Commons:OTRS/Noticeboard/Archive 9

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.


File:Jana Cova DSC00937.jpg

File was uploaded with the idea, that we already have many images under ticket 2007081610000479 from the same flickr photographer and so the uplaoder assumed "that consent for numerous images from very similar session means consent for all". This conclusion is forbidden, however he maybe is lucky and the file is included. I want to point to the fact however, that the photographer is inside the image. Not the much discussed and maybe existing copyright problem but the privacy problem is of my concern. In doubt I wouldnt say, the photographer released a photo of himself under a free license for privacy concerns and so I personally prefer deletion, we have much, much better photographs from the same photographer and the same setting, e.g. File:AN Jana Cova 1.jpg. --Martin H. (talk) 10:39, 10 June 2010 (UTC)

Only Jana Cova image mentioned in the ticket is [[:File:AN Jana Cova 1.jpg]. Is there any reason why I shouldn't speedy delete that image? Is a new OTRS forthcoming? That ticket is over 1000 days old. Now-a-days, we generally ask people who e-mail us regarding flickr to use flickrreview instead, and to simply change the license on Flickr for public verification. So even if a new e-mail comes it, it may not be approved. I don't see why this image is necessary when we have the other one, but if a user really wants it, I'd request that they ask the flickr user to relicense the image on flickr. Why was the OTRS pending tag added? Was something new sent in? Or is it ok to speedy delete as the applied ticket doesn't cover that image? -Andrew c (talk) 15:09, 10 June 2010 (UTC)
Answering only the first two questions: No and No. The uploader doesnt have any agreement or permission from the flickr user, see User_talk:Laod. Deleted per copyright violation. --Martin H. (talk) 15:33, 10 June 2010 (UTC) p.s.: Thanks for the final note on the usertalk, user shows good contributions and work, so this was only a misunderstanding or a small gap in knowledge that we resolved here now. --Martin H. (talk) 15:50, 10 June 2010 (UTC)
Yes check.svg Resolved

Ticket check

Can someone check ticket # 2210522? A known serial copyvio uploader put up File:DevPatel08TIFF 2.jpg and referenced this ticket. I see there are other images from the same Flickr account on Commons with this OTRS # attached (e.g., File:AmosGitai08TIFF.jpg) so I'm wondering what the extent of the ticket is. Tabercil (talk) 22:32, 9 June 2010 (UTC)

Ticket is okay for:

Actually the only comment the user left was that all images under sets "TIFF06", "TIFF07", and "TIFF08" are released under cc-by-1.0. I don't know if those images are indeed from those sets but if they are, the license needs to be changed to cc-by-1.0. ZooFari 00:56, 10 June 2010 (UTC)

I don't see the 1.0 mentioned. In fact it appears no version number was stated.--Rockfang (talk) 01:04, 10 June 2010 (UTC)
If no version is stated then it's 1.0. See {{cc-by}}. ZooFari 01:19, 10 June 2010 (UTC)
I was not aware of that. Thank you for pointing that out.--Rockfang (talk) 01:49, 10 June 2010 (UTC)
Is that actually officially stated somewhere? I'm asking because it seems relevant to a discussion I participated in regarding a still ongoing deletion request. —Ilmari Karonen (talk) 23:32, 11 June 2010 (UTC)

Liposuction photo

Can the photo on this page be used for an online publication?

As long as you attribute "Dr. Otto J. Placik" and state that his picture is published under the " Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0" license, yes.--DieBuche (talk) 09:43, 11 June 2010 (UTC)


This is a file I marked with "no permission" a few days/hours ago.

Now, an IP has typed what seems to be the copy of a permission E-mail on File talk:Tymoshenko2010.jpg. Has a real E-mail been sent and received ?

Teofilo (talk) 19:45, 11 June 2010 (UTC)

  • Yes, it's been sent and received, but there is no OTRS-permission yet Rubin16 (talk) 19:53, 11 June 2010 (UTC)
OK thanks. Teofilo (talk) 20:45, 11 June 2010 (UTC)

Tom Friedel

User:Tomfriedel ( uploaded several images (FP and QI). The website states: "My photos are free to use for non-commercial purposes only, ..." That resulted into deletion of File:Masked Flowerpiercer.jpg. See

I think we need a permission via OTRS. Please take care of this. -- Common Good (talk) 20:51, 11 June 2010 (UTC)

That's not exactly how this works. The copyright holder needs to e-mail us a release, then we can process the ticket via OTRS. We don't e-mail copyright holders and request permission (though you are welcome to, and ask them to contact us with COM:EMAIL). -Andrew c (talk) 16:08, 12 June 2010 (UTC)

Check on ticket 2009101910019811 please

Got a bunch of photos uploaded by User:Zombie 777 from the Flickr account of Cruise News Weekly - e.g., File:CorbinBleuJul09 9.jpg - and tagged them all with OTRS permission ticket 2009101910019811. Given that they're all of Corbin Bleu, I'm deeply suspicious this is just User:Chace Watson under a new pseudonym. Can someone check and confirm for me please? Tabercil (talk) 17:02, 12 June 2010 (UTC)

None of that editor's uploads have anything to do with that ticket.--Rockfang (talk) 17:45, 12 June 2010 (UTC)
Thank you. <G> Tabercil (talk) 23:05, 12 June 2010 (UTC)


Is there any word on Commons:Deletion requests/File:Adnan oktar 03.jpg? Einstein2021 (talk · contribs) claims that permission was sent on March 27, 2010. See also Commons:Deletion requests/Files of User:Einstein2021 where several of the user's other uploads are in jeopardy. Thanks. Wknight94 talk 14:19, 13 June 2010 (UTC)

Permission was indeed received and updated the file page. I've also closed the DR and left a comment at Commons:Deletion requests/Files of User:Einstein2021. ZooFari 14:45, 13 June 2010 (UTC)

Ticket Request

I uploaded the image File:Afpday ghq 0131.jpg and File:Afpday gun truck.jpg, and the owner of the file have reply to me via email with OTRS template. I also put OTRS pending and PermissionOTRS to the respective images. What is the next step that I will do now? Need Help,Thanks. User:LightAj (talk) 09:35, 3 June 2010 (UTC)

Forward the email to if you haven't already, and a volunteer will deal with the request. Note that the request may take about 15 days. If all goes well, he or she will replace {{OTRS pending}} with {{PermissionOTRS|#ticketnumber#}} on the file page. If not, you will get a reply if anything's missing. ZooFari 14:22, 3 June 2010 (UTC)
And add the correct author name... --Martin H. (talk) 14:53, 9 June 2010 (UTC)
Yes check.svg Resolved
- LightAj didnt comply with our policies at all - and not only with one but with multopile accounts already. --Martin H. (talk) 12:50, 14 June 2010 (UTC)

Uploads by Arjun024

I noticed that Arjun024 is uploading files (File:Soha.jpg, File:Vidya1.jpg, File:Vidya2.jpg so far) tagged with {{Cc-by-3.0-IndiaFM}}. Now, if I understand things correctly, this template transcludes {{OTRS}}, which should only be used by OTRS volunteers, which Arjun024 is not. {{Cc-by-3.0-IndiaFM}} also states: "Don't just upload images from there and put this license on it - all images from Bollywood Hungama must be verified, individually or in small batches, by OTRS." [original emphasis]

I have a few questions then:

  • Have the files been verified by OTRS as claimed?
  • Is it appropriate for anyone other than OTRS volunteers to use {{Cc-by-3.0-IndiaFM}}?
    • If yes, how will users who are not OTRS volunteers know that the claim of verification is truthful without an OTRS volunteer having edited the file description?
    • If no, could the appropriate procedure be documented in further detail to cut down on misuses of the template?

