User talk:ABF/Archive/2010/June

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.

Embalse de Doiras

Hello. You have deleted the picture Embalse de Doiras.jpg, because you think that


Hello. You have deleted the photo Embalse de Doiras.jpg because you think that it is without license. The photo is propierty of Ministry of Environment of Spain and it is published on this web: [1] The license could be read on this web: [2]

Queda prohibida cualquier distribución de los contenidos y la comunicación pública con contraprestación económica sin la autorización previa y por escrito del Ministerio de Medio Ambiente. En caso de no existir contraprestación económica deberá citarse su origen.

If you traslate the license to english, you can read: Prohibited any distribution of media content and public economic service without prior written authorization of the Ministry of Environment Ambiente. If there is no economic consideration must be given its origin.

Please, reload the photo or explain me why it is not posible. Thank you.Monmr (talk) 14:22, 1 June 2010 (UTC)

Please see COM:L. All files must be free for comercial use. abf «Cabale!» 14:26, 1 June 2010 (UTC)

Race UP Team photos

I has speak with one of the raceup's webmasters and He has say me that he has send to this adresse permissions-commons@wikimedia.org a pdf file for the licese. thank you

xrelly

Done by Geni. abf «Cabale!» 19:40, 2 June 2010 (UTC)

Photo

Did you delete my photo ?

(forskel | historik) . . m Bruger:SYSTRADK‎; 23:30 . . (-23) . . CommonsDelinker (diskussion | bidrag) (Fjerner filen SYSTRA_hovedkontor.jpg, som er blevet slettet fra Commons af ABF med begrundelsen: In category Media missing permission as of 17 May 2010; no permiss)

SYSTRADK

Yes, I did. You Indicated on the file-description page, that someone but you is the author of the photo. If so, please send the authors permission to the OTRS-team, so that your image can be restored. Thank you. abf «Cabale!» 21:14, 2 June 2010 (UTC)

Seltsam ...

Hallo ABF, ist Dir aufgefallen, dass User:geagea und User:Ex13 exakt die gleiche Formulierung bei ihren "requests for filemover rights" genutzt haben? Gruß axpdeHello! 16:41, 3 June 2010 (UTC)

Ja, strenggenommen vllt. ein "Lizenzverstoß". Insgesamt glaube ich aber, dass auf Grund der Herkunft (der eine Israel, der andere Kroatien) und dem insgesamt anderen Editierverhalten ausgeschlossen ist, dass das Sockenpuppen sind. Ich glaube eher, dass sich da jemand mit eher mäßigen Englisch-Kentnissen "Formulierungshilfe" genommen hat. ;) Das Lizenzproblem werde ich gleich 'mal lösen. ;) abf «Cabale!» 16:58, 3 June 2010 (UTC)
Ab wieviel Worten in Folge kann man denn "Schöpfungshöhe" reklamieren ?-) Wollte es auch nur mal erwähnt haben ... Gruß axpdeHello! 18:04, 3 June 2010 (UTC)
Über Schöpfungshöhe kann man immer streiten. ;) Außerdem gibt es da ja keinen festen "Wert" ;) Nein, aber so ist jetzt alles gut, denke ich. Und du? Danke aber für den Hinweis. :) abf «Cabale!» 18:12, 3 June 2010 (UTC)

Ha ha you caught me :) I thought nobody read these statements and I was to lazy to come up with something original :) If this is the problem, i will do my best to write something original :) Thanks for granting the right.--Ex13 (talk) 19:53, 3 June 2010 (UTC)

We actually do read those statements. We sometimes even decline requests for rights. ;) But no worries. ;) abf «Cabale!» 19:55, 3 June 2010 (UTC)

ich brauch dich mal...

schick mir mal bitte eine Mail, falls Wikimail nicht funktioniert: ralf@roletschek.de - ich könnte dich in den nächsten 3 Tagen als Commons-Admin für unbürokratische Aktionen brauchen. --Ralf Roletschek (talk) 20:14, 3 June 2010 (UTC)

File:Falcon Crest.svg

As the deleting editor, can you tell me who the original uploader of this image was? I can't find the attribution path, and need it for en:wp. Thank you! --Kintetsubuffalo (talk) 19:57, 6 June 2010 (UTC)

I don't know, why the original uploader could help you, but you might want to have a look at the log. abf «Cabale!» 16:00, 7 June 2010 (UTC)

File Photo_Thomas_Michael_1.jpg

Hello, You have removed this file, specifying "supprimé sur Commons par ABF ; motif : In category [[commons::category:Media missing permission as of 15 May 2010|Media missing permission a)". I am the creator of the page. All the contents have been gaved to me by Thomas Michael, the artist himself, which the page is about. The file was a photography of him.

