User talk:Judgefloro/Archive 6

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

Photos of Parañaque National High School (incl. Baclaran Annex) and Sun Valley

I added categories for Parañaque National High School, Parañaque National High School - Baclaran Annex, and Sun Valley, Parañaque City, but there are only one to two files there added, and some other public schools that are still out of the coverage. While you have a lot of coverage of Baclaran, especially the tiangges and the Redemptorist Church, why have not been inside to cover Parañaque National High School - Baclaran Annex? You may have plans to cover the rest of Parañaque (i.e. San Antonio, Marcelo Green, Don Bosco, Moonwalk, Sun Valley, United Parañaque Subdivision), but when? Thanks.--TagaSanPedroAkoTalk -> 02:51, 24 June 2018 (UTC)

Thanks for your message; actually, I do not have any plans on photography; what I do is to follow the sun; I finished all the nearby Bulacan Pampanga N. Ecija areas including the Barangays, because they are near Baliuag, Bulacan where I stay; as you requested, I finished San Pedro, Laguna, and thanks, I found that there are lots of Sun, blue sky thereat and nearby towns including some in Cavite; now, it is very difficult to take pictures because of Habagat or cloudy skies; with all due respect to other editors, I only love blue sky and afternoon sun; I stopped taking Paranaque, because of the hardships to find the barangays and Churches, and I have to ride LRT up to Baclaran and ride trikes and before I reach the farther Barangays clouds would cover my view; for which reason I found it easier to go to Laguna and Cavite, via Gil Puyat LRT station buses; please give me more time for I do not want to go to Paranaque under cloudy skies;
To be clear, let me illustrate the apathy and lack of insight by many on photos and mystique; I have a long desire to take Green Meadows Parish Church the only one left in the Pasig and Q.C. areas I failed to cover; my own brother hears Mass thereat weekly, but he has no interest in photos; I cannot ask him to take some; this is the very situation why you finf empty of Photos of the Islands of Visayas and Mindanao; perhaps Commons may advertise to convince many like you to take quality pictures of Barangays of towns of these 2 Islands of the Philippines; for it is stated that it cannot be done; I prophesy that it has been done, it is done, and it will be done; this, my Solitude Photography, which can never be recorded or duplicated by any human beings since the beginning of times, where it not for Time Travel and Bi-location or Omnipresence, convinced me to Donate all my photos to Commons without any condition whatsoever; sincerely (talk)
Category discussion warning

Barangays of Caloocan has been listed at Commons:Categories for discussion so that the community can discuss ways in which it should be changed. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry.

If you created this category, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for discussion 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. If the category is up for deletion because it has been superseded, consider the notion that although the category may be deleted, your hard work (which we all greatly appreciate) lives on in the new category.

In all cases, please do not take the category discussion personally. It is never intended as such. Thank you!


112.201.59.213 13:26, 7 August 2018 (UTC)

Barangay 14, District 2, Dagat-Dagatan, Caloocan City Map of Barangay 14 South Caloocan is located along and specifically part of Category:C-3 Road, Dagat-Dagatan Avenue, Dagatdagatan Extension & C-4 Road; I did not stop at all while taking photos from a jeep or tricycle to capture Barangay 14; What I do is to take photos of Welcome or road signs indicating the Barangays like Barangay 14, since many of the Barangays are interlocking or adjacent one another; sincerely Judgefloro 08:40, 9 August 2018 (UTC)
Please view these pictures Category:Barangays 9, 10, 11, 12, 13 & 14, Zone 2, Dagat-Dagatan District, Caloocan City South and Category:Barangays 4 and 8, Sangandaan, Zone 1, District II, Caloocan City - Notice that Barangays 8, 12 and 14 are included in the so-called Dagat-Dagatan District Judgefloro 09:30, 9 August 2018 (UTC)
Category discussion warning

PNR Metro South Commuter Line has been listed at Commons:Categories for discussion so that the community can discuss ways in which it should be changed. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry.

If you created this category, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for discussion 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. If the category is up for deletion because it has been superseded, consider the notion that although the category may be deleted, your hard work (which we all greatly appreciate) lives on in the new category.

In all cases, please do not take the category discussion personally. It is never intended as such. Thank you!


TagaSanPedroAkoTalk -> 22:51, 23 August 2018 (UTC)

Thanks for your message and diligence in the Categories; I respectfully submit to your sound discretion to pick the one Category and merge the photos thereto, since the 2 Categories deal with the same things; at age 64, I am faced with the record one month+ cloudy skies due to monsoon rains, let's see the sun;
Query: First, after uploading 1.02 million photos in Commons, let me tell thee that I never had any listening to any photography seminary or teach-ins here; I repeatedly voiced that for me, 3-5 pm sun with blue or little white clouds is the best for landscapes and sceneries of roads, schools, landmarks and churches; I am not referrring to Balite Drive or the like gloomy must photos in heavy clouds to depict the scene as in horror or memory lanes; my question, is: what is the consensus or average and general like of photographers here in Commons as to what is the best, cloudy to gloomy or sun with blue sky and a little white clouds; Second, I am trying my best to finish the only nearest to my place Bulacan, landmarks and churches remaining, that is - Las Piñas, Parañaque, Pasay, Dasmariñas-Silang Cavite, Taguig City, Dasmarinas including their imporant Barangays; sincerely, Judge Florentino Floro, Florentino Floro  Judgefloro 14:00, 26 August 2018 (UTC)
File:0001jfSalapungan Mining Angeles City Pampangafvf 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 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!

