User talk:Jmabel/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.
Welcome to the Commons, Jmabel/Archive 1!
Afrikaans | Alemannisch | العربية | Asturianu | Azərbaycanca | Беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ | Български | বাংলা | Català | Čeština | 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 | Italiano | 日本語 | ქართული | 한국어 | Latina | Lietuvių | Македонски | മലയാളം | मराठी | Bahasa Melayu | Plattdüütsch | नेपाली | Nederlands | Norsk bokmål | Occitan | Polski | Português | Português do Brasil | Română | Русский | Scots | Slovenčina | Slovenščina | Shqip | Српски / srpski | Svenska | Kiswahili | தமிழ் | ไทย | Türkçe | Українська | Vèneto | Tiếng Việt | 中文 | 中文(简体)‎ | 中文(繁體)‎ | 中文(台灣)‎ | +/−
Crystal Clear app korganizer.png First steps tutorial

Our first steps help file and our FAQ will help you a lot after registration. They explain how to customize the interface (for example the language), how to upload files and our basic licensing policy. You don't need technical skills in order to contribute here. Be bold contributing here and assume good faith for the intentions of others. This is a wiki - it is really easy.

Icon apps query.svg Getting help

More information is available at the Community Portal. You may ask questions at the Help desk, Village Pump or on IRC channel #wikimedia-commons. You can also contact an administrator on their talk page. If you have a specific copyright question, ask at Commons talk:Licensing.

Transmission icon.png Goodies, tips and tricks
  • Put Babel boxes on your user page so others know what languages you can speak and indicate your Graphics abilities.
  • All your uploads are stored in your personal Gallery
  • Please sign your name on Talk pages by typing ~~~~
  • Use the CommonSense tool to find good categories for your files (then other people can find them too!)
  • To link to an image page, write this: [[:Image:Foo.jpg]], it makes this: Image:Foo.jpg
  • If you're copying files from another project, be sure to use the CommonsHelper
Nuvola filesystems trashcan full.png Made a mistake?
  • 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}}
  • For more information read the full Deletion guidelines
(P.S. Would you like to provide feedback on this message?)


Image talk:028fi.jpg

Why is this obviously a 16th century portrait? Thuresson 04:34, 10 March 2006 (UTC)

Image:Andrew Leman 1.jpg

Image deletion warning Image:Andrew Leman 1.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 image, 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. If the file is up for deletion because it has been superseded by a superior derivative of your work, consider the notion that although the file may be deleted, your hard work (which we all greatly appreciate) lives on in the new file.
In all cases, please do not take the deletion request personally. It is never intended as such. 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)‎ | +/−

Patricia.fidi 23:02, 16 December 2006 (UTC) .

Image:Andrew Leman 2.jpg

Image deletion warning Image:Andrew Leman 2.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 image, 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. If the file is up for deletion because it has been superseded by a superior derivative of your work, consider the notion that although the file may be deleted, your hard work (which we all greatly appreciate) lives on in the new file.
In all cases, please do not take the deletion request personally. It is never intended as such. 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)‎ | +/−

Patricia.fidi 23:24, 16 December 2006 (UTC) .

Re: Welcome?

Hi, yes it was related to a comment I left for you on your VP topic. I originally thought from your signature that you didn't have an account here. Then I figured you probably did and had just modified your sig to point to en.wp only, so I found your talk page.

You're welcome to remove it, of course. Although I think you should review your assumptions about welcome messages, new contributors and the like. I wouldn't think you are any more or less of a contributor just because you do or don't have a welcome message. Why do you think anyone else would? :)

cheers, pfctdayelise (说什么?) 04:50, 12 January 2007 (UTC)

Olympic Sculpture Park

Hey Joe, have you been to the new park yet? Any pictures? I'm gonna take some soon maybe at the public opening on the 20th. And by chance do you have a subscription to the NYT? This webpage [1] (I know it is pretty negative) says they made a 42 page brochure, and I'm trying to find a copy. According to a friend of mine it is not in the Boston edition of the paper and I can't find it online and my library is closed today for MLK day. So I don't know if there is such a brochure. Best regards, DVD R W 00:56, 16 January 2007 (UTC)

Replied by email. - en:Jmabel | talk 06:27, 16 January 2007 (UTC)
Went by today, took some photos that I should eventually upload. Apparently they are "not allowing" photos of the Oldenberg piece, which is on loan from Paul Allen. Of course, that doesn't really mean you can't take photos, but it certainly means that we can't use them without very clear fair use justifications. - en:Jmabel | talk 02:15, 22 January 2007 (UTC)

Your image Elisabeth of Romania 1.jpg

And the new.

