User talk:Siebrand/Archive10

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


Coats of arms and flags of municipalities of Brazil

Hi! I just noticed that you deleted lots of pictures of coats of arms and flags of municipalities of Brazil. It seems that it was lacking permission. If I add this permission {{PD-BrazilGov}}to the description, is it ok or was there lacking something else ? I will wait for your answer before recreating all the flags and coats of arms I can find on the official websites. Thank you ! --Linan 11:25, 15 October 2007 (UTC)

Please provide exact sources. From Commons:Incomplete license: For images that come from a website, you should ideally name three links: a direct link to the image, a link to the page the image is displayed on, and a link to the term of usage of the site. Links to (a page showing) the image and the terms of usage are required. Cheers! Siebrand 17:46, 15 October 2007 (UTC)
Thank you for your answer! I'll try to find all of these three links. Linan 06:40, 16 October 2007 (UTC)


I have restored this image because it was clearly PD-Art / PD-old. Please do not delete images from that book. It is well over 400 years old. --ALE! ¿…? 16:09, 15 October 2007 (UTC)

Because it was not sourced, I could not easily verify the book was 400 years old. Even after your restore, I still see no changes in the description of the image: still unsourced. I disagree with this type of restores, especially if they are done without adding proper sourcing afterwards. Cheers! Siebrand 17:34, 15 October 2007 (UTC)
A very quick Google / Wikipedia search for es:Felipe Guaman Poma de Ayala would have solved this. Especially seeing the external link . In my opinion all the necessary information is on the description page. Please have a second thought before deleting "old" things. --ALE! ¿…? 19:39, 15 October 2007 (UTC)
This is a very old discussion. Uploaders have to take responsibility for their actions. I signal them something is wrong. Then there is a week to fix it. After that, it is being deleted. We, sysops, do not have to shovel that shit, too. Cheers! Siebrand 21:10, 15 October 2007 (UTC)
I totally agree in cases where it is (on the first sight) doubtful whether an image is copyrighted or not. However, in this case, it was more than obvious from the description page, that the image is in fact PD-old. So, please be a litle bit more careful before deleting. --ALE! ¿…? 11:38, 16 October 2007 (UTC)

Siebot category renames

I found that when changing Changing Category:Problem tags to Internationalised problem tags, Siebot also removed image tagging categories, [1] [2] [3] [4] Was it on purpose? Platonides 21:50, 15 October 2007 (UTC)

Ehr... No, most definately not. I'll report a bug in Thanks for noticing that! Cheers! Siebrand 21:56, 15 October 2007 (UTC)


The licence (own release), author (is me) and source (self made) are clearly indicated in the image information. What is the problem then? Any groundless claims will be reported if repeated. You should take a better look at the image info before putting remarks.

--Roman Zacharij 23:31, 15 October 2007 (UTC)

Dude, chill. There was no license. You added it[5] and all was well. Please {{be civil}}. Cheers! Siebrand 23:40, 15 October 2007 (UTC)
You are rightþ I have not noticed the former difference. Hence I beg you pardon. -- 01:02, 16 October 2007 (UTC)


Hi, I was on a business trip so I coudn't answer your message, I've uploaded again the picture, I don't understand why you tagged that image for deletion, You can find that image in the cathedral of Toledo.Jfreyre

Looks better now. Cheers! Siebrand 13:11, 16 October 2007 (UTC)
thanks to you Jfreyre


I want to know why you have deleted this photo which is own work and I have the original. The new photo is similar but not the same, and I'm surprised I didn't have any discusion.--Lohen11 10:17, 16 October 2007 (UTC)

Image:PiazzaArmerina-Mosaik-Bikini.jpg is definately a high res dupe containing all parts of the above image at a higher resolution. Cheers! Siebrand 10:20, 16 October 2007 (UTC)

All the new flags

My Friend, Thanks for your note I just added the flags of:

  • Abu Dhabi
  • Dubai
  • Sharjah
  • Ajman
  • Umm Al Qawain
  • Ras al-Khaimah
  • Fujeirah

They are all made by me, I took the design from Wikimedia Commons and added them under a .png I do not have .svg The reason I did that was because; and you could see the difference, the white does not appear in templates and 20px. I just added boundries of red.

What else should I do. I added that these are self made which is true, and you alreasy have the rights.

--Nasib Bitar 15:11, 16 October 2007 (UTC)

Nasib, you have to add a license tag. For flags and coats of armour, usually {{PD-self}} is used. Use that to replace the {{no source since}}. Cheers! Siebrand 15:14, 16 October 2007 (UTC)

Deleted images PD-Chile

Hi! I want to ask if you can restore the deleted images uploaded by User:Fbaltra. I guess the user didn't give the source clearly and he didn't corrected them because he is absent of Commons since August 2007. But most (if not, all) of them are under {{PD-Chile}}. If you restore them, I will correct the source of the images. Greetings, B1mbo 17:43, 15 October 2007 (UTC)

I have restored them. They are still/again in Category:Unknown as of 5 October 2007. From Commons:Incomplete license: For images that come from a website, you should ideally name three links: a direct link to the image, a link to the page the image is displayed on, and a link to the term of usage of the site. Links to (a page showing) the image and the terms of usage are required. Please be quick, otherwise another admin may delete them soon. Cheers! Siebrand 17:48, 15 October 2007 (UTC)
Thanks, B1mbo 18:38, 15 October 2007 (UTC)
Take care... I'm doing that for the moment because I don't want that the images will be deleted again, while I'm searching the source of the images but it isn't simple and quick... --B1mbo 18:56, 15 October 2007 (UTC)
OK, but please get proper sourcing and licensing. I'll re-check your edits in a week or so. Cheers! Siebrand 21:11, 15 October 2007 (UTC)
I already corrected most of the images... the exceptions are Image:Partidas2.jpg (which is a duplicate of Image:Las Siete Partidas.jpg) and Image:Codigo-penal-Chile.png. I can't find a source at internet for the image... I guess the uploader probably scanned it from the original book but it isn't used at the moment so there is no problem to delete it. Greetings, B1mbo 22:27, 16 October 2007 (UTC)
You have done an admirable job, B1mbo. Thank you very much for your effort. Cheers! Siebrand 22:30, 16 October 2007 (UTC)


Dear Siebrand, this is a temporary file, showing some problem areas used in the FP candidates list. I will delete it (by template) during the next 48 hours. Best regards Richard --Richard Bartz 22:04, 15 October 2007 (UTC)

Please remember to always add a license tag and some information about media when uploading. Otherwise CommonsDelinker or Filbot *will* find your talk page :) Cheers! Siebrand 22:08, 15 October 2007 (UTC)
Okidoki :) --Richard Bartz 20:20, 16 October 2007 (UTC)

Music by year bot request

Hello. Within the Category:Music by year categories consensus seems to support (or at least no objections have been raised) to standardizing years in the "Music in [year]" format rather than "[Year] in music". I've taken care of everything before 2000 by hand. Could you have your bot move items from "Category:2000 in music" to "Category:Music in 2000" and similarly up to "Category:2007 in music" material moved to "Category:Music in 2007"? Thank you. Cheers, -- Infrogmation 15:15, 16 October 2007 (UTC)

Sure, no problem. Will do that within a few hours. Cheers! Siebrand 15:29, 16 October 2007 (UTC)
✓ Done Siebrand 19:47, 16 October 2007 (UTC)
Thank you much. -- Infrogmation 23:48, 16 October 2007 (UTC)


Hi, So I've uploaded so many time ago this photo: You have said to me that i've to say the licence. I've made this screenshot how i can set the license of this photo? Best Regards Vincenzo

See {{please tag images}}. Cheers ! Siebrand 19:28, 16 October 2007 (UTC)

Image Tagging Image:A8_Alpaufstieg.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 | Tiếng Việt | 中文(简体)‎ | 中文(繁體)‎ | +/−

Warning sign
This media may be deleted.

Thanks for uploading Image:A8_Alpaufstieg.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-3.0}} 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 22:53, 16 October 2007 (UTC)

Landscapes of heraldry

Hi. I was just wondering about the rationale behind the category renaming Landscape in heraldry --> Landscapes of heraldry. I'm not a native english speaker but landscapes of heraldry sounds wrong. After all it's Category:Landscapes in art not of art. /Lokal_Profil 09:53, 17 October 2007 (UTC)

That's an oops. I used Excel to prepare cat renames and this one should not have been in it. I will revert. Thanks for your notice. Cheers! Siebrand 09:55, 17 October 2007 (UTC)
No problems. Thanks. /Lokal_Profil 09:56, 17 October 2007 (UTC)
Moved to Category:Landscapes_in_heraldry. Cheers! Siebrand 09:57, 17 October 2007 (UTC)


Hello Siebrand, the problem is that I assumed that when someone upload an image using the "It is entirely my own work" option, the PD-self would appear automatically... --Rolf Obermaier 16:00, 17 October 2007 (UTC)

No problem. That is why we are running the bot: to let you know something was missing. If you have corrected it, all is well... Cheers! Siebrand 17:30, 17 October 2007 (UTC)


Roberto Stuckert, Agencia Brasil, brazilian government press departament. It is written in the inforrmation tag. I think it is clear, isn't? Machocarioca 17:37, 17 October 2007 (UTC)Machocarioca

From Commons:Incomplete license: For images that come from a website, you should ideally name three links: a direct link to the image, a link to the page the image is displayed on, and a link to the term of usage of the site. Links to (a page showing) the image and the terms of usage are required. Please add exact sourced. Cheers! Siebrand 17:39, 17 October 2007 (UTC)

Ede, Concordia Molen

Nog een oops, dat is niet de molen in Oploo.Graag cat's herstellen. Havang 12:16, 17 October 2007 (UTC)

Iets meer informatie alsjeblieft. Ik heb geen idee waar dit over gaat... Groet, Siebrand 17:31, 17 October 2007 (UTC)
De categorie Ede, Concordia molen was plotseling rood, en één Concordiamolen-item was naar ik meende door Siebot verplaatst naar categorie Oploo molen, maar vlak daarna weer hersteld. Is alweer OKE, dus. Kijk onder revision history of Image:Concordia molen houten achtkant rietlatten.jpg.Komt zoiets vaker voor? Havang 19:11, 17 October 2007 (UTC)
Ah. SieBot voert ook automatisch opdrachten van andere admins uit via commando's op User:CommonsDelinker/commands. Dat commando heb ik niet gegeven. Gezien de wijzigingen was dat User:Deadstar, ook een Nederlands sprekende collega. Groet, Siebrand 20:22, 17 October 2007 (UTC)

marking AND deleting unsourced images

Hello Siebrand, would you please stop marking AND deleting unsourced images? In my opinion this shouldn't be done by one person alone because this leads to mistakes:

  • Image:Goerlitz 1575.jpg was marked as missing essential source information by you on 2007-09-17 and deleted in 2007-10-11. There was neither an information on de:Talk:Görlitz nor on Talk:Görlitz which makes the uploader pretty much the only one who got the note. The image had a proper source, it was only in the wrong field. It's easy to blame the uploader, but a second person during the process of checking, marking and deleting might have noticed that piece of information.
  • Image:Amalie von Schintling.jpg - another example.