P 1 9 9   18:15, 27 August 2018 (UTC)

Good evening, thanks for your message; I have no objection to the deletion, for I admit my oversight in the uploading, very sincerely Judgefloro 13:48, 28 August 2018 (UTC)
Pay attention to copyright
File:487Valenzuela City Metro Manila Roads Landmarks 49.jpg has been marked as a possible copyright violation. Wikimedia Commons only accepts free content—that is, images and other media files that can be used by anyone, for any purpose. Traditional copyright law does not grant these freedoms, and unless noted otherwise, everything you find on the web is copyrighted and not permitted here. For details on what is acceptable, please read Commons:Licensing. You may also find Commons:Copyright rules useful, or you can ask questions about Commons policies at the Commons:Help desk. If you are the copyright holder and the creator of the file, please read Commons:But it's my own work! for tips on how to provide evidence of that.

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


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

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

Diannaa (talk) 21:08, 19 October 2018 (UTC)

Thanks for your message; With all due respect, as former resident of Valenzuela, in Barangay Karuhatan from 1965-1969 St. Vincent’s Seminary, the image is free and I asked permission from the City Hall when I photographed the same, and it is an honor for the politicians, however, I respectfully submit and apology for my mistake in taking the photo, sincerely and best wishes for the Seasons --Judgefloro (taBold textlk)
Commons HelpVery sincerely yours, Judgefloro 11:24, 21 October 2018 (UTC)

Notification about possible deletion

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

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

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

Affected:

And also:

Good morning, and thanks for your message and concern; actually these are gifts to me from my sibbling as just remembrance of affection, I have no objection to the deletion and very sincerely yours, Judgefloro 03:18, 24 October 2018 (UTC)
Category discussion warning

Daing has been listed at Commons:Categories for discussion so that the community can discuss ways in which it should be changed. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry.

If you created this category, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for discussion 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. If the category is up for deletion because it has been superseded, consider the notion that although the category may be deleted, your hard work (which we all greatly appreciate) lives on in the new category.

In all cases, please do not take the category discussion personally. It is never intended as such. Thank you!


Howhontanozaz (talk) 07:25, 24 October 2018 (UTC)

Category discussion warning

Tuyo (dried fish) has been listed at Commons:Categories for discussion so that the community can discuss ways in which it should be changed. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry.

If you created this category, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for discussion 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. If the category is up for deletion because it has been superseded, consider the notion that although the category may be deleted, your hard work (which we all greatly appreciate) lives on in the new category.

In all cases, please do not take the category discussion personally. It is never intended as such. Thank you!


Howhontanozaz (talk) 07:33, 24 October 2018 (UTC)

Good morning, and thanks for your message; actually Tuyo and Daing are the Tagalog or filipino dialect version of Dried fish in the Phillippines, hence it may be merged, very sincerely yours, Judgefloro 07:49, 24 October 2018 (UTC)
العربية  català  čeština  Deutsch  English  español  hrvatski  italiano  slovenščina  Tiếng Việt  беларуская‎  беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎  русский  ไทย  မြန်မာဘာသာ  ပအိုဝ်ႏဘာႏသာႏ  日本語  中文(简体)‎  中文(繁體)‎  فارسی  +/−
Warning sign
This file may be deleted.
A file that you have uploaded to Wikimedia Commons, File:0393jfCatholic Women's League Santo Cristo Pulilan Quasi Parish Chuchfvf 26.jpg, is a derivative work, containing an "image within an image". Examples of such works would include a photograph of a sculpture, a scan of a magazine cover, or a map that has been altered from the original. In each of these cases, the rights of the creator of the original must be considered, as well as those of the creator of the derivative work.

While the description page states who made this derivative work, it currently doesn't specify who created the original work, so the overall copyright status is unclear. If you did not create the original work depicted in this image, you will need to specify the owner of the copyright.

Please edit the file description and add the missing information, or the file may be deleted. If you created the original content yourself, enter this information as the source. If someone else created the content, the source should be the address to the web page where you found it, the name and ISBN of the book you scanned it from, or similar. You should also name the author, provide verifiable information to show that the content is in the public domain or has been published under a free license by its author, and add an appropriate template identifying the public domain or licensing status, if you have not already done so. Please add the required information for this and other files you have uploaded before adding more files. If you need assistance, please ask at the help desk. Thank you!

