User talk:JuTa/Archive 11

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.

New file version

Hi JuTa.

I've uploaded new version of this file File:Phrase sanskrit.png but in the corresponding article, the picture stays the same as before. Does this happen? Alteaven (talk) 14:24, 10 June 2013 (UTC)

Hi, a so called purge in the corresping articles should help. See Help:Purge or en:Help:Purge. Or simply add an "?acttion=prurge" to the URLs of the corresponing articles. regards. --JuTa 18:08, 10 June 2013 (UTC)

Freedom of panorama is not a license?


Why did you write that FoP Mexico is not a license? It's the license of all documents published in Category:Murals in Mexico, D. F..

El ComandanteSkull and crossbones.svgHasta ∞ 06:35, 28 May 2013 (UTC)

Well, FOP-Templates are for a copyright exection for murals, scultures, building etc. placed in public space in several countries. But the fotos themself have its own copyright, the fotografer has to release the foto with a free license like any other foto on commons. --JuTa 21:14, 28 May 2013 (UTC)
According to these explanations : "photographing 2D art (e.g. paintings) [...] does not generate any new copyright because the resulting work is defined entirely by the original work; there is no creative input. Therefore authors who create 2D copies are not entitled to copyright for these works, and the copyright of the original work applies". So, there is no need of another license than FoP, right? El ComandanteSkull and crossbones.svgHasta ∞ 11:59, 30 May 2013 (UTC)
Hmm, yes. Such murals seems to be a special case if nothing of the "surrounding" is visible. But this dos not change the fact that FOP templates does not count as license templates. Such images without will apear anytime in Category:Media without a license: needs history check, and will by flagged as no license by people helping in that category. We would need a more proper solution for it. Perhaps you ask in Commons:Village pump for other opinions... regards --JuTa 12:53, 30 May 2013 (UTC)
Hi, I now implemented a solution with {{PD-because}}. regards --JuTa 20:39, 4 June 2013 (UTC)
It seems that your template is incorrect, according Dankarl. I've opened a request for comments about this case. El Comandante (talk) 13:05, 12 June 2013 (UTC)


Exactly what is missing?

My work do not add any copyright, it's not that original. The original is covered by FOP as far as I have understood it, nomatter who the creator is. -- Lavallen 06:50, 11 June 2013 (UTC)

The license for your fotograf is missing. If you dont care what happens with it: just add {{PD-self}}, otherwise i.e. {{cc-by-sa-3.0}} is a recommanded license. regards. --JuTa 07:50, 11 June 2013 (UTC)
I do not like to add PD-self, when I am not the author to anything but the photo, but I guess it's all I can do. -- Lavallen 14:04, 12 June 2013 (UTC)

Why did you remove this image?

It is in public domain, already published elsewhere, and very useful to understand the page it was illustrating: — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk • contribs) 2013-06-11T10:08:37‎ (UTC)

Hi, the image did not had any license template used. Every image on commons needs to have a valid license template describing its copright status. But why do you think its public domain? The fact that other sites in the internet might break copyright law, does not mean that command can an should the same. If you can find a valid license template in Commons:Copyright tags please name it here an I will consider undeletion. regards --JuTa 07:16, 12 June 2013 (UTC)


Hi JuTa, I do not have proper verification for my upload of {{no license|month=June|day=9|year=2013}}

;{{int:filedesc}} {{Information |description={{en|1=Map showing that the precise time signals originated at The Naval Observatory in Washington, D.C.and were broadcast across the country guaranteeing accurate time.}} |date=2011-01-04 16:18:15 |source=scan of reprint of 1936 advertising brochure |author=Western Union Time Service out of business since 1970 |permission= |other_versions= |other_fields= }} ;{{int:license-header}} {{Remove this line and insert a license instead|year=2013|month=06|day=07}} [[Category:Uploaded with UploadWizard]] [[Category:Maps]]

I understand that at this time it will be removed I am sorry for the inconvenience, Just learning! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Elecclock (talk • contribs) 2013-06-11T04:22:38‎ (UTC)

You are very wellcome. Keep learning :) --JuTa 18:03, 13 June 2013 (UTC)

File:Karl-Heinz Pahling 1996.jpg

Commons-emblem-issue.svg File:Karl-Heinz Pahling 1996.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 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 | العربية | Български | বাংলা | 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 | Shqip | Српски / srpski | Svenska | Türkçe | українська | Tiếng Việt | 中文 | 中文(简体)‎ | 中文(繁體)‎ | +/−

-mattbuck (Talk) 15:28, 13 June 2013 (UTC)

JR images


I was wondering why you deleted images from the JR Artist's page, as I work with JR and we have the rights to those images. I am eager to update his page with the images for each of his projects, can you please respond with an explanation? Anything that you could do to help would be greatly appreciated.

