User talk:Thivierr

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

Please use my Wikipedia talk page. --Rob 10:58, 9 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Joy Giovanni's picture[edit]

I've created a Joy Giovanni article, in spanish. I've put your Joy's photo.

Here is the article's link: [1]

RE: Removal of URL[edit]

I didn't think both were important, but I readded the direct image one.--Fallout boy 04:42, 21 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Women's Football Photos[edit]

Hey, thanks for the Freedom photos you've posted. It's nice to see articles in Wikipedia using images of women on the soccer field. If you happen to have any action shots, I'd love to add some to the women's sports pages I help maintain/create. Drop me a line on my wikipedia user page if you have a chance: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Deeb. Thanks again! Deeb 10:58, 13 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

editing comments etc[edit]

Thanks for the comments and changes at Wayne Ray. I found the Canadian Photographers Category, and as I am and have been doing photography for several decades, with photo credits in books and small magazines as well as a few shows, and a very large photo collection and archives, i thought I would put up a sample of my own. On my wikipedia user page, a friend thought it was vanity thing and asked me not to upload any more. YOU wrote "(rv - We should have an inter wiki link and a category; If there is a reason not to; please explain on talk. I don't understand, this is standard)" Do you mean a Category for Photo Collage and a Category for Photo Poems?? Also do you think this is a vanity page, how should I have approached the topic? answer on my photo talk page WayneRay 14:24, 20 June 2006 (UTC)WayneRay[reply]

Tara[edit]

Hi Rob... we haven't bumped into each other for ages but I just noticed your edit on the new page for Tara Conner... great to finally get some free images of her (although, as usual, they are less than flatterig -- what is it about these free images that makes beauty queens look blah?) PageantUpdater 01:56, 20 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. As the saying goes, you get what you pay for. Image:TaraConneratWillowGrove3.jpg was a nice find on your part. I'm curious how you found it. I've found the Google Image search hasn't been updated in months (at least for my typical searches, like this). I largely stopped looking some time ago, as I stopped finding anything remotely new. I was starting to to get the feeling I've seen every photo on a U.S. military web site. --Rob 02:11, 20 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
In the Miss USA year in the life page there were pics from the event... seeing them I googled "Willow Grove Air Reserve Station" -- found the website and they were on the first page! PageantUpdater 07:34, 20 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Re: Commons as source[edit]

Ok. I didn't have any guidance before so I did what seemed right, but you make a good argument, so I'll do it that way from now on. Thanks for the input. --MECUtalk 00:25, 28 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Request[edit]

I happened to come across this image while wandering through Commons. This particular image has severe light balance problems; also, given its dimensions, I assume it's been cropped. Is it possible for you to make available the original image from the camera? I'm certain that I could recrop and rebalance the image to obtain a superior end result. Even just doing an "auto levels" in Photoshop dramatically improves the quality of the photo. If you could see your way clear to making the originals available, I think Commons would benefit as a result. Looking through your gallery, I see that virtually all of your photographs are overexposed; this suggests that your camera is one of those that consistently overexposes, which means that you have to adjust for this in postprocessing, and it doesn't appear that you've done this. Making all of your originals available would be greatly appreciated.

Thank you for your consideration. I hope to hear back from you. Kelly Martin 14:06, 5 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thanks for your comments. here at FlickR. They're all licensed under CC-BY-SA, so feel free to use any. Ultimately, the solution, is for me to get a decent camera. But, if you can make anything good out of what I took, please do. I've found it overly time consuming to upload lots of images to Commons, so I've been more selective as to what I upload to Commons, and left freely licensed images on FlickR, for people do with, as they wish. --Rob 00:35, 6 May 2007 (UTC) Update: I just remembered, I did upload them to Commons (not just FlickR), and they're at Joe Ceci. --Rob 02:04, 6 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Please exchange photo[edit]

Please consider changing the current photo of Michael P. Jackson ( http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Image:Michael_P_Jackson.jpg ) with the latest photo from the U.S. Department of Homeland Security located @ http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/9/9a/JacksonMichaelP_e2037.jpg . This official photo can also be referenced @ http://www.dhs.gov/xlibrary/photos/JacksonMichaelP_e2037.jpg and http://www.dhs.gov/xlibrary/photos/Michael_P_Jackson.jpg Wpublishing 22:04, 28 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks[edit]

