, is that the editor bringing this complaint has already failed at bringing two AfD's on this same BLP, one just over a week ago, and now threatens to bring a 3rd. I believe this is relevant information. As I believe, unfortunately, is this editor's recent history of this pattern [2] when he doesn't get his way. I helped create the Wikipedia:Jack Mitchell (photographer) article, as I did the Tait article, so these challenges, in my view, are purely retaliatory and about gaming the system and sadly not about these images at all. Many thanks. X4n6 (talk) 19:54, 26 March 2012 (UTC)
Irrelevant personal attacks aside, there is no evidence that these files were released by the copyright holders. And the Tait one seems to have been lifted straight from a source that explicitly asserts its copyright (as linked above). Neither was ”rush” deleted. Both had been tagged for some time (your improper tag removals notwithstanding) and both uploaders were notified. Novaseminary (talk) 20:49, 26 March 2012 (UTC)
My comments were neither irrelevant nor personal attacks. While you may not like it, if a clear pattern to your edits has emerged and your history corroborates that pattern, both are relevant. The Notice on this board says: "Include all relevant details about your inquiry". I did. The tag on the Mitchell photo appears to be a stretch of policy at best, especially given the circumstances of that individual's enormous contributions to this project. While I have asked the admin for clarification on the Tait photo and requested the uploader be contacted directly, not just on their talk page. Neither image should have been deleted until this is resolved - your tags notwithstanding. X4n6 (talk) 21:05, 26 March 2012 (UTC)
For the first image, the problem is we only got permission for a specific list of images and we cannot assume we have automatic permission for that self-image of Mitchell. While I am aware of his past donations to the Foundation for images, we still have to treat that image as lacking permission (especially since the upload was on behalf of a company) so I want to be really sure this is indeed a part of the original set of images. It is very easy to link and merge tickets and I already contacted Mitchell to figure out what is going on. (Now to the Second Image) As for my claim for it being sourced to both Flickr and IMDB, if you see where "Other version" was, that was where it linked to IMBD so that is what I felt was a second source. However, there is even a bigger narrative for this second image of Mr. Tait so I am going to paste my response to X4n6 in full here: "As for the second photo, it is currently unusable at all. The uploader, who has the same flickr name, did not provide much information about the photo except a claim of authorship and also two sources. The problem is that both sources does not exist, so we have to treat it as a dubious claim. The photo I found was at for it being a wire photo and thus copyrighted. I also checked the photos that remain on the Flickr page and all of them are not his work at all. A lot of them are of him getting done up for a shot in Star Trek but I also found some red carpet photos where authorship is not determined. There was a similar image uploaded called File:Land.JPG and in that file description, it says "This is a photo of Douglas Tait from The red carpet of The Land Of The Lost Premiere. It was taken by my wife Isabel Cueva, and is not copyrighted. I own the image. It was published on Facebook in July of 2009. I own the photo so I am free to publish it on this page." Prepare for your mind to be blown; Mrs. Cueva is the wife of Tait and if this claim is right, User:Trekkeman is claiming to be Mr. Tait himself. Yet, I find a problem. The movie came out in June of 2009, the picture was supposedly put on Facebook in July of 2009 yet this photo (and even a large size) was put on Facebook on in October 2009. So what we really had was a crop of a bigger photo and the person who uploaded the photo is not only claiming to be Mr. Tait but every other photo I have on the Flickr page is not by him at all. Also, the person is claiming Mr. Tait's wife took the photo, but I believe it was in a case of "Hey, take a photo of me" so it is a work for hire. Yet, when it comes to work for hire/asking someone to take a photo of you, there are guidelines I seen where you also have to ask the photographer. So we might have to ask Mrs. Cueva for permission. Plus, regardless, the image descriptions for both do say public domain, so we have to confirm that this is indeed Mr. Tait, make sure we get the largest photo possible and confirm the license. I know this is a lot to digest, but it is very easy to restore images so once this is sorted out, I can deal with that." User:Zscout370 (Return fire) 22:02, 26 March 2012 (UTC)