InsideOutProject — Preceding unsigned comment added by Insideoutproject (talk • contribs) 2013-06-13T15:45:54‎ (UTC)

Hi, every image on commons need a valid license template, which decribes the copyright status of the image correctly - see Commons:Licensing. This was completly missing on those images. And as they are previously pulished in the internet, they need a verification that the fotografer or copyright holder agrees to a free license. Details are decribded on Commons:OTRS. If you are the copyright holder please write an email to the commons support team and release those images under a free license. A recommanded license is {{cc-by-sa-3.0}}. A (long) list of possible other licenses aou find in Commons:Copyright tags. If you are not the copyright holder, you have to contact him and ask himto write such an email. regards --JuTa 17:53, 13 June 2013 (UTC)


Hello JuTa, you deleted this file approx. 1 month ago due to missing OTRS permission. In the meanwhile we have got one, ticket #2013032010013534. Could you restore the file with the original free license and add the OTRS template or let me know if you prefer me to do that? Thank you and best regards, Poco2 20:08, 14 June 2013 (UTC)

Hi, the file is back. I just renewed the problem tag. Its better when you, as an OTRS-member, add the OTRS template. regards. --JuTa 20:12, 14 June 2013 (UTC)
Thanks, OTRS template added, cheers, Poco2 20:33, 14 June 2013 (UTC)


Voici les seules condition d'usage du logo IGKT File:IGKTLogoColour.jpg:

Using The Guild Logo International Guild of Knot Tyers logo: A yellow turkshead knot on a blue background The Council have formally agreed the design of the Guild logo. Two versions are available – one in monochrome and one in colour. Any member or Branch who wish to incorporate the logo into stationery, clothing or souvenir items or on a website must use one of the approved versions and the wording must remain in English - any translation of ""International Guild of Knot Tyers"" must be clearly separate.

le lien :

Je suis membre de l'IGKT

Aidez-moi pour utiliser ce logo.

Cordialement Pep.per de Ré [1] — Preceding unsigned comment added by Pep.per de Ré (talk • contribs) 2013-06-15T10:03:44‎0 (UTC)

I'm sorry, but thats not enough. Every image must be reuseable and modificable by anybody (not only members of your club) in the world. See Commons:Licensing. regards. --JuTa 14:50, 15 June 2013 (UTC)

I want to prove the age of the photo I posted about Metropolitan Life Insurance Co., Sanitorium Mt. McGregor, N.Y. The company that owned it went out of business in 1952. All photos from this company (The Albertype Co of Brooklyn, NY are dates circa 1920 - 1930. Here is a link to another photo/post card of another building at the facility in question and the link states that the post card image is circa 1920. Artvue Postcard Company. The company no longer exists so it should be fair game to use it.

I am new here so I don't understand how to use all parts of this website. — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk • contribs) 2013-06-15T23:52:09‎ (UTC)

Hi, the license {{PD-US-no notice}} might apply here. But i don't know how to check if there newer was a copyright note. You better ask in Commons:Help desk again. regards --JuTa 07:56, 16 June 2013 (UTC)

Hi, JuTa. Could you tell me how I could legally use a logo that is being used on the English wikipedia (and other wikipedias) on the Romanian page ? I reuploaded it in commons, but it seems to be illegal to do so. I read the Licensing page, but I didn't understand too much of it. Calusarul (talk) 00:35, 17 June 2013 (UTC)

The image is use on en: under so call fair use, which is not allowed here - see Commons:Fair use. I dont know if the romanian wikipedia is allowing fair use. You should ask on ro:Wikipedia:Cafenea or similar. regards --JuTa 05:55, 17 June 2013 (UTC)

File:Planck CMB black background.jpg

Hi there, I have read the information that you have sent me in my "user-talk". The file is not mine, it was taken, or better, it was made by the information collected by ESA's Plack space telescope. It's owner it's the European Space Agency and it's works are public domain as NASA's work. At least, I think so. There is more information about this here:

User:Dyon, User talk:Dyon 2:59, 17 June 2013 (UTC)

Hi, if this image is a pure NASA work then {{PD-USGov-NASA}} would apply. But on the pag you linked I cannot find anything about NASA. And according ESA works can only be reused non-commercially which is not accepted on commons. regards. --JuTa 06:07, 17 June 2013 (UTC)

OTRS - danke!

