User talk:Avraham/Archive 1

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.
Archive 1
| Archive 2



Afrikaans | Alemannisch | العربية | Asturianu | Azərbaycanca | Беларуская | Беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ | Български | Bahasa Banjar | বাংলা | Català | Нохчийн | Čeština | Cymraeg | Dansk | Deutsch | Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ | Zazaki | Ελληνικά | English | Esperanto | Español | Euskara | Estremeñu | فارسی | Suomi | Français | Frysk | Galego | עברית | हिन्दी | Hrvatski | Magyar | Հայերեն | Interlingua | Bahasa Indonesia | Íslenska | Italiano | 日本語 | ქართული | 한국어 | Kurdî | Latina | Lietuvių | Македонски | മലയാളം | मराठी | Bahasa Melayu | မြန်မာဘာသာ | Plattdüütsch | नेपाली | Nederlands | Norsk bokmål | Occitan | Ирон | Polski | Português | Português do Brasil | Română | Русский | Sicilianu | Scots | සිංහල | Slovenčina | Slovenščina | Shqip | Српски / srpski | Basa Sunda | Svenska | Kiswahili | தமிழ் | ไทย | Tagalog | Türkçe | Українська | Vèneto | Tiếng Việt | 中文(简体)‎ | 中文(繁體)‎ | 中文(台灣)‎ | +/−


Hello, Avraham/Archive 1, and welcome to Wikimedia Commons. I hope you like it here and decide to stay. Here are a few good links for newcomers:

  • First steps - will tell you everything you need to know about how to upload, what licenses are OK and what information to include in your image summary
  • Babel guide - Commons is truly international, here's how to handle some multilingual issues
  • Commons FAQ - has some answers to common Commons questions
  • The Community Portal - help us organise and improve our files
  • A Gallery of your images - please correct any that are untagged or orphans (put them in a category)

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Commoner! If you haven't already done so, you might also want to open an account on a Wikipedia in your preferred language, or one of the other Wikimedia projects. Please be sure to sign your name on Talk and vote pages using four tildes (~~~~) to produce your name and the current date. If you have any questions, drop a note on the village pump, the Help desk, or contact an administrator. I look forward to your contributions!


To me you look like you would make a very good admin but I honestly think it is a little early. That doesn't mean others will agree though! The user page does you far more justice now too. You know where I am if I can help (same on meta, en wp and a few other places!). Regards --Herby talk thyme 14:41, 26 October 2007 (UTC)

I think you may be right to have withdrawn. Assuming you stick around and get to know us I would not expect to oppose you in the future - regards --Herby talk thyme 13:19, 28 October 2007 (UTC)
Er no to the mistaken identity, wouldn't mind a link if you have time though, cheers --Herby talk thyme 08:02, 29 October 2007 (UTC)
Wow fame :), thanks for that & the input. Actually my history goes back a bit further, redirects where I'm active, reagrds --Herby talk thyme 14:38, 29 October 2007 (UTC)
Just to say I'm thinking, you'll get mail within 24 hours! Cheers --Herby talk thyme 16:55, 29 October 2007 (UTC)


Why? [1] [2]? Is there any Background, any discussion about this? You are a very new user? --Fg68at de:Disk 08:27, 8 November 2007 (UTC)

Feeling bad

Not having got back to you - time has been short. I'll hope to get to stuff over the weekend. Cheers --Herby talk thyme 09:37, 9 November 2007 (UTC)


Hi Avi. Thank you for your support in my RfA, which has been successful. Regards. — Xavier, 22:06, 14 November 2007 (UTC)

Image:Baltz lewis galerie zander koeln 010907.jpg

Hello, a few minutes ago I have forwarded an email according this image to Please check whether it is useful to the complaining about this image. --GeorgHHtalk   17:31, 13 December 2007 (UTC)

Renaming a file

Hi Avi, unfortunatelly, as far as I know it's not possible to rename an image. The standard way to rename an image is as the {{welcome}} template shows:

Did you want to rename or move a file? Simply upload the file again and mark the old one like this: {{bad name|Correct name}}

Sorry. Best regards --Ecemaml (talk to me/habla conmigo) 21:53, 17 December 2007 (UTC)

No problem :-) --Boricuæddie 01:01, 18 December 2007 (UTC)

Cathedral of the Sacred Heart Richmond.jpg

About Image:Cathedral of the Sacred Heart Richmond.jpg: I'm not actually sure how to credit this. I cropped and rotated another user's image, and I'd like to give them credit, but I don't want to overwrite their image. Is there a method for doing this?--Patrickneil 16:20, 18 December 2007 (UTC)


I can't find this image at, have you a concrete link or are you assuming that it is a copyvio? --GeorgHHtalk   22:08, 18 December 2007 (UTC)

Congratulations, Dear Administrator!

Čeština | Deutsch | Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ | English | Español | فارسی | Suomi | Français | Magyar | Հայերեն | Italiano | 日本語 | 한국어 | Македонски | മലയാളം | Plattdüütsch | Nederlands | Português | Português do Brasil | Русский | Sicilianu | Slovenčina | Svenska | +/−

An offering for our new administrator from your comrades...

Avraham, congratulations! You now have the rights of administrator on Commons. Please take a moment to read the Commons:Administrators page and watchlist related pages (in particular Commons:Administrators' noticeboard and Commons:Deletion requests), before launching yourself into page deletions, page protections, account blockings or modifications of protected pages. The majority of the actions of administrators can be reversed by the other admins, except for history merges which must thus be treated with particular care.

Please feel free to join us on IRC: #wikimedia-commons @ You may find Commons:Guide to adminship to be useful reading.

Please also check or add your entry to Commons:List_of_administrators and the related lists by language and date it references...

EugeneZelenko 15:23, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

Congratulations! RedCoat 14:28, 3 January 2008 (UTC)

« שמועס »

Dear friend please come to ‎« שמועס »‎ to see if we can use this channel as a place for Yiddish chats. This form should work at ‎װיקיװערטערבוך‎ when you are using Firefox, Konqueror or Opera. Unfortunatelly if does not work yet in Internet Explorer.‎
Please search in ‎װיקיװערטערבוך:הויפט זייט‎ at the seventh item in נאוויגאציע.‎ It is ‎« שמועס »‎.‎ I assume that you agree to add such an « שמועס » item at װיקיפּעדיע‎ to נאוויגאציע as soon as our friends m:n:en:user:bawolff ... have fixed the code. Please do not hesitate to write your comments in the comment section.‎
Please make proposals about translating of the text / help: Only Latin characters and Latin numbers are allowed as « Your Nickname: » . Exceptions are « tekhniker|avek » , « ales-viser » etc. Please add some explanations about accessing the channel « #kavehoyz » by using the page chatwikizine: One should select the channel « #kavehoyz » from the channel list, select a Nickname and hit enter. All other fields are optional.‎
Thanks in advance and Good luck! Best regards
‫·‏לערי ריינהארט‏·‏T‏·‏m‏:‏Th‏·‏T‏·‏email me‏·‏‬ 07:05, 9 January 2008 (UTC)

File:Yunus Nobel stage.jpg


someone complained about this image on OTRS, could you tell me who the original uploader was?