LX (talk, contribs) 10:39, 13 June 2010 (UTC)

That template should be deleted. Either we have permission to use all IndiaFM images, in which case individual emails are not necessary and we can just use the template, or we don't have permission, in which case individual emails are necessary and should be processed exactly the same way as all other emails are.
Anyone who's not an OTRS user should not be putting {{OTRS}} on images. m:OTRS/personnel is not always up to date, but OTRS users all have access to a list that is up to date, and I can confirm that Arjun024 is not on the list. Stifle (talk) 11:04, 14 June 2010 (UTC)

Uploads by William S. Saturn

Could someone please check the uploads by William S. Saturn, particularly File:Joe schriner.jpg and File:Schriners.jpg? I tagged these as missing permission, to which the uploader responded by blanking his talk page and blanking the problem tags while using the edit summary to accuse me of lying and spamming (which he also yelled at me about on my talk page) and then replacing them with {{PermissionOTRS}} (despite not actually being an OTRS volunteer). These tags refer to ticket 4780223, which is also used for File:Schriner.jpg. There, the permission is quoted as "feel free to use the picture from the top of this page."

That text doesn't seem to apply to the other files, since they don't appear at the top of It also seems odd that the permission from the same ticket should be {{CC-by-3.0}} for File:Schriner.jpg, but {{CC-by-sa-3.0}} for File:Joe schriner.jpg and File:Schriners.jpg. In fact, I don't see how "feel free to use the picture from the top of this page" would imply any specific license granting everyone the right to use the file in modified or unmodified form for any non-profit or for-profit purpose in any context. LX (talk, contribs) 05:58, 17 June 2010 (UTC)

I was given specific permission to use those photos for the wikinews interview I conducted. This was all handled properly many months ago. I am sick and tired of the spamming of my talk page with automated bullshit by the above user. I have told him to stop this behavior in the past, but apparently he ignored my request. This is borderline harassment by LX.--William S. Saturn (talk) 06:58, 17 June 2010 (UTC)
I happened to stumble upon this, because LX talk was on my watchlist. William, "feel free to use the picture from the top of this page" is not an accepted permission here, any admin or otrs volunteer would confirm that. Acceptable permissions have to at least state the license, under which the work is published. I can assure you that this is no personal harassment by LX, it's how stuff here works. W/o a valid permission ( which this is not), we will have to delete the files--DieBuche (talk) 10:56, 17 June 2010 (UTC)
I assume you are you not an OTRS volunteer, because you if you were you would know that there is a more explicit permission than that.--William S. Saturn (talk) 17:44, 17 June 2010 (UTC)
As far as I'm aware, the only associated image with this ticket is File:Schriner.jpg. The other two files don't seem to appear on the website. Indeed "feel free to use the picture from the top of this page" is not sufficient permission, and an explicit statement of what license he/she wishes to license it under is required. I don't know how you decided CC-BY-SA, and you shouldn't be adding PermissionOTRS to files. I'm afraid these files are eligible for deletion until the information that's needed is sent. ZooFari 18:16, 17 June 2010 (UTC)
I have tagged the files {{npd}} and {{OTRS received|2010041810033217}}. ZooFari 18:22, 17 June 2010 (UTC)
Have you read the OTRS report? I am asking because I am not completely aware what it contains. I would appreciate if you refrained from tagging files and removing OTRS tags from images if you are not an OTRS volunteer.--William S. Saturn (talk) 19:45, 17 June 2010 (UTC)

Here is the email I received from OTRS:

04/18/2010 21:54 - William Saturn wrote:

> This series of e-mails prove that permission was granted for

> File:Schriner.jpg

We have received the permission for the image(s) and have made the necessary modifications to the image page.

Thank you for providing this to us, and for your contribution to the Wikimedia Commons.

Yours sincerely,

James Williams

I understand, but 2 volunteers, including me, agree that the email was not sufficient. I ask you that you do not revert me again, or the consequences for you will be undesirable. ZooFari 20:05, 17 June 2010 (UTC)
This site is completely useless because of users like you and LX. I really wish you people could find something constructive to do, rather than deconstructive. It's really sad that you're wasting your own time in this manner. I hope you come to your senses. Good day. --William S. Saturn (talk) 20:14, 17 June 2010 (UTC)

Hi William S. Saturn, these cases went unfortunately wrong and this isn't your fault. You received a response indicating that the permission was fine which regrettably isn't the case. The other point is that the OTRS member writing the response to you did not even edit the image pages. Perhaps this happened accidental. Please accept our apologies for this. However, please do not carry your grudge to LX or ZooFari who attempted to fix this mess. Instead we need to move forward to save these images. We need not just a permission to use these photographs at en-wp or Wikinews, we need a confirmed free license which allows these photographs also to be used commercially outside the Wikimedia projects (see COM:L). Please see Commons:Email templates for hints how this can be done, i.e. how a declaration of the copyright holder should look like. Regards, AFBorchert (talk) 22:17, 17 June 2010 (UTC)

Thank you. I appreciate that response. --William S. Saturn (talk) 22:55, 17 June 2010 (UTC)

Deleting from Category:OTRS pending

OTRS folks may want to weigh in at COM:AN#Deleting from Category:OTRS pending. Thanks. Wknight94 talk 12:22, 17 June 2010 (UTC)

File:Cloaca Maxima 2.jpg

This file has a high jpg compression. I found a .gif with higher resolution at (from this page). But maybe permission was granted for low resolution only? There is also a good jpg here. /Pieter Kuiper (talk) 20:00, 13 June 2010 (UTC)

I think the email was insufficient; the "author" didn't specify a license to begin with. Uploading a higher resolution shouldn't be a problem though. ZooFari 14:07, 14 June 2010 (UTC)
If the email was insufficient, no OTRS ticket should have been issued... You write "author" in quotation marks. Is their sufficient proof that the author of the email was the author of the photo or was copyrightholder? I have not seen any attribution in the higher resolution images. None of these seem to be the original. Maybe it was from a book. Safest to delete? /Pieter Kuiper (talk) 05:35, 17 June 2010 (UTC)
See Commons:Deletion requests/File:Cloaca Maxima 2.jpg. /Pieter Kuiper (talk) 13:27, 18 June 2010 (UTC)
Where Bastique feels that it was perfectly alright for him to issue the OTRS ticket, wich says that "permission for use of this work has been verified". I do not understand these OTRS tickets. Can any blogger verify permission for any low-resolution photo? /Pieter Kuiper (talk) 07:04, 20 June 2010 (UTC)

Image permission checking

Can you check if Image:Donald J. Farish photo.jpg really does have the permission that the template says it does? The ticket number is given as 1322061 23:22, 16 June 2010 (UTC)

It appears fine to me.--Rockfang (talk) 02:14, 17 June 2010 (UTC)
From a copyright law point of view, this seems to be fine. —Pill (talk) 09:26, 19 June 2010 (UTC)


Could somebody please tell me, if a picture of a tombstone of 1834 in Morocco is considered to be a public domain. Thanks.--Mbz1 (talk) 16:31, 19 June 2010 (UTC)

Was the picture taken in 1834? Doesn't seem likely, as photography was still in development way back then. Is the image of a 2-dimensional piece of art? Graves are normally 3D and involve relief, engraving, and often statues. Is the photograph a simple slavish reproduction, or does it have any original artistic qualities, such as unique angle, lighting, framing, cropping, color, editing, etc. I'd say an image you found on the internet that someone else recently took of a gravestone would not be in the public domain. But I don't have all the details, so I can't say for sure. Want to link to the image in question? (that said, the licensing question talk page COM:CQ is probably the better place to ask. your question doesn't deal with OTRS)-Andrew c (talk) 15:57, 21 June 2010 (UTC)

File:Domii.jpg, File:Domi1.JPG

Please verify the OTRS ticket on these images is valid for them, looks like taken from another image. --Denniss (talk) 19:20, 21 June 2010 (UTC)