I saw this image had been tagged for cleanup, and I though you might like to see the result of my edit to it. I cropped and straightened it, then corrected colour and levels and uploaded it under a new, more suitable name. I have tagged the old image as superseded and nominated it for deletion. I hope you don't mind. See you around. — Vanderdeckenξφ 15:58, 29 January 2007 (UTC)

Great! Yes, I've just finally this month gotten hold of some decent tools to start doing some cleanup myself on images. Good job. - en:Jmabel | talk 17:03, 29 January 2007 (UTC)

Commons Picture of the Year 2006 Competition

POTY barnstar 1.svg
Interested in honouring the best of the best? Vote now in the
Commons Picture of the Year competition 2006
Voting to select the finalists is open until 14th February.

Deutsch | English | español | français | italiano | 日本語 | Nederlands | português | svenska | 中文(简体)‎ | 中文(繁體)‎ | +/−

The arrangements for the Commons Picture of the Year 2006 competition are now complete, and voting will start tomorrow, Feb 1st. All Featured Pictures promoted last year are automatically nominated. As a past contributor to Featured Pictures, we invite you to participate in the competition (but please wait until tomorrow to vote). --MichaelMaggs 22:03, 31 January 2007 (UTC)

Image:Archie McPhee action figures 01A.jpg

Image deletion warning Image:Archie McPhee action figures 01A.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 image, 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. If the file is up for deletion because it has been superseded by a superior derivative of your work, consider the notion that although the file may be deleted, your hard work (which we all greatly appreciate) lives on in the new file.
In all cases, please do not take the deletion request personally. It is never intended as such. 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)‎ | +/−

Melkor23 04:45, 7 April 2007 (UTC)


Image Tagging Image:Daumier-Dieu_Soult.jpg

العربية | asturianu | беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ | català | čeština | dansk | Deutsch | Ελληνικά | English | español | euskara | فارسی | suomi | français | עברית | magyar | italiano | 日本語 | 한국어 | македонски | മലയാളം | Plattdüütsch | Nederlands | norsk nynorsk | norsk bokmål | polski | português | português do Brasil | русский | slovenčina | slovenščina | svenska | Türkçe | Tiếng Việt | 中文(简体)‎ | 中文(繁體)‎ | +/−

Warning sign
This media may be deleted.

Thanks for uploading Image:Daumier-Dieu_Soult.jpg. I notice the image page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you have not created this media yourself then you need to argue that we have the right to use the media on Wikimedia Commons (see copyright tagging below). If you have not created the media yourself then you should also specify where you found it, i.e., in most cases link to the website where you got it, and the terms of use for content from that page. If the content is a derivative of a copyrighted work, you need to supply the names and a licence of the original authors as well.

If the media also doesn't have a copyright tag, then you must also add one. If you created/took the picture, audio, or video then you can use {{self|cc-by-sa-2.5}} to release it under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike license or {{PD-self}} to release it into the public domain. See Commons:Copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

Note that any unsourced and untagged images will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have uploaded other media, please check that you have specified their source and copyright tagged them, too. You can find all your uploads using the Gallery tool. Thank you. odder 08:11, 9 April 2007 (UTC)

I ment there was no good source given. As far as I see after clicking on the link given, there is everything ok with this picture. Sorry for the problems. I'm sometimes a little bit copyright paranoid :) Regards, /odder 15:23, 10 April 2007 (UTC)

Image:Serra Wake 01.jpg

Image deletion warning Image:Serra Wake 01.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 image, 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. If the file is up for deletion because it has been superseded by a superior derivative of your work, consider the notion that although the file may be deleted, your hard work (which we all greatly appreciate) lives on in the new file.
In all cases, please do not take the deletion request personally. It is never intended as such. 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)‎ | +/−

--Davepape 05:41, 16 April 2007 (UTC)


Image Tagging Image:Festal_Hawaiian_dancers_11.jpg

العربية | asturianu | беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ | català | čeština | dansk | Deutsch | Ελληνικά | English | español | euskara | فارسی | suomi | français | עברית | magyar | italiano | 日本語 | 한국어 | македонски | മലയാളം | Plattdüütsch | Nederlands | norsk nynorsk | norsk bokmål | polski | português | português do Brasil | русский | slovenčina | slovenščina | svenska | Türkçe | Tiếng Việt | 中文(简体)‎ | 中文(繁體)‎ | +/−

Warning sign
This media may be deleted.

