User talk:ABF/Archive/2008/February

From Wikimedia Commons, the free media repository
Jump to navigation Jump to 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.

Commons:Deletion requests/Image:MacBook Air 1.jpg

Hello! You closed this discussion as "kept" but deleted the image. Which was done in error? Thanks! —David Levy 07:27, 28 January 2008 (UTC)

[ now its okay, thanks. __ ABF __ ϑ 12:35, 28 January 2008 (UTC)
Okay, could you now explain how you determined that there was consensus for deletion? Thanks again. —David Levy 13:42, 28 January 2008 (UTC)
Reasons are given enough in the del-req. Just read it carefully. __ ABF __ ϑ 13:49, 28 January 2008 (UTC)
I have read it in its entirety. Can you please cite the rationale(s) that you considered when arriving at this determination? —David Levy 13:53, 28 January 2008 (UTC)
"Delete This is pretty much a screenshot of non-free software, which we delete. These keep votes are starting to sound like fair use rationales. Rocket000 12:20, 26 January 2008 (UTC)|Rocket000" for example. __ ABF __ ϑ 13:57, 28 January 2008 (UTC)
That rationale is incorrect (as this is quite different from a screenshot). The non-free content is not the image's principal subject (focus is on the computer itself), so I do not believe that there is any copyright infringement here (though I am not an expert on such matters). In any event, this issue was addressed during the course of that discussion, and I do not believe that consensus was reached. —David Levy 14:13, 28 January 2008 (UTC)
I await your reply to the above. —David Levy 12:56, 1 February 2008 (UTC)
Restored and pixeliced. I hope this will help you. __ ABF __ ϑ 13:43, 1 February 2008 (UTC)
Thank you, but my point is that the unpixelized version (which you have left deleted) apparently is not a copyright violation. I'm a Commons administrator, so my request that you review your closure is procedural in nature. (It would be inappropriate for me to unilaterally reverse your decision.) —David Levy 14:19, 1 February 2008 (UTC)
For me it is and it stays a copyright violation, eg. because you can clearly see Holer Simpson, wich is in fact a copyrighted character. Even if its not focused there is really much copyrighted material, we can not Ignore, sorry. And another thing: please do not change my entrys in discussions. Thanks, __ ABF __ ϑ 14:23, 1 February 2008 (UTC)
1. Okay, then I shall bring this matter to the proper forum for community review.
2. I didn't "change" what you wrote. I corrected the wiki markup to properly display your reply with your specified indentation.
Thank you for your time. —David Levy 14:33, 1 February 2008 (UTC)
Okay, sorry that I cant help, but for me it is and it stays copyrighted. Regards, __ ABF __ ϑ 14:34, 1 February 2008 (UTC)

IRC cloak request

I am Viele-baeren on freenode and I would like the cloak wikimedia-commons/ABF Thanks. NOTE: I have got a wikipedia-cloak yet, but i am nearly not active anymore there and i would prefer a commons cloak, because this is my main wiki. __ ABF __ ϑ 21:10, 31 January 2008 (UTC)

Blurbb. abf /talk to me/ 17:38, 2 February 2008 (UTC)

Deletion of my images

Which images did you say would be deleted of mine? They are of encyclopedic material and are used in various Wikipedia articles in the English project. --AEMoreira042281 16:36, 2 February 2008 (UTC)

I only deleted Classic (transit bus) because it had no media. abf /talk to me/ 17:02, 2 February 2008 (UTC)

WHAT ?!?

If you want i understand something please write me in french. Dominiccv

Pas de probléme. abf /talk to me/ 10:05, 3 February 2008 (UTC)
*hust* Leo ist unser Freund. Dr. Shaggeman 10:15, 3 February 2008 (UTC)


Hallo ABF!

Was meinst Du denn mit “Wikimedia Commons hat einen bestimmten Rahmen [...]Dein Bild oder anderer Inhalt wurde kürzlich aufgrund unserer Richtlinien entfernt” — Welches Bild meinst Du denn?!

Danke und Grüße, --Mattes 19:48, 3 February 2008 (UTC)


Ich weiß nicht, ob Du mit Deiner Vorlageneinbindung diese Weiterleitung ({seecat|Amulets}) meintest, jedenfalls denke ich, daß Dir hier ein Fehler unterlaufen ist. Mit den Projektzielen hat diese Weiterleitung rein gar nichts zu tun.

Ich mache soetwas hundertfach (“Artikel” → Kategorie und vice versa), weil es schlichtweg benutzerfreundlich ist. Bitte sei doch so nett und stelle Amulett wieder her. --Mattes 08:49, 4 February 2008 (UTC) P.S. Das hier wäre für Dich evtl. auch interessant: Template talk:Project scope/de

Ja, genau der Artikel war gemeint, und der hatte, wie du schon sagtest mit den Projektzielen nichts zu tun. Es ist unsinnig von einer Galerie einen Categorie-redirect anzulegen. Grüße, abf /talk to me/ 12:12, 4 February 2008 (UTC)

File:Computerra-cover-705.jpg undelete request

Hi there,

My name is Ilya Schurov, I'm an editor of Computerra Weekly, contributor in Russian Wikipedia and admin of Russian Wikibooks. We (Computerra) have posted this image to Flickr some time ago under CC BY-SA mostly to allow it's usage in Wikipedia. (We use this Flickr account to host images to show them in our blog, as you can see). Now I noticed that Wikipedia still uses our fair-use image and decided to move this image from Flickr to the Commons.

