User talk:P199/Archive 3

From Wikimedia Commons, the free media repository
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Archive This page is an archive. Please do not edit the contents of this page. Direct any additional comments to this page.

A cup of tea for you!

Hope you are alright. Have a cuppa and come back soon! Best wishes! Hedwig in Washington (mail?) 02:07, 1 December 2018 (UTC)

File:Finch ON.JPG

Hi there. I notice you overwrote your original upload of this file with a different file. Was this intentional? If not, could you split the second upload to a new file? Also, could you provide date info for the new file, as I doubt that it was taken in June. Thanks. Mindmatrix 14:11, 26 April 2019 (UTC)

Ditto for File:Webbwood ON.jpg. Mindmatrix 15:33, 26 April 2019 (UTC)
OK, and thanks! Mindmatrix 17:09, 1 May 2019 (UTC)

Welcome back

If you're working on Workers' Day, can you have a look at the following uploads, please? https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Special:ListFiles/Cdev86 Thanks. --E4024 (talk) 16:47, 1 May 2019 (UTC)

Hi @E4024: Thank for welcoming me back. Why do you want me to look at these uploads? They appear to be OoS to me. --P 1 9 9  ✉ 17:00, 1 May 2019 (UTC)
And from FB. They are occupying our space. :) --E4024 (talk) 17:17, 1 May 2019 (UTC)
Ok. Is there a reason why you don't want to nominate them for deletion? Do you want me to do that? --P 1 9 9  ✉ 17:23, 1 May 2019 (UTC)

Deleted Page

Hi P199, I just noticed that you deleted 3 files I uploaded: https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=File:Canadian_flag,_maple_syrup_and_hockey_on_coloring-page.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1 https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=File:Coloring_page_presenting_Egyptian_flag_and_Sphinx.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1 https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=File:Australian_flag_and_symbols_on_coloring_page.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1

I checked https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Licensing but I'm not sure which law has been violated? I created all 3 submitted images and I'm the owner of two websites where these pictures are published. What should I do in this situation to have them republished? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Janmarian83 (talk • contribs) 19:22, 2 May 2019 (UTC)

Hi @Janmarian83: The website that you took the images from clearly states "All rights reserved" (= copyvio). Being the website owner is irrelevant, you need to prove that you are the creator of the images, and you need to send that proof using an OTRS ticket, see COM:OTRS. Regards, --P 1 9 9  ✉ 19:33, 2 May 2019 (UTC)

Source of derivative work - Plaza Cuartel markers

I added the appropriate tag for both images: https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Copyright_rules_by_territory/Consolidated_list_O-R#Philippines https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Deletion_requests/Template:PD-PhilippineGov https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Philippines_copyright_law Pi3.124 (talk) 22:29, 7 May 2019 (UTC)

@Pi3.124: That is not sufficient. There is no credit to the original portrait photographers. And what evidence is there that the images were indeed released as PD? --P 1 9 9  ✉ 01:49, 8 May 2019 (UTC)

I discussed the origin of the photographs with the daughter and granddaughter on the phone and they sent the following email to me:

============================================================================================================================

Original Message-----

From: jennifer ancheta [1] Sent: Saturday, May 11, 2019 5:27 AM To: xxxxx Subject: Picture of Nazario B Mayor


The picture has no copyright. The picture was found in his album of pictures that he had by his oldest daughter Nelllie Loudon Mayor Loleng. There was no date or writing on the back of it. He had quite a few pictures of himself as he loved to freeze time and frequently wrote about the time in his life when it was taken. Usually something profound. This had nothing. We FaceTimed our family in the Philippines to ask and they all said it was my Aunt who submitted it and there’s no info. Any person that would have taken that picture has probably left the earth to a heavenly state by now

Please let me know if any other questions come up. We are happy to reinvigorate his legacy

. Jennifer Mayor Ancheta James

============================================================================================================================

Pi3.124 (talk) 10:47, 11 May 2019 (UTC)

@Pi3.124: Please follow the instructions at COM:OTRS. Thanks. --P 1 9 9  ✉ 13:00, 13 May 2019 (UTC)

Copyrighted

The image is not copyrighted. The images are own.

Please, let me know if any other question comes up. We are happy to revitalize your legacy. — Preceding unsigned comment added by WebOn HN (talk • contribs) 00:30, 27 May 2019 (UTC)

Commons:Deletion requests/File:Mottechaix - 1886.pdf

Please also fix license tag. --EugeneZelenko (talk) 21:37, 28 May 2019 (UTC)

@EugeneZelenko: Thanks for the reminder. Done. --P 1 9 9  ✉ 13:04, 29 May 2019 (UTC)

Please take second look

Greetings! Re: Commons:Deletion requests/Files uploaded by Микола1984леон Please take second look, it seems only some of the files were closed. Thank you!! Ellin Beltz (talk) 19:20, 7 June 2019 (UTC)

@Ellin Beltz: ✓ Done. --P 1 9 9  ✉ 20:07, 7 June 2019 (UTC)

Thanks for the picture of Fassett, Quebec

Have just linked to it in a new article about a court case over the railway line, and there it is, a perfect picture of the railine to illustrate the article. Canadian Pacific Railway Co. v Notre Dame de Bonsecours Thanks! Mr Serjeant Buzfuz (talk) 15:54, 9 June 2019 (UTC)

File:Northbound lane of Jhongli IC on the Taiwan No1 National Highway.JPG

Please look at your edits at 15:01, 30 October 2018. If you take a closer look at the picture you can see that the A-pillar of the car at the lower-right. I don't see any reason for it to be removed, so could you please explain why?--Kai3952 (talk) 17:53, 9 June 2019 (UTC)

@P199: What do you think?--Kai3952 (talk) 11:35, 29 July 2019 (UTC)
@Kai3952: The visible piece of the A-pillar is so small, it's inconsequential, it doesn't define the image. --P 1 9 9  ✉ 12:59, 29 July 2019 (UTC)
Look at what you said earlier: "It is simpler to just add a description to the page that clarifies that a portion of the vehicle must be visible." The A-pillar is a portion of the automobile. Why do you think that it is "inconsequential"? Even if the visible piece of the A-pillar is so small, we can still see it in the picture. So...where is your standard? --Kai3952 (talk) 17:47, 29 July 2019 (UTC)
What's your point? You already put back the category a long time ago. This is a totally moot discussion... --P 1 9 9  ✉ 20:06, 29 July 2019 (UTC)
I have expected that you would follow what you said, that's what my point is. Now I am worried that you may have made the same mistake elsewhere. I have to take the time to check your every edit.--Kai3952 (talk) 21:16, 15 August 2019 (UTC)

@P199: Look at your edits. Just as I expected would happen, you have made the same mistake elsewhere. The car hood can be seen at the bottom of the picture(to me that is clear), so I don't know why you didn't see it.--Kai3952 (talk) 05:09, 20 August 2019 (UTC)

Deletion of The_4_Mimff_books_by_H.J._Kaeser.jpg,

Hi, This is about 18 months late! Please advise why you appeared to remove a photo THAT I TOOK of the four books by H. J. Kaeser to illustrate that writer's Wikipage/? Thanks in anticipation. Arrivisto (talk) 11:05, 10 June 2019 (UTC)

@Arrivisto: Yes, you took the photo, but you don't own the copyright of the illustrations in the photo, read COM:DW. --P 1 9 9  ✉ 13:07, 10 June 2019 (UTC)

Deletion of House illustrations

Hi, I just read Commons:Deletion requests/Files in Category:Illustrations of the cast of House (television programme) following the automatic removal of these pictures from Wikipedia. I don't have access to all of them, but I do remember the looks of File:House graffiti.jpg.

Doesn't it comply with Commons:Fan art#There is no copyright in an actor's likeness? Tomer T (talk) 19:01, 21 June 2019 (UTC)

@Tomer T: Restored File:House graffiti.jpg as per Commons:Deletion requests/File:House graffiti.jpg. As per the COM:FAN: " if the fan art drawing is a wholly new creative representation showing the actor’s natural likeness plus some non-creative allusion to the original work, it can be accepted". The rest are clearly not wholly new. Regards, --P 1 9 9  ✉ 19:26, 21 June 2019 (UTC)
However, it does not "copy creative elements from the movie". What do you suggest to do? Reopen a deletion discussion for this image? What's the protocol for that? Tomer T (talk) 19:33, 21 June 2019 (UTC)
You had more than a month-and-a-half to comment on the DR. We can't start a discussion after the DR closed. The protocol is to ask for undeletion, see COM:UNDEL. Regards, --P 1 9 9  ✉ 13:10, 24 June 2019 (UTC)

Commons:Deletion requests/File:KurtBeckJohannesRau.jpg

Hello P199. It is not the small image that I worry. What I wanted to point out is that there is a human head that does not exist between the sitting people, and that we can not see the hairstyle that the person sitting behind can see. This photograph is clearly a collage and it is impossible for the uploader to shoot. And this uploader's images has been deleted in large quantities. I do not think that he made this collage with his material. I am sorry for the inconvenience, but please check again.--Y.haruo (talk) 16:43, 25 June 2019 (UTC)

@Y.haruo: I don't see the clear evidence of a collage. Yes I see that there are some persons mostly blocked from view by others. But the image is so small and with little depth perspective, and depending on just the right camera position, it is possible to get funny/strange anomalies in pictures. It is not conclusive to me. If you still feel strongly about it, I suggest to get a 3rd opinion. Regards, --P 1 9 9  ✉ 17:06, 25 June 2019 (UTC)
Let's wait for the third party's opinion.--Y.haruo (talk) 17:35, 25 June 2019 (UTC)
The discussion on Administrators' noticeboard is over. For more information see Commons:Administrators' noticeboard/Archive 74#Commons:Deletion requests/File:KurtBeckJohannesRau.jpg. By the way, I removed this image from wikipedia excluding the Hebrew version on June 27th. (I did not know the location of the Hebrew version of the image.) The reason is "useless file like collage". Two weeks have passed, but no one has restored this file. I find this to be a true third-party view. The fact that this file remains is of course negative for Commons, but I think it is also negative for the uploader. The fact that this file remains is to leave a black mark permanently for the uploader. Please let me know your opinion if you have that.--Y.haruo (talk) 20:29, 11 July 2019 (UTC)
Sorry @Y.haruo: but there is no third opinion at the AN. Achim merely concludes that fotoforensics can be fooled, but it's very hard to do so. And Túrelio states it's highly improbable that this user would claim something untrue. You are still the only one arguing for its deletion. I will take no further action on this file. Regards, --P 1 9 9  ✉ 01:30, 13 July 2019 (UTC)

Commons:Deletion requests/File:Standard Model of Elementary Particles outlines.svg

You have deleted the file without proper discussion or responses to the deletion request. A random nomination is certainly not enough to delete someone's work from Wikimedia Commons, yes? The nomination is basically just a I-don't-like-it plea. Please give a real reason. Cush (talk) 21:54, 22 July 2019 (UTC)

@Cush: It was deleted because it was a (near) duplicate of an existing file without any purpose. That is a deletion reason. If you felt that it should not be deleted, well, you didn't provide any argument to keep it at the DR. --P 1 9 9  ✉ 14:34, 23 July 2019 (UTC)
The purpose is use by third parties, as mentioned in the DR. Cush (talk) 15:53, 23 July 2019 (UTC)

Deletion requests Orgosolo Murales Giovanni Leone.jpg

Although it is a work of public domain, given the cancellation request, i the Mayor of Orgosolo for authorization via PEC(Certified email). The administration of Orgosolo has not communicated any prohibition. So we must wait. You are not the Law and you do not know the Italian rules. The cancellation report was made in a completely arbitrary manner. Please, as the administration of Orgosolo has not communicated prohibitions, restore the page. Thank you. --Dino Michelini (talk) 12:08, 17 August 2019 (UTC)

Making a picture useful

https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Commons:Deletion_requests/File:3199_-_Center_Park_Gillig_(3822089135).jpg&action=history : actually, the vehicles have not been identified (just who owns them), and the picture remains without any categories that are particularly relevant to what it shows, and with a near-useless description. - Jmabel ! talk 03:45, 24 August 2019 (UTC)

Commons:Deletion requests/Files uploaded by FraneKKB

License tags still need to be fixed. --EugeneZelenko (talk) 16:55, 26 August 2019 (UTC)

✓ Done --P 1 9 9  ✉ 17:01, 26 August 2019 (UTC)
Same for Commons:Deletion requests/Files uploaded by Lbmparis and Commons:Deletion requests/Files uploaded by Corallium1, please. --EugeneZelenko (talk) 17:26, 28 August 2019 (UTC)
✓ Done --P 1 9 9  ✉ 18:12, 28 August 2019 (UTC)

Deletion requests/File:Cvision logo.png

Hi, thanks for deleting images in the Commons:Deletion requests/File:Cvision logo.png, but you forgot to delete the main image: File:Cvision logo.png. Thanks. - Premeditated (talk) 06:33, 29 August 2019 (UTC)

✓ Done. Thanks for alerting me. --P 1 9 9  ✉ 12:58, 29 August 2019 (UTC)

Commons:Deletion requests/Files uploaded by Judgefloro

Hi P199, is it ok to remove those unnecessary arguements in Commons:Deletion requests/Files uploaded by Judgefloro? The DR is too long and is clogging up the daily DR page. 大诺史 (Talk/留言/토론/Discussion) 03:02, 4 September 2019 (UTC)

@大诺史: No, don't remove content. Just "hide" it with a collapsible box, see Template:Collapse top. Regards, --P 1 9 9  ✉ 18:15, 4 September 2019 (UTC)

Community Insights Survey

Share your experience in this survey

Hi P199/Archive 3,

The Wikimedia Foundation is asking for your feedback in a survey about your experience with Wikimedia Commons and Wikimedia. The purpose of this survey is to learn how well the Foundation is supporting your work on wiki and how we can change or improve things in the future. The opinions you share will directly affect the current and future work of the Wikimedia Foundation.

Please take 15 to 25 minutes to give your feedback through this survey. It is available in various languages.

This survey is hosted by a third-party and governed by this privacy statement (in English).

Find more information about this project. Email us if you have any questions, or if you don't want to receive future messages about taking this survey.

Sincerely,

RMaung (WMF) 01:16, 10 September 2019 (UTC)

Commons:Deletion requests/Files uploaded by User:EctopicOnSchedule

Hello I am trying to understand why you think an OTRS ticket is needed for the images you have deleted. I've read thoroughly the Commons:OTRS page and it states clearly 'When contacting OTRS is unnecessary' because 'I found the image on Flickr where it was marked as having been released under a free license.' Would you please explain? I am trying to learn. --EctopicOnSchedule (talk) 17:20, 10 September 2019 (UTC)

@EctopicOnSchedule: The problem is license laundering: Ana-Maria Sandi is releasing images for free on Flickr that are not her own, but by artist Dumitru Bâșcu. Because the artist has died already, his heir needs to submit an OTRS ticket to proof who owns the copyright. --P 1 9 9  ✉ 17:34, 10 September 2019 (UTC)

File:Miesz(k)ając (w) przeszłości - grupa majstrów.jpg

This file was used in WMPL wiki, so in scope. Why was it deleted? Ankry (talk) 11:10, 17 September 2019 (UTC)

@Ankry: As you can see in my closing comment, I indeed wanted to keep the files that are in use. Because there were dozens of files involved in this DN, I must have missed or overlooked this one. Sorry, about that. I will restore it. Regards, --P 1 9 9  ✉ 12:18, 17 September 2019 (UTC)
Thanks. BTW, I think they all might be in scope as the uploader is a notable artist. But, I think, this requires identity confirmation through OTRS. So let's leave it now as it is. Ankry (talk) 12:35, 17 September 2019 (UTC)
@Ankry: Notable? While I don't understand Polish, I do know that many wikis don't have the same rigorous standards for notability as the English wiki does. Furthermore, if we can believe that the uploader is indeed the artist herself, than this is pure self promotion, and that is certainly out of scope. And as for OTRS, you are right and that is required for these images. --P 1 9 9  ✉ 12:56, 17 September 2019 (UTC)
Definitely not selfpromotion as the upload was not the artist's initiative. She was asked to do so. Maybe promotion of WMPL activity or promotion of Wikimedia Commons ("How to reuse Wikimedia Commons content"). If we can call this kind of activity "promotion". AFAIK the images were intended to be used in some WMPL activity reports and in articles about interesting artistic techniques. It would be sad if images for this purpose had to be uploaded into wiki(s) locally. Ankry (talk) 18:14, 17 September 2019 (UTC)

Yes, if needed we can provide OTRS ticket, but it looks it's not the case. We will file undelete request anyway soon. Yarl 💭  12:58, 17 September 2019 (UTC)

Reminder: Community Insights Survey

Share your experience in this survey

Hi P199/Archive 3,

A couple of weeks ago, we invited you to take the Community Insights Survey. It is the Wikimedia Foundation’s annual survey of our global communities. We want to learn how well we support your work on wiki. We are 10% towards our goal for participation. If you have not already taken the survey, you can help us reach our goal! Your voice matters to us.

Please take 15 to 25 minutes to give your feedback through this survey. It is available in various languages.

This survey is hosted by a third-party and governed by this privacy statement (in English).

Find more information about this project. Email us if you have any questions, or if you don't want to receive future messages about taking this survey.

Sincerely,

RMaung (WMF) 15:25, 20 September 2019 (UTC)

Reminder: Community Insights Survey

Share your experience in this survey

Hi P199/Archive 3,

There are only a few weeks left to take the Community Insights Survey! We are 30% towards our goal for participation. If you have not already taken the survey, you can help us reach our goal! With this poll, the Wikimedia Foundation gathers feedback on how well we support your work on wiki. It only takes 15-25 minutes to complete, and it has a direct impact on the support we provide.

Please take 15 to 25 minutes to give your feedback through this survey. It is available in various languages.

This survey is hosted by a third-party and governed by this privacy statement (in English).

Find more information about this project. Email us if you have any questions, or if you don't want to receive future messages about taking this survey.

Sincerely,

RMaung (WMF) 20:04, 3 October 2019 (UTC)

Commons:Deletion requests/Files in Category:Disney's Pop Century Resort

You seem to have forgotten to delete these files. --Jonatan Svensson Glad (talk) 21:33, 21 November 2019 (UTC)

@Josve05a: Thanks for letting me know. Looks like the "mass process" button didn't work... Deleted now. --P 1 9 9  ✉ 21:43, 21 November 2019 (UTC)
Yeah, the tool seem to be a bit broken lately for some reason...--Jonatan Svensson Glad (talk) 21:47, 21 November 2019 (UTC)

File:OSS.svg

Hi, I just came by this file, and I noticed an image by the same name was deleted by you 25 January 2017. Is the current file (w/ upload date 7 July 2017‎) a reupload of a previously deleted version? If so, it probably qualifies for speedy removal. Asav | Talk 18:11, 4 December 2019 (UTC)

File:Artavasdes II coin.jpg

Hi dear P199, will you explain me what was wrong with this? I took it from Commons and with „Paint“ program make its background grey. Thanks.--Nooberella (talk) 17:01, 9 December 2019 (UTC)

Commons:Deletion requests/File:Hans Rosenberg - Instabilities in the solar corona - titelpagina proefschrift, Utrecht, 1973.jpg

Dear P199,

Sorry to come back to this matter, but my question was not answered: a simple typed title page was, as you state "pure text", but was for that reason deleted, being "out of scope"? Clearly, it lacks originality and does not deserve protection of any copyright I think. I asked for the proper license, but did not get an answer. This title page and the accompanying thesis (published scientific articles with connecting texts) is important for the history of solar physics and plasma physics.

  • Can you please explain your reason "out of scope" "pure text"?
  • What should i do to conserve this important image on Commons?

The author Hans Rosenberg died in 1992. Thank you, the original uploader Hansmuller (talk) 14:16, 17 December 2019 (UTC)

@Hansmuller: As per COM:PS: Excluded educational content includes "Files that contain nothing educational other than raw text." BTW, it is really a stretch to call this titlepage an "important image"... Regards, --P 1 9 9  ✉ 14:28, 17 December 2019 (UTC)
I'm sorry, this picture actually is important for the history of solar physics. I wouldn't suppose you could know about him or his science. Rosenberg was both a scientific and political figure, both in the Partij van de Arbeid (Dutch Labour Party) and the Dutch student movement of the 1960s in the Netherlands. Rosenberg contributed in Europa and the US with his theories for the generation of radio signals on the sun by the magnetic field and plasma of the sun. Furthermore, Rosenberg is of interest for the history of AIDS in The Netherlands, as he was a prominent figure in Utrecht who turned out to have contracted AIDS/HIV. Why isn't it important you think? Please state reasons. It is a title page of a typed Dutch type PhD thesis (this is not a just a British or US PhD, it contained published scientific articles with additional discussions on an international scientific level.) Please discuss this if you cannot believe this, how could you know? The image was used on the wikipedia page w:nl:Hans Rosenberg. He also was Municipal councillor/Alderman for finance in Utrecht and modernised the city on a grand scale.
So please undelete this important image. Thanks. Hansmuller (talk) 17:30, 17 December 2019 (UTC)
@Hansmuller: Everything you are saying above is about the notability of the person himself, not this image. Regardless, it still fails COM:PS. --P 1 9 9  ✉ 18:18, 17 December 2019 (UTC)

Dear P199 No, there is a misunderstanding. This picture actually is important for the history of solar physics. (I have studied (astro)physics and obtained a Dutch type PhD, and worked in space science (supported X-ray astronomy satellite BeppoSax).) It is just a title page of an important document, as there are many title pages on Commons. Some of them have artistic value, e.g., File:Title_page_of_'Des_chansons_reduictz_en_tabulature_de_lut_a_deux,_trois_et_quatre_parties'_published_by_Phalesius_in_1547.jpg, and if they are relatively recent, their art work entitles them to copyright protection, right?

  • The title page under discussion does not have artistic value, so it does not deserve copyright protection as a work of art, it is plain text.
  • If the author were Einstein, you would be convinced? But the argument of scientific interest would be the same.
  • Why is there a problem? The image clearly is for its historical and scientific interest within the scope of Wikimedia.
  • Do you want an email by a solar physics academic professor? To what address can (s)he send the email?
    Cheers, Hansmuller (talk) 07:12, 23 December 2019 (UTC)

PS I need it for w:nl:Hans_Rosenberg, so it is needed for another Wikimedia project, as specified in COM:PS. Thanks, Hansmuller (talk) 07:18, 23 December 2019 (UTC)

PS2 By the way, all title pages without art work should be deleted ("raw text")? e.g., File:A Dictionary of Hymnology Vol. 1.pdf and hundreds.. more. Book covers with text only (for instance File:1959 Murrays Handbook to India, Pakistan, Burma & Ceylon, 18th Ed. .jpg? Or should the format of the Rosenberg title page be .pdf? Thanks Hansmuller (talk) 09:57, 23 December 2019 (UTC)

None of this address the root issue. That there are other images that should be deleted is not a reason to keep this image (eventually we'll get around to nominate those too). Please bring any further comments to COM:UNDEL if necessary. Regards, --P 1 9 9  ✉ 15:02, 23 December 2019 (UTC)
Well, don't you think this is an exhaustive way to waste time of productive Wikipedians with trivial blocking techniques? OK then, up to COM:UNDEL as you like. Hansmuller (talk) 19:44, 23 December 2019 (UTC)
@P199 You can review the outcome of this undeletion process here.
* Please do not frustrate users and give your support to the Wikimedia project! (It would save time for you and for me :=) Thank you, Hansmuller (talk) 08:14, 28 December 2019 (UTC)

Demande de changement de photo

Bonjour je travail pour la municipalité de La Macaza et nous aimerions beaucoup un changement de photo. Quand nous écrivons sur google La Macaza on voit apparaître votre photo mais nous on aimerais beaucoup y voir une photo de notre pont couvert construit en 1904. Est ce possible de changer votre photo pour celle ci. Nous en serions très reconnaissant.

https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Pont_couvert_La_Macaza.jpg

https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Pont_couvert_La_Macaza.jpg — Preceding unsigned comment added by La Macaza (talk • contribs) 15:18, 19 December 2019 (UTC)

WP is not a tourist brochure! My photo is far more representative of the place than the bridge. --P 1 9 9  ✉ 15:37, 19 December 2019 (UTC)

File:00100sPORTRAIT 00100 BURST20191215143455229 COVER.jpg Unused personal photo of non-notable author, out of scope.

Hello,

Why do you believe the author picture of myself is unusable? What do you mean, out of scope? Should I use the photograph from the back cover of my book instead? I don't understand why you would flag my photograph or have a problem with it? Please elucidate why you have any opinion of which photo I use of myself, one that I took myself, I might add.— Preceding unsigned comment added by KatieBeeBooks (talk • contribs) 11:07, 22 December 2019‎ (UTC)

@KatieBeeBooks: Please read COM:PS, in particular section COM:SPAM. Thanks. --P 1 9 9  ✉ 14:58, 23 December 2019 (UTC)

Several Files tagged for clarification on usage and permission

Hello,

You sent a message that the following files need clarification on usage and permission.

1. Ambassador Jose V. Romero, Jr. with former Speaker Jose V. De Venecia.jpg 2. Past members of the PCFR.jpg 3. Recognition for the contribution of PCFR for the National Security Strategy.jpg 4. Reconvening after the demise of the former Chairman Ambassador Jose V. Romero, Jr.jpg 5. Speech by PCFR Chairman Rafael M. Alunan, III on Perspectives on an independent foreign policy.jpg 6. Round table discussion with Chinese foreign delegation.jpg

The files are uploaded on the Philippine Council on Foreign Relations Facebook page and is set to "Public". Therefore the images can be used similarly on the article subject to the Philippine Council for Foreign Relations.

I have advised them of your message, they are willing to send a written permission by email once the Holiday break is over.

Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rjiedcom (talk • contribs) 04:22, 28 December 2019 (UTC)

Deletion request

Good day @P199: ! I'm requesting the deletion of my three userspace pages for the reasons indicated below:

Thank you! JWilz12345 (talk) 07:59, 31 December 2019 (UTC)

@JWilz12345: ✓ Done --P 1 9 9  ✉ 15:01, 1 January 2020 (UTC)
Changed my mind now: Good day P199. I've decided to continue my two userspace pages of User:JWilz12345/Philippines roads and highways and User:JWilz12345/Metro Manila roads, since I have a decent internet connection now. May I request for the restoration of both userspace pages? Although I might be occasional in editing these two userspace pages. Thank you and sorry for the inconvenience. JWilz12345 (Talk|Contrib's.) 16:12, 15 September 2020 (UTC)
@JWilz12345: ✓ Done --P 1 9 9  ✉ 16:14, 15 September 2020 (UTC)

File:FPE AWARD.jpg

Hello. I'm not sure why you requested the deletion of an award jpg that is on our page. Please elaborate. - Mmenzel02 (talk) 15:50, 2 January 2020 (UTC)

The reason is on the DN page, see Commons:Deletion requests/File:FPE AWARD.jpg. Please also read COM:PS. Thanks. --P 1 9 9  ✉ 16:14, 2 January 2020 (UTC)

Commons:Deletion requests/File:Rafaële Germain au SLM 2019.png

Hello,

I saw you kept that picture because she has an article in FR Wiki. I just wanted to let you know that we'll never let the author use that picture on the article, because the quality is way too low. Considering that, the picture has no use on Wikipedia. This is the same for all the picture from Bull-Doser that I nominated. Should I nominate them once more?