Thanks for this. I didn't even know it was possible to copy from a pdf! I'll have to go back and fix some of the others then too. Btw, prize for the beauty queen with the most public domain image? It'd have to go to Rachel Smith (!) PageantUpdater 09:41, 16 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Is that possible for all PDFs? I've had success with one but can't get it to work with others... PageantUpdater 21:36, 16 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I'm not sure, can you given some example(s) of a PDF it doesn't work on? --Rob 21:58, 16 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I've tried it with the this pdf (pic of Chelsea & Shelley) and this one (Miss Florida). Neither works. PageantUpdater 22:46, 16 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Are you using Adobe Reader version 8? I had no problem doing it. I just clicked on the image, and then right-clicked, and selected "Copy Image", than pasted into an image editor. I uploaded three image updates. I didn't update Image:Chelsea Cooley Shelley Hennig GTMO.png, because there was improvement in quality that I could see. But Image:Kylie Williams.png, Image:Kylie Williams 1.png, and Image:Kylie Williams 2.png look better in full resolution. --Rob 23:45, 16 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Aha! I realised that the first one I did at uni (with version 8) and the rest I tried to do at home (version 7). Thanks for that. PageantUpdater 01:45, 17 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I hit the jackpot[edit]

Look what a very kind friend released for us :) PageantUpdater 04:41, 17 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Blurring face in image[edit]

Hi! I was just wondering, would you object to blurring the face of the person-who-looks-like-a-minor in Image:Aryan Guard 05.jpg? Someone related to the whole thing asked via OTRS if I could do it for them and reupload, and out of courtesy I felt it would be appropriate to ask you first.

Any comments, suggestions etc., feel free to post here or (if you wish to discuss it privately) via email. Cheers, Daniel (talk) 11:35, 30 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

That's fine with me. --Rob 15:43, 30 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks! Cheers, Daniel (talk) 04:45, 31 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

RfA[edit]

Hi - can I just say that I am sorry to see that it failed. I do think that your contributions show you have much to offer. Please do get involved in community stuff if you feel like like it & if I can help I would be happy to do so. Regards --Herby talk thyme 15:04, 7 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

interior images of Florence buildings[edit]

hi there Thivierr ,

I was at the Uffizi just two days ago, and they made it VERY clear that any photography of the interior in any way is completely forbidden. Now this has been the case in many buildings that I visited in Florence and Siena, including various churches, etc. I am not making up these rules, if interior images are not allowed then they clearly should not have been taken in the first place. Gryffindor 11:06, 6 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Nobody is disputing that's what they told you. They have the legal right to ask a photogrpaher to leave, or refuse entry. But, they don't own copyright of photos they didn't take and didn't commission. This is a common issue, that's already been dealt with. --Rob 14:05, 6 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I am completely aware that I work for the Commons and not the museum, thank you for reminding me. Fact remains that if photography is not permitted in the interiors in the first place (and I am not talking about scans of paintings etc. only of images of the rooms themselves), then what are these images doing if they are not supposed to exist in the first place? Gryffindor 14:50, 6 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Hi there. We had a discussion once about the usage of interior images in museums. Now that the issue has been made clear, I have put a note to inform other users about the Commons usage. Do you think the note is fine the way it sounds? Category:Interior of the Villa la Petraia? Gryffindor 14:06, 9 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Hi that seems just fine to me. Also, I wish to apologize for previously being rude to you. --Rob 16:08, 9 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
No apologies needed, really it's totally fine. It was a misunderstanding, I now understand how the situation works but I just think it would be good for other users who might have similar concerns to inform them with this note, it would save the Commons some work I hope. Glad to hear you are fine with it. sincerely Gryffindor 11:13, 10 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Library and Archives Canada non-public domain images[edit]

You have uploaded one or more images from Library and Archives Canada which is tagged as "copyrighted free use". Since Library and Archives Canada has made it clear they have not granted permission for free use of its photo catalogue, I have nominated all non-public domain images for deletion. Please see Commons:Deletion requests/Library and Archives Canada non-PD images. Thanks - some day, when your image(s) enter(s) the public domain, it can return to Commons! --Padraic 15:06, 7 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Katarina Witt[edit]

The original image is a cover of a autobiography, a public image (I think). Veritas (talk) 08:27, 4 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, thanks. Veritas (talk) 20:56, 4 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

LAC images, redux[edit]

There's plenty more where those came from. Some are PD, some are not; keep nominating these as you see them. Thanks a ton, Lewis Collard! (lol, internet) 21:24, 19 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

will do. Thanks for being so responsive in dealing with these. --Rob (talk) 23:50, 19 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Redirecting[edit]

I was not doing it systematically, only for a few that did not seem to have value as both, and the category page is more useful. Is there any particular gallery page that you would specifically like for me to restore? Cirt (talk) 16:48, 20 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Okay thanks, no worries. Cirt (talk) 21:45, 20 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]


File:McDougall_2007-04-13_CTV_Bill_Marks_1.JPG has been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether it should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry.

If you created this file, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with it, such as a copyright issue. Please see Commons:But it's my own work! for a guide on how to address these issues.

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!

Rob (talk) 05:47, 5 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]


File:Bill_Marks_(458777724).jpg has been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether it should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry.

