User talk:Josve05a/Archive 6

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 4

→

Please note that some sections were archived in to Archive 5 by mistake. So, while some sections should be in here - they are not.

File:Dan Creek Area - Lime Butte, Nikolai Butte, and Joshua Green Peak (21425863168).jpg

Dear Josve05a,

Can you please pass this image and add a correct license for this image. The flickr account profile says it is from the Alaska National Park service and that the image is in the public domain. It is likely public domain. I just don't know the correct license for it. Maybe it is {{PD-USGov-NPS-HALS}}?

If you don't, would Jameslwoodward know? Thank You, --Leoboudv (talk) 05:27, 8 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

It looks like someone else has changed the license now. Thank You anyway. --Leoboudv (talk) 09:00, 8 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Flickr files tagged as pixabay

Can you take a look at File:Croissants au beurre (18953292873).jpg? Somehow you've tagged a reviewed Flickr file as a pixabay file needing review. I fixed another just like this. There's probably more in the license review category. INeverCry 05:27, 10 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

File:Buddhist monk in Myanmar (1068571).jpg

Notification about possible deletion

Bundle DR:
Commons:Deletion requests/Photos of Revere Beach Sand Sculpting Festival

This includes a number of photos you uploaded from flickr. Great photos, but sadly US copyright law does not respect freedom of panorama. Pi.1415926535 (talk) 21:22, 16 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Valued Image Promotion

★ Your nomination has been reviewed and promoted ★
Congratulations! The image you nominated was reviewed and has now been promoted as a valued image. It is considered to be the most valued image on Commons within the scope:
Isophya pyrenaea, female.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

★ Your nomination has been reviewed and promoted ★
Congratulations! The image you nominated was reviewed and has now been promoted as a valued image. It is considered to be the most valued image on Commons within the scope:
Isophya pyrenaea, male.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

I need your help.

I uploaded a photo to Commons, and I didn't knew that it was from here, because that image was provided to me by the photographed person (Alberto de la Rosa), so I thought that he was the "owner" of that photo (I don't know if I'm being clear, my english it's kind of bad). What should I do? or How can I delete it or change the copyright info?

File:Alberto de la Rosa Cantando.jpg

This photo

The photographer, or the copyright owner (most likely the same person) needs to email our permissions-team and give permission that s/he allows the file to be licensed under a free license. Please read COM:OTRS. Josve05a (talk) 02:21, 25 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

File:Beato Placido osst.jpg

Hola. No entiendo lo que usted quiere con esta imagen File:Beato Placido osst.jpg. El autor de la fotografía soy yo, y el permiso de uso lo he señalado: Yo, el titular de los derechos de autor de esta obra, la publico en los términos de la siguiente licencia (....). Ahora si te refieres al autor del cuadro, es un cuadro que se venera en la iglesia de San Carlino alle Quattro Fontane, en Roma, (está indicado en la misma imagen), es una iglesia y expuesto a la veneración pública, por lo tanto se podrá reproducir. Si me equivoco por favor dígame en qué lo hago y ¿cómo debo proceder?. Pues en ese sentido todas las imágenes de lienzo de santos del siglo XX tendrían que borrarse. Gracias. Fraychero (talk) 09:37, 25 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Excuse me for not typing in Spannish, since I can't. I can however try and give advise and help in English.

First of, you need to attribute the artist of the work, and prove why it is in the public domain. Has the artist been dead for more than 70/80/95/100 years? Do you know the name of the artist? Josve05a (talk) 09:42, 25 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External link Box

On another "subject", @Liné1: , I'd like to see in the futere that all external databases were listed in a "box" (like an infobox-sort of thing), and coded like {{Taxa databases|eol=535352 |itis=123739 |gbif=978932}}. But, that might just be what I want... Josve05a (talk) 13:35, 25 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I thought about it a lot.

The thing is that our templates provide more that links:

They provide the author
They provide the validity
They provide access to different links:
- {{APNI genus}}, {{GRIN genus}}, {{WRMS}}... provide a link to pages listing subtaxa
- mirror sites (very important for FishBase which website crashes all the time ;-))

So the box would be a poor replacement.

But if we have one template for all these, it may be easy to add stuff to. like |eol-ID=4535345 |eol-author=L. 1893, so the say that more things are needed to be displayed, could simply be coded in to that single template, could be easy to, me thinks.... Josve05a (talk) 14:45, 25 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

OTRS-ticket-issue

Hello fellow editor Josve05a

I am requesting your assistance with https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sandro_Mencucci I have previously uploaded a photo to Whig I have full permission from the sole owner and creator:

[Ticket#: 2016030710012501]

Sent from my iPhone

Begin forwarded message:

From: hidden<Hidden@hidden>
Date: March 7, 2016 at 2:53:19 PM GMT+1
To: "permissions-commons@wikimedia.org" <permissions-commons@wikimedia.org>
Cc: "hidden" <hidden>
Subject: Picture Sandro Mencucci - ACF Fiorentina
Dear Wikimedia Permissions-Commons,

ACF Fiorentina Spa hereby affirms that ACF Fiorentina Spa, is the creator and sole owner of the exclusive copyright the media work as shown here: 

[photos included in original email]
I agree to publish the above-mentioned content under the following free license: Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 4.0 International.
I acknowledge that by doing so I grant anyone the right to use the work, even in a commercial product or otherwise, and to modify it according to their needs, provided that they abide by the terms of the license and any other applicable laws.
I am aware that this agreement is not limited to Wikipedia or related sites.
I am aware that the copyright holder always retains ownership of the copyright as well as the right to be attributed in accordance with the license chosen. Modifications others make to the work will not be claimed to have been made by the copyright holder.
I acknowledge that I cannot withdraw this agreement, and that the content may or may not be kept permanently on a Wikimedia project.

Please kindly let me know why it was once again removed? Thank you for your time. 11lionsd 18:39, 25 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@11lionsd: My guess is that no one put an otrs-permission/recived/pending-template on the file page, so the deleting admin did not know of the ticket in question. I'm deferring this to someone else right now. Will check back in a few minutes...Josve05a (talk) 18:58, 25 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, so now, thanks to natuur12, the issue has been resolved. Thanks. Josve05a (talk) 19:02, 25 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

A cup of tea for you!

