User_Talk:Kevin Payravi

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


Welcome to Kevin Payravi's Talk Page

Userpage - Talkpage - Email - Contributions - Uploads

Posting Here

Feel free to leave me a message here. Questions, comments, suggestions, and requests are all welcome. I'm human, and I do make mistakes – please feel free to point out any that I've made.

If the matter is one that requires more privacy (or if it is just more convenient for you), you may always email me if you wish.



Before leaving a message…
New messages go at the bottom of the page.
Remember to sign using "~~~~"



Welcome to Wikimedia Commons, SuperHamster!

Contents

COM:AWB[edit]

Hello. You've been approved for COM:AWB. Enjoy! Let me know if there is a problem. Wknight94 talk 02:06, 30 December 2009 (UTC)

Thanks, I appreciate it. ~Kevin Payravi (Talk) 04:08, 30 December 2009 (UTC)

Files you uploaded may be deleted[edit]

The files listed below, which you uploaded, have been tagged {{OTRS pending}} for more than 30 days. This tag indicates that an email setting out permission to use the file was sent to the OTRS team. Unfortunately, we cannot find any record that such an email has been received, and accordingly the file remains without permission. Unless the OTRS team receives evidence that permission has been granted within 15 days of today’s date, the file will be deleted. If you have already sent the permission, please re-send it to "permissions-commons@wikimedia.org" now. Please quote the file name in your email. At the same time, please leave a message at the OTRS noticeboard so that a volunteer can follow this up. Alternatively, you can contact an OTRS volunteer directly. Please note that this message is being left by an automated bot, whose operator is not an OTRS volunteer, therefore please do not send this information to me, as it will not save your images from deletion. Thanks for your time! Please help translate this message! HersfoldOTRSBot(talk/opt out) 01:00, 21 March 2010 (UTC)

Commercial packaging[edit]

It has to do with Commons:Derivative works and the "copyrightability" of the original packaging. If a given packaging has a simple design with a text logo, it cannot be copyrighted, so it is OK to make photos (derivative work) of it, even without permission. If it has complex designs (such as the ones you are pointing to), the packaging can be copyrighted, and it will be copyrighted unless otherwise expressed by its author(s). Copyrighted material can be uploaded here only if we get a proper permission or the copyright owner publishes it under a free enough license.

The argument "there are other similar images over here" cannot be accepted: maybe those images are not so similar (simple "uncopyrightable" designs vs. complex copyrighted ones), or maybe those images are also affected by the same problem and should be deleted too. Regards. --Dodo (talk) 07:40, 21 May 2010 (UTC)

I know that the argument "there are other similar images over here" cannot be accepted to prevent deletion; I meant to state that as merely an observation and to ask a question. Thanks for your explanation. ~Kevin Payravi (Talk) 10:29, 21 May 2010 (UTC)

File:Maid of the Mist IV.jpg[edit]

Hi Kevin,

I noticed that your custom template prevents the new buttons (Download, Use this file, Use this file, Email, Information) to appear. A change like this allows them to appear, but make us loose the special design of the custom template. Not sure what to think of it. --  Docu  at 10:43, 12 March 2011 (UTC)

I see, thanks for pointing that out. The reason why I made the custom template was that I never really liked the standard Information template (though I confess, my custom template isn't anything to gaze at, either). If my custom template prevents the new buttons from appearing, though, I'd be fine with converting all my files’ descriptions to the standard Information template. I'll try to get that done sometime today. Thanks, ~Kevin Payravi (Talk) 16:49, 12 March 2011 (UTC)

File:Bacon WikiCup 2011 Medal.svg[edit]

Беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ | Български | Català | Čeština | Dansk | Deutsch | Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ | Ελληνικά | English | Esperanto | Español | فارسی | Suomi | Français | Galego | Magyar | Íslenska | Italiano | 日本語 | Македонски | മലയാളം | Nederlands | Norsk nynorsk | Polski | Português | Português do Brasil | Русский | Slovenščina | Svenska | Українська | 中文(简体)‎ | 中文(繁體)‎ | +/−


There seems to be a problem regarding the description and/or licensing of this particular file. It has been found that you've added in the image's description only a Template that's not a license and although it provides useful information about the image, it's not a valid license. Could you please resolve this problem, adding the license in the image linked above? You can edit the description page and change the text. Uploading a new version of the file does not change the description of the file. This page may give you more hints on which license to choose. Thank you.

This message was added automatically by Nikbot, if you need some help about it please read the text above again and follow the links in it, if you still need help ask at the ? Commons:Help desk in any language you like to use. --Nikbot

Pictogram voting keep.svg Fixed ~Kevin Payravi (Talk) 03:30, 30 March 2011 (UTC)

File:Single Blueberry.jpg[edit]

Hi, just wanted to let you know that a photo of yours was used in the Swedish newspaper "Fria Tidningen" to illustrate an article about Thai people travelling to Sweden to pick blueberries: http://www.fria.nu/artikel/88942 Thuresson (talk) 18:44, 11 July 2011 (UTC)

Oh wow, I like how they made the flag :) Thanks for the notification. ~Kevin Payravi (Talk) 18:12, 12 July 2011 (UTC)

Go On Red[edit]

My band, go on red, would like to use File:LED traffic light on red.jpg and wanted to inform you.

