User talk:Martin H./Archive 14

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.


Archive Note

see the archive. --Martin H. (talk) 17:39, 2 December 2009 (UTC)

Deletion request

more than 20 photos of the 07:37, 4 December 2009 (UTC)

All these images violate the copyright law of Romania. 07:44, 4 December 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for watching that issue. However, im not the best instance in deciding about FOP or not (I e.g. fail to see the creativity in File:HPIM7270(cladirea-csm).JPG) so nominating them for deletion was already the best way. For questions use the talkpage of COM:FOP. --Martin H. (talk) 07:53, 4 December 2009 (UTC)

St John's Cathedral, Brisbane

Would you kindly restore the photo of the Cathedral taken across Ann Street from the liturgical southwest. It can hardly be a copyright violation as I took the photo myself. Thank you. 09:12, 4 December 2009 (UTC)

The image in en.wp en:St John's Cathedral, Brisbane was replaced by a copyright violation, that copyright violation was deleted, not your image. You may undo the copyright vandalism by User Brisbane7. --Martin H. (talk) 09:56, 4 December 2009 (UTC)

Categories by age

Hello. Of course, it would take ages to categorize all of the photos of persons where the age can be calculated. But categorizing even four people of each age could be a good way to the creation of an "age-guessing game" (google it), freely licensed, maybe even free from the personality rights burden. I haven't paid much thought to the category naming though. Do you have any suggestions? Regards, Ageguessinggames (talk) 13:35, 4 December 2009 (UTC)

Thats not inside the Commons scope imo. It not opens people the Commons content or makes commons more usuable but only creates more and more useless categories for persons. From the bot categorization Commons already has a mess of categories inherited from en.wp. In result people will add Category:George Bush in 2007 to a category of 61 and 60 years old people, thats not serves any purpose. --Martin H. (talk) 13:42, 4 December 2009 (UTC)
  • Category:George W. Bush in 2007 contains few pictures where George W. Bush is depicted alone. Where there are people of different age in a picture, I would add no category for a particular age. Since others could, I don't know how to fix that (a warning template?). There should not be too many categories for undefined ages. Actually, for an age-guessing game, even "men in their twenties" is not useful, because, I believe, there are many more pictures where the age is defined unambiguously.
  • However, that category contains 211 free-standing files, which would be a bigger problem than categorizing random images from it, if the pictures were only of GWB himself.
  • Bots must not add the categories if they cannot tell if there is only one person in the picture, who that is, and when the picture was taken.
  • Should all kinds of categories include everything that fits, or can some be like galleries?
  • If we don't use categories like "Men in their twenties" for files, but only categories like "28-year-old men", "Men by age" would be a good tree (though "People by age" could be connected with it everywhere, and people would probably want to add categories by race and similar).
Would having them not be worth it? There are computer games and other programs which parse Wikipedia articles to create interesting things. This could be one of the things, and, unlike many, actually educational.
--Ageguessinggames (talk) 14:21, 4 December 2009 (UTC)
As I said: It might be interesting to look at people of the same age, but it fails to provide educational use. It would be a very good idea to add descriptions to images (e.g. Goethe at the age of 25), but it is useless to add images to an age category too compare how they are looking. --Martin H. (talk) 19:26, 4 December 2009 (UTC)

Questions as to CC status of CyArk images discussed on my Talk Page

According to correspondence I had with CyArk representative Liz Lee, they are releasing certain images into the full CC 3.0 domain sans the Noncommercial/No derivatives license and under Attribution/Share-Alike. However, as for Qal'at al-Bahrain, the images are under full copyright protection and I will thus remove all of them (see my wikipedia profile talk page). I will make sure that any CyArk (and other) images I post to wikimedia are released into the public domain, and the same applies to any user of wikimedia commons who uses images CyArk - Elizabeth Lee informed me that we should just email them about individual instances for permission and they will release individual images into the attribution/share-alike class of CC, and indicate so on those individual media on the CyArk website. elizabeth.lee(at) is the email to use, they seem to be pretty generous folks over there. An example is found at, which links to, where the license was changed for an individual media item. --DuendeThumb (talk) 02:04, 5 December 2009 (UTC)

Yes, indeed, that media file is under ad different copyright status and it is ok on Commons ({{cc-by-sa-3.0}}). However, image without that exemption on the website or without a written permission from the copyright holder stored in COM:OTRS are not ok. --Martin H. (talk) 09:00, 5 December 2009 (UTC)

Commons:Administrators' noticeboard#Question about the procedure of blocking

Please assist on my request.--Александр Мотин (talk) 19:07, 5 December 2009 (UTC)


Please check those users, it seems that User:Laiaalba few days ago uploaded several images illustrating breastfeeding without any source and now User:ALBA LACTANCIA MATERNA is uploading same images from Flickr (images uploaded 12.04-12.05) as "own images", but as before photos seems to be very different, small size, no EXIF and so on. --Justass (talk) 21:50, 5 December 2009 (UTC)

No need for a check, no doubt that they are the same. At the moment they use flickr washing. The flickr account is a mixture of (likely) self-created and (likely) copied works. Some works realy missing better references on who created the images. Im deterred by this use of ugly capital letters ;) --Martin H. (talk) 09:41, 7 December 2009 (UTC)
Cleaned out the first account, only duplicates not used anywhere. Marked the images for the second account, Flickrwashing used here in evasion of a correct sourcing. --Martin H. (talk) 10:10, 7 December 2009 (UTC)

RE File Tagging File:Mapa_rodoviário_do_MS.jpg

I don't have any link but the site of the Ministry of Transport is a sign that says "materials, photos and audio files run in Transport can now be reproduced as long as the claims cited by the Agency.", so there is no disrespect to any rule. To see, you need enter HERE, clik in "Notícias, Áudios e Fotos" and you will see the permission. Thanks. Gustavo Siqueira msg 19:38, 8 December 2009 (UTC)

Thats sounds not free enough. See the Commons:Copyright_tags#Other_free_tags, they not mention modification of the images, possibly they dont want their images used commercially. Statement like this need a verification by email that they really agree to Commons:Project scope#required licensing terms. --Martin H. (talk) 21:02, 8 December 2009 (UTC)
Only a new question, These (1 and 2) two maps have the same source of the MS map, and is only my map have issues permission. I believe that the same license used to these two maps, it should also as my map no? I'm lost, I don't know what I have. Sorry for the inconvenience (and my bad english too xD) Gustavo Siqueira msg 07:52, 9 December 2009 (UTC)


Hola, perdona pero no entiendo ingles y llevo peleandome con las imagenes varios dias. El unico problema es mi ciber-torpeza. Todas las images que he subido estan el licencia CC y son libres, primero las subi de una manera y no funciono, luego de otra y otra, al final consegui que el sistema me las aceptara, pero desde un principio las imagenes eran libres y si parece que esten duplicadas o con información contradictoria es porque me equivoqué yo al subirlas.

Ruego borren todas las imagenes subidas como laiaalba y consideren validas las subidas como ALBA LACTANCIA MATERNA, todas estan en FLIKR con la licencia adecuada.

Gracias.--ALBA LACTANCIA MATERNA (talk) 22:04, 8 December 2009 (UTC)

File:Nelson Mandela Stadium in Port Elizabeth.jpg

Sorry. I agreed with the Panoramio user that he would change the license, but I uploaded it to Commons without realizing that was not valid. I've been in contact with him to change it. Soon, I will upload it again with the correct license. Greetings.--Goldorak (talk) 02:14, 9 December 2009 (UTC)


Mr. Martin H the permission that I added in [[File:TraianBasescu.jpg]] is correct? Thanks, and sorry if I made a mistake.--Ionutzmovie (talk) 16:32, 9 December 2009 (UTC)

No, Template:PD-RO-exempt is for works exempted from copyright, that protrait/photographic work is not covered by any of the categories listed in the template. --Martin H. (talk) 16:44, 9 December 2009 (UTC)


hi, I have update TinEye check code, see User:Sz-iwbot/tineyecode.--shizhao (talk) 17:01, 9 December 2009 (UTC)

Possible User:Daugarte sockpuppet User:Mfernandarojas

Few hours after you blocked Daugarte, Mfernandarojas uploaded same logo File:Logosename.jpg --Justass (talk) 19:57, 9 December 2009 (UTC)

Thanks, it was the second one, User talk:Danyqf was before. --Martin H. (talk) 20:01, 9 December 2009 (UTC)

Ain Shams University

مرحبا يا Martin H

الصور التي رفعتها على ويكيميديا كومونز لا تمثل اي تعدي على حدود الملكية الفكرية. الصور من الكلية التي ادرس بها، صورة منهم انا من التقتها، والباقي زملاء لي من التقطوها. وما يظهر بالصور مباني عامة ليست ملك لاحد، ولا تظهر وجوه لاشخاص بشكل واضح.

مسح الصور بهذه الطريقه لمجرد الشك في مصدرها وبدون التاكد مني هو سبب عدم مساهمتي بشكل اكبر في مشاريع ويكيبديا.

Nasrmisr (talk) 21:35, 9 December 2009 (UTC)

The requirement is: You are the photographer or the photographer/copyright holder agrees to license the photograph freely so that everyone can reuse it everywhere, every time and for every purpose including commercial use. Read Commons:Licensing. You evidently uploaded images from other photographers without attributing your sources correctly and without the copyright holders written permission. --Martin H. (talk) 21:59, 9 December 2009 (UTC)

I need some help

I made a mistake in the past and I did some vandalism

Now I want to be a serious contributer

But I am afraid my IP adress is tarnished

Is there any way you can reset my history--Beastman12 (talk) 23:52, 9 December 2009 (UTC)

The best way for a new start is to not create a new account, log in with the old account and to place an {{unblock|reason}} request on your talkpage to request for unblock of your first account. The second best way is to create a new account. Noone will bother you as long as you not start disruption (vandalism, copyright violation, e.g.) again. So have a good start. --Martin H. (talk) 23:56, 9 December 2009 (UTC)

Regarding the Romanian President

Hello, I saw your comment on File talk:TraianBasescu.jpg. I reported the license suspicions on, and the file has been replaced to use one that is definitely free instead of something that might be free. I'm still interested in clearing up the license issues for File:TraianBasescu.jpg and File:TraianBasescu01.jpg. The official website only has the cropped version [1]... I'm not sure where to go from here, especially since the website is only available in Romanian at the moment. Killiondude (talk) 06:58, 10 December 2009 (UTC)

I have no reason to belive that the image is not from the romanian presidency. A permission from them should be satisfying but hard to achieve. --Martin H. (talk) 23:37, 10 December 2009 (UTC)

I´ve already sent permission for my images but...

Hi there. Today I received a notification warning me about the future deletion of my files.