Sometimes a hard-working Wikimedian needs a cup of tea. I dream of horses (talk) 00:16, 28 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Much appreciated! Thanks! Josve05a (talk) 00:28, 28 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Help

Hello,
When I modify templates, I really need someone to give me his comments.
Let me present you my current problem.
Someone has been creating a lot of species categories with old names (we already had the category for the correct name).
So I wanted to modify {{SN}} to provide links to the syn categories.
With those link, contributors can check if their are duplicated categories of if the other categories contain {{Synonym taxon category redirect}}

With those link, contributors can check if their are duplicated categories of if the other categories contain {{Synonym taxon category redirect}}
Look at Category:Aonyx capensis congica code.

Step 1: I modified {{SimpleTaxa}} that normally takes the rank as first param to accept a single Taxon without rank (look at {{SimpleTaxa}} doc: syntax 2)
Step 2: I want to provide a source for the synonymy. <small>Lönnberg, 1910 (from {{Taxasource|BioLib}})</small> is too long. So I created {{Synsource}}
Step 3: the author in small is also too long to write. So I added auth= to {{SimpleTaxa}} for Syntax 2 only. (Maybbe the small is not needed ?)

Tell me what you think of this (the template names, syntax, is the small needed). Then I will document the templates changes and change WBR to generate those.
Cheers Liné1 (talk) 13:26, 25 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Liné1: I like that it is in small text, to clearly differentiate from the taxon name etc. However I do not like the "bold" link in Category:Aonyx capensis congica, since it can not be a synonym of itself, and I tend to remove those when it is the same name as the category page it is on.

The template names are good, imo. Go for it! Josve05a (talk) 13:32, 25 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, the bold black one is strange. It is mostly due to the fact that I copy the {{SN}} section from one synonym to the other. And I wanted the contributor to be able to rename a category and keep the SN as it was.

OK, let us remove it.

Thanks Liné1 (talk) 14:40, 25 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I changed the syntax for {{Syn}}.

Can you look at Category:Aonyx capensis congica code?

The idea of course is to have WBR generate that syntax ;-)

Cheers Liné1 (talk) 07:54, 29 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Liné1: Looks good :) Can it handle multple sources? Sometiems WBR generates the same synonym twice (once from IUCN and once from BioLib, causing the Syn to appear twice in the {{tl<SN}} -template. Josve05a (talk) 10:13, 29 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, yes, {{Syn}} supports multiple sources. I will improve the doc of {{Syn}} and I think that I have to update doc of most templates using source2, source3...

WBR has always generated identical data for different sources (Same subtaxalist for ITIS & MSW, Same SN for IUCN and BioLib) that you have to manually merge.

It really is a limitation of the way I created WBR: with independent plugins for each source/website.

I will improve that, but not in a near future.

What I will improve is that WBR generates multiple SN. That is easy. But you will still have to merge the Syn line manually.

Cheers Liné1 (talk) 12:01, 29 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I added the synonymy type (basionym, protonym...) It will a good template.

Did you see my little change on {{IUCN}}: the icon ?

Cheers Liné1 (talk) 13:26, 29 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Liné1: That's really a great thing, about the synonym types! Woo :D

I did notice your change, however I thought it looked a bit misplaced, like it either is too big, compared to the parenthesis', or something, so I moved the icon to before the name. Feel free to revrt, but i think that the alligment now looks a bit better. What do you think? Josve05a (talk) 13:34, 29 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I understand that I am a misunderstood artist ;-)

Cheers Liné1 (talk) 13:56, 29 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Stockholm Pride 2015 Parade by Jonatan Svensson Glad 71.JPG, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates.

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments Good Quality Ram-Man 01:25, 31 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

--QICbot (talk) 05:17, 2 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Valued Image Promotion

★ Your nomination has been reviewed and promoted ★
Congratulations! The image you nominated was reviewed and has now been promoted as a valued image. It is considered to be the most valued image on Commons within the scope:
Ischnocerus impressicollis, (Fungus weevil) lateral.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

Template:CC-GobCL/Flickr

{{CC-GobCL/Flickr}}
Commons:Deletion requests/Template:CC-GobCL/Flickr Amitie 10g (talk) 21:25, 4 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

File:Aviation photo (25561568811).jpg

File:Aviation photo (25027491643).jpg

File:"Ackergifte? Nein danke!"-Logo.jpg / File:Landwende-Logo.png

Hi Jonathan,

A couple of weeks ago, I uploaded two images which I knew where under a creative commons license. Unfortunately, the website where I took them from was lagging behind and, by mistake, had a copyright notice on it. This has no been modified and there is a copyleft notice specifying a cc-licence which explicitly includes the logos uploaded: http://landwende.de/home/impressum.html

I would like to use these images on the following Wikipedia page I created: https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bürgerinitiative_Landwende

What can I do to have the images undeleted?

Kind regards, Matt (Trueblue80 (talk) 21:09, 6 April 2016 (UTC))[reply]

@Trueblue80: I'd suggest you go to Commons:Undeletion requests and follow that guide. Josve05a (talk) 22:07, 6 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

File:-WhyLucasInLA (14518944283).jpg

A barnstar for you!

	The Copyright Watcher Barnstar
	Thanks for ensuring I am displaying due diligence! Arlo James Barnes 21:19, 11 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Always on the alert. Thanks! ;) Josve05a (talk) 21:57, 11 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

A barnstar for you!

