User talk:Duvillage

From Wikimedia Commons, the free media repository
Jump to: navigation, search
Welcome to Wikimedia Commons, Duvillage!
Afrikaans | Alemannisch | العربية | অসমীয়া | asturianu | azərbaycanca | تۆرکجه | беларуская | беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ | български | भोजपुरी | 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 | Interlingue | íslenska | italiano | 日本語 | ქართული | 한국어 | Kurdî | Latina | lietuvių | македонски | മലയാളം | मराठी | Bahasa Melayu | Mirandés | မြန်မာဘာသာ | Plattdüütsch | नेपाली | Nederlands | norsk | occitan | Ирон | polski | português | português do Brasil | rumantsch | română | русский | sicilianu | Scots | سنڌي | ၽႃႇသႃႇတႆး  | සිංහල | slovenčina | slovenščina | shqip | српски / srpski | Basa Sunda | svenska | Kiswahili | தமிழ் | тоҷикӣ | ไทย | Tagalog | Türkçe | українська | اردو | vèneto | Tiếng Việt | 粵語 | 中文 | 中文(简体)‎ | 中文(繁體)‎ | 中文(台灣)‎ | +/−

Yann (talk) 07:32, 6 August 2008 (UTC)


  1. I always read welcome messages
  2. I find that on commons.wikimedia this one should appear automatically upon registration
  3. When the welcome message is generated AFTER contributions, it makes one wonder if it was generated because commons.wikimedia noticed the new user being clumsy and making stupid mistakes
  4. commons.wikimedia should explain in more detail and more clearly the reason for the existence of the sandbox = the main reason as I understand it is that by using the sandbox it reduces the traffic on the servers / editing and correcting for real increases strain on the servers each time. And also: does the sandbox permit making files, and from the files making galleries and from the galleries making categories? It is still not clear to me what exactely one can do in the sandbox, and what it's limitations are. --Duvillage ( ) 00:42, 7 August 2008 (UTC)

Public domain This file is in the public domain, because identity photographs are ineligible for Copyright in France

In case this is not legally possible:
The right to use this work is granted to anyone for any purpose, without any conditions, unless such conditions are required by law.

Dialog-warning.svg Please verify that the reason given above complies with Commons' licensing policy.

Category:Academie Julian[edit]

May I ask why you put this in Category:Hidden categories? Rocket000(talk) 20:41, 12 August 2008 (UTC)

I do not know why "Académie Julian" went into "Hidden categories". I thought it was some automatic thing done on this site by the "Wikimedia Commons" robots! --Duvillage (talk) 22:51, 14 August 2008 (UTC)

Copyright Banner[edit]

As for the copyright banner on my own discussion page, this is only a personal reminder for myself. I was looking for an identity photographs to illustrate articles, since they fall outside the scope of what is covered by the laws in France, and when I would have found them, I would have the banner ready to put with the photographs. A lot of background research went into finding the information in the French legal documents, about the exceptions applying to identity photographs, so I did not want it to get removed. --Duvillage (talk) 22:51, 14 August 2008 (UTC)

File source is not properly indicated: File:Henri_Royer_Ex-voto.jpg[edit]

العربية | asturianu | беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ | বাংলা | català | čeština | dansk | Deutsch | Ελληνικά | English | español | euskara | فارسی | suomi | français | galego | עברית | magyar | italiano | 日本語 | 한국어 | македонски | മലയാളം | Plattdüütsch | Nederlands | norsk nynorsk | norsk | polski | português | português do Brasil | русский | sicilianu | slovenčina | slovenščina | svenska | ไทย | Türkçe | українська | Tiếng Việt | 中文(简体)‎ | 中文(繁體)‎ | +/−
Warning sign
This media may be deleted.
A file that you have uploaded to Wikimedia Commons, File:Henri_Royer_Ex-voto.jpg, is missing information about where it comes from or who created it, which is needed to verify its copyright status. Please edit the file description and add the missing information, or the file may be deleted.

If you created the content yourself, enter {{own}} as the source. If you did not add a licensing template, you must add one. You may use, for example, {{self|GFDL|cc-by-sa-all}} or {{Cc-zero}} to release certain rights to your work.

If someone else created the content, or if it is based on someone else's work, the source should be the address to the web page where you found it, the name and ISBN of the book you scanned it from, or similar. You should also name the author, provide verifiable information to show that the content is in the public domain or has been published under a free license by its author, and add an appropriate template identifying the public domain or licensing status, if you have not already done so.