So I think I have all required authorizations. Could you restore the picture please ?

Thanks TotalRecall (talk) 08:44, 10 June 2010 (UTC)

Please send his permission via E-Mail to the OTRS. Then they'll check and possibly restore the image. Thank you, abf «Cabale!» 13:08, 10 June 2010 (UTC)

Huh

Go away :) Not that I ever look at such things but .... All the best --Herby talk thyme 10:31, 10 June 2010 (UTC)

Hehe, I got you. ;) Next Step: Eugene! ;) All the best, abf «Cabale!» 13:08, 10 June 2010 (UTC)

File:Jon Gudni Fjoluson.jpg

Hallo, kannst du das bitte löschen? Ich habe auf dfb.de ein Bild von diesem Spieler gesehen, auf dem er als Jon Gudni Fjoluson bezeichnet wurde und das ohne weiter nachzuprüfen geglaubt. Aber es ist der andere Spieler. --Yoda1893 (talk) 18:17, 10 June 2010 (UTC)

Theorethisch lösche ich das gerne, praktisch geht's aber nicht, weil's schon gelöscht ist. ;) abf «Cabale!» 19:08, 10 June 2010 (UTC)
Trotzdem Danke! :) --Yoda1893 (talk) 19:19, 10 June 2010 (UTC)
Kein Problem, wenn's nochmal was gibt, melde dich einfach. abf «Cabale!» 19:29, 10 June 2010 (UTC)

requirements for filemover rights

Hi ABF, You were the one who recently informed me you could not grant me filemover right based on "too little experience". I thereupon asked you what kind of experience you were looking for but then it remained painfully quiet on your side of the line. It seems no one can give me an answer on that. Now my experience is that with most things I do for the first time on wikipedia or on commons, it takes a few steps more than usual before I get it right. Like trying to create a category and forgetting to place "Category:" in front of the name, or making a redundant category redirect to the correct one and then loosing track of the page. But in all cases such as these, I didn't quit before I got it right and chances are little that I will make the same mistakes again. That's how learning and getting experience works. I'm quite sure this will be the case too when renaming a file for the first time: it may take me a few more steps than necessary the first time but doing it is the only way to learn it. I recently cleaned up the big mess in Magnolia pictures. I identified several dozens unidentified or misidentified ones, placed them in the right categories and took care of wikipedia pages that featured them incorrectly based on them being miscategorized or misidentified. I cleaned up the "Information" templates, added descriptions if needed, and sorted out the structure of the main category and the subcategories of Magnolia (for example: a number of Magnolia pages lacked the Magnolia category, so they would be missed by someone looking for pictures). While doing this, I came upon a few dozens of files that had misleading filenames or spelling errors that would finding or using them more difficult for other users. My work could have been much more effective if I could have renamed these files right away, in stead of placing "rename" templates and hoping some moderator would take notice. I have begun some work on other unidentified plants (Ranunculaceae I did in part yesterday) and again I found misnamed files. I really could be more effective if I could handle these cases myself. So again: what kind of experience are you looking for when you grant the filemover right and in what field would I have to improve myself before you (or any other moderator) got enough faith I will not make a mess of commons when granted that right? - Wikiklaas (talk) 11:31, 11 June 2010 (UTC)

