User talk:Ankry

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

Archives:


Marcin Bielski's "Prophetic rams in Cracow"[edit]

Wow, that was fast, Ankry. It would have taken me some hours to suss out, including these copyleft notices in metadata.

Bows, Zezen (talk) 12:02, 3 August 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Bajki Fredry[edit]

Czy mogę prosić o ukrycie pełnej wersji? Obawiam się, że to będzie na razie 140 lat od daty wydania, bo nie znam daty śmierci ilustratora. Z góry bardzo dziękuję. Wieralee (talk) 20:49, 5 August 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@Wieralee: ✓ Done Ankry (talk) 21:20, 5 August 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

PD-Polish czy PD-Ukraine[edit]

Dzień dobry, użytkownik Alexkrakovsky wgrywa pliki (np. File:CDIAK 966-1-16. Heraldyka W.Wielądko.pdf, File:CDIAK 966-1-23. Skorowidze.pdf) w języku polskim z szablonem PD-Ukraine. Nie widzę daty powstania w tych plikach, ale ze stylu pisma na skanach wnioskuję, że są one bardzo stare, prawdopodobnie jeszcze przedrozbiorowe, gdy na terenie Ukrainy były obszary, których prawnym spadkobiercą jest chyba Polska. Czy nie powinny w związku z tym w tych plikach być szablon PD-Poland czy PD-Polish zamiast PD-Ukraine? Mahnka (talk) 04:58, 10 August 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@Mahnka:
  1. Nie jestem specem od prawa międzynarodowego i nie jestem pewien, czy obecne państwo polskie jest formalnie następcą prawnym czegoś wcześniejszego niż Księstwo Warszawskie.
  2. Te spisy są na pewno późniejsze; widziałem tam datę 1840; mogą być nawet powojenne
  3. Jeśli chcesz je zgłosić do usunięcia - twoje prawo; status prawny tych spisów jest niejasny: prawdopodobnie stanowią utwór jako opracowanie, jeśli autor nie jest znany, to bieg wygasania praw autorskich zarówno w .pl jak i w .ua liczy się od ich pierwszej publikacji, czyli? Co więcej, w EU publikujący takie coś, jeśli nie było wcześniej opublikowane, sam nabywa wyłączne prawa. Więc mamy dość skomplikowaną sytuację. Ankry (talk) 07:23, 10 August 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Dziękuję, w żadnym razie nie myślałem o zgłaszaniu do usunięcia, jedynie o korekcie licencji. Mahnka (talk) 07:37, 10 August 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

NAC[edit]

Bardzo proszę o pomoc.

Nieumiejętnie przesyłałam portretowe zdjęcie Abdona Stryszaka, znalezione w zbiorach NAC; SM0_42-L-471.jpg (301×400). To chyba jest domena publiczna (licencja CC?). User:JuTa usunął je z Commons, a ja obawiam się, że popełnię kolejne błędy ponawiając próby przesłania.

Byłabym bardzo wdzięczna, gdybyś znalazł wolną chwilę i przywrócił ten portret. Serdecznie pozdrawiam, --Joanna Kośmider (talk) 06:06, 17 August 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Zakładam, że chodzi o File:Abdon Stryszak.jpg. Ze zdjęciami Hartwiga z NAC jest ten kłopot, że nie do końca wiemy jaki jest ich status prawny, a zgodnie z zasadami, to do zamieszczającego zdjęcie na Commons należy wyjaśnienie wszelkich wątpliwości. Jeśli zdjęcie było gdzieś w Polsce opublikowane przed marcem 1989 bez zastrzeżenia praw (trzeba wskazać dokładnie: gdzie i kiedy; jak tu lub tu, to jest ono PD ({{PD-Poland}}). W przeciwnym razie, prawa wygasną dopiero w 2074 i do tego czasu potrzebujemy wolnej licencji od właściciela praw. Ze standardową "licencją" udzielaną przez NAC jest ten problem, że nie wspomina ona o tworzeniu utworów pochodnych (co jest na Commons wymagane) i nawet nie wiemy, czy NAC posiada prawa by jej udzielić (zależy od tego jakiej treści umowę archiwum zawarło z Fundacją Edwarda Hartwiga lub z jego spadkobiercami bezpośrednio). Być może @Polimerek potrafiłby coś więcej powiedzieć w tej materii (jeśli jest jakaś zgoda w OTRS), ale wątpię. Wg mnie potrzeba by tutaj działań jakiegoś wolontariusza we współpracy z NAC, który by kwestie prawne mógł wyjaśnić.
PS. Podobny problem (nieprawidłowy szablon licencji) dotyczy również innych zdjęć Hartwiga (i nie tylko Hartwiga) z NAC i, moim zdaniem, kwalifikują się one do usunięcia, jeśli ktoś zgłosi zastrzeżenia. Ja takich działań nie mam w planach. Ankry (talk) 06:53, 17 August 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Szkoda! Bardzo dziękuję za wyjaśnienie (informacje na stronie NAC były niejednoznaczne). Pozdrawiam--Joanna Kośmider (talk) 11:08, 17 August 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Copyright status: File:PL Kraków i Lwów w cywilizacji europejskiej.djvu

