User talk:Polarlys/Archiv5

From Wikimedia Commons, the free media repository
Jump to: navigation, search
Archive This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.


Bow Wow

Hi -

Can you explain why File:Bow Wow.png was marked as a copyright violation? I found it at where it was posted with a CC-BY license. I used TinEye to search for other copies of that photo, in case it was copied to Flickr from a copyrighted source, but was unable to find any. Tim Pierce (talk) 20:00, 15 May 2010 (UTC)

The one who requested the speedy deletion noted, that this is an “obvious promotional image” and I agree in this case. --Polarlys (talk) 21:23, 15 May 2010 (UTC)
I'm sorry, but I have to disagree. It may be that the photo was a copyright violation, but it is not at all "obviously" so when the photo has an explicit licensing tag and no promotional copy of the photo can be easily found. This should have been sent to Commons:Deletion requests. Would you be willing to undelete the photo so it can be submitted through that process? Tim Pierce (talk) 21:38, 15 May 2010 (UTC)
Some additions from my perspective:
Look at all the blurry puppy shots from an bird’s eye view. Then look at this photo. Same photographer?
Look at the licensing. All rights reserved., Some rights reserved., All rights reserved. Pretty random in my eyes.
Finally look at and Same shooting. Same clothing. Same style. Definitely not freely licensed. :) --Polarlys (talk) 22:35, 15 May 2010 (UTC)
PS: photographer Scott Gries, see --Polarlys (talk) 22:36, 15 May 2010 (UTC)
PPS: How did I find them? Just search for "bow wow" on Google Image Search and choose the optional color "red". --Polarlys (talk) 22:38, 15 May 2010 (UTC)
Thanks for following up on this. I didn't see any of these photos on the first few pages of Google Image results for Bow Wow -- if I had, I would not have uploaded the image. Tim Pierce (talk) 16:30, 16 May 2010 (UTC)
Sorry, Tim. But that image is more than obviously a copyright violation. Please don't be so gullible to believe every licence you see on flickr. There is the more than well-known fact that people collect images and many of them upload those they like best for others to see them. Flickr-users are no exception to that. But when you see a picture that is too good to be true than don't switch your brain off and take the easy way. No, you first check. In this case even a little check at the other contributions of that Flickr-user would have made you notice that the uploader is a teenage girl (my estimate is 16 years old) while the image was a professional shot. And if nothing else then this fact should have made you thinking. But for that you would need to be interested in actually wanting to see a copyright problem. -- Cecil (talk) 23:19, 15 May 2010 (UTC)
There is no need for you to be so rude. Tim Pierce (talk) 16:30, 16 May 2010 (UTC)
Just stating the facts. It is great when people try to illustrate Wikipedia articles but it seems that many of them do that no matter what and try to ignore all the signs. See a good image, one minute research and upload here. And later they tell it was not obvious. Sorry if you consider the truth as rude but maybe if you would have done any research you would not have to encouter it. -- Cecil (talk) 18:31, 16 May 2010 (UTC)


Hi there! I noticed you deleted File:Ajay-Devgan-LondonDreams01.jpg (log), which I had marked as a copyright violation. If I'm not mistaken, I pointed out that it was only the last two revisions uploaded by Shrikrishna 3 (talk · contributions · Move log · block log · uploadsblock user that should be deleted. Did you happen to miss that notice, or did you conclude that the original, overwritten version was also a copyvio? LX (talk, contribs) 19:15, 16 May 2010 (UTC)

I missed the notice, I think. --Polarlys (talk) 18:11, 4 June 2010 (UTC)

Civil War

Hello. I've seen that you have requested the deletion of some posters from the Spanish Civil War. The are some posters like this 30px that should be deleted because are signed works: the author of that work is José (or Josep) Bardasano, who died in 1979. But in the other hand, there are some posters that have no signature of their author, so they're anonymous, and as long as the SCW ended 71 years ago, they're in PD, like 30px -if there is a real way of proving it's authory, then should also be deleted if necessary- or 30px this. The poster of the farmers ladies and the "no pasarán" one are signed but I can't identify the author, so I don't know what should We do. --Coentor (talk) 10:46, 21 May 2010 (UTC)

„I don’t know the author“ ≠ anonymous work. Do some research and then tell us why these files are anonymous. --Polarlys (talk) 18:09, 4 June 2010 (UTC)
BTW: Commons:Deletion requests/File:S27.jpeg. On single internet search gives you a result, please don't use the license template this way. --Polarlys (talk) 18:15, 4 June 2010 (UTC)

Image "Shitala Devi (Hindu smallpox goddess).JPG" licence

I took this image from File:Chl329.JPG (in the English Wikipedia)
There is a free licence {{PD-self|date=January 2008}}, but I don't know how to reflect this licence here in Wikimedia Commons. I just change the file's name because Chl329 is not friendly.
--Rosarino (talk) 03:08, 23 May 2010 (UTC)

Hi! You did nothing wrong. The problem is, that there are a lot of unsourced images on (like this one). --Polarlys (talk) 19:21, 5 June 2010 (UTC)

Commons:Deletion requests/File:Азартные игры и пари.jpg

Hi, there were two more files nominated in that deletion request. You deleted only one. Renata3 (talk) 18:59, 5 June 2010 (UTC)

Thank you! :) --Polarlys (talk) 19:18, 5 June 2010 (UTC)


Hi! I'm not sure which image Finlandia.gif, which you deleted for copyright violation, was. Maybe you can explain how I violated copyright law, so that I can learn. In the future, I would appreciate a more detailed edit description, especially if you delete speedily and there is a risk that the uploader may not have the opportunity to check the picture before it's gone. Sincerely, --Jonund (talk) 20:33, 10 June 2010 (UTC)

The lyrics are from 1934 and still copyrighted. --Polarlys (talk) 00:17, 4 July 2010 (UTC)

Löschungen im Allgemeinen und im Besonderen

Hallo Polarlys!
Du hast kürzlich File:DB Museum Nürnberg - DB-Webeplakat "Für Sie bin ich immer da. Ihr Meer. Die Bahn fährt sie hin" der Deutschen Bundesbahn, um 1980.jpgDR und File:DB Museum Nürnberg - DB-Webeplakat "Go easy Go Bahn".jpgDR gelöscht. Die Begründung war jeweils "deleted". Kein "as per sycro" und/oder eine faktischer Begründung. Es wäre super, wenn Du künftig bei Löschaktionen eine genauere Begründung abgeben könntest. Ich hätte nämlich gerne etwas Sicherheit, damit ich nicht in Zukunft wieder umsonst tätig werde (Fotografieren, Hochladen). Könntest Du mir erklären, wieso die Werbeplakate der Deutschen Bundesbahn keine amtliches Werke sein sollen? Danke, --Mattes (talk) 19:16, 26 June 2010 (UTC)

Hallo! Vornweg: Ich formuliere kein Begründung, wenn dem Löschantragstext nichts hinzuzufügen ist oder zwischen verschiedenen Standpunkten abgewogen werden muss. Ob ich nun bei einer Löschdiskussion, die ausschließlich aus dem Antragstext besteht, nun „as per sycro“ schreibe oder nichts, ändert inhaltlich nichts. Der Grund für die Löschung war, dass es sich bei den Plakaten um kein amtliches Werk handelt. Weshalb sollten sie erfasst werden? Weil die DB ein Staatsunternehmen ist? Grüße, --Polarlys (talk) 00:14, 4 July 2010 (UTC)
Danke, das is OK. Ich denke, dass die DB bis in die 1980er Jahre ihre Plakate noch selbst gefertigt hat (Motiv, Sprüche usw.), außer die eigentliche Produtkion. Belegen kann ich das aber nicht. Sei's drum. Schönen Sommertag wünscht --Mattes (talk) 06:51, 10 July 2010 (UTC)

Files for deletion?

Hello, I see that on March 22, 2010, you have deleted the File:Buada Lagoon.jpg because the permission was considered insufficient. I also see that this file was actually one in a series of 21 photos uploaded by the same user, on the same day, February 20, 2007 (log), from the same website ([1]), with the same permission. The other 20 photos are still here. I'm guessing that logically they should be deleted for the same reason? if so, can you take care of that also, please? Thanks. -- Asclepias (talk) 20:17, 5 July 2010 (UTC)

Thank you for bringing this to my attention! Have a good weekend, --Polarlys (talk) 11:47, 24 July 2010 (UTC)

File:Map of Ethnic Groups in Afghanistan, by district.svg

Hi, I've come across this crazy looking map made with errors which goes against the 4 CIA ethnolinguistic maps. I was wondering if you can delete this now or leave a comment on it. I hate seeing maps made by users which contains missing ethnic groups. Thanks!--Officer (talk) 03:50, 6 July 2010 (UTC)

This map is not helpful but instead creating huge problems. Someone with political agenda created this map which washes away some ethnic groups and makes another group smaller and this leads to uprisings by some ethnic groups in Afghanistan when their leaders see this online. This is why deadly attacks on western forces in Afghanistan are on the rise because some of those Afghans think that they are being ethnic cleansed by the western armies. If you are a westerner, you are putting your own soldiers at risk.--Officer (talk) 20:11, 6 July 2010 (UTC)

I can’t decide in this case since I am not familiar with the content of the file. Thank you for understanding. --Polarlys (talk) 11:49, 24 July 2010 (UTC)


Hallo Polarlys, vorhin habe ich in o.g. Kategorie, die Unterkategorie Beckwithia eröffnet (en:List of the vascular plants in the Red Data Book of Russia#Ranunculaceae), um File:Gletscher-Hahnenfuß (Beckwithia glacialis, L. Á.Löve & D.Löve) 5782.JPG einzuordnen. Wenn dabei etwas schief gegangen ist, bitte ich Dich hiermit um delete. Danke und Gruß --Hedwig Storch (talk) 10:24, 16 July 2010 (UTC)

Was ist denn schiefgegangen? Viele Grüße, --Polarlys (talk) 11:49, 24 July 2010 (UTC)
Nichts, ein lieber Kollege hat meinen Nonsens wenige Minuten nach der "Tat" korrigiert. Gruß --Hedwig Storch (talk) 08:13, 27 July 2010 (UTC)

File:Über dem Dettifoss 6375.JPG, File:Reyðarfjörður 6448.JPG

Hallo Polarlys, ich bitte Dich um Delete der alten Versionen o.g. zwei Dateien. Gruß --Hedwig Storch (talk) 16:39, 29 July 2010 (UTC)

Against Nature

Hallo! I see you have again warned to delete the Against Nature photo. I am sorry I have not had the time to forward a permission for use to you, but I am on paternety leave, and do not have access to my work e-mail. I have been "out of circulation" for allmost half a year, and won't be back at work so that I can fix the permission ubntil late October. Please do not delete the file until I am back at work and can get the relevant permissions sent to you. --Petter Bøckman (talk) 10:30, 3 September 2010 (UTC)

Undeletion request

Just a heads-up that I've listed File:HarryJerome.jpg at COM:UNDEL as I do think that the image does qualify for freedom of panorama. Tabercil (talk) 20:31, 18 September 2010 (UTC)

It was my mistake, I am sorry. See my explanation at COM:UNDEL. Sorry to cause inconvenience. --Polarlys (talk) 10:06, 19 September 2010 (UTC)

Commons:Deletion requests/File:Musa-dagh.gif

Hello Polarlys,

File File:Musa-dagh.gif deleted in January 2010. Photos from have OTRS permission - {{GFDL-Armenica}}. Do you have any objection to restore this file (or maybe you prefer to do it by yourself)? Geagea (talk) 22:47, 5 October 2010 (UTC)

Please provide and author, otherwise GFDL is useless. --Polarlys (talk) 21:21, 17 October 2010 (UTC)

Not constructive

This is not constructive if you do not agree with the outcome of a DR. /Pieter Kuiper (talk) 20:56, 17 October 2010 (UTC)

It has no source. The template asks for a source. Add a source and remove the template. Add no source and the file will be deleted sooner or later since nobody can establish where this file is from and who created it. Where would you start? --Polarlys (talk) 21:12, 17 October 2010 (UTC)
A book by Vogel? For example: Als ich Hindenburg malte? /Pieter Kuiper (talk) 21:18, 17 October 2010 (UTC)
Not some random book, but the book the photo is taken from. Pieter, you are a clever guy and you most like speak some German. „malen“ and „photographieren“ are not the same. --Polarlys (talk) 21:19, 17 October 2010 (UTC)
Why would there not be photos in the book? /Pieter Kuiper (talk) 21:31, 17 October 2010 (UTC)
Why should I care if there is any book, when the uploader is not willing to tell me where the file is from? And yes, Vogel was a painter (a pretty old one, btw) and the question remains: Who took the photo and published it when and where? The book is no answer as long as the uploader doesn't help us. --Polarlys (talk) 21:33, 17 October 2010 (UTC)

COM:AN edit

[2] - please do that line 53 thing again. -mattbuck (Talk) 00:06, 18 October 2010 (UTC)

Do you want me to reproduce it? It's an error when using my user scripts with Safari :( --Polarlys (talk) 14:44, 18 October 2010 (UTC)
The bugzilla/mediawiki people may be interested. -mattbuck (Talk) 15:23, 18 October 2010 (UTC)
I will tell it Raymond sooner or later, I guess it's flaw of the script. Regards, --Polarlys (talk) 16:35, 18 October 2010 (UTC)

Derechso de autor

Hola Polarys. Todas mis imágenes no tienen derechos de autor por haber pasado más de 70 años desde su realización.Ealmagro (talk) 14:55, 20 October 2010 (UTC)

I don’t understand you, I am sorry. --Polarlys (talk) 21:41, 20 October 2010 (UTC)
Hi, ... ich dürfte? :-)
Er sagt, das keines seiner Bilder Urherber-rechtlich-geschützt sei. da diese wohl ziemlich alt sind ... (!?)
er hat ziemlich viele Tippfehler drinne, also nicht so einfach :D, naja wenn du antworten willst - kannst du mir den Link für die Bilder. posten, ich würde dann übernehmen oder Übersetzen :-) Gruss DaniSelorio (talk) 19:08, 26 October 2010 (UTC)

Vielen Dank! Leider weiß ich nichts über seine Bilder, da er sie ohne Angabe zur Herkunft hochlädt. Das ist das Problem. Grüße, --Polarlys (talk) 11:38, 29 October 2010 (UTC)

Takashi Ochi

Hallo Polarlys, das Bild stammt von einem Freund von mir, der es selbst erstellt und zur Verwendung in den Commons freigegeben hat. Ich habe nicht genau verstanden, welche Belege du noch brauchst. Genügt es, wenn ich das Bild auf meine Webpage hochlade, es mit einer Copyright-Erklärung versehe und dir den Link schicke? Agriculus (talk)

Und nochmal hallo. Die Lizenzfrage scheint doch ein wenig komplizierter zu sein als oben dargestellt. Nach meinem derzeitigen Kenntnisstand liegen die Nutzungsrechte bei der Familie Ochi, die mit einer Veröffentlichung unter cc prinzipiell einverstanden ist. (Das hatten wir natürlich geklärt, bevor wir das Bild hochgeladen hatten). Allerdings wurde das Foto von meinem Freund im Rahmen seiner beruflichen Tätigkeit erstellt und ich muss klären, ob die Nutzungsrechte von der Fotoagentur wirklich zu 100% an Ochi übertragen wurden. So kurz nach dem Tod kann ich die Familie aber nicht darauf ansprechen. Die Sache wird also sicher noch 2-3 Wochen bis zur endgültigen Klärung brauchen. Juristische Auseinandersetzungen sind also keine zu erwarten. Ich kann aber natürlich verstehen, wenn du es bevorzugen solltest, das Bild bis zur endgültigen Klärung erstmal offline zu nehmen. --Agriculus (talk) 08:45, 18 November 2010 (UTC)

Edit request

{{editprotected}} Hi. Back on 4 and 5 June 2007 (UTC), I made four posts here on User talk:Polarlys with transcluded sigs. They have been archived to User talk:Polarlys/Archiv1, which is fully protected (edit=sysop). All transcluded sigs have been nominated for deletion at Commons:Deletion requests/Transcluded user signatures per Commons:Signatures#Transclusion_of_templates and may be deleted soon, so I would like some assistance from you or one of your talk page stalkers in transcluding them. If it is too late to do that, please use my sig which follows instead. They all contain "{{User:Jeff G./sig". Thank you.   — Jeff G. ツ 03:59, 15 December 2010 (UTC)

✓ Done Has been already done by User:Leyo. --Mormegil (talk) 16:54, 23 December 2010 (UTC)

File:Marienkäfer 4088.jpg

Hallo Polarlys, in der deutschen Redaktion Biologie (16. Marienkäfer) wurde heute erwogen, mein o.g. Foto in die Leerstelle unten rechts in dem Bild File:Harmonia axyridis01.jpg einzufügen. Ich schaffe das nicht. Was kann ich tun? Gruß --Hedwig Storch (talk) 11:03, 19 December 2010 (UTC)

Fall erledigt. Gruß --Hedwig Storch (talk) 19:19, 19 December 2010 (UTC)


Hi! Happy New Year! I just came across Category:Undelete in 2011 and you deleted 2 files some time ago. You mentioned that author died in 1940 but files do not tell who the author is. Do you remember? If so perhaps you could add a note on the two photos. --MGA73 (talk) 13:33, 1 January 2011 (UTC)

Oh found it on another upload by that user. Hope it is ok now! --MGA73 (talk) 13:41, 1 January 2011 (UTC)
Hope so! Happy New Year to you, too! :) --Polarlys (talk) 00:10, 7 January 2011 (UTC)


Commons-emblem-issue.svg File:Leopard2A4.jpg has been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether it should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry.