I confirm that this image was posted to Flickr by Computerra staff (actually, it was Vladimir Guriev, editor-in-chief that days) after we get permission from the author of this cover (Victor Zhizhin) to do so.

Please, restore the image.

Ilya Voyager 15:58, 4 February 2008 (UTC)

No, its a copyrighted cover. abf /talk to me/ 16:00, 4 February 2008 (UTC)
Yes, it's copyrighted. And we (Computerra Weekly) as copyright holder posted it to Flickr under CC BY-SA. (You can see the link from our blog to this image.) So it's free. What kind of confirmation that it was posted to Flickr by Computerra should I give? Isn't a link from (our editorial blog) enough? Ilya Voyager 16:15, 4 February 2008 (UTC)
I can not read that please send a written permission to OTRS. Regards, abf /talk to me/ 19:36, 4 February 2008 (UTC)
Hello Ilya and ABF, I think, it's the best way, to write a mail to OTRS. At Flickr, you could'nt see, if this user really have the right, to give this picture free (just like here, because Usernames here and there are anonymous). Greetings -- Ra'ike T C 07:01, 5 February 2008 (UTC)==
Yes, I see. I though it will be enough to link from our blog and my statement here. OK. There's another problem with that file -- I'm not sure we have copyright on the image of F1 bolid (checking it now to be sure), so I've asked for permission and uploaded another one cover (Image:Computerra-cover-706.jpg) which is 100% ours. Appropriate OTRS ticket notice have been added by User:Putnik who have OTRS access. If we have copyright for F1 bolid image, I'll ask for restoring the image under consideration again. (I have permission for it on OTRS too now). Thank you for your help. Ilya Voyager 14:07, 5 February 2008 (UTC)

Login request

Hello ABF, I posted my e-mail at Commons:Administrators'_noticeboard/Attention as you requested. 17:29, 4 February 2008 (UTC)

Done. Thank you. RaNo 19:49, 4 February 2008 (UTC)
No problem. abf /talk to me/ 19:50, 4 February 2008 (UTC)

delete please

Please can u delete mi first picture uploaded..i made a mistake...please delete S B Ali.jpg please

Hehe, allready done :) abf /talk to me/ 15:57, 5 February 2008 (UTC)

thanks a lot ! :)

No problem, we sysops are there to do something as that ;) abf /talk to me/ 16:00, 5 February 2008 (UTC)

Copyright violations

--Breezer 09:24, 5 February 2008 (UTC)

There isnt any copyright violation. The images I have uploaded are mine and I want to share them with wiki. If I didn't explain it correctly please tell me how can I put them with the way you want them. I have wrote that note also in image comments but I suppose no one looked there.

--Breezer 10:32, 6 February 2008 (UTC)

It is any problem to undelete the Womenunder.jpg, Menboxer.jpg, Mentanga.jpg, Menslip.jpg ??
Do not ask me, ask the deleting sysop. You can find him in the deletion Log. In your case it seems to be Arria. abf /talk to me/ 12:41, 6 February 2008 (UTC)

RE:Welcome back

Thanks, and enjoy your break! --Boricuæddie 20:13, 6 February 2008 (UTC)

No problem and thanks. I think about how nice it is not to be a sysop for one week or two at the moment! Mmmmmh! abf /talk to me/ 20:15, 6 February 2008 (UTC)
Schade, dass sich ausgerechnet einer, der so richtig aufräumt, wochenlang deadministrieren lässt... Muss das denn wirklich sein? --S[1] 21:44, 6 February 2008 (UTC)
Ja du, ich schreib nächste Woche Englisch und Französisch und muss ausserdem noch für die Mofa-Prüfung lernen. Ausserdem möchte ich mal etwas ruhe für mich selbst haben, mit den knöppen gibts immer so viel zu tun, was andere eher langsamer machen und dann kann ich mich nie halten ;) in ein bis zwei wochen hol ich mir die knöppes dann auch wieder ;) abf /talk to me/ 12:38, 7 February 2008 (UTC)


Hattest du meinen Botrequest komplett gelesen? Derzeit muss ich noch unter meinem Hauptaccount User:ChristianBier den AWB laufen lassen. Dort kannst du auch in den Contribs schauen. Das stand dort aber auch. BierBot hat noch keinen Approved Status für den AWB. ChristianBier 15:25, 7 February 2008 (UTC)

Dann approve den AWB vom Bot, aber so lange, wie der keine Edits hat gibts kein support, Hauptaccount hin oder her. abf /talk to me/ 19:34, 7 February 2008 (UTC)
So ein Käse, was unterscheided den Testlauf unter dem Hauptaccount vom Botaccount? ChristianBier 00:25, 8 February 2008 (UTC)
Einiges, Imho. abf /talk to me/ 14:07, 8 February 2008 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Spickzettel im Kugelschreiber.JPG
Your image has been reviewed and promoted
Congratulations! Spickzettel im Kugelschreiber.JPG, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates.
  • beeing proud* thank you :) abf /talk to me/ 19:21, 8 February 2008 (UTC)


Personally "yes" & done. This to me is a reason to have the local rights. IP places email (or other contact info) - really not worth bothering a steward but it might be done maliciously. I'm sure someone will tell me if I wrong :) Thanks & regards --Herby talk thyme 08:23, 8 February 2008 (UTC)

