User talk:Rosenzweig/Archiv1

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


Luke Ford's

Thank you very much, Rosenzweig. About this picture, you're right, and I didn't pay enough attention to the problem. It has to be deleted. --Delias 21:16, 9 August 2006 (UTC)

Image:Wappen Landkreis Bautzen.png

Image deletion warning Image:Wappen Landkreis Bautzen.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 image, 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. If the file is up for deletion because it has been superseded by a superior derivative of your work, consider the notion that although the file may be deleted, your hard work (which we all greatly appreciate) lives on in the new file.
In all cases, please do not take the deletion request personally. It is never intended as such. Thank you!

Afrikaans | العربية | 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)‎ | +/−

TM 16:27, 28 October 2006 (UTC)


heyy=) thanx very much for your message, actually yes, I emailed Monstar asking him for permission to use his pictures on Wikipedia and he answered what I posted on each one of the pictures from his site I uploaded. Yeah he emailed me, on september 21 2006. How can I do that thing u tell me??=) thanxx!! Slave4u 00:15, 4 November 2006 (UTC)

Simply create a page that tells everything you told me just now. If possible, put on it the actual text of the e-mails you sent and received (without actual adresses, real names etc.) Have a look at en:User:Tabercil/Luke Ford permission and create a page like it, here in Commons perhaps. How about User:Slave4u/Monstar permission? Regards --Rosenzweig 00:24, 4 November 2006 (UTC)
By the way, is there a simple way to search this site for suitable pictures? And how do I tell if the pictures are actually taken by the site owner himself? There seem to be pictures from other photographers at the site as well, and he can't license those, so anybody using the permission will have to be careful to select only pictures taken by the site owner himself. --Rosenzweig 00:32, 4 November 2006 (UTC)

Yeah, he posts pictures that are not taken by him, but he also posts losts of pictures that he takes at porn events and such. It's very easy to tell what pictures have been taken by him because he always puts a big watermark on them, like here: Those that don't have the watermark don't belong to him. There really isn't a way to find specific pictures on his site, you know like if you're looking for a porn star or something, he posts the news which sometimes contain pictures and then they go to the archives, but they're never listed any other way=( I will do that thanxx very much 4 your time n kindest regards!!!=) Slave4u 00:49, 4 November 2006 (UTC)

Image Tagging Image:Rheinprovinz Wappen.png

العربية | asturianu | беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ | català | čeština | dansk | Deutsch | Ελληνικά | English | español | euskara | فارسی | suomi | français | galego | עברית | magyar | italiano | 日本語 | 한국어 | македонски | മലയാളം | Plattdüütsch | Nederlands | norsk nynorsk | norsk bokmål | polski | português | português do Brasil | русский | slovenčina | slovenščina | svenska | Türkçe | українська | Tiếng Việt | 中文(简体)‎ | 中文(繁體)‎ | +/−

Warning sign
This media may be deleted.

Thanks for uploading Image:Rheinprovinz Wappen.png. I notice the image page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you have not created this media yourself then you need to argue that we have the right to use the media on Wikimedia Commons (see copyright tagging below). If you have not created the media yourself then you should also specify where you found it, i.e., in most cases link to the website where you got it, and the terms of use for content from that page. If the content is a derivative of a copyrighted work, you need to supply the names and a licence of the original authors as well.

If the media also doesn't have a copyright tag, then you must also add one. If you created/took the picture, audio, or video then you can use {{self|cc-by-sa-2.5}} to release it under the Creative Commons or {{PD-self}} to release it into the public domain. See Commons:Copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

Note that any unsourced and untagged images will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have uploaded other media, please check that you have specified their source and copyright tagged them, too. You can find all your uploads using the Gallery tool. Thank you. Rüdiger Wölk 07:04, 19 November 2006 (UTC)

de:Liste der Wappen in Thüringen

Hallo Rosenzweig. Die meisten dieser Wappen wurden von Dir hochgeladen. Frage: Ist es Absicht, dass alle statt Weiß (heraldisch Silber) in einem Lilaton gehalten sind? Trifft auch für Braun statt Gelb (heraldisch Gold) zu. Falls es ein unerwünschter Effekt war/ist, würdest Du sie nachbearbeiten? Zwei davon habe ich gerade versilbert (Landkreis Altenburger Land, Landkreis Eichsfeld). gruss Geograv 22:02, 3 January 2007 (UTC)

Die waren (und sind) in der benutzten Quelle so. Es handelt sich um die offizielle Website Thüringens, kann schon sein, dass die heraldisch nicht so beschlagen sind :-) Also: ganz korrekt ist es wohl nicht, ob es von den Erstellern erwünscht war oder nicht, kann ich nicht beurteilen. An einer Korrektur kann ich mich in den nächsten Tagen mal versuchen, große Priorität werde ich dem aber nicht beimessen. Ich habe ganz sicher nichts dagegen, wenn mir jemand zuvorkommt. Viele Grüße --Rosenzweig 22:52, 3 January 2007 (UTC)
Okay, so nach und nach werden sie sich "aufhellen". Habe die offizielle Seite auch gesehen und war sehr erstaunt. Geograv 01:41, 4 January 2007 (UTC)

Fresken und andere multidimensionale Höhlenzeichnungen

Danke, dass Du unserem "Experten für Antike Plastiken" Bescheid gegeben hast. Vielleicht sollte er sich einfach auf das 20. und 21. Jahrhundert beschränken.  ;-) Grüße.--Nemissimo 12:28, 23 February 2007 (UTC)

Purple Star

Purple Star.png The Purple Star
For enduring vandalism on your userpage while keeping a cool head =).   — Jeff G. (talk|contribs) 05:33, 11 March 2007 (UTC)

Image:Bitwa pod Komarowem w 1920 roku.jpg

Yes, you're right. Painter died in 1955. No suitable license here. --Hiuppo 18:12, 18 March 2007 (UTC)

What I wonder...

I already met several Germans, and I respect their creativity, initiative, and leadership.

But I wonder how German people are cold and presumptuous.

Some peoples prefer to appear « cool » (Anglosaxon), some other prefer appear talking lowdly and friendly and appear naive to manage what they finaly want (Italian, Spanish, French people). German people (often) only state coldly what they want.

An important point, in your case, is that none sentence thanks for the fact that I took 25min to converte your not-scalable png into a new scalable SVG, this in my « free time ».

I admit that I never seen a people -except Germans- which can scold in 10 lines, without thanks you even just with one word. Truely amazing. Yug (talk) 16:14, 10 May 2007 (UTC)

I see your point as far as I as a person am concerned, and I'll try to add a few words of thanks next time I have a situation like this, be it with you or someone else. Some of the blame is to be put on the non-personal medium of communication (written words, in a foreign language to boot) that is used here, but I accept the other part of it. The fact that I was somewhat annoyed about the things I wrote to you about may serve as a bit of an excuse.
But I did not and do not see the point in converting this particular coat of arms PNG image into an almost identical SVG image (and I still wonder why anyone would choose it). The original PNG image is relatively large for this kind of image, which is normally only displayed at small sizes anyway. The graphical quality of the SVG version is about the same as that of the PNG or perhaps even slightly worse (some small details are simplified). So: thank you for your time and effort, but once again, I do not see the point. Yes, it's scalable. But on what occasion would you want to use this image, which is not of outstanding quality in either veron, in a size bigger than the original image?
In any case I tried to write to you in a way that, while being clear about what I wanted to discuss, still was perfectly polite. I still think I have managed this. You obviously expected something else, so it seems your feelings were hurt as well. So let's file this as a case where, hopefully, both sides have learned something, and move on.
On the other hand, I do not think your musings about national character traits are helpful here; on the contrary, in my experience things like this are very easily misunderstood and can lead to bitter arguments. So in my experience it's best to avoid reasonings like this altogether. Regards --Rosenzweig 17:00, 10 May 2007 (UTC)

Image:Wappen Bad Rappenau.png 17:59, 28 August 2005
I dowload you png and start to make the SVG
I made the Check usage => nothing
Image:Wappen Bad Rappenau.svg uploaded at 18:34, 7 May 2007 and Deletion of .png. I also edited the png page to say "image deleted, please use the SVG one."

what I means is that we can do as best as we can, but in some cases, that don't work completely. It's impossible to guess that you where exactly in the same time puting the image in 3 wikipedias.

For the fact that my previous talk was mid-hostile, that because I did -a bit more stronger- the same jump of coldness that you previously did.

We are all here in hour free time, we can do mistakes, but we have to assume good faith. If someone come to scold me or talking coldly, I conscienciously answer angain more "hostile". I also admit that "non-personal medium of communication (written words, in a foreign language to boot)" are not helping us !

So please always assume good faith, especially with confirmed users (like us two), we all are here in our free time. Simply have fun on commons, notice simply mistakes when someone do one, and he/she will fix it promptly and happily.

--Yug (talk) 10:55, 11 May 2007 (UTC)


Image deletion warning Image:Seracher_Dichterkreis_weniger_Blaustich.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 image, 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. If the file is up for deletion because it has been superseded by a superior derivative of your work, consider the notion that although the file may be deleted, your hard work (which we all greatly appreciate) lives on in the new file.
In all cases, please do not take the deletion request personally. It is never intended as such. Thank you!

Afrikaans | العربية | 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)‎ | +/−

Rosenzweig 19:59, 22 May 2007 (UTC)

Photos of synagogues destroyed by the nazis during the Kristal Nacht or during WWII

Dear Mr Rosenzweig.

1/ Concerning the remarks you made on the pictures of the synagogues destroyed by the nazis during the Kristal Nacht, I will contact the website where they have been published first. If you go to their website, you will see they differentiate between what they call "Historische Fotos" and the more recent photos.

2/ I am contacting and will contact several Jewish organisations including Yad Vashem, to know if a nazi criminal who has taken pictures of a burning synagogue after having put the fire to it (personnaly or with his group), is legally the owner of the copyright. As there is an absolute international law which says no one can take profit from his crime, I do not think he can claim for his right. Best regards --FLLL 14:30, 28 May 2007 (UTC)

1) If a website calls some pictures Historische Fotos, this has no legal relevance whatsoever regarding copyright. You took the pictures from this page. They in turn took the pictures from books, not mentioning the original photographers.
2) Please give a reference for this "absolute international law" you mention that you think exists. I do not think there is such a "law" (passed by whom?), and I also think you should learn more about copyright before uploading any more pictures. A good starting point would be to read Commons:Licensing, especially Material in the public domain. --Rosenzweig 16:00, 28 May 2007 (UTC)
This is not a law, but a maxim (like ne bis in idem or in dubio pro reo). The question is whether it is applicable in those cases. I don't think it has any consequences regarding copyright. An example so you may better understand it: Adolf Hitler, arguably the top Nazi, wrote a book, the infamous Mein Kampf. Him being a Nazi does not have the effect that this book enters the Public Domain, quite on the contrary, the copyright still exists (and will do so until December 31, 2015). Regards --Rosenzweig 08:43, 29 May 2007 (UTC)

Jewish Encyclopedia

This book is in the PD because of its age. But you mention the photos I have imported are copyrighted and that it is mentionned on the photo itself. Your argument is the pictures were taken by a photographer, not by the Jewish Encyclopedia. I have 2 remarks:

  • It is not because someone place "copyright" on a picture, that he automatically owns the rights. His work must be copyrightable?
  • You ask me to study about the copyrights. I have checked the French law about copyrights, so that several explaining articles. The law mention clearly the copyright is to protect "une oeuvre intellectuelle" (Intellectual work). "une copie à l'identique" without "un apport intellectuel" is not copyrightable. This includes all the means of copying (photocopy, photography without personnal contribution, mechanical, chemical means etc..) which are not copyrightable. If I understand the law, the photos of are not copyrightable, as they are just pure copy of the book.
Waiting your comments --FLLL 10:48, 2 June 2007 (UTC)
Méry Laurent au Chapeau de Loutre, 1882
I looked up the Jewish Encyclopedia website and it says the encyclopedia is from 1901 to 1906. You did not mention any years in the image description pages of the pictures taken from the Jewish Encyclopedia. We still do not know who really photographed these pictures and when he died, but pictures that are more than a hundred years old are generelly tolerated here, even without sufficient information, unless someone proves that the picture in question is still protected. This is not the case with these pictures; I will add the information that they are taken from a work published 1901 to 1906 and remove the insufficient information tag.

As to your second question, you misunderstood something. The identical copies you are referring too are not copyrightable on their own. Let's take this painting by Manet. The painting is from 1882, Manet died in 1883. His paintings are all in the public domain because of age. But what you see here is not the painting itself, of course, it is a photograph of the painting, converted into a computer file and displayed on your screen. The photograph shows just the painting, nothing else, and it does show it straight from the front, nothing was changed. Such images are meant by "une copie à l'identique" without "un apport intellectuel", you cannot claim any copyright on them. That is what the PD Art tag is all about. This is good for us here at Wikipedia, because if photographers could claim copyright on their identical photographs of paintings etc. in the public domain, we could only show images of public domain paintings if the photographers had expressly given their consent. (Please note that all of this applies to flat images. For photographs of sculptures etc., works with three dimensions, you can claim a copyright, because some intellectual input is assumed when photographing something that is not flat - selecting the angle from which the photograph was taken etc.)

On the other hand, if the painting/picture itself is still copyrighted, the same copyright that is valid for the original picture is also valid for any copies/photographs of it. You won't see any paintings of Pablo Picasso on Commons or on the French and German wikipedia, because Picasso died only in 1973 and his works are still protected up to and including December 31st, 2043. (The English wikipedia does show some paintings by Picasso, but only because some of Picasso's paintings are in the Public Domain in the United States, not in Europe. American copyright law is different from European laws, but as a rule of thumb here on Commons, pictures should be in the PD both in the US and in their country of origin.) So: The pictures taken from the Jewish Encyclopedia are copies of course, and the copies themselves are not copyrighted. But if the original photograph is still protected, the same protection is also valid for any copies. As stated above, I will remove the tags nonetheless and add the information that those pictures are more than a hundred years old, they are generally tolerated then. Please note that this still only means the images are tolerated beause they are most likely PD. Without further information, we do not really know. Regards --Rosenzweig 11:46, 2 June 2007 (UTC)

Image Tagging Image:Obersulm_Weiler_Schloss_1_20061126.jpg

العربية | asturianu | беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ | català | čeština | dansk | Deutsch | Ελληνικά | English | español | euskara | فارسی | suomi | français | galego | עברית | magyar | italiano | 日本語 | 한국어 | македонски | മലയാളം | Plattdüütsch | Nederlands | norsk nynorsk | norsk bokmål | polski | português | português do Brasil | русский | slovenčina | slovenščina | svenska | Türkçe | українська | Tiếng Việt | 中文(简体)‎ | 中文(繁體)‎ | +/−

Warning sign
This media may be deleted.