català  čeština  dansk  Deutsch  Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎  English  español  français  galego  hrvatski  italiano  magyar  Bahasa Melayu  norsk  norsk bokmål  norsk nynorsk  polski  português  português do Brasil  română  sicilianu  slovenčina  slovenščina  suomi  svenska  Türkçe  беларуская‎  беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎  български  македонски  русский  українська  ಕನ್ನಡ  ತುಳು  മലയാളം  한국어  日本語  עברית  العربيَّة  فارسی  中文  +/−
Warning sign
This media may be deleted.
Thanks for uploading File:PL Kraków i Lwów w cywilizacji europejskiej.djvu. I notice that the file page either doesn't contain enough information about the license or it contains contradictory information about the license, so the copyright status is unclear.

If you created this file yourself, then you must provide a valid copyright tag. For example, you can tag it with {{self|GFDL|cc-by-sa-all}} to release it under the multi-license GFDL plus Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike All-version license or you can tag it with {{PD-self}} to release it into the public domain. (See Commons:Copyright tags for the full list of license tags that you can use.)

If you did not create the file yourself or if it is a derivative of another work that is possibly subject to copyright protection, then you must specify where you found it (e.g. usually a link to the web page where you got it), you must provide proof that it has a license that is acceptable for Commons (e.g. usually a link to the terms of use for content from that page), and you must add an appropriate license tag. If you did not create the file yourself and the specific source and license information is not available on the web, you must obtain permission through the VRT system and follow the procedure described there.

Note that any unsourced or improperly licensed files will be deleted one week after they have been marked as lacking proper information, as described in criteria for deletion. If you have uploaded other files, please confirm that you have provided the proper information for those files, too. If you have any questions about licenses please ask at Commons:Village pump/Copyright or see our help pages. Thank you.

This action was performed automatically by AntiCompositeBot (talk) (FAQ) 17:05, 18 August 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Cepeda[edit]

Hi Ankry, it was my own photo, because it was taken by me. It is not a Cepeda selfie, someone else changed the file name, but it is not true, and maybe here was the missunderstading. In fact, the file itself was cropped and I appear besides him. Please change this advisory message. Thanks for your work. --Patrick (talk) 14:48, 23 August 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@Patrickpedia: Doubts need to be resolved. And contacting VRT seems to be the right way. Ankry (talk) 16:21, 23 August 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Notification about possible deletion[edit]

Commons-emblem-issue.svg
Some contents have been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether they should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at their entry.

If you created these pages, please note that the fact that they have been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with them, such as a copyright issue. Please see Commons:But it's my own work! for a guide on how to address these issues.

Please remember to respond to and – if appropriate – contradict the arguments supporting deletion. Arguments which focus on the nominator will not affect the result of the nomination. Thank you!

Affected:

FMM-1992 (talk) 08:57, 24 August 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Sanah[edit]

Za każdym razem wywalacie zdjęcie sanah, które udało mi się zdobyć dla wiki.... To bez sensu... Proszę o informację co muszę przesłać do Was żeby zdjęcie było ok ??

W jaki sposób mam przesłać kopię emaila od managera sanah ?? Oto mail ctrl/c ctrl/v


Jasna sprawa. To prosze tylko o aktualizację daty premiery plyty w angielskiej wersji wpisu - bo tam ciagle widnieje dzisiejsza data, a poprawna to 8 maja Dzieki!