I expect some knowledge of the commons community (we're not "moderators", see 1), some recent work with images (wich of course you have), the usage of the preview-function and of course edit-summaries. Of course, you can't do anything with an edit, but if you repeatedly need to use many edits in a short period of time, this does not lead me to the point, that you're well in this topic. And of course, some maintenance-work in the Commons-Namespace would be good. There are, of course, some other "small" criteria, but I hope, this overview helps you. abf «Cabale!» 12:33, 11 June 2010 (UTC)
First of all: thank you for your ample explanation. You really took the time to give examples. I'm really sorry though to notice you place the accent on things that are of minor importance when it comes to the goal that is achieved. I'm absolutely sure the Magnolia pages have improved a lot in quality after my work. Work that is, by the way, quite burdensome and tiring, so that may explain a number of the re-edits: I get tired after a while. And furthermore this is the way I work. I make use of the preview function many many times but also when I save a page I again take a look and very often find other things I'm still not content with. I have no plans to alter the way I work just to be able to reach my goal in less edits. It's the final result that counts for me, not the number of edits I needed to reach it. If I would have to keep that in mind all the time, it would take the pleasure out of my work, which I'm not going to let happen. Moreover, I find it very disappointing that you looked so thoroughly for the "mistakes" I made and sort of put aside the good things I did. It's very easy to find a users mistakes when a user contributes a lot. It feels as though my contributions did not count at all but only the fact that I did not make them in a way you would have made them. But you can't expect every user to deliver quality results and quality edits. I thought my contributions would make some people happy because they mean an overall quality improvement but as it seems it is more that they make some people unhappy because I could not live up to the high standards of editing you hold. Pitty, because this is not the way I like my contributions to be judged. And if I were an administrator, I wouldn't mind being called a moderator by mistake. I wouldn't mind if a user contributes to the social events in commons too, as long as he or she is a happy contributor and replies to the comments and questions that are posted on the users talk page or the articles talk pages, and if he or she acts as a responsable and social person. I was a bit involved in the Dutch Wikipedia community. Users there are arguing with each other in very nasty ways. I know it's the same on the German project. I always stayed friendly, did not get into fights, received compliments for staying polite and friendly but in the end decided that I don't ever want to get involved in the social community that is called Wikipedia, so you will indeed not see me in the Commons namespace. But does that make me a worthless contributor? I only want to contribute to the content. That's what I am good at. In my own way. - Wikiklaas (talk) 14:24, 11 June 2010 (UTC)
I never told, your contributions are "worthless" or anything like that. But, if we now discuss this to infinity and beayond, that does not help commons at all. I gave you the filemover-rights "on probation" and I'll see how you use them. Untill then, I now do assume good faith. abf «Cabale!» 14:31, 11 June 2010 (UTC)
I'm very sorry if I caused you discomfort but I thank you very very much for putting this much faith in me. I am very sure that I won't disappoint you on the "good faith" part. Cheers. - Wikiklaas (talk) 14:35, 11 June 2010 (UTC)
Hi ABF, I hope you can appreciate it when I seek your advise. I just renamed a file that was screaming for it. File:Micheliachampaca.jpg had a misleading filename because it was a misidentification. I renamed it into File:Shrub from San Diego Zoo.jpg, being the best descriptive filename now. I checked whether there were pages that linked to this file. There were none. Now I see that the old filename is automatically turned into a redirect to the new one. I'd like to have that filename deleted because there are no pages that link to it AND because it will become available then for a picture that is Michelia champaca. My first intention was to tag Micheliachampaca.jpg with a speedydelete template but the help page on that template said it was deprecated for most uses. My two questions are: One, are you OK if I seek your advise here or would you rather have me pose my question in the Help Desk?, and Two, what in your opinion is the best procedure to have the filename Micheliachampaca.jpg" freed up for other uses? - Wikiklaas (talk) 16:22, 11 June 2010 (UTC)
Sure, you can ask me for advice, but I can't promise to be around all the time, so if you need urgent response, please ask the community at the known pages. In this case, as the redirect is orphaned globally, you can of course tagg it for speedy deletion using {{Speedy|Orphaned redirect. ~~~~}} in order to get it deleted or you can just ping me or another sysop. In this case, I deleted the page. I hope, this helps. Kind regards, abf «Cabale!» 18:12, 11 June 2010 (UTC)
Thanks. No I don't expect you to be around all the time. Neither am I. Moreover I don't expect to need help and advise all the time. Most of the time the help pages are clear enough or taking a look at similar cases solved by other users if enough guidance. In this case I was just puzzled by the remark that the template was deprecated but now I see how you used it, it won't be of any problem for me anymore. Thanks again and buy for now. - Wikiklaas (talk) 23:10, 11 June 2010 (UTC)

my rfa

Is there anything I can do to alleviate your concerns? Perhaps agreeing to taking on the tools in a trial manner? -Nard the Bard 20:38, 13 June 2010 (UTC)