Hallo JuTa, ich möchte nur ein kurzes Danke hierlassen, weil du mir hinterherräumen musstest - das tut mir leid, ich lerne noch. In Zukunft werde ich das Datums-Tag entsprechend setzen. viele Grüße --DmdM (talk) 14:16, 18 June 2013 (UTC)

Aber immer gerne doch :) --JuTa 14:27, 18 June 2013 (UTC)


I derived File:LandwassertunnelPortal.jpg from File:CH Landwasser 1.jpg. Don't know how to transfer the copyright information properly. Please help.--Panda17 (talk) 15:10, 18 June 2013 (UTC)

Hi, I fixed it now; see here. regards --JuTa 15:18, 18 June 2013 (UTC)
Vielen Dank.--Panda17 (talk) 07:04, 19 June 2013 (UTC)

Help requested

Hello. I am trying to upload photographs from a book published in 1896. I find the Copyright information utterly bewildering. How do I carry out this task? RSLlGriffith (talk) 22:24, 18 June 2013 (UTC)

Hi, in this case it is very likely {{PD-old}}. If you know or can find out the deathyear of James Dobie you could add {{PD-old-auto|deathyear=<year>}}. Just edit the file description pages and replace the {{Remove this line and insert a license instead|year=2013|month=06|day=16}} with one of the templates I recommanded. regards. --JuTa 22:30, 18 June 2013 (UTC)

Your message

I don't really understand your message since I mentioned for the last document that it is a book from google books, I give the title and the author and therefore anyone can check the author died more than a century ago and the book was published almost 2 centuries ago. I don't see what else can be done. Is there any kind of misunderstanding ? In any case, about the files you deleated, for the next time, give me some time in order to act or to reply before using a final solution. Many thanks. --Lembeye (talk) 22:28, 18 June 2013 (UTC)

Hi, every image on commons needs a license template desribing correctly its copyright status. In this case it is very likely {{PD-old-auto|deathyear=1873}}. Just edit the file description pages and replace the {{Remove this line and insert a license instead|year=2013|month=06|day=17}} with the template I recommanded. regards. --JuTa 22:30, 18 June 2013 (UTC)

ok, thank you. --Lembeye (talk) 22:37, 18 June 2013 (UTC)

All good with my photo?

Hi! I Added a photo of myself (luis herrero.jpg) for the first time, couldn't do it right at first with the licensing, but now I think the license should be ok. Could you please check that out. Cheers! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Luismikael (talk • contribs) 2013-06-19T11:34:20‎ (UTC)

Hi, only in case you are Mika Heittola and shot the foto File:Luis Herrero.jpg yourself. In this case you better change the description page again a bit:
|author=[[User:Luismikael|Mika Heitto]]
If not Mika has to send a releasing email to the commons support team to confirm he is willing to publish this foto under a free license - see Commons:OTRS. regards --JuTa 17:07, 19 June 2013 (UTC)

Your help is requested

HAY! Mr Ju Ta! Kindly see my talk page here. I have been continuously harassed here. Please see [2] and [3] also. If the people like Sitush and Fastily can delete my files without any consensus what's the use of my contribution to wikicommons. Since you are the administrator here, your intervention is immediately required. Thanks for the trouble. Krantmlverma (talk) 14:57, 19 June 2013 (UTC)

Hi, if you feel that some of your uploaded images were deleted wrongly please raise one or multiple Commons:Undeletion requests. Please name the images in question and give a comprehensible reason why they should be undeleted. regards. --JuTa 18:03, 19 June 2013 (UTC)

Copyright status of File:Karapet Rubinyan Jan 2011.jpg and File:Karapet Rubinyan 00.jpg

Hi JuTa.