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

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

  — Jeff G. ツ 11:02, 9 January 2011 (UTC)


I'm very sorry. I didn't know. I thought the uploads were on my watchlist. I will add them. I have terrible trouble uploading. I have to try repeatedly for even small files because of the Great Firewall of China. Most of the time, the connection gets cut by surveillance software and I have to go back and type in the info again. I forgot to add them to the watchlist the last time, I think. Please don't be angry. I am doing my best.
About answering the Liang Dehua question, I didn't know how else to answer. What else can I say? I asked her to take the photos because she lives by the station. She did. She emailed them to me and said I can use them any way I like. Commons:OTRS and all commons guidelines confuse many, many editors. I am doing my best to understand. Thank you for your help and sorry to make you angry. :) Anna Frodesiak (talk) 02:43, 12 January 2011 (UTC)
Hi Anna, you did not make me angry. :) The only thing I would advice you to do is asking your friend to send in the template you find under Declaration of consent for all enquiries via mail. And yes, this infrastructure for censorship sucks. --Polarlys (talk) 17:40, 12 January 2011 (UTC)


This image is made in 1940 and owner is we - VMRO organisation in Bulgaria, pleace recover pointed image. Mpb eu (talk) 17:39, 13 January 2011 (UTC)

Please provide proper source (When published, where published, who is the photographer) and if necessary a permission by the copyright owner. Thank you. --Polarlys (talk) 09:27, 14 January 2011 (UTC)

Is very dificoult

My english is short, if you no handestand spanish, and català, bath te web of Ejercito del Aire specific your public domain of this files (photografies) Thank yous. --Jbaropuig (talk) 17:12, 13 January 2011 (UTC)

Hi, we need to know the author (photographer) of these files. If he died in 1980, these images are still protected for 40 years! --Polarlys (talk) 00:24, 14 January 2011 (UTC)

FIrst Truck picture


I can understand deleting the Zaolzie picture to some extent (although it was 70 years after being taken, and at the same time the author was unknown, but OK, I can live with that), but deleting picture of First Truck which was taken in 1898 makes no sence to me. Cimmerian praetor (talk) 08:41, 14 January 2011 (UTC)

I don’t know when a picture was taken when there is no source provided. --Polarlys (talk) 09:26, 14 January 2011 (UTC)


Warum wurde dieses Foto trotz einer vorhandenen Erlaubnis, die ich an den jeweiligen Dienst weitergeleitert habe, gelöscht/ --Vysota1079 (talk) 20:37, 8 January 2011 (UTC)

Im Bild wurde keine solche Erlaubnis vermerkt. Du kannst nochmal bei dem damaligen Ansprechpartner nachfragen, falls sie ihm vorliegt und ausreichend ist, kann er die Datei wieder herstellen. --Polarlys (talk) 23:10, 8 January 2011 (UTC)
Wen meinst Du unter dem "damaligen Ansprechpartner"? Den Supportdienst? Ich habe von denen keine Antwort auf meine Email erhalten, und der User, der das Bild wegen der angeblich fehlenden Erlaubnis angezeigt hat, meinte, dies sei in Ordnung so, und die bräuchten schon ihre Zeit, um zu antworten, aber solange sie nicht geantwortet haben, wird das Bild hängen bleiben. Und jetzt ist das Bild trotz der vorhandenen Erlaubnis und der fehlenden Antwort (sprich: nichtbearbeiteten Erlaubnismail) gelöscht. Und diesmal erfahre ich sogar zufällig darüber. Was soll das? Ich kann das Bild natürlich auch wieder hochladen, doch ich denke, zuerst muss hier seitens Supportdienstes Klarheit geschaffen werden, und worüber sollte dieser Klarheit schaffen, wenn das Bild schon weg ist? Und wo im Bild sollte ich da etwas vermerken? Ich habe doch schon alle Felder ordnungsgemäß ausgefüllt und das Bild wurde direkt vom Rechteinhaber zur Verfügung gestellt. --Vysota1079 (talk) 01:09, 9 January 2011 (UTC)
Hallo! Folgendes: Wenn das System hier funktionieren würde, wäre das Bild schon länger gelöscht. Bitte mach mir keine Vorwürfe, dass ich hier „Altbestände“ abarbeite. Der Supportdienst kann das Bild sich auch anschauen, wenn es gelöscht ist und es auch wiederherstellen. Bitte nimm nochmal Kontakt mit dem OTRS-Team auf. Kann es eventuell sein, dass die Freigabe nicht ausreichend war? „speziell für Wikipedia“ (wie es auch in den anderen Dateien steht), ist eine Einschränkung, die mit dem Projektziel („freie Dateien für alle Zwecke“) nicht vereinbar ist. Mit „im Bild vermerken“ meine ich übrigens den Hinweis auf eine vorliegende Erlaubnis durch den Supportmitarbeiter. Viele Grüße, --Polarlys (talk) 18:13, 9 January 2011 (UTC)
Hallo! Vielen Dank für die Antwort. Das mit dem "speziell" war mehr meine Initiative, der Rechteinhaber haz diesbezüglich keine Bedingungen gestellt, so habe ich jetzt den Zusatz weggenommen. Aber ich habe vom Supportdienst auf meine Mail überhaupt keine Antwort erhalten, auch keine Bestätigungsmail. Deswegen denke ich, es hat nicht sehr viel Sinn, diesen anzumailen. Gibt es vielleicht eine andere Möglichkeit, auf eine irrtümlich gelöschte Datei aufmerksam zu machen? Ich glaube, ich habe so etwas gesehen, aber jetzt finde ich es leider nicht. :( --Vysota1079 (talk) 11:41, 17 January 2011 (UTC)
Ups, was ich nicht verstehe: ich habe doch den Zusatz weggemacht, und auf meiner Gallery-Seite erscheint der nicht mehr. Aber in den eingebundenen Fotos ist der immer noch zu sehen. Werden die nicht sofort mitaktualisiert? Und was muss ich jetzt tun? --Vysota1079 (talk) 11:51, 17 January 2011 (UTC)
Ich spreche dein Thema auf Commons:OTRS an, der Zusatz ist doch korrekt entfernt, wo taucht er noch auf? --Polarlys (talk) 14:35, 17 January 2011 (UTC)
Es wäre ganz nett von dir, vielen Dank! Der Zusatz taucht in verlinkten Bildern bei Wiki auf (zumindest sehe ich den immer noch). Muss ich jetzt alle Bilder rausnehmen und noch einmal stellen? --Vysota1079 (talk) 14:42, 17 January 2011 (UTC)

Hallo Polarlys, de:Fabian Windrich hattest du selbst gelöscht. In dem Zusammenhang fiel mir dieses Bild auf. Abgesehen davon, dass "Londoner Pressekonferenz" mir nicht zu diesen Steinen zu passen scheint, das DPA rechts unten entweder falsch oder urheberrechtlich bedenklich ist, weiß ich auch nicht so recht, was eine Enzyklopädie mit einem verpeilt im Gegenlicht dastehenden Heranwachsenden anfangen soll. Gruß --Hozro (talk) 09:32, 16 January 2011 (UTC)

Danke für den Hinweis. Das Bild sollte in keinem Buch zum Thema „Üble Phototechnik“ fehlen. :) --Polarlys (talk) 16:21, 16 January 2011 (UTC)


Hallo Polarlys, ich stimme mit Ihren Kommentaren, aber immer noch einige der gelöschten Dateien wirklich aus mir gemacht. Ich hoffe, Sie zu bitten, eine Datei wiederherstellen Ратанамали.PNG. Mit Respekt ВМНС. --ВМНС (talk) 10:31, 16 January 2011 (UTC)

But what about the design? --Polarlys (talk) 16:23, 16 January 2011 (UTC)
Sorry. Maybe I can not understand, but I hope to restore the file:Ратанамали.PNG. Image ratanamali has no author and is in my possession. --ВМНС (talk) 22:35, 16 January 2011 (UTC)

Re: File:Ramón_Sampedro_no_seu_leito.jpg

Ok, I'm think that you're right. It's a Flickr image of Certo Xornal, originally posted to Flickr as Ramón Sampedro no seu leito. I think now that the image can be a copyvio. Thanks--Miguel Bugallo 18:18, 17 January 2011 (UTC)

Успенская церковь (Ижевск)

auf welcher Grundlage wurde diese Datei gelöscht? - 1974год.JPG

  • Übersetzt von Google, Niveau der Sprachkenntnisse Babel -2 21:30, 18 January 2011 (UTC)
This was the reproduction of an unfree photo. --Polarlys (talk) 17:28, 20 January 2011 (UTC)

this is not a reproduction a photograph of the glass with blurred background.Other: this is public domain.please return.

  • translated by google knowledge babel - 18:51, 20 January 2011 (UTC)
Ok, who took the photo of the church? --Polarlys (talk) 18:52, 20 January 2011 (UTC)

File:Tjängvide image stone.jpg


IMO, when seeing this photo, it is not a flat painting but rather a 3D sculpture, and PD-Art can't apply. Du hast recht... Bibi Saint-Pol (sprechen) 21:26, 20 January 2011 (UTC)

Thank you for your opinion. Merci! --Polarlys (talk) 23:00, 20 January 2011 (UTC)

Bild Verschieben

Hallo Polarlys,

kannst du, da du ja Admin bist, bitte das Bild File:Suidakra live @ Ragnarök-Festival 2010 .jpg nach File:Suidakra live @ Ragnarök-Festival 2010 XIII.jpg verschieben? Ich bin beim Upload versehentlich zu früh auf die Return-Taste gekommen, so dass das Bild nun leider einen (basierend auf meiner Durchnummerierung) falschen Namen hat. Dankeschön! --Trollhead (talk) 21:47, 22 January 2011 (UTC)

Erledigt! --Polarlys (talk) 16:37, 24 January 2011 (UTC)

Logos and pictures

Hey there, I just wanted to let you know that all these pictures are from the fansite kit of the game Nadirim. You can check it. At the moment it might be an updated version of the fankit, but I have all the photos from there. File:Nomad_male.png, File:Twisted_Tribe_logo.jpg, File:Nadirim_inventory.png, File:Nadirim_logo.jpg, File:Twisted Tribe logo 2.jpg, File:Digital Reality Logo.jpg As I can see they were already deleted. (Manwith1plan (talk) 09:04, 28 January 2011 (UTC))


Hallo Polarlys! Da ich nur eher selten in der Wikipedia bin und noch seltener auf Commons, habe ich die Hinweise auf Probleme mit meinen Bildern verpasst, was schließlich durch die Löschung durch dich geführt hat. Da ich in allen drei Fällen selbst der Fotograf bin und das (vermutlich bzw. hoffentlich) auch angegeben habe und die gelöschten Dateien natürlich nicht mehr einsehen kann, verstehe ich ehrlich gesagt nicht, was der Löschgrund war. Es wäre schön, wenn du die Bilder wiederherstellen könntest, damit ich mögliche Unklarheiten beseitigen kann. --Elektroschrottsammler (talk) 23:41, 28 January 2011 (UTC)

Hallo! Die Bilder wurde einige Monate vor dem Upload hier unter (bspw. hochgeladen. Aufgrund der zeitlichen Diskrepanz und unterschiedlichen Autorangaben ging der Nutzer, der die Freigabe-Warnung einfügte, davon aus, dass sie hier nicht korrekt lizensiert wären. Kannst du dich dazu nochmal äußern, bevor ich die Bilder wiederherstelle? Danke und Gruß, --Polarlys (talk) 20:20, 2 February 2011 (UTC)
Ich verstehe, aber die vermeintliche Quelle ist meine Seite. Soll ich eine Mail an OTRS schreiben oder glaubst du mir auch so? Übrigens, muss man hier eigentlich unter Klarnamen arbeiten, um Bilder hochladen zu dürfen bzw. muss man den Klarnamen dabei angeben? Oder gilt das nur, wenn die Bilder auch woanders im Netz stehen? Ich bin nicht unbedingt scharf darauf, meinen Namen im Netz zu verbreiten, da ich auch gewerblich tätig bin. Ich hatte den Eindruck, dass ziemlich viele Bilder auf Pseudonyme lizenziert sind und dabei die Vertrauensbasis (also die Angabe "eigenes Bild") ausreicht. --Elektroschrottsammler (talk) 23:38, 10 February 2011 (UTC)
Das ist in der Regel auch so und du kannst weiterhin deine Anonymität wahren. Ich habe die Dateien wiederhergestellt. Wenn die Bilder unter einer anderen Autorenangabe im Netz zu finden sind, kann berechtigterweise der ursprüngliche Autor nachgefragt werden, insbesondere wenn die Bilder erst sekundär bei uns eingestellt wurden. In der Regel sind es auch Urheberrechtsverletzungen (Der Blick in die Metadaten ist oft erhellend. Hier haben es schon „eigene Werke“ in die Kandidatur für exzellente Bilder geschafft und es bedurfte erst eines versierteren Nutzers, der nach all den positiven Kommentaren darauf hinwies, dass der Autor ein Agentur-Photograph ist und das Bild einen Tag vor dem Hochladen auf auftauchte. Wir haben ein richtiges übles Problem damit. In deinem Fall bitte ich um Verständnis für die Umstände. Grüße und danke für deine Uploads, --Polarlys (talk) 17:35, 11 February 2011 (UTC)
Ja, dafür habe ich Verständnis, zumal ich es auch nicht witzig finden würde, wenn Dritte meine Bilder unter ihrem Namen hochladen würden. Danke für's Wiederherstellen! --Elektroschrottsammler (talk) 20:33, 11 February 2011 (UTC)


Hallo! Ich sehe die Diskussion weder hier, noch im Archiv. Wie steht es jetzt? --Vysota1079 (talk) 19:14, 2 February 2011 (UTC)

Ich weiß nichts neues, was sagt denn das OTRS-Team? --Polarlys (talk) 20:16, 2 February 2011 (UTC)


Du hast diese Datei "File:Nürnberg1945.02.12.jpg" aus urheberrechtlichen Bedenken heraus zur Löschung vorgeschlagen (so verstehe ich die Nachricht auf meiner Disk). Ich habe hier dazu Stellung genommen. -- Freud (talk) 09:26, 24 February 2011 (UTC)

Du hast das Bild mit Löschbaustein versehen, trittst aber nicht in die Diskussion ein. Das finde ich nicht so toll. -- Freud (talk) 03:02, 27 February 2011 (UTC)

Picture deletion

I see a couple of months you deleted the obviously free photo File:Yrigoyen (últimos años).jpg. That's so silly, I can't see it now but I'm sure it was properly categorized as "old", and "old" pictures does not have copyright in Argentina (as noted in the template). Niqueco (talk) 20:54, 9 March 2011 (UTC)


Hi Polarlys. You removed: File:OPAFIRE.jpg from the Opafire page. I own all rights to this image, and have attached a permission statement bellow as well as submit said permission statement to Wikimedia Commons. Please tell me what else I need to do to get this image restored?? -- Thanks in advance for your help!


I hereby assert that I am the creator and/or sole owner of the exclusive copyright of WORK "File:OPAFIRE.jpg"

I agree to publish that work under the free license

I, the copyright holder of this work, hereby publish it under the following licenses:
GNU head Permission is granted to copy, distribute and/or modify this document under the terms of the GNU Free Documentation License, Version 1.2 or any later version published by the Free Software Foundation; with no Invariant Sections, no Front-Cover Texts, and no Back-Cover Texts. A copy of the license is included in the section entitled GNU Free Documentation License.
w:en:Creative Commons
attribution share alike
This file is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 4.0 International, 3.0 Unported, 2.5 Generic, 2.0 Generic and 1.0 Generic license.
You are free:
  • to share – to copy, distribute and transmit the work
  • to remix – to adapt the work
Under the following conditions:
  • attribution – You must attribute the work in the manner specified by the author or licensor (but not in any way that suggests that they endorse you or your use of the work).
  • share alike – If you alter, transform, or build upon this work, you may distribute the resulting work only under the same or similar license to this one.

You may select the license of your choice.

: "Copyleft (Multi-license GFDL, all CC-BY-SA)"

I acknowledge that I grant anyone the right to use the work in a commercial product, and to modify it according to their needs, as long as they abide by the terms of the license and any other applicable laws.

I am aware that I always retain copyright of my work, and retain the right to be attributed in accordance with the license chosen. Modifications others make to the work will not be attributed to me.

I am aware that the free license only concerns copyright, and I reserve the option to take action against anyone who uses this work in a libelous way, or in violation of personality rights, trademark restrictions, etc.

I acknowledge that I cannot withdraw this agreement, and that the work may or may not be kept permanently on a Wikimedia project.

[ signed: March 11, 2011, Zachary Norman Engelleitner ] Indepthmusic (talk) 22:57, 11 March 2011 (UTC)


Hi Polarlys. You removed: File:OPAFIRE.jpg from the Opafire page. I own all rights to this image, and have attached a permission statement bellow as well as submit said permission statement to Wikimedia Commons. Please tell me what else I need to do to get this image restored?? -- Thanks in advance for your help!


I hereby assert that I am the creator and/or sole owner of the exclusive copyright of WORK "File:OPAFIRE.jpg"

I agree to publish that work under the free license

I, the copyright holder of this work, hereby publish it under the following licenses:
GNU head Permission is granted to copy, distribute and/or modify this document under the terms of the GNU Free Documentation License, Version 1.2 or any later version published by the Free Software Foundation; with no Invariant Sections, no Front-Cover Texts, and no Back-Cover Texts. A copy of the license is included in the section entitled GNU Free Documentation License.
w:en:Creative Commons
attribution share alike
This file is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 4.0 International, 3.0 Unported, 2.5 Generic, 2.0 Generic and 1.0 Generic license.
You are free:
  • to share – to copy, distribute and transmit the work
  • to remix – to adapt the work
Under the following conditions:
  • attribution – You must attribute the work in the manner specified by the author or licensor (but not in any way that suggests that they endorse you or your use of the work).
  • share alike – If you alter, transform, or build upon this work, you may distribute the resulting work only under the same or similar license to this one.

You may select the license of your choice.

: "Copyleft (Multi-license GFDL, all CC-BY-SA)"

I acknowledge that I grant anyone the right to use the work in a commercial product, and to modify it according to their needs, as long as they abide by the terms of the license and any other applicable laws.

I am aware that I always retain copyright of my work, and retain the right to be attributed in accordance with the license chosen. Modifications others make to the work will not be attributed to me.

I am aware that the free license only concerns copyright, and I reserve the option to take action against anyone who uses this work in a libelous way, or in violation of personality rights, trademark restrictions, etc.

I acknowledge that I cannot withdraw this agreement, and that the work may or may not be kept permanently on a Wikimedia project.

[ signed: March 11, 2011, Zachary Norman Engelleitner ] Indepthmusic (talk) 22:57, 11 March 2011 (UTC)

Category:Polarlys (ship, 1996)

Kanntest du diese Kategorie schon? ;-) --Túrelio (talk) 20:43, 26 March 2011 (UTC)

Aber sicher :) --Polarlys (talk) 07:10, 8 April 2011 (UTC)

You deleted the Sequoia Logo on 20 March 2011 citing copyright violation. My understanding was that logos are permitted and do not have copyright protection to be used provided they are un-altered. Can you please explain this deletion? Thanks so much. Greenshinobi (talk) 22:28, 20 April 2011 (UTC)

Hi, please see Commons:Licensing for details (search the page for "logo"). In short: Very simple designs (simple geometrical shapes e.g.) can be kept, others can’t. --Polarlys (talk) 21:06, 23 April 2011 (UTC)

Unblock User_talk:Animere?

This user that you blocked in 2007 has requested an unblock (claiming it was a different person). Perhaps it's been long enough to give him a second chance? --99of9 (talk) 13:13, 6 June 2011 (UTC)

Martin responded. --Polarlys (talk) 08:36, 7 June 2011 (UTC)

Verschieben? oder was?