Sent from my iPhone

> On 27 Mar 2020, at 19:18, [redakted] wrote: > >  > Z zasady Wikipedia podaje tylko encyklopedyczne dane. Podawanie daty pojawienia się na Youtube poszczególnych kawałków raczej nie należy do wiedzy encyklopedycznej i szybko zostało by to usunięte przez innych użytkowników portalu. Takie dane każdy kto jest zainteresowany znajdzie dość szybko w historii youtube. Pozostaje liczyć dalszych sukcesów by zbierać te najważniejsze info, wszak to dopiero początek. Pozdrawiam i dziękuję za materiały. > > Łukasz Świerczewski > > Dnia 27 marca 2020 15:41 [redacted] napisał(a): > > Witam ponownie, > > Dzięki za dodanie zdjęcia sanah do wpisu – a czy jest szansa na uzupełnienie także tych informacji, o których pisałem poniżej? > > Z góry ogromne dzięki, > > maciek > > > > From:[redacted] > Sent: Tuesday, March 24, 2020 1:21 PM > To: [redacted] > Subject: sanah wiki - materiały > > > > Hej, na prośbe ludzkości 😉 przesyłam zdjecie sanah do publikacji, mam nadzieję, że jest OK? > > > > Przy okazji mala prosba: we wpisie angielskim jak można to podmiencie datę premiery płyty „Krolowa dram” na nową – 8 maja. W polskiej wersji jest OK. > > > > I jeszcze do polskiego wpisu – w 2019 roku ujawniliśmy w streamingu audio i video trochę więcej utworów , także po było ich więcej, czyli jeżeli jest szansa na update tutaj to pełna chronologia wygląda tak: > > 11.02.2019 Bez słów > > 01.05.2019 Cząstka > > 19.05.2019 Siebie zapytasz > > 12.07.2019 Solo > > 29.08.2019 Aniołom szepnij to > > 06.09.2019 Idź > > 11.10.2019 Proszę pana > > 30.10.2019 Koronki > > 06.12.2019 projekt nieznajomy nie kłamie > > 03.01.2020 Szampan > > 28.01.2020 Melodia > > > > I Zuza (sanah) pytała czy jako zawód można dopisać także na końcu „skrzypaczka” – w orkiestrze na studiach gra w orkiestrze na skrzypcach 😊 > > > > Z góry dzięki za poprawki i ogólnie też dzięki za fajną robotę przy tych wpisach! > > Pozdrawiam, > > maciek > > > > > > [redacted] > > project manager > MAGIC RECORDS Sp. z o.o. > 02-384 WARSZAWA, UL. WŁODARZEWSKA 69 > TEL.: [redacted] NIP:113-19-68-978 > www.magicrecords.pl > > > > > — Preceding unsigned comment added by Cyku new (talk • contribs) 20:17, 24 August 2021 (UTC) Cyku new (talk) 20:17, 24 August 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@Cyku new: Zgodę musi przesłać osobiście właściciel praw: czyli albo fotograf, albo osoba, która zawarła z fotografem umowę o przeniesienia praw autorskich, wraz z tą umową. Wolontariusze VRT nie mogą akceptować kopii umów przesyłanych przez pośredników. Formą jaką musi mieć zgoda znajdzie na tej stronie. Zgoda "do publikacji" jest bezużyteczna. Jeśli agent nie jest fotografem, musi wykazać, że fotograf mu przekazał swoje prawa. I pamiętaj, że zamieszczanie na wiki cudzych danych osobowych jest poważnym naruszeniem zasad. Swoje można, cudzych nie. Ankry (talk) 22:05, 24 August 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Gustavo Mohme[edit]

Hello, sorry for not having responded and about the license is that I have seen that several images in Wikipedia have it. Now about the author I have no idea who he is but I am giving a reference to where I found the photo that comes from the page Gustavo Mohme Foundation , the image is not edited at all and I decided to upload it since I saw that several Politicians articles have no photo on them. I did not have any bad intention of uploading it without giving credits about where the image comes from and I hope they can restore it just like the other image of Henry Pease. Greetings--Junior2912 (talk) 05:31, 26 August 2021 (UTC)Junior2912Reply[reply]

@Junior2912: We cannot host images without evidence of free license (granted by the photographer) until their copyright expires (in US: 95 years after publication or 120 years after creation). In order to upload such photos you need either (1) meet the polititian and made him a photo yourselves, or (2) identify the photographer and convince them to grant a free license (that allows eg. derivative works and commercial use), or (3) find a photo that has already been published under such a license by the photographer. Some Wikipedias (eg. English) allow non-free photos under Fair Use; but this generally applies to images of deceased people only. False licensing claims are copyright violation, which is against Wikimedia Commons policies and violation of law. Ankry (talk) 08:18, 26 August 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Regarding the Possible Sock Behavior of Marco56333, Adad01023, and Tmc210523[edit]