Usually 2d-images of paintings from 1575 and 1831 are considered as public domain, the missing source is a very weak argument in this case. --32X 18:33, 17 October 2007 (UTC)

Any unsourced and untagged images will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Sourcing is not just about establishing a copyright status or license status, but also about credibility. The first image you reference has not been sourced properly. See Commons:Incomplete license and please add weblinks or more specific information. Cheers! Siebrand 20:14, 17 October 2007 (UTC)

fix redirected cat

I've written something for the first point, I'll continue when I've time. You can see the code here (but also need a fix to work properly..). Bye, --Filnik 19:03, 17 October 2007 (UTC)

Fixes to current code are not a problem. Thanks for starting with it already! Cheers! Siebrand 20:15, 17 October 2007 (UTC)


I have updated source for this image. Warrakkk 19:10, 17 October 2007 (UTC)

Thank you, but the image is still missing permission. Are you Martin Rudefelt? If not, who created the photograph? That should be entered at the author field. If you are not the author, you need permission. Cheers! Siebrand 20:19, 17 October 2007 (UTC)

Is it {{Attribution}}? Gridge 20:51, 17 October 2007 (UTC).

I guess that yes. Gridge 21:03, 17 October 2007 (UTC).
Yes. Siebrand 21:12, 17 October 2007 (UTC)


Thx for your warning message on my discussion page. In fact, I didn't bring much more infos on this image because just after its uploading, little resarchs convinced me that such picture was a copyright violation. It was apparently loaded from an article from the Cercle of Ancient Iranian Studies. This website is already famous for multiples violations of copyrightswich , and therefore was blacklisted on both and The article in the CAIS, containing the image appeared probably to be copyed/pasted from the original published in an iranian newspaper Hamshari Daily in 22 August 2000. As it has to be deleted, I was thinking to contact an administrator.

I also have another picture I recently uploaded, that I'd like to be deleted for its very poor quality, as I already have made a better version. I would appreciate your help for that.

Regards Pentocelo 21:00, 17 October 2007 (UTC)

✓ Done Siebrand 21:13, 17 October 2007 (UTC)


Siebrand 1 Image:Dorpskerk_Hervormde_Gemeente_Wierden_002.jpg 2 Opmerking bij bestand Image:Ingrid_Groeneveld_Kunstenares_Wierden.jpg 3 Opmerking bij bestand Image:Wierdense_Revue_1979_01.jpg 4 Opmerking bij bestand Image:Jan_Aanstoot_Kunstenaar_Wierden.jpg Alle afbeeldingen zijn geplaatst met expliciete toestemming van de betrokkenen. Er is daarom geen enkele reden deze afbeeldingen te verwijderen, zij horen ook bij meerdere onderwerpen op Wikipedia. Met vriendelijke groet, Okido.--Okido 23:03, 17 October 2007 (UTC)

Hoi Okido. Lees alsjeblieft Template:No permission since/nl en zorg dat je aan de voorwaarden gaat voldoen die er beschreven staan. Als je niet de rechthebbende bent van geplaatst materiaal, dien je tastbaar bewijs te overleggen. Groet, Siebrand 23:15, 17 October 2007 (UTC)


I'm sorry but the whole information is there. visit the link faria lima on wikipedia to see the article as well. cheers

Who are you and what is this about? Please see the top of this page for what you need to add for me to be able to give a proper response. Cheers! Siebrand 05:54, 18 October 2007 (UTC)


You delete Image:Герб Волновахи.jpg as duplicate Image:Volnovakha-COA.gif, but this images are different --Butko 06:38, 18 October 2007 (UTC)

Restored. Siebrand 08:20, 18 October 2007 (UTC)


Hi! I've got a question about Image:Esztergom.bottyanhid3.JPG and Image:Esztergom_Lorinc_utca_3.JPG.

These were marked for deletion, because I didn't give a source, but I have no idea who took the picture, all Iknow that they are very old, both from the early 20th century. And if the artist is unknown, the 70 years begin ticking from the date the picture was taken, isn't that right? These postcards are all from my friends collection, who is a collector, is that enough information to save pe pictures? Villy 09:36, 18 October 2007 (UTC)

You have to provide external proof of the image being in the public domain, either by dating it pre-1907 or by proving that the copyright has expired some other way. Cheers! Siebrand 09:38, 18 October 2007 (UTC)

1907? Don't you mean 1937? There is no way I can find external proof, the artist is impossible to hunt down almost a century later. Nobody knows who took a picture for a simple postcard a 100 years ago, and if the artist is unknown I think the law is specific: The picture itself has to be older than 70 years, and it is not calculated from the death of the photographer. There is no loophole in these situations. These pictures are clearly old enough for that criteria. I can tell, because I live here, and I know when certain buildings were built or demolished, but it is not so obvious to someone from out of town. Most of these postcards are unique, I will not be able to track down external proof. Doesn't the fact help, that the original pictures are like 50 meters away at my friend's house? Villy 09:55, 18 October 2007 (UTC)

1907 (100 years) is the cut off year for anonymous PD. 1937 is the current year minus 70 years for known authors. If you think you have a case, please describe that in the source part of the information template. You are providing no information whatsoever now in the image description. Cheers! Siebrand 09:59, 18 October 2007 (UTC)

Thank you

Thank you for "licensing" correctly my images. :-) --Fabexplosive 15:09, 18 October 2007 (UTC)

even though I have no idea which media: you're welcome. Please check your uploads if you fear there may be more... Cheers! Siebrand 15:10, 18 October 2007 (UTC)

Age pyramids

I have checked the prepared category changes in User:Siebrand/test. The general form for the destination category names is:

[Age pyramids] [of] [TERRITORIES]

  1. The root category for this subject is Category:Population pyramids, and this name is consistent with Population pyramid. So, you would consider the replacement of [Age pyramids] with [Population pyramids].
  2. You want to replace the preposition for with of. I think that this preposition is only a convention, and I prefer to keep the same preposition for all subcategories of Category:Population pyramids: so, I support your proposal (preposition of). However, other people can have different opinions.
  3. TERRITORIES are OK, except for “counties of Tennessee.csv”. The correct expression is “counties of Tennessee”, without suffix.

--Juiced lemon 20:17, 18 October 2007 (UTC)

So it will be. Thanks for your input. Cheers! Siebrand 20:34, 18 October 2007 (UTC)
✓ Done Siebrand 22:29, 18 October 2007 (UTC)

Siebot edit descriptions

I am a little bemused at this edit description "Robot: Moving category Registered Historic Structures in Washington to Registered Historic Places in Washington" of this edit action[6]. No harm done but an incorrect description is worse than no description at all :-) --Tony Wills 22:16, 18 October 2007 (UTC)

Unfortunately a known issue in the bot framework... If a second job is started, while a prior one is running, the old job will get the new job's summary, even though the edits themselves stay correct. The bot starts a new category move every 45 seconds, so if the processing of a category takes longer than that. This happens if a category has about 50 or more members. Cheers! Siebrand 22:20, 18 October 2007 (UTC)

Answer on image

Hello. I would like to delete the image referred. I will post more similar in the future.Thanks, --Fanourakismanos 09:47, 19 October 2007 (UTC)

Please add a license tag, or if you want it deleted, add a {{speedy|reason}} tag. Cheers! Siebrand 09:48, 19 October 2007 (UTC)

Own Work

Commons:Contributing your own work and Commons:Own work are tagged with "This is work in progress. Please do not translate until this message has been removed." since July. Commons:Choosing a license had the tag until a IP removed it.

I think these tags must be removed yet. What do you think about it? Sanbec 16:17, 19 October 2007 (UTC)

Yep. Be bold ;) Cheers! Siebrand 16:32, 19 October 2007 (UTC)

Weird categories

User:SieBot has placed an awful lot of images in Category:Music by country and Category:Musicians by country, none of them appropriately (these catgories are not intended to contain images directly). I've spent several hours cleaning up most of the former (except some that appear to me to have rights issues), and am making headway on the latter, but since I'm unfamiliar with how a bot is choosing categories, I am turning to you to possibly attack this at the root. - Jmabel | talk 00:04, 11 October 2007 (UTC)

I am assuming these are images that SieBot has moved from nl.wikipedia. Correct? If so, they were categorised using the 'use CommonSense' option of CommonsHelper. Based on usage in articles, CommonSense chooses categories on Commons that are related to categories in interwiki links of the categories the article(s) on the local wiki are in (I think!). This tool was written by User:Duesentrieb. I/We know that the CommonSense categorisation is not always the best, but usually it is somewhat adequate, although at many times in a supercategory of where it should be in the end - the thought here is any category is better than no categories at all. I have no knowledge on the exact workings of CommonSense. As far as I know, Daniel has made the code available and I am sure he'd be happy to accept and process and input to improve CommonSense.
Basically you have volunteered to fine-tune the categorisation of the images, which is great. Please nominate the image for which you have doubt for deletion. I'll check things out both here and at the source wiki, if that wiki is nl.wikipedia, where I am also a sysop.
Is this a reply you can live with? Cheers! Siebrand 06:17, 11 October 2007 (UTC)
I guess I'll have to. Yes, I have been pursuing the ones with rights issues: because the issue are complex, and the trail is in Dutch, I've been asking User:Deadstar for help. But I'm not sure I agree that "any category is better than no categories at all." The problem is that when images are placed in categories that should contain only categories, not images, it encourages other people also to place images there. I'd much rather we had something like "music images needing classification" for the bot to use. I'll pass that along to User:Duesentrieb. - Jmabel | talk 17:09, 11 October 2007 (UTC)

Could you please see [[User talk:Duesentrieb#Weird categories? His answer seems to be that you are misusing his tool. - Jmabel | talk 04:31, 14 October 2007 (UTC)

I may be using it differently from how he meant it to be used, that does not make it misuse. Siebrand 15:20, 20 October 2007 (UTC)

Commons:Deletion requests/Image:Blason-theux.svg

Commons:Deletion requests/Image:Blason-theux.svg

This image is wrong. I made mistake in it and replaced it a couple of minutes after by the good version. I don't need the replaced tag or the superseeded (or something so). It needs to be simply deleted. I thougt that as the creator I had the right of asking a pictur I made could be erased just by asking it... :)

Elsewhere I replace it by a simple white pixel if you don't want to delete it... :-þ


Min's - 13:47, 15 October 2007 (UTC)

It is still in use[7]. If you overwrite the image with a blank pixel while it is still in use, that will be vandalism and it will be dealt with appropriately. Cheers! Siebrand 17:41, 15 October 2007 (UTC)
Damn... open your eyes... 736 wikis searched. Blason-theux.svg is used on 1 pages in 1 projects. and In an archive page I wrote myself. I delete it right now on that page... now it's not used anymore. Could you then delete it please? thanks Min's - 21:16, 19 October 2007 (UTC)
Thank you very much beaucoup... :) Min's - 13:09, 20 October 2007 (UTC)

Image:Clandras Köprüsü.jpg

I think , i fixed the problem about license, is it enough ?