Hi, du bist nun mal mein bevorzugter Ansprechpartner. Leider habe ich erneut Mist gemacht. Die von mir angelegte Kategorie Category:Oekhoven ist orthografisch falsch. Es müsste Category:Oekoven lauten , OHNE H. Als ich es bemerkte, stoppte ich die Kategorisierung der noch ausstehenden Bilder. Kannst du die Cat verschieben? Oder muss alles neu gemacht werden? Danke. --Peng (talk) 13:22, 6 July 2011 (UTC)

Kann ich meines Wissens nach nicht. Habe es schnell mal manuell gemacht, da konnte die falsche Kategorie gleich weg. Grüße, --Polarlys (talk) 16:16, 10 July 2011 (UTC)
Danke vielmals. Gruß.--Peng (talk) 10:15, 11 July 2011 (UTC)

Ein Wunder!

Hallo Polarlys, auf meiner Diskussionsseite hat sich ein geläuterter Vandale gemeldet und fragt an, ob zwei Dateien löschbar seien. Kannst du dich darum kümmern? Danke und Gruß --Hozro (talk) 20:06, 17 July 2011 (UTC)

Gelöscht und Links entfernt. Lupo 08:55, 18 July 2011 (UTC)
Danke! --Polarlys (talk) 19:42, 18 July 2011 (UTC)

File:Schlosskirche Meerholz Franz Neudeck.jpg

Hallo, die Datei ist trotz Verwendung plötzlich gelöscht worden. Wäre es nicht besser auf Copmmons eine Log-info unter dem alten Filenamen zu haben, damit die Weiternutzer es wissen. Wir haben heute leicht verzweifelt nach der Datei gesucht... MfG --Commander-pirx (talk) 14:07, 5 August 2011 (UTC)

Hallo, unter File:Schlosskirche Meerholz Franz Neudeck.jpg gibt es doch einen Log-Eintrag. Die Datei ist übrigens nicht „plötzlich gelöscht“ worden, sondern nachdem wochenlang nach einer Erlaubnis des Autors gefragt wurde, die leider nicht kam. Warum die Einbindung nicht entfernt hat, ist mir unbekannt. Viele Grüße, --Polarlys (talk) 09:48, 7 August 2011 (UTC)

Old book photos

Hello! All these photographs and scans of the old books (1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9 are strongly PD-Arts and doesn't need any proof. If you don't think so, you should delete all other my files. Nik1986 (talk) 16:34, 11 August 2011 (UTC)

As I pointed out before, these are no scans. These are photos of books. A scan of an old book page, which is in the public domain, is a two-dimensional reproduction and is (of course!) allowed. A modern photo of the whole book is copyrighted by the photographer. Please read Commons:When to use the PD-Art tag carefully:
{{PD-Art}} may be used by the uploader of a photograph taken by somebody else to assert that the photograph can have no independent copyright as it is simply a faithful reproduction of an old, public domain, two-dimensional work of art. The tag can be used on any such photograph regardless of the source country, following a poll in July 2008.
“When should the PD-Art tag not be used? (…) When the work of art shown in the photograph is in three dimensions”
See also these examples: Commons:When_to_use_the_PD-Art_tag#Photograph_of_an_old_sculpture_found_on_the_Internet.2C_or_in_a_book.
Best regards, --Polarlys (talk) 10:01, 15 August 2011 (UTC)

All picture delete

File:ATTOUGA.jpg , File:F.ROCCHEGIANNI.jpg , File:Doublé 1966-1967.jpg , File:Doublé 1972-73.jpg , File:Féthi Zouhir.jpg , File:Club Africain team 1930.jpg , File:Club africain 1958-1959 .jpg , File:Club africain.jpg , File:Mahmoud Mestiri.jpg je suis pas c est quoi le problem chaque fois un admin efface les j ai deja regler les problem avec les autre admin tu veut quoi toi ? les source sont des archives des photo tunisien t as compris et la licence c est ca Ce document a été placé dans le domaine public conformément à la loi tunisienne n°94-36 et ses modifications ultérieures. Au moins 50 ans sont passés depuis la prise de la photographie (50 ans après la mort de l'auteur pour les autres types de documents). Avant le 5 juillet 2009, le copyright pour les photographies était effectif durant 25 ans. Les photographies publiées avant le 5 juillet 1984 ont déjà été placées dans le domaine public.

t as compris non??? deja t as deja effacer les photo de Fichier:ATTOUGA.jpg et Fichier:GHOMMIDH.jpg pourquoi??? tu connait pas les licence ou quoi???? et aussi?? Fichier:CA 5- 1 EST.png ???? pourquoi finalement je dit t as des erreur rendre les photo sur la page ??? j ai deja disscuter avec une autre admin de ces photo ok?? bah tu cherche quoi?????--Adnen1985 (talk) 13:03, 15 August 2011 (UTC)

j ai deja des source the author you want change ? change but many picture with the user pic because is unknown ok look the anther page ok like esperance sportif de tunis ..... and etoile du sahel and club sportif sfaxien ?--Adnen1985 (talk) 13:04, 15 August 2011 (UTC)

ok j ai modifier les source et l auteur bas mnt rendre les autre photo qui t as deja effacer Fichier:ATTOUGA.jpg et Fichier:GHOMMIDH.jpg Fichier:CA 5- 1 EST.png pour changer les meme information ok?--Adnen1985 (talk) 13:15, 15 August 2011 (UTC)

Please add true source information (you are not the author, “archive” is no source at all). Thank you. --Polarlys (talk) 13:53, 15 August 2011 (UTC)

i add source how about the pic delete --Adnen1985 (talk) 07:50, 16 August 2011 (UTC) ???????????? i change source , the anther picture delete por what ??--Adnen1985 (talk) 15:08, 17 August 2011 (UTC) where are you ???--Adnen1985 (talk) 11:41, 18 August 2011 (UTC) ???????????????????????--Adnen1985 (talk) 12:46, 21 August 2011 (UTC)

Hi, thank you for adding source information. --Polarlys (talk) 19:05, 22 August 2011 (UTC)

but you have not delete the message above the pic infromation ??--Adnen1985 (talk) 12:35, 27 August 2011 (UTC) why you delete pictures??????????????????????????--Adnen1985 (talk) 00:45, 6 September 2011 (UTC)

Nathalie Lucas.jpg

Bonjour, pourquoi l'image de l'infobox de la page de Nathalie Lucas a été supprimé ? Le photographe m'avait donné son accord.. Merci d'avance --Anais89 (talk) 15:57, 24 August 2011 (UTC)

I am sorry, but I don’t understand French very good. --Polarlys (talk) 13:09, 25 August 2011 (UTC)

I'll try in English Why the picture (File:Nathalie Lucas.jpg) in the infobox of Nathalie Lucas' page was deleted ? The photographer said me he was okay, I can use his picture. --Anais89 (talk) 16:35, 25 August 2011 (UTC)

Ok, so he should send a permission to Commons:OTRS (take a permission from Commons:Email templates). Best regards, --Polarlys (talk) 12:09, 26 August 2011 (UTC)

Ok thanks, but just a last question. On the Declaration of consent on Commons:Email templates, the <LINK OR LOCATION> I have to insert is File:Nathalie Lucas.jpg or another link ? Thanks --Anais89 (talk) 14:26, 26 August 2011 (UTC)

As it says: The file name of the URL. By the way: not you should insert it, but the copyright owner/author. Thank you, --Polarlys (talk) 21:40, 26 August 2011 (UTC)

File:2001-2008 Société Générale tower, La Défense, Paris.jpg

Hello Polarlys,
I see that on 22 March 2010 you deleted the File:2001-2008 Société Générale tower, La Défense, Paris.jpg (log). I cannnot presently view the file or its description page, but it seems that it was probably a photo of the Granite tower of Société générale, of architect Christian de Portzamparc. As the photo was uploaded by User:Alanya Knowles, whose photos are officially authorized by that architect, in principle this photo should be covered by the permission of the architect received in 2008 through the OTRS ticket number 2008031910023091. From what I could gather from the discussion pages, it seems that the ticket authorizes the photos of Portzamparc buildings uploaded though the account User:Alanya Knowles (and through the account User:Portzamparc Francais, which exists on fr.wp). Here is the history of this photo. This photo (with others) was initially uploaded to the fr.wikipedia on 18 January 2008 by User:Portzamparc Francais and it was also uploaded on the Commons on 22 January 2008 by User:Alyana Knowles. On fr.wikipedia, at first, those photos were questioned for insufficient information and deleted, but after contact with the architect they were duly validated on 19 March 2008 to the satisfaction of everybody and restored and the OTRS template was added to the description page. Finally this photo was removed from fr.wikipedia on 23 July 2008 because the copy was already on the Commons. (log history at fr.wikipedia.) Then, the photo lived its normal and happy life on the Commons until 2010. On the Commons, I see that the deletion nomination that preceded the deletion did not mention the ticket at all, which is strange and doesn't help to know what happened. So, I don't know if the OTRS template was simply missing by mistake from the description page on Commons, or if the ticket somehow excluded this particular photo (that would be surprising), or if there was some other unknown problem. The most probable explanation is simply that in March 2008 when the OTRS template was added to the description page of the copy that was on fr.wikipedia, people forgot to add the OTRS template also to the description page of the copy that was on the Commons. Could you please look into this matter and, if you conclude that the photo is valid, as it probably is as far as I can guess, could you restore it please? Thank you in advance for your help. -- Asclepias (talk) 15:45, 13 September 2011 (UTC)

Hi, thank you for your explanation and sorry for the inconvenience. I most likely misunderstood the otrs permission or haven’t seen it – mea culpa. I restored the image, please have a look if everything is okay and contact me afterwards. Thank you and sorry again for the trouble, --Polarlys (talk) 17:43, 13 September 2011 (UTC)
Thank you, everything looks fine. (Ah, now I see in the restored file's history that I had transferred the information from the fr.wp description page to the Commons. Sometimes, I surprise myself.) (In the meantime, I noticed another file with apparently a somewhat related question, which caused me to ask a clarification at the OTRS noticeboard.) -- Asclepias (talk) 18:38, 13 September 2011 (UTC)

Re: File:Logo Cai Club Alpino Italiano Stemma.png

Hi, the image File:Logo Cai Club Alpino Italiano Stemma.png should be deleted. It was my error when I did not know rules and I just forgot it. I will upload it on wikipedia in fair use.

For the other images I'm searching a solution and I need help: For Italy (all images are published first time in Italy, and all people is italian) copyright for non artistic images is 20 years (Template:PD-Italy) but if I use pd-italy someones tell me that i can't because the pictures were not taken in the italian territory. So I used pd-pakistan but you tell me that I can't because the pictures was published in Italy and because people in the pictures was italians. So, there is a solution? I should use pd-Italy? I should use pd-Pakistan? I should use both? If there's not solutions thank you anyway. Regards. Rupertsciamenna (talk) 11:18, 15 September 2011 (UTC)

P.S. sorry for my english
I've solved with another user, thank you anyway. See you! Rupertsciamenna (talk) 14:23, 15 September 2011 (UTC)
Hi. About PD-1996 all pictures were taken in the 50s, so it was not copyrighted at the URAA date of restoration (Jan 1 1996), so it is in the public domain also in the USA. Guideline say: wasn't in copyright in the United States due to being registered for copyright there (see Commons:Copyright tags#United States for most cases) and was created prior to 1976 — then it was out-of-copyright in Italy on the URAA date of restoration (January 1, 1996) (17 U.S.C. § 104A). If so, please add {{PD-1996}}.
(In german: es fällt nicht unter das Urheberrecht der USA; es wurde dort nicht separat für einen Schutz registriert (siehe Commons:Copyright tags#United States für die meisten Fälle) und es wurde vor 1976 erstellt — dann ist es außerhalb des Urheberrechts bezüglich der der URAA-Erneuerung (1. Januar 1996) (17 U.S.C. § 104A). In diesem Fall, füge bitte {{PD-1996}}
Thank you. Rupertsciamenna (talk) 08:20, 19 September 2011 (UTC)

Betr.: Category:Georg-Bücher Schule (Frankfurt am Main)

Da hat wohl der Einsteller einen Schreibfehler produziert. Leider kann ich es nicht verschieben, aber du. Bitte ändere die Kat in de:Georg Büchner. Vielen Dank. --Peng (talk) 11:56, 25 September 2011 (UTC)

Hm, bist wohl in Urlaub? Ich hebe jetzt einfach eine neue cat angelegt und du müsstest die alte nur noch löschen. --Peng (talk) 09:46, 27 September 2011 (UTC)
War schon weg. Bin derzeit wenig aktiv. Viele Grüße! --Polarlys (talk) 12:13, 28 September 2011 (UTC)

File:John Marburger.jpg

Hi Polarlys, this image was taken in an official capacity at a U.S. government sponsored conference and published on a U.S. government website. Under U.S. law, works of the federal government are ineligible for copyright and are thus automatically in the public domain, and need no explicit permission. If this rationale is incorrect or if there is some Commons policy I'm unaware of, please let me know. Antony-22 (talk) 18:25, 8 October 2011 (UTC)

Hi anthony! I am aware of PD-GOV, but in this case we don’t know for sure if they were created in the meaning of the license, please see --Polarlys (talk) 14:28, 9 October 2011 (UTC)

Commons:Deletion requests/Clip-ons by Ksana555

You've deleted files. Please, close their deletion request. Dmitry89 (talk) 11:31, 29 November 2011 (UTC)

Thank you for your reminder! :) --Polarlys (talk) 15:15, 29 November 2011 (UTC)

Need Help

Hi Polarlys,

I am trying to add an image for a famous personality from our state. He is a movie actor, leader, and youth icon and is an inspiration to many people. I added image at the below link. Though I accept that this image was taken from random internet image, I want to know if there is any process to resolve this. I'm not trying to do anything illegal here, but my image was marked for deletion due to copy right tags missing issues. I am completely new to this wiki coding and I couldn't find relevant information to understand how to add copy right tags and all. I would be very glad if you can help me on this. Thanks in advance.

You can’t upload images from the internet (this statement is true for 99,98 % of all images out there, except they are really old or freely licensed. See for details: File:Licensing_tutorial_en.svg and Commons:Licensing.)
Find an image, contact the creator, ask him if he is willing to upload it with a permission like this: COM:OTRS. Don’t upload it against his will or ask for a permission after uploading it. Regards, --Polarlys (talk) 08:45, 2 December 2011 (UTC)

deletetion of File:Liat Timor.jpg

Hello, I have restored this image and added an OTRS template to this image, but from some reason you have deleted it 2 hours and 3 minutes later, why? if this is a mistake please restore or let me know and I will restore it. Thanks matanya talk 07:05, 2 December 2011 (UTC)

Well, there is an insufficient OTRS permission and a request for speedy deletion. I undeleted it for now, although I am skeptical about this user’s uploads and their permissions. Regards, --Polarlys (talk) 08:48, 2 December 2011 (UTC)

Deletion Request: Neisseria Meningitidis

Hi Polarlys,

I'm the Acting Editorial Manager for PLoS Medicine. I'm sorry but we've put in a deletion request for the image you added to wikimedia commons. It came to light this image was rights managed not CCAL. Issues like this are extremely rare at PLoS (this is the first occasion I have encountered) and we have acted swiftly to rectify this. Please still feel free to make use of PLoS' Open Access content. Katie Hickling:

Hi Katie, thank you for bringing this to my attention. I deleted the image and replaced it in an article. I am sorry for the circumstances, best regards, --Polarlys (talk) 15:31, 7 December 2011 (UTC)

Big Bang pictures

So CC-BY is not allowed on Commons? Lee Jaewon (Talk) 23:19, 29 November 2011 (UTC)

Only if it is not restricted. --Polarlys (talk) 15:32, 7 December 2011 (UTC)

Deletion: Sebastiane estatua.jpg

Hello. I think you have deleted a picture created by us. We are a gay association we give a film award in a Film Festival in Spain. The picture deleted was made by us and this is a statue made for us, paid for us and we are the owners of the rights. Please, what should we do this picture to be restablish?. Thank you very much.