Mr. Karapet Rubinyan (User:Lastak), who sole owner of the exclusive copyright of text and images of article Karapet Rubinyan and user page Lastak, sent a OTRS form agreement to If OK, please, change the Copyright status of File:Karapet Rubinyan Jan 2011.jpg and File:Karapet Rubinyan 00.jpg. Vahram Mekhitarian (talk) 08:51, 19 June 2013 (UTC)

Hi, the license template you used ({{PD-AM-exempt}}) does not apply. These are normal fotos and not any kind of govermental work as required by the license. The author, which is the person who made the foto and likely not Mr. Karapet Rubinyan, has to release these fotos under a free license - see commons:OTRS. He has to send an email to the commons support team releasing the fotos unter a free and commons compatible license. A reconnended license is {{cc-by-sa-3.0}}. As soon this is done please include the template {{OTRS pending}} to the description page, this will prevent deletion for minimum 30 days. regards --JuTa 16:55, 19 June 2013 (UTC)
I replaced the license template {{PD-AM-exempt}} to {{cc-by-sa-3.0}}. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Vahram Mekhitarian (talk • contribs) 2013-06-19T18:11:59‎ (UTC)
And now I changed the problem tag from {{no license}} to {{no permission}}. As I wrote above the fotografer and/or copyright holder has to verify that he is willing to release the images under a free license. --JuTa 18:21, 19 June 2013 (UTC)
Im an owner and downloader this files. I corrected files information in "filedesc". Vahram Mekhitarian (talk) 20:19, 19 June 2013 (UTC)
Thanks! Vahram Mekhitarian (talk) 20:23, 19 June 2013 (UTC)

File:Uruguay 50Centesimos 1939.jpg

You informed me the file has been nominated for deletion. What do you need from me? I posted the image way back in 2007 and place it under GNU free license. The image is my own. I took a picture of the paper bill from my own collection. It is a paper note from Uruguay from 1939. If there is any copyright issue with the government of Uruguay, even though it is a long out of circulation paper bill, I can't help you there. Therefore if it must be removed, so be it, though I fail to see why as the notice does not explain what the copyright status is. -- Alexf (talk) 00:26, 20 June 2013 (UTC)

Hi, I currently checking files in Category:Media without a license: needs history check and File:Uruguay 50Centesimos 1939.jpg was one of them. The reason why it was listed in this category is that there was no license template was included. I saw you text about GFDL, but thats IMHO not a correct license in this case. In Commons:Currency we have a list of which countries are OK and which are not. Unfortunatly Uruguay is missing there. So: its currently unknown if images of Urugayen banknotes are in the public domain or not. I could not find another fitting license template for this case. Thats the reason why I marked it with "no license". On the other hand: in Category:Banknotes of Uruguay are several images with the same problem. If you would apply {{self|GFDL|cc-by-3.0}} as you did it at File:Uruguay 50Centesimos 1939 Side2.jpg I would not inestigate this case anymore. regards --JuTa 19:35, 20 June 2013 (UTC)

File:Map detail of Laar in the county of Bentheim 1850 1863.png

I now labelled it with "pd old 100 license", the map is created between 1850 and 1863, so the creators of this map I assume are dead for a long time. Is that sufficiant?

Yours sincerely,

--Radiergummischreiber (talk) 15:37, 21 June 2013 (UTC)

I answered on your talk page. regards --JuTa 18:33, 21 June 2013 (UTC)

About the File:DA Logo.jpg

I am sorry for the lack of copyright info on the file. I just don't understand how to put in the required information on the file. It is the correct logo of an Indian non-government organisation and I sourced the logo from them. While uploading the file, I could not understand which option to select. Can you help me with that please? Thanks a lot in advance. Subirendra (talk) 00:00, 20 June 2013 (UTC)

Hi, in this case {{PD-textlogo}} IMHO applies. I modified the deacription page accordingly. regards. --JuTa 19:18, 20 June 2013 (UTC)

Thanks a lot. It means the logo won't be deleted, right? :p Thats my only concern. Best regards. Subirendra (talk) 14:31, 22 June 2013 (UTC)

If nobody else disagrees: yes --JuTa 17:02, 22 June 2013 (UTC)

File:Coat of arms of Morocco.png

Hallo, JuTa. Ich bin gerade dabei, in Category:Coats of arms images without a license: needs history check aufzuräumen. Die Upload- und Lizenzgeschichte dieser Datei ist das reine Chaos, da wurden fröhlich die verschiedensten Quellen und Versionen überschrieben. Die erste wirklich nachvollziehbar freie Version wurde am 15. Juni 2008, 19:19 von Xiquet hochgeladen, basierend auf File:COA Kingdom of Morocco.svg, die inzwischen gelöscht ist. Kannst du bitte die damalige Lizenz für File:COA Kingdom of Morocco.svg nachgucken? Und ich würde auch vorschlagen, alle Versionen, die älter als 15. Juni 2008 sind, wegen URV zu löschen. Vermutlich wäre es sogar besser, einen kompletten LA zu stellen und das Ding von Grund auf neu zu zeichnen. Gruß, De728631 (talk) 14:25, 21 June 2013 (UTC)