They are. The ticket is about a photo of Nelly Furtado. —Pill (talk) 20:19, 21 June 2010 (UTC)

User:Samuel Ho

Could someone please check on Samuel Ho (talk · contribs)? I see several of his uploads tagged with OTRS, like otrs:2010021410021044 on File:010-Japan1878-Meiji-100a.jpg, otrs:2010021510037679 on File:020-Japan1888-Meiji-100.jpg, etc. But he has many other uploads still tagged with OTRS Pending from February (I've even deleted one trying to ease that backlog). Did he really verify so many of his uploads one at a time? But then leave others to be deleted? Thank you. Wknight94 talk 02:25, 22 June 2010 (UTC)

Stifle and myself handled a number of those tickets. I believe I even deleted some (i.e. File:1941-SS-GeorgeVI-002.jpg). Basically, a number of the coins were derivative works, as they were produced recent enough to still have copyright, while others were PD-old. I believe each file had an individual e-mail sent for it. I'm thinking the ones that are still pending may have been handled by someone saying they didn't have enough permission or that the coin was a derivative work, but perhaps they didn't delete the file or add OTRS received. I'd say any coin image that clearly is not PD can be speedy deleted by any admin, and if there are any OTRS pending tickets still open after that cleansing, I'd be glad to check the system for more info. -Andrew c (talk) 14:05, 22 June 2010 (UTC)

File:Villa Lysis (Tiburzi).jpg

File:Villa Lysis (Tiburzi).jpg (OTRS e-mail sent on March 31st) still hasn't been processed. Is the e-mail not in the system or what happened? Thanks. Morn the Gorn (talk) 16:12, 19 June 2010 (UTC)

I've searched our system for "Lysis," "Tiburzi" and the email address specified on the image page but unfortunately it didn't come up with any result—if the email you sent us contained any of these terms, I fear something has gone lost :(. Do you have a possibility to resend it? —Pill (talk) 20:11, 20 June 2010 (UTC)
Done. Hopefully it works this time. Morn the Gorn (talk) 09:07, 21 June 2010 (UTC)
Thanks. (As our search interface seems to be somewhat broken, I'm afraid I can't check right now.) —Pill (talk) 11:17, 21 June 2010 (UTC)
Your e-mail was in the junk folder. I'm not sure why, but something must have flagged it as junk, perhaps all the HTML code or header stuff? Or maybe an e-mail address or domain is blacklisted. I really don't know enough about our junk mail filter, so I'm entirely speculating on why it ended up there. We can probably assume your first e-mail was deleted from the junk queue as well, so sorry about that. Maybe someone will take sympathy to your plight, and handle your ticket our of queue, because as it stands, we are backlogged about 300+ e-mails in the Commons queue. -Andrew c (talk) 16:02, 21 June 2010 (UTC)
What's the ticket number? —Pill (talk) 16:40, 21 June 2010 (UTC)
OTRS ticket 2010062110015236-Andrew c (talk) 16:52, 21 June 2010 (UTC)
Yes check.svg ResolvedWill deal with the ticket. —Pill (talk) 20:59, 21 June 2010 (UTC)

Done. —Pill (talk) 20:04, 22 June 2010 (UTC)

Ticket check #2008082610013775

Can someone please check this ticket: #2008082610013775, it's about uploads by Selligpau (talk · contribs) from   ■ MMXX  talk  09:24, 25 June 2010 (UTC)

Ticket is in Dutch. ZooFari 15:10, 27 June 2010 (UTC)
So at least the ticket exist! problem is I couldn't find which OTRS member added the ticket at first place.   ■ MMXX  talk  15:15, 27 June 2010 (UTC)
The closest I could understand was "From this mail shows clear pictures of permission to use under the GFDL license. Should this future questions arise please refer to OTRS ticket # 2008082610013775.". ZooFari 15:26, 27 June 2010 (UTC)
Commons:OTRS/Noticeboard/Archive_4#File:20090301 NK veldlopen Abdi Nageeye.jpg. --Martin H. (talk) 17:10, 27 June 2010 (UTC)

TicketID 1527489

Is there a ticket with the ID 1527489 that is valid for File:Calytrix depressa Eneabba.jpg? --Leyo 19:05, 14 May 2010 (UTC)

Yes and no. Yes, that is the ticket that discusses that image (or rather content from that source site), but no it never got approval. It appears 39 images that reference that ticket need to be deleted because we never got a valid permission statement from the copyright holder. I'll pull up AWB in a bit and do the deletion (unless someone chimes in before then with a reason not), -Andrew c (talk) 19:26, 14 May 2010 (UTC)
I deleted the 39 images referencing and ticket 1527489/2008050610013461. -Andrew c (talk) 15:48, 17 May 2010 (UTC)

Anyone (with OTRS access) care to offer a second opinion on the above ticket +2009013010006384? -Andrew c (talk) 13:58, 19 May 2010 (UTC)

Indeed, the flora uploads involved may hours of identification checking, uploading and creation of en.Wikipedia articles based on them. Melburnian (talk) 11:24, 30 May 2010 (UTC)
Based on the tickets in their current state, I suggest undeletion of any related images. The ticket number of 2009013010006384 should be used. I'd offer to do it myself, but I'm not an admin.--Rockfang (talk) 06:24, 8 June 2010 (UTC)
Thankyou Rockfang. Could someone please restore these with the amended ticket? Melburnian (talk) 12:40, 14 June 2010 (UTC)

Does anyone have an objection to me reuploading the following images with the amended ticket 2009013010006384?

Melburnian (talk) 23:05, 28 June 2010 (UTC)

IMO, that ticket has not been given approval by an agent yet. I'm not sure why the agent responded but not approved the ticket. I have been unable to get a response from that agent, and I am only one person. So I don't believe that is a valid OTRS ticket (at least not yet). Maybe someone else can look at this? I also posted on the private OTRS wiki about this, and no one there handled the ticket either. Sorry about this. OTRS has really been backlogged and I guess most agents are rather busy in real like, so quality has suffered. -Andrew c (talk) 02:44, 29 June 2010 (UTC)

OTRS not confirmed for File:ErnieWasson.jpg

See User talk:Wknight94#Deletion of File:ErnieWasson retouched.jpg and File:ErnieWasson-close-up.jpg. File:ErnieWasson.jpg and its derivatives File:ErnieWasson retouched.jpg and File:ErnieWasson-close-up.jpg, are all tagged with a non-confirming OTRS ticket otrs:2009122810028317. What is the story with that ticket? H-stt (talk · contribs) is adamant that the permission is good and even undeleted the images after I had deleted them. Thank you. Wknight94 talk 13:24, 24 June 2010 (UTC)

No, the ticket is not sufficient because there was no license specification. The volunteer was/is expecting a license template as noted by the sender "I asked the author... to send the template mail to the permission-commons mail adress and am sure he will do so". I'm not sure if that email was ever sent, but this ticket was sent back in Dec 2009 so the files should be deleted as no permission. ZooFari 14:26, 24 June 2010 (UTC)
I will take action and ask for a license now. Tag the image for "delayed deletion" (1 month or something) so Mr. Watson has the time to reply. If nothing comes forth, the file can still be deleted. --Guandalug (talk) 17:47, 24 June 2010 (UTC)
Nobody from OTRS informed me that the email statement from Ernie :"Attached is a picture of me taken on my camera so there is no copyright restrictions." was not sufficient. Today I send out an email to Ernie to request a formal cc license for the foto (perhaps it is now double but he knows me and it would be a pity to loose the image). --Neozoon (talk) 00:58, 26 June 2010 (UTC)
license send to permission-commons on 28 June 2010. --Neozoon (talk) 21:36, 28 June 2010 (UTC)
Just received a mail from the OTRS team that the permission is now fine and the OTRS for this picture processed (OTRS|28. Jun 2010|2010062810052862). Can be closed. --Neozoon (talk) 21:25, 29 June 2010 (UTC)