Hi, please send in a permission via COMMONS:OTRS. Please understand that we need such a permission to prevent copyright violations. Thank you, --Polarlys (talk) 19:51, 9 December 2011 (UTC)

Deletion of many files

After I have posted a message on the Village pump you deleted many files of Keith Coventry. Thanks for that. Now I came accross uploads of user Vcolliga. On his talk page I questioned the copyright. No answer received. Recently new images have been uploaded. I have nominated a few images for deletion because I found them on the website of Ricado Bofill or elsewhere with a clear copyright message. I would like to nominate all images uploaded by this user that have "Bofill" in the name for deletion. How can that be done in the easiest way or can you do that? Regards, Wouter (talk) 20:02, 9 December 2011 (UTC)

Hi Wouter! This is kind of strange. The uploader uses several accounts (, for adding these images to Some former accounts have been blocked some years earlier. Some images are from Hedrich-Blessing (e.g. We also have every camera manufacturer but strangely the date from EXIF data and the file information template are the same. Maybe he is “so advanced” that he reads them before uploading images (have seen this before). The copyright status is also set to "public domain" although no image is uploaded under this license here. If you ask me: Somebody who is quite obsessive about these photos tries to fool us. I could easily nuke them (Special:Nuke) but I think you should open a request for deletion and copy the file list there. There is no easy way :-/ --Polarlys (talk) 20:30, 9 December 2011 (UTC)
Thanks Polarlys. I did the deletion request for all the files. Regards, Wouter (talk) 09:10, 10 December 2011 (UTC)

File:Daisy Fuentes.jpg

Hi, I'm a little confused as to what happened with File:Daisy Fuentes.jpg. It appears[3] that you deleted this file, than restored the text for the image description, but not the file itself. I believe a uploaded a valid PD image in 2006, produced by an employee of the US government. However, somebody seems to have recently uploaded a copyvio on top of it, and that caused both files to now be deleted. --Rob (talk) 10:39, 10 December 2011 (UTC)

I restored only the page after the deletion, not the file. Sorry for the confusion. Should be fine now. Sorry again for the circumstances. --Polarlys (talk) 10:59, 10 December 2011 (UTC)

Commons:Deletion requests/File:Rajni-Aamir.jpg

Hey, You'd closed this DR a short while ago. I was going to submit the Flickr account to User:FlickreviewR/bad-authors as all images that I checked on that account were web grabs wrongly released as CC-BY, however since you closed the DR I can't get to the Flickr account (didn't bother saving the link!). Could you check it and add to the bad-authors? There are some good images that are likely to be reuploaded by unsuspecting editors. cheers. —SpacemanSpiff 04:31, 12 December 2011 (UTC)

Done! Thank you and sorry for the circumstances. --Polarlys (talk) 10:48, 12 December 2011 (UTC)
Thank you, no worries, just been cleaning up Indian actor image uploads, so I was slow! —SpacemanSpiff 11:15, 12 December 2011 (UTC)

File : Logo_beta.jpg

hello Polarlys I would like to know why this file was deleted. Indeed it's our logo and it was developed by our designer. So why I haven't rights on it ? Thanks

Hi! We simply don’t know this. Everyday people upload copyrighted images from companies. Most of them are deleted with respect to their copyright owners. If you disagree with the deletion, please use the procedure described at COM:OTRS to give us permission to display your uploads. Thank you for your understanding. --Polarlys (talk) 10:51, 12 December 2011 (UTC)

Lack of permission

You marked File:Ifealogo-couleur.jpg as lacking a licence permission. I think that the logo is too simple to be eligible for copyright. You can discuss the matter at Commons:Deletion requests/File:Ifealogo-couleur.jpg. --Stefan4 (talk) 11:49, 13 December 2011 (UTC)

Ok, --Polarlys (talk) 11:59, 13 December 2011 (UTC)

Wieder mal ne Löschung

Hi, zufällig fiel mir DIESE Kategorie auf , sie ist wohl überflüssig (hatte sich wohl jemand verschrieben) und kann gelöscht werden. Danke. --Peng (talk) 09:34, 16 December 2011 (UTC)

Da war jemand schneller als ich. Grüße, --Polarlys (talk) 13:21, 19 December 2011 (UTC)

plz close it

here--Алый Король (talk) 14:24, 19 December 2011 (UTC)

Dubious Azeri photos

File:Hindbaku.jpg and other work by User:Viggenblog are extremely dubious. Trying to watch the Azeri military articles on En:wiki, I've been concerned about them for some time. Would it be possible for you to take a look? Buckshot06 (talk) 15:57, 30 December 2011 (UTC)

Hi, I’ll have a look. --Polarlys (talk) 02:18, 31 December 2011 (UTC)

Copyright violation

You marked File:Skyline2HCMC.jpg as a copyright violation. Could you please say why? Because the file is still on English Wikipedia. Actually it would be helpful if you could tag English Wikipedia images you see as copyright violations on English Wikipedia so that they aren't still around. Magog the Ogre (talk) 00:10, 31 December 2011 (UTC)

Hi, it was an unfree flickr image. --Polarlys (talk) 02:17, 31 December 2011 (UTC)

It's not related to w:File:Skyline2HCMC.jpg? Magog the Ogre (talk) 03:31, 31 December 2011 (UTC)

It is the same image, taken from --Polarlys (talk) 11:43, 31 December 2011 (UTC)

File:Christian Weilers.jpg

Hallo Polarlys, was die IP hier schrieb, scheint mir nach 5 Minuten Rumsuchen plausibel zu sein. Vermutlich hat sie mich angesprochen, weil ich Footballchamp96 auf DE gesperrt hatte. Guten Rutsch --Hozro (talk) 16:10, 31 December 2011 (UTC)

Jan Stempel by Jan Tesar

Hi! The uploader Tesarjan is Jan Tesar - the partner of architect w:cs:Jan Stempel. Images are taken from I requested deletion of images made by other authors (Pavel Štecha, Ivan Němec, Iveta Kopicová) and with no OTRS permission. Photographs by Jan Tesar himself seems to be o.k. --Gampe (talk) 09:36, 1 January 2012 (UTC)

Thank you. --Polarlys (talk) 23:05, 1 January 2012 (UTC)

speedy deletion

While I had contradicted the speedy deletion of File:Banisadr.pdf, you deleted it and I found no obvious explanation in the edit summary. Could you please explain why you deleted that file? Thanks. AMERICOPHILE 06:28, 2 January 2012 (UTC)

There was a request for speedy deletion, if you disagree, please place your comment on the file’s page. I deleted the file since there were no information supporting the given license. I opened a regular RfD now. Regards, --Polarlys (talk) 11:40, 2 January 2012 (UTC)
Thanks for restoring it. As far as I know the speedy deletion tag reads: "If you think that the file does not meet the criteria for speedy deletion, please explain why on its talk page." And on Wikipedia anyone (except the user who created it) can remove the speedy deletion tag but apparently not on Commons. AMERICOPHILE 12:01, 2 January 2012 (UTC)
I am sorry for the circumstances, but talk pages are often forgotten here since you don’t find anything useful there in a lot of cases :-/ --Polarlys (talk) 14:17, 2 January 2012 (UTC)

Ich bin damit nicht einverstanden.

Ich habe Bild von "Rau, Johannes (2007). Der Berg-Karabach-Konflikt zwischen Armenien und Aserbaidschan. Verlag Dr. Köster. pp. 89. ISBN 978-3-89574-629-1.; Mamedov Y,/ Shukurov K. Real history, facts, documents, Baku 2005, S.35." kopiert. Von wem sollte ich genehmigung bekommen? Ich habe diese Autor zitiert und möchte Bild auch darstellen.--MrArifnajafov (talk) 09:31, 2 January 2012 (UTC)

1978 hat jemand dieses Photo gemacht. Er ist der Autor. Es ist egal, wieviel Informationen du angibst, wenn du nicht das Recht hast, das Bild hier hochzuladen. Du bist auch nicht der Autor.
Somebody created this photo 34 years ago. It is by no means in the public domain and you are not the author. --Polarlys (talk) 11:37, 2 January 2012 (UTC)

Deleted Image

Hi, I've just uploaded File:Cilantro y Perejil Poster.jpg and you deleted it. Could you say why? I'm the owner of that image, and I do poses the wrights of it. It will be great to have it back!

If you are the copyright holder, please send a written permission according to COM:OTRS, --Polarlys (talk) 18:16, 7 January 2012 (UTC)

Removed Picture

You removed a picture I uploaded of Steve Sailer (Steve_Sailer.jpg). I got permission from the subject himself to place that picture into CC-BY-SA. I thought I had placed it under that when I uploaded it, but maybe I forgot -- anyway, I cannot tell now since the removal seems to have entirely removed all evidence of it. I want that photo to exist for the wiki entry. Can you undelete it? Is re-uploading it making sure to mark it as CC-BY-SA acceptable at wiki commons? Leonard Dickens (talk) 20:58, 6 January 2012 (UTC)

Hi! The source you provided ( said nothing about a free license. The image’s description looked at it has been uploaded without the copyright owner’s consent. We need a written permission for such photos, please see Commons:OTRS. Please note: We need a permission by the author/copyright owner, this is only in a few cases the displayed person. --Polarlys (talk) 21:32, 6 January 2012 (UTC)
Hi, same for me: you deleted File:Magic Johnson 1987 Lipofsky.jpg...I provided the same informations written in all the pictures in Category:Photographs by Steve Lipofsky, so what's the problem with that image? O.o --Delfort (talk) 02:13, 8 January 2012 (UTC)
I haven’t seen the others but this is copyrighted without a free license ( Regards, --Polarlys (talk) 12:55, 8 January 2012 (UTC)
I had a look and as far as I know these photos were uploaded by Steve Lipofsky himself, I don’t know if it is okay for him to upload other photos by him. --Polarlys (talk) 13:28, 8 January 2012 (UTC)
No Polarlys, I uploaded from as all the other files in Category:Photographs by Steve Lipofsky, and on that web page I read: Photos available for editorial and commercial usage; I am not a copyvioler, so that warning on my page is not correct, I think. I just uploaded a file in the same way all the files in that category have been uploaded till now! Let me know please ;) --Delfort (talk) 15:08, 8 January 2012 (UTC)
The photos in the category were uploaded by the photographer himself. We have no idea what Photos available for editorial and commercial usage means, it is no permission or even a free license. All in all these photos are sold and when you click on a photo on the webpage twice you can read Copyright © 2012 All Rights Reserved. Unauthorized reproduction prohibited by law. I don’t want to blame your for anything, since this is confusing situation. But the photos we have so far were uploaded by the photographer and he hasn’t allowed us to upload more of his work. --Polarlys (talk) 15:19, 8 January 2012 (UTC)
Thank you very much for your answer, now I understand; I'll try to write to the photographer to ask him to upload the file. Last question: am I allowed to remove that warning on my page? As I said (and as you can see from my edits) I'm not a copyvioler, and it's clear that this situation has born from a misunderstanding. --Delfort (talk) 15:28, 8 January 2012 (UTC)
Thank you, you have been very kind; and thank you for the clarity in the explanation. Have a nice day, hope to work with you again on commons! --Delfort (talk) 16:05, 8 January 2012 (UTC)

Why was my pictures still deleted after I showed proper usage rights?

Please explain to me why you still deleted my pictures after I provided the proper media usage rights? Here is what I provided so please explain why you removed them anyway?

The Venom picture was originally created and copy-written for Marvel Comics. There is a public license agreement stating that as long as the image is "NOT" being used for business advertising to get or potentially get monetary gain it can be recreated for personal non-profit use. The link going to a "copy" of the original picture is on a site called which is owned by a company named SoEntertain.Me (Copyright - Daily Comic News. Copyright SoEntertain.Me. All Rights Reserved.)

The Owner and CEO of SoEntertain.Me is Paul Keller. He can be contacted by e-mailing him to this address;

He will verify they do not own or hold copyrights to my image or the original created for Marvel Comics. Please always remember when a version of an image is hosted somewhere that doesn't mean the site or its parent company owns it.

Zeddicus Zorander 88

This Is Proper Information Showing I'm Not Violating Someones Copyright Or Breaking Any Laws! Here are the deleted file paths for you to reference;

Zeddicus Zorander 88

This is a copyright violation, please see Commons:Licensing. These files are „All Rights Reserved“, not released under a free license, they can be used for personal non-profit use only. This is not enough for Wikipedia. Please read Commons:Licensing and stop uploading unfree images. Thank you, --Polarlys (talk) 13:54, 8 January 2012 (UTC)

Proof From The Marvel Comics Website Itself

Link to the information stated below =

Please tell me again that I'm violating their copyright or doing something wrong!! and I quote

" Infringement claims

If you are aware or suspect any persons infringing on the intellectual property of Marvel, please contact and describe the suspected infringement. Please be as detailed as possible so that the claim can be investigated properly. Please also provide as much information as possible on the suspected infringer (ex. name, address, website, e-mail, phone number).

Such examples of intellectual property infringement are:

   Unlicensed merchandise using Marvel's characters or names
   Unapproved commercial use of Marvel characters or trademarks
   Counterfeit products
   Illegal copies of Marvel material being sold or distributed."
Here is a copy of the e-mail I just sent them seeing as I've been a member of their site for over 10 years and a fan all my life. If you like I'll ask them to contact you here personally so you'll see I'm not lying. So as you can see they have ALL my personal information so its not I can run and hide.
I've been a Spiderman fan ALL my life and a registered user and customer here for better than 10 years now. I even still have most of my comics including the 1st Edition and 1st Print of "Peter Parker; The Spectacular Spiderman" Anyway, I used one of the pictures of Peter Parker back in the symbiote suit and changed it around to something I thought was really cool and looked great. Yau'll give this picture away free as a wallpaper for fans, which I am obviously. I wasn't trying to use it for anything commercial or any type of monetary gain. I was using it as a profile picture on my Wikimedia Commons User Profile Page. No personal gain whatsoever besides the satisfaction of thinking how awesome it looked. Here is what your own website says and I even explained all this to the people who still deleted the picture.

""Infringement claims

If you are aware or suspect any persons infringing on the intellectual property of Marvel, please contact and describe the suspected infringement. Please be as detailed as possible so that the claim can be investigated properly. Please also provide as much information as possible on the suspected infringer (ex. name, address, website, e-mail, phone number).

Such examples of intellectual property infringement are:

   Unlicensed merchandise using Marvel's characters or names
   Unapproved commercial use of Marvel characters or trademarks
   Counterfeit products
   Illegal copies of Marvel material being sold or distributed.""

If I'm wrong I apologize for wasting everyone's time but, please explain this to me! Marvel gave it to me as a free wallpaper download and I used as a picture on my "personal" wikipage because I think its just that durn cool looking.

Sincerely, James aka Zeddicuss Zorander 88

Hi James,
Please read Commons:Licensing#Acceptable_licenses:
All copyrighted material on Commons must be licensed under a free license that allows anyone to use the material for any purpose. In particular, the license must meet the following conditions:
  • Republication and distribution must be allowed.
    Publication of derivative work must be allowed.
    Commercial use of the work must be allowed.
There is no such thing like “only for personal use” on Wikipedia.
Is a work licensed under a free license we can do anything we want and can keep it here.
Is it not licensed this way and its usage is restricted (e.g. “personal use”, “noncommercial”, “education purposes only”, “for press use”) we cannot. --Polarlys (talk) 16:39, 8 January 2012 (UTC)

"File talk:I'll Come For You On A Dark & Stormy Night.gif"

(Deletion log); 13:39 . . Polarlys (talk | contribs)‎ deleted "File talk:I'll Come For You On A Dark & Stormy Night.gif" (copyright violation, see Commons:Licensing) (Deletion log); 13:38 . . Polarlys (talk | contribs)‎ deleted "File:I'll Come For You On A Dark & Stormy Night.gif" (copyright violation, see Commons:Licensing) (Deletion log); 13:36 . . Polarlys (talk | contribs)‎ deleted "File talk:Lets Play.jpg" (copyright violation, see Commons:Licensing) (Deletion log); 13:36 . . Polarlys (talk | contribs)‎ deleted "File:Lets Play.jpg" (copyright violation, see Commons:Licensing)

Here is my information directly from backing up everything I've been trying to tell people along with a copy of the e-mail I sent to their legal department as well.

Link to the information stated below =

Please tell me again that I'm violating their copyright or doing something wrong!! and I quote

" Infringement claims

If you are aware or suspect any persons infringing on the intellectual property of Marvel, please contact and describe the suspected infringement. Please be as detailed as possible so that the claim can be investigated properly. Please also provide as much information as possible on the suspected infringer (ex. name, address, website, e-mail, phone number).

Such examples of intellectual property infringement are:

   Unlicensed merchandise using Marvel's characters or names
   Unapproved commercial use of Marvel characters or trademarks
   Counterfeit products
   Illegal copies of Marvel material being sold or distributed."
Here is a copy of the e-mail I just sent them seeing as I've been a member of their site for over 10 years and a fan all my life. If you like I'll ask them to contact you here personally so you'll see I'm not lying. So as you can see they have ALL my personal information so its not I can run and hide.
I've been a Spiderman fan ALL my life and a registered user and customer here for better than 10 years now. I even still have most of my comics including the 1st Edition and 1st Print of "Peter Parker; The Spectacular Spiderman" Anyway, I used one of the pictures of Peter Parker back in the symbiote suit and changed it around to something I thought was really cool and looked great. Yau'll give this picture away free as a wallpaper for fans, which I am obviously. I wasn't trying to use it for anything commercial or any type of monetary gain. I was using it as a profile picture on my Wikimedia Commons User Profile Page. No personal gain whatsoever besides the satisfaction of thinking how awesome it looked. Here is what your own website says and I even explained all this to the people who still deleted the picture.

""Infringement claims

If you are aware or suspect any persons infringing on the intellectual property of Marvel, please contact and describe the suspected infringement. Please be as detailed as possible so that the claim can be investigated properly. Please also provide as much information as possible on the suspected infringer (ex. name, address, website, e-mail, phone number).

Such examples of intellectual property infringement are:

   Unlicensed merchandise using Marvel's characters or names
   Unapproved commercial use of Marvel characters or trademarks
   Counterfeit products
   Illegal copies of Marvel material being sold or distributed.""

If I'm wrong I apologize for wasting everyone's time but, please explain this to me! Marvel gave it to me as a free wallpaper download and I used as a picture on my "personal" wikipage because I think its just that durn cool looking.

Sincerely, James aka Zeddicuss Zorander 88

Simply read Commons:Licensing#Acceptable_licenses Thank you, --Polarlys (talk) 16:56, 8 January 2012 (UTC)

Deleted file:Dhwani 09.jpg

The image is taken by me.So how can it be copyright violation. pls undelete the file. Abilngeorge (talk) 16:51, 8 January 2012 (UTC)

I won’t restore it, since it was taken from the internet. --Polarlys (talk) 16:57, 8 January 2012 (UTC)

File source is not properly indicated: File:Dhwani 06.jpg, File:Dhwani 04.jpg

Above files are photos taken by me.So there no is missing information about where it comes from or who created it. Abilngeorge (talk) 17:43, 8 January 2012 (UTC)

Like the other files you uploaded from some webpages … --Polarlys (talk) 22:51, 8 January 2012 (UTC)

Dispute - I like to have resolved

Hi Polarlys,

(Dansk? Norsk?)

At January 18, 2010 User Kliek changed the name of the author from Vijverln to Kliek without having any visible upload of the origional or a derivate work of File:A4_RIJSWIJK.JPG. In the History of the file you can check this.

So on January 6th, 2012 I revert that edit to it's (So I claim) rightfull owner, vijverln. In the edit-statement i place: No Idea why he claims the copyrights as i can't see why he does this edit.

Yesterday User Robotje reverted my edit, without any comment, which I revert with: Check the history Robotje. He just put his name there.

He changes it back again with: If you have no idea, don't revert things. this refers to my comment of my initional revert. This is ofcourse a lame excuse. He still doesn't provide any evidence that my edit is wrong. Therefor I write on his diskussionpage why I reverted the (in my opinion) false claim by Kliek, and that he shouldn't start an editwar. I also revert the latest revert by Robotje refering to his diskussionpage.

Robotje undid my revert again with the comment:

Come on, Rodejong, first of all you did so far 3 reverts on that page (although over a period of about 50 hours) of which the last two were today with only a few hours in between, while I only did 2 reverts on that page with more than 40 hours in between. So if somebody is about to start an edit war, it is you. And why? If you did a little better your best you would have known your statement above about Kliek is a false statement (ever heard about "You must not testify falsely as a witness against your fellowman"?). So if you have no idea why Klied changed it (see "No Idea why he claims the copyrights"), please don't edit that page and leave it to people who obviously know about this so much better than you do.

Who starts the edit war is not the issue. My issue with Robotje is, that he didn't give any clear reason why my revert of the authors name was wrong (If it was) and plays on the statement that I make: No Idea why he claims the copyrights. However, I have clearly stated why I did that edit afterwards to him on these two occasions, which h chooses to ignore.

So therefor I ask of you if someone neutral could shed a light on this issue. Maybe you can see something I have overlooked or we're not able to see.

I would appreciate it if this could be resolved.

