User talk:Courcelles/Archive 2

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 Archive 3 →


Hi Courcelles, no OTRS permission needed please see at the bottom of Alakasam (talk) 15:13, 18 August 2011 (UTC)

For more information please read Template talk:CC-AR-Presidency Thanks again. Alakasam (talk) 15:16, 18 August 2011 (UTC)

Please, can you remove the deletion warning? Thanks Alakasam (talk) 15:26, 18 August 2011 (UTC)

Good enough for me, put please be careful to include a link to something that includes the licence when uploading third-party work. Courcelles (talk) 17:10, 18 August 2011 (UTC)

It's ok :) Alakasam (talk) 17:31, 18 August 2011 (UTC)

Around this days administrator Cambalachero will create a special template. Alakasam (talk) 17:34, 18 August 2011 (UTC)

My rename request from yesterday

Hi Courcelles. Thank you for moving my wrongly placed svg files. But there's still one problem: the old file name still exist as redirects. Please be so kind and remove (delete) those (wrong) redirects: File:Amphoe 3806.svg, File:Amphoe 3810.svg and File:Amphoe 3813.svg. Thank you very much. --hdamm (talk) 07:27, 21 August 2011 (UTC)

  • I'm not an administrator on Commons, so I can't delete anything here, but I've tagged them for speedy deletion. Courcelles (talk) 15:38, 21 August 2011 (UTC)
Thank you anyhow. --hdamm (talk) 16:58, 21 August 2011 (UTC)
Looks like an admin has deleted all three. Courcelles (talk) 20:34, 21 August 2011 (UTC)

TUSC token 76ee61e795f362d6f110f449d2d04323

Courcelles (talk) 23:52, 22 August 2011 (UTC)


My reasonings are absolutely good reasons to rename the files. They all have ambiguous names. They say thins like "President Pro Tempore seal". Well, that raises the question: "President PT" of what? Where? What country? The same goes to the other ones that you insist on undoing. Symbols like that are supposed to say of what they are, and not be ambiguous. I ask you to leave my rename tags alone since you disagree, and let someone else decide, but to say my reasons aren't valid when they are is rather silly. Fry1989 eh? 00:53, 26 August 2011 (UTC)

  • They aren't valid, which one of the Commons:File renaming guidelines are you saying is met here? You're not the uploader, the names aren't meaningless or misleading, it's not an organism, so criteria four is out, disambiguation is not an obvious error, there's no template argument made, and it's not pejorative. The rename criteria are incredibly strict, and your requests come nowhere near meeting any of them. Quite frankly, continuing to try to push them through is rather disruptive. Courcelles (talk) 04:44, 26 August 2011 (UTC)
I have to disgaree. Look at "Category:Presidential seals", and all the presidential seals in there. Now try and imagine if they were all named "President's seal" and similar, and how disruptive that would be. Rather, they say what country they're from, such as "Seal of the President of Colombia". That is the common practice. National symbols are supposed to say what country they are from. Fry1989 eh? 21:26, 26 August 2011 (UTC)
What should be common practice at uploading, and what is worth the incredible disruption that moving a file causes when they are this highly used, are entirely different subjects. You're asking for a little convenience (And it is little, the files have been at these names for nearly four years), that links on hundreds of pages on several dozen wikis be updated, and all the past links broken. That's an incredible amount of disruption to the project globally, as anyone who moves files regularly knows, the "file redirects" don't work half the time, and readers are left staring at a normal wikilink where an image should be. Courcelles (talk) 22:44, 26 August 2011 (UTC)

Thank you. Gracias. Merci. Pikinez (talk) 22:00, 28 August 2011 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

Kindness Barnstar Hires.png The Random Acts of Kindness Barnstar
Many thanks for your help renaming Hollyhock in the sun. Cheers. ~Geaugagrrl talk 03:29, 29 August 2011 (UTC)
  • Thank you, happy to be of assistance. Courcelles (talk) 03:33, 29 August 2011 (UTC)

File:Mark W Clark time magazine cover 1946.jpg

File:Mark W Clark time magazine cover 1946.jpg is OK? --Arachn0 (talk) 08:01, 29 August 2011 (UTC)