I´ve already contact the author of those photographs and he sent a permission for using them at

Images are:

I don´t know what else to do. --Anemonefield (talk) 13:30, 11 December 2009 (UTC)

On the images I uploaded

I'm working on gathering all the info you indicated; however, am confused on what I should use instead of {{PD-US}}. Bab-a-lot (talk) 14:09, 11 December 2009 (UTC)

If the image was published befor 1923 you have to provide the publication where it was published before 1923. Also the images must be public domain in the country of origin (not the country where something, e.g. a photographs, was taken but place of first publication, institutional creators or the authors origin), {{PD-US}} applies if the U.S. are the country of origin - first publication, author if disclosed and year of creation/publication are essential informations. You may add the website as secondary source, but only a website is not enough to determine the copyright status. --Martin H. (talk) 14:14, 11 December 2009 (UTC)


Hi Martin ¿can I upload the sign from a person died in the 1970's? He was an argentine author. Thanks. Alakasam (talk) 23:42, 11 December 2009 (UTC)

sign? Signatures you can always upload, Commons:When to use the PD-signature tag: {{pd-signature|Argentina}}. --Martin H. (talk) 23:44, 11 December 2009 (UTC)


Tag Martin, wärst du in der Lage, mit AWB eine kleine Bildersetzung von 32 Seiten hier nur auf Commons durchzuführen? Es wäre gut, wenn du das Bild File:Sony dv handycam.jpg, welches auf ein paar Hauptseiten benutzt ist, auf diesen Hauptseiten durch File:Video-x-generic.svg ersetzen könntest. Zum einen ist das Bild auf 24 Pixel klarer als Videoicon zu erkennen (zum Vergleich alte und neue Version) und das alte Bild hat im Moment keine Quelle. Wäre das möglich? --The Evil IP address (talk) 11:21, 12 December 2009 (UTC)

Schon erledigt. --Martin H. (talk) 12:27, 12 December 2009 (UTC)
Danke. --The Evil IP address (talk) 21:50, 12 December 2009 (UTC)

RE": File:Alalamlogo.jpg

I beleive the logo was simple enough it's just a bunch of shapes but together. There isn't even any writing. What would the logo be then if it's not Commons:Licensing#Simple design?

Andimahony (talk) 19:01, 12 December 2009 (UTC)AndiMahony Dec 12,09

  • Actually, I came to see about this one too. It's allowable on English Wikinews where it was in use on a main page lead article. I don't want to have to block CommonsDelinker again, can someone code some sense into it or, when admins are reviewing an image, check usage which may meet a project with local uploads' EDP? n:en:WN:EDP?
A locally uploaded copy would be nice too! --Brian McNeil / talk 23:09, 12 December 2009 (UTC)
Its up to the uploader to upload something to the correct project. The Commons guidlines about fair use are clear, no matter which project uses the image and no matter of local EDPs on Commons fair use is not allowed. I missed the use on en.wikinews mainpage, normally I wait some hours after tagging the image if it is in use on some mainpage on any project, so sorry for that. --Martin H. (talk) 23:18, 12 December 2009 (UTC)


Thanks! No, not mine; I just happened to spot the Calphotos credit at the bottom of the page, and know that they are not PD-US. Guess I'll have to see if any of the other pics on that page are also uploaded (I'd just been sorting the Arctostaphylos pics when I found it) - MPF (talk) 22:20, 13 December 2009 (UTC)

Thanks!! - MPF (talk) 22:37, 13 December 2009 (UTC)

Indef block

[2] I don't hesitate to block users myself, but a ban right after a one-day block, that sounds pretty harsh... I'd rather use at least one long block (>1 month) before a ban, for copyvio issues. Regards, --Eusebius (talk) 06:48, 14 December 2009 (UTC)

The user had enough warnings to learn it, yes, the block is a little bit harsh, but for that reason I selected the only template showing the user what to do to request unblock ({{copyviouploadindefblock}}). My personal guess is, that this user (as most other es/pt users comming here) not read any rules nor even know what this project is about, even the first block was totally ineffective to improve this. --Martin H. (talk) 07:05, 14 December 2009 (UTC)
Just curious, Martin, do you know if there's some sort of outreach effort in Spain that's bringing in these class projects? I'm asking because I saw the same thing you saw on the CU requests today. --SB_Johnny talk 23:16, 15 December 2009 (UTC)
I saw your check, I also left a note on the checkuser log to let other CUs know what I found (and im not sure if I can release that information publicly). But yes, meta:Wikimedia_in_Catalan#Initiatives fostering the use of Viquimèdia at school gives some evidenca about such efforts, I hope Jordi will give us some information at the CU request. --Martin H. (talk) 23:22, 15 December 2009 (UTC)

Is this information OK?

Hi Martin. About information of image BetsyJonesMoreland1.jpg. Is now OK? Sorry for my error and thanks to help me.

--Martinlp72 (talk) 13:04, 14 December 2009 (UTC)

Not perfect but better. I dont know the copyright status of the movies, so I cant say what Commons:Copyright tags#United States is the best choice. --Martin H. (talk) 13:39, 14 December 2009 (UTC)

Don Cossack Choir Serge Jaroff

If I only knew how to add images on a valid way. With all good intentions I want to make some wiki-pages and illustrate them with some pictures. It seems that Wikipedia and Wikipedia Commons don't deserve a usability-award. Can you tell me how I have to do it the right way?

I strongly recommend you to read Commons:First steps, but in short: Full author and source information is always required. My own personal demand on how to Wikipedia:Citing sources|cite a source may exceed many other uploaders quality standards, but at least a source should be findable and verifiable for everyone without much research to even find the source. Essential source information are the creator of the work and the date, location and title of first publication. Besides sourcing the very most important requirement is, that images are free. That means that everyone can use it for everything, they must be free for commercial reuse. That requires, that the work is either in the public domain in the U.S. and in the country of first publication/photographers home country (country of origin) due too copyright expiration (see Commons:Licensing section 3 and 9) or the copyright holder of the work voluntarily give his written permission on free reuse by everyone, everywhere, for ever and for every purpose under the terms of a free license. See also Commons:OTRS on how to provide a written permission. However, if the copyright holder is not even known or not researched like in the case of uk:Файл:Minsky Mykhailo.jpg it is neither possible to determine the copyright status nor possible to obtain written permission to a free license. Thats often disappointing and yes, finding free imagery from the 1920s - 2000s is difficult and in most cases not possible. Given a reliable and checkable source and author information, Commons talk:Licensing is open to ask for detailed copyright status if you are unsure about the details. --Martin H. (talk) 16:05, 16 December 2009 (UTC)

Tina Arena …

Hallo Martin, dies kurz zur Info, da Du Dich um den offensichtlichen Vorgängeraccount gekümmert hast. Mal sehen, wie lange dieses Spielchen noch weiter geht. Zum weiteren Tracking scheint [3] ganz tauglich zu sein ;-) --:bdk: 18:09, 16 December 2009 (UTC)

Danke für den Hinweis, ich hab da nochmal etwas genauer hingeschaut und klar, ganz offensichtlich. --Martin H. (talk) 18:42, 16 December 2009 (UTC)

Kinks image

The actual cited immediate, Kinks-devoted image source--which presents multiple images from the same professional photographic session--is definitive about the location. The named provider (Jerry Helmfrid) is Swedish. There is no evidence that the adduced Spanish entertainment website has any particular expertise in matters Kinks. There is a verifiable Kinks professional photographic session in Stockholm, Sweden, on or around 2 September 1965 (see The Kinks: All Day and All of the Night : Day-By-Day Concerts, Recordings and Broadcasts, 1961-1996); there is no record of any such session in Denmark. Thanks for your attention to this matter. Dockino (talk) 12:07, 19 December 2009 (UTC)

Hi. Just to let you know, I've never once searched for "the kinks sweden" in order to find visual material or for any other reason, and I'm not sure what led you to assume I had. As for the cover of The Kinks in Sweden resulting from the 2 September 1965 photo session--yes, it certainly did, and if you had access to a higher-fidelity rendering of the cover, you'd see that the band members are all wearing the same clothes that they are in the photo under discussion (though Quaife has doffed his jacket for the album cover shot). Regards, Dockino (talk) 21:47, 23 December 2009 (UTC)

Re:Nordic Council

Hi, thanks for the note. However, I don't really see the problem, as they explicitely state on their website, that their photos can be used freely as long as the source is stated. I also posted a question on Efloean's talk page. Best, --Antissimo (talk) 17:05, 19 December 2009 (UTC)

Gonstead Pictures

Regarding Clarence Gonstead related pictures.

Since I'm either in possession of the originals or have access to them, what is the appropriate permission clause to use?

Thanks, MJA

You need to provide written permission from the copyright holder, the permission must allow everyone to reuse the image everywhere, for ever and for every purpose. See Commons:Project scope#required licensing terms. --Martin H. (talk) 23:48, 19 December 2009 (UTC)

USS Taurus

Thanks for the info but I tried to upload it here and the system said it is already here. What do I do now. It is a Scan of the commisioning Pamplet. Bigroger27509 (talk) 03:46, 22 December 2009 (UTC)

  • Someone over at Wikisource transfered it to here. Sorry for the Trouble.Bigroger27509 (talk) 04:00, 22 December 2009 (UTC)

:D Ola

Bueno solo estaba probando como subir imágenes Lo siento!! :D pero dime..osea de todas maneras no puedo subir esas fotos??? leeré mas sobre licencias...disculpa... :D osea me refiero a que si sigo todas las se puede subir las fotos?? :D --Alberjita (talk) 09:20, 23 December 2009 (UTC)

Please read Commons:First steps and the Commons:Image casebook for first information. No, you can not upload other peoples photographs without written permission. --Martin H. (talk) 10:12, 23 December 2009 (UTC)

InkHeart & Co Sockenzoo

Hallo Martin, vielen Dank für Deine Mühe, die Du Dir um diesen Sockenzoo gemacht hast und Deinen bereits archivierten Beitrag auf der OTRS-Seite. Ich habe jetzt eine zugehörige Fallseite bei OTRS eröffnet und hoffe, dass wir dass auch auf der Seite umfassend dokumentieren können. Wenn Du noch weitere Erkenntnisse oder Verdachtsmomente zu diesem Fall hast, würde ich das gerne wissen, um das dort zusammentragen zu können. Bei den drei Bildern mit den gefälschten OTRS-Permission-Templates von FranNatta habe ich diese entfernt und jeweils einen SLA gestellt. Viele Grüße, AFBorchert (talk) 11:42, 25 December 2009 (UTC)

Danke, ist mir lieb wenn sich die OTRSler darum kümmern, ich halte die Augen offen und hab ein paar Artikel auf der Beobachtungsliste. --Martin H. (talk) 12:13, 25 December 2009 (UTC)
Auf meiner Beobachtungsliste habe ich ein paar Löschungen gesehen, File:Sang-mi 23.jpg wurde mit angesprochen? ist die erste Quelle bei eingabe von 남상미 in Google, das Bild ist dort 2048 x 1360 px groß. Solltet ihr in OTRS nach email adresse etc suchen können das Bild und den Absender vielleicht mit unter die Lupe nehmen. --Martin H. (talk) 18:53, 2 January 2010 (UTC)

Merry Christimas

Merry Christmas 2

I concur with those sentiments exactly. lol. Season's greetings and many happy returns to you and yours, and thanks again for your help in the year just now passing. Regards, MarmadukePercy (talk) 01:56, 26 December 2009 (UTC)

Thank you Marmaduke and Light Warior and a wonderful christmas vacation as well as a happy new 2010 for you too. Frohes Weihnachtsfest und guten Rutsch. --Martin H. (talk) 17:36, 26 December 2009 (UTC)

Servus Martin

Als erstes, Frohe Weihnachten. Im weiteren habe ich ein problem: der Benutzer Ceha hat eine Menge an demographischer Karten Bosniens reingestellt die ohne irgendeine Quelle sind. Die letzte Volkszählung war im Jahre 1991. Seine basieren auf "seinen" Schätzungen und sind unbegründet. Die Karten hat er im weiteren in alle relevanten Artikeln kreuz und quer auf den wikies reingestellt. Ich würde gerne eine Löschung der Karten beantragen, jedoch mag ich nicht jede einzelne durchgehen und kennzeichnen. Gibt es eine Möglichkeit ihn zu verwarnen und ihm die Möglichkeit zu geben seine Karten zu verifizieren und ansonsten grundsätzlich zu löschen? Hier ist ein Beispiel der seine "Forschungsarbeit" schön darstellt. Andere basieren an bereits gelöschten Phantasiekarten von der Wenn geht bitte hier antworten da ich zu selten auf commons bin. Danke im Voraus Ex-Seha --WizardOfOz (talk) 10:42, 26 December 2009 (UTC)

Danke für die Antwort, werde mal was vorbereiten da es im Moment nicht eilt. Für mich ist es auch verwunderlich dass auf so vielen Projekten der Blödsinn benutzt wird. Danke trotzdem. --WizardOfOz (talk) 18:06, 26 December 2009 (UTC)

Hi, you recently left a message regarding File:Ammazzateci funerali.gif on my Talk page. I just now found the note and the image has been deleted in the meantime. I don't remember what the image was about or what its source was. Would you have access to the deleted text so that I can investigate? My email is axelboldt(at) Thanks and cheers, AxelBoldt (talk) 03:58, 28 December 2009 (UTC)

RE: File:Samsung_HMX-H104,H105,H106_(front_view).jpg

I do apologise for using the wrong license. I didn't know which one to use.