P.C.:Sorry, my english so worsed :) I'm not sharing media files I carrying them from tr.wikipedia . Euthygenes 11:17, 19 October 2007 (UTC)

This is a very obscure permission that cannot be verified. I advise you to get permission stored in OTRS to not have the image removed at a later time. Cheers! Siebrand 15:17, 20 October 2007 (UTC)


-- Hello. Thanks for your information about the picture. I have edited the GFDL. The picture is used in the german wiki --Gogoschinski 14:02, 19 October 2007 (UTC)

Please use CommonsHelper when copying media. Cheers! Siebrand 15:14, 20 October 2007 (UTC)

Image:Altarrückseite-Wittenberg 1.jpg

Delate this file. mfg Torsten Schleese 20:28, 19 October 2007 (UTC)

✓ Done Siebrand 21:15, 19 October 2007 (UTC)


Hello. I have put lot of hard work in uploading all those images to Commons and I do not have time to convince you of my good faith. If you do not believe me, just enter EN Wiki and ask some people about my person. I will not provide any personal communication with my friends who were so kind to free their photos to Commons. This communication was in Czech language mostly and happened through ICQ and other IM programs so I can't provide it even if I would want to do so. I will not give a source for coats of arms of Czech villages, this is irrelevant by the nature of the Czech law. These images are free per se, so no direct link is needed. These coats of arms were transferred from EN Wiki, where they were uploaded by me several months ago, and I don't remember now where I found most of them. Some of them were scanned by me (further work by my person). You can really believe me and rather concenrate on all those freshman users who upload pictures found on the internet. I am veteran user. - Darwinek 23:20, 19 October 2007 (UTC)

Hi Darwinek. This is not a matter of assuming good faith. That is implicit, and hereby I am making it explicit. If I assumed bad faith, I'd just speedy delete the images.
Commons *requires sourcing for all media*, as can be read on COM:L. Licensing *must* be in writing and can be stored privately through OTRS. If not for the license, it is most definately needed to be able to verify the claim that is being made. I noticed one of your uploads as I was casually browsing recent uploads. Especially if I see unsourced coats of armour, I investigate a user a little further, to see if there is more to it. In your case, there unfortunately was. My advice to you on your talk page I well meant *and* serious. Please add sources to your uploads, or they cannot be kept, according to Commons policy. I do understand this is a lot of work. Please feel free to remove the current tagging (as said: I am assuming good faith) and take your time to fix it (2-3 weeks isn't a problem). And please only upload completely sourced media from now on. Cheers! Siebrand 23:25, 19 October 2007 (UTC)
I understand you are just following the policies as a bureaucrat. I will try in the future to fill more complex information to avoid any further difficulties with the "bureaucrats". But as I said before, written permission would be available when I would write an e-mail to some institution, not when I will chat with my friend during lunch. Vast majority of photos uploaded by me and not taken by me is photographed by my friends. And believe me, they will not be so kind and patient to write any written permissions. - Darwinek 00:04, 20 October 2007 (UTC)
I do not think that trying to make me look rediculous is the right way to go. You have neglected to familiarise yourself with the requirements that are connected to having free media hosted on Wikimedia Commons. I have informed you of that and kindly requested you to fix it. I urge you a second time to make the effort to contribute to the free media in the sense that Wikimedia Commons wishes to provide. Cheers! Siebrand 09:22, 20 October 2007 (UTC)
I am not making you look ridiculous, I am sorry if you feel so. Stupid Commons rules are making you ridiculous, you are just victim of this totalitarian bureaucracy. Commons will end up in hell if policy of its editors would be to harass other, good working contributors. I understand your "urges" as threats and will fix only such files I will recongnize as necessary. I am sorry you are wasting your time with me. Just use slight more common sense in dealing with good non-problematic editors. P.S. And how the hell I should prove that some images you tagged as "unsifficient source" are mine. You don't understand English when I wrote "from the personal archive"? Hmm, maybe I should write in which box in my room it is located or ask my dead ancestors to write written permission. - Darwinek 09:35, 20 October 2007 (UTC)
"how the hell I should prove that some images you tagged as "unsifficient source" are mine.": that's easy: "Source=own work". As for "You don't understand English when I wrote "from the personal archive"". Sure I do. That means that you have more to say about where the image came from. Maybe you scanned it from a postcard you grandmorther received in 1918, maybe you bought the postcard in 2006. Please provide the information Commons needs to be able to preserve your work (!!!). Siebrand 09:43, 20 October 2007 (UTC)
OK. I understand it better now. Would "family archive" be better? You know, sourcing some photo from 1928 as "own work" when it was taken by unknown neighbour of my grandgrandfather is kind of weird :). - Darwinek 09:49, 20 October 2007 (UTC)
As said above: we are assuming good faith. Just mention that the photograph was created around 1928 by an unknown neighbour of your grandfather's. That adds very much to the value and credibility. Cheers! Siebrand 09:54, 20 October 2007 (UTC)
OK. Sorry if I caused you any inconvenience. Hope we are cool now. I hope our mutual interest is the good of Commons, Wikipedia and other sister communities. Would you be bothered if I would write to you in the future with some question regarding e.g. licensing? You know, we should help each other. - Darwinek 10:14, 20 October 2007 (UTC)
As far as I'm concerned, we've been cool all along. No problem with the questions either. If you need a more generic platform for licensing questions, you can also post at Commons talk:Licensing. Cheers! Siebrand 10:16, 20 October 2007 (UTC)


Appreciated (even if Lar pointed out the extra bonus!) cheers --Herby talk thyme 10:49, 20 October 2007 (UTC)

Heh. You completely had it coming! Siebrand 10:59, 20 October 2007 (UTC)


Really thanx! :-) When I see you (well... I see "siebrand" written on pywikipediabot chan :-)) I will need to speak with you regarding the "check-if-an-admin-has-set-the-cat-change" problem for the bot ^__^ Bye, --Filnik 11:00, 20 October 2007 (UTC)

You're welcome. You deserved it in my opinion. The second thing: ✓ Done, obviously... Cheers! Siebrand 15:10, 20 October 2007 (UTC)

About "Image Tagging Image:K8t900.jpg" in my user_talk page

Thank you for your work for the license.That may be my mistake that I haven't marked and written down the source of the photo.I just remembered that it was shown on famous PC magazine in China Mainland ,MicroComputer.I haven't recognized that though no license about the photo was shown at the magazine, it's very important to shown it here, the Wikicommons.So I will renew it.

Pardon me,Sir.

Aleksejevski 13:19, 20 October 2007 (UTC)

P.S.:I am just a student studying in Senior Middle School in China.If there is something wrong about the words or sentence,please forgive me and point it out.I wil Thanks a lot for it.

P.S.2:As you know, it's difficult for China mainland to click on the Wikis.For save the short time surfing the webpage, I haven't logged on.I beg your Pardon.

Aleksejevski 13:19, 20 October 2007 (UTC)

This is a copyright violation, as this image has not been licensed with a free license. I have deleted it per COM:L. Cheers! Siebrand 15:10, 20 October 2007 (UTC)

Commons:Bots/Requests for flags

Could you please take a look at two latest requests? I don't think that this is good idea to close request with one person comments... Thank you. --EugeneZelenko 14:54, 20 October 2007 (UTC)

✓ Done Siebrand 15:07, 20 October 2007 (UTC)


Hello. I see you deleted the Duplicate template on Image:French_Peloponnesian_expedition_map-fr.jpg. Please deleted that image I'm the author because it's now useless as I made a SVG version. Also, it doesn't follow the colorimetric convention of the WP-fr. Thanks. Sting 15:28, 20 October 2007 (UTC)

✓ Done Siebrand 22:54, 20 October 2007 (UTC)


Can you please correct the denomination of the two following images: Image:Foucaulsches Pendel im Rathaus von Tours 1.JPG and Image:Foucaulsches Pendel im Rathaus von Tours 2.jpg. The accurate denomination is Foucaultsches. Thanks --Anima 21:17, 20 October 2007 (UTC)

Not sure if I understand you correctly. You wish to have the images renamed? If so, please add {{rename|Newname}}. Cheers! Siebrand 23:08, 20 October 2007 (UTC)

About image "Image:Flag of USA.svg" that you are deleted

See in, you are deleted Image:Flag of USA.svg and not checked your effects in spanish wikipedia, and others projects. Please before delete duplicated images, check with a commons delinker ( Shooke 21:24, 20 October 2007 (UTC)

Duh. I've been working on that issue for two weeks. I am sorry if a tiny few of the thousands have slipped. That have apparently not been reported... Cheers! Siebrand 22:53, 20 October 2007 (UTC)
✓ Done [8] Cheers! Siebrand 23:00, 20 October 2007 (UTC)
Not been reported, because the template es:plantilla:flagicon not was modified next you deleted the image, and i believe that the image was remained in cache of spanish wikipedia servers. This must be a bug of wiki software. Thanks for the solution :) Shooke 23:19, 20 October 2007 (UTC)

image liscense problem

Hi would you plz check this photo and see whether it has licensing problem or not? I am new to wikipedia and need help!

Regards --Lukadium 01:11, 21 October 2007 (UTC)

If you are Roozbeh Taassob, it may have been licensed correctly. In that case, please add a link between your username Lukadium and Roozbeh Taassob. If you are not Roozbeh Taassob, you need his permission to publish this image under a free license. See {{no permission since}}. Cheers! Siebrand 09:12, 21 October 2007 (UTC)

DelinkerHelper marking duplicates, even when it knows they aren't...

A user erroneously marked an image as being a duplicate of another, when in reality, the newer image was just a different photo of the same item (compare old and new). I removed the erroneous tag and reverted the editor's changes to the gallery page it had been removed from. However, CommonsDelinkerHelper then came along and acted as if it was a legitimate duplicate, despite the edit summary saying that it wasn't.[9] It even replaced the image in the local gallery page, which caused the same image to appear twice.[10]

I asked Bryan why this was, and he said that the command came from you. I can understand the image being tagged with {{superseded}}, but not to be tagged as an exact duplicate. EVula // talk // // 20:49, 21 October 2007 (UTC)

Duplicates are sometimes also media files that are very similar to the image that is being kept. In this case, there is a badly framed, low res image that is being replaced by a high res well framed image from exactly the same angle of the same object. There is no reason to keep the former image. Your removing the {{duplicate}} tag has prevented the orphaned image from being deleted. That's fine by me, by the way... Cheers! Siebrand 21:02, 21 October 2007 (UTC)
Ah, alrighty. Thanks for the explanation. EVula // talk // // 21:43, 21 October 2007 (UTC)
  • I strongly urge that {{duplicate}} not be acted upon if they are not exact duplicates, it should be changed to a normal deletion request, with the reason for the proposed deletion stated, otherwise {{duplicate}} is being used as a back-door speedy delete avoiding necessary discussion. --Tony Wills 09:19, 22 October 2007 (UTC)
Sure, although I think there is a high risk that eventually we need to talk eachother to death and not acoomplish anything in the mean time... Cheers! Siebrand 09:22, 22 October 2007 (UTC)
Yes, due process is not as efficient at getting rid of images, but then we are here to build a library of images, keeping things tidy is secondary :-) --Tony Wills 09:44, 22 October 2007 (UTC)
Hmm, you wouldn't want to do a week without tidying, believe me... Glad to hear that you'll let me know when you're near death, although I hope I never have to see that message... Cheers! Siebrand 10:06, 22 October 2007 (UTC)

Fw: Oops deletion

You're right, I followed some mistaken instructions, now Paintman has just said to me what must I do with commands options of CommonsDelinker. I'm sorry so much, I'll look carefully the new changes. Thank you for your patient :) Kordas 22:21, 21 October 2007 (UTC)

It was my fault, indeed. Paintman 22:49, 21 October 2007 (UTC)


Thanks, I think there is good now. Can you confime me? (sorry for my bad english) --Lansbricae 09:53, 22 October 2007 (UTC)

You should use CommonsHelper to make sure all required information is present. Cheers! Siebrand 13:39, 22 October 2007 (UTC)


I do it. Thanks--Lmbuga gl, pt, es: contacta comigo 12:44, 22 October 2007 (UTC)

Excellent. Thanks. Cheers! Siebrand 13:39, 22 October 2007 (UTC)



You wrote to my talk page that I've some files untagged. As the files are not used in any language (and I think they will never be used), I ask you to delete all files from Kalögena. --Athalis 20:24, 21 October 2007 (UTC)

✓ Done Siebrand 20:29, 21 October 2007 (UTC)
Thank You --Athalis 15:15, 24 October 2007 (UTC)


Tel Aviv - Magen David Square (1936)

Siebrand, my man! Can I upload this image? Gridge 21:50, 22 October 2007 (UTC).