Hum - just seen the Meta log entry - very sorry to see that --Herby talk thyme 08:24, 8 February 2008 (UTC)
I am not able to understand what you meant, have I made any mistake? abf /talk to me/ 19:23, 8 February 2008 (UTC)
Nope - I saw you had let go your rights but you got them back quick (& before I posted)! Thanks for your work - regards --Herby talk thyme 18:41, 9 February 2008 (UTC)

re. Commons:Administrators/Requests and votes/Codeispoetry

Your fault for having a lame sig! :P Cheers, giggy (:O) 06:26, 9 February 2008 (UTC)

  • g* I made my Sig only a bit brightr to link theattention of the reader to the contents, not to my signature. abf /talk to me/ 08:17, 9 February 2008 (UTC)


Thank you for your message and notification of an imminent deletion, but can you please tell me which of my contributions was out of scope, as it is not immediately clear from your message, which of my contributions is the offending one. Thanks again. KTo288 18:30, 9 February 2008 (UTC)

Travelator. abf /talk to me/ 18:31, 9 February 2008 (UTC)

Sofia Rotaru images

Hi, why did you delete the images I uploaded? If there was something wrong, what it was? Thank you for your explication.--Koktita5 16:42, 9 February 2008 (UTC)Koktita5

They are copyrighted and there is no fair use on commons. abf /talk to me/ 17:07, 9 February 2008 (UTC)
What does it mean "fair use" and how to use it?--Koktita5 15:05, 10 February 2008 (UTC)Koktita5
This will help. abf /talk to me/ 15:06, 10 February 2008 (UTC)


I think when I got to the end I realised they were the new bunch (I just have this thing about inactive users with extra tools!). Thanks for sorting it. Regards --Herby talk thyme 19:37, 9 February 2008 (UTC)

Main Page

Why did you remove {{sprotected2}} from it? Rappingwonders2 18:22, 10 February 2008 (UTC)

Because the current design loocks terrible and it is not needed. abf /talk to me/ 19:19, 10 February 2008 (UTC)
How? Rappingwonders2 19:27, 10 February 2008 (UTC)
What does your how mean? abf /talk to me/ 19:29, 10 February 2008 (UTC)
How is it not needed? Rappingwonders2 19:38, 10 February 2008 (UTC)
Why would be correct, IMHO Because the main page is no article, it presents Commons. abf /talk to me/ 19:41, 10 February 2008 (UTC)
How are people gonna know it's protected? Rappingwonders2 19:42, 10 February 2008 (UTC)
They will know it after they tried to edit.... abf /talk to me/ 19:43, 10 February 2008 (UTC)
But the tag will let them know BEFORE that. Rappingwonders2 19:44, 10 February 2008 (UTC)
They do not NEED to know it before. Please discuss it at the Village Pump if you feel it have to be there. abf /talk to me/ 19:45, 10 February 2008 (UTC)
Why would they not need to? Rappingwonders2 19:46, 10 February 2008 (UTC)
No reply? Rappingwonders2 20:15, 10 February 2008 (UTC)
Try to imagine. If you can't find an answer till tomorrow I will help. abf /talk to me/ 20:18, 10 February 2008 (UTC)
All right, I'll try to think. Rappingwonders2 20:19, 10 February 2008 (UTC)

Bot request

Thanks a lot! That was quick :) guillom 20:12, 10 February 2008 (UTC)

No probelm, we at commons have to help eachother, otherwise it wont work ;) Regards, abf /talk to me/ 20:14, 10 February 2008 (UTC)
What do you mean by "reviewing [your] move? It seems ok to me. guillom 20:42, 10 February 2008 (UTC)
OK. Thanks, 11:49, 11 February 2008 (UTC)


Since you are an admin, could you delete Image:Plies.JPG for me? It's a duplicate of Image:Plies.jpg. Rappingwonders2 21:10, 10 February 2008 (UTC)

✓  Done --Boricuæddie 21:22, 10 February 2008 (UTC)
Thanks Boricuaeddie. 11:49, 11 February 2008 (UTC)

Image:Herford Fritken-Oberdiek-Denkmal.jpg

Hallo ABF,

beim oben genannten Bild hast du {{no source since/en|month=February|day=1|year=2008}} eingetragen. Als ich 2005-07-08T20:28:10 das Bild hochlud, trug ich als Lizenzbaustein {{GFDL-self}} ein. Zum damaligen Zeitpunkt dachte ich, es sei damit wohl eindeutig, dass ich der Urheber dieses Bildes sei. Daher war ich doch sehr erschrocken darüber, dass du dieses Foto wegen angeblich fehlender Quellenangabe zum Löschen gekennzeichnet hast. In der Zwischenzeit habe ich ich die Vorlage {{Information}} eingefügt und vollständig ausgefüllt.

Solltest du nochmals Fotos von mir entdecken, bei denen ich ausschließlich {{GFDL-self}} eingetragen habe, bedenke bitte: Bei allen dieser Bilder handelt es sich um eigene Fotografien von mir, [[User:Ludger1961|ludger1961]], bevor du dort nochmals {{nosource}} einträgst. Für das Datum kannst du davon ausgehen, dass ich die Fotos im selben Kalenderjahr aufgenommen habe, in dem ich sie dann zumeist kurz darauf in die commons hochgeladen habe. Die Bildbeschreibung geht auch eindeutig aus den von mir gewählten Dateinamen hervor.

