User talk:Túrelio/Archive6

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


Talkpage archive from 2011

Seasons Greetings[edit]

Happy News Year to you and all of you.

My first question to start with in 2011: Is the file from Rafel Schächter available on commons ? Lotje ʘ‿ʘ (talk) 10:39, 1 January 2011 (UTC)
Thanks. RE: The Rafel Schächter photo. The current image on :en is per se not usable for Commons as it is tagged as fair-use. As the same photography is abundant on the web, even in a color/sepia version, a thorough study/evaluation of its authorship status and consequently its copyright status may result in finding it being PD already. However, this would require quite some investigative work. You are invited ;-). --Túrelio (talk) 14:33, 1 January 2011 (UTC)

Weingarten Wappen[edit]


ich komme nicht so ganz zurecht mit der Bedienung von wikimedia commons. Die Datei ist mit dem silbernen Grund die richtige, welche Änderungen muss ich noch machen, damit das Wappen erhalten bleibt?

Danke Wengerder — Preceding unsigned comment added by Wengerder (talk • contribs) 01:52, 8. Jan. 2011 (UTC)

Wow, das bezieht sich auf meinen Hinweis vom 23. September 2010. Wenn nicht ein unbekannter die Lizenzvorlage ersetzt hätte[1], wäre die Datei längst weg gewesen, da fair-use auf Commons ein no-go ist. Momentan ist an der Datei nichts mehr zu tun. Du solltest aber versuchen, einen Beleg/Evidenz dafür zu bringen, dass es sich bei diesem Wappen tatsächlich um ein amtliches Werk handelt und somit die aktuelle Lizenz (PD-COA-Germany) gerechtfertigt ist. Im Zweifelsfall per Email-Nachfrage beim Webmaster der Website, von wo du es entnommen hast. Gruß. --Túrelio (talk) 08:43, 8 January 2011 (UTC)

Do NOT delete categories without redirecting please...[edit]

... e.g. this Category:Universität Karlsruhe is still being used in w:Karlsruhe Institute of Technology. Then users would immediately be redirected and have a better experience. Thanks, ----Erkan Yilmaz 14:58, 8 January 2011 (UTC)

fixed now at WP: [2], ----Erkan Yilmaz 14:59, 8 January 2011 (UTC)
Oh, sorry. The speedy-request said "This Category was replaced with Category:Karlsruhe Institute of Technology." which obviously hadn't been done completely. Thanks for fixing it. --Túrelio (talk) 16:37, 8 January 2011 (UTC)

Deletion of File:GanymedesSchenkerDerGoden-citaat.jpg[edit]

I would ask you to reconsider deleting this image. The file is a quotation from an image. According to Dutch law quotations of images may be used (or even a whole image if applicable). The quotation does not display the whole image. It is applicable to the topic, since Johan Dijkstra was the author, and the article is his biography. Furthermore it applies to the book 'Ganymedes' which is mentioned in the text. I now see I should have filled in the description page of the image sooner. Sorry. How do I go about this? Deerntje (talk) 15:36, 8 January 2011 (UTC)

Hi Deerntje,
I am not accustomed with specialties of Dutch copyright law. I can undelete the image and then open a regular deletion request, which allows for a full discussion with expert input, and may well result in a "keep" decision. --Túrelio (talk) 16:36, 8 January 2011 (UTC)
Dutch copyright here is the same as in other countries: The artist died 1978, the work is not free untill 2049, of course you can use a part of the work in an educational context under quotation rights, you can however not use it in Wikimedia Commons since the above described rational of en:Right_to_quote is similar to the concept of fair use in US law and fair use isnt allowed here. This is a free content project with content available for commercial reuse, offering media for commercial reuse is not what the right to quote includes. --Martin H. (talk) 17:46, 8 January 2011 (UTC)



You deleted File:Steenbergenluchtfoto.jpg. But didn't delete File:Steenbergen2.jpg which is an exact copy of this file (only without the black border). Also this image was part of a bigger nomination of around 75 images here. Maybe you can look into that as well.

Mvg, Basvb (talk) 18:22, 8 January 2011 (UTC)

AW: File:Paris 2010Feb 218.jpg[edit]

Hallo, was ist genau das Problem? Geht's um FoP? Wieso gibt es dann so viele andere Bilder über den Eiffel Tower? Bin etwas verwirrt. Wenn es sein muss, dann weg damit, aber nach dem ich so viele Bilder übers Objekt gesehen habe, habe ich mich mit den Einzelheiten vom FoP in Frankreich nicht beschäftigt. Viele Grüsse, Poco a poco (talk) 22:02, 8 January 2011 (UTC)

Hallo Poco a poco, überraschend dass du deutsch sprichst. Das Problem ist der nachts erleuchtete Eiffelturm. Das Urheberrecht daran gehört der Firma, die die Beleuchtung entwickelt hat, wie franz. Gerichte bestätigt haben. Eine franz. Idiotie, die wir aber nicht ändern können, und in Frankreich gibt es kein brauchbares FoP. Du kannst versuchen, das allerbeste deiner Eiffelturm-bei-Nacht-Fotos lokal auf :de hochzuladen. Aber schau vorher, ob es wirklich so gut ist wie die dort ggf. vorhandenen. --Túrelio (talk) 22:06, 8 January 2011 (UTC)
Überrascht? Wir sind doch Europäer :) Nun im Ernst, bin Spanier, aber lebe in M. Bezüglich dem von dir beschriebenen Problem, habe ich nur ein Wort dafür: Wahnsinn. Ich habe ein paar hochgeladen, einfach löschen. Vive la France! :) Poco a poco (talk) 22:13, 8 January 2011 (UTC)
Regarding the naming, sorry, you are right. I am usually more careful with these aspects, but just forgot to divide the Paris pics per subject. Will not occur again. Regards, Poco a poco (talk) 22:17, 8 January 2011 (UTC)
Prima. Hasta luego. --Túrelio (talk) 22:18, 8 January 2011 (UTC)

Copyright image exception...[edit]

Hi, User Pages Cgomez there were some recent image deletions of 2 images which you stated there were copyright 2011, now regarding the images used, there was a note in the original site witch states the following "*The above image is available as content for fan pages, press kit or any respectable promotional purpose." here, request images to be undeleted if available thank you... — Preceding unsigned comment added by Cgomez007 (talk • contribs) 9. Januar 2011, 00:43 Uhr (UTC)

Hi Cgomez007, I had read that before I deleted the images. The above mentioned "permission" is clearly not enough for Commons. We require uploads to be free for any purpose, including commercial use. --Túrelio (talk) 00:01, 9 January 2011 (UTC)
Hi, Regarding the "permission" that you stated it does specify any promotional (informational witch applies) purpose, under a fair use rationale, in "Step 3. Supply a description and a "fair use" rationale." it does give the possibility to upload this type of content, I may have omitted some of that information. Now you did state that Commons required free images, including for commercial use. In File copyright tags/Non-free, does say it can be used provided a "A well-written use rationale" {{Non-free use rationale}} In the website it does say copyright 2011 but does give the Fair use of the images source. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Cgomez007 (talk • contribs) 02:20, 9. Jan. 2011 (UTC)
Hi Cgomez007, oh, the old problem, :en-wikipedia does allow fair-use content, but Commons does not. Therefore the above linked "Non-free use rationale" template produces a speedy-deletion message. So, fair-use is a no-go on Commons. But, if you want to use these images only on :en, you may try to upload them locally on :en under a fair-use rationale. --Túrelio (talk) 08:14, 9 January 2011 (UTC)
Thanks... for the help Túrelio,,, i'll figure that in a few days. Thanks again --Cgomez007 (talk) 08:12, 16 January 2011 (UTC)

File:FIFA World Cup 2010 Uruguay Netherlands.jpg[edit]

Could you please explain why you have deleted this file and not File:FIFA World Cup 2010 Netherlands Uruguay.jpg, because the match was officially URU-NED and not NED-URU. I have explained this on the image page. If you don't want to undelete, at least complete the information, as File:FIFA World Cup 2010 Uruguay Netherlands.jpg had a way more detailed description and more precise as well (the photo could not be taken at 1 July 2010, 00:00). Thanks — NickK (talk) 01:25, 9 January 2011 (UTC)

You are right. I've undeleted it. However, as the CommonsDelinker is sleeping since >24 hours, the substitution may take some time. --Túrelio (talk) 08:21, 9 January 2011 (UTC)

Robert A Foster[edit]

Hi, Ref the Photo of Robert A Foster. Robert & Isabel Foster hold full copy rights to this photo as when it was taken the right where bought to all photo taken at the time. Please can you remove the tag from it. Thank you Icequeen05 (talk) 15:39, 9 January 2011 (UTC)

The problem is not whether Robert & Isabel Foster hold the full rights, the unanswered question is whether they allowed you to upload it under a free license. --Túrelio (talk) 15:42, 9 January 2011 (UTC)
Well yes because this photo was taken as part of a promotional photos shoot for them to be use to promote them and Amie who knew that. These photo are on Spotlight, IMBD, and many other websites. We always give Amie credit for taking the photo's which is the correct way of doing it even when you own the copyrights.Icequeen05 (talk) 16:17, 9 January 2011 (UTC)
This "smells" clearly as fair-use, which is o.k. on :en-Wikipedia, but definitively not on Commons. In general, promotional photos are not free in the meaning of free licenses, including making derivatives and commercial use. And that an image is also used somewhere else has little significance for Commons. Finally, you have to provide a written permission by the photographer or, if the Foster parents have the full rights, by them to OTRS. --Túrelio (talk) 16:44, 9 January 2011 (UTC)
Trust me they cost a lot to have done and I am the parent, I have added code but not sure if i've done it correct and sent off form. Just don't want the photo removed? Icequeen05 (talk) 17:28, 9 January 2011 (UTC)
No, I don't want the photo have removed, why should I? But, as an admin, I have to take care that all images uploaded to Commons, are correctly licensed and don't result in problems for re-users. Our communication would have been easier if you had said in the beginning that you are the boys mother or father. Though, the permission would have been required anyway. And, yes, you have added the correct template, which will prevent deletion until our OTRS volunteers have checked the permission and then put an o.k.-ticket on the page. --Túrelio (talk) 19:30, 9 January 2011 (UTC)
Thank you for letting me know that i've added the correct template, i'm still new to this.Icequeen05 (talk) 19:54, 9 January 2011 (UTC)


Hi! could include this request in User:CommonsDelinker/commands?

Thank you for your attention. --HélioVL (talk) 23:29, 9 January 2011 (UTC)

Hi, this seems to have been done already. Or do you want the redirects removed? --Túrelio (talk) 06:45, 10 January 2011 (UTC)
I prefer to remove the redirects. Are unnecessary now. --HélioVL (talk) 12:02, 10 January 2011 (UTC)
✓ Done. --Túrelio (talk) 13:21, 10 January 2011 (UTC)


Danke für diesen Hinweis, den Google mir zuverlässig geliefert hat. Ich habe mich mal registriert und die Dateibeschreibung klargestellt. Raymond 18:10, 10 January 2011 (UTC)

Gern geschehn. Dein Bild war noch das "harmloseste". Wenn man die hiesige Situation kennt, braucht man sich nicht zu wundern, dass anderso ähnliche Probleme auftreten. --Túrelio (talk) 19:25, 10 January 2011 (UTC)

Deleted paintings of Anna Staniszewska[edit]

The paintings of Anna Staniszewska you deleted are painted by my Mother, and she gave me rights to put her works into internet. Pictures of paintings are done by me own. I didn't know, how to show my rights to Wikimedia, and I don't know what to do with that.

Vallenty (talk) 12:52, 12 January 2011 (UTC)

Wow, this was 2 years ago! Besides, I did not delete these files, I did only notify you about the impending deletion. They were be deleted by another admin. Anyway, in order to have them here on Commons, you need to sent a permission to OTRS, because the original artist, your mother, also holds the copyright of your photos. Assuming that you prefer polish language, copy the "Pozwolenie na zamieszczenie pliku na wolnej licencji" from Commons:Pozwolenia, enter the filenames of the images plus the name of the choosen license, and then ask your mother to sign and date it and to sent it to Thereafter, you may notify me about the un-deletion of the images. --Túrelio (talk) 13:13, 12 January 2011 (UTC)


Re:Commons:Deletion requests/File:SmileyOriginal.jpg, you stated that "fair use is not allowed" in your deletion summary, but that wasn't image being used under fair use as the Smiley face logos cannot be copyrighted. They entered the public domain in the '60s and besides they do not have sufficient originality, e.g. see [3] - copyright and trademark are not the same. For what it's worth, User:Yann agreed with this when I asked him about the deletion (I thought he had deleted it initially). It's a pity to see the word of an editor with a probable COI taken at face value like that. Could you undelete the file, please? Fences and windows (talk) 20:23, 12 January 2011 (UTC)

Hmm, I deleted this file because it was so requested by the uploader Drinas himself, who - in addition - had added a fair-use equivalent tag (non-fee logo) to the description page. As he might feel bad to be attached to this file, why not upload it again from the source --Túrelio (talk) 20:32, 12 January 2011 (UTC)


Hi! Re this, did you know that you can just view the deleted version from Special:Undelete/File:Luismesa10.jpg without actually undeleting the file? :) Regards, Jafeluv (talk) 08:32, 13 January 2011 (UTC)

Ah, yes, thanks, I somehow forgot. --Túrelio (talk) 08:38, 13 January 2011 (UTC)


Dear Túrelio,

I am currently "godfathering" the new user Ghislain118 (see his gallery).
When checking his uploads of Thymus species, I have revised and updated the category Thymus according to the Kew World Checklist.
Thank you for your appreciated help (delete of wrong categories).

Best regards from Belgium, --Réginald alias Meneerke bloem (To reply) 17:47, 13 January 2011 (UTC)

Dear Réginald, I was off Commons for 50 hours, therefore somebody else may have deleted the wrong cats already. Anyway, your "godfathering" ;-) is a very valuable work. Thanks. --Túrelio (talk) 22:04, 15 January 2011 (UTC)

Uploading (regarding deleted tacodoritosfront.jpg)[edit]

Hi Túrelio.... I was attempting an upload of 2 images regarding the recent return of taco-flavored Doritos chips. The pictures I was attempting to upload would help clarify an edit of the Doritos article I was about to do, as it is a return of a popular flavor not available in the US for many years. Earlier in the article, there is mention of many consumers who liked the taco flavor and had wanted it to return. The back of the bag (that I would have uploaded just after the front picture) explains the "limited edition" nature of the bag, which uses a style not seen in US stores in many years. The back also shows a very small image of bag of Taco Doritos using the current style bag, and goes on to say that the Taco flavor is returning soon using the new/current packaging style. Anyway, I tried to emulate the uploading style used by the person who uploaded Nacho-Cheese-Doritos-Bag-Small.jpg, which appears in the infobox of the Doritos Wikipedia article. I may not have done it correctly. I was only trying to offer proof by photo of the return of Taco Doritos, the limited edition bag, and the instance of a Doritos logo which existed previously but is no longer used. As the image Nacho-Cheese-Doritos-Bag-Small.jpg was accepted, what can I do to get my pictures accepted (without being hurriedly deleted first) ? Thanx for your time, Túrelio. Awtribute (talk) 23:11, 15 January 2011 (UTC)

Hi Awtribute,
w:File:Nacho-Cheese-Doritos-Bag-Small.jpg was uploaded to :en (not to Commons!) under fair-use, likely as the logo is considered copyrighted. The problem is that fair-use, which is a specialty of US copyright law, is per policy allowed on :en-Wikipedia, but also per policy not allowed on Commons. Therefore, your upload had to be deleted. If you want to use your images only on :en, you should try to upload them locally on :en, claiming fair-use. --Túrelio (talk) 23:38, 15 January 2011 (UTC)

Not free photos?[edit]

Hi, today I found this. I thought that this kind of stuffs were not allowed in Commons. Are they? Thanks. --Andrea (talk) 18:40, 16 January 2011 (UTC)

Hi Andrea, what made you assume "that this kind of stuffs were ..."? Independant of that, the cited image was uploaded in 2005 and may have slipped through our scrutiny, if there is really a problem. --Túrelio (talk) 19:28, 16 January 2011 (UTC)
Sorry, I don't understand what you mean with "if there is really a problem". Does it means that is it valid to upload images GNU 1.2 and ask for contact with the author for "negotiate the terms for another licence"? Tell me yes, I start to change my photos licence now. --Andrea (talk) 20:03, 16 January 2011 (UTC)
I checked and he has self - retired from Commons because of his problems of licences, but still his contributions remains, wich are a lot. --Andrea (talk) 20:07, 16 January 2011 (UTC)
Ok, I didn't look for that, because you didn't give me any hint in that direction and my main work is to detect copyvios, where the uploader even hasn't any right over the image. And my comment above referred to that kind of problems. As this case merits some discussion, I would recommend you to open a regular deletion request. I assume your "change my photos licence now" was meant ironically, as you cannot restrict the license once you have released an image. --Túrelio (talk) 21:02, 16 January 2011 (UTC)
Yes, sorry. I didn´t know about your job. I though that as admin you could do it. Tell me how I open the request, please. Thanks. --Andrea (talk) 21:26, 16 January 2011 (UTC) PS: Now I know who ask about a CR file ;)
Anyone can (is authorized) to file a regular DR. It is done like that: you put {{delete|<here you write the reason for the deletion>}} into the description page and press enter; then a message windows appears up. You click on the line of text (content varies with language) directly below the part with the red background and then perform the first three steps (it's just 3 times copy and paste); see File:Charging bull.JPG as an example. --Túrelio (talk) 21:49, 16 January 2011 (UTC)

Thanks, but I´m affraid is not so simple. He used to be an admin an uploaded 2.500 files. I tagged one and add his contribution list, but I´m affraid that´s not enough. Also, one of his files was promotred to deletion earlier but was kept because the deadminship process, but when it finish I found no resolution about it. I made a mass request anyway, but I'm not sure it will be sucessfull. Chears. --Andrea (talk) 23:02, 16 January 2011 (UTC)

Die IP[edit]

Bist du dir sicher, dass es nach dem Log nur drei Tage sein sollen? Wenn du nichts dagegen hast, würde ich die Schule gerne deutlich länger vom Netz nehmen. Grüße, abf «Cabale!» 13:40, 17 January 2011 (UTC)

Nix dagegen. --Túrelio (talk) 13:43, 17 January 2011 (UTC)
Herzlichen Dank! Die Kinder dürften nu' erst 'mal nicht mehr nerven. ;) abf «Cabale!» 13:48, 17 January 2011 (UTC)


--Túrelio (diskuse) 15:17, 17 January 2011 (UTC) You cannot simply copy images from a website. --Túrelio (diskuse) 15:18, 17 January 2011 (UTC)

Well, I am an emploee of the university, the pictures of our Dean and vice-deans are our property (copyright and all...), I was delegated by the board of faculty to upload it to wiki commons under public domain and use it to create Wikipedia atricles about our faculty and its management That is why I actually CAN "simply copy images from a website" ... it is the website I am a webmaster of ... If in doubt, please contact me on my work email: If I was wrong and filled some of your entries incorrectly, I am sorry. Lets change it accordingly, however, do NOT DELETE the files. Let them be, they are ours and we totally agree to publish it under public domain.

A. P. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Pavlant (talk • contribs) 18. Januar 2011, 10:44 Uhr (UTC)

Hi A.P.,
if your university has the full rights (from the photographer) over all these images, then the responsible body/person should sent a written permission to OTRS. Go to Commons:Email templates (or your language version), take the "Declaration of consent for all enquiries" (or the equivalent), enter the filenames (or full URLs) of all images to be covered, and enter the name of the license and mail it all to the person who is authorized to issue such a permission. He/She should then date and sign it with his/her real name and mail it back to the email address shown on the page OTRS. After doing that, you should put on all the image pages {{OTRS pending}}. --Túrelio (talk) 09:51, 18 January 2011 (UTC)
In between somebody else has deleted the image. So, after you get the o.k. from your university for the permission, post the filenames on my talkpage. I will then restore them and tag them with OTRS-pending. --Túrelio (talk) 16:06, 18 January 2011 (UTC)

File:Mexico-Iztaccihuatl-hreben.jpg, File:Mexico-Iztaccihuatl.jpg[edit]

Well, these files "survived" on wiki commons for almost five years without any notice, and you delete it in about five hours? I dont even get a chance to delare, that the "Non-profit" exclusion can be changed to general public domain? You know what? You can either change it yourself to the status whichever suits the wikipedia, or levave it deleted. However I am not uploadig it again. Your loss, if you delete it. --Tony (talk) 10:04, 18 January 2011 (UTC)

It was indeed strange that these 2 images survived that long despite clearly violating Commons policy. Now, the problem with changing the license is that only File:Mexico-Iztaccihuatl-hreben.jpg was credited to "Antonín Pavlíček", but File:Mexico-Iztaccihuatl.jpg had been credited to "Jakub Hejtmánek" by you. If you are the author of the first one, I can un-delete it, so that you could change the license to whatever complies with our policy. However, the second one? --Túrelio (talk) 10:45, 18 January 2011 (UTC)
After undeleting the first image, I found that the author name had been changed[4] to "R. Espinoza", by an IP very similar to aother IP which later requested deletion[5]. I assume it was vandalism, but could you comment on that if you have an idea. --Túrelio (talk) 10:49, 18 January 2011 (UTC)
No, I dont know any Espinoza, it is nonsense ... the pictures were taken by ME and my friend Jakub Hejtmanek. Hard to say, which one of us held the camera which time, we travelled together and took the pictures on one camera, so dont ask me about precise "authorship", the only thing I know for sure, it WASNT some R. Espinoza.

To conclude ... thank you for helping, however I am quite busy at the moment for trying find out how to tackle wikipedia and its copyright policies ... so, I delegate on you all my rights to adapt any necessary changes to keep my pictures on-line ... however I am not in the position to do it myself. Best regards -- 14:31, 18 January 2011 (UTC)

Anna Staniszewska pictures[edit]

Thanks for the answer, I will try to download it once more

Vallenty (talk) 08:39, 20 January 2011 (UTC)

You are welcome. --Túrelio (talk) 19:04, 22 January 2011 (UTC)

Delete redirect[edit]

Hi, Túrelio! Could you delete this redirect? I need to load an image with the same name.

--HélioVL (talk) 18:04, 20 January 2011 (UTC)

✓ Done. --Túrelio (talk) 19:03, 22 January 2011 (UTC)

Give Up[edit]

Hi - I did not get why you deleted (Journal des suppressions de page) ; 16:12 . . Túrelio (discuter | contributions) a supprimé « File:Give-Up-Munich.jpg » (Does not allow for commercial use and/or derivative works: Speedydelete). The image is explicitly for non-commercial use, the context described is everything but commercial. Please reinstate picture. al_ashton 2011 01 22 18:32

Ok, seems you are new here. Commons requires per its policy that all uploads have to be free for any kind of use, including commercial use. File:Give-Up-Munich.jpg is at its source[6] licensed as NC, i.e. restricted to non-commercial use, thereby it violates Commons' policy. It cannot be uploaded to Commons. If you convince the author to lift this restriction, then it could be uploaded. --Túrelio (talk) 19:03, 22 January 2011 (UTC)

(OTRS) K129 wreck.png[edit]

Please delete this NOW, as it was a {{speedy}} from the very first moment. Asav (talk) 03:15, 23 January 2011 (UTC)

I deleted it four hours ago. Wknight94 talk 03:29, 23 January 2011 (UTC)
I would still like to know on what grounds this was downgraded from Speedy to AfD, as I can't see any reason for it. Asav (talk) 04:34, 23 January 2011 (UTC)
See my comment at COM:AN. --Túrelio (talk) 08:53, 23 January 2011 (UTC)

User Acreana and Luna123[edit]

Thanks for deleting images uploaded by Acreana. Could you also check files uploaded by User:Luna123? They are already tagged with npd, but have photos copied from the same website. Ednei amaral (talk) 17:04, 23 January 2011 (UTC)

Taken care of. --Túrelio (talk) 17:03, 28 January 2011 (UTC)

Thank you[edit]

As you can see I am godfathering a new user (user:Ghislain118), who is uploading a wonderful portfolio of pictures of plants. As yet he has already uploaded some 1,800 of them. I the meantime I am also reviewing some of the categories in which those pictures are uploaded.
Thank you for deleting so promptly the mispelled pages or category I am asking for deletion. --Réginald alias Meneerke bloem (To reply) 17:14, 23 January 2011 (UTC)

You are welcome and again thanks for your valuable work with user:Ghislain118. By the way: I don't know how far or near from Aachen/Aken you are located, but next saturday evening we have "wikipedia meeting" in Aachen, see [7], in case you are interested. --Túrelio (talk) 18:02, 23 January 2011 (UTC)


réalisée en 1982 par M. Leplus. --Chatsam (talk) 17:50, 24 January 2011 (UTC)

Merci. The problem I see with this photography is that it may violate the copyright of "M. Leplus". It may depend on whether we have to consider it a work of art or not. --Túrelio (talk) 20:18, 24 January 2011 (UTC)


Dear Túrelio,

I have a problem. User:Ghislain118 has put a new version of File:Glaucium flavum aurantiacum 1.jpg and File:Glaucium flavum aurantiacum 2.jpg. Doing so he has replaced pictures taken by User:Stan Shebs at the University of California Botanical Garden. Ghislain's pictures are of the "true" var. aurantiacum. That of Stan Shebs are clearly of the "common" var. flavum. I have tried to solve this issue for File:Glaucium flavum aurantiacum 2.jpg, but I am missing the rights to do it. Is there any possibility to revert Stan Shebs' picture and to save them in separate files, e.g, "Glaucium flavum 3.JPG" and "Glaucium flavum 4.JPG"? Or do we let it as it currently is?

Thank you for your appreciated help, --Réginald alias Meneerke bloem (To reply) 10:19, 24 January 2011 (UTC)

Hi Réginald,
first tell Ghislain never to overwrite other users images.
As Stan Shebs' pictures were uploaded already in 2006, I would like to preserve them with their upload log, for forensic reasons (in case he needs to prove to a court the date when he published his images). The would require that Ghislain has to re-upload his overwriting-uploads. But to solve the filename problem, I could revert to Stan Shebs' original version and then rename them as you requested. Thereafter, Ghislain could re-upload his images under the ideal/preferred filename. However, for the above mentioned forensic reasons Ghislain should not use an 100% identical filename as the Shebs images have. Would that be O.k.? --Túrelio (talk) 10:26, 24 January 2011 (UTC)
It is OK so. I will tell Ghislain to re-upload these two pictures under another name. As you now he is is stil a "young" user. I will ask him to never overwrite uploads of other users, even when the uploads of the other user are clearly incorrectly identified. Thank you again for your appreciated help. --Réginald alias Meneerke bloem (To reply) 10:41, 24 January 2011 (UTC)
I've done the required steps until the renaming. However, as Stan Shebs was online already this year, would you mind to notify him about the taxonomic "change" of his images, just to avoid that he gets surprised or upset. --Túrelio (talk) 10:42, 24 January 2011 (UTC)
Ähemm, should the new name for the Shebs images be File:Glaucium flavum x.JPG or File:Glaucium flavum flavum x.JPG or File:Glaucium flavum var flavum x.JPG ? --Túrelio (talk) 10:58, 24 January 2011 (UTC)

Deletion of duplicates[edit]


I am rather surprised to suddenly find File:Sunset in Dubai desert 17.jpg and File:Desert of Dubai 5.jpg deleted as duplicates, without any notification or warning at all. In fact I wouldn't have known had I not placed my uploads on my watchlist. There were a lot of photos that looked similar to each other that I uploaded in sequence - but they were not duplicates and there were subtle differences. There is the small possibility I made a mistake and uploaded one twice, but because of the nature of how I upload that is unlikely. Please restore them, at least temporarily so I can check them. CT Cooper · talk 10:28, 24 January 2011 (UTC)

✓ Done. They had been tagged by another user. I performed the substitution and deletion, as they seemed to be rather "identical". --Túrelio (talk) 10:35, 24 January 2011 (UTC)
Many thanks for your quick response. They do look very similar, and I can understand why someone would tag them as a duplicate. However, they are not duplicates - there are differences between the photos, which are explained in my edit summary reason for removing the tags, and are significant from photography point of view. CT Cooper · talk 10:41, 24 January 2011 (UTC)

A little puzzled.[edit]

Hi. Is there something fishy with the upload history of this? Or is it just a matter of recycling a file name? Not being an admin, I can't figure it out. thanks. --Moros y Christianos 14:56, 26 January 2011 (UTC)

Your second guess (recycling a file name) was right. An image with that name had been originally uploaded by Dougjj. Some months later it was renamed (copied) to File:Blue Ground Dove female.jpg and thereafter deleted as duplicate of the copy. 16 months later an unrelated user used the same filename for his upload of an image of the same bird species. --Túrelio (talk) 15:08, 26 January 2011 (UTC)
OK, thanks. Moros y Christianos 16:28, 26 January 2011 (UTC)

RVed deletion request[edit]

Hi there Túrelio, I guess you meant it well but your RV of my request to delete File:Charles Stewart Parnell in 1885.jpg is not ok, because it genuinely does not open on my screen for some technical reason (the advise from the Desk on my Talk page did not help). I then uploaded a similar image with File:Charles Stewart Parnell, portrait 1885.jpg which opens fine (for me). Therefore please understand I do not want a blank image in my gallery. Kindly reinstate my request for speedy deletion for said reasons. Thank you for being understanding, and Greetings. Osioni (talk) 19:44, 27 January 2011 (UTC)

Ok, I have put the now deleted original version through the jpg-optimizing function of IrfanView (a superb freeware) and uploaded it as other version to your new upload and thereafter reverted to "your" version. I did that in order 1) not to loose slightly larger image, and 2) that you could test whether the old display problem is still true for this "cleaned" version. --Túrelio (talk) 19:56, 27 January 2011 (UTC)
Good work Túrelio, cleaned version works fine. I down-loaded it, and re-uploaded to have it re-appear in MY Gallery (it had moved to yours!). Copying all this to my Talk page. Thanks a million, Osioni (talk) 11:47, 28 January 2011 (UTC)


Pleaae remove the deletion tag

and check the link again

--Ranatalwar (talk) 20:40, 27 January 2011 (UTC)

Sorry, but you seem not to understand the problem. ist totally useless as source, because it has no information about license, authorship and anything. If this image was shot by the person you said to be the author, then you need to provide either a proven release of this image under a free license by its author. Photographies are per law copyrighted by the author until 70 years after his/her death. --Túrelio (talk) 21:02, 27 January 2011 (UTC)

For the other image

--Ranatalwar (talk) 20:44, 27 January 2011 (UTC)

War going on[edit]

Hi Túrelio. Could you have a look at the file history of this? To me it looks like a valid file, but there is some serious war going on there. Maybe the two opponents have to be cautioned or the file protected? cheers. --Moros y Christianos 06:43, 28 January 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for notifying. I've full-protected the file. But there is more with this user. He did the same with his other images. --Túrelio (talk) 07:39, 28 January 2011 (UTC)

Mediaset logo(s) - Deletion tags[edit]

Hi Tùrelio, yes, the file Tgcom logo.png can be copyright infrangement for the background colors, and for me it can be deleted now. But Mediaset extra logo.PNG has a very simple text and isn't (actually) a registered trademark. I think that it can hosted by Commons without "problems" (also it has many differences between the real logo (see "Mediaset Extra in Google images). Thank you, good work! --Jack21 (talk) 13:11, 28 January 2011 (UTC)

That's fine for me. Actually I hadn't speedy-tagged them. I had only found them in the cat for speedy-deletions and found also that you hadn't been notified, which I then did. But, as I wasn't sure about it for myself, I didn't delete them, but choose to wait-and-see strategy. --Túrelio (talk) 13:23, 28 January 2011 (UTC)
Ok, thank you very much! --Jack21 (talk) 19:16, 29 January 2011 (UTC)


Please check and nuke the uploads of User:Praveenicox..

  1. File:Thee-011213347264.jpg
  2. File:Namitha.jpg

++ many more More--...Captain......Tälk tö me.. 08:09, 29 January 2011 (UTC)

++ This user User:Hemayet files under fair use......Captain......Tälk tö me.. 08:11, 29 January 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for notifying. --Túrelio (talk) 08:40, 29 January 2011 (UTC)

Image you deleted for me that I re-uploaded[edit]

Hi, thanks for doing that earlier. I was wondering if it's possible for me to upload the image again and the old revision just be deleted? I know this can be done on Wikipedia so I assume it can be done here as well. I think this would be easier as it would save having to add all the categories and things again. If you can do this I'll re-upload all the pictures and then let you know which ones so you can delete the original revisions. Is that ok? I just don't really want my name coming up in Google results. AnemoneProjectors (talk) 17:01, 29 January 2011 (UTC)

I was offline until now and therefore couldn't answer earlier. We should try your proposal with 1 image and if it works well we can do it with all. --Túrelio (talk) 22:50, 29 January 2011 (UTC)

Speedy deletion[edit]

Hi! I want to know if I can nominate these 2 pictures to SD, because they´re not longer in use, any other version has been created in 4 years, they´re out of scope, and at least one seems to be copied from somewhere and retag in an awful way. Or maybe I should ask for a DR? Thanks. Cheers. --Andrea (talk) 02:42, 30 January 2011 (UTC)

Last reason for its keep is to redraw and upload...If the new version is available please nominate for DR, Not using is not the DR reason....Captain......Tälk tö me.. 03:48, 30 January 2011 (UTC)
There's no reason to redraw because the section where it was using was an add of a medical procedure, wich actually no longer exist and will be no replace. Not using is not the DR reason, but the out of scope, yes. And I see no reason for waist time redrawing an add, not clear even for an spanish-speaker like me. Cheers. --Andrea (talk) 10:36, 30 January 2011 (UTC)
Hi Andrea, you should choose a regular DR, as out-of-scope is officially not a speedy reason, and as File:Jjstt.jpg seems to be used on 1 project. Regards. --Túrelio (talk) 10:47, 30 January 2011 (UTC)
Ok. But Jjstt.jpg it's a redirection to "Profirinas"... and as I already says, the only article mention as linked, es:Efecto fotoelectrico en porfirinas no longer use it, because has been fusionated with es:Porfirinas and the promotional content has been removed. Cheers. --Andrea (talk) 12:12, 30 January 2011 (UTC)

Only use category redirects where necessary[edit]

Your thoughts may be helpful at Commons_talk:Only_use_category_redirects_where_necessary#Changes needed to turn this into a guideline. Walter Siegmund (talk) 18:30, 30 January 2011 (UTC)


Dear Túrelio,

For your info: The last three weeks I have "godfathered" User:Ghislain118 who was uploading a wonderful collection of more than 3,000 pictures of plants (mostly rock and Mediterranean plants). I have verified and classified all these plants, and as last identified an additional batch of 60 plants he could not identify. In the meantime I have put some order in categories in which these plants had to be put. This work is now fulfilled.

Best regards, --Réginald alias Meneerke bloem (To reply) 15:11, 31 January 2011 (UTC)

Removing of emptied categories[edit]

Please be more carefull when removing emptied categories. Don't remove them before you make sure who and why emptied them. Recently, you removed the category Category:Praha-Smíchov (train station) and several its subcategories which were moved from the correct names to incorrect names by the trolling user W.Rebel. --ŠJů (talk) 23:44, 31 January 2011 (UTC)

Ok, but when an additional "categories for/under discussion"-tag is missing, it's hard to find out whether the speedy-tagging was legitimate or nor.
In addition, if User:W.Rebel is clearly vandalizing cats, he should be blocked. --Túrelio (talk) 06:53, 1 February 2011 (UTC)
Regrettably, we have no utility for logging of a category content history. --ŠJů (talk) 09:22, 1 February 2011 (UTC)
As it seems in the discussion, he didn't want to vandalise these categories, but he was confused with the incorrect name at the station board and he was wrongly interpreted and applied the manual of the Institute for Czech Language and headlong moved categories without discussion and regardless of sister categories. But it's clear and demonstrable what form of the station name is correct. --ŠJů (talk) 09:29, 1 February 2011 (UTC)

versions to be deleted[edit]

Hello, can you clean File:Bessuejouls eglise autel.jpg by deleting the two latest versions, including that test version. --Havang(nl) (talk) 13:33, 1 February 2011 (UTC)

I've removed the "test" version. Before I can remove the latest version, I would have to do the same that User:Jayawardana12 has done, reverting to your version, because the currently displayed version cannot be deleted (except all is deleted). So, if you want to have your username in the upload-log for the latest/then-current version, you have to revert to your own version. Thereafter I could delete the then 2nd and 3rd version. Enough confusion? ;-) --Túrelio (talk) 14:07, 1 February 2011 (UTC)
OKE as it is. Thanks--Havang(nl) (talk) 15:09, 1 February 2011 (UTC)

File:VLC media player Easter egg.png[edit]

Hi, Túrelio. Author request or not, I think that is copyvio since it is a Windows interface screenshot. But am not sure... Rehman 16:15, 1 February 2011 (UTC)

I'm not sure about that myself. Anyway, I've asked the uploader and speedy-tagger why he wants it deleted. --Túrelio (talk) 13:59, 2 February 2011 (UTC)

sorry & thanks[edit]

Hi Túrelio,

I'm aware of violating copyrights :) Normally I check images before uploading but this time I was too lazy... sigh, will not happen again (at least I hope so...) Rbrausse (talk) 09:57, 2 February 2011 (UTC)

Überhaupt kein Problem, zumal das auf der Quelle ja nicht erkennbar war. Ich hatte zu spät registriert, dass du den LA selbst gestellt hattest. --Túrelio (talk) 10:02, 2 February 2011 (UTC)


Hallo! Das Tierchen ist - bzw. war zum Zeitpunkt der Aufnahme - ein höchst lebendiges, wie der Fotograf (den ich persönlich gut kenne) hier bestätigt: [8]. Das Bild dürfte so beliebt sein, dass offenbar auch gewerbliche Nachnutzer Interesse daran gefunden haben - und leider "vergessen", die Lizenzbedingungen zu beachten... -- Herby (Vienna) (talk) 12:00, 2 February 2011 (UTC)

Ok, danke für die Klärung. Hab den Urheber inzwischen auf die SZ-Nutzung hingewiesen. --Túrelio (talk) 13:26, 2 February 2011 (UTC)

Botany Barnstar[edit]

Thank you, Túrelio, for this reconnaissance. It is an important boost to sustain my collaboration to the botanical projects of the wikimedia foundation.

Best regards, --Réginald alias Meneerke bloem (To reply) 15:24, 2 February 2011 (UTC)

Mother Teresa[edit]

Túrelio, I've seen that you made a photograph of Mother Teresa when she was in Bonn, Germany, in 1986. Do you have more photographs of this event - I was on stage with her that day and would like to have a memento. -- 00:57, 3 February 2011 (UTC)

Hi unknown, so far I have published two images, File:MotherTeresa 090.jpg and File:MotherTeresa 094.jpg. Of course, I have shot more images at this event, though not all of them have been digitalized. You may contact me via my email account (see link in the tool box to the left). --Túrelio (talk) 10:26, 3 February 2011 (UTC)

Speedy-deletion requests by Anso os[edit]

Hi Túrelio, oki this my image which are remove despite free license. That explain may be oki. anso_os (talk) 07:28, 3 February 2011 (UTC)

Hi Anso os, sorry, but no, this is not a sufficient rationale to delete images that have been uploaded under a free license. --Túrelio (talk) 07:31, 3 February 2011 (UTC)

But why this my image - I can not change my view?! anso_os (talk) 07:36, 3 February 2011 (UTC)

Because releasing an image under a free license is a binding legal act. Immediately before you uploaded your image, you were told that you cannot withdraw this release. Despite this clear legal situation, we do sometimes courtesy deletion on request by the uploader if there is a reasonable cause/rationale. --Túrelio (talk) 07:44, 3 February 2011 (UTC)

oki read better a free license - my mistake that i did not read anso_os (talk) 07:50, 3 February 2011 (UTC)

So, do I understand you correct, that despite your " mistakes" tagging, there is no serious need to remove these images, right? We have no intention to give our contributors problems or to damage them. --Túrelio (talk)

but, i do not use them, unimportant, oki i understand what you want me to say anso_os (talk) 07:58, 3 February 2011 (UTC) the end talks

File:Vaginaland Coat of Arms.PNG[edit]

Not reverting your edit, but there are actually a fair number of images in Category:Coats of arms of micronations ... -- AnonMoos (talk) 19:39, 3 February 2011 (UTC)

I know. Before tagging them, I have actually done a (somewhat disgusting) Google word + image search for that "country", which yielded nothing related to these uploads. May have been uploaded for "fun" or to "illustrate" a hoax article (there was already a dea link to :en). --Túrelio (talk) 19:45, 3 February 2011 (UTC)

Speedy deletion[edit]

I responded on my talk page, but a bot can unlink them if they're still in use. They're old and outdated and I am requesting their deletion. Moulder (talk) 09:21, 4 February 2011 (UTC)

✓ Done. --Túrelio (talk) 09:04, 7 February 2011 (UTC)

C. Kennedy Garrett[edit]

How are you authorized to publish and distribute these photographs from C. Kennedy Garrett? The nine prints listed under your User name should be deleted from general distribution. From the original flickr site, all photographs of C. Kennedy Garrett's are blocked from private use- copying, saving, distribution and printing. You do not have the license to include these images in your downloads, and making them available for others to download as well directly impedes her rights as an artist. Please remove them from your posts. — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk • contribs)

Hi TwoWings,
I just wanted to notify you that an IP has tagged quite some uploads from Flickr that had been initiated by you, for alleged copyvio. However, all file that I checked were still under the original CC-BY license. Any idea what's going on here? --Túrelio (talk) 07:23, 4 February 2011 (UTC)
Licences were checked by a bot and licences are not revokable. So there's no problem. The IP is just unaware of licence rules. I reverted him. --TwoWings * to talk or not to talk... 10:35, 4 February 2011 (UTC)

Kuppel St. Lorenz[edit]

Hallo Túrelio, ich habe gesehen, dass du hier geschrieben hast, dass das Bild in einem Magazin verwendet wurde. Ich würde mich freuen, wenn du mir einen Scan davon schicken könntest. :) Vielen Dank! Beste Grüße, alofok* 12:17, 4 February 2011 (UTC)

Mal sehen, ob ich am Wochenende dazu komme. --Túrelio (talk) 16:10, 4 February 2011 (UTC)
Es eilt nicht, bloß will ich es mal sehen. ;) alofok* 17:19, 4 February 2011 (UTC)
✓ Done. --Túrelio (talk) 09:04, 7 February 2011 (UTC)

Just a question about blocking user[edit]

Just for curiosity a question. Why did you block now this [user] for 1 week? The latest "contribution" was on 10-09-2010 for which I gave a warning. Thanks, Wouter (talk) 16:06, 4 February 2011 (UTC)

If you are authorized look at this. If you are not: today created a spree of 6 pages with demeaning statements about other people, likely other pupils in his class. --Túrelio (talk) 16:09, 4 February 2011 (UTC)
Thanks for the info. I did not know of that as I am not authorized to look at it. Wouter (talk) 17:25, 4 February 2011 (UTC)

Replace a .tif file with a .jpg file to comply with “Commons:File types” ?[edit]

Hi Túrelio. I wanted to replace a .tif file with a .jpg file to comply with “Commons:File types”. But I let you see which file is the more appropriate or if it is better to leave both, Ang%C3%A9lique_B%C3%A8gue.tif and Angélique Bègue Portrait.jpg. Thank you Cquoi 08:26, 5 February 2011 (UTC)

Thank you very much Túrelio, for having already converted my .tif file into a .jpg file in a higher resolution than my previous one. Sorry for the work ! Cquoi 08:40, 5 February 2011 (UTC)
No problem, you are welcome. By the way, as to my knowledge TIFF format is now acceptable and can be displayed directly, at least on Commons. --Túrelio (talk) 08:55, 5 February 2011 (UTC)
OK, Thanks a lot Cquoi 09:10, 5 February 2011 (UTC)


It's a forged flickrvio. The file was uploaded to Flickr only on 2011-01-29, likely for sole purpose to delete the file here as copyvio. Trycatch (talk) 10:57, 5 February 2011 (UTC)

Wow. There seems to be no limit to the criminal energy of some people. Thanks for notifying. --Túrelio (talk) 23:47, 5 February 2011 (UTC)

Löschung Jahreskats[edit]

Hallo Túlerio, guckst du mal hier. Ich finde die Löschung mit der Begründung "Anachronismus" falsch, weil per se für alle möglichen Zeiten die heutigen räumlichen Zuordnungen verwendet werden sollten. Es wäre quatsch, Kategorien wie Category:1735 in Heiliges Römisches Reich o.ä. anzulegen. Gruß--Leit (talk) 15:03, 6 February 2011 (UTC)

Hallo Leit, ich habe zwar eine Reihe dieser cat-Löschungen ausgeführt, sofern die cats leer waren, weil mir die Löschbegründung grundsätzlich plausibel erschien. Aber das hindert nicht daran, dass diese cats, zumal es sich ja um eine Menge handelt, mal grundsätzlich diskutiert werden sollten, um individuellen Streit unter Usern zu vermeiden. Dafür würde ich an deiner Stelle aber nicht eine Benutzer-Disku wählen, sondern, da es sich anscheinend nur um deutschsprachige cats handelt, COM:FORUM oder halt Commons:Categories for discussion. --Túrelio (talk) 15:12, 6 February 2011 (UTC)
Die Kats waren ja nur leer, weil sie vorher geleert wurden. Zu einer grundsätzlichen Diskussion sah ich bisher keinen Anlass, da niemand einen Löschantrag gestellt hatte und das bisherige Katsystem in Frage stellte. Ich werde erstmal abwarten, was BlackIceNRW dazu sagt.--Leit (talk) 15:22, 6 February 2011 (UTC)
Die Notwendigkeit einer "grundsätzlichen Diskussion" sehe ich nicht wegen der Existenz dieser cats (die mir zuvor unbekannt waren), sondern wegen der massenhaften Löschanträge. --Túrelio (talk) 15:33, 6 February 2011 (UTC)

Commons:Deletion requests/File:Guty Cárdenas.jpg[edit]

Hi. Thanks. What did I do wrong on the deletion request, because I have another one. --Yodigo (talk) 23:50, 5 February 2011 (UTC)

You did nothing really wrong. However, the image in question has a 350x467 pixel resolution on the alleged source website, but our version has 600x800 pixel. Therefore, the former is unlikely the source of the latter. and because of that I decided that this case "might merit some discussion", as I wrote in the new DR. --Túrelio (talk) 00:12, 6 February 2011 (UTC)



für obiges Bild war die Rechtelage unklar und ich habe den Fotografen auf deinen Wunsch hin nun eine Genehmigung verschicken lassen, dass das Bild genutzt werden darf. Nun wurde es aber gelöscht und nicht genehmigt. Kannst du mir sagen wo da der Fehler lag?