Where is the metadata for the image? Who created it, when? Is he dead, was he a US federal gouvernment employee at the time it was created? Cheers! Siebrand 21:53, 22 October 2007 (UTC)
I do not know. Gridge 21:56, 22 October 2007 (UTC).
Then I do not know if you can upload it :) Siebrand 21:58, 22 October 2007 (UTC)
I guess that "loc" isn't enough... Thanks anyway. Gridge 22:04, 22 October 2007 (UTC).
I'm trying to find it, but no luck so far. Search terms "square balcony" on Siebrand 22:10, 22 October 2007 (UTC)
The location is Tel Aviv (Article) and the year is 1936, if it's helps. Gridge 22:20, 22 October 2007 (UTC).
Very high res is here: (19MB TIFF). That will help. Give me a minute more. Almost off to bed... Siebrand 22:22, 22 October 2007 (UTC)
Have you got the name of the square? Siebrand 22:23, 22 October 2007 (UTC)
Probably by the same photographer: [11] Siebrand 22:25, 22 October 2007 (UTC)
Got it: [12]and [13] RIGHTS INFORMATION: No known restrictions on publication. So you can upload it :) Please preserve all information in your upload. Best convert the TIFF to a JPG for best quality/size ratio. Siebrand 22:29, 22 October 2007 (UTC)
I think it will be best if you can upload the image yourself, tomorrow or the next day. If you can't, I'll see what I can do. This is the square. Gridge 22:51, 22 October 2007 (UTC).
✓ Done Cheers! Siebrand 08:35, 23 October 2007 (UTC)

Uitstekend! Thanks, man. Gridge 13:53, 23 October 2007 (UTC).

Image:Flag of Morocco.png

What do you want to do with this image? You blanked the page. That is not helpful.. Cheers! Siebrand 18:40, 23 October 2007 (UTC)

Also: On Image:Flag of Morocco.png the star thingie is a lot larger. Do you have any references to the correct sizing? Siebrand 18:42, 23 October 2007 (UTC)

Please see: The current flag of Morocco is not correct. So I uploaded the true flag (3rd in gallery).

Yesterday's images of Novi Beograd

Please don't bother. I'll mark them on { talk } 17:51, 21 October 2007 (UTC)

I want to at least do my thing. sr.wp appears to have a strage template: "keep as proof". Have they (not sure of you are part of that community) considered making a clear deletion summary stating that the file actually originates from sr.wp? Then there is no need to keep the object. Trusted admin deletion should suffice. Cheers! Siebrand 17:53, 21 October 2007 (UTC)

Please use my talk page to leave me a message in the future. The strange template has been added to prevent deletion of the images before the case has been closed. And the case concerns a guy who uploaded some of these images on his personal space on, thereby stating that he has full copyright over them. Now, ouch, I must admit that I never heard of the term Trusted admin deletion (which could be forgiven, since reacts likewise), and I'm afraid the people on, who I am trying to contact, could react in the same manner. Not that I exclude other possibilities, but this one is the simplest possible.

Since I'm the author of the images, sysop on and the person who leads this case, I can assure you that the old copies of the images on will be deleted as soon as the case has been closed.--Michael { talk } 18:18, 21 October 2007 (UTC)

Alrighty then :) Siebrand 18:23, 21 October 2007 (UTC)
I answer where the question is asked to not scatter talk all over the place. Thank you for your understanding. Cheers! Siebrand 14:14, 22 October 2007 (UTC)
I sked you for another pattern of conversation because it is, imho, corresponding with the way MediaWiki works. When you post me comment here, I can read it only if I check your talk page, or have added it to my watch list. Otherwise I'll even not know you posted anything directed to me. Now, making people hang on your talk page and waiting to see your answer (again imho) isn't that neat.
At the other side, if you leave me a comment on my talk page, I will be notified at the moment I open this project the next time. Such a neat thing. Amazing! Face-grin.svg
Oh, I forgot why I came back here. The case has been closed and the duplicates have been removed.--Michael { talk } 20:52, 24 October 2007 (UTC)

The way of having a discussion you describe to be the wiki way is in no way mandatory nor common practice. Some like it, others do not. As stated at the top of my talk page: I like to keep talk consistent and together, and I do not scatter it all over the place. I just won't do it... Cheers! Siebrand 07:00, 25 October 2007 (UTC)

Yeah, you're officially longer on wikipedia projects (few months). Yet I can say I saw quite few persons talk in this way so at least I can say this way of taking a conversation is neither a practice. Still software does notify user when you leave answer on his page, and does not do that otherwise, which make it convention, implicated directly by the software architecture. Besides, once one get used to it, this makes it really more comfortable than this, phew. And about consistent and together - for me it IS always consistent and together even if we talk between different projects, so long as the both sides know where to look for the reply. My point this one is neither neat nor comfortable for many but for the person who owns the page where the conversation is taking the place.--Michael { talk } 10:24, 25 October 2007 (UTC)

Another non exact duplicate deleted

While I was examining Image:Crystal Clear app kate.png with Image:Crystal Clear app kedit.png I see the delinker tried replacing Crystal Clear app kate.png with Crystal Clear app kedit.png and failed rather badly (it added a huge list of places it apparently failed to replace the image. But once again my point is they were not exact duplicates (this is hinted at in that the second file has the word 'edit' as part of its name!). The original had a border, the edit does not. They are (were!) different images, the border may well be desirable for some usage, a deletion discussion is appropriate. Is it possible to undo the de-linker operation? --Tony Wills 09:38, 22 October 2007 (UTC)

  • I may be wrong, I now see 'kedit' is the application name that the icon represents! And the border may just be because I had clicked on it. Perhaps disregard this message :-) --Tony Wills 09:49, 22 October 2007 (UTC)
    • Consider it disregarded. Cheers! :) Siebrand 07:01, 25 October 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for your alert about Image:Trickle Filter Cross-section.png

Please read my response to your alert on my Talk page, where I also asked your help in renaming the image. I will watch there for your response. Regards, - Mbeychok 04:06, 23 October 2007 (UTC)

Never mind, I've now taken care of the problem with the name of the image. - Mbeychok 15:23, 24 October 2007 (UTC)
✓ Done Siebrand 07:03, 25 October 2007 (UTC)

Erika Ringor Head Shot

Erika Ringor has given me permission to post her head shot photos. She is the owner of the photo. So how can i make sure that the photo is not deleted from the wikipedia article?


Erika Ringor Head shot Source

Erika Ringor photos Date

2007 Author

Erika Ringor Permission (Reusing this image)

See below. Other versions

Please sign your messages on talk pages with Siebrand 07:05, 25 October 2007 (UTC) so I know who you are. Please also add a link to the media page you wish to discuss. As you did not do either of the above, I am not able to answer you. A geenric response based on the above: please read {{no permission since}}. Cheers! Siebrand 07:05, 25 October 2007 (UTC)



I reverted your most recent, good-faith edit to Image:Flag_of_the_United_States.svg for two reasons. First, in my humble opinion, the previous “Image notes” section really deserves to be in its own, separate section, since it’s not really meant to be a brief, general description of the image. (The filename itself serves that function well.) Second, although the description box is pretty, it’s bulky and doesn’t add any new information to the description page. The “Contents” box seems to serve better, since it lets users jump to the relevant sections quickly.

If you disagree with my edit, feel free to revert me. (I follow a self-imposed “one-revert rule”—I never revert other people’s edits more than once.) —Technion

Okay, I guess I was wrong about the “Contents” box (apparently it only shows up if there be four or more sections). But I still think the description page is more compact this way, with less redundancy. —Technion 05:47, 23 October 2007 (UTC)
All media files should be described in a consistent way. I added that and you reverted it. Please re-add the template {{Information}} and add information as you like. We need it for automated processing of media descriptions. Cheers! Siebrand 08:21, 23 October 2007 (UTC)
I’ve done as you advised, albeit reluctantly. —Technion 05:55, 25 October 2007 (UTC)
Thank you! Siebrand 07:45, 25 October 2007 (UTC)

No source

Uh? Waarom heb je die tag verwiderd? -- Bryan (talk to me) 09:09, 23 October 2007 (UTC)

Is materiaal van de Wikimedia Foundation voor de fundraiser. User:Wiki blue moet wel nog even opgevoed worden, dat ben ik met je eens. Cheers! Siebrand 07:06, 25 October 2007 (UTC)


Hello. I don't now where is the problem with this file? I wrote that it is "self-made" and it's true. This particular picture were based on Image:Super35 and Techniscope.png which is Public Domain, but made by me. Voytek s 22:48, 24 October 2007 (UTC)

You forgot to add a license. Thanks for fixing that. Cheers! Siebrand 06:53, 25 October 2007 (UTC)


Um... you've pointed out that I've uploaded a couple of photos without giving enough copyright stuff however I now can't find where I'm supposed to go to fix it. Any pointers? Thanks Auccl799 02:14, 25 October 2007 (UTC)

See COM:CLIC. Cheers! Siebrand 06:54, 25 October 2007 (UTC)

CommonsDelinker on fr.wikibooks


A sysop from fr.wikibooks said on the french-language Village Pump that the intervention from CommonsDelinker could be improve im some pages.

Here for exemple : instead of delete the line Image:Canon EOS 1Ds Mark III.jpg|[[/Canon EOS 1Ds Mark III|Canon EOS 1Ds Mark III]] {{75}} (20 août 2007), the bot should change it into Image:IMG.svg|[[/Canon EOS 1Ds Mark III|Canon EOS 1Ds Mark III]] {{75}} (20 août 2007). So on this page (and some others), CommonsDelinker should replace the name of a deleted image by Image:IMG.svg.

Is it possible to do it (with a template for exemple) ?