  • Yep, looks like one of the last they forgot about. Courcelles (talk) 19:23, 29 August 2011 (UTC)

Renaming request

I requested File:"Light of Dawn" Rocky Point Oregon.jpg be renamed without quotation marks as they cause problems when the filename is included in automated processes. I am most aware of Cropbot, which cannot read such named files. They should be considered "funny" characters when reading Commons:File naming. I hope you consider this a valid reason. Thanks. Finavon (talk) 18:50, 29 August 2011 (UTC)

  • Meh, I'm not sure that's technically within the criteria, but, if it helps, so be it, given that doing this move won't affect any usages, anywhere. Moved. Courcelles (talk) 23:06, 29 August 2011 (UTC)
Thanks. Finavon (talk) 20:01, 30 August 2011 (UTC)

Wappen Abbensen (Wedemark).svg

Hi, Here is my gallery. A little chaotical, because not every filename is on a same. I made for my works a standard. I translate the Hungarian names to English and I will rename everything. If you see my link, you can find almost everything, because lot of names are sorted. Rauenstein renamed it and I very unhappy, because it's bad for my sorting. I need the original name, because it's goes back to the german coat of arms. My images made for a book, not just for the Wiki projects. The writer gets the images for hes book, from my category view. Hes work will heavier, because the finding will longer. Sorry for my English, but I thing you can understand my problem. Please the Wappen Abbensen (Wedemark).svg rename to the original name!

Bye, Madboy74 (talk) 19:55, 3 September 2011 (UTC)

You're going to have to talk with the person who moved the file, and see if they will reverse themselves. For me to do it unilaterally would be without good cause and against COM:MOVE policies. Courcelles (talk) 05:00, 4 September 2011 (UTC)

File Tagging File:CamptocampLogo.png

I've added the permission link.

That link only seems to discuss the guidebook, and not the organisation's logo itself. Indeed, there is a full copyright notice at the bottom. Am I missing something? Courcelles (talk) 10:24, 6 September 2011 (UTC)


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...

Courcelles, congratulations! You now have administrator rights 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 on There is also a channel for Commons admins, which may be useful for more sensitive topics, or coordination among administrators:#wikimedia-commons-admin.

You may find Commons:Guide to adminship to be useful reading.

Please also check or add your entry to the List of administrators and the related lists by language and date it references.

EugeneZelenko (talk) 14:48, 13 September 2011 (UTC)

Thanks. Anyone who brings sweets is doubly welcome here! In lieu of bothering anyone with thanks-spam, I'll just say here thanks to everyone who participated for the confidence. Courcelles (talk) 15:18, 13 September 2011 (UTC)
Welcome to the team. You may find User:Jameslwoodward/Commons notes for administrators useful -- feel free to add to it.      Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 19:50, 13 September 2011 (UTC)
Thanks for the link, very useful... though expecting me to add to a guidebook on my first day is a little crazy :D Courcelles (talk) 22:46, 13 September 2011 (UTC)

Some stroopwafels for you!

Gaufre biscuit.jpg Congratulations in your election as an administrator! Some cookies for you. (Am I using the Wikilove thing? OMG!) --Marco Aurelio (disputatio) 18:06, 13 September 2011 (UTC)
Oooh, waffles! Thanks!. (I've not ever used the WIkilove thing, either...) Courcelles (talk) 22:45, 13 September 2011 (UTC)

Here too?

Are you an admin/CU here too? Might ease up my life to transfer socks and copyvios to you! SpacemanSpiff (talk) 18:11, 16 September 2011 (UTC)

I'm an admin here, not a CU. Courcelles (talk) 18:18, 16 September 2011 (UTC)

Many thanks!

