User talk:Monumenteer2014

From Wikimedia Commons, the free media repository
Jump to: navigation, search
Welcome to Wikimedia Commons, Monumenteer2014!

-- Wikimedia Commons Welcome (talk) 16:52, 18 June 2014 (UTC)

Institutional consent[edit]

Hi, I added something to my answer at the Help desk. -- Asclepias (talk) 06:57, 1 July 2014 (UTC)

head shot for wikimediadc website[edit]

hey monumentman, we need a headshot better than File:Baltimore_Free_School_Editathon_20121208.jpg. the wikimediadc page has a mystery silhouette for you. Slowking4Farmbrough's revenge 03:31, 6 July 2014 (UTC)

There's no King like Slow King! Duly noted, sire, I shall prepare an image for you with haste. Monumenteer2014 (talk) 05:21, 6 July 2014 (UTC)
no rush, i would have last we met, had i known. btw, did you see this Commons:Unvisited app? saw his talk at wikiconfusa [1] Little Rock AR & Columbus GA. Slowking4Farmbrough's revenge 22:24, 6 July 2014 (UTC)

Copyright status: File:Fig 1B Entrance from inside.tif[edit]

беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ | български | català | čeština | dansk | Deutsch | Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ | English | فارسی | suomi | français | magyar | italiano | македонски | മലയാളം | Bahasa Melayu | 日本語 | norsk | polski | português | română | slovenščina | svenska | українська | 中文(简体)‎ | 中文(繁體)‎ | +/−

Warning sign
This media may be deleted.
Thanks for uploading File:Fig 1B Entrance from inside.tif. I notice that the file page either doesn't contain enough information about the license or it contains contradictory information about the license, so the copyright status is unclear.

If you created this file yourself, then you must provide a valid copyright tag. For example, you can tag it with {{self|GFDL|cc-by-sa-all}} to release it under the multi-license GFDL plus Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike All-version license or you can tag it with {{PD-self}} to release it into the public domain. (See Commons:Copyright tags for the full list of license tags that you can use.)

If you did not create the file yourself or if it is a derivative of another work that is possibly subject to copyright protection, then you must specify where you found it (e.g. usually a link to the web page where you got it), you must provide proof that it has a license that is acceptable for Commons (e.g. usually a link to the terms of use for content from that page), and you must add an appropriate license tag. If you did not create the file yourself and the specific source and license information is not available on the web, you must obtain permission through the OTRS system and follow the procedure described there.

Note that any unsourced or improperly licensed files will be deleted one week after they have been marked as lacking proper information, as described in criteria for speedy deletion. If you have uploaded other files, please confirm that you have provided the proper information for those files, too. If you have any questions about licenses please ask at Commons:Village pump/Copyright or see our help pages. Thank you.

And also:

No required license templates were detected at this file page. Please correct it, or if you have any questions please check my FAQ or contact me on my talk page. Yours sincerely, Jarekt (talk) 12:21, 1 October 2014 (UTC)

Hello there Jarekt. The author submitted permission through "OTRS" before I uploaded. Accordingly, I put an OTRS Pending tag on the photos. I think if you check the files you'll see he gave permission and everything is in order. Thanks, Monumenteer2014 (talk) 12:35, 1 October 2014 (UTC)
You still need a license template at the upload time. That requirement has little to do with OTRS requirements, since you need to know if the author released the images under free license or not before the upload. --Jarekt (talk) 12:59, 1 October 2014 (UTC)
Ah, ok, comprende, just added the intended license (CC-BY 4.0). Monumenteer2014 (talk) 13:17, 1 October 2014 (UTC)

File:Interesting Grave (247216748).jpg[edit]

Commons-emblem-issue.svg File:Interesting Grave (247216748).jpg has been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether it should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry.

If you created this file, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with it, such as a copyright issue.
Please remember to respond to and – if appropriate – contradict the arguments supporting deletion. Arguments which focus on the nominator will not affect the result of the nomination. Thank you!


Afrikaans | العربية | Български | বাংলা | Беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ | Català | Čeština | Dansk | Deutsch | Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ | Zazaki | Ελληνικά | English | Esperanto | Español | Eesti | فارسی | Suomi | Français | Galego | עברית | Magyar | Bahasa Indonesia | Íslenska | Italiano | 日本語 | 한국어 | Македонски | മലയാളം | Plattdüütsch | Nederlands | Norsk nynorsk | Norsk bokmål | Occitan | Polski | Português | Português do Brasil | Română | Русский | Slovenčina | Slovenščina | Shqip | Српски / srpski | Svenska | Türkçe | українська | Tiếng Việt | 中文 | 中文(简体)‎ | 中文(繁體)‎ | +/−

Ronhjones  (Talk) 23:57, 4 October 2014 (UTC)

File:Scar-Faced Angel (3370953133).jpg[edit]

Commons-emblem-issue.svg File:Scar-Faced Angel (3370953133).jpg has been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether it should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry.

If you created this file, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with it, such as a copyright issue.
Please remember to respond to and – if appropriate – contradict the arguments supporting deletion. Arguments which focus on the nominator will not affect the result of the nomination. Thank you!