Thanks--Bapti () 13:20, 25 October 2007 (UTC)

This is possible with a plugin. Please contact Bryan for details. Something similar is currently being used on nl.wp to replace instead of delink for galleries. Cheers! Siebrand 13:35, 25 October 2007 (UTC)
Thanks and sorry for the disturbance ;) but on meta:User:CommonsDelinker, it is mentionned that you must be contacted for comments, suggestions and complaints ;). Cheers!--Bapti 13:44, 25 October 2007 (UTC)
Yes, that is true. No problem at all. I try to shield Bryan a bit from all kinds of feature requests. This appears to be a very valid one, though :) Cheers! Siebrand 13:48, 25 October 2007 (UTC)

Image:Akiva Eger.jpg

FYI, I have reverted you there and added profuse explanations. If this is not enough, kindly contact me on enwiki for elaboration. NYC JD 13:39, 25 October 2007 (UTC)

Will also post this on your en.wp talk page. Could you please add the translation of the text on the image on the description field? Cheers! Siebrand 13:50, 25 October 2007 (UTC)
Done. NYC JD 14:22, 25 October 2007 (UTC)


Hoi Siebrand,

Zo ken ik jou niet, dat je een verwijderingsnominatie weghaalt. Maar het is natuurlijk wel sympathiek.

Ik heb enige tijd geleden flink geruzied met Erik Baas, die vond dat Colours.SVG er op zijn browser niet goed uitzag. Hetzelfde probleem bestond met de oudere versie Colours.svg. Ik heb toen maar Colours.png gemaakt. Erik had daar geen probleem mee. De svg-files interesseren me nu niet meer, maar als jij ze wilt houden, dan mag dat natuurlijk.

Ik vind Colours.SVG beter dan Colours.svg. HandigeHarry 20:56, 12 October 2007 (UTC)

En weer leg je reden bij mijn waarnemingen, terwijl ik aangetoond heb dat er een fout in zit (wat overigens door derden bevestigd is). - Erik Baas 20:05, 13 October 2007 (UTC)
Hou jij je mond als ik met Meneer Siebrand praat. HandigeHarry 17:38, 17 October 2007 (UTC)
  • PROEST* - Erik Baas 23:11, 17 October 2007 (UTC)

Het lijkt me handig als jullie nogmaals op basis van argumenten met elkaar tot overeenstemming proberen te komen over ofwel de juiste versie ofwel tot de conclusie komen dat beide mediabestanden een functie hebben. In het eerste geval zou ik een tag {{superseded}} toevoegen, in het tweede geval kan je in {{information}} "other_version=" gebruiken om een kruisverwijzing te maken. Groet, Siebrand 06:56, 25 October 2007 (UTC)

Heel fijn dat je na twee weken ook nog eens reageert. :-( Te laat, ik heb het al lang op een andere manier opgelost. P.S.: Het is nu wel helemaal duidelijk dat je geen flauw benul hebt wat er eigenlijk speelt (en gespeeld heeft)... - Erik Baas 10:28, 27 October 2007 (UTC)
Graag gedaan. Groet, Siebrand 08:56, 29 October 2007 (UTC)


Hello Siebrand! This is Filomena. I have this friend of mine who has a few pics of this Brazilian singer. He will alow copyrigts of the pics he has taken of her. I ony have a question: here you say anyone can use in a comercial product and chenge teh img...Is it so? The permission must be sent like this? Tks Filomena 13:22, 22 October 2007 (UTC)

Yes, please. And he has to mention a specific permission. For example: "I license the images GFDL and CC-BY-3.0." Cheers! Siebrand 13:38, 22 October 2007 (UTC)
Ok, tks, although I ´d appreciate you answer on my talk page. Ok, can he link to one oage where there are several pics or it has to be one link for eac pic? Tks. Filomena 13:56, 22 October 2007 (UTC)
I answer where the question is asked to not scatter talk all over the place where i have to go look for it. Thank you for your understanding. Cheers! Siebrand 14:13, 22 October 2007 (UTC)
Ok, so what´s the answer? Filomena 15:34, 22 October 2007 (UTC)
As I stated above: "Yes, please. And he has to mention a specific permission. For example: "I license the images GFDL and CC-BY-3.0."" Siebrand 21:23, 22 October 2007 (UTC)
What if he allows pcis from someone else? Filomena 16:47, 28 October 2007 (UTC)
One cannot license material of which one is not the (sole) copyright holder. Cheers! Siebrand 08:56, 29 October 2007 (UTC)

um, oops!

Hi Siebrand. Commonsdelinker (at least on wikiversity) replaced Image:Crystal Clear action easymoblog.png with Image:Crystal Clear app kaddressbook.png, and then you deleted Image:Crystal Clear app kaddressbook.png! I've undeleted for now, but maybe figure out what the mess was, eh? --SB_Johnny | PA! 09:32, 23 October 2007 (UTC)

nevermind, seems to be a template issue on wikiversity (commonsdelinker apparently ignored the template). --SB_Johnny | PA! 09:36, 23 October 2007 (UTC)
No problem. Cheers! Siebrand 07:12, 25 October 2007 (UTC)

Category:Coat of arms photographies from Germany

Hoi Siebrand, Omdat photographies fout is en photographs moet zijn, begon ik met hernoemen, maar ik had moeite met hernoemen van die categorie en zijn subcategorieën. "Move" ipv "delete" is prima; maar de nieuwe naam die ik gaf is lastig. Wat vind je van Category:photographs of coats of arms of Germany, zou dat als nieuwe naam beter zijn? Dan moeten ook nog alle subcategorieën aangepast worden. Kun jij nieuwe categorienamen invoeren? Groeten, Havang 09:34, 23 October 2007 (UTC)

Ja, dat kan ik. Maar gebruik alsjeblieft {{move|Category:Nieuwe naam|reden}} op de categoriepagina, om een verplaatsverzoek te maken. Dan kan iedereen het afhandelen. Groet, Siebrand 08:58, 29 October 2007 (UTC)
OKE, ✓ Done . Havang 12:38, 29 October 2007 (UTC)

Verwijderen categorie

Kan de delinker ook een bepaalde categorie verwijderen? Bv. alle afbeeldingen in Category:Iftar staan ook in Category:Ramdan (een misspelling van Ramadan) en deze cat hoeft niet verplaatst omdat Iftar al naar Ramadan linkt? ... ik hoop dat je het begrijpt... Groeten & alvast bedankt. Deadstar (msg) 11:05, 23 October 2007 (UTC)

Nee, op User:CommonsDelinker/commands kan je geen commando geven om items uit een category te verwijderen. Dat kan wel vrij eenvoudig met een bot: " remove -from:Naam_van_cat". Als je zoiets te doen hebt, laat me dat dan weten. Groet, Siebrand 07:15, 25 October 2007 (UTC)
Ah - zou je dan Category:Ramdan kunnen verwijderen van de 40 bestanden in de categorie? Alvast bedankt! Deadstar (msg) 10:15, 25 October 2007 (UTC)
Is vermoed ik inmiddels gebeurd. Ik ben de afgelopen week erg druk bezig geweest met de organisatie van de Wikimedia Conferentie Nederland. Vandaar dat ik niet eerder aan je verzoek opvolging heb gegeven. Groet, Siebrand 08:59, 29 October 2007 (UTC)

Image Tagging Image:Mola_mola.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 | Tiếng Việt | 中文(简体)‎ | 中文(繁體)‎ | +/−

Warning sign
This media may be deleted.

Thanks for uploading Image:Mola_mola.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-3.0}} 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 14:18, 25 October 2007 (UTC)

Siebrand! Your bot is tagging your own uploaded image! Did you not update a higher-resolution picture of Mola mola yourself on May 25, 2007? Where did you get that high-res image anyway? See your bot's change and look at the ne of the page for file upload history. Fredhsu 02:10, 29 October 2007 (UTC)
Good question. Where did I get it from. I think I did this before I was very much aware of the necessity of sourcing images :(. Most probably at the source for which the uploader indicated the license, without an actual source. Cheers! Siebrand 09:01, 29 October 2007 (UTC)

Bondage pictures from

As I see you tagging some bondage pictures from as no source while I would tag them no permission, I would like to invite you to come to Commons:Administrators' noticeboard where I start a section about this concern. If they have to be deleted, we will have to delink them as well. I have to know if OTRS has received any confirmed permission.--Jusjih 03:05, 26 October 2007 (UTC)

OK. There appears to be enough response over there. THe no source is there because there is no precise source given, which makes it hard or impossible to check *if* the images even originated from the site mentioned in the media description page. Cheers! Siebrand 09:03, 29 October 2007 (UTC)

Image:Kirkeby_Groningen_01 e.a.

Hi Siebrand, nog bedankt voor je bijdrage van 05-10-2007 in de deletion discussie. Ik dacht dat het hiermee voorbij was en aangezien de discussie allang (3 weken) stilligt en ik mezelf verplicht steeds even te kijken de vraag: wie verwijdert de deletion request eigenlijk? Een admin? De aanvrager zelf? Ik toch niet? Laat me iets weten. Bedankt.--Gerardus 07:39, 26 October 2007 (UTC)

Ik ben de afgelopen week erg druk bezig geweest met de organisatie van de Wikimedia Conferentie Nederland. Vandaar dat ik niet eerder aan je verzoek opvolging heb gegeven. Deletion requests worden door admins afgehandeld. Er is echter een zeer aanzienlijk aantal af te handelen verzoeken. Het kan dus wel 2-3 maanden duren voordat een verzoek wordt gesloten. Op zich geen probleem, vermoed ik. Groet, Siebrand 09:04, 29 October 2007 (UTC)
Alle begrip. Bedankt voor je reactie.--Gerardus 11:31, 29 October 2007 (UTC)

Hey, we were using that image!

I don't mean to be rude, but we were using that picture of Alice Bailey at her Wikipedia article. Is there really no notification process for images like this for WP articles that use them prominently? I don't know who uploaded it, or how to find out (now). But we need an image, and that certainly was one. Wouldn't it have been more effective to drop a note on the article's talk page asking someone to justify the image? I do understand that your deletion was following normal procedure, so I'm not questioning that, but isn't somebody supposed to get a chance to write a fair use thingie or something? (I admit: I'm ignorant of the rules on this.)