Thank you for renaming my picture file from Palystes castaneus to Palystes superciliosus. I should not have named it before being sure of the ID, but I was unaware that more than one species occurred in this region. Well, now that that is clear, I shall be in a better position to be confident that the next pics (I want to show a male P. castaneus and female P. superciliosus for example) are properly labelled. Thanks again, JonRichfield (talk) 20:09, 16 September 2011 (UTC)

No problem, happy to be able to help. Courcelles (talk) 20:45, 16 September 2011 (UTC)

Added heading

What probleme ?????? Hello why r u delete my pictures on Pierpoljak article ??? u hav no reason to do that ! I hav the right on pic. bye

Please tell me what image you are discussing. Please be prepared to prove you have permission to release the file to COM:OTRS was well. Courcelles (talk) 20:21, 19 September 2011 (UTC)

Move deleted copyrighted image to en

You recently deleted LUofficialseal.JPG from commons as it's a copyrighted image. Can you please undelete and move it to en where it's a valid image for fair use? Thanks! ElKevbo (talk) 20:57, 18 September 2011 (UTC)

The source of the file was also invalid, so it could have been deleted on those grounds, and would have been deleted from enwp on those, as well. Also, I do not upload fair use images on philosophical grounds, so if you want to claim it meets NFCC, feel free to find the image on the university's website and upload it to enwp yourself. Courcelles (talk) 21:44, 18 September 2011 (UTC)

This [1] is copyviol from [2].-- 18:10, 19 September 2011 (UTC)


Hi, File:Dorpsgezicht.jpg had a valid reason added to the request, namely "clearer - Lundy "view of village"". I am sorry if this was not clear enough. To elaborate - at the moment, the file is named (in Dutch) "view of village.jpg". I had intended to have this changed to "Lundy, Dorpsgezicht.jpg", which would translate as "Lundy "view of village"". (btw, I don't know if this is actually a view of the village, as it looks to me like it's a view of the church, but that's what the uploader called it. And as I haven't been there, I take their word for it). If you think this name is not suitable, or still not clear enough, please feel free to change it to something more appropriate. The issue remains that "dorpsgezicht" ("view of village") by itself is unclear and very general, and as such is allowed to be renamed (see reason #2 on the page you mentioned). Thank you for your help. -- Deadstar (msg) 07:43, 20 September 2011 (UTC)

Okay, now that makes sense. File moved, I didn't get what you were trying to say with the "(lundy, "view of village")" line, and it didn't occur to me at all that Dorpsgezicht translated as "view of village" in that rationale. Courcelles (talk) 08:19, 20 September 2011 (UTC)
Thanks again :) -- Deadstar (msg) 09:13, 20 September 2011 (UTC)

Commons:Deletion requests/File:Autofellatio-Kiki51.jpg

Are you sure that COM:PCP applies to this case, as stated in you closing decision? It speaks about free content, which this image undoubtedly is. So why did you put it inside your closing? -- /人 ‿‿ 人\ 苦情処理係 09:01, 20 September 2011 (UTC)

  • "The precautionary principle is that where there is significant doubt about the freedom of a particular file it should be deleted." Really, we have all kinds of doubts here, from comments saying it looks ripped from the internet, to ones about whether the person depicted gave consent for the image to be exhibited. The keep side provides no compelling reason it is permissible to host this file, and they are the side with the burden of proof -- which is ultimately the core of the PCP. Courcelles (talk) 17:27, 20 September 2011 (UTC)

Category moves for "Electrically-powered XXX"

I started out on the Village Pump, and was told to use User talk:CommonsDelinker/commands, which I did. In a day and a half, there have been no comments on the Village Pump that these requests were controversial. I agree that the English WP guidelines do not directly apply here in Commons, but when Commons templates start popping up in enwp, they should conform to English WP guidelines. Take a look at the WP article "Electric locomotive" [3], which has "electrically" without the hyphen, except in the template "Commons category|Electrically-powered locomotives". That's why I'm here. Perhaps you would prefer that I create unhyphenated soft redirects in Commons. OK with me; the Commons cats can be in Pig Latin or Esperanto, as long as enwp looks right. What do you think? Chris the speller (talk) 19:39, 22 September 2011 (UTC)