Per IRC-communication. abf «Cabale!» 21:01, 13 June 2010 (UTC)

Sorry, my mistake

Hi, I made a mistake in Commons:Deletion requests/File:Cuadro de nubes.jpg, I wrote "vd" by accident. I see no reason to suspect that this would not be uploader's own work. /Pieter Kuiper (talk) 14:25, 14 June 2010 (UTC)

That explains my doubts in your comment. I still think, that we could doubt the autorship, but however, I've re-opened the deletion-request. abf «Cabale!» 14:30, 14 June 2010 (UTC)

clean up

cheers for cleaning all those old "no permission since" files!--DieBuche (talk) 14:27, 14 June 2010 (UTC)

Ich weiß zwar nicht, warum du mich auf englisch anschreibst, aber bitte, bitte. ;) abf «Cabale!» 14:31, 14 June 2010 (UTC)
Ach richtig. Ich kann mir irgendwie nie merken wer hier was spricht :)--DieBuche (talk) 14:39, 14 June 2010 (UTC)
Hehe. ;) abf «Cabale!» 14:41, 14 June 2010 (UTC)

Filemover on probation

Hi ABF, you granted me the filemover right "on probation" which probably means that you may want to review my edits or otherwise judge my latest contributions. I have been quite active in the last two days and also renamed a number of files. I started off easy, just to see how other users would react, to give them time to contact me in case of errors or to snow me under with criticism in the worst case. Nothing of that kind happened. Upon contacting Túrelio, who did a number of speedy deletions on my request, and asking him about my doings, it turned out most went right, so I felt encouraged to go on correcting names of misidentified plants and obvious misspelt names. I am very much aware of double redirects or broken links I could create in the process, so I spent a lot of time correcting these things right before or immediately after I changed a file name (not just in commons but also on the project pages that linked to the file). See my list of contributions for my recent activities. You will also notice that all of my edits now have meaningful edit summaries, something you commented upon earlier. You will also see a number of cases where I still needed multiple edits to reach my goals, especially when I worked on related files (files that had "other versions" where some file at the back of the row prompted me to go back to the first ones). I'm quite happy to be able to use the right. I have no plans to use it in other ways than I have done so far (correcting misspelt names or misidentifications and changing names of files I uploaded myself with names not so luckily chosen, or assisting in correcting problems with files listed on the special pages). I hope you can approve of that. Please let me know if you see any problems or let me know your other comments. And I'd like to hear from you what you meant with "on probation". Is that for a certain period of time, or does that mean you reserved the right to stop me if I made stupid or serious mistakes or abused it in other ways? Thanks again for your faith and cheers for now - Wikiklaas (talk) 20:28, 13 June 2010 (UTC)

Yes, basically, the "probation" means, that I'll remove it, if you do not use them for the projects benefit. And the main thing you (hopefully, you read it allready) will have to follow for this is still our policy about file renaming. abf «Cabale!» 17:13, 15 June 2010 (UTC)
OK, yes, I read that at some earlier stage but it's not a bad thing to re-read it every once in a while. - Wikiklaas (talk) 07:55, 16 June 2010 (UTC)

Re:Koolhoven F.K.46

Not much to say, the original user has released the image cc-by-2.0, who are we to determine if this is fake? Even if we (or me if you prefer) does not have responsibility to report such a license, then if you think it's a violation take responsibility for its cancellation. :-)--Threecharlie (talk) 17:17, 15 June 2010 (UTC)

I've nominated the file for deletion, as it is usual in this case. The community will now discuss the case and hopefully find out, who is the original author. This is nothing else, but regular buisiness on commons. I hope, you can agree with that. abf «Cabale!» 17:19, 15 June 2010 (UTC)

File:Tymoshenko2010.jpg

Hello,

Could you please undelete this picture ?