And also:

Yours sincerely, BevinKacon (talk) 13:55, 8 December 2018 (UTC)

Thanks for your message and good morning from here, Philippines. Actually, I took picture during a meeting of the CWL all over Bulacan and I was given a copy of their humble work as for me to own, for the Feast days. I have no objection to the deletion, very sincerely Judgefloro 04:22, 9 December 2018 (UTC)

Notification about possible deletion

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

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

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

Affected:

And also:

Yours sincerely, xplicit 03:46, 7 January 2019 (UTC)

Thanks for you message and good afternoon from here, Philippines; actually, this is a gift to me by my sibling as memory, and I have no objection to the deletion, very sincerelyJudgefloro 05:36, 7 January 2019 (UTC)

Notification about possible deletion

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

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

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

Affected:


Yours sincerely, Sealle (talk) 04:03, 26 January 2019 (UTC)

Thanks for your message and good afternoon from hereat Philippines; actually these are gifts by my sibling from his vacation for my personal consumption; at any rate, I have no objection to the deletion, very sincerely yours, Judgefloro 05:50, 26 January 2019 (UTC)
File:811Ateneo Art Gallery University 14.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!

Howhontanozaz (talk) 01:46, 27 January 2019 (UTC)

File:811Ateneo Art Gallery University 19.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!

Howhontanozaz (talk) 01:48, 27 January 2019 (UTC)

Notification about possible deletion

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

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

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

Affected:

And also:

Yours sincerely, howhontanozaz Howhontanozaz (talk) 01:57, 27 January 2019 (UTC)

Notification about possible deletion

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

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

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

Affected:

And also:

Yours sincerely, howhontanozaz Howhontanozaz (talk) 02:56, 27 January 2019 (UTC)

Notification about possible deletion

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

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

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

Affected:

And also:

Yours sincerely, Howhontanozaz (talk) 03:21, 27 January 2019 (UTC)

Notification about possible deletion

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

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

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

Affected:


Yours sincerely, Howhontanozaz (talk) 04:04, 27 January 2019 (UTC)

Notification about possible deletion

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

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

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

Affected:

And also:

Yours sincerely, howhontanozaz Howhontanozaz (talk) 04:12, 27 January 2019 (UTC)

Notification about possible deletion

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

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

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

Affected:

And also:

Yours sincerely, Howhontanozaz (talk) 07:47, 27 January 2019 (UTC)


Thanks for all the messages; when I took these pictures I asked permission from the officers, and I was told that taking photos of these are allowed, especially they appear to be for public learning; I respectfully remain very sincerely yours Judgefloro 06:40, 28 January 2019 (UTC)
May I suggest a Written-Formal Query on No Freedom of Panoramana in the Philippines to Director General Josephine Rima-Santiago Considering that a New Director has been appointed replacing Director Blancaflor (who, I presume did not categorically respond on my or your editors' query on No Freedom of Panoramana in the Philippines) it is but just and fitting that Senior editors or sysops of Wikimedia Commons formally submit a written Query on the matter, to settle once and for all whether photos should be deleted or not based on the present rules of Commons on the matter. Director General Josephine Rima-Santiago of Intellectual Property Office of the Philippines Very sincerely Judgefloro 09:43, 28 January 2019 (UTC)

May I suggest a Written-Formal Query on No Freedom of Panoramana in the Philippines to Director General Josephine Rima-Santiago

Considering that a New Director has been appointed replacing Director Blancaflor (who, I presume did not categorically respond on my or your editors' query on No Freedom of Panoramana in the Philippines) it is but just and fitting that Senior editors or sysops of Wikimedia Commons formally submit a written Query on the matter, to settle once and for all whether photos should be deleted or not based on the present rules of Commons on the matter. Director General Josephine Rima-Santiago of Intellectual Property Office of the Philippines Very sincerely Judgefloro 09:38, 28 January 2019 (UTC)

Notification about possible deletion

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

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

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

Affected:

And also:

Yours sincerely, howhontanozaz Howhontanozaz (talk) 16:23, 28 January 2019 (UTC)

Artist Napoleon Abueva died only in 2018. This sculpture would become public domain in the Philippines in 2069. Also, there is no FOP in the Philippines. However, the sculpture is now owned by the Eternal Gardens Memorial Park, hence no copyright subsists; I, as Catholic was given express permission by the Park officers to take photos of this landmark; please note with relevance, that Wikimedia editor Ijon met with Ricardo R. Blancaflor, the Director of the Intellectual Property Office of the Philippines in November 2011, and asked about FoP. The Director said "The law is silent on the matter", and said they are waiting for case law to settle the question one way or another. The matter has not reached the supreme court yet. I wrote a Letter to IPO Director who has not yet responded; Therefore, I am now preparing a Letter to Director General Josephine Rima-Santiago - Re: Request for a Definitive Opinion on Freedom of panorama concerning Wikimedia Commons Photography - Uploading - Publishing vis-a-vis the IP Code of the Philippines (Act No. 8293) (2015 Edition), Chapter VIII ("Limitations on copyright) which does not appear to make any exception for photographs of copyrighted works; at present, I hope that Director General Josephine Rima-Santiago, will respond in due course so that this pending entry for discussion may be solved with justice and equity; very sincerelyJudgefloro 06:24, 29 January 2019 (UTC)