Uploads by AteshCommons

AteshCommons (talk, contribs) has previously been blocked for one month for uploading a large number of copyright violations. Yesterday they uploaded 23 copyrightable logotypes, claiming to be the author and copyright holder of all of them and that evidence of this had been sent to OTRS. Could someone please check that and then either delete the files and block the user to stop the mess from getting even bigger or pass the salt so that I can eat my hat. Cheers! LX (talk, contribs) 12:44, 14 June 2010 (UTC)

There is currently a backlog of approximately four weeks on permissions-commons emails to OTRS. All mails will be dealt with in the order received. Stifle (talk) 11:04, 15 June 2010 (UTC)
I don't think a known copyright violator should get a 4 week free pass by gaming the system with OTRS templates... I'm searching the system for tickets related to this... and I'm coming up empty. -Andrew c (talk) 14:25, 15 June 2010 (UTC)

I've contacted the user, with no response, even though they have been editing. I've poked them one more time, but I think we can proceed with deleting these files. Any admin willing to volunteer for that task?-Andrew c (talk) 14:40, 22 June 2010 (UTC)

All tagged and ✓ done. Thanks, Andrew! And thanks to Bidgee for pressing all those delete buttons. LX (talk, contribs) 11:52, 1 July 2010 (UTC)

Uploads by Suhyoun2

Suhyoun2 (talk, contribs) has uploaded fifty files without any licensing tag whatsoever and with mostly nonsense source and authorship information and descriptions. Supposedly, the "details of the permission for this file has been sent" to OTRS. Some of the files are sourced from Google by the uploader's own admission, so I can only assume that if anything at all has been sent to OTRS, it's useless. I know there's a backlog, but putting an end to this before we get another batch of fifty bad uploads should save some time, so please give this case priority. LX (talk, contribs) 20:38, 21 June 2010 (UTC)

I have been unable to find any tickets associated with those files. I think it's safe to start deleting them, as some are blatant copyvios. -Andrew c (talk) 14:35, 22 June 2010 (UTC)
All ✓ gone. Thanks, Andrew! And thanks to Herbythyme for pressing the Big Red Button. LX (talk, contribs) 18:28, 1 July 2010 (UTC)

Ticket check

Please verify the ticket of File:Corbin Bleu Concert 9.jpg and similar images from this uploader. It's somewhat unusual to see a new user operating with OTRS. --Denniss (talk) 00:05, 30 June 2010 (UTC)

Thats a Category:Sockpuppets of Chace Watson sockpuppet. Will delete the images. If someone disagree and says, that is covered by 2008100310024006 the image may be restored, however Chace cant know the content of the ticket so he cant upload with it. --Martin H. (talk) 01:21, 30 June 2010 (UTC)
That ticket does cover specific images from that flickr user, and does include images of Corbin Bleu, but I searched the list and did not find #1308192818. Perhaps the uploader thought the entire flickr stream was fair game, but in actuality only a few were specifically mentioned in the ticket (by few I mean ~100). There is also a chance that the image number may have changed or something like that, since a large number of the images in the ticket are no longer available. I'd communicate with the uploader and ask their intentions for clarification. -Andrew c (talk) 13:48, 30 June 2010 (UTC)
The image id is fix, use and add the id to the url. --Martin H. (talk) 18:37, 1 July 2010 (UTC)
Maybe I wasn't clear? File:Corbin Bleu Concert 9.jpg referenced . 2008100310024006 references 100+ images from that flickr user, but not "1308192818". Therefore, I believe File:Corbin Bleu Concert 9.jpg is not covered by the ticket (but I could be missing something, such as if the URL of the file has changed or something like that). -Andrew c (talk) 20:39, 1 July 2010 (UTC)

Last chance on File:Mehdi Karubi-campagne.jpg

Final warning for File:Mehdi Karubi-campagne.jpg. It has been up for deletion for over two months at Commons:Deletion requests/File:Mehdi Karubi-campagne.jpg because a discussion at Commons:OTRS/Noticeboard/Archive 8#Verification needed questioned the validity of otrs:2009052910019017. Would anyone like to object and/or investigate further before it is deleted? Wknight94 talk 16:20, 1 July 2010 (UTC)

I think the only right thing is to delete this image. --MGA73 (talk) 21:07, 1 July 2010 (UTC)

Russian Items missing OTRS ticket ID

Hi! In Category:Items missing OTRS ticket ID there is a few images that needs to be checked. I think 2 of them are russian. Could someone perhaps take a look? And yes I know I could search for someone who speaks Russian but this way everyone gets a chance to see "Power Girl" :-D --MGA73 (talk) 21:07, 1 July 2010 (UTC)

Shenandoah Valley Academy images

Back in April I tagged File:ShenandoahAcademy.jpg and File:ShenandoahValleyAcademy.jpg as missing evidence of permission and raised the concern that based on the comments left by the uploader on the image page, these images were not really being released under a free licence. An OTRS ticket (number 2010042310031978) was opened but the permission given was not sufficient (according to the tag put on the images) as it did not release the images under a free licence. It is now July and the status of these images is still unclear. I am considering nominating these images for deletion on grounds that they have not been released under a free licence. Is there any input an OTRS volunteer can give on what is currently happening before I do so? CT Cooper · talk 12:03, 2 July 2010 (UTC)

I handled the ticket. No one replied since April. I think technically a bot is supposed to leave a message to the uploader and give them time (another 15 days? a month? something like that) to fix the problem before deletion, but it has been many months. I'd feel ok deleting these images myself, and undeleting if anything is sent in.-Andrew c (talk) 13:25, 2 July 2010 (UTC)
Okay, I have added the standard no permission template to the images, as that is what the problem is, with a note linking to this discussion. To give one last chance for permission to be given, I have left a note on the uploader's talk page and at w:Talk:Shenandoah Valley Academy where one of the images is being used. CT Cooper · talk 16:21, 2 July 2010 (UTC)

Capitol Hill Babysitting Coop pictures?

Dear Commons OTRS folk,

Back in March, I sent in an OTRS message for the below images, with subject and date as follows:

Subject: OTRS consent for Capitol Hill Babysitting Coop pictures
Date: Mon, 29 Mar 2010

I understand that there is a backlog; I was wondering if this email had been received and if everything was in order, or if there was anything I could do to help?

Thank you!

—Nils von Barth (nbarth) (talk) 03:07, 4 July 2010 (UTC)
Can you tell me the prefix of the e-mail address you sent it to? Doing a subject line search yields nothing, so there are 3 possible options. 1) it's in a queue I don't have access to (such as a foreign language info queue). 2) the spam filter accidentally picked it up and it was deleted a long time ago or 3) we never received the e-mail. If you want, you can forward it again to the permissions-commons address, and I can give you confirmation on whether we receive it (and search based on your e-mail address). -Andrew c (talk) 13:55, 4 July 2010 (UTC)
Thanks Andrew!
I sent it to permissions-commons so presumably it looked spammy, French, or got lost in transit.
I just forwarded it again to permissions-commons so hopefully it got received, else I can try sending it from a different address.
—Nils von Barth (nbarth) (talk) 18:44, 4 July 2010 (UTC)
Found your email (in the junk queue ...), and moved it back to permissions-commons. Sorry for the inconvenience. —Pill (talk) 11:23, 5 July 2010 (UTC)
No worries – thanks Pill!
—Nils von Barth (nbarth) (talk) 18:37, 5 July 2010 (UTC)