As I said on your talk page: I appreciate how much effort you put into your response. As well as all your research. Let me see if I can offer something that makes sense. Again, it doesn't seem logical that the photographer or his company would, not only go to the trouble of uploading and posting his self-portrait, but also filing out a public domain license for it if they didn't intend it to be used. That makes no sense. I do appreciate your concerns about an abundance of caution, but you really have 3 separate actions as I've described, that suggest their intent. But not to belabor the point, I understand you have contacted the photographer. Thanks. That's about all we can do, is let the author weigh in. On the Tait photo, I actually take the same position. I requested that you try to contact the uploader directly to let them weigh in, but you haven't indicated if you did. I also found something else very interesting about that event. You indicated that you found somewhere that Tait himself had explained it was his image and not from WireImage? That would seem to jive with the list of photos that WireImage took from that event, and that photo is not among them. As for finding the image on IMDB, WP's policy has always been that IMDB is not reliable, so logically their copyright attributions should be viewed with equal skepticism. I don't know if the uploader is also the subject, but again, if you attempt to contact the uploader directly, we may get to the bottom of this. But in the interim, I don't think we can reasonably say the photo is unusable, simply because as you said, we just don't know all the facts yet. Thanks. X4n6 (talk) 10:55, 27 March 2012 (UTC)
I think a part of it was I dealt with situations before that while an author released images before, he/she did not authorize another photo to be added or some authors from one website were OK with their images being used while others were not. But I want to focus less on the Mitchell photo since he has been contacted and the ball is in his court. As for the Tait image, I am confused. But let me go to class and I will try and figure out a response later. User:Zscout370 (Return fire) 14:16, 27 March 2012 (UTC)
For the Mitchell image, it is indeed authorized by him and the only thing I just need is to have him confirm the CC-0 license and the image will be good to go. As for Tait, we just need to find out if Tait is the owner of the Trekkieman account on Flickr, then go on from there. Images can be restored, so you don't have to worry about losing this image forever, but there are just a lot of confusion and unknowns so I felt not having the image here would be safer on our part until we connect the dots (and there are a lot of dots to connect). User:Zscout370 (Return fire) 17:16, 27 March 2012 (UTC)
It seems the Mitchell photo has finally been resolved. So it was much ado about nothing, really? Just as I argued. But at least it's done now and can't be the subject of any further nonsense. I really do appreciate the hard work you put in that got this resolved so quickly. Congrats and well done! As for the Tait photo, can you please clarify if you've attempted to directly contact the owner of the Trekkieman Flickr account? If not, would you please? Again, I appreciate your efforts on this photo as well and am reassured by your willingness to restore it once the questions are resolved. Thanks again. X4n6 (talk) 06:21, 28 March 2012 (UTC)
The Mitchell image was resolved yesterday; he confirmed the licensed and had it go through the OTRS system so that image is fine. As for Tait, I just need to look for a good way to contact him since both accounts are stale (in the sense they have not been active for about 2 years). I know he has a Facebook fan page, but just need to see how often that is updated and start going from there. But I ask for your patience since I have some issues in real life that I need to deal with, including a fundraiser for an organization I belong to. User:Zscout370 (Return fire) 14:27, 28 March 2012 (UTC)


