User talk:Kameraad Pjotr/Archive1b

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.

Flag of the Hlinka Gard

Hello, Pjotr! Can you please tell me why you have deleted the flag of the Hlinka Gard? --80.121.218.238 21:18, 29 July 2009 (UTC)

Hello,
I'm sorry, but what image exactly are you discussing? If you could give me the exact filename, I would be happy to help.
Kind regards, Kameraad Pjotr 19:26, 30 July 2009 (UTC)

Picture deleted

Hi Kameraad!

You deleted a picture because "Licensing#Material under the fair use clause is not allowed on Commons|Fair use claims are not permitted on"

Can we tackle the problem the other way around? What is needed to have the "right" to use this picture? Would a "hotlink" be ok? Groetjes, Clément.

Hello,
I'm afraid the only way to be legally able to use this picture is to obtain permission from the copyright holder to use the image under a free license and send to to OTRS.
Kind regards, Kameraad Pjotr 19:42, 30 July 2009 (UTC)

File:Kumon_Method_Logo.svg

Hi Kameraad Pjotr. I just saw you deleted this image claimimh it's a copyvio. Though it is a trademarked logo it is made of a typeface and simple shapes to meet the Threshold of originality. See the US law below

The following are examples of works not subject to copyright and applications for registration of such works cannot be entertained:

(a) Words and short phrases such as names, titles, and slogans; familiar symbols or designs; mere variations of typographic ornamentation, lettering or coloring; mere listing of ingredients or contents;

(b) Ideas, plans, methods, systems, or devices, as distinguished from the particular manner in which they are expressed or described in a writing;

(c) Blank forms, such as time cards, graph paper, account books, diaries, bank checks, scorecards, address books, report forms, order forms and the like, which are designed for recording information and do not in themselves convey information;

(d) Works consisting entirely of information that is common property containing no original authorship, such as, for example: Standard calendars, height and weight charts, tape measures and rulers, schedules of sporting events, and lists or tables taken from public documents or other common sources.

(e) Typeface as typeface.

Also see Image_casebook Trademarks. Under theses conditions Commons allows logos. That's why we have the Category:Logos and the licenses {{PD-textlogo}}, {{PD-text}}, {{PD-shape}} and the warning tag {{trademark}}. If you still think this image is not simple enough I'm gonna open an UR so we can discuss it. Best regards. Mizunoryu 大熊猫❤小熊猫 (talk) 20:55, 31 July 2009 (UTC)

Hello,
I'm afraid I disagree with you. The problem is the face-shaped 'o', which I'm afraid meets the threshold of originality and is thus protected by copyright. Of course you are free to open a UR if my answer does not satisfy you.
Kind regards, Kameraad Pjotr 21:14, 31 July 2009 (UTC)

Nah! That's no problem. Everybody has the right to think different. I already opened the request here. Regards. Mizunoryu 大熊猫❤小熊猫 (talk) 21:54, 31 July 2009 (UTC)


Alexis Sánchez Picture

I need know the reason of why this picture File:Sanche1.jpg was erase of commons. The Picture was taking by a normal camera. The Imagen no was taking of a magazine or any newspaper. Is a Original Work.

The reason is for was retouched by photoshop?

Greetings

Andre el gigante (talk) 16:12, 1 August 2009 (UTC)

Hello,
I'm sorry, but I seem to have made a mistake. I have restored the image. I apologize for my mistake.
Kind regards, Kameraad Pjotr 18:14, 1 August 2009 (UTC)

Commons:Deletion requests/File:Snoopdogg.jpg

I'm quite sure this is own work Ok, but why? Usually when you think something is the case, you add comment like the rest of us instead of closing it (unless you give some policy-based reason or find some new unarguable evidence). I'm not protesting this closure because I think it's been open for a reasonable amount of time and no one's voiced opposition, but I would like to encourage you to give more thorough reasoning in the future. How sure you are is implied by your action to close it in the first place, but it's irrelevant without a reason why you're "quite" sure. Thanks. Rocket000 (talk) 01:42, 2 August 2009 (UTC)

P.S. Please change the description page to have a valid source. And adding the author would be good too. Rocket000 (talk) 01:49, 2 August 2009 (UTC)
Hello,
All done.
Kameraad Pjotr 12:33, 2 August 2009 (UTC)
Thanks! Cheers, Rocket000 (talk) 15:29, 2 August 2009 (UTC)

reopened Commons:Deletion requests/File:Tanguitocolgado.jpg

I have reopened Commons:Deletion requests/File:Tanguitocolgado.jpg, because I think your reason for closing is not enough. --ALE! ¿…? 17:15, 2 August 2009 (UTC)

Keep up the good work!