--Steven Fruitsmaak (Reply) 20:44, 15 February 2008 (UTC)

Abbey Mills

I am sorry to say that I don't have picture of the proposed site. I will try to get one in the next few weeks. Thanks for the tips and pointers! Gordo 22:18, 21 February 2008 (UTC)

Category:Male politicians

Category discussion notification Category:Male politicians has been listed at Commons:Categories for discussion so that the community can discuss ways in which it should be changed. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry.

If you created this category, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for discussion 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. If the category is up for deletion because it has been superseded, consider the notion that although the category may be deleted, your hard work (which we all greatly appreciate) lives on in the new category.
In all cases, please do not take the category discussion personally. It is never intended as such. Thank you!

Беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ | Deutsch | English | Español | Français | עברית | Magyar | Italiano | 日本語 | Македонски | Polski | Português | Русский | +/−

--Patstuart (talk) 06:18, 25 April 2008 (UTC)

TUSC token 414baf2920e5f459f686fc4b83386524

I am now proud owner of a TUSC account!

Take a look

Hi Avraham,
as Yontanh seems to be offline, could you kindly check whether Image:Rabbi at purim.jpg is acceptable or somewhat "defamatory" or violating personality rights. I'm not very comfortable with the image, but I'm not jewish, so I might be wrong. --Túrelio (talk) 07:40, 3 July 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for your reply. See or vote at Commons:Deletion requests/Image:Rabbi at purim.JPG and Commons:Deletion requests/Image:Rabbi at purim.jpg. --Túrelio (talk) 08:45, 3 July 2008 (UTC)

Thank you for participating

Purple flowers on Capitol Hill.jpg Thanks for taking part in my RFA. It passed 29-5-0, and I appreciate and will take to heart all of the feedback, and do my absolute best to better Commons with the trust placed in me by the community as a whole. rootology (T) 17:15, 31 July 2008 (UTC)

TUSC token 670144c4707b1667d02885b1fb3e3543

I am now proud owner of a TUSC account! -- Avi (talk) 05:10, 4 August 2008 (UTC)

Image Tagging Image:Patrick Rothfuss.jpg

Беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ | Català | Čeština | Dansk | Deutsch | Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ | Ελληνικά | English | Español | فارسی | Suomi | Français | Galego | עברית | Hrvatski | Magyar | Հայերեն | Italiano | 日本語 | 한국어 | Lietuvių | Македонски | മലയാളം | Plattdüütsch | Nederlands | Norsk bokmål | Polski | Português | Română | Русский | Sicilianu | Slovenčina | Slovenščina | Svenska | Türkçe | Українська | اردو | Tiếng Việt | 中文(简体)‎ | 中文(繁體)‎ | +/−

Warning sign
This media may be deleted.

Thanks for uploading Image:Patrick Rothfuss.jpg. This image is missing permission information. A source is given, but there is no proof that the author or copyright holder agreed to license the file under the given license. Please provide a link to an appropriate webpage with license information, or send an email with copy of a written permission to OTRS (

Unless the permission information is given, the image may be speedy deleted after seven days. Thank you. Kimse (talk) 01:40, 3 September 2008 (UTC)


Hello. I've been trying to merge my account to en.wikipedia, but because you have rangeblocked it, I can't merge it. I know I'm not using it now, but I'll soon be making a request to change my username so that I am using it.--MrIPA (talk) 17:35, 29 November 2008 (UTC)


Hello Avraham. Can you rename File:Bombay Presidenct (1882).jpg to File:Bombay Presidency (1832).jpg Kensplanet (talk) 07:39, 24 December 2008 (UTC)

Deletion of picture for privacy reasons

Hi Avraham, I would be very thankful if you could speedy-delete File:User olve.png for me for privacy reasons... -- Olve Utne (talk) 07:18, 9 January 2009 (UTC)

deletion of File:That luang1.jpg

Hello Avraham. If you'd tell me to confirm the copyright via email I would have done it right away. If you have a look at my German User Page you can easily identify my with my full name. Anyway: To whom do I have to write an email? --Spolloman (talk) 19:13, 10 February 2009 (UTC)

Need your help

Hello Avraham!

Can you have a look on these 2 deletion discussions about NATO-photos, please:

I think the copyright situation is clear in both cases.

Thank you, High Contrast (talk) 17:14, 11 February 2009 (UTC)

No copyright on facts

In reaction to Commons:Deletion requests/File:Pembina-oilsands.jpg - there is no copyright on facts. /Pieter Kuiper (talk) 18:53, 12 February 2009 (UTC)

Pierson's Puppeteer.jpg deletion

See: [3]

This isn't something I'm much invested in, but the rationale that it was deleted because it was a "screen shot from a game" may not be valid. This was an original creation by me using the Creature Creator stand alone program by Maxis (for Spore). The deletion rationale would be similar to getting rid of all images created using Microsoft Paint, or any image captured from Second Life or World of Warcraft, or similar games using user created images. Feel free to let me know if I'm missing a guideline or policy for using such images.

Creature Creator was the mechanism by which I created an image to which I owned the intellectual property rights (and had released using suggested CC licensing) - the image itself was not inherent to any Maxis game.

Anyway, my hackles are not up. This is no big deal, but if deletion of such images is standard, I'd be happy to join the crew that is pruning all of these from the Commons. --Quartermaster (talk) 16:31, 19 February 2009 (UTC)

This should remain deleted, it is clearly a copyrighted work of Maxis. The EULA for Spore (the main product that "creature creator" is a sub-product of) clearly states Maxis retains all copyrights for all the "characters" and artwork. Even though this user assembled the parts to create this creature, Maxis still retains all commercial copyright for the use of that image using their creative works. There would be no legal ground to use this image in a commercial capacity, so it couldn't be released under a license that is acceptable for Commons. Raeky (talk) 14:15, 1 March 2009 (UTC)
See my replies on my talk page. Raeky (talk) 16:18, 1 March 2009 (UTC)
I'm having a problem following all the links to this (wiki-confusion?) and don't know how to reply to Raeky. Let me state that this isn't something I'll fight against, I'm more invested in understanding how to proceed in the future. Personally, I think that intellectually and legally I'm in the right in posting this image. However, I also understand that within wikipedialand we all want to proceed cautiously and adhere on the side of caution. When in doubt, delete. I'd rather be on the side of unambiguous and airtight inclusion of materials. I just want to go on the record about being against this deletion, that's all. No reply needed. --Quartermaster (talk) 21:23, 1 March 2009 (UTC)

Tip: Categorizing images

Afrikaans | العربية | беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ | català | čeština | dansk | Deutsch | Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ | Ελληνικά | English | Esperanto | español | فارسی | suomi | français | galego | עברית | magyar | íslenska | italiano | 日本語 | ქართული | 한국어 | македонски | മലയാളം | Plattdüütsch | Nederlands | norsk bokmål | polski | português | português do Brasil | română | русский | slovenčina | slovenščina | српски / srpski | svenska | українська | Tiếng Việt | 中文 | 中文(简体)‎ | 中文(繁體)‎ | +/−

Hello, Avraham!