Thanks for uploading Image:Festal_Hawaiian_dancers_11.jpg. I notice the image page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you have not created this media yourself then you need to argue that we have the right to use the media on Wikimedia Commons (see copyright tagging below). If you have not created the media yourself then you should also specify where you found it, i.e., in most cases link to the website where you got it, and the terms of use for content from that page. If the content is a derivative of a copyrighted work, you need to supply the names and a licence of the original authors as well.

If the media also doesn't have a copyright tag, then you must also add one. If you created/took the picture, audio, or video then you can use {{self|cc-by-sa-2.5}} to release it under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike license or {{PD-self}} to release it into the public domain. See Commons:Copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

Note that any unsourced and untagged images will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have uploaded other media, please check that you have specified their source and copyright tagged them, too. You can find all your uploads using the Gallery tool. Thank you. Yonidebest Ω Talk 02:24, 1 June 2007 (UTC)

Fixed. Not sure how this got uploaded without the summary & licensing. - en:Jmabel | talk 06:56, 1 June 2007 (UTC)
Thanks, Yonidebest Ω Talk 11:29, 1 June 2007 (UTC)


Image Tagging Image:Seattle_U_Immaculate_Conception_cropped.jpg

العربية | asturianu | беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ | català | čeština | dansk | Deutsch | Ελληνικά | English | español | euskara | فارسی | suomi | français | עברית | magyar | italiano | 日本語 | 한국어 | македонски | മലയാളം | Plattdüütsch | Nederlands | norsk nynorsk | norsk bokmål | polski | português | português do Brasil | русский | slovenčina | slovenščina | svenska | Türkçe | Tiếng Việt | 中文(简体)‎ | 中文(繁體)‎ | +/−

Warning sign
This media may be deleted.

Thanks for uploading Image:Seattle_U_Immaculate_Conception_cropped.jpg. I notice the image page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you have not created this media yourself then you need to argue that we have the right to use the media on Wikimedia Commons (see copyright tagging below). If you have not created the media yourself then you should also specify where you found it, i.e., in most cases link to the website where you got it, and the terms of use for content from that page. If the content is a derivative of a copyrighted work, you need to supply the names and a licence of the original authors as well.

If the media also doesn't have a copyright tag, then you must also add one. If you created/took the picture, audio, or video then you can use {{self|cc-by-sa-2.5}} to release it under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike license or {{PD-self}} to release it into the public domain. See Commons:Copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

Note that any unsourced and untagged images will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have uploaded other media, please check that you have specified their source and copyright tagged them, too. You can find all your uploads using the Gallery tool. Thank you. Siebrand 23:36, 3 June 2007 (UTC)

The page was absolutely clear that I created the content. It also was explicit that I granted GFDL, even though it was, admittedly, missing the specific {{self|GFDL}} template. But your claim that you "notice the image page currently doesn't specify who created the content" means that you "noticed" something that was not the case. - en:Jmabel | talk 05:12, 4 June 2007 (UTC)


Image:Kirsten wind tunnel 06.jpg

Image deletion warning Image:Kirsten wind tunnel 06.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 image, 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. If the file is up for deletion because it has been superseded by a superior derivative of your work, consider the notion that although the file may be deleted, your hard work (which we all greatly appreciate) lives on in the new file.
In all cases, please do not take the deletion request personally. It is never intended as such. 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)‎ | +/−

I fixed your deletion request on this one --Deadstar 15:54, 15 June 2007 (UTC)

This was my upload; I'd requested deletion because it's simply not a good image, and I've uploaded better ones. Not sure what may have been wrong with my previous request for deletion... - en:Jmabel | talk 02:10, 16 June 2007 (UTC)

Peter's image permission

Note to self: {{OTRS|2007072210001861}}, user:Tweenet


Image Tagging Image:Swanson_Shoe_Repair_22.jpg

العربية | asturianu | беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ | català | čeština | dansk | Deutsch | Ελληνικά | English | español | euskara | فارسی | suomi | français | עברית | magyar | italiano | 日本語 | 한국어 | македонски | മലയാളം | Plattdüütsch | Nederlands | norsk nynorsk | norsk bokmål | polski | português | português do Brasil | русский | slovenčina | slovenščina | svenska | Türkçe | Tiếng Việt | 中文(简体)‎ | 中文(繁體)‎ | +/−

Warning sign
This media may be deleted.