I'm also ignorant of how to properly link my WP account over here, so, my talk page is here. Could you let me know if there's anything we can do to get our image back? Photos of obscure esoteric writers from the early 20th century are pretty hard to come by. :) Eaglizard 07:45, 26 October 2007 (UTC)

Please see COM:L for the Wikimedia Commons license policy and media information requirements. Uploaders of media are warned of pending deletion of media they uploaded. After that, unless it is an obvious copyright violation, the media can be deleted after a week. There is a possible process called meta:Commons Ticker that may be of help to you. Undeletion requests can be made at COM:UR. Cheers! Siebrand 09:09, 29 October 2007 (UTC)

CommonsDelinker in Wikipedianaamruimte

Hoi Siebrand, nl:User:CommensDelinker heeft in nl:WP:K en twee andere kroegen een afbeelding weggehaald, omdat deze verwijderd is. Ik vraag me af of het niet beter is om ze daar te laten staan. Zonodig verwijdert een mens de rode links wel. Nu ik er over nadenk zou hij eigenlijk ook alle overlegnaamruimten wel mogen negeren. Wat vind jij ervan? Groet, Erwin85 08:31, 26 October 2007 (UTC)

Hm... ik dacht dat dat al zo ingesteld stond siebrand? Als ik het me goed herinner is het niet mogelijk de delink-namespaces per wiki op te geven, maar ik zal ergens volgende week daar wel een plugin voor schrijven. -- Bryan (talk to me) 08:55, 26 October 2007 (UTC)
CommonsDelinker['delink_namespaces'] = range(1000)
Primaire reden is dat het beleid op Commons is dat we moeten delinken voor/na verwijderen. CD is volgens mij altijd al op deze manier ingesteld. Instellingen per wiki zijn wel een mogelijkheid, maar dan moet denk ik wel gelogd worden dat we niet gedelinkt hebben vanwege lokaal beleid. Anders snappen de admins op Commons er weer niets van... Groet, Siebrand 09:15, 29 October 2007 (UTC)


Hi, in case you missed this on your watchlist I've got an explanation for the authorship question. The picture's completely legit but I'm unsure how to attribute authorship since I photoshopped two existing Commons images to make this. The full story's on my user talk. Would you do me a favor and drop by with an impartial opinion? I doubt my creative input is enough to call it a new work, more likely a derivative work that deserves attribution to the two creators of the source image... Thanks, Durova 15:21, 26 October 2007 (UTC)

It is definately a new work. Now that the source images are linked everything is fine. Thanks! Siebrand 09:17, 29 October 2007 (UTC)

Image:147437.2.jpg and Image:Tgalindo-100sevilla99.jpg

What are you talking about? There's a source and an author. Machocarioca 20:49, 26 October 2007 (UTC)Machocarioca

I do not appear to have tagged the second image for any missing information. The first image is missing a proper source. Just slapping an Agencia Brasil template on it will not do. Provide proper web sources, as described on Commons:Incomplete license. Cheers! Siebrand 09:30, 29 October 2007 (UTC)

Agencia Brasil is the brazilian government agency and all pictures from it are public domain. What are you talking about? Machocarioca


Description to the pictures is write in Czech language. I am from Czech republick and for me is the simplier write the descrtiption in my language. Ale máte pravdu. Pokusím se o nápravu. --Vodacek 08:47, 27 October 2007 (UTC)

Descriptions in any language are fine, but please realise that adding descriptions in more languages increases the chances of the media being used more often, as they can be found more easily. As for the warnings on your uploads: you have not added a license. Please do so, or the media will be deleted. You can just edit the page the media are on and add a proper license tag, while removing the missing information tag. More information can be found at COM:CLIC. Cheers! Siebrand 09:32, 29 October 2007 (UTC)

orphan detection overlooks use in en.wikipedia

Hi Siebrand,

I don't understand why images that are in fat linked to article (only in the English wikipedia) are listed as orphans. Could you explain that to me on my discussion page? All my uploads are listed as orphans. But the only reason I upload them to commons instead of the English wikipedia is to make them usable from all wikipedias. I thought that's the point of commons. Hope to hear from you, -- Jasu 15:11, 27 October 2007 (UTC)

Please give me one or more links that illustrate the possible problem you identify. Please be aware that media that are not used on a gallery page on Commons and are not categorised on Commons, are considered an orphan on Commons. This by the way has no consequenses for the media status, although it means that it is not likely that the media will be re-used that often, as they are hard to find. Cheers! Siebrand 09:34, 29 October 2007 (UTC)

Image:Subaru legacy rs-ra 02.jpg and Image:LegacySedan.jpg

I found both images at Wikimedia commons Japan for the first one and Germany for the second one. The images were listed as having no copyright on either image and I was having difficulty linking the english wiki to both the japanese and german wiki sites. Can you help me satisfy the requirements so that the images will remain? I currently don't know how to.

Please use CommonsHelper when copying media from other Wikimedia wikis. the current descriptions of the media will mean that they will be deleted. Cheers! Siebrand 09:39, 29 October 2007 (UTC)

Image Tagging Image:Alexandre_da_Sagrada_Familia.gif

The image Image:Alexandre_da_Sagrada_Familia.gif is a self made scan of a lithograph published in a book long ago in the public domain, a reproduction of an 1818 painting, the whereabouts of the original no longer known. So it is a public domain image. Angrense 10:35, 28 October 2007 (UTC)

Hi Angrense,
Thanks for correcting the information. It looks fine now. regards, pfctdayelise (说什么?) 10:01, 29 October 2007 (UTC)

The description line of SieBot

Hi! I just wondered what Robot: Moving category Corset advertising to Corset advertisements would have to do with Image:Østerport.jpeg. Nothing, it seems, since the actual edit changes "gate" to "gates". I assume you forgot to change the description from an earlier round? G®iffen 20:32, 28 October 2007 (UTC)

Not really. It is a threading bug in the bot framework that it not being fixed, unfortunately. Sometimes this happens and it can indeed lead to confusing edit summaries. I get about one report/month about it, but I am unfortunately not able to fix it... Cheers! Siebrand 09:37, 29 October 2007 (UTC)

Deletion tag on Image:Dendrogale_murina.JPG

The image in question is from (the Maltese Wikipedia -- the link is listed in the description), and since I'm sure they follow the rules same as we do, the image is available for our use. Unfortunately, I cannot read Maltese. If you can, then add the proper licensing information or tell me what to change. Thus far, this is the only image I can find of an open source image of this particular species.

Here's where I originally found it:

Thanks, TeamZ

Source: [14] at the bottom, no mention of free license. No mention of true source either. Lupo 09:32, 29 October 2007 (UTC)
The media has no license at the source. It is not safe to assume that other wikis enforce the same criteria we do. This media has no permission and proper source. It appears to be a scan of an unknown stamp. It should be deleted if no permission for a free license it obtained (for which we need a proper source first). Cheers! Siebrand 09:41, 29 October 2007 (UTC)

your deletion of Image:Globaltext_logo.png

Hi Siebrand,

I came to late to correct the image page File:Globaltext logo.png. Don't what the problem there was but the image is CCbysa-licensed (like all the material of, so there should be no problem. Could you restore the image or tell me what the problem was?

Best regards,

Jasu 14:53, 27 October 2007 (UTC)

There was no evidence that the copyright holder had licensed the media under a free license. Cheers! Siebrand 11:17, 1 November 2007 (UTC)

Category:Pomeranian Voivodship

Should be Category:Pomeranian Voivodeship. Łukasz Westwalewicz 18:34, 29 October 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for that. You can use {{move|Category:New name}} to request renaming (already done in this case). Cheers! Siebrand 12:18, 1 November 2007 (UTC)


Hi, thank you for your message. You say wether the info regarding the author, the source, or the permission is missing, but it's not, all that info is on the infobox. Is there anything else that is missing/wrong with the image? thank you:)--AJ0922 03:12, 30 October 2007 (UTC)

Please link the image, so I know what you are asking me about... Siebrand 12:19, 1 November 2007 (UTC)


Hi, thank you for your message. You say wether the info regarding the author, the source, or the permission is missing, but it's not, all that info is on the infobox. Is there anything else that is missing/wrong with the image? thank you:)--AJ0922 03:12, 30 October 2007 (UTC)

Please link the image, so I know what you are asking me about... Siebrand 12:19, 1 November 2007 (UTC)


Hoi Siebrand,

Toen ik hier anderhalf jaar geleden begon was er al een User:Aiko, die een stuk of twee bijdragen had gedaan. Inmiddels zijn die bijdragen er niet meer en het account lijkt opgeheven en "onbewoond". Het zou mij een lief ding waard zijn als ik in die lege woning zou mogen trekken. Is het mogelijk mijn huidige account met gebruikersnaam User:.Aiko om te zetten in User:Aiko? Bij voorbaat dank voor je moeite. .Aiko 12:50, 30 October 2007 (UTC) aka nl:gebruiker:Aiko

Dat kan helaas niet... Een mogelijke strategie is het aanmaken van meer 'Aiko' accounts binnen Wikimedia wiki's en dan als SUL er komt een grotere kans te hebben dat je de gebruikersnaam 'Aiko' kan claimen. Het is mij niet bekend dat gebruikers worden hernoemd om een andere gebruiker de reeds in gebruik zijnde gebruikersnaam te geven. Je zou eventueel contact kunnen opnemen per e-mail met die gebruiker (als die zijn e-mailadres heeft bevestigd) om het onderhands te regelen... Groet, Siebrand 12:21, 1 November 2007 (UTC)


I am sure that this image is copyright free as I have asked some admins before. It is inappropriate to state that you are going to delete images when one is on wikibreak. I think you should halt the speedydelete or I would let somebody else upload again as duplicate. But I promise that I am going to fix it as soon as possible when I am back from wikibreak. Chanueting 03:18, 31 October 2007 (UTC)

You can convert the no permission to a speedy deletion request. Cheers! Siebrand 23:29, 31 October 2007 (UTC)


The uploading of this image was an accident, I accidentally clicked enter on my keyboard before I had finnished. I clicked "stop" on my browser thinking this would stop the process, as the next page hadn't even partially loaded yet, but it obviously didn't stop it. Could you please delete it? I have uploaded the image again properly described and licensed (after accidentally uploading the first version). Sorry, and thankyou. Jackrm 05:30, 1 November 2007 (UTC)

✓ Done Siebrand 07:01, 1 November 2007 (UTC)

Tarkan photos

The permisison for photos you tagged in Category:Tarkan like Image:Tarkan Vienna2006 3.JPG is sent to OTRS. Im waiting for OTRS to reply. For source I cannot give a link because I have the files only on my computer, as they were shot by a friend and given directly to me on CD. is it enough if I write Personal CD as source? Am I oblidged to upload them on some photo site like imageshack? I would also have one more question. I have a few photos from a Turkish friend, who doesn't speak English, and we corresponded in Turkish. Is it enough if I send the screenshot of the correspondence to OTRS? Are there any Turkish editors there? Thanks in advance --Teemeah 14:48, 1 November 2007 (UTC)

We need a license declaration from the copyright holder (your friend). Just ensure that is what you have mailed to OTRS. Please also let me know which keyword(s) I should search for so I can find your email. Cheers! Siebrand 21:21, 3 November 2007 (UTC)

RE Image:1948_photo_of_dancer_Bill_Earl_by_Carl_Van_Vechten.jpg

Done. but it seems that a template was created preventing the possibility to write in it directly. Not very convenient.--User:G.dallorto 14:51, 1 November 2007 (UTC)

Yeah. We probably need a better solution for this... I'll look into it once... Or maybe you could if you have knowledge on templates? Cheers! Siebrand 21:22, 3 November 2007 (UTC)

Hacienda Hotel-2(and others)

Okay, I put a tag on, because I was the one who took it. This website wasn't letting me do it before. Now how can I add it to the category that I want it, and two others in? --DanTD 13:36, 2 November 2007 (UTC)

Just add [[Category:Some category name]] as text in de description page of the media file. Cheers! Siebrand 13:38, 2 November 2007 (UTC)

Wrong edits by SieBot

Hello, it seems that SieBot today around 15:00 make wrong edits to the history of some files:

I've seen this error by only this files, but others by the period around 15:00 should be checked, I think. --GeorgHH 22:06, 2 November 2007 (UTC)

Known error. Edit is correct, edit summary is wrong. This is a threading issue in the pywikipedia bot framework. Siebrand 22:24, 2 November 2007 (UTC)


Done. Is it correct? Thank you. --Fergon 11:04, 3 November 2007 (UTC)