Tip: Add categories to your images

Thanks a lot for contributing to the Wikimedia Commons! Here's a tip to make your uploads more useful: Why not add some categories to describe them? This will help more people to find and use them.

Here's how:

1) If you're using the UploadWizard, you can add categories to each file when you describe it. Just click "more options" for the file and add the categories which make sense:


2) You can also pick the file from your list of uploads, edit the file description page, and manually add the category code at the end of the page.

[[Category:Category name]]

For example, if you are uploading a diagram showing the orbits of comets, you add the following code:

[[Category:Astronomical diagrams]]

This will make the diagram show up in the categories "Astronomical diagrams" and "Comets".

When picking categories, try to choose a specific category ("Astronomical diagrams") over a generic one ("Illustrations").

Thanks again for your uploads! More information about categorization can be found in Commons:Categories, and don't hesitate to leave a note on the help desk.

BotMultichillT 05:40, 4 March 2009 (UTC)

Basic Principles

In view of this, I am curious about the Basic Principles of commons. Could you refer to a guideline? /Pieter Kuiper (talk) 06:40, 12 March 2009 (UTC)

Please see Commons:Undeletion requests/Current requests#File:Alan dershowitz by Latuff.jpg. Adambro (talk) 08:51, 12 March 2009 (UTC)

Image:Glencairn Museum.jpg

Thanks. Evrik (talk) 19:35, 13 March 2009 (UTC)


The policy issue is separate from this image. The image was given the okay by the WMF GC. It should appropriately tagged as being DM.Evrik (talk) 17:48, 15 March 2009 (UTC)

  • Under the current policy the image is fine, it's how the policy is applied or interpreted. This is where the opinion the the GC is important. The discussion should stay on the page until the image is restored. Evrik (talk) 17:57, 15 March 2009 (UTC)
  • Consensus does not mean that any one person is right on the facts. All I'm asking is that the discussion stay open until the whole thing is resolved. Evrik (talk) 18:14, 15 March 2009 (UTC)
  • You may want to get the facts down right, there were people who supported the undeletion. The WMF GC also said that the image was acceptable. MichaelMaggs posted the information that disagreed with how the policy was applied. It hurts no one to keep the discussion up there. Tell you what ... how about a compromise? Restore the image and restore the deletion debate.Evrik (talk) 18:23, 15 March 2009 (UTC)
  • It hurts no one to leave the debate there. Evrik (talk) 18:31, 15 March 2009 (UTC)
  • The policy is not in question. The policy is fine. I am not the only person who thought the image was okay, saying so distorts the truth. In fact, the image is okay. I have asked for someone not already involved in this discussion to comment, I posted that here: Set of neutral eyes. Evrik (talk) 18:45, 15 March 2009 (UTC)


Hi Avi. Can you please give me a reason why you deleted it? Thanks, --Kanonkas(talk) 08:01, 22 March 2009 (UTC)

The thing is - the source Martin used was not the "original source". See this deleted revision. Problem from there is that the original source is gone. That means you can't see it, but it was there. I saw it, but I can't remember if the page mentioned "courtesy photo". Now I looked at the link again, if you look closely it says "courtesy.jpg" at the end. As such, I think I'll just leave it. Thanks for taking your time on DRs, Avraham! Best regards, --Kanonkas(talk) 08:14, 22 March 2009 (UTC)

Images from

Hi Avraham, i did some fixture to Template:Cc-by-3.0-IndiaFM, i dont know why it was used with subst:, I now replaced it. I saw, that you where involved in the instalation, and as an en.wp admin and OTRS volunteer you can help me in one thing: 1.: Many images had a OTRS template on it, I dont remove it allthough the template itself uses and always used an own OTRS number. Is there a difference between OTRS 1740679 of the template and the OTRS numbers used on some images in Category:Images from 2.: Searching for images in the spectrum Bollywood I found three images not qualified for this template:

This three images originaly used the defuncted w:en:Template:Bollywoodblog. Something is not ok with this images, User_talk:Riana#There_you_are.21, but i dont know what it is. They have on thing in commons: A (maybe valid) OTRS ticket. I also asked User:Riana. --Martin H. (talk) 08:48, 7 April 2009 (UTC)


Could you please check what is going on at File:Bloody child's shoe after rocket fired from Gaza hit Israel.jpg? Mbz1 uploaded the file that you deleted, and is herself adding tags for Flickr review and OTRS. The Flickr review does not match this image. How about the OTRS ticket? /Pieter Kuiper (talk) 07:07, 20 April 2009 (UTC)

Commons:Deletion requests/File:Ecro 001 svp.jpg

Excuse come no one informed me of this deletion, since I uploaded the image? I understand the reasoning, although I'm surprised that I missed the copyright notice on it. (Thank you for taking action on it, btw...I do my best to follow copyright law and am capable of a mistake now and then.) Since the page history is missing, I'm not sure when I uploaded it...I'm guessing it was before I realized that the US Government-owned PLANTS database contained several copyrighted images. I'll try to be more careful in the future, but please start notifying people (or at least cleaning up) when you delete an image. I've had a dead image hotlink sitting on my image gallery page on the English Wikipedia now for three months and didn't notice until today when I was casually browsing through it. Bob the Wikipedian (talk) 19:04, 20 May 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for checking that date for me. Yes, that was one of the first images I pulled from PLANTS, when I was still under the impression all US Government images were public domain. I have notified the person who nominated the file for deletion in hopes they will inform uploaders in the future. Thanks. Bob the Wikipedian (talk) 19:13, 20 May 2009 (UTC)

Commons:Deletion requests/File:Arpad Miklos Boiler.jpg

Hello. I don't really understand why the picture was deleted. At that moment I asked Arpad Miklos for a picture trough E-Mail. I received an email from with number [Ticket#2007090310010623]. I forwarded the authorization of Mr. Miklos (or I think I have done so), so I don't really know why it was deleted. Thanks a lot --Knorpel (talk) 10:09, 9 June 2009 (UTC)

Hi again. So what should it say: "I, blablaba, authorize the use of my picture in Wikipedia, etc." Or how? Thanks. --Knorpel (talk) 06:47, 10 June 2009 (UTC)


Message tied up in Ribbon.jpg Hello, Avraham. You have new messages at AJCham's talk page.
You may remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Asturianu | Беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ | Български | বাংলা | Català | Čeština | Deutsch | Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ | English | Español | Suomi | Français | Galego | हिन्दी | Magyar | Italiano | 日本語 | ქართული | Македонски | മലയാളം | Plattdüütsch | Nederlands | Português | Română | Русский | Slovenščina | Svenska | Türkçe | 中文(简体)‎ | 中文(繁體)‎ | +/−