Navbox Request

Can I create a navbox for the routes within the Paris bus network. Also can I create a page showing a list of all the bus routes within Paris? I really like the idea and hope you accept. Myles Findlay (talk)

The first problem, the Samsung files: There regretably is no license for this images. A photo is copyrighted, always, the copyright holder must agree to a free license. Otherwise Commons cant use the images. Regarding the navbox: I have no idea, do what you want to improve Commons. But remember that Commons uses categories and galleries like Category:Buses in Paris. --Martin H. (talk) 22:06, 28 December 2009 (UTC)

Regarding The Images That I have uploaded

Dear sir/Madam the images that i have uploaded into the wikimedia commons are mine, i have scanned them and released them into the public domains. Some of the images were scaned from some acadamic books and, since there is no proper copy right law about the historical images of the kings and rulers in Afghanistan so it is obvious that every one can have access to the historical images, to publish them or use them in their works of research. I would also like you to know that you can find these images everywhere in other afghan websites. Actually afghans get happy to see the images of their past kings published anywhere in the internet.

In regard to one image with the name thumb|100px I would like to say that if you could delete this i would be thankful to you. because i am going to publish the original image of this person, this one was modified by the computer graphic software and there is no red tie in the original picture.

Kind Regards

--احمد-نجيب-بياباني-ابراهيمخېل (talk) 17:08, 29 December 2009 (UTC)

Why are you asking me? If you scan something you MUST provide the full source information! Name of the publication, year, name of the publisher, place of publication. All information about first publication. Thats what I initialy requested on your talkpage. Scanning something does not make you the author. --Martin H. (talk) 17:15, 29 December 2009 (UTC)

File:WEH von Dresler u Scharfenstein 2.JPG

Hallo, Martin H. Du hast mir hier eben einen L-Baustein reingesetzt. Was mag denn bitte an diesem Scan einer Kopie eines etwa 130 Jahre alten Familienfotos eines unbekannten Autors löschenswert sein ? Bzw - was ist unklar ? --Wistula (talk) 18:05, 29 December 2009 (UTC)


Sorry but ¿What you mind? I don't undestand you.

Place: Guatemala Date: There is.

And I put own, I don't pic it but who pic it is death since many time before. That I did was edit some the real photo.

LMEF2009 (talk) 03:48, 30 December 2009 (UTC)

Read COM:EI. 1) Name of the photogapher, 2) place and date of first publication, 3) source/website you toke the image from. --Martin H. (talk) 03:00, 30 December 2009 (UTC)

I don't found the name of the photographer but I find the picture here.

LMEF2009 (talk) 03:54, 30 December 2009 (UTC)

I asked them where they found it but I am waiting their answer yet. I apologize by my errors when writing but I do not speak very well English.

LMEF2009 (talk) 04:31, 30 December 2009 (UTC)

I found here this about the picture Armando Tezucún / Revista 1857 (Sep-Dic 2007)

LMEF2009 (talk) 04:34, 30 December 2009 (UTC)

1940s photographs is far too young. Copyright expires 70 years after the photographers death (75 years after the photographers death in Guatemala, see, Art. 43), so without asking the photographer or his/her heirs for permission your uploads will not have a chance. --Martin H. (talk) 04:42, 30 December 2009 (UTC)

Britney Spears

Hi! please replace this photo [4] to this version [5]

You mean revert? No, 250×653 is not a good format for a photograph. The photograph with the entire stage is much more powerful and good to illustrate the performance, the song or the theatre/arena. in general the image is not good to illustrate the person (to small, low quality, sunglasses, ugly clothing, unfavorable position) so no need to reduce it and take the value it has. --Martin H. (talk) 04:19, 30 December 2009 (UTC)


Hallo, Du kategorisierst grad Potsdam-Bilder. Max Baur hat alle seine Fotos mit Potsdam benannt, obwohl die Aufnahmen woanders gemacht sein können. Pfaueninsel z.B. ist in Berlin Zehlendorf. In die Historik-Kategorien bräuchten m.E. auch keine trivialen Baum- Park- oder nichtssagende Straßenansichten ohne jeden historischen Bezug. Grüße --Botaurus (talk) 03:50, 30 December 2009 (UTC)

Ich habs gerade bemerkt - dass und zusätzlich dass die Metainformation 1928 falsch übertragen wurden. Tatsächlich sind die Bilder beim BArch nur in "1928/1944" und "nach 1945" unterteilt. Ich werde demnächst die Bauer-Bilder wieder speziell aus Category:1928 in Potsdam Kategorien entfernen, auch wenns Schade ist. Sie generalisierend zu den 1930er Bildern zu tun wäre sachlich wohl auch falsch, sie in 20th century zu sortieren wäre kein Mehrwert. --Martin H. (talk) 04:13, 30 December 2009 (UTC)
Ich korrigiere jetzt das Datum 1928 in ca. 1928 bis 1944 wie es im BArch steht. Ich hätte die Bilder wirklich gerne in einer Kategorie im "Datums-Baum". Dazu 3 Vorschläge:
1. Kategorisierung in Category:Potsdam in the 1930s, sehr grob für den Zeitraum 1928-1944 (wobei den Bildern nach eher deutlich vor 1944), erlaubt aber Kategorieüberschneidungen und bietet damit Mehrwehrt (Irgendwann wird catscan mal ein Teil von Wikimedia :))
2. Extrakategorie für Max Baur - Potsdam - 1928-1944 Bilder
3. Kaskadierung von Category:Potsdam in the 20th century, vergleichbar meiner Lösung in Category:Stralsund in the 20th century - dass ist allerdings ein massiver eingriff in den Kategorienbaum und bedarf der Abwägung ob es sich für einen Fotografen dauerhaft lohnt. Ich könnte mir eine Einteilung pre- und post Weltkrieg vorstellen, das ist relativ flexibel und freilassend für Werke anderer Künstler.
--Martin H. (talk) 15:30, 30 December 2009 (UTC)

Wem nützt das alles bzw. wer braucht diese Kategorien?
Wenn Ich auf Category:History of Potsdam klicke, erwarte ich Geschichtliches über Potsdam. Ich bekomme aber Kategorien, die lediglich sämtliche Bilder Potsdams entsprechend ihres Aufnahmezeitpunktes nach Dekaden oder nach bestimmten Jahren einordnen. Einige dieser Kategorien dürften, wenn sie voll sind, einige Hundert Bilder beherbergen.
Zu 1: Was soll der Mehrwert sein?
Zu 2: Max Baur hat eine eigene Kategorie (Category:Photographs by Max Baur mit 997 Bildern).
Zu 3: Weiter oben ging es um die Potsdamer Kategorien nach Dekaden oder Jahren, hier nun um einzelne Autoren oder Künstler? Die Category:Stralsund in the 20th century finde ich gut und geschickt gelöst.
Etwas ratlos --Botaurus (talk) 18:15, 30 December 2009 (UTC)

In der Kategorisierung nach Erstellungsdatum liegt schon ein großer Mehrwehrt, egal wie groß die Kategorien werden ermöglichen sie es in der Geschichte zu stöbern und dass interessiert viele Besucher von Commons. Die stadtgeschichtlichen Kategorien können sehr vielfältig sein, sicherlich vielfältiger als Potsdam derzeit ist. Da können auch historische Text, Bücher und Karten zugeordnet werden, es gibt Kategorien für historische Ansichten/Stiche/Gemälde von Städten, es könnne mit der Geschichte verbundene Persönlichkeiten gefunden werden etc. - halt Sammlungen wie alles auf Commons :)
Schlecht datierte Bilder lassen sich schlecht in ein Datumsraster pressen, daher die Suche nach einer Näherungslösung. --Martin H. (talk) 18:44, 30 December 2009 (UTC)

Regarding other people's image

Hi Martin H. I have a querry regarding some image uploads. You see, since the images in Category:Drowned World Tour and Category:Re-Invention World Tour were copyright vios and were deleted, I have been trying to search free images for those tow MAdonna tours. Well I have found one person who went to the tour and took pics. I asked him whether he can help by allowing his pics to be used in Wikipedia. He has agreed to do so. My question is how do I upload his images and how do I properly attribute it to him? Legolas2186 (talk) 03:48, 30 December 2009 (UTC)

Obviously you have a websource to cite as source and a name to name as the author. Forward your conversation to OTRS following COM:OTRS. --Martin H. (talk) 04:15, 30 December 2009 (UTC)
Well no, these are all physical pictures and the conversation happened on pulsemusic chat. The user said he can scan it and then create an account in commons to upload it. Is that fine because if he himself uploads them, OTRS won't be needed right? Legolas2186 (talk) 04:53, 30 December 2009 (UTC)
Yes. --Martin H. (talk) 14:36, 30 December 2009 (UTC)

File File:Anna_Timiriova_1954.jpg

You have tagged the above mentioned file for not containing information about copyright. The comments of the file indicate that the photograph has been taken by the soviet KGB in 1954. There is no copyright protection for any police files in any country of the world and specifically for KGB photographs of detainees. 18:45, 30 December 2009 (UTC)

Thats simply wrong. A photographer gains copyright for his work, maybe the copyright is transfered to the employer. Maybe the copyright expired, maybe the image is public domain by copyright exemption - but it is not pd-ineligible (not eligible for copyright according to Commons:Licensing#Simple design. To prevent future misunderstandings regarding "There is no copyright protection for any police files in any country": Wrong, every police photograph in every country is protected by copyright, the only exemption I know of are photographs created by the U.S. federal government (specially FBI here), they are exempted from copyright by the U.S. copyright law. --Martin H. (talk) 18:51, 30 December 2009 (UTC)

A little help

Hi Martin. I wanted to know if you can do me afavor. Could you send this deleted file to my email? And Happy new Year! Mizunoryu 大熊猫❤小熊猫 (talk) 02:43, 31 December 2009 (UTC)

I temporary undeleted it. --Martin H. (talk) 02:45, 31 December 2009 (UTC)

Thank you so very much. I already saved it. Cheers! Mizunoryu 大熊猫❤小熊猫 (talk) 03:24, 31 December 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for the info. Have a good 2010! --Martin H. (talk) 03:26, 31 December 2009 (UTC)

Re: File:Reina Tanaka 2.jpg

Thanks, ill be more evaluative with Flickr images, greetings from Spain. すけ (talk) 19:28, 31 December 2009 (UTC)