	The Tireless Contributor Barnstar
	Jonatan is truly a tireless contributor; keep up the amazing work! Riley Huntley (talk) 21:50, 11 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. I'll do my best ;) Josve05a (talk) 21:58, 11 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

WBR

Hello my friend,
I saw this contribution. I think that you disabled the option "Restrict Taxobox phylo to botanic" of WBR.
This option, when disabled, generates a dirty Taxonavigation.
The dirty Taxonavigation can be used to find the lowest existing parent taxon of a new category:
You copy the WBR taxonavigation in the page, request a preview, open a parent taxon's page, copy its Taxonavigation, then past it in your current Taxonavigation.
For example in Category:Sarcophaga vagans I used the dirty Taxonavigation to open Category:Sarcophaga which Taxonavigation I copied. See here the change.
But dirty Taxonavigation shouldn't be saved in wikicommons ;-)
Cheers Liné1 (talk) 09:43, 14 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, I see. I will keep that in mind, and try to do better. Thanks for letting me know! :) Josve05a (talk) 09:45, 14 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

You are already doing excellent work. ;-)

Cheers Liné1 (talk) 18:48, 14 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

European Otter (Lutra lutra) (5584351087).jpg

Dear Josve05a,

just a short note that this is not a European otter, nor it is even a species of the genus "Lutra". As fas as I can see, it most likely is an Asian small-clawed otter (Amblonyx cinerea). As this is also the place where the pictures was taken (London Zoo) - that true? - then I become even certain about the "real" species. Cheers, PhocaV — Preceding unsigned comment added by PhocaV (talk • contribs) 14:32, 15 April 2016‎ (UTC)[reply]

@PhocaV If you are sure, please feel free to request rename/recategorize and update in articles. Josve05a (talk) 13:18, 15 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

A bowl of strawberries for you!

The strawberry fruit (which is not actually a berry) is widely appreciated for its characteristic aroma, bright red color, juicy texture, and sweetness.

Welcome on OTRS ;) Steinsplitter (talk) 11:59, 20 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks Steinsplitter, but I think I'll have a real berry - like a banana. Josve05a (talk) 12:02, 20 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Query re: File:Mark Satin in 1978.jpg

Hello Josve05a, thank you for responding to this matter so quickly.

I am afraid I do not understand what the problem is. Mark Satin was given all rights to the photo by its creator (Erich Hoyt). That makes him the copyright holder, and he has chosen to donate all rights to Wikimedia and the public domain.

Please inform me what else needs to be done, and I will make it happen. (Satin is nearly blind now, as you'll see from his bio on English Wikipedia, but I can act as intermediary.) - Babel41 (talk) 00:46, 25 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Babel41: In most cases all rights is owned by the photographer, unless such rights were transferred. OTRS needs information as to why and how these rights were transferred to the subject, alternatively have the photographer send in the permssion. Josve05a (talk) 01:04, 25 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

hello help

please approve this pic https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Bipasha_Basu_Karan_Singh_Grover_at_their_Mehndi.jpg 58.106.65.203 17:43, 18 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Already approved by Thibaut120094. Josve05a (talk) 19:46, 28 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This section was archived on a request by: Josve05a (talk) 19:46, 28 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

hello please approve this pic

File:Bipasha Karan at their Reception.jpg 120.19.7.57 10:28, 4 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This section was archived on a request by: Josve05a (talk) 19:44, 28 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Merging tickets to closed ones

Hi Jonatan, please be extra careful when merging tickets, as merging an open ticket into a closed ticket does not re-open the closed ticket! So if LX hadn't posted to OTRSN, Ticket:2015111610021596 would have stayed closed and ignored forever. See [1]. Storkk (talk) 12:16, 20 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Ouch. Oh dear. Ok, thank you. Josve05a (talk) 12:19, 20 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Happens to every new agent, I think, because it is so counterintuitive. No worries, just keep it in mind! Cheers, Storkk (talk) 12:46, 20 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Storkk: BTW; I merged after the OTRSN. BTW; I've merged ticket:2016040410011756 (yours), but I can't unlock it or open it. Josve05a (talk) 14:23, 20 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I don't know why you wouldn't be able to unlock or open it, considering you clearly have access to the permissions-en queue since you replied before you merged it. Storkk (talk) 14:37, 20 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I'd ask an OTRS admin on OTRS-wiki. Storkk (talk) 14:40, 20 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

And now you see a practical example ;)... thanks for re-opening Ticket:2015072210023983, I will inform Riley Huntley who merged it. This is really something that should be fixed in OTRS, IMO. Storkk (talk) 22:45, 28 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Storkk: Do you now if it is tracked on Phabricator? Josve05a (talk) 22:48, 28 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

To get a ticket that's locked to someone else, there are two possibilities. You can 'quick close' it, after which the ticket will be closed and unlocked, or you can 'change owner' to yourself, after which the ticket will be open and locked on your own name. Jcb (talk) 22:50, 28 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Jcb: the issue is that a ticket was merged into a closed ticket (that you happened to own). In that case, the ticket stays closed and you are not informed; the new message effectively "disappears". Storkk (talk) 22:55, 28 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I know, over the years I think I have seen such cases at least 100 times. I was actually resonding to the "but I can't unlock it or open it" comment above. Jcb (talk) 22:59, 28 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I believe it's a known "feature", as in WONTFIX upstream. Storkk (talk) 22:51, 28 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Well, since it is open source (etc. et.al.) we should be able to modify this downstream. I'll check Phabricator, and try to at least create a ticket, so it is known that I want something done. Even if they won't do it. Josve05a (talk) 22:54, 28 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This section was archived on a request by: Josve05a (talk) 19:42, 28 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Please undelete File:Flag of Hualien County.svg

This flag belongs to Hualien County in Taiwan. Based on Copyright Act of the Republic of China, this flag shall not be the subject matter of copyright, and is in the public domain in Taiwan administered by the Republic of China. That is, this file never violates any Wiki Common's copyright rules. So, please undelete it and revert all removed links. Thanks a lot. BTW, I also requested here[2]--Akira123 (talk) 15:09, 2 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Frst of, I am not an admin, nor do I remember this file, or know how I've been involved with this. Josve05a (talk) 15:19, 2 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This section was archived on a request by: Josve05a (talk) 19:41, 28 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Notification about possible deletion

Bundle DR:
Commons:Deletion requests/Files in Category:Files uploaded by Josve05a (delete)

Affected:

File:A boy with Kalashnikov (10404759643).jpg

And also:

Yours sincerely, Josve05a (talk) 21:22, 6 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This section was archived on a request by: Josve05a (talk) 19:41, 28 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Notification about possible deletion

Bundle DR:
Commons:Deletion requests/Files in Category:Files uploaded by Josve05a (delete)

Affected:

File:Attack? (2397397826).jpg

And also:

Yours sincerely, Josve05a (talk) 21:24, 6 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This section was archived on a request by: Josve05a (talk) 19:40, 28 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

A barnstar for you!