Vielen Dank und viele Grüße -- 13:05, 6 February 2011 (UTC)

Hallo Sebhe?,
Cecil hat es am 2.2. gelöscht, weil ich es bereits am 23.1. als no-permission markiert hatte. Ich habe es jetzt ent-löscht und mit OTRS-pending markiert, wodurch es vor Löschung geschützt ist bis die eingereichte Genehmigung vom OTRS-Team geprüft wurde. --Túrelio (talk) 14:19, 6 February 2011 (UTC)

OTRS check[edit]

Hi, i saw you at recent changes and can you check this picture's otrs? --Aşkım da değişebilir gerçeklerim de (talk) 20:30, 6 February 2011 (UTC)

Hi, seems to be o.k. to me, as an OTRS-ticket (permission checked by our OTRS volunteers) has been added[9]. However, as I have no OTRS access, I can't check the ticket by myself. If you have doubt, you should ask at Commons:OTRS/Noticeboard. --Túrelio (talk) 20:34, 6 February 2011 (UTC)

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

asturianu | беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ | български | বাংলা | català | čeština | Deutsch | Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ | English | español | suomi | français | galego | हिन्दी | hrvatski | magyar | italiano | 日本語 | ქართული | македонски | മലയാളം | Plattdüütsch | Nederlands | português | română | русский | sicilianu | slovenščina | svenska | Tagalog | Türkçe | 中文(简体)‎ | 中文(繁體)‎ | +/−

File:Labaro (Rome) - S. Alfonso M. de Liguori 12.JPG[edit]

Purtroppo non parlo inglese (je ne parle pas l'anglais). Je ne comprend pas (Non capisco perché) cette photo et l'autre aussi (File:Labaro (Rome) - S. Alfonso M. de Liguori 13.JPG) sont menacées d'être effacées. Non capisco perché si vuole cancellare queste due foto. Qui a décidé que ces photos son des oeuvres d'arts? Con quali criteri si è deciso che sono opere d'arte coperte da copyright? Solo perché sono belle e moderne? Une photo peut violer le copyright? Una fotografia può violare il copyright? Les permissions (licenza) données sont liées aux photos, non à l'oeuvre-d'art en soi. In ogni caso è una battaglia persa, tanto le foto le cancellate comunque.--Croberto68 (talk) 11:37, 8 February 2011 (UTC)

Hallo Croberto68,
though I don't fully understand what you are saying, I think, you are asking why File:Labaro (Rome) - S. Alfonso M. de Liguori 12.JPG has been tagged with "no permission". This photo reproduces a station of a Via Crucis, which seems to consists in a 3-dimensional colored sculpture. This sculpture is a work of art and was likely made by another artist. If this artist is dead since >70 years, everything is fine and you can take as many photos of it as you want. But, if the artist is not dead since >70 years, he (or his heirs) still hold the copyright over this sculpture and any reproduction, including photographies. So, you should find out the artist who created this sculpture and whether he/she is still living or already dead and since when.
Per capire questo, utilizzare il traduttore di Google o chiedere di User:Trixt, che parla italiano. (Google translation) --Túrelio 14:07, 8 February 2011 (UTC)

Baumberge (talk · contribs)[edit]

Hallo Túrelio,

du hattest geschrieben:

Hallo Baumberge, du hattest bei File:Havixbeck-huelshoff-drostebueste.jpg nachträglich die Lizenz von GFDL/CC-BY-SA auf die restriktivere CC-NC-ND-Lizenz umgeändert, so jedenfalls verstehe ich diesen Edit. Das geht so nicht, zumal es auch dem anderen Lizenz-Baustein widersprechen würde. Ich habe mir deshalb erlaubt, deinen Edit rückgängig zu machen. --Túrelio (Diskussion) 12:57, 7 February 2011 (UTC)

Ich möchte genau das und noch einen Schritt weiter gehen. Da ich keine Antwort bislang bekommen habe kannst du vielleicht helfen: Ich will meinen Account hier in Wikimedia sowie alle Beiträge von mir löschen bzw. löschen lassen. Wie mache ich das bzw. an wen muss ich mich wenden und wie kann das möglichst einfach schnell und ohne große Diskussion gemacht werden? Baumberge

Keine Antwort? Ich hatte dir gestern binnen 1/2 h auf deine Frage auf COM:AN geantwortet und mir sogar einige Mühe gegeben statt dich mit einem kurzen "Geht nicht" abzufertigen.
Und die Antwort auf das obige "Ich möchte genau das" findest du letztlich auch dort. Wenn du nach dem Lesen meiner ausführlichen Antwort auf COM:AN noch Fragen zu deinem generellen Anliegen hast, kannst du sie gerne stellen; dann aber besser auf COM:AN, damit sich die Diskussion nicht überall verteilt. --Túrelio 13:50, 8 February 2011 (UTC)


Hello, I'm new to Wikipedia, and I could use a few guidelines... I'm an active editor at Wikia, so I understand the importance of licensing copyrighted images, but the licensing is so confusing for me, and differs highly from what I'm used to at Wikia. Basically, I want to contribute a few images, some of Print Screens from a video game, other that I took myself with a camera. How exactly would I license these? And how would I fill out the general information forms? You help is appreciated. SSDGFCTCT9 (talk) 03:06, 9 February 2011 (UTC)

Video games are copyrighted, and photograph of that games will be considered as derivative work. Before uploading just go through this......Captain......Tälk tö me.. 07:58, 9 February 2011 (UTC)
beyond of what Captainofhope already explained, a practical guide is here. --Túrelio (talk) 09:11, 9 February 2011 (UTC)


Sorry, I had no idea of this. Thank you! --Duuk-Tsarith (talk) 16:49, 9 February 2011 (UTC)

Lyes L[edit]

Dear Túrelio,

I am contacting you concerning the problematic contributions of this user. He has uploaded two new pictures that have been taken from the Internet. Despite several messages on his discussion page, he does not seem to understand the issue. I would suggest to block his account to avoid loosing more time monitoring his contributions for more copyvios. Regards, Moumou82 (talk) 10:54, 10 February 2011 (UTC)

Taken care of. Thanks for notifying. However, COM:AN is the more appropriate location, as more admins are watching it. --Túrelio (talk) 11:18, 10 February 2011 (UTC)

Memphis, Tennessee[edit]

Memphis, Tennessee I'd like to improve and expand on the page. I don't understrand why it was deleted. Evrik (talk) 19:26, 10 February 2011 (UTC)

The speedy rationale by User:DoxTxob was "all photos here are in the top category or sub cats. all international wikilinks have been transfered to the top cat Memphis, Tennessee", which seemed plausible to me. However, as there was no copyvio or similar, the gallery could easily be restored. --Túrelio (talk) 22:11, 10 February 2011 (UTC)
  • Would you please? Evrik (talk) 16:25, 11 February 2011 (UTC)
✓ Done. --Túrelio (talk) 12:45, 13 February 2011 (UTC)

Danke hierfür[edit]

- wird wohl Zeit für heute Schluß zu machen. ;-) Gruß, --4028mdk09 (talk) 22:28, 12 February 2011 (UTC)
Gern geschehn. Sehr gelungene Fotos! --Túrelio (talk) 22:35, 12 February 2011 (UTC)
Nicht nur die Tiere haben den heutigen sonnigen Vorfrühlingstag genossen und es mir leicht gemacht. Danke für das Kompliment und gute Nacht! --4028mdk09 (talk) 22:37, 12 February 2011 (UTC)


Ave. Leider hast Du die obige Datei nicht rausgeschmissen. Beide Bilder sind das US Navy Foto "80-G-41686", einmal in schlechter Qualität von hier [10]/[11] und in besserer Qualität ohne Geschreibsel von hier [12]/[13], Noch besser ist die Qualität dieses Fotos File:TBDs on USS Enterprise (CV-6) during Battle of Midway.jpg, auf dem allerdings die USS Pensacola rechts fehlt. Macht es Sinn die schlechte Datei mit dem Geschreibsel zu belassen, wenn es zwei wesentlich bessere Versionen gibt? Ich meine nicht. Vielleicht magst Du es Dir ja noch einmal überlegen. Danke und Grüße Cobatfor (talk) 11:29, 13 February 2011 (UTC)

Ich hatte mir vor meiner Entscheidung beide Versionen angeschaut und fand die bildliche Wiedergabe auf der momentan belassenen Datei sogar besser, weil man die Flugzeuge besser erkennen kann. Sicher könnte man auch bei der technisch besseren anderen Datei das Bild etwas aufhellen, um den gleichen Effekt zu erzielen. Bislang hat das aber keiner gemacht. Ansonsten kannst du es gerne nochmal nominieren; vielleicht entscheidet ein anderer admin anders. --Túrelio (talk) 12:45, 13 February 2011 (UTC)


Hallo, kannst Du mir sagen, wo hier die Copyright-Verletzung liegen soll? Und warum wird das nicht sachlich begründet, sondern nur pauschal? -- Gerd Leibrock (talk) 14:45, 13 February 2011 (UTC)

Die speedy-Begründung von Rosenzweig war "Uses a map that is protected by copyright" und schien mir glaubhaft.
"warum wird das ..." - Bei URVs hat das Recht des Urhebers und damit die Löschung zeitlich Vorrang vor einer weiteren Diskussion, die sich ja immer anschließen kann, zumal eine Ent-Löschung sehr einfach ist. Wenn jemand eine Datei zur Schnelllöschung markiert hat, dauert es erfahrungsgemäß doch noch etwas bis die Löschung erfolgt; bei deiner Datei waren es ca. 3 Stunden. Ich nehme im Jahr ca. 20-30.000 Löschungen vor, bei einigen meiner Kollegen dürfte es ähnlich sein. Wir haben einfach nicht die Zeit, auch noch die detaillierte Löschbegründung auf die User-Disku zu setzen. --Túrelio (talk) 14:59, 13 February 2011 (UTC)

Deletion of template[edit]

Hi Turelio, I noticed you deleted Title:Der Mönch am Meer which I created. Although I should have documented it more clearly, this was actually a template which was in use. I've restored it. Dcoetzee (talk) 10:52, 14 February 2011 (UTC)

Oh, sorry. Seems I didn't recognize the "Title:" prefix and deleted it as empty gallery. --Túrelio (talk) 10:57, 14 February 2011 (UTC)
No worries, that's my fault, I made up the Title prefix :-) Dcoetzee (talk) 10:58, 14 February 2011 (UTC)

Identification of plants[edit]

Dear Túrelio,

As you have suggested to D. Villafruela, I have easily identified the plants File:Béziers-Jardin médiéval 07.jpg and File:Béziers-Jardin médiéval 08.jpg as Lychnis chalcedonica and Salvia sclarea - two classical plant of medieval gardens.
Consequently I have categorised them accordingly and removed the request for deletion.

Best regards, --Réginald alias Meneerke bloem (To reply) 10:08, 14 February 2011 (UTC)

I knew you would do it ;-). Thanks. --Túrelio (talk) 10:16, 14 February 2011 (UTC)

CEIT pictures[edit]

Hello Túrelio!

This is ODS40 to confirm that I have spoken to CEIT following your request re Wikimedia Commons images ALEJO-AVELLO.JPG ALEJO.jpg et al and they have in turn confirmed that they have sent a permission email granting release of pictures in their website ( under a "CC Attribution Licence 3.0". I have modified the files accordingly. Thank you so much for your help. 13:10 GMT, 14 February 2011

Great. The permission email should be send or forwarded to I have added {{OTRS pending}} to the images to prevent premature deletion. --Túrelio (talk) 13:13, 14 February 2011 (UTC)

That's right, they have sent the standard template granting permission under CC-By at 11:53 GMT Thanks for the {{OTRS pending}} ODS40 (talk) 13:27 GMT 14 February 2011

@ODS40, the easiest way to produce a time-stamp with your username signature is to use: --~~~~ . --Túrelio (talk) 13:33, 14 February 2011 (UTC)

ODS40(talk) Thanks I know, it's just habit :-) 13:35, 14 February 2011 GMT

File:Chow Yun-Fat 2008.jpg[edit]

so what is your decision? --Алый Король (talk) 16:11, 15 February 2011 (UTC)

Hi. I'm very sorry to hear this. I was very happy when I managed to make its licence changed to CC-BY-SA on Flickr. Of course, if it is problematic, cancel it, just inform me, please. Thanks. - RepliCarter (talk) 17:43, 15 February 2011 (UTC)

I checked it with Tineye and I found only one result, but it is smaller version. So I don't know it this photo is really a copyrighted one or not... Make your decision. - RepliCarter (talk) 17:49, 15 February 2011 (UTC)

File:Hochreines Titan (99.999) mit sichtbarer Kristallstruktur.jpg[edit]

Hallo Túrelio,

danke für deinen Hinweis bezüglich der Lizenz. Da Alchemist-hp auch die angesprochene Lizenz verwendet dachte ich, dass es möglich ist, diese Lizenz zu verwenden. Die Lizenz habe ich aus 2 Gründen eingeschränkt:

1. Meines Erachtens haben sich die zuvor von mir angegebenen Lizenzen widersprochen (ich habe mich hier zugegebenermaßen an Alchemist-hp orientiert)

Ein Widerspruch war dadurch gegeben, dass durch die ArtLibris Lizenz ein copyleft stattfindet, hingegen ich durch die NC-ND ein widersprechliches copyrigth Einfluss nimmt.

2. Ich würde die Bilde gerne vor kommerzieller Verwendung schützen, sodass das Bild nicht eines Tages in einem Werbekatalog erscheint, da ich das Bild nur für Bildungszwecke bzw. privaten Gebrauch freigeben möchte

Siehst du eine Möglichkeit, eine andere Lizenz zu verwenden, um das Bild vor kommerziellem Missbrauch zu schützen?

Grüße, --Metalle-w (talk) 09:20, 16 February 2011 (UTC)

Hallo Metalle-w,
nicht wirklich. Früher haben wir unwilligen Bildspendern (also bei Bildern, die man nicht selbst gemacht hatte, sondern von jemand eine Erlaubnis haben wollte) vorgeschlagen sie nur unter die GFDL zu stellen (weil deren Nutzung den Abdruck des gesamten Lizenztextes verlangt, der kaum auf ein T-Shirt oder eine Tasse passt) und gleichzeitig nur in online-geeigneter Auflösung hochzuladen. Auf diese Weise habe ich das einzige freie Portrait des ermordeten Theo van Gogh beschaffen können. Dann kam aber vor 2 Jahren die große (mehr oder weniger zwangsweise) Um- bzw. Zusatzlizensierung aller nur-GFDL-Inhalte auf CC-BY-SA, womit die ursprüngliche Absicht hintertrieben wurde. Inzwischen sind nur-GFDL-Uploads m.W. auch nicht mehr erlaubt (kann mich aber irren); anscheinend doch noch Commons:Licensing#Acceptable licenses. Dazu könntest du mal User:Ralf Roletschek ansprechen, da er auch eher restriktiv lizensiert. Vor kommerziellem "Missbrauch", i.S. unlizensierter Nutzung, kannst du dich zwar kaum proaktiv schützen. Wenn er eintritt, kannst du aber zumindest im deutschsprachigen Raum durchaus erfolgreich dagegen vorgehen. Das tue ich auch. --Túrelio (talk) 09:31, 16 February 2011 (UTC)
Ich habe die Lizenz nun geändert und trotzdem ist das File noch gelöscht - wer hat die Löschung initiiert? --Metalle-w (talk) 16:22, 16 February 2011 (UTC)
Nee, ist nicht gelöscht, sondern das ist ein anderes Problem, was mir auch schon aufgefallen ist. Es könnte systembedingt sein, weil heute die mediawiki-Software aktualisiert wurde, es könnte aber auch der neue Dateiname mit dem %-Zeichen sein. Mach dir keine Sorge deswegen, da kümmern wir uns schon drum. --Túrelio (talk) 16:23, 16 February 2011 (UTC)
Danke dass du dich darum kümmerst! Das Bild ist derzeit nämlich auch ein KEB, und wenn es nicht angezeigt wird wirkt sich das vermutlich negativ auf die Abstimmung aus... --Metalle-w (talk) 16:53, 16 February 2011 (UTC)
Hab umbenannt und siehe da, es wird wieder sichtbar. Die Nutzungen auf :de und :en habe ich manuell angepasst. --Túrelio (talk) 19:09, 16 February 2011 (UTC)

File:Mahakumbh Shivers.jpg[edit]

I have seen that you have deleted & restored the imge, just after i insert the no-permission tag, is there any particular reason for that, so that i can remove the tag.....Captain......Tälk tö me.. 15:09, 16 February 2011 (UTC)

Only after my deletion, I discovered that the uploader put "author=[[User:Prtrinitas|Udit Kulshrestha]]" in all but one of his uploads. My overall impression is that it is credible. Of course, if you have evidence to the contrary, go ahead. --Túrelio (talk) 15:19, 16 February 2011 (UTC)


You mentioned on my talk page that there's a copyright claim on a derivative of this file. However, is this not a faithful photographic reproduction of an ancient two-dimensional work of art? If so, does that not make any such claims irrelevant? Before uploading I have carefully considered if this criterium was met (about the copyright status of the original work can of course be no doubt). There seem to be no distinguishable 3-dimensional features of the scroll apparent in the image and it looks like a faithful copy without any creative contributions. This is, I think, in line with other pictures of ancient manuscripts on Wimimedia, which have the same licence. Lindert (talk) 00:43, 19 February 2011 (UTC)

You don't need to explain that to a Commons' admin ;-). I only notified you as the uploader about the existing claim, though you are not the real cause of the problem. The problem is that Wikimedia's position is understandibly not so easy to accept for people who put a lot of work or money in such reproductions. --Túrelio (talk) 08:41, 19 February 2011 (UTC)
Ok, sorry for the misunderstanding and thanks for clearing that up. Lindert (talk) 10:01, 19 February 2011 (UTC)

Can you delete this files[edit]

because author has not consented to the use of files--Muffi (talk) 20:28, 19 February 2011 (UTC)


W.Rebel and PetrS.[edit]

Would you please take a look at Commons:Administrators'_noticeboard/User_problems#Copyright_violation? I'm tired of the two of them warring. Thanks,      Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 21:52, 19 February 2011 (UTC)

I'm tired too. May need an interaction ban. --Túrelio (talk) 21:53, 19 February 2011 (UTC)

Image permission[edit]

the person from whom I obtained the license, turned out not to be their author, sorry :( So you can delete,this:

but for this i have permission, so ask the author to send a license

--Muffi (talk) 22:57, 19 February 2011 (UTC)

✓ Done. --Túrelio (talk) 23:44, 19 February 2011 (UTC)
thank you, i'm sorry :'( --Muffi (talk) 23:47, 19 February 2011 (UTC)

Problemi con l'immagine: File:Roberto Lawley ritratto.jpg[edit]

Ciao, l'autore della foto (Simone Casati) ha inviato una mail di autorizzazione all'indirizzo: --Luca Oddone (talk) 08:56, 21 February 2011 (UTC)

Grazie, I've changed the tag accordingly. --Túrelio (talk) 13:19, 21 February 2011 (UTC)
Ticket reported that the image cannot be licensed under a free licence so must be deleted on commons, can only be used in with a copyright tag. --Abisys (talk) 13:08, 23 February 2011 (UTC)
Thanks for the update. --Túrelio (talk) 16:52, 23 February 2011 (UTC)

New set of identified pictures[edit]

Dear Túrelio,

As you probaly have seen, Ghislain118 heve put two days ago a set of 195 pictures he has taken in the past in the Pyrenees. I have identified and classified 190 of them, and in agreement with Ghislain I have asked yesterday for the removal of 3 failed pictures (you already did) and today for the removal of 2 other pictures, of which no correct identification is possible. Indeed, the identification of a botanical rose requires a picture of the full plant, as also does that of the unidentified Asteracea.

With my renewed thanks for your kind support. Best regards, --Réginald alias Meneerke bloem (To reply) 10:30, 23 February 2011 (UTC)

The deletion of one of the remaining 2 images was really a pain (as it was nice, though unidentified). --Túrelio (talk) 21:12, 23 February 2011 (UTC)


May be worth reviewing the cross wiki contribs - extensive - known vandal active recently but some are blocked as open proxies. Sorry got to go but I am sure you will understand! Regards --Herby talk thyme 08:56, 24 February 2011 (UTC)

Can you revert and protect?[edit]

Can you revert File:Anna Marie Franziska of Saxe-Lauenburg.jpg to the first edition, delete later editions and subsequently protect the page. note that the latest image is a duplicate of another file. See also the messages on User talk:Picture Perfect Prince. This new user does good work, but doesn't understand the procedures and probably doesn't read the messages on it's talk page. Greetings, --Havang(nl) (talk) 21:02, 24 February 2011 (UTC)

Done and protected for 1 month. --Túrelio (talk) 21:32, 24 February 2011 (UTC)
Thanks.--Havang(nl) (talk) 21:33, 24 February 2011 (UTC)
I looked a bit further. User is a sockpuppet of User:LouisPhilippeCharles who did the first overwrite on that page; he has been blocked at de-wi. But what he does is not so bad, he is just too stubborn. To watch closely. --Havang(nl) (talk) 21:59, 24 February 2011 (UTC)

Bilder von Mausoleum des Kyrus den Großen[edit]

Guten Abend Túrelio, ich will die Bilder von Mausoleum des Kyrus den Großen, die ich selbst gemacht habe, auf Commons hochladen. Aber die Commons-Webseite ist nicht erreichbar im Iran and darum muß ich ein Proxy benutzen. Dieserweise die Hochladung-Geschwindichkeit wird sehr sehr langsam sein. Können Sie bitte diese Bilder für mich auf Commons hochladen?

Die Genehmigung ist auch richtig für eine Commons-Hochladung: "Some of the the pictures are old designs and also old bank notes of Iran which have no copyright and all of them are in public domain. I also publish the rest of the pictures which have been drawn or taken by me to the public domain and anyone can use these pictures for Commercial and Non-Commercial purposes as long as he/she mentions me as the author. Any derivative work based on my pictures should also mention me as the original author. Click on any of the pictures to see the full size image."

Diese Bilder müssen in der Kategorie von Tomb of Cyrus the Great hochgeladen werden.

Danke für Ihre Hilfe.

Mit den besten Wünschen aus Teheran!

Hallo Unbekannter,
toll dass du aus Teheran so gut deutsch schreibst. Das Problem ist, dass ich von deiner Website die Meldung "Service Temporarily Unavailable" erhalten habe. Ich werde es später oder morgen ncohmal versuchen. Steht auf deiner Website der Autoren-Name (Photograph) dabei? Falls nicht, müsste ich den vorher wissen, weil ich die Fotos ja ncht gemacht habe. --Túrelio (talk) 20:29, 25 February 2011 (UTC)
Vielen Dank für Ihre Antwort! Bitte versuchen Sie noch einmal. Manchmal gibt es dieses Problem. Meine echte Identität will ich nicht verraten, weil es im Iran gefährlich sein könnte. Aber Sie können mich "Truth Seeker" nennen! Und danke für Ihr Kompliment. Ich habe Deutsch seit fast zwei Jahre gelernt. ;-)
Hallo Truth Seeker, hast du denn schon ein "Konto" (account) auf Commons? Das wäre gut, damit ich die Bilder diesem Namen/Konto zuordnen kann. Für die Anmeldung brauchst du nicht deinen wirklichen Namen preiszugeben. Es gibt schon einen User User:Truth Seeker (fawiki). Bist du das? --Túrelio (talk) 21:20, 25 February 2011 (UTC)
Es gibt ein Download-Problem mit Vermutlich weil die Endung falsch ist, es sollte nur .JPG sein. --Túrelio (talk) 21:24, 25 February 2011 (UTC)
Die richtige Adresse ist, ohne "g".

Nr. 1: File:CyrustheGreatTombDrawingbyThruthSeeker 22042.gif. --Túrelio (talk) 21:38, 25 February 2011 (UTC)

Vielen Dank! Die Bilder in meiner Webseite sind schon gemeinfrei. Ich habe die Genehmigung auf meiner Webseite geschrieben. Darum dürfen Sie (oder irgendjemand) mit Ihren eigenen Konto die Bilder auf Commons hochladen. Nur brauchen Sie die Adresse von meiner Webseite auf der Beschreibungen von den Commons-Bildern schreiben. Ich glaube es ist nicht wichtig, ob ich persönlich ein Commons-Konto habe oder nicht.

Nun gibt es aber ein Problem, weil ich eine Warnung erhalte, dass diese Datei (22043.jpg) schon einmal hochgeladen (File:Restoration of the tomb of Cyrus the great May 2006 -A.JPG) und heute gelöscht worden ist. --Túrelio (talk) 21:48, 25 February 2011 (UTC)

Wenn Sie dieses Bild sehen, Sie können leicht verstehen, daß dieses Bild von meinen Bildern gemacht wurde! Ich habe diese Bilder früher auf Commons hochgeladen und viele Wiki-Projekten haben meine Bilder benutzt. Heute habe ich gesehen daß diese Bilder von einem Steward, der in der persischen Wikipedia tätig ist, gelöscht wurden! Er ist mein Feind seit fast 3 Jahre! Er wollte religiöser Quatsch auf persischen Artikeln schreiben und ich war dagegen. Er hat mein Konto in persischer Wikipedia gesperrt und auch wenn er siehst, er löscht meine Bilder auf Commons! Er hat Freunde in Meta und Commons und ich konnte mich nicht gegen ihn beschweren. Sie können hier sehen, daß mein Commons-Konto nicht gesperrt ist. Er hat seine Steward-Macht mißbraucht und dieses Konto global gesperrt! Aber meine Bilder sind wichtig für Wiki-Projekten und ich erlaube ihn nicht sie einfach zu löschen. Diese Bilder sind gemeinfrei und ich habe sie auf einer anderen Webseite hochgeladen, darum jeder kann diese Bilder von meiner Webseite auf Commons hochladen. Sie wissen Copyright-Gesetze sehr gut und es gibt kein problem diese gemeinfreie Bilder auf Commons hochzuladen. Danke für Ihr Verständnis und beste Grüße aus Teheran.
Sheila the PC cat.jpg

Ich habe inzwischen alle Dateien von deiner Website auf meinen Computer heruntergeladen und erst einmal je 1 Bild aus den beiden Serien auf Commons hochgeladen, File:CyrustheGreatTomb 22059.jpg und File:CyrustheGreatTombRestoration 22043.jpg. Der Rest später, weil ich jetzt zu müde bin. --Túrelio (talk) 22:37, 25 February 2011 (UTC)

Vielen Dank und sehr süße Katze. lol :P
Wann Sie wieder Zeit haben und meine Bilder auf Commons hochladen wollen, Bitte laden Sie auch dieses Bild, das ich neu gezeichnet habe, hoch. Herzlichen Dank!
  • Guten Abend. Wann werden Sie die Bilder auf Commons hochladen? Dieser Artikel und auch viele andere Artikel brauchen diese Bilder. :-)
Vielen Dank für die Hochladung dieses Bildes! Das Buch heißt "Pasargadae: A Report on the Excavations Conducted by the British Institute of Persian Studies from 1961-63".
Würden Sie auch den Rest hochladen? Wir wollen mit diesen Bildern einen exellenten Artikel machen. :-)

File:CyrustheGreatTombRestoration 22043.jpg, File:CyrustheGreatTombRestoration 22044.jpg, File:CyrustheGreatTombRestoration 22045.jpg und File:CyrustheGreatTombRestoration 22046.jpg habe ich unter Vorbehalt hochgeladen, da sie schon einmal gelöscht wurden. --Túrelio (talk) 23:13, 5 March 2011 (UTC)

Herzlichen Dank!
  • Seien Sie ganz sicher, daß diese Bilder mir gehören. Ich habe Ihnen auch vorher gesagt, daß diese Bilder sind von einem persönlichen Feind von mir, der ein Steward in Meta ist, gelöscht wurden. Sehen Sie selbst. Er hat erst diese Bilder für (Copyright violation, see Commons:Licensing) gelöscht, dann für (upload by blocked sock pupetter)). Sehr komisch!

Also es ist ganz deutlich, daß es hier kein copyvio gibt. Und mein Konto ist nicht gesperrt. Er ruiniert die ganze Wikipedia um mich zu stören.

Nochmal will ich Ihnen versichern, daß alle diese Bilder, die Sie auf Commons hochgeladen haben, gehören mir und ich bin der Fotograf dieser Bilder und die Bilder sind gemeinfrei.

Opinion of relevance[edit]

My years ago schooldays German is not sufficient. Can you cast an eye over File:Familenfreundlich_WK.jpg and say whether it is a keeper or not. Thanks.  — billinghurst sDrewth 13:05, 27 February 2011 (UTC) + File:Familienfreundlicvh STadt.jpg, File:Landeswappen.jpg & File:StadtwappenHeyn.jpg  — billinghurst sDrewth 13:10, 27 February 2011 (UTC)

I'm in hurry to get a train, therefore just in short: it's my impression that most of this users uploads are sort of "promotional", not necessarily illicit, but probably not all in scope. Likely the uploader is from the company. Will look into it tomorrow. --Túrelio (talk) 13:29, 27 February 2011 (UTC)
A whenever task. Having found them and noted them, we won't lose track of them. That was my gut feel, however, I wasn't brave of my German. <sigh>
Finally taken care of. --Túrelio (talk) 21:19, 26 March 2011 (UTC)

Max Minghella copyvio image[edit]

Hi, Seanmarti777 has re-uploaded the image you deleted at 09:18 UTC today. Would you care to delete them again and salt the page titles? The images are at File:Maxming.jpg and File:MaxMing.jpg. I've also reported this account for falsifying the source and author fileds at File:MaxMinghella2006.jpg. Thanks for any assistance - Pointillist (talk) 09:57, 28 February 2011 (UTC)

Taken care of. --Túrelio (talk) 21:12, 2 March 2011 (UTC)

I know you mean well but...[edit]

I put the tag on for it to be deleted, so surely putting a tag on my page saying it's been deleted is redundent. When I uploaded and requested for deletion and therefore expect it to be deleted promptly. KnowIG (talk) 13:33, 1 March 2011 (UTC)

Oops, sorry. When the speedy-rationale is evident, I don't always check who was the requester. --Túrelio (talk) 13:35, 1 March 2011 (UTC)


I'm sorry. I don't understand the topic you left me.It seem like i'm not very good to upload stuff, if you want to help me, your wellcome.

Replied on your talkpage. --Túrelio (talk) 14:36, 1 March 2011 (UTC)

Little Help[edit]

Hi mate. I'm not sure how to delete an image. If you could give me instruction, I am trying to delete this image.. File:Eric Statzer & Teresa Navaez.jpg

✓ Done. --Túrelio (talk) 19:27, 2 March 2011 (UTC)

File:Michelle Pfeiffer 2007.jpg[edit]

Hi! I try to do my work well. Might be the Flickr's user have changed the licence. To say the truth I don't remember exactly... Is there the chance that is was my mistake, too. Regards Electron Smiley kabelsalat.gif <Talk?> 08:43, 2 March 2011 (UTC)

Replied at your talkpage. --Túrelio (talk) 19:27, 2 March 2011 (UTC)

My images[edit]

I'm sorry for uploading the 'copyrighted' images, but it's hard to tell which pictures on the net are copyrighted or not, as they don't say, so people like me assume they're free. I'm currently want to uploaad a new image of The All-American Rejects here then add to their Wikipedia page, it's the one I uploaded before but it got deleted. How can I tell if the image is copyrighted or not?— Preceding unsigned comment added by Bigwhofan (talk • contribs)

Take a look at Commons:Image casebook. --Túrelio (talk) 19:27, 2 March 2011 (UTC)
In short, Bigwhofan, you should be thinking the opposite. By default, people retain their intellectual and artistic property rights, so to use their work you require their permission, and then compliance with any conditions to its release.  — billinghurst sDrewth 05:11, 3 March 2011 (UTC)

File:Michelle Pfeiffer 2007.jpg[edit]

Hi! I was right about the license. The Flickr user has change the license again. Now it is CC BY 2.0, see ->, so restore the file, please. Regards Electron Smiley kabelsalat.gif <Talk?> 11:24, 3 March 2011 (UTC)

Strange, but great. Did you contact him for that? I've uploaded the original uncropped image in highest resolution to allow for bot-Flickreview. That's critical as it's also licensed via Getty. Can be cropped thereafter. --Túrelio (talk) 11:27, 3 March 2011 (UTC)
OK. Yes, I contacted him. I receved the e-mail. He wrote that for some reason the license wasn't correct, as you said, so I changed it... Electron Smiley kabelsalat.gif <Talk?> 14:45, 3 March 2011 (UTC)

Chi Guevara[edit]

Hey there, you just set Delinker on File:Che Guevara.jpg but it choked on a fully protected page. I got a Polish admin to replace it, so the image is good to go (the remaining apparent link is just a cache thing). Also, would you mind setting the bot against File:GuerrilleroHeroico.jpg as well (it's in the exact same boat). Thanks for the help. Huntster (t @ c) 09:29, 4 March 2011 (UTC)

First one finally deleted, second one still in use. --Túrelio (talk) 08:16, 9 March 2011 (UTC)

Lenhart Schubert[edit]

Why did you remove Lenhart Schubert's image?

Because it had been taken from (without any hint of being under a free license) and been put under a bogus "PD-ineligible" by the uploader. --Túrelio (talk) 22:43, 4 March 2011 (UTC)

immagine nella pagina mitch e squalo[edit]

Buona sera in data 3.3.2011 io avevo caricato un immagine nella pagina Mitch e Squalo Ed essendo io una loro collaboratrice Mitch e Squalo mi hanno dato il permesso di gestire e mettere le loro immagini su wikipedia. quindi la prego di ripristinare l'immagine.

Are you talking about File:190470 149825885079237 100001554802124 301604 4881310 n.jpg? This image is from Facebook and as such requires a written permission by the rights holder. Please send the permission to and after that drop me a note, so I can restore the image temporarily. --Túrelio (talk) 23:28, 4 March 2011 (UTC)
There is also File:188788 1818923723213 1543743962 31888458 8244037 n.jpg, nominated for deletion. No source seems to be given, is it also from Facebook? --LPfi (talk) 10:24, 11 March 2011 (UTC)

File:Shiva Gajasuramardana.JPG[edit]

See my comment and take action on duplicate issue. --Redtigerxyz (talk) 06:38, 5 March 2011 (UTC)

What "comment"? I don't see any. --Túrelio (talk) 08:27, 5 March 2011 (UTC)

Regarding the File:Ubuntu7.10 Cover.JPG[edit]

Hi, I have seen ,that you have added this to the file that I have uploaded.

{{no permission since|month=March|day=5|year=2011}}

there are lots of files like mine on common.


I think nearly none of them have permission from Ubuntu.

If permission needed I don't know ,who has done the photo work ,but I will look for it and ask for a permission. Thanks in advance --Pouyana (talk) 17:25, 5 March 2011 (UTC)

Hi Pouyana,
the problem is only about the photography on the cover, not about the Ubuntu-relatied things, they should be free. But the photo is not automatically free. --Túrelio (talk) 19:06, 5 March 2011 (UTC)

as to this site they are all free to use and property of Ubuntu. Licence--Pouyana (talk) 19:28, 5 March 2011 (UTC)

O.k., great. I have removed the no-perm tag from the image. Could you put the above source link somewhere into the description. --Túrelio (talk) 19:57, 5 March 2011 (UTC)

Thanks , I have added some info. --Pouyana (talk) 22:11, 5 March 2011 (UTC)

What is this FoP missing for Romania?[edit]

Hey, I see you deleting images take from Romanian cities saying that Romanian has no FoP. What is this FoP? They seem legitimate pictures uploaded by the authors, unless I am missing something. If you don't mind, please clarify this. Thanks!--Codrin.B (talk) 03:14, 7 March 2011 (UTC)

Ok, in meantime I did some research and found this: Commons_talk:Freedom_of_panorama/Archive_3#Romania. Look at the last answer which it makes perfect (common?) sense. I think your interpretation is a stretch and seems unreasonable to remove all such images. Also, the link to the Romanian copyright law from Commons:Freedom_of_panorama#Romania is broken, so I am not ever sure what guidelines you use. But I found it here. And I went through the mentioned section several times. The intention is to protect the architect or the artist, from copying their work, but the photo itself is not copyrighted and people can take pictures in public places and do whatever they want with them. One provision says "it shall be mandatory to mention the source and the author's name if it appears on the work used, and, also in the case of works of three-dimensional art or architectural works, the place in which the original is to be found.", which I think can be easily satisfied and it is beneficial for Commons to specify the location anyway.--Codrin.B (talk) 04:18, 7 March 2011 (UTC)
First, I am not deleting, I am proposing/requesting for deletion (DR). That is a mayor difference and the DR will not be finally decided by me as the requester. A DR allows for input/opinions of others. This was necessary because the uploader was not responsive to my simple question from a month ago. In regard to our FOP#Romania-policy: this not about my interpretation, it is just what our current knowledge about copyright in Romania reflects. You may challenge that, if you have new fact or if you think that it does not reflect the local law. --Túrelio (talk) 08:34, 7 March 2011 (UTC)
I have linked to a new source of Romanian law and included the relevant section at Commons:Freedom_of_panorama#Romania. Note that the principal subject of the photograph cannot be the building and that commercial use is forbidden -- we need both here.      Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 12:47, 13 March 2011 (UTC)
Thanks for the update. --Túrelio (talk) 14:44, 13 March 2011 (UTC)

User:Wikieditor info[edit]

Hi! Could you see what is doing User:Wikieditor info -> ? In my opinion it is vandalism... Hi/she is a puppet of User:Wikinetbot, I think, who upload many files about uflp university and has vandalised the page of deletation request-> Electron Smiley kabelsalat.gif <Talk?> 10:04, 7 March 2011 (UTC)

Thanks. However, as I've to go offline now, I'll look into that tomorrow. --Túrelio (talk) 10:21, 7 March 2011 (UTC)

Why did you remove my photo?[edit]

Hi, I just simply don't understand why you removed my photo File:Jue wine cup.jpg and citing it has a copyright violation, while the author of the photo is myself and the object is a public item not belonging to any particular person or party. Thanks! -- Rosemania (talk) 20:57, 8 March 2011 (UTC)

Hi Rosemania, this photo was sourced by you to, where it is marked as "(C) All rights reserved". As many uploaders put their name in the "author entry" of the image description, even when they are clearly not the author, we usually don't take that at face value. Therefore, the source is what matters. And in your case the source says (C). In addition, our Flickr-review bot, which checked the image on March 5, couldn't find the correct image size on Flickr. Therefore, I would recommend you either to temporarily change the license on Flickr (provided the image is really the same, by bit), so that our Flickr-review bot can check the image again and confirm the license, or to send an individual permission to, confirming the ownership. --Túrelio (talk) 07:53, 9 March 2011 (UTC)
After the license has been changed on Flickr, I've undeleted the image and re-uploaded in in the highest available resolution. --Túrelio (talk) 08:03, 14 March 2011 (UTC)


Hi there I've updated why I need to delete the file that I uploaded there, thanks. KrazyTea (talk) 02:51, 9 March 2011 (UTC)

Thanks, but already deleted by Rehman. --Túrelio (talk) 07:55, 9 March 2011 (UTC)

Aviadvigatel permission for the picture.[edit]

Hello! I am an employee Aviadvigatel in what form you need to send the resolution Pictures?