Perhaps there was a problem with the servers being slow, but I am pretty sure it was no longer marked as "no permission" at 16:42, 17 June 2010, as I had changed it to "OTRS pending". Please visit User_talk:Teofilo#File:Tymoshenko2010.jpg and File talk:Tymoshenko2010.jpg and Commons:OTRS/Noticeboard#File:Tymoshenko2010.jpg. Teofilo (talk) 18:16, 17 June 2010 (UTC)

Sure, it was OTRS-Pending, but it wasn't confirmed. And on the linked page, it states clearly, that there is no valid permission by now. ;) If the permission arrives, the otrs-agent will resore it or will request it to be restored. abf «Cabale!» 18:48, 17 June 2010 (UTC)
"there is no OTRS-permission yet" can mean that the received E-mail is a good E-mail, but they simply have not had enough time to process it. Doesn't COM:OTRS say OTRS is currently backlogged and may take a month before someone responds. I think you should wait for one month before deleting a picture. Teofilo (talk) 09:04, 18 June 2010 (UTC)
Would you know, what waiting a month for deletion would mean for our backlog? abf «Cabale!» 11:23, 18 June 2010 (UTC)

South Ossetia physical map

Hi! You have deleted this file recently. There was a license there. Some bot put that template but nobody removed it after i had provided a license.83.149.8.216 03:18, 18 June 2010 (UTC)

What Image, please? abf «Cabale!» 04:50, 18 June 2010 (UTC)
File:South Ossetia physical map.svg--Bouron (talk) 05:26, 18 June 2010 (UTC)

So can you undelete it?--83.149.9.26 06:49, 18 June 2010 (UTC)

Sure, ✓ Done, I am sorry for that, I misunderstood that description-page, I didn't read the comment following the link. abf «Cabale!» 12:20, 18 June 2010 (UTC)
Danke!--Bouron (talk) 13:21, 18 June 2010 (UTC)

Permissions

File:2003_Stuckist_Turner_demo_(1).jpg

File:2003 Stuckist Turner demo (2).jpg

File:2003 Stuckist Turner demo (3).jpg

You have placed a "permissions missing" tag on each of these image pages, requesting "evidence of permission by ... providing a link to a site with an explicit grant of permission". The link to the site giving this permission is directly underneath the tag, e.g.[3] where it says:

Retrieved from stuckism.com, 4 April 2008. Licence:
Stuckist demonstration against the Turner Prize, Tate Britain, 7 December 2003.
left to right: Philip Absolon, Ella Guru, Elsa Dax, Charles Thomson, Daniel Pincham-Phipps, Alex Russell
http://www.stuckism.com/clown2000.html
Copyright © Charles Thomson, stuckism.com. http://www.stuckism.com/thomson/index.html
Released under GFDL. This applies to this file only.
The moral right of the author is asserted. Apply for other permission or higher file size.

Might I suggest you click on such links, as they are present on other images I have uploaded also.

Ty 17:21, 18 June 2010 (UTC)

I can't see no permission there. Please send the permission to the OTRS or give a clear link to the release. abf «Cabale!» 17:46, 18 June 2010 (UTC)

If you click the link stuckism.com given on the image page, File:2003_Stuckist_Turner_demo_(1).jpg, and reproduced above, it takes you to a page headed, "GFDL: TURNER PRIZE DEMONSTRATIONS" (upper case as on the site heading). The eleventh image on that page is the one I uploaded as File:2003_Stuckist_Turner_demo_(1).jpg. Under that image on stuckism.com, it states "Released under GFDL". At the top of that page, under the heading, "GFDL: TURNER PRIZE DEMONSTRATIONS", it says, "Text of GFDL licence here". The word "here" links to another page on the site, headed "GFDL TEXT", where it says, "Material released under GFDL is also co-licensed as CC-BY-SA-3" (with a link to the "Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 Unported" page).

The site from where the image was taken has therefore stated that they have released the image under GFDL and CC-BY-SA-3.0, which meets the licence requirements of Commons. Could you explain why, if you still think so, there is a problem with this.

The above also applies to the other two images you tagged, which are also on the same page at stuckism.com.