Hi folk! The file I've mentioned in subj had been uploaded by me on June 21st and was deleted earlier today. The owner of the image sent an email trying to explain what rights he owed and what permissions he gave to on June 23th (in English I guess). But it seems to me you didn't receive that email. User Lupo told me I had to tag the image with {{OTRS pending}} (my fault - I didn't know I had to do that before) and advised me to ask here about whether you received that email or not. So here am I. May I ask you to check your inbox? --Ingumsky (talk) 19:48, 4 July 2010 (UTC)


I stumbled across File:BjornHovik.jpg, which is supposedly licensed under the terms of the GNU Free Documentation License. As all OTRS volunteers hopefully know, this license requires attribution of the work's author. However, none is provided in the file description. Please complete the file description with information from the ticket. LX (talk, contribs) 10:22, 5 July 2010 (UTC)

Ticket is in Norwegian. Without looking at the specific case, however, please note that according to German copyright law, for instance, the author is free to choose whether or not (s)he wants to be attributed (§ 13 UrhG). Also, I am not aware of a clause in the GFDL that would require the licensor to do anything of that kind. —Pill (talk) 11:19, 5 July 2010 (UTC)

ticket contents (Stefan Demary)

Hi OTRS, is the consent (Recht am eigenen Bild) to use his photograph in ticket:2009092610042258 (from Commons:Deletion requests/Image:Demary.JPG) applying only to Image:Demary.JPG or to all photographs of him? There's a good picture of him on flickr (CC-by license) which I would like to upload. Sadly he deceased just recently. --Saibo (Δ) 15:33, 1 July 2010 (UTC)

Is my question hard to understand? --Saibo (Δ) 18:55, 4 July 2010 (UTC)

I think, nobody is home... ;-) Uwe Dedering (talk) 19:30, 4 July 2010 (UTC)
Hi Saibo, no, it does not apply to "all photographs of him," and we would not accept something like that anyway. Generally speaking, the question whether or not a particular image of someone may be made available on the internet is of relevance for the uploader/creator of the file—accordingly, we (speaking for the German-language branch of the response team) do not under normal circumstances demand written consent from the persons displayed (though we often inform people that there's something called "personality rights" ...). —Pill (talk) 11:38, 5 July 2010 (UTC)
Hi Pill, thank you for your reply. I am wondering a bit why the DR of the old image wasn't speedily closed if such consent isn't necessary at all here. Okay, since Demary did not seem to prohibit all images of him, I have uploaded the image: File:Stefan Demary 2009.jpg. Hopefully in his will/interest. Cheers --Saibo (Δ) 00:27, 6 July 2010 (UTC)


The IUCN should have sent yesterday an Email with the permission. If i understand the procedure correctly, one of you OTRS volunteers will check it and modify the template to include the ticket number. The uploaders of maps using their data will then choose the IUCN_map_permission and include in the description a link to the data and all is fine. This concerns probably thousands of maps in the next months and years. Can somebody please tell me, if i am right or wromg? Thanks Uwe Dedering (talk) 09:14, 2 July 2010 (UTC)

Hi Uwe, normally it works this way, yes, but it often depends on the specific conditions mentioned in the permission email. Unfortunately, I cannot find the email at the moment. Do you know which address it was sent to? Cheers, —Pill (talk) 12:02, 5 July 2010 (UTC)
Hi, I just now got a confirmation that IUCN sent the permission email TODAY. So, that explains why you couldn't find it :). Hope everything is ok now! Cheers, GoEThe (talk) 12:56, 5 July 2010 (UTC)
Got the permission, and inserted the link on the template. Alchimista (talk) 16:00, 6 July 2010 (UTC)


Could someone who can access ticket 2010062110009065 please comment on Commons:Deletion requests/File:Soeurodilerieunette.jpeg? With the DR as it stands, it seems rather impossible to make a reasoned closure. —Ilmari Karonen (talk) 21:51, 5 July 2010 (UTC)

Ticket is in French. Note that I've fixed the link (otherwise volunteers will be displayed a "no permission" screen). —Pill (talk) 23:47, 5 July 2010 (UTC)

Advice on how to help clear a ticket up

I'm looking at File:MelissaLauren1.jpg and how the image has a tag indicating the OTRS permission received was insufficient. I'd like to get in touch with the uploader to try and clear this up... but I was never part of the original submission chain so I have no clue what's the shortcoming is, and I don't have OTRS access so I can't go in and see what the problem is. Who should I get the uploader to contact to try and resolve this?? Tabercil (talk) 01:22, 6 July 2010 (UTC)

It was a forwarded message from the claimed copyright holder. However, the message just gave permission "for Wikipedia", and did not mention a license or anything like that, so we responded with the default, "more specific permission" message. We need the copyright holder to send something in like COM:EMAIL to OTRS. I guess the uploader needs to contact the copyright holder and relay that. Otherwise, the image will be deleted (and sooner, rather than later, as it has been months and months since we last heard from anyone via e-mail). -Andrew c (talk) 01:42, 6 July 2010 (UTC)
Thanks. That's sufficient details for me to work with. Tabercil (talk) 11:46, 6 July 2010 (UTC)

File:Jon Hamm and Jennifer Westfeldt 2010 Golden Globes.jpg

I just deleted File:Jon Hamm and Jennifer Westfeldt 2010 Golden Globes.jpg, but now I see File talk:Jon Hamm and Jennifer Westfeldt 2010 Golden Globes.jpg says OTRS was sent via "". Anyone see an OTRS with that e-mail for that file? Thanks. Wknight94 talk 17:29, 6 July 2010 (UTC)

Permission request for File:SpaceLiner separation wiki.jpg

I was wondering if any OTRS volunteer could look for the permission for File:SpaceLiner separation wiki.jpg (Sent by User:Eypdu)? Also when a permission email is sent is the a auto reply with an ID sent? Bidgee (talk) 09:05, 7 July 2010 (UTC)

Hi Bidgee, we have received multiple emails regarding File:SpaceLiner separation wiki.jpg--however, they have not been dealt with yet (and it may take up to some weeks). I've added a note to the image description page for the time being. The emails were sent to -- there are no auto replies for this queue. —Pill (talk) 10:04, 7 July 2010 (UTC)
Thanks for that Pill! Bidgee (talk) 10:42, 7 July 2010 (UTC)
Thanks Pill and sorry for having sent several permission emails (One told me that I would receive an automatic confirmation) Eypdu (talk) 12:06, 7 July 2010 (UTC)
No problem, I've merged them together. —Pill (talk) 16:10, 7 July 2010 (UTC)

File:Worsley Man.jpg

File:Worsley Man.jpg was uploaded on 20 March 2008 with "Permission granted by copyright holder. Confirmation email sent to" in the permission field. Can anyone help to locate the OTRS for this image? I have asked Malleus to help provide further information on the email. Jappalang (talk) 04:18, 11 July 2010 (UTC)

I have copied the discussion (based on this diff) from Malleus's User talk page on Wikipedia to aid further resolution to this.