--Myloufa (talk) 14:44, 4 January 2020 (UTC)

Hi @Myloufa: I fully support deletion of all garbage images on Commons and I laud your efforts. But in this case, I am leaning toward the "keep" side because I agree with User;Infrogmation, who stated that this is "at present the only free licensed photo we have of notable person." And some of the other images are just about decent enough to use. If the quality was indeed too atrocious, I have deleted the file (e.g. Commons:Deletion requests/File:Élise Guilbault au Chez Roger.jpg). Keep up your good work. Thanks. --P 1 9 9  ✉ 02:12, 5 January 2020 (UTC)

Bassel's art

Hello P199! You deleted the photographs that Joi took of Bassel's paintings (which he owns, as they were given to him). The art is not covered by Syrian FOP, since the art was never in a public place in Syria.

Would you mind undeleting? Thanks and regards, --SJ+ 01:49, 7 January 2020 (UTC)

Hi @Sj: Why didn't you comment at the deletion discussion? Anyway, FOP has nothing to do with this, this is not a panorama photo. Key issue here is that just possession of the artworks doesn't confer copyright to the owner, that stays with the artist and heirs. In the previous DN, it was already stated that there is little actual evidence that the images are freely licensed. I don't know why User:Yann undeleted the files. While it is quite possible that Bassel released them under a free license, merely saying it is not enough. Best approach is to go through the COM:OTRS process. Regards, --P 1 9 9  ✉ 14:50, 7 January 2020 (UTC)
I was on vacation, only just saw it. Indeed it is not FOP; I mentioned that because it was linked to from the nomination. OTRS: ok; a pity we don't yet have a smoother + more publicly transparent process. --SJ+ 21:35, 7 January 2020 (UTC)

Request of recat of two Taal Volcano 2020 eruption images

Good day @P199: ! if this is compliant with Commons standards on protected images, may I request for the recategorization of File:Taal Volcano - 12 January 2020.jpg and File:Phreatic eruption of Taal Volcano, 12 January 2020 (reduced).gif from Category:Taal Volcano to Category:2020 Taal Volcano eruptions? For the purpose of making categories more specific. Thank you! JWilz12345 (talk) 10:01, 15 January 2020 (UTC)

@JWilz12345: ✓ Done. --P 1 9 9  ✉ 17:02, 15 January 2020 (UTC)

Changing of license of my pictures

Hello @P199: ! If this is allowed by WikiCommons, can I change the licenses of all my pictures I uploaded here (in Category:Photographs by User:JWilz12345 and Category:Photographs of roads by User:JWilz12345 from Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike to either one of the two "PD" tags (Template:PD-user or Template:Cc-zero). I want to make all my images in public domain as much as possible, but with these two types of "PD" licenses I don't know which one will I choose? Thanks for answer! JWilz12345 (talk) 11:50, 16 January 2020 (UTC)

Hi @JWilz12345: In principle the license is irrevocable. But changing to a PD license is actually reducing the restrictions, so that shouldn't be problem (but you can never again reimpose the restrictions or copyright). I would recommend Template:PD-user because it takes your username (or real name if you want) to explicitly state that you release the images in PD; use it in this way: {{PD-user|JWilz12345}}. Regards, --P 1 9 9  ✉ 15:18, 16 January 2020 (UTC)

@P199: Thank you P199 for the answer! I'll change all my pics to PD-user. Thanks againP199! :-) JWilz12345 (talk) 06:12, 19 January 2020 (UTC)

Commons:Deletion requests/Files uploaded by Jays04

Good day P199

I have read your request and reasons for the deletion of the photos uploaded yesterday for the SB19 page. I know you mentioned that getting permission from the owner is not enough. Tho I can upload a screenshot of our convo as well. I am new to Wiki so I am unaware that it will still need COM:OTRS ticket.

Anyway, I already communicated again with the photographer. I am waiting for any response. Thanks and God bless!Jays04 (talk) 02:57, 17 January 2020 (UTC)

Hi @Jays04: . A screenshot would not be sufficient either. The photographer needs to release the photos freely. Please read COM:OTRS. And please continue this conversation at the deletion nomination page to centralize the discussion. Regards, --P 1 9 9  ✉ 15:38, 17 January 2020 (UTC)

Okay. I understand. If that's the case and since the owner hasn't responded to my message yet. Maybe it's best to delete the photos first. Do I do it or Wikipedia? Maybe once the owner has the COM:OTRS tix then we can reupload it. God bless. Jays04 (talk) 03:18, 20 January 2020 (UTC)

Please don't reply here on my talk page but click here to reply. Thanks. --P 1 9 9  ✉ 14:04, 20 January 2020 (UTC)

Second look at an RFD

Hi,

Can I ask you to take a second look on Commons:Deletion requests/Files uploaded by SirElliotSpootz. @Patrick Rogel: rationales were indeed very bad but I do think that these files should be deteled. It's highly unlikely that the photos were actually taken by this user (who was blocked for one week for repeated copyvio) and the sock-puppet BerrixGote. I couldn't find these images online except for two: File:MichaelGruenin2015.png who has Everipedia has a source but comes from the profile pic of the Instagram account: https://www.instagram.com/michaelgruen/ and File:ShaneGregoirein2019.png who also come from Everipedia (this time ot indicated in the source, but is Everipedia acceptable as a source, is the licence there compatible with Commons? plus I suspect the multiple account on Wikimedia and Everipedia is the same person).

Cheers, VIGNERON (talk) 09:53, 26 January 2020 (UTC)

Hi @VIGNERON: Thanks for your comments. Still fairly thin evidence but I will delete the files based on this info. But I will no longer deal with "witch-hunt" nominations and (unless it is plain obvious copyvio) just close them as "kept: insufficient reason for deletion". Regards, --P 1 9 9  ✉ 17:25, 27 January 2020 (UTC)
Thank you. I try to avoid witch-hunt too (although I'm dealing with one right now :/) but for this specific case I thought it deserved a second look. Thank you again. Cheers, VIGNERON (talk) 18:06, 27 January 2020 (UTC)

File:The Murder of Michael Brown Jr, P199‬ has been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that...

I am new here and not sure how to reply or respond using the online Wiki portal. I certainly object to the deletion of the photos's as they promote peaceful activism in America and a part of black history. The photo's were taken of me and for myself and belong to me. I have exclusive rights to and permission to posting the photo's.

P199‬ left a message on my talk page in "‪File:The Murder of Michael Brown Jr, sparked Activ...‬". requesting the deletion of this File:The Murder of Michael Brown Jr, sparked Activism in Ferguson and across the world.jpg. I certainly object. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kingya20 (talk • contribs) 04:51, 31 January 2020 (UTC)

Please add your comments to the Deletion Discussion, not here on my talk page. Thanks. --P 1 9 9  ✉ 15:18, 31 January 2020 (UTC)

Cannot find PD user in Upload wizard, I chose Cc-zero instead

Good day @P199: ! I cannot find PD-user on any of the choices of free licenses on Upload Wizard. So in my five latest pictures (all about Skyway Stage 3), I chose CC-zero instead. Is this ok? And can I change the CC-zero licensing on my five pics to PD-user or not? Thanks for the answer! :-) JWilz12345 (talk) 08:36, 31 January 2020 (UTC)

Hi @JWilz12345: It is not available for Upload Wizard, but if you use main upload form or basic upload form, select "Own work, all rights released (Public domain)". Anyway, nothing wrong with CC-0, but you can change it to PD-user if you want. (BTW, no need to ping me because I already get a notice for any message on my talk page.) Regards, --P 1 9 9  ✉ 15:27, 31 January 2020 (UTC)
P199, does changing from Cc-zero to PD-user cause no issues? I fear of having my files deleted due to changing pf licenses. :-( Thanks for the reply again (in advance) JWilz12345 (talk) 17:47, 31 January 2020 (UTC)
By the way, I have stated in categories of my own photos (Category:Photographs by User:JWilz12345 and Category:Photographs of roads by User:JWilz12345) that I may also contribute photos with CC-zero, as per your suggestion/advice. Besides, all of newer uploads by User:Judgefloro are under CC-zero. If you wish you may watch my files under both categories or watch both of my categories since I'm not used to highly technical aspects of Commons.JWilz12345 (talk) 18:09, 31 January 2020 (UTC)
@JWilz12345: Changing from Cc-zero to PD-user is not a deletion reason. I don't see any issues with that (very similar license anyway).
On a separate note, you state in your category that you don't permit abusive use, vandalism, and discourage modification. But once an image is released as PD, you have no control how it is used, meaning that statement is contradictory to PD/CC-0. --P 1 9 9  ✉ 18:21, 31 January 2020 (UTC)
P199, I'm going remove that statement now. Although I'm now thinking of uploading files under CC-zero (as stated in my categories), since uploading through upload forms you mentioned is prone to errors or sudden network interruption or change in network configuration. I admit UploadWizard does the better job.JWilz12345 (talk) 18:32, 31 January 2020 (UTC)
Or, some of my files will be under PD-user (whenever I use the upload forms), or while others will be CC-zero (if I use the Wizard). Anyway, both are PD-type so I hope there will be no issues or problems.JWilz12345 (talk) 23:35, 31 January 2020 (UTC)

Thanks

Hello After this talk, this is the first time i log in to my account. Now i recognize that I was wrong. Thanks for your contribution. --05F2uIhfx0Rv (talk) 07:34, 3 February 2020 (UTC)

delete

I looked at wikimedia, respectively. to the list of images I upload and I'd rather remove them below. Why? I want to prevent my account from being blocked as it was written on my profile. (The block would only apply to wikimedia or even wikipedia?)

Once I have the authors' consent, I will upload them again.

--Marian Buštík (talk) 11:42, 3 February 2020 (UTC)

@Marian Buštík: Thanks for contributing to Commons and for your honesty. I will speedily delete the images that are not your own work (hence copyvio), and I'll take a look at the rest for consideration. Your account will not be blocked (since you are showing a willingness to learn and do future uploads according to the policies). Regards, --P 1 9 9  ✉ 14:16, 3 February 2020 (UTC)
Looking at the rest of your uploads, there are many more images with problems (e.g. File:Epitaf z roku 1778.jpg --> "Source from Internet"; and File:Zchdvůr.jpg --> taken from FB; etc.). I will start a DR for these. Sorry. --P 1 9 9  ✉ 14:41, 3 February 2020 (UTC)

Please read my comment on your post in my discussion.

Please read my comment on your post in my discussion. ** marked are my works, do with others what you want. I'm tired of seeing that something is really as it is and you ignore it, more precisely:

Public domain

This work is in the public domain in its country of origin and other countries and areas where the copyright term is the author's life plus 70 years or fewer.

You must also include a United States public domain tag to indicate why this work is in the public domain in the United States. Note that a few countries have copyright terms longer than 70 years: Mexico has 100 years, Jamaica has 95 years, Colombia has 80 years, and Guatemala and Samoa have 75 years. This image may not be in the public domain in these countries, which moreover do not implement the rule of the shorter term. Honduras has a general copyright term of 75 years, but it does implement the rule of the shorter term. Copyright may extend on works created by French who died for France in World War II (more information), Russians who served in the Eastern Front of World War II (known as the Great Patriotic War in Russia) and posthumously rehabilitated victims of Soviet repressions (more information).

This file has been identified as being free of known restrictions under copyright law, including all related and neighboring rights.

, author unknown. --Marian Buštík (talk) 15:09, 5 February 2020 (UTC)

@Marian Buštík: You cannot use {{PD-old-70}} for images if the author is unknown or the author's date of death is unknown. Note that this license says that "the copyright term is the author's life plus 70 years or fewer." So how would we know the copyright term if the author's life is unknown??? It is up to you to fix such problems. But add your comments to the Deletion Discussion, not here on my talk page or on your own talk page (these will not be read when an admin closes the DR). Thanks. --P 1 9 9  ✉ 15:42, 5 February 2020 (UTC)

Commons:Deletion requests/File:MetroLisboa-linha-azul.svg

Hi P199. You deleted this file per this DR discussion, but someone has re-uploaded it (or at least a file with the same name). Can you check File:MetroLisboa-linha-azul.svg and advise what should be done? Some of the other 8 February uploads by the editor also appear to be re-uploads of Commons:Deletion requests/File:MetroLisboa-linha-vermelha.svg and Commons:Deletion requests/File:MetroLisboa-linha-amarela.svg of files you deleted. Finally, File:MetroLisboa-linha-azul-versão-branca.png may be a png version of one of these files uploaded a few years ago by a different account. -- Marchjuly (talk) 22:36, 7 February 2020 (UTC)

Yes, it is the same. Speedy deleted. --P 1 9 9  ✉ 03:13, 8 February 2020 (UTC)
Thank you for taking a look. — Marchjuly (talk) 15:42, 8 February 2020 (UTC)
  • Please undo all these deletions. They are used via template in pt.wp are their absence is causing a lot of redlinks and misformatting in tables and diagrams across hundreds of pages. Lets instead replace each file with a free look-alike that works well enough in small sizes, as usually done in such cases. I guarantee that replacement within 12h max., and then the overwritten version can be deleted. (Its too late to undo centrally the damage caused by Commons Delinker, but will do it manually.) -- Tuválkin ✉ ✇ 19:29, 8 February 2020 (UTC)
    • If the original source image is a copyright violation per COM:L than any differently sized version of the same image is also going to be a copyright violation. Commons doesn't allow fair use, Portuguese Wikipedia does per meta:Non-free content; so, you could upload the file's locally to Portuguese Wikipedia and use them locally on Portuguese Wikipedia. Unless you can show that the copyright holder has released the images under a free license accepted by Commons or are claiming that they are COM:PD for some reason, Commons isn't really going to be able to keep any version of these files. If P199 wants to re-open the DRs for further discussion, that's fine with me; you could also ask for a COM:DRV. -- Marchjuly (talk) 23:03, 8 February 2020 (UTC)
I wasn’t trying to imply you didn’t understand copyright, but even if you do create a “free-look-alike” version to replace the ones which have been deleted, I’m not sure why that should stop any copyvios from being deleted. Can’t you just upload your look-alike versions as separate files? It sounds like you want to COM:OVERWRITE an existing file with a different file which isn’t really allowed, but I may wrong. It does seems as if it would be better to upload your versions as separate files, but if P199 wants to restore the deleted files or they get restored via DRV, then that’s fine. In either case the older versions which end up overwritten are still likely going to need to be re-deleted, won’t they? I also think the same file names may even work once the other files have been deleted, but new files under new names could be used in the templates, couldn’t they? Finally, I wasn’t commenting on you as a person or as an editor; just commenting on the files themselves. — Marchjuly (talk) 07:21, 9 February 2020 (UTC)
It appears that now that Commons:Deletion requests/File:MetroLisboa-linha-verde.svg has been resolved, then perhaps there's a way for the other files to be resolved in a similar manner. When I posted this I was only commenting on the file, not you. I saw the PD you were linking to, but the version you uploaded looked the same to me. I apologize if that was because the page didn't refresh for me or because I didn't purge it properly. If things are now sorted out, then that's fine with me. -- Marchjuly (talk) 21:37, 9 February 2020 (UTC)
So all the official Lisbon Metro pictographs are forbidden of use because they might be under copyright infringement even if the company itself gave away the files freely (I myself have those files on my computer) and they have been in use here for years? Ligaanet (talk) 22:04, 9 February 2020 (UTC)

Overwrite?

Hi P199. Would you mind taking a look at User talk:Guanaco#File:MetroLisboa-linha-amarela.svg. The original file seems fine, but someone in good-faith uploaded a different file (similar but different) that you previously deleted per Commons:Deletion requests/File:MetroLisboa-linha-amarela.svg. So, there's now a copyvio embedded into the file's history. There's also another file File:MetroLisboa-linha-amarela.png which is a png version of the same file deleted per the DR. If you think it's better to due another DR, then that's fine; I'm just not sure how to DR just one particular version of a file. -- Marchjuly (talk) 10:12, 15 February 2020 (UTC)

Hi @Marchjuly: I have deleted the official version in the file history, and deleted and redirected the PNG version to the SVG version. Regards, --P 1 9 9  ✉ 13:57, 25 February 2020 (UTC)
Thank you for taking care of this. I think the redirect should take care of all the places where the copyvio png was being used. -- Marchjuly (talk) 02:23, 26 February 2020 (UTC)

OTRS and watermarks

Good day/evening P199! May I ask you something about the OTRS and watermarks? --hueman1 (talk) 11:38, 25 February 2020 (UTC)

@HueMan1: Sure. I'm not an expert on OTRS, nor am I a member of the OTRS team (i.e. I can't read the tickets). But maybe I can help anyway. --P 1 9 9  ✉ 13:51, 25 February 2020 (UTC)
@P199: So here's the case, Dim Valencia (pen name) of the YouTube channel dmitrivalencia gave me a permission to upload some of their works here on Commons, but they have some concerns about plagiarism. –hueman1 (talk) 14:11, 25 February 2020 (UTC)

Deletion Requests

Hi P199, I am not so firm with Commons procedures. You deleted some files on my request (e.g. Commons:Deletion requests/File:Namibia - Eagle Monument 03.jpg‎). Actually the User:Pyb uploaded all photos from the Heritage Council in Namibia into one category called Category:National Heritage Council of Namibia. They all do not have Creative commons rights. I put a deletion request into that category, but do not know whether this is the right procedure to get actually all files under that category deleted? Many thanks --Chtrede (talk) 05:58, 28 February 2020 (UTC)

The website of the National Heritage Council of Namibia is under CC-BY 4.0 Pyb (talk) 08:11, 28 February 2020 (UTC)
No, it is not and that is why some files already got deleted. Where did you get the info from that photos of that website are CC. They are not even all taken by NHC staff, but by private persons etc? --Chtrede (talk) 11:23, 28 February 2020 (UTC)
@Pyb: And you should maybe take your position on the official request site: Commons:Deletion_requests/2020/02/13#NHC_Files --Chtrede (talk) 11:28, 28 February 2020 (UTC)

Request for deletion of this nomination page

Good day P199! May I request for the deletion of this nomination page I started: Commons:Deletion_requests/File:Asin_Road_at_Tuba,_Benguet.jpg. The affected file has since been indicated as a copyvio deserving permanent deletion, so I assume this nomination page is no longer applicable. Thanks! :-D JWilz12345 (Talk|Contrib's.) 12:37, 29 February 2020 (UTC)

I need your help

Good day P199!I have seen your post in my talk page regarding this picture File:Illiya basilla.jpg, when I was new in Wikipedia, I dont know how add photos in Wikipedia using wikitext, so I made a mistake by uploading them again, so I upload many pictures that were present in Commons by uploading them again, I was warned that time, and the pictures I upload mistakenly was removed from my upload, and I was warned, so unfortunately, only this image remain, without being removed from my upload and contrubution, so the person removing the pictures mistakenly left this one File:Illiya basilla.jpg so I dont know how to remove it, and today I receive your message in my talk regarding the picture, you can check when the picture was uploaded. I dont know how to remove it and it is not my work. and I was been given last warning with all the pictures I upload unknowingly together with this one. and I dont want to be block in Commons, because I am working right now to Improve hausa wikipedia by providing Images that belong to me. I do hope you will look forward to this. Anasskoko (talk) 15:42, 9 March 2020 (UTC)

@Anasskoko: Speedy deleted as requested. --P 1 9 9  ✉ 16:05, 9 March 2020 (UTC)

Request to speedily delete - File:Ayala Avenue - Flickr.jpg

Good day from Bulacan, Philippines, User:P199! Despite undergoing Luzon-wide community quarantine right now, I can still be able to contribute on wiki sites. Now may I request for speedy deletion of File:Ayala Avenue - Flickr.jpg? After doing extensive browsing I found out that despite having free license on Flickr the veracity of its copyright claims is in doubt. Thanks! JWilz12345 (Talk|Contrib's.) 16:53, 16 March 2020 (UTC)

Delete as per COM:CSD#F6. Regards, --P 1 9 9  ✉ 18:48, 16 March 2020 (UTC)
@P199: another one "Flickr" pic that I found too suspicious (because of its nature): File:Aljur Abrenica at Quezon City Hall of Justice 2014 - Flickr.jpg. Thanks again and stay healthy and safe fellow Wikipedian / Wkimedian :-) JWilz12345 (Talk|Contrib's.) 09:13, 18 March 2020 (UTC)
Yes, found online, taken from https://vimeo.com/101676030. Speedy deleted as License Laundering. --P 1 9 9  ✉ 15:53, 18 March 2020 (UTC)

Request of deletion of File:True score model v2.png

Hi P199, I would like to ask you about your request for deletion of 5 files:

  1. File:True score model v2.png;
  2. File:True score model new version.PNG;
  3. File:SQP21.jpg;
  4. File:Illustration CME.PNG;
  5. File:True score model.png

You say: Unused text tables and diagrams, should be in wiki markup if needed. And 1 unused logo, out of scope.

What do you mean with "should be in wiki markup if needed"? Is there a format problem with these files?

Thank you very much. 12:55, 24 March 2020 (UTC). — Preceding unsigned comment added by 83.46.129.16 (talk • contribs) 08:52, 24 March 2020‎ (UTC)

I mean that if these diagrams are really needed, they should be added as actual text in wikipedia articles, not as images. See w:en:Help:Wikitext. Regards, --P 1 9 9  ✉ 13:05, 24 March 2020 (UTC)
@P199, And if we link these diagrams to a category, will the problem be solved? Because a lot of images in Wikimedia haven't been used yet in a Wikipedia article, but they are not deleted, isn't it? Thank you very much again. Regards, 25 March 2020. — Preceding unsigned comment was added by 83.46.129.16 (talk) 13:28, 25 March 2020 (UTC)
No, the issue is not the lack of categories or not being used. It is basically a text image that "should be in wiki markup" if needed in a WP article. Also, the images have no context/description/explanation, thereby limiting its educational value. --P 1 9 9  ✉ 13:42, 25 March 2020 (UTC)

Commons:Deletion requests/Files uploaded by Audioboss

Greetings P199. I have listed the hosting Flickr site for my illustrations with the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0 license. If needed I can request OTRS Thank you-

File:General Gregorio Tapalla.tif - https://www.flickr.com/photos/44518673@N00/49717803247/in/album-72157712441684497/ File:General Emilip Verdeflor.tif - https://www.flickr.com/photos/44518673@N00/49716882638/in/album-72157712441684497/ File:General Ariston Villanueva.tif - https://www.flickr.com/photos/44518673@N00/49717734407/in/album-72157712441684497/ File:General Marcela Marcelo.tif - https://www.flickr.com/photos/44518673@N00/49717803182/in/album-72157712441684497/ File:General Luis Malinis.tif - https://www.flickr.com/photos/44518673@N00/49717803267/in/album-72157712441684497/ File:General Nicolas Gonzales.tif - https://www.flickr.com/photos/44518673@N00/49717422231/in/album-72157712441684497/ File:General Manuel Tinio.tif - https://www.flickr.com/photos/44518673@N00/49347509661/in/album-72157712441684497/ File:General Gregorio Del Pilar.tif - https://www.flickr.com/photos/44518673@N00/49347049498/in/dateposted-public/ File:General Pantaleon Villegas.tif - https://www.flickr.com/photos/44518673@N00/49347048843/in/album-72157712441684497/ File:General Mariano Llanera.tif - https://www.flickr.com/photos/44518673@N00/49347509531/in/dateposted-public/ File:General Agueda Kahabagan.tif - https://www.flickr.com/photos/44518673@N00/49347510096/in/dateposted-public/ File:General Ambrosio Mojica.tif - https://www.flickr.com/photos/44518673@N00/49319083788/in/dateposted-public/ File:General Vicente Lukban.tif - https://www.flickr.com/photos/44518673@N00/49319083178/in/dateposted-public/ File:General Vicente Leyva.tif - https://www.flickr.com/photos/44518673@N00/49319576711/in/dateposted-public/ File:General Teodoro Sandiko (Sandico) (1860-1939).tif - https://www.flickr.com/photos/44518673@N00/49318451456/in/dateposted-public/ File:General Mariano Noriel.tif - https://www.flickr.com/photos/44518673@N00/49318451871/in/dateposted-public/ File:General Troadio Galicano.tif - https://www.flickr.com/photos/44518673@N00/49318451016/in/dateposted-public/ File:General Juan Saraza Castañeda.tif - https://www.flickr.com/photos/44518673@N00/49307135607/in/dateposted-public/ File:General Cipriano Pacheco.tif - https://www.flickr.com/photos/44518673@N00/49307135912/in/dateposted-public/ File:General Alejo Nazareno Miñosa.tif - https://www.flickr.com/photos/44518673@N00/49307136037/in/dateposted-public/ File:General Eusebio Roque.tif - https://www.flickr.com/photos/44518673@N00/49306930386/in/dateposted-public/[12] — Preceding unsigned comment added by Audioboss (talk • contribs) 18:41, 30 March 2020 (UTC)

— Preceding unsigned comment added by Audioboss (talk • contribs) 14:41, 30 March 2020‎ (UTC)

We don't need the source for your illustrations but the source/author/date of the original historical images and backgrounds that you used to make these derivative works, see COM:DW. --P 1 9 9  ✉ 18:48, 30 March 2020 (UTC)

Do you want that information in each description? The illustrations I used are taken from Historical text physical description of the persons that I illustrated. The drawings are from my imagination. Those that were from historical text are from public domain photos from 1898 ( more than a century) already. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Audioboss (talk • contribs) 18:58, 30 March 2020 (UTC) --Audioboss (talk) 18:58, 30 March 2020 (UTC)

Yes, that info needs to be in each description. But drawings from your imagination are out of scope. There is no value in making up a likeness for a historical person, in fact, it could be considered as misleading, or worse, as a hoax. As I said at the DR, it would be much better if the original historical images were used at the articles instead of your personal artworks. --P 1 9 9  ✉ 19:22, 30 March 2020 (UTC)

There are no known likeness for some of the subject - "they are artful renditions". They are important in preserving Filipino cultural history as most are records were destroyed during the Filipino-American War. Moreover, most of the historical images were in bad condition. As a Filipino, our culture thrives on visual representation and art. Most of our earlier historical figures have images from illustrations that are ideal representations only of that person. Restoration of those images required artistic license to endeavor. In the context of historical studies, visual representation of historical figures albeit representational or ideal only is very important to the narrative and context of discussions.

I appreciate your point of view. I hope my simple explanation sheds a light why the subject matter is important. I spent countless hours in research and technical time to contribute to our wikicommons and wikipedia

I also have requested permissions commons wikimedia for review and issuance of OTRS

thanks

--Audioboss (talk) 19:37, 30 March 2020 (UTC)

Speedy delete

Good day P199! Sorry for my impatience. Now, may I request for speedy deletion of the following Flickr pics that I uploaded before but now I discovered to have FB metadata. Thanks.

