User talk:SimonTrew

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

Tip: Categorizing images[edit]

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


Hello, SimonTrew!

Tip: Add categories to your images

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

Here's how:

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

Uploadwizard-categories.png

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

[[Category:Category name]]

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

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

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

When picking categories, try to choose a specific category ("Astronomical diagrams") over a generic one ("Illustrations").

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

BotMultichillT 06:11, 5 April 2009 (UTC)

File:LaszloNemeth.jpg[edit]

I deleted this and requested deletion for the same reason on hu.wp hu:Fájl:Nemeth.JPG. The reason: see http://telekihaz.erdely.org/pages.php?menuid=55 (http://telekihaz.erdely.org/uploaded/images/20031229-111354_6.jpg). The source of the image not supports the public domain claim made on hu.wp, it was copied there without any information who the correct copyright holder is and without any evidence of permission to a free license. The image is by far not old enough to be Public Domain. --Martin H. (talk) 13:57, 29 November 2009 (UTC)

The same for hu:Fájl:000b Preisich Gábor.jpg (File:Preisich Gábor.jpg). The image on hu.wp has the "license" Template:PD-ineligible. A photo is never to simple for copyright, that license cant be correct. Please select the correct licenses, the license on hu.wp was hu:Sablon:Közkincs-nemjogosult and not a Creatice Commons waiver license. The license sais that the image is to simple for copyright and not that the copyright holder had waived all copyrights. Thats a very important difference. Also please transfer all information from the original. You transfered "Source 000b_Preisich_G%C3%A1bor.jpg at HU:WP" - and whats with the original source information? See your welcome box above: If you transfer images to Commons please make sure to use the CommonsHelper. --Martin H. (talk) 14:06, 29 November 2009 (UTC)
OK, well I have to take your word for it, but how I see it, if it is on Hungarian WP as being stated as being public domain, it is reasonable for me to move it to Commons when translating and Interwiking. I do try my best here to preserve the original information but I must admit I do find it a bit tricky sometimes to get it right first time. I can understand that if you believe it is not properly attributed, it is reasonable to delete it. I also wanted to transfer http://hu.wikipedia.org/wiki/F%C3%A1jl:N%C3%A9methL%C3%A1szl%C3%B3_Szil%C3%A1gyiErzs%C3%A9bet79.jpg, which again is stated as being in the public domain. I won't bother to upload it until I have your advice, because if it falls at the same fence we are just making work for each other.
I do assure you of my best intentions. Many other files that are claimed to have limited licenses I have not transferred from HU:WP, but these were plainly marked as being in the public domain. SimonTrew (talk) 14:36, 29 November 2009 (UTC)
I of course believe you edit in best faith. I admite that it it is not common knowledge that Template:PD-ineligible not covers photographic works, so please excuse if it sounds like I demanded you to know this. Bad here is the hu.wp that they not maintain their images and license selection. Nothing is public domain without a reason, possible reasons are 1) released by copyright holder, needs written evidence 2) to simple for copyright 3) Copyright expired for some reason in COM:L.
hu:Fájl:NémethLászló SzilágyiErzsébet79.jpg is presumably public domain because the author (Csurla) released the photograph into the public domain. hu:Sablon:Közkincs-saját is Template:PD-self, the copyright holder released the image into the public domain. Following Commons:Copyright tags (first section, public domain) you should use {{PD-user-w|projectcode|projectname|username}}, that means {{PD-user-w|hu|Hungarian Wikipedia|Csurla}}. --Martin H. (talk) 15:16, 29 November 2009 (UTC)

File:Beachcomber2.jpg[edit]

Pay attention to copyright
Wikimedia Commons does not accept fair use content. Fair use laws vary from country to country, and uses that are acceptable under US law, for example, may not be acceptable in many other countries with more restrictive rules.

Also, fair use is only applicable in a few limited contexts. The use of a media file in one context may be considered fair use, while the use of the same file in another context may constitute copyright violation. In particular, fair use does not extend to the collection and distribution of media files in a media database such as Commons. Therefore, Commons cannot legally rely on fair use provisions.

Non-free content that may be used with reference to fair use may be uploaded locally to projects which allow this.


беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ | čeština | dansk | Deutsch | English | español | فارسی | suomi | français | magyar | 日本語 | македонски | മലയാളം | Plattdüütsch | Nederlands | polski | português do Brasil | русский | svenska | 中文 | 中文(简体)‎ | 中文(繁體)‎ | +/−

If you have a question concerning this process, answer below, or in case of a deletion request, on the deletion-discussion page. Do not ask on my discussion page. With best regards RE rillke questions? 15:30, 25 January 2012 (UTC)

I answered at Commons:Upload_Wizard_feedback#Uploading_a_file_to_Commons. --Martin H. (talk) 22:44, 25 January 2012 (UTC)

Privatisation of MÁV??[edit]

Good and important pictures :-)! But!