	The Technical Barnstar
	I do not like giving this out considering I've yet to get one.. but.. Commons:Bots/Requests/Josvebot 2 has proven quite useful, so thank you for your hard work! ~riley (talk) 03:09, 10 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! Don't worry, you'll get one soon enough! ;) Josve05a (talk) 09:36, 10 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Please disable minor edits for Task 2, requesting deletion of a page is not a minor deletion and may result in the edit being hidden on talk pages. ~riley (talk) 07:23, 10 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
- Oh, shoot. Forgot about that one. Having to have different settings for different users on different wikis, you're bound to forget just one setting. Thanks! Josve05a (talk) 09:36, 10 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This section was archived on a request by: Josve05a (talk) 19:40, 28 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Bildgranskning

Hej Josve05a. Jag har laddat upp File:Areal photo of Karlstad.jpg vilken jag skulle vilja få godkänd av en bildgranskare medan länkar är aktiva. Finns det någon mall man kan lägga till för att få detta gjort? I annat fall - är det något du kan hjälpa till med (vet att du gjort det tidigare med bilder från Mynewsdesk) Med vänliga hälsningar --I99pema (talk) 11:49, 26 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@I99pema: Mallen {{License review}} är vad du är ute efter. Man kan alltid testa att använda http://archive.org/web/ för att kolla på gamla versioner av hemsidor, om det sparats. Jag markerade bilden som granskad. Josve05a (talk) 12:43, 26 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Jag tackar för det! --I99pema (talk) 13:00, 26 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This section was archived on a request by: Josve05a (talk) 19:40, 28 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Please avoid watermarked pictures

čeština ∙ Deutsch ∙ español ∙ English ∙ italiano ∙ magyar ∙ македонски ∙ русский ∙ हिन्दी ∙ ಕನ್ನಡ ∙ +/−

The image File:Standing out - Flickr - peganum.jpg you uploaded contain(s) watermarks. The usage of watermarks is discouraged according to policy. If a non-watermarked version of the image is available, please upload it under the same file name. After removing the watermark, ensure that the removed information is present in the EXIF tags, the image description page, or both. Thank you for understanding.

Elisfkc (talk) 22:01, 28 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Elisfkc: en:WP:DTTR. Josve05a (talk) 22:35, 28 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This section was archived on a request by: Josve05a (talk) 22:35, 28 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Jonatan (Josve05a) at WMSE office in Stockholm.JPG, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates.

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments Good quality. --Poco a poco 18:31, 29 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

--QICbot (talk) 05:17, 2 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Please talk normally

I just noticed this. Please be kinder to a fellow hard working colleague next time and do refrain from "talking" in a derogatory tone via an edit summary. This is not kind nor polite. Regards, MoiraMoira (talk) 19:59, 3 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, you are a ard working user, and for that we thank you. However, you are very careless when tagging it seems. Back in 2013 you had this exact conversation with Jcb. Continuing tagging PD-exempt files as needing source or permission, without learning from your mistakes and other's reverts of your tagging, is creating a whole lot more work. If a user (me) has removed more than 4-5 of these tags within the course of 1-2 weeks by doing spot checks and being linked by other users, it does warrant a more serious or hash message then just removal of the tag. I will no apologize for saying the following one month ago; "This islike [sic. Typo] the 5th time I've removed tags after you've tagged them, despite not being above", since it was the fifth time, and all was over COM:TOO, and "Permission for this file is obvious or is not required." is a standard message.

Please, be more careful when tagging images, in order to not tag images for deletion which are no copyrighted. Josve05a (talk) 20:29, 3 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

While Josve05a could have sugarcoated his edit summary, there was little to no degogatory tone used, only matter-of-factly speaking. Sugarcoating shouldn't be necessary with another experienced user after repeated incorrect tagging. You are indeed a hard working user, but please read COM:TOO and Template:PD-logo, we do not want to create work for other users. Riley Huntley (talk) 03:18, 4 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I don't see anything "abnormal" in that edit summary. Indeed, I congratulate Josve05a for being so calm and matter-of-fact in his edit summary. Nemo 07:22, 4 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Sommartal 2015 in Stockholm 14.JPG, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates.

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments Good quality. --A.Savin 08:20, 6 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

--QICbot (talk) 05:22, 9 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Sommartal 2015 in Stockholm 08.JPG, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates.

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments Good quality. --Poco a poco 17:51, 11 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Sommartal 2015 in Stockholm 03.JPG, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates.

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments Good quality. --A.Savin 15:25, 11 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

--QICbot (talk) 05:24, 14 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Error detection

Hello my friend,
With Category:Hyptis fruticosa and Category:Adenophora uehatae you discovered my work on error detection.
Everyday I try to improve our templates to detect bad usage.
When a bad usage is detected, a red message is displayed. You can click on the message, it will redirect to a template documentation.
It also adds Category:Pages with incorrect biology template usage.
Cool, no ?
Sadly, I am the only one emptying this category.
But I let you correct your 2 pages ;-)
Cheers Liné1 (talk) 07:24, 18 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Notification about possible deletion

Bundle DR:
Commons:Deletion requests/Files in Category:N206FR (aircraft)

Affected:

File:FRONTIER A320 (N206FR (14365540675).jpg

Yours sincerely, Josve05a (talk) 10:03, 29 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This section was archived on a request by: Josve05a (talk) 01:05, 19 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

thanks for marking Copyvio pics

thanks for checking and marking possible copyvio pictures Best regards --Neozoon (talk) 23:16, 31 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Neozoon: It's sad that so much copyvio gets uploaded and goes unnoticed, but I try to do my part and cleaning it up. Josve05a (talk) 23:28, 31 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This section was archived on a request by: Josve05a (talk) 01:06, 19 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Notification about possible deletion

Bundle DR:
Commons:Deletion requests/Files in Category:Seoul Calligraphy Art Museum

Affected:

File:Seoul Calligraphy Art Museum.jpg

Yours sincerely, Josve05a (talk) 01:51, 15 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This section was archived on a request by: Josve05a (talk) 01:21, 19 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Copyright infrigment question

Hey! I saw you marked an image I uploaded as a copyright violation, it was the coats of arms from the city where I live. It's classified for common usage so I can't see why it got deleted. Wikimedia told me you moderated it so I wanted to ask you first if you knew the reasons. Thanks and sorry for the troube! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Vaquedoso (talk • contribs) 10:47, 01 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

(talk page stalker) @Vaquedoso: Hello! Unfortunately, the image is too complex to be considered public domain, so you'll need to provide evidence that this file is classified for commons usage. You'll need to do this providing a source for the image that states it can be freely used, when you previously uploaded the file you marked it as "Own work". This is considered a copyright violation because you did not make it, therefore its not your own work. ~riley (talk) 15:39, 1 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This section was archived on a request by: Josve05a (talk) 02:46, 29 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Bad Author Additions

If you believe a file is copyrighted, then nominate it as such please. Please don't add the file to the bad author category if it has already passed review (it makes it a little confusing and overfills the category. Thanks Elisfkc (talk) 20:29, 6 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

As you can see, I stopped after a few files. I have asked the Review-bot operator to generate a list of all these files now, (it was ~10-15000) and we will nominate them for deletion, or make a better strategy soon. Josve05a (talk) 20:41, 6 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This section was archived on a request by: Josve05a (talk) 02:47, 29 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

File:Eyes and Teeth for Days (19534876803).jpg

This section was archived on a request by: Josve05a (talk) 02:47, 29 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Bildrättighet för tavla

Artikeln om Peter Artedi i SvWp saknar alltjämt en bild på vetenskapsmannen. Det finns nu en målad bild, som hembygdsföreningen på födelseorten inköpt och anser sig ha rättigheterna till. Själva bilden lär dock konstnären fortfarande ha rättigheterna till. Jag antar därför att det inte räcker med att fotografen intygar rättigheterna för fotot, utan att konstnären måste intyga att det är OK. Stämmer det, eller finns det några specialare att ta hänsyn till? Deryni (talk) 11:43, 22 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Deryni: Jag är på Wikimania i Italien just nu,så kan inte svara så utförligt, men i de flesta fallen skulle jag säga nej - det är inte möjligt att ladda upp den tavlan (om artisten är svensk), såvida artisten inte varit död mer än 70 år. Josve05a (talk) 21:46, 22 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Tack. I just det här fallet tror jag konstnären är villig att ge tillstånd. Jag går vidare med mallen. Deryni (talk) 06:47, 23 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This section was archived on a request by: Josve05a (talk) 02:47, 29 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

About deletion

First, let me say that I do not think deleting FOP-related images is in the best interest of the project. Yes, rules are rules, but consider en:WP:IAR, and that WMF is extremly unlikely to get into any trouble over FOP issues. Those are not "stolen pictures", architects are not artists who tend to protect their works, etc. Just some food for thought. There are more serious copyvio issues - like people uploading pictures which they clearly do not own - that I think we should focus on cleaning here first. Then we could revisit FOP images, which are compared to that much more harmless. In that vein, I'd like to invite you to review, for example, my request for help at Commons:Village_pump/Copyright#Problematic_uploads_by_User:.D0.9A.D1.81.D0.B5.D0.BD.D0.B8.D1.8F_.D0.91.D0.B5.D1.80.D0.B5.D0.B6.D0.BD.D0.B0.D1.8F. I don't have time to follow it up, but perhaps you could. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus ^Talk 08:54, 15 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Piotrus: Wikimedia Commons works on a different set of rules and policies than Wikipedia. Wikimeida Commons actually has an official policy, which acts in the exact opposite way than en:WP:IAR does - it is called COM:PRP or "the precautionary principle".

Secondly, saying that there are "worse violators out there" is like stating en:WP:OTHERSTUFF on an AfD on enwp, that argument is not gonna fly.

This projects core mission is to host free media. That's it. This is not completely free ~~(I don't know what you are referring to - guessing the Paris image)~~. This argument you are making is also like "please only delete vandalism articles, we can deal with notability and spam article later".

Wikimeida Commons tries to follow all copyright laws, in all jurisdictions, both for our sake, but also for our re-users. Josve05a (talk) 09:02, 15 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for the reply and links. Your argument is convincing, but I still think my point about priorities hold. FOP-violating images may need to be deleted, but they are less damaging then some other type of images we should try to police first. It's a bit like cleaning the street while the house nearby is on fire. There's plenty of copyvio images people have stolen, i.e. found on the web and uploaded here, that are more likely to get us in trouble, then FOP images, which are IMHO less likely to be a problem. PS. I still see nobody has bothered to nominate the clear copyvios I listed in the VP/C for deletion; so forgive me if I don't find this entire issue a bit... annoying. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus ^Talk 06:42, 16 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

It is true, if you prioritise different violations, this might not be the highest prio. I however am not trying to find the most violating image, not trying to find this kind either. I only noticed this image ater I myself uploaded the other image in the DR, and I had to mark it for deletion. Josve05a (talk) 12:10, 17 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This section was archived on a request by: Josve05a (talk) 13:07, 7 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Löschung von Pussy Sisster Logo

Hi! Ich bin die Bookerin der Band und habe die 2 Fotos (Logo+Bild) persönlich vom Manager der Band bekommen um sie auf der Seite zu veröffentlichen. Warum wurde das gelöscht? Ausserdem ist es das offizielle Logo der Band und freigegeben. Was ich auch in der Datei angegeben hatte! Tina Filifera — Preceding unsigned comment added by Tina Filifera (talk • contribs) 18:36, 03 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Entschuldigung, I sprechen kein Deutsch. You need to send in permission for the images to permissions-commons@wikimedia.org since the images has been published before here. Josve05a (talk) 12:41, 4 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

If you are the copyright holder, please email our permissions verification team (VRT).