_ JWilz12345 (Talk|Contrib's.) 05:46, 3 April 2020 (UTC)

✓ Done Regards, --P 1 9 9  ✉ 12:51, 3 April 2020 (UTC)

Commons:Deletion requests/File:LDS Bible.jpg

Please see the remark I made here. Veverve (talk) 13:47, 17 April 2020 (UTC)

@Veverve: Oops! I missed that too. I thought that the DR was about the copyright infringement of the cover. Thanks for pointing that out. Deleted as missing permission. Link doesn't work, so it failed LR. --P 1 9 9  ✉ 14:29, 17 April 2020 (UTC)

help

https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Iran_Turks_Iran_T%C3%BCrkleri.jpg

https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Turkic_people_in_Iran.jpg

Nominate for deletion

two fake , unsourced and self made maps.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Azerbaijanis/Archive_9#Self-made_map_by_Ebrahimi_Amir — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kiltwhip (talk • contribs) 13:17, 22 April 2020 (UTC)

Hi @Kiltwhip: Both files are in use, therefore they can't be nominated as being out-of-scope. And if File:Turkic people in Iran.jpg is really a self-made map, then it can't be deleted as copyvios either. But File:Iran Turks Iran Türkleri.jpg is clearly not own work and has been nominated for deletion along with most other uploads by this user, see here. --P 1 9 9  ✉ 14:55, 22 April 2020 (UTC)

Copyright warning

Dear P199 I have got your message with a warning. There is no need to block my account because I will not upload any new file. I guess there are a few points that I am still missing. If you have any explanation of what I did wrong it would help my learning process. Thank you in advance --Maxmarwiki (talk) 21:13, 29 April 2020 (UTC)

Plese stop the request the removal of the pictures I took years and years ago

Why did you erase my files? that is incredibly rude. Please put them back!!! — Preceding unsigned comment added by JakeNady (talk • contribs) 03:26, 30 April 2020 (UTC)

Hi, I don't know what led you to think that the photos I had on my phone of my dad and uploaded to this site were not legitimately uploaded here. I implore you to stop this action. I'm easy to find if you have any questions.

Thanks, JN — Preceding unsigned comment added by JakeNady (talk • contribs) 20:49, 19 April 2020 (UTC)

@ Commons:Deletion requests/File:Hanno Koffler en 2015.jpg

Please have a look at the metadata of this file: Urheberrechte ddp images (de:ddp images). Regards Mutter Erde (talk) 08:50, 11 May 2020 (UTC)

@Mutter Erde: Thank you for the additional info (please add such info to the DR next time). --P 1 9 9  ✉ 14:40, 11 May 2020 (UTC)

Categories "Photographs of flags of France..."

Hello,

Thanks a lot for your message in the discussion I had about Categories "Photographs of flags of France in canton ...". It seems they have been all deleted (how, I don't know).

But two problems remain :

  • as you saw, this user insists on putting the greatest number of pictures in his categories, even with no avalaible reason; shall we go and look then all for eliminate most of them? I cannot afford (yes, a little however..)
  • more serious, he creates a lot of categories and subcategories with no logic; see for example Category:Photographs of flags of France in Corsica: he put as subcategories "Photographs ... by arrondissement", plus "... by department", and "... by commune"! -- with obviously the same under-categories and finally a few number of files (non all pertinent)... Delete all these redondant categories in each region of France? I can't.

Because he is now extending his creations to the whole of France.

Is it possible to stop such an obsessional process? I doubt.

Your opinion would interest me. Thanks.

--Fr.Latreille (talk) 19:43, 18 May 2020 (UTC)

PS: my english is bad; if you can speek french better..

Last minute: I just receive a message from User:SpinnerLaserz saying he apologies for his too complex organization and looks for arrangement. I naturally answer to him with some suggestions. I will sleep quetly this night. I hope I didn't bother you. --Fr.Latreille (talk) 20:53, 18 May 2020 (UTC)

Commons:Deletion_requests/File:French_Canadian_Costume.jpg

I believe File:French Canadian Costume.jpg was taken from said website listed without authorization from those operating the website, and as such is in violation of copyright policy. I'm surprised nobody has stepped in yet to raise this concern (nobody has spoken up at all, except for us). The website in question has right-clicking disabled, and there is a section in which images approved for media use are listed, but that image is located elsewhere on the website.

I would like this taken into consideration as a more sufficient reason for deletion than the previous "not been used in a meaningful manner" reason, by which other files in Wikimedia Commons are readily deleted (i.e. sexually explicit photos trawled from Flickr not being used in an educational capacity). The Nominate for deletion link in the menu to the left produces a dialog box which below the Reason box, asks that I contact the admin (you) who decided "Keep" before renominating it.
DeNoel (talk) 08:15, 30 May 2020 (UTC)

@DeNoel: Thanks for explaining this. I checked the website and I also cannot find any evidence that the image is free. I have opened the DR again with this new info. --P 1 9 9  ✉ 22:48, 31 May 2020 (UTC)

Why delete my two files La Disco?

Why delete my two files La Disco? It’s the cover of a book I wrote. Giovas06 (talk) 14:59, 17 June 2020 (UTC)

The reasons are clearly stated in the DR. Commons is not your personal free webhost to promote or publish your work. --P 1 9 9  ✉ 15:04, 17 June 2020 (UTC)

Two requests

Good day (afternoon here in the Philippines), P199. I have two requests:

  • May I request for the deletion of my short-lived subpage User:JWilz12345/Favorites. I found this feature "boring" and "not helpful" to my contribs here at Commons. I might disable the gadget enabling the favorites feature at my preferences.
  • May I request for the checking of the deleted file File:Manuel Roxas Boulevard.JPG. Per Commons:Deletion requests/File:Manuel Roxas Boulevard.JPG it was deleted due to no-FOP. But since I'm not an admin, I cannot be sure of its depiction, if it was really a monument along the boulevard that supported its deletion or if it was just an ordinary street scenery that complies de minimis.

Thanks for your response and stay safe and healthy in the midst of COVID-19! :-) JWilz12345 (Talk|Contrib's.) 07:55, 1 July 2020 (UTC)

Deletion done.
And File:Manuel Roxas Boulevard.JPG is not a general street view but a close-up of a statue. Regards, --P 1 9 9  ✉ 14:29, 2 July 2020 (UTC)

Deletation of Carlos Trilnick article

Hi p199, I am a direct relative to the deceased artists and actually own the rights to these images. Please undo the deletion.. I have been working hard on this article to honour their memory and its a false misconception you have about the infringement. The images to which i do not own the rights (like DeLoof Trilnick 1989) were properly quoted and diferenciated from the others.

Refered article: https://es.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carlos_Trilnick — Preceding unsigned comment added by BrunoTrilnick (talk • contribs) 21:18, 6 July 2020 (UTC)

If you are willing to help, please let´s colaborate together.. i understand you are more experienced — Preceding unsigned comment added by BrunoTrilnick (talk • contribs) 21:19, 6 July 2020 (UTC)

You will need to prove that you own the rights, see COM:OTRS. Regards, --P 1 9 9  ✉ 13:21, 7 July 2020 (UTC)

Uploaded without permission

Hi. All of this person's uploads say that they are images uploaded from Google. I don't think they have any kind of legitimate permissions. Am I missing something?: https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/That_Witty_Person

I'll leave it to you. All the best! -- Ssilvers (talk) 23:34, 7 July 2020 (UTC)

Thanks for the notice. All speedily deleted. And warning given. Regards, --P 1 9 9  ✉ 13:21, 8 July 2020 (UTC)

Request to revert my crop

hello P199! May I request you to revert my crop at File:Camalaniugan Church Ruins - Flickr.jpg? I should have used "precise mode" instead of "lossless mode" which has still left a black "letterbox"-type at the upper part of the pic. I will recrop this (CropTool) but this time using precise mode. Thanks! JWilz12345 (Talk|Contrib's.) 10:22, 12 July 2020 (UTC)

✓ Done. Regards, --P 1 9 9  ✉ 20:26, 19 July 2020 (UTC)

Re: File:Organigrama diagnóstico EC.2.jpg

Hi, P199.

I agree that this file be deleted.

When I uploaded it to Wikimedia Commons years ago, I didn't know how to update it and created several ones (.1, .2, .3).

Best regards. --BallenaBlanca (talk) 19:34, 29 July 2020 (UTC)

@BallenaBlanca: Please reply at the DR itself, not here on my talk page. The closing admin will not read this. Thanks. --P 1 9 9  ✉ 20:18, 29 July 2020 (UTC)
Sorry, I am not familiar with this procedure. Thanks. --BallenaBlanca (talk) 21:16, 29 July 2020 (UTC)

You MUST respond to issues in a timely manner.

Please note that when you are given administrator privileges, you must use them in an appropriate manner. Deleting a user's image uploads without responding to inquiries is not acceptable. Do know that however difficult it may be for you, discussion is an integral part of this website's function. Please keep in mind for the future. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Camdoodlebop (talk • contribs) 04:15, 6 August 2020 (UTC)

@Camdoodlebop: FWIW, I responded to your comments within 1 or 2 days, see my reply here and here. --P 1 9 9  ✉ 12:57, 6 August 2020 (UTC)

sorry for coming off as so rude Camdoodlebop (talk) 18:05, 6 August 2020 (UTC)

Tool for automatic uploading of high-res versions of existing Flickr files here

Good day P199! Is there a tool of some sort to automatically upload highest resolutions of Flickr files that are currently being hosted here on Commons? I cannot find a "download" button at Flickr (perhaps becuase I don't have a Flickr accnt). Nevertheless I want to have the highest resolution of files like File:Marcos highway tunnel.jpg (orig. Flickr link: https://www.flickr.com/photos/42505444@N08/5124906027) uploaded to here (Commons). I assume there should be no problems because the original files are still in their acceptable licenses. But I don't know if there's a tool for uploading such orig or highest-reso. files. JWilz12345 (Talk|Contrib's.) 10:17, 9 August 2020 (UTC)

@JWilz12345: Hi JWilz12345. Yes, there is a tool for uploading Flickr images: https://flickr2commons.toolforge.org/#/. Alternatively, you can download different resolutions (including original size) even if you don't have a Flickr account. On the webpage, there is a download symbol () on the right side of the screen. Regards, --P 1 9 9  ✉ 18:23, 10 August 2020 (UTC)
P199, what I meant is about replacing existing Flickr pictures here with their highest reso variant at Flickr. In my usage of Flickr2Commons it cannot upload higher reso version of such pictures, and instead marks it as available here (even if it is a low resolution counterpart). I was asking if there's a tool for such purpose - uploading highest reso version of Flickr files here like File:Marcos highway tunnel.jpg. And when I went to the Flickr page of the file, I cannot see the download button. It may be that I'm browsing thru my phone (I use en:Samsung A20 whenever I do uploads to Flickr files here). JWilz12345 (Talk|Contrib's.) 05:22, 11 August 2020 (UTC)
OK, I misunderstood. I am not aware of an automated way of replacing an image. And I don't see a download feature either on the mobile version. As far as I know, you need to manually download the highest/original resolution on a laptop and then click "Upload a new version of this file". --P 1 9 9  ✉ 13:52, 11 August 2020 (UTC)

I've found a way. I just used "desktop version" for the current window (with the page of the Flickr file) on my mobile browser, and voila! Thanks P199 :-) JWilz12345 (Talk|Contrib's.) 13:02, 12 August 2020 (UTC)

Uploader's req of speedy del

Good day P199! May I request for the speedy deletion of one Flickr pic that I uploaded: File:Balete tree Jed Sazon - Flickr.jpg, because it appeared to be from FB (using its metadata). Thank you. JWilz12345 (Talk|Contrib's.) 06:22, 11 August 2020 (UTC)

It doesn't qualify for speeedy deletion anymore (uploaded more than a week ago). I'll start a DR. BTW, if you want to speedy delete one of your new uploads in the future, just tag it with {{speedydelete|G7}}. Regards, --P 1 9 9  ✉ 13:58, 11 August 2020 (UTC)

Media needing categories to be put into language categories

@Joshbaumgartner and Crouch, Swale: I am working with category:All media needing categories as of 2015. There are many images where file name or file's description is not in English and therefore most of the users are not able to properly categorise these files. So, I think that edits like this: Special:Diff/438727932 are very useful. Agree?--Estopedist1 (talk) 17:09, 11 August 2020 (UTC)

Seems like more work for little to no gain. You can still easily do a search with non-English file descriptions. For example your edit above. It took me 10 seconds to find and categorize the image properly (in other words, that was almost the same effort as first categorizing it by language). And there is also Google Translate... --P 1 9 9  ✉ 18:02, 11 August 2020 (UTC)
And I think that moving files to such splinter categories will result in less attention, longer time before anyone works on them. --P 1 9 9  ✉ 18:57, 11 August 2020 (UTC)
I appreciate the effort, but for me when categorizing, 90% of the time I end up relying on the image itself with the title and description (if present) as only additional information to the process. I am concerned that segregating by title language may dissuade a non-Spanish speaker for example from working on an image in the Spanish category when in reality, most of the time, user language vs. title language is not an impediment to adding meaningful categories. I don't have a strict opposition to sub-categorization of maintenance cats, but we should avoid having to spend so much time sorting within maintenance cats that we never get around to adding real categories to files...it is a fine balance I suppose. Josh (talk) 02:27, 11 September 2020 (UTC)

Question regarding certain Flickr pictures hosted here

Good evening again (from here in the PHL)! I have one daunting question. Certain Flickr-based files here are of inferior quality than their original counterparts, like:

I would want to d-'load their original, highest quality resolutions, but their licenses on Flickr today have changed (to an unfree license that's non-compatible here). Can I still download their original resolution images and upload here or I might need to conduct a longer process (might be Commons:Flickr files/Appeal for license change)? Sadly, I don't have a Yahoo account. JWilz12345 (Talk|Contrib's.) 14:23, 12 August 2020 (UTC)

Good question. IMO, I don't think you can. As far as I understand, the free license is specific to a specific version. For copyright questions, it is best to ask at COM:VP/C. --P 1 9 9  ✉ 14:28, 12 August 2020 (UTC)
I just posted the question at Commons:Village pump/Copyright#Question regarding certain Flickr_pictures hosted here JWilz12345 (Talk|Contrib's.) 04:48, 13 August 2020 (UTC)

They are authentic photographs

The files you have requested for deletion are photographs taken by from the mobile phone by me only. How can you say that they are not authentic just for the sake of saying!!! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Niloy N Roy (talk • contribs) 14:25, 13 August 2020‎ (UTC)

@Niloy N Roy: I commented at the DR that 3 out of 4 of your uploads show that these photos are taken from somewhere else. Care to explain? Or, you can prove that these images belong to you if you upload them with the original resolution and full EXIF data. --P 1 9 9  ✉ 18:32, 13 August 2020 (UTC)

@P199 Can you explain , what do you mean by 'somewhere else'? I had been director of the play 'Faust' which was performed in Kolkata in November 2019 and that's where photograph was taken by me from my phone.It may have been used in different media or People's Theatre Group's website of social media, but it belongs to me.

The Seventh Moon cover was deleted? Why?

Hello, greetings from Philippines!

I'm wondering why the official cover of the book I am writing an article about was deleted by you. It says that the reason for deletion is Copyright violation, but I placed the name of the copyright holder and followed the rules religiously. I am currently searching for other novels in the Wikipedia, but their covers are there. May I ask what's the main problem or if there is anything I can do to get it back there?

My article is not yet approved by Wikipedia.

Jemcordial (talk) 17:13, 17 August 2020 (UTC)

Commons does not allow copyrighted images, even if you mention the name of the copyright holder (unless they release it under a compatible license, which must be proven via COM:OTRS). Read COM:L. --P 1 9 9  ✉ 15:57, 19 August 2020 (UTC)

About Entrance to University of the Philippines Diliman.jpg

Good day P199. Is the deleted file File:Entrance to University of the Philippines Diliman.jpg depicting the copyrighted Oblation statue substantially or only depicts it incidentally (COM:DM)? Should it depicts the statue incidentally and depicts more of the Quezon Hall which dates to 1950, I'm planning to request undeletion of this with the now-updated Commons:FOP Philippines. JWilz12345 (Talk|Contrib's.) 03:50, 18 August 2020 (UTC)

Not DM. It actually shows the statue from behind along with University Avenue. Regards, --P 1 9 9  ✉ 15:59, 19 August 2020 (UTC)
Thanks for the response. How about File:University of the Philippines, Diliman.jpg, which I don't know if it applies to the Quezon Hall (which is now allowed here per the updated Commons:FOP Philippines since the building is from 1950) or to the potentially copyrighted Oblation statue. JWilz12345 (Talk|Contrib's.) 13:08, 20 August 2020 (UTC)
And pardon me for another pangmamakulit: does File:UPmanila333jf.JPG depict a building or a statue? Thanks for the response. JWilz12345 (Talk|Contrib's.) 13:20, 20 August 2020 (UTC)
File:University of the Philippines, Diliman.jpg is a duplicate of File:Entrance to University of the Philippines Diliman.jpg. And File:UPmanila333jf.JPG is definitely focused on the statue (but has the building in the background). Regards, --P 1 9 9  ✉ 17:35, 20 August 2020 (UTC)

About File:Wikimedia Conference 2018 by Nirmal Dulal (13).jpg

Hi there, I think you deleted my file mistakenly. Check here properly this one is the duplicate of mine and its already deleted but you also deleted my original one. Here is another one same like this one. --Nirmal Dulal (talk) 09:50, 8 September 2020 (UTC)

Hi @Nirmal Dulal: I have undeleted the files. The issue was that the duplicates were already redirected before the DR was closed. So that resulted inadvertently in the originals being deleted. Sorry about that. Regards, --P 1 9 9  ✉ 13:41, 8 September 2020 (UTC)

Thank you for undeleting ☺️ @P199: -- Nirmal Dulal (talk) 15:11, 8 September 2020 (UTC)

Turn a version of an image into a separate file

Hello. Is there an easy way to upload a version of an image as a new, separate file, instead of doing it manually? To be more precise, I would like to do this with the current version of this file, because it is not a new version of the previous image but of another. I already asked the uploader to do so, but I have not received any anwser. Veverve (talk) 10:42, 11 September 2020 (UTC)

Hi @Veverve: Unfortunately, there is no automated tool for that. It is actually cumbersome, see COM:SPLIT. You can tag the image with {{Split}}. Regards, --P 1 9 9  ✉ 13:03, 11 September 2020 (UTC)
Request done. Veverve (talk) 13:14, 12 September 2020 (UTC)

File:Sabaton.svg

Hello, could you please also delete this file? I already started a discussion in July. It is also fanmade, just like this file. Thank you in advance. --Merkið (talk) 08:04, 22 September 2020 (UTC)

Hi @Merkið: Sorry, but File:Sabaton.svg is in use. If no longer used, let me know and I'll close the DR. Regards, --P 1 9 9  ✉ 14:02, 22 September 2020 (UTC)
Hi P199, the file is still used by two user pages. Do they also count? --Merkið (talk) 11:13, 8 October 2020 (UTC)
@Merkið: No, those 2 pages don't count. I deleted the file and closed the DR. Regards, --P 1 9 9  ✉ 12:30, 8 October 2020 (UTC)

My userspace page with info on FoP

Hello. I just made a page entitled User:JWilz12345/FoP, in my userspace, detailing concepts on FoP with information sources from various policy pages on Commons. I added disclaimer on it that this page doesn't reflect wider or official views of Wikimedia Commons community. I hope that my new userspace page does not run counter to Commons policies. JWilz12345 (Talk|Contrib's.) 11:09, 22 September 2020 (UTC)

Category restoration

Hello P199. Please restore (undelete) the Category:Philippine National Bank. A photo with a category bearing this name now exists here on Commons (I just transferred that photo from enwiki via FileExporter). Thanks! JWilz12345 (Talk|Contrib's.) 13:25, 30 September 2020 (UTC)

Hi @JWilz12345: . Actually Category:Bangko Nasyonal ng Pilipinas already existed (not sure why Filipino was used when the bank only uses English branding). So I just moved it to Category:Philippine National Bank (there was nothing pertinent in the former category that needed restoration). --P 1 9 9  ✉ 19:36, 30 September 2020 (UTC)
Ok P199. Noted :-) JWilz12345 (Talk|Contrib's.) 02:06, 1 October 2020 (UTC)

Notification about possible deletion

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

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

Please remember to respond to and – if appropriate – contradict the arguments supporting deletion. Arguments which focus on the nominator will not affect the result of the nomination. Thank you!
Afrikaans ∙ Bahasa Indonesia ∙ bosanski ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ dansk ∙ Deutsch ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ ∙ eesti ∙ English ∙ español ∙ Esperanto ∙ français ∙ galego ∙ hrvatski ∙ íslenska ∙ italiano ∙ magyar ∙ Nederlands ∙ norsk bokmål ∙ norsk nynorsk ∙ occitan ∙ Plattdüütsch ∙ polski ∙ português ∙ português do Brasil ∙ română ∙ shqip ∙ sicilianu ∙ slovenčina ∙ slovenščina ∙ suomi ∙ svenska ∙ Tiếng Việt ∙ Türkçe ∙ Zazaki ∙ Ελληνικά ∙ беларуская ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ ∙ български ∙ македонски ∙ русский ∙ српски / srpski ∙ українська ∙ հայերեն ∙ বাংলা ∙ മലയാളം ∙ ပအိုဝ်ႏဘာႏသာႏ ∙ မြန်မာဘာသာ ∙ ไทย ∙ 조선말 ∙ 한국어 ∙ 日本語 ∙ 简体中文‎ ∙ 繁體中文‎ ∙ עברית ∙ العربية ∙ پښتو ∙ فارسی ∙ ދިވެހިބަސް ∙ +/−

Affected:


Yours sincerely, Mrcl lxmna (talk) 04:44, 7 October 2020 (UTC)

Notification about possible deletion

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

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

Please remember to respond to and – if appropriate – contradict the arguments supporting deletion. Arguments which focus on the nominator will not affect the result of the nomination. Thank you!
Afrikaans ∙ Bahasa Indonesia ∙ bosanski ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ dansk ∙ Deutsch ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ ∙ eesti ∙ English ∙ español ∙ Esperanto ∙ français ∙ galego ∙ hrvatski ∙ íslenska ∙ italiano ∙ magyar ∙ Nederlands ∙ norsk bokmål ∙ norsk nynorsk ∙ occitan ∙ Plattdüütsch ∙ polski ∙ português ∙ português do Brasil ∙ română ∙ shqip ∙ sicilianu ∙ slovenčina ∙ slovenščina ∙ suomi ∙ svenska ∙ Tiếng Việt ∙ Türkçe ∙ Zazaki ∙ Ελληνικά ∙ беларуская ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ ∙ български ∙ македонски ∙ русский ∙ српски / srpski ∙ українська ∙ հայերեն ∙ বাংলা ∙ മലയാളം ∙ ပအိုဝ်ႏဘာႏသာႏ ∙ မြန်မာဘာသာ ∙ ไทย ∙ 조선말 ∙ 한국어 ∙ 日本語 ∙ 简体中文‎ ∙ 繁體中文‎ ∙ עברית ∙ العربية ∙ پښتو ∙ فارسی ∙ ދިވެހިބަސް ∙ +/−

Affected:


Yours sincerely, Mrcl lxmna (talk) 11:36, 7 October 2020 (UTC)

Delete old ver

Hello P199. Pls. delete the old version of File:EDSA Shrine EDSA Tayo (no freedom of panorama phl blacked-out).png, as I have uploaded the better version. Thanks. JWilz12345 (Talk|Contrib's.) 16:48, 9 October 2020 (UTC)

✓ Done --P 1 9 9  ✉ 20:22, 9 October 2020 (UTC)
Another one: File:Bonifacio Shrine (Padre Burgos, Manila; 11-23-2019) (no freedom of panorama phl blacked-out).png, which I replaced with a better version. Please also delete the old version. Thanks JWilz12345 (Talk|Contrib's.) 18:06, 11 October 2020 (UTC)
✓ Done --P 1 9 9  ✉ 18:05, 13 October 2020 (UTC)

Are these FOP-related?

Hello again P199. Hope you're safe while the pandemic still rages. Do these DR's of files by Judgefloro relate to FOP-reliant subjects?

I just asked since I don't known if I will group them under Category:Philippine FOP cases/deleted. Thanks for the response. JWilz12345 (Talk|Contrib's.) 11:33, 11 October 2020 (UTC)

Also: the speedy deletion of File:SPGPjf2185 14.JPG, is the subject FOP-reliant too? 12:01, 11 October 2020 (UTC)

Also too: the subject of File:Hermosa,Bataanjf2733 10.JPG, is that subject FOP-rliant too? 12:48, 11 October 2020 (UTC)

Hi @JWilz12345: . In answer:

  • Files:05094jfAtate Maps New Capitol Building Palayan City Nueva Ecijafvf ... -- No, DW of maps and artwork.
  • File:SPGPjf2185 14.JPG -- Yes, outdoor plaque (not architectural work).
  • File:Hermosa,Bataanjf2733 10.JPG -- No, DW of portraits.

Regards, --P 1 9 9  ✉ 18:12, 13 October 2020 (UTC)

Hi again. Are these also FOP-reliant?
Thank you in advance for the response! JWilz12345 (Talk|Contrib's.) 00:21, 17 December 2020 (UTC)
Hi @JWilz12345: . Yes, both are a plaque of the Guinness World Record certificate for the longest fresh flower lei (similar as File:SPGPjf2185 14.JPG above). --P 1 9 9  ✉ 14:53, 17 December 2020 (UTC)
✓ Done adding them manually at Category:Philippine FOP cases/deleted (I added some speedy deletions, after I saw one speedily deleted file listed at Category:Icelandic FOP cases/deleted). Thank you again and stay safe and healthy 🙂 JWilz12345 (Talk|Contrib's.) 15:24, 17 December 2020 (UTC)

Your deletions

It is very upsetting to see the number of deletions you did on my contributions.

For 4 years I spent many hours a day contributing to Wikipedia. As you know, there is no monetary retribution.

I see you deleted 3 photos of the Grand Trunk Station I grew up in in Maine as well as a photo I took in Lewsiton, Maine. How can you do this?

I see you deleted a photo I took in Qinzhou, China where I married my wife Yi Zeng. How can you do this?

The photo fo Tian'anmen where we went for our trip.

The photos of Le Pélican which I took photos during the contruction of the boat.

The Val-Cariter military base which is just 20 minutes away

My photo of La Tuque, Quebec during a work trip.

My photo of la Maison Montcalm where I presently live.

My photo of Fort Chambly which I visited on several occasions.

All this is very upsetting. I don't know how much money you get to do this, but you could have taken the photos one by one and ask me.

Because one was wrong, you assumed all the others were.