April Hunter photos

Check yer email dude... forwarded you something & would like your thoughts. Tabercil (talk) 01:47, 1 January 2010 (UTC)

I not received your email so far. However, thanks for your work with this files. But be carefull, the "author" is clearly not the author you wrote on File:April Hunter splits.jpg. I wrote the author - and likely the copyright holder who maybe gave the subject only a limited permission! - in File:April hunter dec2009.jpg. --Martin H. (talk) 03:45, 1 January 2010 (UTC)
+Both of this images are something with a watermark removed - technically: cropped! A copyright holder must not remove watermarks from images. Make sure that this are not en:Time for prints or that the emial even is from the person you think it is - I strongly doubt this. --Martin H. (talk) 03:59, 1 January 2010 (UTC)
Well I'm sure the person at the other end is April, based on prior emails. As for the earlier forwarding, I'm quite sure I sent it to the right address as I'm quite sure we talked earlier on the Waffen SS pics. Do me a favour and send me a fresh one will ya? Tabercil (talk) 04:07, 1 January 2010 (UTC)
And I just noticed something. You're saying that "a copyright holder must not remove watermarks from images". Huh? The copyright holder is the person with the legal right to the image, and thus can do whatever they wish with it. If they wish to add or remove a watermark, that is their concern. Tabercil (talk) 19:03, 2 January 2010 (UTC)
Yes, but the uploads are edited, so they not uploading the unedited files but files with removed watermarks - evidently from the aspect ratio of the files. A copyright holder not need to remove watermarks to upload files without watermarks. He will simply take the original files without the watermarks. --Martin H. (talk) 19:06, 2 January 2010 (UTC)


Regarding Ticket:2009122910027718 I can't find why were deleted Maldini20's files. You just said Copyright violation, but i can't find from where. Platonides (talk) 17:51, 1 January 2010 (UTC)

The uploader claimed personal authorship on a photograph he had taken from some web resources, maybe from or somewhere else, but he wasnt even able to steal the full size [6]. Second he uploaded fair use logos of organizations under the claim, that he himself created the logos. I not double checked this now, but the photo he again uploaded of a girl in a boat was also found on the web. For me the usual copyright violation and wrong authorship claim. My first suspiccion was, that he may come from that orgianization he uploaded the logos from and that he must correct the author (not his person work but the organization) and source (not own work but the organizations publication), but finding him stealing images from elsewhere destroyed this idea. --Martin H. (talk) 15:43, 2 January 2010 (UTC)
P.s.: im not an OTRS volunteer. --Martin H. (talk) 15:57, 2 January 2010 (UTC)

Re: File:Peng Shilu.jpg

Dear Administrator Martin: I re-created the "File:Peng Shilu.jpg" because I have been using entirely my own work. Please check it carefully. Thank you! Happy New Year!--Lvhis (talk) 23:51, 1 January 2010 (UTC)

Aw this. --Martin H. (talk) 15:39, 2 January 2010 (UTC)

Picture Permissions

Hi Martin,

I've sent an email with permission for the following pictures pictures to

What's next? --Hanky27 (talk) 11:03, 2 January 2010 (UTC)

'll answer this at your talk. --Martin H. (talk) 15:44, 2 January 2010 (UTC)
There is a question at my talk --Hanky27 (talk) 17:55, 8 January 2010 (UTC)


Dear Martin,

Please consider closing this DR as a delete very soon. If I read the flickrowner's response right, she could sue WikiCommons for the use of the merlot grape image. This is an emergency request! All I did was ask if she would license the image freely...or would she want the image deleted. Her response is most unfriendly. Now I have to give her this link and hope she does not attack me for asking for a license change. Regards, --Leoboudv (talk) 08:31, 3 January 2010 (UTC)

She can ask the WMF for takedown, thats all. She cannot sue the WMF for something a user did. However, the dr is already closed. --Martin H. (talk) 16:14, 3 January 2010 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment: That is nice to know Martin. She never said in her flickr profile that she charges for the use of her photos. So, I thought it was a reasonable idea to contact her. But I was wrong. Regards, --Leoboudv (talk) 20:23, 3 January 2010 (UTC)

Pavement art

Hi Martin in view of your recent decision on File:Chalk1.JPG, you might like to comment on this case. Thanks and a belated happy new year.KTo288 (talk) 12:35, 3 January 2010 (UTC)

Im asked to comment where? Also this deletion was only secondary related to pavement art and in first instance to the copyvio uploads by User talk:Rolfalmao. --Martin H. (talk) 16:20, 3 January 2010 (UTC)
Aplogies my mistake, (I used cut and paste of a preview and it grabbed the text without the markup). "this" should have linked to here-Commons:Deletion requests/File:Artistas callejeros en Florencia.JPG. The only comment on the deleted file was "Copyright violation" and I presumed that the copyvio in question was of the artists work, however if I am to understand you correctly this was only pheripheral to a copyvio by User talk:Rolfalmao (the actual file itself? rather than what it depicted?). In which case sorry for wasting your time.KTo288 (talk) 08:35, 4 January 2010 (UTC)
The major concern here was, that the uploader uploaded copied images of a person with disrespective name (so copyviouploads and vandalism), blatant vandal images (the latter), blatant copyright violations ("it is the only picture of the school on Google images", see the log). I deleted all the rest of his uploads in a batch, I dont cared about whether the likely copyvio photo is also derivative or not. --Martin H. (talk) 17:42, 4 January 2010 (UTC)
Understood now, i had thought you might have been interested in such files in general, anyway thankyou for your time.KTo288 (talk) 20:53, 4 January 2010 (UTC)


Tag, vielleicht hast du ja Lust, „fair use rationale“ zu deinen Suchen hinzuzufügen. Heut morgen hab ich bei so einer Suche Radiohead-Musik gefunden, die in einem Jahr nur von den Bots entdeckt wurde. --The Evil IP address (talk) 13:53, 3 January 2010 (UTC)

Die Nutze ich eh nicht mehr. Wenn allerdings jemand was mit einer fair use rational hochlädt suche ich nach dem Text (z.b. "no free equivalent is available"). --Martin H. (talk) 16:16, 3 January 2010 (UTC)

about the image source

Hello Martin I received a notification about source of the picture I uploaded yesterday . The image is my own work , I also indicated on the picture description however it tells me that the image does not have any source. I edited again and hopefully this time the source will show up as my own work . Thanks --Cheshmehregi (talk) 17:43, 3 January 2010 (UTC)

Not clear, I left my comment directly on the image too point you to the problem. --Martin H. (talk) 18:08, 3 January 2010 (UTC)
Most of the pictures I upload are from my own photo gallery and people take them without telling me that's why you can find them in most blogs - however I uploaded a different image from my photo gallery and hopefully no one used this picture on their web sites.--Cheshmehregi (talk) 01:41, 5 January 2010 (UTC)
A full source information requires that you provide all information where you have published this (first) and that you provide a written permission/formal release covering the source. --Martin H. (talk) 01:43, 5 January 2010 (UTC)
P.s.: Also you may explain in written form why you have to remove a watermark from your own work, thats everything else but plausible. --Martin H. (talk) 01:45, 5 January 2010 (UTC)

Ah, but someone HAS complained

Please see the photo at [7]. This individual has also nominated other photos of mine that were taken with celebrities, on the grounds that I don;t have written permission from THEM to upload those photos. Generally celebrities do not pose with someone they do not wish to be seen with. I have had a photo my wife took of me with the first President Bush, and a local newspaper ran it with no copyright issues, or permissions required from Mr. Bush. I personally think this guy is just nit-picking. Can you help?Drsjpdc (talk) 06:42, 4 January 2010 (UTC)

You are now mixing two different things: Permission from the photographed person is not (maybe sometimes) required, a "model release" is a Non-copyright restriction adressed in Commons:Photographs of identifiable people, but it is not the problem here that you dont have written permission from the celebrities. The problem you asked and I answered on COM:HD was that you are not the photographer, and therefore not the copyright holder. As you assure that your wife had taken the photographs, and I have no reason to distrust you, it is indeed nitpicking to ask your wife for a written permission. --Martin H. (talk) 06:51, 4 January 2010 (UTC)


This is a vandalism in spanish wikipedia. Please answer here --Diegusjaimes (talk) 21:22, 4 January 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for the note. --Martin H. (talk) 21:24, 4 January 2010 (UTC)


I cannot find my original notes on this, though I did check it at the time I uploaded the file. Please do not delete this to give me time to revisit the painting and check the details again. Thankyou. Babakathy (talk) 07:57, 5 January 2010 (UTC)

no hurry. --Martin H. (talk)

Photos of C.A. Cornell

Hello Martin I see you tagged the images I uploaded of C.Allin Cornell as missing copyright info. These were taken by students and friends of his and then given to the various web pages after his death. I sincerely doubt the web pages hold any kind of copyright on these and it will take a while to get written permission as you requested. I can probably get an e-mail from one of the authors of the article, with whom I am in contact with, but it seems that may not be enough for you. Should I just change the source and just point to the students rather than the web pages? -- 08:22, 5 January 2010 (UTC)

The problem is not the source, the problem is that the copyright holder must provide a written permission allowing unlimited distribution of the image by everyone, in every media for every purpose including commercial use under the terms of an irrevocable, free license. See Commons:Project scope#required licensing terms. It is of course a good idea to ask the authors of the source article on who the copyright holder (and the author, the photographer) might be. But if you dont find out or dont know the correct copyright holder it would be rather impossible to meet the basic permission requirement. If your upload was intended as a picture of a deceased person under non-free fair use for educational purposes only you uploaded it to the wrong project as Commons not allows fair use content. --Martin H. (talk) 10:34, 5 January 2010 (UTC)

Good news, after a series of e-mails to friends and co-workers I found the original copyright holder (the guy who took the picture) and he is fine with using it online for Wikipedia. I can get this in writing but as you mention, perhaps Commons is not the right place for this. I am not sure he will go for totally free distribution and I do not want to push him. It has nothing to do with commercial reasons, it is simply an issue of respect to our deceased friend, where having a photo as completely free to modify/play with might seem a bit excessive. Which would be the right project to upload it to? You can see I am kind of new at this and I only went for Commons because the Wikipedia FAQ suggested it as the simplest solution. Thanks again for your time-- 21:42, 11 January 2010 (UTC)

It's Raining Mail.