"presumably as part of the privatisation if MÁV"

Oh, no, no... This government is not a great privatisator, the current national goal is the total nationalisation of public services: gas, electricity, water, motorway system, including the railways. The real reason of rebranding is the reconstruction: the building was renovated as of the original plans few months ago. The owner is the MÁV, but the building has a new operator: the Sülysáp local council.

Beroesz (talk) 21:20, 18 March 2014 (UTC)
@Beroesz: Ah, I didn't know that. The rebranding seems a bit patchy, Mende I think still has the old branding but Sulysap has the new one. They opened the new pentztar at Szolosnyaralo about two weeks ago, and very nice it looks too. Please excuse my lack of accents etc but I am on an English keyboard. Did I put in false information if so it should be removed? Tanulok a kicsit magyarul, és OK nap es nap de nem super. I have some nice pictures of Keleti and I think I added one to Keleti pályaudvar they are doing a nice job there and it is starting to look very beautiful, and good old Baross is back in his rightful place on the tér, it is looking quite nice. SimonTrew (talk) 10:08, 21 March 2014 (UTC)
You get totally different information from the English side of the MÁV site. We better take this out if it is incorrect and add the link you gave. But it does seem to me on the whole that en:Victor Orban is doing what en:Margaret Thatcher did in England in the early 1980s, encouraging people to stand on their own feet and not be subsidised etc. I didn't like her then and Hungarians don't like him now, but it was necessary and looking back it made the UK better but people didn't like it. But Wikipedia is not a place for politicising so perhaps that comment should somehow be changed or removed – I don't know how to do that.
My brother-in-law told me a joke that there is a poem going around along the lines of en:House That Jack Built that a light-bulb now on MÁV costs 20.000Ft because it has to go through seven different levels of organisation (this is essentially what en:Cyril Northcote Parkinson argued in his book and en:Parkinson's law, "Work expands to fill the time available for its completion". But since the vonat is so cheap compared to British railways there is obviously something askew one way or another. I do not want to get all political but we should report the facts straight and if I put something in that was wrong please take it out. SimonTrew (talk) 11:38, 21 March 2014 (UTC)

Copyright status: File:Spirella - Outside 1.jpg[edit]

беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ | български | català | čeština | dansk | Deutsch | Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ | English | فارسی | suomi | français | magyar | italiano | македонски | മലയാളം | Bahasa Melayu | 日本語 | norsk | polski | português | română | slovenščina | svenska | українська | 中文(简体)‎ | 中文(繁體)‎ | +/−

Warning sign
This media may be deleted.
Thanks for uploading File:Spirella - Outside 1.jpg. I notice that the file page either doesn't contain enough information about the license or it contains contradictory information about the license, so the copyright status is unclear.

If you created this file yourself, then you must provide a valid copyright tag. For example, you can tag it with {{self|GFDL|cc-by-sa-all}} to release it under the multi-license GFDL plus Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike All-version license or you can tag it with {{PD-self}} to release it into the public domain. (See Commons:Copyright tags for the full list of license tags that you can use.)

If you did not create the file yourself or if it is a derivative of another work that is possibly subject to copyright protection, then you must specify where you found it (e.g. usually a link to the web page where you got it), you must provide proof that it has a license that is acceptable for Commons (e.g. usually a link to the terms of use for content from that page), and you must add an appropriate license tag. If you did not create the file yourself and the specific source and license information is not available on the web, you must obtain permission through the OTRS system and follow the procedure described there.

Note that any unsourced or improperly licensed files will be deleted one week after they have been marked as lacking proper information, as described in criteria for speedy deletion. If you have uploaded other files, please confirm that you have provided the proper information for those files, too. If you have any questions about licenses please ask at Commons:Village pump/Copyright or see our help pages. Thank you.

No required license templates were detected at this file page. Please correct it, or if you have any questions please check my FAQ or contact me on my talk page. Yours sincerely, Jarekt (talk) 04:21, 4 July 2015 (UTC)

Admin attention[edit]

I am in a legal dispute at Wikipedia and I wish all the content I have contributed to Wikimedia commons to be deleted; I understand the terms of the licence but that does not allow the Wikimedia Foundation to libel me nor any of its contributors, so it is Wikimedia's best interests if it deleted any and every contribution I have made to Wikimeda and Wikipedia.

It is not a legal threat, it is a legal promise. WMF has obligations and cannot claim as ISPs do that "we are not the sewerage, only the sewer". Since Wikimedia projects patently serve content WMF has a responsibility to ensure that content is sensibly provided and not allow libels from a long-time contributor, and then when pulled up on it bans that contributor for making legal threats rather than even discuss it or giving the contributor the right of reply. So, please, just delete all my contributions. My irrevocable licence does not extend to legal disputes of ownership. We'll decide that in court. Until then I think it is in the WMF's best interests to delete all content I have ever added, this is called the WP:clean hands doctrine as I am sure you know. — Preceding unsigned comment added by SimonTrew (talk • contribs) 20:51, 02 August 2016 (UTC)