User talk:Clarkcj12/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.

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, Clarkcj12!

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:

Uploadwizard-categories.png

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]]
[[Category:Comets]]

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"). Pro-tip: The CommonSense tool can help you find the best category for your image.

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.

CategorizationBot (talk) 11:24, 24 September 2011 (UTC)

Weird tags on migrated file

File:CYRILLIC LETTER DZHE.png looks like it has some stray fields: {{Ns has subpages}}, {{Red}}, and {{Tlx}}. Are they mis-entered items from the migration process, or a bug in CommmonsHelper? DMacks (talk) 09:55, 25 September 2011 (UTC)

Category:Taken with Canon Digital IXUS 970 IS

Hello Clark! I must ask what is the purpose of the category Category:Taken with Canon Digital IXUS 970 IS? I noticed that you added my photo File:Ältasjön, gångväg.jpg to that category. There is only 30 files in that category although there should be hundreds of photos on commons taken with that camera. /Esquilo (talk) 19:43, 15 December 2011 (UTC)

Congratulations, Dear Reviewer

If you use the helper-the scripts, you will find the links next to the search box (vector) or as single tabs (monobook). They are named license+ and license-

Hi Clarkcj12, thanks for your application to be an image reviewer. The application has been removed as successful, and you've been added to the list of reviewers. You can review all kind of image licenses on Commons. Please see Commons:License review and Commons:Flickr files if you haven't done so already. Backlogs include Flickr review, Picasa review, Panoramio review, and files from other sources. You can use one of the following scripts by adding them to your common.js:

importScript('User:ZooFari/licensereviewer.js'); stable script for reviewing images from any kind of source
importScript('User:Rillke/LicenseReview.js'); contains also user notification when review fails, auto blacklist-check and auto-thank you message for Flickr-reviews.

You can also add {{user reviewer}} or {{user trusted}} to your user page if you wish. Thank you for your contributions on Commons!--Morning Sunshine (talk) 03:35, 18 December 2011 (UTC)

OTRS after revieving pisasa

Hi, as I saw you have just reviewed files added from Picasa: [1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] but you did not fix a OTRS ticket. Will you finnish it, please? Or OTRS is unnecessary after revieving pisasa license? Jacek555 (talk) 19:51, 19 December 2011 (UTC)

check

http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:SS501_jung_min.jpg --1.227.196.123 12:51, 29 December 2011 (UTC)

User:Clarkcj12/common.js

Hi Clarkcj12, one of the two lines is enough. Otherwise it will unnecessarily slow down page-loading and may interfere. Thank you. I wish you a happy new year. Regards -- RE rillke questions? 13:48, 30 December 2011 (UTC)

Marmota marmota latirostris files from Picasa web

Hi. Would you review files downloaded from picasa: [7], [8], [9], [10], [11], [12], [13], please? I have not been sure if I had to sign them with OTRS template at all. Should I remove that templates just now, or after revieving? Or maybe if a file derives from Picasa, I should not use OTRS template? In the other notification, I was asking OTRS team to finnish a OTRS procedure after your revieving, but I have received a answer that they do not need to check a file if it was reviewed by you. So now itis unclear for me...Jacek555 (talk) 18:30, 30 December 2011 (UTC)

OK.Thank you Jacek555 (talk) 21:17, 30 December 2011 (UTC)
Can you check it please: [14]? Jacek555 (talk) 22:06, 30 December 2011 (UTC)
Hi! This file's name is wrong. It should be File:Çankaya University Preparatory School.JPG. How can do this? Thanks :)--Reality006 (talk) 13:36, 7 January 2012 (UTC)

File:Capela do Porto.jpg

You might be interested in commenting on Commons:Deletion requests/File:Capela do Porto.jpg. Thank you. -- RE rillke questions? 16:17, 24 January 2012 (UTC)

Co-operative Logos

They were taken from The Co-operative Group's [15] official Flickr page - importantly rights for the logos were reserved so.... Stevo1000 (talk) 22:45, 9 September 2012 (UTC)

CC-BY-NC-SA-2.5

Hi,
We cannot upload CC-BY-NC-SA-2.5 licensed images (for example: File:Tcdd2Network2011.gif) to commons, can we? --Infestor (talk) 18:56, 19 September 2012 (UTC)

File:JulieSpira.jpg

Hi, is there any more information you need regarding the copyright of [16]? Thanks Fifteendegreesbelow (talk) 23:33, 2 October 2012 (UTC)

Thank you. Resent with whole conversation. Fifteendegreesbelow (talk) 11:15, 3 October 2012 (UTC)
✓ Done This issue has been resolved. --Clarkcj12 (talk) 14:26, 25 October 2012 (UTC)

Ticket

For 'Amanda purple boasmall1.jpg' Please confirm sending an message to writer's email showed on hers official webpage (Stormy Glenn). +PrinceWilly 17:54, 8 October 2012 (UTC)