Please see and respond if you can. /Orrling Ooh (talk) 19:21, 5 January 2010 (UTC)

Please forward your mail to COM:OTRS and not post them in the public. I will delete them because of two reasons: Privacy (email adresses etc.), copyright (windows surface). --Martin H. (talk) 19:25, 5 January 2010 (UTC)

Deletion request


could you please delete this file : File:Madeleine_Chapsal.JPG ? There was some confusion about its rights status and I could check that it won't get its otrs permission (unlike the others I uploaded today, for which I got an agreement). Thanks JJ Georges (talk) 20:55, 5 January 2010 (UTC)

Done. Regards, --Martin H. (talk) 20:57, 5 January 2010 (UTC)

Becker & Maass

[8] Thanks a lot... --Eusebius (talk) 22:19, 5 January 2010 (UTC)

Still researching. --Martin H. (talk) 22:23, 5 January 2010 (UTC)

File Tagging File:Mir Hossein Mousavi signature.jpg

Hello Martin, thanks for your time. I searched for Mir-Hossein Mousavi's signature and actually found one in jpg format. It seems like the uploader, Amir.Hossein.7055, has uploaded it. Since I'm a new user here and don't know most of Commons policies but I know that file is clearly missing date, author, and permission information (as you said in its deletion request and was taken directly from Mousavi's official campaign site, [], so it is most likely that the file is copyrighted. It is his campaign logo for presidential election (the logo itself is a writing of his full name in Nastaleeq, Nastaleeq is the core script of the Persian writing tradition.). In addition to, I'm a Persian and live in Iran and saw it many times in the hands of his supporters. I believe it's definitely not his real signature and shouldn't be used in his article. Could you possibly left a notice or something in his talk page addressing this issue. Thank you. —peace JuventiniFan (talk) 10:17, 6 January 2010 (UTC)

Thank you for your explanation. As a simple combination of letters it is not eligible for copyright and fulfills the requiremtns of Commons:Licensing#Simple design under the license tag {{PD-signature}} as a signature or {{PD-textlogo}} as a simple combination of letters. If it is not a signature I suggest renaming of the file to an appropriate filename, for example "Mir-Hossein Mousavi campaign wordmark.jpg" or something like this. The date is unimportant as the simple writing not depends on any date, anyone could have written it in the long history of that script style. So also an author is appreciated but well, requesting authors for files like this on Commons is tilting at windmills. --Martin H. (talk) 12:58, 6 January 2010 (UTC)


Your claims are ridiculous! I have been using the "stolen" pictures before, but the last three of my uploads were completely my own work and you know, as well as I do, that they have never been uploaded before, anywhere! You should at least check when you delete photos and should not base your actions on the past user's violations. Next time you address me, do not give me the links to the photos that I am not talking about. The last three are PURE ORIGINALS! That is why you should admit your mistake and cancel the deletion somehow! At least, let me upload them again! You are wrong and Wikipedia is not your property, so you could make the rules. Don't make me address your superiors and prove that you were persistently wrong and uncooperative. Dialiba (talk) 00:30, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

You have no images of that person. The first image was stolen and so the last. Im not your nanny. --Martin H. (talk) 09:52, 7 January 2010 (UTC)
P.s.: I like to remember you on your "free lance photographer" career. --Martin H. (talk) 10:26, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

The last image was stolen?????? Where is the proof? I lied before about the freelancing, didn't think was too important nor want to waste my time on scanning. Anyway, THE LAST IMAGE I HAVE UPLOADED IS MY OWN. I paid for it to be taken and have all the rights in the world! You cannnot just erase pictures because of someone's previous wrong doings. That's totally unproffesional and lazy! You give Wikipedia a bad name!!!Dialiba (talk) 12:26, 22 January 2010 (UTC)

Aha, so you not created it yourself as you claimed, case closed. --Martin H. (talk) 12:32, 22 January 2010 (UTC)

So if I hired a photographer to take it and he took it for me, gave me the original and was left with no copies of it, that is not my picture? I actually have to press the button on the camera to own the rights? Dialiba (talk) 12:50, 22 January 2010 (UTC)

I dont know the exact law of your contry, in most countries: the copyright transfer works in written form only. But who cares, you not uploaded the image the first time but the second time. It is not the last image you uploaded but also the 3rd or 4th, and as you said youself: you lied before. The image is not an original but a cropped version from somewhere. You dont have an original full size image. As well as your previous claim: This story is constructed and not true, please stop this. --Martin H. (talk) 12:52, 22 January 2010 (UTC)

I have the original in my hands right now and of course, it's a full size image. I could also upload it in full size, even though I am not sure how it proves anything. So, what should I do to prove you wrong and to prove that I am the only owner of the original image? There has to be a way to do that, since you are clearly judging me solely by my previous actions. Dialiba (talk) 13:29, 22 January 2010 (UTC)

Upload an unedited original and forward a written release from the copyright holder to COM:OTRS. --Martin H. (talk) 13:30, 22 January 2010 (UTC)

I have uploaded the unedited original by the name of Cocalic.jpg and I also uploaded a few derivative versions to fit well with the article(Cocalic2.jpg and Cocalic3.jpg). Even though there was no way that you could tell if it was an original or not. Dialiba (talk) 17:49, 22 January 2010 (UTC)

Thank you, please forward a written permission to COM:OTRS to provide evidence that the orignal copyright holder allows everyone to reuse the image everywhere for every purpose including commercial reuse under the terms of a free license. --Martin H. (talk) 17:51, 22 January 2010 (UTC)


bilder löschen. das sind meine bilder und die möchte ich gerne glöscht haben. wo besteht das problem?

ja das ist richtig,stimmt.
hiermit möchte ich mich entschuldigen,danke.

bitte löscht alle meine bilder,und dann das konto.

Arena auf Schalke

Hallo Martin,
ich erinnere mich nicht mehr so ganz wie wir das letzte Mal einen vom uploader unerwünschten Eintrag aus dem upload-log entfernt haben, ohne den upload-log komplett zu entfernen. Ich habe jetzt eine Anfrage wegen dieses (bereits 2005 hochgeladenen) Bildes und weiterer Bilder desselben Users, der (nur) seinen Namen aus der Beschreibungsseite verschwinden lassen möchte. Geht das auf admin-Ebene oder muss da oversight ran? Danke im voraus. --Túrelio (talk) 19:20, 8 January 2010 (UTC)

Informationen aus dem Upload log müssen "ge-oversighted" werden. Raymond fragen (siehe Oversighter Gruppe). --Martin H. (talk) 08:27, 9 January 2010 (UTC)
Danke. Inzwischen hatte aber schon unabhängig von mir ein Kollege Hand angelegt, m.E. allerdings etwas unglücklich, weil die Bilder einfach unter einem neuen account neu hochgeladen und die 2005 hochgeladenen Versionen einfach gelöscht wurden; siehe von File:Arena auf schalke gelsenkirchen germany.JPG. --Túrelio (talk) 09:54, 9 January 2010 (UTC)
Stimme ich mit dir überein. Das Problem kann aber immer noch einfach mit einem Redirect gelöst werden. Wenn der Log eintrag weg soll muss ein OS ran. --Martin H. (talk) 09:57, 9 January 2010 (UTC)
OV scheint auf jedenfalls unvermeidlich, weil bei einem redir, den ich gerade mal probeweise erstellt hatte, die ursprünglichen Logs (zumindest für uns) sichtbar bleiben. Gruß --Túrelio (talk) 10:11, 9 January 2010 (UTC)

anfrage wegen bilder

wenn ich so dreist sein darf, dich zu bitten, auf meine discussion seite zu schauen. dort wurde von trixi vier Bilder reklamiert und ich habe die informationen abgeändert. könntest du nachschauen, ob man es so lassen kann? die bilder auf dem dort angegebenen projekt sind gemeinfrei (älter als 100 jahre), das photo vom auto befindet sich im besitz der projektbetreiber. die voraussetzungen zur bildnutzung sind auch erfüllt. vielen dank schonmal im voraus --Okami-san (talk) 20:34, 8 January 2010 (UTC)

¿do you know spanish?

que tengo que hacer para poner fotos y q no las borren.....

todos los perfiles de equipos de futbol tienen fotos.

File tagging: missing permissions

Hi Martin! You wrote, that these files has no licence information: 1. 2. 3.

Please, check mail We sent licence confirmation a few hours ago. Also, you can check licensing on the page

Thank you! Peter.

An OTRS volunteer will handle this. --Martin H. (talk) 04:16, 10 January 2010 (UTC)

need help

Hi Martin! I wrote the wrong file title,could you help change the file name? File:SD launch vehicle model.JPG The title name should called CZ-2C/SD launch vehicle model. My English not very well.Thank you.--HSBC$$$ 04:06, 10 January 2010 (UTC)

A "/" is not allowed in filenames. --Martin H. (talk) 04:15, 10 January 2010 (UTC)
OMG!The launch vehicle ’s name is “CZ-2C/SD launch vehicle” How should I do?--HSBC$$$ 03:58, 11 January 2010 (UTC)

About File:St. John's Episcopal Church, Cleveland.jpg

Hi Martin... I saw that you reverted my upload at File:St. John's Episcopal Church, Cleveland.jpg, I'm really sorry. I don't know why, but previous image that I'm uploaded doesn't previewed in Commons correctly... Actually I'm upload the new version of that photo according to the request at Graphic Lab/Photography workshop in Wikipedia... And now, it seems that my latest version of upload did success... I hope this doesn't happen with me in the future upload... I'm terribly sorry...
Oh yeah, I see that you're an admin in Commons, can you help me to delete File:St. John's Episcopal Church, Cleveland Fix.jpg because that image is just a test upload (after you revert my upload, I tried to upload under different name so I won't make more mess in the File:St. John's Episcopal Church, Cleveland.jpg's File history). And again, I'm really sorry... Ivan Akira (talk) 05:10, 10 January 2010 (UTC)

No problem, deleted the temporary upload. The version I reverted was broken for some reason, looks good now. --Martin H. (talk) 06:35, 10 January 2010 (UTC)
Thanks! Ivan Akira (talk) 13:38, 10 January 2010 (UTC)

Picture Permisson 2

Hi Martin, there is a question for you regarding this topic at my talk. Regards --Hanky27 (talk) 08:56, 10 January 2010 (UTC)


Concerning File:Iskra-Angelova.jpg. She is a BG actress and journalist and last year organized Jimbo's visit to Bulgaria. However, she didn't like her image File:Iskra Angelova 20090605.jpg, as cropped from File:Wikipedian-meetup-with-Jimbo-in-Sofia-20090605-3.jpg and asked me to replace it with this image which she sent me. Before I did so, I explicitly required the information of the author's name and agreement for publishing under a free license, and she declared that the photographer has devolved all rights to her and that she is okay with the publication under a free license. She simply cannot do it by herself because has no experience with wikipedia and commons, and... after all she is not obliged to. :) However, she has her personal reasons not to want to contact him again for a new permission, which I also consider meaningless having all the rights transferred. How do you think? As far as I know, there is still no Bulgarian speaking member of the OTRS team, so forwarding the correspondence (even with a translation) is practically the same as taking the responsibility to upload in this way. However, if you advise me, I'd waste some more of my and her time on the issue... Spiritia 11:01, 10 January 2010 (UTC)

It was a bit difficult, but I already understand what happend while marking the image as missing permission evidence. Please forward permission to OTRS, I dont know if there bulgarian speaking volunteers, so maybe a translation in your forwarded message will help. Thats the process and I see no reason to not follow it. --Martin H. (talk) 11:05, 10 January 2010 (UTC)
The permission was sent yesterday, directly in English. Hope this helps. Spiritia 17:13, 11 January 2010 (UTC)

Im Sinn verdreht

Hallo Martin!