This is why you will find fewer and fewer people working on behalf of wikipeida and more with other sites such as facebook where it is much more rewarding.

You did this in May when I was strickened by the virus but managed to survived.

Like is short on earth, you should not go out of your way to hurt others.

Varing--Varing (talk) 04:38, 22 October 2020 (UTC)

File:Donald (66103969).jpeg

Hello P199. I want to know the "country of origin of the subject of this image, deleted at Commons:Deletion requests/File:Donald (66103969).jpeg, so I can categorize the case page accordingly. I feel this is a Flickr image, and if this is a Flickr image, if you have access on the desc page as an admin, can yoy copy and paste here the Flickr URL so that I can access and analyze the Flickr description and tags.

Also:

Thank you P199 🙂 JWilz12345 (Talk|Contrib's.) 10:14, 6 November 2020 (UTC)

Hi @JWilz12345: . The source for Donald was: https://500px.com/photo/66103969/donald-by-ernesto-viramontes. I don't see any country of origin.
The source for 알 was {{own}}. Again, no indication at all where taken. Regards, --P 1 9 9  ✉ 14:23, 9 November 2020 (UTC)

File:This was hanging from the ceiling of the hotel (3423568925).jpg

Hello po muli p199 🙂 sorry for bothering again. May I request for determining the Flickr link of this deleted image? - File:This was hanging from the ceiling of the hotel (3423568925).jpg. This was part of Commons:Deletion requests/Files in Category:Table4five photographs, originally intended for "SCOPE" reasons, but ultimately resulted to mixed kept/delete (some were deleted due to COM:DW concerns, including this image which the subject was deemed as FOP-reliant). I want to access the Flickr URL so as to obtain possible clues (like Flickr tags) regarding the source jurisdiction of the subject of this deleted file. Thank you po 🙂 JWilz12345 (Talk|Contrib's.) 16:16, 19 November 2020 (UTC)

Hi @JWilz12345: the Flickr URL is http://www.flickr.com/photos/table4five/3423568925/ Ingat po. --P 1 9 9  ✉ 16:56, 19 November 2020 (UTC)

File:Original Grist Mill, Inglis Falls 8934 (9681527784).jpg

Hey P199, I noticed the tag you placed on this file. If you look closely, you'll see there's a copyright tag on the mural itself (next to the author Allen C. Hilgendorf), so this should be speedy deleted. Mindmatrix 20:26, 11 December 2020 (UTC)

File:吉隆坡双峰塔.jpg

Hello P199! Since File:吉隆坡双峰塔.jpg is locked indefinitely as a featured picture (only admins may edit it), may I request you to add {{FoP-Malaysia}} on it? It is still an architectural work by the still-living César Pelli. Thank you in advance! JWilz12345 (Talk|Contrib's.) 01:52, 13 December 2020 (UTC)

@JWilz12345: not necessary, notice is already in category. Thanks. --P 1 9 9  ✉ 16:41, 13 December 2020 (UTC)

Freepik

I just searched for "Freepik" in Commons and found 240 files. Considering this decision, shouldn’t those too be deleted? -- Tuválkin ✉ ✇ 18:03, 14 December 2020 (UTC)

Hi @Tuvalkin: Yes, it appears so. See {{Freepik}}. --P 1 9 9  ✉ 03:29, 15 December 2020 (UTC)

Wrongly deleted scans of old books

Hi! Most files you deleted in User:Gun Powder Ma's DRs are evidently scans of old books. I had reported the problematic DRs twice to AN: Commons:Administrators'_noticeboard/Archive_80#User:Qiushufang's_files_in_DR Commons:Administrators'_noticeboard/Archive_82#Nonsense_DR_still_open_five_months_later. I did not close them because of the sheer quantity and because sysops could do it semiautomatically.--Roy17 (talk) 10:25, 15 December 2020 (UTC)

Commons:Deletion requests/Archive/2020/05/09: s/he made 130+ such DRs. I kept 22.--Roy17 (talk) 10:39, 15 December 2020 (UTC)
It is the uploader's responsibility to provide the proper info and source. Without that, it is impossible to say if it is indeed old. Even modern images can easily be created to look old. Regards, --P 1 9 9  ✉ 16:23, 15 December 2020 (UTC)
No they are not fake old scans. The books have been uploaded to commons. I have identified the correct source and verified the authenticity. All it needed was a sysop to close all the nonsense DRs.--Roy17 (talk) 00:16, 16 December 2020 (UTC)
Thanks P 1 9 9.
Roy17, I find it worrisome that you are still going around with your theory that adequate sourcing by the uploader is somehow not required. It is. Please familiarize yourself with the long-standing rules. Shouldn't admins know and act upon these? Note that you will be held accountable for every copyvio that you keep by adding a source you are only guessing.
The real scandal is that someone like Qiushufang could upload hundreds of copyright violations and have them for years here up and widely linked to the English wiki. Furthermore, the copyvios of his previous username Yprpyqp are still around, although I have pointed to them half a year ago. Qiushufang/Yprpyqp's copyvio spree has been one of the largest undetected copyright violations on Commons for years. Gun Powder Ma (talk) 21:32, 25 December 2020 (UTC)

File:Duilia_gs1

Hello P199. I recently had a photo deleted. I would like to know how can I update the article photo without infringing Wikipedia's rules. In this particular case, the picture was sent to me by the subject's husband. What is the correct procedure? I will appreciate any help. Thanks, Gustavo. 79.168.97.167 19:16, 15 December 2020 (UTC)Dec 15 2020

You need to receive permission from the photographer and submit that permission, see COM:OTRS. Regards, --P 1 9 9  ✉ 15:53, 16 December 2020 (UTC)

Several files under Category:434th Aldo ning Mexico, Pampanga Exhibit (SM City Pampanga)

Hello P199. Are the objects under several images at Category:434th Aldo ning Mexico, Pampanga Exhibit (SM City Pampanga) posters or boards? Or some sort of screens? I also see some COM:DW issues here. JWilz12345 (Talk|Contrib's.) 07:27, 18 December 2020 (UTC)

I would say they are exhibit displays, boards. --P 1 9 9  ✉ 18:57, 18 December 2020 (UTC)

Old copyvio version of File:04118jfGateway Araneta Center Mallfvf 10.jpg

Hello. Pls. delete the old version of File:04118jfGateway Araneta Center Mallfvf 10.jpg, containing the copyrightable advertisement (as advertisements in the Philippines are copyrighted according to Ms. Emmelina Masanque, the Assistant Division Chief of the Information Dissemination and Training Division of the Documentation, Information and Technology Transfer Bureau under IPOPHL, who was one of the principal guests at the October 30, 2020 FB Live webinar of the Office for Alternative Dispute Resolution (OADR). Thank you in advance po :-) JWilz12345 (Talk|Contrib's.) 11:14, 18 December 2020 (UTC)

Sige. Tapos. --P 1 9 9  ✉ 18:57, 18 December 2020 (UTC)

Request to remove/del copyvio version/s

Hello po muli. Request to delete the old version of File:02472jfBalintawak Interchange Caloocan Quezon City EDSA Roadfvf 08.jpg as it has substantial inclusion of the copyrighted billboard. I won't be specifying the heading of this thread as I may need to request for such more removals (for cases that some files, mostly from Judgefloro, can be cropped to remove potentially copyvio parts like billboards, posters, and signboards). And also, if you wish you may want to check the files I nominated at Commons:Deletion requests/Files in Category:Balintawak Interchange (2nd nomination, all files showing copyrighted billboard ads, and cannot be cropped as this may eliminate their usability). Thank you po! JWilz12345 (Talk|Contrib's.) 17:06, 19 December 2020 (UTC)

de minimis

Hi, I am wondering about Commons:Deletion requests/File:National Portrait Gallery visitors view First Lady Michelle Obama.jpg. I am trying to understand the legal rationale behind this (not the Commons policy rationale). Can you explain why this is de minimis from a copyright law perspective? --Gnom (talk) 13:58, 30 December 2020 (UTC)

@Gnom: Obviously my decision is not legal, and you have to remember that DM is subjective (there is no law that define the limits of this). But simply put: copyright is protecting who and how a work may be used. In this case, it would be impossible to use (reproduce) the portrait in that image due to its extreme distortion and low quality. That would be the same if this image was taken straight from the front and the portrait was blurred out. --P 1 9 9  ✉ 03:25, 31 December 2020 (UTC)
Thank you for your quick response. My understanding is that the de minimis exception is defined by law and that its application is of course objective (in Germany, for example, de minimis is regulated by sec. 57 of the German Copyright Act and there are countless court decisions that interpret this law). What I am trying to understand is the legal background of the application of de minimis on Commons under U.S. copyright law. I have a feeling that points such as "extreme distortion and low quality" are irrelevant (because they would be under German law). --Gnom (talk) 21:56, 31 December 2020 (UTC)

de minimis

Hi, I am wondering about Commons:Deletion requests/File:National Portrait Gallery visitors view First Lady Michelle Obama.jpg. I am trying to understand the legal rationale behind this (not the Commons policy rationale). Can you explain why this is de minimis from a copyright law perspective? --Gnom (talk) 13:58, 30 December 2020 (UTC)

@Gnom: Obviously my decision is not legal, and you have to remember that DM is subjective (there is no law that define the limits of this). But simply put: copyright is protecting who and how a work may be used. In this case, it would be impossible to use (reproduce) the portrait in that image due to its extreme distortion and low quality. That would be the same if this image was taken straight from the front and the portrait was blurred out. --P 1 9 9  ✉ 03:25, 31 December 2020 (UTC)
Thank you for your quick response. My understanding is that the de minimis exception is defined by law and that its application is of course objective (in Germany, for example, de minimis is regulated by sec. 57 of the German Copyright Act and there are countless court decisions that interpret this law). What I am trying to understand is the legal background of the application of de minimis on Commons under U.S. copyright law. I have a feeling that points such as "extreme distortion and low quality" are irrelevant (because they would be under German law). --Gnom (talk) 21:56, 31 December 2020 (UTC)
Hi, do you think it is worth continuing this conversation? Or should I ask somewhere else? --Gnom (talk) 11:42, 3 January 2021 (UTC)
Hi @Gnom: I'm not sure why you would pursue this conversation. What is your intent? Still trying to get this image deleted? Rest assured that as an admin, I try to apply Commons policies as conscientiously as possible, but I am no copyright lawyer. For legal advice, you better consult a lawyer. Sorry for not being helpful here. --P 1 9 9  ✉ 14:57, 3 January 2021 (UTC)
Hello po @Gnom and P199: . Just chimed in, seeing this very interesting discussion. It appears that if de minimis concept is indeed objective, then IMO it may not apply in the Philippine DW/FOP-related cases. I admit I am no lawyer, though I have always referred to Republic Act No. 8293 or IP Code of the Philippines in many FOP or DW-related requests. I cannot find something DM-like. But the matter whether DM applies to the Philippine cases may no longer need debate, if a potential dialogue between IPOPHL and Wikimedia happens. (IPOPHL, in their reply to an email sent by Higad Rail Fan last November 2020, said they are open for such dialogue, though I don't know if Wikimedia is aware on this, considering that IPOPHL expects a WMF-initiated dialogue on FOP). BTW, the de minimis seems "invalid" for SoKor cases: see Commons:Deletion requests/Files of the exterior of the N Seoul Tower in Category:N Seoul Tower. Even some images that may pass DM were also deleted. I don't know the nature of the existing court case there which is outlined by Explicit at Commons talk:Copyright rules by territory/South Korea#Add example of FOP?. A building used as a background for a TV commercial (which some may claim de minimis), but was ruled as infringement to the architect of the building by the Seoul Central District Court. I supported Explicit's proposal to add that example on the CRT page of SoKor. JWilz12345 (Talk|Contrib's.) 16:35, 3 January 2021 (UTC)
Hi P199, my intent is to understand if and how our de minimis policy here on Commons is in line with U.S. copyright law. (I am a lawyer myself and hold a Ph.D. in German copyright law.) If not here, where do you think is a good place to discuss this? --Gnom (talk) 18:05, 3 January 2021 (UTC)
IMO it is actually ridiculous that mere users need to establish the legal policies to which Commons must adhere. One would expect the Wikimedia lawyers to take care of this. I guess that would be my starting point... --P 1 9 9  ✉ 18:44, 3 January 2021 (UTC)
We could ask the WMF legal team to issue guidance in this matter. (I am the author of meta:Wikilegal/Database Rights myself...) --Gnom (talk) 19:32, 3 January 2021 (UTC)

Notification

Hello. I would like to notify you about this subject as you have shown in the past an interest in it. Gun Powder Ma (talk) 04:03, 7 January 2021 (UTC)

Request for deletion

Hello P199. If this is OK for policies, I'm requesting for the deletion of my personal userspace "essay" User:JWilz12345/FoP. My personal reasons. Thank you po. JWilz12345 (Talk|Contrib's.) 13:50, 10 January 2021 (UTC)

Yes deletion of personal userpages is allowed, COM:CSD#U1. Just put {{speedydelete|[[COM:CSD#U1]]}} on your userpage. --P 1 9 9  ✉ 16:43, 10 January 2021 (UTC)

AutoWikiBrowser rights

Good day @P199: ! Please consider my request for AutoWikiBrowser rights at Commons:Requests for rights, as I have already been using it on other Wikis and intend to use it here as well. Thanks! —hueman1 (talk • uploads) 01:59, 22 January 2021 (UTC)

@HueMan1: ✓ Done. Good luck in your editing. --P 1 9 9  ✉ 02:42, 22 January 2021 (UTC)
@P199: Thank you! —hueman1 (talk • uploads) 09:24, 22 January 2021 (UTC)

Please reconsider the deletion of File:Catherine L. Nakalembe.jpg

Re: Commons:Deletion requests/File:Catherine L. Nakalembe.jpg

Hi, P199. Would it be possible please for you to reconsider your decision to delete the file File:Catherine L. Nakalembe.jpg? I am contacting you in the first instance as per COM:UNDEL.

  • The BBC article mentioned in the deletion request does indeed display that image, but at a resolution of 976 x 549, a filesize of 118.5kB. See here
  • According to link, the image that was uploaded to wikimedia was at a resolution of 1254x1600, with a filesize of 267KB

It is therefore extremely unlikely in my opinion that the uploader, @Quantum Priest: , simply copied the file from the BBC article, as asserted by @Gråbergs Gråa Sång: in the deletion discussion.

There was no notification on the talk page of the only article that uses this file, or else I would have made these observations during the deletion discussion instead of here.

Thanks in anticipation, Hallucegenia (talk) 17:44, 22 January 2021 (UTC)

Hi @Hallucegenia: Thanks for your comments. Unfortunately this doesn't change the outcome. Besides the fact that previously published images need an OTRS ticket, the BBC clearly credits a different organization. That alone requires a confirmation with OTRS. See COM:OTRS. Regards, --P 1 9 9  ✉ 20:19, 22 January 2021 (UTC)
Good grief. That image was used three months before the BBC story that @Gråbergs Gråa Sång: quoted: by NASA on 12 September and by Deven on 11 September, both times crediting Dr Nakalembe. The BBC caption just says who they got the image from. Who do you think took the photo? What more information would an OTRS ticket give you? You already have a user who asserts that he is the lady's husband and that he took the photo. Whatever happened to COM:GOOD FAITH? No wonder clever black women have to work so much harder to get their achievements recognised. Hallucegenia (talk) 21:51, 22 January 2021 (UTC)
That guideline says "When dealing with possible copyright violations, good faith means assuming that editors intend to comply with site policy and the law. That is different from assuming they have actually complied with either." I see no reason to believe P199 treated this pic differently because there is a clever black woman in it. Sadly the user who asserts didn't use a previously unpublished image, that would have simplified things (from "our" end). Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 17:48, 23 January 2021 (UTC)

P199, another question, about "There was no notification on the talk page" (on WP). That's correct, TBH I've never considered that when nominating something on Commons for deletion. Is there some guidance on this, bots seems to do it sometimes [2]? Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 07:52, 25 January 2021 (UTC)

@Gråbergs Gråa Sång: as far as I know, notification on WP is a fairly recent process, and only as a courtesy. It is done by a bot. The process description only says to notify the uploader on their talk page, nothing about notifying WP where the image is used (which would be most impractical considering all the different languages and uses). Regards, --P 1 9 9  ✉ 14:10, 25 January 2021 (UTC)
Thank you! Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 14:13, 25 January 2021 (UTC)

lochaber-partie-Ouest

Hi,

Could The picture for the township "lochaber-partie-Ouest" be updated?

It is my house and it is finished. I would love to see a prettier picture for our township.

I could take a new one for you of the same angle

Thanks — Preceding unsigned comment added by 142.169.78.85 (talk • contribs) 13:50, 3 February 2021‎ (UTC)

Hi. Sure, I can take a new one of this one: File:Lochaber-Ouest QC.JPG. Don't take it for me since that could pose problems with copyrights. Give me a few weeks though... --P 1 9 9  ✉ 18:56, 3 February 2021 (UTC)

Please participate in the Universal Code of Conduct consultation on Wikimedia Commons!

Dear P199

Thank you for your hard work to create the sum of all knowledge that is freely sharable to every single human being across the world. As our diverse community grows, we need a guideline that will help all of our work collectively and constructively where everyone feels safe, welcomed, and part of a team. That is why the Wikimedia movement is working on establishing a global guideline called the Universal Code of Conduct, often referred to as UCoC.

After the months-long policy consultation, we have prepared a policy (available in many languages) that has been ratified by the Board of Trustees. We’re currently in the second phase of the process. During this round of consultation, we want to discuss the implementation of this policy. As a member of the functionary team of Wikimedia Commons, your opinion on enforcement is of great value. We want to hear from you on how this policy can be enforced on the Wikimedia Commons community and what might be needed to do so. There are a few enforcement questions so you can easily outline your answers based on them. Please do not hesitate to bring any more questions/challenges you think are not yet discussed.

The discussion is taking place on Commons:Universal Code of Conduct consultation. You can also share your thoughts by replying to this message (Please ping me so I get notified), posting your message on my talk page. I am aware that some thoughts cannot be expressed publicly, so you can always share your opinion by emailing me as well.

As a valued member of the Commons community, please share your thoughts, ideas, and experiences that relate to UCoC. Let us know what needs to be improved so we can build a more friendly and cooperative space to increase editor engagement and retention of new users.

Wikimedia projects are governed by you. So, it is you who needs to step up to ensure a safe, comfortable, and pleasant working environment.

Let me know if you have any questions.

Thank you! Wikitanvir (WMF) (talk) 10:18, 5 February 2021 (UTC)

Please do not delete https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=File:Image1_-_copie_تهران_ایران_در_سن_۵%DB%B0_سالگی.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1

Hello, this photo is an integral part of the article on professor Mahmoud Shahabi << https://fa.wikipedia.org/wiki/ محمود_شهابی_خراسانی >> and it should not be deleted please. this photo belongs to me and it is from my personal album, I ask you to put it back in its place please. --Doctor Mansour Chehabi (talk) 10:40, 15 January 2021 (UTC)--Docteur Mansour Chehabi (talk) 10:22, 8 February 2021 (UTC)

@Docteur Mansour Chehabi: Because you are not the photographer, you should have supplied the name of the original photographer, the date it was taken, and permission to publish this photo, see COM:LI. Regards, --P 1 9 9  ✉ 14:20, 8 February 2021 (UTC)

@--P199 Hello this photo, this is my father's photo which was taken over 70 years ago in Tehran and it is from our family album and has been used on his Wikipedia page. have the kindness of the update it please--Docteur Mansour Chehabi (talk) 17:40, 8 February 2021 (UTC)

Hello P199,

you delete photos << https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=File:Image1_-_copie_ تهران_ایران_در_سن_۵% DB% B0_ سالگی. jpg & action = edit & send redlink = 1 >>, without a valid reason, I send you explanatory messages without any response and reaction from you. I therefore ask you to return the photo that you have deleted please, because this photo was taken over 70 years ago and belongs to my private album and is used on the page of https: //fa.wikipedia .org / wiki / محمود_شهابی_خراسانی --Docteur Mansour Chehabi (talk) 07:43, 14 February 2021 (UTC)

@Docteur Mansour Chehabi: I have already given you a valid reason, but you never responded by providing the name of the original photographer, the date it was taken, and permission to publish this photo as per COM:LI. For the procedure to undelete a photo, see COM:UNDEL. Regards, --P 1 9 9  ✉ 14:47, 14 February 2021 (UTC)

Questions regarding deletion request of my uploaded files

Some of these pictures were taken by me directly. For others, I have received express permission to post them as my own. As someone new to the Wikipedia community, I am not sure if there is another way I should upload the pictures that I did not physically take. If so, I would sincerely appreciate some advice. Thank you in advance! BrinaWiki9 (talk) 21:05, 8 February 2021 (UTC)

See reply at Commons:Deletion requests/Files uploaded by BrinaWiki9. Regards, --P 1 9 9  ✉ 21:30, 8 February 2021 (UTC)

Requesting reversion of protected File:Presidential Standard of Brazil.svg

Hello it seems like the file has been locked for the edit war that ensued a decade ago, can you perhaps revert it back to the azure/sky blue version as similar with the File:Coat of arms of Brazil.svg for the reason mentioned in my edit request? I have opened an edit request and an admin noticeboard and I have been left unnoticed. My edit request is here at the file's talk page [3], thanks! Nevermind I think it should stay as it is as shown in photos of Jair Bolsonaro when searching for him. PyroFloe (talk) 05:17, 11 February 2021 (UTC)

Please take a short survey regarding UCoC

Hello P199,

I would like to inform you that we now have a survey in place to take part in the UCoC consultation. It is not a long one and should take less than 10 minutes to complete. You can take the survey even if you have already participated in the on-wiki consultation. It has a different set of questions and allows you to participate anonymously and privately.

As a member of the Commons functionaries, your opinion is especially essential. Please click here to participate in the survey.

You are still welcome to participate in the on-wiki discussions. If you prefer you can have your say by sending me an email. You can also drop me an email if you want to have a one-to-one chat.

Thank you for your participation! Wikitanvir (WMF) 13:54, 12 February 2021 (UTC)

Banat files

Must be the quickest response ever! Thx! --TU-nor (talk) 21:51, 23 February 2021 (UTC)

User uploading images as own work

@Ali ahmed andalousi: has uploaded numerous images, claiming it was his/her own work. File:Covida.png is https://pngtree.com/freepng/red-covid-19-bacteria-isolated-on-transparent-background-3d-rendering-of-virus-for-coronavirus-awareness_5340587.html; File:Lion symp.png is https://www.freepng.es/png-n9vfx2/; I have opened a discussion for File:Almohad Flag.jpg. Looking at the user's uploads make me think there is multiple images which have the same problem. Could you tell me what is the procedure? Veverve (talk) 21:02, 25 February 2021 (UTC)
Hello? Veverve (talk) 12:38, 4 March 2021 (UTC)

Magandang Hapon po!

  • Magandang Hapon po! I would like to tersely sum up the history of my photos which I asked help from my relatives or close friends to put on Commons: (note, this is edited using shared computer with shown IP Address since I have no account yet and no computer)
  • My FIRST hired Editor: User:Judgefloro Mr. R. Miranda was engaged in Coconut charcoal or bricks making and I on Coconut healing oil, it was he who suggested that I put photos here on 26 June 2007 ; but because of boom of his business he stopped helping me;
  • My SECOND hired Editor: on User:Ramon FVelasquez 27 January 2010 My first photo that I and Ramon took is P. Buhangin Church when I and my cousins had a reunion; 24 January 2010; I had some problems and asked the help of an Administrator, to wit: "If you want help from me or others xxx, I want you to ask for help before you create new categories and do uploads, so that is done right immediately. -- P 1 9 9 ✉ 14:48, 11 February 2014 (UTC) I really appreciate the efforts you make to take pictures. I also go out of my way to take pictures of small towns so they can be added to WP articles. So I know this involves a lot of work. And for that reason I have awarded you a barnstar in the past". No body is trying to get you blocked. -- P 1 9 9 ✉ 17:01, 12 February 2014 (UTC)
  • Due to permanent disability and lingering illness, he took a very long until now Wiki-break - a) User:Ramon FVelasquez (10:42, 27 January 2010 (UTC) to Long Wiki-break due to permanent disability or illness) Total edit count: 120,091 to 02:56, 12 February 2014 and my close friend and far relative
  • Hence My FIRST hired Editor User:Judgefloro started uploading my photos from 20:46, 29 April 2013 (7 years ago) Total edit count: 1,706,763 to today March 6, 2021;
  • On 2015, User:Judgefloro repeatedly asked me to find another editor who could be trusted to upload my photos, since I am already 67 years old now and I am not knowledgeable about Commons Information Techical Matters; I failed to find one until he recommended to me his own close friend and close relative my in-law far relative in Bulacan to help me share my photos to Wikimedia Commons; hence, I was helped by
  • My FOURTH hired Editor helped with User:Judge F Floro on 10 September 2015 (UTC) 22 October 2015 to 10 September 2015 (5 years ago) Total edit count: 353 but resigned because of Travel reasons abroad for work;
  • My FIFTH editor is User:P1953 on 09:52, 6 March 2021 (UTC);
  • However, after lengthy discussions, User:P1953 resigned for personal reasons; --Jarekt (talk) 05:44, 7 March 2021 (UTC) required that I get com:OTRS for User:P1953; but, our Canon of Judicial Ethics disallow this form since any statement of User:P1953 which is in violation of the Code of Judicial Ethics will cause a Disbarment Case against me in the Integrated Bar of the Philippines and or in the Office of the Court Adminstrator;
  • Because of this, I propose to create and will now create User:Floro FVCarreon where I, Judge Florentino Floro will be the one personally editing and uploading my photos; this is for your perusal and to the Commons Village Pump or Help Desk, regarding any Uploading that I will start or have started; Maraming salamat po and hoping for your kind thoughts and advice on the matter, very sincerely 119.92.228.245 09:14, 8 March 2021 (UTC)

Tertiary highways

Without spending a looong time going through all your images, I was wondering if you've happened to snap/upload any images of one of the handful of tertiary highways in Ontario... perhaps a trip to Burchell Lake/Kashabowie, or possibly on your trip to Central Patricia... maybe even the road to the Manitou Falls dam near Ear Falls? - Floydian (talk) 04:46, 10 March 2021 (UTC)

Hi Floydian. Thanks for your interest in my photos, and kudos for your work on Ontario highways. Sorry, I have no images of Highway 802 or 804. The highway to Central Patricia is Highway 599, which already has a photo (File:Hwy 599 ON.JPG). I have no photos of the tertiary roads branching off from Hwy 599. Regards, --P 1 9 9  ✉ 13:55, 10 March 2021 (UTC)

Questions regarding deletion request of my uploaded files : File:Chat dormant dans une position étrange.jpg and File:Aide-memoire-wikipedia-art-féminisme-2018.pdf