Thanks for uploading Image:Obersulm_Weiler_Schloss_1_20061126.jpg. I notice the image page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you have not created this media yourself then you need to argue that we have the right to use the media on Wikimedia Commons (see copyright tagging below). If you have not created the media yourself then you should also specify where you found it, i.e., in most cases link to the website where you got it, and the terms of use for content from that page. If the content is a derivative of a copyrighted work, you need to supply the names and a licence of the original authors as well.

If the media also doesn't have a copyright tag, then you must also add one. If you created/took the picture, audio, or video then you can use {{self|cc-by-sa-2.5}} to release it under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike license or {{PD-self}} to release it into the public domain. See Commons:Copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

Note that any unsourced and untagged images will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have uploaded other media, please check that you have specified their source and copyright tagged them, too. You can find all your uploads using the Gallery tool. Thank you. Siebrand 23:51, 8 June 2007 (UTC)

I beg your pardon? This image never missed any required element, it always had a license, and the description always stated it was my "own picture". --Rosenzweig 18:14, 9 June 2007 (UTC)


This picture, though nice, has no source info. It has been tagged since August 16th and it is now the 26th. As far as I know, it's been on wikipedia for a very long time without rationale. If you are an admin, please delete the photo since the 7-day mark has been passed in regards to the warning tag in the picture's summary. If you are not an admin, please refer this to the appropriate parties --Ghostexorcist 19:07, 26 August 2007 (UTC)

I'm not an admin. If you want one, have a look at Commons:Administrators. In my experience, things are sometimes a bit slow here, so 10 days is really nothing to worry about. Regards --Rosenzweig 19:22, 26 August 2007 (UTC)

Image deletion warning Image:Rashi.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 image, 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. If the file is up for deletion because it has been superseded by a superior derivative of your work, consider the notion that although the file may be deleted, your hard work (which we all greatly appreciate) lives on in the new file.
In all cases, please do not take the deletion request personally. It is never intended as such. Thank you!

Afrikaans | العربية | 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. (talk|contribs) 23:25, 27 August 2007 (UTC)

Why do you post this here? I did not upload that particular picture. --Rosenzweig 16:27, 30 August 2007 (UTC)
I posted this Image deletion warning here because of the above postings and because you posted in Image talk:Rashi.jpg.   — Jeff G. (talk|contribs|Administrator nom) 19:23, 3 September 2007 (UTC)
I can't add anything else to the debate. Anybody who says this is old enough to be PD should provide some valid source. Regards --Rosenzweig 03:03, 4 September 2007 (UTC)

Hast Du

irgendeine Vermutung, was der User damit (25. und 26 August) sagen wollte? gruss Geograv 01:36, 4 September 2007 (UTC)

Mir scheint, da wurden die Landkreis-Artikel in en.wp auf die Commons-Wappen umgestellt und die vorher dort verwendeten Wappenversionen hier abgespeichert, bevor man zur vorherigen (besseren) Commons-Version zurückgekehrt ist. Viele Grüße --Rosenzweig 03:05, 4 September 2007 (UTC)

Image:Jenna Jameson AVN Awards January 9 2006.jpg

Sorry, da hab ich mich irgendwie verguckt, bin mir sicher in der Kopfzeile den Dateinamen von der flickr Seite gesehen zu haben. Nichts für ungut, und frohe Weihnachten. --GeorgHHtalk   20:37, 22 December 2007 (UTC)

Wappen von Benutzer PälzerBu

Hallo Rosenzweig. Wie Du vielleicht bemerkt hast, tauchen im Südwesten in den letzten Tagen neue Wappen auf - teils als svg (Image:Wappen Neustadt.png —> Image:Wappen neustadt weinstrasse.svg), teils aber auch als png. Letztere mit unterschiedlicher Qualität (Image:Wappen Schwetzingen.png —> Image:Wappen von Schwetzingen.png). Ich weiß nicht so recht, es sollte bestimmt nicht das Ziel sein, mehrere Wappen im gleichen Format herumliegen zu haben und mitunter die in besserer Qualität verwaisen zu lassen. Auf dieses habe ich mal das neue, größere darübergezogen, auf die Dauer mag ich mir das aber nicht antun. gruss Geograv 06:53, 2 February 2008 (UTC)

Hallo Geograv, ich habe Benutzer:PälzerBu mal auf seiner Diskussionsseite deswegen angeschrieben. Viele Grüße --Rosenzweig 15:56, 2 February 2008 (UTC)

Image:Orthetrum brunneum - 001.jpg

Ok, I'm going to rename the file, thank you very much for your comment! Greetings! Mutari (talk) 15:15, 28 July 2008 (UTC)

Transferring images to Commons

Hi, I have a rather critical response to the remarks you made one my Wikipedia talkpage. I would appreciate if you would take a look. Thank you. -- Marcel Douwe Dekker (talk) 19:45, 7 October 2008 (UTC)


Hi, schau's Dir nochmal genau an: Image:Neues Rathaus der Stadt Wiesbaden.jpg. Zur Zeit gibts keinen Original-Autor und -Uploader. Gruss Mutter Erde (talk) 17:51, 16 November 2008 (UTC)

Ich bin mir nicht sicher, ob ich verstehe, was du meinst. In der Bildbeschreibung steht Author VanWinkle Original uploader was VanWinkle at de.wikipedia, jeweils verlinkt. Dass dieser Benutzer in de.wp keine Benutzerseite angelegt hat, ist nun mal so. Oder was meinst du? Viele Grüße --Rosenzweig δ 18:25, 16 November 2008 (UTC)
Ich steig selbst noch nicht ganz durch. Also: Der Author isr der hier: -=RipVanW=-, und den Uploader hab ich auch noch nicht - selbst wenn ich aus dem User:VanWinkle wieder einen Benutzer machen würde:-). Wundersames wikipedia :-). Gruss Mutter Erde (talk) 18:39, 16 November 2008 (UTC)
Hochgeladen hat das Bild am 24. Januar 2007 der de:Benutzer:VanWinkle (Beiträge), und der war ursprünglich auch als Urheber angegeben (siehe das Original upload log). Erst später, am 11. Mai 2007, kam dann dieser -=RipVanW=- daher und hat sich als Urheber eingetragen. Möglicherweise ein Nachfolgeaccount von VanWinkle, weil der sein Kennwort nicht mehr wusste oder so (die Aktivitätsperioden dieser beiden Benutzer überschneiden sich nicht). Ist aber auch egal, das wurde erst nachträglich geändert, und man weiß nicht, ob es stimmt. Deswegen steht jetzt der ursprünglich angegebene Urheber drin, der identisch mit dem Hochlader ist. Viele Grüße --Rosenzweig δ 19:35, 16 November 2008 (UTC)
OK, OK, alles klar. Konnte es nur nicht glauben, dass man sowohl eine rote Benutzer-Seite als auch eine rote Benutzer-Disk haben kann. Grüsse Mutter Erde (talk) 20:43, 16 November 2008 (UTC)


Nabend Kollege, schau mal hier vorbei. Freu mich auf deine Meinung. ChristianBier (talk) 21:57, 4 December 2008 (UTC)

Ich äußere mich noch, kann aber bis Sonntag dauern. Viele Grüße --Rosenzweig δ 00:30, 5 December 2008 (UTC)


Servus Rosenzweig, du hast bei diesem Bild (File:Wappen des Herzogs in Bayern (Haus Wittelsbach).png) die Lizenz gelöscht. Kannst du die richtige einfügen bzw, gibt es für diese Art Wappen überhaupt eine Lizenz? Gruß --Flow2 (talk) 11:21, 10 July 2009 (UTC)

In der deutschen Wikipedia würde ich das mit Bild-PD-Schöpfungshöhe versehen, und dort gäbe es m.E. auch keine Probleme damit. Hier entspräche dem Template:PD-ineligible, aber auf Commons wird das meiner Erfahrung nach enger gesehen, und es ist möglich, dass PD-Ineligible für dieses Bild hier nicht akzeptiert wird. PD-Coa-Germany war jedenfalls ganz falsch, das ist nur für Wappen von deutschen Gebietskörperschaften, nicht für Personenwappen. Gruß --Rosenzweig δ 16:10, 10 July 2009 (UTC)
Also die Wappen habe ich vom Heraldiker für die Wikipedie bekommen. Könnte man es dann mit der GNU-Lizenz versehen? Gruß --Flow2 (talk) 23:01, 10 July 2009 (UTC)
Ja, aber nur, wenn die von ihm selbst kommt und per E-Mail in der vorgeschriebenen Form vorgelegt wird, siehe Commons:OTRS/de. Für die Wikipedia reicht aber auf keinen Fall, Freigaben müssen für jedermann und jeden Zweck (auch kommerzielle) erfolgen. GFDL wird über kurz oder lang in den Wikimedia-Projekten soweit möglich auf CC-BY-SA-3.0 migriert werden, also wäre es sinnvoll, gleich diese Lizenz zu nehmen. Wenn die Lizenzierung wie beschrieben nicht klappt, könnte man es a) drauf ankommen lassen und die Bilder hier mit PD-ineligible auszeichnen (mit der Gefahr, dass irgendwann ein Löschantrag kommt), b) die Wappen stattdessen auf die dt. Wikipedia laden und dort mit Bild-PD-Schöpfungshöhe versehen. Letzteres geht ggfs. auch dann noch, wenn hier konkrete Löschgefahr besteht. Gruß --Rosenzweig δ 12:00, 11 July 2009 (UTC)


File:Wappen Seitingen-Oberflacht.png

Commons-emblem-issue.svg File:Wappen Seitingen-Oberflacht.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 | 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)‎ | +/−

--Calle Cool (talk) 20:34, 5 February 2010 (UTC)

Deleted files

Hello, Rosenzweig. As I could see just a few minutes ago, my only file I uploaded to Commons, will be deleted. Why? : "Quite certainly NOT uploader's "own work", the image is (as stated) from the 1926 film Metropolis by Fritz Lang. Fritz Lang died in 1976, so this film will still be copyrighted for quite some time." Well, what can I say? I uploaded this photo myself, and for me it's the only way I had to put some file in the article of the German Actress. I know perfectly that Fritz Lang died in 1976, and for this reason, Metropolis will be copyrighted for a long time. So, I only can tell you that it's everything in your hands; if you had a good photograph of Brigitte Helm, of your own work, just put on the article. I'm a beginner on this Wiki world, and if this photograph can't stay in the article, I ask you to upload it then, please. Thank you — Preceding unsigned comment added by Webbergrande (talk • contribs) 22:58, 24. Nov. 2010 (UTC+1)

No, I do not have a suitable photograph of her. And apparently, it is not easy to find a free image of her, or else we already would have one. Commons only accepts free images, this one is not free, so it will be deleted, and the search for a free image of her will have to continue. Regards --Rosenzweig δ 22:16, 24 November 2010 (UTC)

Thank you for your answer. I created the picture myself; if you searched for something similar, just a few months ago, you couldn't find it, so I decided to made it. All the pictures of the actress are from cards and similars, so there's no free pictures yet. It's really a shame for me, I was just learning to upload files to Commons. So from now on I'll wait for the warning, and the delete, or I'll delete myself, if I can. Thank you! regards — Preceding unsigned comment added by Webbergrande (talk • contribs) 05:20, 25. Nov. 2010 (UTC+1)

Größere Löschaktionen

Hallo Rosenzweig, wenn Du größere Mengen ähnlich gelagerter Fälle zur Löschung vorschlagen möchtest (wie gerade die Postkarten von Sendker), dann würde die Bearbeitung leichter fallen, wenn ein größerer Antrag anstatt vieler kleiner eingereicht würde. Im aktuellen Falle kommt das natürlich zu spät, aber bei künftigen Anträgen wäre es nett, wenn Du dies berücksichtigen könntest. Danke und viele Grüße, AFBorchert (talk) 01:09, 19 December 2010 (UTC)

Kenne ich, das war nicht so geplant. Zuerst war da eine Datei, dann zwei, dann sind einfach immer mehr davon aufgetaucht, und irgendwann habe ich (vorerst) aufhören müssen. Im Prinzip könnte man einen Sammelantrag auf 80 bis 90 % der Uploads von Sendker stellen, bis auf ein paar eigene Fotos und einige Grafiken, die unzweifelhaft alt genug sind (vor 1850 oder so), sind das alles Postkarten und dergleichen aus dem 20. Jhdt. ohne ausreichende Angaben. --Rosenzweig δ 09:49, 19 December 2010 (UTC)

Vitraux in Saint-Denis

Salut, merci pour le patch. Clavier d'erreur. --Acoma (talk) 15:58, 27 January 2011 (UTC)

File:Teppich-Museum Oelsnitz 28.jpg

Hello Rosenzweig, why have you marked this file as missing permission? Doesn't it fit into PD-OLD or some other Germany related provision (such as official state works or such)?--- Darwin Ahoy! 09:59, 10 February 2011 (UTC)

The image on the carpet is protected by copyright, and since it was obviously made in 1933, we cannot assume its creator is dead for at least 70 years. The image certainly is not an official work. Regards --Rosenzweig δ 10:42, 10 February 2011 (UTC)
An "honorary citizenship" certificate can't be assumed to be an official work?--- Darwin Ahoy! 11:27, 10 February 2011 (UTC)
No. See de:Amtliches Werk#Deutschland: official works (in Germany) are „Gesetze, Verordnungen, amtliche Erlasse und Bekanntmachungen sowie Entscheidungen und amtlich verfaßte Leitsätze zu Entscheidungen“. A certificate is none of those. There may have been some official declaration of honorary citizenship, but the certificate wasn't part of it. If anybody thinks otherwise, he'd have to prove it. --Rosenzweig δ 11:53, 10 February 2011 (UTC)
Ok, understood. Incidentally, I've found what is stated to be the very same tapestry for sale in a website, that's weird.--- Darwin Ahoy! 08:26, 11 February 2011 (UTC)

Ich halte das für Copyright-Paranoia (es wird nie ein Hahn danach krähen, und schon gar kein Künstler oder dessen Erben). Der Entwurf zu diesem peinlichen, aber geschichtlich interessanten Teppich ist eine grafische Gestaltung des Kunsthandwerks, die eine urheberrechtlich relevante Schöpfungshöhe ohnehin nicht erreicht. Außerdem anonym. Bitt entferne den Baustein, das Werk kann ohne weiteres hier bei den Commons bleiben. -- 07:32, 25 March 2011 (UTC)

Für eine solche Krähender-Hahn-Politik bin ich nicht zu haben, denn dann könnten wir jegliche Versuche, von den hier Hochladenden halbwegs korrekte Quellenangaben usw. zu erhalten, sofort einstampfen und als Konsequenz Commons gleich mit. Schöpfungshöhe ist bekanntermaßen Ansichtssache. Woher willst du übrigens wissen, dass das Werk anonym ist? --Rosenzweig δ 23:05, 25 March 2011 (UTC)


What I choose to leave for a photo of a band?--!!!Thrashing All!!! (talk) 20:57, 4 March 2011 (UTC)

I'm sorry, I do not understand that question. I'm also not very good in Portuguese (which I guess is your original language). The image you uploaded and I marked as copyvio is protected by copyright, you cannot upload it here without permission. Perhaps someone at the Commons:Esplanada can help with explanations in Portuguese. Regards --Rosenzweig δ 21:06, 4 March 2011 (UTC)

File:Jafr alien invasion.jpg

Hi, could you please check what happened with the license, and maybe fix it yourself next time? Originally the license was there, but it was deleted, when a user uploaded a new version. If you checked it, you would have seen it. Regards.--Mbz1 (talk) 11:51, 8 March 2011 (UTC)

I answered on your talk page. --Rosenzweig δ 11:53, 8 March 2011 (UTC)

What is this homepage? I cannot find it.