Ich hoffe doch, du hast diese Antwort meinerseits nicht als Deutschtümelei interpretiert, denn so war dies nicht beabsichtigt. Gruß, High Contrast (talk) 11:58, 10 January 2010 (UTC)

Ich habe sie als humorvollen Hinweis darauf verstanden, dass ich deine Babel-Boxen nicht beachtet hatte und dass ich es eigentlich wissen müsste, da man sich ja häufiger begegnet. Fällt mir erst jetzt auf, dass sich das VD nicht auf meinen Satz beziehen, sondern ein "Merks dir für die Zukunft, vielen Dank" sein könnte. Ich war allerdings auch damit beschäftigt zu schmunzeln, weil ich deine Antwort zusammen mit diesem, Minuten später von dir getätigten Eintrag auf meiner Beobachtungsliste hatte ;) --Martin H. (talk) 12:11, 10 January 2010 (UTC)
Dann war und ist alles in Butter. Gruß, High Contrast (talk) 18:35, 10 January 2010 (UTC)


Hi martin. please delete this picture for it subtitle. thanx.Gire 3pich2005 (talk) 18:47, 10 January 2010 (UTC)

Why? --Martin H. (talk) 05:50, 11 January 2010 (UTC)

because the is advertising. Isnt it?Gire 3pich2005 (talk) 11:59, 11 January 2010 (UTC)

Its a watermark from the source, you can remove it. --Martin H. (talk) 13:42, 13 January 2010 (UTC)

User:Asalex040479 Files

Dear Martin Н. I did some changes, concerning permissions for files: File:Elena_Panova_2008_Champ.jpg File:Elena_Panova_Byceps.jpg File:Elena_Panova_Dance.jpg File:Elena_Panova_Photo_Session.jpg

Would you please check it? If I did something wrong, please, explain what shall I do. All these files are not copyrighted. 3 of them are made by me. And 1 by my friend - Andrey Krutogolov. Thank you. --Asalex040479 (talk) 19:28, 11 January 2010 (UTC)

The image descriptions not satisfactory explain who created the content. Also if something was published befor a written Commons:Permission is required. See COM:OTRS. --Martin H. (talk) 13:41, 13 January 2010 (UTC)

User Bcav22


the user Bcav22 (talk · contribs) was blocked but he created another account (50brian (talk · contribs) - [9]). I want to know if he can do it, 'cause the block log says: "with an expiry time of indefinite (account creation disabled) (Intimidating behaviour/harassment)"

he already uploaded many images, at least one of then is copyvio...File:Memorial Corinthians Entrada.jpg - the image is very similar but isn't the same.

thanks, tales.ebner 11:38, 12 January 2010 (UTC)

I will have a look for copyvios, but further check with checkuser tools are not realy helpful as the old case is too long ago. The old account was, you remember the uploads, blocked because of the persistant copyright violation and the users wrong claims like "my father created the images" on images from various sources. --Martin H. (talk) 13:41, 13 January 2010 (UTC)


I need help with a file that I uploaded. I received the following message.

A file that you have uploaded to Wikimedia Commons, File:Marti_Rulli.jpg, is missing information about where it comes from or who created it, which is needed to verify its copyright status.

The picture came from Marti Rulli and I have her permission to use it. What do I need to do?

--Clover24 (talk) 20:27, 13 January 2010 (UTC)

Considering the size of the image it comes from The author is of course not the person herself but someone else on her behalf. Furthermore please provide written evidence that the copyright holder agreed to release the image in the public domain so that everyone can use it everywhere, perpetually for every purpose including e.g. commercial reuse without any copyright restrictions. --Martin H. (talk) 19:07, 14 January 2010 (UTC)


(Bitte benutzen Sie den Übersetzer)

Hola Martin H., fijate que hoy viendo el artículo The Smiths en la wikipedia en español ví que borraron una imágen que tenía el artículo, me fije que había pasado con ella y me lleve una sorepresa al ver que pusiste esto, dices que soy un títere de otro usuario, eso es falso; tal vez creas eso por unas charlas que tuvimos sobre imágenes de The Beatles y de The Beach Boys (estas), dondé dije que mi papa las había tomado, acepto que era mentira pero desde entonces quiero tomar otros rumbos, quiero seguir las reglas establecidas aquí y si te das cuenta he sido precavido al subir mí ultima imágen. Desearía que quitaras ese cuadro donde dice que soy un títere ya que no lo soy. Saludos compañero.--Beat 768 (talk) 23:26, 13 January 2010 (UTC)

User talk:Zak Smith is your sockpuppet. --Martin H. (talk) 13:08, 14 January 2010 (UTC)
Claro que no, no se que otra cosa además de subir una imágen de los Beach Boys haya hecho el User:Zak Smith para relacionarlo conmígo, como dije, yo quiero cambiar mis rumbos en el proyecto despues de las mentiras de las fotos, si te das cuenta desde entonces no he subido imágenes falsas ni nada.--Beat 768 (talk) 20:46, 14 January 2010 (UTC)
I not understand you. Use a simple language and not make typographical mistakes. Typos make it impossible to read this per translation tool. Additional: You talk of "el" User:Zak Smith... YOU are Zak Smith. You may have missed my group membership including checkuser, I make use of this tool if appropriate. --Martin H. (talk) 20:57, 14 January 2010 (UTC)
Zak Smith I'm not, I do not know the user, I do not know what that user did to confuse me.
(I used the translator)--Beat 768 (talk) 21:06, 14 January 2010 (UTC)

OTRS permission

Hi Martin H. The images uploaded at Category:Drowned World Tour have their permission at OTRS with ticket number as Ticket:2010010810008251. Is it possible to confirm them ASAP as the article in Wikipedia, where they will be used, is on a GA review. Legolas from Mirkwood 07:53, 14 January 2010 (UTC)

Ask at COM:OTRSN please. --Martin H. (talk) 07:55, 14 January 2010 (UTC)

Re-deleted file Gruposgae_arbol

  • The image Gruposgae_arbol.gif was deleted, restored, and deleted again. What can I do? I don't receive Wikimedia email notifications when somewho answers to me, and I don't live in Wikipedia. --Libero (talk) 08:41, 14 January 2010 (UTC)
  • I don't have data about when I drew the Gruposgae_arbol.gif file, but if the picture in is the same, then mine is made before. And I cannot remove a logo if I have'nt the image available (the mine) --Libero (talk) 08:50, 14 January 2010 (UTC)

The Emirr

Hallo. I think you fixed my template. I understood. I have to add "subst:" Danke. Guten tag.  The Emirr Disscussion 11:53, 14 January 2010 (UTC)

You are right. I will do that. Thanks. Have a good day.

 The Emirr Disscussion 18:51, 14 January 2010 (UTC) ´

Hello. MGA73 told me there is a problem in my licence tag. I think I must add something to my template. Can you help me, please?  The Emirr Disscussion 18:53, 15 January 2010 (UTC)

License migration

You made this edit [10] with a note that migration is not redundant. I do not agree. If image is {{cc-by-3.0}} then we do not migrate. Try to remove "|migration=relicense" and you will notice that the template does not ask for migration.

IF migration is not redundant and migration should be done then we should check thousands of images again. --MGA73 (talk) 18:02, 14 January 2010 (UTC)

The image in question was licensed under cc-by and GFDL, the migration adds a cc-by-sa. Of course the cc-by-sa is not a big gain over the cc-by, but it is not the same. Count my edit as nitpicking but I dont see a reason to disagree. --Martin H. (talk) 19:04, 14 January 2010 (UTC)


Does an image of a person have copyright just for the fact of containin that person? Or is the source from where I took the picture the main issue?


No, the person inside the photo not have copyright but personality rights, the copyright is with the photographer, so the source was the reason. --Martin H. (talk) 11:11, 16 January 2010 (UTC)

My image

You have blocked my image. I have sent the ermission at Early I too sent permission, but the answer has not received. It is possible, you will help me to solve this problem --Rafshm (talk) 22:01, 16 January 2010 (UTC)

An OTRS volunteer then will review the copyright holders written permission. --Martin H. (talk) 22:04, 16 January 2010 (UTC)

O'k --Rafshm (talk) 22:06, 16 January 2010 (UTC)

I have received the message ---- OTRS is currently backlogged, so it may take up to one month until you receive an answer (see commons:Commons:OTRS). --Isderion 08:54, 17. Jan. 2010 (CET)

I think my photo will deleted, because they cannot authorize within a week. --Rafshm (talk) 08:02, 17 January 2010 (UTC)

Already solved. --Martin H. (talk) 17:12, 17 January 2010 (UTC)

O'k--Rafshm (talk) 18:55, 17 January 2010 (UTC)


Hey, I do not upload images without permission, all are of my own, because someone always comes and says I load images without permission? I'm tired, I even think about giving up my projects on Wikipedia, I edit the articles about my hometown with my picture and then someone comes and says that carried other people without permission! Please do not delete my pictures! Sorry for my English, God bless you.

Mauro Costa (talk) 15:07, 17 January 2010 (UTC)

Nonsense, the track of source links says the opposite, also you said at this talk that you not copy images from anywhere else - wekk, that exactly what you did. --Martin H. (talk) 17:11, 17 January 2010 (UTC)

Uploaded Files

i have uploaded a one file in wikipedia commons, this file, have a owner but i have permission to distribute this.

No, you not have a written permission from the copyright holder of en:File:Deathly hallowslogo.jpg to upload it here so that everyone can reuse it everywhere for everything including commercial reuse. --Martin H. (talk) 17:10, 17 January 2010 (UTC)


Hey. The media I uploaded (Errah3.jpg, Ixion1.jpg, and Kerrat1.jpg) are actually screenshots, not concept art, and as thus are quite public (anyone can play a game and snap some pictures). They have actually been published already in a few magazines. More so, I am one of the developers of the article the said images were attached to, the screenshots were taken by me, Errah3.jpg, and by another of our artists ikarus, (real name available on request), Ixion1.jpg and Kerrat1.jpg.

I was unsure though as to what license is applicable to images of a non-CC/non-GPL software. It's an independent modification of Unreal Tournament 3 and we plan to go commercial, so I hesitate to label even our screenshots as CC. Is there a way around this? Since it seems like WikiCommons does not allow non-CC content.

The images are of course meant to be freely distributed, but only with attribution, and no derivatives. Nevertheless, I will add relevant information now. Please advise before further actions against said content.

Re: Kerrat1.jpg, Ixion1.jpg, Errah3.jpg
May I then ask how is it that Epic has its own page for Unreal Tournament III here on Wikipedia including screenshots and the company logo? As well as not one but a lot of game mods that are currently also featured om Wikipedia, also all featuring their respective logos and screenshots. They are also all derivatives of commercial software and in most instances aren't even sanctioned by the original game engine itself. How far does 'derivative' go before being recognized as a separate entity from the original? AFF: Planetstorm is a total conversion mod, which means that almost everything except the core code has been changed from the original.
AFF: Planetstorm, however, is completely recognized by Epic Games. We, as well as several other mods, have been part of the Make Something Unreal Contest sponsored by Epic itself, as well as having already won several awards and been part of several promotional campaigns by Epic including one on their newly released free engine.
If I may list some examples of mods present here on Wikipedia which are undeniably breaking this rule as you yourself have outlined them (some in fact, are using Epic's proprietary software): Garry's Mod, Eternal Silence, Killing Floor, List of Battlefield 1942 Mods, List of Source Engine Mods
Those are unarguably exceptions. If so, how do I do the same? Are the media files present in those wikipedia entries of other mods hosted on external servers or on en.wikipedia itself (and not on wikicommons)? Or does wikipedia also disallow that? --Astepintooblivion (talk) 06:48, 20 January 2010 (UTC)
Have a look at the images.


Can I use this one? [11] Jmh649 (talk) 10:10, 18 January 2010 (UTC)

Obviously not. The website content is licensed under a Non-commercial Non-derivative license, so the content is neither free for commercial reuse nor modification, but both are Commons:Project scope#required licensing terms. Also the images are grabbed from elsewhere, so even if the license is free for commercial reuse it cant apply to the images. --Martin H. (talk) 10:11, 18 January 2010 (UTC)
Yes sorry missed that. Here is one on Knol [12] they are under the same license is use right?Jmh649 (talk) 10:16, 18 January 2010 (UTC)
Yes, the text is free, but the images are again not created by the same author but from somewhere else. They are not published under the free license by the copyright holder - but thats required. --Martin H. (talk) 10:20, 18 January 2010 (UTC)
Okay well I guess I will just wait until I get someone who is anorexic and welling to have their picture taken.Jmh649 (talk) 10:24, 18 January 2010 (UTC)
Yes, also the CDC as a potential source for public domain images has no images. --Martin H. (talk) 10:33, 18 January 2010 (UTC)


Bonjour MARTIN. H. Je vous remercie pour votre message et vos avertissements concernant mes erreurs de débutant.