Thanks for uploading Image:Swanson_Shoe_Repair_22.jpg. I notice the image page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you have not created this media yourself then you need to argue that we have the right to use the media on Wikimedia Commons (see copyright tagging below). If you have not created the media yourself then you should also specify where you found it, i.e., in most cases link to the website where you got it, and the terms of use for content from that page. If the content is a derivative of a copyrighted work, you need to supply the names and a licence of the original authors as well.

If the media also doesn't have a copyright tag, then you must also add one. If you created/took the picture, audio, or video then you can use {{self|cc-by-sa-3.0}} to release it under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike license or {{PD-self}} to release it into the public domain. See Commons:Copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

Note that any unsourced and untagged images will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have uploaded other media, please check that you have specified their source and copyright tagged them, too. You can find all your uploads using the Gallery tool. Thank you. Jusjih 15:57, 28 August 2007 (UTC)

  • Fixed. - Jmabel | talk 17:13, 28 August 2007 (UTC)

Image:Seattle_-_1551_10th_E_-_06.jpg

català | čeština | dansk | Deutsch | Ελληνικά | English | Esperanto | español | français | galego | עברית | italiano | 日本語 | 한국어 | lietuvių | Nederlands | norsk bokmål | polski | português | русский | slovenčina | 中文(简体)‎ | 中文(繁體)‎ | +/−


Hello, and thank your for sharing your files with Commons. There seems to be a problem regarding the description and/or licensing of this particular file. Please remember that all uploads require source, author and license information. Could you please resolve these problems, which are described on the page linked in above? Thank you. Siebrand 18:06, 28 August 2007 (UTC)
This message was placed by an automated process. Please go to Commons:Help desk if you need help.

  • Fixed. - Jmabel | talk 18:25, 28 August 2007 (UTC)

Petosa

Hi Jmabel, I shot the foto at the gaze of a rather small factory in the center of town near the watertower. Here you can find a list of fisarmonica factories in Castelfidardo: http://www.castelfidardo.it/visitatore/index.php?id=400030&id=search&set=21&cat=105 Probably Probably let their fisarmonicas manufacture by another (big) factory and only brands it. The bigger plants seem to be outside the historic center anyway. I did not publish all my Castelfidardo fotos on Wiki, so if you have any special interest... Zyance 07:43, 30 August 2007 (UTC)

Image Tagging Image:Seattle - Blessed Sacrament - interior 05.jpg

العربية | asturianu | беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ | català | čeština | dansk | Deutsch | Ελληνικά | English | español | euskara | فارسی | suomi | français | עברית | magyar | italiano | 日本語 | 한국어 | македонски | മലയാളം | Plattdüütsch | Nederlands | norsk nynorsk | norsk bokmål | polski | português | português do Brasil | русский | slovenčina | slovenščina | svenska | Türkçe | Tiếng Việt | 中文(简体)‎ | 中文(繁體)‎ | +/−

Warning sign
This media may be deleted.

Thanks for uploading Image:Seattle - Blessed Sacrament - interior 05.jpg. I notice the image page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you have not created this media yourself then you need to argue that we have the right to use the media on Wikimedia Commons (see copyright tagging below). If you have not created the media yourself then you should also specify where you found it, i.e., in most cases link to the website where you got it, and the terms of use for content from that page. If the content is a derivative of a copyrighted work, you need to supply the names and a licence of the original authors as well.

If the media also doesn't have a copyright tag, then you must also add one. If you created/took the picture, audio, or video then you can use {{self|cc-by-sa-3.0}} to release it under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike license or {{PD-self}} to release it into the public domain. See Commons:Copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

Note that any unsourced and untagged images will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have uploaded other media, please check that you have specified their source and copyright tagged them, too. You can find all your uploads using the Gallery tool. Thank you. --Filnik 23:12, 30 August 2007 (UTC)

  • Fixed. - Jmabel | talk 23:18, 30 August 2007 (UTC)

Re: Questionable recat

Dear Jmabel, feel free to move Category:Coin-operated devices back to Category:Coins if you like. I just did a major clean-up in Category:Coins. In the process, I figured that people wouldn't expect to find coin-operated devices in Category:Coins in the first place. But on the other hand - where else would people find it? Regards, Alfons Åberg 15:24, 31 August 2007 (UTC)