Don't worry about me. I'm crazy. Thank you for editing there. +PrinceWilly 01:53, 18 October 2012 (UTC)
✓ Done Issue has been resolved. --Clarkcj12 (talk) 14:27, 25 October 2012 (UTC)
I think that this discussion is resolved. If you disagree, don't hesitate to replace this template with your comment. Clarkcj12 (talk) 14:41, 26 October 2012 (UTC)

OTRS for File:Glen Anthony Doherty.jpg

Hello,

The author of the photo, Michael Shannon of Glen Doherty Memorial Foundation, has replied back to my email in its entirety and cc-ed permissions-commons@wikimedia.org to confirm that the photo is released under CC-BY-SA-3.0. Have you received the confirmation? The subject line is "OTRS for File:Glen_Anthony_Doherty.jpg on Wikimedia Common" Thank you! :-) — Hasdi Bravo • 14:04, 19 October 2012 (UTC)

On behalf of the Glen Doherty Memorial Foundation we have released the below mentioned photo to the public under CC-BY-SA-3.0 license and have reviewed the license.
 
If you have any question please let us know.
 
Thanks
Michael
 
Michael Shannon
michael at glendohertyfoundation.org
www.glendohertyfoundation.org
✓ Done This has been resolved by OTRS Ticket number 2012101910007121. --Clarkcj12 (talk) 03:19, 20 October 2012 (UTC)
I think that this discussion is resolved. If you disagree, don't hesitate to replace this template with your comment. Clarkcj12 (talk) 14:41, 26 October 2012 (UTC)

File:Bandwidth Hogs.png

You added OTRS permission to this image, but it was uploaded to both Wikipedia and Commons with different sources and licences indicated. What is the correct source and licence? Currently, both sources and all licences appear on the file information page, but all of them can't be correct unless the user has multiple accounts. --Stefan4 (talk) 22:28, 28 October 2012 (UTC)

✓ Done Thanks for letting me know, I have fixed it. --Clarkcj12 (talk) 14:06, 29 October 2012 (UTC)
Are you sure that it's correct? The file appeared on Wikipedia before it was uploaded to Commons, but you listed the Commons source (i.e. the more recent source) as the correct one. --Stefan4 (talk) 14:16, 29 October 2012 (UTC)
Yes I am sure that it is correct, as the license stated in the OTRS ticket, states that they release the image under the CC-BY-SA-3.0 license. Also I did correct two tiny things since then. To make it more accurate. --Clarkcj12 (talk) 14:26, 29 October 2012 (UTC)
OK, thanks. I just wanted to be extra careful in case something was overlooked. --Stefan4 (talk) 14:32, 29 October 2012 (UTC)
I think that this discussion is resolved. If you disagree, don't hesitate to replace this template with your comment. Clarkcj12 (talk) 14:26, 29 October 2012 (UTC)

File:Logic race.gif

Commons-emblem-issue.svg File:Logic race.gif 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 | 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 | Српски / srpski | Svenska | Türkçe | Tiếng Việt | 中文 | 中文(简体)‎ | 中文(繁體)‎ | +/−

Moogsi (talk) 12:50, 26 November 2012 (UTC)

Questions about ticket:2012112810003035

If you could comment at Commons:OTRS/Noticeboard#File:GB_2.jpg_and_File:GB_19.jpg. Thanks, Legoktm (talk) 23:00, 29 November 2012 (UTC)

File:77 Monza Spyder.jpg

Commons-emblem-issue.svg File:77 Monza Spyder.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 | 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 | Српски / srpski | Svenska | Türkçe | Tiếng Việt | 中文 | 中文(简体)‎ | 中文(繁體)‎ | +/−

Kevin Rutherford (talk) 04:57, 21 January 2013 (UTC)

Image version confusion of File:Pandit Ram Kishore Shukla and Motilal Vora inaugurating a beam bridge on river son in Madhya Pradesh in 1986.JPG

Good morning, please guide regarding my upload of recent cropped version of File:Pandit Ram Kishore Shukla and Motilal Vora inaugurating a beam bridge on river son in Madhya Pradesh in 1986.JPG, in order to omit scanning errors at top right corner but still it is noticeable at right top corner, how is this ???? Please guide how to have the recent cropped file in use. Thank you. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Sks1950 (talk • contribs) 03:57, 5 March 2013 (UTC)

I am not quite sure I follow you. --Clarkcj12 (talk) 15:31, 5 March 2013 (UTC)

File:Plan Catedrala ortodoxaTM.svg.png

Commons-emblem-issue.svg File:Plan Catedrala ortodoxaTM.svg.png 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 | 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 | Српски / srpski | Svenska | Türkçe | Tiếng Việt | 中文 | 中文(简体)‎ | 中文(繁體)‎ | +/−

Magog the Ogre (talk) (contribs) 04:17, 6 March 2013 (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, 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 | 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 | Српски / srpski | Svenska | Türkçe | Tiếng Việt | 中文 | 中文(简体)‎ | 中文(繁體)‎ | +/−

Affected:


Yours sincerely, russavia (talk) 01:16, 19 April 2013 (UTC)

File:World lgbt adoption.png

Commons-emblem-issue.svg File:World lgbt adoption.png 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 | 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 | Српски / srpski | Svenska | Türkçe | Tiếng Việt | 中文 | 中文(简体)‎ | 中文(繁體)‎ | +/−