Notification about possible deletion

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

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

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

Affected:

And also:

Yours sincerely, howhontanozaz Howhontanozaz (talk) 16:28, 28 January 2019 (UTC)

Artist Napoleon Abueva died only in 2018. This sculpture would become public domain in the Philippines in 2069. Also, there is no FOP in the Philippines. However, the sculpture is now owned by the Eternal Gardens Memorial Park, hence no copyright subsists; I, as Catholic was given express permission by the Park officers to take photos of this landmark; please note with relevance, that Wikimedia editor Ijon met with Ricardo R. Blancaflor, the Director of the Intellectual Property Office of the Philippines in November 2011, and asked about FoP. The Director said "The law is silent on the matter", and said they are waiting for case law to settle the question one way or another. The matter has not reached the supreme court yet. I wrote a Letter to IPO Director who has not yet responded; Therefore, I am now preparing a Letter to Director General Josephine Rima-Santiago - Re: Request for a Definitive Opinion on Freedom of panorama concerning Wikimedia Commons Photography - Uploading - Publishing vis-a-vis the IP Code of the Philippines (Act No. 8293) (2015 Edition), Chapter VIII ("Limitations on copyright) which does not appear to make any exception for photographs of copyrighted works; at present, I hope that Director General Josephine Rima-Santiago, will respond in due course so that this pending entry for discussion may be solved with justice and equity; very sincerelyJudgefloro 06:25, 29 January 2019 (UTC)

Category:Letter to Josephine Rima-Santiago (Philippines)

Considering that a New Director has been appointed replacing Director Blancaflor (who, I presume did not categorically respond on my or your editors' query on No Freedom of Panoramana in the Philippines) it is but just and fitting that Rulings on these Deletion of images entries be held in abeyance for the sake of Wisdom of future Users and global learners of Wikimedia Commons; today, I formally submitted a written Query on the matter, to settle once and for all whether photos should be deleted or not based on the present rules of Commons on the matter. Director General Josephine Rima-Santiago of Intellectual Property Office of the Philippines
Letter to Intellectual Property Office (Philippines) IPO Director General Josephine Rima-Santiago (Philippines) 6 pages Letter from Judge Florentino V. Floro, Jr. or User:Judgefloro regardings Commons:Freedom of panorama specifically Freedom of panorama Philippines Re: Request for a Definitive Opinion on Freedom of panorama concerning Wikimedia Commons Photography - Uploading - Publishing vis-a-vis the IP Code of the Philippines (Act No. 8293) (2015 Edition), Chapter VIII ("Limitations on copyright) which does not appear to make any exception for photographs of copyrighted works. This letter is mailed today via LBC mail as evidenced by Category:LBC Express receipts Very sincerely yours, Judgefloro 08:21, 29 January 2019 (UTC)
File:FvfBustosPark0400 05.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!

Howhontanozaz (talk) 10:56, 31 January 2019 (UTC)

Thanks for your message; these photos were taken during the Minasa Festival of Bustos; I proceeded to the Tourism office which is in the Mayor's Office; I was granted express permission by the Mayor's Office to take photos not only this Municipal Compound but all the landmarks of Bustos for Commons; note that the subjects of these photos were transferred absolutely to the ownership of the Municipal Government hence, as owned by Bustos Government, it is in the Public Domain and expressly exempted from Copyright law prohibitions Judgefloro 11:15, 31 January 2019 (UTC)
File:09796jfHeritage Park Bustos Municipal Hall Bulacanfvf 15.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!

Howhontanozaz (talk) 11:04, 31 January 2019 (UTC)

Thanks for your message; these photos were taken during the Minasa Festival of Bustos; I proceeded to the Tourism office which is in the Mayor's Office; I was granted express permission by the Mayor's Office to take photos not only this Municipal Compound but all the landmarks of Bustos for Commons; note that the subjects of these photos were transferred absolutely to the ownership of the Municipal Government hence, as owned by Bustos Government, it is in the Public Domain and expressly exempted from Copyright law prohibitions Judgefloro 11:16, 31 January 2019 (UTC)

Notification about possible deletion

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

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

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

Affected:

And also:

Yours sincerely, howhontanozaz Howhontanozaz (talk) 10:37, 31 January 2019 (UTC)

Thanks for your message; these photos were taken during the Minasa Festival of Bustos; I proceeded to the Tourism office which is in the Mayor's Office; I was granted express permission by the Mayor's Office to take photos not only this Municipal Compound but all the landmarks of Bustos for Commons; note that the subjects of these photos were transferred absolutely to the ownership of the Municipal Government hence, as owned by Bustos Government, it is in the Public Domain Judgefloro 11:13, 31 January 2019 (UTC)

Category:Letter-Permit to-from Arnel F. Mendoza (Philippines)