→

This section was archived on a request by: Josve05a (talk) 13:06, 7 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

File:Gettyimages-542157348 master.jpg

I have picked that picture from the Italian blog site blogo.it that clearly states all content is subject to some rights reserved under the CC license : "© 2004-2014 Blogo.it, alcuni diritti riservati sotto licenza Creative Commons." (see bottom page @ http://www.outdoorblog.it/post/396932/svezia-belgio-0-1-euro-2016-video-gol-22-giugno-2016). I don't understand in that case how it can be a copyright infringement ? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Garulfo71 (talk • contribs) 12:51, 5 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The blog does not own the photo - the photgrapher and Getty Images owns the image. It is a COM:License laundry. Josve05a (talk) 11:13, 5 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This section was archived on a request by: Josve05a (talk) 13:07, 7 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

File:Pochettes panini 2016.jpg

This is a scan I have made myself of a couple of stickers sleeves I have collected. It is used to illustrate a section of the article in French about the Belgian national football team (on fr.wikipedia). A store chain in Belgium organized a marketing campaign around an exclusive Panini album only distributed in their stores. As it makes a lot of sense to have an illustration of these in that section, I'd very much like to keep this picture in the database. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Garulfo71 (talk • contribs) 12:51, 5 July 2016‎ (UTC)[reply]

COM:Fair use is not allowed on Wikimedia Commons. The artwork on the COM:PACKAGING of the product is a COM:Derivate work. Josve05a (talk) 11:12, 5 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

What is the difference then with those pictures of shirts : File:2010-2011_Belgium_football_shirt.jpg or File:Belgium_2014-2015_national_football_shirt.jpg ??? Aren't those also considered derivatives ? I don't get it... — Preceding unsigned comment added by Garulfo71 (talk • contribs) 13:45, 05 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Garulfo71: Well the copyrighted elments in those images are either too small (COM:De minimis) or not copyrightable for being to simple (COM:TOO). Please refer to the Casebook. Josve05a (talk) 13:48, 5 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This section was archived on a request by: Josve05a (talk) 13:08, 7 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Copyright status: File:Common Darters. Sympetrum striolatum - Flickr - gailhampshire.jpg

No required license templates were detected at this file page. Please correct it, or if you have any questions please check my FAQ or contact me on my talk page. Yours sincerely, Jarekt (talk) 12:55, 7 July 2016 (UTC) @Jarekt: Thanks! Josve05a (talk) 13:06, 7 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This section was archived on a request by: Josve05a (talk) 13:06, 7 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

File source is not properly indicated: File:Capitol Hill Cherry Blossoms - Flickr - treegrow (9).jpg

@Magog the Ogre: Thanks! Josve05a (talk) 03:13, 8 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This section was archived on a request by: Josve05a (talk) 03:13, 8 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Photos deleted

The photos Claudio Taffarel & Roberto Baggio.jpg, Taffarel vs Roberto Baggio.jpg and Claudio Taffarel & Gianluca Pagliuca.jpg are free as you can see https://www.flickr.com/photos/134803508@N03/21420725523/in/album-72157657303060483/ https://www.flickr.com/photos/134803508@N03/27366158836/in/album-72157657303060483/ https://www.flickr.com/photos/134803508@N03/27366162276/in/album-72157657303060483/

Why were deleted?--Marinaio56 (talk) 22:43, 8 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Marinaio56: Due to COM:Flickrwashing. The flickr user does not own the copyright and his release on Flickr is thereby invalid and a copyright violation. Josve05a (talk) 23:02, 8 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I how can know it? If i don't know...... I've seen the license --Marinaio56 (talk) 00:26, 9 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

If you do Google reverse image search (by pressing the Camera icon on images.google.org, or right-clicking on images if you are using Chrome) you can see if the image appars elsewhere online. If so, you can check the date and photo size of those images. The photos you mentioned wee all used elsewhere onlinebefore the flickr user uploaded them to flickr. Josve05a (talk) 00:29, 9 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This section was archived on a request by: Josve05a (talk) 12:22, 25 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, my English is not so good. Why do you deleted the files LesArt Logo mit Schrift klein.jpg and Wikland Plakat.jpg. I have the rights to publish the pictures, where is the problem? I am the Graphic Designer, who design the Logo and the Poster and I have the permission of the artist, to use the pictures for my work ...--Kinderbuchfreund (talk) 10:27, 26 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Copyright status: File:Chrysomela aenea, North Wales, June 2011 - Flickr - janetgraham84.jpg

Magog the Ogre (talk) (contribs) 02:37, 10 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This section was archived on a request by: Josve05a (talk) 12:22, 25 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Commons:Administrators/Requests/Josve05a (2016)

Hi Josve,

I would like to inform you that you have been nominated for adminship. Please let me know if you accept. Natuur12 (talk) 13:20, 15 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Tabk you guys! Of course I gladly accept this kind nomination Josve05a (talk) 13:30, 15 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This section was archived on a request by: Josve05a (talk) 12:22, 25 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Valued Image Promotion

★ Your nomination has been reviewed and promoted ★
Congratulations! The image you nominated was reviewed and has now been promoted as a valued image. It is considered to be the most valued image on Commons within the scope:
Rhabdophis chrysargoides.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

File:Me and the boss - Flickr - peganum.jpg

File:Me and the boss - Flickr - peganum.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 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!

Afrikaans ∙ Bahasa Indonesia ∙ bosanski ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ dansk ∙ Deutsch ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ ∙ eesti ∙ English ∙ español ∙ Esperanto ∙ français ∙ galego ∙ hrvatski ∙ íslenska ∙ italiano ∙ magyar ∙ Nederlands ∙ norsk bokmål ∙ norsk nynorsk ∙ occitan ∙ Plattdüütsch ∙ polski ∙ português ∙ português do Brasil ∙ română ∙ shqip ∙ sicilianu ∙ slovenčina ∙ slovenščina ∙ suomi ∙ svenska ∙ Tiếng Việt ∙ Türkçe ∙ Zazaki ∙ Ελληνικά ∙ беларуская ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ ∙ български ∙ македонски ∙ русский ∙ српски / srpski ∙ українська ∙ հայերեն ∙ বাংলা ∙ മലയാളം ∙ ပအိုဝ်ႏဘာႏသာႏ ∙ မြန်မာဘာသာ ∙ ไทย ∙ 조선말 ∙ 한국어 ∙ 日本語 ∙ 简体中文‎ ∙ 繁體中文‎ ∙ עברית ∙ العربية ∙ پښتو ∙ فارسی ∙ ދިވެހިބަސް ∙ +/−

DavidIvar (talk) 18:39, 4 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

File:3rd Annual Capitol Congress - Capitol Music Group's Day-long Premiere Of New Music And Projects For Industry And Media (20775661291).jpg

File:3rd Annual Capitol Congress - Capitol Music Group's Day-long Premiere Of New Music And Projects For Industry And Media (20775661291).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 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!