Hello P199, I am wondering why these two files were submitted to deletion. - Chat dormant dans une position étrange.jpg is a picture taken by me. - Aide-memoire-wikipedia-art-féminisme-2018.pdf is a file made in collaboration with colleagues from universities in Quebec, Canada, for an introduction to Wikipédia. Both of these files are published under the Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 4.0 International license. I thank you in advance for your response. --Special:Contributions/Bernipède 14:21, 13 March 2021 (UTC)

Hi admin

You just closed Commons:Deletion requests/File:Othman Al-Kamees.png. Can you also please close, the DR of File:Hani Al-Mulki 2016.jpg, from the same uploader? But please have a look at this internet page before closing it. Thanks in advance and best wishes. --E4024 (talk) 01:57, 20 March 2021 (UTC)

Hi @E4024: thanks for bringing this user to my attention. But I couldn't establish copyvio on File:Hani Al-Mulki 2016.jpg (I didn't see this exact image on the page or video -- and not found using Google Images). But looking at all uploads of this user together, it looks indeed suspicious. All portrait photos they uploaded are all inconsistent in quality and size, low-res, cropped, etc. They would need to be nominated as a batch, so that reviewers can consider that. Regards, --P 1 9 9  ✉ 02:19, 20 March 2021 (UTC)
I see. Regrettably I do not know how to make a mass DR (I tried but could not understand when colleagues told me how to). If I am not abusing your generosity, can you give a minute of your time and work to Commons:Deletion requests/File:Ibrahim Gokcek.jpg and close it? As you may see at this example (also) the concerned file has been published in the net in several occasions before being uploaded here by an occasional visitor. All the best. E4024 (talk) 02:27, 20 March 2021 (UTC)
  • Hi again. Sometimes a simple DR takes time to close, only because the file is in use, a very understandable situation for a file that is, say, f/ex the only one that depicts a notable person. However, I observe that even DRs about "junk" files which are in use but have several similars to replace that use, as in this case (where there are "more than several" similar images in the relevant cat). Not an important issue, but I noticed some admins visit the DR area only to close "keep" cases or very clear copyvios or F10/G7 cases; this way of course we will always have a backlog there. Best wishes. E4024 (talk) 21:56, 3 April 2021 (UTC)

Please delete the redirects

Hello. Please delete the ff. redirects:

These request to delete redirects is for contingency purposes, if ever FOP is introduced in the Philippines (for the latter) and the depicted work of the former (French work) falls public domain. Thank you po :-) JWilz12345 (Talk|Contrib's.) 13:06, 25 March 2021 (UTC)

Also the redirect File:Saint-Germain-l'Auxerrois, Paris, France - panoramio (34).jpg (because a previous occupant was deleted - Commons:Deletion requests/File:Saint-Germain-l'Auxerrois, Paris, France - panoramio (34).jpg. JWilz12345 (Talk|Contrib's.) 13:38, 25 March 2021 (UTC)

✓ Done --P 1 9 9  ✉ 20:56, 25 March 2021 (UTC)
Also another redirect: File:MacArthur Landing Memorial National Park.jpg, so that an older file by this name that was deleted at Commons:Deletion requests/Files in Category:Leyte Landing Memorial (FOP related) can be undeleted easily by admins once FOP now exists here officially and formally (contingency reason). Note that the instance of use of the link at User:OgreBot/Uploads by new users/2018 June 01 03:00 is about the deleted file (as the uploader is not the same as the uploader of the current one). Thanks. JWilz12345 (Talk|Contrib's.) 09:54, 30 March 2021 (UTC)

Yuiyui spam

@P199: Good day sir. I think it's safe to say that the person behind Teamayuiyui, Yuiyui2014, and Yuiyui2021 is a sockpuppeteer. This user keeps spamming Philippine-related maps and graphics. —hueman1 (talk • uploads) 08:52, 30 March 2021 (UTC)

@HueMan1: not only that, this person uploaded unfree images of IBC 13 logo which I now nominated at Commons:Deletion requests/Files uploaded by Yuiyui2021. Note that the local file of IBC logo at enwiki is currently tagged as not free file. JWilz12345 (Talk|Contrib's.) 09:16, 30 March 2021 (UTC)

User blocked as multiple account abuser, and I nominated all other logos for deletion as out of scope. --P 1 9 9  ✉ 14:14, 30 March 2021 (UTC)

@P199: Thank you! —hueman1 (talk • uploads) 08:58, 31 March 2021 (UTC)
@P199: New sock sir: User talk:Yukirin91. —hueman1 (talk • uploads) 16:25, 6 April 2021 (UTC)

Good day, P199. I think User:雷電1990 is a sock of Yuiyui. He's messing with File:Labelled map of the Philippines - Provinces and Regions.png (which is Yuiyui's usual target). —hueman1 (talk • uploads) 07:25, 20 June 2021 (UTC)

Commons:Deletion requests/File:Carte Neandertaliens.jpg

Please add the link to the source map so copyright can be validated. I strongly disagree with the closing statement "simple base map is clearly PD-map". Maps of the world or maps of countries are not all public domain, that goes against COM:PRP and the complete lack of any evidence fails COM:L. For any image to comply with the template PD-map, "entirely of information that is common property and contains no original authorship" needs to be verifiable, not vaguely presumed by an uploader.

In the meantime, until you add a verifiable source, I have correctly marked the image as a derived work missing the source in compliance with copyright policies. Please do not remove that template, unless you wish to either reopen the DR, or add the correct source. --Fæ (talk) 17:29, 30 March 2021 (UTC)

I knew this would solicit a reaction from you... First I appreciate your efforts to support and maintain Commons, clearly you care about it as much as I do. It should be said that neither you or me are copyright experts (it is baffling that these issues are not addressed by the lawyers of WMF...), so both our statements are merely opinions and interpretations. I feel very strongly that a simple outline map does not contain any copyright, as pure geodata is not copyrightable (simple outline maps were free of DW until you single-handedly removed it from COM:DW based on 1 case study; much of that info is actually still valid). This fact is verifiable already and doesn't need to be continuously proven free (just like we wouldn't do for simple shapes). I could add any free source, and it would be hard to dispute it, because a simple map of Europe is going to look the same irrespective of what source is used. Incidentally, adding the DW template is also not the right process, because they went though a DR already. --P 1 9 9  ✉ 18:22, 30 March 2021 (UTC)
The reasoning and the DR closure is flawed as it relies on PD-map. Unless there is evidence that the map is "common property" please re-open the DR. Drawing of borders of countries, and in particular asserted publications of political boundaries, or maps with contours or reliefs are invariably copyright by the publisher. This map even has special colourings for what might be sandbanks, or maybe artistic impressions of sandbanks that seem unrelated to any public domain map I am aware of.
By the way, discussing this with my tame ancient historian, they believe that any map of detailed find spots like this is likely to be copyrighted. There's plenty of "arbitrariness" on exactly where to place the find spots, or which finds to select as important. This was not 100% invented by the uploader one day, it is certain to have been copied from a copyrighted sourcebook.
Just to clarify, I'm happy to be disagreed with, but verification still needs to be there, or policy clarified. If we are going to accept any map claimed to be user-created without asking for verification, then let's spell out how that "good faith" exception works and create a template for it. --Fæ (talk) 10:57, 1 April 2021 (UTC)

Deleted cat

(Not like this one!) Can you please revive Category:Poems in Turkish? Thanks in advance. --E4024 (talk) 01:45, 6 April 2021 (UTC)

Restore File:Rani jamaria intake during construction.jpg

Hello, can you restore the file. I am the owner of the file. The logic given to delete the file is strange. How does a low resolution photo makes eligible to deletion? In case there any such criteria, please point me to the link? Additionally, my photos are being used in wiki since long, see some of here in google [4] Nirmaljoshi (talk) 04:31, 6 April 2021 (UTC)

Also seems you are deleting files without considering anything else. You also deleted Tinau powerhouse view from inside.jpg without quoting any reason. I am the owner of the file. Nirmaljoshi (talk) 06:25, 6 April 2021 (UTC)

Reminder: Assume good faith. -- Nirmaljoshi (talk) 06:28, 6 April 2021 (UTC)

You have a record of uploading images that are not yours, therefore all your uploads are under more scrutiny. If this image is really yours, make your case at COM:UNDEL. And assuming good faith is not the same as assuming there are no copyright issues with uploads. --P 1 9 9  ✉ 12:57, 6 April 2021 (UTC)
I am fed up with explaining same thing to everyone who come across and claims to be the saviour. As i had explained to another guy that those photos were shown as free to use by google few months back and suddenly google started only two option (CC and non CC) and those pics became non-cc. It not my fault. Its googles fault. Had you gone though properly, you would not be accusing others. Nirmaljoshi (talk) 13:08, 6 April 2021 (UTC)

Carlos Morales Treviño

Please do not delete and republish file. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Carmors (talk • contribs) 17:28, 7 April 2021‎ (UTC)

Commons:Deletion requests/File:Pachtvertrag Dr. Blauert Dolgener See.jpg and Commons:Deletion requests/File:Dolgener See Pachtvertrag.jpg

Hi P199, your deletions created red links in two references in de:Dolgener See (Dolgen am See). --Leyo 15:16, 9 April 2021 (UTC)

@Leyo: I see... But I wonder if those need to be linked like that. It should be just like any other reference to an off-line source. If these docs are really needed, Wikisource might be a better place... Thoughts? --P 1 9 9  ✉ 15:28, 9 April 2021 (UTC)
Wikisource does not host files. In this case, the scans of the original files are needed, not the transcripts. --Leyo 10:01, 12 April 2021 (UTC)

New subcategory name

Hello po P199. I'm planning to create a subcategory under Category:Philippine law deletion requests where I will collect case pages involving FB-sourced images, for purposes of organization. What might be the most suitable subcat name?

I'm thinking of: "Philippine images sourced from Facebook (-related) deletion requests" or "Facebook-sourced Philippine images (-related) deletion requests". Or "FBMD-related deletion requests in the Philippines" or similar. But I still want your suggestion which might be better. Thanks. JWilz12345 (Talk|Contrib's.) 05:16, 14 April 2021 (UTC)

Is there a benefit to tracking such copyvio cases? I'm not so sure, it doesn't relate even to PH law. --P 1 9 9  ✉ 13:10, 14 April 2021 (UTC)
Just for organization purposes only. But if it only adds unnecessary clutter, then I will not proceed with this (besides this only adds needless burden on my part). I will now cancel this idea. JWilz12345 (Talk|Contrib's.) 13:14, 14 April 2021 (UTC)

Date for File:Seagull Shower (4213705016).jpg

I think the edit you made to the date in this file is incorrect. That flickr user has uploaded numerous scans of older photographs, and usually provides a date for the photo (typically month and year). In this case, the tags associated with the photo include '1994' (see source pic), and I'm inclined to believe that May 1994 is the correct date (but not 1 May 1994). I think the date you used is the scan date. Mindmatrix 12:51, 17 April 2021 (UTC)

@Mindmatrix: OK, thanks for that clarification. Regards, --P 1 9 9  ✉ 17:35, 17 April 2021 (UTC)

Poularde Lucien Tendret

hello, I don't understand why you deleted Poularde Lucien Tendret who was also in Jacques Manière. I asked not to do it since the only beneficiary of Jacques Manière, his son, gave up all his rights to this photo. I had attached a supporting email. Can you please restore it and take into account that it is copyright free?--Jpbrigand (talk) 09:56, 18 April 2021 (UTC)

@Jpbrigand: It is not enough to reply at Commons talk:Deletion requests/File:Poularde truffée Lucien Tendret.jpg. Please submit it through COM:OTRS. It can be undeleted once the OTRS team approves it. Regards, --P 1 9 9  ✉ 15:03, 18 April 2021 (UTC)

Deletion of two of my artist works

Dear P199,

"Pink Marilyn" is not a derivate work. Many years ago, I created it as a black pencil drawing completely ON MY OWN HANDS. Later, the pencil drawing was converted in a computer art work.

"Jim Morrison, Hommage on Andy Warhol" is also a computer art work of my own hands (in the style of Andy Warhol). The picture body is a well known portrait of Jim Morrison. Artists are allowed to create OWN art works using a photo or a painting. This is in no way a violation of Copyrights because such art works are individual and new ones, not a copy of the original.

With best regards, Monika Hoerath --Monika Hoerath (talk) 15:44, 20 April 2021 (UTC)

@Monika Hoerath: You sure have lots of talent. But I don't think you were sitting in front of Marilyn or Jim when you were drawing it; you must have used an existing photo or artwork as guide. That is COM:DW. Regards, --P 1 9 9  ✉ 15:59, 20 April 2021 (UTC)

Dear P199,

thank you for your kind reply.

§ 24 Urheberrechtsgesetz says the followingː

§ 24 Freie Benutzung

(1) Ein selbständiges Werk, das in freier Benutzung des Werkes eines anderen geschaffen worden ist, darf ohne Zustimmung des Urhebers des benutzten Werkes veröffentlicht und verwertet werden.

(2) Absatz 1 gilt nicht für die Benutzung eines Werkes der Musik, durch welche eine Melodie erkennbar dem Werk entnommen und einem neuen Werk zugrunde gelegt wird.

It doesn't matter whether an artist were sitting in front of an individual while painting she or him. This would be only a rare option if the one is still alive and the artist got such an order.

My both artworks are so far away from any other work (photo or painting) that they are completely a so called "selbständiges Werk" (independent work). This means that the basis is not recognizable.

If you wish to delete my both works, despite this legal situation, I don't want to prevent you from doing so. But there is no reason for that.

With best regards, --Monika Hoerath (talk) 18:06, 21 April 2021 (UTC)

@Monika Hoerath: I have another concern here. The images, along with some of your other uploads, are merely uploaded to showcase your talent. This is not the purpose of Wikipedia or Commons, and they fall therefore outside the scope of Commons. Sorry. --P 1 9 9  ✉ 18:23, 21 April 2021 (UTC)

Incomplete deletion request

Hello, you deleted the file, but forgot to close the deletion request for Commons:Deletion requests/File:Una mirada a los 200 años de la República del Perú y las tareeas, peligros y esperanzas camino al Tercer Centenario.pdf. Johnj1995 (talk) 17:29, 20 April 2021 (UTC)

@Johnj1995: Thanks for letting me know. Done. --P 1 9 9  ✉ 17:32, 20 April 2021 (UTC)

maison de Jean Commaille sur la chaussée d'Angkor Vat

Hello P199,

Merci pour votre message. La photo de la maison de Jean Commaille au bord de la chaussée d'Angkor Vat date de plus de 70 ans, Jean Commaille est mort en 1916, et l'auteur est inconnu. J'ai pris contact par mail avec depuis un certain temps avec la responsable de la photothèque de l'EFEO (Ecole française d'Extrême orient). Bien cordialement, --Atalante88 (talk) 18:20, 26 April 2021 (UTC)

Are these FOP related? (04-2020 question)

Hello po. Are these 4 files found by me at User talk:Judgefloro/Archive 1 FOP related or just DW related? File:FvfTarlac0158 43.JPG, File:FvfMalacanangMuseum0040 32.JPG, File:FvfMalacanangMuseum0040 33.JPG, and File:FvfMalacanangMuseum0040 34.JPG. Salamat po :-) JWilz12345 (Talk|Contrib's.) 11:24, 27 April 2021 (UTC)

Category:Puerto_Princesa

Category discussion warning

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

If you created this category, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for discussion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with it. If the category is up for deletion because it has been superseded, consider the notion that although the category may be deleted, your hard work (which we all greatly appreciate) lives on in the new category.

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

čeština ∙ Deutsch ∙ English ∙ español ∙ français ∙ italiano ∙ magyar ∙ Nederlands ∙ português ∙ polski ∙ sicilianu ∙ slovenščina ∙ Tiếng Việt ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца) ∙ македонски ∙ русский ∙ українська ∙ ತುಳು ∙ ಕನ್ನಡ ∙ ไทย ∙ עברית ∙ 日本語 ∙ 中文 ∙ +/−

JWilz12345 (Talk|Contrib's.) 12:00, 28 April 2021 (UTC)

Common deleting request: Preisschild dt. Feldbordell Schloss Havremont

Hi there, The mentioned File is use just on my wiki user side. https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Benutzer:Bullvolkar/staaliche_Verfolgung#cite_note-51

The source is given Magnus Hirschfeld (Hrsg.): "Sittengeschichte des Weltkrieges". Verlag für Sexualwissenschaft Schneider. Leipzig-Wien. 1. Aufl. 1930. Band 1. Abschrift von S. 321

Published in the year 19930 the source with the image is so what historical.

A wiki table format ist not appropriate cause its an image

Kind regards Berlin, 29.04.2021 Bullvolkar --Bullvolkar (talk) 14:07, 29 April 2021 (UTC)

@Bullvolkar: File:Preisschild Havremont 1916.JPG is a simple text box. Commons is not intended for such "images", see COM:PS. Just replace the image with a wiki-table on your page. Thanks. --P 1 9 9  ✉ 15:54, 29 April 2021 (UTC)

Category:Pigeons of the Philippines resting on overhead power lines

Hello P199! Please check the uploads at Category:Pigeons of the Philippines resting on overhead power lines, whether the files fall in COM:SCOPE or not. Thanks. JWilz12345 (Talk|Contrib's.) 12:00, 2 May 2021 (UTC)

Also: several uploads at Category:Views of bathing women, children and topless men in Angat River from General Alejo Santos Bridge. Thanks po ulit JWilz12345 (Talk|Contrib's.) 12:09, 2 May 2021 (UTC)

Hi @JWilz12345: Finally had a chance to deal with this, see Commons:Deletion requests/Files in Category:Pigeons of the Philippines resting on overhead power lines and Commons:Deletion requests/Files in Category:Views of bathing women, children and topless men in Angat River from General Alejo Santos Bridge. Once all these images are deleted (assuming they will), then I will delete the ridiculous categories as well. Just indicate your support for deletion at the DR's. Regards, --P 1 9 9  ✉ 14:40, 18 May 2021 (UTC)

Commons:Deletion requests/Files uploaded by Accuracy222

Please fix license tags that still claim own work and license non-existent at time of publication. --EugeneZelenko (talk) 14:06, 18 May 2021 (UTC)

Thanks for flagging this. Done. --P 1 9 9  ✉ 14:16, 18 May 2021 (UTC)

Google

Hi. Can you make a Google check to this file please; I did but am not sure of the result. --E4024 (talk) 02:40, 19 May 2021 (UTC)

Hi @E4024: Not found with dates prior to upload at Commons. Regards, --P 1 9 9  ✉ 02:43, 19 May 2021 (UTC)
Thanks, you saved me of a mistake but I made another by opening Commons:Deletion requests/File:Sakarya 2004 -Ceylan Journey 025.jpg. Can you delete or close speedily the DR please? Many thanks in advance. --E4024 (talk) 02:49, 19 May 2021 (UTC)
Who is that guy? --P 1 9 9  ✉ 02:50, 19 May 2021 (UTC)
Footballer with articles in several WPs, I just categorized. (Sorry, I'm one of the few Turks who are not crazy for football... :) --E4024 (talk) 02:59, 19 May 2021 (UTC)

File:Gemeentewapen Oostflakkee.gif

File:Gemeentewapen Oostflakkee.gif has been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether it should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry.

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

Please remember to respond to and – if appropriate – contradict the arguments supporting deletion. Arguments which focus on the nominator will not affect the result of the nomination. Thank you!
Afrikaans ∙ Bahasa Indonesia ∙ bosanski ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ dansk ∙ Deutsch ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ ∙ eesti ∙ English ∙ español ∙ Esperanto ∙ français ∙ galego ∙ hrvatski ∙ íslenska ∙ italiano ∙ magyar ∙ Nederlands ∙ norsk bokmål ∙ norsk nynorsk ∙ occitan ∙ Plattdüütsch ∙ polski ∙ português ∙ português do Brasil ∙ română ∙ shqip ∙ sicilianu ∙ slovenčina ∙ slovenščina ∙ suomi ∙ svenska ∙ Tiếng Việt ∙ Türkçe ∙ Zazaki ∙ Ελληνικά ∙ беларуская ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ ∙ български ∙ македонски ∙ русский ∙ српски / srpski ∙ українська ∙ հայերեն ∙ বাংলা ∙ മലയാളം ∙ ပအိုဝ်ႏဘာႏသာႏ ∙ မြန်မာဘာသာ ∙ ไทย ∙ 조선말 ∙ 한국어 ∙ 日本語 ∙ 简体中文‎ ∙ 繁體中文‎ ∙ עברית ∙ العربية ∙ پښتو ∙ فارسی ∙ ދިވެހިބަސް ∙ +/−

Glorious 93 (talk) 10:24, 19 May 2021 (UTC)

You are trying to delete too many good images

I just looked at a sample of your recent requests, having stumbled up Category:Media needing categories requiring human attention and noticing that you are nominating all of them for deletion (at least from the few sample days I reviewed). Some requests are good (as some of those images are copyvios or low quality out of scope) but you are also trying to get a lot of useful images deleted. Please be more careful, dominating everything with no exceptions is disruptive. PS. That said, I do want to thank you for cleaning up those old images, someone has to do it. I am just imploring you to be more considerate. Many of those images do have educational value and are in the project's scope. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus Talk 07:34, 25 May 2021 (UTC)

@Piotrus: Rest assured that I do not start DR's indiscriminately. And I stand by my DR's. I could even argue that you are too lenient in your view of the project scope when you want to keep an image that "can be useful for illustrating.. something" -- this shows you actually have no limit for the project scope. The fact that the far majority of my DR's are closed as delete by a variety of admins proves that my DR's are valid. Regards, --P 1 9 9  ✉ 17:46, 25 May 2021 (UTC)

Why to delete my images?

Hi, why do you nominated to delete my images? you nominate a lot of images. These are my own images. I am a photographer Dari Ingal (Vsemoguchi). Here is the official page where you can see those images and both of my names: Dari Ingal & Vsemoguchi in the bottom of the page: http://artlantic.design/mangyans/ — Preceding unsigned comment added by 151.237.56.34 (talk • contribs) 15:42, 27 May 2021 (UTC)

No need to comment here. Confine discussions to the relevant DR‎. Thanks. --P 1 9 9  ✉ 20:29, 27 May 2021 (UTC)

Deletion_requests/File:Tous_pour_un_avec_le_bataillon_outre-mer_des_199ième_Irish_Canadian_Rangers

Please, see my comment to your Deletion Request here- [[5]] Thank you --Ooligan (talk) 23:34, 28 May 2021 (UTC)

Deletion of pictures under Premil Ratnayake & Arnolis Weerasooriya

Hi @P199: Sorry for the confusion, but all Photos for Premil Ratnayake, I've taken myself, with the permission from the family, from their own personal collection of photos, the only exception being one I found from one of his old articles that was digitized online, which again I asked his family for, since no other source exists. I have not violated any copyright laws. I literally have express permission from his living wife Mrs Jasmine Ratnayake. No other copies of these photos exist, except for what Mrs Ratnayake Keeps in her albums.

Also most of Arnolis Weerasooriya's photos, theres no copyright on them since it exceeds the period of protection which is 70 years under Sri Lankan Intellectual Property Law, plus they have no traceable author, I got it from their family website, again with their permission.

Please let me know how we can go about this, I don't know how to fix it. Thank you.

ShArk50008 (talk) 16:18, 30 May 2021 (UTC)

See my comments at UNDEL request: Commons:Undeletion requests/Current requests#Pictures for Premil Ratnayake (related DR: Commons:Deletion requests/Files uploaded by ShArk50008). --P 1 9 9  ✉ 14:33, 31 May 2021 (UTC)


P199 Hi, that photo (with the trophies) was taken by Mr Ratnayake's family, and is in the ownership of his wife, who legally inherited everything belonging to him (there are no other living relatives). I would be more than happy to legally prove anything required. Please let me know how we can go about this. Also would American Copyright laws apply to Sri Lankan photos? Let me know, as to how I can go about proving it to you, without you dismissing what I say, please do be fair. I can put you in touch with his daughter even, through Mrs Ratnayake. You can email me or her even. Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by ShArk50008 (talk • contribs) 18:22, 31 May 2021 (UTC)

Please follow the OTRS process, see COM:OTRS. Regards, --P 1 9 9  ✉ 20:27, 31 May 2021 (UTC)

File:NPA Schreiben BMI Chiphardware.pdf

Hi P199, around 2 years ago you had deleted File:NPA Schreiben BMI Chiphardware.pdf (letter from German gov on a FOI request). Per de:Wikipedia:Urheberrechtsfragen#c:Commons:Deletion requests/File:NPA Schreiben BMI Chiphardware.pdf a request was made about whether the table contained in the above mentioned letter couldn't be undeleted, as it is needed for an article on :de. After viewing the deleted document, IMO the table alone should be below TOO and therefore qualify for PD-ineligible. So, I will upload the cropped table. However, feel free to request it for deletion, if you think conditions aren't met. --Túrelio (talk) 07:12, 10 June 2021 (UTC)

File:True-Bounce-Rate-Formula-from-Covario-by-Marcos Richardson.pdf

hello admin apologies for not understanding protocol and maybe this is the wrong place for me request? I am the author of True Bounce Rate and at the time employee of Covario but still the originator. The formula and references are all my copy and still stand true. Pls re consider your request for deletion. Happy to chat directly. Marcos Richardson — Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.232.191.168 (talk • contribs) 15:20, 15 June 2021 (UTC)

Please add your comments directly to the deletion nomination. Thanks. --P 1 9 9  ✉ 19:24, 15 June 2021 (UTC)

Request to delete redirects

Hello. May I request for the deletion of the ff. category redirects so that the categories that these point to can be moved to the said titles (following enwiki articles' titles for uniquely-named settlements)?

  1. Category:Balayan (for Category:Balayan, Batangas)
  2. Category:Lucban (for Category:Lucban, Quezon)
  3. Category:Sariaya (for Category:Sariaya, Quezon)
  4. Category:Tubao (for Category:Tubao, La Union)
  5. Category:Vigan (for Category:Vigan City)

I decided to request directly to you, as there is some debate ongoing in some of the CfDs I started with this reason or rationale, notably Commons:Categories for discussion/2021/06/Category:Tagum. Thank you _ JWilz12345 (Talk|Contrib's.) 07:32, 21 June 2021 (UTC)

Hi @JWilz12345: All category moves done except for Vigan City - there are other meanings to Vigan and this will become a disambig page. Regards; --P 1 9 9  ✉ 13:32, 21 June 2021 (UTC)
Thanks P199, and noted. JWilz12345 (Talk|Contrib's.) 13:41, 21 June 2021 (UTC)

LTA

Good day P199. I've raised this issue before at the administrators' noticeboard but I think no picked it up, so I am here. If they haven't made it obvious already, I really think 雷電1990 is a sock of Yuiyui and/or Catpain Barbell. One more thing, File:Labelled map of the Philippines - Provinces and Regions.png's current version is 雷電1990's version, but I can't revert it back since I'm not an admin. Thank you in advance! —hueman1 (talk • uploads) 14:14, 30 June 2021 (UTC)

I have blocked the account. Any reason why the previous version of File:Labelled map of the Philippines - Provinces and Regions.png is particularly better? --P 1 9 9  ✉ 19:15, 30 June 2021 (UTC)
@P199: This template on the English Wikipedia doesn't support it. —hueman1 (talk • uploads) 04:29, 1 July 2021 (UTC)

@P199: New sock spotted: Emperor 1990z. —hueman1 (talk • uploads) 14:40, 6 July 2021 (UTC)

Why keeping in-use duplicates?