Consolidated Reply and Argument: I was expressly permitted and even assisted by the Officers of Bustos Mayor's Office to take photos
On 21 July 2017, I took photos of the exterior and all inside the interiors of the Heritage Park, Library, Museum, BMA Monument, Sports & Community Centers and Municipal Offices (Bustos Municipal Hall) including the memorabilia in the Library and works of Conrado Garcia Mercado, Sigrid Mercado and Portia Mercado, like the Last Stand, Cocoon, Eggmans Dome, Takipsilim and the likes in the Heritage Park which is part of the BMA Shrine. Bustos, Bulacan
Before I took these pictures, as courtesy, during the Minasa Festivals, I went to your Tourism office and asked permission for photography of Bustos and their landmarks including all in the Municipal Compound, specifically the Heritage Park, Library, Museum, BMA Monument, Sports & Community Centers and Municipal Offices (Bustos Municipal Hall) including the works of the Conrados. The Conrados are architects-artists and were native; they donated or transferred to the Bustos Municipal Government and the BMA Shrine absolutely and all these are now owned and maintained by your administration and government. As such the Shrine is considered a work of your government and according to the Intellectual Property Code of the Philippines, no copyright subsists in works of the government. This also applies to when the Philippine government was part of the United States during the time the shrine was designed. As far as I know, Filipino architects don't mind any pictures of their works, even where posted on the Net, and they are even thankful to those who remember them and take photos of their legacy, works for the education of future Filipinos. On February 1, 2019, as express permission and ratification of grant of permission to previous photography, Mayor-his Office Arnel F. Mendoza issued herein Editor an Official written Permit granting the Filed Letter-Request dated February 1, 2019 of herein editor; therefore, in accordance with Philippine Copyright Law vis-a-vis Civil Code of the Philippines, the subject of the photos are within the jurisdiction, administration and ownership of Bustos Municipal Government, hence, not within the prohibition of the Laws, due to the Permit Granted, Sincerely, I hereby Oppose the Deletion, with all due respect Judgefloro 08:37, 1 February 2019 (UTC)
File:09781jfHeritage Park Bustos Municipal Hall Bulacanfvf 10.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!

Howhontanozaz (talk) 10:53, 31 January 2019 (UTC)

Thanks for your message; these photos were taken during the Minasa Festival of Bustos; I proceeded to the Tourism office which is in the Mayor's Office; I was granted express permission by the Mayor's Office to take photos not only this Municipal Compound but all the landmarks of Bustos for Commons; note that the subjects of these photos were transferred absolutely to the ownership of the Municipal Government hence, as owned by Bustos Government, it is in the Public Domain and expressly exempted from Copyright law prohibitions Judgefloro 11:14, 31 January 2019 (UTC)

Category:Letter-Permit to-from Arnel F. Mendoza (Philippines)

Consolidated Reply and Argument: I was expressly permitted and even assisted by the Officers of Bustos Mayor's Office to take photos
On 21 July 2017, I took photos of the exterior and all inside the interiors of the Heritage Park, Library, Museum, BMA Monument, Sports & Community Centers and Municipal Offices (Bustos Municipal Hall) including the memorabilia in the Library and works of Conrado Garcia Mercado, Sigrid Mercado and Portia Mercado, like the Last Stand, Cocoon, Eggmans Dome, Takipsilim and the likes in the Heritage Park which is part of the BMA Shrine. Bustos, Bulacan
Before I took these pictures, as courtesy, during the Minasa Festivals, I went to your Tourism office and asked permission for photography of Bustos and their landmarks including all in the Municipal Compound, specifically the Heritage Park, Library, Museum, BMA Monument, Sports & Community Centers and Municipal Offices (Bustos Municipal Hall) including the works of the Conrados. The Conrados are architects-artists and were native; they donated or transferred to the Bustos Municipal Government and the BMA Shrine absolutely and all these are now owned and maintained by your administration and government. As such the Shrine is considered a work of your government and according to the Intellectual Property Code of the Philippines, no copyright subsists in works of the government. This also applies to when the Philippine government was part of the United States during the time the shrine was designed. As far as I know, Filipino architects don't mind any pictures of their works, even where posted on the Net, and they are even thankful to those who remember them and take photos of their legacy, works for the education of future Filipinos. On February 1, 2019, as express permission and ratification of grant of permission to previous photography, Mayor-his Office Arnel F. Mendoza issued herein Editor an Official written Permit granting the Filed Letter-Request dated February 1, 2019 of herein editor; therefore, in accordance with Philippine Copyright Law vis-a-vis Civil Code of the Philippines, the subject of the photos are within the jurisdiction, administration and ownership of Bustos Municipal Government, hence, not within the prohibition of the Laws, due to the Permit Granted, Sincerely, I hereby Oppose the Deletion, with all due respect Judgefloro 08:36, 1 February 2019 (UTC)
File:09796jfHeritage Park Bustos Municipal Hall Bulacanfvf 16.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!