Afrikaans ∙ Bahasa Indonesia ∙ bosanski ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ dansk ∙ Deutsch ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ ∙ eesti ∙ English ∙ español ∙ Esperanto ∙ français ∙ galego ∙ hrvatski ∙ íslenska ∙ italiano ∙ magyar ∙ Nederlands ∙ norsk bokmål ∙ norsk nynorsk ∙ occitan ∙ Plattdüütsch ∙ polski ∙ português ∙ português do Brasil ∙ română ∙ shqip ∙ sicilianu ∙ slovenčina ∙ slovenščina ∙ suomi ∙ svenska ∙ Tiếng Việt ∙ Türkçe ∙ Zazaki ∙ Ελληνικά ∙ беларуская ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ ∙ български ∙ македонски ∙ русский ∙ српски / srpski ∙ українська ∙ հայերեն ∙ বাংলা ∙ മലയാളം ∙ ပအိုဝ်ႏဘာႏသာႏ ∙ မြန်မာဘာသာ ∙ ไทย ∙ 조선말 ∙ 한국어 ∙ 日本語 ∙ 简体中文‎ ∙ 繁體中文‎ ∙ עברית ∙ العربية ∙ پښتو ∙ فارسی ∙ ދިވެހިބަސް ∙ +/−

—LX (talk, contribs) 20:20, 5 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

File:Poetry Slam SM 2008 torsdag (2457521207).jpg

File:Poetry Slam SM 2008 torsdag (2457521207).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 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!

Afrikaans ∙ Bahasa Indonesia ∙ bosanski ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ dansk ∙ Deutsch ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ ∙ eesti ∙ English ∙ español ∙ Esperanto ∙ français ∙ galego ∙ hrvatski ∙ íslenska ∙ italiano ∙ magyar ∙ Nederlands ∙ norsk bokmål ∙ norsk nynorsk ∙ occitan ∙ Plattdüütsch ∙ polski ∙ português ∙ português do Brasil ∙ română ∙ shqip ∙ sicilianu ∙ slovenčina ∙ slovenščina ∙ suomi ∙ svenska ∙ Tiếng Việt ∙ Türkçe ∙ Zazaki ∙ Ελληνικά ∙ беларуская ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ ∙ български ∙ македонски ∙ русский ∙ српски / srpski ∙ українська ∙ հայերեն ∙ বাংলা ∙ മലയാളം ∙ ပအိုဝ်ႏဘာႏသာႏ ∙ မြန်မာဘာသာ ∙ ไทย ∙ 조선말 ∙ 한국어 ∙ 日本語 ∙ 简体中文‎ ∙ 繁體中文‎ ∙ עברית ∙ العربية ∙ پښتو ∙ فارسی ∙ ދިވެހިބަސް ∙ +/−

Hiddenhauser (talk) 14:03, 7 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

OTRS details

Hi Jonatan, I am a volunteer who has been assisting an edit-a-thon and part of it involved releasing some portraits of Indian women scientists. Apparently one of the media File:Vidita_Vaidya.jpg has a problem with the OTRS release email. Could you indicate what the problem was? Was it a problem with domain of the email sender? I would like to follow up and ensure that the medium is released properly. Shyamal (talk) 10:49, 19 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Shyamal: I am currently on a ferry with limited WiFi connectivity, and won't be able to go in-depth right now. However, due to the confidential nature of OTRS I can't really disclose information which may be private; what I can say though is that there was a question of how the email-sender could own the copyright owner of the image, and not the photographer. Josve05a (talk) 14:21, 19 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, I remember seeing something about a clause on portrait photographs made on contract (either formal or informal) - in any case this image is also on the faculty site http://www.tifr.res.in/~dbs/faculty/V_Vaidya.html - let me see where I read it on Commons and check the issue with others. Shyamal (talk) 14:45, 19 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

your cooperation please

You recently nominated a very large number of files for deletion -- all files I uploaded, roughly once a week, for the past decade.

I think you made several errors in your nomination.

Many of the files you nominated contain zero images that are not PD. That was careless.
The examples you offered are either not really useful, or worthless.
- You cited one example as [[:File:The Wire Issue 01v13.pdf|page 16]] this page? If so, it would be more useful to cite is as [https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=File%3AThe_Wire_Issue39v12.pdf&page=13] [3], or, alternately, [https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/a/a2/The_Wire_Issue39v12.pdf#page=13] [4]
There is a preview of the next page, to the right of cover of the image. It has a box where you can enter page numbers. Use that box to select the page number you want. Then cut the URL from the location bar.
- Could you go and do this for all the other examples you think are relevant?
I believe issues of The Wire, from its first years, contain no proprietary images. That would make listing those issues a mistake.
Practically every issue since then has a movie review, written by a GI, but illustrated with a couple of images from the movie. Of course you are correct, that those movie images are proprietary. But, as was pointed out the first time someone raised this concern, they also constitute a tiny fraction of the issue. The conclusion then was that the "de minimus" principle applies. Those proprietary movie images generally take up a fraction of a page, generally half or less. Most issues are sixteen pages long. That is just over three percent. Most people would regard that as de minimus.

Are you familiar with de minimus? Geo Swan (talk) 01:27, 26 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

You wrote here: "I will go through most files tomorrow and mark a detailed list of all non-free elements..."

That is a serious commitment of your time. 600 files, if you can go through one file every 5 minutes, and you plan to go through all the files, you are committing yourself to well over a solid week of work.