Does 2010081010003319 apply to File:CityPark AkhisarTurkey.jpg & File:Tepemezarligi ancient Thyatira Akhisar Turkey.jpg ? These images were posted to wowturkey by same person (Metin Canbalaban). 23:57, 27 March 2012 (UTC)


Is Ticket:3619630 valid to File:Macar (Hungarian) Houses Early20thcentury Milas Turkey.jpg which was taken by Türker Baş ? As long as I understand, this ticket is used for images of Mehmet Yasa ? Can Mehmet Yasa give permission for our using images of Türker Baş ? Takabeg (talk) 01:38, 28 March 2012 (UTC)

File:SMSP LOGO.jpg


I hereby affirm that I, QuecyKeith is the creator and/or sole owner of the exclusive copyright of File:SMSP LOGO.jpg (604 × 604 pixels, file size: 126 KB, MIME type: image/jpeg)

I agree to publish that work under the free license "Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0 license" (unported) and GNU Free Documentation License (unversioned, with no invariant sections, front-cover texts, or back-cover texts).

I acknowledge that by doing so I grant anyone the right to use the work in a commercial product or otherwise, and to modify it according to their needs, provided that they abide by the terms of the license and any other applicable laws.

I am aware that this agreement is not limited to Wikipedia or related sites.

I am aware that I always retain copyright of my work, and retain the right to be attributed in accordance with the license chosen. Modifications others make to the work will not be claimed to have been made by me.

I am aware that the free license only concerns copyright, and I reserve the option to take action against anyone who uses this work in a libelous way, or in violation of personality rights, trademark restrictions, etc.

I acknowledge that I cannot withdraw this agreement, and that the work may or may not be kept permanently on a Wikimedia project.

[QuecyKeith (to allow future verification of authenticity)] [SMSP School Logo (604 × 604 pixels, file size: 126 KB, MIME type: image/jpeg) (Are you the copyright-holder, director, appointed representative of, etc.)] [13 October 2011] QuecyKeith (talk) 17:12, 28 March 2012 (UTC)

Municipal theatre of Mladá Boleslav

I realized that three of the photos from the Municipal Theatre of Mladá Boleslav has been marked as "no permission". The permisson was granted by the theatre's principal (Mgr. František Skřípek) on December 2nd, 2011 and it should be available as ticket #2011120210006171 (sent to info-cs). It allows me (Michal Bělka) to upload any photographs from the theatre to Commons under the CC-BY-SA licence while the number of photographs I actually upload is the subject of the agreement between me and the principal. A few weeks after uploading first photographs, I added three extra photos as I had been asked to do so during the Featured Article nomination. I marked them "OTRS-pending" because I wasn't sure wheter I can confirm the permission personally, but I forgot to notify our local OTRS volunteer. I did so a few days ago but unfortunately he hasn't responded yet. Meanwhile, Fastily marked these photographs as "no permission":

I would like to ask any member of the OTRS team whether they could mark these photos confirmed (permission #2011120210006171) as I don't want to see them being deleted. Thanks in advance! --Michal Bělka (talk) 20:37, 28 March 2012 (UTC)

Pending Since 25 February

Hey, I sent many images more than a month ago and I still haven't had any reply.

Can someone please check it out. The images are on ticket number 2012022410006566.

Thanks. J10452M (talk) 17:04, 29 March 2012 (UTC)}}

License Selection

License Selection

Dear current OTRS member, I would greatly appreciate it if you can you resolve the issue outlined in the reply below! ... Then do I need permission/written agreement with the parties concerned? Or can I freely upload it? ... This is all "greek" to me.

This is my first upload, and I wanted to verify what type of License I should use. I have recropped the existing image

This will be crop2. The first cropping is being used on his Wikipedia page already. It says "The permission for use of this work has been archived in the Wikimedia OTRS system." The new crop2 will be the same pixel width and height as the current image.

I did not see how to communicate for -- "In doubt, don't hesitate to ask at Commons talk:Licensing before uploading your files." Thank you. Verities (talk) 14:18, 29 March 2012 (UTC)

Reply: If the OTRS ticket is valid, then that means that the CC license on the page is valid and you can crop and upload as it is allowed by that license, which license is the agreement of the parties. However, in the case of this particular image, it can be seen that the mention of a OTRS ticket was added on the page by a user who is indefinitely blocked on the en.wikipedia and there is no easily accessible evidence to determine if he even was a member of the OTRS team at that time. So, before doing anything, you certainly want to have the validity of that OTRS ticket verified by identifiable OTRS members. You can ask on the page Commons:OTRS/Noticeboard. (If the ticket is valid, then it would also be useful if a current OTRS member would validate the ticket directly on the description page of the file, to lift the ambiguity.) -- Asclepias (talk) 15:40, 29 March 2012 (UTC)

Verities (talk) 18:27, 29 March 2012 (UTC)