Excellent. Thank you for your contribution(s). Cheers! Siebrand 21:20, 3 November 2007 (UTC)

Image:USS Brooklyn 1858.jpg

Strangely, I had specified PD-US in the drop-down menu and yet it didn't show up on the page. I think Commons has a bug in those menus; this isn't the first time that's happened. Morven 11:35, 3 November 2007 (UTC)

This happens. I think you've hit some JavaScript traps on information or selections made AFTER choosing the license. Please always check your upload when it's been made to prevent this. This is also what the bot is for - to warn you in case something was missed. Cheers! Siebrand 21:19, 3 November 2007 (UTC)


Delinker seems to have choked on Image:ExtinctDodoBird.jpg.[15] Best wishes, Walter Siegmund (talk) 17:57, 3 November 2007 (UTC)

Nah. That's just what happens if media are used in templates. It finds pages the media are used on and skips replacement because it cannot find text equal to the media name. Seen worse... Thanks for the notice, though. Cheers! Siebrand 21:18, 3 November 2007 (UTC)

My photos

The photos were taken with my camera propria. I hope you understand. Nascente(talk) 19:57, 3 November 2007 (UTC)

See COM:COWN. Cheers! Siebrand 21:15, 3 November 2007 (UTC)


Ok. I have more pictures for my load. You help me to record all the photos? I have doubts about it. Or register all of them. Thank you. Nascente(talk) 14:37, 3 November 2007 (UTC)

But I put all the information that was required. You insists say this but does not specify what they lack. After all what information they failed? Nascente(talk) 19:17, 4 November 2007 (UTC)

Frédéric Delalot

Thank you Siebrand, it's been corrected as you said for this french writer picture. Have a nice day. Manuscrit

I added {{GFDL-self}}. Cheers! Siebrand 09:00, 7 November 2007 (UTC)

Foto's verwijderd

Hallo Siebrand,

Ik heb in augustus in het artikel "Vorenpakker" enige tekst en foto's toegevoegd. Het waren mijn eigen foto's, zelf gemaakt op het eigen bedrijf. Ik begrijp inmiddels dat er gegevens vermeld moeten worden van schrijver, toestemming, etc. etc. Ik heb begrepen dat de afbeeldingen verwijderd zijn, maar mijn tekst staat er nog. Moet ik nu weer alles opnieuw gaan plaatsen? En hoe kan ik deze gegevens toevoegen?


Luc Berden.

Hoi LucBerden. Onderteken alsjeblieft al je overleg met vier tildes (~~~~). Dan is het eenvoudiger voor mij om te zien wie een bericht heeft achtergelaten. Ik heb de twee afbeeldingen van je hersteld (Image:Vorenpakker1.jpg, Image:Vorenpakker2.jpg). Er mist een licentie. Zie COM:COWN voor tips over welke licentie te kiezen. Voeg die toe door op de beschrijvingspagina bij de afbeelding te bewerken en het licentiesjabloon toe te voegen. Als je geen licentie toevoegt, worden de afbeldingen wederom verwijderd over een week of twee... Groet, Siebrand 09:05, 7 November 2007 (UTC)


Hi. I took the picture (Image:Zavaleta.jpg) And also, the page offers information about the camera that I used. I don't know if I can do more to prove that I took the picture. thanks for help. --Mendozamori 18:11, 2 November 2007 (UTC)

The image above has never existed. You probably mean Image:Zavaleta.JPG. Now that you have added a license, all is well: thank you for contributing your work! Cheers! Siebrand 09:08, 7 November 2007 (UTC)


I really do not understand this: I send an email on "maandag 17 september 2007 21:56:09" with the permission to Why was the image deleted? C mon 10:41, 3 November 2007 (UTC)

I am sorry, but I have not been able to locate a ticket created on 2007-09-17 containing "halsema" or "groen". Please inform me through "email this user" of the email adress you sent this mail from. If the media had a valid license, they will be restored. Cheers! Siebrand 09:13, 7 November 2007 (UTC)


This is an erroneously uploaded image. The original one was an old stamp of Belgium that was accidently deleted by Nascente because he(she) used the same file name. Can we restore the original image, please? Thanks. --Michael Romanov 21:58, 3 November 2007 (UTC)

Fixed. Cheers! Siebrand 07:49, 5 November 2007 (UTC)

Re: Image:Tamaran BY Ja ;P xD xP ;D.PNG


Please sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~) so that I know you wrote this comment. The media does not yet contain a license. If this is not fixed, the file will be removed. See COM:COWN for hints. Cheers! Siebrand 09:17, 7 November 2007 (UTC)

Image:René de Clerq, De Noodhoorn.jpg

Please take a look. Looks like book cover for me. Thank you. --EugeneZelenko 14:35, 4 November 2007 (UTC)

Correct. And the copyright holder died in 1932, so no problem. Cheers! Siebrand 09:18, 7 November 2007 (UTC)

Moving categories

Please move folloving categories from Category:Requested moves according to my offers (in template "move" on category pages):

<...> (clear info about deleted categiries)

Please also move all content from folloving redirected category:

All content in Category:Oktyabrskaya Railway Museum (include subcategory) also need moving in Category:Museum of Railway Technology (Saint Petersburg) (the second museum is branch of the first, but an independent museum). Category:Oktyabrskaya Railway Museum is a not necessary to delete (useful for future content).

Thanks. --Kaganer 10:20, 5 November 2007 (UTC)

✓ Done Thank you for your time and effort. Cheers! Siebrand 10:09, 7 November 2007 (UTC)

Image Tagging Image:Ultra_PRT.jpg

Беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ | Català | Česky | Dansk | Deutsch | Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ | Ελληνικά | English | Español | فارسی | Suomi | Français | Galego | עברית | Magyar | Հայերեն | Italiano | 日本語 | 한국어 | Lietuvių | Македонски | മലയാളം | Plattdüütsch | Nederlands | Norsk bokmål | Polski | Português | Română | Русский | Slovenščina | Svenska | Türkçe | Українська | اردو | Tiếng Việt | 中文(简体)‎ | 中文(繁體)‎ | +/−

Warning sign
This media may be deleted.

Thanks for uploading Image:Ultra_PRT.jpg. This image is missing permission information. A source is given, but there is no proof that the author or copyright holder agreed to license the file under the given license. Please provide a link to an appropriate webpage with license information, or send an email with copy of a written permission to OTRS (

Unless the permission information is given, the image may be speedy deleted after seven days. Thank you. ~ putnik 11:17, 5 November 2007 (UTC)

I have asked to original uploader for a ticket in OTRS. Cheers! Siebrand 08:35, 7 November 2007 (UTC)

About russian cats

You say at User talk:Kaganer, that you will ban me for russian categories. This is your position, as administrator? You really think, that uploading images with russian categories distib a wikipedia operation? If so, I can stop uploading images by myself, without bans. #!George Shuklin 14:22, 5 November 2007 (UTC)

  • I suggest to stop a talk about bans and similar not very good things. George is not a vandal or troll, he has uploaded many useful images on Commons. We talked with George and he agreed not to create categories with cyrillic names - instead of them he will create gallery pages, like Вагон пассажирский цельнометаллический плацкартный. I hope it is the solution acceptable for all sides. MaxiMaxiMax 17:37, 5 November 2007 (UTC)
    • It appears that you both have misinterpreted my statement here. What I stated was that *if* the would would persist in creating non-English categories, *refusing* to use them, *that* would lead to a block *eventually*. These conditions have not been met by far, and I am happy to be reading that you have been able to reason with George Shuklin. No problem here from my side... I just have to be clear about "what happens if". Cheers! Siebrand 08:34, 7 November 2007 (UTC)

A bug in Delinker ?

Hi Siebrand, it's me again. This time, this is CommonsDelinker that did something weird. Apparently, something needs to be fixed in the regular expression search and replace. Regards. — Xavier, 11:30, 6 November 2007 (UTC)

Thanks. I notified Bryan of it. I do hope he is able to fix this. Cheers! Siebrand 08:26, 7 November 2007 (UTC)

Image-Ferrari 212 Inter Vignale 1951

Image:Ferrari212InterVignale1951.jpg modified from Image:Ferrari 212 Inter 00.jpg. Ciao --Ligabo 14:14, 6 November 2007 (UTC)

OK. Please do not forget to credit the pervious author(s)! Siebrand 08:23, 7 November 2007 (UTC)

Registration of bot

Please sign CD here. Regards, --Klemen Kocjančič (Pogovor - Quick response) 16:18, 6 November 2007 (UTC)

Feel free to give CommonsDelinker a bot bit. I will not request a bot flag for CommonsDelinker because of transparancy reasons. It is totally up to communities to choose to hide edits by CommonsDelinker from RecentChanges. Cheers! Siebrand 08:10, 7 November 2007 (UTC)


After uploading this image, I realized that I can't verify that the image is public domain even though it's from 1894. It was never published in the U.S., thus I can't use the 1923 rule; I can't confirm that the author has been dead for 70 years since the author is unknown; and I know nothing about the details of Italian copyright law. Unless you can think of a better solution, go ahead and delete the image. P.S. - in the future you may want to wait more than 10 minutes after the image is first uploaded to notify the uploader of problems as it is entirely possible the uploader is still editing image description. Kaldari 17:02, 6 November 2007 (UTC)

If it is over 100 years old and you have properly sourced it, it is safe to assume it is in the public domain because of age, until proven otherwise. We check any uploaded media for missing information 20 minutes after upload. We occasionally get requests (usually only from the right uploaders - those with good intentions and fair knowledge about they way Commons works) to extend the checking period, but I have chosen not to. Main reason for it is that the longer I wait, the smaller the chance that the uploader is still around. 20 minutes should suffice for adding basic information for media. Manual tagging sometimes happens within minutes of a media upload. Hope you understand... Cheers! Siebrand 08:16, 7 November 2007 (UTC)


Hi Siebrand, met hulp van of ingeschakeld door User:Majorly (ik heb geen idee hoe dat werkt) zijn alle images verwijderd van Niki de Saint-Phalle, niet alleen in Commons, maar ook in alle Wikipedia-versies. Majorly erkent dat de beslissing images uit (met name) Duitsland en Zwitserland te verwijderen onjuist was en heeft zojuist weer enkele beelden (uit Hannover) teruggeplaatst. De aktie vond plaats op 25 september 2007, maar nu zie ik pas de aangerichte "schade". Artikelen als :Niki de Saint Phalle', Nanaen Skulpturenmeile Hannover zitten nu zonder illustratie in Wikipedia NL, De, Fr etc. Wat te doen?--Gerardus 08:08, 7 November 2007 (UTC)

Je kunt hier zien waar CommonsDelinker de media heeft verwijderd. Via ongedaan maken kan je de afbeeldingen handmatig terugplaatsen... Omdat je geen medianamen hebt genoemd, hoop ik dat je zelf in staat bent om "&image=Afbeeldings_naam.jpg" of iets dergelijks toe te voegen aan de URL om het juiste overzicht te krijgen. Groet, Siebrand 08:13, 7 November 2007 (UTC)
Siebrand, ik heb enkele foto's handmatig kunnen herplaatsen. Ik mis er nog een stel en heb User:Majorly er naar gevraagd. Sorry, maar van jouw verhaal begrijp ik (computerONdeskundig als ik ben) geen snars. Wat geeft zo'n Delink actie, indien onterecht, toch een heisa. Groetjes--Gerardus 10:56, 7 November 2007 (UTC)
computerONdeskundig is geen probleem. Wat wel een probleem is, is dat je me niets geeft om mee te werken. Ik heb bijvoorbeeld de namen van afbeeldingen nodig voordat ik het voor je kan doen... Groet, Siebrand 11:59, 7 November 2007 (UTC)

Siebrand, hier heb je m'n hele discussie met User:Majorly

TSS SkyWonder and yacht Tatoosh picture

Dear Siebrand, your robot needs more sophistication. For both of these images, I branded them with the PD-user tag and my user name. It should be obvious that I am placing them in the public domain.