Je dois vous avouer que j'ai du mal à comprendre et à appliquer toutes les applications de WikipédiA. C'est un véritable labyrinthe qui demande une bonne mémoire, ce que à mon âge j'ai bien perdu.

Je pense avoir remédié en partie le téléchargement incriminé "Tryptique-Odyssee". Il semble toutefois qu'il reste un détail à rectifier sans que je sache comment. Votre aide me serait précieuse et un grand merci de me la procurer. J'espère retrouver votre réponse quand elle aura lieu.--Colibrix (talk) 16:54, 18 January 2010 (UTC)

Re-Bonjour MARTIN. H. Je viens de me rendre compte que mon précédent message s'est intégré dans le message ANOREXIE et je m'en excuse. De plus il est tout déformé et ne reflète pas exactement ce que j'ai voulu dire..? Non je ne suis pas Raphaël Toussaint. Je suis un ami de très longue date et notre confiance réciproque est totale. J'ai bien sur son autorisation pour accomplir, pour construire, suivre et mettre à jour son site. J'ajoute que c'est à sa demande qu'il en est ainsi. Il me fournit, au fur et à mesure des besoins, notamment pour sourcer, les documents que je scanne et que j'intègre dans ses pages. Comme vous pouvez le constater à la lecture de son site, il n'y a que moi qui intervient. Avant cela je ne connaissais pas du tout WikipédiA, ce qui explique mes difficultés dans les travaux qui demandent de l'expérience. Il faut beaucoup de mémoire, ce que je n'ai plus, pour naviguer dans ce foisonnement de liens et de renvois où on a vite fait de se perdre. J'ai bien demandé à être parrainé, sans résultat pour le moment. La demande doit être plus importante que l'offre.Il faut s'armer de patience. Dans cette attente, je vous remercie pour votre aide. J'espère avoir répondu à votre attente.

Aujourd'hui: 19 janvier 2010-10h06

Cher MARTIN. H. Cette réponse à votre dernier Email. J'ai honte de vous avouer mon ignorance. D'ordinaire, je n'ai pas de problème pour naviguer dans les Forums que je visite régulièrement alors que dans WikipédiA je me sens perdu. Je ne comprend pas ce que vous voulez que je fasse. Je ne sais pas comment rectifier la catégorie de "Tryptique-Odyssee" qui devrait être la même que "Ambiance Hivernale....". Quand à la source, j'ai noté ((posséder)) "Own work" sans être sur. Il y a bien cet outils mentionné mais que je ne sais pas utiliser. Je pratique WikipédiA depuis trop peu de temps pour comprendre toutes ses subtilités. De plus, je ne comprends pas pourquoi ces présents messages sont déformés une fois transmis. Par exemple, que vient faire "ONU" dans hommage rendu par R.T. d'où sort cet ONU. Auriez vous la gentillesse de m'indiquer point par point, comment exécuter les manipulations nécessaires pour rétablir convenablement l'image. Merci pour votre compréhension.--Colibrix (talk) 09:23, 19 January 2010 (UTC)

Bonjour MARTIN. H. Je fais suite à votre dernier Email. Je dois dire que je ne suis pas plus avancé. Il semble qu'il y a un problème de traduction dans nos échanges que j'ai du mal à appliquer. A vrai dire, je ne sais pas les appliquer. Vous me demandez qui est l'auteur des images que je veux verser dans Commons. L'auteur des photos c'est moi et non pas Raphaël Toussaint qui est lui, l'auteur des œuvres peintes. J'ai le droit d'utiliser ces photos à ma convenance. Je vous demande donc d'en tenir compte. Concernant cette photo "Tryptique Odyssée", ayant peur de ne pas savoir rattraper les erreurs, n'est-il pas plus simple que vous la supprimiez pour que je puisse la téléverser en suivant les bonnes règles. Ceci dit et après concertation avec Raphaël Toussaint, nous avons décidé de faire parvenir à WikipédiA, une déclaration de consentement standard de licence pour photos. Je vous remercie pour votre attentive compréhension.--Colibrix (talk) 13:16, 20 January 2010 (UTC)
Martin, thank you for having taken care of this. Since I'm a native French speaker, I have offered my help to Colibrix; that will be easier for both of you. Judging by what Colibrix says above, I have taken the liberty to add an {{OTRS pending}} to the picture. I hope this is OK as I am not 100% sure Colibrix used the OTRS system (I have asked him to in his talk page). Cheers — Xavier, 22:10, 21 January 2010 (UTC)
Yes! Thank you very much, I not understood much of the above text. --Martin H. (talk) 22:18, 21 January 2010 (UTC)


Can you please restore the logo of Gumley Cricket Club on the page that I created. I am a member of the club and have full permission to use the logo on the club's page. In any case there is no copyright on the logo.

I find it quite strange that there is some weird police force patrolling wikipedia for copyright violations, presuming guilt and putting the onus on the innocent to vindicate themselves. This is not the wikipedia spirit that I understand, where everyone pulls together to make something great that owes nothing to any corporation, what is going on?

Ayrton5; 18-Jan-2010

There is copyright on everything, except it is Commons:Licensing#simple design which is not the case here. Please provide a written permission from the copyright holder following the process described in COM:OTRS refering to the url and the logo will be restored. The information that you have permission to reuse something is not enough as permission must be given to everyone to reuse everywhere for every purpose. So far Commons:Licensing#Acceptable licenses (third block of examples) applies. --Martin H. (talk) 23:38, 18 January 2010 (UTC)

Image free

Hello Martin. H, I wondered if I could pass this image of the English wiki to here? (See the license). Thanks.--Beat 768 (talk) 23:27, 19 January 2010 (UTC)

Im unsure, the uploader not provides a source of the first publication but only a recent website, at least questionable, worth an deletion discussion to have expert opinions. --Martin H. (talk) 13:28, 20 January 2010 (UTC)

New section

Scan einer Kopie eines etwa 130 Jahre alten Familienfotos eines unbekannten Autors löschenswert sein ? Bzw - was ist unklar ? --Wistula (talk) 18:05, 29 December 2009 (UTC)

Ich denke du sprichst über File:WEH von Dresler u Scharfenstein 2.JPG, keine Angst, es ging nicht um "löschenswert", es ging darum so viel Informationen wie möglich zu haben und nicht so wenig wie gerade nötig. Der upload erfüllte zweiteres, es waren so gut wie keine Informationen vorhanden. Und ja, dass gilt auch für 130 Jahre alte Bilder. --Martin H. (talk) 13:31, 20 January 2010 (UTC)


Please see Commons:Administrators'_noticeboard#DeLinker_backlog. -- User:Docu at 08:17, 22 January 2010 (UTC)


Christian Wirth's photo is in the public domain. The Romani children is also in the public domain. They come originally from Nazi sources and are now in trhe U.S. archives. 7mike5000 (talk) 12:03, 22 January 2010 (UTC)

Provide a source, archive number, weblink or publication - something to search in at least so that everyone can verify the copyright status. Also note, that seized enemy property might be pd in the us but not in the country of origin. Thats not enough for commons. --Martin H. (talk) 12:05, 22 January 2010 (UTC)

there is a message on the talk page of professor Uwe Kils

please remove immediately the third line of user:uwe kils. His email is normally secret. Dr. Chandra Patell 15:40, 22 January 2010 (UTC)

I already did that minutes ago per request, everyone else including you could have done it, the page is not protected. --Martin H. (talk) 15:41, 22 January 2010 (UTC)
p.s.: ist zwar etwas spekulativ, aber wer aus dem Netz der Deutschen Telekom schreibt und sich 7 Minuten vorher noch als wer Anders ausgegeben hat braucht sich nicht hinter Englischer Sprache oder anderen Namen zu verstecken. Finde ich offen gesagt ziemlich lächerlich, unfgefähr so lächerlich wie die dem Fall zugrunde liegenden Schutzrechtsberühmungen. --Martin H. (talk) 15:49, 22 January 2010 (UTC)


I sent an email to COM:OTRS yesterday. Hilton62 (talk) 15:43, 22 January 2010 (UTC)


Have a good day--Quintupeu (talk) 00:05, 23 January 2010 (UTC)

No, Special:NewFiles and your copyright violations. --Martin H. (talk) 00:07, 23 January 2010 (UTC)
This is the end. Thanks a lot for your "help". No more. --Quintupeu (talk) 00:13, 23 January 2010 (UTC)
You not even tried to do something good here, so dont complaint. See File:EdgardoBathich.jpg - what has this image to do with the fbi? Thats pure fantasy - or a blatant lie. --Martin H. (talk) 00:16, 23 January 2010 (UTC)
Bye.... Continue with the delete button. Its YOUR work.--Quintupeu (talk) 00:17, 23 January 2010 (UTC)
See this edit. --Martin H. (talk) 00:37, 23 January 2010 (UTC)

Atsushi ito

Hi Martin . I'm gongunner.. i'm sorry for my english. Well,do you have some legal photo of Atsushi ito?

Thank you.


Hello. Why you delete the image Immortal_apollyon_spain.jpg. This image doesn´t have copyright--Progenie of the great apocalypse2 (talk) 19:04, 23 January 2010 (UTC)

How can you say it has copyright or not, it is not your own photo. --Martin H. (talk) 19:11, 23 January 2010 (UTC)
The photographer was my friend, and she takes me the photo. THE PHOTO DOESN´T HAVE COPYRIGHT.

I want to edit in Commons, and now I can´t, thanks Martin!

File:Primary Student of Pakistan.JPG

FYI, [13] - you've reverted to a vandalized version of the page. -- 01:57, 24 January 2010 (UTC)

Thanks, I wanted to revert to the version with the information template of course. Looks ok now. --Martin H. (talk) 02:03, 24 January 2010 (UTC)

Artist cannot add his own images to a wikipedia article written about him?