Howhontanozaz (talk) 11:06, 31 January 2019 (UTC)

Consolidated Reply and Argument: I was expressly permitted and even assisted by the Officers of Bustos Mayor's Office to take photos

Thanks for your message; these photos were taken during the Minasa Festival of Bustos; I proceeded to the Tourism office which is in the Mayor's Office; I was granted express permission by the Mayor's Office to take photos not only this Municipal Compound but all the landmarks of Bustos for Commons; I was then asking them for photos of Alexis Santos and Mayor Thelma Santos; I was even assisted by them in some of the photo-taking; note that the subjects of these photos were transferred absolutely to the ownership of the Municipal Government hence, as owned by Bustos Government, it is in the Public Domain and expressly exempted from Copyright law prohibitions; note also that I did not take photos of properties still owned by the artists: under Philippine Civil Laws, specifically Ownership and its accessory rigths, as such, under the Rules of Statutory Construction, the special provisions of General Law, the Civil Code prevails over the general provisions of Specific Law, the Copyrights law; for this reason, Director Blancaflor stated that the Copyright law is silent on the Matter; however, I differ with him since he did not respond to my Written Petition to Issue Legal Opinion; hence I forthwith wrote and did Petiion the New Director General, thusly:

Category:Letter to Josephine Rima-Santiago (Philippines)

Considering that a New Director has been appointed replacing Director Blancaflor (who, I presume did not categorically respond on my or your editors' query on No Freedom of Panoramana in the Philippines) it is but just and fitting that Rulings on these Deletion of images entries be held in abeyance for the sake of Wisdom of future Users and global learners of Wikimedia Commons; today, I formally submitted a written Query on the matter, to settle once and for all whether photos should be deleted or not based on the present rules of Commons on the matter. Director General Josephine Rima-Santiago of Intellectual Property Office of the Philippines
Letter to Intellectual Property Office (Philippines) IPO Director General Josephine Rima-Santiago (Philippines) 6 pages Letter from Judge Florentino V. Floro, Jr. or User:Judgefloro regardings Commons:Freedom of panorama specifically Freedom of panorama Philippines Re: Request for a Definitive Opinion on Freedom of panorama concerning Wikimedia Commons Photography - Uploading - Publishing vis-a-vis the IP Code of the Philippines (Act No. 8293) (2015 Edition), Chapter VIII ("Limitations on copyright) which does not appear to make any exception for photographs of copyrighted works. This letter is mailed today via LBC mail as evidenced by Category:LBC Express receipts Very sincerely yours, Judgefloro 08:21, 29 January 2019 (UTC) Judgefloro 11:24, 31 January 2019 (UTC)

Category:Letter-Permit to-from Arnel F. Mendoza (Philippines)

Consolidated Reply and Argument: I was expressly permitted and even assisted by the Officers of Bustos Mayor's Office to take photos
On 21 July 2017, I took photos of the exterior and all inside the interiors of the Heritage Park, Library, Museum, BMA Monument, Sports & Community Centers and Municipal Offices (Bustos Municipal Hall) including the memorabilia in the Library and works of Conrado Garcia Mercado, Sigrid Mercado and Portia Mercado, like the Last Stand, Cocoon, Eggmans Dome, Takipsilim and the likes in the Heritage Park which is part of the BMA Shrine. Bustos, Bulacan
Before I took these pictures, as courtesy, during the Minasa Festivals, I went to your Tourism office and asked permission for photography of Bustos and their landmarks including all in the Municipal Compound, specifically the Heritage Park, Library, Museum, BMA Monument, Sports & Community Centers and Municipal Offices (Bustos Municipal Hall) including the works of the Conrados. The Conrados are architects-artists and were native; they donated or transferred to the Bustos Municipal Government and the BMA Shrine absolutely and all these are now owned and maintained by your administration and government. As such the Shrine is considered a work of your government and according to the Intellectual Property Code of the Philippines, no copyright subsists in works of the government. This also applies to when the Philippine government was part of the United States during the time the shrine was designed. As far as I know, Filipino architects don't mind any pictures of their works, even where posted on the Net, and they are even thankful to those who remember them and take photos of their legacy, works for the education of future Filipinos. On February 1, 2019, as express permission and ratification of grant of permission to previous photography, Mayor-his Office Arnel F. Mendoza issued herein Editor an Official written Permit granting the Filed Letter-Request dated February 1, 2019 of herein editor; therefore, in accordance with Philippine Copyright Law vis-a-vis Civil Code of the Philippines, the subject of the photos are within the jurisdiction, administration and ownership of Bustos Municipal Government, hence, not within the prohibition of the Laws, due to the Permit Granted, Sincerely, I hereby Oppose the Deletion, with all due respect Judgefloro 08:33, 1 February 2019 (UTC)

Notification about possible deletion

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

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

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

Affected:

And also:

Yours sincerely, howhontanozaz Howhontanozaz (talk) 16:03, 28 January 2019 (UTC)