If you created this file, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with it, such as a copyright issue. Please see Commons:But it's my own work! for a guide on how to address these issues.

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!

Rob (talk) 05:49, 5 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]


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

If you created this file, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with it, such as a copyright issue. Please see Commons:But it's my own work! for a guide on how to address these issues.

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!

Rob (talk) 05:49, 5 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]


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

If you created this file, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with it, such as a copyright issue. Please see Commons:But it's my own work! for a guide on how to address these issues.

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!

Jessyt81 (talk) 07:33, 19 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]


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

If you created this file, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with it, such as a copyright issue. Please see Commons:But it's my own work! for a guide on how to address these issues.

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!

Jessyt81 (talk) 07:34, 19 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]


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

If you created this file, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with it, such as a copyright issue. Please see Commons:But it's my own work! for a guide on how to address these issues.

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!

Jessyt81 (talk) 07:36, 19 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Possible Photo Deletion[edit]

Hi! I wasn't quite sure how to fill some of the things out when I started, but I think I might've updated it correctly. The photographer was Michael Hrizuk and we do have a signed agreement that the rights have been fully turned over to me, so I can distribute as I like. I hope that clears it up. This is my first time using Wikipedia, so I'm still trying to wrap my head around it all. It can be a little confusing. The 'Niki Barr' page really needed to be updated because a lot of the information was really out-dated and didn't portray the artist accurately. I'm updating new press, as well, and all will be credited. Thanks!

Deleted Photos & Artist's Rights[edit]

Reason for removal of other photos... Though I'm still trying to grasp the concept of Wikipedia, there has to be some rights on the artist's (Niki Barr) behalf as to what can be posted and not posted? I mean that in a very non-aggressive sense, but more to learn how exactly the rights are distributed on this site. I am all for the photographer's rights and will post properly, now that I know. However, the photos posted on here previously were posted without permission by 'Niki Barr'. Is there a process one would have to go through to have those rights approved?

Deleted Photos & Artist's Rights[edit]

No one is fighting over anything here and I'm sorry if the words came across as such. I didn't intend to argue at all and don't intend to. I'm just trying to understand Wikipedia better, as I'm very new to it. Anyways, the recent photo was posted, mostly because it was an image we have the rights to and it's one of the few of just Niki. Most of the others are of the full band, which should probably be properly filed under 'Niki Barr Band'. Many of the performance photographers of Niki Barr are often unknown, as they're mostly fans photos. I might be able to dig up some artist released photos we have, though. Can photos be posted if the photographer is unknown? Thanks for your help in this! Nikibarrband (talk) 02:51, 14 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]


File:Aurora.adams.piazza..JPG has been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether it should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry.

If you created this file, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with it, such as a copyright issue. Please see Commons:But it's my own work! for a guide on how to address these issues.

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!

--Sherool (talk) 12:27, 11 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Tip: Categorizing images[edit]

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


Hello, Thivierr!
Tip: Add categories to your files
Tip: Add categories to your files

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

Here's how:

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

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

[[Category:Category name]]

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

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

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

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

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

BotMultichillT 03:26, 8 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Kat Von D[edit]

Hello, i saw you fixed this pic here, i wandered if you could do the same for this one? Thanks a lot. --Bls2009 (talk) 10:18, 30 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I took both photos, but it was User:Äppelmos who fixed the one image. --Rob (talk) 23:58, 30 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

You regular and "fixed" versions of the Kat Von D pic have been uploaded separately. You should either delete the one or upload the "fixed" version as an update to the old version (also while specifying how the changes were made). Perhaps the easiest thing to do would be to upload the "fixed" image as an update to the old version, and then delete the "fixed" version. This would require changing the articles linked to the "fixed" version. I could do it for you if you don't object. Jason Quinn (talk) 20:56, 21 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The reason for two separate version, is that somebody else fixed the image. Normally, when doing this, it's recommended you create a different name. You normally only re-use the name, when you alter the image yourself. However, it's a minor (but good) fix, so I'm fine if they're put under one name. If you feel it's better to do it, as one name, please go ahead and do it. In fact, I'd be fine if you just deleted the old version entirely, as I see no real use for it. So, whatever you feel is best, I'll support. --Rob (talk) 23:47, 21 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
File:Audra_Williams.jpg has been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether it should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry.

If you created this file, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with it, such as a copyright issue. Please see Commons:But it's my own work! for a guide on how to address these issues.

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!

– Adrignola talk 00:57, 2 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

File:Audra_Williams_(cropped).jpg has been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether it should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry.

If you created this file, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with it, such as a copyright issue. Please see Commons:But it's my own work! for a guide on how to address these issues.

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!