Gruß, --ludger1961 22:05, 10 February 2008 (UTC)

Ok, Bild ist so okay. abf /talk to me/ 11:49, 11 February 2008 (UTC)


Sorry I haven't been able to get back to you until today. Knowing that travelator was the contribution to be deleted leaves me less perplexed, I had thought that it was an upload of mine that was out of scope, but with a greater resolve to dispute its deletion.

Beginning first with your concerns that such a contribution was out of scope. The scope of Commons is to be a "media file repository", but for what purpose is a repository if it cannot be used. To have any purpose users must be able to easily find files they want within the repository and to find the correct category to categorise the files they upload to Commons; and it was in trying to find a category for a file in the backlog of uncategorised images that lead to the creation of the "travelator" category.

It may be a bit rich of me to complain that at present Commons is a bit too Anglo particularly US-centric, but the category title Moving sidewalks is practically useless to anyone who is not American. Such machines are normally referred to as "Travelator" in the UK (google the term, and you'll find that everyone from the BBC to bloggers uses the term.) With a little head scratching I would have thought of :Category:Moving walkway (another category you might wish to delete if your reasoning is to prevail), but not even under the threat of the gravest torture would I have thought of "moving sidewalk". Only by searching for "Travelator" on en:Wikipedia was I lead to the "Moving sidewalk" category.The redirect I created (and unless I formatted it wrong the destination of the redirect was to the category and not the gallery), was to follow the common sense Wikipedia policy of creating redirects of valid and logical search terms to the appropriate articles. A policy that if Commons does not endorse it should. For one thing as a repository for all Wikipedias, English and American English may not be the first language of contributers, and for a second Commons uses an internal naming convention which fits its an internal logic, but which is out of kilter with common and normal use. For example another redirect I've created is PLAAF the common and usual term for what by Commons naming logic has to be called Air Force of China.

If such redirects are indeed outside the scope of Commons, than there are a number that I've created that will need to be deleted, but know that all such redirects that I've created were done so to ease navigation to the desired categories by users.

Thanking you for your time. KTo288 08:41, 11 February 2008 (UTC)

I am not an expert in what you mean. Sorry. abf /talk to me/ 11:49, 11 February 2008 (UTC)
Let me try and explain. It should be no problem to accept that a common subject may be known by different names in different languages. For example a "Moving sidewalk" is known as "Fahrsteig" in German. However even in English the same thing may be known by different terms depending on where the speaker comes from. For example the term sidewalk is the term that an English speaker from the United States would use to describe what an English speaker from the United Kingdom would call a "pavement". A pavement in the United States in actual fact being the part of the road on which the vehicles drive. It would not be immediately obvious to a user from the US what a category titled "Pavement" would involve, and it would not be immediately obvious for a user from the UK looking for what he understands to be a pavement to enter "Sidewalk". (The Pavement category as it stands is at the moment quite confused seemingly encompassing both usages.)
Because of the nature of the Wikipedia projects, American useage of English is the defacto standard, with English English use being marginalised. Now English English users on Wikipedia have less to complain about than say Japanese users or German users, but some category names makes Common less useful to people who do not speak American English than it otherwise would be. Unless users can find the images they want and the categories they want then Commons is not serving its purpose as a tool for all the Wikipedia projects that is all the different language versions of Wikipedia and not just the English wikipedia.
It would be disruptive and counter productive to rename categories into a version of English to suit ones own preferences, but it should be tolerated that a redirect from one common useage to the existing commons category. For example when creating the category Austrian Air force I also created Österreichische Luftstreitkräfte so that a German speaker searching for "Österreichische Luftstreitkräfte' would be led to the category he or she was seeking. According to your rationale for the deletion of "Travelator", Österreichische Luftstreitkräfte would be a nonsense category as it contains no gallerys or files and does nothing but redirect to "Austrian Air Force". However it is in its value as a navigation tool for users, and that was the value of Category:Travelator for UK English speakers looking for files that belong in Category:Moving sidewalks, but not knowing that that was the term being used on Commons. KTo288 21:22, 11 February 2008 (UTC)


Wegen dem hier: da hatte ich mich schon irgendwann mal bei Polarlys beschwert, dass man hier sofort Bapperl reingeknallt kriegt, während man gerade in eurem Lizenzwirrwarr nach der richtigen Lizenz sucht... und deshalb beschwer ich mich jetzt bei dir ebenfalls: Such du doch die passende Vorlage für 117 Jahre altes Foto mit unbekanntem Fotografen! Grrrr!! :-) PDD 13:19, 12 February 2008 (UTC)

Wie wärs mit vor dem hochladen suchen ;) Grüße, abf /talk to me/ 13:22, 12 February 2008 (UTC)
Ich krieg gleich schlechte Laune! ^^ PDD 13:23, 12 February 2008 (UTC)
Lieber nich ;) *PDD tröst* abf /talk to me/ 13:25, 12 February 2008 (UTC)
Schon wieder alles gut... :-) PDD 13:30, 12 February 2008 (UTC)