  • Thanks, I'll do that. Yes, it was hard to come up with parent categories for that. - Jmabel | talk 17:31, 31 August 2007 (UTC)

Image:Seattle - Immanuel Lutheran interior 05.jpg

Please explain if there is any replacement. I could not find any easily.--Jusjih 18:04, 9 September 2007 (UTC)

Images with bad quality can be deleted only by posting to Commons:Deletion requests per Commons:Deletion guidelines, so I cannot speedily delete for you unless you have a better replacement ready.--Jusjih 13:14, 10 September 2007 (UTC)

Not acorn jelly, but Tteok made of acorn powder

I have answered to your question in my talk page. --Applebee 00:05, 13 September 2007 (UTC)

Image:Didgeridoo - U. Dist Street Fair 1993 - 1.jpg

Just as a note, I'm using this image on en:Portal:Music of Australia. If you object to this, please leave me a note. Thanks, Giggy\Talk 01:25, 16 September 2007 (UTC)

Not at all, why would I object? Glad to see it used. - Jmabel | talk 04:32, 16 September 2007 (UTC)

Image:Carl_P._English_Gardens_02.jpg

català | čeština | dansk | Deutsch | Ελληνικά | English | Esperanto | español | français | galego | עברית | italiano | 日本語 | 한국어 | lietuvių | Nederlands | norsk bokmål | polski | português | русский | slovenčina | 中文(简体)‎ | 中文(繁體)‎ | +/−


Hello, and thank your for sharing your files with Commons. There seems to be a problem regarding the description and/or licensing of this particular file. Please remember that all uploads require source, author and license information. Could you please resolve these problems, which are described on the page linked in above? Thank you. Siebrand 05:53, 19 September 2007 (UTC)
This message was placed by an automated process. Please go to Commons:Help desk if you need help.

Dealt with. - Jmabel | talk 05:59, 19 September 2007 (UTC)


Dutch images

Hi, I'll have a look at the images you mentioned. Some of them are a bit strange alright. Let me know if there are any others. Deadstar (msg) 08:06, 11 October 2007 (UTC)

Some progress made on those (see my talk). As for what do to on occasions like these: If I'm really not sure I also ask someone else to look at it :) If something definitely not right, I tend to nominate for deletion, and explain the problem I see. Oh, and sorry for the delay, I was away for a few days. Deadstar (msg) 11:44, 11 October 2007 (UTC)

RE:

Effectivily, the rights dont stand on their own. I've already noticed the uploader and tagged the image. Cheers, Gizmo II 23:22, 11 October 2007 (UTC)

Actually, the permission must be there, as we are trying to do things the right way ;). An email to OTRS would suffice, but still, I think there's no posibility of that, or no intention, we'll see. There's no need to write to me in spanish, I understand english pretty well. Cheers, Gizmo II 06:14, 15 October 2007 (UTC)
Clearly, but I'm not sure Paco Perez reads English and I wanted to make sure he was clear on what I was saying. - Jmabel | talk 16:08, 15 October 2007 (UTC)
Kind of you ;). Make the Commons a better place they say. Cheers, Gizmo II 22:19, 19 October 2007 (UTC)

Foto Pepe Blanco

Una pregunta....una foto con una dedicatoria explícita hacia una tercera persona...no pasa a ser propiedad de la persona que recibe la dedicatoria? No sé si me explico...esta no es la foto original, sino que está alterada con una dedicatoria y una firma, entregada expresamente por la persona fotografiada a la persona mencionada en la misma, es decir, mi madre, Esther. No varía eso el copyright? No quiero convertir esto en un melodrama, Jmabel, te lo prometo, simplemente quiero conocer bien la norma, y no tengo claro que una foto dedicada pertenezca al autor de la foto. Si uno de los dos pudiera facilitarme el texto en el cual se recoge este aspecto en las normas españolas del copyright se lo agradecería. Si no entiendes algo, intentaría traducirlo. --Pacoperez6 19:32, 14 October 2007 (UTC)
El foto como objecto, sí. Pero los derechos intelectuales, no. Al menos en los EEUU, y creo que es más o menos lo mismo en otros paises. Otro caso similar es si yo compro un cuadro, o el artista le me da, el cuadro físico es el mío, pero los derechos del artista queden con el artista. Yo no tengo ningún derecho de reproducirlo, faltando los mismos derechos de "fair use" cuales pertenecen a quienquiera. - Jmabel | talk 00:11, 15 October 2007 (UTC)

You make a fine point, but...