Great! Thanks for letting me know. ~Kevin Payravi (Talk) 05:03, 12 December 2011 (UTC)

Beiqi_Foton_Motor_logo.png[edit]

Hello Kevin, the file that I uploaded doesn't have any copyright violation. I work for Foton Motor and my boss gave me the logo to update the one on Wikipedia. Which kind of document will be necessary to certificate this? Thank you. Shan (talk)

Hi Shan – please take a look at the various tips and notices placed on your talk page. While your boss may have given you the file the upload to the Commons, it most likely does not meet the licensing requirements here on the Commons. Files uploaded here are required to be free – by uploading the file under the CC-BY-SA file you did, you are giving everyone the right to use the logo, for any reason (including commercial), with the only requirement to attribute the creator of the file. Rarely are company logos licensed in such a way, as companies usually want to hold the fully copyright to their own logos.
If you are sure that your company would like to license their logo under the free license you chose, you'll need to send the permission to the Commons using our OTRS. This acts as a record that the file is licensed correctly.
Most likely, though, your company still wishes to retain full copyright of their logo. The best option, then, will be to upload the file to Wikipedia itself under the claim of fair use, not the Commons. The English Wikipedia is able to host non-free files in specific cases where non-free equivalents cannot exist, such as company logos, movie scenes, etc.
If you have any questions or need clarification, feel free to ask. Thanks, ~Kevin Payravi (Talk) 20:04, 24 December 2013 (UTC)

Question[edit]

Hi Kevin

I am putting a training Manual regarding Manual Handling together and would like to use your image. However I do not understand the commons thing at all and I have repeatedly read it. Therefore sorry for being so cheeky but would you let me know what to re the attribution.

Many Thanks Debbie — Preceding unsigned comment added by Debbie harry (talk • contribs) 20:27, 8 February 2014 (UTC) (UTC)

Hi @Debbie harry: All images on the Commons have (or should have) their licensing information available on their file page. I license my images under the CC-BY-SA 3.0 license, which basically means you can use my images freely, as long as you release the image under the same (or similar) license, and attribute me. If you could attribute my image as "Kevin Payravi, Wikimedia Commons (CC-BY-SA 3.0)", that'd be fine with me! It doesn't matter to me where you place it -you could place the attribution in the image in vicinity of the image, or in a designated credits section elsewhere. Hope this clears things up! ~Kevin Payravi (Talk) 22:13, 8 February 2014 (UTC)

File tagging File:Darwin Falls long exposure.jpg[edit]

Беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ | Català | Čeština | Dansk | Deutsch | Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ | Ελληνικά | English | Español | فارسی | Suomi | Français | Galego | עברית | Hrvatski | Magyar | Հայերեն | Italiano | 日本語 | 한국어 | Lietuvių | Македонски | മലയാളം | Plattdüütsch | Nederlands | Norsk bokmål | Polski | Português | Română | Русский | Sicilianu | Slovenčina | Slovenščina | Svenska | Türkçe | Українська | اردو | Tiếng Việt | 中文(简体)‎ | 中文(繁體)‎ | +/−
Warning sign
This media was probably deleted.
Thanks for uploading File:Darwin Falls long exposure.jpg. This media is missing permission information. A source is given, but there is no proof that the author or copyright holder agreed to license the file under the given license. Please provide a link to an appropriate webpage with license information, or send an email with copy of a written permission to OTRS (permissions-commons@wikimedia.org). This also applies if you are the author yourself.

Please see this page for more information on how to confirm permission, and Commons:Permission if you would like to understand why we ask for permission when uploading work that is not your own.

The file probably has been deleted. If you sent a permission, try to send it again after 14 days. Do not re-upload. When the OTRS-member processes your mail, the file can be undeleted. Additionally you can request undeletion here, providing a link to the File-page on Commons where it was uploaded ([[:File:Darwin Falls long exposure.jpg]]) and the above demanded information in your request.

TLSuda (talk) 00:28, 12 May 2014 (UTC)

File source is not properly indicated: File:İbrahimxəlil xan.jpg[edit]

Düzəltdim. --Samral (talk) 12:01, 26 May 2014 (UTC)

File tagging File:Cəmil Həsənli 2013 seçki təbliğat şəkli.jpg[edit]

Şəkilin sahibi şəkili rəsmi facebook səhifəsində hər kəsə açıq formada paylaşmışdır. Official page of Jamil Hasanli Bu da əsas verir ki, şəkil bura da yüklənsin.--Samral (talk) 12:04, 26 May 2014 (UTC)

Hi – just because a picture is on Facebook doesn't mean that it is freely licensed. The source of the image must explicitly state the free license the photo is under for it be usable on the Commons. See Commons:Licensing for more info. Thanks, ~Kevin Payravi (Talk) 18:24, 26 May 2014 (UTC)

Image query[edit]

不要移除文件。 DFSDFGDFGDFGDFGDFG (talk) 09:45, 11 June 2014 (UTC)

Hi DFSDFGDFGDFGDFGDFG – thanks for the barnstar, but please make any remarks as to why you think your file shouldn't be deleted here. ~Kevin Payravi (Talk) 19:08, 11 June 2014 (UTC)

去掉通知,去掉提出请求文件然后再清理掉文件。 DFSDFGDFGDFGDFGDFG (talk) 03:56, 12 June 2014 (UTC)

Automatronic company[edit]

Hi Kevin,

I would like to know why have you refused the logo of the automatronic company, and how can I get it back ?