Category:Devon (Porn star)

deine Löschbegründung leuchtet mir nicht ein, kannst du das ein wenig genauer erläutern? Welcher der Punkte unter Commons:Project scope war denn hauptverantwortlich? Gruß, --NoCultureIcons 02:21, 13 February 2008 (UTC)

Sorry, ich glaub das war der falsche Knopf, "replaced by template, orphaned" sollte da eigtl. stehen. Die Kategorie war leer und bestand aus der Speedy Vorlage, sonst nichts. Grüße, abf /talk to me/ 12:33, 13 February 2008 (UTC)


The president od Rabbit Watch Association says that if you suggest better sort of license than used here please do not hestitate to share this knowledge with us. This logo is not a registered trademark under our national laws hence we would wish to use best way to publish it in order to protect it under available ways of licensing here. So please be so kind as to write what is your proposal. Tajniak2 15:48, 13 February 2008 (UTC)

Please send a permission to COM:OTRS. abf /talk to me/ 15:50, 13 February 2008 (UTC)

Deleted images from Sadlo

Hi there! Please tell me, what I did wrong.. I uploaded twice two images, which you have deleted every time.. First I thought, I chose the wrong licensing, but after I changed it, you did it again. It were two album cover images, which I was allowed to publish, because I am one of the members of the organization, which owns the copyrights for these covers. So please tell me, who should do it then, if not me.. Thanks a lot. The image file names were> Behind_the_wall_GR.jpg and Under_one_flag_GR.jpg --Sadlo 15:19, 12 February 2008 (UTC)

If you have got the permission to publish the Images please send the permission to our OTRS-Team. abf /talk to me/ 17:55, 12 February 2008 (UTC)
It's like - it's written on the booklet.. >>This compilation of songs, notes, cover and design are the copyright of Broken Board Records.<< Broken Board Records is the company, where I am a member maintaining this kind of work. Shall I send to myself an e-mail and ask me if I could publish this booklets? Sounds kinda weird... So? What to do? Should I just send you an e-mail from BBR and write, that Sadlo has the permission to publish these two booklets? thank you for your answer.. --Sadlo 21:53, 12 February 2008 (UTC)
>>This compilation of songs, notes, cover and design are the copyright of Broken Board Records.<< --> i its copyrighted its definetly unfree for Commons. abf /talk to me/ 12:35, 13 February 2008 (UTC)
Sorry, I thought it wouldn't be wikipedia, who tells whether or not it can be published. I thought, if the copyrightholder says it is okay to publish the images and it is okay to release them for public use, then there is nothing else in the way. Obviously I was very wrong...

If I shoot a photograph of my house, which I built, do I have the copyrights of such picture? I bet I do... And because now the photograph is copyrighted it cannot be published. Am I right? So then where are all the other published pictures from? I seem to run in circles... please, help me out. If I - as the copyright holder of those two little pictures - release those damn two little pictures for public use on Internet, is that against the rules? I seem to misunderstand something... Thank you for your polite answer. Hopefully we find some reasonable solution finally...--Sadlo 18:40, 13 February 2008 (UTC)

I can tell you again, if you have got a permission to publish the Images under the items of a free license form the copyright-holder please send it to the OTRS. Thanks, abf /talk to me/ 12:49, 14 February 2008 (UTC)


I will delete the Image:Edificio_San_Ignacio-Grafica.JPG for now, but the uploader will check again the author. (The image was published 1926.) --ALE! ¿…? 12:58, 14 February 2008 (UTC)

Ist okay, ich wollte gestern nur AGF walten lassen. Ist aber nicht wirklich nötig, so isses auch gut. Danke und grüße, abf /talk to me/ 13:00, 14 February 2008 (UTC)

why have been my picts deleted again?

I've uploaded, for the last time, the picts of my band. Picts with a completely free CC licence, of a CC album. They're mine, and I've uploaded them with a correct licence, with that info in the pict, but they're again deleted. I don't know why, nodoby explains just gives me links to huge pages with licence info. thanks

Because it did not seem as free. I will wait for ALE's decission about Image:Portadamiddlefingers.jpg and than do the same. abf /talk to me/ 19:11, 14 February 2008 (UTC)


From your lack of interest and response I take it that you wish to ignore me and sweep things under the carpet. I think that your attitude and the way that you are acting is high handed and contemptible, cowardly even.

From the speed and confidence that you acted in deleting my contribution and the stridency of the warning on my talk page I believed that my contribution must have been mistaken in the extreme. I have gone out of my way to explain myself in some depth. This not being helped by the fact that you did not have the curtesy to make known, when you were defaming me on my talk page, what it was you found at fault and was set to delete. From the way you have avoided addressing my expalnation and your own admission that you are not an expert on this matter I believe that is you not I who needs to explain and justify his actions. I therefore demand from you, with the same alacrity you used in deleting, action in settling this matter in either of the following ways:

i) Showing me the deletion log of at least one similar case by an administrator other than yourself prior to your action. That is to show me a precedent that redirects of a common and logical search term to a category following a different naming convention should be deleted. If you can do this I will accept the deletion and your judgement in the matter.

ii) Strike out the "Out of scope" warning on my talk page, and I do mean strike out and not delete, and underneath it admit that you were hasty and mistaken in using this warning. I would also appreciate it if you would personally restore the deleted contribution and an apology for using the word "nonsense" in the deletion log.