Hi. Two recent deletion requests were closed by you: Commons:Deletion requests/File:Hydrogen-2.png, Commons:Deletion requests/File:Hydrogen-3.png. What's the reason to keep them? I believe the proper way is "delete while leaving a redirect". Cherkash (talk) 11:44, 1 July 2021 (UTC)

Hi @Cherkash: Thanks for your efforts maintaining Commons. PNG format is not the same as SVG, hence not a true duplicate. Normally I would redirect it, but not if it is in use at a certain WP. Maybe there is a but reason why that particular WP choose to use the PNG format over the SVG. --P 1 9 9  ✉ 14:07, 2 July 2021 (UTC)
Yes, P199, the PNG and SVG formats are not the same - but despite that, "duplicate" is intended partially for this reason as well: to eliminate identical content that is stored in different formats. So this was a correct use of "duplicate" and typically should result in getting rid of an inferior version (PNG in this particular case). There is almost never a reason to maintain raster images in addition to identical vector images. SVG is internally rendered into PNG anyway by the Commons rendering engine, and unless the renderer is broken in some specific way, there is no need to maintain a separate but identical PNG. Cherkash (talk) 21:04, 7 July 2021 (UTC)

Deletion closure

Re: Commons:Deletion requests/file uploaded by User:Jan Arkesteijn

I'm a bit surprised you closed this deletion nomination on the basis that I did not dispute the Dutch interpretation of the copyright. I am not a Dutch speaker, so what else could I say. Do you know any other Dutch speakers who could have verified their interpretation? You might not have checked but all the pages mentioned, including the source pages, are on the Wayback Machine and this copyright page https://www.4en5mei.nl/copyright is still their current one and is the same as the archived ones all the way back to 2012, through the upload date. Would you consider reviewing this closure for a translation by another Dutch speaker? Ww2censor (talk) 15:45, 8 July 2021 (UTC)

Hi @Ww2censor: I meant you didn't dispute the provided info, i.e. the quoted text from www.4en5mei.nl. And as per this saved page at WaybackMachine from March 24, 2019 (closest to upload date), the photos were indeed rights free at that time. I am a native Dutch speaker and I agree with User:Vysotsky's interpretation. Regards, --P 1 9 9  ✉ 16:23, 8 July 2021 (UTC)
Because you are a Dutch speaker, then I'm satisfied with your decision. Thanks for responding. Ww2censor (talk) 21:52, 8 July 2021 (UTC)

Subject of File:Monument philippine flag manila.jpg

Does this file (File:Monument philippine flag manila.jpg), deleted due to no FOP rationale, show the public domain w:Rizal Monument? JWilz12345 (Talk|Contrib's.) 15:44, 9 July 2021 (UTC)

No. It was of the "Monument to the three women who sewed the flag adopted as the national flag of the Philippines. Manila." --P 1 9 9  ✉ 15:48, 9 July 2021 (UTC)
Thanks P199. Oh and just a pahabol: does File:University of the Philippines, Diliman.jpg show the public domain U.P. Quezon Hall (architecture from 1950)? Or just it shows the Oblation statue (which is not OK in Commons for the meantime)? JWilz12345 (Talk|Contrib's.) 16:17, 9 July 2021 (UTC)
Also, File:UP.jpg. Does it show Quezon Hall or more-problematic Oblation? JWilz12345 (Talk|Contrib's.) 16:22, 9 July 2021 (UTC)
  • File:University of the Philippines, Diliman.jpg = Oblation statue from behind with a large part of University Avenue visible.
  • File:UP.jpg = just Quezon Hall. But this is a 600×450 low-res image, not worth restoring considering the numerous better alternatives.
Regards, --P 1 9 9  ✉ 17:39, 9 July 2021 (UTC)

Files uploaded by 蕭漫

Hi P199, regarding Commons:Deletion requests/Files uploaded by 蕭漫, there are a few files which were uploaded during that discussion but weren't added to the list, for example File:Lianlian and Zhenzhen, two Chinese River Dolphins.jpg, File:Qiqi, a Chinese River Dolphin (Baiji) 26.jpg, File:Chinese Paddlefish.jpg, File:达氏鲟.jpg, File:达氏鳇.jpg. These are all attributed to other sources, but lack the OTRS permission mentioned in the deletion discussion. Would a new Deletion request be needed, or can they be removed in line with the Deletion request while awaiting OTRS? Best, Chipmunkdavis (talk) 02:42, 16 July 2021 (UTC)

Hi @Chipmunkdavis: We need to open a new DR. Thanks. --P 1 9 9  ✉ 02:45, 16 July 2021 (UTC)

Notification about possible deletion

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

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

Please remember to respond to and – if appropriate – contradict the arguments supporting deletion. Arguments which focus on the nominator will not affect the result of the nomination. Thank you!
Afrikaans ∙ Bahasa Indonesia ∙ bosanski ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ dansk ∙ Deutsch ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ ∙ eesti ∙ English ∙ español ∙ Esperanto ∙ français ∙ galego ∙ hrvatski ∙ íslenska ∙ italiano ∙ magyar ∙ Nederlands ∙ norsk bokmål ∙ norsk nynorsk ∙ occitan ∙ Plattdüütsch ∙ polski ∙ português ∙ português do Brasil ∙ română ∙ shqip ∙ sicilianu ∙ slovenčina ∙ slovenščina ∙ suomi ∙ svenska ∙ Tiếng Việt ∙ Türkçe ∙ Zazaki ∙ Ελληνικά ∙ беларуская ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ ∙ български ∙ македонски ∙ русский ∙ српски / srpski ∙ українська ∙ հայերեն ∙ বাংলা ∙ മലയാളം ∙ ပအိုဝ်ႏဘာႏသာႏ ∙ မြန်မာဘာသာ ∙ ไทย ∙ 조선말 ∙ 한국어 ∙ 日本語 ∙ 简体中文‎ ∙ 繁體中文‎ ∙ עברית ∙ العربية ∙ پښتو ∙ فارسی ∙ ދިވެހިބަސް ∙ +/−

Affected:

Yours sincerely, Mrcl lxmna (talk) 16:22, 26 July 2021 (UTC)

New sock spotted

Hello P199. Yuiyui2001 has returned as Emperor1991z. —hueman1 (talk • uploads) 19:42, 27 July 2021 (UTC)

My image of Pulilan Church

Hello P199. Does my photo File:San Isidro Labrador Parish Church Pulilan ultra-wide angle view Oct 2019jwilz.jpg pass one of the picture statuses at Commons:Image guidelines? Thanks for your reply in advance! JWilz12345 (Talk|Contrib's.) 05:19, 1 August 2021 (UTC)

Your image is quite good quality. I see no issues here... --P 1 9 9  ✉ 14:15, 1 August 2021 (UTC)

Help

Check out this map. It appears to have infringed copyright.--Rdhlww (talk) 22:35, 1 August 2021 (UTC)

Sure about that?

You really deleted this file after four comments in favour of keeping and none to delete? Call me a bit skeptical. –MJL ‐Talk‐☖ 05:40, 2 August 2021 (UTC)

Request

Hello P199. May I request to delete the redirect File:IMG 2292.JPG? It was previously occupied by a deleted file of Cloud Gate, Chicago. There will be no issue as the two tracking oages where the image links are using the current name, not the redirect. May I also request to lock the file name so that it won't be overwritten by a new file again in the future. I will add the filename to the list of speedily-deleted files at Category:United States FOP cases/deleted. Thanks! JWilz12345 (Talk|Contrib's.) 09:47, 2 August 2021 (UTC)

Photos of RCAF Mossbank, No. 2 Bombing and Gunnery School

I submitted photos of RCAF Mossbank, No. 2 Bombing and Gunnery School last year which you deemed to be "Historical Photos" "Certainly not own works", etc. and deleted I believe. They are in fact photographs that my grandfather took himself while stationed there in 1942 with the RCAF before moving on to No. 7, B & G in Manitoba. His name is Lloyd Stanley "Red" Lafoy and can be found via Google. I am in possession of the photographs and scanned them to share with British Commonwealth Air Training Program of Canada, Bomber Command Museum of Canada, and the Mossbank Museum which requested copies of them as I had an aerial view that they had not seen before and wanted in order to mark the original locations of the buildings of the now defunct air base. I in fact have over 200 photos of his service from Canada to UK to Africa back to UK and back to Canada. I have also shared many photos with the Virtual War Museum of Canada of many lost air men he served with that had no photos attributed to them. Is there are way to recover them? I am not versatile on Wikimedia Commons, etc.

Che Lafoy

Colour correction

Hi there. Would you mind if I tweaked this photo by correcting the colours? Thanks. Magnolia677 (talk) 14:52, 6 August 2021 (UTC)

Hi @Magnolia677: Thanks for asking, very courteous of you. No, I have no objection at all (but the colours are not far off from reality - it was a rather gloomy morning when it I took it). Regards, --P 1 9 9  ✉ 15:48, 6 August 2021 (UTC)
Have a look at the new picture. If it's too off, please just revert back. No feelings hurt. Cheers! Magnolia677 (talk) 16:33, 6 August 2021 (UTC)

Are these OK for Commons

Hello P199! Are files at Category:Topless boys with catfish in the Philippines OK for Commons or not? Thanks in advance for the answer. JWilz12345 (Talk|Contrib's.) 15:26, 7 August 2021 (UTC)

Well, I can't really see what they are doing or what the purpose of these photos is... lf you start a batch DR, I will support deletion, as out of scope. The category name is also far too specific... Regards, --P 1 9 9  ✉ 16:48, 8 August 2021 (UTC)

File:Praesentation Train-the-Trainer-Seminar Wikipedia-2019 Convivia.pdf

Please delete the old version of the pdf file, as one of its pages contain a file by a blacklisted Flickr user (Marco Verch). See also COM:Deletion requests/File:Praesentation Train-the-Trainer-Seminar Wikipedia-2019 Convivia.pdf. Thanks. JWilz12345 (Talk|Contrib's.) 12:45, 13 August 2021 (UTC)

✓ Done. Regards, --P 1 9 9  ✉ 15:51, 13 August 2021 (UTC)

Deletion Requests

Hey, I have gotten some deletion requests that link back to your account. Could you please explain your problem. Thanks!

Phillip Gallant

Please see Commons:Deletion requests/Files uploaded by PhillipGallantMedia and provide comments there. Thanks. --P 1 9 9  ✉ 19:38, 13 August 2021 (UTC)

DR messages on my talk page

Hello, feel free to delete them all immediately if they are from me. Basically skip the discussion. Orizan (talk) 02:55, 24 August 2021 (UTC)

deletion Angel Nappi contributions.

Thank you for calling historical the photos.Simplier they are 40-50 years shots duplicated in many copies to be given to fans.Belong to my family (including the two Enzos). I have elaborated them on the computer.If by policy they need to be deleted.Be it.My regards. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Angel Nappi (talk • contribs) 07:41, 8 September 2021 (UTC) --Angel Nappi (talk) 08:13, 9 September 2021 (UTC)

No need to comment here. Please add your comments directly at Commons:Deletion requests/Files uploaded by Angel Nappi. Thanks. --P 1 9 9  ✉ 14:22, 9 September 2021 (UTC)

Commons:Deletion requests/File:185 Ischnura elegans.jpg‎

This was one of several close-up insect image DRs you closed just recently. I had commented in these DRs that the images were high quality and quite encyclopedic, despite the nominator saying the reason for deletion nomination was low quality. You closed most of them as keep, but deleted this one as a courtesy G7. I'm just curious as to your reasoning. A cached version of the image still shows up in Google Images; looking at it again, I can't figure out what was different about this one than the others. I'm just curious. IronGargoyle (talk) 13:31, 10 September 2021 (UTC)

Hi @IronGargoyle: . G7 refers to criteria G7 in the Commons:Criteria for speedy deletion: "Author or uploader request deletion". Since this was the only image requested for deletion on the same day it was uploaded, it qualified for speedy deletion. Regards, --P 1 9 9  ✉ 13:49, 10 September 2021 (UTC)
Gotcha. I knew what G7 stood for, but I wasn't able to see the upload logs any more and didn't know it was so recent. That makes sense. Thanks. IronGargoyle (talk) 14:00, 10 September 2021 (UTC)

Yuiyui possible sock

This user named "Emperor1991z" is uploading mass uploads, and as well reverting Philippines blank and islands maps as well. This user have been used by Yuiyui2001 until the user created since July 2021. --Not logging in (talk) 22:32, 16 September 2021 (UTC)

A question

File:Beethoven in Bonn.jpg was deleted due to COM:Deletion requests/File:Beethoven in Bonn.jpg. However, Bonn is a city in a country with adequate FOP. If so, is the statue indoors or not permanently-situated so as to cause its deletion? JWilz12345 (Talk|Contrib's.) 07:53, 23 September 2021 (UTC)

It is an image of 2 busts of Beethoven (modern reproductions) with a violin case behind glass; not a permanent installation by the looks of it, likely even an indoor exhibit. --P 1 9 9  ✉ 13:17, 23 September 2021 (UTC)
Thanks for the response P199. To add relevant category shortly afterwards. JWilz12345 (Talk|Contrib's.) 14:00, 23 September 2021 (UTC)

File:Pierre Saint-Paul (2015), 37 x 58 x 19,5, technique mixte, photo Ph. Henrion.jpg

Bonjour, je ne comprends pas bien où est le problème? Il me semble que j'avais fait le nécessaire à la publication de la photo. Je viens quand même d'envoyer un mail à: permissions-fr@wikimedia.org... Merci de ne pas supprimer la photo!!! Bien cordialement Philippe HENRION--Philippe HENRION (talk) 19:52, 4 October 2021 (UTC)

@Philippe HENRION: copyright remains with heirs of Pierre Saint-Paul. Need COM:VRT ticket with permission from them. --P 1 9 9  ✉ 20:01, 4 October 2021 (UTC)

Resim telif hakları ve yanıtlama hk.

Merhaba sevgili P199, Turan Seyfioğlu için eklediğim resmin silinmesi talebinde bulunmuşsunuz. Bu resmin telifi ve/ya hak sahipleri hakkında herhangi bir bilgi bulunmamakla beraber, film setinde çekilmiş bir resim olduğu için lisans hakkına sahip olmadığını düşündüğüm için ekledim. Konu ile ilgili yardımcı olmanızı rica eder, sevgi ve saygılarımı sunarım. Hoşçakalın.

PS: (I don't have any idea about CC for this image/picture. Image/picture has been captured at a set. Can you tell me an idea for about this image? how can i add this image to Wikimedia ?)

retrait des photos sur l'article Danielle Chegue Wabo

Bonjour,

Pourrais je svp savoir pourquoi vous avez supprimé les photos de l'article or nous en sommes l'auteur? Et nous l'avions déclaré.

Ariane membre associatif de Miss Earth Cameroon; Merci d'avance de votre retour, Danielle CHEGUE WABO

Goa beach pic

Hi, I have replied to your notice on this page - pls remove pic deletion notice now. Goa4goa (talk) 23:01, 23 October 2021 (UTC)

Commons:Deletion requests/File:Eidos Montréal logo.jpg

Please review this DR. The original revision of the JPEG to be deleted is the same (though of lower quality) as the new PNG. The JPEG was incorrectly revisioned (by me) some time ago, which has since been fixed. IceWelder [✉] 15:13, 2 November 2021 (UTC)

@IceWelder: OK, done. --P 1 9 9  ✉ 15:38, 2 November 2021 (UTC)
Thanks. IceWelder [✉] 15:41, 2 November 2021 (UTC)

Posted work justification

Hi All work posted is absolutely own work without any fabrication and posted photos are going to use for Wikipedia article that's reason to uploaded and very sure this is not marketing promotion Shakil100471 (talk) 09:55, 5 November 2021 (UTC)

No need to comment here. Please add your comments directly at Commons:Deletion requests/Files uploaded by Shakil100471. Thanks. --P 1 9 9  ✉ 13:04, 5 November 2021 (UTC)

User:RafaJimenezAguilar photos deleted

Hi P199,

I'm writing you to please reconsider the deletion of these photos:

Valeria_Tejero_Navas.jpg Cartel Antigona 2011.jpg Cartel la danza de lola.jpg Imagen oficial festival rodas 2020.jpg Cartel rodas 2021.jpg Cartel de Sinsabores.jpg Zambra Pasiflora.jpg Cartel Locura 2013 Bueno.png Sinsabores en Abtenau.jpg Cartel Zambra Pasiflora Teratro Avanti.jpg Cartel sinsabores santiago de calatrava.jpg Valeria Tejero Navas.jpg Festival Teatro Miami.jpg Sinsabores Ciudad Real.jpg Sinsabores Dakka.jpg Sinsabores Dakka2.jpg Oujda 2019.jpg Locuras de una Flamenca Sevilla.jpg Los Francisquitos Girona.jpg Zambra Pasiflora Valladolid.jpg Sinsabores Corea.jpg

I've been more than one month working in my user space making the wikipedia page of the flamenco dancer and great spanish artist Valeria Tejero Navas.

I really don't understand the deletion of these photos as all of them are related with posters of Valeria shows in different cities and moments related with Valeria's curriculum. Please see the rest of the photos in my wiki common space to check that I'm uploading photos of this artist to use in the wikipedia page.

I would like you to reconsider the deletion of these photos as all of them have been taken during the theater festivals or have been sent to us by the proper theaters or by the festivals organizations.

Waiting for your response Best Regards Rafael Jimenez Aguilar

--RafaJimenezAguilar (talk) 20:15, 5 November 2021 (UTC)

@RafaJimenezAguilar: Thanks for your contributions, but taking photos of posters, album covers, and existing photos of others is called COM:Derivative works, which violates copyrights. --P 1 9 9  ✉ 01:12, 6 November 2021 (UTC)
@P199: Hi P199, I've observed tickets photos in some artist wikipedia pages, and the photos I've uploaded are Valeria's real performances. The festivals have no problem with this. And for example some photos like "Valeria_tejero_Navas.jpg" that I am using as the main photo of Valeria's wiki page is a photo of her doing a flamenco performance, I don't understand what is the problem, she is my wife and she passed me that photo. In Valeria's wikipage there no photos of others there are photos taking by our own in the different festival where valeria has been invited. And some files like for example "Zambra Pasiflora.jpg" is a composition she her own made in her computer as publicity for her performance, how can you violate your own work? Please If you want I can explain you photo by photo, I would like you to reconsider the deletion of the photos, and if you want we can contact and I can show you my work (Valeria's wikipedia page) that is still in my wikipedia user space. Please, what I only want is to let people know this great flamenco artist. --RafaJimenezAguilar (talk) 10:08, 6 November 2021 (UTC)
@RafaJimenezAguilar: WP and Commons are not for personal promotion! The images you uploaded recently are excessive and purely personal, out of scope. See COM:PS. Unfortunately I will need to nominate them too for deletion. --P 1 9 9  ✉ 13:23, 6 November 2021 (UTC)

@P199: Hi P199, I really don't understand if an artist cannot have photos of her performances or her activities for me this is just censorship. Pure censorship. I've seen the same kind of photos relative to other artists in wikipedia. We are only showing images of international festivals where Valeria Tejero Navas has been performing her flamenco shows. If an artist cannot show her job, what can we do? What kind of photos can we show? I really don't understand. This all corresponds to our personal job and my purpose is to let people know this fantastic artist. If you simply delete us all the photos, what are we going to show? How are we going to show Valeria's performances all over the world? --RafaJimenezAguilar (talk) 15:25, 7 November 2021 (UTC)

There are numerous other websites for that. --P 1 9 9  ✉ 15:46, 7 November 2021 (UTC)

@P199: Valeria Tejero Navas is a flamenco artist with more than twenty years of carreer, known in flamenco world, creator of a new flamenco style called flamenco monologue (flamenco is cultural heritage of Humanity). Isn't this international flamenco artist life good enough to be known? Could you be so kind to tell me what kind of photos related with her performances done all along her carreer can be shown in her wikipedia page?

First of all, which photo did you take yourself of her? And I mean, of her personally, not of a poster or a picture of an existing photo? --P 1 9 9  ✉ 16:40, 7 November 2021 (UTC)

@P199: Hi P199, first of all for me is the first time trying to make a wiki page that's why I'm trying to know how to do things all right and accord to the terms of wikipedia. My only purpose is just educational. All the poster photos have been passed to me by Valeria personally, others belongs to the festivals and sent by the proper festivals organizations and the others have been taken by me personally as I've been with her working as her technician all over the world. We've just been performing in greece, poland and austria recently and those are the last photos I uploaded this week. Perhaps I'm wrong and I'm so excited to let people know about this fantastic flamenco artist that I've uploaded too many photos. As I only want to let people know about her carreer I would like you to explain me what kind of media should be fine to include in her wikipage. If you want I can show the page I've written in my personal space that I have prepared to publish. But I would like to do things all right --RafaJimenezAguilar (talk) 16:56, 7 November 2021 (UTC)

Delete

This file File:Princess Ingrid Alexandra of Norway in 2020.png should be deleted now. The source does not include a free license. Its just for press etc. --Johannes Østby (talk) 11:59, 13 November 2021 (UTC)

Sorry, as nominator, I can't close the DR (Commons:Deletion requests/File:Princess Ingrid Alexandra of Norway in 2020.png). --P 1 9 9  ✉ 13:58, 13 November 2021 (UTC)

Commons:Deletion requests/File:Flag of Bulgaria (1948).svg

Could you please restore this file File:Flag of Bulgaria (1948).svg, i think i'm going to need that. ColorfulSmoke (talk) 17:58, 13 November 2021 (UTC)

It's identical to File:Flag of Bulgaria (1946-1948).svg. Just use that one. --P 1 9 9  ✉ 18:01, 13 November 2021 (UTC)
@P199: It just needs to be updated, File:Flag of Bulgaria (1948).svg incorrectly has File:Coat of arms of Bulgaria (1946–1948).svg on its flag, the correct coat of arms on the flag should be File:Coat of arms of Bulgaria (1948).svg, i'll ask Fry1989 to do the update. ColorfulSmoke (talk) 18:11, 13 November 2021 (UTC)
Could you bring back the file, plz and thx. ColorfulSmoke (talk) 18:51, 13 November 2021 (UTC)

Commons:Deletion requests/File:Vue Nord-Ouest de l'ensemble sculptural de l'hommage aux peintres ayant oeuvrés à Céret.jpg

I'm really confused, did you wrongly deleted that file when you decide "Kept: no valid reason for deletion."? Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 09:28, 18 November 2021 (UTC)

@Liuxinyu970226: Thanks for pointing that out. It is indeed a mistake, I meant "Deleted" (the image prominently shows the artwork installation). Correction made. Regards, --P 1 9 9  ✉ 13:49, 18 November 2021 (UTC)
Find another one Commons:Deletion requests/File:Vue Sud-Est de l'Hommage aux peintres venus oeuvrer à Céret, et haut de l'Av Clémenceau.jpg. --Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 09:17, 20 November 2021 (UTC)
@Liuxinyu970226: Thanks. And corrected. --P 1 9 9  ✉ 17:11, 20 November 2021 (UTC)

Commons:Deletion requests/File:Joshua-Outside-St-Michael's.jpg

You recently closed Commons:Deletion requests/File:Joshua-Outside-St-Michael's.jpg, and deleted the file. While the request was open I uploaded a cropped version as File:Statue of Mary at St Michaels Cathedral Toronto.jpg, using CropTool which copied the {{Delete}} tag from the original file. The cropped version can be kept, but I am unsure whether protocol allows me to remove the delete tag. Please remove this tag, or let me know that I can do so.

Also, I messed up my first cropping attempt, so the original revision of the cropped file has the same problem as the uncropped file. Is it necessary for the first version of the cropped file be deleted?

Thanks, Verbcatcher (talk) 14:56, 19 November 2021 (UTC)

@Verbcatcher: Delete tag removed (yes, you could have done that - DR notice didn't apply to that file). And deleted the old version. Regards, --P 1 9 9  ✉ 17:11, 20 November 2021 (UTC)

Hanafuda SVG files

Hi. I noticed on 2nd November you deleted files that are mentioned in the below deletion request, even though no consensus was reached. It would be great if the files could be reinstated? In my opinion there are no grounds to the copyright claim and I'd be happy to explain further if my reasons at the link aren't enough. https://commons.m.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Deletion_requests/Copyright_hanafuda many thanks. Flicky1984 (talk) 23:05, 20 November 2021 (UTC)

The link where the discussion was happening: https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Deletion_requests/2021/10/21 Flicky1984 (talk) 23:09, 20 November 2021 (UTC)

Hi @Flicky1984: . For copyvios, there is no need for a consensus. I see that you already brought your arguments to COM:UNDEL, so there is nothing further to say here. Regards, --P 1 9 9  ✉ 20:39, 23 November 2021 (UTC)
All I would like say is that it is provably not a copyvio, so I feel the wrong thing has been done here. Flicky1984 (talk) 11:15, 26 November 2021 (UTC)

Your opinion about me

Hi, about this comment , this comment is wrong! Please do not slander me :) I was unfamiliar with copyright at the beginning of my career, but now I am familiar. Good luck.Parsa 2au (Talk) 04:41, 27 November 2021 (UTC)

Commons:Deletion requests/File:The New Orleans Bee 1827 November 0009.pdf

While not part of the discussion, what should be done with Category:The New Orleans Bee - missing pages? I made a note at Category talk:The New Orleans Bee so hopefully that solves the issue from the discussion. -- Ricky81682 (talk) 08:49, 2 December 2021 (UTC)

Hi @Ricky81682: IMO, your note on the talk page should do the trick. We can delete this category as empty. --P 1 9 9  ✉ 14:27, 2 December 2021 (UTC)

transmission code in EXIF data

Re Commons:Deletion requests/File:Beşikdüzü-Şahmelik-1.jpg "transmission code in EXIF data" - thanks for the tip, I'll read up on how to recognize that! Cheers, -- Infrogmation of New Orleans (talk) 17:49, 5 December 2021 (UTC)

please retract deletion request

you have requested a mass deletion of my works, siting the line on "personal interpretation" . on which my subjects are of mythological origin, the costumes and designs of these works are based of extensive research on these subjects and do justifiably represent those topics. the line "based on personal interpretation" simply means these photos are not historical but are modern recreations, ie. religious figures. like many other artworks of old greek gods to christian imagery those are all based on personal interpretation of older texts. these works were created to give a reasonably accurate representation to mythological folklore of my country, of which very few images exist and are at risk of being forgotten. please understand that these photos are equivalent to artist rendition paintings on subject that have no other or very few imagery as reference, and are a product of extensive research on culture and fashion North gevero (talk) 20:19, 8 December 2021 (UTC)

to add these photos can and do serve educational purposes in illustrating characters and or people in folkllore and are done so in respect to historical descriptions. to say that these are personal renditions is ture, but arnt all images of folklore and mythology products of personal artists renditions or interpretations of the artist based off the artists study of the subject? like how can there be a sculpture of greek gods or paintings of Jesus when all the descriptions of these subjects were only written or verbal? so images of these subjects would not be allowed here because they are also "artists interpretation" ? North gevero (talk) 21:00, 8 December 2021 (UTC)

File:Zagali.jpg

What was the reason of the deletion of this file? The photo was taken by me personally. --Verman1 (talk) 10:19, 13 December 2021 (UTC)

Hi @Verman1: As stated: "per nomination, needs COM:VRT" (because it was previously published, see COM:VRT#Licensing images: when do I contact VRT?, 2nd section). I see that you have submitted a VRT ticket and it has already been undeleted. Regards, --P 1 9 9  ✉ 14:20, 13 December 2021 (UTC)

Request to delete redirects

Hello P199. Please delete the following redirects:

This is to give way for panoramio-imported files that were deleted due to no Slovenian FOP (DR's: this, that, and this). In order to make restoration of the 3 panoramio files easier should the subjects fall public domain in the future. JWilz12345 (Talk|Contrib's.) 00:18, 19 December 2021 (UTC)

✓ Done --P 1 9 9  ✉ 13:56, 20 December 2021 (UTC)

Deletion Appeal: "Copyright hanafuda"

The request Commons:Deletion requests/Copyright hanafuda appears to be a duplicate of Commons:Deletion requests/Copyrighted Hanafuda Trace which was contested. Unfortunately, Commons:Deletion requests/Copyright hanafuda was missed by the English hanafuda community. Judging by the text and links used, it was the same requester trying to evade notice. These images were not traced but were created by a professional graphic designer (User:Louiemantia) specifically for referencing on Wikipedia. We would be grateful if you would undelete these files. - Navarr (talk) 16:28, 21 December 2021 (UTC)

Furthermore, it seems that the uploader, Louiemantia, was never notified of the deletion requirement as policy dictates. Hàlian (talk) 17:07, 21 December 2021 (UTC)

Commons:Deletion requests/Files uploaded by PedroRibeiroMG

Hello P199, The images that you removed from this request have also been deleted. Should I open a request at Commons:Undeletion requests? Pedro Ribeiro (talk) 21:47, 23 December 2021 (UTC)

I checked again and the images have been restored, thank you. Pedro Ribeiro (talk) 01:57, 24 December 2021 (UTC)

How we will see unregistered users

Hi!