Best regards,

Antoine, — Preceding unsigned comment added by France91100 (talk • contribs) 07:16, 26 June 2014 (UTC) (UTC)

@France91100: Hi there, and sorry for the wait in getting my response! The messages I left on your talk page explain the reason behind the files’ deletion. The Wikimedia Commons is a repository of freely licensed media that anyone can be use, for any purpose. Assumingly, the logo you uploaded is copyrighted (if not, we need proof that it is freely licensed). I suggest checking out the links in my messages on your talk page for further info. If you have any more questions, feel free to ask. Thanks, ~Kevin Payravi (talk) 18:52, 29 June 2014 (UTC)

File:Butterball Turkey Bacon Package.jpg[edit]

Commons-emblem-issue.svg File:Butterball Turkey Bacon Package.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)‎ | +/−

Josve05a (talk) 19:44, 19 December 2014 (UTC)

File:Package of Oscar Mayer Turkey Bacon.jpg[edit]

Commons-emblem-issue.svg File:Package of Oscar Mayer Turkey Bacon.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)‎ | +/−

Josve05a (talk) 19:45, 19 December 2014 (UTC)

File:All Messier objects.jpg[edit]

What exactly is wrong with this? The user left a CC sign thing on bottom right Tetra quark (talk) 12:22, 26 January 2015 (UTC)

@Tetra quark: Well, the first problem is that you tagged the image as being in the public domain (CC0) instead of the correct license.
Here is the list of the six CC licenses (not including CC0). Works on the Wikimedia Commons need to be available for commercial use; as a result, three of the six CC licenses available cannot be used on the Commons. The work you uploaded didn't allow for commercial use. If you have any questions, let me know! Thanks, ~Kevin Payravi (talk) 20:14, 26 January 2015 (UTC)
@Kevin Payravi: I do. The owner of the compilation, per my request, said he is adding this tag now. He will update his blog (the source) with this new image with this new tag. I believe it'd be ok, right? Tetra quark (talk) 02:18, 27 January 2015 (UTC)
@Tetra quark: Sure, that'd be perfectly fine (as long as the image itself is also clearly updated as being under the new license). ~Kevin Payravi (talk) 02:19, 27 January 2015 (UTC)

IOIO Derivations[edit]

When the original images were deleted, my derivations were also deleted. Now that the originals have licenses (see below), can you please restore my derivations too? Also, is this cropped image correctly uploaded? (license, etc) Wonderfl (talk) 10:05, 13 August 2015 (UTC)

The original images are here:

The derivations images are here:

I've also messaged User:Green Giant about this.

Wonderfl (talk) 15:38, 15 August 2015 (UTC)

Hey @Wonderfl: NIce job getting things in order! Regarding restoring the derivatives: since I'm not an admin here, I unfortunately can't restore deleted images. Green Giant is an admin, however, so I'll leave that to them. As for File:IOIO OTG Cropped.jpg: The license you placed is CC BY-SA 4.0, but the original is CC BY-SA 3.0. You also marked the author as yourself, even though SparkFun is the one who created the original work. I've made some fixes with this edit. ~Kevin Payravi (talk) 15:47, 15 August 2015 (UTC)
Thanks for all the help. Everything’s done as of now. Wonderfl (talk) 10:10, 18 August 2015 (UTC)

[edit]

Hi Kevin – Yes the {{PD-ineligible}} would fit better than the CC license in this case. Many thanks for the notification. :) --Ericmetro (talk) 07:38, 4 March 2016 (UTC)

@Ericmetro: Done, thank you! ~Kevin Payravi (talk) 05:50, 6 March 2016 (UTC)

Kevin’s Fusion Reactor[edit]

Hello Kevin. I am fascinated by your high school fusion experiment and picture shown here on Wikipedia. I would love if you had some sort of paper that described what you did and how you did it. Things like Fuel source, ignition, power measurements… you know, the things that tell the world how you got it to work and what it does. Can you please post it here. Thank you, George. (I don't have an account yet, sorry). — Preceding unsigned comment added by 73.209.84.82 (talk • contribs) 19:24, 17 March 2016‎ (UTC) (UTC)

Hi George! Apologies if it wasn't clear from the image’s description, but this fusion reactor was created by a friend of mine named Will Jack. I've updated the image’s description to clarify this. Will wrote up two blog posts detailing on two iterations of his reactor: MK II and MKI III. I hope that helps! ~Kevin Payravi (talk) 19:30, 17 March 2016 (UTC)

User page[edit]

why was my entire page user/tetrahydrate deleted⁇⁇⁇?