Märt 2011, 06:20 utc. Solovei777.

Hi Solovei777, go to Commons:Email templates (or the fitting language version; see links on top of that page), copy the "Declaration of consent for all inquiries" (or its equivalent), enter the filenames (or complete URLs) of the images covered by this permission, enter the name of the choosen license and mail all that to the legally responsible person of the company that holds the rights over the images and ask him/her to date and sign it with his/her legal name and mail it directly from a company email address to Thereafter, you may notify me, so that I can then undelete and/or tag the images with {{OTRS pending}}. --Túrelio (talk) 11:31, 10 March 2011 (UTC)


it's my own shot. made by mobile phone camera. why removed? 19:57, 10 March 2011 (UTC) (behind the river)

Hi, the deletion rationale was "Unfree Derivative work this is likely a recent sculpture from an artist still living or not dead since >70 years; and no FOP in Russia". I don't remember the image, but I assume it was a statue or sculpture. --Túrelio (talk) 20:01, 10 March 2011 (UTC)
ok. that's write.

User SuperTank17[edit]

Several of the categories you deleted have already been recreated by this ever problematic user. See Category:Škoda 130 GL‎, Category:Škoda 120 L‎ and probably lots more - I just don't have the energy to keep after this guy. He has also butchered several other categories regarding Eastern European cars (Polski Fiat 125, 126) and countless pages on military vehicles. For a great example of this user's style and methods, see this jewel of a conversation. So far not one user has offered him any support, whereas at least half a dozen users have asked him to refrain from creating such narrow and confusingly organized categories. Thankful for any help, Mr.choppers (talk) 10:11, 11 March 2011 (UTC)

Bild entfernen[edit]

Hallo, das Bild Hassel(Saar).JPG auf WikiCommons zeigt einen Grenzstein im Querformat und wurde irrtümlich von mir hochgeladen. Ich bitte darum, es zu entfernen. Danke!--EHaseler (talk) 20:14, 11 March 2011 (UTC)

✓ Done. --Túrelio (talk) 21:12, 11 March 2011 (UTC)

You deleted my photo which I have copyright of. please put it back.[edit]

You deleted my photo TonglandStreets.jpg because you incorrectly stated it's a copyright violation.

Clearly you have no concept of what osgrid is. It's a virtual world which individual users such as myself pay to host. It's like a webpage except it's 3D content. I created the 3D content and then took a screenshot of it through the browser (called a viewer).

I thus own not only the copyright to the screenshot which I gave full public domain rights to, but also the 3D content I created which is visible in the photo.

You have arrogantly and arbitrarily deleted it because you ASSUMED I don't have copyright, but I do.

Please put it back. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Xxdb (talk • contribs) 00:36, 12. Mär. 2011 (UTC)

Xxdb, you may make a undeletion request at Commons:Undeletion requests. --Havang(nl) (talk) 10:54, 12 March 2011 (UTC)
The image had already been undeleted by me earlier and filed for regular deletion: Commons:Deletion requests/File:TonglandStreets.JPG. --Túrelio (talk) 13:29, 12 March 2011 (UTC)

Turelo said he doubts that I own the copyright because the content looks like some of it is from real photos. Yet again you're showing your ignorance of 3D worlds. I'm going to explain it once because I'm tired of this. 3D content is created by forming primitive 3D objects which are then textured. Textures are created by uploading photographs or drawn art in the form of jpgs or tga or other formats of 2D images. These textures are applied to faces of the primitives and each time the primitive is drawn by the graphics engine, the textures are rendered on the surface. The textures are mine from photographs I took from around the Bridgeton area of Glasgow (London road and Gallowgate) and also some are from near Glasgow university on Great Western Road. The 3D content was made my me in my virtual world. Your call.

Here is the wrong place for any further discussion, take it to the above linked deletion discussion. --Túrelio (talk) 06:46, 16 March 2011 (UTC)


io chiedo la cancellazione di due doppioni e voi cancellate i doppioni e immediatamente mi mettete quelle con i dati corretti in cancellazione. Ma dove volete che vada a prendere le informazioni di copy su delle foto mie che non sono da nessuna parte nè su internet nè altrove? Potrò fare quel che mi pare delle foto scattate da me a delle cose che ho fatto io? Chiedete di fornire informazioni e poi dite che non sono verificabili. Allora mettete delle regole più chiare, così non si perde tempo a fare dei lavori che poi vengono cancellati. Ripeto: tutte le foto che ho caricato sono libere da copyrighy, sono mie e riproducono cose mie. fate voi --Brancusi (talk) 12:53, 12 March 2011 (UTC)

Sorry, I don't speak Italiano and the Google translation of your comment didn't make sense. The images File:Lascito duchamp.jpg and File:Lascito brancusi.jpg were both credited by you to "Walter Battistessa". You are obviously not Walter Battistessa, because here File:Bosco RoyBatty.jpg you used the credit "fotografo Brancusi". If you upload images shot by another person, you need to provide his/her written permission, as I had already written in my edit summaries[14],[15]. --Túrelio (talk) 13:28, 12 March 2011 (UTC)
Ok, i'm really sorry, but I had seen other questions to you in italian and I thought ... by the way: all the pictures that I uploaded are mine. Also the two images File:Lascito duchamp.jpg and File:Lascito brancusi.jpg. I corrected the author information, that are |author=[[User:Brancusi|Brancusi]]. I am the photogapher and the photogrphs are free of third party copyrights, so the Licensing is {{PD-self}}. Best regards --Brancusi (talk) 15:53, 12 March 2011 (UTC)

Deleted images[edit]

Hello. I was just wondering why File:Charice2.jpg and File:Charice.jpg were deleted. User:Jtalledo nominated a bunch of images of this singer for speedy deletion earlier today, on the basis that the Flickr licenses had changed since they were uploaded to the Commons, but the images all ought to been tagged {{Flickr-change-of-license}} instead of being deleted. These two images might have been deleted for completely different reasons (and I suspect they were, given that you have much more experience with these matters than I do), but I can't tell from your edit summary, so I thought I would double-check. Cheers, --Skeezix1000 (talk) 13:45, 12 March 2011 (UTC)

I just found the deletion requests. How odd. --Skeezix1000 (talk) 13:51, 12 March 2011 (UTC)
The deletion rationale "I made a mistake" was from the uploader Charicenewstoday, and as the request was filed on the day of upload, I granted it. In addition, as I see now, there was also a claim of "Copyvio from" by Jtalledo for both images. --Túrelio (talk) 13:52, 12 March 2011 (UTC)
If it was a copyvio, there are two other images by the same uploader (File:Charice4.jpg and File:Charice3.jpg ) which might have the same problems. --Skeezix1000 (talk) 13:55, 12 March 2011 (UTC)
Not unlikely. However, I couldn't find them by Google or at Getty Images. --Túrelio (talk) 16:04, 12 March 2011 (UTC)


Hallo Túrelio, eine kleine Frage zur Commons-Gestaltung. Die alphabetische Sortierung in den Kategorien ist z.Z. nur noch in Großbuchstaben. Ist das eine temporäre Baustelle oder dauerhafte Absicht? Viele Grüße. Orchi (talk) 17:41, 12 March 2011 (UTC)

Z.Zt. läuft seitens der Software einiges nicht so ganz richtig, vermutlich als Folge des Mediawiki-Updates. Leider bekommen wir von dort kaum mal Vorwarnungen und auch selten ein Feedback. Auf COM:VP und dem Forum wurde schon diverse Probleme dieser Art andiskutiert. Also einfach mal beobachten und wenn es in 2 Wochen auch noch so ist, auf dem Forum oder auf COM:AN als "Fehlermeldung" posten (oder direkt auf Bugzilla, wenn du dort ein Konto hast). Schönen Sonntag. --Túrelio (talk) 18:02, 12 March 2011 (UTC)
...ich danke dir für Deine Auskunft. Gruß. Orchi (talk) 18:09, 12 March 2011 (UTC)

File:Img 0692.jpg[edit]

Hi! You tagged "File:Img 0692.jpg" for renaming but did not provide a suitable name. Will you be renaming this file yourself? — Cheers, JackLee talk 08:29, 13 March 2011 (UTC)

Ähem, it wasn't me[16] and I wouldn't have done it before having identified the species of this animal. --Túrelio (talk) 14:43, 13 March 2011 (UTC)
Oops. I guess I will decline the request, then. Thanks. — Cheers, JackLee talk 14:48, 13 March 2011 (UTC)

Roman and done[edit]

Hi. Sorry, can I ask you what is done here? Because I really don't get it. Thank You. JDavid (talk) 13:03, 14 March 2011 (UTC)

Somebody else had uploaded a different image (+copyvio) over the original one, as a "new version". This then 2nd version had been deleted by me (therefore you cannot see it in the version history); tis was meant by the "done". --Túrelio (talk) 13:36, 14 March 2011 (UTC)
Yes, but I marked this file (first version) with {{No permission since}}, because uploader wasn't an author of this file. Uploader is N12345n, but declared author is Atelier Joly. So I don't get why you've removed the tag. JDavid (talk) 13:48, 14 March 2011 (UTC)
Ok, now I see what you meant. I had assumed both tags refered to the same problem. I've now reinstated the no-perm. --Túrelio (talk) 14:19, 14 March 2011 (UTC)


Hello Túrelio! @Commons:Deletion requests/File:Alexis Love on set of Barely Legal 75 9.jpg: The picture you mentioned is made by en:Panning (camera). A different effect of motion blur. Cheers --Saibo (Δ) 00:43, 15 March 2011 (UTC)

Danke für die Info. --Túrelio (talk) 07:16, 15 March 2011 (UTC)

Thank you![edit]

Thank you for your deletion File:Pray for Japan prayforjapan.jpg. And thank you for putting the image on your page from Japan!! --mizusumashi 10:54, 15 March 2011 (UTC)

You are welcome. --Túrelio (talk) 11:06, 15 March 2011 (UTC)

Deletion request[edit]

I uploaded File:Tylenol Extra Strength.jpg (again) and was hoping you could delete it with a single comment of "The author (Editor182) requests its deletion. (global usage; delinker log)". If the previous logs cannot be removed, that's fine, as long as the correct message is made clear in the end. Thank you. Editor182 (talk) 15:48, 15 March 2011 (UTC)

I don't fully understand. You had requested it for deletion and I had deleted it. Then you re-uploaded it to get it deleted again? Besides, the deletion edit-summary was exactly what you had written in your deletion request. Are we playing a game here? --Túrelio (talk) 15:58, 15 March 2011 (UTC)

Not at all. The first deletion log claimed my image was a copyright violation, which it wasn't, it was only an overzealous administrator. The second deletion log was too long for the log and was cut short. The third deletion log was correct, short and to the point. It would be even better if it were the only log listed, but I'm guessing the previous two logs cannot be removed. Thanks again. Editor182 (talk) 16:12, 15 March 2011 (UTC)

O.k. As to my knowledge, deletion logs, if at all, can only be removed by an oversighter, though that would be sort of overkill. --Túrelio (talk) 06:48, 16 March 2011 (UTC)

Antic cafe.jpg[edit]

Fue borrado por tí, Verás, muy tarde me di cuenta del aviso de "pocible violación de derechos de autor", pero la imagen corresponde a un trabajo propio, fotos tomadas de un recital, por lo que no tienen Copyright, ¿Podrías revertir el borrado?, y en cuanto lo hagas, yo agrego a la pagina de descripción que corresponde a fruto de mi trabajo. Saludos. Pierrot ~ (talk) 09:11, 16 March 2011 (UTC)

Hi Carrousel, it was deleted because this research result clearly suggests that it was taken from somewhere else, for example from here or here, which both have far higher resolution than your upload. And I am not sure what you mean by "que no tienen Copyright". I cannot judge whether the stage scene is copyrighted, but surely the photographer who took this shot, holds copyright over this image until 70 years after his/her death. Anyway, you can request undeletion at Commons:Undeletion requests. --Túrelio (talk) 09:37, 16 March 2011 (UTC)
Entiendo, justamente esa no era la foto a la que me refería, (es que el aviso fue muy rápido y no tuve tiempo de saber a cual se refería exactamente), así que me disculpo, saludos, y espero no me ocurra otra vez. Pierrot ~ (talk) 12:22, 16 March 2011 (UTC)

Fcarcena01 . . .[edit]

Ok ... I stop uploading files with no significant informations ...

Though I don't know what you mean by "with no significant informations", you should not upload images that are still under copyright. --Túrelio (talk) 10:37, 16 March 2011 (UTC)

Deletion Request[edit]

I have just received an email with the permission to use the logo of FC Red Bull Salzburg. What have I to do now?--Werner100359 (talk) 16:10, 16 March 2011 (UTC)

Leite die Erlaubnis im Volltext samt Headern an weiter, wohin der Rechteinhaber sie direkt hätte schicken sollen. Gib dabei genau den Namen der Datei an, auf den du dich beziehst. --Túrelio (talk) 16:16, 16 March 2011 (UTC)

{{Duplicate}} deletions[edit]


I'm a bit concerned with a few issues regarding the use of {{Duplicate}}. The big issue I will be taking to AN shortly to try and get the deletion rules tightened - [17] and [18] are exact duplicates, but when you deleted one of them in December a significant amount of metadata was lost. The lack of a redirect was also incorrect IMO.

I also noticed that you added these replacements to CommonsDelinker, when some are clearly not duplicates (eg File:Tsunayoshi.gif and File:Tsunyaoshi.jpg).--Nilfanion (talk) 19:40, 16 March 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for pointing to probable mistakes of mine. However, getting notified in March about what might have gone wrong 3 months earlier ... . In all these Japanese drawings, which I hadn't been original dupe-tagged by myself, I visually compared the to-remain version with the to-be-deleted one and found the latter of clearly inferior quality and resolution. Anyway, if more admins would work on speedy-queues/backlogs there might be more time available for each file. --Túrelio (talk) 08:14, 17 March 2011 (UTC)
Yeah, I agree its not that useful to point out mistakes several months after the fact :)
As for the Japanese pics, I agree the to-be-deleted version was worse quality in every case. However, substantially different versions of the same things should really go via a deletion request and not a speedy. The colours are different in some cases, and I'm not sure which colour palette is correct - the DR gives chance for people to work it out. With the cropped image I mentioned, its clearly inferior quality. However, if its being used in a template for instance, replacing it with the better image is likely to be unhelpful to the relevant wiki - so it should be manually replaced, not by delinker.
It looks like a high proportion tagged with duplicate are not exact dupes, or will have problems if deleted. For instance I've seen a PNG tagged as a dupe to a JPG (of a photo), its possible the png was deliberately uploaded as a raw version - so deleting is wrong. This one of that Japanese batch includes more detailed info that its replacement. And this one you deleted yesterday needed a redirect - it was uploaded a year ago and was used in an article for several months. No redirect means the old versions of that article were broken, and causes problems for external re-users.--Nilfanion (talk) 11:03, 17 March 2011 (UTC)

Just so you know, started thread on AN Commons:Administrators' noticeboard#Deletion of duplicates. Two of the 4 examples I give are ones you deleted today.--Nilfanion (talk) 20:58, 17 March 2011 (UTC)

Oh my bad. Thanks for notifying. --Túrelio (talk) 21:21, 17 March 2011 (UTC)
And Special:Undelete/File:Coat_of_Arms_of_Łódź_Voivodeship.svg this one. I know creating the redirect is currently a pain but most of the time it should be done. I've asked DieBuche if a quick script to create the redir automatically is possible; if a one (or two) click deletion method was available I think it would help this a lot.--Nilfanion (talk) 22:26, 18 March 2011 (UTC)

FYI please see this by DieBuche, using QuickDelete like that will sort my procedural concerns and is just as easy as using the nuke button. Identifiying if its a duplicate or not is another issue of course :)--Nilfanion (talk) 10:21, 23 March 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for the update. --Túrelio (talk) 08:15, 25 March 2011 (UTC)

Can you please create the appropriate redirects after you delete duplicate files? I've just trawled through the deletion log for March 28 - of the non-recent duplicate deletions, the all 6 of your deletions File:Chile73.jpg, File:©Milet.jpg, File:Mairie de Fonbeauzard.JPG, File:La Ramajería.SVG, File:Grey Reef Shark 2.jpg and File:Orca at Sea World.JPG should have had redirects set up. (1 of others was also poorly executed by a different admin). This old version on en.wp demonstrates some of the problems this is causing.

If you use the QuickDelete button I've mentioned this above it will prevent this problem; I'm inclined to remove the nuke button and the links in the processing (apart from the one to delinker) too. If you carry on deleting without creating the redirects, I'll take this to the AN.--Nilfanion (talk) 13:17, 29 March 2011 (UTC)

Though I don't really see a need to maintain all the links/redir to outdated article versions (always a mystery for me how to know of these former uses) as the resulting redir-accumulation may lead us in the future to have as many (or more) redirs as real files, from now on I will completely abstain from dupe-deletions of files. There should be enough other admins to take on that task.
To be nit-picking, File:©Milet.jpg was (very likely) a copyvio. But as it was in use and as the ongoing copyright evaluation was located at the other dupe, I "moved" the use to this other copy to have it all at one place. So, more a pre-emptive cv-del than a a dupe-del.
However, if I understand the underlying logic correctly, even deletions such as this request File:Птрет неизвестнй в тюрбане и зеленм платье. ГРМ.JPG (a rather common case) can no longer be performed, as it is exactly the redir that is requested for deletion. By the way, in such cases I quite sometimes found the speedy-requested redir still in use (as I do always check for that) and therefore first tagged it with duplicate to enable CD-substitution, then requested CD-substitution and later (after substitution was performed) deleted the then unused redir. Quite a chain of work, but no more. --Túrelio (talk) 09:29, 30 March 2011 (UTC)
Fair enough on the likely copyvio image.
Having billions of redirects isn't a bad thing, as redirects are cheap - having them outnumber files isn't "bad", more a reflection of the inadequacy of our file names. en.wp has 33% more redirects than articles, fr.wp has similar numbers, es.wp has over 50% more redirects, as long as we maintain Special:BrokenRedirects and Special:DoubleRedirects we don't have a problem.
As for why redirects should be kept after the deletion of a duplicate, its the same reasoning that applies to Commons:File renaming. Keeping the attribution chain for reusers of our content intact is a big deal, if we want to be considered as a reliable source of media. The renaming info goes into more detail on that, but the relevant bit really is "keep harmless redirects (minor spelling errors, or .JPG to .jpg), delete harmful ones (misleading, offensive, promotional)".
We have no way of knowing if the file is being used by someone else, like you say its hard enough to work out if its used on an old version of WP, so its best to be cautious and set up the redirect.
The exception is that recent uploads don't need redirects: As they are recent the odds of someone else using it are slim to non-existent. The recent bit is vague, but if a file was uploaded today there's no point keeping the redirect (like most files that get tagged with {{Bad name}}) - so deleting that redirect you mentioned is sensible. A file uploaded in 2005, like the Grey Shark is not recent.
Hope that explains things.--Nilfanion (talk) 10:07, 30 March 2011 (UTC)



No problem. I did a rename myself (because it felt weird to have my user name in the file name :)). Cheers. Anthere (talk) 19:57, 16 March 2011 (UTC)


Hi! Thank you for this quick deletion. Please, don't forget File:Ballabio taglio retina.jpg ;-) Bye bye! --Delfort (talk) 22:27, 16 March 2011 (UTC)

You are welcome. --Túrelio (talk) 08:02, 17 March 2011 (UTC)


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

asturianu | беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ | български | বাংলা | català | čeština | Deutsch | Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ | English | español | suomi | français | galego | हिन्दी | hrvatski | magyar | italiano | 日本語 | ქართული | македонски | മലയാളം | Plattdüütsch | Nederlands | português | română | русский | sicilianu | slovenščina | svenska | Tagalog | Türkçe | 中文(简体)‎ | 中文(繁體)‎ | +/−

21:53, 17 March 2011 (UTC)

File:Automovilistas y yuntas, 1Oct 1922, ampliación.jpg[edit]

Yes, exactly: this photo can stay in Wikipedia, as originally intended. Do I remove my request or someone else needs to do it for me?--Wkboonec (talk) 00:08, 18 March 2011 (UTC)

I've closed it already with Keep. --Túrelio (talk) 07:09, 18 March 2011 (UTC)

File:Piece de el hadjar.png[edit]

It is not Algeria’s currency Why you delate it ?????????????????????????????

Piece_de_el_hadjar.png -- User:Vikoula5 8:26, 18 March 2011 (UTC)

Because it had been tagged as "Copyright violation: Commons:Currency# Algeria. Algeria’s currency is copyright. Unless coin is pre-1948 (PD-Algeria) the coin is copyrighted" by ARTEST4ECHO. But you yourself had put it in Category:Algeria. --Túrelio (talk) 17:41, 18 March 2011 (UTC)
the Algerian bank did not link with this coin, because it it not a currency it is a jubilee Medal of an algerian factory ........ User:Vikoula5 10:52, 19 March 2011 (UTC)
Restored. Sorry. --Túrelio (talk) 09:40, 19 March 2011 (UTC)

Restoration Request: NorthernOakWSLiveFeb2011.jpg[edit]

Hi there,

I noticed that you marked this file for deletion due to it having a non-free licence; the photographer has since contacted me and notified me that he's changed the licence for the picture on Flickr to Attribution Creative Commons, which should hopefully allow it to be used on Wikipedia. Please visit the picture's Flickr page at to confirm this and let me know if the file can be restored. Thanks! ChrisManji (talk) 09:07, 18 March 2011 (UTC)

✓ Done. --Túrelio (talk) 10:20, 18 March 2011 (UTC)

File:JAPAN EARTHQUAKE 20110311.png[edit]

Hi, please revert to my last version File:JAPAN EARTHQUAKE 20110311.png (revert version of user Kintetsubuffalo) and lock after. Thank you. --W.Rebel (talk) 18:54, 18 March 2011 (UTC)

Sorry, but when I took a look at it the map content had already been "changed" (magnitude value increased to 9). Therefore it wouldn't make sense now to revert to your last version. By the way, is the now missing border/frame that important? --Túrelio (talk) 09:49, 19 March 2011 (UTC)
These same images in different languages​​. Kintetsubuffalo attack on just one. --W.Rebel (talk) 10:17, 19 March 2011 (UTC)
Ok, that might be a reasonable rationale, as it would be preferred if all look the same. So you might add the border/frame the the last version of File:JAPAN EARTHQUAKE 20110311.png. --Túrelio (talk) 10:23, 19 March 2011 (UTC)
thank you --W.Rebel (talk) 10:32, 19 March 2011 (UTC)
Next attact from User:Kintetsubuffalo on File:JAPAN EARTHQUAKE 20110311.png --W.Rebel (talk) 11:26, 19 March 2011 (UTC)

Funktion von templates[edit]

Hallo Túrelio, weißt Du, ob z.B. folgende tempates: {{Clist}}, {{Collapse}} in commons nicht mehr funktionstüchtig sind oder sein sollen? In Wikispecies "klappt" das Zusammenklappen. Gruß. Orchi (talk) 20:22, 18 March 2011 (UTC)

Keine Ahnung. Ich bin mal auf Category:Zeus gegangen, wo {{Collapse}} benutzt wird, und dort schien es zu funktionieren. Geht es bei dir (wo du den Defekt bemerkt hast) immer noch nicht? --Túrelio (talk) 09:44, 19 March 2011 (UTC)
...beim "Zeus" war mein Rechner auch nicht bereit, Inhalte zu öffnen und zu schließen. Ich habe meinen Opera-Browser wieder erst mal im Verdacht (unter Firefox geht es teilweise) oder in meinen Einstellungen (MonoBook) von Commons und WP stimmt etwas nicht gegenüber von Wikispecies. Ich werde die Einstellungen mal Punkt für Punkt vergleichen. Danke für Deine Überprüfung. Orchi (talk) 12:05, 19 March 2011 (UTC)
...Fehler war eine Einstellung in Opera (Opera wurde als Firefox ausgegeben). Gruß. Orchi (talk) 19:37, 19 March 2011 (UTC)


Can you please undelete the file File:Theme6-production.jpg which you have deleted because we have received OTRS permission for it. The OTRS TT # is 2011031610003333 --Sreejith K (talk) 05:33, 19 March 2011 (UTC)

✓ Done, though an OTRS volunteer will still have to add the ticket to the page. --Túrelio (talk) 09:42, 19 March 2011 (UTC)
Thank you. I have added the necessary template. --Sreejith K (talk) 11:19, 19 March 2011 (UTC)

File:Florencia Bertotti.png[edit]

excuse me, but I was wrong to put the right license. I am a bit 'inexperienced and I was distracted.

Now, okay? If not good, please can you tell me what.

..and you talk easily the english? I am Italian so I have difficulty understanding English. Thanks you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk • contribs) 19. März 2011, 17:06 Uhr (UTC)

Ciao Pediwiki,
I fear it is not o.k. These 2 images were obviously shot from a TV series. But TV content is not free. It belongs to the TV channel or company. And by making a screenshot or capture, you do not earn any rights or become the author. --Túrelio (talk) 16:56, 19 March 2011 (UTC)


Sorry, my language is spanish. I take the second photo with my camera in that event, (presentation of a TV series) where i asist. Firts photo is a personal photo that i take with her. Sorry my bad english. Any problem?--Huaweiideluis (talk) 20:48, 19 March 2011 (UTC)

Ok, yo solo sabe un poco de castellano. Tu has tenido la photographia File:Maite Dolores.jpg por tu mismo de verdad? Pero con que tipo the camera? Mi pregunta por los EXIF data refiere a los "meta datos" que puedes ver per exemplo en este imagen File:RiccardiAachen 2222.jpg a bacho. Eso dato son producidos automaticamente por la camera digital. Ninguno to tus imagenes tiene meta datos, por que? --Túrelio (talk) 21:06, 19 March 2011 (UTC)

La verdad no estoy seguro, subí las fotos a facebook. Formatearon mi Pc y para recuperarlas las copie desde facebook , la tome desde dos cámaras diferentes, la última foto fue tomada con la cámara Kodak de mi hermana.--Huaweiideluis (talk) 23:32, 19 March 2011 (UTC)

"la última foto" es este File:N702985515 1918209 6505.jpg? En cas de un Si, 1) pregunta tu hermana si la es accuerda con la distribucion de su foto, y 2) cambia el nombre del autor en la nombre de tu hermana. --Túrelio (talk) 23:37, 19 March 2011 (UTC)

Request undeletion[edit]

We have received the OTRS permission for the following three files.

Can you please undelete the files. The OTRS ticket # is 2011031610003333 --Sreejith K (talk) 13:59, 20 March 2011 (UTC)

✓ Done. But File:Forest day 3 image.jpg should be double-checked as it is credited to "Casper Christoffersen-AFP/Getty Images"! --Túrelio (talk) 20:36, 20 March 2011 (UTC)

File:Alsace, Haut-Rhin, Colmar, Musée d'Unterlinden, La Vierge de Niedermorschwihr, vers 1500..jpg[edit]

Hi Túrelio, the above is an unnecessary redirect, but your colleague wouldn't delete it. Would you be so kind? Thank you very much! --Edelseider (talk) 07:52, 22 March 2011 (UTC)

Der Kollege hatte insofern recht als dein Foto tatsächlich auf dieser externen Seite direkt eingelinkt ist und bei der Löschung des redirs dort fehlen würde. Du könntest vielleicht mal versuchen den Betreiber zu kontaktieren, damit er das Link korrigiert. Weitere externe Nutzungen habe ich auf die Schnelle nicht gefunden. --Túrelio (talk) 08:02, 22 March 2011 (UTC)
Ach so, das hatte ich nicht verstanden. Sag, wieso hast du eigentlich ein spanisches Pseudonym? Da ich deine Babel-Leiste nicht angeschaut hatte, dachte ich bisher, du seist hispanophon. Weiterhin gute Zusammenarbeit wünscht --Edelseider (talk) 08:24, 22 March 2011 (UTC)
Spanisch? Túrelio ist Quenya[19]. á na márië. --Túrelio (talk) 08:49, 22 March 2011 (UTC)
Aha. --Edelseider (talk) 09:08, 22 March 2011 (UTC)

Talkback request[edit]

Hi there, thanks for your message on my page. Can we please continue that conversation there? Schwede66 08:22, 23 March 2011 (UTC)


For clarifying things at Admin noticeboard - cheers SatuSuro (talk) 12:16, 23 March 2011 (UTC)

You are welcome. --Túrelio (talk) 21:08, 23 March 2011 (UTC)

A second thank you[edit]

Hi Túrelio. Thanks for cleaning up the speedy's I requested the last couple of days. :-) (And I've got three more for you, hehe) With love, Trijnstel (talk) 21:26, 23 March 2011 (UTC)

You are welcome. --Túrelio (talk) 21:59, 23 March 2011 (UTC)

File:15. January 2010 Gul Mudin.jpg[edit]

Hello you delited this file. I find simmeler file is public domain This applies worldwide. Pictures taken by U.S. military personnel on duty are ineligible for copyright, unless the photographer successfully claims that the photographs were not taken as part of his or her official duties. The photographers of the Abu prisoner abuse photos have denied this under oath. I think a file 15. January 2010 Gul Mudin is the same case. Can you help me? Thenks.--PowerAustin (talk) 13:39, 24 March 2011 (UTC)

the problem is that I do not agree with the keep-decision in Commons:Deletion requests/Image:Abu-ghraib-leash.jpg. These are just community votes and they are (we all, me too) influenced by political things. Both are images are important documents, no doubt. But that does no mean they are free. In my opinion, with the Gul Mudin image it is the more clear that it was not shot doing their duty, as this "kill team" was their own idea, contrary to their duties, as I understand it. Anyway, you are always free to file the image for undeletion at Commons:Undeletion requests. --Túrelio (talk) 21:06, 24 March 2011 (UTC)
I would agree with Túrelio and state that the prosecutions will show that the photos were not part of the soldiers' official duties, and Commons cannot host them on the grounds of fair use, whereas other sites can do so.  — billinghurst sDrewth 09:14, 25 March 2011 (UTC)

/* Gemma Mewse deleted wiki images */[edit]

Hi there, I uploaded two images to wiki commons about a month ago to use on conjunction with the Gemma Mewse Wikipedia page. I set the image permissions on flickr to CC so that there would not be a permission or access problem but for some reason they were deleted by yourself and I'm unsure why. I sent the permission form email in and did not hear a response and have only recently noticed that the images were removed. Can you pelase explain to me how to have these images reinstated as they are my personal images. Thank you.

Mdanie2 (talk) 14:43, 25 March 2011 (UTC)

Hi, could you please specify to which images you are refering to. In case it is File:Gemmamewseroachfordtonymoorejonallen.png, on Flickr it is still non-commercial, which is not allowed on Commons. --Túrelio (talk) 15:13, 25 March 2011 (UTC)


Hi, I had request for deleting {{Rtl-lang}}, but Rtl-lang is protected for me so I requested deletion on talk page. can you delete that template? thanks :) 00:30, 26 March 2011 (UTC)

✓ Done. --Túrelio (talk) 08:23, 26 March 2011 (UTC)


Kannst du mir beim Aufbau einer Kategorie helfen? -- amrollbia 21:23, 26 March 2011 (UTC)

Ähem, was meinst du mit "Aufbau"? Und welche Kat. konkret? --Túrelio (talk) 21:25, 26 March 2011 (UTC)
Also ich möchte ein Bild zu einer neuen Kategorie Amrollbia hinzufügen. -- amrollbia 17:07, 2 April 2011 (UTC)
Die Kategorie Amrollbia existiert momentan ja nicht mehr, weil sie, da leer, gelöscht wurde. Wenn du sie neu anlegen möchtest, was sehr einfach ist, oder ich sie für dich anlegen soll, sollten wir mal den Namen abklären. "Amrollbia" sagt mir nichts, außer dass es dein Username ist. Wenn Amrollbia keine weitere eigenständige Bedeutung hat, ist es als ungeeignet, da keiner nach einem unbekannten Begriff suchen wird. Wenn du Amrollbia als Kat.namen wählen willst, weil du, User:Amrollbia, dort deine eigenen Dateien einsortieren willst, es sich nach unserem Verständnis also um einer User-Kategorie handelt, sollte der anders lauten, nämlich z.B. Category:Files uploaded by Amrollbia oder Category:Images by Amrollbia. Weitere Frage: wird es bei dem "ein Bild" für die Kat. bleiben oder kommen weitere hinzu. Im ersteren Fall wird die Kat. nämlich nicht lange überleben, weil eine 1-Bild-Kat. i.a. nicht wirklich sinnvoll ist.--Túrelio (talk) 07:58, 3 April 2011 (UTC)

File:Brisa passion fruit fizzy drink and sweets.jpg[edit]

Hello Turélio, I've seen that you deleted File:Brisa passion fruit fizzy drink and sweets.jpg, which, if I well recall, was uploaded by me. What was the problem with the file? Was it the brand in the bottle or something like that?-- Darwin Ahoy! 06:14, 27 March 2011 (UTC)

Hi DarwIn, it had been tagged (by somebody else) as derivative. As the Tweety figure was well visible, I considered that a valid (though not too strong) rationale. The bottle lable wasn't important for me, as it was hardly readable. If you prefer, I can undelete it and let it go through a regular DR. --Túrelio (talk) 07:47, 27 March 2011 (UTC)
If it wouldn't be too much work, I would prefer, yes. I would like if at least the bottle could remain, as it shows one of Madeira local industries, the Brisa juices.-- Darwin Ahoy! 13:16, 27 March 2011 (UTC)
I had undeleted it, but if was deleted again by somebody else. I had understood that you wanted to crop away the Tweety figure. --Túrelio (talk) 18:45, 27 March 2011 (UTC)
Yes, sorry, I didn't noticed it... Can you please undelete it again? I'll crop it right away. Sorry for all the trouble.-- Darwin Ahoy! 20:21, 27 March 2011 (UTC)
✓ Done. --Túrelio (talk) 20:39, 27 March 2011 (UTC)
Thanks, I've cropped it now, I even prefer it this way, since I never liked that yellow bright Tweety sweet box in the back, wich has nothing to do with Madeira island. Do you believe it's ok now?-- Darwin Ahoy! 20:48, 27 March 2011 (UTC)
Hope so. --Túrelio (talk) 21:02, 27 March 2011 (UTC)


Ich darf Dich bitten, das Bild wieder herzustellen, da der Maler nicht wie von Dir vermutet Herbert Knötel (war gar kein Maler, sondern ein Historiker) sondern Richard Knötel (1857-1914) war. -- Steinbeisser (talk) 09:05, 27 March 2011 (UTC)

Du hattest das hier schon File talk:Ö-u Ulanen.jpg schon gelesen? --Túrelio (talk) 09:07, 27 March 2011 (UTC)
Der Herr Herbert Knötel hat in der de:WP nicht mal einen eigenen Artikel und wird lediglich als Heereskundler im BKL aufgeführt. Scheint mit der Malerei nicht weit hergewesen zu sein. Als Maler nscheinend nur Insidern bekannt (die sogar seinen Stil erkennen können, potz Donner und Doria) -- Steinbeisser (talk) 09:14, 27 March 2011 (UTC)
Da kann ich sachlich nichts zu sagen, keine Ahnung. Wenn du das mit den beiden durchdiskutieren willst, kann ich das Bild vorübergehend entlöschen und in eine reguläre DR überführen. Just say it. --Túrelio (talk) 09:16, 27 March 2011 (UTC)
Bitte -- Steinbeisser (talk) 09:18, 27 March 2011 (UTC)

about File:Versailles-Appartements de Marie-Antoinette-Grande salle de Bains.png[edit]

Hello, i see that file are delete for "loading error, impossible to load". But, it seem that the file can be download ? what's the problem with this file ? Thanks. Crochet.david (talk) 17:28, 27 March 2011 (UTC)

Hi, in fact it had been tagged as such by User:Bohème. When I had gone to the image page, the image indeed didn't show. However, when I checked now, it did appear, though after a long loading time. So, I will undelete it. No, same problem, see for yourself. Eventually you should reduce the size. --Túrelio (talk) 17:43, 27 March 2011 (UTC)

removal of tamper evident security label picture[edit]


you have removed an image I posted of a tamper evident security label which I would like reposted and the original image restored.

You have not understood that I am the Managing Director of the Manufacturer and fully entitled to list the image as I have under this creative commons license.

you can confirm this by emailing we

Please undo you removal immediately.

Dr Adrian Steele — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk • contribs) 27. März 2011, 19:54 Uhr (UTC)

As you have neither mentioned your username nor the filename, I have no idea to which image you are refering. --Túrelio (talk) 18:43, 27 March 2011 (UTC)

Фотография неизвестного автора[edit]

Вы удалили фотографию Любови Кабо, загруженную мной, под предлогом, что у нее не указан автор. Это фотография из личного архива Л. Р. Кабо. Автор ее мне неизвестен. Если следовать Вашей логике, то я не могу и фотографию своей персоны опубликовать, если не помню, кто ее сделал? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Holothrop (talk • contribs) 10:28, 28. Mär. 2011 (UTC)

Sorry, I don't read Russian. Goggle translates: "You have removed the photo of Lyubov Cape, loaded me on the pretext that it is not specified by the author. This photo is from the personal archive LR Cape. Its author is unknown to me. If we follow your logic, I can not and will publish a photograph of his persona, if you do not remember who did it?" Is that what you were saying? --Túrelio (talk) 08:30, 28 March 2011 (UTC)
In case you are refering to File:KaboLR.jpg: when the author is "unknown", you cannot release it under a CC-license, because that can only the author. If it is proven anonymous and if the relevant jurisdiction has a provision for anonymous works, you might claim PD-anonymous, if the terms are met. --Túrelio (talk) 08:40, 28 March 2011 (UTC)
It is the photo of russian writer Lubov Kabo, taken from her personal archive. Where must I search the author!?
When You place your photo on Facebook You also indicate the author? Be reasonable.
What do you mean by "her personal archive"? Facebook content is per se not free. A user can put an image on his/her Facebook page, without having the right to do that. If we then copy such an image to Commons and redistribute it, we may commit a copyright violation and any re-user may be sued for that by the rights holder. If "Lubov Kabo" is still alive, you could contact her and ask her for permission. A template for a legally correct permission text, is here in english and here in Russian?. By the way, Facebook? ;-) --Túrelio (talk) 20:28, 28 March 2011 (UTC)
The person you talk about died in 2007. Túrelio, I'll try to explain the rules in Russian. Mithril (talk) 12:45, 29 March 2011 (UTC)
Holothrop, ситуация именно такова: нельзя публиковать на Викискладе произведения, не имея никаких представлений об авторстве. Скажем, если Вы сфотографировали картину в картинной галерее, не посмотрев, кто её написал, это исключительно Ваше упущение, не дающее Вам никакого права распоряжаться собственностью автора (к примеру, продавать репродукции полотна). Если Вы не обладаете информацией в силу других «непреодолимых» обстоятельств, ситуация не меняется. В России это кажется странным, но всё предельно логично. Но! Если Вы всего лишь хотите использовать данную фотографию в статье в русском разделе Википедии, Вы можете загрузить файл под несвободной лицензией не на Викисклад, а в файловое хранилище русской Википедии. Разумеется, изучив Критерии добросовестного использования. Если понадобится помощь, свяжитесь со мной там (логин тот же). Mithril (talk) 12:45, 29 March 2011 (UTC)
Thanks for your support. --Túrelio (talk) 07:59, 30 March 2011 (UTC)
Always welcome. Although seems to me the effort has made no effect because the user didn't see my reply. Mithril (talk) 11:14, 30 March 2011 (UTC)
Я правильно Вас понял? Я не могу публиковать фотографии из своего семейного фотоальбома? Права на фотографии моих родственников имеет фотомастерская? Говорите дальше, умоляю Вас... :-D — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk • contribs) 19:14, 30 March 2011 (UTC) (UTC)
Почти правильно: авторское право на такую фотографию, скорее всего, принадлежит не фотомастерской, а фотографу, сделавшему фотографию. В соавторстве с декоратором и гримёром, если таковые имели место. Авторские права, конечно же, не единственные права. Существует, в частности, право собственности. Однако, мнится мне, для юридического удостоверения права собственности на фотографию нужны документы, которых в данном случае тоже нет. Mithril (talk) 02:42, 31 March 2011 (UTC)
Апофеоз копирастии! Удивительно, что я смог опубликовать в своем паспорте свою фотографию - ее ведь тоже делала не машина, а она в свободном доступе - по первому требованию... Holothrop (talk) 20:15, 1 April 2011 (UTC)
Вы невнимательно прочли то, что я написал. Однако Вы можете не принимать условий, на которых фонд Викимедия предоставляет свои услуги, если эти условия Вам непонятны или чем-то не устраивают. Никто Вас к этому не обязывает. Mithril (talk) 17:40, 2 April 2011 (UTC)


Hello. I'm questioning this user (Rawa77 (talk · contribs)) and his/her uploads. There is no way to verify his/her claim of being the authorized representative of the women's right group RAWA (w:Revolutionary Association of the Women of Afghanistan). I suspect that this is a fake account. Can you help me where to report this investigation? Thanks.--Officer (talk) 11:45, 29 March 2011 (UTC)

Humberto Krujoski[edit]

Hey You! Again you erased photos mine! The photos that you erased I took for the page Humberto Krujoski. I raised and them that page after raising wiki! I took those photographies for this website: BUT THEY ARE STILL MINE!

P.D: Answer me in Spanish!

