User talk:RHaworth

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

You may get a faster response at en:User_talk:RHaworth.

unsubsted transclusion of User:RHaworth/mylic[edit]

On commons such templates should not be transcluded without the subst: . If you want I can subst all this templates using my bot. Regards, abf /talk to me/ 08:54, 13 May 2008 (UTC)

  • Why should they be substed? -- RHaworth 02:59, 14 May 2008 (UTC)
'cause otherwhise you could do changes to your license in the template and because the license should be visible in the source. abf /talk to me/ 09:41, 14 May 2008 (UTC)
  • OK. Go ahead and subst em. -- RHaworth 18:38, 14 May 2008 (UTC)

Image:AnkhnEdt.jpg[edit]

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

This message was added automatically by Filbot, if you need some help about it, ask its master (Filnik) or go to the Commons:Help desk. --Filnik 14:11, 14 October 2008 (UTC)

File:Nossa Senhora da Piedade 166.jpg[edit]

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

This message was added automatically by Nikbot, if you need some help about it, ask its master (Filnik) or go to the Commons:Help desk. --Filnik 19:21, 11 March 2009 (UTC)

Crackpot[edit]

Note to self. In a weeks time, request deletion of Special:Contributions/Xirja. — RHaworth (Talk | contribs) 21:23, 26 July 2009 (UTC)

Tip: Categorizing images[edit]

Afrikaans | العربية | беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ | català | čeština | dansk | Deutsch | Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ | Ελληνικά | English | Esperanto | español | فارسی | suomi | français | galego | עברית | magyar | íslenska | italiano | 日本語 | ქართული | 한국어 | македонски | മലയാളം | Plattdüütsch | Nederlands | norsk bokmål | polski | português | português do Brasil | română | русский | slovenčina | slovenščina | српски / srpski | svenska | українська | Tiếng Việt | 中文 | 中文(简体)‎ | 中文(繁體)‎ | +/−


Hello, RHaworth!

Tip: Add categories to your images

Thanks a lot for contributing to the Wikimedia Commons! Here's a tip to make your uploads more useful: Why not add some categories to describe them? This will help more people to find and use them.

Here's how:

1) If you're using the UploadWizard, you can add categories to each file when you describe it. Just click "more options" for the file and add the categories which make sense:

Uploadwizard-categories.png

2) You can also pick the file from your list of uploads, edit the file description page, and manually add the category code at the end of the page.

[[Category:Category name]]

For example, if you are uploading a diagram showing the orbits of comets, you add the following code:

[[Category:Astronomical diagrams]]
[[Category:Comets]]

This will make the diagram show up in the categories "Astronomical diagrams" and "Comets".

When picking categories, try to choose a specific category ("Astronomical diagrams") over a generic one ("Illustrations"). Pro-tip: The CommonSense tool can help you find the best category for your image.

Thanks again for your uploads! More information about categorization can be found in Commons:Categories, and don't hesitate to leave a note on the help desk.

BotMultichillT 06:01, 5 September 2009 (UTC)

A couple of photos with wrong sources[edit]

While tidying up images imported here for Geograph British Isles, I noticed that File:Great Bentley 319.jpg and File:Great Bentley 330.jpg are marked as being from Geograph but are linked to an entirely different photo of Great Bentley there. Indeed, I can't find those photos on Geograph at all (though with 1.6M pictures to search, I might have missed them). Would you mind updating the sources of these pictures, either to give their correct IDs on Geograph (correcting both the source URL and the {{geograph}} template), or to mark them as "own work" (updating the licensing accordingly)? Thanks. --bjh21 (talk) 18:54, 30 January 2010 (UTC)

Thanks. Sorry I didn't check the history before wasting your time. --bjh21 (talk) 17:24, 1 February 2010 (UTC)

File:Maypole Inn Ashurst Wood.jpg[edit]

Thanks for providing your originals to Commons and taking care of the now duplicate uploaded files. Happy editing, --Martin H. (talk) 04:48, 6 February 2010 (UTC)

Autopatrol[edit]

Hello. I just wanted to inform you that I have given you Autopatrolled rights. This does not affect your editing, but makes it easier for users watching Special:RecentChanges to find unhelpful edits. Regards, –Juliancolton | Talk 13:02, 18 March 2010 (UTC)

Usual Storye[edit]

Thanks for all your corrections on my previous set of Geograph uploads. I hope I'm getting it right nowadays, though. Storye book (talk) 12:13, 24 April 2010 (UTC)

  • I checked a couple of your recent ones - the seem OK. It would be appreciated if you could look at this list (which will continue to grow during the next month) and fix those marked no {{geograph}} tag. (Talking of gin gangs, have you seen this pic?) — RHaworth (Talk | contribs) 03:30, 25 April 2010 (UTC)