Hi @Tetrahydrate: Your user page wasn't deleted; it’s viewable at the English Wikipedia. You're on the Wikimedia Commons right now, and userpages are not shared between Wikipedia and the Commons. The only things that were deleted were the screenshots from Undertale, since they were screenshots of a copyrighted video game. The Commons is a repository of freely licensed images, and as a result we cannot accept copyrighted content. If you have any more questions, let me know! ~Kevin Payravi (talk) 15:37, 6 April 2016 (UTC)

Remix of a picture[edit]

Dear Kevin, I would like to use your graphic as a motive on t-shirts for corporate sport team. Can I do it free of charge? Best regards, Joanna —Preceding unsigned comment was added by 195.60.216.126 (talk) 06:46, 10 May 2016 (UTC)

Note: Responded on Facebook. ~Kevin Payravi (talk) 22:02, 11 May 2016 (UTC)

You incorrectly deleted two of my images[edit]

You might have wanted to reach out before deleting two of my images related to Pokemon Go. I am an editor with about 30 years of experience in media. Those images (which I created myself using a tool Nintendo created for that purpose) didn't even come close to violating copyrights. Similar images have been used in news stories around the world in the past week. --Jdmdetroit1 (talk) 13:40, 15 July 2016 (UTC)

Hi @Jdmdetroit1: Thanks for contacting me. The issue here is copyright; Nintendo et al. own the copyright to the Pokemon visual in your image. Even if Nintendo provides a way to take a screenshot of the game and share it, that doesn't mean that they are granting you the copyright over their artwork, nor are they granting you the right to share the work under a free license here on the Commons. Taking a screenshot of a copyrighted work counts as a derivative work, and is subject to the copyrights of the original work. Journalists frequently use copyrighted images (including Pokemon Go screenshots) either through some kind of press agreement, and/or under a claim of fair use. ~Kevin Payravi (talk) 14:02, 15 July 2016 (UTC)

The use of those images was fair use by any standard. The image was included inside an original image created by me. If I took a photo of a building and that building had a corporate logo on it, would it be deleted from Wikimedia as a copyright violation? Of course not. Earlier, I uploaded a photo of a bicycle. That bicycle is marked with copyrighted logos of its manufacturer. Was that a violation? Again, of course not. The same principle applies here.

I can guarantee you that no journalist using screenshots of Pokemon in the "augmented real world" are first contacting Nintendo for permission to do so. How can I say that? Because I have nearly 30 years’ experience working in newsrooms and I have dealt with issues like this before. With all due respect, your profile identifies you as a 19-year-old computer science student. It doesn't mention any newsroom experience at all. So, when you talk about what "journalists frequently" do, you are really just making a guess based on nothing. When I tell you what journalists do, it’s based on direct experience that dates to a period before you were born. --Jdmdetroit1 (talk) 14:15, 15 July 2016 (UTC)jdmdetroit1

@Jdmdetroit1: There is a fundamental misunderstanding on the purpose of the Commons. The Commons serves as a repository of freely licensed images and other media; in other words, we host images that have been licensed in a way that lets anyone use the image for nearly any purpose. As a result, we don't host non-free images, which leads to the point that we don't host media under a claim of fair use. Most (not all) Wikipedia projects do let you upload photos under a claim of fair use, for the purpose of illustrating a subject like Pokemon Go. The Commons doesn't exist to serve that purpose, however.
The point you bring up about taking a photo of a building with a corporate logo is a good one – except in those images, de minimis is a valid argument. In this case, I'd wager that the Pokemon was the image’s focus, main purpose, and proportionally a large part of the image.
I appreciate your expertise in journalism (not so much your dismissal of my argument based on my age), but we're on the Commons, which has its own purpose and set of policies that I am trying to inform you of. I never said journalists are contacting Nintendo first, and I completely agree that no journalist is doing so. Notice the and/or that I mentioned regarding journalists using images, and note that I was not referring solely to Nintendo in this case. (and not that it matters, but I'm 21 – thanks for reminding me to update my age). ~Kevin Payravi (talk) 14:24, 15 July 2016 (UTC)

I am sorry that you don't understand that decades of direct experience actually means something and that you apparently think that someone with zero experience in a field can claim to be an expert just because they want to.

I posted those images because I knew that bloggers and small publications were writing about Pokemon GO, but there were no really pertinent images on Wikimedia Commons related to this important cultural phenomenon. So, I generated two images that show what the gameplay looks like. Editorially, they tell something about the story. And because they were intended for editorial and non-commercial use, they do not violate anybody’s copyright. If everybody interpreted copyright law the way you do, a whole lot of journalism would be shut down. Again, I can guarantee that, when news organizations around the world used and distributed photos like this from the NY Times: https://static01.nyt.com/images/2016/07/12/insider/12-Insider-Pokemon-Photo/12-Insider-Pokemon-Photo-master675.jpg, they didn't send a letter to Nintendo asking for permission.

By denying a right to post images like the ones I have posted, you are forcing bloggers and others to pay for very similar images created by organizations that did not get any more permission than I did.

I really think decisions like this should be made by experienced people with at least some first-hand knowledge of journalism. --Jdmdetroit1 (talk) 14:51, 15 July 2016 (UTC)jdmdetroit1

@Jdmdetroit1: You mention that the images are "intended for editorial and non-commercial use". This is the point I'm trying to drive at: the Commons only hosts free images that allow anyone to use the image for nearly any purpose, including commercial use. I understand fair use, and I know that any journalist using a screenshot of Pokemon Go in a news article is doing so under a valid claim of fair use. That’s totally fine, but that is irrelevant here. We're on the Commons, which has its own rules and its own goals. If we want to bring age into this, I have worked on the Commons much longer than you have. We're not an image repository for journalists (as much as they are welcome to use our images); we exist to host freely-licensed images of educational value. Please review Commons:Fair use, which is our official policy that describes that we do not host images under fair use. ~Kevin Payravi (talk) 14:58, 15 July 2016 (UTC)
Likewise, the reason I tagged your images as a copyright violation is that you placed them under a license that does allow for commercial use. ~Kevin Payravi (talk) 15:05, 15 July 2016 (UTC)

Yeah, well… By no standard was that image a copyright violation any more than a photo of the Citgo sign in Boston would be. But you probably know that.