--Diego HC (talk) 21:38, 29 March 2011 (UTC)

How should we know that? The image on JE Competicion has a higher resolution than File:Humberto Krujoski.jpg. This suggested that was the source. The images on have no author credit, which is rather strange. But thereby we had no chance to compare the photographers name with your username. And carries a clear (C) note "JE Competicion - Todos los derechos Reservados"[20]. Though I tend to believe you, I have contacted and asked for confirmation. To prevent such problems in the future, I would recommend you for all your own images that have been published prior your upload to Commons to put a link to prior-publication site into the entry other_versions of the image description page.
I don't know enough spanish to translate that by myself. Google translated (with some corrections by me): ¿Cómo podríamos saber eso? La imagen de JE Competicion tiene una resolución mayor que la File:Humberto Krujoski.jpg. Esto sugiere que era la fuente. Las imágenes de no tienen crédito al autor, que es bastante extraño. Poro eso no tuvimos oportunidad de comparar el nombre del fotógrafo con tu nombre de usuario. Además, lleva una nota de copyright "JE Competicion - Todos los derechos Reservados"[21]. Aunque me inclino a creerte, me he comunicado con y le pidió confirmación. Para evitar estos problemas en el futuro, te recomiendo a todos tus propias imágenes que se han publicado antes de la subida de Commons para poner un enlace al sitio antes de la publicación en la other_versions entrada de la página de descripción de la imagen. --Túrelio (talk) 07:55, 30 March 2011 (UTC)

OK, now I understand... Then, the next time, there will be photos that I will not raise the Team´s Web, not to have problems.. (OK, ahora comprendo... Entonces, la próxima vez habrán fotos que no subiré a la página del Equipo para no tener problemas)

Thanks --Diego HC (talk) 19:41, 15 April 2011 (UTC) (My English is very bad. "It's very Difficult" says Carlos Tévez)

Deleted copyvio[edit]

Hi Túrelio! You acted a speedy I put up for one of User:Deanb's images. I have proposed almost all of his images for deletion because of repeated copyright violations (he has been blocked on English Wikipedia for this). Please take a look. Thanks, Ynhockey (talk) 09:29, 2 April 2011 (UTC)

I'll try to look into it later this day. --Túrelio (talk) 07:50, 3 April 2011 (UTC)
Oops, missed it. Done now by Jameslwoodward. --Túrelio (talk) 12:30, 9 April 2011 (UTC)

RE: File:Desfile Leandro de Itaquera 2009.jpg[edit]

Thiago Toledo changed the license of the photo. Please verify that the license is correct. Thank in advance. Regi-Iris Stefanelli (talk) 23:22, 2 April 2011 (UTC)

✓ Done. --Túrelio (talk) 07:46, 3 April 2011 (UTC)

Your deletion of File:Daft Punk - Tron Legacy Soundtrack.jpg[edit]

Could You please elaborate more, as "PD-Textlogo my ass" cannot clarify which font was an obvious copyright violation. Just to be sure on my next upload. Thanks. feydey (talk) 22:33, 3 April 2011 (UTC)

Sorry for not manually cleaning the somewhat "less friendly" deletion rationale that had been added by nominator User:Sertion. As I understand (and as I agree to, after vieweing the image), he wanted to express that this image can hardly be considered as PD-Text only, as the main element "tron" is graphically elaborated. (In addition, it's from Disney, who like to sue for copyvio, in general). --Túrelio (talk) 18:50, 4 April 2011 (UTC)
Thank You for the reply. My User talk page template gave no indication of the deletion rationale that had been used by nominator User:Sertion. feydey (talk) 10:02, 6 April 2011 (UTC)

Apidadant.jpg is from 1900, then it is hardly your own work[edit]

that image was not used anywhere got proof. erases everything you need, thanks.

Salines (talk) 20:44, 4 April 2011 (UTC)

The image may be public domain. But to check that, we need to know the source and the photographer. --Túrelio (talk) 20:47, 4 April 2011 (UTC)

File:Babajanian statue at night.jpg[edit]

Thanks for your notification, the source link is rectified and the problem is solved.--Kevorkmail (talk) 11:02, 5 April 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for your feedback. But, regrettably that was not the problem. The problem comes from the sculpture itself. It is very likely still copyrighted by the sculptor. Thereby, images of the statue require the permission of the sculptor, as there is no exemption for such works in Armenia (COM:FOP#Armenia). --Túrelio (talk) 12:14, 5 April 2011 (UTC)

Villa del Cerro speedy[edit]

Hi Túrelio. Thank you for the cleanup. I had not noticed that File:Villa del Cerro-Montevideo Map.PNG was still in use. I updated to the new map, but maybe we should wait for a while to see if anybody wants the previous version. I am not sure: Should I remove the speedy template for now? Hoverfish (talk) 22:25, 5 April 2011 (UTC)

✓ Done. --Túrelio (talk) 12:58, 8 April 2011 (UTC)

Borrado de la imagen de File:San Beranrdo.JPG y Archivo: Socaire.JPG[edit]

Según indica la propia página de google, no violo ninguna ley sobre derechos de autor al publicar esta imagen, ya que colocando el logo de google que sale en la parte de abajo no se violan los derechos, lee la siguiente página ----------

"Attribution is the line(s) shown on the bottom of the Content in the products along with copyright notices, such as “©2011 Google, Map Data ©2011 Tele Atlas.” (The exact text of the attribution changes based on geography and Content type.) The attribution text must be legible to the average viewer or reader. The automatically-generated Google logo and attribution text may only be removed or obstructed if reintroduced in a visible form elsewhere within the Content. In print use, if for some reason attribution cannot be placed within the Content, separate attribution text must be provided directly adjacent to the Content. In video, attribution must appear on-screen for the entire duration the Content is displayed; we cannot approve requests to move attribution to end credits."

see example

— Preceding unsigned comment added by Dinglerzaga (talk • contribs) 6. April 2011, 00:20 Uhr (UTC) --Túrelio (talk) 06:12, 6 April 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for providing the links that clearly show that Google maps content is not free enough. This states that you are not allowed to use the images for commercial products, which is required per Commons' policy. This states that Google Maps/Earth material can be used under fair-use, which is also not allowed on Commons (contrary to :en wikipedia), and that derivative use is not allowed, which again is a requirement per Commons' policy. --Túrelio (talk) 06:17, 6 April 2011 (UTC)

Erhard Mettler photo[edit]

Hi, I hope you remeber that couple of weeks I've uploaded one jpg file which was a portret of dr. Erhard Mettler. It has been deleted because didn't has a right permission to used it. I wrote same e-mail to headquarters of METTLER TOELDO Inc. and they sent me one photo which wasn't used never before. it was in their archive. I put a citation of e-mail i gave from them below:

"....We can provide you with the enclosed image of Erhard Mettler. The original picture is in our archive which has been published in earlier years when Mr Mettler was in the company. Since he is the founder of Mettler Toledo Inc. and the inventor of our main product, I think this should be enough prove that we may use this picture.

Best regards Daniel Kreienbühl

Head of Advertising Agency Global MarCom Switzerland

Mettler-Toledo International Inc. Im Langacher CH-8606 Greifensee, Switzerland Tel. +41 44 944 28 82 Fax +41 44 944 30 90 ..."

Do you think i can upload that new photo to commonswiki and use it in to Erhard Mettler? Thanks for your answer. MTPL

great! Please do the following: upload the new photo under a slightly different filename than the deleted one, and add to the description (either at upload or thereafter) the following string: {{OTRS pending}}. Thereafter you should forward (complete with headers) the above posted original email with the permission to and don't forget to mention the new filename of the uploaded image, in order that our OTRS volunteers can associate the permission with the file. --Túrelio (talk) 10:25, 6 April 2011 (UTC)
Thanks, I do that, MTPL
I've done everything exactly like you said. Could you check it, if it properly done for sure? MTPL
It's fine. I have only removed the "self" from the license template, as only the author can "self-license". Could you find out anything about the time (year) when this photo was shot? It's not required, but would be helpful for re-users. It may take some time until an OTRS volunteer has checked the permission and issued the "o.k. ticket". But the image is protected by the OTRS-pending. --Túrelio (talk) 13:07, 6 April 2011 (UTC)
Sorry, that photo is comming from Mettler toledo Inc. archive. Like mr. Daniel Kreienbühl wrote "....The original picture is in our archive which has been published in earlier years when Mr Mettler was in the company. ..." Thanks for your time MTPL

Ticket 2011040610011001 has been received but no explicit statement on the license for the photo has been given. A date for the photo is needed to know if it may now be in the public domain otherwise. – Adrignola talk 13:36, 6 April 2011 (UTC)

File:Frans Oerder11.jpg[edit]

Pay attention to copyright
File:Frans Oerder11.jpg has been marked as a possible copyright violation. Wikimedia Commons only accepts free content—that is, images and other media files that can be used by anyone, for any purpose. Traditional copyright law does not grant these freedoms, and unless noted otherwise, everything you find on the web is copyrighted and not permitted here. For details on what is acceptable, please read Commons:Licensing. You may also find Commons:Copyright rules useful, or you can ask questions about Commons policies at the Commons:Help desk.

The file you added has been deleted. If you believe that the deletion was not in accordance with policy, you may request undeletion.

Wikimedia Commons takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing.

Afrikaans | العربية | asturianu | azərbaycanca | беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ | български | বাংলা | català | čeština | dansk | Deutsch | Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ | Zazaki | Ελληνικά | English | British English | español | euskara | فارسی | suomi | français | galego | עברית | hrvatski | magyar | հայերեն | Bahasa Indonesia | italiano | 日本語 | 한국어 | Lëtzebuergesch | македонски | മലയാളം | मराठी | Bahasa Melayu | Malti | မြန်မာဘာသာ | norsk bokmål | Plattdüütsch | Nederlands | norsk nynorsk | norsk | polski | português | português do Brasil | română | русский | sicilianu | slovenčina | slovenščina | српски / srpski | svenska | тоҷикӣ | ไทย | Türkçe | українська | Tiếng Việt | 中文(简体)‎ | 中文(繁體)‎ | +/−

Hi, thank you for placing the above notice on my talkpage, but I do think that since I attached the speedy delete tag to the image I must be aware of its deletion. cheers Androstachys (talk) 07:07, 7 April 2011 (UTC)

Oops, sorry. Often I find speedy-tagged images without the uploader being notified. --Túrelio (talk) 07:32, 7 April 2011 (UTC)

Delete Image Gallery.[edit]

Se puede borrar una galería de imágenes si ninguna está enlazada. gracias Salines (talk) 07:26, 7 April 2011 (UTC)

You can delete an image gallery if none is bound. thanks

Salines (talk) 09:56, 7 April 2011 (UTC)

Hi Salines, I am not sure to understand what you mean or want. Is that a question or an information? Galleries on Commons can be deleted if they are empty or totally redundant to the related category. --Túrelio (talk) 10:08, 7 April 2011 (UTC)

hello, the specific question is: my gallery has five images, none of them has been linked, can you delete that entire gallery?

Salines (talk) 16:40, 7 April 2011 (UTC)

What do you mean by "my gallery", this one? --Túrelio (talk) 11:55, 8 April 2011 (UTC)

Boy or girl[edit]

File:Vaishnavi Kadam - Kolkata 2011-04-05 2234.JPG It is really a girl's photograph. Her face looks boyish, but wears a frock (the two strips are seen on shoulder) I was also confused! After taking photograph, I asked her mother of the child's name, she told - 'Vaishnavi Kadam', in case of male child, she would say 'Vaishnav'. After getting your comment, I again asked nearby people showing this photograph, they confirmed. Biswarup Ganguly (talk) 08:47, 7 April 2011 (UTC)

Many thanks. I didn't intend to cause you additional work. --Túrelio (talk) 08:48, 7 April 2011 (UTC)

What's your criteria on Commons' purpose?[edit]

Wikimedia Commons' project scope states:

"All files:


Must be realistically useful for an educational purpose."

You removed the {{Speedy}} template that I put on File:SERGIO Y SU CELULAR 2.jpg because is "used on his userpage". And what? That file is educational and useful for Wikipedia or any other Wikimedia project? I think not. The user that uploaded that file must understand that Wikimedia Commons is not Imgur or Imageshack, it is not a personal repository. All is explained well in COM:PS.

EDIT: I miss: Special:Contributions/Hilios1 and Special:Contributions/Fer:)nandh are cousins and they are uploading tons of personal files.

"Examples of files that are not realistically useful for an educational purpose:

Private image collections, e.g. private party photos, photos of yourself and your friends, your collection of holiday snaps and so on. There are plenty of other projects on the Internet you can use for such a purpose, such as Flickr. Such private image collections do not become educational even if displayed as a gallery on a user page on Commons or elsewhere."

Greetings, Fitoschido // Leave me a shout! 18:15, 7 April 2011 (UTC)

You might have read the message from the {{Userpageimage}}-tag that I had then added to the image:

This image is used on a user page of a Wikimedia user and is stored on Commons according to the rules set out in Commons:Project scope#File in use on Commons only: the uploading of small numbers of images (e.g. of yourself) for use on a personal Commons user page is allowed or Commons:Project scope#File in use in another Wikimedia project: the uploading of small numbers of images (e.g. of yourself) for use on a personal user page of another project is allowed as long as that user is or was an active participant on that project.
If the image ceases to be used it may be eligible for deletion as it may have no educational purpose.

. Of course, as this image seems no longer to be used, now it can be deleted. --Túrelio (talk) 19:39, 7 April 2011 (UTC)

From the very page you linked: "An otherwise non-educational file does not acquire educational purpose solely because it is in use on a gallery page or in a category on Commons, nor solely because it is in use on a user page (the "User:" namespace), but by custom the uploading of small numbers of images (e.g. of yourself) for use on a personal Commons user page is allowed." – Adrignola talk 19:37, 7 April 2011 (UTC)


Hallo Túrelio, weißt du noch was hier raus geworden ist?

Wenn er die Fotos nur von Fotolia gekauft hat, dann kann er sie wahrscheinlich ja nicht nicht hie hochladen. Oder bezog sich das nur auf andere Bilder, also die von ihm, die jetzt noch hier online sind? Viele Grüße --Saibo (Δ) 18:51, 7 April 2011 (UTC)

Wow, hast du ein Langzeitgedächtnis! Das ist ja gut 2 Jahre her. Na ja, beim Suchen nach meiner Antwort auf die verlinkte Anfrage hab ich wenigstens meine damalige talkpage-Mieze wiedergesehen. Geantwortet hatte ich letztlich hier. Aber 1 Tag später hat der User seine Aktivität eingestellt. Das damals andiskutierte Bild ist am selben Tag gelöscht worden, aber nicht wegen URV, sondern oos ("Promotional content"). Auch wenn ich mir relativ sicher war, habe ich bei Fotolia mal nachgeschaut und erwartungsgemäß ein ausdrückliches Verbot der Weiterveräusserung und Überlassung gefunden[22],[23]. D.h., wir sollten unser Bilderreservoir regelmäßig nicht nur nach Getty-Material sondern auch nach Fotolia screenen und löschen. --Túrelio (talk) 19:35, 7 April 2011 (UTC)
Die alte (aber vom Alter her wohl junge) Muschi ist ja süüß! Die aktuelle ist aber auch ganz nett. :-D
Nein, Gedächtnis hat damit nichts zu tun - einfach nur die Edits des Accounts angeguckt und gesehen, dass er hier geschrieben hat. Eh ich mich aber selbst durch Versionsgeschichten durchwurschtel, dachte ich, dass ich besser einfach frage, denn du erinnerst dich ja vllt. noch daran.
Mir geht es nicht um das eine Bild - sondern die ganzen anderen von ihm, die auch alle relativ promotional sind (aber sei's drum) - ist halt nur fraglich, ob z.B. die Hände nicht von Fotolia sind. Denn, wenn du mit tineye nach File:Wiki labeltag.jpg suchst, dann findet man das gleiche CD-Bild - aber ohne Hände. Aber da werden wir/ich wohl mal etwas herumgooglen müssen, um das zu finden... Was war denn auf dem gelöschten Foto drauf? Viele Grüße --Saibo (Δ) 00:12, 8 April 2011 (UTC)
Das war eine Collage aus 5 Bildelementen plus Text. In der Mitte die Unterseite einer CD in Blau-metallic, in den 4 Ecken jeweils ein Minibildchen teils mit Leuten, die irgendetwas mit einer CD machen. Letztlich wir ein Werbebild, um zu zeigen, was das Produkt (keine Ahnung ob Label oder Software oder was; da kein Produktname) alles ermöglicht. Deshalb auch meine ursprüngliche Frage an den Uploader, ob er für alle Einzelbilder die Rechte hat. Der Umstand, dass er "gegangen" ist, legt zumindest nahe, dass die anderen Uploads auch "von irgendwo" stammen können. Insofern wäre es nicht schlecht, wenn du mal danach schauen könntest. --Túrelio (talk) 06:09, 8 April 2011 (UTC)


Здраствуйте я работник ОАО Авиадвигатель. Из-за нехватки времени я не написал письма подтверждающие того что Авиадвигатель разрешает использовать принадлежащие ему изображения в Википедии. Пошлите пожалуйста мне еще раз ссылку на шаблон письма. Пришлите мне пожалуйста еще раз ссылку на письмо для подтверждения прав. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Solovei777 (talk • contribs) 12:48, 8. Apr. 2011 (UTC)

See my explaination and the added links on your talkpage. --Túrelio (talk) 12:12, 8 April 2011 (UTC)

Здраствуйте вчера я получил

OTRS Wikimedia

This work is free and may be used by anyone for any purpose. If you wish to use this content, you do not need to request permission as long as you follow any licensing requirements mentioned on this page.

Wikimedia Foundation has received an e-mail confirming that the copyright holder has approved publication under the terms mentioned on this page. This correspondence has been reviewed by an OTRS member and stored in our permission archive. The correspondence is available to trusted volunteers as ticket #2011042010005251.

If you have questions about the archived correspondence, please use the OTRS noticeboard.

Ticket link:

, можно ли восстановить удаленные изображения.

Thanks. I've undeleted some of the files and asked the OTRS volunteers to confirm the ticket range. --Túrelio (talk) 09:07, 22 April 2011 (UTC)

Red Swastika Society[edit]

Fixed: File:Red_Swastika_Society_member.jpg#Licensing. I uploaded as public domain because I don't know how to do it directly with the PD China tag. Victor falk (talk) 08:37, 9 April 2011 (UTC)

Hi, sorry, but it is not fixed. PD-China requires and accordingly the license tag says "Please provide where the image was first published and who created it." --Túrelio (talk) 08:38, 9 April 2011 (UTC)
Unfortunately the source doesn't have this information, but this photo is evidently made before 1961. Also, the Red Swastika society was disolved when the communists took over in 1949. Victor falk (talk) 08:48, 9 April 2011 (UTC)
Still per PD-China (all photographs enter the public domain 50 years after they were first published, or if unpublished 50 years from creation) you have to provide evidence that either the image has been published at least 50 years ago or that it has been unpublished in the 50 years after its creation. --Túrelio (talk) 08:54, 9 April 2011 (UTC)
It's obvious. Victor falk (talk) 13:29, 9 April 2011 (UTC)
So far, you have neither provided evidence that it has been published at least 50 years (i.e., before 1961) ago nor that it has been unpublished in the 50 years after its creation, which would be much more difficult, of course. Try the first one. --Túrelio (talk) 14:14, 9 April 2011 (UTC)
How does unpublishing work? Victor falk (talk) 05:28, 10 April 2011 (UTC)
Therefore I recommended you to research for evidence of the "published at least 50 years ago". --Túrelio (talk) 13:29, 10 April 2011 (UTC)

danke, geht.[edit]

was mach ich beim Hochladen auf Commons falsch? Error Author needed. original Source needed. Ist etwas neu? Kannst Du mein Antarctic Krill krill666.jpg Bild bitte vorschlagen als Picture of the Day Uwe kils (talk) 12:16, 9 April 2011 (UTC)

"Picture of the Day" - hab ich bislang noch nie gemacht, weshalb ich nicht genau weiß wie das geht :-(. --Túrelio (talk) 12:56, 9 April 2011 (UTC)

Cuman woman warrior[edit]

Why are you marking this as a violation. I found this on an internet forum about warriors - it is quite a nice picture and would be such a shame to delete it, please dont...

Ever thought that the artist who draw this, might hold the copyright (until 70 years after his/her death)? Ever did care to inform us about the real source (http://....) instead of the useless information "internet forum"? --Túrelio (talk) 12:53, 9 April 2011 (UTC)

Ok fine, here is the site where some of them come from: And please tell me if it is fine, judging from the source site

Thanks. But after viewing the site, I don't think we can accept that. It is obvious that the images in the relevant posting on that site come from different sources. In addition, the forum itself does not offer any statement about copyright. That means, we cannot simply assume that the poster of these images does hold the copyright for them. He/She likely scanned them from books or other sources. If you are very hard interested to have these images, you will have to do a thorough research for the original sources and artists. When you have found them, we can check whether eventually some are PD due to age (though that seems unlikely) and you can directly contact the artists and ask them for a release under a free license. --Túrelio (talk) 13:04, 9 April 2011 (UTC)


Actually, A.Catalina is not non-communicative, just has very, very little English. I've been communicating a bit with her by email; she has been writing me in Romanian and I've been responding largely in English, which I gather she is following largely through Google Translate or some such. I did my best to explain the lack of Freedom of Panorama in Romania, and also clarified some issues she didn't understand about copyrights. Most salient among the latter was that she was under the misimpression that the copyright of a building belonged to its owner rather than its architect, and consequently was thinking she had relevant permissions where, in fact, she did not. I don't know if her behavior will change at all, but at least she now better understands the issues. - Jmabel ! talk 07:07, 10 April 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for the update. Though she produced a lot of unnecessary work for me (and others), I think your effort is well-deserved as she has contributed a lot of usable images. --Túrelio (talk) 13:27, 10 April 2011 (UTC)

Delete photho[edit]

you just delete the photo File:Puffin in Farne Island 2010.jpg, I've made a mistake, sorry. --Famabe (talk) 09:36, 10 April 2011 (UTC)

If it is really your own photo, you could change the license from CC-NC-something to CC-something by yourself. --Túrelio (talk) 13:30, 10 April 2011 (UTC)


File:Revista Ea.png

العربية | беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ | বাংলা | català | čeština | dansk | Deutsch | Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ | Ελληνικά | English | español | euskara | فارسی | suomi | français | galego | עברית | hrvatski | magyar | Հայերեն | italiano | 日本語 | 한국어 | lietuvių | македонски | മലയാളം | मराठी | norsk bokmål | Plattdüütsch | Nederlands | polski | português | română | русский | sicilianu | slovenčina | slovenščina | српски / srpski | svenska | ไทย | Türkçe | українська | اردو | Tiếng Việt | 中文(简体)‎ | 中文(繁體)‎ | +/−
Warning sign
This media was probably deleted.
Thanks for uploading File:Revista Ea.png. This media is missing permission information. A source is given, but there is no proof that the author or copyright holder agreed to license the file under the given license. Please provide a link to an appropriate webpage with license information, or send an email with copy of a written permission to OTRS ( This also applies if you are the author yourself. After you emailed permission, you may replace the {{No permission since}} tag with {{subst:OP}} on file description page.

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

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

--Motopark (talk) 07:33, 11 April 2011 (UTC)

File:Revista Ea.gif

Pay attention to copyright
File:Revista Ea.gif has been marked as a possible copyright violation. Wikimedia Commons only accepts free content—that is, images and other media files that can be used by anyone, for any purpose. Traditional copyright law does not grant these freedoms, and unless noted otherwise, everything you find on the web is copyrighted and not permitted here. For details on what is acceptable, please read Commons:Licensing. You may also find Commons:Copyright rules useful, or you can ask questions about Commons policies at the Commons:Help desk.

The file you added has been deleted. If you believe that the deletion was not in accordance with policy, you may request undeletion.

Wikimedia Commons takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing.

Afrikaans | العربية | asturianu | azərbaycanca | беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ | български | বাংলা | català | čeština | dansk | Deutsch | Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ | Zazaki | Ελληνικά | English | British English | español | euskara | فارسی | suomi | français | galego | עברית | hrvatski | magyar | հայերեն | Bahasa Indonesia | italiano | 日本語 | 한국어 | Lëtzebuergesch | македонски | മലയാളം | मराठी | Bahasa Melayu | Malti | မြန်မာဘာသာ | norsk bokmål | Plattdüütsch | Nederlands | norsk nynorsk | norsk | polski | português | português do Brasil | română | русский | sicilianu | slovenčina | slovenščina | српски / srpski | svenska | тоҷикӣ | ไทย | Türkçe | українська | Tiếng Việt | 中文(简体)‎ | 中文(繁體)‎ | +/−

--Túrelio (talk) 07:44, 11 April 2011 (UTC)

File:Isla Grande Boulevard.png

Pay attention to copyright
File:Isla Grande Boulevard.png has been marked as a possible copyright violation. Wikimedia Commons only accepts free content—that is, images and other media files that can be used by anyone, for any purpose. Traditional copyright law does not grant these freedoms, and unless noted otherwise, everything you find on the web is copyrighted and not permitted here. For details on what is acceptable, please read Commons:Licensing. You may also find Commons:Copyright rules useful, or you can ask questions about Commons policies at the Commons:Help desk.

The file you added has been deleted. If you believe that the deletion was not in accordance with policy, you may request undeletion.

Wikimedia Commons takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing.

Afrikaans | العربية | asturianu | azərbaycanca | беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ | български | বাংলা | català | čeština | dansk | Deutsch | Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ | Zazaki | Ελληνικά | English | British English | español | euskara | فارسی | suomi | français | galego | עברית | hrvatski | magyar | հայերեն | Bahasa Indonesia | italiano | 日本語 | 한국어 | Lëtzebuergesch | македонски | മലയാളം | मराठी | Bahasa Melayu | Malti | မြန်မာဘာသာ | norsk bokmål | Plattdüütsch | Nederlands | norsk nynorsk | norsk | polski | português | português do Brasil | română | русский | sicilianu | slovenčina | slovenščina | српски / srpski | svenska | тоҷикӣ | ไทย | Türkçe | українська | Tiếng Việt | 中文(简体)‎ | 中文(繁體)‎ | +/−

--Túrelio (talk) 07:48, 11 April 2011 (UTC)

MESMERIZING CAT (Wire and Plastic Products (talk) 08:03, 11 April 2011 (UTC))

✓ Done. --Túrelio (talk) 13:02, 11 April 2011 (UTC)


File:Paradise Art Space.jpg+File:Revista Ea.jpg Thanks again. (Wire and Plastic Products (talk) 08:14, 11 April 2011 (UTC))

✓ Done. --Túrelio (talk) 13:02, 11 April 2011 (UTC)


Hallo Túrelio, hab dem Benutzer sogar am 4. April noch eine E-Mail geschickt, für den Fall, dass er hier nicht mitliest. Ich denke, wir sollten jetzt löschen, die Gefahr, dass das Bild von dort nur geklaut wurde, ist einfach zu groß. Würdest Du bitte...? Grüßle, --Schwäbin (talk) 08:47, 11 April 2011 (UTC)

✓ Done. --Túrelio (talk) 13:02, 11 April 2011 (UTC)
Dankeschön! --Schwäbin (talk) 13:12, 11 April 2011 (UTC)

Deleting ship categories[edit]

Hi. Instead of deleting all these ship categories, can you just redirect them? Deleting them is leaving many broken links on many Wikipedias, none of which follow the strange new convention here. Thank you. Wknight94 talk 12:54, 11 April 2011 (UTC)

Ok, I'll try to remember when I see them again. Lately it's really getting somewhat complicated with all this redir-requirements. May be we should add to the Welcome-page "Wikimedia Commons is a media file and redirect repository" ;-). --Túrelio (talk) 13:02, 11 April 2011 (UTC)
That would be better than a home page apology, "Sorry we can't follow the same convention as any of the other Wikipedias. en:Carnival Spirit, fr:Carnival Spirit, pt:Carnival Spirit, ru:Carnival Spirit, ...... Category:Carnival Spirit (ship, 2001)." I don't know where this Commons-only convention came from, but it's a terrible idea. Why not call it Category:Carnival Spirit (ship, 2001; port of registry, Panama; tonnage, 85,900; length, 963 ft; ...) Suddenly, to correctly find the ship's category, you need to know other things about it. Silly. I know we're not a Wikipedia, but why do so many feel the need to be different, even if it makes us worse? Wknight94 talk 13:16, 11 April 2011 (UTC)

File:Ehlers 2010-10-18.jpg[edit]

[edit] File:Ehlers 2010-10-18.jpg

Hi Vleit, it is not enough to write "permission granted". You have to provide a permission by the photographer and eventually also by the depicted person (depending on applicable personality rights in your country) to OTRS. --Túrelio (talk) 19:28, 11 April 2011 (UTC)

Regarding this file. It was sent to me by the subject for his Wikipedia page. I have his permission to make it public (see below). What more is required? Thanks, Vleit


From: Ehlers, Jürgen Dr. <xxx@xxx> Date: Mon, 11 Apr 2011 06:44:31 +0000 Subject: My Wikipedia entry

MIME structure of this message, including any attachments:

       text/plain, 40 lines Download this text
       text/html, 101 lines Download this text
   [paperclip] =?iso-8859-1?Q?Wikipedia=5FJ=FCrgen=5FEhlers=5Ftranslated.docx?= application/vnd.openxmlformats-officedocument.wordprocessingml.document 18 KBytes
   [paperclip] Ehlers_2010-10-18.jpg image/jpeg 3158 KBytes

Part 1.1:

Dear Vleit,

As the promised page proofs from Mr. Salin have not yet arrived, I have used the weekend for writing mysteries, starting a Facebook page (I do not know yet how it works; I have to ask Jan-Erik for every new step), writing the English version of my homepage (to be installed today, I hope) and writing an English version of my Wikipedia entry (see attachment). As I cannot put it up myself, I was wondering if either you could do that for me, or if you know somebody who might do it.

The text is nearly identical with the German version (of which I do not know who put it up), with a few omissions of German stuff and a few additions regarding English publications.

To have an English Wikipedia entry might be useful when it comes to the question of having something translated into English. That refers to both the scientific books (Die Nordsee, Das Eiszeitalter) and the crime novels. The next novel which will come out in June is set in 1938, and it might have a (small) chance to find an English publisher, because that period is of some interest in Britain - see Hans Fallada's "Alone in Berlin".

Many regards from all of us. Best wishes, Jürgen.

Part 2: =?iso-8859-1?Q?Wikipedia=5FJ=FCrgen=5FEhlers=5Ftranslated.docx?= application/vnd.openxmlformats-officedocument.wordprocessingml.document (18 KBytes)

Part 3: Ehlers_2010-10-18.jpg image/jpeg (3158 KBytes) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Vleit (talk • contribs) 11. April 2011, 21:52 Uhr (UTC)

The problem is that "for Wikipedia" is not enough to be uploaded to Commons. We require all uploads to be under a so-called free license, that allows others to use the images for any purpose (incl. commercial), at least in regard to copyright. Other restrictions, as personality rights, may apply. Therefore, we need a release under a specific license. As the depicted lives in Germany, please go to Commons:Emailvorlagen#Einverständniserklärung (Rechte-Inhaber), copy the boxed text, enter the filename and the name of a license of the rights holder's choice (recommended is Creative-Commons-BY-SA; for a human-understandable explaination see here). Then mail all together to the rights holder (this assumes that the depicted did also shoot this photo! if this is not the case, the depicted has to ask this permission from the photographer) and ask him to read the text and, if he agrees, to put his legal name and the date under it and to mail it back to Thereafter one of our OTRS volunteers will check the permission and issue a so-called OTRS ticket to the image (equivalent to o.k.). --Túrelio (talk) 20:09, 11 April 2011 (UTC)

Advice pls..[edit]

File_talk:Rasool_Pookkutty_Wax.jpg - Pls advice.....Captain......Tälk tö me.. 04:31, 12 April 2011 (UTC)

IMHO, the usual copyright rules for 3D sculptures should apply. However, as we currently host quite a number of wax sculptures depicting contemporary persons, I have asked about whether there is any consensus about that. --Túrelio (talk) 06:36, 12 April 2011 (UTC)


Hallo Túrelio

danke für das Löschen meiner Unterseiten. Eine kleine Bitte habe ich noch: Könntest du meine CSS-Dateien User:Labant/chick.css, User:Labant/monobook.css, User:Labant/modern.css, User:Labant/cologneblue.css, User:Labant/myskin.css, User:Labant/nostalgia.css, User:Labant/simple.css, User:Labant/standard.css und User:Labant/vector.css ebenfalls Löschen? --Labant (talk) 06:50, 12 April 2011 (UTC)

✓ Done. Ich hoffe, die Großlöschung bedeutet nicht dass du uns verlässt. --Túrelio (talk) 06:54, 12 April 2011 (UTC)
Nein ganz im Gegenteil. Ich habe einfach Mal meine Benutzerseite aufgeäumt. Muss auch Mal sein. Nochmals Danke. --Labant (talk) 06:58, 12 April 2011 (UTC)



Quelle und Autor sind doch angegeben, oder übersehe ich etwas?

Gruß Mulhollant (talk) 15:34, 12 April 2011 (UTC)

Ähem, du willst doch nicht wirklich sagen, dass du diesen File:K-Wagen.jpg aus dem 1. Weltkrieg am 11.1.2011 selbst aufgenommen hast, oder? --Túrelio (talk) 16:32, 12 April 2011

Ich habe es nicht aufgenommen sondern gezeichnet, ganz altmodisch mit Bleistift. Beim Hintergrund habe ich ein gemeinfreies Bild hinzugezogen.

Gruß Mulhollant (talk) 18:18, 12 April 2011 (UTC)

Na dann, Gratulation, dass du so gut zeichnen kannst, dass man die Zeichnung für ein Foto hält. Ist das Vorlagefoto auch auf Commons oder Wikipedia? --Túrelio (talk) 18:25, 12 April 2011 (UTC)

Nein, es stammt nicht von hier

Mulhollant (talk) 12:21, 14 April 2011 (UTC)

Ist das Vorlagephoto denn sonst irgendwo online? Eine sehr nahe Abzeichnung eines Original stellt m.E. urheberrechtlich eine Bearbeitung (engl. derivative) dar, für denen Legitimität der urheberrechtliche Status des Originals relevant ist. Will sagen, wenn das ursprüngliche Photo noch geschützt ist, was ja nicht unmöglich ist (Todesjahr des Photographen +70 Jahre), kann die Zeichnung u.U. das Recht des Photographen verletzen. Um dieses "u.U." zu klären, muss man aber das Original sehen. --Túrelio (talk) 12:34, 14 April 2011 (UTC)

Photograph und Todesdatum sind nicht angegeben...aber habe das Problem schon behoben

Mulhollant (talk) 17:05, 14 April 2011 (UTC)

Old User:Klaricid uploads[edit]

Hi, are you able to look at deleted files File:Juliaca airport.jpg, File:Stacat6.jpg, File:Dc4satco.jpg, File:Dc3satco.jpg, File:C46satco1.jpg, File:Satco001.jpg, to see whether they are taken with the same camera as his remaining uploads?. I suspect that at least File:Juliaca airport.jpg was. Thanks, --Tony Wills (talk) 22:11, 14 April 2011 (UTC)

Good point. Regrettably all airplane images were "blatant" copyvios. Only File:Stacat6.jpg did show a similar church[24] than the currently discussed image, but had no EXIF data, and was uploaded on the same day. It was deleted by the same rationale, as the uploader had changed the author entry 13 hours after upload to ""[25]. All the other deleted files had been uploaded either earlier or later than the two church images, and had no EXIF data. IMHO, it doesn't add much to the DR, except that the uploader had indeed uploaded copyvios. --Túrelio (talk) 06:02, 15 April 2011 (UTC)
I wasn't really thinking about the current deletion request (which I think is complete nonsense :-), I was wondering whether anything else they uploaded was unnecessarily deleted. Yes, I thought the plane images were probably derivatives (photos of photos) at best. But I am suprised that File:Juliaca airport.jpg wasn't original (as the photographer appears to live in that city and apparently provided other images taken at the airport.) - it may have been on another website, but if it was uploaded by a different person (or pseudonym), it might give a clue to how to contact them (I suspect the account on Panoramio is probably to old to receive a response from). Did you find the "original" that File:Juliaca airport.jpg was supposably a copy of? Thanks for your work on this :-) --Tony Wills (talk) 08:23, 15 April 2011 (UTC)
The File:Juliaca airport.jpg image somehow shows that the uploader wasn't a clever or even conscious copyviolator, as it was taken from, carrying a big in-image caption stating that and the name of the photographer. Also the style of that image was totally different from the remaining airplane images. --Túrelio (talk) 08:29, 15 April 2011 (UTC)
Was the photographer not "sergio de la puente" or "sergio kaiser" then? --Tony Wills (talk) 10:15, 15 April 2011 (UTC)
The credit in the in-image caption was "Copyright Cyril Delehaye". --Túrelio (talk) 10:30, 15 April 2011 (UTC)
Thanks. I have emailed all the contact email addresses that I could find on the archive of the site that Klaricid listed as the author contact. I do not hold out a lot of hope that any of these old addresses will still be active (two have already bounced) but you never know (it would probably help if I spoke Spanish :-). --Tony Wills (talk) 23:11, 16 April 2011 (UTC)

Fair image use[edit]


If I find an image under an archive, doesn't that suggest that I may use it, under fair, public rights? Regards Tholoana23 (talk) 07:59, 15 April 2011 (UTC)

Hi Tholoana23,
being publicly "available", i.e. shown on a website, does not say anything about being free from copyright. To the contrary, you have to assume that any content (if not PD due to age or for other reasons) is copyrighted, if not stated otherwise. If a company puts their content on their website or makes it available for download for "press purposes", that does not mean that it is free in our understanding of free.
Fair use can be claimed locally on :en Wikipedia, if the terms are met; but fair use is absolutely not allowed on Commons. --Túrelio (talk) 08:05, 15 April 2011 (UTC)

Sad news[edit]

Since you were involved in the discussion at File talk:Dubai 051.JPG, I thought I should inform you in case you weren't aware, the news has come through that Producer (talk · contribs) died in February 2011. CT Cooper · talk 12:42, 15 April 2011 (UTC)

No, I didn't know. I have semi-protected his userpage and will pray for him. Thanks for notifying. --Túrelio (talk) 12:58, 15 April 2011 (UTC)
I have also placed a note on his English Wikipedia page. CT Cooper · talk 13:23, 15 April 2011 (UTC)

Sacrifice offer - photo[edit]

Dear Turelio, You deleted a photo on which (as far as I know) just limited copyright is: I didn't use it for commercial goals. I put it on the next page: What did I wrong? Theologieproject (talk) 22:02, 15 April 2011 (UTC)

Hi Theologieproject,
per our general policy we do not allow images on Commons that are not free for any kind of use, i.e. no commercial use, educational-only, whatever. Therefore, the deletion had nothing to do with your intended use of this image, but simply with our policy. If you really "need" this image for :nl, you may try to convince the Flickr user to release to Commons without this restriction. --Túrelio (talk) 08:03, 16 April 2011 (UTC)

Kind request[edit]

Dear Turelio, can you please delete this photo from the commons, as I have mistakenly uploaded it from flickr with a wrong license. Thanks a lot.--Kevorkmail (talk) 06:25, 16 April 2011 (UTC)

✓ Done. A pleasure. --Túrelio (talk) 07:36, 16 April 2011 (UTC)


de:Wikipedia_Diskussion:Fotowerkstatt Du hast es gelöscht, wenn ich recht sehe. Bitte, danke. Viele Grüße --Saibo (Δ) 12:59, 16 April 2011 (UTC)

Ähem, und was willst du mir damit sagen? Soll ich es entlöschen? Es war von Sandmann4u mit "speedydelete|replaced by [[File:41 025 RAW Nied 1939bearbeitet2.jpg" getaggt worden; hab aber kein Problem es wiederherzustellen. --Túrelio (talk) 13:05, 16 April 2011 (UTC)
Ja, "entlöschen" bitte - ist übrigens in use, wie du ja leicht sehen kannst. Du scheinst nicht wirklich das gelesen zu haben, was ich verlinkt habe. Viele Grüße --Saibo (Δ) 15:12, 16 April 2011 (UTC)
Bitte sehr: File:41 025 RAW Nied 1939bearbeitet1.jpg. Bzgl. in "in use": Fotowerkstatt ist natürlich kein "echter" use, sondern meist nur vorübergehend. Tatsächlich hatte ich vor der Löschung die FW-Seite besucht und nach lesen von "Danke an xavax, habe seine Fassung eingebaut. --Alupus" gefolgert, dass die Version von Alupus nicht mehr benötigt würde. --Túrelio (talk) 15:21, 16 April 2011 (UTC)
Danke. Ja, es ist ein Projekt-"Use". Bei uralten Fotowerkstatt-Sachen, sieht die Sache vielleicht ein klein wenig anders aus, aber bei solch aktuellen Bildern stört es einfach, wenn plötzlich eine Bearbeitung weg ist. Und bei älteren Abschnitten (im Archiv) ist es einfach sinnvoll sie zu behalten, um den Diskussionsverlauf nachvollziehen zu können. Commons braucht eine bessere Verwaltung von Versionen - wie die aussehen soll, weiß ich nicht, aber löschen bringts nicht. Viele Grüße --Saibo (Δ) 17:09, 16 April 2011 (UTC)

This shot ( is acceptable ?[edit]

Hello Ddfree, You have uploaded several files that are copyright violations and you have done so despite our requests not to do so, and despite our instructions. If you do not stop uploading files that are not free, your account will be blocked. See Commons:Licensing for the copyright policy on Wikimedia Commons. You may also find Commons:Image casebook useful. Please leave me a message if you have further questions. --Túrelio (talk) 15:11, 16 April 2011 (UTC)

Mention sur Flickr licence Acceptable sur Commons ? Some rights reserved CC-BY-SA ACCEPTABLE
This shot ( is acceptable ? Ddfree (talk) 15:53, 16 April 2011 (UTC)
Hi Ddfree,
sorry, but this is the difference between the ideal and real world. As you may or may not have experienced on Commons or Wikipedia, people sometimes do not tell the truth, they lie. This also happens on Flickr, Picasa, PhotoBucket, etc. They upload an image that they have stolen from "somewhere" and then claim it as their own. However, in the above mentioned image, it is very easy to detect the lie. Just look at the description below the image on Flickr. The last words are "Photo by Ross Land/Getty Images". Getty Images is a large commercial image agency that likes to take people to court, who use their images without paying for them. And when they get you, you will pay a lot. You should never upload images that have any association with Getty Images to Commons. --Túrelio (talk) 16:03, 16 April 2011 (UTC)

File:BEE author photo2010highres.jpg[edit]

OTRS has received permission for the file File:BEE author photo2010highres.jpg from Jeff Burton. The OTRS ticket # is 2011021310002305. Can you please undelete this file? --Sreejith K (talk) 14:55, 17 April 2011 (UTC)

✓ Done, though it doesn't display. --Túrelio (talk) 18:04, 17 April 2011 (UTC)


Hello. The image is no longer in use. Could you delete it please? (Lilic (talk) 16:38, 17 April 2011 (UTC)).

Please give images better names[edit]

čeština  Deutsch  English  español  français  italiano  magyar  Nederlands  polski  português  sicilianu  suomi  македонски  русский  українська  മലയാളം  日本語  中文  עברית  العربية  +/−

I noticed you've uploaded File:Europ12DSC_0843.JPG and I thought I should draw your attention to a common error. Please give uploaded images meaningful names. Otherwise they are difficult to track and it is hard to tell what the image is about without actually looking at it. I suggest you rename your image with an intuitive name that describes the image itself. Thanks, and happy editing!