Working Man's Barnstar.png For your never ending work to cleanup old DR's you deserve this barnstar! --MGA73 (talk) 21:32, 3 August 2009 (UTC)
Tnx! I'll try to close some more, but I'm rather busy with my 'holiday job' (I don't know the English word for this). Kameraad Pjotr 18:58, 4 August 2009 (UTC)

Please...

...close this deletion debate of an image that was correctly deleted by you recently. --High Contrast (talk) 19:43, 7 August 2009 (UTC)

What?

You deleted my image File:Bauchet European clusters.png claiming that "fair use is not permitted at the commons", but:

1/ I never made any claim of fair use.
2/ This image was entirely my own work.
3/ In the original paper no similar image exists.
4/ I made the image from data included in the paper, that is I used information in the paper to produce an image. That is equivalent to, for example, taking a set of data from a scientific paper and making a bar graph from it. The data are not copyright and the bar-graph I make is my work. The map I made was my work, only the data came from the paper. There is no copyright infringement in that.
5/ I can find no discussion regarding deletion of this image.

Apparently you have deleted this image because you believed a fair use rational had been used to upload it, but no such rational was used. This image was created by me, and no one else. You don't seem to have got your facts correct and have acted without apparently even knowing the license that the image was uploaded under. Please correct your mistake. Alun (talk) 06:02, 10 August 2009 (UTC)

Hello,
I have some more questions before I can undelete the image. Who created the map of Europe in the background?
Kind regards, Kameraad Pjotr 19:14, 10 August 2009 (UTC)
It is from the commons. Alun (talk)
This one File:Europe location.png. Cheers. Alun (talk) 12:44, 11 August 2009 (UTC)
Hello,
I have restored the image now the status of the map is sorted. I had however, to change the license to the one used on the map, as it is 'share-alike', which means you can't change the license. I hope that's all right.
Kind regards, Kameraad Pjotr 19:29, 11 August 2009 (UTC)
Have to ask. Why the "migration=not-eligible"? --MGA73 (talk) 19:44, 11 August 2009 (UTC)
Because the image already has a cc-by-sa license (2.0-de), AFAIK relicensing can only be done using a 3.0 license. (I'm not entirely sure, so if it is wrong, feel free to remove it). Kameraad Pjotr 18:37, 13 August 2009 (UTC)
Thanks Pjotr, I appreciate it. Alun (talk) 12:52, 13 August 2009 (UTC)

File:Tour_de_france_2005_20th_stage_02.jpg

If we think the permission is ok. Should the "User:FlickreviewR/reviewed-fail..." not be removed then? Otherwise it will still be in a "bad category". --MGA73 (talk) 19:50, 16 August 2009 (UTC)

Done, cheers. Kameraad Pjotr 16:52, 17 August 2009 (UTC)

fop

Some new FOP violations to be erased

Latvia:

Estonia

--Avala (talk) 18:36, 25 August 2009 (UTC)

Photo of Bobbie Koek, Dutch actress

Dear Komrad, I uploaded this file: http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Bobbie_Koek_by_David_Cohen_de_Lara.jpg and sent an email to permissions-commons@wikimedia.org. The mail in witch the author gave his consent for the Attribution 3.0 license is in Dutch, so would you mind to take a look? Every info you might need is in that mail sent to permissions-commons@wikimedia.org. If you need anything more, I'd be happy to hear from you. --Klaasjan-o (talk) 13:52, 28 August 2009 (UTC)

Hello,
I'm sorry, but I have currently no access to the OTRS network due to computer problems. When I can access OTRS again, I will look into your request.
Kind regards, Kameraad Pjotr 10:04, 5 September 2009 (UTC)

Diagrama_CP_Lisboa.fv+0606.jpg

So, you delete this. You think it is «Copyright violation: Derivative work.» Derivative? A photo of no reproduction quality showing a diagram publicly available for cummuter’s information? And then you say it might be FOP? You have nothing better to do? Tuvalkin (talk) 10:23, 3 September 2009 (UTC)

Hello,
The fact that something is publicly available does not mean there are no copyright restrictions on it. It is certainly a derivative work and, if freedom of panorama does not apply, then it cannot be used at commons without permission of the copyright holder. More information is available at Commons:Licensing.
Kind regards, Kameraad Pjotr 10:04, 5 September 2009 (UTC)

Logo but available ?