Artist Napoleon Abueva died only in 2018. This sculpture would become public domain in the Philippines in 2069. Also, there is no FOP in the Philippines. However, the sculpture is now owned by the Roman Catholic Diocese Las Piñas Church hence, no copyright subsists; I, as Catholic was given express permission by Church officers to take photos of this landmark,; please note with relevance, that Wikimedia editor Ijon met with Ricardo R. Blancaflor, the Director of the Intellectual Property Office of the Philippines in November 2011, and asked about FoP. The Director said "The law is silent on the matter", and said they are waiting for case law to settle the question one way or another. The matter has not reached the supreme court yet. I wrote a Letter to IPO Director who has not yet responded; Therefore, I am now preparing a Letter to Director General Josephine Rima-Santiago - Re: Request for a Definitive Opinion on Freedom of panorama concerning Wikimedia Commons Photography - Uploading - Publishing vis-a-vis the IP Code of the Philippines (Act No. 8293) (2015 Edition), Chapter VIII ("Limitations on copyright) which does not appear to make any exception for photographs of copyrighted works; at present, I hope that Director General Josephine Rima-Santiago, will respond in due course so that this pending entry for discussion may be solved with justice and equity; very sincerelyJudgefloro 06:21, 29 January 2019 (UTC)
Good morning; I would like to differ in your interpretation of this quoted proviso of the law; in fact there is no jurisprudence yet on this proviso and all the matter of FoP as stated by Director Blancaflor, since the law is silent due to lack of case elevated in the Supreme Court; the 1987 Constitution must be the applicable law prevailing over this proviso you quoted; the separtion of Church and state is exemplified in the Absolute ownership of Church properties by the Roman Catholic Diocese like here; the works here, the statues, are now owned by the Church and as Catholic member I or we co-owned them; in fact, I was expressly permitted to take photos of the entire compound of the Las Pinas Church as I even paid fees to visit the Museum and Bamboo organ; no copyright subsists in all the properties of the Roman Catholic Diocese or Bishop; thus Commons can take judicial notice and no need of proof, that all Catholic Churches and compounds are title in the name of Roman Catholic Diocese and under the Property Registration Decree, the Bishop exercises total control over the property, here, of the statue, very sincerelyJudgefloro 03:51, 4 February 2019 (UTC)

Re: Letter to Josephine Rima-Santiago (Philippines) and Freedom of Panorama in the Philippines

Good day, user Judgefloro!

I would like to show my support on your effort to find a conclusive answer on the debate of Freedom of Panorama in the Philippines.

I would also like to express my gratitude for your contributions as they are of great help to us common folks in preserving and expanding our knowledge on the culture and identity of us Filipinos.

Hoping that we get a proper response on this matter once and for all.

Regards,

Markoolio97 (talk) 01:35, 4 February 2019 (UTC)

Thanks for your kindness and good morning from hereat Bulacan; I am planning to personally talk to IPO Director General as I did last time and talked with its high officer Atty. Limbo who stated that there is nothing wrong with my taking photos on FoP subjects, since it was his boss Dir. Blancaflor who opined that the Copyright law is silent on the matter, hence, until the Supreme Court rules on the matter En Banc or by Division, FoP or this freedom to take photos is allowed in the Philippines; thus, Dir. Blancaflor did not respond to my filed written letter; but this new Directress General may respond to my letter by my planned personal appearance;
May I ask you to review my letter since it appears garbled or hard to comprehend as the Law is; in layman's works, if you please, please write down here 1 or 2 paragraphs, keep it short, addendum or supplement to my letter so that I can file a new one, in your own works or with help of your Commons editors-friends, sum up what this FoP means and what we stand for, so that the Directress may respond forthwith and understand our situation vis-a-vis, the Law, very sincerelyJudgefloro 04:02, 4 February 2019 (UTC)

Re: February 5, 2019 Reply-Acknowledgement Letter-Receipt of-by the IPO Directress General's Office Josephine Rima-Santiago to Judge Floro, promising to Act on the Letter to Josephine Rima-Santiago (Philippines) and Freedom of Panorama in the Philippines

Today, the I received the IPO Directress General's Office Reply-Acknowledgement Receipt stating that the IPO Office of the Director General will Act and issue Reply-Legal Opinion on Judge Florentino Floro's Letter on Freedom of Panorama in the Philippines; it is now in Meycauayan, Bulacan and I will upload the letter and its contents here in Commons once I go to Meycauayan, I therefore ask the Administrators and editors to await the Ruling of the IPO Office on Freedom of Panorama for the benefit of Commons very Sincerely Judgefloro 05:09, 6 February 2019 (UTC)

Category:Letter (Receipt-Appropriate Action-Feedback) of the Intellectual Property Office of the Philippines (Marou Eduarte - of Josephine Rima-Santiago to Florentino Floro