File:Elizabeth Elmore.jpg

I am at a disadvantage in that i can't see what I did to that photo. Did I do the flickr review? Evrik (talk) 14:31, 14 August 2009 (UTC)

  • I stand by the review I made. Rather than delete it immeadiately, I think it should go under a deletion review. Evrik (talk) 18:07, 14 August 2009 (UTC)
  • Yes, but if they freeely released it, they can't go back. I think it should be undeleted while the review occurs. Evrik (talk) 18:23, 14 August 2009 (UTC)
  • I understand the concern. All I'm saying is that this should remain until the information is verified. That's all. Evrik (talk) 18:41, 14 August 2009 (UTC)
  • I sent an email? Really? I thought I just did a flickr review. Evrik (talk) 18:56, 14 August 2009 (UTC)
Hi Avraham. You may want to see this, which is related to the above. Best regards, Kanonkas // talk // e-mail // 16:02, 19 August 2009 (UTC)

Tip: Categorizing images

Afrikaans | العربية | беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ | català | čeština | dansk | Deutsch | Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ | Ελληνικά | English | Esperanto | español | فارسی | suomi | français | galego | עברית | magyar | íslenska | italiano | 日本語 | ქართული | 한국어 | македонски | മലയാളം | Plattdüütsch | Nederlands | norsk bokmål | polski | português | português do Brasil | română | русский | slovenčina | slovenščina | српски / srpski | svenska | українська | Tiếng Việt | 中文 | 中文(简体)‎ | 中文(繁體)‎ | +/−

Hello, Avraham!

Tip: Add categories to your images

Thanks a lot for contributing to the Wikimedia Commons! Here's a tip to make your uploads more useful: Why not add some categories to describe them? This will help more people to find and use them.

Here's how:

1) If you're using the UploadWizard, you can add categories to each file when you describe it. Just click "more options" for the file and add the categories which make sense:


2) You can also pick the file from your list of uploads, edit the file description page, and manually add the category code at the end of the page.

[[Category:Category name]]

For example, if you are uploading a diagram showing the orbits of comets, you add the following code:

[[Category:Astronomical diagrams]]

This will make the diagram show up in the categories "Astronomical diagrams" and "Comets".

When picking categories, try to choose a specific category ("Astronomical diagrams") over a generic one ("Illustrations").

Thanks again for your uploads! More information about categorization can be found in Commons:Categories, and don't hesitate to leave a note on the help desk.

BotMultichillT 05:39, 3 September 2009 (UTC)

Scan of my Social Security Card


I see that you've replaced my clean image of my Social Security card with a redacted one.

Why? I cleared this up with OTRS via email. The image has already been posted all over creation in other places.

Email to mike _at_ gogulski _dot_ com would be appreciated.

Thanks, Mike Gogulski

File:Turkiye Turchia Turkei Turquie Tourkia(1).jpg

I was wondering if you could review File:Turkiye Turchia Turkei Turquie Tourkia(1).jpg and the OTRS permission you added. The text of the image states that a certain person took the photo, yet the OTRS permission was not sent in by that person (and most likely the uploader, not the copyright holder did this). I just denied 2 OTRS requests from this user, and I saw that in the past you approved one, so we have this inconsistency that I was hoping we could reach an agreement on. Thanks! -Andrew c (talk) 17:44, 1 October 2009 (UTC)

Mari Shlomo Malachi picture

Could you please look up the OTRS permission on file for File:Shlomo malachi.jpg, and forward it to me? I'm curious as to who could have given this permission. It's a photo from an Israeli ID card; surely the copyright, if any, belonged to the Israeli government. R Shlomo immigrated in 1949, so my guess is that the photo was taken then, and according to Template:PD-Israel it would be PD 50 years later, unless the government had some other agreement with the photographer, which seems unlikely. If so, it should have a PD-Israel tag on it, not an OTRS permission. OTOH, the rav died in 1978, so perhaps the ID card was issued later, replacing an earlier one; in that case the photo may well still be copyright to the Israeli government, which I very much doubt wrote to the OTRS! -- Zsero (talk) 21:05, 13 October 2009 (UTC)

Does the OTRS message give any details on when the card was issued (i.e. more than 50 years ago or less)? And do we know that teudat zehut photos are covered by the standard 50-year term for Israeli government works? -- Zsero (talk) 22:09, 13 October 2009 (UTC)

Why interference Category:Gastronomy?

See also Why interference Category:Gastronomy? (Category:Gastronomy --> Category talk:Gastronomy)--Tom778 (talk) 10:27, 26 October 2009 (UTC)

Files still awaiting OTRS confirmation

Hello, Avraham. The file(s) listed below have been marked with {{OTRS received}}, but there has been no complete confirmation of its permission status in the last 30 days. From what I'm able to tell, you were the person who added this template. Would you mind taking a look at this again? If confirmation cannot be found, this file should probably be marked for deletion. This should be the only notification you will receive regarding this image, so long as the comment I added to the image description page is not altered. Thanks! HersfoldOTRSBot(talk/opt out) 09:16, 12 December 2009 (UTC)

If you are not an OTRS volunteer or did not add the "received" template to this file, it's possible I made a mistake identifying the correct user. I look for the most recent diff where the template was added, so if you reverted an edit where this template was removed, I can't tell the difference. If this is the case, please let my operator know at w:en:User talk:Hersfold. Sorry for the inconvenience!

The file(s) in question are:

OTRS pending mistake

Hi Avraham. The images below, being my first uploaded images, were transferred from Hungarian Wikipedia, and I used the wrong image permission. They belong to the English translations of the same articles in Hungarian. Can this be corrected please? Many thanks. Ineuw (talk) 00:24, 13 December 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for the help. For the missing images, I will try to find the info. Ineuw (talk) 22:51, 13 December 2009 (UTC)
Hi Avi. Sorry for not responding earlier, as I just saw your two week old message on my talk page. While the issue is no longer relevant, I tried using the toolserver's image transfer tool but it also refused to complete the transfer for some unclear reason. Since then, someone has taken care of these. For now, I am sticking to uploading 100+ PD-Old years old images from Wikisource. :-) Thanks again. (talk) 08:39, 31 December 2009 (UTC)

Commons:Deletion requests/File:PikiWiki Israel 3577 Ramat-Gan City.JPG

Hi there. Please note that I've renominated this image for deletion following your restoration of it earlier. Whilst I am of the opinion that it should be deleted, I welcome the restoration because it makes it easier for us to discuss. Regards. Adambro (talk) 09:26, 21 December 2009 (UTC)

Seasonal greetings

Must have been a cold night.jpg

Fresh off the camera - with thanks for your support in 2009 and regards --Herby talk thyme 13:55, 22 December 2009 (UTC)


When adding images to categories please check so that they aren't already listed in a subcat of the category you are adding. You categorised a lot of Latuff images, but they are already listed in Category:Israeli-Palestinian conflict cartoons by Latuff that is a subcat of Category:Carlos Latuff and that already is a subcat of both Category:Political cartoons and Category:Editorial cartoons. Thanks! // Liftarn (talk) 12:04, 28 December 2009 (UTC)