You can of course ignore my demands, and archive this thread without responding, in which case I will strive to seek redress in whatever way Commons allows. KTo288 23:22, 13 February 2008 (UTC)

Listen, my dear friend, the text "This category is being or has been relocated." On a GALLERY (NOT a Category) page is nonsense, IMHO. The secat template is made for categorys. If you want to feel free to redirect the page to another Gallery page. The syntax for it is #REDIRECT [[NAME]]. If you have got any REAL idea why a 'secat' template should be used in a gallery-page please tell me and we can talk about restoration. Regards, abf /talk to me/
There is a gallery called Moving sidewalk there is also a category called Category:Moving sidewalks. Therefore the use of the seecat template as a redirect to Category:Moving sidewalks is perfectly legitimate. And even if I was mistaken and left an "s" out, I'm not sure that I have or have not, I'll have to go and have a look, that was something that could easily be fixed if a mistake had been made. It would have been even easier to fix if you had included in your warning what the offending edit was rather than does jumping to paste the "Out of scope" warning on my talk page. And even if a mistake had been made how is it "Out of scope".KTo288 14:52, 14 February 2008 (UTC)
Had a look and "seecat|Moving sidewalks" was used, the "s" was not missed out and the category would have redirected to Category:Moving sidewalks. KTo288 14:56, 14 February 2008 (UTC)
Okay as this? abf /talk to me/ 14:59, 14 February 2008 (UTC)
This could have been easily done, if with your warning, you had made clear at the time what it was that needed to be corrected and dealt with. To be honest its not so much the Travelator redirect that is bugging me so much as having to face the "out of scope" warning on my talk page, if you agree to strike it from my page and that my efforts were not "out of scope" but a mistake in formatting a redirect, than I will accept any change of words that reflect this and any censure that accompanys it, and hopefully that will end the matter. KTo288 17:38, 14 February 2008 (UTC)
Thank you. KTo288 20:24, 14 February 2008 (UTC)


Hallo ABF, please restore the page about this bridge; I have now uploaded the pictures. - thanks and greetings --44penguins 14:32, 15 February 2008 (UTC)

Nö, nur zwei davon, und dafür ist IMHO kein restoren nötig, legs einfach neu an wenn du Bilder hast. Grüße, abf /talk to me/ 14:56, 15 February 2008 (UTC)

Range block

Yes I agree. It is sad to have to block someone who may not understand but as they appear to write in English they should be able to read the warnings. I guess rangeblocks should be avoided but in this case it looks ok to me. I wouldn't block for any longer than you have to though. Thanks & regards --Herby talk thyme 16:52, 17 February 2008 (UTC)

Ok, thanks. abf /talk to me/ 12:31, 18 February 2008 (UTC)

Re: CD

Ok, is running now. -- Bryan (talk to me) 18:59, 17 February 2008 (UTC)

Thank you :)) abf /talk to me/ 12:31, 18 February 2008 (UTC)

Rules 7 days

Bonjour, et bravo pour avoir supprimer mon travail personnel (my own work) : 80px A supposer que ce logo soit sous licence, ce qui n'est pas le cas, merci de me le prouver, en 7 jours bien sûr. Cordialement, --Infofiltrage 15:49, 20 February 2008 (UTC)

Pardon, je ne parler pas le françaises tres bien. Quand c'est ta travail personnel c'est d'accord et je regarder Christian restaurert l'Image. abf /talk to me/ 17:55, 20 February 2008 (UTC)
Danke vielmals Christian, Du sprichst einem guten französisch : ich verstehe dich. Bis bald. ;) --Infofiltrage 19:37, 20 February 2008 (UTC)
Je ne suis pas Christian mais je suis Fabian. ;)) abf /talk to me/ 05:22, 21 February 2008 (UTC)

Image Tagging Image:Geschichtsverein.png

Mail ist raus. Danke für den Hinweis. --Michael Reschke 20:14, 21 February 2008 (UTC)

Kein Thema. abf /talk to me/ 14:05, 22 February 2008 (UTC)


Hallo, wieso hast du das o.g. Bild gelöscht ? Die Copyrightrechte waren gesichert. Ich habe es mit Genehmigung der Nationalparkverwaltung veröffentlicht. Da das Bild auf deren Bildarchiv lagerte und ich als Mitarbeiter dafür zuständig bin. Du hättest auch vielleicht mal vorher nachfragen können um das zu klären. mfg --JesterWr 08:32, 22 February 2008 (UTC)

hat nie bestanden. abf /talk to me/ 14:05, 22 February 2008 (UTC)

Suppression of an image


I'm highly unhappy that you suppressed this image :

As I understand that the copyright was not exactly adequate for a use on commons, it appears ok to use this image on

Can you, please, undelete this image to allow a transfer of it on fr.wikipedia, where I will use it ? Thanks a lot. MaCRoEco 02:14, 16 February 2008 (UTC)

Sorry, but no Commons-Admin will ever restore a Image incompatible to COM:L. abf /talk to me/ 09:34, 16 February 2008 (UTC)
OK, but can we move this image to and , without keeping it in Commons ? MaCRoEco 16:36, 16 February 2008 (UTC)
Yes, if fair use is allowed there. Then loock for a source and move it there. abf /talk to me/ 17:01, 16 February 2008 (UTC)
Ok. I'm really sorry to bother you, but I don't have anymore the image ; and there was a text with the image here on commons that was describing the source. Can you find a way to move this image to, or send it to me by email, or anything else. Pleeease. MaCRoEco 23:58, 17 February 2008 (UTC)
Move it quickly. You have got one day. abf /talk to me/ 12:31, 18 February 2008 (UTC)