I managed to find the OTRS ticket. It seems that the person who handled the ticket found that the permission granted by the Manchester Museum was not enough, and asked for a followup. NW (Talk) 13:19, 11 July 2010 (UTC)
He didn't ask me for a followup. As far as I'm concerned, the permission from the museum is perfectly adequate. Malleus Fatuorum 13:57, 11 July 2010 (UTC)

Hundreds of files on otrs:2009082710036201 in OTRS received for many months

I see there are hundreds of winter sports photos from Facebook with OTRS received tags for almost a year. See these search results. Where do these stand? Time to delete? Re-contact the copyright owner? Over 10 months in this state seems excessive. Thanks. Wknight94 talk 02:15, 6 July 2010 (UTC)

We have permission for cc-by but I do not have access to the set of images this applies to (the link points to some Facebook site only accessible for the copyright holder's friends). I will try to contact the volunteer originally dealing with the email. —Pill (talk) 08:33, 6 July 2010 (UTC)
I've read this and will remind the uploader once again. --Gnu1742 (talk) 11:18, 6 July 2010 (UTC)
I am in contact with the creator of the images. Please be patient for only a few days more. It will be solved in the very near future. --Gnu1742 (talk) 09:03, 7 July 2010 (UTC)
312 images getting re-tagged OTRS instead of OTRS received as of now. --Guandalug (talk) 19:14, 11 July 2010 (UTC)

File:Wiki chk hdm amst air2.jpg

Could someone check whether the ticket that covers File:Indu amerika rebuild-plant.jpg and other photos is broad enough to cover File:Wiki chk hdm amst air2.jpg, currently marked with {{no permission since}}? I suspect it is. - Jmabel ! talk 18:13, 8 July 2010 (UTC)

No, sorry. Specific files only. Ciell (talk) 13:08, 13 July 2010 (UTC)

Category:OTRS pending as of 2 March 2010 and User:Подпоручикъ, maybe otrs:4467058

Category:OTRS pending as of 2 March 2010 has dozens of photos uploaded by User:Подпоручикъ and attributed to Tchavdar Marinov. User:Подпоручикъ says that s/he sent several letters with permission. Can anyone find them? Does s/he need to re-send? I did find otrs:4467058 which is on other Tchavdar Marinov photos: File:Tsarknias S'botsko.jpg, File:Visheni 2 edited.jpg, File:Visheni Visinia.jpg. Wknight94 talk 12:23, 10 July 2010 (UTC)

The ticket is received and there the user has been contacted by OTRS. There are some difficulties that need to be taken care of first, please give it a bit more time. Ciell (talk) 14:30, 13 July 2010 (UTC)

Permissions ticket backlog

The permissions-commons queue is heavily backlogged. There are over 400 tickets in English and an additional 45 in German, 79 in Spanish, and 48 in Portuguese. Any assistance clearing the backlog would be appreciated.--Chaser (talk) 21:56, 12 July 2010 (UTC)

File:M27 Infantry Automatic Rifle.jpg

Hi I used to send a OTRS request about that picture but still didn't receive any thing, now someone marked it as pic without a permission. Could some contact me over the mail oder answer here?--Sanandros (talk) 13:47, 5 July 2010 (UTC)

OK done--Sanandros (talk) 10:41, 16 July 2010 (UTC)

File:Airspeed files logo.png

The uploader added the ticket himself at upload time. Can someone check if it really applies? Thanks. –Tryphon 21:35, 15 July 2010 (UTC)

Yes, the ticket releases the logo under the GFDL and does appear to come from the owner of the domain that uses the logo. Shell babelfish 08:17, 18 July 2010 (UTC)

RE: Signature Images for K Graham and Catherine Delahunty

Hello, I have received 2 complaints about reverting signatures which an anonymous user on Wikipedia-EN removed. I have advised the users issuing the complaints to contact OTRS. I am moving the discussions here for reference, assuming that the users do contact OTRS and their requests are authentic. Personally, I am not too sure about the authenticity of these requests (especially after I received a carbon-copy request after working on the first request. Please feel free to contact me if you need anything else.

Extra spacing truncated. Original copies are available on my WP-EN talk page. Anowlin (talk) 17:49, 6 July 2010 (UTC)

Hi, My request was authentic - Sorry that I copied Richard's wording, I was just trying to write a formal request efficiently. Cheers. Lichen12 (talk) 01:55, 20 July 2010 (UTC)

K Graham Signature

Dear Anowlin, I understand the nature of the internet and the ability to share images and information. But can you please respect the rather more delicate circumstances surrounding K Graham's signature - can you pelase remove it from his page. This will help protect him from people misusing his identity. Cheers Richardjslade —Preceding unsigned comment added by Richardjslade (talkcontribs) 23:53, 5 July 2010 (UTC)

An IP user went through and removed signatures from several profiles, most of which I reverted. I saw K Grahm come up again (edited by a different IP) after I reverted, and there was a note with it. I have respected the note and not reverted since. I will see that the signature is removed. If it gets restored again, please don't hesitate to contact me. --ANowlin: talk 23:59, 5 July 2010 (UTC)
  • This notice has been added to the page: Per the request of a representative of Dr. Grahm, please do NOT restore the signature image. Dr. Grahm has expressed concerns of identity theft linked to his signature being posted on this site.
Mmm, fair enough; it was looking a bit like edit-war. Can we say something on the talk page, please, to show we've discussed it? Thanks.  Chzz  ►  00:03, 6 July 2010 (UTC)
I think that can be done. Meanwhile, I've requested that the image be deleted from Wikimedia Commons. --ANowlin: talk 00:11, 6 July 2010 (UTC)
I have restored it for now, until Mr Graham or his office contacts OTRS to verify the removal request. fetch·comms 00:21, 6 July 2010 (UTC)
Anowlin, re. requested deletion - where? I see no tags on File:Kennedy Graham signature.svg or File:Kennedy Graham signature.jpg ?  Chzz  ►  01:05, 6 July 2010 (UTC)
Should show on the Wikimedia info page for the svg file. I don't know if there is a jpg. --ANowlin: talk 01:55, 6 July 2010 (UTC)
  • Issue tagged as Resolution Pending until OTRS authenticates the removal request. --ANowlin: talk 02:00, 6 July 2010 (UTC)
  • Status Change I changed this to "Unresolved." Discussion of this issue should continue at OTRS once the request is authenticated. --ANowlin: talk 12:41, 6 July 2010 (UTC)

Catherine Delahunty signature

Dear Anowlin, I understand the nature of the internet and the ability to share images and information. But can you please respect the rather more delicate circumstances surrounding Catherine Delahunty's signature - can you please remove it from her page. This will help protect her from people misusing her identity. Cheers Lichen12 PS I see elsewhere on this Talk page that someone suggests staff from these Green MPs' offices email OTRS to verify our request. Can you please advise how to do this? I'm not very familiar with editing wiki - am just trying to do what Catherine asked. Thanks heaps! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Lichen12 (talkcontribs) 02:02, 6 July 2010 (UTC)

Please contact OTRS to authenticate your request. Instructions should be on the Manual removal of signatures without this authorization will be reverted. --ANowlin: talk 02:12, 6 July 2010 (UTC)
  • Issue should be discussed further at OTRS. --ANowlin: talk 12:41, 6 July 2010 (UTC)
For future reference, the general OTRS email is . fetch·comms 17:19, 6 July 2010 (UTC)
Many thanks for the email addy Fetchcomms. I've just emailed OTRS from my work address. Lichen12 (talk) 22:59, 6 July 2010 (UTC)

Otrs:2010021510029151 and User:Gomezprieto

Hi. Gomezprieto (talk · contribs) is claiming at Commons:Deletion requests/File:Estrildid finches.jpg that he is the author of the pictures that appear in an online journal - one whose license is non-commercial-only. I checked his deleted contribs and found that I had actually deleted his previous images (coincidentally) because they were in OTRS Received for over three months. The OTRS on those was Otrs:2010021510029151. Why was the OTRS insufficient the first time they were deleted? What can be done to help Gomezprieto now - with his images facing deletion for a second time? Thank you. Wknight94 talk 12:47, 13 July 2010 (UTC)