Hello. I'm Timmyboger from zh.wiki and I'm currently looking into the possible sock relationship that exists between the accounts Marco56333, Adad01023, and Tmc210523 on a local discussion page here. As a result of one of the participants of the discussion @Itcfangye: requested comment from a current steward, I would like to ask for your opinion on this subject and the possibility to conduct a checkuser request on commons, given that you were part of the discussion on an undeletion request that involves the members I'm suspecting to be either socking or meatpuppetry to disrupt zh.wiki, shown here and here.
Some relevant discussions in the past for your information: zh:Wikipedia:元維基用戶查核請求/2021/9#Marco56333, zh:Wikipedia:元維基用戶查核請求/2021/9#Marco56333_2, and Commons:Deletion_requests/File:自拍11.jpg.
So what happened was that I was looking into zh:Wikipedia:元維基用戶查核請求/2021/9#Marco56333, a page for requesting checkuser on meta since the local checkusers were suspended by office action, and I noticed that the image Tmc210523, a suspected user, was constantly attempting to add is the same image Adad01023 has imported on commons, which is now requested for deletion by another user. Then I looked into the deletion requests and found that Marco56333 and Adad01023 seems to have a relationship, given they participated in the same undeletion request for M自拍照, which you participated, and have shown an odd relationship to me. You may have noticed that when Marco56333 claimed authorship on the file M自拍照, the authorship actually belongs to Adad01023, showing an interesting relationship, in my opinion, between these two accounts.
I also looked into the files Adad01023 have uploaded and noticed an odd pattern. He or she has been using signatures on the files he or she uploaded that does not correspond to the username, shown in File:自拍11.jpg and File:Catcodle.jpg. It is suspicious to me that he or she would not use his or her own signature, and, most importantly, I wonder why he or she would use the name "test" when labeling the author for the image on File:Catcodle.jpg.
Another component regarding this when the checkuser requests were done locally is that during requests like zh:Wikipedia:元維基用戶查核請求/2021/9#Marco56333 and zh:Wikipedia:元維基用戶查核請求/2021/9#Marco56333_2, there are already other members of the community showed that there is a correlation between Marco56333 and Tmc210523 regarding their editing interest.
However, there is a previous checkuser request that the steward indirectly showed my flaw in this argument. In meta:Steward_requests/Checkuser/2021-09#Marco56333@zh.wikipedia, the steward who conducted the checkuser marked the users Marco56333 and Tmc210523 as Symbol unlikely.svg Unlikely. As we all probably know, checkuser is a method that checkusers use technically and might not reflect the actual outcome. Given that the comment the steward gave in meta:User_talk:Sotiale#Would_a_checkuser_between_different_projects_be_possible? in response to this subject that involves the disruption in both the commons and zh.wiki community, I would like to request your opinion on this subject, and, given that the previous checkuser result does not indicate the IP relationships between these accounts, would it be reasonable to suspect that these accounts are meatpuppetry instead of just normal socks?
Thank you for taking your time to read this and provide me with constructional feedback regarding this subject, in advanced. --) 08:25, 18 September 2021 (UTC)
Editor note: Sorry for the texts that were not formatted correctly, and I'm sorry for the inconvenience for your need to translate some Mandarin (and possibly English) into your home language. --) 08:28, 18 September 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@Timmyboger: I am sorry, but I am afraid that I cannot help you. Sockpuppetry investigation is out of scope of my Commons activity. Ankry (talk) 08:49, 18 September 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Would you mind to at least provide me with some information regarding the images themselves and your opinion about the problems? Like is the misuse of signatures prohibited based on commons policy? I'm a mainly zh.wiki editor so I'm not quite familiar with the system here. --) 08:53, 18 September 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Timmyboger: Generally, only photos that are original, non-preprocessed versions from the camera and that were never published before can be uploaded as {{Own}}. In other cases, the uploader is required to provide an evidence of free license. If signature in EXIF points to anybody else than the uploader, it is also a copyright doubt. Watermarked photos are not original. But the uploader can try to convince the comunity that they are indeed the author in case of doubts. Ankry (talk) 11:07, 18 September 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

You are invited to comment on a subject at "COM:VP/C"[edit]

As you took part in the previous discussion surrounding this template, I would like to invite you to the current discussion about the template "PD-South VietnamGov" as editors over at the Vietnamese-language Wikisource have been debating its validity and seek help from users who have more experience in dealing with these kinds of copyright © disputes. --Donald Trung 『徵國單』 (No Fake News 💬) (WikiProject Numismatics 💴) (Articles 📚) 11:36, 7 October 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Bot help needed[edit]

Hi, we need help in re-categorizing contributions of Wiki Loves Monuments Junior participants who have uploaded photos through the main competition uploader instead of the Junior Campaign. We need to have them in the appropriate school categories (here is a list of usernames and categories). I will be very grateful for your help :) Natalia Szafran-Kozakowska (WMPL) (talk) 10:26, 18 October 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]


File:LL-Q809 (pol)-Olaf-absolutystka.wav has been marked for speedy deletion. (Reason: None)

Why not upload a picture of a plant, animal, or anything else which fits into our scope. You can contribute any media type you want, including but not limited to images, videos, music, and 3D models. Start uploading now! If you don't have anything to upload at the moment, why not take a look at our best images or best videos, sounds and 3D models. If you have any doubts/questions don't hesitate to visit our help desk.