This previously occurred with the image File:Vote Stuckist 2001 Machine and Vine (4).jpg also from stuckism.com. Snowmanradio tagged it {{copyvio}} with the edit summary, "appears to be copyvio - according to licence on sourse[sic] website - and other images from same website".[4] I pointed out to him that it had been licensed on the source website.[5] In the meantime, Kameraad Pjotr had tagged it {{no_permission}} with the edit summary, "Missing permission".[6] I pointed out to him, as I have with you, that the permission was stated on the originating site.[7] He then removed the {{no_permission}} and {{copyvio}} tags,[8], and replied to me on his talk page, "I have changed the license"[9] (although he had not changed the license, just removed the tags).

I did not get a reply from Snowmanradio, so presumably he accepted my explanation. Kameraad Pjotr, who is an admin, approved the image and licence, and did not inform me I needed to do anything differently.

Ty 08:48, 19 June 2010 (UTC)

Thank you for your explanation, now I can see the Permission. :) Excuse me for any inconvenience. abf «Cabale!» 10:01, 19 June 2010 (UTC)
Phew! I thought the link was clear, but I'll obviously have to spell it out more obviously somehow. I'd be grateful for a watching eye, should this recur with other such images in the future. Ty 10:59, 19 June 2010 (UTC)

Bot Frage

Ist es nicht normalerweise untersagt, einen Bot unter dem normalen Account laufen zu lassen? 11 edits pro minute kommt mir ein bisschen suspect vor: [10] --DieBuche (talk) 16:37, 19 June 2010 (UTC)

Er benutzt den AWB, ist dazu auch unter seinem Haupt-Account freigeschaltet, hat mir aber gerade im IRC versprochen, etwas langsamer gehen zu lassen. ;) abf «Cabale!» 16:40, 19 June 2010 (UTC)
Oh. Sorry. I'll slow down the edits ;) --Diego Grez return fire 16:42, 19 June 2010 (UTC)
Thanks. Sry to ask, I didn't think of AWB--DieBuche (talk) 16:57, 19 June 2010 (UTC)
Ich bin immer froh, wenn gefragt wird. :) abf «Cabale!» 16:58, 19 June 2010 (UTC)

Walter Grassroot

Guten Abend!

Kannst du bei Gelegenheit hier erneut vorbeischauen? Es scheint kein Ende absehbar zu sein. Aufgrund der andauernden Aggression würde ich gerne eine Überarbeitung der Sperrung bezüglich Dauer und Deaktivierung der Diskussionsseitenbearbeitung mit dir abklären. Wie soll verfahren?

Gruß, High Contrast (talk) 22:47, 19 June 2010 (UTC)

Ich finde die Sperrdauer schon am obersten Rand angesiedelt, aber die Diskussionsbearbeitung würde ich da auch gerne deaktiviert sehen. Ich werde aber gleich im IRC nochmal einen anderen Admin fragen, sodass man dann schon zu dritt ist. Danke für den Hinweis! :) abf «Cabale!» 09:06, 20 June 2010 (UTC)

Diosa del Mar

Why did you delete MY picture of the stern of the Diosa del Mar??????????????? This is my picture and I stated it was MY picture when I uploaded it. All the color photos were designated. This is the 3rd time someone has delete pictures. I get so tired of people like yourself who go around deleteding pictures that people have taken the time to upload and include on pages. I guess you have nothing better to do with your life. I have other things to do with my life other than wasting an hour of my time trying to figure out how to reinstall the photo.

The Stroll--The Stroll (talk) 04:22, 20 June 2010 (UTC)

I've deleted the image, because there was no licensial information at all. Please re-upload the image with correct licensial information if possible. Kind regards, abf «Cabale!» 09:04, 20 June 2010 (UTC)
By the way, got this on my talk - restored it (and added that info).--Nilfanion (talk) 10:41, 20 June 2010 (UTC)
I can't see any recent restorations in your log, but anyway, thank you. :) abf «Cabale!» 10:43, 20 June 2010 (UTC)
That's because I posted as I was restoring (wasn't expecting you to check that quickly) :)--Nilfanion (talk) 10:50, 20 June 2010 (UTC)

Problem

Hello, could you be so kind and solve as an admin a problem mentioned here. Thanks in advance, Taavetti (talk) 12:53, 20 June 2010 (UTC)

✓ Done abf «Cabale!» 13:00, 20 June 2010 (UTC)
Thanks, Taavetti (talk) 13:01, 20 June 2010 (UTC)
You're welcome. abf «Cabale!» 13:03, 20 June 2010 (UTC)
Hi, please clean this file too. Thanks. --Harold (talk) 13:05, 20 June 2010 (UTC)
✓ Done abf «Cabale!» 13:07, 20 June 2010 (UTC)