I'm very sorry, the image was wanted was this one Image:3DScience DNA structure labeled-fr.jpg, I have been misled by the redirect.... MaCRoEco 13:31, 19 February 2008 (UTC)

/me gets upset... Again, you have got 12 hours. abf /talk to me/ 20:09, 19 February 2008 (UTC)
12 hours was too short for me.. :-((( MaCRoEco 23:54, 20 February 2008 (UTC)
Can we try again, until 13h today ? MaCRoEco 08:47, 21 February 2008 (UTC)
Can we try agan, until 18h today ? MaCRoEco 09:22, 22 February 2008 (UTC)
Done. abf /talk to me/ 14:05, 22 February 2008 (UTC)
That was the last chance. I do not know if you have moved it. Anyway its over now. abf /talk to me/ 20:49, 22 February 2008 (UTC)
It's ok, thanks. MaCRoEco 20:32, 25 February 2008 (UTC)


why Image:I-400 Tokyo Bay 1945.jpg is deleted? (Idot 12:31, 22 February 2008 (UTC))

Because no proper source was provided (Backlink to Navy, Author etc.). abf /talk to me/ 14:05, 22 February 2008 (UTC)
have you tried to ask downloader for the source? have you tried to contact via email? (Idot 05:24, 23 February 2008 (UTC))
Talk-page warning here E-Mail not required. abf /talk to me/ 08:18, 23 February 2008 (UTC)

Russian Symbols

Regarding your deleting flags - All of these Pictures are Russian State Symbols and have no copyright - I simply do not now how to implement it on WikiCommons - could you explain or add this information to the pictures?CaesarAvgvstvs 16:37, 22 February 2008 (UTC)

COM:L will help. abf /talk to me/ 20:49, 22 February 2008 (UTC)

Enebro quemado and others

Deletion OK--Xemenendura 12:57, 24 February 2008 (UTC)


Hallo! Guckst du mal hier: [1], da sich dort schon wieder kein Bot meldet, wäre es vielleicht was für deinen? Ich meine, mann muss ja nur die Vorlage entfernen, dürfte also eigentlich kein Problem sein... Grüßle --S[1] 13:06, 24 February 2008 (UTC)


Apparently you have removed this image. If it is the image I think it is (and of course I cannot tell, because you have removed it), I recently uploaded it to replace a non-free image. I went to a lot of trouble to find it. It was an original photograph and the photographer released it to the public domain. What is going on here? 16:22, 24 February 2008 (UTC)

It had no License. abf /talk to me/ 17:16, 24 February 2008 (UTC)

Wegen Commons:Deletion requests/Image:Alqueva1.jpg

Da gibt's scheinbar Unverständnis hierüber... --S[1] 15:25, 25 February 2008 (UTC)

Scheint sich mit deinem Kommentar gelöst zu haben, oder? Grüße, abf /talk to me/ 18:29, 25 February 2008 (UTC)

Image:Zweihaender im historischen Museum Basel.JPG

coulde you help me with translation? (Idot 12:30, 26 February 2008 (UTC))

I changed it to a valid description, but I do not know how to translate the name of the subject, sorry ;) Regards, abf /talk to me/ 12:31, 26 February 2008 (UTC)
Thansk a lot! (Idot 12:33, 26 February 2008 (UTC))
No problem. abf /talk to me/ 12:34, 26 February 2008 (UTC)


Würdest du das Bild bitte wieder herstellen? Es ist 3600 Jahre alt und an der Lizenz kann ja wohl kein Zweifel bestehen. --h-stt !? 15:06, 25 February 2008 (UTC)

es ist aber ein Lichtbild davon und das Lichtbild (das eine zusätzliche lizenz benötigen würde) ist leider keine 3600 Jahre alt. Grüße, abf /talk to me/ 15:11, 25 February 2008 (UTC)
Nicht bei PD-Art. --h-stt !? 15:12, 25 February 2008 (UTC)
Wäre mir neu, ich hoffe, dass du damit einverstanden bist, dass ich es jetzt erstmal durch die diskussion jage. Grüße, abf /talk to me/ 15:14, 25 February 2008 (UTC)
Danke. Und natürlich braucht PD-Art keine eigene Lizenz des Fotografens, das ist ja gerade der Sinn dieser Lizenz. Durch die Reproduktion einer zweidimensionalen Vorlage entsteht kein eigenes Urheberrecht des Fotografens. Siehe Template:PD-Art --h-stt !? 15:18, 25 February 2008 (UTC)

Abf - bitte kümmere dich um die Lizenzen. Dann passiert dir sowas nicht. 2-Dimensionale Abbildungen von PD-Art-Werken sind immer frei. Und das ist eine 2-Diemsnsionale Bbildung. Ich habe das Ganze jetzt beendet, eine andere Version mit Datenquelle habe ich zudem noch hochgeladen. Marcus Cyron 19:24, 25 February 2008 (UTC)