Kind regards,

--Rodejong (talk) 23:42, 8 January 2012 (UTC)

Although Rodejong states "So on January 6th, 2012 I revert that edit .." the page linked with the 'I revert' text was not his edit but mine on a different page. That mistake is rather typical to the way this kind of Rodejong related problems starts/continue; if he would do his best a little better there wouldn't have been any problem. Rodejong did a revert on that day on that page with this edit. If you click on that link and then in the 'Author field' in the Information-template on the uploader account name, you will see it is redirected to the user page of Kliek. Rodejong could have figured out this himself if he would have done some research before he did that revert with in the edit summary "No Idea why he claims the copyrights." To understand better why there is a redirect, you can see on the history of that redirect ([4]) that the redirect was automatically made on January 13 2010 as result of an account renaming procedure done by the bureaucrat Erwin. On January 7 2010 this rename request was done for privacy reasons! I hope Rodejong will change the original account name he used in the request he put on this page on last night by '*****' or so, since the change of the account name was done for privacy reasons (same for the discussion on 'my' talk page). I hope it is now clear to everybody why Kliek changed on Commons the name of the uploader, several days after the account renaming was done on the Dutch Wikipedia. So not only the statement of Rodejong on my talk page that Kliek didn't have any rights to claim copyright (and similar nonsense about Kliek) was a false statement, also his remark about me: "I asked you to check the history, and you obniously [sic] didn't. " [5] turns out to be incorrect. It is quite the opposite; Rodejong is the person who didn't check the history good enough, even after his reverts were undone three times! - Robotje (talk) 07:22, 9 January 2012 (UTC)
So, now i ask someone else to shed light on this problem, you tell me why you reverted my edit. Was that so hard to say this from the start??
No, I didn't expect a user namechange. Normaly it becomes a redirect. As I requested Polarlys to help out, I also stated that I could have overlooked something. That was obviousely the case. It is just so typicle of you to fool around with people, leaving them in the dark. Lot's of conflicts could be avoided by telling people what is wrong at the start, in stead of just reverting people without reason.
I apollogize for the wast of time on this discussionpage Polarlys. --Rodejong (talk) 08:17, 9 January 2012 (UTC)
I corected the mistake with the wrong link.--Rodejong (talk) 08:20, 9 January 2012 (UTC)

Hi guys, I think the issue ist settled after Robotje explained his actions. Communicating over the internet has always this awkward potential for misunderstandings ;-) You are both from The Netherlands, I propose to drink a beer together at a local Wikipedia meeting. Best regards, --Polarlys (talk) 10:09, 9 January 2012 (UTC)

King Peter II

Can i ask you if i find licence and permision since i know who owns painting thats photographed would you stop delete process? Snake bgd (talk) 11:25, 9 January 2012 (UTC)

No. Don’t try to fool us, you won’t give us the painter’s name, contact him or his heir and succeed in getting a permission for a free license. --Polarlys (talk) 12:40, 9 January 2012 (UTC)


Dear Polarlys, I've added the template, so I know that the images go to cancellation, therefore it is not necessary that you put me in the talk page templates. Thank you! --Luckok (talk) 21:14, 10 January 2012 (UTC)

Hi, I just saw that all these older uploads had no permission and I can’t see a permission on the linked site. Regards, --Polarlys (talk) 21:15, 10 January 2012 (UTC)
In fact, for this reason, I was putting the cancellation templates in the various photo pages; you only had to wait a little bit... Sincerely --Luckok (talk) 21:30, 10 January 2012 (UTC)


Hi, could you explain your deletion here please? You say "no source, no permission", but there was a licence (cc-by-sa) and source (own). -mattbuck (Talk) 10:06, 11 January 2012 (UTC)

Hi Matt! The user uploaded several unfree files that were tagged as "own" work. While I deleted some of them I might have overlooked Eugene's argumentation for deletion in this case (COM:SCOPE). This was a penis photo of bad quality, uploaded by a uploader who lied about sources before – my rationale for deletion was wrong it this case, but I would prefer not to restore this photo. Regards, --Polarlys (talk) 14:29, 11 January 2012 (UTC) PS: Disclaimer: I am pro-penis.
OK, no worries, I don't really want it restored, but in future please note it's a PRP deletion. -mattbuck (Talk) 16:03, 11 January 2012 (UTC)

R:File source is not properly indicated: File:Franco Colletta.JPG

Guten Tag Polarlys, thank you for pointing out the problem about that file. I tried to arrange it, I hope now it works. The file is my own work and I release all the rights about it. Please, feel free to tell me if something is still wrong. All the best--Alessandro Zangrilli (talk) 10:23, 11 January 2012 (UTC)

You deleted images that were plainly listed as uploaded by owner why?

I uploaded several images that plainly listed me as the owner and you deleted them saying that no permission was given for me to use them...well i here by give my self (the owner of those images) permission to use them any way i see fit. please reinstate them asap

You are most likely not the copyright owner of an newspaper photograph from an unknown author. How could you? Please provide permission by sending it to COM:OTRS. --Polarlys (talk) 21:08, 12 January 2012 (UTC) BTW: Your upload had no license for eight days before I deleted it.


You have deleted this picture but, on all the picture that User talk:Laurent.calleja have uploaded, this is the one with the great licence. Can you reupload it ?
Thank you. Dédélembrouille (talk) 14:04, 12 January 2012 (UTC)

I restored it. It still needs a better name … --Polarlys (talk) 16:58, 12 January 2012 (UTC)

Thank you very much. Dédélembrouille (talk) 06:35, 13 January 2012 (UTC)

Steamboat Robert E. Lee

Hello, I have a question about my speedy delete request for File:Robert E Lee Steamboat.jpg. It appears that the image rights are retained by the Louisiana State Museum. See the "Conditions Governing Rights and Reproductions" link on their photo requests page: [6]. When the image was uploaded the image a few years ago, I thought it was in the public domain due to age. However, I'm not certain if this particular image of the painting is actually in the PD. Therefore, the image should be deleted to avoid copyright problems. Can you explain why it isn't a candidate for speedy deletion? Thanks, --AlphaEta (talk) 17:29, 12 January 2012 (UTC)

I am pretty sure this file is in the public domain because of its age. Not every copyright claim is valid (“copyfraud”). This should be discussed. --Polarlys (talk) 20:37, 12 January 2012 (UTC)

Deletion of Istanbulsapphiretower.jpg

CommonsNotificationBot left a message about this file's deletion on en:Talk:List of tallest buildings in the world at 5:29 am, saying "Don't panic; a discussion will now take place over on Commons about whether to remove the file. This gives you an opportunity to contest the deletion..." According to the log, the file was deleted by you at 11:18 am. I don't think less than 6 hours is anywhere near enough time to discuss or contest the deletion, or to give people enough time to move the file to a more suitable venue in order to make a claim for fair-use.

  • Why was it deleted so quickly?
  • Why was the suspected reason not posted by CommonsNotificationBot on the en:talk page?
  • I notice the reason you deleted it was "copyright violation", but nowhere does it say where it was copied from. A URL would be very useful.

Astronaut (talk) 17:49, 12 January 2012 (UTC)

Hi Astronaut. At first: Please don’t remove my request for speedy deletion from other files without reason. We have a huge problem with copyright violations here. If most contributions of an user consist of proven copyright violations, we don’t waste our time to find the source for another low-resolution, small-size, bad-quality image that is most likely no own work. You are welcome to waste your time with an uploader that uploaded a lot of images from various unfree locations with fake licenses before he realized that the best way is to upload these files with a fine own-template. (Unfortunately he forgot to remove the watermark here Commons:Deletion_requests/File:San_giovanni_rotondo.JPG). --Polarlys (talk) 21:17, 12 January 2012 (UTC)

The file was deleted so quickly because it was listed as a candidate for speedy deletion. You should be happy about that. We had huge backlogs in the past that paralysed this project.
Sorry, I don’t know about how this bot works.
This deletion went along with other deletions on images from a Turkish tourism broschure and images from that were uploaded by different users. This image is also available from the web as promotional material with the project’s logo.
I admit that giving more detailed deletions reasons in the deletion commentary was useful, unfortunately the WMF does not provide us with powerful tools to do so, nor do we have the man power to work slower. Sorry for that. --Polarlys (talk) 21:04, 12 January 2012 (UTC)
The problem seems to be that the bot goes around looking for problem images, puts a deletion request/speedy delete on the image on Commons and visits each usage, leaving a message reassuring people there to not panic, "a discussion will now take place" - effectively an invitation to participate in the discussion here on Commons. Usual practice on the English Wikipedia is for delete discussions to last 7 days, yet the policy on Commons seems to be delete it within hours with no discussion, and very little by way of explanation.
While you may see a huge backlog of "obvious deletions" and little time to deal with them; what I see is an invitation to a discussion, only to find the image already deleted. The explanation is simply "copyright violation", I cannot see the original image and I have no idea where it was copied from, so the image cannot be recovered and possibly uploaded to a more suitable venue under a possible fair-use claim. With all due respect, you do need to slow down and allow sufficient time (a few days?) for people from the various Wikipedias to comment, to supply the correct proof of the image being free, or to move the image elsewhere so it can be put under fair-use. Astronaut (talk) 11:05, 13 January 2012 (UTC)
As for the other matter you mention above, yesterday's experience got me thinking, how many more images are set to be speedily deleted for copyright violation when there is no information as to where it is copied from. When I took a quick look at a few random images from Category:Copyright violations, a couple of them didn't say where they were copied from. To be honest, a "screenshot" does not automatically make it an obvious copyright violation. It may be small and of poor quality, but it could have easily been a freeze frame from the uploader's own video. Without information as to where it has been seen before, it is impossible to say and I believe one should assume good faith until proven otherwise. In the case of the two files I appealed, I did supply a reason on the talk page.
Unfortunately, I am unable to see the uploader's history of bad uploads that have been deleted (the link you supplied is restricted to admins only). Looking today at that particular uploader's current content, I see some OK images and some poor quality images - maybe video stills. Only the company logos say to me "copyright problem?". Until proven otherwise, I would be reluctant to speedily delete his uploads based on the evidence I can see and would probably go for the slower 'deletion request' instead. Astronaut (talk) 11:13, 13 January 2012 (UTC)
Hi Astronaut! I have been active on several projects and everywher a “speedy deletion” procedure is established. You cannot list a simple copyvio with a regular deletion request here, people will tell you to move to a request for speedy deletion. I am sorry, but we can’t assume "good faith" anymore for users who uploaded a lot of copyright violations before.. Uploaders remove EXIF data to remove evidence that the files was taken by a professional. They even fake EXIF data. They upload unfree images to flickr under a free license and request a bot move to Commons then. Another bot will check than that the license is valid. So you get a perfectly checked image. People upload photos of TV screens showing concerts or screenshots of youtube videos. We can’t say in every case that our evidence is rock solid, but when it has been proven before, that the uploader lied about licenses again and again, we can assume that there is something wrong with a file with strange perspective (shooting a photo while standing behind James Hetfield during a concert) or the classic "web rip-off" format (resolution, size).
Have a look at this file. It was uploaded with the wrong license which can’t be used here (uploading images this way was the first option during a test – suddenly people started uploading "screenshots of free software") and a honest statement on source ("web"). Now we request the source and suddenly there is an own template. Here i found the source and suddenly the author is removed. Regards, --Polarlys (talk) 13:01, 13 January 2012 (UTC)
That's pretty enlightening. While the likes of Bansky are clearly trying to evade copyright rules - yes, many of them (maybe all of them) are copyvios - I believe there are many others who upload in good faith but have either not read the rules or simply do not understand that they cannot grab stuff off the internet and upload it here. I can certainly imagine many users never reading past the first box on the Commons upload wizard: "I" took the photo/scanned the page/downloaded the image it is therefore "my own work" and so I can upload it here.
I'm not going out of my way here to defend Bansky's uploads, or requesting that the Istanbulsapphiretower.jpg be restored. However, I think the process of deleting files and notifying Wikipedia projects does need to be changed. At the very least, it should be easy for the infrequent visitor to Commons to find "proof" of the copyright violation even after the file has been deleted - a URL or a comment like: "the uploader has a history of multiple copyright violations so this is probably one as well" placed in the log would be very useful. Astronaut (talk) 16:59, 13 January 2012 (UTC)

KarlBureschf1.highres.jpeg deleted

Hello Polarlys. It seems KarlBureschf1.highres.jpeg got deleted. Did you see my note in the file's discussion page? Unless I am much mistaken the file was in the public domain because the the Bibliotheque national de France, that claims to own the collection the file belongs to, says it is. I may be mistaken, but I understand in that case we need not wait for the 71st year after the author's death. I understand in this case we were (are) facing the case where the copyright holder released the picture into the public domain. I do so with my pictures now and then and I am not even dead...--Rowanwindwhistler (talk) 11:58, 12 January 2012 (UTC)

The artist died in 1950. False and erroneous claims on copyright and public domain occur on a daily basis, especially when images are provided at a large scale. If you disagree with the deletion, please contact Österreichische Nationalbibliothek regarding Inventory Pb 580.555-F 2. Thank you, --Polarlys (talk) 12:06, 12 January 2012 (UTC)
Agreed, but shoudln't we do it the other way around? Wait till we know that it is a mistake and then delete the file (if confirmed the claim was wrong) not delete it and then see if it was a mistake. And the artist cannot have the copyright for the picture (he is dead), some else does. The BNF claims to have it (though they may be wrong, of course). I would suggest doing it in the reverse order: if we find neither institution has the copyright (or the one that does does not release it in the public domain) then delete it, but I think somenoen has been a bit "trigger happy" here...--Rowanwindwhistler (talk) 12:51, 12 January 2012 (UTC)
No, if we are unsure about files we shouldn’t upload or keep them here. No matter which file this is. This is not an anonymous work or something but an photo that can be traced to a author whose life dates are known. When we take over erroneous and implausible information, we multiply them and make them available to people who want to reuse our content without problems. I’ll be happy to restore the file at a later date, if this issue has been cleared. Thank you for your understanding. --Polarlys (talk) 16:57, 12 January 2012 (UTC)
The dates seem to be known (you seem to be chosing to belief the Österreichische Nationalbibliothek and not the BNF and I see no reason why), assuming the Österreichische Nationalbibliothek is right, but that does not mean the file is not in the public domain. It would be so if the copyright owner were not the BNF but someone else (the Österreichische Nationalbibliothek itself?) who did not release the file into the public domain. What evidence do you have to assert that the information from the BNF is "erroneous and implausible information"? What check did you do to say so? I will restore the file myself now, I will check with both institutions now as well (something that should have been done once we may be facing conflicting copyright statements (this is just a possibility, they need not be imcompatible as I hope you realize) but certainly before assuming the file was incorrectly uploaded and deleted) and ask for its deletion myself if I get no satisfactory answer from either the BNF, the Österreichische Nationalbibliothek or both in a few days at the latest. But so far the file stays, and I hope no one rushes to delete it (I would put it back immediately) without further information. Let us all do things right, for the benefit of wikipedia.--Rowanwindwhistler (talk) 19:36, 12 January 2012 (UTC)
The artist is not long enough dead to have this file in the public domain in the EU. This was added by a trustworthy user, and I made a decision upon this fact. If you disagree with the deletion, please contact the page for restoring files. --Polarlys (talk) 20:42, 12 January 2012 (UTC)
Not long enough to be in the public domain unless the current copyright owner released it, that is, and that we do not know yet. That is what I expected everyone to wait for before doing anything at all about the file at least for more than a few hours! The "trustworthy user" (curiously they all are to me) claimed the author had died too recently for the file to be in the PD by time, which is only one criteria, we are still ignoring the sizeable possibility of the file having been released into the PD... I have already asked for its undeletion and I am checking with the BNF and ON at the same time for clarification, but this should have been done the other way around (my original and only point really): check first and delete afterwards (if necessary). Next time kindly try to take a few more facts into account before deleting content from Commons.--Rowanwindwhistler (talk) 14:28, 13 January 2012 (UTC)
The source is a French photo agency, a company selling photos that they not created. The author is known. Copyright transfer in Austria (similar to Germany) is only possible by bequest, there is no other way of transfer. So if the BNF not even knows the author then they obviously not inherited the copyright. It doesnt matter if the ÖNB is the copyright holder or not, copyright not expired, thats enough to know for us. And because a photo selling company is not an author it is of course required to do all possible research before uploading, not afterwards. --Martin H. (talk) 19:36, 13 January 2012 (UTC)
Indeed, as much investigation as necessary till you are satisfied the picture is free enough to enter Commons: I was with the BNF statement till you found about the author in the ÖNB. From then on certainly in doubt, but by no means convinced (yet, I await the BNF's and ONB's confirmation). I did not mean the author left the picture to the BNF in his last will and testament, I meant the Agence Mondial could have bought the picture (and then, unless I am mistaken acquired the copyright (I may be wrong but I doubt Corbis has absolutely no pictures by German or Austrian photographers unless the ones these good souls left to Mr. Gates in their wills)) and in turn the BNF would have got it when purchasing the collection. Of course this could be wrong but I think it would be better to check first (indeed when in doubt before uploading, but certainly before deleting) and delete afterwards (if necessary). I am no lawyer but, wouldn't it be enough as well to get a free-enough license (I am thinking a CC sort) from the ONB (or whoever has the copyright) to keep it in Commons? I understand it would but again, I may be wrong.--Rowanwindwhistler (talk) 21:00, 13 January 2012 (UTC)

Zenescope Deletions.

To whom it may concern,

I was asked to create a wiki page with the full backing and consent of Zenescope Entertainment. The images uploaded that you guys have deleted multiple times I have full permission to use and distribute. They are even available on their site to view and use on other sites. If you need the contact information of my contact at Zenescope please ask and i will get it right to you. I understand you are just doing your job but I am also doing mine. So please help me get this done asap.


Jacob aka 719pcmedic

Please read COM:OTRS. Thank you, --Polarlys (talk) 21:37, 14 January 2012 (UTC)

do as you please, but hmm?