You get this message because you are an admin on a Wikimedia wiki.

When someone edits a Wikimedia wiki without being logged in today, we show their IP address. As you may already know, we will not be able to do this in the future. This is a decision by the Wikimedia Foundation Legal department, because norms and regulations for privacy online have changed.

Instead of the IP we will show a masked identity. You as an admin will still be able to access the IP. There will also be a new user right for those who need to see the full IPs of unregistered users to fight vandalism, harassment and spam without being admins. Patrollers will also see part of the IP even without this user right. We are also working on better tools to help.

If you have not seen it before, you can read more on Meta. If you want to make sure you don’t miss technical changes on the Wikimedia wikis, you can subscribe to the weekly technical newsletter.

We have two suggested ways this identity could work. We would appreciate your feedback on which way you think would work best for you and your wiki, now and in the future. You can let us know on the talk page. You can write in your language. The suggestions were posted in October and we will decide after 17 January.

Thank you. /Johan (WMF)

18:11, 4 January 2022 (UTC)

Commons:Deletion requests/Files uploaded by Adityagaikwad2912006

I believe that the note marked in red to not delete the files yet were clear enough. Now there isn't a live example. --Minorax«¦talk¦» 14:27, 5 January 2022 (UTC)

Forgotten deletion

Hello!

There was another file added to Commons:Deletion requests/File:Gianginny audiovisuales.png by the nominator which you forgot to delete.Jonteemil (talk) 14:29, 7 January 2022 (UTC)

@Jonteemil: Thanks for letting me know. Deletion done. --P 1 9 9  ✉ 15:03, 7 January 2022 (UTC)

Unprocessed file

The link to the file File:Kemaliye, Karanlık Kanyon.jpg was moved special:diff/618001101 in the list, because of this it became unclear that this file is also part of the request. But it also needs to be deleted as a file having the same attribution to another person. --Сунприат (talk) 22:56, 8 January 2022 (UTC)

@Сунприат: done. --P 1 9 9  ✉ 02:35, 9 January 2022 (UTC)

Commons:Deletion requests/File:Shalamar garden burhan.JPG

Thank you for attending to this request. Please could you also delete the second file in the request? 2A02:C7C:1018:6E00:D1E4:7DB6:9589:EC2E 12:28, 10 January 2022 (UTC)

Thanks for letting me know. Deletion done. --P 1 9 9  ✉ 14:08, 10 January 2022 (UTC)
Very grateful for your prompt action. 2A04:4A43:517F:2E5B:2177:90CB:894:F7DF 14:45, 10 January 2022 (UTC)

File:Skyline Cagayan de Oro.JPG

Hello P199. I may need some clarification on this, as I cannot see deleted files (as a non-admin). What caused this file to be deleted as copyvio? The user's photos are decent, per my inspection of images at Special:ListFiles/R136a1_Star. The file in question was once used at w:en:List of cities in the Philippines. JWilz12345 (Talk|Contrib's.) 16:01, 12 January 2022 (UTC)

Hi @JWilz12345: If you click the red link, you can still see when and why it was deleted: 00:27, 15 May 2013 INeverCry deleted page File:Skyline Cagayan de Oro.JPG (Copyright violation, see Commons:Licensing)
Additionally, the final revision was marked as "Marking as possible copyvio because Retouch of http://www.skyscrapercity.com/showpost.php?p=88532919&postcount=1232". Regards, --P 1 9 9  ✉ 16:10, 12 January 2022 (UTC)
The phrase "Copyright violation, see Commons:Licensing" is vague for me (though I assume that admin tools were limited at that time, so the nominator's reason could not be incorporated at that time). Any way thanks P199 for your response. Stay safe amidst the pandemic; our situation isn't looking good and seems worsening day by day. JWilz12345 (Talk|Contrib's.) 17:59, 12 January 2022 (UTC)

File:Facade of San Fernando Church in Cebu province.jpg

File:Facade of San Fernando Church in Cebu province.jpg has been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether it should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry.

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

Please remember to respond to and – if appropriate – contradict the arguments supporting deletion. Arguments which focus on the nominator will not affect the result of the nomination. Thank you!
Afrikaans ∙ Bahasa Indonesia ∙ bosanski ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ dansk ∙ Deutsch ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ ∙ eesti ∙ English ∙ español ∙ Esperanto ∙ français ∙ galego ∙ hrvatski ∙ íslenska ∙ italiano ∙ magyar ∙ Nederlands ∙ norsk bokmål ∙ norsk nynorsk ∙ occitan ∙ Plattdüütsch ∙ polski ∙ português ∙ português do Brasil ∙ română ∙ shqip ∙ sicilianu ∙ slovenčina ∙ slovenščina ∙ suomi ∙ svenska ∙ Tiếng Việt ∙ Türkçe ∙ Zazaki ∙ Ελληνικά ∙ беларуская ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ ∙ български ∙ македонски ∙ русский ∙ српски / srpski ∙ українська ∙ հայերեն ∙ বাংলা ∙ മലയാളം ∙ ပအိုဝ်ႏဘာႏသာႏ ∙ မြန်မာဘာသာ ∙ ไทย ∙ 조선말 ∙ 한국어 ∙ 日本語 ∙ 简体中文‎ ∙ 繁體中文‎ ∙ עברית ∙ العربية ∙ پښتو ∙ فارسی ∙ ދިވެހިބަސް ∙ +/−

Ox1997cow (talk) 11:21, 23 January 2022 (UTC)

DR closed as delete but not deleted

Hello. Commons:Deletion requests/Files uploaded by MoTx-Brevard was closed by you as delete, but File:Jim & Jeanne with Dolly.jpg is still active with a DR tag. This is the only image in the DR that's bluelinked. Did this picture get missed? If so, no worries! :) --MrLinkinPark333 (talk) 04:26, 30 January 2022 (UTC)

@MrLinkinPark333: Thanks for letting me know. Deletion done. --P 1 9 9  ✉ 04:30, 30 January 2022 (UTC)

With regard to...

With regard to... your closure of Commons:Deletion_requests/File:Chris_Hunkeler_at_Fort_Rodney_(26008793417).jpg.

I took a closer look at the original flickr page... https://www.flickr.com/photos/chrishunkeler/26008793417/

At the time I uploaded I presumed Chris Hunkeler had put his camera on its 10 second timer, pressed the button, and posed in front of the cannon.

At the very bottom the description says "Photo credit: RB SLU_6557" Who is RB? Did Chris Hunkeler get RB to sign a formal release of his IP rights, before he posted this picture they took, on flickr? Should it have been necessary for CH to do that?

You say the flickr description say "author unknown, 1975". I think that applies to the four paragraph description, in Italics. I think the 4 paragraphs in italic is text copied off a history plaque.

I think we should assume RB is Hunkeler's wife, or best travel buddy, and that it was understood that when he or she gave Hunkeler the image he had tacitly agreed he could put it on flickr under a free license.

I am not going to appeal. I just went back to the image discussion, since it shows up in red on my user talk, and I wanted figure out what happened, and leave a note, there, describing the discussion.

Cheers! Geo Swan (talk) 20:07, 28 February 2022 (UTC)

Hi @Geo Swan: I totally agree that if you ask a bystander/travel buddy to take a picture for you, hand him your camera, and takes the picture according to your instructions, hands back the camera – in a case like that, it is implied that the bystander/travel buddy is not claiming any rights to the picture he took (especially if it is a stranger). Even WMF preliminary perspective on this legal issue agrees but this was never adopted on Commons as policy (because we don't know all the circumstances how the photo was taken and therefore don't know true authorship status). --P 1 9 9  ✉ 13:53, 1 March 2022 (UTC)
That is very interesting. A couple of years ago I started an article about a woman who wrote a book on American food. The book was different, extraordinary. I am forgetting the details, but the first image of her, sitting at a table full of her books, at a book fair, was taken just that way. She handed her camera to a freindly looking passwerby, and asked them to snap a photo.
I was cross when it was deleted.
Luckily, she was a good sport about it, and the article was illustrated with a similar image, this time taken by a friend, who was able to correspond with OTRS.
Sometimes I despair, because I see people argue for carrying the precautionary principle to ridiculous lengths, lengths I think expose us to ridicule from outsiders.
Over on en.wiki there are a small group of people who will challenge just about every use of a non-free image, even when it is not "reasonably replaceable" by a free image. Actual "fair use" generally protects the rights of those who own the intellectual property rights. The underlying theory beneath granting patents, copyrights, trademarks, is that these all, ultimately, benefit the general public.
It is my understanding that US fair use law, and similar laws elsewhere were passed by legislators who ALSO thought the fair use provisions they passed, that superceded the IP rights of photographers, were also intended to benefit the public good. It is my understanding that, it is seen as more important for the public good, to view an image that quailifies for a fair use usage, than it is for the photographer to get a royalty for each and every single use of their photo.
One day I tried to figure out the history of en.wiki's WP:NFCC. I wanted to read the discussion where good faith contributors had debated the pros and cons of the NFCC policy, as we see it today, and a more generous policy, more in line with the legal requirements of US fair use law.
There doesn't seem to have been a debate. The WMF decided every wiki needed to have some kind of policy over the use of non-free images, and a small group of people very dedicated to the very narrow restrictions we see, seem to have drafted it without the broad discussion of pros and cons that I was hoping to find and read.
It is annoying.
About a dozen years ago I realized how terribly vulnerable en.wiki's policies are. Commons too, I suspect. The policies are not locked down. Anyone can edit them. So, a dozen years ago a very unpleasant person thundered at me, "how dare you! Don't you know BLP says XYZ?" No, I did not know it said that, but sure enough, when I checked, it did say "XYZ". I was sure it hadn't said XYZ when I had first read through the entire thing, five years earlier. I checked. It had not. It hadn't said it 2.5 years prior to that day either. Nor had it said it a year, or a bit more than a year previously. Maybe there is a tool that can figure out who first added a specific passage to an article or a policy? If so I don't know that tool.
There were over 1000 edits to BLP, between when it did not contain the XYZ passage, and when it did contain the passage. There was nothing on Talk:BLP, showing there had been a discussion to add that major revision. Well what about the edit summaries of those 1000 edits? Did any of them contain a clue that someone felt authorized to make that major revision? Nope.
What I found, when I looked at the edit summaries, and a couple dozen of the actual edits, is that they gave the surface appearance of a bunch of people discovering what they regarded relatively minor errors to the spelling, punctuation or sentence structure of the policy, who had gone in, on their sole judgment, to correct what they represented as errors. Sadly, some wikipedians are barely literate, and their notion of what is a error in grammar that needs correction is highly unreliable.
I had, by that time, realized that there were some deep vandals on en.wiki - individuals who were prepared to make thousands of innocuous policy compliant edits, so the could apply to be administrators, or just be trusted, so they could occasionally stick their oar in, cause chaos. I know of at least two en.wiki administrators who used sockpuppetry to apply for administratorships under two separate wiki-IDs. One got away with it, two wiki-IDs granted administratorships.
A small clique of POV pushers could plot out a policy change, and agree that each of them would make one of a series of tiny edits to BLP, each of which looked like someone making an apparently good faith tiny fix to what they saw as bad grammar, but which, taken as a whole, did make a significant change to policy. And, in a case like this, what you would get was a stealth policy change, from a small group of vandals, or a small group of zealots.
This vulnerability chills me, when I think about it.
Cheers! Geo Swan (talk) 15:42, 1 March 2022 (UTC)
Yes, I agree that policy pages should be locked. But my biggest annoyance with the copyright issues here on Commons is that policy for that should actually be set by WMF Legal, not by a consensus of a small group of laymen or even "POV pushers" (no matter how well meaning). Considering the potential legal ramifications for WMF, I am often very surprised that WMF Legal hardly ever comments on copyright discussions or set legal/policy precedents. As for deleting images per precautionary principle, there is of course a big grey area. But if we get it wrong and don't delete a questionable image, there could be bad consequences down the road... --P 1 9 9  ✉ 15:57, 1 March 2022 (UTC)

Commons:Deletion requests/Files uploaded by Nikolaidisa

Hello, could you please kindly check the status of the undeleted files ? Not sure what your intention was. Thanks, — Racconish 💬 10:36, 8 March 2022 (UTC)

Same with Commons:Deletion requests/Files uploaded by Takomabibelot. — Racconish 💬 17:36, 8 March 2022 (UTC)

@Racconish: Looks like the mass delete button was not working properly. Now deleted. Thanks for letting me know. --P 1 9 9  ✉ 19:05, 8 March 2022 (UTC)

Redact revision request

Hello P199. Please hide my edit at Commons:Deletion requests/Files in Category:Divimart Pulilan (specific edit: [6]). This is a courtesy request from my FB friend. Regards, JWilz12345 (Talk|Contrib's.) 08:33, 9 March 2022 (UTC)

✓ Done. BTW, will you withdraw the DR again? If so, I'll close it right away. --P 1 9 9  ✉ 13:48, 9 March 2022 (UTC)
Yes, I withdraw. The building is not artistic enough to warrant designer's protection. JWilz12345 (Talk|Contrib's.) 14:09, 9 March 2022 (UTC)

Commons:Deletion requests/File:Raghuveeran.P.jpg

Hi P199, please note my repeated delition request. Keeping this image does not comply to Commons:Deletion policy. Greetings, -- Ies (talk) 09:56, 13 March 2022 (UTC)

Hi @Ies: thanks for helping clean up Commons. This image was in use in 2016, so that makes it automatically in scope. Now that it is no longer used, I completely agree with your DR. It will have to go through the normal process though (no need to specially inform me). Regards, --P 1 9 9  ✉ 13:56, 13 March 2022 (UTC)

Image

Hi P199, Just wondering what categories was File:Roksana Rahman Poly.jpg in prior to nomination/, Thanks, Warm Regards, –Davey2010Talk 00:59, 14 March 2022 (UTC)

Hi @Davey2010: . Category:Female models from Bangladesh and Category:Rahman (surname). Regards, --P 1 9 9  ✉ 03:34, 14 March 2022 (UTC)
Hi P199, Ah okay many thanks for that, IMHO I believe the file's inscope however just because I do doesn't mean everyone else does - Would you possibly undelete the file and I'll recat it or failing that would you object to me going to UDR to seek different opinions ?, Although the person is non-notable the image imho was taken in a way that imho could make it usable, Many thanks, Warm Regards, –Davey2010Talk 14:22, 14 March 2022 (UTC)
Hi @Davey2010: this person is not notable - no article on any WP, nor item in Wikidata. No objection against UDR (that is after all the right process). Regards, --P 1 9 9  ✉ 14:29, 14 March 2022 (UTC)
Hey P199, In all fairness we do have and accept images of non-notable people providing the image can be of use but ofcourse I agree with your sentiments, Okay no worries I'll head to UDR, Many thanks for replying :), Take care P199, Warm Regards, –Davey2010Talk 19:07, 14 March 2022 (UTC)

Categories on File:Untitled -- Addshore, Twitter, 2022-01-08.png

Hi P199, thanks for closing the deletion discussion.

I saw you also removed the 2 categories that were previously on the file. I believe both of these should still be on the file?

Regarding Wikidata art, you'll notice the Wikidata logo featuring on the left hand side of the image (as a flag). Also this is most definitely a digital drawing. These 2 categories also keep the file in line with the prior file which is also in these categories.

Let me know what you link. ·addshore· talk to me! 08:47, 22 March 2022 (UTC)

@Addshore: In general, we consider such private art as out of scope, therefore it is not suitable to add other categories (Wikidata art is rather incidental on top of that). Since it is used on your userpage, the current category is sufficient (just like personal photos that are out of scope but used on a userpage - they are not categorized elsewhere). Regards, --P 1 9 9  ✉ 17:30, 22 March 2022 (UTC)

Pictures taken by Mendozamori

Hello P199, I miss the pictures taken by Mendozamori listed on Commons:Deletion requests/Files uploaded by Mendozamori used in several Wikipedia articles (es, en, de, qu). User:Mendozamori confirmed that he himself took those pictures, so they are his own work. Please restore them, for they are not copyrighted. Thanks in advance -- PhJ (talk) 14:48, 22 March 2022 (UTC)

@PhJ: Can't take their statement at face value. There is more than sufficient doubt to question ownership here, so unfortunately, uploader needs to prove copyright ownership via VRT. --P 1 9 9  ✉ 17:33, 22 March 2022 (UTC)

File is my own work

I took all the photos in collage by my self and these places not exclusive.Success think (talk) 04:19, 24 March 2022 (UTC)

@P199: All photos are take by myself with the phone camera. Its my own work. Success think (talk) 07:55, 24 March 2022 (UTC)

Don't leave your comments here, but at Commons:Deletion requests/Files uploaded by Success think. --P 1 9 9  ✉ 13:24, 24 March 2022 (UTC)

Could you undelete File:Wudu Istiqlal Mosque.JPG?

I’m pretty sure this one was de minimis as it showed people taking/doing/whatever wudu and didn’t feature the mosque in any prominence. Dronebogus (talk) 02:55, 5 April 2022 (UTC)

It showed enough architectural elements of the interior wash place that I deemed this image just over DM. Regards, --P 1 9 9  ✉ 03:01, 5 April 2022 (UTC)

Deleted with link to wrong discussion

You deleted File:Eila HILTUNEN Sibeliusdenkmal - 1967 - Helsinki - 1969 - 143.09.jpg "per Commons:Deletion requests/File:Tim Dodd with SpaceX Falcon Heavy at Launch Complex 39A.jpg", which is very confusing. Could you do something to make the file history point at Commons:Deletion requests/File:Eila HILTUNEN Sibeliusdenkmal - 1967 - Helsinki - 1969 - 143.09.jpg, which seems to be the correct one. You also deleted the talk page. Is that practice? At Swedish Wikipedia talk pages are retained when articles are deleted, for future reference. –LPfi (talk) 10:47, 5 April 2022 (UTC)

Hi @LPfi: Thanks for letting me know. This is very strange, because that step of the deletion process is automated. In any case, I restored it and manually deleted it to add the correct link. Regards, --P 1 9 9  ✉ 12:48, 5 April 2022 (UTC)

Error in closing a DR

Hello. I think you made an error when you closed this DR. You deleted the file, but you closed the DR as "kept". Best regards, BrightRaven (talk) 11:18, 5 April 2022 (UTC)

Thanks @BrightRaven: for letting me know. That was indeed an error (not paying attention), and corrected now. Regards, --P 1 9 9  ✉ 12:53, 5 April 2022 (UTC)

Commons:Deletion requests/Files uploaded by Avikanyar

Hello P199,

it looks like you missed to delete one file which is part of this DR. Regards --Rosenzweig τ 22:49, 8 May 2022 (UTC)

@Rosenzweig: Done. Thanks for letting me know. --P 1 9 9  ✉ 00:01, 9 May 2022 (UTC)

Hello

I did nothing wrong.Your don't see license it free image pixabay.Why your blocked mẹ. PeaceAndGood (talk) 14:03, 9 May 2022 (UTC)

I allowed to upload free image cmon. PeaceAndGood (talk) 14:07, 9 May 2022 (UTC)

@PeaceAndGood: I didn't block you, I warned you because you have uploaded numerous non-free images in the past. And no, if you don't see a license, you can NOT assume it is free. Not all images on Pixabay have licenses compatible with Commons. If you have any questions about this, feel free to ask me. Regards, --P 1 9 9  ✉ 14:10, 9 May 2022 (UTC)

Commons:Deletion requests/File:Maradona_cebollita.jpg

How does your close mesh with the instruction at Template:Not-PD-US-URAA? Hekerui (talk) 16:23, 17 May 2022 (UTC)

I see, you refered to this close by User:Ruthven and User:Jcb, which is so wrong! Jcb was removed as an admin, not sure was Ruthven was thinking, these files are all new and not legacy stuff predating the court decision. Hekerui (talk) 16:41, 17 May 2022 (UTC)
Someone uploads knowing copyright violations after the date of the discussion when the discussion is about earlier and you close as keep. No response to my question? Hekerui (talk) 10:36, 26 May 2022 (UTC)
The conclusion of COM:DIU was that "URAA cannot be used as the sole reason for deletion", which is exactly the case for this DR. You can nominate the file again, this time adding the other reasons you give above. WMF Legal gave the following direction in this regard: "The WMF does not plan to remove any content unless it has actual knowledge of infringement or receives a valid DMCA takedown notice. To date, no such notice has been received under the URAA. We are not recommending that community members undertake mass deletion of existing content on URAA grounds, without such actual knowledge of infringement or takedown notices." If I missed anything else, I welcome any education on this. Regards, --P 1 9 9  ✉ 13:34, 26 May 2022 (UTC)
I believe you missed that this not approval to upload copyright violation at will going forward since the conclusion of the underlying judgment from the legal case. Your interpretation is used to upload verifyable copyright violations currently. The uploader of File:Maradona cebollita.jpg acknowledges by adding Template:Not-PD-US-URAA that the picture is in the copyright in the US (the template states since 2014 "New files should not be uploaded with this tag"). Please participate at Commons talk:WikiProject Public Domain/URAA review to help resolve this. Hekerui (talk) 11:42, 27 May 2022 (UTC)

Commons:Deletion requests/Files uploaded by Jahirul film

Hello P199,

it seems this is another one where a file you wanted to delete got away. Regards --Rosenzweig τ 08:41, 19 May 2022 (UTC)

Hi @Rosenzweig: Mass Deletion doesn't always work correctly. Thanks for letting me know. --P 1 9 9  ✉ 12:50, 19 May 2022 (UTC)
Or the DR has a confusing layout :-) Here's another one: Commons:Deletion requests/Files uploaded by Jkubler1. --Rosenzweig τ 19:52, 20 May 2022 (UTC)

Photos from Fujisan Winery

You deleted photos Koshu_grapes.jpg and Fujisan_winery_vineyard.jpg for copyright violation.

I have permission from Fujisan Winery to post these on Wikipedia on a page about them. How should I proceed? — Preceding unsigned comment added by BruceThomson (talk • contribs) 09:12, 28 May 2022 (UTC) BruceThomson (talk) 09:13, 28 May 2022 (UTC)

@BruceThomson: see the instructions at COM:VRT. Regards, --P 1 9 9  ✉ 14:21, 28 May 2022 (UTC)
Thanks! BruceThomson (talk) 11:19, 30 May 2022 (UTC)

Hello,

I am messaging you because a contest for a sound logo for Wikimedia is being developed and your opinion as a Wikimedia Commons admin is appreciated. My team would like to know if it is possible for the top finalist sound logos in the contest to have attribution temporarily hidden from public view until all the votes are final? The idea is to let the public judge the sound logo contestants based on the merit of the logo, not the person or people who made it. Again, any feedback is appreciated.

Thank you,

VGrigas (WMF) (talk) 18:03, 17 June 2022 (UTC)

Commons:Deletion requests/File:Protestas en contra de Pedro Castillo en Lima Perú. Registro 5 de abril, 2022..webm

I was not attentive to Commons:Deletion requests/File:Protestas en contra de Pedro Castillo en Lima Perú. Registro 5 de abril, 2022..webmand I considered that the licensing was clear, but unfortunately its author changed it, so I request that you restore the video. MONUMENTA Talk 00:07, 24 June 2022 (UTC)

@MONUMENTA: ✓ Done. --P 1 9 9  ✉ 01:23, 24 June 2022 (UTC)
Thanks you very much P199.Althair Talk 16:23, 24 June 2022 (UTC)

Deletion discussion

Hello. I have renominated a file for deletion you previously kept. Please see Commons:Deletion requests/File:Eunice Foote - bizilabe.png. Cheers --Animalparty (talk) 07:18, 17 July 2022 (UTC)

A small favour

Hi there. Could you please make a small edit to a file for me? No matter what I do, when I make the edit to File:HC08212AF (40903576763).jpg, the edit won't save. Specifically, in the "Structured data" tab, the entry for "coordinates of the point of view" should be updated to the coordinates "44.15380, -77.38900", a change I've already made on the file itself. The "publish changes" button refuses to work for me (both using the mouse and the keyboard). My apologies for the inconvenience. Mindmatrix 16:25, 7 October 2022 (UTC)

Hi @Mindmatrix: Done. No inconvenience. --P 1 9 9  ✉ 17:20, 7 October 2022 (UTC)
Thanks! Mindmatrix 17:54, 7 October 2022 (UTC)

File:Anisolophus skull.jpg

Hello, I'm Magnatyrannus, and I wanted to know why it was deleted. I can verify that the file was, in fact, not directly from the source, but at a different angle. Magnatyrannus (talk) 09:09, 18 October 2022 (UTC)

@Magnatyrannus: Exact same photo! And even if it didn't come directly from Twitter, it is still not your own work. It needs permission from original photographer (COM:VRT), or proof that it was published with a free license. --P 1 9 9  ✉ 12:48, 18 October 2022 (UTC)
Also, why did you have to nominate the File:Pternoconius.png for deletion shortly after deleting the Anisolophus one? Sure, it was inaccurate, but it was the best I could do. Magnatyrannus (talk) 23:32, 19 November 2022 (UTC)
Although I am not willing to contest the deletion, I am just curious, that's all. Magnatyrannus (talk) 23:33, 19 November 2022 (UTC)

File:World Press Photo. D. Knight bij de winnende foto van Kyoichi Sawada, Bestanddeelnr 046-0662.jpg

Hello P199,

that file still has the DR template linked to Commons:Deletion requests/File:World Press Photo. D. Knight bij de winnende foto van Kyoichi Sawada, Bestanddeelnr 046-0662-picture.jpg, which you closed. I'm not sure if the nominator intended that one for deletion as well or not. Could you please take another look? Regards --Rosenzweig τ 17:03, 25 October 2022 (UTC)

@Rosenzweig: Thanks for letting me know. The nominator apparently felt the need to link the DR to this image (file history when the DR notice was added says "related DR"). I have removed the template. --P 1 9 9  ✉ 18:29, 25 October 2022 (UTC)

Commons:Deletion requests/File:Prayetietia.png

You deleted this file with this message: per nomination, not notable.