User who nominated the file for deletion (Nominator) : Olaf.

I'm a computer program; please don't ask me questions but ask the user who nominated your file(s) for deletion or at our Help Desk. //Deletion Notification Bot (talk) 18:26, 20 October 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Sela Ward image[edit]

This is indeed our image. We own the rights to the image and can use it freely. Please put the image back up. Thank you 2600:1010:B163:90EA:ACEC:FD4F:3669:EC66 15:30, 2 November 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Our? Photos cannot be works of joint authorship. And if not uploaded personally by the photographer, evidence of free license trackad to the photographer is needed; via email to VRT if some info or documents are not public. Ankry (talk) 15:54, 2 November 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Deleting some no permission since files[edit]

Hello @Ankry. Hope you're having a nice day.

I am here to request you to delete some no permission since files which have well over crossed the 7-day notice period

1) File:Mathias Höschel.jpg
2) File:KCochrane2017.jpg
3) File:Laura Evans.jpg
4) File:Oleg Shadskiy.jpg
5) File:Patricia de FIGUEIRÉRO 2019 @LaurenceGuenoun.jpg
6) File:MUNN8391.jpg
7) File:Rodrigo 2016.jpg
8) File:Rodrigo de la Sierra Escultor.jpg
9) File:Płk. Franciszek Jasiński.jpg
10) File:Portræt af Sergei Sviatchenko.jpg
11) File:Sandro Malinowski.jpg
12) File:Sirko Archut (2).jpg
13) File:SirkoArchut2006.01.23S01-0101.jpg
14) File:Роман Игоревич Терюшков.png
15) File:Tarick Salmaci.jpg
16) File:Balázs Máté.jpg

Thank you in advance for doing! Contributers2020Talk to me here 04:01, 23 November 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Prośba[edit]

Chciałbym prosić o zmianę nazw dla dwóch plików:

File:Zbigniew Pasek ChAT 2021-11-26 003.jpg na File:Jakub Slawik ChAT 2021-11-26 003.jpg

File:Zbigniew Pasek ChAT 2021-11-26 004.jpg na File:Jakub Slawik ChAT 2021-11-26 004.jpg

Może to i drobiazg, ale aby nikogo nie wprowadzać w błąd wypadałoby zmienić nazwy. Dziękuję. Leszek Jańczuk (talk) 01:19, 28 November 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Prośba w sprawie wandala / trolla[edit]

Rzecz dotyczy usera "82.25.126.28, PolishBoyInUK, Gejzir.owski". Przypuszczam że to ten sam. Wandalizuje na commons, english wiki i prawdopodobnie na innych. Podaję teraz zrevertowane przeze mnie owoce jego "tfurczości" na english wiki [1] i na commons [2]. Jest szczególnie zjadliwy ponieważ dokonuje często dwóch zmian pod rząd i revert staje się skomplikowany (Patrz: wkład 82.25.126.28). Szczególną bezczelnością jest załładowana przez niego na commons sfejkowana panorama Helu z drapaczem chmur [File:Hel Panorama 2020.jpg] jak i grafiki jakoby Lidla na Helu (po prawdzie we Władysławowie) i McDonaldsa na Helu. Wypada skontrolować wszystko co zrobił i zaladował na commons i w innych projektach. Pozdro. 2A01:C23:951E:AB00:153F:592E:8690:7949 22:54, 28 November 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Ponownie wszystko zwandalizował[edit]

Patrz edycje z 28 listopada tu [3] 2A01:C23:951E:AB00:153F:592E:8690:7949 23:35, 28 November 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Sugeruję pójść z tym do ANU. Ankry (talk) 23:39, 28 November 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Dzięki, zgłosiłem tylko jak im (ANU) wytłumaczyć że na Helu nie ma drapaczy chmur [4], że na Hel nie dojeżdżają pociągi elektryczne [5], że na Helu nie ma przejść podziemnych [6], że Hel to nie Rumia, że Chłapowo należy do gminy Władysławowo [7] a ulica Rdestowa w Gdyni z zawieszoną trakcją trolejbusową [8] to nie wieś Chłapowo. Co gorsza, User "RichardKiwi" ma mnie już za wandala :( a prawdziwy troll/wandal rączki zaciera i dalej wandalizuje. Dzięki, może jutro coś się z tym ruszy. 2A01:C23:951E:AB00:153F:592E:8690:7949 00:26, 29 November 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

File:Ghafari1.png[edit]