A couple of years ago, I tried to be active here at Wikimedia Commons. I was chased away by abusive comments. It’s clear to me that there is a really awful culture in this organization that treats "newbies" with contempt and tries to maintain the control of a insular group of people who like the opportunity this site gives them to exercise a petty little bit of power and abuse people with impunity. So, you folks look for any kind of nitpicky reason to chase people out. You folks also keep this user-unfriendly so that you can dismiss anyone who doesn't figure out all the byzantine stuff involved with using it.

Two years ago, I apparently created the "wrong kind" of user page. And instead of just explaining that to me and helping me out, Wikimedia’s moderators heaped insults on me. In short, I really, really like what Wikimedia is trying to do. But a lot of the people doing it have the wrong motives and the wrong attitude for this work. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jdmdetroit1 (talk • contribs) 15:15, 15 July 2016 (UTC)

@Jdmdetroit1: Again, I agree that the image would qualify for fair use for journalistic purposes. But that’s not our purpose here on the Commons; by uploading a copyrighted image under a free license, you do commit a copyright violation, as you cannot license the image on behalf of Nintendo.
I understand the difficulty for new editors to try and get involved on Wikimedia Projects. The projects are complicated and have a countless list of rules and guidelines, and many new editors often do find themselves dealing with editors who aren't patient and/or willing to explain. And that’s a problem, because it drives editors away from the project and created a toxic atmosphere. Perhaps you think I fell under that category – maybe I did, or perhaps I didn't do an effective job of explaining the situation. But would you not say I attempted to offer you a fair explanation of the Commons’ rules, along with links to the relevant policies? My goal is to help you figure out all that byzantine stuff; it is up to you to review it and ask questions about it, rather than dismiss it based on my age or whatever lack of expertise in journalism you see. As hard as it may be to grasp Commons’ policy, it’s just as hard to explain it when a chief argument against my replies has to do with my age. I didn't try to chase you out or be nitpicky. The Commons has a responsibility of ensuring that images here fall into the project’s scope and don't violate copyright. You are absolutely more than welcome to edit and contribute to any Wikimedia project (and I'd encourage you to!), but that also requires the willingness to learn from other editors and review each project’s policies when required. ~Kevin Payravi (talk) 15:26, 15 July 2016 (UTC)

File:Participating Countries WLM 2016.svg[edit]

Kevin, I suggest you to colour the entire US map instead of merely Ohio state. --Saqib (talk) 17:47, 29 August 2016 (UTC)

Hi @Saqib: The reason I originally colored only Ohio was because only Ohio was participating, and we did not want to confuse anyone by having them think the entire country was participating - but, we have since moved to hosting it nation-wide and I've updated the map accordingly :) Thanks! ~Kevin Payravi (talk) 17:40, 2 September 2016 (UTC)

Editing pics[edit]

Hi I wanted to know if I can edit a pic before posting it for the competition. Thank you — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dcoons (talk • contribs) 01:20, 08 September 2016 (UTC)

Replied via e-mail. ~Kevin Payravi (talk) 01:09, 13 September 2016 (UTC)

Wiki Loves Monuments 2016 in the United States[edit]

Hi Kevin, I just found out about Wiki loves monuments, and I posted three pictures (I have more) of the Vietnam Veterans Monument in Albany, NY, that I took on my phone. They went to the default "Cultural heritage monuments in the United States." I would like to move the pictures to the existing category of "Monuments and Memorials in Albany, New York" and possibly x-posting in the existing category "Cultural heritage monuments in New York". Could you do this for me, and in the future is there a way for me to move and x-reference them myself? Also, under "Monuments and Memorials in Albany, New York" could there be a sub-category created titled Vietnam Veterans Monument? Again, in the future, would it be possible for me to create sub-categories myself if I think that would be the place for them? Thanks, John White (user name Drbones1950). — Preceding unsigned comment added by Drbones1950 (talk • contribs) 01:23, 09 September 2016 (UTC)

Replied via e-mail. ~Kevin Payravi (talk) 01:08, 13 September 2016 (UTC)

Florida[edit]

Hi Kevin, I just wanted to point out that "Florida" is unambiguous and does not need "(U.S. state)". So Category:Images from Wiki Loves Monuments 2016 in Florida (U.S. state) should be moved to Category:Images from Wiki Loves Monuments 2016 in Florida and the corresponding labs page should be updated to have Florida use the correct category. Also, I notice you've been updating the arg passed to {{Wiki Loves Monuments 2016}} to include the state; will this be corrected in the upload tool eventually? Must be tedious to do all that for every uploaded image (semi-)manually. Face-smile.svg -- King of ♠ 05:59, 12 September 2016 (UTC)