Regards, Intersofia 13:14, 5 November 2007 (UTC)

The bot has some very simple checks. It requires a license template for example. This will not be fixed, because it does not need fixing. On the other hand, please do not be concerned: media tagged as you did, would not have been deleted because of a lack of information. These are one of a the few false positives that are being reported. Cheers! Siebrand 08:58, 7 November 2007 (UTC)
I consider myself fairly sophisticated, but I find the process of uploading media to Commons tedious, fraught with hoops, and confusing choices and messages. To be able to finally upload and publish, is quite an accomplishment. I can just imagine someone less computing inclined, will have a very hard time uploading, and then, DESPITE the fact that the uploader clearly has used the "PD-Self" tag, (or some other suitable tag) some un-intelligent robot threatens deletion. It's silly, uneccessary and discouraging. It is my firm opinion that if you have unleashed a robot on the encyclopedia, it better do no harm. Your robot almost did harm.
The MediaWiki software, IMHO, should see that the PD-Self or other suitable copyright status indication, is present, and add the other tags, that are implicit; Since the MediaWiki software doesn't do this on it own (apparently), then your bot certainly should, IMO, since that is its role, to be a helper agent of sorts.

Intersofia 07:20, 8 November 2007 (UTC)

I want my images back

Hi Majorly, I have not checked my pages related to Modern Sculpture recently. To-day I noticed that images from Niki de Saint Phalle sculptures where deleted by CommonsDeLinker on September 25, 2007(I suppose on your request):

  • Image:Saint_phalle_hannover1.JPG
  • Image:Hannover_nanas1.jpg
  • Image:Saint_phalle_hannover2.JPG

Can you please explain me why these images, which are obviously taken in Germany, are copyright violations. You should have read this line on the Niki de Saint Phalle page/article before you took this drastic action: "Pictures taken in several countries (at least taken in Germany and Switzerland) are ok by freedom of panorama. Please check before deletion" I believe you also deleted the Zurich (Switzerland) image. Why, oh why??? Sorry for my late reaction. Greetings--Gerardus 11:37, 1 November 2007 (UTC)

Majorly, can I please hear something, anything from you--Gerardus 15:19, 6 November 2007 (UTC)
Sorry, I missed your message. Undeleted them, Majorly (talk) 19:01, 6 November 2007 (UTC)
Majorly, thanks a lot. But can you reopen Category:Nana by Niki de Saint Phalle as well?--Gerardus 07:30, 7 November 2007 (UTC)
Majorly, I found 2 out of 3 images mentioned above, but not: Saint-phalle_hannover1.JPG. I also checked the nl-wikipedia pages and miss image:Niki_de_Saint-Phalle_Nana_on_Dolfin,_Den_Haag_juni_2003.JPG (Netherlands also f.o.p.). From the Swiss image in Zurich I even don't know the filename. What a mess. Admin:Siebrand gave me some hints how to do the Delinking, but honestly I don't understand a word. Help me. Greetings--Gerardus 10:52, 7 November 2007 (UTC)

Ik raak van zulke discussie enigszins in de knoop en heb er een hekel aan een ander met (mijn, nou ja mijn ?) problemen lastig te vallen. Kijk maar wat je kunt doen.--Gerardus 12:27, 7 November 2007 (UTC)

Fixed. Siebrand 08:13, 8 November 2007 (UTC)

Mr Siebrand

I received your notice. As I took the picture from another WIkipedia-page I assumed that copyright would be no issue. HOwever, can I derive the needed information from the wikipedia page where the picture was downloaded from?


Please use CommonsHelper in the future. There is a link in the welcome text on your user talk page. Now another user has corrected it for you. Cheers! Siebrand 08:02, 8 November 2007 (UTC)

Request for bot task

Hi, Siebrand. I accidentally saw your bot contributions on the English Wikipedia. Could you please perform the same task for the Arabic Wikipedia? --Meno25 23:54, 4 November 2007 (UTC)

No problem. You can expect some edits soon. Cheers! Siebrand 09:24, 7 November 2007 (UTC)
✓ Done 81 media files tagged on ar.wp. Cheers! Siebrand 09:31, 7 November 2007 (UTC)
P.s. I used CommonsClash. Ideally this tool reports zero (0) hits. You may want to sort out non-duplicate files with the same name after removing the duplicates. There are about 40-50 of those for ar.wp. Cheers! Siebrand 09:45, 7 November 2007 (UTC)
I, on behalf of Arabic Wikipedians, thank you dearly. You have been a great help. Regards. --Meno25 01:54, 9 November 2007 (UTC)

SieBot's strange behaviour

Hi Siebrand. I've just stumbled upon a modification by SieBot that puzzles me. I was not able to find out who asked what to SieBot so that it made this replacement. I'm reverting it right now (hope this is ok). — Xavier, 11:15, 5 November 2007 (UTC)

Trivial change anyway. I have redirected all categorisations for {{badname}}/{{bad name}} to Category:Duplicate because it saves time doing maintenance, as the administrative process for all those templates is the same (1. check if duplicate. If not: remove template. 2. If duplicate, replace by media to be kept. 3. delete orphan). Cheers! Siebrand 08:38, 7 November 2007 (UTC)
Ok, that's fine for me, but what I don't explain is why Siebot changed the text of this talk pages (actually a template parameter in this case). Strange, isn't it ? I know you're quite busy so don't lose any time on this. But if you have an immediate answer (i.e. without investigating), I'd be curious to know it. Regards. — Xavier, 20:48, 8 November 2007 (UTC)
I think because I ran " -ref:Template:Badname" with "s/bad name/duplicate"... Cheers! Siebrand 20:53, 8 November 2007 (UTC)
OK, thanks, that would explain this modification, indeed. But I fail to see the reason for such a change. FYI, I've just found SieBot's related actions at that moment and suprisingly, they are few and very selective. I'm checking whether they need to be reverted or not. At first glance, I would say a revert is needed for each one. Bye. — Xavier, 21:06, 8 November 2007 (UTC)
Feel free. It was done because {{bad name}} does not add anything to {{duplicate}}, because from a process point of view, they are treated the same. Cheers! Siebrand 21:09, 8 November 2007 (UTC)
Apparently, Siebot changes was a mistake. EVula and you talked about this at that time. Tschüs! — Xavier, 21:23, 8 November 2007 (UTC)


Excuse me I didn't understand anything. This photo was taken by me, so I don't know why i'm not respecting its copyright. I've already read the copyryght page and I ignore what I'm supposed to write in my file in order to be "correct". I look forward for your answer. --Kermoareb 15:46, 8 November 2007 (UTC)Kermoareb

Answered on your talk page. Cheers! Siebrand 19:29, 8 November 2007 (UTC)

Info for featured picture

I just saw that Image:Hatiora ×graeseri flower.jpg doesn't lead to it's nomination file in the featured picture box - probably because the image was renamed after it got featured. Do you know how to fix that? The link to the now existing picture should also be linked correctly from the archiv file.

In my opinion it's a bit strange like that as I know that there are also sometimes people putting non-featured pictures in the featured-picture galleries, so it's good if you can see that an image was really featured (and yes, I know that there is the link on the bottom but still).

All the best, --Anna reg 12:59, 9 November 2007 (UTC)

Should be fixed now... Fiddled a bit with page names and redirects... Cheers! Siebrand 14:02, 9 November 2007 (UTC)

Tagging {{bad name}} without a replacement

You prefered to remove my tags (because I did not have the time to reupload them) on those image than to delete them! Good job! Thanks a lot for the help. Liné1 21:55, 9 November 2007 (UTC)

I assume you are using sarcasm here. I have no idea why you would do that... My apologies if I misunderstood and/or disappointed you. Please use {{rename}} if you do not wish to re-upload yourself. Then it may take a while, though. Cheers! Siebrand 21:57, 9 November 2007 (UTC)

Jean Fouquet

Yet again a (PD) image is replaced with a far inferior one, and the bettter version disappears. What is it with you people?? 02:25, 10 November 2007 (UTC)

Please be specific. Otherwise it is really hard to address the issue you are raising. Cheers! Siebrand 09:23, 10 November 2007 (UTC)


Hi Siebrand,
I had some troubles with an image which was tagged as {{no source since}}, but which was used in some wikipedias (The source wasn't added for ~10 days).
My idea for a new command for CommonsDelinker is {{universal orphan}}. There is {{universal replace}} and {{orphan}}, but there is always a problem with pictures which have no source and/or no licence but which are used somewhere. So universal orphan could be a solution for this problem.
--D-Kuru 10:07, 10 November 2007 (UTC)

I agree. This is on Bryan's 'todo' list, but he's got too much on it, I fear... Also see User talk:CommonsDelinker/commands/documentation... We now have a JIRA project. You could bug us there :) Cheers! Siebrand 10:10, 10 November 2007 (UTC)
First I have to tell you that I don't know so many about computer language, so: What's a JIRA project ? (I think to bug means that I work with it and I tell you then what doesn't work)
I see that you already had the idea I wrote named as {{Universal delink|Imagename.ext}}
Shell I write new ideas on User talk:CommonsDelinker/commands/documentation?
--D-Kuru 10:38, 10 November 2007 (UTC)
See Cheers! Siebrand 12:02, 10 November 2007 (UTC)

Miki Maus

Can you check this picture. Thanks----László (talk) 19:05, 10 November 2007 (UTC)

Obvious copyright violation (derivative work of a Walt Disney thingie). Speedy deleted. Siebrand 11:07, 11 November 2007 (UTC)

Vandalism ru:User:CommonsDelinker


Thank you for reporting this. We think this may have been a connection reset (the bot was not done submitting text, but the IP connection was closed). This may point out a fundamental flaw in the bot framework (although not occurring that often) that the coders are currently adressing. Please sign your comments on talk pages in the future with ~~~~ so that it is easier for me to see who made the comment and when. Cheers! Siebrand 11:03, 11 November 2007 (UTC)

Big Problem (User:RonenY)

Hi Siebrand.

These images are probably o.k (Give me some time and I will fix the data):

Delete the rest. [17]

Most of the bad images he took from here. We can scan these, but we can not use the images from this website.

The images of the maps are probably ok.

Gridge 17:33, 11 November 2007 (UTC).


Image deletion warning Image:AvalokitesvaraBright.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 | Српски / srpski | Svenska | Türkçe | українська | Tiếng Việt | 中文 | 中文(简体)‎ | 中文(繁體)‎ | +/−

Secretlondon 19:21, 11 November 2007 (UTC)