But the only users to actually investigate the subject’s notability concluded that the subject is notable. What’s going on? Brianjd (talk) 07:13, 5 November 2022 (UTC)

File:International Space Station star trails - JSC2012E039800.jpg

Umm, did you mean to delete File:International Space Station star trails - JSC2012E039800.jpg? It's one of the POTY finalists and I don't see what it has to do with the referenced deletion request. Legoktm (talk) 04:18, 1 December 2022 (UTC)

+1 Came here to ask the same thing :) czar 04:28, 1 December 2022 (UTC)
Okay I think I know what happened. It looks like P199's logs deleted a bunch of articles that were formerly listed in Commons:Deletion requests/Files in Category:Copyright violations. The space station image was listed for deletion in 2012 but was kept then and was somehow caught (among others from that page) in a batch of deletions today. (I still don't see the connection with Commons:Deletion requests/Files uploaded by Balaam Barugahara as mentioned in the edit summary, though.) I'm going to undo the deletion in question since (1) it is going to be an issue with the amount of traffic going to the POTY finalist page, (2) the action appears to have be accidental, (3) P199 doesn't appear to be online to see this. Feel free to revert me if I've missed something, P199, and we can address the others once you're back online. czar 04:44, 1 December 2022 (UTC)
Thanks @Czar. I was willing to wait a little longer, but was also planning to undelete for the same reasons. AntiCompositeNumber (talk) 04:50, 1 December 2022 (UTC)

@Legoktm, Czar, and AntiCompositeNumber: Sorry everyone. I don't know how this happened. I mass-deleted the files in Commons:Deletion requests/Files uploaded by Balaam Barugahara which was listed on the deletion page of Oct. 13 right before Commons:Deletion requests/Files in Category:Copyright violations. I assume a glitch in the mass delete process... --P 1 9 9  ✉ 13:28, 1 December 2022 (UTC)

Is someone going to undelete these files before e.g. CommonsDelinker removes them from wikis? bdijkstra (overleg) 09:30, 2 December 2022 (UTC)
@P199, it looks like you started to restore some files but didn't finish (Special:Log/P199). Do you need a hand? czar 03:42, 3 December 2022 (UTC)
Okay I've handled it. czar 04:01, 3 December 2022 (UTC)
Thanks. bdijkstra (overleg) 11:14, 3 December 2022 (UTC)

Happy holidays 2022/2023!

  * Happy Holidays 2022/2023, P199! *  
  • Merry Christmas! Happy New Year!
  • Joyeux Noël! Bonne année!
  • Frohes Weihnachten! Frohes Neues Jahr!
  • ¡Feliz Navidad y próspero año nuevo!
  • Щасливого Різдва! З Новим роком!

   -- George Chernilevsky talk 02:29, 23 December 2022 (UTC)  

Utilisation d'une de vos photos

Bonjour Monsieur Grandmont,

Je souhaite utiliser deux de vos photos pour une vidéo de vulgarisation historique. Il s'agit d'une de vos photos du sarcophage de Portonaccio ainsi qu'une de vos photos de la cathédrale de Tournai. J'ai lu dans les conditions de licence que vous aimeriez qu'on vous contacte pour vous signaler l'utilisation de ces photos, raison pour laquelle je vous écris. Naturellement je mentionnerai votre nom dans la référence des images utilisées.

Merci Sandozfred (talk) 11:08, 19 January 2023 (UTC)

@Sandozfred: You left this message in error on my talk page. You must have meant User:Jean-Pol GRANDMONT. --P 1 9 9  ✉ 01:00, 20 January 2023 (UTC)

Commons:Deletion requests/File:03 février 2022 13.47.45-3.jpg

Hi, You closed this as "Deleted", but the file is still there... Yann (talk) 08:09, 3 February 2023 (UTC)

Thanks for notifying me. Somehow missed it. ✓ Done --P 1 9 9  ✉ 13:47, 3 February 2023 (UTC)

Giuseppe Frascaroli/Wegeta

P199, I now regret nominating those files for deletion. I have every reason to believe that the uploader is one in the same with the author, and had every right to upload original works and assign proper licences to them. Unfortunately, on Commons we often vilify authors of original work, as if we have some magic pixie dust which enables us to discern whether or not they've actually produced the works they claim to have produced. We transfer stuff in from Flickr all the time with less scrutiny. I wish I could've withdrawn that broad and overreaching deletion request. Won't you reconsider this decision? Elizium23 (talk) 16:31, 14 February 2023 (UTC)

Hi @Elizium23: Thanks for your work on Commons. As for these files, I had more concerns. The fact that 2 different users uploaded them and claimed as own is a big red flag. They may be the same person but this would definitely need a VRT ticket. And assuming that User:Giuseppe Frascaroli really is the artist, then several of the uploads where he is in the photo, therefore not own work anyway. --P 1 9 9  ✉ 19:17, 14 February 2023 (UTC)
In my limited experience, Commons has little regard for whether sockpuppets are the authors of media uploaded as "own work". Take, for example, @Orlando Paride and their multiplicity of alternate accounts. Since the photos are high-quality, not obviously stolen, and literally forced into as many articles as possible across the WMF, they have been kept, despite repeated deletion requests. Commons:Deletion requests/Files uploaded by Orlando Paride 🤷🏼‍♂️ Elizium23 (talk) 19:31, 14 February 2023 (UTC)

Montreal photo requests: Drawn and Quarterly

Hello! I was doing work on manga articles on ENwiki and I found that en:Drawn and Quarterly is based out of Montreal, with its headquarters and bookstores there. If Montreal is still convenient to your location, you're welcome to take photographs of the D+Q sites.

Thank you, WhisperToMe (talk) 14:18, 11 March 2023 (UTC)

Commons:Deletion requests/File:Nadeen Ayoub, Miss Earth (Water) 2022 with crown.jpg

You simply wrote Deleted: per nomination., but the nomination has several different reasons, most of which are invalid per Ikan Kekek. What was your actual reason for deletion? Brianjd (talk) 15:10, 15 March 2023 (UTC)

Accessing deleted SVG files

Heyo, I'm looking to try and find some SVG files someone uploaded that you had deleted back in 2021, the Wayback Machine is crashing pretty frequently for me when I try to do this and said uploader's email doesn't work. Is there any way you could help me here if I were to send some more info via email or such? NorthTension (talk) 19:03, 15 March 2023 (UTC)

Commons:Deletion requests/File:Igor-Gjorgjievski-CV-23.pdf

You recently closed this discussion and deleted one of the two files that were nominated. Since no distinction was made between the two identical files, I assume this was just a minor oversight. Can you please have a second look? Thank you. Marbletan (talk) 13:35, 18 March 2023 (UTC)

@Marbletan: yes, oversight. Thanks for letting me know. Now deleted. --P 1 9 9  ✉ 14:44, 18 March 2023 (UTC)

Commons:Deletion requests/Files uploaded by Zelechin

Just to clarify regarding your close: Are you saying that the ticket number in the edit summary of the diff I provided is not a valid ticket number? Or does not actually provide permission? IronGargoyle (talk) 23:04, 7 April 2023 (UTC)

@IronGargoyle: I am not a VRT member, so I can't see the ticket. I don't know if the ticket number is valid (2010101810011729), but it means that it was submitted on Oct. 18, 2010. If it was indeed submitted on that date, it should have been processed by now and added to each of the uploads. There was no VRT ticket at these files. --P 1 9 9  ✉ 01:23, 8 April 2023 (UTC)
I too am puzzled by the closing comment. The ticket was judged satisfactory by two OTRS members, in October 2010 [7] and in May 2011 [8]. How can it now be assumed to have not existed? -- Asclepias (talk) 02:02, 8 April 2023 (UTC)
@Asclepias: You expect anyone to dig in category revision history and old unrelated DR's to find an OTRS ticket? That is NOT how OTRS tickets are dealt with. So no, an edit summary in a Category [1] and a closing comment in a DR by a non-OTRS member [2] is NOT satisfactory. OTRS tickets are for files, and should be mentioned in the file description. Where is the actual ticket??? --P 1 9 9  ✉ 02:37, 8 April 2023 (UTC)
I wouldn't expect someone to dig into the category, but since I did dig into the category and pointed out there was a ticket, it might have been worthwhile to check with someone on the VRT before closing the discussion. IronGargoyle (talk) 02:55, 8 April 2023 (UTC)
No one had to dig into anything. Those two instances were explicitly specified and linked in the DR, one by IronGargoyle, the other by me. And yes, even if we hadn't already done it, it is certainly expected as normal procedure for the closing user to proactively check the previous discussions about the same matter. The ticket was also mentioned in some of the description pages. The 2011 DR was not unrelated, it was exactly for one of the same files, it was duly noted in the talk page, and the closing admin was an OTRS member [9]. The DR was closed as kept specifically on the basis of the permission in the OTRS ticket. When, twelve years later and after the licensor has died, files are deleted without checking the permission, that is a big problem. Having not read the permission, it is peculiar to boldly proclaim that it is not satisfactory in opposition to the VRT members who read it and accepted it as satisactory. The information indicate that there is an existing permission. Doing as if the permission did not exist when it is known that it exists is not a useful option. If there are doubts about the permission (indeed it's quite ok to have doubts and to check), then the solution is to ask at the VRT noticeboard or VRT members, or alternatively, if a user won't do it, the closure can be left to someone else. The solution is certainly not to blindly delete valuable files when the available information seems to indicate at least that they are likely legitimate. Broad tickets, covering all works of a person or covering all uploads made by an identified authorized account, as may be the case with this ticket, don't necessarily end up being noted on each and every file page, especially when more new files are uploaded over a period of time (and for a number of possible reasons, including optimal management of limited resources and time of the VRT team, oversight, etc.). Such tickets should be noted at least in the logical places, on the relevant category page and/or on the relevant user page, as the case may be. If one believes that each file should also display a template noting the ticket, why not, but then again the solution is not to delete the files, the solution is to fix what one perceives as a problem and request that VRT members add such templates. As for the last question, it is in the records of the OTRS system that the ticket would be recorded. -- Asclepias (talk) 15:37, 8 April 2023 (UTC)
I have asked the VRT noticeboard to look into this issue. IronGargoyle (talk) 01:23, 12 April 2023 (UTC)

Thanks for your nominations to delete my works.

Thank you for your nominations to delete my efforts and works and interest in blocking incompetent editors like me. Absolutely right move, you are a great editor. If you want to delete all my works, then you can do it, do you need a nomination for that!!. If you want to block me then you can do that too. Take care dude and by. Tojoroy20 (talk) 16:10, 12 April 2023 (UTC)

Please do something about this.

Ghghghghb (talk · contribs) is replacing photos with images of a random dude. SpinnerLaserzthe2nd (talk) 02:04, 16 April 2023 (UTC)

Round 1 of Picture of the Year 2022 voting is open!

2022 Picture of the Year: Saint John Church of Sohrol in Iran.

Read this message in your language

Dear Wikimedian,

Wikimedia Commons is happy to announce that the 2022 Picture of the Year competition is now open. This year will be the seventeenth edition of the annual Wikimedia Commons photo competition, which recognizes exceptional contributions by users on Wikimedia Commons. Wikimedia users are invited to vote for their favorite images featured on Commons during the last year (2022) to produce a single Picture of the Year.

Hundreds of images that have been rated Featured Pictures by the international Wikimedia Commons community in the past year are all entered in this competition. These images include professional animal and plant shots, breathtaking panoramas and skylines, restorations of historical images, photographs portraying the world's best architecture, impressive human portraits, and so much more.

For your convenience, we have sorted the images into topical categories. Two rounds of voting will be held: In the first round, you may vote for as many images as you like. The top 30 overall and the two most popular images in each category will continue to the final. In the final round, you may vote for just three images to become the Picture of the Year.

Round 1 will end on UTC.

Click here to vote now!

Thanks,
the Wikimedia Commons Picture of the Year committee

You are receiving this message because you voted in the 2021 Picture of the Year contest.

Delivered by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 09:14, 20 April 2023 (UTC)

undeletion request for Our Personal Space files

Hi, you deleted these files per Commons:Deletion requests/Images in Category:Our Personal Space, please undelete them. Detailed assets information can be found from GitHub repository and files are openly lisensed.

--Zache (talk) 15:37, 28 April 2023 (UTC)

@Zache: What educational purpose do those screenshot serve? They seemed mostly promotional to me... --P 1 9 9  ✉ 15:50, 28 April 2023 (UTC)
I uploaded them as an example images for en:Ren'Py en:visual novel engine. More specific I uploaded them as replacement images for artificially created Ren'Py images by Midnight68. Our Personal Space images could be used as example photos for en:Educational games too if we stretch our imagination little bit. -- Zache (talk) 18:56, 28 April 2023 (UTC)
Hi, I will push this up as you seem to be daily active again. Please, restore the images as the deletion rationale of incompatible license were incorrect. The detailed copyright information of the images was not just in licence text, but they were copied to inwiki file description too. --Zache (talk) 00:21, 3 May 2023 (UTC)
Just FYI, As I didn't understand what it means that you didn't answer to me I added this to Commons:Undeletion_requests/Current_requests#Our_Personal_Space. --Zache (talk) 20:01, 3 May 2023 (UTC)
That is the right way to do it. Thanks for letting me know. --P 1 9 9  ✉ 20:04, 3 May 2023 (UTC)
Actually appealing decisions says: If you disagree with an admin's decision to delete a file, or not to delete it, you should first set out your reasons on the admin's talk page and ask for reconsideration. and another bullent point for admin before actual deletion: administrators are encouraged to check whether the uploader was notified on their talk page of the pending deletion request (Commons:Deletion_requests). -- Zache (talk) 20:35, 3 May 2023 (UTC)

Barnstar

The Photographer's Barnstar
For your work on w:Ontario Highway 11. The gallery of images at the bottom really helps you understand the layout, appearance, and condition of the road!
-Asheiou (they/them • talk) 16:36, 10 May 2023 (UTC)
@Asheiou: Thanks a lot! --P 1 9 9  ✉ 16:48, 10 May 2023 (UTC)

Re. Commons:Deletion requests/File:Plato-Alcibiades.jpg

You wrote:

Kept: looks to me as an exact replica (i.e. copy) of the original

I think you have a misunderstanding of what the "original" is here. The w:First Alcibiades is a text, not a physical document. Any "original" which was first written down has been lost to time; all we have are copies made by medieval scribes. This particular image is a creative work - a reimagining of what that original document might have looked like by an amateur calligrapher. It's both ahistorical and not clearly in the public domain. Omphalographer (talk) 18:00, 16 May 2023 (UTC)

@Omphalographer: So, is this image a copy/replica from a Medieval document? If so, it is certainly PD now as well. Whether or not it is ahistorical is irrelevant because the image is in use a lot. --P 1 9 9  ✉ 18:06, 16 May 2023 (UTC)
The text is copied (more or less, see the file talk page), but the presentation is original. My feeling is that there's enough creativity in how the calligrapher chose to present this passage that it's above the threshold of originality - the intent of the piece was to showcase the creator's calligraphy, not to present the text to readers, and in that regard it's their original work. Omphalographer (talk) 18:54, 16 May 2023 (UTC)
@Omphalographer: deleted. Regards, --P 1 9 9  ✉ 14:43, 17 May 2023 (UTC)

Commons:Deletion requests/File:Pavilion Station Escalator.jpg

This is not about alternatives in Category:Escalators, and I'm surprised you gave such an inappropriate deletion reason, which is perhaps analogous to deleting a useful photo of a particular species of lizard that lives in a very limited area with the argument that "we have plenty of pictures in Category:Reptiles." That is a picture of an escalator in a particular LRT station in Kuala Lumpur, isn't it? Why do we want to not have photos of escalators in particular stations to be viewable on this site? Would you reconsider? -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 20:52, 16 May 2023 (UTC)

Hi @Ikan Kekek: we already know that you and I don't have the same standards when it comes to scope and quality of images; you don't need to argue over every DR I close... ;-)
This image was blurred, unusable. And there are escalator alternatives in "its category", meaning Category:Bukit Bintang MRT Station. Regards, --P 1 9 9  ✉ 14:48, 17 May 2023 (UTC)
Just try to make a clearer statement like this when you close and you wont get an incredulous reaction like that from me. I actually have no big problem with that one being deleted (especially courtesy deleted) if there are good substitutes for views of that escalator in particular. But if you make a closing statement like you did, I will tend to react incredulously and at least wonder whether you are applying some kind of blanket deletion reason like the one you have for logos. Thanks. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 18:33, 17 May 2023 (UTC)

Category:Hengelo, Karneval

You deleted Category:Hengelo, Karneval ‎with a rationale "unused and implausible". However the category was used for years until it was made a redirect and its content moved. As it was in use for many years, there may be many people (without wiki account) who use this category as a bookmark or as a link on a website. Now it is gone without a CfD or anything. I think this is a disservice to reusers of commons content. The existence of the category was not wrong, it was helpful. C.Suthorn (@Life_is@no-pony.farm) (talk) 19:36, 21 June 2023 (UTC)

File:Balazs Marton.jpg

Why did you delete this picture? This was upload by me years ago. I am the author. Wikizoli (talk) 19:49, 6 July 2023 (UTC)

????? Wikizoli (talk) 19:52, 7 July 2023 (UTC)

See my additional comments at Commons:Deletion requests/File:Balazs Marton.jpg. BTW, you don't appear to be the uploader; it was uploaded by User:LiaVeja. --P 1 9 9  ✉ 20:03, 7 July 2023 (UTC)

Then she replaced my picture. Check the history. My one wasː File:Balázs Márton.JPG Wikizoli (talk) 06:12, 8 July 2023 (UTC)
???? 217.73.170.82 10:04, 12 July 2023 (UTC)

Commons:Village pump/Proposals#Remove hint (hidden rule) at all categories like "Views from …"

Hi P199, FYI, a proposal has been opened to revert your CfD closures at Commons:Categories for discussion/2018/05/Category:Views from automobiles and Commons:Categories for discussion/2018/05/Category:Views from vehicles. Regards, AFBorchert (talk) 18:11, 31 July 2023 (UTC)

@AFBorchert: Thanks for letting me know. As fellow admin, you should see that this is not really a "proposal" but a discussion about the category that should be discussed at COM:CfD, not at the Village Pump. --P 1 9 9  ✉ 20:14, 31 July 2023 (UTC)
I know but I did not open that thread, I just thought that you should be notified. --AFBorchert (talk) 20:17, 31 July 2023 (UTC)

Commons:Deletion requests/Files uploaded by Isaabdulla09

Thanks for closing Commons:Deletion requests/Files uploaded by Isaabdulla09. I notice that you deleted all the listed files, except for one. Since the nomination didn't make any distinction between the files, maybe this is just a small oversight - or maybe I'm missing something that's different about the file that wasn't deleted? Can you please have a second look? Marbletan (talk) 17:26, 4 August 2023 (UTC)

@Marbletan: Thanks for letting me know. Glitch with mass processing. I should have double-checked... --P 1 9 9  ✉ 17:54, 4 August 2023 (UTC)

restore file

hello, I am writing to ask you if you could please restore this file for me since according to the description it is the work of the painter Ferdinand Voet and consequently the copyright has already expired for well over a hundred years

Rikamini96 (talk) 11:58, 18 August 2023 (UTC)

Hi @Rikamini96: The file was uploaded by an abuser - the facts of this image need to be verified. The right place to ask for restoring a deleted file is COM:UNDELETE. Thanks. --P 1 9 9  ✉ 13:32, 18 August 2023 (UTC)
the file in question was not uploaded by an attacker at all because according to the description I analyzed the appropriate Template Artwork, and the source would derive from a book that would be entitled: Petrucci, Francesco (2007) (in Italian) Il principe romano. Ritratti dell'aristocrazia pontificia nell'età Barocca, Gangemi Editore ISBN: 978-88-492-1328-7. OCLC: 117926133. and also the licenses I think are more than appropriate (being a work of Voet) and therefore I think that whoever deleted it has absolutely not checked the details of the work in question and regarding his request to appeal to the COM:UNDELETE page unfortunately it would be a waste of time since from what I have seen no restore request is seriously considered so I appeal to you who are an administrator Rikamini96 (talk) 15:30, 18 August 2023 (UTC)

Block sock and delete files

Hi, I'm Pbritti. Previously, you have deleted files uploaded by Wiki Eapen such as File:Alencherry.jpg and File:Srampickal.jpg, both of which have been re-uploaded by Sleevachan (the former was again deleted and again re-uploaded, now as File:Catholicos-patriarch.jpg). Sleevachan and TheCompassFour have both been blocked on EnWikipedia as Esthappanos Bar Geevarghese sockpuppets. I am requesting administrator intervention directly on your talk page as my request on COM:AN/B has gone several days without action while the abusive editor has continued to add images, including those deleted by community consensus. ~ Pbritti (talk) 19:56, 22 August 2023 (UTC)

Suggesting a move

It was suggested to me at w:User talk:Veverve#Vatican City to move File:Flag of the Vatican City.svg, please read the discussion. What do you think? Veverve (talk) 01:28, 2 September 2023 (UTC)

So, what do you think? Veverve (talk) 11:04, 13 September 2023 (UTC)
@Veverve: Thanks for asking, but I've no opinion. Unless renamed to something unsuitable, file names are not much of a concern to me... --P 1 9 9  ✉ 12:55, 13 September 2023 (UTC)

File name change

Hi, regarding my renaming request of File:Debreu, Gérard (1921-2004).jpeg, per MOS:YEARRANGE: A simple year–year range is written using an en dash (–, &ndash; or {{ndash}}, or {{nbnd}} for a non-breaking en dash), not an em dash, hyphen, or slash. It is therefore requested that the file name be changed to be in line with this standard, as the existing name with the hyphen is unsuitable and does not adhere to the style guideline. Rowing007 (talk) 18:31, 10 October 2023 (UTC)

@Rowing007: The MOS is from WP, not Commons. And the style guideline is for articles, not filenames (which are not even visible). So, utterly pointless to change hyphens to en-dash for innumerable filenames, and then have that updated for each use in articles for something that is not even visible. Not to speak of the major inconvenience of having to type en-dashes... This is akin to Criteria #1 at COM:FRNOT. Thanks. --P 1 9 9  ✉ 18:54, 10 October 2023 (UTC)
File names are visible in the source code, and are part of articles. My renaming request is valid under use #6: Non-controversial maintenance and bug fixes. The request is inherently uncontroversial and correct. It does not "look better"; it's a correction of an error. The file is used on 138 articles globally. That would take maybe 1 hour of time to do manually, or a bot could be created (if it does not already exist) to automate the renaming process. Also, COM:FRNOT Criteria #1 is terribly ambiguous; there is no quantification of what constitutes something that looks "a bit" better (i.e., versus something that looks "a lot" better). Lastly, en dashes are not an inconvenience to type. On desktop, simply copy one into a notepad as a reference and paste it into each instance or simply type (i.e., copy and paste) &ndash;. On mobile, press and hold the hyphen key to bring up and select the en dash. I'm seeing this refusal as simply a lazy unwillingness to correct an error, but it's out of my control I suppose, so I'm moving on, knowing that some day it will be fixed, if not by humans, then by a bot someone creates to fix these issues that people seem to consider too trivial or trifling to be bothered trying to fix. Thanks. Rowing007 (talk) 19:26, 10 October 2023 (UTC)
At nearly 300,000 edits on Commons, I don't think you can call me lazy. This is inconsequential, and therefore meaningless, work creation. Our efforts are better used elsewhere. --P 1 9 9  ✉ 19:33, 10 October 2023 (UTC)
Calling it "inconsequential, and therefore meaningless" is a gross mischaracterization of the issue, and deserves my description for this particular instance, regardless of the number of previous edits you may have... If Eliud Kipchoge were to suddenly act like a couch potato for no reason other than he "doesn't want to get up because it's 'inconsequential, and therefore meaningless'", it would indeed be accurate to call him lazy for that, despite his numerous athletic accomplishements. I hope you can see the analogy I'm trying to make; this is not a hard task, it's objectively correct, and if I would have had the ability to implement the change myself, I would have had no problem doing so, including cleaning up the 138 global articles that use the file. But, like I said, a bot will eventually take care of it, I'm sure, so I'm not worried that you're not taking this seriously. Best regards. Rowing007 (talk) 19:54, 10 October 2023 (UTC)

Commons:Deletion requests/File:Usagi 2018-11-24 1200.jpg followup

OK, so you decided to delete a small copy of a PD Nasa photo. I get that. But you didn't actually hide the photo, and the file page is now dysfunctional. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 10:11, 19 October 2023 (UTC)

Some glitch I assume... Now corrected. --P 1 9 9  ✉ 13:25, 19 October 2023 (UTC)

Protect a redirect from edition

Users have tried to change this redirect in the past and I suspect others will continously attempt to change it in the future. Changing this redirect breaks too many redirects, including ones used on WCommons to credits the author. This is why I am requesting for it to be protected it: only admins should be allowed to change this redirect, and this restriction should be indefinite. Thanks in advance. Veverve (talk) 20:17, 21 October 2023 (UTC)

Happy holidays!

   * Happy Holidays! *  
  • Merry Christmas! Happy New Year!
  • Joyeux Noël! Bonne année!
  • Frohes Weihnachten! Frohes Neues Jahr!
  • ¡Feliz Navidad y próspero año nuevo!
  • Щасливого Різдва! З Новим роком!

   -- George Chernilevsky talk 21:14, 22 December 2023 (UTC)  

Retrieved from "https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:P199/Archive_3&oldid=836885572"