I do believe policy is you have to *discuss* any copyvio claims not just unilaterally remove them because you disagree? No? The whole point of copyvio tags is to discuss if they are copyvios and get proof they are not. Please revert your removal of my copyvio tag if you don't mind, that would be the civil thing to do. You may do how you wish though, I am not here to edit war with anyone. I just am sad when people act so bossy on here. Sigh. Nesnad (talk) 07:01, 16 January 2012 (UTC)

Why should this be a copyright violation? Uploaded by artist. This is not bossy by the way, but you have to remove doubtful cases from the category copyright violations before they are deleted by someone else. You can open a RfD then (I see no reason) or remove the template. Please use the "no permission" template (copyvio is the wrong template here) the next time and also include both similar uploads from the uploader. Thank you. --Polarlys (talk) 12:04, 16 January 2012 (UTC)


Where is this archive database entry for File:August_Gailit,_VAMF1581_5.JPG, that states that it's made by Parikas? --WikedKentaur (talk) 07:29, 16 January 2012 (UTC) Best regards, --Polarlys (talk) 12:07, 16 January 2012 (UTC)

You deleted my picture

This is my own work, then why did you send it for deletion?? File:DecayedSouls.jpg is my own work. I had taken the picture of that band. Its is completely my own work, so i request you to please withdraw that Deletion requests

Please discuss this in the RfD. Thank you. Please don’t make false claims about authorship like you did before regarding File:Ahmed Patel.jpg. Thank you. --Polarlys (talk) 12:15, 16 January 2012 (UTC)

Okay. I admit that it was a false claim about 'File:Ahmed Patel.jpg'. But this picture really is taken by me. It is a picture of a local Metal band in India. The people in there are my friends. What should i present you to prove my point?? The picture was cropped by me just to remove the animation below using snipping tools. If you have any problem can i upload another picture of them which is clear?? As I m a neophyte please guide me, It has been only 20 days since i am active in this site. And Sorry if i troubled you. --Yasht101 (talk) 09:48, 17 January 2012 (UTC)

Please see COM:OTRS and send in a permission for your file. Thank you. --Polarlys (talk) 13:37, 18 January 2012 (UTC)

Request for help

Hello Polarlys! I've recently submitted an image for deletion (Commons:Deletion requests/File:Fort Lachine.jpg) and was hoping you could provide some input. When I originally uploaded the image, I thought it was in the public domain in the US. However, with a little more research and help from other Commons editors, it was discovered that the image came from a book that was published in Belgium in 1927. Since then, I've become concerned that the image isn't in the public domain in the US. After reading this table (under Works Published Abroad Before 1978) on the Cornell University website, the book from which the Fort Lachine image was taken would fall under the following category: "Solely published abroad, without compliance with US formalities or republication in the US, and not in the public domain in its home country as of 1 January 1996" for material published 1923 through 1977. Therefore, the US copyright would expire 95 years after initial publication. The book was published in 1927, so it appears to be under copyright in the US until 2022. This is in agreement with Wikipedia:Non-U.S. copyrights and the current Commons tags for Non-US works. Therefore, I suspect that the image should be tagged with {{Not-PD-US-URAA}} and deleted. If you have time, could you please provide your opinion on this matter. Kindest regards, --AlphaEta (talk) 16:56, 16 January 2012 (UTC)

Hi AlphaEta! Thank you for asking me in this case. I think there is nothing to add to Carl Lindbergs statement. You shouldn't be afraid of the file being here, let’s see how another administrator decides in this case. In the meantime, you should be afraid of any personal consequences, there won’t be any. Regards, --Polarlys (talk) 13:42, 18 January 2012 (UTC)

Re:File:Falla Granada.jpg

That file was uploaded six years ago, then I don´t remember the exact source: nowadays it can be founded in a lot of web pages, but there is a remarkable thing: without doubts, it has 90 years old. Therefore, if it must be deleted, proceed. --Antur (talk) 02:38, 17 January 2012 (UTC)

When the file was created by someone who was born in 1890 and died in 1960 at the age of 70, the file is protected until 2031. The age of the photography itself does not matter. --Polarlys (talk) 13:50, 18 January 2012 (UTC)

Vinaver and Uolcaes Falkons

I really tried hard to find more about photos, and yet I indicated wright source in public library. Pisanje (talk) 07:11, 17 January 2012 (UTC)

I am confused, what do you mean? --Polarlys (talk) 13:51, 18 January 2012 (UTC)

Copyviol and missing permission

It's the first time that i upload a file by another person. In particular I received these pictures from the author Massimo Piattelli Palmarini, who has authorized me to publish them on wikimedia with CC-BY-SA 3.0 and told me the authors of pictures. Concerning Franco Venanti it's the same. How can I do? --raul (talk) 00:09, 19 January 2012 (UTC)

Don’t upload these images until you got a permission like this (COM:OTRS) from the author (NOT the displayed person, but the photographer). “On Wikipedia“ is not enough, everywhere, in every context, commercial and derivative is necessary. --Polarlys (talk) 00:11, 19 January 2012 (UTC)
The author ask me that with photographer it's everything OK. I send a messagge to permission.otrs. I look the procedure. Excuse me. The next time I send before the message to permission.wikimedia and after I upload the files. Sorry --raul (talk) 00:26, 19 January 2012 (UTC)

San Diego Museum source problem

I would like to inform you that all flagged (by you) photos I uploaded from the San Diego Air & Space Museum Airchive's page on flickr have been source with their respective URLs. I ask you please look over these and remove the notice, since they complay. -Spartan7W — Preceding unsigned comment added by Spartan7W (talk • contribs)

Thank you for adding these URLs. Your help is truly appreciated and helps us to conserve these files here without doubt. Thank you again, --Polarlys (talk) 16:59, 19 January 2012 (UTC)

Why did you delete ALL of my pics?

I'm trying to figure out why you deleted ALL OF MY PICS that I uploaded. I understand now why the one's from Gettys got deleted but WHY DID YOU DELETE ALL OF MY PICS!?!? The pics that came from Gettys I marked as coming from Gettys when I uploaded them. The pics I uploaded that I marked that I own- I ACTUALLY DO OWN THOSE BEING TOOK WITH MY OWN CAMERA WHILE ATTENDING MINOR LEAGUE BASEBALL GAMES IN ROME GA AND CHATTANOOGA TN. The pics of Matt Young, Christian Bethancourt, Cory Gearrin, Russ Mitchell, and Luis Salazar were mine that I took personally- all of these came from 2 games between Chattanooga Lookouts vs Mississippi Braves from 2009 or a game between the Rome Braves vs Hagerstown Suns from 2011. - BravesInsider13

You did not only uploaded about ten Getty images, but also files from Craig Kimbrel’s website which are also unfree. Please re-upload the other files under the following conditions: You provide them as they came from your camera (full size, EXIF data) and prove us that way that you did not take them from somewhere else. Okay? And please don’t upload unfree files anymore. Thank you. --Polarlys (talk) 17:09, 19 January 2012 (UTC)


For your information — you deleted the image, but you forgot to delete the talk page. Nyttend (talk) 13:59, 19 January 2012 (UTC)

Thank you for the hint. --Polarlys (talk) 17:00, 19 January 2012 (UTC)

Don’t play games with us, please!!!! --Polarlys (talk)

I am born on August 18th my birthday is in all games!!!! And I am Ruml-Kuzmanoviz named after Franz Jozef.

So then stars, games, Rome, Germany what do you have? If you do not honor me. I do not love people without stile. "Do not play with us!!!!!" I am not playing, you are playing and Lord is playing with you. I am just singing with you and Lord alongside Pisanje (talk) 14:16, 19 January 2012 (UTC)

"scan from book" is no source at all. Please remain calm and friendly. thank you, --Polarlys (talk) 16:59, 19 January 2012 (UTC)

Speedily undeleted a work for normal deletion discussion

Hi. I have big doubts about the speedy deletion request of File:The Lost Prince.djvu, and as it impact upon a work being used at Wikisource, I have undeleted it and I am putting it through a normal deletion process. I have not done full research on the work, though from initial check of the copyright statement in the work it clearly says 1914/15, and if the images are later, they are possibly in the public domain through not being published with a copyright notice. Start of the details are at Commons:Deletion requests/File:The Lost Prince.djvu  — billinghurst sDrewth 23:57, 19 January 2012 (UTC)

This is a good idea, sorry for the circumstances. --Polarlys (talk) 13:58, 20 January 2012 (UTC)

File:Xdevice logo.jpg

Hello, I had just created a deletion request for this logo when you deleted it. It seems quite obvious that PD-textlogo applies. Regards, Yann (talk) 13:58, 21 January 2012 (UTC)

Of course, sorry for the circumstances. --Polarlys (talk) 14:09, 21 January 2012 (UTC)

Deletion of File:UPDS.jpg

Please note that the photo you have tagged for deletion does not violate any copyrights. It was taken by me on a samsung champ C3303 phone, which has a VGA camera. This photo was shot at KASA stadium Diphu, Karbi anglong, Assam, India on 3:45 PM, during the surrender ceremony of UPDS (United People's Democratic Solidarity) which was an important day for all of us Karbi's. Please do not desecrate the name of UPDS in this manner. I respect them for all the sacrifices they made so far, all the cadres that were killed in bringing nearer to us the reality of Hemprek Kangthim. I live in Diphu, Karbi Anglong, Assam, Opposite Basic Training Center, Rukasen - 782460, My name is Aaron, If you think such a place or name doesn't exist, look up "India" in google maps, zoom towards the "north east", then zoom in towards "Assam" then "Karbi Anglong", then "Diphu". Why the hell would I lie about something I took myself. If you need me to I'll even mail you the phone I took the photo with so you can cross-examine it. I know that YOU GUYS ARE DOING ALL THIS JUST TO HELP but I would respectfully ask you not to falsely tag images for deletion. Kaitheloner (talk) 21:38, 21 January 2012 (UTC)

Sorry, if you upload images with the source Reuters, I can’t assume it is your own work. --Polarlys (talk) 14:16, 22 January 2012 (UTC)

Deletion of Useless Project Photo

Thank you for deleting this file. I wanted to delete it but didn't know how to. lol Kaitheloner (talk) 21:46, 21 January 2012 (UTC)

File source is not properly indicated: File:Netherlands, Stompwijk, German tanks, June 1940.jpg

Dear Polarlys, On my page you say that the source of this image is not properly indicated. That is not true. I have provided the exact web-source in the upload form. The fact that Picasa classifies this image as "All rights reserved" is void, as according to Dutch copyrights law there are no such rights. The image is anonymous and is older than 70 years, hence it is in the public domain. Period. Picasa is a service from Google. In the Terms of Service, article 9.4, Google says: "Google acknowledges and agrees that it obtains no right, title or interest from you (or your licensors) under these Terms in or to any Content that you submit, post, transmit or display on, or through, the Services, including any intellectual property rights which subsist in that Content (whether those rights happen to be registered or not, and wherever in the world those rights may exist)." In this text "you" is the uploader of files (or content) in a Picasa album (or: service). Thus, neither Picase nor Google have -or claim to have- any rights with regard to this image. Proprietary rights, if they exist, remain with the uploader of the file into a Picasa album, which in this case is a certain Ingrid. The simple fact is that Ingrid does not own such rights, as the image (being anonymous and >70 years old) is in the public domain. And that is a reason why she was able to publish it, and why it can be used by Wikimedia Commons as well. I suggest that this image will not be deleted without a broader discussion among Wikimedia Commons copyright experts. Loranchet (talk) 22:27, 16 January 2012 (UTC)

My point is the following: A historical image that was uploaded by an individual anonymous person to a hosting service without additional source information can’t be considered to be of encyclopedic value ("does this image show what it pretends to show?"). We even can’t establish a copyright status if nobody tells us where the file is from. The given file could originate from a news movie, but I am not sure. Best regards, --Polarlys (talk) 13:49, 18 January 2012 (UTC)
I live in this area and there is no doubt that the picture is taken on the road to Stompwijk, even though I admit that reference points are few. But go to Google maps on {Location|52|4|50.16|N|4|25|4.51|E|region:NL} and look in West-South-Westerly direction along the canal. The hedgerow, the canal wall, trees in the distance, it hasn't changed. About the copyright: if I take a picture of a 17th century painting from a website to upload on Commons, should I bother about this website claiming all kinds of things? I don't think so. Pictures of 17th century paintings are in the public domain, purely by age, whatever source they're from. This anonymous image of tanks is, too (according to Dutch copyright law). Loranchet (talk) 22:31, 27 January 2012 (UTC)

The Administrator's barnstar

Police Barnstar Hires.png The Administrator's barnstar
I hereby award Polarlys this barnstar for high activity as Administrator on Commons in 2011. Very good work! -- George Chernilevsky talk 20:21, 23 January 2012 (UTC)
Thank you George! :-) --Polarlys (talk) 17:23, 24 January 2012 (UTC)

why were these photos deleted?????

Decision Tree on Uploading

i uploaded photos given to me by the family of the person i created the page for and listed myself as the copy-write holder, and you said that i didn't have the proper permission to use them...if i am the copy-write holder, what other permission do i need????????? Chippowell (talk)

Well, you are obviously not the copyright holder. I have no idea who it is, but most certainly not you. Please add the following to your upload: Who created it (photographer, painter) and who is the copyright holder. A permission by the copyright holder is needed, please see Commons:OTRS. Please add a correct date, these photos were obviously not created in early 2012. Please see also Commons:Licensing. --Polarlys (talk) 17:23, 24 January 2012 (UTC)

can you un-delete them so i can change the information??? i guess I'm misunderstanding something or am miss tagging something, sorry the pages you suggested read like stereo instructions, i thought the date and all the other info asked for was for the person who up-loaded the files i put the Template:Pd-heirstag that said that the heirs of the person in the photo release the photo to the public domain

These are not “stereo instructions”, but basic help pages. If you don’t want to read stuff like Commons:Licensing#License_information, please look at least at the image on the right. I won’t restore these files by now, since I don’t have the feeling that you can provide the information needed. The license tag is not wrong, but we would still need a permission, see Commons:OTRS. And again: The heirs of the person in the photo are not necessarily the copyright owners (or to give an example: the heirs of Elvis don’t necessarily own the rights to a photo someone else took of the artist). --Polarlys (talk) 20:17, 24 January 2012 (UTC)

Commons:Deletion requests/File:Denisse uribe.JPG

Hey! Have you seen this Commons:Deletion requests/File:Denisse uribe.JPG? Open your eyes please -- 21:03, 30 January 2012 (UTC)

Just another upload with wrong license information … --Polarlys (talk) 21:06, 30 January 2012 (UTC)


I transferred this one, but I cannot see what is wrong with it... It's been on En-Wiki for almost 3 years with a {{PD-self}} template. The source is the en-Wiki user as I ensured the description showed.  Ronhjones  (Talk) 19:59, 7 February 2012 (UTC)

Hi, there is no explicit statement on authorship as needed on Commons and furthermore this is doubtfully own work when the photographer is identical with the displayed person as supposed in the checkuser request on Regards, --Polarlys (talk) 22:53, 7 February 2012 (UTC)

Unable to upload deleted images, can provide permission

Dear Polarlys, 2 weeks ago I uploaded images to the topic "Elisha Ben Yitzhak". The pictures were deleted because of lack of permissions. I can now provide the permissions to the pictures, but it seems that I cant upload them again once deleted. I sent the permissions to , asking them to restore the pictures, or let me upload them again with the permissions. I haven't heard anything from them, so I'm asking you, if you dont mind, what can I do to upload them again now when i do have the permissions ?

also I'm not sure if that is the place to ask for your help. excuse me please if it isn't.

Thank you, Guy.e

Hi Guy.e, it will need some time, but if the permissions are sufficient, our OTRS team members will restore your files. Regards, --Polarlys (talk) 14:02, 9 February 2012 (UTC)

Commons:Deletion requests/Files uploaded by Sdornano

Hello Polarlys,

I am new to wikipedia editing and I am sorry if I have misunderstood the rules regarding pictures uploading.

I am the grandson of the painter. I am the creator of the photos and I want to put those photos with CC licence. The CC licence is on the pictures not on the paintings. The paintings are presently owned by my mother, daughter of the painter. She allows me to take the picture to promote the artwork of her father (she is too old to do it herself). The paintings are in her home, not in a museum...

How shall I proceed to publish theses pictures in clean way regarding licensing.

The pictures were created from a scan of paper photos so it explains there is no exif metadata.



On the wikipedia page about my grandfather, I put an external link to some pictures, but I didn't use those pictures directly since the the copyright have been given to this institution ADAGP

I asked today my mother to send a confirmation message to otrs

Thank you for sending permissions to COM:OTRS. --Polarlys (talk) 19:58, 26 February 2012 (UTC)

Commons:Deletion requests/File:Penispubic.jpg

Hallo Polarlys, zu Commons:Deletion requests/File:Penispubic.jpg: |source={{own}} |author=[[User:Xclios|Xclios]] {{self|cc-by-sa-3.0}}

soll "no source, no permission" sein? Ich glaube du hast da irgendetwas verwechselt - bitte korrigiere. Viele Grüße --Saibo (Δ) 19:48, 9 February 2012 (UTC)

Mir schleierhaft, danke für den Hinweis. --Polarlys (talk) 23:26, 9 February 2012 (UTC)
Dank dir. Viele Grüße --Saibo (Δ) 01:55, 11 February 2012 (UTC)


The case of Levante UD logo 20px is the same as IKEA logo Ikea logo.svg. They have the same permissions. So why should you delete the first one, and the IKEA can stay?

 (Talk) 8:43, 11 February 2012 (UTC)

One is a simple text logo and the other not. --Polarlys (talk) 16:36, 11 February 2012 (UTC)
Deleted one. As said above: one logo is text, the other not. And more: Spanish copyright law requires not much creativity for copyright protection. --Martin H. (talk) 22:51, 12 February 2012 (UTC)

Receive image personally from the author

Hello Polarlys, I uploaded couple of pictures which I received personally from their author by email, in order to upload them to wikipedia. When I tagged those pictures in the source as "own", they were deleted. only the source as "own", I still wrote that I don't own the copyrights, and I sent the permissions for the pictures to the permissions email. my question is- what should I state in the "source" form, when i receive the pictures personally ? Thank you

Please add the photographer’s name, since they are not your own work. Unfortunately a lot of people provide images showing themselves but they don’t pay attention that they are not necessarily the copyright owner. Thank you, --Polarlys (talk) 21:27, 23 February 2012 (UTC)
Thank you :)

Imagen carece de información esencial sobre su fuente / File:J Aurich 1968.jpg

Hola Polarlys, no se si entiendas el español, soy nuevo en Wikimedia Commons y Wikipedia. La imagen (J Aurich 1968.jpg) la he tomado de revistas antiguas que ya clausuraron sus publicaciones y estan fuera de circulación hace varias décadas, además esa imagen la han usado en muchos posters, no sé su autor porque no lo citan, pero es totalmente de dominio público. Quisiera que me ayudes a editar la licencia de este archivo. Por favor respóndeme en español. Gracias.

Este usuario no entiende español. See Commons:Licensing --Polarlys (talk) 09:09, 3 April 2012 (UTC)

Protected templates

Hallo Polarlys, auf der Suche nach einem aktiven Admin bin ich bei dir gelandet. Es geht um eine kleine Erweiterung in der geschützten Vorlage {{U}}. Sie ist zwar internationalisiert, aber anders als alle ähnlichen Vorlagen umständlich über einen benannten Parameter statt mit "3=". Mit der Erweiterung wird nun beides unterstützt, so dass ältere Parametrierungen weiterhin funktionieren, und endlich auch die übliche Schreibweise möglich ist. Die Änderung in der Logik ist sehr geringfügig, etwas mehr ist in der Beschreibung zu ergänzen; deshalb habe ich das gesamte Vorlagencoding als Text bereitgestellt. Alternativ und besser wäre der Vorlagencode zu ändern und statt den Hinweisen ein Aufruf der Dokumentation einzubauen, die könnte und würde ich dann selbst pflegen.