Yes, but there are a few differences. If you look at my edits, I added neither of those categories to the cartoons; rather, I added more specific categories that do not apply to all Latuff cartoons, therefore the additions should stand. Thank you. -- Avi (talk) 15:02, 28 December 2009 (UTC)
Yes, and the categories you added weren't very helpful. In any case when adding that many you should at least consider using a subcat instead. // Liftarn (talk) 15:07, 28 December 2009 (UTC)

Again I kindly ask you not to add irrelevant categories. Categories should be relevant to the image. Not what you feel about the image and certainly not about your feelings for the creator of the image. // Liftarn (talk) 15:11, 28 December 2009 (UTC)

Certainly they are. Not all of Latuff's cartoons are Anti-Zionist, and not even all of them are propoganda, although they are political. They certainly add to the visitor to commons' understanding of Latuff and the differences between his vvarious cartoons. I am somewhat concerned about the incorrect summary you gave to mass-reverting my clarifications, but I understand that you likely misread the categories I added. As for subcats, since they do not apply to every Latuff, or even every Latuff I-P cartoon, they are inappropriate. Actual categorization of each image correctly is what matters, which I am certain you would agree with, for the betterment of the commons. -- Avi (talk) 15:10, 28 December 2009 (UTC)
I understand that you may feel that way, but they are political cartoons and that is something different from propaganda. Also there is no obvious antizionism in the cartoons so adding that category is not helpful. I also noticed you totally ignored my suggestion about creating a suitable subcategory instead. // Liftarn (talk) 15:16, 28 December 2009 (UTC)

I wholeheartedly concur that irrelevant categories should not be added. However, to say that Anti-Zionism and Political propoganda are not appropriate to various Latuff caricatures is about as credible as saying that they are not related to I-P or carciturization either. I kindly ask you to realize that categorization on the commons is to inform, educate and clarify for the reader, not for political motive. You are free to take the issue up on the villiage pump as I did regarding the volume of Latuff's work. -- Avi (talk) 15:14, 28 December 2009 (UTC)
As the images you add are neither propaganda nor antizionistic the categories you add are obviously irrelevant and even if they were relevant I would still recommend you to create a subcategory for them instead of flooding the main category. Again I kindly ask you to stop. // Liftarn (talk) 15:20, 28 December 2009 (UTC)
Please stop both changing the categories on many of these images and instead engage in discussions about this issue. Adambro (talk) 15:19, 28 December 2009 (UTC)

Their intent is to influence the reader and to create a link between Israelis, Jews, and Nazis, which is propaganda according to any deifnition. Secondly, I explained why a subcategory is inappropriate, unless you mean "Anti-Zionistic propaganda of Carlos Latuff", which is, in my opinion, ridiculous if we already have the two existing categories. Adding the two catgeoris to the specific Anti-Zionistic propagandist cartoons of Latuff, and not the others (such as the Forgiveness ones) is the cleanest, most efficient, most commons-appropriate way to properly categorize these images, which already exists in the Commons catergozation lexicon. If you have a better solution, I suggest you bring it up at the pump or somewhere centralzied so a discussion may be had; but creating new redundant categories to fit one particular artist strikes me as being somewhat bizarre. -- Avi (talk) 15:20, 28 December 2009 (UTC)

Category:Anti-Zionistic propaganda of Carlos Latuff could work, but I would rather recommend something more generic such as Category:Propaganda cartoons and Category:Anti-Zionistic cartoons. There is no limit to the number of categories an image may be in. Except for of course that they all have to be relevant and I don't think "propaganda" is a relevant category since it obviously isn't propaganda, but an editorial cartoon and it already is listed as such. There is a vast difference between picturing something and trying to influence. // Liftarn (talk) 15:31, 28 December 2009 (UTC)
Liftarn, if I may ask, what do you see as the difference between:
  1. Category:Propaganda cartoons and Category:Political propaganda and
  2. Category:Anti-Zionistic cartoons and Category:Anti-Zionism?
in each case, the former is what you suggest and the latter already exists on the commons. As long as each image is also tagged "Cartoon/Caricature" then that is exactly what we already have, and has the benefit of allowing for better cross-reference searching through categories? -- Avi (talk) 15:34, 28 December 2009 (UTC)
The former (cartoons) would be a subcategory of the latter. That way it would make it easier to find. But I still think it is needless as it is listed (some cats up) in both Category:Editorial cartoons and Category:Political cartoons. It would be easier to add the entire Category:Editorial cartoons as a subcat to Category:Propaganda. // Liftarn (talk) 15:37, 28 December 2009 (UTC)
The main issue with that is not every political cartoon is propaganda. Even in Latuff, I do not think that the "Forgiveness" cartoons are propaganda, although they are certainly political. Also, sub-categorization is good if there are many "parents". If a category tree is basically filled with only one sub-category node at each level, that defeats the purpose of the categorization and obfuscates the relationships. -- Avi (talk) 15:45, 28 December 2009 (UTC)
I don't suggest the category should be added to every image, but only the relevant ones. // Liftarn (talk) 16:36, 28 December 2009 (UTC)
Which is exactly what I did with categories almost identical to what you suggest, which have the two benefits of 1) already existing on the commons and 2) not being single-entry special-purpose categories, so I am no unsure what the basis for our disagreement is? -- Avi (talk) 16:40, 28 December 2009 (UTC)
I still disagree with that categorisation since the images clearly isn't propaganda, not is about antizionims, but if you insist on it please do it in a good way. By your reasoning we should have no subcategories at all in Commons, but just a single Category:Everything. // Liftarn (talk) 16:43, 28 December 2009 (UTC)
As I said above, when multiple parent categories can combine, then sub-categorization is appropriate to minimize the tree, but when the proposed category has only one node per level, then either no, or at most one, category is saved, and the parsimony is outweight by the obfuscation in my opinion. -- Avi (talk) 16:46, 28 December 2009 (UTC)
Adding relevant subcategories to avoid crowding the main cat is perfectly valid to do. // Liftarn (talk) 16:53, 28 December 2009 (UTC)
Hmm, I think you have a point regarding Category:Political propaganda; even though there are only 40 images in the parent level, as currently there are a number of subcategories having a cartoon-specific subcat may be appropriate,. Regarding Category:Anti-Zionism, however, there is only one subcat, and the parent cat is not overwhelmed with images (less than 200, less than 50 for that matter) so it may be wiser to leave that one for now until it gets over-full. -- Avi (talk) 16:58, 28 December 2009 (UTC)
Thank you. May I also kindly ask you to only use relevant categories based on what the image shows, not how you feel about it. // Liftarn (talk) 18:06, 28 December 2009 (UTC)
Propaganda is a word imported into English from Italian. In Italian the word is used to describe all advertising, and therefore "political propaganda" simply mean anything media material that promotes a political point of view. Latuff's cartoons clearly fall into that category. Malcolm Schosha (talk) 18:41, 28 December 2009 (UTC)
That may be true, but it is not propaganda in the modern sense of the word. // Liftarn (talk) 18:56, 28 December 2009 (UTC)
That is the meaning. If "political cartoons" seems less negative, that is the same thing. But propaganda is correct. Malcolm Schosha (talk) 19:05, 28 December 2009 (UTC)
Yes, it is clealy an attempt to cash in on the negative meanings of the word instead of accepting the more neutral "editorial cartoon" or "political cartoon".
The commons definition of Propaganda is "Propaganda is a specific type of message presentation aimed at serving an agenda. Even if the message conveys true information, it may be partisan and fail to paint a complete and balanced picture. The primary use of the term is in political contexts, and generally refers to efforts sponsored by governments and political parties." That applies completely and totally to Latuff (serving agenda, partisan, fails to paint a valid picture) AND the commons realizes that not all propaganda needs to be govt sponsored. Per the commons definition itself, many, if not most, of the Latuff images, and the ones in specific which I have tagged, are propaganda. However, I think that creation of Category:Propaganda cartoons as a subset of Political propaganda may be the way to go; I'd like to think a bit more. I may open a discussion on Category talk:Political propaganda. Thank you. -- Avi (talk) 19:06, 28 December 2009 (UTC)
The Latuff cartoons utterly fail to be "sponsored by governments and political parties." As the images are already listed in two relevant categories (Category:Political cartoons and Category:Editorial cartoons) it would be a bad idea to shoehorn them into yet another overlapping category. // Liftarn (talk) 19:12, 28 December 2009 (UTC)
But the beauty of the definition, Liftarn, is that they do not have to be. "Generally" means "in general", not "always". Therefore Latuff is completely within the definition :). -- Avi (talk) 19:37, 28 December 2009 (UTC)
You are saying that the Hamas POV, which he represents in his cartoons, is not a political POV? Really? Malcolm Schosha (talk) 19:30, 28 December 2009 (UTC)
I don't think Hamas has anything to do with the cartoons. I would guess that his views is more in line with PFLP, but as fasr as I know he don't endore a specific political party. However this is still irrelevant since the cartoons does in fact is not sponsored by any government and/or political party. Sorry, they requirements for calling them propaganda is not fullfilled. I have however added Political propaganda as a parent category to both Category:Political cartoons and Category:Editorial cartoons so the propaganda category should be removed per COM:OVERCAT anyway. // Liftarn (talk) 19:41, 28 December 2009 (UTC)
As I explain above, Malcolm, it is possible that Liftarn didn't see the focus on the English word "generally" in that sentence. That last sentence means that most of the time, it is govt sponsored, but not all the time. This is in contradistinction to the first two sentences which 1) are part of the integral definition and 2) which the specific images I tagged fill to a "T". -- Avi (talk) 19:42, 28 December 2009 (UTC)