The image has no copyright. No one can copyright images of God. I did not upload it from there, this is not true fact. Many Brahma Kumari devotees use same image on their homepage now. It is free for anyone to use.

I upload File:Shiva108.jpg

O, sure you can copyright images of God. --Rosenzweig δ 12:14, 8 March 2011 (UTC)

Correct format for emailing permission?

Greetings Rosenzweig

Regarding images for Christopher Hills article that you flagged for permissions. Would you be so kind as to review the email wording below and let me know if it is the proper format for granting permission. I e-mailed it to If it is correct I will send e-mails for the other photographs in question.

Thank you.

Subject: Re: Wikimedia Commons permission granted for File:BKS Iyengar Centre House.jpg To Wikipedia, Granting permission Re: File:BKS Iyengar Centre House.jpg

      Editor's summary: Missing permission

I am the author of this photograph, BKS Iyengar Centre House.jpg, and hereby agree to license unrestricted use of the file on Wikipedia Commons.

Sincerely John Hills

User: Coatimanga

Coatimanga (talk) 19:32, 11 March 2011 (UTC)

Please have a look at Commons:OTRS and Commons:Email templates, you will find a standard text there you can use. Your text above sounds ok to me, but I'm not the authority on that, the support team to which you mail the permissions is. They'll tell you if they can accept it or not. Regards --Rosenzweig δ 00:34, 12 March 2011 (UTC)

Hello Rosenzweig, Due to time difference I just saw your message. Thank you for the Email template suggestion. I used that format for all email permission emails. Because we are new to Wikipedia's protocols we are learning on the job here :) I included the File's url in each email as you suggested. Any further tips are always welcomed. Do we now just wait and hope Wikipedia administrators find the Permission emails and correct the Alert Notices? Or is the system efficient and automated by bots? Best Regards Coatimanga (talk) 13:24, 12 March 2011 (UTC)

Now is the time to wait and let the admins and the support team (acting on your e-mails) do their job. I've added the OTRS pending template to each file, so every admin can see a permission was sent and wait until the support team has acted. Regards --Rosenzweig δ 14:08, 12 March 2011 (UTC)

Voluntarias de la Cruz Roja - Meche Rocha - 5May1922.jpg

Oooops! I see where I've been making a mistake, in leaving myself as the author of the photographs. I am proceeding to correct those entries. Sorry.--Wkboonec (talk) 23:12, 16 March 2011 (UTC)


Why do you think that my files are lack of permissions. They are OTRS pending--Hoangquan hientrang (talk) 10:51, 1 May 2011 (UTC)

That may be, but I cannot be sure about it, as anyone can add an OTRS pending tag, even if no OTRS permission was sent at all (yes, it has happened). If a permission was indeed sent, an OTRS person will decide, and any admin looking at the file will ask OTRS before deleting anything. Until then, those are images marked as all rights reserved on Flickr. The tags serve as a reminder to not forget the matter. Regards --Rosenzweig δ 10:59, 1 May 2011 (UTC)
It also seems OTRS deemed previous OTRS mails by you as insufficient, see File:Cole Sprouse 2010.jpg and others. So let's wait and see. --Rosenzweig δ 11:05, 1 May 2011 (UTC)
have email for them but I can't forward it right now. Please remove the tag immediately. Moreover, the OTRS email for images File:Cole Sprouse 2010.jpg is sufficient--Hoangquan hientrang (talk) 12:48, 1 May 2011 (UTC)

File:Ferrier elisabeth1985.png

Ok for deletion Divine surprise (talk) 11:37, 1 May 2011 (UTC)

Agence Meurisse

Hallo !

Hier unten findest Du die gewünschten Antworten (man braucht nur auf den Titel zu klicken) : Ji-Elle (talk) 12:37, 1 May 2011 (UTC)

Es wird zwar nicht klar, warum die Bilder PD sein sollen, aber nachdem die BNF die Bilder der Agence Meurisse anscheinend quasi geerbt hat, verfügt sie vielleicht über die Rechte. Wenn sie also domaine public schreibt, soll's mir recht sein. Danke und Gruß --Rosenzweig δ 20:09, 1 May 2011 (UTC)

Jacques Peirotes

Notice complète [1] Titre : Peirotes, député et maire de Stasbourg (Bas-Rhin) : [photographie de presse] / Agence Meurisse Auteur : Agence de presse Meurisse. Agence photographique Ne voir que les résultats de cet auteur Éditeur : diff. par l'Agence Meurisse (Paris) Date d'édition : 1929 Type : image fixe,photographie Langue : Français Format : 1 photogr. nég. sur verre ; 13 x 18 cm (sup.) ou moins Format : image/jpeg Droits : domaine public Identifiant : ark:/12148/btv1b90557472 Identifiant : Numéro commercial : Meurisse 64741 A Source : Bibliothèque nationale de France, département Estampes et photographie, EI-13(2845) Relation : Appartient à : [Recueil. Actualités 1928-07-05**1929-03-18. Agence Meurisse MEU 59740 A-65984 A] Relation : Provenance : Description : Ancien détenteur : Agence de presse Meurisse Description : Référence bibliographique : Meurisse, 64741 A

Henri Meck

Notice complète [2] Titre : Meck, député (Bas-Rhin) : [photographie de presse] / Agence Meurisse Auteur : Agence de presse Meurisse. Agence photographique Éditeur : diff. par l'Agence Meurisse (Paris) Date d'édition : 1929 Type : image fixe,photographie Langue : Français Format : 1 photogr. nég. sur verre ; 13 x 18 cm (sup.) ou moins Format : image/jpeg Droits : domaine public Identifiant : ark:/12148/btv1b90555993 Identifiant : Numéro commercial : Meurisse 64245 A Source : Bibliothèque nationale de France, département Estampes et photographie, EI-13(2844) Relation : Appartient à : [Recueil. Actualités 1928-07-05**1929-03-18. Agence Meurisse MEU 59740 A-65984 A] Relation : Description : Ancien détenteur : Agence de presse Meurisse Description : Référence bibliographique : Meurisse, 64245 A Provenance :

User:Magog the Ogre/cleanup.js

Nur zur Info, fallsu Du die Seite noch nicht kennen solltest - ist machmal ganz praktisch ;-) Grüße --Brackenheim (talk) 12:19, 3 July 2011 (UTC)

Ist nützlich, danke. Gruß --Rosenzweig δ 13:24, 3 July 2011 (UTC)

User:Jameslwoodward/Commons notes for administrators

It looks like you're going to need this later today. Anticipating that, welcome to the team.

Suggestions and additions to the notes are always welcome.     Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 12:19, 3 July 2011 (UTC)

Thank you. I'll have a look at it. Regards --Rosenzweig δ 17:41, 3 July 2011 (UTC)


Čeština | Deutsch | Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ | English | Español | فارسی | Suomi | Français | Magyar | Հայերեն | Italiano | 日本語 | 한국어 | Македонски | മലയാളം | Plattdüütsch | Nederlands | Português | Português do Brasil | Русский | Sicilianu | Slovenčina | Svenska | +/−

Ein Willkommenspräsent für unseren neuen Administrator von deinen Kollegen...

Herzlichen Glückwunsch, Rosenzweig! Du hast jetzt die Rechte eines Administrators auf Commons. Nimm dir bitte einen Moment Zeit, um dir die Seite Commons:Administratoren und die in Verbindung mit der Beobachtungsliste stehenden Seiten durchzulesen (insbesondere Commons:Administrators' noticeboard und Commons:Deletion requests), bevor du damit beginnst, Seitenlöschungen, Accountsperrungen oder Änderungen am Seitenschutzstatus bzw. an den geschützten Seiten selbst durchzuführen. Der Großteil der Bearbeitungen eines Administrators kann durch andere Administratoren wieder rückgängig gemacht werden, mit Ausnahme der Zusammenführung von Versionsgeschichten, die deshalb mit spezieller Obacht behandelt werden muß.

Wir laden dich herzlich ein, mit uns auf IRC Kontakt aufzunehmen: #wikimedia-commons @ Es gibt auch einen Channel für Commons-Admins, der für sensiblere Themen sowie zur Koordination unter Admins genutzt werden kann. Du findest zudem in dem Commons:Ratgeber zur Administratorentätigkeit vielleicht eine nützliche Lektüre.

Bitte überprüfe, ob du in der Commons:List of administrators und den jeweils nach Datum oder Sprache sortierten Listen eingetragen wurdest und ergänze deine Daten andernfalls.

EugeneZelenko (talk) 15:22, 3 July 2011 (UTC)

Congrats! Tabercil (talk) 15:26, 3 July 2011 (UTC)
Congratulations also from me :) mickit 15:51, 3 July 2011 (UTC)
Thank you. I'll see what I can do :-) --Rosenzweig δ 17:43, 3 July 2011 (UTC)

Italian Road signs

Hello Rosenzweig! First of all I'd like to tell you that I haven't asked the deletion for several files...neither for only one! I don't know why! :) Tha correct font used in Italian Road signs is the Transport road signs using Arial font are wrong...For any other questions write to me! Thank you for your comprehention...--Gigillo83 (talk) 20:05, 5 July 2011 (UTC)

Thank you for your comprehention! So...all the .svg files marked ad duplicated are correct...the "original" files are wrong...Perhaps it had been a mistake when someone had merked them as duplicate...there's an inversion! So I think you can delete the very wrong files (aln all the .png files in the second page of the deletion list) and mantein the very true road sign...I hope to had been clear...if you can't understand me please write to me! Thank you again! --Gigillo83 (talk) 21:02, 5 July 2011 (UTC)
Hello! Thank you for your have all the reasons...the problem is that when we make all the road symbols we made all simbols with arial font...but it's a mistake. Now we're trying to re-make symbols with correct font (transport font), but there are more than 900 symbols to re-make...Here the explication for the duplicate. So you can understand that about all symbols actually used in Italian WP are wrong. Thank you again! --Gigillo83 (talk) 21:48, 6 July 2011 (UTC)

Blaz mel.png

Bonjour. Je suis l'auteur du dessin file:Blaz mel.png, qui n'était qu'un brouillon copié abusivement sur Commons. Je désire qu'il soit effacé. On utilisera avantageusement à la place File:Blason meuble melusine.svg. Le fichier est verrouillé depuis ta dernière intervention. Est-ce toi ? Pourquoi ? Cdlt:--Ssire (talk) 22:11, 8 July 2011 (UTC)
hi. I am the author of the design file: Blaz mel.png, which was only a draft, copy improperly to Commons. I want it to be deleted. Advantageously be used in place of File: Blason meuble melusine.svg. The file is locked since your last response. Is it you? Why? regards --Ssire (talk) 22:11, 8 July 2011 (UTC)
Guten Morgen. Ich bin der Autor des Entwurfs file: Blaz mel.png, die nur einen Entwurf der zu Unrecht Commons. Ich will es gelöscht werden. Vorteilhaft an Stelle verwendet werden File: Blason meuble melusine.svg. Die Datei wird seit Ihrer letzten Antwort gesperrt. Sind Sie es? Warum? Gruss --Ssire (talk) 22:15, 8 July 2011 (UTC)
I only removed the duplicate tag because it isn't a duplicate. The file was protected by User:Jcb on June 12th. As for his reasons, you better ask him, I don't know exactly why he did it. Have you tried a regular deletion request? Regards --Rosenzweig δ 22:18, 8 July 2011 (UTC)
Thank you ! --Ssire (talk) 11:18, 9 July 2011 (UTC)

Vittorio Emanuele II

Hi, thanks for corrections about file name :-). Take care.--o'Sistemonetell me 20:32, 9 July 2011 (UTC)


Commons-emblem-issue.svg File:Tarbes_Town_Hall,_Hautes-Pyrénées,_France.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 | 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)‎ | +/− 07:44, 11 July 2011 (UTC)

This Category

Is it possible if you could mark a few images in this panoramio category (maybe 5 or 6 photos)? I marked 7 or 8 images but I can't mark them all. Its not a good thing to have one person to mark images in Latvia from only one panoramio account. Its better to have at least 2 separate markers. Best Regards, --Leoboudv (talk) 09:24, 12 July 2011 (UTC)

I'll have a look at it later. Regards --Rosenzweig δ 10:39, 12 July 2011 (UTC)
  • Thank You for marking 7 images. That's sufficient. Best Regards, --Leoboudv (talk) 18:59, 12 July 2011 (UTC)

File:Hietsu Ohashi.jpg

Hi Rosenzweig, I dropped a note on the uploader's talk page to tell him/her about a file renaming. Regards, Yasu (talk) 14:56, 15 July 2011 (UTC)

Thank you. --Rosenzweig δ 15:51, 15 July 2011 (UTC)


Thanks for taking a look at this. Can I ask your advice on another logo before I go tagging anything: is it likely that File:Cgd2.jpg has been released under CC0 1.0? Regards, EyeSerene (talk) 19:25, 15 July 2011 (UTC)

Sorry, forgot to provide the context: w:Camp Good Days and Special Times and [3] EyeSerene (talk) 19:36, 15 July 2011 (UTC)