I have no idea what is wrong with that ticket, as it isn't in a permissions queue, or a queue that I have access to for that matter. Could it possibly be in a foreign language info queue? (don't know why some permissions are processed there, because permission has many subqueues for different languages as it is). -Andrew c (talk) 23:51, 13 July 2010 (UTC)
It was added by Stifle (talk · contribs) here, here, and here. And now I see there is a second user account, Scuila (talk · contribs) and a deleted note from Gomezprieto. (No idea if any of that is relevant - just trying to give clues for finding OTRS info). Wknight94 talk 00:54, 14 July 2010 (UTC)
I didn't look closely enough into this. I just clicked your link for the ticket, but you did not format the link properly, so it took me to a non-existing ticket and said "no permission" to view it. I've checked out your links and located the actual ticket. The user just needs to fill out a consent form such as COM:EMAIL and make sure they choose an appropriate license. Make it clear that the license allows 3rd party reuse, modification, and commercial use. I'm not sure if the copyright holder is going to agree to such terms, because they were asking about more restrictive licensing. But the main thing is we need to have an e-mail on file coming from the official website of the image's origin, which clearly states that the copyright holder is releasing the images under a specifically stated free license. This individual never specified a license. Hope this helps. -Andrew c (talk) 13:46, 14 July 2010 (UTC)
Now the uploader has posted messages like this to a few of the photos. It includes an e-mail address. Can someone contact the person at that address and find out which license and whatever other blanks need filling in? Wknight94 talk 12:11, 19 July 2010 (UTC)
It is unlikely that anyone else will; you will need to do so yourself. I am currently working on the 1000+ mail backlog in OTRS. Stifle (talk) 14:07, 22 July 2010 (UTC)


Can someone in the OTRS verify this image?[1] Truthsort (talk) 19:17, 13 July 2010 (UTC)

What do you mean "verify"? Do you mean process your e-mail before the 400+ e-mails that came before yours? Did you check out the FAQ? We process tickets in the order they were received, and currently we are heavily backlogged. Is there some pressing matter that we should be made aware of? Did I miss the reason why you were posting? -Andrew c (talk) 23:49, 13 July 2010 (UTC)
Well whenever my request is next in line I would appreciate it if it gets processed. Truthsort (talk) 00:54, 14 July 2010 (UTC)
It will be, but it's not going to be especially soon. Stifle (talk) 14:05, 22 July 2010 (UTC)

User:LeoniMa and OTRS 2010051910050365

LeoniMa (talk · contribs) has uploaded artwork which appears to require permission. But some of the account's earlier uploads have OTRS 2010051910050365. Does that ticket cover all uploads by User:LeoniMa? Wknight94 talk 16:26, 14 July 2010 (UTC)

The ticket is in Polish and the ticket contains about 70 images. I do not have the time atm to check them all, but maybe another agent does? Ciell (talk) 19:24, 15 July 2010 (UTC)
The ticket just specifies those 70 images. Maybe someone speaking polish could ask them for a new release--DieBuche (talk) 14:30, 22 July 2010 (UTC)

File:City of Adelaide as RNVR club rooms on Clyde.jpg

Greetings OTRS volunteers,

  • On 15 July User talk:Feydey tagged File:City of Adelaide as RNVR club rooms on Clyde.jpg on en-wikipedia as missing evidence of permission.
  • I sent an email to permissions-en at on 15 July with a copy of a 2007 email showing author's willingness for it to be published.
  • That was rejected by User talk:VernoWhitney on 15 July as being insufficient evidence.
  • I then wrote to the original author of the photograph and obtained explicit statement as to the license. That statement followed Wikipedia guidelines. I emailed that statement to permissions-en at on 17 July.
  • There has not been any reaction to this from anyone with an OTRS account, nor have I seen it ticketed.
  • I was going to leave a comment on User talk:VernoWhitney but when trying to create a New Section a notice comes up stating that VernoWhitney is away on vacation from 15 July until 24 July. This made me worried that my second email has been missed because User talk:VernoWhitney is on leave.
  • On 19 July, I then left a message with User talk:Feydey who created the original tag. Still no response seen.
  • On 21 July (about 10 hours ago), I sent another email to permissions-en at asking for someone to look into this issue but still no response nor ticket.

I am now here. I am hopeful that someone can help me to resolve this before the image is deleted tomorrow. Thanks in anticipation.--Cruickshanks (talk) 09:28, 21 July 2010 (UTC)

  • There is currently a backlog of approximately two months on OTRS emails. All emails will be answered in the order received and we are unable to expedite certain emails except in exceptional circumstances. Please don't send any additional emails, as this will delay OTRS volunteers from processing other customers' messages. Stifle (talk) 14:05, 22 July 2010 (UTC)

hard one

Did you ever get an email to containing something similar like this:

I allow the use of the following image:
under creative commons license, in Wikipedia as long as my name is credited as the author.
Kuresh Anbari

Date would be around 14 September 2006, a possible sender email could be anbari[at] --DieBuche (talk) 09:38, 14 July 2010 (UTC)

Yes, that ticket is in the archive (#2006091310003356). The image was defined as own work by the handling OTRS-agent, so no further actions were taken. Why is this a "hard one"? Ciell (talk) 12:56, 14 July 2010 (UTC)
Thanks, I thought it would be harder to find if there was no number provided...Could you add it to Image:Hills_south_west_of_Sanandaj_near_the_village_of_Kilaneh.jpg, i'm not familiar with the template--DieBuche (talk) 13:40, 14 July 2010 (UTC)
When the right information is provided, and given a ticket was actually send to permissions, the search engine in OTRS is quite adequate. I've added the OTRS number for you. Ciell (talk) 19:18, 15 July 2010 (UTC)
Did you? ;) -Andrew c (talk) 19:25, 15 July 2010 (UTC)

All that said, I don't think it's ok to add the ticket number to the image because it has yet to be approved by an agent. If I was handling that ticket, I would reply that a) we need a more specific statement of permission, because they just said "creative common license", which could mean BY or BY-SA or ND or even NC, some of which would not be OK for Wikipedia. Furthermore, I have no idea if the person sending in the declaration is actually the copyright holder, so I'd put research into finding the website where the content was previously published, and see if the contact address matches the sender's address, and if not, ask for a clarification, or for an e-mail to be resent from a proper address, or a notice added to the official website. Again, what is wrong with the original OTRS' assessment? The image was defined as own work by the handling OTRS-agent, so no further actions were taken. OTRS is no better able to prove copyright ownership of "own work" than the Commons community. We allow people to upload their own photos every single day. Why make an exception for this one (unless there is evidence it was previously published outside of the Commons... )-Andrew c (talk) 19:29, 15 July 2010 (UTC)

Through, I'll revert the ticket adding, because it hasn't been actually approved (sorry I'm tired, now I remember why I didn't do this yesterday). "Yet to be approved" though? By closing the ticket succesfully back in 2006, the agent states everything is oké. Because it was such a long time ago, I AGF to both and would not further persue. That is something the community can do as well, if they think it is necessary. Ciell (talk) 19:36, 15 July 2010 (UTC)
My point is, the OTRS ticket simply isn't valid because it doesn't state a license, and it isn't clear the copyright holder was the one who e-mailed us. We cannot add the OTRS ticket to the image because of this (i.e. it was never approved because not all the bells and whistles were in order). The OTRS closed the ticket because they thought it wasn't necessary in the first place, not because they thought everything was OK. If you believe the image needs OTRS permission, then we need a new COM:EMAIL sent in. Sorry if I wasn't clear ;)-Andrew c (talk) 17:28, 22 July 2010 (UTC)
The email adress is okay imo, see --DieBuche (talk) 18:38, 22 July 2010 (UTC)
I hadn't put the research in yet for verification, that's good to know! I'm curious, do you agree with my assessment, or do you feel it is safe to add the OTRS # to the image description page, given the content of that ticket? -Andrew c (talk) 20:33, 22 July 2010 (UTC)
I think the chances of getting a replay from that email now are pretty low (the website doesn't exist in that form anymore); but I wouldn't want to see an image deleted because we forgot to confirm the permission years ago, though if we are to be totally correct that's probably what we would have to do--DieBuche (talk) 23:55, 22 July 2010 (UTC)
I didn't realize this was an image that was published outside of the Commons (on a website) prior to being uploaded here. I (and I guess the original agent) was running under the impression that this was an original upload to the Commons. Sorry I missed that. I guess that does change things. -Andrew c (talk) 01:04, 23 July 2010 (UTC)
Yep, when the pic was nom'ed for FP someone inquired about permission, the uploader then posted an email "I allow use on wikipedia etc." on the talk. He was then informed that this wasn't enough and wrote to the author again, receiving this email, which he forwarded to OTRS. No one of the guys from the FP discussion noticed the new problem and it was then forgotten. So I'd say we should keep it even if it is not completely sufficient, but the intention of the author seems to be clear, and maybe our standards were lower back then. --DieBuche (talk) 10:34, 23 July 2010 (UTC)