Hi Ankry,

Sorry I did not reply sooner to the undeletion request of File:Ghafari1.png (I thought the request would stick for more than two days). The image is of the 1979 Iranian revolution, so shouldn't that meet Template:PD-Iran? As far as I've searched the author of the photograph seems to be anonymous, and here it says the image is in the public domain. What would the image need to be accepted to Wikimedia? Ypatch (talk) 07:48, 30 November 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@Ypatch: The template says about publication date. And no publication date and place has been required. Was the photo published during revolution? When and where exactly? We cannot apply AGF to alamy; they are not a reliable source after making false copyright claims multiple times. Per policy, it is up to uploader to provide an evidence of the photo PD status. For unclear cases we need to apply COM:PCP. Ankry (talk) 08:05, 30 November 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Hi Ankry, thank you for your kind response. But I'm confused about how this works.
This image here, for instance, there is no evidence given that the source is "Iran Press service" (which goes to a deadlink). It also says the author is "شهاب میرزایی (BBC)" (Shahab Mirzaei from BBC Persian), which does not make any sense because according to Mirzaei's BBC profile page, Mirzaei started his "press career in a women's newspaper in 1998". That picture was taken in 1986 in Iraq, in Saddam Hussein's private quarters, so the chances that a (then) teenage Iranian who hadn't started their journalistic career would have access to Saddam Hussein in the middle of the Iran-Iraq war are more than unlikely.
So how why is an image like that ok but this one isn't?
Thank you for your assistance in helping me understand this, Ypatch (talk) 07:28, 1 December 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Ypatch: Nobody declared that this image is 100% OK: there is no license review there. If you think, that it is against Commons policies, feel free to nominate it for deletion raising appropriate doubts. However, you may need to see COM:GOF. Ankry (talk) 10:59, 1 December 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Question about copy right[edit]

Hi Ankry,

You helped in the past with a question about copy right usage of images, so maybe you can help me again? I have a question about this image here. It says the source of the image is "Hoover Institution Archives" but I don't see the image in the link given, and also don't see permission by the Institution to use the image (or by the author). Is this image infringing Wikimedia copyright rules? Thank you for your assistance. Ypatch (talk) 08:53, 17 December 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

COM:AN[edit]

বাংলা  Deutsch  English  español  français  magyar  italiano  日本語  македонски  മലയാളം  मराठी  Nederlands  português  русский  sicilianu  svenska  Türkçe  Tagalog  中文(简体)  中文(繁體)  +/−


Gtk-dialog-info.svg
Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion at Commons:Administrators noticeboard. This is in relation to an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you.
--Vauxford (talk) 10:05, 23 December 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Commons-emblem-issue.svg
File:1990 Vauxhall Astra LX 1.4 Front.jpg has been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether it should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry.

If you created this file, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with it, such as a copyright issue. Please see Commons:But it's my own work! for a guide on how to address these issues.

Please remember to respond to and – if appropriate – contradict the arguments supporting deletion. Arguments which focus on the nominator will not affect the result of the nomination. Thank you!

King of ♥ 20:38, 23 December 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

You asked me and Missvain to be more careful when seeking a licence on a page. I imagine this means that you are already familiar with the silhouette of a man in a circle at or near the foot of the page. I was not. Even when one finds it one has to click it. One could click every other link on the page and become bored and give up prior to finding the correct one. Thank you for undeleting the file. This proves that the system works. I have also now learned where to find the licence that the web designer of the page has chosen to hide in plain sight and then obscure. Timtrent (talk) 14:16, 31 December 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@Timtrent: Yes. And the more users active in DRs are familiar with such issues, the better Commons is. That is why I pinged you. We laern all the time :). Ankry (talk) 14:45, 31 December 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Timtrent: Yes, that's the Creative Commons logo - you can learn more about Creative Commons licensing at http://www.creativecommons.org. - Ankry - It was a simple oversight on my end. I have reviewed over 1,000 deletion cases in the past two weeks to clear backlog. Making one mistake ain't so bad when doing the most thankless job on Commons LOL... :) Missvain (talk) 16:23, 31 December 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Text by Géo André[edit]

Hello. I think that we can assume that Géo André is "mort pour le France". Therefore, his works are not in the PD yet in France. Here is the detail of my opinion about this case: Commons talk:Deletion requests/File:Raoul Paoli - Article Miroir des Sport 1926.pdf. I have changed the category of the deletion page accordingly. Best regards, BrightRaven (talk) 10:24, 3 January 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

How we will see unregistered users[edit]

Hi!

You get this message because you are an admin on a Wikimedia wiki.

When someone edits a Wikimedia wiki without being logged in today, we show their IP address. As you may already know, we will not be able to do this in the future. This is a decision by the Wikimedia Foundation Legal department, because norms and regulations for privacy online have changed.