This is just an information. New name might be File:Hotel Europejski Warschau.jpg. Renaming will be carried out by a filemover. No action at your side is required. Thank you. RE rillke questions? 16:44, 17 April 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for the information. However, I did not originally upload this file. I just "cleaned" it to solve its display problem. --Túrelio (talk) 17:58, 17 April 2011 (UTC)

File:Re-El GIOCHI TV.jpg[edit]

Why only the photo of this console is under copyright? It's not the photo of the envelope or the advertisement: is the photo of the real console (you can see four real switch on it). It is not a photo done by David orban to a photo of the console, it's the photo of David Orban of the real console (placed on top of a box). --Arosio Stefano (talk) 20:49, 17 April 2011 (UTC)

Well, in addition to the possible copyright problem (screen content), the image has so low quality (due to the high cropping factor), that it is hardly usable. --Túrelio (talk) 20:57, 17 April 2011 (UTC)
Yes, the quality is very low, but I added it because it can be the only one chance to have one photo of this rare console.
If you follow the two photo links below, you can understand that the deleted photo is not the packaging of the box console but is the console device itself. The strange (colorful) slim and wide real console (in the deleted photo) is placed vertically laid against the wall. There is not a box in the deleted photo (In the first link you can see that the packaging is grey).
Excuse my poor english.
--Arosio Stefano (talk) 20:19, 18 April 2011 (UTC)
O.k., I can undelete it temporarily. But it will then likely have to go through a regular (slow) deletion request, which will allow the exchange of arguments and might let it survive. --Túrelio (talk) 20:24, 18 April 2011 (UTC)
Thank you!!! --Arosio Stefano (talk) 20:31, 18 April 2011 (UTC)
See here: Commons:Deletion requests/File:Re-El GIOCHI TV.jpg. --Túrelio (talk) 20:32, 18 April 2011 (UTC)


Its not a problem but thanks for your message anyway. I've made my brief comment here. The photo quality is so poor that I could not be sure if it was a photo of the console package or of the actual console itself. It does not matter to me if the image is kept or deleted. Best to let the community decide. Regards, --Leoboudv (talk) 06:39, 19 April 2011 (UTC)

File:Ahmed Ihab.jpg[edit]

Look at the photo Link in Flickr. Its not copyright violation.--Mohamed ElGedawy (talk) 06:34, 18 April 2011 (UTC)

With such images you need the permission of the person who made the image of the poster AND of the person who made the image of the person shown on the poster. On Flickr, you have only the first permission, but not the second one, which is more important. There is the same problem with File:Martyr - Mahmoud Mohamed Hassan.jpg. You need the permission of the photographer who took the original image of the victim. --Túrelio (talk) 06:37, 18 April 2011 (UTC)
Thank you for explaining. How can i get the permission of the person who made the image?--Mohamed ElGedawy (talk) 07:11, 18 April 2011 (UTC)
No idea. You need to find out who actually took the image and ask him/her. Considering the situation in which these photos were shot, this might be difficult.
If you are not successful and if you want to use them only on :en wikipedia, you may claim fair-use. But this has to be done locally on :en, as Commons does not allow fair-use material. --Túrelio (talk) 12:02, 18 April 2011 (UTC)


Hi, Túrelio. How are you=) I have a little problem. Can you check is this file okey for commons? Thanks. Koc61 (talk) 06:47, 18 April 2011 (UTC)

When producing a new work out of the work of somebody else, you also have to credit him/her. Now it should be o.k. --Túrelio (talk) 06:56, 18 April 2011 (UTC)
I see, many thanks to you=) Koc61 (talk) 07:14, 18 April 2011 (UTC)

glass sculpture in murano[edit]

Cometo Di Vetro Comet Glass Star by glass sculptor Simone Cenedese

Thanks. Nice photos of a nice sculpture. But, regrettably Italy has no FOP exemption for works of art in the public. Therefore, the image cannot remain on Commons, as it violates the copyright of the glass artist. Sorry. --Túrelio (talk) 12:27, 18 April 2011 (UTC)

What a stupid law in Italy. Sorry but I didn't know, that no public artwokr picture can published. In Hungary, it's total different. Varga Viktor 12:33, 18 April 2011 (UTC)

There is one other possibility. You may try to contact the artist directly (via his website or email and ask him directly for a permission to license your photo of his sculpture. If you want to try that, I would choose only 1 of your photos. Go to Commons:Modello richiesta di permesso, copy the boxed text, enter the complete URL of the image you have choosen, enter the name of the license (including the weblink to creative commons), mail it all to him, together with your personal letter. If he agrees, he should sent his permission to --Túrelio (talk) 12:40, 18 April 2011 (UTC)

I will give a try for it. Maybe thats the correct, if the author can choose between them. Of-course if he/she give rights, the data will be modified. please don't delete until the reply.

O.k. I have put a comment at all 3 DR discussions. Please sign all your comments using --~~~~ . --Túrelio (talk) 07:49, 19 April 2011 (UTC)

File:Investigation into the murder of Sam Degelia no copyrighted material.pdf[edit]

On Saturday, you deleted File:Investigation into the murder of Sam Degelia.pdf for its copyright violations, and I wanted to give you a heads up that this was re-uploaded with the delightful new title "File:Investigation into the murder of Sam Degelia no copyrighted material.pdf". This file was also deleted last year. If you want to take action or nominate it for speedy deletion, it might help to slow the user's cycle of edit warring on an EN article. I worry that, after seven deleted files, the user's just not getting the message about copyright.--Nkgal (talk) 19:36, 18 April 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for notifying. As his latest upload seems to have 5 pages less then the one deleted by me, copyright-infringing material might have been removed. Therefore, a regular DR might now be more appropriate than a speedy. However, at the moment I haven't the time to scroll through 180 pdf pages. --Túrelio (talk) 20:45, 18 April 2011 (UTC)
Okay, yeah, it seems they removed scanned newspaper articles from the PDF. I however see several pages with mug shots, and unless those are taken by federal authorities, or those in California, they're not usually public domain. Other mug shots can be fair use, but not here, and would also need personality rights labeling. Did you want me to nominate it for DR?--Nkgal (talk) 22:18, 18 April 2011 (UTC)
If you have the time to scroll through the whole new version (as the DR should be based on specified possibly copyvios, not on the users history), that would be great. --Túrelio (talk) 07:53, 19 April 2011 (UTC)
I picked out a few pages that were clear issues, and listed them with the deletion request. If you want to leave a message there, I think it would help.--Nkgal (talk) 20:11, 19 April 2011 (UTC)

Regarding the castle background on File:PySolFC-Bakers-Deal-No-2-Midst-of-Solving-by-fc-solve-with-gi-preset.png[edit]


please see what I've written about the castle background of File:PySolFC-Bakers-Deal-No-2-Midst-of-Solving-by-fc-solve-with-gi-preset.png after you marked it for quick deletion. The castle image there was built-in in PySolFC and I just selected it from there because it was my favourite one.


Shlomif (talk) 14:30, 19 April 2011 (UTC)

Hmm, you just converted my derivative-tag into an incomplete deletion request. I didn't see any more writing. Can't you repeat the screenshot without that background? This would be the easiest solution. Of course, cyou could also try to find any evidence/proof that the background image is indeed coverd by the general license for the software. --Túrelio (talk) 14:44, 19 April 2011 (UTC)


File:Pysolfc-black-hole-solitaire.png has been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether it should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry.

If you created this file, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with it, such as a copyright issue.

Please remember to respond to and – if appropriate – contradict the arguments supporting deletion. Arguments which focus on the nominator will not affect the result of the nomination. Thank you!

Dereckson (talk) 15:30, 19 April 2011 (UTC)


Hallo Túrelio. Ich möchte mich bei Ihnen für Hochladung meiner Bilder noch einmal bedanken. Mein Artikel ist exzellent geworden und jetzt steht auf der Hauptseite persischer Wikipedia. Hier! 14:51, 20 April 2011 (UTC)

Gern geschehen und Glückwunsch zum Exzellenz-Artikel. --Túrelio (talk) 15:04, 20 April 2011 (UTC)

Callista Gingrich[edit]

Regarding the photograph of Callista Gingrich, I looked for verification elsewhere, and found it on the Gingrich Productions website. See here, where indeed it is CC-BY-SA. That seems to confirm the original uploader's declaration. I've commented out your template and note on the page, since I think it is no longer applicable, but because I don't know the protocol here I didn't want to delete outright. Thanks, Stargat (talk) 16:58, 20 April 2011 (UTC)

Regularly I would consider this upload Flickr-washing as the image was uploaded to Flickr today, while it was uploaded to Commons 2 years earlier. As the image now is sourced to Flickr, we have to upload the real version from Flickr, let run the Flickreviwe bot and thereafter eventually revert to the retouched version. --Túrelio (talk) 18:17, 20 April 2011 (UTC)
I agree that it was done wrong before, and glad it was done right this time. I see the review has occurred and all seems to have worked out. Thanks for fixing it. Stargat (talk) 19:38, 20 April 2011 (UTC)

My images deletion[edit]

Did you delete my images ? Only learning. I am happy to provide the right copyright for these, it is quite tough. We own all the images we put up and we have copyright when someone uploads these images to our website, which is were we pull them from. Not sure what to do now, it took me ages :( BTW my cat is the same as yours spitting image, if yours is the white one :) awwJasonBournes1 (talk) 16:50, 22 April 2011 (UTC)

Regrettably it's not my own cat. You have to sort out some facts about these images. You had put your username in the author entry of the image, but at the same time sourced it to a website. That per default invalidates the authorship claim, as website owners rarely post their material on Commons, though they may in rare cases. If I understand you correctly, you did not shoot these 2 images, but they were uploaded by users of your (?) website and per the usage terms, you have the right to use the uploaded images, right? About the ages: the images are not lost; it takes any admin 3 clicks to undelete them. --Túrelio (talk) 16:56, 22 April 2011 (UTC)



I'm author of File:Moscow500.png, created to replace a File:Moscow500.JPG. I'm unsure about rendering of this map (my variant can be unreadeble), so I asked to restore older File here. But after restore you delete the file again, and I was not able to compare 2 pictures. Can you restore a File:Moscow500.JPG and protect it from deletion for one or two days? I will write to you or to High_Contrast after I will save older file. `A5b (talk) 21:49, 22 April 2011 (UTC)

Hi, I had read your older comment, but thought you had already done the comparison. I would prefer if you could do the comparison offline, i.e. at your local computer. For that, I could undelete the image, so that you can download it to your computer. But after a short time I would like to delete it again, as it is a clear copyvio. Would that be o.k.? --Túrelio (talk) 21:53, 22 April 2011 (UTC)
Yes. `A5b (talk) 21:54, 22 April 2011 (UTC)
Thanks, I see now that my variant is very unreadable. You can delete JPG. `A5b (talk) 21:57, 22 April 2011 (UTC)


Thank you for your suggest, but I don't like "badges" very much ;) I hope you'll understand me.--Trixt (talk) 20:12, 23 April 2011 (UTC)

Done.--Trixt (talk) 21:35, 23 April 2011 (UTC)
Thanks. --Túrelio (talk) 07:14, 24 April 2011 (UTC)

File:Alexander Binder.jpg[edit]

Hi, There are deletion discussions about File:Alexander Binder retouched.jpg and File:Alexander Binder-3.jpg. I mention this because another similar image was deleted by you, File:Alexander Binder.jpg, after a similar deletion request. If these two files are kept, I would also suggest undeleting the other one. --Tony Wills (talk) 11:54, 24 April 2011 (UTC)

Hi Tony, I performed this deletion not by default, but for the log-stated reason, well considering that many European countries have rather strict personality rights laws and that we have already File:Aleanderbinder.JPG. I can undelete the image, but will thereafter file a DR. --Túrelio (talk) 13:44, 24 April 2011 (UTC)
Ok, I have no real understanding of European personality rights laws, but I didn't think they were a problem for Commons - if the copyright was ok we only need a personality rights warning I thought? But please mention it on these DRs if it is a reason to delete, thanks :-) --Tony Wills (talk) 22:28, 26 April 2011 (UTC)
Ok those two were closed as keep, so I have started an undeletion discussion as this was cited as the source for one of those two. (Instead of having you undelete it, then start a deletion discussion). We need to keep all or delete all I think. --Tony Wills (talk) 23:51, 3 May 2011 (UTC)
Oops, sorry, over the many copyvios and vandalism of the last days I had totally forgotten this case. Go ahead. --Túrelio (talk) 05:31, 4 May 2011 (UTC)

Must useless Rename redirections be deleted?[edit]

Hello, Turélio,thanks for all your deletions. Must useless Rename redirections be deleted? If yes, how to do the (speedy) deletion request? Just with speedy template or otherwise? Greetings --Havang(nl) (talk) 12:03, 24 April 2011 (UTC)

Hi Havang, that's somewhat disputed as of recently. The term "useless Rename", which you may have seen in my del log, wasn't choosen by me, but by the respective nominator and then is automatically included when performing the deletion. After I was "notified" about dupe deletions by a colleague (see [26]), I have stopped to perform deletions of files (as opposed to cats and galleries) in Category:Duplicate and have performed badname/"useless rename redir" deletions only if the redir was broken anyway, if the original upload (i.e. the "bad" filename) was rather recent or if the original filename was totally nonsense like for example 5.jpg. Personally, I'm not that convinced to transform Commons into a repository of redirects, but that seems to be the mainstream opinion now. --Túrelio (talk) 12:54, 24 April 2011 (UTC)
Thanks for the info. --Havang(nl) (talk) 14:00, 24 April 2011 (UTC)

Autorisations de réutilisation[edit]


J'ai recu des avertissements concernant le manque de "preuves de permission sur ce fichier", et je ne comprend pas ce que cela veut dire.

Je suis d'accord pour qu'elles soit réutilisées, et j'ajoute que ces images viennent toutes de moi.

Merci, Dylan — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ing-renault06 (talk • contribs) 24. April 2011, 16:31 Uhr (UTC)

I do understand what you have written, but I cannot answer you in French.
You may therefore understand that we are somewhat hesitant to your authorship statements. You need to understand that by uploading images, which are not your own, you do not only risk to be sued yourself by the rights holder, but you also endanger re-users of our images to be sued for copyright infringement. Therefore, 1) please do not upload images not shot by yourself, and 2) if you upload images shot originally by yourself, then write {{Own}} in the source entry and your username (eventually add your realname in brackets) in the author entry. --Túrelio (talk) 15:15, 24 April 2011 (UTC)


First, I can say that the images File:Monaco-Nice-30janvier2010.jpg, File:StadeduRay-NiceMonaco.jpg and File:NemanjaPejcinovic-entrainement.jpg are myself, but I don't know how I can change the informations. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ing-renault06 (talk • contribs) 24. April 2011, 21:00 Uhr (UTC)

Just go on the image page, click the edit-button and change what you want to correct. Thereafter, hit the save-button and voila. --Túrelio (talk) 19:02, 24 April 2011 (UTC)


Hi, I couldn't understand why you added {{Badname}} to a number of redirect files as it didn't make sense, the template is for marking duplicate images, not redirects. But I now realise you were simply adding a link back to the renamed file as the redirect doesn't really work in conjunction with the speedy delete template that had just been added. I'm not sure that it is the best way, but at least I understand now :-) --Tony Wills (talk) 22:37, 26 April 2011 (UTC)

After some trials I think that a better way is to amend the speedy delete request by adding a link to the redirect destination, eg

{{speedy|delete unneeded redirect}} to
{{speedy|delete unneeded redirect [[:File:original]]}}

then we also get the link in the edit summary. --Tony Wills (talk) 23:35, 26 April 2011 (UTC)
Though you figured it out by yourself already, this was/is simply a sort of procedural "patch" coming out of my promise (see above paragraph "{{duplicate}} deletions" to have the background) not to delete any more duplicate images and to leave the content of the duplicate-speedy-cat (except for empty cats) completely to others. As those speedy-tagged redirs, mentioned by you, if not rather recent, also fall into the do-not-delete-without-leaving-a-redir pigeonhole I was reprimanded for by Nilfanion, I wanted to make them appear also in the duplicate-speedy-cat, so that other might see and consider them for deletion. --Túrelio (talk) 13:51, 27 April 2011 (UTC)
Ahhhh, thanks :-), more sophisticated than I thought :-). I'm afraid I fall into the keep redirects if possible camp, and have recently added a suggest to Commons_talk:Criteria_for_speedy_deletion#Redirects. I think there are more reasons to keep them than generally stated but if you think there are more good criteria for deleting redirects, add it to the discussion :-) --Tony Wills (talk) 04:45, 28 April 2011 (UTC)

Löschen des Bildes File:Landshut - Mannheim 1983 Meister.jpg[edit]

Hallo, nachdem ich schon am 7. März auf meiner Diskussionsseite darauf hingewiesen wurde, dass für das Bild File:Landshut_-_Mannheim_1983_Meister.jpg eine geschriebene Erlaubis für die Veröffentlichung auf Commons benötigt wird, wurde das Bild verständlicherweise von dir am 10. April 2011 gelöscht. Leider habe ich die Löschung erst bemerkt, als es in Wikipedia verschwunden war. Ich habe mich jetzt um eine schriftliche Erlaubnis des Lizenzinhabers bemüht, der eine Weitergabe des Bildes unter der "Creative Commons Namensnennung-Weitergabe unter gleichen Bedingungen Deutschland"-Lizenz erlaubt. Wie muss ich jetzt vorgehen, damit die Löschung des Bildes rückgängig gemacht werden kann, ich könnte dir z.B. eine E-Mail mit dem Erlaubnisschreiben im Anhang senden? Danke --2000 (talk) 09:14, 28 April 2011 (UTC)

Hallo 2000, die schriftliche Genehmigung sollte an gehen, falls das nicht schon passiert ist. Bitte komplett mit Email-Header usw. Das Bild kann ich vorübergehend entlöschen. --Túrelio (talk) 09:16, 28 April 2011 (UTC)
Danke für die schnelle Antwort! Die E-Mail habe ich abgesendet, das Original-"Dokument" (existiert ja nur auf Papier) im Anhang und der Wortlaut zusätzlich in der Mail selbst. Ich hoffe, das passt so! --2000 (talk) 10:06, 28 April 2011 (UTC)
Ich habe mal {{subst:OP}} hinzugefügt. Ich hoffe ihr nehmt mir die Einmischung nicht übel. (Brauchte mal Futter für mein neues Script User talk:Rillke/AjaxMassDelete.js). -- RE rillke questions? 11:40, 28 April 2011 (UTC)

admin babel[edit]

I had to dive a bit to find the syntax, but I it is now added. Platonides 22:08, 28 April 2011 (UTC)


Can you undelete File:UPLB Campus map.svg? My laptop has recently crashed, and I need a copy of it. Moray An Par 08:33, 29 April 2011 (UTC)

Done. Did you finally download it, so that I can delete it again? --Túrelio 08:47, 29 April 2011 (UTC)

Commons:Deletion requests/File:Sathya sai baba.jpg[edit]

You forgot to close this deletion request --Sreejith K 11:22, 29 April 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for reminding. --Túrelio 12:16, 29 April 2011 (UTC)

User BENJIECI[edit]

User BENJIECI hi turelio please upload this image

Hi BENJIECI, that is not possible. See the disclaimer at the bottom of that page. Uploading it would violate copyright. --Túrelio 09:08, 30 April 2011 (UTC)

User BENJJIECI hi Turelio please unblock me

Hi BENJJIECI, I will only unblock you earlier if you promise not to upload more clear copyvios to Commons. --Túrelio (talk) 11:47, 1 May 2011 (UTC)

Info, please[edit]

Hallo Túrelio. I've saw this thread after processing another one which seems to be related. I've also saw Category:Sockpuppets of Jerry Dandridge. It seems there's a dewiki background, can you please have a look? Thanks, --Dferg (talk) 10:25, 1 May 2011 (UTC)

I've already worked on it. However, as Martin H., who also has CU rights, earlier has already dealt with Sockpuppets of Jerry Dandridge, I wanted to leave it to him, as it might go easier that way. I've directly talked to the requester, who is in no hurry since the "wrong" account is already blocked on Commons. --Túrelio (talk) 11:46, 1 May 2011 (UTC)
Thanks for the info. I'll keep watching that thread (though my German is still very basic :-)). Regards, --Dferg (talk) 13:33, 1 May 2011 (UTC)

scale model - Public Museum[edit]

Hi Túrelio!

I published 2 pictures of a scale model from a public museum but they have been deleted. How come they violate or infringe any copyright if they are in a public place and it's about a heritage site?

"File:Maquete01.jpg" and "File:Maquete02.jpg"

Cheers — Preceding unsigned comment added by Diegoruschel (talk • contribs) 13:14, 1. Mai 2011 (UTC)

Hi Diegoruschel,
both images were deleted as being a derivative work and violating the copyright of the designer of the actual model, of which you took these images. Like real buildings such models are usually under the copyright of its designers until 70 years after their death. If you have any evidence that the designer is already dead for that long, we can undelete your images. --Túrelio (talk) 11:53, 1 May 2011 (UTC)


User Esk15453435 hi turelio okey stop upload file please blocked user gohe 007 reason vandalism

Hi Esk15453435, though I don't fully understand what you are saying. If you stop uploading copyvios, you will not be blocked. What is the problem with "user gohe 007"? --Túrelio (talk) 13:46, 1 May 2011 (UTC)

User Esk15453435 user Gohe007 are you admins yes or no

I am an admin, User:Gohe007 is not. --Túrelio (talk) 13:56, 1 May 2011 (UTC)

User Esk15453435 Turelio Look This file please look this file

O.k., but what is the problem? I don't understand. --Túrelio (talk) 14:03, 1 May 2011 (UTC)

User Esk15453435 Turelio Occupation ? — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk • contribs) 1. Mai 2011, 16:13 Uhr (UTC)

No idea what that means. --Túrelio (talk) 14:15, 1 May 2011 (UTC)

UserEsk15453435 Where are you from Turelio — Preceding unsigned comment added by Esk15453435 (talk • contribs) 16:18, 1. Mai 2011 (UTC)

From Germany, as shown on my userpage. --Túrelio (talk) 14:32, 1 May 2011 (UTC)

UserEsk15453435 Hi Turelio do you speak Deutsche Sprache — Preceding unsigned comment added by Esk15453435 (talk • contribs) 16:54, 1. Mai 2011 (UTC)

Sure, what did you expect from somebody from Germany ;-). --Túrelio (talk) 14:56, 1 May 2011 (UTC)


Hallo Túrelio, kannst du den User mal eine Woche zum Regeln verstehen blockieren? User_talk:Jancen_sergio#Urheberrechtsverletzungen Oder siehst du irgend eine Einsicht bzw. Reaktion? Viele Grüße --Saibo (Δ) 16:53, 1 May 2011 (UTC)

UserEsk15453435 Hi Turelio please is not blocked me — Preceding unsigned comment added by Esk15453435 (talk • contribs) 19:15, 1. Mai 2011 (UTC)

Esk15453435, você também é usuário Jancen sergio? --Túrelio (talk) 17:34, 1 May 2011 (UTC)


Danke! Gruß, --4028mdk09 (talk) 20:30, 1 May 2011 (UTC)

Move a file[edit]

Hi. Sorry to bother you, but can you move File:Journée International des travailleurs et travailleuses anticapitaliste - Montréal.JPG to File:Journée internationale des travailleurs et travailleuses anticapitaliste - Montréal.JPG please? It's embarassing to say, but I made some grammatical mistakes... Thank you. SSDGFCTCT9 (talk) 21:56, 2 May 2011 (UTC)

✓ Done. --Túrelio (talk) 22:05, 2 May 2011 (UTC)

File:Flag of Islamofascism.svg‎[edit]

Please add a header when you start a new subject on a user talk page; failure to do so is somewhat annoying. In any case, the file expresses a "Muslims: clear and present danger" point of view which, without any further context, at a minimum borders on Islamophobia. It really isn't any different from some other files in the category (File:Eurabia Flag.svg etc.). AnonMoos (talk) 08:30, 3 May 2011 (UTC)

The relevant difference between the two flags mentioned by you, is that the latter does exist in the web, so the file simply documents something used at least virtually, whereas the former is purely fiction and might even have been created to get used, aka abuse of Commons for activism. --Túrelio (talk) 08:34, 3 May 2011 (UTC)
That's nice; however this has no relevance to whether the Islamophobia category is applicable. AnonMoos (talk) 08:47, 3 May 2011 (UTC)


UserEsk15453435 hi turelio what is this Qualified to the phase of tournament indicated

Esk15453435, I have no idea to what you are refering. --Túrelio (talk) 12:49, 3 May 2011 (UTC)

UserEsk15453435 Hi Turelio Please Unblock me

But who are you, Easds123454323? The blocking time of this account as already expired. So it should be no longer blocked. But do not again upload copyvios. Next block will be longer. --Túrelio (talk) 12:59, 3 May 2011 (UTC)

UserEsk15453435 Hi Turelio Please blocked this user Soccer-holic reason vandalism page premier leagie 2012 2013

Why should I do this? Soccer-holic (talk · contribs) has no edits at all on Commons. May be you are mixing up Commons and Wikipedia. --Túrelio (talk) 13:08, 3 May 2011 (UTC)

UserEsk15453435 Hi Turelio Please Blocked User Gohe007 reason Upload Several Files

Gohe007 (talk · contribs) has no edits/uploads since April 18. No reason to block.
And with this, our little game comes to an end. I don't know what you intended with your mostly strange questions. I have no longer time for that game. If you face real problems, take them to COM:AN. EOD. --Túrelio (talk) 13:27, 3 May 2011 (UTC)


UserMonstarPR hi turelio please not remove me picture

But these images are "(C) All rights reserved" on Flickr. --Túrelio (talk) 15:16, 3 May 2011 (UTC)

UserMonstarpr hi Turelio what is this Welcome to OTRS

Please sign your comments always with --~~~~.
I have no idea what you mean by "Welcome to OTRS". OTRS is our system for confirmation of permissions. If a user want to upload an image that he did not shoot by himself, but got permission by the original photographer, he has to mail this permission to (OTRS). Our OTRS-volunteers then check the permission and either give their o.k. or request more information. --Túrelio (talk) 15:34, 3 May 2011 (UTC)


Hallo, zunächst einmal ein herzliches Dankeschön für Dein Engagement für die Gedenkseite hier auf Commons. Daß es bisher relativ wenig Feedback gab, mag daran liegen, dass einerseits im Verhältnis relativ wenige die Commons-Adminseiten auf der Beo haben (gehöre selbst auch zu denjenigen), andererseits die Kommunikationskultur auf Commons zumeist etwas langsamer und weniger heftig ist als in anderen Projekten (wobei Ausnahmen sicher die Regel bestätigen *schmunzel*).
Da ich befürchte, dass meine Sprachvermögen im Englischen nicht mehr ausreicht, um nicht missverstanden zu werden, hier mal vorab ein paar Gedanken zu den von Dir gestellten Fragen:
Diese Liste kann und wird nie vollständig sein, da wir in den meisten Fällen gar nicht erfahren werden, dass ein Mensch hinter einem Account verstorben ist. Das sollten wir bei der Diskussion imho im Auge behalten. Nur diejenigen einzubeziehen, die hier regelmäßig über einen längeren Zeitraum aktiv sind, gefällt mir persönlich nicht, denn wo will man hier die Grenze ziehen? Außerdem darf die Gedenkseite nicht zu einer "Best of ..." werden.
Warum nicht auch an diejenigen erinnern, die hier einen selbst angelegten Account hatten, auch wenn sie hier so gut wie nicht editiert haben - denn gerade Commons ist ein übergreifendes Projekt, das nicht zum Selbstzweck, sondern quasi als Dienstleister für die anderen Projekte fungiert. Was wäre Commons ohne diejenigen, die die hier hochgeladenen Dateien systematisch z. B. in ihrem Heimatwiki einbinden?
Um es auf den Punkt zu bringen: ich finde jeder, der hier auf Commons einen selbstangelegten Account hat, von dessen Tod wir irgendwann gesichert erfahren und der einer Aufnahme in die Gedenkliste nicht (auf seiner Benutzerseite oder per opt-out) widersprochen hat, sollte ohne weitere Diskussionen aufgenommen werden - unabhängig von der Zahl seiner Edits oder des Accountalters.
Daher: volle Zustimmung zu der von Dir bislang geleisteten Arbeit an dieser Seite. Gruß, --4028mdk09 (talk) 13:44, 4 May 2011 (UTC) Vielleicht versuche ich mich in den nächsten Tagen mal auf der DS in der hiesigen Arbeitssprache - mag aber nichts versprechen.

Hi 4028mdk09, Danke für die Rückmeldung. Wenn dir letzteres zuviel Mühe macht, kann ich dein Statement auch gerne in englischer Kurzform und unter Bezug auf dieses Posting in die Diskussion auf Commons talk:Deceased contributors‎ einfügen. --Túrelio (talk) 13:59, 4 May 2011 (UTC)
Dein Angebot nehme ich - ehrlich gesagt sehr gerne - an. Zumal es sicher einfacher ist als meine sprachlichen Patzer und Mistverständnisse hinterher auszubessern. Aber bitte nur, wenn es Dir nicht zuviel Arbeit macht - danke! --4028mdk09 (talk) 14:09, 4 May 2011 (UTC)
So, erledigt. Ich hoffe, du fühlst dich korrekt wiedergegeben. --Túrelio (talk) 19:14, 5 May 2011 (UTC)
Habe es gerade erst gesehen - Du hast es absolut auf den Punkt gebracht. Herzlichen Dank! --4028mdk09 (talk) 19:26, 5 May 2011 (UTC)

Category:FSO Polonez[edit]


All I did was include the amount of information necessary for understanding the subject in its entirety.

However I can include this information on a separate page leaving only a small portion on the Category page.

Regards. - SuperTank17 (talk) 14:10, 4 May 2011 (UTC)

You could create a separate gallery page FSO Polonez in which you include 1 to 3 image(s) of each subtype, so that the reader gets an overview without the need to scan thourgh all the (sub)categories. However, even such a gallery should not mimic a Wikipedia article. --Túrelio (talk) 14:12, 4 May 2011 (UTC)
This is a rather complicated subject. Without providing a point by point breakdown it is next to impossible to properly describe the history of FSO Polonez and all its variants and models which is nessacery for someone who does not posses much knowledge about the subject to understand what is what and why.
Regards. - SuperTank17 (talk) 15:26, 4 May 2011 (UTC)
I have cut some of the information concerning the development work (which I might add was already a very brief and undetailed description).
Regards. - SuperTank17 (talk) 15:29, 4 May 2011 (UTC)
Your gallery looks quite better now. Hopefully, the sections currently without images, will be filled over time. --Túrelio (talk) 15:33, 4 May 2011 (UTC)

Cropped picture[edit]

Hi Túrelio!
I am writing in connection with File:Dachldz.JPG. It wasn't error. I cut this photo deliberately becouse it was taken awry. I wanted to use sky in the background to decorate my user page on wikiepedia. Finally picture looked no good so I didn't insert it for my user page. - Adim444 (talk) 08:08, 5 May 2011 (UTC)

No problem. Thanks for the feedback. --Túrelio (talk) 08:10, 5 May 2011 (UTC)

Ronald Davis[edit]

Please restore this image File:P0055av_Ring.jpg that was deleted this morning from the en:Ronald Davis article on the English wikipedia. My understanding is both the painting and the image of it were released by the artist. Thank you...Modernist 11:11, 5 May 2011 (UTC)

Hi Modernist,
I would like to, but we really need evidence for that permission, as I had written at File talk:P0055av Ring.jpg. If you received it by email, then send the original email from the artist to OTRS and tell me when you have done so. I can then temporarily undelete the file. --Túrelio (talk) 12:07, 5 May 2011 (UTC)
I'll let you know when the email is sent. I'm working on it, thanks...Modernist 21:41, 5 May 2011 (UTC)
Where do we email you the artist's permission?..Modernist 23:19, 10 May 2011 (UTC)
I asked the artist to email you - through en:wikipedia...Modernist 01:20, 11 May 2011 (UTC)
Email has arrived, but I have to forward it to OTRS, because they have to issue an OTRS-ticket. --Túrelio (talk) 06:45, 11 May 2011 (UTC)

Annalisa Scarrone[edit]

Grazie per la spiegazione: ora ho capito cosa mi dicevi con quei rettangoli rossi :) e quindi ti faccio una domanda. Come posso mettere le foto che avevo scattato io allora? Devo mettere l'originale? E con quale licenza? Potresti rispondermi in italiano? Grazie per l'attenzione--Little Kiwi (talk) 15:13, 5 May 2011 (UTC)

Sorry, I can't answer in Italiano, I could only Google-retranslate it. When you want to upload images originally shot/taken by yourself, you should put {{Own}} in the source entry. But please do this only with images originally shot by yourself. As you have already uploaded 3 copyvios, the next one likely will get you blocked. With your own images, you can choose any Commons-allowed license (see Commons:Licenze). If you want to retain some control over your image, you might choose {{CC-BY-SA-3.0}}. Ciao. --Túrelio (talk) 15:22, 5 May 2011 (UTC)
Forse ho capito cosa devo fare. Devo caricare le immagini originali e dare a voi il Ticket OTRS?--Little Kiwi (talk) 15:28, 5 May 2011 (UTC)
No, you do not need an OTRS ticket for your own images. You need to get an OTRS ticket for images from other photographers, from whom you received a permission. You need to send this permission to OTRS; they check it and then issue their o.k. or rejection. --Túrelio (talk)

Popular Science Monthly image galleries[edit]

Hi, and thanks for all your help in cleaning up. I also felt that the two images have value on their own, but couldn't think at first of how to deal with them. Finally, I properly titled, described and placed them in their proper category: Category:Native American pottery. I needed to move them because the PSM gallery is a very important tool for tracking and verifying that the images and .djvu pages match as the Internet Archive numbering is off and pages are missing in some of the scans. To correct the error, they often rescan another contribution of the same, but do not remove the damaged copy from their download list.Ineuw talk page on 18:01, 5 May 2011 (UTC)

As of Aziza photo 028 edited.jpg[edit]

The author changed his license and sent another message to OTRS. Please check. Thank you. [User:i_rodionov] 21:22 5 May 2011 (UTC)

Ok, I've tagged it with OTRS-pending. Final evaluation will come from OTRS. I am not on OTRS. --Túrelio (talk) 21:27, 5 May 2011 (UTC)
Thanks [User:i_rodionov] 21:36 5 May 2011 (UTC)

Torrentecosa.JPG erased[edit]

Could I know why did you remove the Torrentecosa.JPG image from commons? I explained that it's a mine image! Thanks, — Preceding unsigned comment added by Arzino (talk • contribs) 21:17, 6. Mai 2011 (UTC)

Because it was sourced to a website,, that doesn't show a free license for its content. --Túrelio (talk) 19:24, 6 May 2011 (UTC)

Rapid removal[edit]

Please remove all pictures that I put up for speedy deletion. Дагиров Умар (talk) 09:20, 7 May 2011 (UTC)

✓ Done. --Túrelio (talk) 20:07, 8 May 2011 (UTC)

Огромное спасибо. -- Дагиров Умар (talk) 23:22, 9 May 2011 (UTC)

Romanian Copyright law (File:2006 0610TurdaMonument.jpg)[edit]

It was a deletion Rewquest for (edit · last · history · watch · unwatch · global usage · logs · purge · w · search · links · DR · del · undel · Delinker log) It was deleted,so it will remain deleted. (i never reupload a picture even if the reason for deletion is not right) The reason was::Contemporary monument (built im1995), thereby still copyrighted. As Romania has no FOP exemption, the image violates the copyright of the sculptor.

Still i have some questions:

  • Why, the Romanian law is applied on commons? Are you familliar with the romanian law? As far as i now

Regarding your arguments: Thanks, but there are already 2 problems. 1) the monument is actually (without reasonable dispute) the "principal subject" of the the image; 2) media on Commons per our policy have to be free for commercial use. In order to be whitout reasonable dispute, the picture shoul present only the monument. Otherwise it is disputable. Rregarding the Commons policy, it is a fair reason to delete a picture, but it was not the reason for deletion request. :)CristianChirita (talk) 22:06, 7 May 2011 (UTC)

Hi CristianChirita,
we (also) apply Romanian law because the image was taken in Romania. At least one reason for this is the Schutzlandprinzip (sorry, only in German).
I am not familiar with Romanian law, but Commons:Freedom of panorama#Romania has sufficient information.
Regarding "without reasonable dispute": please, be honest to yourself, the name of the file was "2006 0610TurdaMonument.jpg".
I do not understand what you mean by "but it was not the reason for deletion request". --Túrelio (talk) 07:25, 8 May 2011 (UTC)


Hi Turélio, I really can't understand why it's said that the above mentioned image is fallen in the pubblic domain: no information about the author is given, except a generic claim which states a not proved death of him. Aside from this, the fact that the author is dead doesn't mean anything by itself, because it's necessary to know if he dead more than 70 years ago and, to be honest, I'm sure he didn't, as this would mean he dead shortly after taking the picture, which is not probable. Also I don't see any information regarding the original source, therefore it's impossible to be sure that the author is anonymouse. I'm not expert, otherwise I would start a deletion request by myself. Consider what is the best thing to do in this case. Goodbye. -- 16:54, 7 May 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for notifying. I've filed it for deletion. --Túrelio (talk) 07:30, 8 May 2011 (UTC)

deletion request[edit]

Hi. Could you delete File:Ralf Zumdick.jpg? Because I've made a mistake, I've uploaded the wrong photo... Best regards--Sabri76 08:12, 8 May 2011 (UTC)

✓ Done. Honestly, this one File:Ralf zumdik.jpg should also be deleted as it does show the depicted in a somewhat demeaning manner. Agree? --Túrelio (talk) 08:15, 8 May 2011 (UTC)

User Deletion[edit]


My account - User:TheGlobalFCzone - was recently deleted.

Is it possible to easily change the username or create a new account?

Thank you,


Hi Roth,
it was not your account that has been deleted (that's impossible), but only your userpage User:TheGlobalFCzone, as its content was considered as promotional. You might consider re-creating your userpage, but avoid promotional wording/content. Username change is possible (see COM:CHU), but somewhat complicated, as you have already uploaded files. --Túrelio (talk) 07:36, 9 May 2011 (UTC)

Мои фотографии (=My Photos)[edit]

Список фотографии снятых лично мной (per Google: List of photos taken by me):

I've copied it to the DR discussion. --Túrelio (talk) 13:42, 10 May 2011 (UTC)

Thank you very much. -- Дагиров Умар (talk) 13:57, 10 May 2011 (UTC)

My page[edit]

Hi Túrelio, I'm Clara and I would like to know why you've deleted my page. It was very important for me because I shared that page with a boy who is special for me and we had lots of memories there and now I don't know how to get that again...Please explain me what can I do. Thank you

Hi Clara, as you are not logged-in and didn't provide the filename, I have no idea to which image you are referring. --Túrelio (talk) 21:02, 10 May 2011 (UTC)

my user name was Marclaradossis, what can I do?

Ok, I see. It was you talkpage, User talk:Marclaradossis, that has been deleted, because it was found being out of scope. Look, our pages, including userpages, are to be used for Commons-related content. You have no uploads at all, you only had some edits on your talkpage in 2009. Thereafter, other users, without being logged-in added content to your talkpage. I can temporarily undelete your talkpage, so that you can copy the content to your computer. But thereafter the talkpage should be "cleaned". If you do not want to upload anything to Commons, you should consider to retire your account. Remember, we are repository for free media files, not a forum or webspace provider. --Túrelio (talk) 21:12, 10 May 2011 (UTC)

Ok thank you, so now what we should do? I opened this page with this boy years ago and then I forgot the password and we couldn't enter but two weeks ago more or less I discovered that I could comment again in our page so we started to write there until today that we've realized that we couldn't see the page. From now on what should we do? can we keep writting in a diferent way or something like that? please tell me. Thank you again.

Hi, please read again, what I wrote you in the above paragraph. If you simply want to safe the content of your talkpage to your personal computer, I can temporarily undelete the page. If you want this, then say so. Thereafter, the content should be deleted again, as it has nothing to do with the aims of this project. If you want to contribute to this project, i.e. upload freely licensed media files, then you can try password-recovery by requesting a new password to be send to the email address you provided when opening your account. If you have no intention to contribute to Wikimedia Commons, you should request to retire (close) your account, by stating this here. --Túrelio (talk) 06:44, 11 May 2011 (UTC)

ok I have understood everything more or less so I want you to undelete my page please. Thank you for everything.

✓ Done now. However, after saving the page content to your computer, you should "clean" the page by yourself. Otherwise it will likely be deleted again. Did you finally recover the password for your account? --Túrelio (talk) 19:40, 11 May 2011 (UTC)

Sorry if I'm not very clear but my english isn't as well as I would like and I do what I can. About my password I've been searching how to get it again but I don't know how to do it..I'll try if I can find the way to get the password and if it's not possible I'll do another account. What do you thing about that? Do you think that's a good idea?

But I told you already: "you can try password-recovery by requesting a new password to be send to the email address you provided when opening your account". When you try to log-in to Commons under your username, you will be asked for the password and you are offered to get a new password. When you click on that, you will get send a new password to the associated email address. --Túrelio (talk) 20:15, 11 May 2011 (UTC)

Ok I think that I've resolt everything more or less. Thanks for your help and sorry if I have bothered you.

File:Burj Khalifa building.jpg[edit]

Hi there! Would you mind reuploading File:Burj Khalifa building.jpg to English Wikinews for use on n:Man commits suicide by jumping from Burj Khalifa? Broken image links make people sad ;-). Thanks, — μ 09:38, 12 May 2011 (UTC)

Does English Wikinews allow fair-use content? The image is still available at --Túrelio (talk) 10:19, 12 May 2011 (UTC)
It does, and thanks. It's all been sorted. — μ 10:40, 12 May 2011 (UTC)

File:CD Granuloma2.jpg[edit]

The file is needed since the File:CD Granuloma2.jpg contains an XML error in the commit summary caused by mediawiki, which is known for a long time and only fixed for new commits. So I will recreate it.Dirk Hünniger (talk) 05:53, 14 May 2011 (UTC)

Kein Problem. Besonders dringend scheint es aber nicht gewesen zu sein, da ich die Datei als Duplikat am 6. Sep. 2010 (!) gelöscht hatte. Es wäre allerdings gut, in der Beschreibung irgendeine Bemerkung zu hinterlassen, sonst wird sie demnächst wieder von jemand anderem als dupe markiert/gelöscht. --Túrelio (talk) 06:58, 14 May 2011 (UTC)

Deletion request[edit]

Could you please delete File:Nokia N82 (front photo).jpg? The file is now orphaned. Thank you. Editor182 (talk) 17:12, 14 May 2011 (UTC)

✓ Done. --Túrelio (talk) 20:21, 14 May 2011 (UTC)

Ellen Oléria[edit]

Olá, a imagem File:Ellen Oléria.jpg foi retirada do Flickr com a permissão da criadora Suelene através e e-mail enviado para mim, que foi encaminhado para sob o título "Permissão de upload", Terça-feira, 10 de Maio de 2011 22:35 Caso haja dificuldade em localizar este email eu posso mandar novamente, ou esclarecer alguma dúvida. ZackTheJack (talk) 19:52, 14 May 2011 (UTC)

Ok, I have removed the speedy-tag. --Túrelio (talk) 20:21, 14 May 2011 (UTC)

File:Logo Chevrolet.svg[edit]

Hi How are you? I ask something to you: This picture] is a violation of copyright? I have understood, that the partial or total reproductions in wikimedia are prohibited that is under copyright laws, and this is a partial reproduction of a Chevrolet's logo.