Hi @King of Hearts: Good catch, thanks! I'll take care of the category. IIRC, I chose to disambiguate it for consistency reasons, due to Category:Cultural heritage monuments in Florida belonging to Uruguay - but I don't think I actually checked whether Category:Images from Wiki Loves Monuments 2016 in Florida was already in use. As for the template arguments, I'm working with the international team to come up with an alternate solution to my recent changes clogging sprees. Thank you! ~Kevin Payravi (talk) 18:57, 12 September 2016 (UTC)
I believe that the U.S. state is widely accepted as the primary topic; c.f. Commons, English Wikipedia, and even the Spanish Wikipedia. So the Uruguay category ought to have parentheses while the U.S. state can stand alone at Category:Cultural heritage monuments in Florida. -- King of ♠ 23:21, 12 September 2016 (UTC)
@King of Hearts: Great, thanks - I've fixed the "Images from..." category. Will take a look at the "Cultural heritage..." ones when I get the chance. Cheers, ~Kevin Payravi (talk) 05:40, 17 September 2016 (UTC)

Another issue - could you please remove Category:National Register of Historic Places from the categories automatically added to photos uploaded using http://tools.wmflabs.org/wlm-us/? Along with {{NRHP}} (which puts it in Category:National Register of Historic Places with known IDs) it's resulting in overcategorization, causing users to have to remove it. Thanks. -- King of ♠ 17:59, 18 September 2016 (UTC)

@King of Hearts: ✓ Done and thanks; I'll have some time in the next few days to also help with cleanup. ~Kevin Payravi (talk) 18:07, 18 September 2016 (UTC)

Commons:Wiki Loves Monuments 2016 in the United States[edit]

Kevin, Nikikana, Addis, thank you for your effort in organizing this contest. It has provided some good images in the past. It has, however, also provided some embarrassments -- while the instructions on photographing copyrighted works on the subject page are good, the US rules have a variety of twists that are no always obvious and many newbies simply don't believe that, for example, the Korean War Veterans Memorial is under copyright.

Therefore, I suggest strongly that before you announce the winners, you have one or more experienced Commons Admins look over the ten images to ensure that they are all, in fact properly licensed. .     Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 13:36, 15 September 2016 (UTC)

Hi @Jameslwoodward: Thanks for the great suggestion! I am (to the best of my self-diagnosing knowledge) familiar with our freedom of panorama laws and am slowly marking copyvios as they come in, but we can definitely get at least one pair of outside administrator eyes when it comes down to the finalists. Would you by chance be interested in being one of those pairs of eyes? ~Kevin Payravi (talk) 13:44, 15 September 2016 (UTC)
Sure. BTW, I noted the comment from Drbones1950 above on the monument in Albany and have just put a DR on his images -- different sculptor from the monument in DC, but the same reasoning applies. See Commons:Deletion requests/File:Albany Vietnam Veteran Memorial.jpg. .     Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 14:07, 15 September 2016 (UTC)
@Jameslwoodward: Great catch - and thanks! I'll be sure to reach out to you when the time comes. If you also know of any other administrators who are knowledgeable in the area, do feel free to recommend them. Thanks, ~Kevin Payravi (talk) 05:38, 17 September 2016 (UTC)

Category:Ohio Historical Markers with known IDs[edit]

You have moved this category, but you haven't emptied it. This work can't be done by Bot, because this category depends on templates. Fix it, please. Wieralee (talk) 17:11, 20 September 2016 (UTC)

Hi @Wieralee: Correct me if I'm wrong, but I believe the category is empty (see file's categories and what links here). I've assumed that the category is showing up as non-empty due to cache, so I've been waiting for the cache to update. Thanks, ~Kevin Payravi (talk) 17:40, 20 September 2016 (UTC)
@Wieralee: When categorizing through templates, sometimes changes to categories take some time to reflect. See this section for some more details. I'll take a closer look, but I'm almost positive that it's a caching issue that will resolve itself soon. ~Kevin Payravi (talk) 18:04, 20 September 2016 (UTC)

Posting the "Worlds Children Peace Monument" in WIKI LOVES MONUMENTS[edit]

Hi Kevin, I posted the Worlds Children Peace Monument located in Berea, Ohio in Wiki Loves Monuments. But I think I did something wrong because I have been informed that it will/was be deleted. This is a public monument and possible the only one promoted by the State of Ohio, Department of Tourism: http://www.ohio.org/destination/art-exhibitsexhibitions/worlds-children-peace-monument-wcpm I think it is important that it should be listed in Wikipedia because it is the anchor stone of the new coast-to-coast Great American Peace Trail.

As one Ohioan to another, can you help me fix this entry? Or maybe suggest someone who is familiar with Wikipedia rules and regulations to assist in this posting? This WCPM topic should not be deleted just because the people lack know how to do it correctly.