Sorry, eigtl. kenne ich mich imho ganz gut aus, aber ich kann leider nicht alle Spezialfälle für unsere über 300 Lizenzvorlagen kennen. Aber aus Fehlern lernt man. Danke Leute! Grüße, abf /talk to me/ 19:26, 25 February 2008 (UTC)
Ich hätte nicht gedacht, daß das ein Spezaifall ist. Kann aber auch daran liegen, daß es für meinen Arbeitsbereich eine wichtige Regel ist. Naja, jetzt weißt du es ;). Marcus Cyron 21:15, 25 February 2008 (UTC)
Seh ich auch so, danke nochmal ;) Grüße, abf /talk to me/ 12:26, 26 February 2008 (UTC)
Genau wie das, oder?! abf /talk to me/ 12:56, 27 February 2008 (UTC)
Leider nein, siehe unten. Marcus Cyron 15:31, 27 February 2008 (UTC)


Hi abf, ich wundere mich, dass dieses Bild ebenso wie Manfred_Jenning.jpg von dir gelöscht wurde. Ich hatte damals die Fotografin angeschrieben und ihr ausdrückliches ok erhalten. Woran liegts? --Tchilp 11:52, 27 February 2008 (UTC)

Weil keine Erlaubniss im OTRS vorliegt. Grüße, abf /talk to me/ 12:49, 27 February 2008 (UTC)
Erlaubnis an erteilen, dann kann ABF das Bild wieder herstellen, wenn das OK vom OTRS-Team kommt. Alles machbar, das Bild ist nicht weg. Marcus Cyron 15:30, 27 February 2008 (UTC)



Do you have an explanation for [2]? There is no source for this photo (photographer? credit?), so it is actually fair use and should be considered for speedy deletion. Bibi Saint-Pol (sprechen) 19:12, 26 February 2008 (UTC)

Its so old, that it cant be anything alse than PD-old, please see #Image:Akrotiri-fisherman.jpg for a nearly same case. Regards, abf /talk to me/ 12:49, 27 February 2008 (UTC)
Old? What is old? You are confusing the work and its reproduction. Copyright is dealing with reproductions of works, not with the works themselves. This photo is obviously recent (color...) and can't be tagged as PD-old. It then has to be deleted. Bibi Saint-Pol (sprechen) 14:40, 27 February 2008 (UTC)
OK, ABF - aber ich muß es dir erklären ;). Was du meinst sind 2-Dimensionale Abbildungen. Leider (und Bibi bedauert das sicher genauso wie ich) ist das ein Teilbild eines Kylix. Und die sind leider in der Form des Bildes 3-Dimensional. Dann ist das leider mit einem CR versehen. Was so etwas angeht, kannst du Bibi absolut vertrauen. Gemälde und Wandbilder sind OK - andere Bilder alter Werke wie Statuen, Keramik etc. leider nur wenn sie unter einer echten freien Lizenz veröffentlicht wurden oder eben wirklich als Bild alt genug sind. Marcus Cyron 15:27, 27 February 2008 (UTC)
Klar. Bibi Saint-Pol (sprechen) 19:24, 27 February 2008 (UTC)

Auckland Zoo

Apologies for my mistakes in setting up the above page (it is my first on commons). Thank you for correcting my mistakes. ZoofanNZ 20:08, 27 February 2008 (UTC)

No problem :) abf /talk to me/ 20:09, 27 February 2008 (UTC)


Hi, du hast die Datei am 14:02, 27 February 2008 gelöscht, da als "no permission" markiert. Ich hatte die nötige Information bereits nachgetragen, aber nicht die markierung entfernt - ich möchte dich bitten dies zu prüfen und die datei wieder herzustellen. danke --Mandavi 15:12, 28 February 2008 (UTC)

War mein Fehler, sorry. abf /talk to me/ 19:28, 28 February 2008 (UTC)


Hallo ABF, Benutzer LambaJan hat mir geschrieben, bitte hier lesen (Baha'u'llah image (religion1.gif)). Daraufhin reagierte ich damit, dass ich einen neuen Version mit den selben Dateinamen hochgeladen habe. Etwas später wurde es auch übernommen, d. h. die verbesserte, neue Version trat in Kraft anstelle der alten .gif Datei. Heute sehe ich, dass die frühere Version wieder aktuell ist. Was nun? Von mir aus kann die ursprüngliche Version weiter existieren, übernehme jedoch keine Haft, falls jemand gegen den Baha´u´llah Bild warum auch immer protestiert bzw. klagt. LG, --Magellan @_/" 15:19, 28 February 2008 (UTC)

Ich verstehe das Problem nicht, genau so wenig aber, was ich damit zu tun habe, sorry. Grüße, abf /talk to me/ 19:28, 28 February 2008 (UTC)

Die Sache hat sich erledigt. LG, --Magellan @_/" 12:59, 29 February 2008 (UTC)


You have removed the picture leifbk.jpg. I don't log in to very often, so I hadn't read the message about the license issue, dated 16.02.2008, until just now. The picture is my own, and I thought that I had made it clear that it was released under the "Creative Commons" license. Can you please help me resolve the issue? Regards, Leif. Leifbk 10:25, 29 February 2008 (UTC)

Yes, you told its Creative Commons, but you have not told what creative commons license, there are also some of them who are not allowed on commons. Please read COM:L and then re-upload it with a correct license. Regards, abf /talk to me/ 13:00, 29 February 2008 (UTC)
Thank you. I must have overlooked the license drop-down list. Leifbk 13:25, 29 February 2008 (UTC)