Kwamikagami (talk) 07:59, 28 October 2013 (UTC)

File:KAZAKHSTAN, 50 Tenge commémorant le 10e anniversaire de l’indépendance.jpg and other pics

Hi,
You put an OTRS autorisation for this file (and many others). How come? I mean, this kazakhstani coin was produced in 2001 and unless i'm mistaken the author, were it the etcher or the central bank of Kazakhstan, still is the legitimate copyright owner for his work. The fact that someone took a picture of the coin doesn't deprive the author of the coin of it's copyright. Think for instance of a modern painting: someone releasing a picture under a free licence is not legally correct since (s)he's not the copyright holder. Yours, (:Julien:) (talk) 07:59, 23 November 2013 (UTC)

It is correct as such its isn't copyrighted due the copyright laws there. Please rad the listing for it at COM:CUR. It though is a copyright image as such it was taken from a website that had a copyright license of the image. So in my optionit is a correct llicense. If it was a regular user it would be under PD due to the copyright laws, but the website that the image is located holds the copyright. Clarkcj12 (talk) 04:36, 24 November 2013 (UTC)
And about that painting technically a user could if that country has a COM:FOP, but it would still be a good idea if they did ask the copyright holder before they did it. As such COM:FOP is a difficult law to understand at times. Clarkcj12 (talk) 04:40, 24 November 2013 (UTC)

Licence for File:Columnar Basalt Giants Causeway Northern Ireland.jpg

On 14 December 2013, I uploaded photo https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Columnar_Basalt_Giants_Causeway_Northern_Ireland.jpg from a French website. The source webpage has a web link for its CC-BY-SA licence (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/deed.fr) which is "Creative Commons Attribution - Partage dans les Mêmes Conditions 3.0 non transposé (CC BY-SA 3.0)" which I believe is the French language translation of the "Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported (CC BY-SA 3.0)" licence. I used the English language version of this licence (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/deed.en) when I uploaded the image using the Wikimedia Commons Upload Wizard. (Wikimedia Commons should automatically show the French translation of this English language licence to users who have French as their user profile language setting). I then requested licence review. I see that when you did the licence review on 15 December 2013, you changed the licence to "Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 2.0 France (CC-BY-SA-2.0-FR)" which corresponds to http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/2.0/fr/deed-en, which I believe is the wrong licence. I suggest that the http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/deed.en licence should be restored using the "cc-by-sa-3.0" template tag. I do not think it would be appropriate for me as the uploader of the file to unilaterally change the licence after your review. Therefore, would you restore the correct licence and also arrange for any additional review, please? GeoWriter (talk) 23:13, 15 January 2014 (UTC)

@GeoWriter: Thank you for sending me this message. I understand what you mean but the license of the image is correct it is licensed under the CC-BY-SA-3.0-Fr Which is the French version of the license. The reason why I did that is because that is what it is licensed under as on the website. --Clarkcj12 (talk) 23:32, 15 January 2014 (UTC)
Thanks for your quick response. I disagree with you about the correctness of the licence. If you are saying that the photo is currently licensed on its source website (http://www.geodiversite.net) as CC-BY-SA-3.0-FR then I don't understand why you think this is the case. Did you assume that the "fr" in the licence URL of http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/deed.fr changes an Unported licence to an FR licence? The photo is not currently licensed on its source website under CC-BY-SA-3.0-FR. It is currently licensed under a French language translation of CC-BY-SA-3.0-Unported (shown by clicking on the CC-BY-SA web link on the photo source page). I believe that CC-BY-SA-FR and the French version of CC-BY-SA-Unported are not the same licence. I believe they are separate licences with different conditions. Unported does not include some France-specific conditions of the FR licence. Moving on to considering what the licence was in December, I suggest that it is unlikely that the CC-BY-SA licence for this photo has ever been different from the all the other photos on the website that have a CC-BY-SA licence. I suspect that the CC-BY-SA web link used by the geodiversite.net website to display the relevant licence from the Creative Commons website is likely to be controlled as a parameter at website level. I've uploaded 33 other photos from the same website before and after this photo, which have been reviewed by several Wikimedia Commons licence reviewers. All the photos had and still have a CC-BY-SA Unported licence from a web URL ending with /deed.fr (for Unported), not, as you imply, a URL ending with /fr/deed-en (for FR). I think you made a mistake in your review in December. Where do we go from here? GeoWriter (talk) 02:51, 16 January 2014 (UTC)
@GeoWriter: I see the mistake, thank you for explaining it to me. I will make the correction. Clarkcj12 (talk) 03:05, 16 January 2014 (UTC)
Thank you. GeoWriter (talk) 12:47, 16 January 2014 (UTC)

Own work by original uploader

Hello. Please take care to remove this template when uploading images which weren't created by the original uploader at the local project (c.f., File:Lu Zhishen.jpg). I believe the tool gives instructions to that effect. Thanks. Magog the Ogre (talk) (contribs) 02:27, 22 February 2014 (UTC)