Hi! Let me outline my rationale, and, in case it does not make sense, feel free to revert my edits or replce the category with something else. For starters: I only started doing this because it seemed like people kept shoving the pictures into the main, vague, category, and, like many other incomplete categories, this was beginning to really bug me (I also hunted stuff like this down and tied loose ends in many other places, as you may have noticed). It also seems to me like the ideas behind categories are sometimes bordering on the absurd: what is the significant difference between "streets" and "buildings" - i.e. is there a photo of a street that would not be one of buildings? The only way I could make sense of these was if they came to include [mainly] subcats, as per other cases.

The photos you took were just added to the "buildings" cat, and I thought I should define them by purpose. It took me a while to find out about them: early on, I meant to answer your original question on the notice board, but it turns out that the reason why the building was so mysterious is due to the firm being called not "Sticlerom", but "Sticerom" (I'm not sure if this was already pointed out). It seems that that is where they actually manufacture glass, and, to my mind at least, the best way to define that, given what I have outlined here, is through "industrial". This since we have no narrower category for a narrower purpose (if we should, under what name do you think it should be?). That said, if it becomes apparent that Sticerom previously had another purpose (and chances are that it did), we could also add a category of the "inns in Bucharest" type to each photo.

Best, Dahn 02:13, 15 October 2007 (UTC)

Streets vs. buildings is usually that the former is a view down a street with no emphasis on a particular building. Yes, I worked out "Sticerom" long ago (you'll notice it is correct in the text) but did not go & re-upload the pic, so it's still where I originally uploaded it.
I'm pretty certain it was an inn, but I don't offhand know the name. It was definitely associated with the Curtea Veche. Someone with a very old map of Bucharest could doubtless work it out.
Yes, they manufacture glass there, but using artisanal methods. In English at least, "industrial" suggests a non-artisanal approach. Maybe we should make a distinct category. Certainly someone looking for images related to people hand-making glass in a building like this - a building that also includes a bar and an art gallery - would be unlikely to look in a category related to things industrial. - Jmabel | talk 04:02, 15 October 2007 (UTC)
I have looked through Giurescu, and it was probably "Hanul lui Zamfir".
As I said, you could rework the picture into any other category (though, personally, I would include artisanal categories as subcats of "industrial buildings", and I'm still unsure as to their names). For now, if the building is multi-purpose, we could just as well also add it to Category:Bars in Bucharest. Dahn 04:44, 15 October 2007 (UTC)
Certainly a view of the side of the building where the bar is should be included in that category. But when a large building happens to contain, among other things, a bar, we don't usually classify the building as a bar.
I'll take a shot at these, but probably not tonight. - Jmabel | talk 05:02, 15 October 2007 (UTC)
I split the difference and introduced Category:Inns in Bucharest, though in this case I'm not certain that was its former use. - Jmabel | talk 00:20, 16 October 2007 (UTC)

Typo in licence?

I saw that you wrote only one } in some of your images, and fixed it in those images, but I've seen in the gallery that there are many other pictures with problems in the licence tag. Please fix it. Yuval Y § Chat § 23:13, 23 October 2007 (UTC)

Dealt with, I believe; I've gone through my 1,000 most recent uploads. If there is a problem in something earlier, sorry, but I'll wait until someone raises the specific issue. - Jmabel | talk 03:13, 24 October 2007 (UTC)

Image:Seattle_and_the_Orient_56.jpg

català | čeština | dansk | Deutsch | Ελληνικά | English | Esperanto | español | français | galego | עברית | italiano | 日本語 | 한국어 | lietuvių | Nederlands | norsk bokmål | polski | português | русский | slovenčina | 中文(简体)‎ | 中文(繁體)‎ | +/−


Hello, and thank your for sharing your files with Commons. There seems to be a problem regarding the description and/or licensing of this particular file. Please remember that all uploads require source, author and license information. Could you please resolve these problems, which are described on the page linked in above? You can edit the description page and change the text. Uploading a new version of the file does not change the description of the file. This page may give you more hints on which information may be missing. Thank you. Siebrand 01:24, 10 November 2007 (UTC)
This message was placed by an automated process. Please go to Commons:Help desk if you need help.