Please add the required information for this and other files you have uploaded before adding more files. If you need assistance, please ask at the help desk. Thank you!

Cecil (talk) 17:56, 11 April 2009 (UTC)


COMMONS has this stand, that a photograph of a 2 dimension public domain art work (old paintings) falls itself into the public domain, on the condition that the photograph strickly represents only the art work itself.

How do you think I can upload a picture! I cannot upload the old public domain painting itself, that is technically impossible! I need to make a numerical soft copy of the painting. That is the whole idea behind the uploading process.

This is a faithful photographic reproduction of a two-dimensional, public domain work of art. The work of art itself is in the public domain for the following reason:
Public domain

This work is in the public domain in its country of origin and other countries and areas where the copyright term is the author's life plus 70 years or less.

Dialog-warning.svg You must also include a United States public domain tag to indicate why this work is in the public domain in the United States. Note that a few countries have copyright terms longer than 70 years: Mexico has 100 years, Jamaica has 95 years, Colombia has 80 years, and Guatemala and Samoa have 75 years. This image may not be in the public domain in these countries, which moreover do not implement the rule of the shorter term. Côte d'Ivoire has a general copyright term of 99 years and Honduras has 75 years, but they do implement the rule of the shorter term. Copyright may extend on works created by French who died for France in World War II (more information), Russians who served in the Eastern Front of World War II (known as the Great Patriotic War in Russia) and posthumously rehabilitated victims of Soviet repressions (more information).

This file has been identified as being free of known restrictions under copyright law, including all related and neighboring rights.
The official position taken by the Wikimedia Foundation is that "faithful reproductions of two-dimensional public domain works of art are public domain".
This photographic reproduction is therefore also considered to be in the public domain in the United States. In other jurisdictions, re-use of this content may be restricted; see Reuse of PD-Art photographs for details.
{{PD-Art}} template without license parameter: please specify why the underlying work is public domain in both the source country and the United States
(Usage: {{PD-Art|1=|deathyear=''year of author's death''|country=''source country''}}, where parameter #1 can be PD-old-auto, PD-old-auto-1923, PD-old-auto-1996, PD-old-100 or similar. See Commons:Multi-license copyright tags for more information.)

--Duvillage (talk) 19:34, 11 April 2009 (UTC)

You always have to give the source from where you have the image and that is a ground rule of Commons. "France" is not a source, that is only the place where the painting was produced, but it is not a revisable source. So stop screaming, check out other painting uploads and see what is necessary. -- Cecil (talk) 20:24, 11 April 2009 (UTC)
I am not screaming, where do you get that? I have the right to my opinion on these pages. I did not say anything wrong, I did not insult you, I just pointed out facts. I have been checking around, and I checked around way before I contributd. And I know as a fact what the stand of COMMONS is about soft copies of old paintings. --Duvillage (talk) 20:43, 11 April 2009 (UTC)

Missing sources[edit]

Čeština | Deutsch | English | Español | Suomi | Français | עברית | Magyar | Italiano | 日本語 | Македонски | Plattdüütsch | Nederlands | Norsk bokmål | Polski | Português | Português do Brasil | Русский | Svenska | Українська | +/−

Nuvola apps important.svg Hi! It has come to my attention that you have removed a warning which says that the page doesn't have enough information about the source of the image and/or doesn't have information about the license conditions. Nevertheless, it seems to me that this information is still missing and I have put back the warning(s). You may either add the required information or, if you think that required information is given, put the image up for a deletion request so that it won't automatically be deleted. Thank you.

-- Cecil (talk) 04:12, 4 May 2009 (UTC)

Wikipedia is not a source.
And don't recreate images which were deleted because of you not giving a source. Images can be restored if you are finally willing to give a proper source. Everything else is a waste of server-space and will be deleted again as long as you are not providing a proper source. -- Cecil (talk) 04:18, 4 May 2009 (UTC)


Les images ont été restaurées. Il serait utile de préciser comment tu les as obtenues : si sur un site web, lequel ? si scannées depuis un livre, lequel ? photographiées dans un musée ? etc. Cordialement, Yann (talk) 09:20, 5 May 2009 (UTC)

OK, très bien. Peux-tu ajouter sur la page de description de chaque image : « photo prise à l'exposition X à Y (nom de la ville ou du musée), à <date Z (au moins l'année)> ». Yann (talk) 10:57, 7 May 2009 (UTC)