You have added the following line on the wikipedia article written about me: "A major contributor to this article appears to have a close connection with its subject." I assume this is because I have attempted to add some images of my artwork in the last 24 hours. Please note: I have added no new text. I have only fixed the shortage of references (and lack of footnotes), which someone else had noted, and I would like to add some images. Does an artist adding images to the article about him mean the article does not have a "neutral point of view"? If so, I will take the images off permanently. This is hardly self-promotion.

artconstructionset, 24jan2010, 11:45EST

The whole text was and is unencyclopedic. Yes, the addition of images also not follows the purpose of information but merely promotion, but the major concern is the text and a possible en:WP:COI. Also the text quality, it uses citations like "reinvent environmentalism for the digital age." without refering to a source. Quoting something without source is an no go in every text. The article was entirely created by people related to the artist with an interest to promote more then to inform with facts, the article simply needs an editor with an neutral view. The article also includes weblinks in the text for promotion, thats a matter of en:Wikipedia:Weblinks#Advertising and conflicts of interest - also called spam. --Martin H. (talk) 17:20, 24 January 2010 (UTC)


Hallo martin h. siehaben mir geschrieben ih soll die bilder rausnehmen die ich eingestellt habe , dass würde ich auch machen aber da bräucht ich ihre hilfe denn, ch weiß nicht wie ich sie aus wikimedia commons wieder rausbekomme. Ich würde mich über eine nachricht freuen. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Franklampard95 (talk • contribs) 23:22, 25 January 2010 (UTC)

Die Bilder sind bereits gelöscht. --Martin H. (talk) 23:25, 25 January 2010 (UTC)


Commons-emblem-issue.svg File:LongwoodNatchez.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 | беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ | български | বাংলা | català | čeština | dansk | Deutsch | Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ | Zazaki | Ελληνικά | English | Esperanto | español | eesti | فارسی | suomi | français | galego | עברית | hrvatski | magyar | Հայերեն | Bahasa Indonesia | íslenska | italiano | 日本語 | 한국어 | 한국어 (조선) | македонски | മലയാളം | Plattdüütsch | Nederlands | norsk nynorsk | norsk | occitan | polski | پښتو | português | português do Brasil | română | русский | sicilianu | slovenčina | slovenščina | shqip | српски / srpski | svenska | Türkçe | українська | Tiếng Việt | 中文 | 中文(简体)‎ | 中文(繁體)‎ | +/−

Nyttend (talk) 00:18, 26 January 2010 (UTC)

Moving/renaming images files

Hi Martin, I actively edit on Wikisource and I transfer many images to the Commons. Sometimes, I should move/rename them to correct my error. How do I go about receiving permission to move/rename images of my uploads. I notice these errors some minutes after the upload when nothing links to the images except my own work. Also, I check links before any changes. Thanks. Ineuw (talk) 02:16, 26 January 2010 (UTC)

The only way to get this right is becoming an administrator. Without the move right please use {{rename|newname.ext|reason=reason according to Commons:File renaming}}. --Martin H. (talk) 17:19, 26 January 2010 (UTC)
My thanks as always. This is all I need. Ineuw (talk) 20:31, 26 January 2010 (UTC)


I find the ban a bit severe (given that the user has not uploaded only copyvios, apparently), I would have issued a long block before any ban. You judge. Unrelated question, I see you using flickr-related warnings and block messages nicer than mine, do you have a custom JS somewhere that I could get a look at? --Eusebius (talk) 15:40, 26 January 2010 (UTC)

No. The flickr uploads are not accidents but blatant flickrwashing. The recent uploads (Nikon D5000, Nikon D300s, Canon EOS-1D Mark III) are taken from recent websites like forums. This user does nothing but copyright violation, he even searches for ways to trick commons. Thats inacceptable. --Martin H. (talk) 15:43, 26 January 2010 (UTC)
Ps: The flickr warning is added by hand with {{subst:flickrvionote|File:..}}. Martin H. (talk) 15:46, 26 January 2010 (UTC)
OK, and your block message template, with an autotranslated section title? --Eusebius (talk) 16:01, 26 January 2010 (UTC)
Hm, I use Template:Indefblockeduser very often, that template not has a title, maybe add one? For shorter blocks I always use {{subst:Blocked|duartion|Reason}}, but some spanish users already complaint that the titel (You have been blocked for a duration of {{{1}}} has an untranslated part, (day or week or month). --Martin H. (talk) 16:28, 26 January 2010 (UTC)
Better than me, I use fully manual and untranslated section titles with a manual {{blocked user}}. Thanks for the info anyway. --Eusebius (talk) 19:58, 26 January 2010 (UTC)

Michael Minsky

In our studygroup are more people who have the same photograph of Michael Minsky ( the one you took away) So, no one is wrong. 16:54, 26 January 2010 (UTC)

The fact that many people own a copy of an image does not make it public domain. See COM:PRP. The image must be public domain due to copyright expiration (e.g. 70 years after the photographer died) or published voluntarily by the copyright holder (e.g. the photographer) under a free license. --Martin H. (talk) 17:21, 26 January 2010 (UTC)

Article Tagansky prison. A photo probably 1957. Threaten to clean. But this photo is 50 years in the free reference. And, of course, it is impossible to establish the author.

--Ohlumon (talk) 23:58, 27 January 2010 (UTC)

The copyright will last 70 years after the photographers death. 50 years not justifies any public domain claim. --Martin H. (talk) 00:01, 28 January 2010 (UTC)


Regresó el copyvio: File:Big-metra300x350-1-.jpg del mismo autor Dj Constantine. Saludos, BetoCG¿decías? 04:37, 28 January 2010 (UTC)

Thanks, --Martin H. (talk) 10:25, 28 January 2010 (UTC)
De nuevo, ya está aquí. :S BetoCG¿decías? 05:18, 29 January 2010 (UTC)

Meltem Arikan.jpg


I've uploaded the File:Meltem_Arikan.jpg, it is one of the pictures of the Turkish novelist and playwright Meltem Arikan, taken by me, with her consent, to be used in her PR. We are not using this picture at anyplace else at the moment, and it was never published on permanent media either (newspapers, magazines, etc) The warning on the File page mentioned its usage on Ms. Arikan's twitter page, so I changed the mentioned picture to something else. I've also sent a mail to from her official site, with the written permission for the licence. Now, I'm leaving this note just to be sure that I've done everything required for the picture not to be deleted.

Thanks in advance, --Peliassos (talk) 09:01, 28 January 2010 (UTC)

Thanks, the email already solves the problem. --Martin H. (talk) 10:23, 28 January 2010 (UTC)
Okay, the warning tag is still on the page, that's why I was worried, so I guess someone will remove it later when they process my mail, right?--Peliassos (talk) 13:38, 28 January 2010 (UTC)

Vollständiger Name

Danke, dass du meinen vollständigen Namen aus der Datei Lothar Matthäus entfernt hast. Könntest du bitte noch bei

File:Bodo_Illgner.jpg, File:Eurotower in Frankfurt.jpg, File:Bugatti Veyron 16.4 3.JPG, File:Jens Lehmann.JPG, File:Uwe_Seeler.JPG, File:Vogts,_Seeler,_Eckel.JPG (zum Teil in file history) rausnehmen? Versuche meine Einträge bei Google zurückzufahren! Vielen Dank. PS: Bist du Admin, oder wie kannst du das verändern?--Florian K (talk) 09:35, 28 January 2010 (UTC)

Finish moves for 4 related images?

Sorry to bug you, but yesterday you moved one image that I marked for rename due to a typo in the file name — File:Illegal export of rosewood 004.jpg. However, there were 3 other related images also marked for rename that have yet to be touched. Would you mind doing them as well? They include: File:Illegally export of rosewood 003.jpg, File:Illegally export of rosewood 002.jpg, and File:Illegally export of rosewood 001.jpg. Thanks! – VisionHolder « talk » 10:28, 28 January 2010 (UTC)

Will rename them, I only catched the one I renamed in the Special:NewFiles and did the rename instantly. --Martin H. (talk) 10:29, 28 January 2010 (UTC)
You rock! Thanks! – VisionHolder « talk » 10:31, 28 January 2010 (UTC)
No, you rock! Images of Madagascar and other African countries are rare, active in the Africa categories I appreciate every new contribution :) Thank you very much. --Martin H. (talk) 15:30, 28 January 2010 (UTC)

You helped me earlier with a few image renames due to a typo, and I was wondering if you could help me with one more. While uploading, I forgot to change the file name, and since the rename requests are heavily backlogged, I'd like to get the problem fixed sooner rather than later (for the OTRS request that I'll be submitting). The image that needs renamed is: File:20091114_0098a.jpg. Sorry to bug you, and if you'd rather let the natural process take care of it, that's fine too. Best, – VisionHolder « talk » 17:20, 30 January 2010 (UTC)

done, your welcome. --Martin H. (talk) 17:23, 30 January 2010 (UTC)
If you want, I'll send you a wikilink to the article(s) I'm writing on the topic when I finally get it/them published. Thanks a million! – VisionHolder « talk » 17:30, 30 January 2010 (UTC)
If published on Wikipedia I will see the article by the file usage ;) --Martin H. (talk) 17:33, 30 January 2010 (UTC)

hola, hi

i take the photo in my camera. what is the licence ??? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Paulizpec (talk • contribs) 15:10, 28 January 2010 (UTC)

We have 2 works here:
  • 1) the photographic work of a 3D object, that work is already licensed by you, you released the photo into the public domain.
  • 2) the book cover which is presumably copyright by a publisher, which is not licensed yet.
Please provide an written permission, email, from the copyright holder of the book cover that they agree to the licensing and agree that this single reproduction of the book cover (this photo) is public domain. --Martin H. (talk) 15:34, 28 January 2010 (UTC)
already sent a mail to e-mail that tells me. change the license??? I have to put that license??
I have to do anything else???
paulizpecPaulizpec (talk) 15:43, 28 January 2010 (UTC)
Nothing. If you sent/forwarded an email according to Commons:OTRS/es from the copyright holder of the book cover to everything is ok. --Martin H. (talk) 15:48, 28 January 2010 (UTC)

I knew not much to answer. What do you want? What if the photo is the original book or copy it from somewhere? What if I took the photo of my house which is what I do to avoid problems like these? "I still do not know why there are problems?

paulizpecPaulizpec (talk) 15:56, 28 January 2010 (UTC)

Your photo contains a copyrighted work, the book cover. So to say your photo is derivative of the book cover. You are required to provide a written permission from the copyright holder of the book - likely the publisher. --Martin H. (talk) 13:26, 29 January 2010 (UTC)


Hi Martin, I unblocked this user on two conditions.

Multichill (talk) 12:34, 29 January 2010 (UTC)

Why not unblock directly the main account Trojan? Anyway, thanks for the info. --Martin H. (talk) 13:19, 29 January 2010 (UTC)
Doh! I mixed up accounts. Blocking this one again. Would like to see user:Ischa1 SULified and than unblocked. Multichill (talk) 14:17, 29 January 2010 (UTC)

Question on Flickr image

Hi Martin, I just wanted to run a question by you on a Flickr image. This is the image [14], and it's licensed as Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 2.0 Generic. I believe this means the image cannot be used on wikimedia commons, but I just wanted to doublecheck. Many thanks again. MarmadukePercy (talk) 22:50, 29 January 2010 (UTC)

Bibliodyssey, an blog I bookmarked and visit every day by the way because it is awsome, is only collecting images from digital libraries. So we can not reuse the image under attribution to the flickr account. The original source is written in the blog, from that information I cant say what the copyright status might be. --Martin H. (talk) 22:58, 29 January 2010 (UTC)
We'd probably have to contact the source for assistance in ascertaining what the status would be... Tabercil (talk) 23:00, 29 January 2010 (UTC)
Yes, ask him on his blog or flickr. --Martin H. (talk) 23:01, 29 January 2010 (UTC)
Okay, many thanks for the help. I'll direct a question his way. And, yes, it is an amazing blog, which I just encountered for the first time. Best, MarmadukePercy (talk) 23:34, 29 January 2010 (UTC)

File:Execution in China.jpg

Hello ! I think that this file is a copyright violation : File:Execution in China.jpg. Thanks. Luoping (talk) 20:56, 31 January 2010 (UTC)

Sorry the correct link is en:File:Execution in China.jpg. Luoping (talk) 18:54, 1 February 2010 (UTC)
Thanks for the correction. Thats fair use on en.wp, the question is if the fair use is justified inside the fair use policy of en.wp or not. Thats an en.wp issue, nothing for me on Commons. --Martin H. (talk) 18:58, 1 February 2010 (UTC)

General Benjamin Lincoln House

Thank you for uploading that larger version of the Benjamin Lincoln House, as well as creating the cat for the general. MarmadukePercy (talk) 02:42, 1 February 2010 (UTC)

Your welcome, the category already existed as a red link, I only added text and subcategories to it ;) --Martin H. (talk) 03:43, 1 February 2010 (UTC)