See next section - Jmabel | talk 05:24, 10 November 2007 (UTC)

Image Tagging Image:Steamer Geo. W. Dickinson under construction 02 - 1900.jpg

العربية | asturianu | беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ | català | čeština | dansk | Deutsch | Ελληνικά | English | español | euskara | فارسی | suomi | français | עברית | magyar | italiano | 日本語 | 한국어 | македонски | മലയാളം | Plattdüütsch | Nederlands | norsk nynorsk | norsk bokmål | polski | português | português do Brasil | русский | slovenčina | slovenščina | svenska | Türkçe | Tiếng Việt | 中文(简体)‎ | 中文(繁體)‎ | +/−

Warning sign
This media may be deleted.

Thanks for uploading Image:Steamer Geo. W. Dickinson under construction 02 - 1900.jpg. I notice the image page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you have not created this media yourself then you need to argue that we have the right to use the media on Wikimedia Commons (see copyright tagging below). If you have not created the media yourself then you should also specify where you found it, i.e., in most cases link to the website where you got it, and the terms of use for content from that page. If the content is a derivative of a copyrighted work, you need to supply the names and a licence of the original authors as well.

If the media also doesn't have a copyright tag, then you must also add one. If you created/took the picture, audio, or video then you can use {{self|cc-by-sa-3.0}} to release it under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike license or {{PD-self}} to release it into the public domain. See Commons:Copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

Note that any unsourced and untagged images will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have uploaded other media, please check that you have specified their source and copyright tagged them, too. You can find all your uploads using the Gallery tool. Thank you.

This message was added automatically by Filbot, if you need some help about it, ask its master or go to the Commons:Help desk. --Filnik 01:25, 10 November 2007 (UTC)

Both this and the previous image were quite clear in saying PD-US, but were missing the template. They were by no means unsourced, nor were they lacking a statement of who created the content. I have added the template. - Jmabel | talk 05:24, 10 November 2007 (UTC)

Zodiac

Ha, see you got a pic of the zodiac, i was just about to run down to the Fairhaven boatyard to see if it was there, but now I don't need to. Cheers! 216.57.213.220 19:04, 15 November 2007 (UTC) (Murderbike not logged in)

Image:Seattle - Polson Building 02.jpg

català | čeština | dansk | Deutsch | Ελληνικά | English | Esperanto | español | français | galego | עברית | italiano | 日本語 | 한국어 | lietuvių | Nederlands | norsk bokmål | polski | português | русский | slovenčina | 中文(简体)‎ | 中文(繁體)‎ | +/−


Hello, and thank your for sharing your files with Commons. There seems to be a problem regarding the description and/or licensing of this particular file. Please remember that all uploads require source, author and license information. Could you please resolve these problems, which are described on the page linked in above? You can edit the description page and change the text. Uploading a new version of the file does not change the description of the file. This page may give you more hints on which information may be missing. Thank you.

This message was added automatically by Filbot, if you need some help about it, ask its master or go to the Commons:Help desk. --Filnik 04:36, 29 November 2007 (UTC)

Fixed - Jmabel | talk 04:49, 29 November 2007 (UTC)

Image:Seattle - Post Steam Plant from south.jpg

català | čeština | dansk | Deutsch | Ελληνικά | English | Esperanto | español | français | galego | עברית | italiano | 日本語 | 한국어 | lietuvių | Nederlands | norsk bokmål | polski | português | русский | slovenčina | 中文(简体)‎ | 中文(繁體)‎ | +/−


Hello, and thank your for sharing your files with Commons. There seems to be a problem regarding the description and/or licensing of this particular file. Please remember that all uploads require source, author and license information. Could you please resolve these problems, which are described on the page linked in above? You can edit the description page and change the text. Uploading a new version of the file does not change the description of the file. This page may give you more hints on which information may be missing. Thank you.

This message was added automatically by Filbot, if you need some help about it, ask its master or go to the Commons:Help desk. --Filnik 04:48, 29 November 2007 (UTC)

Fixed - Jmabel | talk 04:51, 29 November 2007 (UTC)

Image:Grigore Antipa.jpg

I have my doubts about the licensing claim on Image:Grigore Antipa.jpg. The picture is signed by Antipa in 1937. The PD-Old claim requires that the author (in this case the photographer) be dead for 70 years. That would only apply if the photographer died no later than the year the picture was signed. That seems very unlikely. I suggest that you either find a different basis for licensing this, or take it off of the Commons and give a fair use rationale in the language-specific Wikipedia where you want to use it. (I wasn't on patrol for problems when I noticed this: was just intrigued to see a picture of Antipa uploaded, then noticed a problem.) - Jmabel | talk 09:58, 7 December 2007 (UTC)