Instead of the IP we will show a masked identity. You as an admin will still be able to access the IP. There will also be a new user right for those who need to see the full IPs of unregistered users to fight vandalism, harassment and spam without being admins. Patrollers will also see part of the IP even without this user right. We are also working on better tools to help.

If you have not seen it before, you can read more on Meta. If you want to make sure you don’t miss technical changes on the Wikimedia wikis, you can subscribe to the weekly technical newsletter.

We have two suggested ways this identity could work. We would appreciate your feedback on which way you think would work best for you and your wiki, now and in the future. You can let us know on the talk page. You can write in your language. The suggestions were posted in October and we will decide after 17 January.

Thank you. /Johan (WMF)

18:11, 4 January 2022 (UTC)

0 × 0 pixels PDF[edit]

Hi, Do you know how to fix this problem? i.e. File:सम्पूर्ण गाँधी वांग्मय Sampurna Gandhi, vol. 14.pdf and all files in Category:Collected Works of Mahatma Gandhi (Hindi). Thanks, Yann (talk) 22:22, 30 January 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@Yann: The problem that has recenly been worked on is when the metadata are totally missing due to changed method how they are stored in the databese and concerns mainly undeleted old files/file versions (phab:T298417). This does not seem to be the case here: number of pages is available, but their size is not and likely internal OCR is not also. I noticed a similar problem with this file a week ago. But it seems the metadata appeared after some time. So, maybe, just wait a week or two?
I have tested upload of the "broken" file on the test site and (unlike commons) it worked fine there just after upload. So I suggested tthe pl.ws community to try to upload it locally (but there was no consensus to try). I noticed also that detecting page size with ImageMagick's identify command took over 90s on my PC. So maybe, the problem is timeout-related and the metadata are retrieved in a job-queue or some regular maintanance process insted of "just after upload"?
I notised also that thumbnails for the file with "broken" metadata can be still properly generated, so (theoretically) ProofreadPage can work with them -> see phab:T299754 suggeston.
Note:
identify सम्पूर्ण_गाँधी_वांग्मय_Sampurna_Gandhi,_vol._14.pdf
took 242s on my PC... Ankry (talk) 23:09, 30 January 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Hi, Thanks for your answer. Waiting for an hour would be OK. More than that is not. Right now, waiting won't solve the issue. I noticed something weird: for some versions, it looks OK just after upload, and then thumbnails dispeared after a few minutes. See the screenshot I posted on Phab. Yann (talk) 10:28, 31 January 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Yann: I would suggest you to try to upload (maybe one of them) locally to Wikisource, if possible. This needs admin rights in Wikisource to overwrite the Commons version under the same name. Ankry (talk) 10:44, 31 January 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

UDR[edit]

Hi, Could you please sign Commons:Undeletion_requests/Current_requests#Files_uploaded_by_Mdale. Thanks, Yann (talk) 13:34, 17 February 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Thanks for your help in closing this issue :-)

Shouldn't the "TimedText" and "missing" categories be removed from the file? Zabek (talk) 15:42, 17 February 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Sorry, please disregard this. It looks OK now. Thanks again for your help! Zabek (talk) 21:18, 17 February 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Why...[edit]

...did you reopen a 12-year-old deletion when no additional evidence was presented that the image is free, only the personal feelings of an editor? Beyond My Ken (talk) 23:15, 18 February 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@Beyond My Ken: Because nobody opposed this at COM:UDR and the user requesting this is expocted to provide such evidence. Ankry (talk) 06:55, 19 February 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Such evidence should be presented *before* an image is undeleted, not after. Beyond My Ken (talk) 23:09, 20 February 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Beyond My Ken: It was suggested in the original DR that copyright to the promo photo expired this year, if it was registered. So doubts whether the initial deletion reason was valid or whether it is still valid is enough to restart discussion. If an evidence was provided in UDR, the photo would be undeleted without discussion. Ankry (talk) 00:43, 21 February 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Sorry, that wasn't "evidence" it was rank speculation. Beyond My Ken (talk) 01:38, 21 February 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
...accepted by everybody in the initial DR. And that is why some discussion ia needed. DR is the right place. Ankry (talk) 06:45, 21 February 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Moreover, if you think that reopenning the DR was against policies, you can ask another admin to speedy close it. But I would oppose such decision. Ankry (talk) 07:13, 21 February 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
No, I'm not that concerned about it, I just wanted to point out what I thought was an inappropriate decision on your part. Beyond My Ken (talk) 20:37, 21 February 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Please review File talk:Microsoft Edge logo (2019).png#Maximum resolution not to exceed 128×12 px. If what I wrote is correct, will you revert the 1,024×1,024 version uploaded by Laftp (talk · contribs)? Thank you. Senator2029 08:46, 8 March 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