Considering that a New Director has been appointed replacing Director Blancaflor (who, I presume did not categorically respond on my or your editors' query on No Freedom of Panoramana in the Philippines) it is but just and fitting that Rulings on these Deletion of images entries be held in abeyance for the sake of Wisdom of future Users and global learners of Wikimedia Commons; on January 30, 2019, Judge Floro formally submitted a written Query on the matter, to settle once and for all whether photos should be deleted or not based on the present rules of Commons on the matter in the light of IPO-Laws on Copyright of the Philippines Director General Josephine Rima-Santiago of Intellectual Property Office of the Philippines
Letter to Intellectual Property Office (Philippines) IPO Director General Josephine Rima-Santiago (Philippines) 6 pages Letter from Judge Florentino V. Floro, Jr. or User:Judgefloro regardings Commons:Freedom of panorama specifically Freedom of panorama Philippines Re: Request for a Definitive Opinion on Freedom of panorama concerning Wikimedia Commons Photography - Uploading - Publishing vis-a-vis the IP Code of the Philippines (Act No. 8293) (2015 Edition), Chapter VIII ("Limitations on copyright) which does not appear to make any exception for photographs of copyrighted works. This letter is mailed today via LBC mail as evidenced by Category:LBC Express receipts
Letter (Receipt-Appropriate Action-Feedback) of the Intellectual Property Office of the Philippines (Marou Eduarte - of Josephine Rima-Santiago to Florentino Floro - dated January 30, 2019 - stating that her IPO Office received Judge Floro's letter dated January 30, 2019 and regarding the latter's "Request for a Definitive Opinion on Freedom of panorama concerning Wikimedia Commons Photography - Uploading - Publishing vis-a-vis the IP Code of the Philippines (Act No. 8293) (2015 Edition), Chapter VIII ("Limitations on copyright”) which does not appear to make any exception for photographs of copyrighted works." The IPO Office stated that Appropriate Action-Feedback will be issued in due course by the IPO as it referred this matter to its subordinate Bureau of the Intellectual Property Office (Philippines) Judgefloro 10:39, 9 February 2019 (UTC)

Notification about possible deletion

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

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

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

Affected:

And also:

Yours sincerely, Howhontanozaz Howhontanozaz (talk) 15:28, 21 February 2019 (UTC)

I would like to differ in the application, interpretation of the cited Article Sec. 172 of the IP Code of the Philippines, for the following reasons: in Statutory construction, the spirit and intent of the Copyright law in its related provisions should be looked into so as not to make absurd the Section; in this case the IFI church paid all the labors and works of the architect, and all the foreman and manual laborers to build the church; the same can be said of all thousands of churches in the Philippines; as in our Catholic church, the Bishop of the Roman Catholic Diocese owns as Corporate entity all the properties of the Church irrespective of who crafted or built the church; in fact a Parish cannot be created and the Church cannot be consecrated if the architect, laborers and lot owner will not transfer title to the Bishop; this is the difference between the moral rights of the Copyright holder and one who lost all his rights when he is paid his job or works by the Bishop or Diocese; hence, the IFI has control and jurisdiction over the Cathedral; I respectfully oppose the deletion, for this is a National Treasure Church, very sincerelyJudgefloro 01:07, 23 February 2019 (UTC)
Cathedral of the Holy Child Architect Carlos D. Arguelles work Groundbreaking 1964 blessed and inaugurated on May 8, 1969 213.4. In case of works of applied art the protection shall be for a period of twenty-five (25) years from the date of making - hence, assuming for the sake of argument that Arguelles has moral rights over the facade of his works, the term of such right expired by prescriptive period provided by the cited section 25 years after 1969 or in 1994; with these 2 reasons, I humbly oppose the deletion for lack of legal basis, very sincerly respectfully submitted Judgefloro 05:56, 25 February 2019 (UTC)
File:880San Isidro, Laur, Nueva Ecija 05.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!

Patrick Rogel (talk) 17:46, 2 March 2019 (UTC)

Good morning from hereat Philippines, thanks for your message; actually the part of the primary school is painted by ordinary laborers paid about 400 pesos or 8 dollars per day by municipal government, at any rate I have no objection to the deletion, respectfully submitted and sincerely Judgefloro 01:43, 4 March 2019 (UTC)
File:04739jfQuezon City Experience Circle Heritage Hoursfvf 17.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!

.     Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 13:00, 17 March 2019 (UTC)

Good morning from hereat beautiful Philippines; thanks for your message; respectfully submitted regarding the nominations, and sincerelyJudgefloro 02:46, 18 March 2019 (UTC)
With all due respect, allow me to share some points on labor in the Philippines, thus: workers or laborers, skilled or semi-skilled are paid per day or monthly or per piece of work; in this photo, the work has been done by shops performed by semi-skilled ordinary workers and not artists, since the owner of the subject desires to put some words into the place like markers, commemoratives; therefore, there is no copyright or what ever right in the work, for it is just a sign, very sincerely Judgefloro 08:17, 18 March 2019 (UTC)

Notification about possible deletion

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

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

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

Affected:

And also:

Yours sincerely, -Howhontanozaz (talk) 13:26, 20 March 2019 (UTC) Howhontanozaz (talk) 13:26, 20 March 2019 (UTC)