File tagging File:Gray Triptych 1963.jpg[edit]

Беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ | Català | Česky | Dansk | Deutsch | Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ | Ελληνικά | English | Español | فارسی | Suomi | Français | Galego | עברית | Magyar | Հայերեն | Italiano | 日本語 | 한국어 | Lietuvių | Македонски | മലയാളം | Plattdüütsch | Nederlands | Norsk bokmål | Polski | Português | Română | Русский | Slovenščina | Svenska | Türkçe | Українська | اردو | Tiếng Việt | 中文(简体)‎ | 中文(繁體)‎ | +/−
Warning sign
This media was probably deleted.
Thanks for uploading File:Gray_Triptych_1963.jpg. This media is missing permission information. A source is given, but there is no proof that the author or copyright holder agreed to license the file under the given license. Please provide a link to an appropriate webpage with license information, or send an email with copy of a written permission to OTRS (permissions-commons@wikimedia.org). This also applies if you are the author yourself.

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

The file probably has been deleted. If you sent a permission, try to send it again after 14 days. Do not re-upload. When the OTRS-member processes your mail, the file can be undeleted. Additionally you can request undeletion here, providing a link to the File-page on Commons where it was uploaded ([[:File:Gray_Triptych_1963.jpg]]) and the above demanded information in your request.

Teofilo (talk) 11:17, 9 June 2010 (UTC)

Please look at this contribs history. Do you really doubt that en:user:Reginald gray is en:Reginald Gray (artist)? Did you see the edit summary here? Is not that sufficient evidence? If you want further evidence, I suggest you explain very slowly and carefully (see this) to Reginald himself what you want. The best way to contact him is by e-mail or telephone - I would send details to you but you have not given an e-mail option. Failing that, try a message at en:user talk:Reginald gray. (I am sure he is fluent in French so you could try that!)
When you are satisfied that this image is OK, please go through every image in Category:Reginald Gray and mark each one to confirm its permisssion so that I am not bothered by people like you and Tryphon in future. — RHaworth (Talk | contribs) 09:11, 10 June 2010 (UTC)

A hundred years from now, we will all be dead, but the paintings will still be copyrighted and our grand children will need a written record that the artist had agreed to free licence his works. This is why an E-mail is necessary. Teofilo (talk) 05:23, 11 June 2010 (UTC)

An hundred years from now copyright will have expired on these images and the original paintings. Please try to stay on topic. I asked some questions above, please answer them. Please look at File:Reginald Gray self-portrait.jpeg and File:Bacon by Gray 257.jpg and follow up the OTRS tickets that they reference. One or other of these tickets includes a blanket approval for all images by Reginald Gray uploaded by RHaworth. — RHaworth (Talk | contribs) 01:28, 14 June 2010 (UTC)
Doesn't copyright expire 70 years after an author's death for unpublished works ? http://www.copyright.cornell.edu/resources/publicdomain.cfm . I am not sure whether there is consistent case law saying that works merely displayed on the internet are considered "published". I am unable to follow up OTRS tickets as I am not an OTRS volunteer. Please go to Commons:OTRS/Noticeboard and ask if any of these tickets might be of use on File:Gray_Triptych_1963.jpg and if the answer is "yes", please request that OTRS volunteer to perform the action mentioned on COM:OTRS#Templates to use on image pages: add {{PermissionOTRS|ticket=URL}} on this file and other concerned files. Teofilo (talk) 18:47, 17 June 2010 (UTC)

TUSC token 79de45baa798cbaa3851a167b5a0ba09[edit]

I am now proud owner of a TUSC account!

Your actions at File:Shin kicking at the Olimpicks.jpg[edit]

Did you even check what you were reverting? Please explain how can you consider this vandalism?[1] I thank you for correcting my mistake in the url,[2] but I am definitely affronted by your reversion of an attempt to make the source and license clearer to re-users (instead of directing them to jump up and down the page) simply to your liking under a false summary. Jappalang (talk) 15:28, 19 September 2010 (UTC)