Betreffend der geschützten Vorlage {{W}} wäre auch etwas Wesentliches zu verbessern; der Code sollte lauten:
Wenn du Fragen hast zu dieser Änderung, bei {{Wpd}} habe ich bereits alles erklärt.

Allerdings habe ich den tieferen Sinn von safesubst noch nicht so recht verstanden; wenn du Bedarf dafür siehst, kannst du das ergänzen? Thanx -- sarang사랑.svg사랑 11:42, 26 February 2012 (UTC)

Hallo Sarang! Ich würde dir gerne helfen, doch hab ich kein Händchen für Vorlagen (in der Regel ist danach etwas kaputt). Viele der deutschsprachigen Admins sind da technisch versierter als ich und dir ein besserer Gesprächspartner in dieser Angelegenheit. Gruß, --Polarlys (talk) 19:58, 26 February 2012 (UTC)

Hallo Polarlys, danke für deine Antwort, die bisher kontaktierten de-Admins sind schon seit Tagen und Wochen inaktiv. Ich werde es jetzt anders versuchen und den request auf der template-Disku hinterlegen. Oder könntest du eine kurze Entsperrung verantworten? -- sarang사랑.svg사랑 06:24, 27 February 2012 (UTC)

Ich bin derzeit kaum aktiv, sprich doch einen der anderssprachigen Nutzer an. Die Entsperrung würde zu lange sein bei meiner bisherigen Aktivität. Grüße, --Polarlys (talk) 16:06, 28 February 2012 (UTC) PS: Frag mal User:Raymond, der ist für Technisches immer ein guter Ansprechpartner.

You have deleted the files that I have uploaded

Two of my files has been deleted. I feel surprise that I can't stand it.

Those photos are really taken by myself. I don't know why you deleted those files.

Well, do you know what's the name of this game show with those photos?--竹筍弟弟 (talk) 12:09, 5 April 2012 (UTC)

See User_talk:Túrelio#I_really_took_those_photos. Thank you, --Polarlys (talk) 13:15, 5 April 2012 (UTC)

Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-No Derivative Works 3.0 License.

Hi, I see the messages you've left on my talk page about the images I've uploaded. All of the people whose images I've uploaded have explicitly given me permission to use them at Wikipedia. I therefore assumed, apparently wrongly, that they would have uploaded them to Deviantart under the appropriate CC license. Now I see that this is not the case. I will be trying to get into contact with these artists and telling them that they need to change the license if they want their images to appear at Wikipedia. One of the artists has already done so for one of them but it has already been deleted so I will need to reupload it. I apologize for the trouble, I assure you that the mistake was an honest one and I did not mean to violate the artists' copyright. -Ferahgo the Assassin (talk) 14:41, 9 April 2012 (UTC)

Now that I have tried to re-upload one of the deleted files, I see that I am unable to due to 'Unknown warning: "duplicate-archive".' Can you please tell me how to re-upload a deleted file after the artist has changed it to the appropriate license? This is the only artist I've been able to get into contact with so far, but I'm sure the others will change their licenses once I explain to them the situation. The image I'm trying to upload is this one, found here. -Ferahgo the Assassin (talk) 14:49, 9 April 2012 (UTC)

Hi Ferahgo! The best way to keep these files here is to ask the creators to send a permission according to Commons:OTRS to Wikipedia. The files will be restored then, you don’t have to upload them again. Regards, --Polarlys (talk) 15:51, 9 April 2012 (UTC)
Hi Polarlys, as I explained on the talk page for one of the images here [7], the artist has now updated the CC license to be suitable for use at Commons. Is it okay if I remove the tag now? Thanks. -Ferahgo the Assassin (talk) 22:56, 9 April 2012 (UTC)
The license on the Dryptosaurus image has also now been edited by the artist to the correct one [8] but unfortunately this one has already been deleted - I am unfamiliar with OTRS ticketing, is there a way to reinstate the image without being a further bother to the artist? -Ferahgo the Assassin (talk) 01:30, 10 April 2012 (UTC)
I removed the tag and restored the other file. Thank you. --Polarlys (talk) 10:12, 10 April 2012 (UTC)
Thank you kindly for your help. -Ferahgo the Assassin (talk) 11:31, 10 April 2012 (UTC)

Speedy deletion of the pictures from article en:Sergey Zagraevsky

Dear colleague, you've speedy deleted the pictures from article en:Sergey Zagraevsky: Serguey_zagraevsky_moscow1.jpg, Serguey_zagraevsky_ukraine.jpg . It was a mistake because there was the author's registered permission # 2009062810038434 (it was written under the image data). Pls undelete them. Thanks!-- 21:11, 10 April 2012 (UTC)

Sorry, I've forgotten to log in, that was my letter. --Ozolina (talk) 21:16, 10 April 2012 (UTC)
I restored them. Sorry for the circumstances. --Polarlys (talk) 21:24, 10 April 2012 (UTC)
No problem, thanks a lot! --Ozolina (talk) 21:43, 10 April 2012 (UTC)

file:momm_0023_xs_mmp_mmm - magic, money, murder.jpg

wieso wurde von dir magic, money, murder ein Kunstwerk das weltweit ausgestellt wurde sofort gelöscht? Soweit mir noch bekannt ist die Kunst frei - in allen nicht-totalitären Ländern, im besonderen wenn es anerkannte Künstler sind. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sebarts (talk • contribs)

We need a written permission by the copyright holder, see Commons:OTRS. Thank you, --Polarlys (talk) 13:14, 17 April 2012 (UTC)
wie viel zeit habe ich? --Sebarts (talk) 21:41, 17 April 2012 (UTC)
As you like. The file will be restored when it has been deleted in between. --Polarlys (talk) 14:28, 18 April 2012 (UTC)


The file is not properly deleted it seems. Thumb is still visible. --Redtigerxyz (talk) 16:45, 22 April 2012 (UTC)

Happens quite often these days, I’ll check it later. Thank you, --Polarlys (talk) 19:10, 22 April 2012 (UTC)


That image was only simple texts. I don't see any copyright violation.--Inefable001 (talk) 18:25, 22 April 2012 (UTC)

There was more than simple text: The checked box (with some brush, not only some geometric shapes), the stylized envelope (?). "Text logos" have to be really simple on Commons, --Polarlys (talk) 19:15, 22 April 2012 (UTC)

File source is not properly indicated: File:Revolution and Culture biweekly 1928 number 15.JPG I'm not sure why "File source is not properly indicated" for this file ? The actual source is already included into upload description: The magazine in question was offered for sale and is not only dated 1928 (old) but it's also front page of a magazine. Can you please elaborate more, why you "taged" this file for deletion ? Thanks,(abune talk) 22:48, 22 April 2012 (UTC) P.S. Even less clear why this image was tagged The photographer is unknown, this looks like "file" photo and subject has died in 1938 i.e. 70+ years ago. Can you be a bit more specific for reasons why you "taged" it?

File:Revolution and Culture biweekly 1928 number 15.JPG is a photo created by someone who is most likely still alive. We don’t have a permission to use it. Please see Commons:Derivative works. File:Kornilov_Boris_Petrovich_(1907-1938).jpg is a random web upload from a website that does not give any information on the original source and the creator. We have no information, so we cannot assume that the creator (not the subject!) died more than 70 years ago. --Polarlys (talk) 12:02, 23 April 2012 (UTC)


I notice that some of my upload(s) on Wikimedia Commons have been altered and/or nominated despite the fact that..

(1) I legally own most of the images that I have uploaded on Wikimedia Commons, (2) The photographs were taken either my me or by a family member (including ancestors) and I have got the original negatives of most of them, (3) The photographs show our estates and/or residences and the visitors (including Gandhi, Nehru) with a family member, (4) The artist (painter) Beohar Rammanohar Sinha (1929-2007) was my father and the litterateur Beohar Rajendra Simha (1900-1988) was my grandfather, (5) Following my father’s death, I have lawfully inherited all his artworks and paintings solely by way of his WILL which unambiguously authorizes me to handle and use them whichever way I feel appropriate, (6) Even during his lifetime, I was managing all his artworks as <>, (7) Without imposing any conditions, or restricting anyone’s rights, but purely to keep a track of image/file usage outside Wiki, the phrase “Seek consent from <>…” has been inserted. I fully realize that this doesn’t mean much because the uploaded media is now in public domain and freely reproducible.

Hope that the above clarifies and addresses administrators concerns, and that they will now remove all ‘nominations’ from my upload(s). — Preceding unsigned comment added by Abrsinha (talk • contribs)

Ok, so please do the following: Change the phrase (e.g. If you use this file, please drop me a line to let me know.). Add information on the individual creator (even if you are the heir, you are not the creator), state your relationship. I’d also recommend to send a mail to Commons:OTRS. Please see Commons:Deletion requests/Files uploaded by Abrsinha for further discussions in this matter. Thank you, --Polarlys (talk) 12:05, 23 April 2012 (UTC)

Thanks, but I can't find any of my uploads? How do I amend/rectify them? Please help..!!

Glittertind pictures

Hi, I did as you said yesterday and e-mailed to grant them publishing rights on the following pictures: File:Glittertind Evige Asatro.jpg File:Glittertind Til Dovre Faller.jpg File:Glittertind Landkjenning.jpg File:Glittertind Landkjenning Promo 2.jpg File:Glittertind Landkjenning Promo.jpg

I have not received an answer yet. For how long do I have to wait until this issue is resolved? Torbjosa (talk) 14:45, 23 April 2012 (UTC)

A few days, thank you for your support. The OTRS system is a measure to ensure that we don’t host files that violate artist’s rights. --Polarlys (talk) 20:44, 23 April 2012 (UTC)

falsch platzierter Kommentar

Du hattest einen Kommentar auf meine Talkpage geschrieben, der aber wohl nicht an mich gerichtet war--Trex2001 (talk) 08:02, 25 April 2012 (UTC)

Thank You

✓ Done as per your request. It was so nice of you that you noticed the pictures uploaded by me were missing essential information I have put down the information needed and removed the template which said that they missed information which was essential. Thank you for everything. Yours faithfully, --Jagadhatri (talk) 05:42, 29 April 2012 (UTC)


Hi. You closed a DR about Hanoos, but this file still remains. Thanks. --Andrea (talk) 12:55, 30 April 2012 (UTC)

suppression de la photo de Marie-Ève Nault

Bonsoir, je ne comprends pas toutes les règles du Wikipédia. La photo a été prise par l'appareil photo personnelle de notre amie Kelly Parker. Pourquoi as t-on supprimé la photo ? es ce que je n'ai pas comprise le processus de validation --Andrée-Anne (d) 6 mai 2012 à 00:32 (CEST)

I deleted the file because it was taken from Please see Commons:Licensing. --Polarlys (talk) 10:03, 6 May 2012 (UTC) PS: Thank you for reading en:Wikipedia:No personal attacks.

Merci pour votre réponse. je m'excuse pour mes propos. J'ai effacée mes paroles offensantes. Désolée j'étais fatiquée hier --Andrée-Anne dribble (talk) 10:58, 6 May 2012 (UTC)soir

File:Portuguese ships battling the Turks at Goa

Sir how can it violate copyright sir. Source clearly shows that it is out of copy right. Portuguese ships battling the Turks at Goa, by Theodore de Bry, 1620

Source: ebay, Mar. 2003

"Theodore De Bry was variously a goldsmith, engraver and publisher in Frankfort on Main in Germany in the late 1500's, early 1600's. His magnum opus is the 'Collection of Voyages' or 'Grands et Petits Voyages'. In all there were 54 parts to these two works, replete with illustrations and maps highly prized by today's collectors. This page comes from 'Petits Voyages' and shows a view of a battle between the Portugese Armada and Turkish soldiers on horseback in Goa, western India."

And this modified by me by using Adobe Photoshop cs. Wha,s wrong with this sir.--Red Warrior xyz (talk) 10:15, 6 May 2012 (UTC)

I restored File:Portuguese ships battling the Turks at Goa.jpg. Sorry for the circumstances, I deleted it by mistake. --Polarlys (talk) 10:30, 6 May 2012 (UTC)

What about my other files sir. Many of them out of copyright because they are produced by unknown artists .--Red Warrior xyz (talk) 10:38, 6 May 2012 (UTC)

No, they are not. And you don’t know about it, since you can’t even add a proper source and author. --Polarlys (talk) 20:26, 6 May 2012 (UTC)

Sir, is ebay not a reliable source?--Red Warrior xyz (talk) 03:40, 7 May 2012 (UTC)

No. --Polarlys (talk) 09:17, 7 May 2012 (UTC)

File:Nederland Eindhoven Oude gracht.JPG

Moin! Bei der Löschung ist nur die Dateibeschreibung weggekommen, die Datei ist noch da. Viele Grüße, NNW (talk) 14:07, 6 May 2012 (UTC)

Danke für den Hinweis, ist wohl ein aktueller Bug, kommt alle paar Löschungen vor. Danke und Gruß, --Polarlys (talk) 20:24, 6 May 2012 (UTC)

Gallery of Napoli's pictures

Mr Polarlys I contact you because I'm trying to change the main picture on the city of Naples page. I sincerely believe that the picture which appear now on the page of Naples doesn't do justice to the huge beauty of the city, the photos are old, ugly, and the most important monuments and places are missing. So I considered necessary to change it. I made a collage of several pictures of the city that I made with the camera and modified them with the program Photoshop.They are all free pictures without copyright. Then I don't understand the reason why every time I try to put them on wikipidia you always delete them. If I made something wrong with the modality I ask you to explain me in wich way I can load the photos without problems. Regards

Roberto — Preceding unsigned comment added by Amator86 (talk • contribs)

Roberto, please stop lying. This is not your photo. This is also not your photo. The last one is actually the property of someone called „Hans van Reenen“. Please stop stealing his work. You can’t take a photo you found on the web and upload it here. Please see Commons:Licensing & Commons:Benvenuto. --Polarlys (talk) 21:36, 7 May 2012 (UTC)

Betr.: File:PeterundPaul1.JPG

Hi, du bist der einzige den ich kenne hier, deswegen meine Bitte an dich: Guck dir doch mal da die Versionsgeschichte an. In letzter Zeit kloppen sich da welche, rein und raus, hin und her. Auf mein Statement auf der Diskussionsseite geht keiner ein. Man weiß auch nicht, ob da nun Sockenpuppen rumkaspern oder ob gestern zwei neue User dazukamen und mitspielen wollen. Ein Machtwort wäre angebracht. Danke. --Peng (talk) 10:46, 14 May 2012 (UTC)

Das ist offenbar zielgerichteter Einsatz von Sockenpuppen gegen den Bild-Bearbeiter. Habe beide drei Tage gesperrt, bitte melde dich, wenn es erneut Probleme gibt. Grüße, --Polarlys (talk) 19:32, 14 May 2012 (UTC)

Re:Violaciones de los derechos de autor

La verdad no entiendo esa imagenes la cree yo mismo en photoshop con imagenes que saque de mi deviantart creadas por mi saben ya no jodo mas todas la imagenes que subo violan los derechos de autor asi tenga derecho o no igual la borran jodanse.--DJMalik (talk) 15:43, 23 May 2012 (UTC)

  • Este usuario no entiende español.
  • Este utilizador não compreende o português. --Polarlys (talk) 21:39, 23 May 2012 (UTC)

I do not know how to delete images that violate copyrights

List of images that were created by me:

other images were downloaded from the Internet. I would like to delete these images, but I do not know how to do it. Therefore, I offer my apologies if I broke anyone's copyright.

I am a long time was not on this site, so have not seen before such notification.

How can I delete these files?

About how to delete these images, please let us know in this page:Участник:Skylight_555

Thank you Matt. Have a nice weekend. --Polarlys (talk) 14:26, 2 June 2012 (UTC)

umbenennungsorgie als bilderversteckspiel?

hallo polarlys, vielleicht siehst du dir bitte mal diese aktionen/aktivitäten an: [9] + den vollzug [10]? das scheint mir der versuch zu sein durch möglichst komplizierte namen diese bilder unauffindbar zu machen. es hat sich zwar schon ein admin dazu geäussert [11], bisher aber noch nichts weiter unternommen. vielleicht sollte man solche aktionsmöglichkeiten durch ominöse ips mit etwas mehr sicherheitsstufen erschweren? dontworry (talk) 20:06, 5 June 2012 (UTC)

Mh, die neuen Namen sind etwas deskriptiver, sonst sehe ich da wenig auffälliges. Falls es einen „merkwürdigen großen Rahmen“ gibt, kannst du mich ja via Mail kontaktieren. Grüße, --Polarlys (talk) 23:03, 5 June 2012 (UTC)

Universal Mantra Baba Nam Kevalam Kiirtan and other files

You proposed some files uploaded from me for deletion. One is an universal mantra recordered from a gathering of some unknown persons and obviously is copywright free. An other one is an old photo of the late Ernesto Barba, this is a part of an older one (with other persons that I didn't show for privacy reasons) without exif and it's also free (and I can grant for it). What can I do for to prevent the deletion? Its very difficoult to work if every file that I upload without exif is deleted from commons. Maybe I have to insert some particular template to demostrate the possession of the images without exif? Is there a method to personally grant for the freedom of a fie? Thank you--Cornelius383 (talk) 22:29, 4 June 2012 (UTC)

Give a source where the file is from. --Polarlys (talk) 14:54, 5 June 2012 (UTC)
The source (the person that recordered the audio file "Universal mantra") is a friend of mine that published it on Youtube as an audio-videofile (without any copywright limitation). Anyway yesterday I write him a mail to ask a written permission but I don't know how to reinsert again the file and how to prevent a new deletion 'couse I'm not an expert of commons.. The image of Ernesto Barba was thaken from another old image where other people was present. I obtain this photo by mail, directely from a close friend of Barba (Giovanni Bravin) that write on the talk page of the en-WP (as you can also see if you take a look at the Barba's article talk). As you can see if you take a look at my uploads I've recentely uploaded new images (all were taken by me and a few of them are quite old) but what can I do to demostrate that I'm the owner to prevent deletion? I thank you very much if yo can help me.--Cornelius383 (talk) 23:36, 6 June 2012 (UTC)
Please provide appropriate sources: Who took the photo, who is the creator, and so on. --Polarlys (talk) 11:17, 7 June 2012 (UTC)
Ok I will do but can I reinsert a file that was deleted from commons?--Cornelius383 (talk) 15:09, 7 June 2012 (UTC)
Which one? --Polarlys (talk) 15:10, 7 June 2012 (UTC)
For example the Universal Mantra if the person that recorded it from (hundreds) of unknown people singing will give me the OK (I'm sure he will do..), or the image of the late Ernesto Barba because, as I said, it was extrapolated from a bigger image of a group of people (I didn't upload the big one for privacy reasons 'couse many people was there): I received this photo by mail, directely from a close friend of Barba (Giovanni Bravin) that write on the talk page of the en-WP at the Barba's article (you can chek that if you want) and after he send me the image. Thank you (sorry but I'm not an expert of commons as I said..)--Cornelius383 (talk) 18:03, 8 June 2012 (UTC)

Photo Deleted

Hi Polarlys I had an image file removed from my page "Susan Smith-Walsh" and when I queried it with editor Sionk she wrote that it seems to have been you who removed it. As I explained to Sionk the photo was taken by me and I had already uploaded it to Wikimedia Commons prior to adding it to my wiki page. The confusion might arise from a suspicion that I copied the file from a website but please note that I am the owner and administrator of that website. I have the original photo which is a large file that I reduced in size for uploading. The editor Sionk had already raised the issue of the website with me because she thought that I had plagiarised the website. Not so! I would be obliged if you would restore the photo. I am a member of the athletic club to which Susan belonged and I have been asked by the club chairman to create the page in time for the London Olympics. Thank you in anticipation. (Scotty1891 (talk) 16:37, 7 June 2012 (UTC))

Thank you for sending a mail to Commons:OTRS if you are the copyright owner of the photo. Thank you, --Polarlys (talk) 16:39, 7 June 2012 (UTC)


Thank you for replying. I'm puzzled! Will you restore the file to the wiki page? Do you require me to do something else?