I know your time is important to you, but I would like to hear your opinion. Thank You, Renate Jakupca Kommunityingrid

(personal email: rjakupca@sbcglobal.net) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kommunityingrid (talk • contribs) 14:13, 21 September 2016 (UTC)

Hi @Kommunityingrid: Sorry to hear about the troubles! I see two concerns regarding the images you uploaded:
  • With files such as File:OHIO_Recognizes_The_ARK_in_Berea.jpg and File:Map of the ARK in Berea.jpg, it appears you're taking works that others have created and uploading them to the Commons. Since the Commons only accepts freely licensed media, you cannot take others' work and release it under a free license without permission.
  • If you did take some of the photos (such as File:ARK in Berea Historical Marker.jpg), the issue here is that the photo is of a copyrighted work. Ohio Historical Markers that were erected in or after 1978 are copyrighted, so most photos of them cannot be released under a free license.
Let me know if you have any questions or if I can help in any way. ~Kevin Payravi (talk) 18:07, 21 September 2016 (UTC)

Wlm 2016[edit]

Thank you very much for your message! With many greetings from Germany, Barbara — Preceding unsigned comment added by Naturliebhaberin (talk • contribs) 14:37, 21 September 2016 (UTC)

@Naturliebhaberin: No problem - thank you for participating! ~Kevin Payravi (talk) 18:18, 21 September 2016 (UTC)

Deletion requests[edit]

Please, do delete these images. I did not know they are copyrighted Ohio Historical Markers from 2003.

   File:Malabar Farm 02.jpg
   File:Malabar Farm 03.jpg
   File:Over-the-Rhine Historic District 30.jpg

Sorry for the inconvenience.

Niagara66 (talk) Niagara66

@Niagara66: No problem! Copyright with these things can be tricky. They'll be deleted in time, no worries. Thanks, ~Kevin Payravi (talk) 22:09, 21 September 2016 (UTC)

kevin payravi[edit]

HI Kevin my name nyquan chestnut I'M new at this web site can you tell me about this — Preceding unsigned comment added by Zyquez (talk • contribs) 17:41, 22 September 2016 (UTC)

Some baklava for you![edit]

Baklava - Turkish special, 80-ply.JPEG i love food Zyquez (talk) 17:45, 22 September 2016 (UTC)

renaming photo file[edit]

Kevin, your instructions for renaming my photo were quite clear, but when I went to the Edit page, I did not see anything like "==Summary==line." Melissa Stewart — Preceding unsigned comment added by MelissaMStewart (talk • contribs) 00:36, 23 September 2016 (UTC)

@MelissaMStewart: Hi there! My bad - the line you should look for is =={{int:filedesc}}==. Let me know if you run into something! ~Kevin Payravi (talk) 00:41, 23 September 2016 (UTC)

how are the users notified if their photo wins something[edit]

I'm referring to the wiki loves monuments contest. Also is there a way to know how many views a submitted photo has?

Thanks Rebecaluvsbirds (talk) 07:46, 26 September 2016 (UTC)

Hi @Rebecaluvsbirds: We will be leaving a message on a user's talk page, as well as emailing them. I've also updated our information on the event page with these details. Thanks! ~Kevin Payravi (talk) 03:53, 28 September 2016 (UTC)

Adding updated photos and information to Wikipeda[edit]

Kevin, I have discovered two entries for the monuments contest with great photos however, they are ten years old. In addition there is no actual data about these two items. I would like to submit both sets of photographs for each entry and the extra data. Can this been done and still win the contest?

Thank you. Patricia (Dallas, TX) —Preceding unsigned comment was added by 2602:306:CFBC:6D80:F53C:985:AA88:2457 (talk) 15:30, 27 September 2016 (UTC)

Hi Patricia! Regarding the dates of the photos: photos for the contest can be taken at any time, they just need to be uploaded to the Commons during the month of September.
Could you provide a bit more detail on what you'd like to do? If you are interested in adding details to the existing entries, feel free to edit the file pages and add information! The photos (and their original uploaders) would be eligible for the contest.
Otherwise, if you are interested in uploading your own photos featuring those particular sites, feel free to! We accept multiple photos of the same site. Thanks, ~Kevin Payravi (talk) 03:56, 28 September 2016 (UTC)

Historic sites for WLM[edit]

Thanks, but I'm not interested; I contribute images regardless of the season, so it's not as if I'm particularly doing it because of WLM. Nyttend (talk) 11:44, 1 October 2016 (UTC)

@Nyttend: Fair enough - thanks! ~Kevin Payravi (talk) 01:09, 2 October 2016 (UTC)

Identity confirmation[edit]

Kevin,

I have received your email about the copyright release of Washington_Monument_by_JDO.jpg a picture taken by myself and uploaded to the Wikimedia commons by myself.

I have sent an email generated by the OTRS. However it does not ask for ID or any form of identification. Should I send another email for that?

I do have an email account from my school, but it is not linked to my Wikimedia account. How can I use it to validate my identity?

Thanks,

Julian Diaz —Preceding unsigned comment was added by 12.251.217.166 (talk) 19:15, 31 October 2016 (UTC)

Hi Julian - thank you for the quick response! You may send another email for that - you may attach a photo, and please mention the file name. Let me know if you have any other questions! ~Kevin Payravi (talk) 19:19, 31 October 2016 (UTC)

Wiki Loves Monuments 2016 in the United States – Results![edit]

LUSITANA WLM 2011 d.svg This user participated in Wiki Loves Monuments 2016.

Want to show your participation in Wiki Loves Monuments 2016? Add {{User Wiki Loves Monuments 2016}} to your userpage!
Wiki Loves Monuments 2016 in the United States - Logo (text under).svg

Thank you for contributing to Wiki Loves Monuments 2016 in the United States during the month of October! The United States contest saw over 1,700 people contribute over 11,000 great photos of cultural and historic sites from all over the United States and its territories. In addition to National Register of Historic Places sites, we welcomed uploads of sites designated by state- and local-level historical institutions and societies. Hundreds of these photos are already being used to illustrate Wikipedia articles!