Afrikaans | العربية | Български | বাংলা | Беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ | Català | Čeština | Dansk | Deutsch | Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ | Zazaki | Ελληνικά | English | Esperanto | Español | Eesti | فارسی | Suomi | Français | Galego | עברית | Magyar | Bahasa Indonesia | Íslenska | Italiano | 日本語 | 한국어 | Македонски | മലയാളം | Plattdüütsch | Nederlands | Norsk nynorsk | Norsk bokmål | Occitan | Polski | Português | Português do Brasil | Română | Русский | Slovenčina | Slovenščina | Shqip | Српски / srpski | Svenska | Türkçe | українська | Tiếng Việt | 中文 | 中文(简体)‎ | 中文(繁體)‎ | +/−

MGA73 (talk) 16:44, 9 October 2014 (UTC)

Re:MLK photo[edit]

I just checked original registrations in artwork for 1958. Neither Charles Moore nor The Montgomery Advertiser are listed as filing for a copyright. The newspaper also didn't file for a copyright on its July-December 1958 editions. I would hesitate to use any of the photos which were published in Life because the magazine was very efficient in filing for back issue renewals and they are part of the magazine's editorial content. I will be adding the additional information re: Charles Moore to the file's information. We hope (talk) 17:23, 14 October 2014 (UTC)

Hmmm, very interesting, We hope. Regarding the 1962 issue of Life: the credits in the front of the magazine do make clear when a photo comes from Black Star. I did confirm that Time renewed the copyright on Life. However, I'm not sure a lack of copyright registration would be damning. This article by an Assistant Professor of Journalism addresses precisely the relationship between Black Star and Life, stating that Black Star hired the photographers on contract and that "Life paid the agency a minimum guarantee of $1,800 for first refusal rights to these exclusive images" (p. 4). This article also seems to suggest pretty strongly that the author and/or Black Star might have kept copyright. And some evidence from the copyright page of a book published later. IMO the evidence seems pretty overwhelming attributing the copyright to "Charles Moore / Black Star" -- and that copyright was never renewed. Thus I'm still thinking a number of images from Moore and probably other Black Star photographers are public domain. Monumenteer2014 (talk) 18:32, 14 October 2014 (UTC)

Louisiana[edit]

Hello. Please note that Louisiana is not part of Mississippi, it is a separate state. Thanks. Cheers, -- Infrogmation (talk) 18:10, 14 October 2014 (UTC)

Lord have mercy, I'm sorry about that. This flickr tool is very effective but has clearly driven me mad with power. I think I may have annexed some of France for Mississippi also. Monumenteer2014 (talk) 18:36, 14 October 2014 (UTC)

File:Mississippi Lawmen.jpg[edit]

Commons-emblem-issue.svg File:Mississippi Lawmen.jpg has been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether it should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry.

If you created this file, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with it, such as a copyright issue.
Please remember to respond to and – if appropriate – contradict the arguments supporting deletion. Arguments which focus on the nominator will not affect the result of the nomination. Thank you!


Afrikaans | العربية | Български | বাংলা | Беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ | Català | Čeština | Dansk | Deutsch | Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ | Zazaki | Ελληνικά | English | Esperanto | Español | Eesti | فارسی | Suomi | Français | Galego | עברית | Magyar | Bahasa Indonesia | Íslenska | Italiano | 日本語 | 한국어 | Македонски | മലയാളം | Plattdüütsch | Nederlands | Norsk nynorsk | Norsk bokmål | Occitan | Polski | Português | Português do Brasil | Română | Русский | Slovenčina | Slovenščina | Shqip | Српски / srpski | Svenska | Türkçe | українська | Tiếng Việt | 中文 | 中文(简体)‎ | 中文(繁體)‎ | +/−

Magnolia677 (talk) 00:19, 19 October 2014 (UTC)

File:Abilene, KS (14362921024).jpg[edit]

Commons-emblem-issue.svg File:Abilene, KS (14362921024).jpg has been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether it should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry.

If you created this file, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with it, such as a copyright issue.
Please remember to respond to and – if appropriate – contradict the arguments supporting deletion. Arguments which focus on the nominator will not affect the result of the nomination. Thank you!


Afrikaans | العربية | Български | বাংলা | Беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ | Català | Čeština | Dansk | Deutsch | Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ | Zazaki | Ελληνικά | English | Esperanto | Español | Eesti | فارسی | Suomi | Français | Galego | עברית | Magyar | Bahasa Indonesia | Íslenska | Italiano | 日本語 | 한국어 | Македонски | മലയാളം | Plattdüütsch | Nederlands | Norsk nynorsk | Norsk bokmål | Occitan | Polski | Português | Português do Brasil | Română | Русский | Slovenčina | Slovenščina | Shqip | Српски / srpski | Svenska | Türkçe | українська | Tiếng Việt | 中文 | 中文(简体)‎ | 中文(繁體)‎ | +/−

Leoboudv (talk) 00:26, 22 October 2014 (UTC)

File:Abilene, KS (14360493371).jpg[edit]

Commons-emblem-issue.svg File:Abilene, KS (14360493371).jpg has been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether it should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry.

If you created this file, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with it, such as a copyright issue.
Please remember to respond to and – if appropriate – contradict the arguments supporting deletion. Arguments which focus on the nominator will not affect the result of the nomination. Thank you!


Afrikaans | العربية | Български | বাংলা | Беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ | Català | Čeština | Dansk | Deutsch | Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ | Zazaki | Ελληνικά | English | Esperanto | Español | Eesti | فارسی | Suomi | Français | Galego | עברית | Magyar | Bahasa Indonesia | Íslenska | Italiano | 日本語 | 한국어 | Македонски | മലയാളം | Plattdüütsch | Nederlands | Norsk nynorsk | Norsk bokmål | Occitan | Polski | Português | Português do Brasil | Română | Русский | Slovenčina | Slovenščina | Shqip | Српски / srpski | Svenska | Türkçe | українська | Tiếng Việt | 中文 | 中文(简体)‎ | 中文(繁體)‎ | +/−

Leoboudv (talk) 05:19, 22 October 2014 (UTC)