User talk:DizzyMosquitoRadio99

From Wikimedia Commons, the free media repository
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Welcome to Wikimedia Commons, DizzyMosquitoRadio99!

-- Wikimedia Commons Welcome (talk) 04:03, 12 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

SVG (Scalable Vector Graphics)

[edit]
In other languages (translate this)

Deutsch  English  español  français  hrvatski  italiano  português  português do Brasil  sicilianu  беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎  македонски  русский  日本語  +/−

Please use SVG
Please use SVG
Thank you for uploading some images! Did you know that Wikimedia Commons recommends the SVG (Scalable Vector Graphics) format for certain types of images? Scalable Vector Graphics are designed to look appropriate at any scale, and SVG images are easier to modify and translate, helping Wikimedia to distribute knowledge to all of the world. A lot of modern programs support SVG export. If you encountered problems or have questions, don't hesitate to ask me, a member of the Graphic Lab, or the Graphics village pump. Uploading images in SVG format isn't mandatory, but it would help. (To avoid any misunderstandings, please don't just put raster images into an SVG container as embedded raster.) Thanks, and happy editing!

EugeneZelenko (talk) 14:35, 21 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Notification about possible deletion

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

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

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

Affected:

And also:

Yours sincerely, Christian Ferrer (talk) 04:31, 12 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

If you go to http://www.my9nj.com/ you can see the new logo that should replace the current logo in the WWOR-TV article. I don't really know how to upload an image. Thanks.Vchimpanzee (talk) 15:55, 13 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

To Vchimpanzee (talk), when I moved the current-standing logo of WWOR-TV down into a later section of the article and indicated an update to the logo via an update to the branding of that TV station, I wound up having all of my edits reverted and stood accused of "vandalizing" the article, along with a stern notice that no updates to the logo have taken place, for that other logo that you speak of is, in fact, a website branding logo that had been in existence for years. So, therefore, by responding to your suggestion, I put my own self on the line and I took the fall for your error in judgment. In that case, maybe I should just quit responding to recommendations altogether, than. DizzyMosquitoRadio99 (talk) 00:00, 19 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
I don't understand why these people would do such a thing. The station's logo should be on the web site and the other one is the only one that's there. I think I made a reasonable assumption based on that.Vchimpanzee (talk) 15:27, 19 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
To Vchimpanzee (talk), I apologize for losing my patience earlier. Don't think the frustration was directed at you but, rather, I felt as though I was taking the blame for adopting an edit that was actually urged by someone else. I'm so sorry you had to get thrown into the middle of all of that unprofessionalism on my part. But you're absolutely correct in that the poor calculations of branding on the station's fault is what ultimately precipitated the events that transpired here on Wikipedia. It is rather strange, yes, how TV Station logos sometimes are non-existent on station websites. In fact, there are some TV Stations where I have no idea where the Wikipedia article obtained the station logo from because the station doesn't breathe any Online life into the station logo. And, of course, some articles don't have any logos because a copy of the station's logo simply can't be found at all. For Instance: A logo for neither KWBH-LP nor KVCT-DT3 can be found anywhere. I would admire any Wikipedian who could somehow hunt down a logo for either of those two subchannel-based stations. DizzyMosquitoRadio99 (talk) 18:45, 19 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you. I figured there was some good reason why the request was not granted, but when I saw the web site, I believed it was reasonable. I will say that's not a very attractive logo the person was asking to be put in the article.Vchimpanzee (talk) 19:19, 19 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
The person is at it again but I know what's going on.Vchimpanzee (talk) 20:23, 23 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Pay attention to copyright
File:WSVW-LD Logo.png has been marked as a possible copyright violation. Wikimedia Commons only accepts free content—that is, images and other media files that can be used by anyone, for any purpose. Traditional copyright law does not grant these freedoms, and unless noted otherwise, everything you find on the web is copyrighted and not permitted here. For details on what is acceptable, please read Commons:Licensing. You may also find Commons:Copyright rules useful, or you can ask questions about Commons policies at the Commons:Help desk. If you are the copyright holder and the creator of the file, please read Commons:But it's my own work! for tips on how to provide evidence of that.

The file you added has been deleted. If you have written permission from the copyright holder, please have them send us a free license release via COM:VRT. If you believe that the deletion was not in accordance with policy, you may request undeletion. (It is not necessary to request undeletion if using VRT; the file will be automatically restored at the conclusion of the process.)

Warning: Wikimedia Commons takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing.

Afrikaans  العربية  asturianu  azərbaycanca  беларуская  беларуская (тарашкевіца)  български  ပအိုဝ်ႏဘာႏသာႏ  বাংলা  català  čeština  dansk  Deutsch  Deutsch (Sie-Form)  Zazaki  Ελληνικά  English  español  euskara  فارسی  suomi  français  galego  עברית  hrvatski  magyar  հայերեն  Bahasa Indonesia  italiano  日本語  한국어  Lëtzebuergesch  македонски  മലയാളം  मराठी  Bahasa Melayu  Malti  မြန်မာဘာသာ  norsk bokmål  Plattdüütsch  Nederlands  norsk nynorsk  norsk  polski  português  português do Brasil  română  русский  sicilianu  slovenčina  slovenščina  српски / srpski  svenska  தமிழ்  тоҷикӣ  ไทย  Türkçe  українська  oʻzbekcha / ўзбекча  Tiếng Việt  中文(简体)  中文(繁體)  +/−

A1Cafel (talk) 16:44, 15 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

File:WDUV former logo (2000-2013).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 see Commons:But it's my own work! for a guide on how to address these issues.

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

Taivo (talk) 10:15, 14 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

File:WAGM-TV (Former Logo).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 see Commons:But it's my own work! for a guide on how to address these issues.

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

Moonfvblofg2678 (talk) 01:47, 2 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]