I doubt it, it says ©2010 by CAMP GOOD DAYS & SPECIAL TIMES at the bottom of the website. I've tagged the logo as missing permission, then it will be deleted in a week or so unless an acceptable permission is sent. Regards --Rosenzweig δ 19:48, 15 July 2011 (UTC)
Thanks very much. It seemed unlikely to me too - I guess it may qualify for fair use but in that case it shouldn't be on Commons either. I'm watching the relevant en-WP article and have left a note for the likely uploader (there's some socking and COI involved too, though probably unintentional). Thanks again, EyeSerene (talk) 20:57, 15 July 2011 (UTC)

Fotos ersetzen

Hello, I accidentally uploaded two false images: File: Station Elschbach with outbuildings Rückseite.JPG File: Station Elschbach with outbuildings JPG. I wanted to replace the false by the right pictures, but I can not do this, there are always the wrong!--Tara2 (talk) 23:54, 15 July 2011 (UTC)

Scheint ein technisches Problem mit den Thumbnails zu sein, siehe Sitenotice. Ich nehme an, die Bilder mit Katze und See sind die falschen? Soll ich die Versionen mal zu löschen versuchen? --Rosenzweig δ 23:59, 15 July 2011 (UTC)
Ich habe es gerade versucht, das wird wohl nichts. Lade die richtigen Bilder am besten nochmals unter leicht verändertem Dateinamen hoch und schlage die falschen dann mit {{bad name}} zur Schnelllöschung vor. Gruß --Rosenzweig δ 00:03, 16 July 2011 (UTC)

Regarding File:Al-Zawahiri.jpg

if its not owned by the author who owns i then, a illegal terrorist organisation cannot legitimatly own anything including copyrights Lightpositive (talk) 08:58, 16 July 2011 (UTC)

Let us please discuss this at Commons:Deletion requests/File:Al-Zawahiri.jpg. --Rosenzweig δ 09:15, 16 July 2011 (UTC)

Category:St Paul's Church, Bedford

That was quick! I was putting the speedy on the sub-category and poof, it was gone :) Thanks Scillystuff (talk) 16:03, 16 July 2011 (UTC)

Prof. Peter Csermely's Portrait


Thank you for checking: Prof. Peter Csermely's portrait

I'm a PhD student of Prof. Csermely and he asked me in person to upload his image to his wikipedia profile. Could you please suggest a licensing or any solution to do this "legally"? I can obtain any written consent from Prof. Csermely if it is needed.

Thanks in advance,


I guess there would have to be an OTRS permission by e-mail, see Commons:OTRS. And that permission would have to come from the author of the image, that is the photographer, not the person portrayed. If that is not possible, I suggest you take a photo of Mr Csermely yourself and upload that, that shouldn't pose any problem. Regards --Rosenzweig δ 14:31, 17 July 2011 (UTC)

Édouard Manet, Woman Fastening Her Garter (1878–1879).jpg

Message tied up in Ribbon.jpg Hello, Rosenzweig. You have new messages at File talk:Édouard Manet, Woman Fastening Her Garter (1878–1879).jpg#Scaled-down duplicate.
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 | 中文(简体)‎ | 中文(繁體)‎ | +/−

Civil aircraft

Before deleting Category:Videos of civil aircraft consider deleting Category:Civil aircraft and its counterpart Category:Military aircraft.

I am unhappy with Category:Videos of civil aircraft, however, it became a necessary evil for aircraft which only exist in category trees which end with manufacturer names like Category:Messerschmitt M17 and also many Russian aircraft and a few United States aircraft also.

The category tree for aircraft which does not end with the manufacturer seems to be divided between being described by wing details or the number of engines.

If you are competent enough and care enough to delete Category:Videos of civil aircraft (with competence) then you should also be competent enough and care enough to determine and create a more logical category tree under Category:Aircraft so that Category:Videos of civil aircraft need not exist.

I am so glad that you care that much!! The aircraft tree needs someone who cares and is competent and you seem to have volunteered! Hooray! -- Queeg (talk) 23:30, 18 July 2011 (UTC)

I don't quite get it. First you mark the category for deletion as misnamed, I delete it as requested because of that and because it was empty, then you recreate the category and now you want me to develop a whole new bunch of categories? You don't need an admin for that, so sorry, I won't do it, as I have other things to do. Regards --Rosenzweig δ 16:07, 19 July 2011 (UTC)
My apologies.
I actually prefer it when I discover that I am talking down to myself for something stupid I did.
Thank you for maintaining yourself so well when someone was experiencing such self-humiliation.
(I really do not like that category) -- Queeg (talk) 23:32, 19 July 2011 (UTC)
After a very nice few hours -- they were a very refreshing few hours because there was the potential that I was the stupidest person touching the categories these last few days and that is a very reliable kind of nice situation. There have been a few occasions when I was the stupidest person in the room or in the project or on the team (etc) and well, it tended to be a group of people who were at least not idiots.
What is probably really very wrong with this situation is that I get to feel so good/relieved from having treated you so wrongly. Instead of another apology (which seems like empty words at this moment) I will promise not to ever purposely do this to you or any other just to feel good for a few hours/days. -- Queeg (talk) 03:53, 20 July 2011 (UTC)

AjaxMassDelete - Neue Features

Bedienungsanleitung, Wünsche und Probleme

Zuerst möchte ich auch nachträglich zum erfolgreichen Erwerb der Administratorrechte gratulieren und wünsche, dass Du deshalb nicht nur noch "administrative Aufgaben" erledigen musst. (stelle ich mir ziemlich schwierig und eintönig vor ...).

Dann zum Hauptanliegen: Danke für das entgegengebrachte Vertrauen.

Ich würde empfehlen, es nun nur noch "on demand" laden zu lassen, denn es ist inzwischen ziemlich umfangreich. Das ist kein Muss, sondern lediglich ein Vorschlag um die Performance zu verbessern. Das führt dazu, dass das Skript nicht bei jedem Seitenaufruf, sondern nur noch beim Anklicken geladen wird.

So wird's gemacht: In User:Rosenzweig/monobook.js bitte



addPortletLink('p-tb', 'javascript:{importScript(\'User:Rillke/AjaxMassDelete.js\'); void(0);}', "Perform batch task", 't-AjaxQuickDeleteOnDemand', null);


Das war's. Danke. -- RE rillke questions? 20:13, 20 July 2011 (UTC)

Okidoki und danke für die Blumen. Gruß --Rosenzweig δ 20:16, 20 July 2011 (UTC)
PS, ganz vergessen: Dir und allen sonst dran Beteiligten ein Danke für das Skript, so etwas hatte ich vorher sehr vermisst. Gruß --Rosenzweig δ 20:24, 20 July 2011 (UTC)


Hi Rosenzweig! Danke für die Korrektur. Dass das Bild auf einen alten Maler zurückgeht, war mir nicht bewußt. --Gunnex (talk) 19:16, 21 July 2011 (UTC)

Copyvio tag

Hey Rosenweig, this was not supposed to be a copyvio tag, but a DR (it was me who licensed it as textlogo, though I was not sure about that and thus sent it to DR, which turned out to be a copyvio tag instead. It seems that I've chose the wrong option in the left list, and didn't noticed it. Anyway, if you think it qualifies as textlogo, I don't care for the DR. Cheers, --- Darwin Ahoy! 19:58, 21 July 2011 (UTC)

Perhaps {{PD-ineligible}} would be the better tag, as it's not entirely text. But the rather simple graphic part doesn't seem to be any more complicated than the cases presented in Commons:Threshold of originality#United States. In Switzerland (where this company is based), the Federal court even declared a photograph to be below the threshold of originality. Regards --Rosenzweig δ 20:05, 21 July 2011 (UTC)

File:Abandoned California Congress Branch Line Station.jpg

Dear Admin Rosenzweig,

You were right not to speedy delete this picture as I had requested initially. It turns out that I acted a bit rashly and the picture has now been fixed. Its also used on a wikipedia article (though I did not put it there). Thank you for rejecting my speedy deletion tag...and I am glad that I voted for your RfA. I am sure that you will be a great Admin. With Best Regards from Metro Vancouver, Canada, --Leoboudv (talk) 05:20, 22 July 2011 (UTC)

Problem with image from it.wp

Permission is now under revision. Thank you--Trixt (talk) 20:51, 23 July 2011 (UTC)


File:Christmas smiley.jpg more informations added. --Lilyu (talk) 23:47, 23 July 2011 (UTC)

thx --Lilyu (talk) 20:21, 24 July 2011 (UTC)

"No source" vs. "copyvio"


It was a copyvio (in commons parlance, although not in real life).

The subject is a draft signed by en:Alexey Shchusev who died in 1959 (in a 70 years p.m.a. jurisdiction). The original is stored at the Museum of Architecture ( and exhibited from time to time (see this snapshot right off museum wall from April 2011). So the ultimate source is very well known: the Mosproyekt-1 archive in the vaults of the Museum of Architecture. Demanding exact source of the particular scan is, in my opinion, unnecessary - there are scores of this particular scan on the web, and you cannot realistically expect the uploader to come back and locate her source. It won't happen, and if it did it won't make any difference - commons cannot accept drawings until 70 years p.m.a., even with the finest provenance trail.

Regards, NVO (talk) 06:12, 24 July 2011 (UTC)

I suspected something along this line, but none of this information was part of the original copyvio tag. So, not knowing the creator, I couldn't make a speedy deletion, there was the possibility that he died before 1941, and then the drawing would be in the public domain. Because the claim of own work is obviously wrong, I decided to tag the file as no source, which means either the correct info necessary to keep the file is supplied, or else the file is deleted after some time. Regards --Rosenzweig δ 10:46, 24 July 2011 (UTC)

Userpage gallery

No worries, thanks for the pointer. Mattythewhite (talk) 13:33, 24 July 2011 (UTC)


N'abend, Rosenzweig. Das hier sollte besser auch gelöscht werden. Gruß, De728631 (talk) 20:40, 24 July 2011 (UTC)

Und es geht fröhlich weiter. File:MaureenTFox.jpg. De728631 (talk) 20:44, 24 July 2011 (UTC)

File:Marconi Perillo - Governor of Goiás.jpg

If I copy a image nonfree of Mr. Perillo from a newspaper or governamental site and I put it in Flickr under CC licence, now it`s a free image? You are wrong, Rosenzweig.Jo Lorib (talk) 14:56, 26 July 2011 (UTC)

Please have a look at who put it on Flickr. That seems to be the governor himself (or his staff), wouldn't you agree? And please do not simply reverse admin decisions like that. --Rosenzweig δ 14:58, 26 July 2011 (UTC)
  • I don´t agree, of course. It`s better a OTRS. I try.Jo Lorib (talk) 15:28, 26 July 2011 (UTC)
Why don't you agree? Do you seriously believe the uploader, User:Gabrielgodinho1, created the Flickr account Marconi Perillo two years ago, posing as the governor, uploading more than 1,500 images, most of them marked as All rights reserved, uploading the portrait in question on February 3, 2011, months before he uploaded it here? All that for Flickrwashing? That seems to be quite absurd. More likely he asked the governor's staff to change the license for that particular image on Flickr, and they complied. And that is perfectly acceptable. --Rosenzweig δ 15:37, 26 July 2011 (UTC)
  • Why do you use bold? To be an administrator in Commons don´t give you any special rights, be cool. Is the same user (or one of is socks, see in the pt-wp article) that upload the same image last week with a mesage that indicates All rights reserved . What I know, I´m in Wikipédia since 2005, I´m a new member. I try.Jo Lorib (talk) 16:00, 26 July 2011 (UTC)

PS: The answer must be in my talk page, isn´t it?

Please stay on the subject. That the user probably made a mistake before doesn't necessarily mean everything he does is wrong. I've reviewed the Flickr image thoroughly, the license seems ok to me, and being an admin does give me the right to decide (speedy) deletion requests as well as to review images transferred from Flickr. You do not present any evidence that there is something actually wrong. --Rosenzweig δ 16:17, 26 July 2011 (UTC)


I see you did a mass purge on this account's uploaded. I just traded emails with this user to check on who it is - it's a fan and not her. I've blocked the account as a result for impersonation. Tabercil (talk) 11:53, 27 July 2011 (UTC)

Can't say I'm surprised. --Rosenzweig δ 14:28, 27 July 2011 (UTC)
Neither was I, but you gotta check just in case. Hey, I've ended up trading emails with the real deal on some of these celeb uploads so that's always something nice to have in you contact list for future reference. Tabercil (talk) 16:12, 27 July 2011 (UTC)


Hello Rosenzweig, I apologize, I thought that not having the images are copyright could climb Commons. Since I read about politics, I'm sorry, it will not happen. Dangelin5 (talk) 17:05, 27 July 2011 (UTC)

OK. Please continue to contribute, but only with pictures that are made by yourself, are released under a free license or are in the public domain. Regards --Rosenzweig δ 17:12, 27 July 2011 (UTC)


Hallo Rosenzweig!

Du hast ja gerade ein Bild von diesem Nutzer als URV gelöscht - schau dir mal die anderen Beiträge an, die Disk ist sehr aussagekräftig. Da scheint jemand willkürlich aus dem Netz gefischte Bilder von Musikern hier hochzuladen, oder? Lohnt es sich, dafür ein Mass DR aufzumachen oder kümmerst Du dich so inoffiziell darum? Grüße, Grand-Duc (talk) 23:53, 27 July 2011 (UTC)

Das Übliche, dergleichen Fans schlagen hier praktisch täglich auf. Die Fotos waren alle URV und sind schnellgelöscht, das Logo, von dem unklar ist, welche Aaliyah das eigentlich sein soll, ist zur Löschung vorgeschlagen. Gruß --Rosenzweig δ 01:34, 28 July 2011 (UTC)

Image permissions

Hi, thanks for letting me know about the issue. According to Fresno's Internet Policy:

Copy Restrictions
Unless stated to the contrary, data on this website is public information and is generally available to copy or distribute.