(Scotty1891 (talk) 17:29, 7 June 2012 (UTC))

The file will be restored when your ticket is processed. Thank you, --Polarlys (talk) 18:34, 7 June 2012 (UTC)


Hello, I noticed that you left a message on this user's talk page about uploading copyrighted images, and the user has once again uploaded another copyrighted image despite this. I would suggest blocking this user. Gage (talk) 06:07, 18 June 2012 (UTC)


Hello, you recently added 23057750@N0, which seems to be not a valid user id. There is e.g. 23057750@N02 (djricardoramirez (Ricardo Ramirez)) -- RE rillke questions? 17:25, 25 June 2012 (UTC)

Thank you, --Polarlys (talk) 20:35, 25 June 2012 (UTC)


Could you explain what was wrong with this image I uploaded: DamienSandowNXT1.jpg. The image was from my photobucket account. Here is the link. I edited that image from another photobucket's user account, and photobucket's terms of use permits that... "You are also giving other Users the right to copy... and create derivative works from it..." Thus I decide to release the work. I realise that there is no license explicitly stated on the account, so I have granted it a license now. Can it be considered for use on Commons? Starship.paint (talk) 05:49, 30 June 2012 (UTC)

There is no such license on this page. --Polarlys (talk) 10:57, 30 June 2012 (UTC)
I wrote the license on the page yesterday, at the description. Starship.paint (talk) 00:21, 1 July 2012 (UTC)
There is no such license from the original author. --Polarlys (talk) 12:55, 1 July 2012 (UTC)

COM:AN#image removed from wiki page Susan Smith-Walsh

Hallo Polarlys, da gibt es einen Nutzer, der verlangt, dass seine Dateien wiederhergestellt werden sollen. Vllt. magst Du Dich dazu äußern, da die Dateien von Dir als Quelle-fehlend markiert wurden.

Übrigens: Die neuste Version von VisualFileChange ( unterstützt auch Dateilöschungen. -- Rillke(q?) 11:05, 14 July 2012 (UTC)

Bild des Tages vom 11. August 2012

Es gibt eine unberechtigte Eingabe des File:Godavari Bridge.jpg in das Bild des Tages vom 11. August 2012, da dieses File kein Featured Picture ist. Versuche, das File durch ein anderes File zu ersetzen, wurden von User:Ramesh_Ramaiah verhindert. Siehe [12]. Siehe dazu die history von meinem Bild File:Tyto alba (Scopoli, 1769).jpg auf [13]. --Michael Gäbler (talk) 20:02, 4 August 2012 (UTC)

shinya yamanaka foto

hi polarlys, could you please explain more detailed why this file got deleted, and provide an easy accessible link for a normal user so one could understand this without using a talk page? --Soloturn (talk) 21:03, 19 October 2012 (UTC)

Hi! The relevant discussion on a prior upload of this file is linked in the discussion: Commons:Deletion requests/File:Shinya Yamanaka2.jpg. I also referred to the rationale provided by whym that this file is copyrighted by CiRA at Kyoto University. Best regards, --Polarlys (talk) 09:30, 20 October 2012 (UTC)

Licensing claims thread

I saw your posts here. Please take a look at this Licensing claims thread. -- Uzma Gamal (talk) 14:35, 25 October 2012 (UTC)

Thank you for bringing this to my attention. --Polarlys (talk) 17:20, 25 October 2012 (UTC)


This File(Image) belongs to Iraqi ministery of humanrights, and it is free for use in Media as I am an employee in the Media center of the Ministry of human rights and I have full right to publish this Image to provide more Information about our ministry.— Preceding unsigned comment added by Iraq2Human2Rights (talk • contribs)

Please see Commons:OTRS. Thank you. --Polarlys (talk) 16:02, 27 October 2012 (UTC)

Cover albanische öl

Das von mir hochgeladene coverbild steht unter freier Lizens. Ich bin der Urheber und habe damit alle Rechte an diesem Bild, es steht zur freien Verfügung. Gudrun Fröba

Hallo! Wieso bist du der Urheber eines alten Photos? --Polarlys (talk) 15:52, 29 October 2012 (UTC)

Ich habe die Rechte, das Bild für mein cover zu verwenden, gekauft von Herrn Dr. Robert Elsie. Damit habe ich auch das Recht, das Bild als Teil meines Umschlags zu zeigen, sowohl im Print- als auch im webbereich. Das ist üblich in der Branche und wird von allen Bildagenturen so gehalten.

Du hast für deine Verwendung eine Lizenz erworben. räumst hier aber allen ein, das Bild im größeren Rahmen (für jeden Zweck) verwenden zu können. So funktioniert das nicht, siehe bitte Commons:Licensing. Danke, --Polarlys (talk) 15:08, 31 October 2012 (UTC)

Help: no-FoP Italy

Hi Polarlys. When you have a moment, could you do me a favor. I decided to occupy my time to list the no-FoP files in Italy. It has been a long and difficult work that needs to be reviewed by administrators. Please, could you check if everything is correct on User:Raoli/Deletion requests/FoP Italy? Thanks! Raoli ✉ (talk) 00:43, 1 December 2012 (UTC)


File:Carcass1989.jpg was properly sourced when you added this template to it. I have reverted that edit. Please be more careful in the future. – Allen4names (IPv6 contributions) 18:48, 6 December 2012 (UTC)

There is no proper source at all. --Polarlys (talk) 19:39, 6 December 2012 (UTC)
A false source can still be a proper source. Please use the {{Delete}} template. – Allen4names (IPv6 contributions) 19:47, 9 December 2012 (UTC)

File:Wetten dass neu.jpg

Hallo Polarlys,

Du hast die Datei File:Wetten dass neu.jpg mit dem Baustein der fehlenden Genehmigung des Urhebers bzw. Rechteinhabers gekennzeichnet.

Ich denke, es wäre besser, wenn Du einen Löschantrag stellen würdest. Dann könnte geprüft werden, ob die Datei tatsächlich PD-ineligible ist. Wenn dies der Fall wäre, bräuchten wir auch keine Freigabe.

--ALE! ¿…? 08:07, 13 December 2012 (UTC)

Picture of the Year voting round 1 open

Dear Wikimedians,

Wikimedia Commons is happy to announce that the 2012 Picture of the Year competition is now open. We're interested in your opinion as to which images qualify to be the Picture of the Year for 2012. Voting is open to established Wikimedia users who meet the following criteria:

  1. Users must have an account, at any Wikimedia project, which was registered before Tue, 01 Jan 2013 00:00:00 +0000 [UTC].
  2. This user account must have more than 75 edits on any single Wikimedia project before Tue, 01 Jan 2013 00:00:00 +0000 [UTC]. Please check your account eligibility at the POTY 2012 Contest Eligibility tool.
  3. Users must vote with an account meeting the above requirements either on Commons or another SUL-related Wikimedia project (for other Wikimedia projects, the account must be attached to the user's Commons account through SUL).

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. From professional animal and plant shots to breathtaking panoramas and skylines, restorations of historically relevant images, images portraying the world's best architecture, maps, emblems, diagrams created with the most modern technology, and impressive human portraits, Commons features pictures of all flavors.

For your convenience, we have sorted the images into topic categories. Two rounds of voting will be held: In the first round, you can vote for as many images as you like. The first round category winners and the top ten overall will then make it to the final. In the final round, when a limited number of images are left, you must decide on the one image that you want to become the Picture of the Year.

To see the candidate images just go to the POTY 2012 page on Wikimedia Commons

Wikimedia Commons celebrates our featured images of 2012 with this contest. Your votes decide the Picture of the Year, so remember to vote in the first round by January 30, 2013.

the Wikimedia Commons Picture of the Year committee

Delivered by Orbot1 (talk) at 11:17, 19 January 2013 (UTC) - you are receiving this message because you voted last year

File:Janice Jakait Ankunft Barbados - Offizielle Ziellinie.jpg

I was wondering if you could place a template to the uploader's talkpage showing which flickr licenses was acceptable...and which are not. Just so there is no confusion. Thank You, --Leoboudv (talk) 00:04, 12 February 2013 (UTC)

There is already such a template :) Thank you, --Polarlys (talk) 00:06, 12 February 2013 (UTC)

Betr: Änderung einer Category

Hi, du bist leider mein bevorzugter Helfer. Durch Zufall fand ich diese Category:Unnen neben dem Weltkulturenmuseum (Frankfurt) Kategorie. Ich bin 1005 ig sicher, dass es sich um einen Schreib oder Copyfehler handelt und es eigentlich Category:Brunnen neben dem Weltkulturenmuseum (Frankfurt) lauten müsste. Würdest du das bitte verschieben? Danke. --Peng (talk) 11:26, 23 March 2013 (UTC)

Gern. Grüße, --Polarlys (talk) 14:02, 23 March 2013 (UTC)

BMW R 1200 C Independent Cruiser.jpg

Hallo, warum hast Du dieses File gelöscht, ohne vorher mit mir Rücksprache zu halten? Es ist mein Motorrad und meine Datei. Habe ich einen Fehler beim Hochladen bzw. bei den Informationen/Lizenzen gemacht? Ich finde auch nichts auf der Deletion Diskussionsseite dazu. Bmwtroll (talk)

Hallo, die Datei wurde zur Schnelllöschung vorgeschlagen, da sie von der Seite stammt. Ist das deine Seite? Grüße, --Polarlys (talk) 18:06, 5 April 2013 (UTC)
na freilich ist das meine Seite und auch meine Tochter drauf. Meine Frau versichert mir das :) was mich ärgert ist, dass es zur Schnelllöschung kam. Warum zum Teufel durchläuft das nicht den normalen Löschprozess, wo auch mal Fragen gestellt werden? War der Vorschlager neidisch auf mein Motorrad ??? Machst Du es rückgängig ? Bmwtroll (talk) 21:11, 5 April 2013 (UTC)
Die Datei ist wieder da. Bitte hab Verständnis, dass es bei der Menge an Uploads und der Menge tatsächlicher Urheberrechtsverletzungen gelegentlich zu solchen Problemen kommt. Danke, --Polarlys (talk) 22:12, 5 April 2013 (UTC)
Danke 06:37, 6 April 2013 (UTC)
Kannst Du bitte schliessen. Ansonsten hört das nie auf? Bmwtroll (talk) 11:54, 6 April 2013 (UTC)


Hi Polarlys: Would you please explain why this file has been deleted? If I'm doing something wrong, I want to correct it. The photo is owned by Bob Sellers and given to me for the purpose of updating his Wiki article. I know he uses the same photo in other media as well. Thank you. Jackryan733 (talk) 11:05, 6 April 2013 (UTC)

Hi Jack! Please read Commons:Licensing. We need freely licensed photos. Press licenses and similar stuff is not enough. We need an explicit permission by the copyright holder (this is the photographer, not necessarily the displayed person) for every kind of use, not for e.g. Wikipedia. Thank you. --Polarlys (talk) 11:08, 6 April 2013 (UTC)

Mobile Uploads

Moin, danke für deine Hilfe! Die Kategorie alleine zu überwachen ist doch recht viel Arbeit... Benutzt du zum Auffinden der neuen Dateien auch CatScan? Grüße, XenonX3 (talk) 12:41, 6 April 2013 (UTC)

Nein, VisualFileChange. Ich hoffe, dass wir einen Stop dieses Wahnsinns erwirken können. --Polarlys (talk) 12:42, 6 April 2013 (UTC)

"Unused" deletion rationale on very recent uploads

I've noticed several of your recent deletion requests cite "unused" as a rationale for deletion, despite the fact that the images have only very recently been uploaded — for example this request started a mere 39 minutes after the file was uploaded. Surely this is a misuse of policy, seeing as how we can't realistically expect an image to be "in use" so quickly after appearing here. - dcljr (talk) 12:42, 6 April 2013 (UTC)

File:Verwaltungsstruktur für Mecklenburg-Vorpommern.png

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

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

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

Leyo 21:37, 8 April 2013 (UTC)

Questions about deletion

Please see Commons talk:Deletion requests/File:남산공원 2013-04-06 19-12.jpg. - dcljr (talk) 22:02, 10 April 2013 (UTC)

latest flame

Hi Polarlys

I own all the rights for all the stills you erased on april 10. when I upload it to wikicommon I believed I answered all questions regarding the rights. Please tell me what did I miss and what kind of declaration or document should I supply to Wikicommon to show that there is not any what so ever violations of rights. one can't steal something that comletely belongs to him. Thanks.

You surely don’t own the rights to a television series. --Polarlys (talk) 21:12, 11 April 2013 (UTC)

Do you want to see a copy of the contract? I am the creator- writer, director and producer, and I hold all rhe rights, my dear friend. I think you made a mistake. By the way, on the way you erased also photos of myself. not from the series.

Hi, Is there a areason for your silence for 2 days?

When I am making a mistake, I try to fix it ASAP.

--Latest flame (talk) 18:18, 13 April 2013 (UTC)

-- 18:16, 13 April 2013 (UTC)

Commons:OTRS. HTH, --Polarlys (talk) 19:58, 12 April 2013 (UTC)
I pointed you to Commons:OTRS yesterday. --Polarlys (talk) 18:40, 13 April 2013 (UTC)

Thanks. --Latest flame (talk) 19:48, 13 April 2013 (UTC)--Latest flame (talk) 19:48, 13 April 2013 (UTC)


Auf Commons talk:Questionable Flickr images und umseitig befindet sich ein Tool, das den Benutzer auch zu unserer Zweitliste (Commons:Questionable Flickr images/Users) hinzufügt. Ein Link zu einem Photo oder dem Profil genügt dazu. Die ID holt es sich automatisch durch die Flickr-API. Die Zweitliste wird u.a. von meinem License-reviewer-script benutzt, um dem Reviewenden eine Warnung bei entsprechenden Nutzern auszugeben. Ferner scheint Marin H. die Bot-Liste ab und an neu aus der /Users-Liste zu erstellen. Daher wäre es schön, wenn Du Deine Nutzer in Zukunft dort auch eintragen könntest. Und viel mehr Arbeit ist es nun auch nicht mehr. Übrigens kannst Du dir das Widget auch auf Deine Benutzerseite setzen: {{Dashboard/Widgets/Add blacklist user}} -- Danke. -- Rillke(q?) 21:21, 13 April 2013 (UTC)

Großartig, danke! --Polarlys (talk) 21:29, 13 April 2013 (UTC)

Please explain deletion nominations better

I see you're still using "unused, personal file, see COM:SCOPE" in your deletion nominations. As we've discussed before, I don't think that description usually fits why you have decided to nominate the file for deletion. You really should use something like "unidentified person, no realistic educational use, see COM:SCOPE" when it is appropriate. - dcljr (talk) 19:43, 4 May 2013 (UTC)

I think this statement is sufficient. “identifying” the person doesn’t change anything, btw. --Polarlys (talk) 19:56, 4 May 2013 (UTC) PS: Have you figured out how many images that clearly are not covered by Commons:Project scope are uploaded every day, especially with these great new apps? --Polarlys (talk) 19:56, 4 May 2013 (UTC)
If the identity of the person is not relevant, then why repeatedly ask who the person in the photo is when your deletion nominations are questioned? So not only are you being sloppy in your deletion nominations, now you're contradicting the very arguments you were giving for why your nominations were appropriate in the first place. Lovely. - dcljr (talk) 02:17, 20 May 2013 (UTC)


The uploader of this image was warned by you to stop uploading any more copy vios. And yet he uploaded another photo above from a new flickr account with only three images. The image resolution is medium-high and is in jpeg and yet there is no camera metadata? How interesting. Perhaps you should consider banning this uploader for 2 weeks. The flickr account may be a flickr washing account as the photo was only taken yesterday. Best Regards, --Leoboudv (talk) 06:07, 7 May 2013 (UTC)

Thank You, --Leoboudv (talk) 08:02, 7 May 2013 (UTC)

Avís "Manca d'informació amb el fitxer File:Albeniz i Jack.jpeg"

Hola Polarlys, no em queda clar què cal que faci amb aquesta imatge que vaig carregar. L'avís diu que "fitxer ara per ara no especifica qui ha creat el contingut", però jo veig que a l'arxiu hi posa "treball propi", que és el que és. És una fotografia feta per mi d'un pòster d'Isaac Albéniz que tenen al Museu de la Música de Barcelona. A més, si t'hi fixes, vaig enganzar un connector jack al pòster, sobre del puro que Albéniz estava fumant. Quina informació més he d'especificar a la fitxa de la imatge? Gràcies! --Marionaaragay (talk) 09:43, 28 May 2013 (UTC)

Hi! I am sorry, but I don’t speak your language. The file has no source. A good source wood be e.g. a book where you took the file from and the photographers name as the author. Regards, --Polarlys (talk) 16:28, 28 May 2013 (UTC)
Hi, I'm sorry, I didn't realize you don't speak Catalan. The original image was a poster in the Library of the Music Museum of Barcelona, a Public Domain Image of the musician Isaac Albeniz (1880-1909). So there is no photographer to quote as the autor. What can I do? Thanks and regards!--Marionaaragay (talk) 16:18, 29 May 2013 (UTC)
You can state that the photographer is unknown, that the photo is displayed in the museum and that you created the reproduction (for which you can't claim copyrights). Regards, --Polarlys (talk) 18:53, 29 May 2013 (UTC)
Ok, thanks a lot!--Marionaaragay (talk) 19:04, 29 May 2013 (UTC)