  • OK "near vandalism" was a bit strong but please explain to me: since the {{geograph}} tag incorporates {{CC-BY-SA 2.0}}, why do you think it should be given a second time? Where do the majority of Geograph images place the Geograph tag? Why do you think this image should be different? — RHaworth (Talk | contribs) 15:43, 19 September 2010 (UTC)
"'Near vandalism' was a bit strong"? That is patently false; "vandalism" are acts that cause harm to the integrity of Commons (deliberate introduction of false information, turning it into grossly rude or obscene presentations, etc). By what means was a change in layout that did not misrepresent information (instead, it was trying to make the information clearer) any of those?
If you had used a summary that stated a disagreement in layout, I would not have bothered with this. But using false summaries like that show an utter disrespect for others on this project. I disagree with this layout (for the reasons below), but I do not find it worth to be getting into an edit war over formatting.
Commons is standardising its presentation, using {{Information}}; if the source of the image is to be stated in "Source", it is pointless for {{Geograph}} to have that. The Geograph template itself allows for us to break it apart (Template talk:Geograph#CC template); nowhere in the Geograph template or any of Commons's policies and guidelines does it state that one must use the Geograph template as is. Jappalang (talk) 02:26, 20 September 2010 (UTC)
  • Are we talking the same language? "'Near vandalism' was a bit strong" was an admission by me (and muted apology) that the edit summary could have been more diplomatically worded. It did not need discussing. I see that I cannot persuade you to change your mind. As long as geograph images are categorised with the correct sort key and are given the appropriate licence, once only, then I shall not bother you further. — RHaworth (Talk | contribs) 11:02, 20 September 2010 (UTC)

Deprecated License[edit]

Deutsch | English | Italiano | മലയാളം | Português | +/−


Hello. Thank you for uploading Image:Eyemouthharbour02.jpg, however the license that you have uploaded it under has been deprecated. Please could you select a new free license that describes the rights of the image correctly? If you are not able to do this, the image will be deleted in 7 days.

For more information on licenses that can be used on Wikimedia Commons, please see Commons:Licensing. If you have any questions, please ask at the village pump. Thank you for your patience and consideration. This is an automatic message by Nikbot.--Filnik 00:19, 21 January 2011 (UTC)

Nice photos[edit]

I had a look at some of your photos and I wanted to say they are all great, I understand you probably get a lot of grief about doing stuff wrong and so on, but I thought they were all really good photos and wanted to congratulate you on a wonderful contribution to Wikipedia! New users, like me, find it much easier to relate to articles and edit them with a picture. Mikeymand (talk) 19:29, 18 February 2011 (UTC) "A picture tells a thousand words"

April 2011[edit]

Message tied up in Ribbon.jpg Hello, RHaworth. You have new messages at Stuart.Jamieson's talk page.
You may remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Asturianu | Беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ | বাংলা | Català | Čeština | Deutsch | Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ | English | Español | Suomi | Français | Galego | हिन्दी | Magyar | Italiano | 日本語 | ქართული | Македонски | മലയാളം | Plattdüütsch | Nederlands | Português | Română | Русский | Slovenščina | Svenska | Türkçe | +/−

Category:Footpaths[edit]

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

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

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


беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ | Deutsch | English | español | français | עברית | magyar | italiano | 日本語 | македонски | português | русский | +/−

Imgaril (talk) 11:28, 5 August 2011 (UTC)

Deprecated License[edit]

Deutsch | English | Italiano | മലയാളം | Português | +/−


Hello. Thank you for uploading Image:Segmented vase 318.jpg, however the license that you have uploaded it under has been deprecated. Please could you select a new free license that describes the rights of the image correctly? If you are not able to do this, the image will be deleted in 7 days.

For more information on licenses that can be used on Wikimedia Commons, please see Commons:Licensing. If you have any questions, please ask at the village pump. Thank you for your patience and consideration. This is an automatic message by Nikbot.--Filnik 19:41, 27 August 2011 (UTC)

File:Port Logan fish pond - interior - geograph.org.uk - 88203.jpg[edit]

Commons-emblem-issue.svg File:Port Logan fish pond - interior - geograph.org.uk - 88203.jpg has been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether it should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry.

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


Afrikaans | العربية | Беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ | 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 | Српски / srpski | Svenska | Türkçe | Tiếng Việt | 中文 | 中文(简体)‎ | 中文(繁體)‎ | +/−

MorganKevinJ(talk) 22:38, 21 May 2012 (UTC)

File:Swift by Gray 2004.jpg[edit]

Commons-emblem-issue.svg File:Swift by Gray 2004.jpg has been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether it should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry.

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


Afrikaans | العربية | Беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ | 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 | Српски / srpski | Svenska | Türkçe | Tiếng Việt | 中文 | 中文(简体)‎ | 中文(繁體)‎ | +/−

Werieth (talk) 13:15, 10 April 2013 (UTC)

File tagging File:Study for a Portrait - Gray.jpg[edit]

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

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

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

JuTa 20:19, 2 July 2013 (UTC)

National Tramway Museum[edit]

Hi RHaworth. I've undone your addition of Category:National Tramway Museum to File:Crich Tramway Museum Portuguese tram.jpg and File:Crich Tramway Museum - Flickr - mick - Lumix.jpg as both files are already in subcategories of that category (through Category:Tramcars of the National Tramway Museum and then the individual categories per tram). Hope that's OK. Thanks. Mike Peel (talk) 19:13, 28 August 2013 (UTC)