Plakat Hebammentag

Du hast das Poster der Internationalen Hebammentages 2010 gelöscht. Es lag eine, wenn auch nicht ganz commons-Konforme Genehmigung des ICM vor, von mir in den Beschreibungstext kopiert. Ich halte das Löschen daher für etwas voreilig. --Hagen Graebner (talk) 13:33, 20 June 2010 (UTC)

Ich habe heute schon 1000 Dateien gelöscht, wenn du mir nicht genau sagst, um welche es geht, kann ich dir leider nicht helfen. Bitte gib' mir den genauen Bildnamen. Danke, abf «Cabale!» 13:40, 20 June 2010 (UTC)
Du meinst wahrscheinlich das hier--DieBuche (talk) 15:33, 20 June 2010 (UTC)
Wenn du diese Datei meintest, so war auf der Beschreibungsseite keine Freigabe. Wenn du eine Freigabe hast, schick' sie bitte an das OTRS, dann wird das Bild - sofern die Freigabe richtig ist - wiederhergestellt. Grüße, abf «Cabale!» 15:38, 20 June 2010 (UTC)

Filemover

Hi.
As a result of your use of the filemover-rights (e.g. blanking pages instead of requesting them for speedy deletion, renamings careless of the renaming-policy) I had to remove your filemover-rights. I am sorry. abf «Cabale!» 15:32, 20 June 2010 (UTC)

Hi! I'm sorry, I'm a french and I don't completely undesterstand the procedure to rename a file, I thought I had the right to uncreased the redirection of my files when I am wrong of name. I find this sanction excessive, I had import 800 files on commons and every day, I discover a new item on commons, unfortunately, sometimes I take mistakes... there could be a first warning before delete immediately my filemover right! I can learn of my mistakes! It's really pity, I would not have to leave commons because of a arbitrary sanction! Regards,Sitron (talk) 16:28, 20 June 2010 (UTC)

Japs attack

Hi. Where do I find the reason of exception: http//commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=File_talk:%D0%90%D1%82%D0%B0%D0%BA%D0%B0_%D1%8F%D0%BF%D0%BE%D0%BD%D1%86%D0%B5%D0%B2_%D0%BD%D0%B0_%D1%80%D1%83%D1%81%D1%81%D0%BA%D0%B8%D0%B5_%D0%B0%D0%BE%D1%80%D0%B0%D0%B1%D0%BB%D0%B8_(%D0%9F%D0%BE%D1%80%D1%82-%D0%90%D1%80%D1%82%D1%83%D1%80).jpg&action=edit&redlink=1 (In Russian "Атака японцев на русские корабли"). I don't understand anything: "Orphan talkpage" of yours says me nothing. And don't be laconic, pleaseВитольд Муратов (обс, вклад) 14:35, 21 June 2010 (UTC)

Excuse me, I don't understand you. The page Атака японцев на русские корабли did never exist. Did you mean this? If so, this page was deleted, because the File-Page for it didn't exist. abf «Cabale!» 14:41, 21 June 2010 (UTC)

User:Studio Harcourt

Hi,

An OTRS permission is already on its way. User:Okki successfully established contact with them. Jean-Fred (talk) 15:26, 21 June 2010 (UTC)

Wow, great! I was just wondering. Thank you. :) abf «Cabale!» 15:26, 21 June 2010 (UTC)
Well, it is stated on the user page of the user. We commonists should really be careful when tagging images, as it spams the user page in the process (I don't blame you, I did the same many times ; but now I try to be a little bit more careful :-)
by the way, I have prepared a page to explain their initiative on User:Jean-Frédéric/Studio_Harcourt.
Jean-Fred (talk) 15:31, 21 June 2010 (UTC)

Commons:User Pages

Why did you delete this page? It could have been revised and improved rather than deleted. Plus, now there's a broken redirect at WP:UP. TeleComNasSprVen (talk) 04:44, 22 June 2010 (UTC)