Hi, th license was {{self|GFDL|cc-by-sa-all}} set by User:SanchoPanzaXXI who stated own work. But feel free to raise a deletion request anyhow. regards. --JuTa 18:28, 21 June 2013 (UTC)
Ah, thank you. I have tagged the file for missing a license but the latest author, Xiquet, has been blocked for socking years ago. So I guess we won't get a license from them, and will soon be rid of the file anyway. De728631 (talk) 19:34, 21 June 2013 (UTC)
"Quick delete" aside, at the moment this file does in fact not have any valid license, so {{npd}} is not applicable, because that template asks for confirming an existing free license. (Btw, is it for the sake of the general public being able to read this thread, or why did you respond in English?) De728631 (talk) 19:45, 21 June 2013 (UTC)
That was a mistype on your talkpage. I meant {{nld}} and corrected it meantime :) --JuTa 19:48, 21 June 2013 (UTC)


All these files were licensed on the wiki they were uploaded to, the Latvian Wikipedia, the same as File:Petersala-Andrejsala karte.png and should be kept on the same basis, as they were made solely for the project. Rich Farmbrough, 21:32 21 June 2013 (GMT).

Then please correct the description pages accordingly ane remove the problem tag. Regards. --JuTa 21:36, 21 June 2013 (UTC)


Buon giorno Juta I am a new and not practical user.You removed 2 photos that I put with many sacrifices (the article is "Viaggio umanitario del CIS in Malì").The authors are two friends of mine (Carlo Mantoni and Piero Riccio that gave all licenses ).Is it possible to put the 2 photos? Ciao. Cooperazione — Preceding unsigned comment added by Cooperazione (talk • contribs) 2013-06-22T14:12:15‎ (UTC)

Hi, that main problem with these 2 images was that the was no license template was included. But there is another problem with them: They made not directly by you, but from some friends or similar. In this case the fotografer should send a releasing email to the commons support team - see Commons:OTRS - naming the images an declaring under which free license they wish to publish these fotos. If everything checks out OK, the images will get undeleted. regards. --JuTa 17:13, 22 June 2013 (UTC)


N'Abend! Could you please add the original upload log for this file from Thanks. De728631 (talk) 20:13, 22 June 2013 (UTC)

✓ Done ceers. --JuTa 20:22, 22 June 2013 (UTC)

File:Tim Ruijters bij de Wikimedia Conferentie Nederland 2012 - Flickr - Sebastiaan ter Burg.jpg

Hint: Google for image or Flickr + given number and you should get a hit at Flickr if the image is still available. Found a lot of images this way. --Denniss (talk) 21:10, 22 June 2013 (UTC)

Hi, I know google image search. But in this unused case it was a bit too much outlay for me. Thx anyhow. --JuTa 21:25, 22 June 2013 (UTC)
I once stumbled onto this kind of error as well, google image search did not really help but the standard websearch with these parameters did. --Denniss (talk) 14:21, 23 June 2013 (UTC)

Bitte Nachricht beachten

Bitte meine Nachricht dort beachten: User_talk:Blauer_elephant.

Ich bin damit einverstanden, wenn Du den Abschnitt hier und bei meinem user talk löschst.

Trotz der eindeutigen Worte dort gehe ich auch bei Dir von guten Absichten aus.

Mit freundlichen Grüßen und schönen Tag noch, --Blauer elephant (talk) 17:36, 23 June 2013 (UTC)

Larissa banner

Thankscfor the notification. I hope it's ok now.--Smiley green alien wink.svg Alien ? 21:34, 23 June 2013 (UTC)

Not realy. Where did you got this image from? Can you link the source page pls. regards --JuTa 21:41, 23 June 2013 (UTC)
I got the image from here. I just added the link to the file's description.--Smiley green alien wink.svg Alien ? 21:50, 23 June 2013 (UTC)
Ah, I see. I now did some minor fixes. Its OK now. Thx. --JuTa 21:55, 23 June 2013 (UTC)

File:ZU 2002.PNG. (subject of photo is dead)