It applies to both because is a subsite of But I'm not exactly sure where to put this link or how to respond to the template. Foxyshadistalk 23:31, 28 July 2011 (UTC)

That is not sufficient for Wikimedia Commons, it also says there ©2011 The City of Fresno. We need content uploaded here to be either in the public domain (by law) or released under a free license. See Commons:Licensing. The PD-USGov copyright tag you used only applies to works of the federal US government. Regards --Rosenzweig δ 23:34, 28 July 2011 (UTC)

Image supppression

Hello, why did you have suppress File:PoleScience-UnivLR.jpg, the licence on Flickr is compatible with Commons. (see : Dosto

Because I couldn't find it on Flickr. You put no link to its Flickr URL in the image description, bot the Flickr search and Google Images couldn't find it on Flickr (no wonder, the Flickr image description reads intervention de l'agence Campus Communication aux journées Comosup, not mentioning the Pôle Sciences et Technologie de l'Université de La Rochelle at all), but Google found it on other websites, so I had to assume it was a copyvio. Since you have now provided the link to Flickr and it seems ok, I will restore it. Thanks for letting me know. Regards --Rosenzweig δ 11:58, 29 July 2011 (UTC)

Little help

Hello Rosenzweig,

I noticed you have tagged some uploads of User talk:Vitor F S asking for OTRS. Well, I wonder if Japeri.jpg, Deodoro.jpg and Santa Cruz.jpg could be tagged as Freedom of Panorama since I couldn't find myself those pictures in any place on internet (I'm from Rio de Janeiro, as Vitor seems to be)? Mapa da Supervia.jpg is a clear copyvio and I sent to Speedy Delete. Thanks in advance. Sorry for my bad English. OTAVIO1981 (talk) 18:10, 29 July 2011 (UTC)

What do you mean with Freedom of Panorama? That normally applies to copyrighted statues etc. displayed in public, not to railway stations. I don't think the stations themselves are copyrighted, only the photos. Anyway, he stated the image sources himself as, so it's hardly his own work, but instead pulled from that website. Regards --Rosenzweig δ 18:16, 29 July 2011 (UTC)
Ok. Thanks for answer. :) OTAVIO1981 (talk) 18:24, 29 July 2011 (UTC)

File:AN-32B_RA-26222.jpg deleted

Hi. Just wanted to ask why photo, that I uploaded is deleted from wikimedia. I got written permission from the author of this photo, so I could use it in the service. Can I upload it again or it's gonna be deleted?

Hello UfixXx,
this permission was not mentioned when you uploaded the file. At the image source,, it says clearly © Felix Goetting, via Werner Fischdick: The cc-by-2.5 license under which you uploaded it is not mentioned anywhere. Permissions to upload files to Wikimedia Commons under a free license must be documented by having the copyright holder send an e-mail to the Commons OTRS system, see Commons:OTRS. If this requirement is met satisfactorily, the file can be undeleted or uploaded again. Regards --Rosenzweig δ 02:50, 30 July 2011 (UTC)

Avaya Images

I am uploading new versions of the images. Geek2003 (talk) 14:28, 30 July 2011 (UTC)

If you think it will help. --Rosenzweig δ 14:32, 30 July 2011 (UTC)

I have started to upload new sourced images. I uploaded the file and then went back and removed the delete tag. Is this how you want the resolution accomplished? The tag on your page identifies you as an administrator, and I am asking for your advice on how to resolve this problem. Geek2003 (talk) 14:52, 30 July 2011 (UTC)

No, do not remove the tags on your own, just make the necessary notes and remarks about your new versions in the file descriptions and on the deletion request page. --Rosenzweig δ 14:55, 30 July 2011 (UTC)
I don't understand how this works. If I upload the pictures to a new file name that is not the name of the product then the picture and the file are not correct and hundreds of links on other language wiki pages will break when the original picture is delete. Geek2003 (talk) 15:36, 30 July 2011 (UTC)
Responded on your talk page. --Rosenzweig δ 15:45, 30 July 2011 (UTC)

I don't know how to use a "bot" but I am always open to learning new tools. Will you help me through this process?

Also, I am planning to get better pictures with a new camera that I just got and do some professional editing to make the pictures better and upload them to replace the ones that I am uploading now, will I have to go through all this work and re-upload to a new name again? Seems very inefficient... Geek2003 (talk) 16:02, 30 July 2011 (UTC)

The bot (User:CommonsDelinker) will have to be ordered to replace the file usage by an admin, you can leave that to me, Herbythyme or another admin. And yes, if you create different images you should upload them using a new name again. But your present files (that you want to upload now) will not get deleted, so they won't have to be replaced just everywhere. Regards --Rosenzweig δ 16:09, 30 July 2011 (UTC)

OK, let me start with the 2 that I just did since they have only a few links. Geek2003 (talk) 16:38, 30 July 2011 (UTC)

I just tried to upload the new picture of the 8692SF with both the .JPG and .jpg and both give me the error - There is another file already on the site with the same content. Geek2003 (talk) 16:54, 30 July 2011 (UTC)

I reset the images that already had new versions by you to the original versions. Please try again, using the .jpg extension. --Rosenzweig δ 17:04, 30 July 2011 (UTC)
They just deleted all the files and I have lost all the references. Now what do I do, I thought that you were going to give me time to learn how to do this and help me? Geek2003 (talk) 00:15, 4 August 2011 (UTC)
I didn't think you'd take more than the week after which files may get deleted. But I have access to the deleted files and can give you any information that was in their descriptions. What do you need from them? --Rosenzweig τ 03:44, 4 August 2011 (UTC)
Please could you use a bot and put all the links back into the pages that CommonsDelinker removed? Geek2003 (talk) 23:06, 4 August 2011 (UTC)
I'm afraid not, but will ask. As soon as access to the Delinker log works again, I can at least see from where it was removed. --Rosenzweig τ 14:44, 5 August 2011 (UTC)
I am sorry about removing the AFD from the other page, but how do we tell the other admins that we are working on these problems so he will hang on and wait for us to get the work accomplished, especially now, if I have to go and manually put all the links back into all the pages that CommonsDelinker removed. Also could you please help me, because other users are now also reverting some of the links that I am reverting from CommonsDelinker activity. - - -What a disaster... Geek2003 (talk) 23:13, 4 August 2011 (UTC)
There's a deletion request page for the image, and you alread did write there that you're working on it. I'll have a look at which images you have already uploaded to replace the deleted ones and will try to insert them into the appropriate articles where the other images were, if they're not already in place. Regards --Rosenzweig τ 14:44, 5 August 2011 (UTC)

the deletion of the GARUDA image and article

The image is made by my friend who also agreed that I uploaded it to wikipedia.. It is used with the consent of the creator and I don't understand why wikipedia would thought I violated the copyright since I also provide the link to the said forum, which as you can see, doesn't copyrighted the image because it was a free sharing forum/community and copyrighting anything that was posted there would be irrelevant. I hope we can clear this misunderstanding.

If you don't believe me, check my username at the said forum (, STRIG, and you can clearly see that I'm a member and contribute quiet a lot to the said thread.

Hello TheSTRIG,

you mean File:GARUDA, Indonesian Bad Company 2 Clan.png respectively File:Garuda Clan Logo.jpg, don't you? I deleted the former, yes, because it was on the web here, and I found no indication there of the license chosen for the upload here ({{self|cc-by-sa-3.0}}), nor can I find the license chosen for the secound upload ({{FAL}}). An image is already copyrighted simply because it exists, there does not have to be a copyright notice or anything else beside it. So what I see is that somebody took a file that was already on the web and uploaded it here under a free license, claiming to be its author and copyright holder. That could be true, but for all I know, it's more likely like it is with dozens of other images uploaded here every day: they are simply copied by somebody else only saying they are the copyright owner, yet they are not and do not have any right to upload those images here and put them under free licenses. So I deleted it per the precautionary principle: “Where there is significant doubt about the freedom of a particular file it should be deleted.”

If your friend really is the creator and copyright owner of that image, he will have to confirm this by sending a permission by e-mail to the Commons OTRS system; see Commons:OTRS; a permission that confirms both that he is the author of the image and that he releases it under a free license. I have tagged the second upload as missing permission, he now has some time to send that permission. If a satisfactory permission is received, the file can stay (at least as far as copyright is concerned, project scope may be another matter). Else it will get deleted. Regards --Rosenzweig τ 15:23, 31 July 2011 (UTC)

Foto de Vélez Sarsfield

Se puede saber por que razón eliminaste mi foto? te denunciaré por vandalismo, porque no contribuís en lugar de destruir Wikipedia? yo llevo 4 años registrado te comento! se muy bien lo que hago, no necesito que un principiante que ni siquiera es de Argentina destruya mis trabajos. Saludos!— Preceding unsigned comment added by Maurodevelez96 (talk • contribs) 2011-07-31, 20:44 (UTC)

(according to Google Translate, this means in English:) You can tell for what reason you deleted my picture? denounce you for vandalism, because you contribute rather than destroy Wikipedia? 4 years I've been registered you commented! know very well what I do not need a novice who is not even in Argentina destroy my work. Greetings!

Hello Maurodevelez96,
I deleted 5 images you had uploaded because they were in violation of copyright, that means, you simply took them from some websites and copied them here without having permission to do so. Which one of those do you mean? The one you just re-uploaded, File:VelezCampeon.jpg? You first uploaded that file here on July 8, 2011, claiming it was your own work made on that very day. But it was a very small file, 259×194 pixels, and also clearly watermarked as VelezSarsfield.NET. I found this file at various other websites, among them and, uploaded there in 2009 and 2010 respectively. So obviously the information you gave about the file was wrong, and I deleted it as a violation of copyright.
You have now uploaded a larger version, but it still isn't larger than the ones I found on the web; in fact, it is the very same image as here, only it is cropped so the lower portion with the watermark VelezSarsfield.NET is removed, and you now suddenly have changed the date from 2011-07-08 to 2009-07-05. Do you think that will convince anyone that you took this photo yourself? I'll tell you the answer: it will not, and because of that I have deleted it again. If it really is your own photograph, which I doubt very much, please upload a better version without a watermark (and not just cropped to remove it) and also send a permission by e-mail to the Commons OTRS system. See Commons:OTRS.
By the way, I am not any “novice”, I have been here on Commons since January 2005 and at wikipedia since October 2004. And I think I know a thing or two about copyright, whereas you don't seem to know much about that. Regards --Rosenzweig τ 19:40, 31 July 2011 (UTC)
(Traducción automática al español:)
Hola Maurodevelez96,
He eliminado cinco imágenes que había subido porque se encontraban en violación de los derechos de autor, lo que significa, simplemente lo tomó de algunos sitios web y los copió aquí sin tener permiso para hacerlo. ¿Que uno de esos te refieres? ¿El que se acaba de re-cargado, File:VelezCampeon.jpg? En primer lugar, que el archivo subido aquí el 8 de julio de 2011, alegando que era su propio trabajo realizado en ese mismo día. Pero se trataba de un archivo muy pequeño, 259 × 194 píxeles, y también claramente marcado por el agua como VelezSarsfield.NET. Encontré este archivo en varios otros sitios web, entre ellos y, subida que en el 2009 y 2010, respectivamente. Así que, obviamente, la información que dio sobre el archivo estaba mal, y lo he borrado como una violación de los derechos de autor.
Acaba subida una versión mayor, pero aún no es mayor que los que me encontré en la web, En realidad, está la misma imagen, como aquí, sólo se recorta por lo que la parte inferior con la marca de agua,VelezSarsfield.NET se retira, y ahora de repente han cambiado la fecha del 2011-07-08 al 2009-07-05. ¿Cree usted que convencer a nadie que le tomó esta foto a ti mismo? Te diré la respuesta: no, y por eso lo he borrado de nuevo. Si lo que realmente es su propia fotografía, cosa que dudo mucho, por favor, subir una mejor versión sin marca de agua (y no sólo recortar para eliminar) y también enviar un permiso por e-mail a la Cámara de los Comunes del sistema OTRS. Ver Commons: OTRS/es.
Por cierto, yo no soy ningún "principiante", he estado aquí en los Comunes desde enero de 2005 y en la wikipedia desde octubre de 2004. Y creo que sé una cosa o dos acerca de los derechos de autor, mientras que no parece saber mucho acerca de eso. Saludos --Rosenzweig τ 19:40, 31 July 2011 (UTC)

File:Edgardo Raul Sapag 101 0961.jpg

Thank Rosenzweig, send permissions,, Greetings, Dangelin5 (talk) 21:51, 31 July 2011 (UTC)



Please help me to return back the images you deleted:

This images are from the web page ( supported by me. One of them is taken by me, another by one of my colleges.

My personal web page is or

Which tags should be put in order you don't remove them?


User:Jameslwoodward thankfully explained the necessary permission procedure at Commons:Undeletion requests/Current requests. --Rosenzweig τ 16:38, 2 August 2011 (UTC)


Hello! What is the problem with file and the orthers? Thank you--Falcom (talk) 16:52, 2 August 2011 (UTC)

They are derivative images of copyrighted photographs. Compare e. g. [5] and [6]. Regards --Rosenzweig τ 17:01, 2 August 2011 (UTC)

For this one agreement but not for File: PENELOPE CRUZ HUILE.jpg is a painting painted directly on the canvas without deviation of the photo.--Falcom (talk) 19:05, 2 August 2011 (UTC)

OK, I'll have a look at this later but have to be going now. --Rosenzweig τ 03:24, 3 August 2011 (UTC)

Falcom (talk · contribs)


Kannst Du evtl. einen Kommentar auf der Diskussionsseite des Benutzers hinterlassen? Es ist ja nicht ganz abwegig, dass der Künstler ein Photo hatte, das er sich angeschaut hat und sein Kunstwerk darauf basierend geschaffen hat, was nicht heißen muss, dass er das Original abgemalt hätte. Wie auch immer. Der Benutzer macht es einem aber auch nicht leicht. -- RE rillke questions? 17:53, 2 August 2011 (UTC)

File:TYTANE N.jpg

Good licence Flickr and original source indicated with author [[7]]--Falcom (talk) 19:24, 2 August 2011 (UTC)

File:TYTANE P.jpg

Good licence Flickr and original source indicated with author [[8]]--Falcom (talk) 19:25, 2 August 2011 (UTC)

Hello!There is much confusion in the work of Dimitri Parant with afterimage Too many users delete files without thinking, for example here: PENELOPE CRUZ HUILE.jpg TYTANE N.jpg and TYTANE p.jpg Three aspects must be seen:

  • 1 The artist directly by hand on canvas and draws from a photo or not , but often the result has nothing to do with reality.
  • 2 The artist creates a digital drawing directly on the computer without utilisation of original photo.
  • 3 The artist creates a digital drawing from an original photo and most of the time the original source of the photo is specified

--Falcom (talk) 08:53, 3 August 2011 (UTC)

File:Christof Wetterich.jpg

Dear Mr. Rosenzweig,

thanks for your remark. You may further help to answer the following question: I decided to delete the picture from Wikimedia, since Prof. Wetterich would like to allow non-commmercial use without modification only. How do I arrange the direkt deletion of the file and how to publish it under a license including the requirements from above?
Best regards,
C. Albrecht