We're excited to announce that our national judging process has concluded, and that we have selected the winners of Wiki Loves Monuments 2016 in the United States! We were amazed by all of the uploads, and regret having to narrow it down to just 10. That being said – congratulations to our national winners and their amazing shots! Our 10 winners will be sent to the international Wiki Loves Monuments jury, who will then select the winners of the international contest. If you're interested in seeing the winners of the other various national contests as they are announced, you may do so at Wiki Loves Monuments 2016 winners.

Finally, we have also created a feedback form for all participants in the United States to fill out. The survey is optional and anonymous, and only takes a minute or two – we hope to use the feedback to organize better events in the future!

Once again, thank you for participating in Wiki Loves Monuments 2016, and we hope to see you again for future Commons photography events! ~Kevin Payravi (talk) 06:28, 2 November 2016 (UTC)

Please, delete the following photos:

Malabar Farm 02.jpg Malabar Farm 03.jpg Over-the-Rhine Historic District 30.jpg

I didn't know there was a problem. Sorry for the trouble!

Niagara66 (talk) 11:12, 3 November 2016 (UTC) Niagara66

Share your experience and feedback as a Wikimedian in this global survey[edit]

  1. This survey is primarily meant to get feedback on the Wikimedia Foundation's current work, not long-term strategy.
  2. Legal stuff: No purchase necessary. Must be the age of majority to participate. Sponsored by the Wikimedia Foundation located at 149 New Montgomery, San Francisco, CA, USA, 94105. Ends January 31, 2017. Void where prohibited. Click here for contest rules.

Your feedback matters: Final reminder to take the global Wikimedia survey[edit]

(Sorry to write in Engilsh)

Wiki Loves Monuments Results[edit]

Mr. Payravi,

Hello I was surprised and very disappointed to see the 10th place winning photo of Mission San José y San Miguel de Aguayo in San Antonio. It is amazing that in all the photos you received, that a photo of this monument was in the top ten. I am thrilled about that!

File:Missions_of_San_Antonio_99.jpg|https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Missions_of_San_Antonio_99.jpg

I cannot find the photos I submitted online, but the photo I submitted of this mission was a far better photo than the one you chose. I would ask you to please look at my photo again and reconsider. I realize I am not a professional photographer but my photo is much better and I thought this was an amateur contest. I uploaded the files again.

https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Mission_San_Jos%C3%A9_y_San_Miguel_de_Aguayo.jpg

Thank you for your attention. Steve Yount

Hi @Sbyount: Thanks for reaching out to me! You can view all your past uploads here. In the future, you can access this page by clicking on the "Uploads" link at the top-right of any page while logged in. You may also select the "Contributions" link, which will take you to a list of all your previous uploads and edits.
Regarding the results of Wiki Loves Monuments in the United States: You can see how our winners were selected at Commons:Wiki Loves Monuments 2016 in the United States/Winners. 11,000+ uploads went through three rounds of judging. The winners of each round were determined by panels of judges of various backgrounds (including artists, photographers, historians, etc). With 11,000 images to go through, this process was designed to be as fair as possible to all candidates, while bringing on-board diverse groups of judges with various backgrounds, perspectives, and preferences.
Regarding changing the winner: The winners were selected back in 2016, and I've never heard of a contest that replaces winners after-the-fact due to preference. Please keep in mind that for a contest like this, choosing the winners isn't an objective determination. The results of the judging process is, naturally, left to the judges and their own judgement and perceptions. You uploaded a great photo, but there is nothing objective about it being "far better" than the winners. Everyone brings different backgrounds, perspective, and preferences to the table. Take my perspective, for example - you've taken a great photograph at an interesting angle, but having a bit of an eye for the technical aspects of a photograph, your photo's sky is washed out from the sun and has a strong shadow-and-light contrast. Some viewers may not notice or may even like it, thinking it adds to the artistic quality; others may not be a fan. I'm not trying to disparage your photograph, but am rather pointing out that what some people value in a photograph isn't what others value. Out of 11,000 submissions, many are exceptional, and one could argue that any number of them deserve a spot in the top-10 - but unfortunately not everyone can win.
Let me know if there are any questions I can answer. I do regret that we can only select 10 winners for this contest, as so many of our contributors take their time to contribute great photos. At the very least, know that your contributions to the Commons are valued and have helped improve this free source of educational media - and I hope you consider participating in 2017. ~Kevin Payravi (talk) 06:02, 13 March 2017 (UTC)

Mission San José y San Miguel de Aguayo[edit]

Kevin, Thank you for you detailed comments. I realize the decision on the contest cannot be reversed and I am sorry I overreacted. I was just surprised to see a similar shot in the winners. My shot had much more content and color in it but I did not photoshop it so I admit the sky was a bit washed out. I will keep that in mind if I decide to submit any photos in the future. Thank you again for your kind reply. Steve

Your VFC installation method is deprecated[edit]

Hello Kevin Payravi, we are aware that using the old installation method of VFC (via common.js, which you are using) may not work reliably anymore and can break other scripts as well. A detailed explanation can be found here. Important: To prevent problems please remove the old VFC installation code from your common.js and instead enable the VFC gadget in your preferences. Thanks! --VFC devs (q) 16:24, 22 May 2017 (UTC)