(<-)Liftarn, I disagree with that, as not all Editorial cartoons are propaganda, so you are unnecessarily and incorrectly categorizing various images. If anything Prpaganda cartoons should be a SUBCAT of Political propaganda. I will make the changes. -- Avi (talk) 19:44, 28 December 2009 (UTC)

If you use the broad definition that any cartoon with a political subject is propaganda then they are! If you use the definition of a propaganda cartoon as "a cartoon I don't like" then it's a different issue. // Liftarn (talk) 20:47, 28 December 2009 (UTC)
And if you do as I do, which is take the Commons definition of propaganda, then any time a cartoon is made to highlight or bias one side of situation, be it political or be it free-use-related, to serve an agenda (which usually is to influence the viewer) then it becomes more clear which cartoons are propaganda (the Nazi ones) and which ones are not (the forgiveness ones - which do not bias any side). -- Avi (talk) 20:50, 28 December 2009 (UTC)


You wrote: As an aside, as much as people may be disgusted by the Dershowitz image, consensus was that it was in the project's scope, and should be retained, and we all must respect that. remember, Commons is NOT EnWiki, and EnWiki is not the commons, and we have different policies and guidelines here.

NB: decisions need not be final and can be reconsidered when new considerations enter in. But, that aside, you have convinced me (with your edit quoted above) that my previous decision to be finished with Commons was the correct decision, and my venture in the current Village Pump discussions is a wast of my time. Feh. Malcolm Schosha (talk) 15:36, 28 December 2009 (UTC)

Category:Propaganda cartoons

As per your original suggestion, I have created Category:Propaganda cartoons. This way we do not unfairly tag all editorial cartoons and all political cartoons as propaganda. Rather, we can now specify which cartoons are propaganda and which are not. Thank you very much for the suggestion! -- Avi (talk) 19:47, 28 December 2009 (UTC)

Actually that is exactly what you are doing. You are unfairly tagging images you don't like as propaganda. // Liftarn (talk) 21:20, 28 December 2009 (UTC)
No, I am tagging images that are in accordance with the commons's definition. My personal preferences have nothing to do with it, as can be seen by looking at the media in the category already, Liftarn. -- Avi (talk) 21:22, 28 December 2009 (UTC)

Commons:Deletion requests/File:Charmed-dia-w.png

Hi, as Lar suggested at Commons:Administrators' noticeboard#Non-admin closing deletion request, I have undone ZooFari's closing of Commons:Deletion requests/File:Charmed-dia-w.png. May I trouble you to take a look at the DR? I can forward BNL's patent attorney's email to OTRS or you if you wish to verify its authenticity. Jappalang (talk) 03:25, 29 December 2009 (UTC)

Categorisation of Latuff related images

This is a request to those who, looking at page histories, seem most active in changing the categories of Latuff related images. As per my comments here, I must encourage you all to participate in discussions to arrive at a consensus as to appropriate categorisation instead of changing the categories without consensus.

The constant changing of the categorisation of File:Latuff nazi camp 2.png has necessitated its protection from editing. This is an invitation to properly discuss this on the talk page, not to find another Latuff related image and continue to edit war regarding that image's categories.

If the constant changing of categories continues then I will be compelled to take further action to reduce the disruptive nature of this by considering the protection of further pages or blocking of users involved, all of whom are experienced enough to understand why edit warring isn't constructive.