Since it's tagged as lacking permission, it would get deleted in a few days anyway. I can speed that up if you as the uploader wish to get it deleted as well.
What do you mean by “publishing” under a license including non-commmercial use without modification? You can do so simply by choosing an appropriate license (from the Creative Commons) and putting it next to the image at your website. You cannot upload the image to Wikimedia Commons then, though, because those kinds of licenses (non-commercial, non-derivative) are not allowed here. See Commons:Project scope#Non-allowable licence terms. Regards --Rosenzweig τ 19:58, 3 August 2011 (UTC)
PS: Wenn's leichter fällt, können wir gerne auch auf Deutsch schreiben …

Hallo, ja, wenn Du (ich hoffe, das geht in Ordnung - andernfalls angeben, wenn "Sie" gewünscht ist ... in sofern hätt ich besser beim Englischen bleiben sollen :-) ) magst, dann kannst Du das Bild bitte sofort entfernen. Mit den eingeschränkten Bildrechten meine ich Folgendes: Gibt es eine Möglichkeit (entsprechend dann nicht unter Wikimedia mit Creative Commons Lizenz), ein Bild bei Wikipedia hochzuladen und anzugeben, dass es jedem unter der Bedingung der nicht-kommerziellen Nutzung und ohne das Bild zu verändern zur Verfügung steht. Das "Christof Wetterich.jpg"-Bild gehört Prof. Wetterich selbst und ich habe diese Form der Veröffentlichung mit ihm vereinbart.
Mit dem Foto steht auch noch ein Artikel in Verbindung, den ich erstellt habe: [ ]. Ich habe aber noch keine Rechte, den Artikel freizuschalten (obwohl ich schon länger als 4 Tage Wikipedia-User bin und mehr als 10 "edits" habe). Würdest Du einen Blick auf den Entwurf riskieren und ihn gegebenenfalls aktivieren? Wenn damit auch noch das Bild irgendwie unter der entsprechenden Lizenz mit dabei sein kann, wäre ich komplett glücklich.
Grüße, Conrad

OK, ich werde das Bild löschen. Lizenzen wie von dir beschrieben (nur nicht-kommerzielle Nutzung und ohne das Bild zu verändern) sind weder auf Commons noch in den diversen Wikipedia-Versionen zulässig, egal ob von Creative Commons oder nicht, die Möglichkeit der kommerziellen Nutzung und der Veränderbarkeit werden bei frei lizenzierten Bildern gefordert. Es gibt in der engl. Wikipedia noch die Möglichkeit, Bilder als fair use hochzuladen, siehe en:Wikipedia:Non-free content. Das geht aber nur unter sehr engen Voraussetzungen, i. d. R. dann, wenn eine freie Alternative gar nicht möglich ist. Bei einem lebenden Wissenschaftler, der zudem in Kontakt zum Artikelersteller steht, würde das kaum akzeptiert werden.
Bzgl. Artikel "freischalten" in der engl. Wikipedia: Ich nehme an, du meinst, den Artikel zu verschieben. Dazu musst du in der Tat autoconfirmed sein, was i. d. R. nach 4 Tagen und mindestens 10 Beiträgen der Fall ist. Bist du sicher, dass das der Fall ist? Lt. Log hast du dich dort am 1. August um 17:19 Uhr angemeldet, die 4 Tage sind also erst heute nachmittag um. Versuch's dann einfach nochmals. Gruß --Rosenzweig τ 14:28, 5 August 2011 (UTC)

Hey, danke für die ausführlichen Infos. Nach deiner Aussage frage ich mich dann aber, warum fair use scheinbar bei dem (lebenden) Physiker [ ] funktioniert hat. Ich werde es darüber noch einmal versuchen.
Beste Grüße, Conrad

Vielleicht hat es nur noch niemand hinterfragt. Ganz firm bin ich in den Regularien der en.wp aber nicht. Gruß --Rosenzweig τ 15:14, 5 August 2011 (UTC)


I have marked some brazilian sport clubs logo as copyvio but I noticed that some of then was already marked as copyvio but an admin changed to PD-Ineligible and tradmarked just like you did in File:Nauas.JPG. My question is why such logo as File:Fluminense logo.gif can be considered as simple geometric shapes since the letters can't be found anywhere? On the other hand File:Sao Paulo Clube.gif it's easily fitted as as simple geometry shapes. I don't want to do wrong next time so, would you my mind give some tip to distinguish files that can be marked as PD-Ineligible? thanks OTAVIO1981 (talk) 20:12, 4 August 2011 (UTC)

Hello OTAVIO1981,
that will have to be decided one file at a time, based on the examples cited in Commons:Threshold of originality. I'm not sure if File:Fluminense logo.gif could be considered simple geometrical shapes etc., the lettering seems to be quite unique and non-standard. Ultimately, a Commons admin will have to decide. If in doubt, make a regular (not speedy) deletion request. Regards --Rosenzweig τ 14:19, 5 August 2011 (UTC)
Thanks. I sent Fluminense logo and File:Flamengo logo.gif to DR. Yould you mind check if the reason for the nomination it's clear enough? thanks again OTAVIO1981 (talk) 16:56, 5 August 2011 (UTC)
I've clarified it a bit. --Rosenzweig τ 17:08, 5 August 2011 (UTC)

Porque has borrado mis imagenes sin avisarme

Mira espero que entiendas algo de español o te des el tiempo de traducirlo en alguna parte, no hace mucho acabas de eliminar practicamente todas mis imagenes, quiero saber porque no se me aviso antes o se debatio sobre las razones de eliminado, bueno, quizas esta bien lo que dicen y las razones por las que se elimino, quizas de debieron eliminar pero porque no se me avisó antes y porque todas incluyendo algunas que tomé se si es algo tramado con tu amigo aleman Denniss, porque el tambiñen elimino imagenes mías no puedo asegurar nada pero a lo que voy yo ahora es POQUE NO SE ME AVISO SOBRE EL BORRADO DE MIS IMAGENES, si van a ser buenos wikimedistas hagan bien su trabajo y respeten a los demas no pasen por encima de ellos solo porque son menores en esta pagina.--Cesar J. Mora (talk) 16:42, 6 August 2011 (UTC) SALUDOS

(translated by Google Translator:) Because you deleted my images without warning Look I hope you understand some Spanish and give yourself time to translate it somewhere not long ago just removed almost all my pictures, I know because I can not notice before or discussed the reasons eliminated, well, maybe this what they say and why they are eliminated, perhaps because it had to be removed but warned me before and it all including some that took me ... if it's not your friend german engineered with Denniss, because also remove images of me I can not say anything but what I am now is draw poker ME NOT NOTICE THE CLEARING OF MY IMAGES, if they will be good wikimedistas do their jobs well and to respect others do not go over them just because are lower on this page. --Cesar J. Mora (talk) 16:42, 6 August 2011 (UTC) SALUDOS

Hello Cesar J. Mora,

I deleted almost all of the images that you have uploaded because I think they are in violation of copyright. I did not delete 3 images because they really seem to have been photographed by yourself (or a cousin). But the other images were taken from websites like [9]. It is, in general, not allowed to take images photographed by other people and post them here (unless those people either gave their consent or are dead at least 70 years). It seems many people do not know this, so we have to work hard to remove all the files they upload here without being allowed to do so.

You were notified about the deletion of your images, on your talk page, in several languages, among them Spanish. You were notified of a deletion request, Commons:Deletion requests/File:Ciudad de Osorno.jpg, which ran for several days. Yet you never declared that those images were actually photographed by you, whereas another user pointed out that at least two of the images were seemingly taken from the web. And images that are in violation of copyright can even be deleted at once, those are the rules here.

So please do only upload images that are either photographed by yourself or are so old that their creators are dead for at least 70 years. There are other exceptions, but those are the basics. You also might want to read Commons:Sobre las licencias. Regards --Rosenzweig τ 17:25, 6 August 2011 (UTC)

(traducción automática:) Hola Cesar J. Mora,

He borrado casi todas las imágenes que has subido, porque creo que están en violación de los derechos de autor. No eliminar tres imágenes porque realmente parecen haber sido fotografiado por sí mismo (o un primo). Pero las otras imágenes fueron tomadas de sitios web como [10]. Se trata, en general, no se les permite tomar imágenes fotografiadas por otras personas y publicarlos aquí (a menos que esas personas o bien dieron su consentimiento o han muerto al menos 70 años). Parece que muchas personas no lo saben, así que tenemos que trabajar duro para eliminar todos los archivos que suben aquí sin que se les permita hacerlo.

Que fueron notificados acerca de la supresión de las imágenes, en su página de discusión, en varios idiomas, entre ellos el español. Que fue notificado de una solicitud de eliminación,Commons:Deletion requests/File:Ciudad de Osorno.jpg, que duró varios días. Sin embargo, nunca ha declarado que esas imágenes fueron fotografiadas en realidad por ti, mientras que otro usuario señaló que al menos dos de las imágenes fueron tomadas aparentemente de la web. Y las imágenes que están en violación de los derechos de autor, incluso se pueden eliminar de una vez, esas son las reglas aquí.

Así que por favor sólo subir imágenes que son fotografiados por sí mismo o son tan viejos que sus creadores han muerto por lo menos 70 años. Hay otras excepciones, pero esos son los conceptos básicos. También pueden leer Commons:Sobre las licencias. Saludos --Rosenzweig τ 17:25, 6 August 2011 (UTC)

Deletion of SANNA's image

Hi Rosenzweig, U deleted an image I had uploaded (SANNA's 1st Exhibition Poster 22.2.2010). What was the reason for the deletion? The image is my own and I have filled out the form at Commons in the correct manner and the upload/image is not a copyright violation as far as I know. [[User:paaljononnea Paljononnea (talk) 18:14, 6 August 2011 (UTC)]]

You mean File:SANNA's 1st Exhibition Poster 22.2.2010.jpg? I deleted that image because it prominently featured artwork by the artist herself, which is copyrighted. I assume by your username that you are not Sanna Jalomäki herself, so while you may have created that poster, that is not enough, we also need a permission from the artist herself. If you are the artist herself, against my assumption, you may of course give such a permission yourself.
In any case we need such a permission, which includes the right for everyone to use that image for every purpose (including commercial ones), to be sent by e-mail to a specific address. Please have a look at Commons:OTRS for how to do this. Regards --Rosenzweig τ 19:28, 6 August 2011 (UTC)

¿Por qué?

¿Por qué me has borrado esta foto?: File:Francisco jrv.png --Almju (talk) 19:42, 7 de agosto de 2011 (UTC)

Violation of copyright. I found it at (, used there in 2006 before you uploaded it here in January 2011. --Rosenzweig τ 17:45, 7 August 2011 (UTC)

Questionable picasa images

Is there something like "Questionable picasa images"? I'd like to add 1 uploader. -- RE rillke questions? 09:10, 9 August 2011 (UTC)

Seems not, according to Commons:Picasa Web Albums files#Questionable Picasa images. The recommendation there is to write something about the problem at Commons talk:Picasa Web Albums files. --Rosenzweig τ 09:25, 9 August 2011 (UTC)
Oh thanks. I have to admit I was just too lazy to search. -- RE rillke questions? 09:31, 9 August 2011 (UTC)


Hola, ¿formas geométricas simples y texto?, disculpa, entendía por "© 2011 SPTI Networks Iberia, S.L.. All rights reserved. The ANIMAX logo is a registered trademark of Animation Investment, Inc" que el logo era registrado bajo licencia, pero bueno mi inglés en muy malo. Saludos --Edmenb (Mensajes- es) 17:33, 9 August 2011 (UTC)

First, copyright and trademarks are two different things, a logo that is trademarked is not necessarily eligible for copyright. Second, that some company sticks a © next to their logo also does not necessarily mean it is eligible for copyright. Please have a look at Commons:Threshold of originality (with example images). Regards --Rosenzweig τ 17:55, 9 August 2011 (UTC)
(traducción automática:)
Los derechos de autor En primer lugar, y marcas registradas son dos cosas diferentes, un logo que es una marca registrada no es necesariamente elegibles para los derechos de autor. En segundo lugar, que alguna empresa se ​​pone una © junto a su logotipo no necesariamente significa que sea elegible para recibir los derechos de autor. Por favor, eche un vistazo a Commons:Threshold of originality (con imágenes de ejemplo). Saludos --Rosenzweig τ 17:55, 9 August 2011 (UTC)

Files by User:Adaś17

Why you deleted my photos? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Adaś17 (talk • contribs) 2011-08-10 20:51 (UTC)

Hello User:Adaś17,
I deleted the files you uploaded because they were copyright violations. Please have a look at Commons:First steps to get acquainted with the Commons and get information about what kinds of images you can upload here and what kind you cannot. Regards --Rosenzweig τ 16:19, 11 August 2011 (UTC)

Still from 1903 Alice

I don't know how to respond to Commons deletionism but I left a comment. Does it help? If not, what do you expect people to do? Evertype (talk) 14:45, 14 August 2011 (UTC)

Actually, it doesn't, because fair use material is not allowed here. Regards --Rosenzweig τ 16:55, 14 August 2011 (UTC)


UserJghjhgjghjgh Hello Rosenzweig Please Look this image I need site given why he wanted to delete the photo User720

Wrong categories

Hello, you deleted the Category:Cabinet des Dessins on 27th july 2011, replacing its content in the Category:Drawings in the Cabinet des Dessins of the Palais des Beaux-Arts de Lille but actually nearly none of the images contained in this category belongs to the collections of the Palais des Beaux-Arts de Lille ! They belong to the drawings and prints department of the Louvre Museum in Paris informally known as the Cabinet des Dessins. You were right to delete the category:Cabinet des Dessins because its unprecise name could lead to such confusions. So, to rectify the error can you move the content of the Category:Drawings in the Cabinet des Dessins of the Palais des Beaux-Arts de Lille into the Category:Drawings in the Louvre which is the right one for the Louvre's holdings of drawings ? Thank you, --Tancrède (talk) 18:57, 17 August 2011 (UTC)

Hello Tancrède,
I only deleted the already empty category that was marked as an ill-named duplicate. User:NeverDoING did all the categorising. Please sort this out with him, you don't need an admin for it. Regards --Rosenzweig τ 06:40, 18 August 2011 (UTC)

File:Silvana Arias.jpg

Hallo Rosenzweig, du wirst auf dieser Seite genannt, ohne dort überhaupt geschrieben zu haben. Kannst du das mal auf Richtigkeit prüfen. Danke. --Túrelio (talk) 09:19, 18 August 2011 (UTC)

Ditto bei File:Gaby-espino-242772.jpg von einem anderen Uploader. --Túrelio (talk) 10:08, 18 August 2011 (UTC)

Danke für den Hinweis. Offensichtlich keine zwei Benutzer, sondern derselbe, der die komplette Lizenzvorlage einfach von einer anderen Datei kopiert hat. Die Bilder sind als URVs gelöscht, der Benutzer angesprochen. Gruß --Rosenzweig τ 15:58, 18 August 2011 (UTC)

Kurze Rückfrage

Hallo Rosenzweig,
du hast in einige Amy Walker-Bilder {{npd}} gesetzt (z.B. dieses ). Ich habe den Uploader gerade im OTRS. Hast du da gerade eine Quelle für mich? Vllt. kann man das ja gleich mit klären? ;) Danke und Grüße, abf «Cabale!» 21:51, 22 August 2011 (UTC)

Was meinst du mit Quelle? Besagtes Bild lässt sich bspw. recht ähnlich hier (bzw. [11]) finden, meinst du sowas? Gruß --Rosenzweig τ 03:55, 23 August 2011 (UTC)
Danke! :) Ich hatte gedacht, dass du vllt. auch schon nen Autor gefunden hättest, aber das reicht mir so auch. Ich frag mal nach. ;) abf «Cabale!» 07:12, 23 August 2011 (UTC)
Und schon gelöscht, danke. :) Ich habe gerade auch die Antwort bekommen und wollte gerade selbst löschen. Für's Archiv übrigens: Ticket war dieses. ;) Grüße, abf «Cabale!» 17:24, 23 August 2011 (UTC)

Fair Use

Hi, I saw a comment you made on another page for undeletion. "Your use of the words “Anyone is granted the rights of using this for certain purposes.” on the image description page seems to refer to the concept of fair use, but fair use images are not allowed here. You might have better luck at the English wikipedia, which allows fair use images under certain conditions."