Hello JuTa,

I have been told by many Helpers in the Wikipedia Help Chat room that if the subject of the photo is dead, then that photo is automatically considered to be available for free use. While this doesn't make much sense to me, they were all in agreement on this issue. Since you apparently have experience in the field of image free use, would you please clarify this for me? The subject of the photo in question is Sue Draheim and she died on 11 April 2013. If her death does indeed confer free use status on her images, please let me know how I need to prove that it is Sue Draheim and that Sue Draheim is dead. Thank you for your attention and for your help. أخوها (talk) 23:47, 9 June 2013 (UTC)

Hi, no, that not true. The copyright of a foto expieres in most countries 70 year after the fotografers (not the models) death. compare i.e. {{PD-old}}. regards --JuTa 23:52, 9 June 2013 (UTC)
Vielen Danke fűr seine schnelles Antwort, JuTa. Yes, that makes more sense. What the "helpers" told me did not make any sense. In any case, I've contacted the photographer and he will soon be uploading the image under a "Creative Commons" licensing. One more question: should he just upload it by clicking on the "Upload file" link in the sidebar and declaring that he is the owner/creator or should he also fill out and email to the form on this page: vielen Danke fűr die Hilfe, أخوها (talk) 12:11, 11 June 2013 (UTC)
To clarify -- we-the-helpers said that if the subject is dead, then that means that fair-use is acceptable. This does not mean that the photo will be free. DS (talk) 02:07, 12 June 2013 (UTC)
Now I'm thoroughly confused. Please have patience with me as I am having trouble understanding the meaning of the terms you are using. When you say "fair-use is acceptable", what does that mean in practical terms, i.e. can I use it or not? Thank you.--أخوها (talk) 01:19, 13 June 2013 (UTC)
Hi, please see en:Fair use, en:Wikipedia:Fair use and Commons:Fair use. The english spoken Wikipedia i.e. is accepting those immage, commons does not because this is an international project. I don't know about the rules in the arabic spoken Wikipdia. You might like to upload that image locally but pls. ask i.e. on ar:ويكيبيديا:الميدان or similar before. regards. --JuTa 17:40, 13 June 2013 (UTC)
The owner/creator of the the photo just wrote me and told me that he tried to upload the photo to wikimedia commons and he said: "I uploaded the photo, and they say error, that content has already been uploaded and deleted because there wasn't license info attached." He was not using the same file name. I want to use this photo in both the English and Arabic versions of the article ( and and the creator of the photo wants to upload it to you so that I can do so. What is the problem? What does he need to do? Thanks.--أخوها (talk) 20:28, 24 June 2013 (UTC)
Hi, I now undeleted the file File:ZU 2002.PNG. The owner/creater should now edit the decription file and set a free license and confirm he is the copyright holder. regards --JuTa 20:37, 24 June 2013 (UTC)
Thanks for your quick reply. I forwarded your answer to the owner/creator and I think he'll be trying again very soon. P.S. Just to make sure there is no confusion here --- are you saying that he has to access the file ZU 2002 that I uploaded? Wouldn't it be simpler if he was just able to upload it from scratch? That would seem less complicated..Thank you.--أخوها (talk) 20:47, 24 June 2013 (UTC)
Well, I'm not sure if the software allowes new users to reupload previously deleted files (even with new names). The error mssage above indicating that this is not the case. Thats the reason why I undeleted it. --JuTa 20:50, 24 June 2013 (UTC)
From what I understand, he's not a new user as he said: "... I had logged in with a login I apparently have had from years ago." It would be better if he could upload it from the beginning, as the file name ZU 2002 is misleading ---- "ZU" was my personal nickname for the subject of the photo (Sue Draheim) and the date is not 2002 -- it should be 2011. Vielen danke für die Hilfe.--أخوها (talk) 20:59, 24 June 2013 (UTC)
How he can bypass that reupload block, you or he better ask on Commons:Help desk or Commons:Village pump cause I don't know how. If I should redelete the file pls. let me know. --JuTa 21:03, 24 June 2013 (UTC)
Maybe, since it looks like you have software that identifies pictures not from their filenames but from the actual image, would it be simpler if he just cropped it slightly differently so it would not be paired up with the ZU 2002 file?--أخوها (talk) 21:08, 24 June 2013 (UTC)
Possibly yes. Or a higher resolution from the original shot if he has. --JuTa 21:10, 24 June 2013 (UTC)
Ok, I will let him know. Thank you.--أخوها (talk) 21:18, 24 June 2013 (UTC)