Please try, however difficult it may be, to engage in proper discussions with other members of the Commons community to find an acceptable categorisation to all. Adambro (talk) 13:32, 29 December 2009 (UTC)


You seem to be wheelwarring. /Pieter Kuiper (talk) 16:15, 29 December 2009 (UTC)

To what are you referring? -- Avi (talk) 16:16, 29 December 2009 (UTC)
Your restoring of deleted files. /Pieter Kuiper (talk) 16:21, 29 December 2009 (UTC)
That is my job as an admin, to handle requests for undeletion. -- Avi (talk) 16:23, 29 December 2009 (UTC)
You are in an awfull hurry to do so, and you are not neutral. /Pieter Kuiper (talk) 16:41, 29 December 2009 (UTC)
It has been days, and the commons-based decision is clear. The initial deletion was flawed. Neutrality has nothing to do with it, this is a clear application of commons policy. -- Avi (talk) 16:44, 29 December 2009 (UTC)
An example of wheelwarring would be for me to unblock Mbz and then Adambro to re-block her. In that case, Adambro would be guilty of wheelwarring. However, I'm not unblocking Mbz, so the issue is moot. -- Avi (talk) 17:07, 29 December 2009 (UTC)

Matter in a nutshell

If you are referring to me in this comment, I wish to state that (a) I'm not Dutch, I'm Belgian (and that makes a difference since 1648) and (b) who we are in real life has nothing to do with the arguments we make. I'm not seriously doubting that the members of the discussion are who they say they are, but it could of course be that they aren't. There has been a case where this was true. Kind regards, Kameraad Pjotr 20:35, 29 December 2009 (UTC)


Are you nominating this for deletion too? The criteria are exactly the same as Category:Propaganda cartoons, except that it contains more kinds of media? -- Avi (talk) 16:36, 29 December 2009 (UTC)

I do not intend to talk about this on my user page or yours. Let us keep the discussion at Commons:Deletion requests/Category:Propaganda cartoons. --Timeshifter (talk) 23:00, 29 December 2009 (UTC)


I partially reverted your change to the Israel section. The applied -> useful modification is fair enough. However, as I have said on the talk page: Presenti does not indicate "useful art" is a better translation than "applied art" (her book is in Hebrew - how can it provide a translation?). Also, that modification removed the important bit of Presenti's opinion, that "all art" is covered. If we follow Presenti, we need to make clear that all artistic works are covered by FOP...--Nilfanion (talk) 11:25, 31 December 2009 (UTC)

About The Leaked Apollo 20 Mission

Hi, The Leaked Apollo 20 videos that I uploaded here were deleted on this page[4],and it was called Hoax. I have something to say about this.“No problem can be solved from the same level of consciousness that created it.---Albert Einstein ” .I'm sorry to say that you might make a same mistake while judging the so called "HOAX" on Apollo 20 (leaked videos) that were originally uploaded by the former CDR of Apollo 19 and Apollo 20 who are still alive.(Please see [5],[6],[7])And the videos that I quoted were put on a Chinese new index page of (Apollo 20)that I'm working on. So, literately, it is a new index to be edited by different language versions and I will be workig on the English version once I finish the Chinese one. So, please do enough research out of the current old "resources" before making any decision to either deny or confirm it. By the way, NASA did not make any announcement about the Leaked Apollo 19 and 20 Videos since 2007, so you can imagine what consequences would be in the very near future. Please respect and protect the TRUTH of the Apollo program that belongs to all mankind.Thanks.--NasaTopsecret (talk) 15:07, 1 January 2010 (UTC)

Your views

Hi Avi. You might want to take a look here [8], and have a chance to make your views known. Malcolm Schosha (talk) 20:27, 3 January 2010 (UTC)

Policy enforcement

Re this edit. I understand your reluctance. For what it's worth, I can assure you of my support in this matter.

The more I learn about the wmfverse, the more I'm convinced that the biggest issue is the almost universal misunderstanding that enforcing community rules somehow contradicts the openness fundamental to the projects hosted by WMF. In an open comunity, you will always have contributors of wildy varying skill profiles, so policing is actually more important than in homogenous clubs. That does not mean you have to hit people over the head, but there are limits to what we can take before it becomes ridiculous. I've become much more tolerant to endless incompetent discussions often degenerating into pointless sqabbles. As long they at least occasionally contribute productively, what the hell, disk space is cheap, bandwidth aplenty, and I can always choose not to watch. But when the disputes destabilize and corrode our output, our mission if you will, it's time to draw the line. I'm willing to let myself be labeled a hawk, but every community has its rules, they are what defines us. Paradoctor (talk) 00:23, 5 January 2010 (UTC)

Re: w:en:File:Norsk landskap, Rogna vannfall.jpg

Back in those days these images were not allowed on Commons under the PD-Art policy. This has changed since then. -- Bryan (talk to me) 20:26, 10 January 2010 (UTC)

Feel free to move it back here under {{PD-Art|PD-US}} -- Avi (talk) 21:34, 10 January 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for your vote on my RfCU

I would like to thank you for taking the time to review my request for checkuser rights. I hope one more CU will make a difference, at least for the other CUs' workload! Regards, --Eusebius (talk) 16:30, 8 February 2010 (UTC)

Where should I

Hey Avi, I've offered a better translation to the one exists in Template talk:BotMoveToCommons. How can i call people to join the discussion? Tomer A. (talk) 14:40, 19 February 2010 (UTC)

By posting at the Commons:Village pump. I've posted a link there. Thanks! -- Avi (talk) 15:12, 19 February 2010 (UTC)
No No, Thank you Face-smile.svg. Tomer A. (talk) 23:22, 20 February 2010 (UTC)
Another question, Where should I ask a protection of an image which is under edit war? Tomer A. (talk) 18:31, 8 March 2010 (UTC)
Commons:Administrators' noticeboard/Blocks & protections. -- Avi (talk) 19:51, 8 March 2010 (UTC)
10x, sorry to bother you. Tomer A. (talk) 10:43, 9 March 2010 (UTC)

We need your help at the Wikiproject medicine

Rod of asclepius.png

Hello, On the behalf of the Wikiproject medicine at the en.wikipedia, I am inviting you to be a part of the discussion going on the project's talk page about Patient images, The discussion started after I obtained a permission to more than 23000 dermatology related images, and about 1500 radiology images. As some editors of the Wikiproject medicine have some concerns regarding the policy of using patient images on wikipedia, and regarding patient consents. And they believe that commons policy is not so clear regarding the subject. So since you are the experts please join us at this very important discussion -- MaenK.A.Talk 13:46, 20 March 2010 (UTC)

Mitocu River Basin.jpg

Dragomirna River Basin.jpg

The articles which were using these files indicate that you have deleted these files, apparently at the request of user Pieter Kuiper. Please undelete these files which have been abusively deleted under the pretext of "Possibly being a copyright violation". These maps were drawn by me - it takes quite a long time to draw such maps - and are not copied, which was stated in the presentation. Just because somebody assumes that that they are a copyright violation is not a justification for deleting them. I challenge anybody to prove that that the maps are a copy of any existing map. Such a deletion is simply a vandalism, especially as it is not based on any type of discussion. I have several maps I am working on at present, and am doing this for about 9 months. I am appalled that after putting in all this effort, the maps can be simply deleted by somebody who has no proof at all but just wants to be smart.Afil (talk) 04:50, 10 May 2010 (UTC) Afil (talk) 04:50, 10 May 2010 (UTC)

See Commons:Deletion requests/File:Mitorcu River Basin.jpg, and current undeletion requests. /Pieter Kuiper (talk) 06:03, 10 May 2010 (UTC)

Repeat request

I would kindly request the undeletion of the map Mitocu River Basin.jpg. I am the copyright owner of the map and have released it according to rules to public domain under the GNU license. I have requested this before and have received no reply. I need the map and I find it totally abusive to delete it without giving me the possibility of recovering it. I have a dispute with Pieter Kuiper who brings repeated unsubstantiated accusations. Do I have to redraw the map, because it cannot be recovered? At least, I could get an answer regarding my request. Afil (talk) 02:48, 17 June 2010 (UTC)