Daniel Hayes photo deletions

hi i uploaded 5 pictures for an article i am working on and i sent in permissions consent forms (5 of them) but have not heard anything about the status of these images and two were subsequently deleted for lack of permissions as it has now been a week. i'd like to get them back but i have no idea how to go about doing this. any help or information you can provide me with would be great.Designsbyd (talk) 05:09, 22 July 2010 (UTC)

I can't see any deleted user contributions for you, so it's hard to tell which images you're talking about. Can we get more details? Tabercil (talk) 12:06, 22 July 2010 (UTC)
I think that user means 5 images deleted on en-wiki. --MGA73 (talk) 17:08, 23 July 2010 (UTC)

File:Neko Neko.png

My artist has said that he has sent an email to OTRS. Why hasn't it been updated?--Meow~ (talk) 12:21, 24 July 2010 (UTC)

We have received the email (ticket number 2010071710020138). The queue is currently backlogged some weeks—see also our /FAQ. Cheers, —Pill (talk) 19:50, 24 July 2010 (UTC)

Images for article Pritish Nandy Communications

Hi...I had sent a permissions email for some images to be inserted in the above mentioned english article, Pritish Nandy Communications. The email was sent 2 days ago according to the template recommended on your site. Have you received my email? Will it take long for this to get cleared? Shishir58 (talk) 06:13, 25 July 2010 (UTC)

Have you read the FAQ? Commons:OTRS/Noticeboard/FAQ We ask that you generally not contact us about an e-mail you just sent in until at least 14 days, and we generally answer e-mails in the order they were received (and I can tell you now we are quite backlogged, maybe 50 days work of e-mails in front of yours). -Andrew c (talk) 13:21, 25 July 2010 (UTC)
50 days?? I thought Wikipedia was faster than that! I hope it happens sooner. Best wishes. Shishir58 (talk) 17:32, 25 July 2010 (UTC)
Well, keep in mind we're all volunteers and that we all (hopefully) have lives outside the Wikimedia projects. Thank you for your patience. ···日本穣Talk to Nihonjoe 18:36, 25 July 2010 (UTC)

My apologies. That's not the way it was meant. I do hope to hear from you soon though. Shishir58 (talk) 14:23, 26 July 2010 (UTC)


Hello, OTRS people! What about the OTRS approval in this case(LarissaRiquelme01.jpg as charged by me, with given permission by, and related e-mail to on 2010.07.10)? Martin have said "The OTRS approval will take some time"..., but the time has come, does not it? BeremizCpa? 19:55, 24 July 2010 (UTC)

Your e-mail is 14 days old. For any agents interested, it is located (but I was unable to locate the file on the commons or You may be happy to know, in the pt. queue, there are only 16 e-mails in front of yours (but some of those are quite old). I don't know much about the pt queue, as I don't speak Portuguese, but I know that we generally answer e-mails in the order they were received. So hopefully, a pt speaking agent will handle your ticket in due time. Can you explain why I cannot find where you uploaded the file? -Andrew c (talk) 13:29, 25 July 2010 (UTC)
  • This is a good question! I do not know where is that [by me] uploaded file. The only thing I know about is related to its deletion by Yanguas (talk), on 20:53, 10 July 2010 (UTC). Can you help me so? BeremizCpa? 23:13, 25 July 2010 (UTC)
Found it in your deleted contributions File:LarissaRiquelme01.JPG. File names are case sensitive. -Andrew c (talk) 03:31, 26 July 2010 (UTC)
  • Right, but how to restore it and, by the way, who will do that? May I do it? Thanks. BeremizCpa? 16:19, 26 July 2010 (UTC)
will all be taken care of--DieBuche (talk) 16:38, 26 July 2010 (UTC)
  • Why "will all be taken care of"? What does this mean? I am only intending to obtain a image file restoration, as explained, no more. BeremizCpa? 00:02, 27 July 2010 (UTC)
    • When your email reaches the front of the queue, the user who deals with it will undelete the image and add a note confirming that the permission has been received. Stifle (talk) 09:13, 27 July 2010 (UTC)
  • Right. That permission has already provided by me, as exposed above. However, the corresponding undeletion procedure, expected restore, not. Why? BeremizCpa? 16:08, 27 July 2010 (UTC)
When your email reaches the front of the queue, the user who deals with it will undelete the image. Will means it's in the future. Please be patient, thank you--DieBuche (talk) 16:31, 27 July 2010 (UTC)
We normally allow OTRS pending images to stay up for an indefinite amount of time, right? This image was deleted as a copyvio because it was never tagged with OTRS pending. So what do others think about restoring it an tagging as OTRS pending? (I can also tell Bremiz that the permission is not acceptable as is, because no license was agreed to. See COM:EMAIL, and have the copyright holder send in a consent form. We have Portuguese templates as well. Commons:Modelo_de_mensagem -Andrew c (talk) 16:35, 27 July 2010 (UTC)

Please check File:USSubmarines h2ome.jpg

Hey, please check File:USSubmarines h2ome.jpg. There is a problem with the verification and a user has request the files for deletion. Thanks Körnerbrötchen » 11:12, 26 July 2010 (UTC)

The permission is indeed not valid; there was never any mention of any specific license, just "Permission granted." Andrew asked for more, but we never got a reply to that-> Symbol delete vote.svg Delete --DieBuche (talk) 11:17, 26 July 2010 (UTC)
Double thanks. ;) Körnerbrötchen » 19:49, 26 July 2010 (UTC)


A colour sketch / drawing by Owain Owain was given to me in 1993; together with all copyrights. The drawing really gave birth to the Welsh Language Society and is still used as their logo (newer version).

However this image, which I scanned, is being deleted all the time. Can I OTRS the image PLEASE!


Llywelyn2000 (talk) 07:55, 28 July 2010 (UTC)

Please email proof of transfer of copyright along with the image name and license you wish to use for it to Stifle (talk) 08:49, 30 July 2010 (UTC)

Weather data / ticket 2010030510025771

Hallo fellow volunteers, I think there might be a problem with ticket 2010030510025771 regarding weather data like en:File:Trend_frost_days_dec.png. The uploader (they seem to be working for KNMI, Royal Netherlands Meteorological Institute) claims to have generated the data from a publicly accessible homepage. The uploader does not claim to own the underlying data, however. DW? Does anyone know if the data might be free for some reason? Nillerdk (talk) 14:07, 29 July 2010 (UTC)

Meteorological data is not copyrightable. There is no creativity involved in recording temperature measurements. LX (talk, contribs) 20:50, 29 July 2010 (UTC)

Would like to have permission to use this photo P320.jpg‎ (450 × 450 pixels, file size: 19 KB, MIME type: image/jpeg)

P320.jpg‎ (450 × 450 pixels, file size: 19 KB, MIME type: image/jpeg) showing smartphone

Please let me know if I can use this picture in a presentation.

Thanks and best regards, K. M.

Have you read the notice at the top of this page, the /FAQ, and the notice at the top of the edit window saying "Please do not post here to request permission to use an image. We can't give you such permission."? Stifle (talk) 08:48, 30 July 2010 (UTC)