I trust you. Greetings!!! --Diego HC (talk) 22:27, 14 May 2011 (UTC)

Hmm, I'm not really sure about that. The similarity is so weak/little. Bu we can put it in a regular DR, so that others could voice their opinion. --Túrelio (talk) 23:17, 14 May 2011 (UTC)


Hi, can you tell me what 加賀充 contained? I am trying to help User:Kagamitsuru to understand our scope. Thanks, :-) --Tony Wills (talk) 05:06, 15 May 2011 (UTC)

Copy&pasting a few lines from the deleted page to Google: Its a copy of with an image on top. That page again appears to be a stored version of ja:加賀充. --Martin H. (talk) 06:35, 15 May 2011 (UTC)
Thanks :-) --Tony Wills (talk) 09:23, 15 May 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for taking care during my off-time. Case seems to be settled now. --Túrelio (talk) 15:09, 15 May 2011 (UTC)

Re: File:PL Bolesław Leśmian-Przygody Sindbada żeglarza 004 .jpeg[edit]

This is just reason why I asked for removal. Details explained in file talk page. Ankry (talk) 22:31, 15 May 2011 (UTC)

Oops, sorry. I hadn't seen that you had nominated it by yourself. --Túrelio (talk) 07:06, 16 May 2011 (UTC)

Hallo Tureli[edit]

Guten Tag Turelio ich bin noch zimmlich neu bei Wiki. Danke für die Antwort auf meine Bilder. Ja die Bilder sind alle von mir gemalt. Ich zeichne und male seit ich klein bin. Leider sind viele meiner Kunstwerke bei einem Hausbrand letztes Jahr verbrand. Die welche zum glück noch da sind waren bei meiner Mutter eingelagert waren. Die Werke die auf welche Sie geantwortet haben sind aus meiner neuen schaffens Zeit.

Hallo Tosco12, bitte eigene Kommentare immer mit --~~~~ unterschreiben. Die 3 Gemälde-Reproduktionen sind momentan gelöscht, weil sie unbenutzt waren und etwas ouf of COM:SCOPE wirkten. Ich kann sie wieder ent-löschen, wenn du sie irgendwie konkret einordnen kannst/willst. --Túrelio (talk) 10:58, 16 May 2011 (UTC)

File Upload[edit]

Hello Túrelio. The other day you deleted a file I uploaded, File:HairSingleCover.png, so I was wondering if you knew how to do it right. It is a normal single cover for a Lady Gaga song. You can find the official image released by Gaga herself here. Is there any way you could upload it? Thanks in advance, --Evengan (talk) 16:21, 16 May 2011 (UTC)

Hi Evengan, I fear that is not possible. See Commons:Image casebook#Album covers. Publishing something in the internet is not equivalent to release it under a free license. --Túrelio (talk) 16:30, 16 May 2011 (UTC)
How is it then that I find all the single covers in their respective articles? --Evengan (talk) 16:39, 16 May 2011 (UTC)
Could you give me an example? If you refer to :en Wikipedia, they allow so-called fair-use content; Commons does not not. If your local project does allow fair-use content, you should try uploading the image locally. --Túrelio (talk) 18:07, 16 May 2011 (UTC)
I want to upload it to :en Wikipedia, is there a special place to upload the image there? Thanks in advance, --Evengan (talk) 18:51, 16 May 2011 (UTC)
See en:Wikipedia:Non-free content. --Túrelio (talk) 18:54, 16 May 2011 (UTC)

Macruve Photos[edit]

Hola Turelio, Qué debo de hacer para borrar las fotos que me indicas. Gracias-- 20:17, 16 May 2011 (UTC)

Hola Macruve, the 3 photos mentioned on your talkpage are already deleted. Or do you want also your other uploads have deleted? --Túrelio (talk) 20:19, 16 May 2011 (UTC)

Hi Tûrelio, Estas fotos están subidas para ser insertadas posteriormente en unos artículos en Wikipedia. En relación a la fecha las añadireé en breve. aunque todas las de blanco y negro son de 1960/1961. Las fotos que llevan una marca de agua serán eliminadas. Las lleva porque estaban publicadas antesen mi propia web. Las fotos que me dices que son copia se pueden eliminar directamente, aunque son extraidas de un propio video original. Muchas gracias.-- 15:50, 17 May 2011 (UTC)

Turelio, please help[edit]

Good afternoon, sorry but I'm lost, I need your help, my bad i nglés the other hand I'm new in Common, all photos are free to use and correspond to the classification of architecture, but I have no idea how to add that information to the photos, can you please tell me how? I did not cause any problems for my ignorance. Thanks (talk) 15:10, 19 May 2011 (UTC)

I can't really help you with categorization. However, the most pressing problem is whether you have the full copyright for these images. Did you really shoot the original photographies by yourself or did you scan existing photo-prints? The next thing to do, as I had told you already on your talkpage, is to add the date (year) of the creation of the original photo into the date entry to replace the "?" sign. --Túrelio (talk) 15:27, 19 May 2011 (UTC)

The FOP and romanian copyright law[edit]

It seems that the Google Street view does not interpret the romanian law in the sense Wikicommons does. And surprise the romania press does not show any surprise :)CristianChirita (talk) 22:25, 16 May 2011 (UTC)

Well, Google is Google. Of course, FOP or no-FOP becomes relevant only when you are imaging works of art that are still protected. Anyway, the problem would be that the rights holder (the artist or his heirs) would have to sue Google, which is not that easy. So, finally it's a question of power. We do not (want to) follow this approach. --Túrelio (talk) 06:19, 17 May 2011 (UTC)

File:Doullens (14 mai 2011) Nuit des Musées 019.jpg[edit]

Hi Markus3,
are you the parent of the little girl in the foreground of File:Doullens (14 mai 2011) Nuit des Musées 019.jpg and of File:Doullens (14 mai 2011) Nuit des Musées 012.jpg or, if not, did you ask her parents for permission to publish this image? --Túrelio (talk) 07:58, 18 May 2011 (UTC)

And what is your answer? --Túrelio (talk) 08:06, 18 May 2011 (UTC)
Was für eine Eile ! Mein English ist "nichts" ... und brauche immer Zeit zu "argumentieren" und klar zu antworten.
Nein, das Mädchen gehört meiner Familie nicht. Aber die Eltern und andere Personen (Angestelle und Verantworter des Museums, "Begleiter/Animateurs" des Maler-Klubs, usw haben klar gesehen, dass ich Personen (und natürlich auch Kinder) photografierte. Manche kennen mich in Doullens und andere haben sogar mich gefragt, ob ich sie gern knipsen wollte, damit sie Erinnerungen des Abends haben. Einige glaubten, ich photografierte für eine Lokalzeitung. Ich erklärte jedesmal (und wie immer für alle meine WP-Bilder), dass es "nur" für Wikipedia und Wikimedia Commons ist. Jedesmal habe ich also die Gelegenheit, sie zu fragen, ob sie es mir erlauben die Bilder per Internet zu zeigen. Immer bekomme ich die Antwort "ja, natürlich" und immer zeigen sie sich gespannt und wollen so schnell wie möglich die Fotos sehen. Sie fragen mich sogar immer die präzise Internet-Site-Adresse.
So eine "Frage" wurde mir schon gestellt ... Siehe hier !... und meine sehr präzise Erklärung ist da zu lesen. Wirklich nie Problem gehabt ! Wenn es der Fall wäre, würde ich natürlich machen wie gewünscht (Gesicht unscharf machen oder sogar Bild zerstören). Grüsse ! Marc ROUSSEL - --Markus3 (talk) 08:47, 18 May 2011 (UTC)
O.k., dann ist es gut. Denke aber bitte daran, dass auf Commons hochgeladene Bilder nicht "nur für Wikipedia und Wikimedia Commons" sind, sondern auch beliebig außerhalb benutzt werden (können). Bei Bildern mit identifizierbaren Personen bitte {{Personality}} hinzufügen. --Túrelio (talk) 08:36, 18 May 2011 (UTC)


Hi Túrelio. Some kind of action would be appropriate IMO, he keeps uploading in spite of the warnings. Regards. --Eusebius (talk) 20:54, 18 May 2011 (UTC)

✓ Taken care of. --Túrelio (talk) 21:12, 18 May 2011 (UTC)

Hallo! (File:AixafemElFeixisme.jpeg)[edit]

Guten morgen! Sorry my German is way too limited. As you can check in the site where it comes from ( there is no further indication (as far as I know...). I may be wrong but in general the images from Gallica are freed from copyrights. However if you can prove me I am wrong, I will gladly accept your say. Have a nice day, sincerely, Claudi Balaguer/Capsot (talk) 09:18, 19 May 2011 (UTC)

My "evaluation" has nothing to do with the source of the file. This poster/painting/photo (not sure what is really is) is clearly the work of an artist. In Europe (slightly different to the US), the artist always retains his authorship and until 70 years after his death also the copyright (if there is no proof to the other). As this was allegedly created around 1936-8, the artist needs to have died already in 1940 for the image to be PD in 2011. So, if you need this image on a WMF project (except :en, as they accept fair-use), you have to find out the name of the original artist (it might be in the illegible caption at the lower right border) and when he/she had died. --Túrelio (talk) 09:25, 19 May 2011 (UTC)
I found a bit more information on the site even though it doesn't say anything about the author, will this prove to be enough? It says (in French) "Public domain". Bye! Capsot (talk) 10:26, 19 May 2011 (UTC)

"Notice complète Titre : Aixafem el feixisme [Ecrasons le Fascime] : [affiche] / [non identifié]

Éditeur : [s.n.]

Date d'édition : 1936-1939

Sujet : Espagne -- 1936-1939 (Guerre civile) Relancer la recherche sur ce sujet dans Gallica

Sujet : Histoire Relancer la recherche sur ce sujet dans Gallica

Type : image fixe,estampe

Langue : Espagnol

Format : 1 est. : lithogr. en coul. ; 95 x 61 cm

Format : image/jpeg

Droits : domaine public

Identifiant : ark:/12148/btv1b9017940c

Source : Bibliothèque nationale de France, ENTQB-1(1936)-FT6

Relation :

Provenance :"

Thanks for the research. However, the claim is purely "authoritative" and without any explaination/proof. However, I can change the speedy to regular DR to allow for more input/opinions of other users. Feel free to comment at Commons:Deletion requests/File:AixafemElFeixisme.jpeg. --Túrelio (talk) 10:34, 19 May 2011 (UTC)


This image was uploaded here by someone with a difficult uploader history--according to his/her talk page. (you have some contact with this person) It may be genuine or perhaps be a copy vio. If you think it is genuine, then feel free to flickrpass it. If not, then perhaps it should be deleted. I notice this person has 2 images here from the same flickr account but I cannot say if there is any conclusive evidence of flickrwashing. Perhaps it is a genuine photo and I am just a little concerned. I don't wish to accuse anyone of anything without clear evidence. Thank You, --Leoboudv (talk) 07:12, 20 May 2011 (UTC)

Dupe is gone. First one had a "(C) Roberto Ricci" caption on Flickr, suggesting Flickr user is not the photographer. Therefore tagged with no-perm. Will likely go after a week. Thanks for notifying. --Túrelio (talk) 07:51, 20 May 2011 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment: This flickr account that the uploader uses is interesting. It contains many flickrwashes here and here which are correctly licensed as 'All Rights Reserved." But the uploader uploaded another image below and I cannot say if it is a flickrwash or not:
  • File:Romeo&Juliette-Salzburg-2008 (1).jpg

I just find it interesting that on flickr, the web site never what digital camera was used. Of course the flickr acount owner could use a non-digital camera but with so many creates some doubt. Anyway, I won't complain on this other image. Maybe Tineye can see if it is a copy vio or not. Best wishes, --Leoboudv (talk) 09:44, 20 May 2011 (UTC)

Likely a copyvio from --Túrelio (talk) 09:56, 20 May 2011 (UTC)
  • Of course you are right on the uploader's second image. Sadly with this uploader's images, its so predictable...with many copy vios. Regards, --Leoboudv (talk) 19:18, 20 May 2011 (UTC)

Löschung von Synadenium grantii[edit]

Als ich gerade eine Kategorie für Synadenium grantii machen wollte, tat sich die Meldung auf, dass Sie diese Kategorie schon vor mehreren Monaten gelöscht haben. Können Sie mir den Grund dafür geben? Soll ich etwa meine Datei <> umbenennen? Danke im voraus! --Jdsteakley (talk) 14:03, 20 May 2011 (UTC)

Hi Jim, assuming that you are en-native, I answer in english. By the way, you don't need to address me with the formal "Sie", that's very unusual on such a platform. True, I had deleted this category, full 2 years ago! So, I had to "dig deep" to find out the reason for that. The cat had been tagged (by somebody else) as "Needless empty category, previously used for misidentified plants." and surely it had been empty, as non-empty cats aren't deleted. You can simply re-create the cat, provided 1) this species name is botanically correct, and 2) there are >1 files, as we usually don't have 1-file-cats. If this term is obsolete, then it shouldn't be used for a cat, and renaming of your File:Synadenium_grantii.jpg following current taxonomy might be more appropriate. --Túrelio (talk) 14:50, 20 May 2011 (UTC)
Editconflict: Ich habs grad zufälligerweise gesehen. Ich habe die Kategorien wieder hergestellt. Sie wurden gelöscht, weil sie keine Bilder enthielten. Allerdings ist mir nicht ganz klar warum dein Bild in der Kategorie Category:Synadenium grantii und Category:Euphorbia bicompacta ist? LG, Amada44  talk to me 14:55, 20 May 2011 (UTC)
Vielleicht ein Notbehelf, weil letztere anscheinend Syn. Synadenium compactum ist; aber eben nicht grantii. --Túrelio (talk) 14:57, 20 May 2011 (UTC)
Ich bin kein Botaniker, orientierte mich zunächst an das Vorhandensein von Synadenium grantii in wikispecies. Allerdings habe ich inzwischen diese "Klärung" gefunden: <>. Dennoch habe ich meine Datei nicht umbenannt oder aus der wieder hergestellten Kategorie entfernt. Und da eine Kategorie mehr als ein Bild enthalten soll, habe ich gerade ein zweites eingefügt. --Jdsteakley (talk) 08:55, 21 May 2011 (UTC)

PDF-files by Clickrubyshoes[edit]

Hi Túrelio, I am a bit confused by the contributions by Clickrubyshoes. These handle a lot of legal stuff, which I would remove as privacy-violating when I would encounter them on nl-wiki (my homewiki). But I am aware that in the United States it is more usual to simply and fully name suspects etc. Still, I wonder whether these PDF-files are in project scope. What would you, as an experienced and non-american admin, think of it? Kind regards, Lymantria (talk) 08:22, 22 May 2011 (UTC)

Hi Lymantria,
have the same feeling as you. Technically most (or all) of this pds are unsourced. Redistribution of material from PACER may be violate their terms per In addition, most files could be considered out of scope. Howver, there is en:User:Clickrubyshoes/JB Carlson, which seems to be the final aim of this uploads. --Túrelio (talk) 08:37, 22 May 2011 (UTC)
Hi, Túrelio,
Thanks for your response. Yes I noticed the JB Carlson page alos. As a source, the files may be inside of scope. I will give it some thoughts. Kind regards, Lymantria (talk) 11:25, 22 May 2011 (UTC)
I created deletion requests: Commons:Deletion requests/PACER files by Clickrubyshoes and Commons:Deletion requests/Indiana State Courts files by Clickrubyshoes. You already noticed the latter I see :). Kind regards, Lymantria (talk) 06:56, 23 May 2011 (UTC)


fürs Löschen. --Martina talk 20:24, 22 May 2011 (UTC)

Ach. Da hatten sich noch zwei geduckt: File:Landtag Erfurt 2011-05-18 mnII (7).JPG + File:Landtag Erfurt 2011-05-18 mnII (21).JPG. *liebguck* :-) --Martina talk 20:30, 22 May 2011 (UTC)
✓ Done. Gerne doch. --Túrelio (talk) 20:40, 22 May 2011 (UTC)

krismoyes.jpg deletion[edit]

Hey Túrelio,

I'm in the process of requestion that the photographer, David, can open up his license so we can use krismoyes.jpg

Hope this finds you well.

Warm regards,

Swissstevens (talk) 02:29, 23 May 2011 (UTC)Steven

Hi Swissstevens,
thanks for notifying. In the description you put "Cara Stricker" in the author_entry. So, she isn't the photographer? --Túrelio (talk) 06:23, 23 May 2011 (UTC)

Hey Túrelio,
Thanks for getting back to me. You're referring to "Kris_Moyes.jpg" a new image I uploaded, which was photographed by Cara Stricker. No problems there. The question I have is in relation to the previous file you deleted "krismoyes.jpg" photographed by David Wieland. Here is a copy of the log:
"20:23, 22 May 2011 Túrelio (talk | contribs) deleted "File:Krismoyes.jpg" ‎ (Copyright violation: Flickr review NOT passed: Author is using NC, ND, or all rights reserved.) (global usage; delinker log)"
Since the 22 May, David has been notified and has agreed to release the rights of the image, so I would love to upload it again for use.
Is that ok?

02:12, 25 May 2011 (UTC)~Steven

O.k., but File:Krismoyes.jpg had been uploaded by Krismoyes (talk · contribs), not by you. Or is Krismoyes your second account? Anyway, I've undeleted it and let run Flickreview again. Coming back to File:Kris Moyes.jpg, we do really need a written permission from Cara Stricker. To get this, please go to Commons:Email templates, copy the "Declaration of consent for all inquiries", enter the filename and the license of choice and mail it all to Mrs. Stricker and ask her to read, date and sign it and then return it to --Túrelio (talk) 06:22, 25 May 2011 (UTC)

Permission to free publishing of image[edit]

Hi, Turélio! Good day! Thank you for the banner asking for permission. Here is, below, the reproduction of the e-mail my wife Dalgiza Borges and I, the owners of the copyrights, sent to Please, do not delete the image. Please, create the right conditions where necessary in Wikimedia Commons to avoid the image deletion. Here is the copy of the above mentioned e-mail:


I hereby assert that I am the creator and, with the photographed person in the image (my husband Cláudio César Dias Baptista) the owner of the exclusive copyright of WORK [ File:Ccdb de a soltura da cobra 009 tamanho medio.jpg].

I agree to publish that work under the free license (please choose any of them or any other for full public domain publication) [ FAL, CC-BY-SA, CC-BY, GFDL].

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

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

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

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

[ May 21,2011, DALGIZA BORGES (the photographer) and my husband CLÁUDIO CÉSAR DIAS BAPTISTA (the photographed person),,, Brazilian Telephone number: (22)2764-8126]

NOTE 1: - I am the PHOTOGRAPHER of the image which link is above, owner of the copyright with my husband (the photographed person) and with him THE PUBLISHER of the above mentioned image. My husband Cláudio César Dias Baptista is the person who uploaded the file with the image, we cannot violate our own and exclusive copyright! Please, do not delete the image from Wikimedia Commons

NOTE 2: in our site,, page there is an authorization for FREE PUBLICATION of all the images included in the same site (and the above mentioned image is one of them), if the source (the same site) is mentioned.

Cláudio César Dias Baptista – CCDB - " Ccdb (talk) 10:56, 23 May 2011 (UTC)

Hi Cláudio, I've changed to tag at the above mentioned image to OTRS-pending. What about File:Guitarra de ouro ainda sem os pick-ups.jpg? --Túrelio (talk) 11:01, 23 May 2011 (UTC)

Hi, Turélio! Thank you for changing the tag and for the answer. Here is the copy of the permission I've sent to free publication of the file File:Guitarra de ouro ainda sem os pick-ups.jpg


I hereby assert that I am the creator and/or sole owner of the exclusive copyright of the work [File:Guitarra de ouro ainda sem os pick-ups.jpg].

I agree to publish that work under the free license (please choose the GFDL and/or any other licence type to free, public domain, publication) [GFDL].

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

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

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

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

[May 23, 2011 - Cláudio César Dias Baptista (CCDB) ]"

Best regards,Ccdb (talk) 11:05, 23 May 2011 (UTC)

Permission to free publishing of image "Guitarra de ouro ainda sem os pick-ups[edit]

Hi, Turélio! Thank you for changing the tag and for the answer. Here is the copy of the permission I've sent to free publication of the file File:Guitarra de ouro ainda sem os pick-ups.jpg


I hereby assert that I am the creator and/or sole owner of the exclusive copyright of the work [File:Guitarra de ouro ainda sem os pick-ups.jpg].

I agree to publish that work under the free license (please choose the GFDL and/or any other licence type to free, public domain, publication) [GFDL].

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

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

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

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

[May 23, 2011 - Cláudio César Dias Baptista (CCDB) ]"

Best regards,Ccdb Ccdb (talk) 11:17, 23 May 2011 (UTC)

Tag changed accordingly. Shortly thereafter the regular OTRS-ticket has been added by another colleague. --Túrelio (talk) 12:24, 23 May 2011 (UTC)


Sorry! I made a mistake. I was trying to remove this image: because even though I had the verbal permission of the owner to upload te file the website told me that there was a problem. Is it possible to remove immediatly the image? -- Sara santopietro 23/05/2011

✓ Done. --Túrelio (talk) 14:20, 23 May 2011 (UTC)

Thank you!! It won't happen again! -- Sara santopietro 16:22, 23/05/2011

Image talk page remains[edit]

Don't forget to delete File talk:Tour First - La Defense - Inauguration 6 mai 2011.jpg for the image you deleted a little while ago. Ww2censor (talk) 17:30, 23 May 2011 (UTC)

✓ copied and deleted. --Túrelio (talk) 19:32, 23 May 2011 (UTC)


Hello! The user "Hold and wave", continues to remove unjustifiably other users' messages from its user talk. 18:08, 23 May 2011 (UTC).

Hi, while I understand your concern, "cleaning" the own userpage can be o.k., if the activities/behaviour of the user shows that he/she got the messages. This seems to be true with this user. I had asked him not to request speedy deletions but regular deletions, and he did indeed change his earlier behaviour. IMHO, this is o.k. However, feel free to take this to Commons:Administrators' noticeboard/User problems. I am also aware that it may give a bad impression when a user does nothing else than requesting deletions. However, I am rather sure that up to 1 in 10 files on Commons have indeed a questionable copyright status. So, finding these files is actually a service to Commons and to the re-users. --Túrelio (talk) 20:45, 23 May 2011 (UTC)

Flagged items I submitted.[edit]

Hello Túrelio

I'm new to Wikipedia Commons and sumitted several documents which got flagged. Could you please help me understand what is the proper way of citing these items? All of the items I've submitted are publicly available and are free from certain sources. The documents came from the federal government.

While I was learning about his process I noticed other legal documents that were cited:

But I seem to not being doing it the proper way. Please advise.

Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Clickrubyshoes (talk • contribs) 23. Mai 2011, 19:44 Uhr (UTC)

Hi, currently there is no problem with File:FR2ndAmmended.pdf. For information about problematic uploads of yours, see you talkpage User talk:Clickrubyshoes and follow the links to the deletiion discussions, in which you can participate. --Túrelio (talk) 19:31, 23 May 2011 (UTC)

File:Iguane à Chichén Itzá.JPG[edit]

Hi Turelo, Thanks for having deleted this file. Today I tried to re-put this file on Wikimedia Commons, but I've found the bug: click on the file page, then click on the image to look at il in full resolution : you'll see it's not the same picture. The right one is the one in full resolution. The bad one is another picture located in the same folder in my hard drive disk. What to do? Thanks for looking. (P.S.: I'm French, I take German lessons but I prefer speaking English, weil ich ein schlecht Deutsch spreche.) Fandecaisses (talk) 20:27, 23 May 2011 (UTC)

Very strange phenomenon. I have no idea how this can happen. A possible solution would be to convert it into TIFF format and then to re-convert it to JPEG. However, all EXIF data would be lost. I have asked on Commons:Forum for better ideas. --Túrelio (talk) 20:33, 23 May 2011 (UTC)
The problem may be caused by the bug, which is discussed here. --Túrelio (talk) 06:25, 24 May 2011 (UTC)

Hi, I may have an idea. I copy the file in an empty folder and I upload the copy. I don't know what will happen, but I shoul try. Fandecaisses (talk) 10:56, 24 May 2011 (UTC)

Try it. But you should choose a slightly different filename than Iguane à Chichén Itzá.JPG. --Túrelio (talk) 10:58, 24 May 2011 (UTC)

In fact, could you delete File:Iguane à Chichén Itzá.JPG please? It hasn't been uploaded again because it is the same... Thanks! Fandecaisses (talk) 11:12, 24 May 2011 (UTC)

OK, so I've re-put the picture, same results. My problem probably comes from the picture. I will convert and re-convert it, and too bad for EXIF data. Could you please delete the file (again)? I'll break my computer if the problem is still here... Fandecaisses (talk) 12:21, 24 May 2011 (UTC)
I have done this by myself. But, the problem remain. That is the proof that the problem is not your file, but our stupid MediWiki software. For now the problem can't be helped. I would recommend to leave the image out of the article for now and try it again one week from now. --Túrelio (talk) 12:32, 24 May 2011 (UTC)
Thank you very much. Fandecaisses (talk) 12:37, 24 May 2011 (UTC)

Why did you deleted the Felipe Machado picture?[edit]

Felipe Machado authorized me to use it in his wikipedia page.

05/23/2011 16:21 obocci 19:21, 23 May 2011 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Obocci (talk • contribs) 23. Mai 2011, 21:21 Uhr (UTC)

You need a written statement of the photographer or legal rights holder, Felipe Machado or whoever, and send it to OTRS. Assuming you are a spanish-speaker, go to Commons:Modelos de mensajes for further instructions. --Túrelio (talk) 19:28, 23 May 2011 (UTC)

LG GD880 Mini roif456[edit]

why you deleted my file LG File:LG-GD880-Mini-03.jpg GD880 MINI???? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Roif456 (talk • contribs) 24. Mai 2011, 02:57 Uhr (UTC)

Because you have obviously,, stolen the image from another website. --Túrelio (talk) 06:13, 24 May 2011 (UTC)

File:Dsc20050129 144406 10.jpg[edit]

I've made a silly mistake while uploading this file from en-wiki. Could you help in renaming it to something like Spongolite? Mithril (talk) 11:27, 24 May 2011 (UTC)

Ok, but could you please add the complete link to the source file/page, not just to :en. --Túrelio (talk) 12:06, 24 May 2011 (UTC)
Thanks a lot! I've clarified the source information. Nethertheless that seems to be worthless since the original file would be soon deleted from en-wiki. Mithril (talk) 13:59, 24 May 2011 (UTC)

Re: For your information[edit]

As explained in Niabot's talk page it was a terrible misreading mine of one of his sentence joined with a misunderstanding of the word. I'm really sorry about that. Sting (talk) 19:51, 24 May 2011 (UTC)

ACK. --Túrelio (talk) 20:12, 24 May 2011 (UTC)

Why did you deleted the picture? =[edit]

i have got the License directly from the author 走近伪科学.Thank you. File:柳州东门 East Gate of Liuzhou.jpg — Preceding unsigned comment added by 李海斌 (talk • contribs) 24. Mai 2011, 20:43 Uhr (UTC)

Hi, did you see the striken-through $-sign? That means "no commercial use" of this image. This restriction is not permitted on Commons. If you can convince the photographer to lift this restriction, then we can host it on Commons. --Túrelio (talk) 18:48, 24 May 2011 (UTC)

sorry, it's difficult to change it, but you can ask him directly that if i can use it at wikipedia, thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 李海斌 (talk • contribs) 25. Mai 2011, 02:22 Uhr (UTC)

Sorry, no, that is really your task as the uploader. In addition, "use it at wikipedia" is not enough. The image must be free for everybody to use it anywhere. --Túrelio (talk) 06:24, 25 May 2011 (UTC)

thank you for your information. i´m trying to ask him to change it.

About the picture Sambalpur.jpg[edit]

That picture is originally uploaded in the [English Wikipedia], as It is in public domain uploaded by User:Akkida who will be the right person to give info about the pictures which have made the collage. --ସୁଭପାSubha PaUtter2me! 07:16, 25 May 2011 (UTC)

Ok, I did now. But that would have been your task as the uploader. On :en they are somewhat less meticulous about these things. --Túrelio (talk) 07:23, 25 May 2011 (UTC)

Deletion of two of my photos (KARINA GALVEZ)[edit]

Hi Turelio, I am poet Karina Galvez and hadn't noticed your messages about deletion of two of my photos. One is: File:Karina Galvez - Pintura al Oleo de Luis Burgos Flor - 2009.jpg The other one is: File:Karina Galvez 1995.jpg The first one was taken with my own camera, and the oil painting is in my home. Maestro Luis Burgos is like my father and he painted this oil painting of me and for me in 2009. The second one is the black and white picture that appears in my book "Poesia y Cantares" which I published in 1995. I hereby give my written permission to Wikimedia Commons, Wikipedia and any websites related to their parent company, to publish both these photographs and share them with your readers. Please upload them back to where they were. If you need to reach me by phone my cell phone in the U.S. is <censored> and my personal email is <censored>. If at all possible, send me a message when they have been uploaded back, as I need to use them asap. Regards, Karina — Preceding unsigned comment added by POESIA77 (talk • contribs) 03:41, 26. Mai 2011 (UTC)

Replied per email. --Túrelio (talk) 06:47, 26 May 2011 (UTC)

Corny pictures still in scope[edit]

Hi, re the photos like [[::File:Piers$1.jpg]], two points. Speedy is not the right process for "out of scope" deletions: speedy guidelines. Files for use on an editors user pages for personal use are allowed: COM:Scope. By all means delete them on copyvio grounds where necessary, but I think we need to give new users a bit of elbow room, you never know they may actually stay and do something useful. :-) --Tony Wills (talk) 11:33, 26 May 2011 (UTC)

deleted. Not so new, the user joined Wikipedia 3 years ago and recently wasted his time with writing a hoax article on his talkpag, messed up with 21 files, 19 of them are based on unfree content, the remaing ones (A dollar note with his face edited on it, a paint-created banner 'for president') are simply not usefull outside the hoax/vandalism world. --Martin H. (talk) 12:01, 26 May 2011 (UTC)
@Tony, I'm not sure what "corny pictures" means. When seeing all these cheap photoshops of this user all at once, which I did, likely everyone of one us would have the similar feeling, what a crap, away with it. At least this was my feeling. 1 or two might be tolerable, but not 20+. However, to spare this user a bad impression, I only speedy-tagged the images and then deleted only a few per day, not all at once, so that he had time either to get accustomed to it or to react. Of course, many might also have been copyvios, but I didn't hold them worth my time to check for the original. I do think the same about filing DRs for this crap. --Túrelio (talk) 12:32, 26 May 2011 (UTC)
Yes it is crap :-). I was looking at his commons "contributions" and didn't know about 3 years worth of wikipedia activity! I don't consider it is a hoax or vandalism if he just wants to have a humorous user page. I don't think he was trying to fool anybody, I expect that is just his idea of humour. If he creates such pages and then tries to move them into article space, that is a different matter. But yes one or two joke images is enough :-). But he is human, I live in hope that he will improve :-). I don't think that trying to squashing people completely will work (he will just pop up under a new name somewhere else, and perhaps behave worse), I always want to engage and channel people to do something useful - often a waste of time, but I live in hope :-). He wasted his time writing a parody of a biography, how do we guide him to producing useful work (ok not a Commons problem, a en:wiki problem) ? --Tony Wills (talk) 13:19, 26 May 2011 (UTC)
Check his older contribs, looks like he is interested in cricket, guid him to the wikiproject on cricket or ask him to help with updating statistics if he like.
I should mention that guiding people to make usefull edits is an occupational therapy for both, its nothing else, its an investment of time to obtain a minimum output from the guided (or to prevent negative output). The average return on investment is negative. If you join a project that pursues writing an encyclopedia you should either want to write an encyclopedia or leave. If you not made this decision I will not invest in you, its like buying shares of a planned company that not yet knows what business to join with a CEO who isnt sure if he prefers entepreneurship, command economy or a nice campfire of money. Therefore, as long as the user not shows his positive intention to contribute, he probably not worth an investment. Its not me who has to guide him, its is own free will to join the project and contribute and Im here to guide him if he is (e.g. for technical reasons) not able to pursue this will. --Martin H. (talk) 13:54, 26 May 2011 (UTC)
Yes the return is low :-(. He obviously has nothing better to do, it would be nice if he could help somewhere. As you say, too much time spent discussing him already, thanks :-) --Tony Wills (talk) 14:03, 26 May 2011 (UTC)

the photo have changed[edit]

can you change the situation of photo: File:柳州东门 East Gate of Liuzhou.jpg and File:柳侯祠 Ancestral Temple of the Marquis Liu.jpg ? the author has change the permission.李海斌 (talk) 21:49, 26 May 2011 (UTC)

✓ Done. --Túrelio (talk) 22:26, 26 May 2011 (UTC)

File:Casa Boyacá.jpg[edit]

Didn't this image fail flickr review? Now the uploader removes the fail mark. Strange. I don't think the uploader is the flickr account owner...but I cannot be 100% sure. The license has NC and ND restrictions which is very restrictive, too. Best Regards, --Leoboudv (talk) 06:12, 28 May 2011 (UTC)

Strange web site. Regards, --Leoboudv (talk) 06:25, 28 May 2011 (UTC)

For the first I've re-added the no-perm tag and requested permission from the uploader. For the second, well, on the Flickr source it says "Unrestricted Public Domain" and it's licensed "(C) All rights reserved", Facepalm.svg. --Túrelio (talk) 07:44, 28 May 2011 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment: Thank You for your comments. --Leoboudv (talk) 22:07, 28 May 2011 (UTC)

Museum signs[edit]

Hi Turelio, these rather crappy mass uploads by "Bin im Garten" flood the categories of the Ethnological Museum. Many of the images are totally useless, and once the descriptions are transferred to our description fields (which of course the uploader should do), at least those should really be deleted. The user didn't even bother to link which descriptions fit which images. This is useless for any user who isn't standing right beside the obejct in the museum... I spent hours of repairing this crap while uploading own images from the museum, describing and categorizing "bin im Garten"'s images as well. Most of the description fields indeed are not copyright violations, but I'd like the others to be deleted, too. I put a lot of work in museum categories etc., but careless users like this one shouldn't be encouraged to get away with this. --FA2010 (talk) 16:17, 28 May 2011 (UTC)

D'accord. But "copyvio" is something different than "useless or out-of-scope". For those just useless, I would recommend you to put a list on the uploaders talkpage and ask him to consider requesting them for deletion by himself. That spares you the tagging of each image and may have an "educative" effect on the uploader. --Túrelio (talk) 16:21, 28 May 2011 (UTC)

File:Südseeabteilung in Ethnological Museum Berlin 143.JPG, which you didn't delete, has no relation to any of the uploaded images. Hence it is out of scope. --FA2010 (talk) 16:18, 28 May 2011 (UTC)

Foto Ivan Fila[edit]

Hallo Túrelio, ich habe eben gesehen, dass Sie Deutsch sprechen. Ich wollte vorhin mein im letzten Jahr hochgeladenes Foto [27] durch ein komplett neues, aktuelleres Ersetzen (Rechte sind bei mir). Leider ist mir da offensichtlich ein Fehler unterlaufen und ich hab es nicht ersetzt, sondern irrtümlich wohl als "Neue Version" des alten hochgeladen. Könnten Sie mir helfen, das Alte in korrekter Weise durch das Neue zu ersetzen? Ich wäre Ihnen sehr dankbar! Grüße, --Socc82 (talk) 16:32, 28 May 2011 (UTC)

Mir ist nicht ganz klar, ersetzen hier auf Commons oder ersetzen im Wikipedia-Artikel? 2. Frage: soll das "alte" Foto weiterhin auf Commons verfügbar bleiben oder ganz gelöscht werden? --Túrelio (talk) 19:37, 28 May 2011 (UTC)


Actually, the file Havmannen.jpg isn't a copyright violation in Wikipedia even if it might be so on Commons. When it is removed from Wikipedia with this argument used as a reason its simply wrong. There are two (possibly three) rationales for use of such work of art; one is when the subject is at public display and isn't the primary subject of the photo, another when its the subject of some sort of critical description or review. A Wikipedia article is such critical description and any copy of such an article is also covered by the same norwegian laws. Jeblad (talk) 17:07, 28 May 2011 (UTC)

Hi Jeblad, o.k., but none of the "possibilities" outlined by you would be o.k. on Commons. I don't know where the image was in use. If on :en, it might go by "fair use". Anyway, you should check if the project where you want to use it, does allow it, then you should upload it locally. If you need the file temporarily undeleted, I will do so. But first check if it is accepted on the local project. --Túrelio (talk) 19:42, 28 May 2011 (UTC)

Baustein gesucht[edit]

Hallo, ich suche gerade mal wieder den Baustein für Fotos, auf denen lebende Personen abgebildet sind - leider vergeblich. Kannst Du mir helfen? Gruß, --4028mdk09 (talk) 20:28, 28 May 2011 (UTC)

Z.B. {{Personality}}. --Túrelio (talk) 20:34, 28 May 2011 (UTC)
Herzlichen Dank! --4028mdk09 (talk) 20:38, 28 May 2011 (UTC)

File:Ian Somerhalder at the CW Upfront.jpg[edit]

Thank you for killing that image - I knew it wasn't kosher but I couldn't nail down the source that well to be able to delete it myself... didn't pop up on the WireImage website and that one tends to have most of the Getty stuff there as well. Tabercil (talk) 21:03, 28 May 2011 (UTC)

This DR[edit]

Do you know if this is a flickrwash? The uploader has a very bad history with uploads from his talkpage but I cannot say if the Fidelio Artist flickr site is a genuine site or not. Or just a creation of this uploader? Martin H. is suspicious and I am doubtful of this uploader but I don't want to prejudice the uploader either. Maybe you can be a neutral third party and make a judgement on keeping or deleting the picture? Thank You, --Leoboudv (talk) 02:23, 29 May 2011 (UTC)

Hmm, complicated case. I had no-perm tagged File:Rancatore.jpg already 8 days ago. Now I found that File:David Alegret.jpg was uploaded in a far higher resolution to Commons than it is available on its alleged Flickr source. As the uploader didn't react to my message from May 20th, a DR or even a (justified) speedy might wake him up. --Túrelio (talk) 07:19, 29 May 2011 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment: I want to assume good faith but some of the deleted images came from Fidelio Artist. Its hard to trust an uploader with this history. But in this case...the real question is this: does one question the flickr source: Fidelio Artist? I don't know if Fidelio Artist is genuine or not and that is a problem sadly. I cannot say if this is a genuine account or a flickrwash account. If it is a genuine account, then the photos should be passed. If not, they should be deleted. Good night from Canada, --Leoboudv (talk) 09:32, 29 May 2011 (UTC)
May be, if there is enough interest in these images, we should contact the Flickr account direct and use some "legal wording" to prevent him gaming us, if he is not the real rights holder. --Túrelio (talk) 19:21, 29 May 2011 (UTC)


Hey Turélio, thank you for checking my sloppy copyvio marks. All from that user is a copyvio, apparently, I've already removed from the wikipedias the files which he had used in wiki-en and wiki-pt.-- Darwin Ahoy! 07:55, 29 May 2011 (UTC)

No problem. I know that it's sometimes hard to track down the "real" source. --Túrelio (talk) 08:12, 29 May 2011 (UTC)
Re: File:Silke Birgitta Gahleitner.tif. I've changed to no-perm. Yesterday I answered the uploaders question on :de, whether everything is o.k. with the image after he got the file from the depicted.[28] I told him that he needs to send the permission to OTRS. So, lets give him some time. The fact that it's in TIFF, instead of JPEG, suggests he is true. --Túrelio (talk) 08:18, 29 May 2011 (UTC)
Thanks! At first it seemed an obvious copyvio, but then I checked the other contributions by the uploader and suspected there could be an authorization somewhere. I'll remove my copyvio notice from his talk page, then.-- Darwin Ahoy! 08:28, 29 May 2011 (UTC)
Well, actually the cv-tagging made me somewhat "proud", because it's good to know that the current deficiency was detected very early (by you) and because I had predicted in my answer to the uploader, that he should act soon as the image will be tagged earlier or later ;-). --Túrelio (talk) 08:30, 29 May 2011 (UTC)
Eheheh Marking copyvios is not something I usually do, but I was taking a break from the Rozentals and happened to stumble upon it. However, the last thing I want is to scare away some valuable contributor who has actually taken the trouble to get free images from public personalities with a blunt copyvio warning, so thanks for correcting me on that one.-- Darwin Ahoy! 08:38, 29 May 2011 (UTC)

Hab's versucht[edit]

aber ich soll's wegstecken. --Yikrazuul (talk) 21:00, 29 May 2011 (UTC)

Momentan würde ich es dabei belassen, solang sich das nicht wiederholt. IMHO solltest du selbst im Ton aber auch etwas herunterfahren, zumal man auf diese Weise andere kaum dazu bringt, das eigene Lagerdenken mal ersthaft zu hinterfragen. Diese SP-Geschichte, sofern sie sich bestätigt, ist schon unangenehm genug. --Túrelio (talk) 21:07, 29 May 2011 (UTC)
Klar, bei solchen Grundsatzdiskussionen (Exkludisten vs. Inkludisten) wird es immer irgendwann derbe, deswegen renn ich ja auch nicht gleich zur VM. Immerhin weiß jetzt Niabot, was ich mit "club" meine, auch wenn er es als Getrolle tituliert. Diese SP-Geschichte ist tatsächlich dämlich, schade, dass es technisch nicht möglich ist, SPs zu unterbinden. Würde wieder mehr Vertrauen schaffen. Grüße, --Yikrazuul (talk) 21:16, 29 May 2011 (UTC)

File:Sacos R001-021.jpg[edit]

Hey User: Túrelio, wfor what´s deleted? ; File:Sacos R001-021.jpg — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk • contribs) 29. Mai 2011, 21:32 Uhr (UTC)

Because it had been tagged "Duplicate of File:Sacos T001-021.JPG", about 4 months ago. --Túrelio (talk) 20:21, 29 May 2011 (UTC)

Bee Arthur[edit]

Hello! I am Bee Arthur everything on my picture is mine. It is me wearing my own dress.The Logo B'EXOTIQ is mine. I am a fashion designer. You may crosscheck from

Bee Arthur

Hello Turelio!