Does 1221902 (on File:ManisaAglayanKayaWeepingStoneTurkey.jpg) apply to File:Niobe2MountSypilusManisaTurkey.jpg and File:Niobe1MountSpilManisaTurkey.jpg ? Thank you.Takabeg (talk) 21:42, 25 March 2012 (UTC)

I am looking at the ticket but everything is supposed to be based on emails sent in August 2007, but did not get it until November of that year. Plus the license stated in this email and what is on the actual images is also incorrect. Just a lot of strange things with this ticket. User:Zscout370 (Return fire) 23:54, 25 March 2012 (UTC)
Thanks. And 1221902 is used for images of (Manisa branch of the ministry of culture and tourism) and Was both permission provided by one e-mail ? Takabeg (talk) 04:26, 30 March 2012 (UTC)

#2007062110009713 for German-speaking volunteer

Could someone please check this ticket for the name of the author/photographer of File:Feldkapelle Denkenreuth 1.jpg, as the upload log contains "Stephan Beer" as well as "Alfred Beer". In addition, if the ticket contains any means of contact of uploader or author, it would be very welcome, if the OTRS volunteer could contact him, in order to solve the problem with File:Feldkapelle Denkenreuth.jpg and to finally decide the 4-months-old Commons:Deletion requests/File:Feldkapelle Denkenreuth.jpg. --Túrelio (talk) 07:04, 30 March 2012 (UTC)

the name of the author is, as specified on the page, Alfred B., but his son pointed out to us that he (i.e. the son) should be listed as author; but since he himself added his father's name on the image page, i'd just keep it as it was (juta apparently removed the name here). this refers to the may 7, 2007 version of the image. i don't know what happened during the transfer to commons, apparently there was a later version which i am unable to retrieve from the file history on dewiki, as mediawiki returns me the identical image if i click on the may 7 and the november 23 version, respectively (which seems to be a bug). —Pill (talk) 23:50, 30 March 2012 (UTC)

File:Pim Fortuyn - May 4.jpg

Please verify File:Pim Fortuyn - May 4.jpg.[3][4] It has been nominated at COM:Valued image candidates. --Walter Siegmund (talk) 17:58, 1 April 2012 (UTC)

✓ Verified. It's all OK. Trijnsteltalk 16:02, 5 April 2012 (UTC)

File talk:David Ciccarelli Headshot 2008 500x500.jpg

How to handle a permission given on a password protected page? (see file discussion) --GeorgHHtalk   11:35, 3 April 2012 (UTC)

Some IP has added OTRS-ticket

Some IP has added OTRS-ticket to File:Edie thumb 33 ft.jpg, are ticket valid.--Motopark (talk) 14:00, 5 April 2012 (UTC)

✓ Confirmed. That ticket is valid. Trijnsteltalk 16:01, 5 April 2012 (UTC)


Yes check.svg Resolved

Can someone see if the permission email fro file CherishBlondAmbition has arrived? I contacted the owner and he said he sent the permission yesterday--VernitaG (talk) 18:05, 3 April 2012 (UTC)

Hi. Yes, we received an email, see OTRS ticket #2012033010002663. Though I can't confirm the permission yet. Trijnsteltalk 17:56, 5 April 2012 (UTC)
Oh is something wrong??? If that's the case I guess I'll tell the owner of the website/picture to send another email.--VernitaG (talk) 20:41, 5 April 2012 (UTC)


This OTRS-tagged file is missing authorship information. Could someone please complete the file description based on the OTRS ticket? LX (talk, contribs) 21:05, 3 April 2012 (UTC)

Yes check.svg Resolved --Krd 09:59, 9 April 2012 (UTC)

File:Davy and Kristin McGuire Icebook.jpg

It says that this file has permission per ticket:2012032010011976. There is a red link to {{GFDl|migration=redundant}} there. This should be {{GFDL|migration=redundant}}, right? --Stefan4 (talk) 00:44, 4 April 2012 (UTC)

Yes check.svg Resolved --Krd 10:00, 9 April 2012 (UTC)