Hello. You recently deleted the File:HC Sparta Prague - logo.gif (a red "S") cause it's a non free logo. But it seem's to bee available if you considere the Threshold_of_originality. Don't you think so ? --Supertoff (talk) 16:49, 21 August 2009 (UTC)

Hello,
I'm not entirely sure that it does not pass the threshold of originality. I suggest you bring up this case at the village pump, because I'm not 100% sure.
Kind regards, Kameraad Pjotr 10:04, 5 September 2009 (UTC)

File:Barclay de Tolly Tartu01.JPG

Statue was created by Vasily Demut-Malinovsky (1779-1846) in 1849 et:Barclay de Tolly monument. But picture is deleted. Why? --Rünno (talk) 10:16, 5 September 2009 (UTC)

Beste Kameraad Pjotr, ik schrik hier een beetje van. Je hebt blijkbaar een hele hoop standbeelden verwijderd zonder ook maar de uploaders op de hoogte te stellen! Multichill (talk) 10:26, 5 September 2009 (UTC)
I agree with Rünno. Barclay de Tolly's monument was designed by Vasily Demut-Malinovsky (he died 163 years ago) and Apollon Shtshedrin (died also in 19th century). Their works are in public domain.--90.190.139.232 10:56, 5 September 2009 (UTC)

Tip: Categorizing images

Afrikaans | العربية | беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ | català | čeština | dansk | Deutsch | Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ | Ελληνικά | English | Esperanto | español | فارسی | suomi | français | galego | עברית | magyar | íslenska | italiano | 日本語 | ქართული | 한국어 | македонски | മലയാളം | Plattdüütsch | Nederlands | norsk | polski | português | português do Brasil | română | русский | slovenčina | slovenščina | српски / srpski | svenska | українська | Tiếng Việt | 中文 | 中文(简体)‎ | 中文(繁體)‎ | +/−


Hello, Kameraad Pjotr!

Tip: Add categories to your images

Thanks a lot for contributing to the Wikimedia Commons! Here's a tip to make your uploads more useful: Why not add some categories to describe them? This will help more people to find and use them.

Here's how:

1) If you're using the UploadWizard, you can add categories to each file when you describe it. Just click "more options" for the file and add the categories which make sense:

Uploadwizard-categories.png

2) You can also pick the file from your list of uploads, edit the file description page, and manually add the category code at the end of the page.

[[Category:Category name]]

For example, if you are uploading a diagram showing the orbits of comets, you add the following code:

[[Category:Astronomical diagrams]]
[[Category:Comets]]

This will make the diagram show up in the categories "Astronomical diagrams" and "Comets".

When picking categories, try to choose a specific category ("Astronomical diagrams") over a generic one ("Illustrations").

Thanks again for your uploads! More information about categorization can be found in Commons:Categories, and don't hesitate to leave a note on the help desk.

BotMultichillT 17:09, 7 September 2009 (UTC)


File:GrandeArche-LaDéfense-SE.JPG

Commons-emblem-issue.svg File:GrandeArche-LaDéfense-SE.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)‎ | +/−

--Yaroslav Blanter (talk) 08:55, 17 September 2009 (UTC)

Italian stamp

According to this log you deleted a 1917 Italian stamp I uploaded, without any discussion, deletion nomination or notification to me, claiming that {{PD-Old}} did not apply. No matter what way the discussion would have gone I think it was a bit inconsiderate of you to not even notify the uploader. According to Commons:Stamps/Public domain templates this template is used for just such 70+ year old stamps. Please explain why you did not discuss or notify, so others, including myself, could contribute. This is a government work so do you suggest that, because they (usually) never really cease, the copyright is indefinite? I don't think so. Ww2censor (talk) 17:35, 17 September 2009 (UTC)

Today I started an undeletion request at Commons:Undeletion requests/Current requests#File:Stamp Italy 1917airmailC1.png. Ww2censor (talk) 18:32, 19 September 2009 (UTC)

File:Karateka2.JPG

Commons-emblem-issue.svg File:Karateka2.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)‎ | +/−

--Oliver Kurmis (talk) 17:50, 18 September 2009 (UTC)

Chemotaxis history

Dear Kamerad, it is just a note, about the removal of the montage about chemotaxis history from the page 'Chemotaxis' - as majority of the article and figure were made by me. Have you checked the 'history' of the figure also before removing the part? All of the pages made or edited by me were attacked by a german member of Wiki, who was asking others also to attack my pages on the basis of ethical reasons. (However, there was only a scientific problem about removal of a term in a paragraph...) Anyway, the figure mentioned above and removed by you was also attacked. I have submitted all materials from the owners of copyright. It was listed and mailed to the wiki moderator and was accepted. I guess you have missed this point of the story. However, it is the past, so I am not very sad - if wiki is working on this level of accuracy. Best regards from 193.224.49.38 15:16, 22 September 2009 (UTC)

Some things just won't go away...

I thought you might be interested in Commons:Deletion requests/File:Flag of Ghaznavid Empire.svg. Some things just keep repeating themselves over and over. Fut.Perf. 17:04, 2 November 2009 (UTC)