Hi,
I just upload ro:Imagine:GrigoreAntipa.jpg on Commons. The original licence was "Această imagine este inaptă de drepturi de autor şi astfel este considerată domeniu public, pentru faptul că este formată din informaţii comune şi nu are un autor original.".
I will post a topic on ro:Wikipedia:Cafenea to choose a best licensing.--Bapti 10:24, 7 December 2007 (UTC)
Thanks. Cred că "nu are un autor original" ==> "nu ştiu cine este autor original". -- Jmabel | talk 10:28, 7 December 2007 (UTC)
Better than the village pump : the original uploader...--Bapti 10:30, 7 December 2007 (UTC)
The original uploader [2] said thaht this picture is on PD... --Bapti 13:41, 9 December 2007 (UTC)

Mele22

Hi. Have you perchance seen the great photos of Bucharest submitted by User:Mele22? It's worth having a look at his contributions. I wanted to nominate one of them for featured picture, but I had trouble deciding which one - they're all excellent! I don't consider myself a good judge of photography, so perhaps you could weigh in and select one (or two, or three) that you feel meet all the more subtle featured image criteria (just in case they all don't meet them already). Thank you, Dahn 15:06, 18 December 2007 (UTC)

They are nice, but I'm not sure if any will be deemed technically good enough to make the cut. If you were going to nominate one, some likely candidates would be Image:Palace of Parliament.jpg, Image:The Metropolitan Church.jpg, and Image:Ion Heliade Radulescu.jpg: they are all well-composed (although in the last one the sky is pretty wiped out). - Jmabel | talk 18:11, 18 December 2007 (UTC)
Nice ones. How about this one - does it make the cut? Dahn 18:18, 18 December 2007 (UTC)
I liked that one, too. I don't think it is as interesting an image as the others, but it is certainly technically well done. But lately I haven't seen anything this low-resolution accepted. I shoot at about twice that resolution, and resolution seems to be the main reason they won't take mine. - Jmabel | talk 18:21, 18 December 2007 (UTC)

Please excuse me: I left my commons window open, but forgot to sign back in, and then just closed it after a while. For all the liberties I took with PD in the past, and for all the issues of copyright in Romania, I do agree that the image needs to get deleted. I see that photos of that age without a known author may pass for PD (see here); at the same time, however, if it is signed by Antipa, it could actually be copyrighted by him and his successors until 2014. It's weird, in a way, because we actually have a PD portrait of Antipa that we can crop and use (and that we already seem to be using): see here.

On the resolution: I see what you mean. For some reason, the photos looked high-resolution to me - probably because I don't wear my glasses when I edit. It was only then that I noticed the relative lack of depth and their rather small size. And yes, credit is due: yours are indeed much more detailed. It's a real shame, because they're really worth it (as ar many of yours). This project is run by snobs! :) Dahn 21:45, 22 December 2007 (UTC)

Snoqualmie Moondance dancers 02.jpg
I assume that the deletion remark is strictly about the Antipa picture, not anything of Mele's! Could you try to move that forward, because I suspect it should be pursued by a native Romanian speaker?
Mele's are very clean, no camera shake at all (maybe with tripod), so they are sharp, but not high-res.
It's not necessarily snobbery, it's a matter of a particular aesthetic having won out here as being appropriate to an encyclopedia. I don't necessarily share that aesthetic, and I'm going to keep shooting the way I shoot. National Geographic, among others who have used my work, doesn't seem to disagree with me. But any given venue is going to have its own dominant aesthetic.
FWIW, the image I've thumbed here - one of my favorites that I've ever shot - was rejected for its graininess and its lack of a level horizon line. At that point, I stopped even submitting photos for "featured" status. - Jmabel | talk 21:56, 22 December 2007 (UTC)
Keeping in mind that I'm not the best judge of photography, that festival photo looks great to me. In some way, it is reminiscent of paintings by the Nabis or Gaugin. Since we're somewhere near the subject, and I never found a way to squeeze this into the conversation: judging by some dialogs I read on your talk page over at en:wiki, we seem to have some musical tastes in common. (And then, I'm of the generation that thinks Seattle and great music were once one and the same.) Anyway, moving along.
Oh, yes, I should have clarified that about the Antipa photo. In any case, I'll be commenting on the deletion page as my next move. Dahn 22:09, 22 December 2007 (UTC)
(Before I forget: I've watchlisted your talk page, so I'll know if/when you reply here.) Dahn 22:11, 22 December 2007 (UTC)