Because it was unusable for Commons in the current style and copied from enwiki without any history. If you wish to "revise" it fot commons, I can import it for you and put it in your User-namespace, so that you can work on it. By the way, the broken redirect is deleted. Thanks for pointing it out. abf «Cabale!» 05:00, 22 June 2010 (UTC)

File:6.21.10EdBrubakerByLuigiNovi4.jpg

Hey, why did you tag this as missing permission? The image says own work, so I assume he is Luigi Nova. -mattbuck (Talk) 20:16, 22 June 2010 (UTC)

Thank you for the hint. I wanted to get another one. Sorry for any inconvenience. abf «Cabale!» 20:19, 22 June 2010 (UTC)
No problem, glad to help. -mattbuck (Talk) 20:40, 22 June 2010 (UTC)

File:Effiong Dickson Bob.png

Hi,

I saw you flagged this. I am not sure if the problem is basic or the way I filled out the form. See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:AfDevInfo_image_permission.jpg for a permission letter from the publisher, AfDevInfo, stating the image is public domain and can be reused. I put that in the permission field. Is it sufficient proof? Aymatth2 (talk) 20:43, 22 June 2010 (UTC)

Please do send permissions always to the OTRS-team. Thank you. abf «Cabale!» 20:47, 22 June 2010 (UTC)

O.k. - I have sent them a note. Thanks, Aymatth2 (talk) 21:05, 22 June 2010 (UTC)

Deletion

Re: your deletion of file talk page, please check this page: Commons:Undeletion_requests/Current_requests#Image:Melnica-20151.png. You may see the deleted file and talk page must be restored.--PereslavlFoto (talk) 13:36, 23 June 2010 (UTC)

Please contact Polarlys, he was the one, who deleted the file. abf «Cabale!» 16:06, 23 June 2010 (UTC)

Argh

T_T Everything I do is wrong... Why commons is so complicate? Usually, I use this template : {{no permission since|month=June|day=21|year=2010}}, but for Copyvio I don't found always the source, so I add only the category. For the blank edit summary, it's not optional? On WP, I fill it sometimes.

So, I've read the notice for the file movers, I think understood it. I provide to import 100 files soon, I can recuperate my filemover-rights? Please. Cordialy--Sitron (talk) 19:13, 23 June 2010 (UTC)

Image question

Hi there, looks like you deleted this a couple days ago [11]. I see I had a notice on my talk page... I remembered working on the Wikipedia article for this but didn't recall uploading an image. Looking back through my upload log, it appears I just uploaded a larger version of it, so the deletion notice may have gone to the wrong person. Is there any way to determine who the original uploader was to see if they can resolve the issue? Multixfer (talk) 07:47, 22 June 2010 (UTC)

Yes, you can find the original uploader in the log. abf «Cabale!» 11:37, 22 June 2010 (UTC)
Thanks. Is there any way you could look at it and tell me who it was sourced to? For some reason I recall this being a "self created" image but I could be wrong as it was a while ago. I'm just wondering if someone (or even me) modified it somehow and screwed it up in the process. Multixfer (talk) 05:30, 23 June 2010 (UTC)
It was first published at 1. ;) abf «Cabale!» 12:44, 24 June 2010 (UTC)

User:Conty

hat einen großteil seiner Dinosaurier zeichnungen als RfD markiert. Die Begründungen sind immer "Der Kopf ist ein bisschen zu groß, die Beine zu klein" etc. Ich habe eher das Gefühl, dass er sich umentschieden hat und seine Bilder nicht mehr hier haben will & sie deswegen nominiert. Imho sind die Zeichnungen, selbst wenn nicht perfekt, sehr nützlich & auch viel benutzt. Einige Bilder wurden auch schon gelöscht, da er immer einzelne DRs stellt und den löschenden Admins anscheinenend nicht aufgefallen ist, wie viele er nominiert hat. Was würdes du als Vorgehn vorschlagen? Btw: Bist du eig. manchmal im irc?--DieBuche (talk) 18:10, 25 June 2010 (UTC)

hier sind alle RfDs--DieBuche (talk) 18:14, 25 June 2010 (UTC)
Ich seh's mir an. Ich bin häufig im IRC, habe da aber einen anderen Namen als Trollschutz. Bin auch gerade da. abf «Cabale!» 18:26, 25 June 2010 (UTC)