I am Bee Arthur. The picture is me in my dress with my logo B'ExotiQ. you may crosscheck from or facebook. My Page is B'ExotiQ by Bee Arthur. Otherwise, kindly advise how to proceed. Many thanks.

Bee Arthur (talk) 10:12, 30 May 2011 (UTC) Bee Arthur 30 May 2011

Hi Bee Arthur, great. Then we only need the permission of the photographer. To prepare the correct permission text, go to Commons:Email templates, copy the boxed "Declaration of consent for all inquiries", enter the name of the image file and the license of choice and mail it to the photographer. He/She should then read it, date and sign it and email it back to --Túrelio (talk) 10:38, 30 May 2011 (UTC)

Commons:Deletion requests/File:MUSEE DAVID D'ANGERS.jpg[edit]

Good morning:

When you delete a DR, it leaves a red entry in the log, which someone has to check and cleanup -- wouldn't it be easier for all of us to simply close the DR in the usual way, with "error" as the closing comment? Regards,      Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 12:58, 31 May 2011 (UTC)

Good afternoon,
o.k. I hadn't created this DR and had assumed that there was nothing else remaining as it was empty except of the speedy tag. --Túrelio (talk) 13:05, 31 May 2011 (UTC)

These images[edit]

Are we supposed to remove the human flickr review tag here for US Government work for these 3 images or just mark them to be safe? Please see the flickr license.

Maybe you know what to do? Thank You, --Leoboudv (talk) 03:24, 2 June 2011 (UTC)

To be on the safe side, I've manually confirmed Flickreview record. --Túrelio (talk) 08:22, 2 June 2011 (UTC)
  • OK, I'll do that then. Thank You, --Leoboudv (talk) 09:13, 2 June 2011 (UTC)

Les Charlots[edit]

Hello, Túrelio.

Do you understand that in the Web we cannot find any free image of the group? The deleted image was a frame made as a printscreen by me. And - in support of my rights - please, see an analoguos event. I insist the file must be restored, even if it will be non-free and only for the Russian Wikipedia. --Ceroi (talk) 09:12, 2 June 2011 (UTC)

Are your refering to this image File:Charlots.png? "support of my rights" - sorry, you have no rights in this image. Your printscreen violates the rights of the original photographer. Anyway, Commons does not host non-free images. If your local project does allow fair-use equivalent material, then you have to upload it locally. The same way as it happens with fair-use material on :en, which is not hosted on Commons, but locally on :en. --Túrelio (talk) 09:18, 2 June 2011 (UTC)
Translation of the page: "This file is not free (does not meet the definition of free cultural works). In accordance with the decision of the Wikimedia Foundation, it can be used in the articles of the Russian section of Wikipedia only under the criteria of fair use. Any other use (as in the Russian section of Wikipedia, and outside it) may be copyright infringement". But, as far as I can see, that file was uploaded like the ones of mine. What "local projects' upload services" (or "servers") do you mean? Please, give me the links to their pages. --Ceroi (talk) 09:43, 2 June 2011 (UTC)
What is so hard to understand here? Your example is located on :ru, not on Commons. --Túrelio (talk) 09:45, 2 June 2011 (UTC)

File:American Buildings Survey.jpg[edit]

Kannst du bitte den Verschieberest löschen? Unter dem Namen wurde das gestern hochgeladen und in der Fotowerkstatt besprochen. Inzwischen habe ich es auf einen sinnvolleren Namen verschoben, kategorisiert und eingebunden. Danke. --Matthiasb (talk) 10:37, 2 June 2011 (UTC)

✓ Done. --Túrelio (talk) 12:34, 2 June 2011 (UTC)

Brazilian copyvios[edit]

Answered, sorry, I forgot to fill in the summary in my edition.-- Darwin Ahoy! 11:21, 2 June 2011 (UTC)

Thanks. I didn't doubt the hit, but Photobucket itself often hosts copyvios. --Túrelio (talk) 12:33, 2 June 2011 (UTC)
We will have no collaboration from Mrzero, so it seems. He left me a message in wiki-pt saying he doesn't care if we delete all his uploads. Perhaps I should feel some gratitude for the very few legit uploads he has done (not counting the plaques, whose origin is uncertain to me), but the time I've spent tracking down his copyvios doesn't allow for much sympathy for such users, really.-- Darwin Ahoy! 13:20, 2 June 2011 (UTC)


Thanks for checking his latest uploads, I've indefed him and nuked them all. -mattbuck (Talk) 14:26, 2 June 2011 (UTC)


Hello Túrelio. Regarding your question at File:Kaczyce-kosciol.jpg. The author of this photo is my friend. I don't have a contact with him for a long time, so I cannot obtain the OTRS permission from him. Since that is the case, I think it should be deleted, especially since we have other properly licensed photos of this church. What do you think? - Darwinek (talk) 15:52, 2 June 2011 (UTC)

Ok, I hadn't seen that this was the problem. --Túrelio (talk) 15:54, 2 June 2011 (UTC)
Sorry for the intromission, but is OTRS really necessary in this case? It's It was a nice and useful image uploaded by a trusted user.-- Darwin Ahoy! 15:59, 2 June 2011 (UTC)
Ähem, well, he had asked himself for deletion, first without a sufficient rationale. When I asked for more, he made me aware that it wasn't even his own image. --Túrelio (talk) 16:02, 2 June 2011 (UTC)
There are several other photos, that I have uploaded, with the same problem; i.e. taken by my friend (without OTRS permission) and with existing alternative. Can I request their deletion here? Photos taken by my friend without exisiting alternative should be left on Commons. - Darwinek (talk) 16:10, 2 June 2011 (UTC)
Well, yes and no. "Missing permission" is not really influenced by "being used" or similar. If the images were uploaded with the expressed consent (even if verbal only) of the photographer/friend, who is no longer accessable, you yourself might send an permission to OTRS and see if it is accepted. If the images were uploaded without the expressed consent of the photographer/friend, they should be deleted alltogether, being with or without alternative. The risk that a re-user is sued by the original photographer is simply too high, IMHO. Of course, at first you should try to contact that friend of yours and ask him whether he would issue a permission, which is not that complicated. --Túrelio (talk) 16:27, 2 June 2011 (UTC)
I see. Well, I will try to contact him. The point is, that until 2008 I've uploaded bunch of photos by my friends with their verbal consent. Anyways, I should probably obtain OTRS permissions from them in order to avoid possible trouble in the future. For several years, I am uploading only my photos anyways. - Darwinek (talk) 16:38, 2 June 2011 (UTC)


Hi Túrelio, wärst du bitte so lieb die alte Version des Bildes zu löschen? Sie ist eine Urheberrechtsverletzung und wurde mit dem Reupload korrigiert. Best Dank! Hekerui (talk)

✓ Done. --Túrelio (talk) 20:50, 2 June 2011 (UTC)

Stained glass windows of St. Martin[edit]

Hello Túrelio, please review the following deletions, since I believe they were deleted by mistake due to a wrong copyvio tag. If those photos are like the one still not deleted, I believe they are covered by FOP in Germany, since they are in a public place:

Thanks, -- Darwin Ahoy! 20:30, 2 June 2011 (UTC)

Ähem, I deleted them myself. They are regrettably not covered by FOP of Germany, because that is only valid for the outer appearance. Images shot from inside a building are not covered. FOP regulations differ from country to country; in Austria it's broader than in Germany, for example. I didn't delete the 4th image, because I think there is nothing copyrighted in this. --Túrelio (talk) 20:50, 2 June 2011 (UTC)
But I consulted Commons:Licensing and it says: "Objects permanently located in public that can be photographed from public (accessible) grounds, without devices such as a ladder", it doesn't says it has to be from outside. If it is indeed the case, that explanation should be modified.-- Darwin Ahoy! 21:55, 2 June 2011 (UTC)
Well, the standard place for such information would be Commons:Freedom of panorama#Germany. I didn't even realize that COM:L had anything about FOP. --Túrelio (talk) 06:11, 3 June 2011 (UTC)
Is a stained glass window a work of architecture or a work of art? I expect the window design is the work of an artist, not an architect. If a work of art, permanently located in a public place, then it is fine. Perhaps one would have to edit out the architectural detail of the window surround. --Tony Wills (talk) 07:09, 3 June 2011 (UTC)
I fail to see the difference for us. The photo was taken from inside, which excludes FOP exemption in Germany. --Túrelio (talk) 07:11, 3 June 2011 (UTC)
I was looking at the phrase 'public places', (öffentlichen ... Plätzen), which I now see has been defined as "squares, plazas" on our FOP page, although that qualification doesn't appear in the English translation of the legislation. I expect that there has been much discussion (and hopefully legal interpretation) of this, I will go and look :-) --Tony Wills (talk) 10:52, 3 June 2011 (UTC)
Thanks for the heads-up, I didn't knew Commons:Freedom of panorama. I have the same doubts as Tony Wills: 1) I'm not sure this is even a "work of architecture", since the building is undoubtedly PD-old, and only the decorative glass of the windows seem to be recent. If instead of glass they used Picassos to cover the windows, what would it be? I believe this is more a work of art than an architectural feature. 2) I do not speak German, but that mix-up of "places" and "plazas" seem very awkward and ill defined, especially considering how Germany has such a reputation of clarity (though I'm quite frustrated trying to understand how their copyright law works respecting anonymous works, I still don't understand it).-- Darwin Ahoy! 12:00, 3 June 2011 (UTC)
He he, the FOP provisions in Germany are rather clear, see this detailed 38 kBytes long article de:Panoramafreiheit (in German, of course). FOP is not restricted to architectural works; actually the relevant § 59 UrhG just says "Werke" (i.e., works of art). Besides, there have been quite a number of court decisions about FOP, some even from the highest court of Germany. The question about photographies of copyrighted works taken from interior is actually not a question, it's a clear no, see de:Panoramafreiheit#Innenaufnahmen. To be sure, the situation is different (more lax) in Austria and the UK. --Túrelio (talk) 12:13, 3 June 2011 (UTC)
I see, sculptures are specifically mentioned there, which answers my doubts. Thanks for the explanations, they were very educative indeed. The English documentation here on Commons should be clarified, however, as it passes a message that does not correspond to reality.-- Darwin Ahoy! 12:25, 3 June 2011 (UTC)
Those links are certainly useful, I too would like to see a propper translation (google can only get you so far :-). An interesting point is that the photo has to be taken from a public place (so a view of the same thing taken from a better angle, but not on public ground, is prohibited). The controversy about photos taken from enclosed 'roads' (eg underground railways), is interesting, I would have expected that you could take photos of things in the interior of tunnels (eg sculptures, posters), just not the architecture (although you might have to stand in the middle or the railway tracks to do it ;-). I also suppose that if you take a photo, from a public place (through an open door or window) of an artwork, that it would be allowable (so long as it didn't show internal architecture, or the architecture was out of copyright!). --Tony Wills (talk) 23:11, 3 June 2011 (UTC)
I believe I've red somewhere that the work of art has to be on permanent display, so that paintings and posters, for instance, are not covered by FOP. The Portuguese law says that, and I seem to recall to have red something like that on Túrelio's links above about the German law. That would probably exclude other artworks such as sculptures photographed through open windows, as they are not "in permanent display", but rather displayed only when the window is open. I wonder what would be the case is the window is always open, or if it's a glass wall, however.-- Darwin Ahoy! 06:14, 4 June 2011 (UTC)

File:Three Blind Mice.jpg & File:Poster - Men's Group 2008.jpg[edit]

These 2 images are potentially flickrwashes. But the uploader has uploaded 2 other images which deal with the same web site. I don't know if its own work or a flickrwash. Maybe you can ask him/her? Regards, --Leoboudv (talk) 05:40, 3 June 2011 (UTC)

I've contacted the original film company. --Túrelio (talk) 06:23, 3 June 2011 (UTC)
  • That sounds a reasonable idea. If they say no, then it is a flickrwash. If not, the images can be kept. Regards, --Leoboudv (talk) 06:26, 3 June 2011 (UTC)
I've done the same and got a positive response, i.e. this Flickr acount is indeed officially linked to the original film company. I will forward this to OTRS such that we get this archived. --AFBorchert (talk) 08:45, 3 June 2011 (UTC)
It is archived under OTRS ticket number 2011060310004486. --AFBorchert (talk) 08:50, 3 June 2011 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment: Its good that the problem is resolved then. Best Regards, --Leoboudv (talk) 18:40, 3 June 2011 (UTC)


You included {{!vote}} inside a discussion in which anybody had put arguments on the table. Additionally you included it right before many Symbol delete vote.svg Delete arguments. It isn't appropriate to do this for two reasons:

  1. There was no "pure voting"/canvasing
  2. The placement (right before your opposition) of the template is itself is slandering of the arguments.

Have a nice day. -- /人 ‿‿ 人\ 苦情処理係 08:40, 4 June 2011 (UTC)

Yes, "slandering" because of your accusation of "missuse" (incl. the original typo).
Eynbein's "invitation" on DCII (now version-deleted due to serious privacy violations) is clearly canvassing. Not unlikely that even Eynbein was canvassed, a user (accused of being a SP of Simplicius) who had ten (10) edits on Commons and no own work uploaded, but goes straight to this DR. Besides, you should know for yourself that pure votes are completely irrelevant in this DR. The image will (very likely) be deleted anyway, but it is the wrong way to single-out 1 contributor, who is now even slandered by others such as Eynbein and Widescreen. While I acknowledge that you and Neourf have pointed to an existing potential problem (which merits a solution), the way you are doing it results in poisoning the atmosphere on Commons. --Túrelio (talk) 08:51, 4 June 2011 (UTC)
The problem is that we have proposed licenses and no rule for custom licenses. Without having confirmed what is allowed and what is not (currently i assume only unchanged licenses to be allowed) i can't support the upload of images under such custom licenses, which are even a legal problem for Wikipedia itself. The last deletion was a month ago. No one tried to start a discussion to achieve a solution. I guess you won't start it, since the outcome should be clear already.
I have made multiple requests, in a nice way, to inform Wolfgang to change his licensing. He just ignores it, or is actually trying to get trough with that. Instead on deleting every image one by one i would make request to delete any of this images, if Wolfgang doesn't change his mind. This is also not good for the athmosphere, but at least it happens only once. -- /人 ‿‿ 人\ 苦情処理係 09:10, 4 June 2011 (UTC)
ACK. But how would/do you react when you get the (clear) impression that your uploads are targeted with whatever plausible or non-plausible arguments?
Besides, you seem again to misinterpret/misunderstand me in your conclusion ".. you won't start it, since the outcome ..". I do take the discussion in the first DR already as a (sort of) precedence and I acknowledge that the stance of the community towards this has changed now. Geoff Brigham (whom I have taken in the boot, by the way) has to a certain degree supported your concerns in regard to re-users, but has strongly recommended a general community decision about this issue. Very early in the current DR I have outlined a number of questions/issues that have to be addressed in such a community decision. None of you has taken that seriously or done anything about it. I have more than enough to do with the daily amount of copyvios etc. You can't really expect me to do your work, as this was your initiative. I will support a polling/Meinungsbild about this and contribute to it. But you have to start it. If you feel more comfortable, create a first outline in German. Then other de-natives can "finalize" it and thereafter it may be translated into en, fr, it, es etc. --Túrelio (talk) 15:52, 4 June 2011 (UTC)

Löschung: Orchids in Mallorca[edit]

Hallo Túrelio, könntest Du bitte die gelöschte Category:Orchids in Mallorca wiederherstellen. Nach Beratung mit Bdk sollte sowohl "Orchids in Mallorca" als auch "Orchids of Mallorca" mit differenzierter Handhabung nebeneinander möglich sein. Vielen Dank und Grüße. Orchi (talk) 18:56, 4 June 2011 (UTC)

...danke! Orchi (talk) 18:59, 4 June 2011 (UTC)


That's twice tonight you've nuked a copyvio I tagged after an OTRS complaint. Nice work. :) HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 22:05, 4 June 2011 (UTC)

You're welcome. However, now I'll go to bed. --Túrelio (talk) 22:06, 4 June 2011 (UTC)

File:What do you want to be when you grow up?.jpg[edit]

Why isn't this image own work? The image resolution by the uploader here is so much higher than the one on flickr. This would indicate its the same photo. I have the same problem with my own pictures at flickr. Since I have a basic account there, flickr limits the resolution to only about 1024 X 783/683 pixels. But if I upload the same image here, I get the maximum resolution which can be as large as 3264 X 2448 pixels. I think its reasonable to accept good faith here. Perhaps the photo can be passed? Regards, --Leoboudv (talk) 03:36, 5 June 2011 (UTC)

I've send the Flickr user an email. --Túrelio (talk) 08:22, 5 June 2011 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment: OK. If it was me, I would assume the flickr account owner is the uploader. But I suppose its better to be sure. Very Interesting. It seems that someone else also asked the uploader the same question...but she seems to be away. Regards, --Leoboudv (talk) 08:49, 5 June 2011 (UTC)

File:Axis occupation of Yugoslavia 1943-44.png[edit]

The file File:Axis occupation of Yugoslavia 1943-44.png is a derivative work of this PD image. --DIREKTOR (TALK) 15:30, 5 June 2011 (UTC)

Is there any problem for that..(Copyvio or something) but irrelevant as source is PD??--...Captain......Tälk tö me.. 15:36, 5 June 2011 (UTC)
No, but before my nsd-tagging, source and authorship were not that clear (and led to a complaint on COM:AN/U). --Túrelio (talk) 15:40, 5 June 2011 (UTC)
My mistake, I did not clarify the source properly. Has the complaint been lodged by one "User:PANONIAN"? --DIREKTOR (TALK) 17:45, 5 June 2011 (UTC)
Yes, his complaint was my reason to check the file. However, I hadn't the time and the nerve to mediate your edit-war. --Túrelio (talk) 17:56, 5 June 2011 (UTC)
He is the author of the source file, knows full well it has been released into public domain, and understands that this is a modification of his PD file. He has posted a bad-faith report in a deliberate attempt to delete the images on a technicality (I assume counting on my absence or preoccupation with enWiki issues). He is in general rather maliciously disposed towards me. --DIREKTOR (TALK) 11:33, 6 June 2011 (UTC)
No need to justify yourself. I didn't take the source issue as a bad intention from your side. --Túrelio (talk) 12:23, 6 June 2011 (UTC)

Wegen AN[edit]

Sei nachsichtig mit ihm, er ist ein wenig impulsiv :D --WizardOfOz talk 18:06, 5 June 2011 (UTC)

Natürlich war das eigenlich harmlos, aber wehret den Anfängen. In letzter Zeit sind die Umgangsformen und die Stimmung auch auf Commons m.E. schlechter geworden. Dann reagiert man selbst auch gereizter und schon hat die Spirale begonnen. --Túrelio (talk) 18:14, 5 June 2011 (UTC)
Na dann schau dir mal die Diskussion über die Karte an wo wir beide beteiligt sind :D. Dort ist die Ganze Diskussion kurz vorm kippen :D --WizardOfOz talk 18:18, 5 June 2011 (UTC)
Meine Frustrationskapazität ist für heute schon ausgeschöpft durch die Mobbingaktion des :de-Dödelclubs gegen Martina, Ralf and andere. Wenn du den Eindruck hast, dass es dort zu fetzig wird, zieh dich einfach eine Zeit lang zurück oder bitte auf COM:AN um eine vorübergehende Seitensperre. (Ich muss ehrlich sagen, dass ich diese Art von Konflikten über Fahnen, Karten usw. wirklich hasse, weil eine Intervention für einen inhaltlich unbeteiligten Admin extrem zeitraubend ist.) --Túrelio (talk) 18:24, 5 June 2011 (UTC)
Was für Mobbingaktion? Hier oder auf dewiki? Meinst den Roletschek? Hab nichts mitgekriegt. Was die Karte betrifft, war nur ein Hinweis damit du dir ein Bild machen kannst. Für mich ist die Diskussion dort erledigt. --WizardOfOz talk 18:28, 5 June 2011 (UTC)
Ich möchte diesen Typen durch ein Direktlink nicht noch publicity verschaffen, zumal die justiziablen Sachen inzwischen eh versionsgelöscht sind. Schau dir nur die Benutzerseiten de:Benutzer:Ralf Roletschek und de:Benutzer:Martina Nolte an. Das sollte schon reichen. --Túrelio (talk) 18:39, 5 June 2011 (UTC)
Schade. Wie es scheint zwei gute weniger :( Anscheinend gibt es überall solche spezialisten die es schaffen einem die Freude zu nehmen. --WizardOfOz talk 18:55, 5 June 2011 (UTC)

File:Mémorial col des Abeilles.jpg[edit]

This memorial was installation, in homage of a resistant, deceased in 1944. it must dated after the second war. the author is unknown. I do not see or can be the copyvio or the author's right in this case! -- Véronique PAGNIER (talk) 17:51, 5 June 2011 (UTC)

Selbstgemachtes (?) aus Caracas?[edit]

Hallo Turelio, von einem Nutzer gibt es eine Reihe von Bilder aus Caracas, die mir zu professionell aussehen, als das sie (wie angegeben) selbstgemacht sein könnten. Eines ist hier

- die Bilder des Nutzer mit EXIF-Daten sind deutlich schlechter als die 3-4 "Postkarten". Trifft m.E. auf alle Bilder Caracas1 bis Caracas4 des Nutzers zu. Wie weiter? Das ist mir nicht klar. Grüße Cholo Aleman (talk) 20:02, 5 June 2011 (UTC)

Ich vermute dass alle - außer vielleicht dem 1 EXIF-Bild - alle copyvios sind. Allerdings gab tineye keinen hit. 1 Bild habe ich via Google gefunden. Wenn's dir gerade danach ist, dann such doch in Google nach dem Dateinamen oder der Beschreibung. Andernfalls kannst du für alle eine DR stellen. Der Uploader wird sich eh nicht melden; war auf :it auch nur kurz aktiv. --Túrelio (talk) 20:45, 5 June 2011 (UTC)
Südamerikanische Städte sind ein Quell immerwährender Detektivarbeit. Das Bild wurde in diesem Skyscrapercity Beitrag von Juni 2009 bereits verwendet. Es stammt von Flickr, ist dort - vermutlich weil der Pro-Account des Flickr-Benutzers abgelaufen ist und infolge seine Beiträge auf 200 reduziert worden - noch auf dem Server gelagert aber nicht mehr über zugänglich. Urheber nicht mehr identifizierbar, aber Bild aus dem Internet kopiert. --Martin H. (talk) 21:29, 5 June 2011 (UTC)
und p.s.: File:Caracas3.jpeg stammt aus dem gleichen Skyscrapercity Beitrag, ebenso File:Caracas2.jpeg und File:Caracas.jpeg. File:Caracas,entrata di uno dei tanti centri commerciali.jpg kommt aus der gleichen Skyscrapercity Diskussion ein Beitrag darüber. Da hat sich jemand großzügig selbstbedient. --Martin H. (talk) 21:34, 5 June 2011 (UTC)
Da hat sich wieder jemand den Sherlock-Holmes-Award verdient. --Túrelio (talk) 05:30, 6 June 2011 (UTC)

+ 1, wunderbar, Danke! Cholo Aleman (talk) 16:12, 6 June 2011 (UTC)

Universities in Danang[edit]

Just a note regarding your deletion of Category:Universities in Da Nang: Da Nang actually has other universities besides the University of Da Nang (e.g. Duy Tan University, Da Nang Architecture University, etc). I created the category, and I realize that there was only the U of DN subcategory in it—I just hadn't gotten around to uploading the rest of my pics. I've been (and still am) busy IRL for the past while, so I probably won't do any work on it for at least another month or so, but I just wanted to drop you a line to let you know that I'll eventually recreate and continue filling up the category. --Dragfyre (talk) 15:04, 6 June 2011 (UTC)

Hi Dragfyre, thanks for the note. There is absolutely no problem in recreating a cat, when it is used. It's not like recreating a copyvio ;-). --Túrelio (talk) 15:16, 6 June 2011 (UTC)

October Project image[edit]

Hi Túrelio, yesterday I tagged File:October project on rooftop.jpg as a copyvio, but I believe this was an error on my part. The image was an original file, much larger than the press kit image, so it could not possibly have been a rip from the PDF. Would it be possible to undelete the image, but retain the {{Npd}} tag for now (it appears in the last history edit prior to the copyvio tag)? I am in the process of getting in touch with the photographer to get confirmation for OTRS. Thank you so much. – Kerαunoςcopiagalaxies 00:07, 7 June 2011 (UTC)

✓ Done. --Túrelio (talk) 08:24, 7 June 2011 (UTC)
Thanks so much, Túrelio. – Kerαunoςcopiagalaxies 08:47, 7 June 2011 (UTC)

File:What do you want to be when you grow up?.jpg[edit]

Dear Admin Turelio,

Update: Regarding this image, after thinking carefully, I decided to flickpass it. I gave my reasons in its image talkpage here. (You may wish to read it) I said that if anyone has a problem, they can revert the flickrpass and retag it as nsd. But personally, it seems very likely that the uploader is the flickr account owner. If there is a problem, the image can be deleted in future. I also notified the person who originally filed the nsd tag here and he said on my talkpage that he has no problems. Maggie, the uploader, clearly works with the 'Building Tomorrow' organisation and places a watermark on her photos on educating African children in Uganda from this article but that is not a good enough reason to delete her photos especially when her flickr account shows no evidence of flickrwashing. With kind Regards, --Leoboudv (talk) 04:59, 7 June 2011 (UTC)

ACK. I haven't got an answer from the Flickr-Maggie. --Túrelio (talk) 08:26, 7 June 2011 (UTC)

Patrolling question[edit]


Often while patrolling, I encounter files like this. I can't confirm the source and permission because login is required. What should I do in these cases?

Thank you in advice,

Yours Sincerely -- RE rillke questions? 18:38, 7 June 2011 (UTC)

Hi Rillke,
the most simple, still formally correct way would be tagging it with cv as the source website (before log-in) says "© 2006-2011". I've done that now. If you guess the image could be "o.k." and valuable, you might tag it with no-permission, which gives the uploader 7 days to provide a permission. --Túrelio (talk) 19:17, 7 June 2011 (UTC)
Thanks again. -- RE rillke questions? 19:19, 7 June 2011 (UTC)

File:BudaViewfromPest 029.jpg[edit]

Zur Information: [29] --08-15 (talk) 20:18, 7 June 2011 (UTC)

Danke. --Túrelio (talk) 20:29, 7 June 2011 (UTC)


Hallo Turelio. Habe mich drangemacht und am 23.5. eine neue Lizenzerklärung meiner Firma für obiges File und weitere unklare files gemailt und auch am 23.5. noch die Bestätigung unter der Ticket#: 2011052310006377 erhalten und dies auch unter der Undeletion-request-Seite gemeldet. Nur: es ist bisher nichts passiert; kann ja verstehen, dass es mit all den vielen fleißigen Admins und dem Riesenberg an abzuarbeitenden Aktionen eine Weile dauert, würde die Aktion aber noch gerne vor meinem Urlaub erledigt wissen. Kannst Du da was erreichen? Wäre Klasse. (Den gleichen Text habe ich auf Deiner deutschen Disk-Seite platziert.) Dank schon mal und Gruß vom --Leumar01 (talk) 07:11, 8 June 2011 (UTC)

Du meintest sicher File:CMCLagerhuelsen.jpg (mit n am Ende), oder? --Túrelio (talk) 09:13, 8 June 2011 (UTC)
Uups, natürlich, und ob, ja. Danke! Gruß --Leumar01 (talk) 12:38, 8 June 2011 (UTC)

Danke fürs Löschen[edit]

Moin Turelio, wollte nur Danke sagen und eine Frage loswerden, gibt es eine Möglichkeit meine Bilder so aufzulisten, das ich sehen kann, ob sie in keiner Seite eingebunden sind. Ich habe bei der Umstellung einige Bilder verloren, die Galerie zeigt ja nur Catlose an. Tschüß -- Ra Boe watt?? 11:24, 8 June 2011 (UTC)

Ich misch mich mal wieder ungefragt ein ;-)
Ich habe Duesentrieb am 9. Mai eine Wikimail mit eben dieser Frage geschrieben (Anzeige auf einen Blick, wo die Bilder eingebunden sind). Leider erhielt ich keine Antwort. Vielleicht fragst Du ihn auch nochmal? --Schwäbin (talk) 11:28, 8 June 2011 (UTC)
Für offizielle Aktivitäten im Namen von Wikimedia Deutschland nutze ich einen separaten Account, Benutzer:Daniel Kinzler (WMDE). Fragen und Anregungen nehme am liebsten per Wikimail an diesen Account entgegen. Da er jetzt zum WMDE Team gehört hat er Stress, Beantwortung von Mails dauern da bei einigen Herren länger ;), spreche aus eigener Erfahrung und kann sagen, das sich die Damen und der Boss schnell melden. ;))) Tschüß -- Ra Boe watt?? 12:00, 8 June 2011 (UTC)
Leider keine Ahnung. Ich wär nicht mal darauf gekommen, deswegen Düsentrieb anzusprechen. Die "normale" Gallerie-Auflistung ist dir natürlich bekannt. Nutzung oder Fehlen derselben wird da aber nicht direkt angezeigt, sondern man muss für jedes Bild auf "Usage" klicken. Aber das dürfte für dich nix neues sein. --Túrelio (talk) 12:07, 8 June 2011 (UTC)
Da er WikiSense (die Galerie) und auch das Tool CheckUsage programmiert hat, hab ich ihn angesprochen. Raboe und mir geht es drum, nicht erst bei jedem Bild einzeln auf Usage klicken zu müssen, sondern eine zusätzliche Spalte in der Galerie zu haben, die (analog zur Spalte, in der die Kategorien angezeigt werden) auf einen Blick die Seiten anzeigt, in die das Bild eingebunden ist. --Schwäbin (talk) 12:19, 8 June 2011 (UTC)
Genau darum geht es. ;) Aber schreib ihn ruhig noch mal an und erwähne das wir jetzt schon zwei mit der gleichen Frage sind. Tschüß -- Ra Boe watt?? 13:37, 8 June 2011 (UTC)
Mach Du das lieber. Ich mag ungern einem ehrenamtlichen Wikipedia-Mitarbeiter zweimal eine Bitte vortragen, er hat ja selbstverständlich das Recht, eine unbezahlte „Auftragsarbeit“ nicht anzunehmen. Aber Du könntest ihn auch mal bitten, wenn von zwei Seiten sowas kommt, sieht es für ihn vielleicht wieder anders aus. --Schwäbin (talk) 13:48, 8 June 2011 (UTC)
Nee er ist, so meines Wissen, bezahlter Angestellter der WMDE, aber ich schreibe die Mail. Tschüß -- Ra Boe watt?? 14:04, 8 June 2011 (UTC)

Falls du eine User-Kat in deine Bilder eingebunden hast, gäbe es dafür ein Auswertungtool. Beispiel (lange Ladezeit) --Martina talk 17:00, 10 June 2011 (UTC)

Und wo sehe ich jetzt, ob sie in keiner Seite eingebunden sind? -- RE rillke questions? 20:28, 10 June 2011 (UTC)
Wer nur seine Dateinutzung sehen will und keine Nutzerkategorie hat: Magnus -- RE rillke questions? 20:35, 10 June 2011 (UTC)
Wenn es nur um Wikimedia- Projekte (das was immer unter "Globale Dateinutzung" steht) geht, kann ich auch ein JavaScript zusammenzimmern, sollte es keine andere Möglichkeit geben. -- RE rillke questions? 20:32, 10 June 2011 (UTC)
Danke, Martina, für den Hinweis auf das Tool von Magnus, das hilft mir!
Zumindest mir reicht eine Nutzung auf Wikimedia-Projekten. Ich dachte halt, wenn es die WikiSense-Galerie schon gibt (und die ja auch bei den Beiträgen gut verlinkt ist), müsste man ja nur noch eine zusätzliche Spalte reinsetzen. --Schwäbin (talk) 21:02, 10 June 2011 (UTC)

Appropriate template[edit]

Hallo! I've recently found one more problem with file licensing by user form Russia. User Vladlen666 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · edit filter log · block user · block log) have uploaded a pack of files claiming that they are in public domain ({{PD-old}}). However he didn't put the names of their creators: just "soviet artist" (e.g., File:Coregonus lavaretus pidschian.jpg), "soviet photographer" (e.g., File:Orlov A G.jpeg) and "soviet cartographer" (e.g., File:Pohod Tamanskoi armii.JPG). At least in some cases that copyright violations took place. I hope the reason of such activity is misunderstanding and try to explain him what's wrong with it. Neverthless the files do exist here and I dont't know what template should be added better to files under doubt. Mithril (talk) 20:55, 8 June 2011 (UTC)

Your tagging of File:Coregonus lavaretus pidschian.jpg was correct. I have now tagged File:Orlov A G.jpeg as no-permission, because the name and life dates of the photographer were not provided. As I don't read any Russian, it would be great if you could explain the uploader what is missing. Thanks. --Túrelio (talk) 20:59, 8 June 2011 (UTC)
The problem is much more larger: I believe that about one third of all files uploaded by this user is of such kind. Mithril (talk) 21:07, 8 June 2011 (UTC)
Just try to find out what is missing in each file and then tag it as no-permission or no-source or, when you are rather sure, as copyvio. Thanks. --Túrelio (talk) 21:12, 8 June 2011 (UTC)
Something is going wrong. Mithril (talk) 21:58, 8 June 2011 (UTC)
No. That is rather normal ;-). Opinions differ. Anyway, you re-tagged it. --Túrelio (talk) 06:34, 9 June 2011 (UTC)
  • Seems to me I need help here. That's fair use and good faith attack. Mithril (talk) 01:43, 10 June 2011 (UTC)
  • I'm a page stalker and I'm reading this. ;) -- Darwin Ahoy! 01:56, 10 June 2011 (UTC)
    Be sure it is no problem. Mithril (talk) 01:59, 10 June 2011 (UTC)

a picture of Dr Israr Ahmad and weirdos[edit]

Hey Turelio, :) you recently deleted a picture I had provided for the article Dr Israr Ahmad. Why did you delete it? I had obtained it myself from the said owner (dr Israr) with his full permission to release it into wiki public domain. There may be one other reason, there are ultra orthodox muslims (salafis) who do not like to save and use pictures of human beings, maybe one of those weirdos complained of it being a copy right violation!! I can assure you it isnt, maybe if you could explain a little, it would be really helpful. (Note: those orthodox dudes have deleted his pictures many times before, you can check it in the page's history!!). Thanx! Afghan Historian (talk) 06:02, 9 June 2011 (UTC)

Hi Afghan Historian,
are your referring to File:Dr Israr Ahmad.jpg? If yes, well, this file wasn't deleted by me, but by User:Yann. I did only notify you of the deletion request. As of the deletion log, it was deleted because it is assumed to be a copyvio from, a page to where the same image was uploaded in 2009. This is not a proof, but at least suggestive of copyvio. I recommend you to either talk to Yann or to file an undeletion request at Commons:Undeletion requests. --Túrelio (talk) 06:32, 9 June 2011 (UTC)

Deletion of Photo under incorrect copyright (File:Tommy-castillo.jpg)[edit]

Túrelio, I am Mr. Tommy Castillo's personal assistant. You have previously deleted the Official picture of him from the commons area; tommy-castillo.jpg. uploaded by user spkeller13. This picture is NOT owned by Strathmore Paper company and is owned by Mr. Castillo himself. He has given permission to Strathmore to use it on their website with his biography.

Please contact me or Mr. Castillo via email.


Personal Assistant to Mr. Castillo, Samantha P. Keller 407-271-5140

Spkeller13 (talk) 13:43, 10 June 2011 (UTC)

Hi Samantha,
could you please send a confirmation to I can then undelete the image. --Túrelio (talk) 16:14, 10 June 2011 (UTC)

File:Neochilidia fusca.jpg[edit]

Could you please rename this file into File:Neochildia fusca.jpg. That's a typo. Mithril (talk) 21:04, 10 June 2011 (UTC)

✓ Done. --Túrelio (talk) 21:13, 10 June 2011 (UTC)
Thanks a lot! Mithril (talk) 21:21, 10 June 2011 (UTC)


Hallo Túrelio, du hast die Bilder von hier unter einer CC-Lizenz hochgeladen. Ich lese auf der Website Namensnennung/Gleiche Bedingungen, aber nicht spezifisch CC. Habe ich da was falsch verstanden? Wenn ja, würde ich mich über eine Erklärung, damit ich es verstehe, freuen. Gruß --Atlan 03:12, 11 June 2011 (UTC)

Hallo Atlan, das war ein besonderer Fall. Den Hintergrund findest du hier. Der mutmaßliche Ersteller hatte Zoff mit einem Adminkollegen aus der gleichen Gegend (Mehr will ich dazu jetzt mal nicht kommentieren), der die meisten Bilder vorher mal geöscht hatte, wobei mir die Rationale aber wenig stichhaltig vorkam. Da das ganze eine Art Service war, habe ich überhaupt nichts dagegen, wenn du díe Validität der Bilder hinterfragst/überprüfst/falsifzierst. Du kannst auch gerne mit dem mutmaßlichen Ersteller Kontakt aufnehmen, zumal er recht gut deutsch spricht. --Túrelio (talk) 08:00, 11 June 2011 (UTC)
Hallo Túrelio, ist schon in Ordnung, ich bin zufällig darauf gestoßen und wollte mal nachfragen. Scheint ja zu passen. Gruß --Atlan 08:54, 11 June 2011 (UTC)

hilfe... (umbenannt zu File:Ramón Grau Director.jpg)[edit]

hier File:Director.jpg hat Benutzer Samaeli in altes Bild mit einem neuen überschrieben, - das neue ist offenbar nonsense. (Das alte war passabel) Wie mache ich das rückgängig? kapiere ich leider nicht. Grüße und Dank im Voraus Cholo Aleman (talk) 08:05, 11 June 2011 (UTC)

Habs revertiert. Ich glaub das kann aber jeder User; einfach in der Tabelle "Dateiversionen" auf das "zurücksetzen" neben der gewünschten Version klicken. --Túrelio (talk) 09:15, 11 June 2011 (UTC)

Danke! - nächste mal probiere ich das selbst, eher seltener Fall. Cholo Aleman (talk) 09:19, 11 June 2011 (UTC)

October Project image[edit]

Hi Túrelio, thank you so much for your previous help with File:October_project_on_rooftop.jpg. I have been in touch with the photographer, Steven Lowy, and its apparent that the image is, in fact, a copyvio. Can I request you to, once more, delete it permanently? I'm really sorry for the trouble. The image is technically licensed to be used by the band, but not freely by anyone else, so even if the uploader is affiliated with the band (which neither the photographer nor I know, or can prove), they never had any right to upload the image in the first place. I will remove the image from the articles it appears on in a short while (I'm writing back to Mr. Lowy at the moment). Thanks so much, and if you prefer me to go a different route (tagging the image copyvio again), let me know and I'll do that. Either way, thanks for working with me on this. I assumed good faith and it turned out it definitely was not! – Kerαunoςcopiagalaxies 20:46, 11 June 2011 (UTC)

Gone. --Túrelio (talk) 21:01, 11 June 2011 (UTC)
You work fast, that's great, thank you. Again my apologies for wasting everyone's time. – Kerαunoςcopiagalaxies 21:02, 11 June 2011 (UTC)

Lizenz Bilder[edit]


I request that the images I uploaded to wikimedia commons are not deleted. Some of them belong to other historical characters and personalities of national importance in my country. The sources are indicated and are publicly accessible, it is clear that besides being used to promote culture and knowledge of some officials currently in office.

Ich beantrage, dass die Bilder, die ich auf Wikipedia hochgeladen werden nicht gelöscht. Einige von ihnen gehören zu anderen historischen Figuren und Persönlichkeiten von nationaler Bedeutung in meinem Land. Die Quellen sind angegeben und sind öffentlich zugänglich, ist es klar, dass neben verwendet wird, um Kultur und Wissen von einigen Beamten, die derzeit im Amt zu fördern.

danke schon

BlackBird07 (talk) 00:28, 12 June 2011 (UTC)

Hi BlackBird07,
the importance of a depicted person has no effect on the copyright of its image, which belongs to the photographer. A photography is protected by copyright until 70 years after the death of the photographer. This is also true for Peru[30]. The fact that an image is available/shown on another website has no meaning for copyright. For uploads to Commons you have to provide proof/evidence that the image is either out of copyright (because the photographer has died 70 years ago) or was released under a free license by the photographer. What we really don't like here manufacturing description entries or bogus ownership claims. When you uploaded File:Pedro-Cotillo-Zegarra.gif, you provided "" as source. After I notified you that this source entry 1) is incomplete, because we need the link to the page where the image is actually shown, and 2) that we need evidence of a permission, you changed[31] the authorship from "unmsm" to your username. You did the same with File:Omar-Chehade2.jpg, File:Luis izquierdo vasquez.jpg, File:Alcalde transitorio Marco Parra.jpg and File:Jorge del castillo.jpg. Eventually you do not know that claiming authorship over a work of whom you are not the author, is a criminal act in many countries, see Copyfraud. Therefore, I have reverted your changes to protect you and potential re-users from legal problems. If you want to remain your uploads on Commons, you first have to find out (and provide evidence for) who was the photographer (name, location, eventually year of death). If the photographer is still living, you may ask him for a written permission. --Túrelio (talk) 08:24, 12 June 2011 (UTC)

File:The NA Barakat Academy of Nakaseeta.jpg[edit]

Maybe its time for this image to be deleted. Its more than 7 days now. Regards, --Leoboudv (talk) 09:37, 12 June 2011 (UTC)

Yeah. Regrettably, the Flickr user did never reply to my mail. --Túrelio (talk) 10:28, 12 June 2011 (UTC)
  • Thank You sadly. But someone had to make a decision eventually. It was perhaps a derivative image, too. --Leoboudv (talk) 18:52, 12 June 2011 (UTC)

Request for help: two images[edit]

Dear Turelio, Thanks for your help with the file I uploaded - USAFA stone circle.jpg - where you fixed the image by removing the CMYK color coding to allow non-corrupted viewing in IE. However, it looks like the problem returned when you improved the image again by removing the lower section. When I try to use the image in an article, the very small photo that appears is all right, but when I click it, the large image that appears is corrupted. Is there any way to delete other images and just leave the corrected image that you created?