I was hoping you could tell me more about how to upload a fair use image. I tried to upload a screenshot and an icon for an open source program (under a CC-BY-SA license for screenshots and icons). EugeneZelenko, the troll that he is, deleted them and refused to give me any help or even explain why he did it. I am new to editing whole Wikipedia articles. I usually just edit spelling and grammar for pages. I don't know how to host the images on ONLY the English wikipedia. Every time I went to upload an image to an English article, it would force me to upload things to Wikimedia Commons, without even a hint of how to not upload to the Commons. This is really confusing. I correctly surmised that there was a legal distinction that would let me upload under fair use on the English Wikipedia (and not hosting on the Commons) even though EugeneZelenko was immensely unhelpful (I have a decent legal mind). After that I couldn't find a way to do it, so I gave up, thinking I had guessed wrong. It seems that I was right. Thank you in advance for the help. Rj.amdphreak (talk) 07:21, 27 August 2011 (UTC)

Hello Rj.amdphreak,
screenshots from computer programs that are distributed under a free software license are not fair use, they can be uploaded to the Commons. You need to use the correct license though, which is the one the program uses, GPL for example. Typically, you would use a license tag like {{Free screenshot|license=GPL}} for that. The problem with the program in question (Linphone) is that apparently they distribute the screenshots, icons etc. on their website under a different license, cc-by-nd-3.0. Eugene Zelenko is right, that license, though considered free, is not accepted on Commons, because we don't accept any license with non-commercial or non-derivative clauses here (Commons:Licensing and Commons:Copyright tags). You could say it's free, but not free enough for Commons. So, for uploading here, you can't take the screenshots they provide on their website. But you can make your own screenshots and tag them with {{Free screenshot|license=GPL}}, since the program itself is released as GPL. It doesn't matter that they released their own screenshots under a different license. Be sure to leave any desktop background images out of the screenshot, though, those are of course not covered by Linphone's GPL license. It is debatable whether the screenshot should contain any features coming from Windows (like the window control boxes), but even if those are copyrightable at all, they are—in my opinion—De minimis in any normal screenshot. To prevent any problem with that, make the screenshot using another, free software operating system/desktop like Linux/KDE or similar.
For uploading fair use files to the English wikipedia, please try Be sure to read Wikipedia:Non-free content first, though.
And please refrain from calling any admin or other user a “troll” just because there was some misunderstanding or miscommunication between the two of you. To achieve results, that is not helpful. Regards --Rosenzweig τ 08:56, 27 August 2011 (UTC)
Rosenzweig, AFAK making a screenshot - if it does not show someone's work does not create a new copyright. Therefore the claims on their website are maybe wrong? Sincerely -- RE rillke questions? 09:41, 27 August 2011 (UTC)
AFAIK, they are the creators of this program and the images and can license them any way they want. So if they release the program under GPL and additionally release the icon and some screenshots under a CC license, that's ok. One could argue that those screenshot are part of the GPL program and therefore also under the GPL, but just to be safe it's better IMHO to simply make your own screenshots. --Rosenzweig τ 10:18, 27 August 2011 (UTC)
Thanks. *I* -- RE rillke questions? 10:22, 27 August 2011 (UTC)
If you want to know which project accepts fair use media, you may read meta:Non-free content -- RE rillke questions? 09:41, 27 August 2011 (UTC)

Photos by Ioan Bacivarov

Dear Collegue,

I am a new contributor of Wikimedia Commons. I would like to certify that all the photos published on Wikimedia Commons by IoanBacivarov are authored by Ioan Bacivarov. Ioan Bacivarov agreed to license the files for inclusion in Wikimedia Commons.

Please let me know if this answer is convenient to you

Best Personal Regards,

Prof.dr. Ioan C. Bacivarov University of Bucharest

Editor-in-Chief "Quality Assurance"

It seems OTRS already dealed with this. Regards --Rosenzweig τ 15:14, 6 September 2011 (UTC)


Permission was emailed to OTRS and was assigned Ticket#2011081610019755 File:McConico2.jpg on 2 September 2011. See below

Re: [Ticket#2011081610019755] File:McConico2.jpg
Please remove the notice on File:McConico.jpg. It's license is documented in Ticket#2011081610019755

I hereby assert that as Publisher of Community Impact I am the sole owner of the exclusive copyright of the works: File:McConico.jpg and File:McConico2.jpg . I agree to publish that work under the free license CCA-SA-3.0 License. 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 claimed to have been made by 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. August 17, 2011 John Garrett, Publisher Community Impact News --- John P. Garrett Publisher - CEO Community Impact Newspaper (o) 512.989.6808 | (c) 512.663.7428 | (f) 512.989.6809

OTRS will deal with this, not me. Please be patient. --Rosenzweig τ 15:40, 6 September 2011 (UTC)
It appears that OTRS has already dealt with this by issuing the ticket number. I've spent 13 months trying to get this fixed and finally received a valid ticket number on 2 September 2011. The notice on lack of a license, howeever, had your signature on it. Why, then, cannot you remove the notice? Austex (talk) 15:27, 6 September 2011 (UTC)
That should be done by the OTRS volunteer who handled the correspondence; I'm not an OTRS volunteer. I see that File:McConico2.jpg still is deleted BTW. Are you sure you can give permission for everything was in that picture, including the text of that newspaper clippings? Do you hold the rights to that as well? But please ask OTRS about this, not me. Regards --Rosenzweig τ 15:40, 6 September 2011 (UTC)
The compilation was created by a newspaper and as such the Pblisher has the copyright on the created image, or so I'm told when questioned about this by OTRS. The whole point may be moot in that I just received a moment ago an email from OTRS that the image is indeed properly licensed. I assume they will to the un-delete when they have time? Austex (talk) 19:26, 6 September 2011 (UTC)

Deletion nomination

Hello, I was hoping you could take a look at this [12] utilitarian product and close the nomination with your decision. Thank you Editor182 (talk) 08:55, 27 September 2011 (UTC)

Decided. Regards --Rosenzweig τ 10:46, 27 September 2011 (UTC)

Thank you, I also have one more related file [13] nominated for deletion which has been open for the same amount of time with no progression. If you could also close this nomination it'd be further appreciated. Thanks again Editor182 (talk) 04:53, 28 September 2011 (UTC)

Leyo has decided that. Regards --Rosenzweig τ 17:30, 28 September 2011 (UTC)

No problem. I couldn't help noticing that Leyo decided to keep the related file only after making it clear that I am only the author of the photograph, not the product design or logo, and thought this may be applicable to the previous nomination, so I also thought it would be worth asking (respectfully) if you would be willing to reconsider your decision for deletion if I were to reupload the image using these correct credentials? Thank you Editor182 (talk) 02:04, 29 September 2011 (UTC)

I didn't delete it because of missing credentials of any kind, I could have amended that in the image description. The problem is, as I wrote in the decision, the copyrighted photos/graphics used by the package design. --Rosenzweig τ 06:51, 29 September 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for the reply. I hope you don't mind, but as a final inquiry, can you please briefly explain to me why the gel is not copyrighted, but the razors are? I'm genuinely interested (not opposed), as I too have noticed another experienced user who was of the same opinion in both the deletion nominations. They were also not in favor of keeping the razors, but were in favor of keeping the gel, so therefore I know I must be missing a considerable distinction between the two, as one is copyrighted and the other is not. Much appreciated Editor182 (talk) 07:57, 29 September 2011 (UTC)

The main difference is that the gel packaging features only letters and some rather simple graphic elements, whereas the razor packaging features photographs (most likely, or else rather realistic drawings) of the razor and batteries. If you had photographed the razor and the battery as such, that would not be a problem, but you photographed another photograph. There are some exceptions when this would be ok (twodimensional reproductions for instance, or if those other photographs where shown only in a de minimis way, e. g. very small in the background), but I do not think any one of them applies here. They are recent, threedimensional photographs and so must be assumed to be copyrighted. Regards --Rosenzweig τ 08:46, 29 September 2011 (UTC)

I see, thanks. Editor182 (talk) 09:09, 29 September 2011 (UTC)

Tweaking? What tweaking?

I don't understand the changes you've made recently to a number of DRs that I've been involved with. The edit history shows only the line with {{Delf}} on it, but does not, apparently, show any change.

I ask only because there are at least fifteen of them now on my watch list. I keep an eye on DRs that I've been involved with, so, ordinarily I would look at each of them to see what change was made post-closure. Since I know you as a solid colleague, I don't guess you're doing anything wrong -- but after looking at two, I'm curious. Regards,      Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 19:32, 3 October 2011 (UTC)

In each case, there was a blank space before the {{Delf}}, which seems to have prevented User:DRBot from archiving those closed deletion requests (that is, moving them from e. g. Commons:Deletion requests/2011/08/13 to e. g. Commons:Deletion requests/Archive/2011/08/13). At least, that's what I think, they were all closed some time ago, but not archived. I have removed those blank spaces; let's wait if the bot will archive them now. Regards --Rosenzweig τ 21:06, 3 October 2011 (UTC)
On the other hand, I've now looked at some of the closed DRs that were archived, and they have the same blank space. So maybe that wasn't the reason and I should ask User:Bryan, who's behind DRBot, why they weren't archived. I'll do this, but not today, it's close to midnight now here and I'm too tired :-) Regards --Rosenzweig τ 21:14, 3 October 2011 (UTC)

Zeitreihe - time series

Kocher 19600704.jpg
Forchtenberg Blick Büschelhof01 2011-10-16.jpg

Hallo Rosenzweig, Du hast da ein altes Foto ausgegraben. Vorgestern habe ich versucht, den gleichen Standort aufzusuchen. Ging nicht ganz (private Weide und ansonsten verwachsen), aber nah genug dran, um die 51 Jahre Unterschied zu sehen. Grüße -- KlausFoehl (talk) 09:19, 18 October 2011 (UTC)

Postales de Venezuela.jpg

Hola la verdad que fastidio con este sitio cada ves que una hace algo bueno siempre tiene que salir alguien con su envida a fastidiar con algún cuento, como esta foto estoy cansada de ver aquí y con la misma información que suministre, pero en fin ni discutir más bórrala ya se que eso es lo que quieres, no cargare el articulo que iba cargar lo cargo entro sitio. A también ahórrate el tratar de explicar con los enlaces que llevan a las supuestas ayudas, por esas cosa no sirven para nada, solo hablan para atrás y para adelante y ya de hace tiempo deje de leerlas no pierdo mi tiempo con cosas que funcionan. Gracias que la pases bien. --Veronidae (talk) 23:07, 20 November 2011 (UTC)

Imágenes relacionadas con Coronel Carlos Romero Giménez

Estimado Rsenzweig: Soy nuevo participando con aportaciones en Wikipedia. El Coronel Carlos Romero Giménez fue mi abuelo. Al descubrir que alguien había creado una entrada, entre mi madre (91 años, hija del Coronel Romero) otro nieto y yo hemos trabajado para enriquecerla aportando información e imágenes. He recibido notificaciones acerca de que podrían ser borradas las imágenes por motivos que según entiendo tienen que ver con dejar claro su origen y derechos de autor. Dado que me resulta confusa la información acerca de como explicar el origen y hacer públicos los derechos, ruego su ayuda para dejar las cosas correctamente conforme a los criterios requeridos. Las imágenes proceden de la colección familiar y sus descendientes no tenemos inconveniente en abrirlas al dominio público. Otro tema donde ruego su ayuda es en corregir la entrada del artículo, pues el segundo apellido Giménez es con G, no con J. Si las referencias incluidas en el artículo no fueran suficientes, por favor indíqueme que documentación comprobatoria sería necesaria para ello. Gracias por su ayuda.Descendiente (talk) 17:21, 21 November 2011 (UTC)

Hello Descendiente,
I can't really help you with the article, I don't write any Spanish (I can read it to some extent), and I'm practically inactive at the Spanish wikipedia. I can only recommend that you ask for help at the es:Wikipedia:Café.
About the images: Only images that are free of copyright or released under a free license can be uploaded to Wikimedia Commons (here). Generally speaking, an image is free of copyright 70 years after its creator has died. That can hardly be the case for drawings that were published or made in 1943 and 1948, like File:Coronel Carlos Romero Giménez- libro “Bajo las Garras de la Gest 001.jpg and File:Coronel Carlos Romero Giménez exilado en México.jpg. We need to know who the artists that did those drawings were. For File:Coronel Carlos Romero Giménez, Melilla, 1 sept 1921.jpg, you write that it is from 1921, but we do not know who is the photographer. And for File:Coronel Carlos Romero Giménez 001.jpg, you write nothing about either the year or the photographer. Please add as much details as you know about the images. If they were photographed by some ancestor of you, please write that down, normally we accept images made by fathers, grandfathers etc. of the uploaders. We'll have to decide about each image separately, depending on what information about them is available to us. Regards --Rosenzweig τ 18:38, 21 November 2011 (UTC)

(traducción automática:)