Please file a request at Commons:Undeletion requests. -- Avi (talk) 02:42, 25 June 2010 (UTC)


Hi Avi, I was looking for some images of shiviti, and Commons has nothing. There are images on line, such as this [9], but I doubt that it could be uploaded here. Any ideas for usable sources that could be uploaded to Commons? Malcolm Schosha (talk) 14:45, 1 July 2010 (UTC)

I did create Category:Shiviti. There is not much in it, but hopefully it will grow over time. When I left my previous message (above) I had not noticed that you are on break. Malcolm Schosha (talk) 00:42, 2 August 2010 (UTC)

Picture verification

Hi there. Do you have time to please verify and follow up these 4 pictures on wikimedia-commons? (1, 2, 3, 4) I received the email permissions from the owner of the picture with his statement of permission and the license, and forwarded them to on August 12 2010 and August 15 2010. Thank you. Amsaim (talk) 19:48, 18 August 2010 (UTC)

Check your email :) -- Avi (talk) 17:01, 20 August 2010 (UTC)
Thanks very much for the picture verification. Concerning the wrong URL of the Kate Henshaw picture, I have sent another email request to the picture owner with the correct URL. I shall forward the email permission to wikimedia-commons once I have it. Amsaim (talk) 19:03, 20 August 2010 (UTC)

Request by Emeritus

Dear Avraham, last night about pictures of Kiribati. My requests, my problems are: there are pictures of the Parlament, the Maneaba ni Maungatabu - but none of Ambo, the new site, before the Parlament has been in Bairiki, both places in South Tarawa. I do not find pictures of that villages. The story is going further: Tarawa is a chain of small islets, that means many names. The article about North Tarawa is missing in de:wiki - but before I start to write, as I feel a little responsible for our Kiribati Portal (the ugliest of the world - but not my responsibility, because someone started it without heart), we should check the illustrations.

To help me will need some work, to search for special names - on Flickr or elsewhere.

The list is:




and already done: Phoenix Islands Protected Area - because new UNESCO World Nature Heritage since August 2010.

In addition I like to give you two links, first is the very lovely person Jane Resture and her great website. The other is Kiribati National Tourism Office.

I tell you this, because you should have an impression what can be done and to see what is needed.

Next step: I will try to find some pictures on Flickr, and tell you the links. I need time for such work. I am handicapped.

Sincerely yours, Emeritus

my home is

Request for OV

Congratulations! :) I've closed it as successful, so we're only waiting on a Steward to give you the rights. If you have any questions, feel free to ask. Kanonkas // talk // e-mail // 13:03, 13 September 2010 (UTC)

✓ Done by Mercy. Kanonkas // talk // e-mail // 13:04, 13 September 2010 (UTC)
  • (Edit conflict) Congratulations Avi! Regards, --Dferg (talk · meta) 13:06, 13 September 2010 (UTC)
    • Thank you! I look forward to responding to even more e-mails now :) -- Avi (talk) 14:37, 13 September 2010 (UTC)

free speech flag

thank you for your work on Free-speech-flag-ps3.svg Decora (talk) 14:35, 12 April 2011 (UTC)


Commons-emblem-issue.svg File:Beis_Medrash_Toiroh_Veyiroh.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 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!

Afrikaans | العربية | Български | বাংলা | Беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ | Català | Čeština | Dansk | Deutsch | Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ | Zazaki | Ελληνικά | English | Esperanto | Español | Eesti | فارسی | Suomi | Français | Galego | עברית | Magyar | Bahasa Indonesia | Íslenska | Italiano | 日本語 | 한국어 | Македонски | മലയാളം | Plattdüütsch | Nederlands | Norsk nynorsk | Norsk bokmål | Occitan | Polski | Português | Português do Brasil | Română | Русский | Slovenčina | Slovenščina | Shqip | Српски / srpski | Svenska | Türkçe | українська | Tiếng Việt | 中文 | 中文(简体)‎ | 中文(繁體)‎ | +/−

Hold and wave (talk) 09:28, 21 April 2011 (UTC)


Hello. I have problems in uploading pictures on commons - I cannot upload them. Please, help me to solve mentioned case. Is any problem in my account? Why I can't upload files? Thank you in advance, Nodar Kherkheulidze Talk 15:40, 12 June 2011 (UTC)

I may be able to help you, but only if you describe your problem in specific. Thanks. -- Avi (talk) 16:06, 12 June 2011 (UTC)
This talk page in other languages:

De-adminship warning

Dear Avraham/Archive 1. I am writing to you to inform you that you are in danger of losing your adminship on Commons because of inactivity.

If you want to keep your adminship, you need both to sign at Commons:Administrators/Inactivity section/Aug-Sep 2011 within 30 days of today's date, and also to make at least five further admin actions in the following six months. Anyone who does not do so will automatically lose administrator rights.

You can read the de-admin policy at Commons:Administrators/De-adminship.

Thank you a×pdeHello! 17:03, 15 August 2011 (UTC)

Thanks. -- Avi (talk) 17:51, 15 August 2011 (UTC)
You're welcome :) a×pdeHello! 18:33, 15 August 2011 (UTC)

Request for deletion

Hello. I have created Category:Saint Mary Mother of Jesus church, Maribor and Saint Mary Mother of Jesus church, Maribor by mistake and I want to delete it. Thanks, --Janezdrilc (talk) 00:07, 19 September 2011 (UTC)

Notification about possible deletion

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.
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!

Afrikaans | العربية | Български | বাংলা | Беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ | Català | Čeština | Dansk | Deutsch | Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ | Zazaki | Ελληνικά | English | Esperanto | Español | Eesti | فارسی | Suomi | Français | Galego | עברית | Magyar | Bahasa Indonesia | Íslenska | Italiano | 日本語 | 한국어 | Македонски | മലയാളം | Plattdüütsch | Nederlands | Norsk nynorsk | Norsk bokmål | Occitan | Polski | Português | Português do Brasil | Română | Русский | Slovenčina | Slovenščina | Shqip | Српски / srpski | Svenska | Türkçe | українська | Tiếng Việt | 中文 | 中文(简体)‎ | 中文(繁體)‎ | +/−

GrapedApe (talk) 17:36, 4 December 2011 (UTC)


Thank you for your support.      Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 11:06, 9 February 2012 (UTC)

RQust for Unblock

Hello,plzzzz unblock my IP Address or My User page in English Wikipedia

Special:Unblock/ I know my behaviour is too bad but at that time i did not know rules and regulations of Wikipedia but now i have understood all rules and regulations of wikipedia i promise that this time i will not really create any problem with any page plzzzzzzzzzz this is request...Good Contributions will be really made (I Promise)...

  • Note:I've contacted the original Blocking admin But i've not got any result so therefore i've contacted you thanx Changez121 09:52, 28 April 2012 (UTC)