If MS uploaded the higher resolution version in the repo with MIT license declared, I see no problem with this file. If you disagree, start a DR again. Ankry (talk) 10:13, 8 March 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

chila and finlak deletion[edit]

Very sorry but you’ve redeleted the chila and finals photos before I've had a chance to upload higher quality versions as requested to prove my ownership. Im about to go away for a few days so won't be able to do anything more until mon 13 June but I hope meantime you can restore the photos so I can add the high q versions. thanks davidz — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dz3 (talk • contribs) 14:07, 4 June 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@Dz3: You can still upload the higher resolution version and restart UDR request if it become deleted. Note, that stardard timing for a response in COM:UDR is 24 hours; when starting a request you should ensure that you have time to handle it.
PS. please do not place new sections on top of a discussion page, unless instructed to do so. Ankry (talk) 15:53, 4 June 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
OK thanks david Dz3 (talk) 09:47, 13 June 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

VRT[edit]

You helped me once with the OTRS/VRT tickets of organ pictures. This time it is about the following pictures. The author thinks he has sent the licence to the Volunteer Response Team. Could you check if something has arrived? File:Groningse Bachvereniging (01).jpg File:Groningse Bachvereniging (02).jpg File:Groningse Bachvereniging (03).jpg File:Groningse Bachvereniging (04).jpg File:Johan van der Meer.jpg Thanks and greetings, --Wikiwal (talk) 12:12, 11 June 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@Wikiwal: I am sorry, but I cannot help: I am no longer an operator of the permissions queue. Ankry (talk) 12:47, 11 June 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Okay. Best wishes! --Wikiwal (talk) 12:58, 11 June 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

[edit]

Hello,

I am messaging you because a contest for a sound logo for Wikimedia is being developed and your opinion as a Wikimedia Commons admin is appreciated. My team would like to know if it is possible for the top finalist sound logos in the contest to have attribution temporarily hidden from public view until all the votes are final? The idea is to let the public judge the sound logo contestants based on the merit of the logo, not the person or people who made it. Again, any feedback is appreciated.

Thank you,

VGrigas (WMF) (talk) 17:25, 17 June 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Email[edit]

@A09090091: I am afraid I cannot help you, at least non in near future. I am hardly active on-wiki recently, and mostly in non-technical areas. I doubd if I am able to dig through filters in reasonable time period. Ankry (talk) 18:17, 30 June 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Ankry: Sorry for bothering you, will find help elsewhere. I thought you were still active (I checked some filter creations and you last contributions). Have a nice day, A09090091 (talk) 19:42, 30 June 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hello Ankry,

Please update "File: International Cricket Council members – Africa.png" and "File: International Cricket Council members – Europe.png"

I have added some notes for updating information in those images.

Thank you. Purnendu Bhowmik Shuvro (talk) 07:27, 4 July 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

The files are not protected. Ankry (talk) 10:00, 4 July 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Usunięcie zgłoszonych plików[edit]

Witam @Ankry. Mam nadzieję, że masz spokojny dzień i będziesz miał chwilę czasu by zająć się moją sprawą Commons:Deletion requests/User:Ciszema. Dwukrotnie pisałem do Administratorów, ostatnio Commons talk:Administrators/pl jednak brak jakiejkolwiek reakcji czy chociażby odpowiedzi. Pozdrawiam! Termida (talk) 06:00, 9 July 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@Termida: Wypowiedziałem się, ale nie podejmę decyzji w tej sprawie. Zostawiam ją innym administratorom. Ankry (talk) 20:29, 9 July 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Ankry: Odpowiedziałem na wątpliwości na stronie dyskusji. Termida (talk) 18:14, 10 July 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Regarding my topic on the Undeletion Request page[edit]

It's been several days now since you were pinged to make a determination on the undeletion request for File:ZSU-37-2 Yenisei.jpg and have yet to post any response on the matter. I'm just contacting you here in case you somehow missed that ping, but if your lack of a response is because you do not want to get involved in this dispute then I understand and will seek assistance via another admin. (If that's how that's supposed to work, from what I've gathered it seems like there isn't really a dedicated team/ or system for arbitrating/overturning admin abuses and/or mistakes.)

If you do intend on resolving the topic then feel free to post any further questions you have on said undeletion request thread and I'll answer them to the best of my ability. Although frankly idk how much more there really is to say on the matter that hasn't already been said, multiple times by now. Sxbbetyy (talk) 17:40, 8 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I was not pinged there. My only comment in this request was to notify the deleting admin, that you probably forgot. Ankry (talk) 17:43, 9 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]