You realise you can adjust that template on enwp without doing a thing on Commons, right? Simply replace {{Commons category|Electrically-powered locomotives}} with {{Commons category|Electrically-powered locomotives|Electrically powered locomotives}}. The same pipe trick will work on any commons category template, without having to move anything here, or even make a single edit here. Putting a category move directly to COmmonsDelinker is only for things so simple no one could possibly object, like a pure typo (if it had said "Electriclly" instead of "Electrically" for example.) Courcelles (talk) 21:10, 22 September 2011 (UTC)
I can't say that it's likely that anyone would object to proper punctuation on Commons, but stranger things have happened even on enwp, so I guess it's easier overall, at least for now, to pipe-patch it on enwp than to fix it right once and for all on Commons. It will require ongoing maintenance. At least I won't have to continue trying to figure out the circular directions for Commons cat renames. Thanks for the info, and happy editing! Chris the speller (talk) 23:52, 22 September 2011 (UTC)

Commons:Deletion requests/File:Masturbating with a toothbrush.jpg

What do you think you are doing. You just deleted one of less than five images we had of masturbation using things which are neither sex toys nor vegetables. And you close the DR without even a single word of explanation? Please tell me this is just an aberration, a mistake. -mattbuck (Talk) 23:22, 22 September 2011 (UTC)

It's not a mistake, the argument of NOTCENSORED was clearly out argued by the other three participants, who refuted that NOTCENSORED alone is a reason for keeping a file. Not one plausible argument was made for this being in scope, it is a low quality photograph, and COM:PORN was, to my mind, quite clearly the correct argument. Courcelles (talk) 23:34, 22 September 2011 (UTC)
Then might I suggest that in your future admin actions - congrats on that btw - you explain your reasoning in closing deletion requests where there is dissent. I have brought it up at UDEL, but please know that I find your actions at best misguided. -mattbuck (Talk) 23:37, 22 September 2011 (UTC)
See [4]. That was a particularly bad DR in terms of the arguments, and clearly flawed in light of the comments at REFUND. Courcelles (talk) 23:51, 22 September 2011 (UTC)
Thankyou. -mattbuck (Talk) 23:54, 22 September 2011 (UTC)
@C.: Was my comment in the DR "It illustrates masturbation with an electric toothbrush" that hard to understand? And: yes, you may think on your own - especially if you close that early. Cheers --Saibo (Δ) 00:17, 23 September 2011 (UTC)
Your comment was not a reason to keep the file, it was a description of the file. It would be akin to saying on a DR about File:Golden Retriever 046.jpg "Illustrates the face of a Golden Retriever". Yes, it does, but that's not actually an argument for retention. Compare your argument with the ones on REFUND. And it was not closed early, a DR canonically lasts for seven days, this one lasted for seven days and 16 hours. Courcelles (talk) 00:27, 23 September 2011 (UTC)
Yes, my comment wasn't very long. I couldn't believe that someone would decide to delete this. The value of this file is obvious. If it isn't to you please think about not closing such DRs. If you are not sure, please ask - I am happy to add more explanation if needed.
It was closed early - 7 days is the minimum time for non-speedy closures. Many many DRs are open longer. Cheers --Saibo (Δ) 15:52, 23 September 2011 (UTC)
It wasn't the fact that your comment was short that meant I disregarded it, it was that it had no argument. It described the image, and added nothing beyond what anyone who looked at the image could have seen. It didn't argue that it was the only such image we had, it didn't argue that the practice it depicted was somehow important, it just said what the image was. "The value of this file is obvious." Obvious to whom? It's not to me, nor to the other three people who participated in the DR, and it wasn't in use anywhere, the UDEL at least made a plausible argument why it might be worth keeping that the DR never touched, but you didn't raise any valid arguments and just expected whoever closed it to see that you were right, when we delete a fair amount of bad porn on a daily basis. (I remember from reading your userpage during your RFA, that you have some very strong, and somewhat out of the mainstream ideas, on where the line should be on keeping porn on the Commons. If you want those views to be accepted, you have to make your arguments, even in German, and not hope whoever closes the DR will see the issue being as much of an obvious call as you do, because this case was in no way obvious; "masturbating with a toothbrush"? You relied on whoever closed it having some idea that that would ever happen in real life (as opposed to one photographers idea), instead of making that argument directly. Being short isn't the problem, not making the case is.) Courcelles (talk)