Also, there is a similar problem I have with another file I uploaded: Rusk Memorial Chapel.jpeg. I had originally uploaded a black and white image, but then replaced it with a color image. When I use the file in an article, the small version that appears is the new (color) file -- but when I click it the large file that is shown is the old black and white file. Again, is there a way to delete this black and white file completely, so that only the color file remains?

If you can help with one or both of these issues, I'd very much appreciate it! NearTheZoo (talk) 12:35, 12 June 2011 (UTC)

Hi NearTheZoo,
this seems to be related to the still lurking cache-problem on Commons. (If you want to see a real problem case, look at File:Iguane à Chichén Itzá.JPG and click on it.) At least I couldn't reproduce the problem with File:USAFA stone circle.jpg. When I clicked on the image, the full resolution was shown withut any problem. The same was true for me with File:Rusk Memorial Chapel.jpeg. When I click on the image, I see the full resolution without any problem. Besides, I'm not sure whether deleting the first version would really help. Did you ever click on the "purge" button on each image page? --Túrelio (talk) 12:49, 12 June 2011 (UTC)
Hi, Turelio - thanks for your note! The "USAFA stone cirlce.jpg" file seems to be working now. The "Rusk Memorial Chaplel.jpg" doesn't work for me (it shows up in color in the article, but clicking it gives the black and white version) - but I guess that's not the end of the world....
However, there is one other file that is driving me a little crazy, and I wonder if you could take a look? It's "Army Chaplain School flag.jpg" - which, if you look at the history, you'll see I've reverted back and forth between two images so many times that it is embarassing. I uploaded a tiny image, but then found a much better one and uploaded it. For some reason, though, when I revert to the small image, it shows up in the article and when you click it, it shows up small, which makes sense. But when I revert to the larger image, and it shows up in the article -- when you click it, it shows up very fuzzy. However, when I click the thumbnail in the list of past versions (for example, the second in the list) it shows up clear. For now, I've reverted to the smaller image for the article. Any ideas? NearTheZoo (talk) 11:25, 13 June 2011 (UTC)
In this case, after reverting to the larger version I could indeed reproduce the phenomenon, clicking on the thumb or on full-resolution produce the small image version. Absolutely strange. It remained even after purging. I would recommend you to raise this issue on COM:VP, as I have no idea what to about that. On second thought, I have downloaded the larger version and run it through "optímising" in IrfanView and voila, it worked.--Túrelio (talk) 14:13, 13 June 2011 (UTC)
Thanks again for trying, Turlio. Drives me crazy! :) Anyway, I uploaded the image to a different file - "Flag for Army Chaplain School.jpg" -- and it works perfectly. So I used the image from the new file in the article and have marked this first (problematic) file -- "Army Chaplain School flag.jpg" -- for speedy deletion. Somehow I have continuing problems when I try to upload a "better version" of a file over an existing one. If I upload it separately and request the first be deleted, it seems to work. This just adds work for wikimedia commons editors, though. Anyway - thanks! NearTheZoo (talk) 14:43, 13 June 2011 (UTC)

My DR comment[edit]

Dear Turelio, you did the right thing. It was inappropriate, I see. And reinforced the position of the guy. I make many mistakes, you see? But, without errors, there is no learning. Thank you for your work. --Giorgiomonteforti Speak your mind 10:06, 14 June 2011 (UTC)

No problem. --Túrelio (talk) 10:14, 14 June 2011 (UTC)

Pedro Passos Coelho[edit]

Hallo Túrelio, du hast verschiedene Bilder von Passos Coelho auf Commons gelöscht. Beim Laden der Bilder habe ich auf die Lizenz geachtet und diese genau so eingegeben wie sie auf der Webseite stand. Meines Erachtens habe ich keinen Fehler festgestellt, wieso hast du die Bilder gelöscht? Also so kommen wir nicht weiter.--Cruks (talk) 11:51, 14 June 2011 (UTC)

Ich habe folgende beiden Dateien gelöscht:
Beide tragen eine no-commercial-use-Beschränkung (siehe durchgestrichenes Dollar-Zeichen), die auf Commons nicht erlaubt ist. Du kannst natürlich den Autor fragen, ob der diese Einschränkung auf Flickr generell aufheben oder dir eine Genehmigung (ohne NC) für Commons geben kann, die dann natürlich von jedermann genutzt werden kann. --Túrelio (talk) 12:11, 14 June 2011 (UTC)


Thank you for reviewing the image. Although I used to be an OTRS volunteer, I no longer have access. I verified that the ticket number was the same one as what was recorded for the original image listed in the speedy deletion rationale. I still keep authors' permissions in my email so was able to review it from there. Anyway, thanks again. --Happy editing! Nehrams2020 (talkcontrib) 14:10, 14 June 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for the feedback. --Túrelio (talk) 14:13, 14 June 2011 (UTC)

This DR[edit]

If you have any views on this DR--either for or against, please feel free to make them known. I thought it was an AP photo but maybe I'm wrong. Thank You, --Leoboudv (talk) 22:51, 14 June 2011 (UTC)

Regards, --Leoboudv (talk) 05:02, 15 June 2011 (UTC)

How to provide copyright permission ?[edit]

Hi Túrelio, I received a written permission from Ms. Danielle Chesnay, the rights holder of Louis-Olivier Chenay's pictures. Shall I provide this permission anywhere on Wikimedia and how ? Many thamks in advance for your help. Best regards Jean-Michel Henny (talk) 21:47, 15 June 2011 (UTC)

Hi Jean-Michel,
just go to Commons:Messages type (assuming that you prefer French), copy the boxed "Déclaration de consentement", enter all the filenames (or complete URLs), enter the name of the license of choice, mail that all to Ms. Danielle Chesnay and ask her to read it and, if she consents, to date and sign it and to mail it back to After she told you that she will send the permission, you should add {{OTRS pending}} to all images covered by this permission. This will save them from premature deletion. --Túrelio (talk) 06:26, 16 June 2011 (UTC)

Template move[edit]

Hi, sorry for the additional work for my mistakes. I saw that you are often required remedies to my wrapping a new category, but I realize now that you are overworked in this. I can then, if and when I realize my mistake, I simply move to that category IMHO more correct to avoid you dirty work? Once moved to put the warning to the old class for cancellation. It can help or you still have to watch to make sure it is a correct operation? Thanks and sorry for the translator (as fast as I do) :-)--Threecharlie (talk) 08:02, 16 June 2011 (UTC)

Hmm, I am not totally sure that I understand. A category (cat), once it is created, cannot be "moved" to another name, such as from Category:Buildings in Adria to Category:Buildings in Adria (Italy). Of course, the content of a cat can be "moved", just by changing the cat entry at the bottom of each page. Deleting an already emptied cat is no big deal, whereas moving many files from one cat to another, is quite some manual work. So, if you have a full cat with a wrong or unfitting cat-name, it does indeed help, if you move the content (i.e., the files in the cat) to the new cat. Thanks for yor care. --Túrelio (talk) 08:12, 16 June 2011 (UTC)
As you can see in in the history of "Adoration of the Magi Triptych by Hans Memling"], a SieBot moves provides some interesting information. It renames the related talk page too when possible. --Foroa (talk) 11:44, 16 June 2011 (UTC)

File:Afghan Leopard Gecko.jpg[edit]

{{Flickrreview}} not sure what to do but I got the license changed on the original picture on Flickr. Please review. Andrew Pollock (talk) 20:39, 16 June 2011 (UTC)

Undeleted and new run of Flickreview. --Túrelio (talk) 20:45, 16 June 2011 (UTC)

For my own edification, could you please tell me why CC-BY-NC-SA isn't okay, but CC-BY-SA is? Andrew Pollock (talk) 22:55, 16 June 2011 (UTC)

NC means "no commercial use allowed", as you may know. Per our policy, files on Commons have to be free also for commercial use. A file that has only a NC-license is therefore not allowed on Commons. Some users uploads files under a NC-license plus a different non-NC-license. However strange this combination may look, it would be allowed.
RE:your upload. In case you are the original photographer, you may now change the license on Flickr back to NC, as we have recorded the non-NC-licensing at upload time to Commons. --Túrelio (talk) 06:28, 17 June 2011 (UTC)

File:Kim Estrada.jpg[edit]

Dear Admin Turelio, I left the comment in this picture. In your view, is this picture OK or is it a flickrwash? Originally, there were 6 images all of Kim Estrada on the flickr account photostream. Now there are 12 images. If it is OK, feel free to pass it. If not, consider failing it or doing nothing. When I see this picture, I see no camera metadata and it looks like it has an artificial perspective...which might make it a derivative. Thank You, --Leoboudv talk) 06:21, 18 June 2011 (UTC)

  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment: I made a reply to your response to the DR . I don't know who to trust sadly--if the uploader is really Patricia Campbell. Thank You, --Leoboudv (talk) 08:53, 19 June 2011 (UTC)

Jean(-)Baptiste Bourguignon d'Anville[edit]

Halli, hallo. Du hast vor ein Paar Wochen die Notiz von Jean-Baptiste Bourguignon d'Anville gelöscht (siehe das). Ich habe ein Bißchen recherchiert, und habe gefunden, dass obwohl die Englische Wikipedia Jean Baptiste ohne Bindestrich schreibt, alle anderen (inklusive die französische) außer ein Paar (nl, pl z.B.) schreiben Jean-Baptiste mit Bindestrich. Ich habe auch bei der Bibliothèque Nationale de France hier geprüft, und es ist klar, dass der Name mit Bindestrich geschrieben sein sollte. Ich habe auch fest gestellt, dass im englisch sprachigen Raum, der Bindestrich ist irgendwie nicht benutzt. Ich frage mich aber, welche Version wir da wirklich benutzen sollten. Ideen? Danke! notafish }<';> 00:03, 19 June 2011 (UTC)

Hi notafish, meine Löschung beruhte nicht auf eigener Recherche, sondern weil der Eintrag für mich plausibel (mehr nicht) mit {{bad name|Creator:Jean Baptiste Bourguignon d'Anville}} markiert war. In Anbetracht deiner Quellenarbeit scheint klar, dass die Bindestrich-Variante die Richtige war. Ich habe diese nun entlöscht und die andere Variante zur Löschung markiert. --Túrelio (talk) 07:27, 19 June 2011 (UTC)

User talk:Susan sponder[edit]

Sometimes when a user talk page consists solely of a recently-added welcome template, I add my comments on top of the template, since the template is so long that I worry that a new user might overlook comments added below it... AnonMoos (talk) 13:21, 19 June 2011 (UTC)

ACK. --Túrelio (talk) 09:50, 20 June 2011 (UTC)


Hi. I asked for you to delete a picture of mine, and you did. [32] Could you add it back? I would like to change some colors on it. And it fits in well with the others here, [33]. Also, I have some problem with the wikipedia coding. I used the "==" but I don't get another section. Do you know how to fix this? (Lilic (talk) 06:31, 20 June 2011 (UTC)).

✓ Done. You had opened a gallery, but not closed it. Therefore the "==" didn't work. --Túrelio (talk) 06:35, 20 June 2011 (UTC)
Thanks a lot. (Lilic (talk) 16:01, 20 June 2011 (UTC))

Please Review your delation[edit]


You deleted one of my pictures but i have the copyright. Can you please note that?



Hi Louis,
please sign your comments with --~~~~
Are your refering to File:Stéphanie Manasseh.jpg? If yes, the problem is that the image was also found here: and If you are really the photographer, then send a written confirmation to If you are not the photographer, you have to provide a written permission by the photographer. --Túrelio (talk) 09:50, 20 June 2011 (UTC)

Datei:Fessenheim abschalten2.svg[edit]

Hallo Túrelio, ich habe die Version des "Atomkraft-Nein danke" Logos hier gefunden: Datei:Atomkraft Nein Danke.svg. Wird unter anderem auf der Wikiseite verwendet. Gruss

Hallo Mondberg, aber du hattest auf de:File:Atomkraft_Nein_Danke.svg die Warnung "do not transfer to Commons ..." gesehen? Ich persönlich sehe eigentlich kein Problem damit, zumal dasselbe Logo in anderen Sprachen inzwischen auf COmmons liegt. Es könnte aber doch passieren, dass jemand anderer das moniert. --Túrelio (talk) 18:06, 20 June 2011 (UTC)

Ob das hier[edit]

irgendwen interessiert? --Martina talk 20:23, 20 June 2011 (UTC)

Also, so ganz verstehe ich das Problem selbst nicht. Ich hab mich sogar extra mal ausgeloggt, konnte aber keinen Unterschied zum eingeloggten Zustand erkennen. Als Creditline erschien in deinem Foto beide Male "Foto: Martina Nolte / Lizenz: Creative Commons CC-by-sa-3.0 de" und beiden Male war der Lizenzname mit einem Link zum legal code unterlegt. Einen "Use this file on the web"-Button sehe ich garnicht, nur das allgemeine Link "(Reusing this file)". --Túrelio (talk) 21:10, 20 June 2011 (UTC)
Die Creditline zeigt Name und Link zur Lizenz korrekt an. "User this file on the web" ist nicht mit jedem Browser zu sehen (sowieso nur ausgeloggt). Zum Beispiel IE8 nicht, Firefox 4.0.1. ja. Ich geh zur MediaWiki-Seite damit. --Martina talk 18:01, 21 June 2011 (UTC)
Jetzt hier --Martina talk 11:16, 22 June 2011 (UTC)

Copyvio candidated for featured picture[edit]

Hello Turélio, what do we do with this? I fear there will be more files in this situation, this user has a very unfortunate habit of passing others work as his own, and even trying to win prizes with it.-- Darwin Ahoy! 05:38, 21 June 2011 (UTC)

As the Pescadores escultura image was already gone, I've checked his other uploads, but didn't find any evidence or suspicion for further copyvios. However, we should keep an eye on hiim. --Túrelio (talk) 07:08, 21 June 2011 (UTC)
I guess I got rid of at least the most obvious, thank you for reviewing it. Many of the remaining uploads seem to be legit, though I have a certain suspicion about his other candidate for featured picture, but perhaps it is legit as well. I was asking about this page because I don't know if I should leave it as it is, or if it should be deleted as "dependent on deleted file". I guess it should be kept as a record, but just in case, I thought it would be better to ask.-- Darwin Ahoy! 07:14, 21 June 2011 (UTC)
I see. As I've never been active on FP, I've no idea. But I would leave it as a record, as you said. --Túrelio (talk) 07:16, 21 June 2011 (UTC)

Companies and ships of those companies[edit]

I found that you removed the ships category for Hawaii Superferry. Was something wrong in the spelling? I add these categories to devide between the company and the ships. Extra images of the company have sometimes nothing to do with the ships and it gives the possibility of adding Ships by operator, when the company also has a lot of other activities. --Stunteltje (talk) 19:00, 21 June 2011 (UTC)

It had been tagged by Vantey as badname/dupe of Category:Hawaii Superferry. --Túrelio (talk) 19:03, 21 June 2011 (UTC)
Thanks. I'll contact Vantay to clarify the use of these categories. --Stunteltje (talk) 19:11, 21 June 2011 (UTC)

Cat for user talk pages[edit]

Is it okay, please see here--...Captain......Tälk tö me.. 03:43, 22 June 2011 (UTC)

No, out of scope as is the "article" on the talkpage. Cats removed and user advised. --Túrelio (talk) 06:43, 22 June 2011 (UTC)

Upgrading .svg image of the Coat of Arms of Nepal[edit]


I am new to editing on Wikipedia and I am mainly interested in working on materials related to Nepal. Currently (and actually for about a year now) I am trying to upgrade the .svg image of the Coat of Arms of Nepal (Image). I even uploaded an upgraded version of the .svg file last summer but at some point later on it was taken off and a page shows that you were involved in making the decision link.Sorry for my rudimentary skills at editing. I also uploaded a .gif file which was converted to .png by another user. This image has not been taken down image.

In the reason for removing the "upgraded" image it was written that the new image is a "scaled down duplicate" but the image had actually been altered in other ways: the text on the red ribbon at the bottom of the picture was "corrected" and a bangle was added in the female hand to match more closely with the actual Coat of Arms, as depicted in the .png image. The continued use of the present inaccurate image is particularly bothering because almost everyone on the Internet seems to be using the current image.

Also, it seems I can't re-upload the upgraded version of the file because it has already faced deletion once. Therefore I thought of asking you for help. I realize that I failed to credit the original creator of the image appropriately but it was mainly because I did not know how to do that here. Apologies for that shortcoming.

Thanks a lot for your attention to this matter.

Sincerely, PraShree (talk) 04:33, 22 June 2011 (UTC)

Hi PraShree, I can temporarily un-delete File:Coat of arms of Nepal.svg, so that you can check which version you do want to remain and eventually to complete the description/source/credit etc. Are you still online in this moment? --Túrelio (talk) 06:46, 22 June 2011 (UTC)
Thanks a lot for your prompt response.I have compared the file that was deleted with the .png file (which is a scan of an actual Coat of Arms on an official document) and I am quite sure that the new file is much more like the actual the Coat of Arms. Some of the letters and words written on the current .svg file don't make proper sense even to people who can read them. I would greatly appreciate it if you could restore the deleted file.PraShree (talk) 04:06, 23 June 2011 (UTC)
✓ Done, File:Coat of Arms of Nepal.svg. --Túrelio (talk) 07:12, 23 June 2011 (UTC)
Thanks a lot. I have updated some information on this file. Also, could you please suggest improvements that would qualify this image to replace the older image. And what is the procedure for replacement?PraShree (talk) 03:00, 24 June 2011 (UTC)
Your "to replace the older image" refers likely to its use on a project page, such as wikipedia, right? Well, this has to be discussed on the respective project. If there is no dispute/resistance, you might simply replace it. However, a better way might be to make a suggestion/proposal on the talkpage of the article where you want it to be used. --Túrelio (talk) 06:12, 24 June 2011 (UTC)
Thanks for your advice. I will do that right away. PraShree (talk) 23:26, 25 June 2011 (UTC)

The Breyer Law Accident Book[edit]

The image I am uploading is not violating any copy write laws, I own the copy write. Why is it coming up as a violation?

Hi, if you are refering to File:13 biggest mistakes accident book.jpg, this had been tagged as copyvio by User:Chatsam; you may ask him. You other two uploads have been deleted by my colleague User:Jcb. --Túrelio (talk) 18:33, 22 June 2011 (UTC)


Please block user:Lycaon indef and protect the discussion page. That account is no longer used on commons. Thanks. Lycaon (talk) 17:03, 24 June 2011 (UTC)

✓ Done. --Túrelio (talk) 18:20, 24 June 2011 (UTC)


Hallo Turelio, mich wurmt, dass bei bei inzwischen leider vielen Städten, auch bei Düsseldorf, die Kategory "Streets in..." so versteckt ist, dass sie nur von ganz versierten Nutzern gefunden wird. Obwohl das eine so wesentliche, zum Nachschlagen geeignete Kategorie ist. Ich wollte jetzt die Kategorien Plätze und Straßen wieder in einer Oberkategorie "Streets and squares in Düsseldorf" zusammenführen und diese dann direkt unter Düsseldorf einordnen. Die bisherigen Kategorien können ja trotzdem beibehalten werden. - Leider erst nachdem ich die Kategorie eingerichtet habe, sehe ich, dass Du sie schon mal hast löschen lassen. Ich schlage vor, auch eventuell gegen das sich einbürgernde allgemeine Vorgehen, sie wieder aufleben zu lassen. Gruß --Kürschner (talk) 10:01, 25 June 2011 (UTC)

Ähem, obwohl ich als gebürtiger Kölner bei Düsseldorfer Straßen sicher als befangen angesehen werde ;-), kann ich mich an den Vorgang nicht mehr so recht erinnern. Vermutlich habe ich als dupe/badname markierte cats gelöscht, aber sicher nicht von mir aktiv solche Markierungen vorgenommen. Wenngleich eine Überkategorisierung vermieden werden sollte, ist jede vernünftige Maßnahme zur erleichterten Auffindbarkeit begrüssenswert. Grundsätzlich ist es gut sich vor größeren Strukturänderungen anzuschauen wie es bei anderen Städte-Kategiesystemen gemacht wurde. --Túrelio (talk) 10:09, 25 June 2011 (UTC)
Ich bevorzuge großzügige kölsche Lösungen, danke, Gruß von der scheel sick! --Kürschner (talk) 10:30, 25 June 2011 (UTC)

Image Gansowiki[edit]

Hello Túrelio, I removed the copyvio of this image Gansowiki.jpg, I'm just warning you. Truu (talk) 15:24, 25 June 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for the notification. "Warning" sounds a little bit to strong ;-). In between somebody else reverted your last edit. Anyway, my "no" wasn't meant as an "o.k." for our file, because the existance of the uncropped image (your link) makes it a likely copyvio. --Túrelio (talk) 16:19, 25 June 2011 (UTC)


Hallo Túrelio, können wir das Bild bestehen lassen? Wenn ja, wer löscht mein "copyvio"? Kann man von der Herkunftsseite nach andere Daten kopieren? Viel Grüße. Orchi (talk) 19:30, 25 June 2011 (UTC)

Ich hatte garnicht gesehen, dass du es markiert hattest. Da die vermutliche Quellwebsite unter CC-BY-SA steht, dürfte es durchgehen; allerdings müsste die Lizenz und ggf. die Autorenangabe korrigiert werden. Ich habe deshalb mal den Uploader gefragt und von cv auf disputed umgestellt. --Túrelio (talk) 20:19, 25 June 2011 (UTC)
Danke! (Der Uploader ist sehr fleißig und aktiv, hatte aber in der Vergangenheit schon einige Bilder mit Urheberrechtsverletzung hochgeldaden). Gruß. Orchi (talk) 20:55, 25 June 2011 (UTC)

Sunny Leone[edit]

User Kjllhkjlhj5535 hello turelio please look this image

Hi Kjllhkjlhj5535, nice, but fully copyrighted; see the (C) at the right side. --Túrelio (talk) 10:20, 26 June 2011 (UTC)

User Kjllhkjlhj5535 hi turelio this user gohe007 are you photograph or flickr yes or no

Don't know what you are talking of. --Túrelio (talk) 21:41, 26 June 2011 (UTC)

Commons:Deletion requests/File:Stasi-2.1-zensursula.png[edit]

Hallo Túrelio, 7 Tage sind vorbei, kannst Du das jetzt bitte entscheiden?-- 16:21, 26 June 2011 (UTC)

Wir sind hier nicht auf :de und handeln mehr nach Angemessenheit als nach starren Regeln. --Túrelio (talk) 18:13, 26 June 2011 (UTC)
Danke für die Rückmeldung. Habe gerade ein Zeitfenster von 30 Tagen erfahren. Na, da wird wohl noch einiges an Bites verbrannt werden.-- 18:31, 26 June 2011 (UTC)

File:Old and New EMU at Howrah Station .jpg[edit]


Just copied the photo from the english Wikipedia... are you going to deleete it there too?

Regards, Knipptang (talk) 20:19, 26 June 2011 (UTC) 20:17, 26 June 2011 (UTC)

As I am not an admin on :en, I wouldn't be able to do so. Besides, as :en allows fair-use, eventually this image is under fair-use on :en. --Túrelio (talk) 20:18, 26 June 2011 (UTC)

Category:Cameras on white background[edit]

Hi. Why delete a category to the benefit of a less precise one? --Eusebius (talk) 06:32, 27 June 2011 (UTC)

Hi, likely because it was speedy-tagged as being empty. Feel free to re-create it, if you think Category:Cameras and lenses on white background is too full already. --Túrelio (talk) 06:36, 27 June 2011 (UTC)
It was manually emptied right before the deletion was requested. I'm afraid we don't have any tools to spot this kind of stuff... --Eusebius (talk) 06:41, 27 June 2011 (UTC)


Commons:Deletion_requests/File:270530_2129385835767_1279594596_32543004_6961963_n.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 project page, 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.

Please remember to respond to and – if appropriate – contradict the arguments supporting deletion. Arguments which focus on the nominator will not affect the result of the nomination. Thank you!

Faoureddine (talk) 07:30, 27 June 2011 (UTC)

Hi, if you want to contest a deletion request, you should add a comment[34], instead of tagging the deletion request itself. --Túrelio (talk) 07:32, 27 June 2011 (UTC)

Permissions given[edit]

Hello there, i have sent the email re photo usage on Wikipedia, thank you

Hi Unknown, what is your username or to which image are you refering? --Túrelio (talk) 09:53, 27 June 2011 (UTC)

File:Massimo Sarmi Poste Italiane 01.jpg[edit]

Hello, I've seen you deleted the image of Massimo Sarmi. Actually I received the image directly from the press office of Poste Italiane. I had contacted them for a research and they gave me that image to use freely. I hope to hear from you soon. Thank you for your consideration --Filippo Marci (talk) 09:56, 27 June 2011 (UTC)

Hi Filippide84,
please forward your original communication with the Poste Italiane to and mention the above filename. The OTRS colleagues may approve it or ask for further details. --Túrelio (talk) 10:01, 27 June 2011 (UTC)


Guten Morgen, ich gehe wohl recht in der Annahme, dass Du nicht der Admin bist, welcher über die beiden Deletion-Requests entscheidet, da Du mit Deiner Meinung involviert bist und demnach nicht unabhängig, oder sehe ich das falsch?-- 10:05, 27 June 2011 (UTC)

Es gibt keinen "der Admin ...". Jeder Admin ist völlig frei darin, sich der Schließung einer DR anzunehmen; außer wenn er/sie die DR selbst gestellt hat. Aber auch das ist kein Hindernis, sofern es sich um eine unumstrittene DR handelt. Meinung und "Unabhängigkeit", was immer du damit meinst, schließen sich nicht aus. Als Admin muss man sich ohnehin darum bemühen, bei Konflikten möglichst "objektiv" oder besser "sachbezogen" zu agieren. Zudem "kontrollieren" wir uns gegenseitig auch und sind keineswegs immer einer Meinung. Wie dem auch sei, ich sehe keine Notwendigkeit mich in deiner Frage festzulegen, weder grundsätzlich noch im Augenblick, zumal in dieser DR durchaus noch nicht alle Fakten auf dem Tisch liegen. Wie ich einer anderen IP schon geantwortet hatte, auf Commons werden DRs i.a. geschlossen, wenn die Zeit reif ist, was manchmal auch Wochen dauern kann. --Túrelio (talk) 10:19, 27 June 2011 (UTC)
Welche Fakten fehlen?-- 10:34, 27 June 2011 (UTC)
Z.B. die Identität des Fotografen des Originalbilds. --Túrelio (talk) 10:41, 27 June 2011 (UTC)
Die Identität des Fotografen ist irrelevant, die Kopierrechte für das Foto (welches gar nicht veröffentlicht wurde), hat das Ministerium und dieses gibt seine Fotos nachweislich frei zur freien Verwendung! Da Du von Beispiel sprichst, was noch?-- 10:45, 27 June 2011 (UTC)
In der Verwaltung des Deutschen Bundestages, Referat PI 2 – Besucherdienst – Foto- und Bildstelle, ist ein Fotograf mit der Entgeltgruppe 6 TVöD angestellt, welcher u.a. auch Portraitaufnahmen der Mitglieder des Deutschen Bundestages und der Bundesregierung herstellt. Er bekommt dafür Lohn und hat keine Urheberrechtsansprüche an diesen Fotos, ergo ist seine Namensnennung unerheblich.-- 11:23, 27 June 2011 (UTC)
So, ich hatte gerade das Presseamt der Bundesregierung am Telefon und bekomme es (ich hoffe bald) auch schriftlich, dass die Fotos der Minister frei zur Verwendung sind. Dann ist diese Farce hoffentlich erledigt.-- 10:57, 27 June 2011 (UTC)
In welchem Gesetz steht, daß Urheberrechtsansprüche erlöschen können? Das wäre ein brandneues Gesetz in Kontinentaleuropa. Bzw. wo steht, daß man keine Urheberrechtsansprüche hat, wenn man dafür Lohn bekommt? Das ist gelinde gesagt einfach nur grober Unfug. --Ralf Roletschek (talk) 11:52, 27 June 2011 (UTC)
Tritt Du den Beweis an, dass das von Dir genannte Foto bearbeitet wurde.-- 12:28, 27 June 2011 (UTC)
Wir benutzen keine Beweisumkehr. Der Uploader muß beweisen, daß sein Werk frei ist. --Ralf Roletschek (talk) 14:43, 27 June 2011 (UTC)

Ich weiß zwar nicht, was auf dem Bild genau zu sehen ist, aber hier ist zu lesen, dass Urheber immer der Fotograf bleibt und der Arbeitgeber lediglich ein Nutzungsrecht erlangen kann. Anders sieht es ja bei Computerprogrammen (§ 69 b. UrhG) aus. (Warum eigentlich dieser Unterschied?) -- Rillke

Software zu erstellen gilt als handwerklich, nicht als Kunst. Also wird ihr kein Urheberrechtsschutz zugebilligt. Fotos werden per gesetz prinzipiell als Kunst angesehen. Ob das nun richtig ist, kann jeder sehen wie er möchte, es ist Gesetz. --Ralf Roletschek (talk) 17:46, 27 June 2011 (UTC)

File:Gebelsheikhsuleiman.jpg & File:DoubleFalcon.jpg[edit]

This is a sketch/drawing of a graffiti and a vessel which is 3D art should it not? Or is the first picture 2D art because it is just a drawing? The second photo seems to me should be deleted. Just curious, --Leoboudv (talk) 09:15, 28 June 2011 (UTC)

I've deleted the 2nd one. However, File:Gebelsheikhsuleiman.jpg looks like a drawing to me. If we assume that is a mere reproduction (which make sense in the context), it should go as PD-Art/old. --Túrelio (talk) 13:15, 28 June 2011 (UTC)
  • OK, I'll license it as Pd-Art. Thank You, --Leoboudv (talk) 18:51, 28 June 2011 (UTC)


Hi, I am curious as to why the change of Category:Woodland of the East Riding of Yorkshire to Category:Forests in the East Riding of Yorkshire. I would consider that there are no forests in the East Riding of Yorkshire and that woodland was a more appropriate category. The woodland category is used in other counties in England such as Category:Woodland of Derbyshire. Keith D (talk) 10:24, 28 June 2011 (UTC)

This had been requested by User:Skinsmoke ({{Bad name|Forests in the East Riding of Yorkshire}}) and had seemed reasonable to me. --Túrelio (talk) 10:32, 28 June 2011 (UTC)
Thanks. Keith D (talk) 13:03, 28 June 2011 (UTC)

Neo ender drawing[edit]

Hey Túrelio, I'm not so sure any more that the drawing depicting that kid was computer generated. In fact, the facial expression has something peculiar to the drawing that can't be seen in the photo. Assuming that it is a drawing made from scratch, is it still a derivative? From Jacklee comment It seems that if it's an unauthorized derivative it is allowed with it's own copyright.-- Darwin Ahoy! 06:01, 29 June 2011 (UTC)

To discuss this, I opened the DR. Otherwise it would have been a derivative-speedy ;-). --Túrelio (talk) 06:03, 29 June 2011 (UTC)
Ok, ok, thanks. :) -- Darwin Ahoy! 06:04, 29 June 2011 (UTC)


hallo turelio, da du bisher der einzige admin warst, der zu erkennen gab, dass er sich bisher mit dem fall zumindest beobachtend beschäftigt hat, bitte ich dich, da offenbar "afbrochert" sich dazu nicht bereit findet [36] hier tätig zu werden, indem du die schnellgelöschten files wieder herstellst. ansonsten werde ich, wenn du auch die meinung vertreten solltest dass afbrochert hier richtig entschieden + gehandelt hat, mich dazu genötigt sehen die anderen mehr als 90 files [37] - die ebenfalls unter gleichen bedingungen entstanden + von mir hochgeladen wurden - schnellöschen zu lassen, damit endlich juristisch hierbei "klar schiff" gemacht wird + ich dabein nicht weiter unter dem verdacht der gesetzesübertretung stehe. dontworry (talk) 07:46, 29 June 2011 (UTC)

Oh Mann, da fragst du eigentlich den falschen, da ich vermutlich der admin auf Commons mit den meisten Löschungen bin ;-). Da du sicher kein Basta, sondern eine zumindest halbwegs begründete Entscheidung erwartest, brauche ich dafür Zeit, die ich frühestens heute abend finden werde. --Túrelio (talk) 08:04, 29 June 2011 (UTC)
danke, es eilt nicht - hat ja schon so ne weile gedauert. bis ende der woche reicht mir vollkommen. dontworry (talk) 08:19, 29 June 2011 (UTC)
hallo turelio, kurze erinnerung: das ende der woche meinte den sonntag 03.07.2011, nicht 2012! ;-) dontworry (talk) 06:38, 6 July 2011 (UTC)
True, you have a mail. --Túrelio (talk) 12:10, 6 July 2011 (UTC)
danke, habs gelesen. geh dann noch ne runde spazieren. ;-) dontworry (talk) 07:28, 7 July 2011 (UTC)

Jardí de les Escultures FOP[edit]

Hi Túrelio, Alle bilde vom Garten der Skulpturen sind vom Barcelona, ​​wo FOP gemacht, so das is gut!--Kippelboy (talk) 08:23, 29 June 2011 (UTC)

Hi Túrelio, sorry for my bad german (longtime without speaking :). The installation is a permanently show in Barcelona, next to Fundació Joan Miró. Was opened in 1990 as a permanent, free and public exhibition of sculptures. Thanks for taking care of this kind of topics :)--Kippelboy (talk) 08:34, 29 June 2011 (UTC)
I've added cat FOP (for freedom of panorama) to avoid further questions in the future ;-). --Túrelio (talk) 08:36, 29 June 2011 (UTC)


there are lots more soviet-pd files, that are as old as the Katjucha i uploaded and which are still in wiki. Apply same rules to all files, keep all or delete all.

- for example :


  • Interesting would be, if the argument of federal russian work given in File:Aleksandrov BA.jpg applies to all concert file of the alexandrov- and other state ensembles. Then i could upload some more files. (The Russian licence is placed here on the understanding that the Soviet military was a state government agency and that its official photograph of the co-director of of its army entertainment corps (i.e. this image) is a state agency document.) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Gonzosft (talk • contribs) 29. Juni 2011, 16:40 Uhr (UTC)
I didn't originally tag the file for deletion, only performed it as I found the deletion rationale "this is not PD-RU-Excempt. It'a just a song with real authors" plausible. For the moment I cannot take care about the other files listed, sorry. --Túrelio (talk) 15:03, 29 June 2011 (UTC)
Tolle Einstellung - erst mal weglöschen aber nicht überlegen. Die genannten Datei stammen teilweise aus der selben Quelle und sind auch mit pd-soviet gelistet. Also bitte gleiches Recht für alle Files. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Gonzosft (talk • contribs) 30. Juni 2011, 15:23 Uhr (UTC)
Ich habe sehr wohl überlegt, wie du meiner obigen Antwort hättest entnehmen können. Seitens Dritter besteht zudem kein Anspruch, dass ich allen auf meiner Disku geäusserten Vorschlägen und Wünschen nachkomme, da ich das in meiner Freizeit mache und nicht dafür bezahlt werde, sondern meinen Lebensunterhalt durch andere Arbeit erwerben muss. Wenn dir die Löschung der aufgelisteten Dateien dringlich erscheint, dann stelle selbst entsprechende Löschanträge. Sofern diese gerechtfertigt sind, verstößt das nicht gegen de:Wikipedia:BNS. Außerdem solltest du deine Kommentare "unterschreiben" (--~~~~), damit das nicht andere machen müssen. --Túrelio (talk) 14:28, 30 June 2011 (UTC)


HELP: There is a BIG RED copyright warning at the top of my category listing Malcolm Lidbury

I AM Malcolm Lidbury (aka Pinkpasty) and the images I am loading too Wikimedia are of my own paintings & sculpture which I have personally created & then photographed.

My sculpture blog

Can some one pleas get rid of the big red warning sign at the top of my own category, of submissions of my own art ?

I really find wiki confusing, hostile & obstructive to newbie contributors

Malcolm Lidbury aka Pinkpasty

✓ Done. That was based on the earlier assumption that you are not the artist. --Túrelio (talk) 11:56, 30 June 2011 (UTC)

Paintings by Malcolm Lidbury[edit]

Hi thank you for your msg

RE:- Paintings by Malcolm Lidbury (loaded to wikimedia by Pinkpasty). I am one and the same person. But thank you for looking out for my copyright.

It is because wikimedia has been such a usefull resource to me as an artist and sculptor ( ) that I wished to contribute back by making images of my own art & sculptures I have created availabe on wikimedia for use too others under creative commons.

Yours Malcolm Lidbury aka Pinkpasty

Hi Malcolm,
thanks for your feedback. In order to save you further requests (by other users) about the legitimacy of the uploads through your account, I would recommend you to send a permission to our "permissions volunteers" OTRS, which would then put a sort of "o.k.-stamp" on the pages (not on the images) of your uploads. If that would be o.k. for you, then simply send an email to in which you state that the account Pinkpasty belongs to the artist Malcolm Lidbury and that the "reproductions" (photos) of your works are uploaded with your consent. This email would not be made public, but can only be accessed by our OTRS volunteers. It would also not necessarily require the identification of your real name and your account name, in case you do not want that. --Túrelio (talk) 11:00, 30 June 2011 (UTC)

Flickr human review[edit]

It looks like there are many valuable images for human review today but its now 1:30 AM in Vancouver, Canada. I have marked 3 images. Maybe you can mark a few...if you have time. Best Regards, --Leoboudv (talk) 08:34, 30 June 2011 (UTC)


Hi Túrelio

I want this image deleted because I forgot to remove my email addresses before uploading. I'll re-upload the one with email addresses removed after it is deleted.

Mongkhonvanit (talk) 13:36, 30 June 2011 (UTC)

✓ Done. --Túrelio (talk) 14:14, 30 June 2011 (UTC)
I re-uploaded the file but the preview image here( is still not updated. --Mongkhonvanit (talk) 23:48, 30 June 2011 (UTC)
Sadly, that happens quite often in recent times. Usually the outdated thumb will disappear after some time. --Túrelio (talk) 06:11, 1 July 2011 (UTC)

Files: Crocodileserekh.jpg, DoubleFalcon.jpg e Pe-Hor.jpg[edit]

I received an e-mail of FRANCESCO RAFFAELE that says:

"I think there should be no problem: it'd be good for my site too, which I recently happen to update seldom (but I have new pages in preparation).

Many are scans of images which cant be used for selling material, but in this case Wiki has no such finality"

Like this, i think that there isn't a violation... --Renato de carvalho ferreira (talk) 18:27, 30 June 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for your feed-back. Sorry, but "which cant be used for selling material" is actually a restriction to non-commercial-use-only, which is not allowed on Commons, as we not only serve the Wikimedia projects, but also the "rest of the world". --Túrelio (talk) 22:16, 30 June 2011 (UTC)

User/talk page vandalism and harassment continues[edit]

See Special:Contributions/Лука_Мудищев & Special:Contributions/МеДвЕд. Looking forward for protection of the pages. I would also advise indefinite semi-protection of the userpages and blocking vandal's IP range for some time if it's allowed by the local policy. --Gleb Borisov (talk) 16:26, 2 July 2011 (UTC)

Protecting user: namespace pages will be a sollution, protecting user_talk: pages is not wanted. I looked for the IPs but cant help you with blocking IP ranges in this case, that will have to much negative effects on other users. --Martin H. (talk) 16:53, 2 July 2011 (UTC)

Deletion of Harry Kalas image[edit]

Just so you are aware, the image you deleted of Harry Kalas was originally properly licensed. That Flickr user realized that his images were being used for Wikipedia and illegally revoked the CC license, depriving us of a lot of quality pictures. I just wanted you to be informed of that. Thanks. Killervogel5 (talk) 12:28, 3 July 2011 (UTC)

Could you please specify the filename of the image you are refering to. --Túrelio (talk) 12:37, 3 July 2011 (UTC)

File talk:TRANSEARCH International Logo.jpg[edit]

Well, unused (there's an article on en.WP) and incorrectly stated (Fair use is not allowed on Commons) are not enought for an image to be deleted. Though, uploader requested it to be deleted (incorectly stating it's copyrighted material, while it's probably just trademarked). See User talk:Celestewhatley

All in all, everyone seems to prefer to get this image deleted, so it's fine. But i still think there was no real problem for commons to host this image.Lilyu (talk) 13:41, 3 July 2011 (UTC)

Looked borderline to me too. The one letter with a dash through it might merit some "copyrightability"; but who knows? --Túrelio (talk) 13:45, 3 July 2011 (UTC)
The Invisible Pink Unicorn knows lol Lilyu (talk) 14:11, 3 July 2011 (UTC)

Help ![edit]

Bonjour Túrelio,
Grâce à ta connaissance des arcanes des Wikis, t'as pu me dépanner une fois à propos de Botanique, ce coup-ci il s'agit de entomologie ... C'est tellement plus chic d'épingler un joli papillon aux murs de WikiCommons avec son vrai nom, et si en plus il est en latin !...
Alors la question est: Qui est cul et chemise avec les papillons d'europe ?
Merci d'avance. Daniel Villafruela (talk) 15:19, 3 July 2011 (UTC)

Blood feeding butterflies 5362.JPG

Hello Túrelio
With your knowledge of the Wikis'arcanes, you have helped me once, about Botany. This time it's on entomology ... It's so much more chic to pin a beautiful butterfly on the walls of Wikicommons with his real name, and if in addition it is in Latin !...< br /> So the question is: Who is in glove with the butterflies of Europe?
Thank you in advance. Daniel Villafruela (talk) 15:19, 3 July 2011 (UTC)

Bonjour Daniel,
that's a topic of which I've no idea. The only "butterfly" I've uploaded so far was the one feeding on my blood from my blood-soacked sock. After viewing the edit history of this image, User:Leonardorejorge seems to have some knowledge in claasification. In addition, you might simply ask for an expert at the english COM:VP or at the german-language COM:FORUM. I've put a request in german on the latter. --Túrelio (talk) 07:26, 4 July 2011 (UTC)

Bonjour !

Flambé-Iphiclides podalirius.jpg

Le mystère est résolu grâce à un spécialiste belge des papillons, Jean Delacre. Il s'agissait de Iphiclides podalirius alias le Flambé que bien d'autres avaient photographié sous d'autres cieux. Je l'ai quand même épinglé sur Wikicommons. - Merci pour la réponse.

In approximative globish :
The mystery was solved by a Belgian specialist of butterflies, Jean Delacre. It was Iphiclides podalirius alias Flambé (in french) that many others have photographied in various lands. I still pinned it in Wikicommons
Daniel Villafruela (talk) 11:53, 4 July 2011 (UTC)


Hallo Túrelio,

Photo of a kitten.jpg

hast Du eine Ahnung, was das sein/bedeuten soll? Echt seltsame Dinge, denen man auf Commons so begegnet... <kopfschüttel>

Grüße, Schwäbin

So besser? Sei