Hola Descendiente,
Realmente no puedo ayudarte con el artículo, yo no escribo nada de español (puedo leer hasta cierto punto), y estoy prácticamente inactivo en la wikipedia en español. Yo sólo puedo recomendar que pedir ayuda a la es:Wikipedia:Café.
Acerca de las imágenes: Sólo las imágenes que están libres de derechos de autor o publicado bajo una licencia libre puede ser subido a Wikimedia Commons (aquí). En general, una imagen libre de derechos de autor 70 años después de su creador ha muerto. Eso no puede ser el caso de los dibujos que fueron publicados o puestos en 1943 y 1948, como Archivo: Coronel Carlos Romero Giménez-libro "Bajo las Garras de la Gest 001.jpg y Archivo: Coronel Carlos Giménez Romero exilado en mexico.jpg. Tenemos que saber quiénes son los artistas que hicieron los dibujos fueron. De Archivo: Coronel Carlos Giménez Romero, Melilla, 01 de septiembre 1921.jpg, usted escribe que es a partir de 1921, pero no sabemos quién es el fotógrafo. Y de Archivo: Coronel Carlos Giménez Romero 001.jpg, escribir nada acerca de los años o el fotógrafo. Por favor, añadir detalles como todo lo que sabe acerca de las imágenes. Si ellos fueron fotografiados por algún antepasado de ustedes, por favor, escriba eso, normalmente se acepta imágenes hechas por los padres, abuelos, etc de los uploaders. Vamos a tener que decidir sobre cada imagen por separado, dependiendo de qué tipo de información acerca de ellos está disponible para nosotros. Saludos --Rosenzweig τ 18:38, 21 November 2011 (UTC)

Muchas gracias. Solicité ayuda a es:Wikipedia:Café aportando detalles sugeridos y estoy en espera de respuesta. Descendiente (talk) 21:00, 23 November 2011 (UTC)


你好:这几张照片是我个人拍摄。本人是中国辽宁省沈阳市的一名新闻编辑。这几个公众人物参与商业活动时本人拍摄,活动地点都在中国辽宁沈阳市。在上传维基百科的时候进行过编辑。 本人使用维基共享资源不是很熟练。请多指教。或者如何能正确上传。 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Wang65 (talk • contribs) 11:05, 28. Nov. 2011 (UTC+01:00)

(machine translation into English:)

Hello: This is my personal take some pictures. I was in Shenyang City, Liaoning Province, China, a news editor. These public figures involved in commercial activities, I shoot, the venue in Shenyang City, China. When uploading Wikipedia been edited. I use the Wikimedia Commons is not very skilled. Like him to teach. Or how to properly upload.

Hello Wang65,
please send an e-mail explaining this and containing a permission to the OTRS system. Please read Commons:OTRS/zh-hant for details. If this explanation and permission is accepted, the files can most likely be restored. Regards --Rosenzweig τ 16:49, 28 November 2011 (UTC)

(翻译成中文机:) :您好Wang65,

:请发送电子邮件,解释和含有OTRS的系统权限。请阅读 Commons:OTRS/zh-hant 细节。如果接受这样的解释和权限,文件最有可能被恢复。关于 - --Rosenzweig τ 16:49, 28 November 2011 (UTC)


It is not right, that the file File:Drina'-1_Tapai.jpg is deleted from User Fastily. I am however holder of license, because driwer István Tápai drew picture for me. He has not computer nor e-mail. So I give to picture free license too. He wrote on papir, that this picture has free license in Wikipedia and overall. I think it is more as enough. Why I do if somebody can it withouth reason delete?--Stebunik (talk) 14:49, 28 November 2011 (UTC)

István Tápai wrote free license too for Wikipedia and overall with his own hand. I think it is enough: File:Drina permission1.jpg --Stebunik (talk) 16:28, 28 November 2011 (UTC)

I wrote this before, and I am writing it again, for the last time: Please read Commons:OTRS for what you must do. Please send any permissions you have by e-mail to the address specified there. Attach any scans if necessary. Please do also read Commons:Email templates for the wording such a permission should typically have to be accepted. If you do what I write, the OTRS volunteers will tell you if the permission you have is acceptable or not. If it is, the file can most likely be restored. And, PS: DO NOT modify Commons:Deletion requests/File:Drina'-1 Tapai.jpg any more, this deletion request is closed. If necessary, use the Undeletion requests. Regards --Rosenzweig τ 16:37, 28 November 2011 (UTC)

(strojno prevajanje v Slovenskem:)

Sem napisal že prej, in jaz sem to pisanje še enkrat, še zadnjič: Prosimo, da preberete Commons:OTRS za to, kar morate storiti. Prosim pošljite dovoljenja imatepo e-pošti na naslov, naveden tam. Pritrdite vse skenira če je to potrebno. Prosimo, da preberete tudi Commons:Email templates za besedilo bi tako dovoljenje, običajno jih je treba sprejeti. Če boste to, kar pišem, bo OTRS prostovoljci vam povem, če imate dovoljenje je sprejemljivo ali ne. Če je to, datoteke lahko najverjetneje mogoče obnoviti. In, PS:NE spremeniti Commons:Deletion requests/File:Drina'-1 Tapai.jpg vse več, to zahteva izbris jezaprta. Če je potrebno, uporabite Undeletion requests. Regards -Rosenzweig τ 16:37, 28 November 2011 (UTC)

They have not computer

Tápai István and Tomaž Perko, they have not computer neither e-mail. So They wrote their free licences. I think it is more as enough. So I ask you to give back the deleted pictures.--Stebunik (talk) 21:42, 15 December 2011 (UTC)

Can't you read? I already wrote everything there is to write about this above. --Rosenzweig τ 22:05, 15 December 2011 (UTC)


Hallo Rosenzweig, könntest du bitte die geschützte Datei entsprechend [14] ändern? PS: letztens habe ich wieder ein Wappen von dir überschrieben, jedoch habe ich erst hinterher gesehen, dass es eventuell behaltenswürdig ist (wie schon mal angemerkt von dir, File:Wappen Landkreis Havelland.png). -- πϵρήλιο 16:33, 28 November 2011 (UTC)

Die Datei ist doch gar nicht geschützt, da konntest du selbst ändern. Besagte neue Wappenversion sehe ich nur als standardisierte Variante der bisherigen Versionen an, solange diese in der Versionsgeschichte erhalten bleiben, habe ich keine Probleme damit. Gruß --Rosenzweig τ 16:40, 28 November 2011 (UTC)


I scanned a picture, that drew I.P. for me and he wrote permission for Wikipedia and overall. I do not understand in what is problem and how to disolve it. All is there: permission of drawer, I wrote that it is free license. Permission for overall wrote I.T. later, but he only added it on the same paper. He has not computer nor e-mails. If yout can, what to do, help. All components for free are here. Or it disturbs, because is picture about Catholic nuns?--Stebunik (talk) 16:50, 28 November 2011 (UTC)

I already wrote all I have to say about that above. Please read it and act accordingly. --Rosenzweig τ 17:16, 28 November 2011 (UTC)

Deletion of photographs on the Paul Comi Wikipedia page


What can I do to retrieve the photographs that you have deleted on Paul Comi's Wikipedia page? Paul Comi is my grandfather, and I uploaded the photographs from his Facebook page. Prior to uploading the photographs, he informed me that they do not possess a copyright.

Please help me post these photographs back onto his page.,_Bill_Shatner_as_Kirk,_and_George_Takei_as_Sulu_in_episode_%22Balance_of_Terror%22_of_Star_Trek.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1

Sincerely, Fill_the_Gap

Those images cannot be restored because they are not free images, i. e., they are neither in the public domain nor released under a free license. Only free images can be uploaded to Wikimedia Commons.
You may be able to upload the images to the English wikipedia as fair use images. Please refer to en:Wikipedia:Non-free content to see if this is possible. I'm not sure it is possible, if necessary please ask at the English wikipedia, I won't be able to help you with that. Regards --Rosenzweig τ 22:15, 29 November 2011 (UTC)

Public Domain Images in israel

The Israel museum, as part of its glam cooperation with Wikimeida Israel, has allows volunteers to upload images from its database that are in the public domain. In Israel, all images become Public Domain 50 years after it is taken (see Template:PD-Israel, therefore, the many images you tagged for deletion should not be deleted (for example [15])(I will added the correct PD tag and the categories). Deror avi (talk) 15:42, 15 December 2011 (UTC)

Don't forget the proper sources and correct dates/years, which are essential to determine copyright status. --Rosenzweig τ 16:43, 15 December 2011 (UTC)

Ich sand Brief und hier ist Antwort

Original Message -----

From: Janez Jelen To: Sent: Tuesday, November 29, 2011 6:43 PM Subject: vrnite izbrisano sliko

Brisana slika

Nekateri pravijo, da je moja angleščina slaba; verjetno tudi moja nemščina ni dosti boljša. Tisti avtomatski Googlovi prevodi v slovenščino so pa celo pošastni. Zato menim, da je najboljše, če napišem v slovenščini. Kar pišem angleško ali nemško, tako nihče ne upošteva. Torej: Brisana slika File:Drina'-1 Tapai.jpg Ima dovljenje za prosto uporabo ne le na Wikipediji, ampak tudi povsod drugod, kot tam piše v madžarščini. Avtor nima niti računalnika niti e-majla, zato sem njegovo dovoljenje skeniral in ga postavil noter. Prosim, da izbrisano sliko obnovite. Hvala

File:Drina permission1.jpg
Dovoljenje za sliko od avtorja Drinskih mučenk.


Original Message -----

From: "OTRS Freiwilligenteam" <> To: "Janez Jelen" <> Sent: Tuesday, November 29, 2011 6:43 PM Subject: [Ticket#2011112910026485] Eingangsbestätigung deines Schreibens für die Support-Team-Mitarbeit

Hallo und einen guten Tag, wir freuen uns über dein Interesse an der Mitarbeit im Support-Team. Hiermit erhältst du zunächst eine automatische Antwort, um dich darüber zu informieren, dass deine E-Mail bei uns eingegangen ist. Die Aufnahme im Team wird im Einvernehmen der aktiven Support-Mitarbeiter getroffen. Bitte habe noch etwas Geduld, in etwa 3 Wochen informieren wir dich über unsere Entscheidung. Bei Fragen melden wir uns bei dir unter der von dir genutzten E-Mail-Adresse. Falls Du noch etwas hinzufügen möchtest, nimm bitte folgende Ticketnummer in den Betreff deiner E-Mail auf: 2011112910026485, Mit freundlichen Grüßen, dein Wikimedia Support-Team.

Ich sand also einen Brief über gelöschten Bild (Drina Maryrs); sie (die Freiwilliger) sind warscheinlich gute Männer, aber an OTRS verstanden nicht über was ist es geredet worden. Darum ich schrieb dort umsonst.

Hier ist ganzes Text, Übersetzung aus ungarisch. Ich weiss wirklich nicht, was fehlt noch: Ich Tápai István machte das Bild über Drina-Martyrs. Dieses Bild ich schenkte zu meinem Freunde Stebunik. Dieses Bild kann man nutzen an Wikipedia und überall in echten Zielen. Tápai István, 11. April 2011. --Stebunik (talk) 21:11, 16 December 2011 (UTC)

Das war nur die vorläufige Bestätigung, dass deine E-Mail überhaupt eingegangen ist, eine inhaltliche Antwort soll innerhalb von etwa drei Wochen kommen. Diese drei Wochen sind noch nicht vorbei, warte daher bitte, bis du die nächste E-Mail von ihnen bekommst. Da sollte dann drinstehen, ob noch etwas fehlt und wenn ja, was. Gruß --Rosenzweig τ 00:15, 17 December 2011 (UTC)

Q-music Press pictures

You have pictures delete of me on Q-music. On the website (in Dutch): Bij alle foto's dient als bronvermelding Q-music gemeld te worden. That means I can use the picture when I put the source with it. I would like you to restore the pictures.

Greeting BOB-NL

Hello BOB-NL,
those are press photos to be used by the press. For Wikimedia Commons, that is not enough, we accept only free images that are free to use for everyone and for every purpose. See Commons:Licensing for more information. Regards --Rosenzweig τ 18:01, 17 December 2011 (UTC)

Commons:Deletion requests/File:Sodomie.jpg

Just wanted to say thanks for closing this as keep - this was one of six really heated DRs started by Ryulong, and it's nice to know that other people do see the value of sexual imagery. -mattbuck (Talk) 03:09, 25 December 2011 (UTC)

Oh come on. This is a useless photo of some exhibitionist who rammed a vegetable in his ass. It's not in use on any Wikimedia project and it is terribly out of scope. I can see the value of sexual imagery, but this one image has no educational purpose other than saying the Commons will host your self-made porn and/or shock photos so long as you give it the right copyright.—Ryūlóng (竜龙) 03:43, 25 December 2011 (UTC)
Ryulong, this has been kept twice at DR within a month now. It's in scope, get over it. -mattbuck (Talk) 10:22, 27 December 2011 (UTC)


File Sodomie.jpg was not mine. I received from user Rosenzweig and so I sent him, why send he that deletion to me. So one (I can not who) user blokked me. Please, let you unblock me. Thank you. --Stebunik (talk) 07:39, 27 December 2011 (UTC)

What are you talking about? You are not blocked. --Rosenzweig τ 08:05, 27 December 2011 (UTC)
Nor did you get sent anything about this image. -mattbuck (Talk) 10:21, 27 December 2011 (UTC)

Today I attempted to open the page in Wikipedia Koran (quran in English). Ther wrote: this page is currently semi-protected and can be edited only by established registered users. I think, I am registered. Why I can not do on this page? I thought, that because I was blocked. There wrote, that I am blocked to February and I can not why. --Stebunik (talk) 17:23, 27 December 2011 (UTC)

You mean en:Quran? It seems that article is semi-protected, that means indeed that only registered users can edit it, if and when they meet some other conditions (they must be registered for some time and have a certain number of edits). Why that seems to be a problem in your case I do not know, you'll have to ask at Wikipedia about that. Regards --Rosenzweig τ 17:44, 27 December 2011 (UTC)

File talk:Casa do forno.jpg

This was being discussed. As you eliminate something without giving an explanation of the arguments raised against the Koehne? A file must be eliminated just because someone copied it after the commons? Leandro Rocha (talk) 15:25, 29 December 2011 (UTC)

The file, File:Casa do forno.jpg, was marked as a copyvio. I checked it and found the file here respectively here, exactly the same file as the file on Commons, only it has a file modification date of January 8, 2009, more than four months before it was uploaded to the Commons. So I concluded that it was indeed a copyvio, deleted it accordingly and explained the situation in the deletion log entry. So I did explain the deletion. After a file is deleted, it is standard procedure to delete the orphaned file talk page. Regards --Rosenzweig τ 15:36, 29 December 2011 (UTC)