The first time someone voiced a concern over the embedded movie images, there was discussion over taking an editor capable of editing pdfs, and using it to excise the proprietary images. I think these files should be left alone, as per my understanding of de minimus. But, if a consensus arises that they cannot remain, I'd prefer we used your willingness to go through a big fraction of these files to excise the two or three images from the pdf, so that the PD 97 percent of these important files gets to remain.

I just looked at half a dozen of the files from the first three volumes. Five of them contained no proprietary images. In the bottom right hand corner of page 9 of File:The Wire Issue01v4.pdf there is an image of a visting musician. That image takes up about 1/80th of that page, and that issue is 12 pages long. That would be slightly more than 1/1000ths of the file. Clarification please -- are you going to call for that file to be deleted, when 99.9 percent of it was PD? Geo Swan (talk) 03:09, 26 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This section was archived on a request by: Josve05a (talk) 02:41, 22 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

File:Entardecer elevedor lacerda.jpg

File:Entardecer elevedor lacerda.jpg looked fine to me before the deletion. Why add {{No permission}} --Jarekt (talk) 18:24, 1 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Commons:NETCOPYRIGHT, I believe...of http://www.wresh.com.br/clientes/peach-site/author/ciro-amado/?post_type=product which I don't know was posted before or after Wikipedia, but it is bigger and the user's nameis on that ite, but selling the images. We would want evidence that they are the same person...(a bit afk, so not long answer right now...) Josve05a (talk) 18:54, 1 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

That make sense, but is totally unclear from the file history. Perhaps regular DR would have been better. --Jarekt (talk) 19:54, 1 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

All well, that ends well - or something like that. Josve05a (talk) 02:43, 22 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This section was archived on a request by: Josve05a (talk) 02:43, 22 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Gifs delete

Hey,why you delete my gif with Dorin Rotariu?What's wrong with it? — Preceding unsigned comment added by EmbeddedCronus (talk • contribs) 20:46, 02 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@EmbeddedCronus: You can read the reason here: Commons:Deletion requests/File:DorinRotariuGol.gif. Josve05a (talk) 14:31, 3 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This section was archived on a request by: Josve05a (talk) 02:43, 22 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Administrator

čeština ∙ Deutsch ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form) ∙ English ∙ español ∙ فارسی ∙ suomi ∙ français ∙ magyar ∙ հայերեն ∙ Bahasa Indonesia ∙ italiano ∙ 日本語 ∙ 한국어 ∙ македонски ∙ മലയാളം ∙ Plattdüütsch ∙ Nederlands ∙ português ∙ português do Brasil ∙ русский ∙ sicilianu ∙ slovenčina ∙ slovenščina ∙ svenska ∙ +/−

Grattis, Josve05a! Du har nu administratörsrättigheter på Commons. Ta några minuter att läsa igenom sidan Commons:Administrators och bevaka relaterade sidor (särskilt Commons:Administrators' noticeboard och Commons:Deletion requests) innan du kastar dig in bland sidraderingar, sidskydd, kontoblockeringar eller ändringar på skyddade sidor. De flesta administratörshandlingar kan återställas av andra administratörer, förutom historiksammanslagningar som måste behandlas med särskild omsorg.

Tveka inte att möta oss på IRC: #wikimedia-commons på irc.freenode.net. Det finns också en kanal för administratörer på Commons, som kan vara användbar för mer känsliga ämnen eller samordning mellan administratörer: #wikimedia-commons-admin.

Överväg också att gå in på #wikimedia-admin, en wikioberoende samordningskanal för Wikimediaadministratörer. Ställ en fråga till någon kanaloperatör för an invite exemption (annars kan vem som helst på kanalen bjuda in dig tillfälligt). Alla administratörer från alla projekt är välkomna.

Du kan finna sidan Commons:Guide to adminship att vara användbar läsning.

Kolla också eller lägg till dig själv på listan över administratörer och relaterade listor efter språk och datum.

EugeneZelenko (talk) 14:06, 22 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Congratulations my friend.

I did not have the chance to vote for you, but know that I would have, without hesitation ;-)

Cheers — Preceding unsigned comment added by Liné1 (talk • contribs)

Congrats Jonatan! :) Reh man 00:54, 23 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Svidish kongrattulations and lots of wikilove, Jonatan!

Peter ^Isotalo 17:00, 25 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks everybody! This was actually a bit unexpected for me. Feels great to know I've got all your support! Josve05a (talk) 17:01, 25 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I missed the vote, but anyway, welcome to the cabal! — regards, Revi 17:17, 25 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

User talk:Josve05a/Archive 6

Flickr files tagged as pixabay

Categories

Notification about possible deletion

Valued Image Promotion

I need your help.

File:Beato Placido osst.jpg

External link Box

OTRS-ticket-issue

A cup of tea for you!

Help

Quality Image Promotion

Valued Image Promotion

File:"Ackergifte? Nein danke!"-Logo.jpg / File:Landwende-Logo.png

A barnstar for you!

A barnstar for you!

WBR

European Otter (Lutra lutra) (5584351087).jpg

A bowl of strawberries for you!

Query re: File:Mark Satin in 1978.jpg

hello help

hello please approve this pic

Merging tickets to closed ones

Please undelete File:Flag of Hualien County.svg

Notification about possible deletion

Notification about possible deletion

A barnstar for you!

Bildgranskning

Please avoid watermarked pictures

Quality Image Promotion

Please talk normally

Quality Image Promotion

Quality Image Promotion

Error detection

Notification about possible deletion

thanks for marking Copyvio pics

Notification about possible deletion

Copyright infrigment question

Bad Author Additions

Bildrättighet för tavla

About deletion

Löschung von Pussy Sisster Logo

File:Gettyimages-542157348 master.jpg

File:Pochettes panini 2016.jpg

Copyright status: File:Common Darters. Sympetrum striolatum - Flickr - gailhampshire.jpg

File source is not properly indicated: File:Capitol Hill Cherry Blossoms - Flickr - treegrow (9).jpg

Photos deleted

Copyright status: File:Chrysomela aenea, North Wales, June 2011 - Flickr - janetgraham84.jpg

Valued Image Promotion

OTRS details

your cooperation please

Gifs delete

Administrator

Navigation menu

Search