– Adrignola talk 00:57, 2 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]


Deutsch  English  español  فارسی  français  hrvatski  italiano  日本語  മലയാളം  Nederlands  sicilianu  Tiếng Việt  +/−


A file that you have uploaded to Wikimedia Commons from Flickr, File:A whisper to Jenn Turcott.jpg, has been reviewed by an administrator or reviewer and found available on Flickr under the license Noncommercial (NC), No derivative works (ND), or All Rights Reserved (Copyright), which isn't compatible with Wikimedia Commons, per the licensing policy. Unless the Flickr user changes the license to one that Wikimedia Commons accepts, the file will be speedily deleted. Commons:Flickr files/Appeal for license change has information about sending the Flickr user an appeal asking for the license to be changed. Only Flickr images tagged as BY (CC BY), BY SA (CC BY-SA), CC0 (CC0) and PDM (PDM) are allowed on Wikimedia Commons. Once the license on Flickr is changed, you may replace the {{Unfree Flickr file}} tag with {{Flickrreview}} so that an administrator or reviewer can review the image again.

. Túrelio (talk) 18:22, 15 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Deutsch  English  español  فارسی  français  hrvatski  italiano  日本語  മലയാളം  Nederlands  sicilianu  Tiếng Việt  +/−


A file that you have uploaded to Wikimedia Commons from Flickr, File:Carolyn Bennett at podium.jpg, has been reviewed by an administrator or reviewer and found available on Flickr under the license Noncommercial (NC), No derivative works (ND), or All Rights Reserved (Copyright), which isn't compatible with Wikimedia Commons, per the licensing policy. Unless the Flickr user changes the license to one that Wikimedia Commons accepts, the file will be speedily deleted. Commons:Flickr files/Appeal for license change has information about sending the Flickr user an appeal asking for the license to be changed. Only Flickr images tagged as BY (CC BY), BY SA (CC BY-SA), CC0 (CC0) and PDM (PDM) are allowed on Wikimedia Commons. Once the license on Flickr is changed, you may replace the {{Unfree Flickr file}} tag with {{Flickrreview}} so that an administrator or reviewer can review the image again.

. Lymantria (talk) 05:37, 29 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

It seems that you are the uploader as well on Flickr as here. There are two ways to fix this problem. First you might change the license at Flickr, or second you might send a permission throug OTRS. Kind regards, Lymantria (talk) 16:22, 29 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I appreciate all the good work you and others are doing to cleanup copyvio. However, I think what's happened here is separate people have managed to create a mess, no individual would ever do by intention. I personally took this photo and uploaded directly to Commons. I properly tagged and described it. It is beyond question a free image. At some other time (not sure order) I happened to upload it to FlickR. I left it as "All Rights Reserved" on FlickR, because frankly, it's easier to do that. Now, for some reason, somebody decided to add a link to FlickR and request a review, which is frankly a stupid thing to do. Now, suddenly it's being reviewed, failed, deleted, and it's crop version is deleted. Under no circumstances will I "fix" this. There is nothing whatsoever to fix.
In fact, I can tell you that there are many other self-created images I uploaded to Commons that I have on FlickR (or elsewhere) marked "All Rights Reserved". These images were all uploaded under a free license to Commons. Elsewhere, I don't worry about how they're described. Often, on those other sites (mainly FlickR) they're mixed with other images that are truly "All Rights Reserved" so it's simpler and safer to say "All Rights Reserved". Once uploaded under a free license (by definition) the fact it's uploaded as "All Rights Reserved" elsewhere is legally meaningless. Pretty much every self-created image I've uploaded to Commons could be (in past or future) uploaded elsewhere as "All Rights Reserved".
The real problem here, is that people should not be editing the legal declarations of other people. If I create an image and upload it, it's for me to describe it, and declare where it came from. If I fail to do the job properly, then it should be deleted. But, nobody should come by and mess up what was previously ok. --Rob (talk) 21:23, 29 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I am sorry about the mistake, I assumed the photos were copyrighted on flickr and therefore unuseable. I apologize for the mistake and misunderstanding, and have fixed the two photos. - Aaaccc (talk), 29 August 2011 (UTC)
Pay attention to copyright
File:Daisy Fuentes.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. If you are the copyright holder and the creator of the file, please read Commons:But it's my own work! for tips on how to provide evidence of that.

The file you added may soon be deleted. If you have written permission from the copyright holder, please replace the copyvio tag with {{subst:OP}} and have them send us a free license release via COM:VRT. If you disagree that the file is a copyright violation for any other reason, please replace the copyvio tag with a regular deletion request.

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

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

Fred the Oyster (talk) 01:04, 8 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I see that you blanked your nomination from this page. Was it your intention to withdraw the nomination? If so, you must also remove the {{Delete}} tag from the file and the DR from the day's log.

You comment

"I clicked "Nominate for Deletion" and didn't know this was already done. We need an easier interface."

If you see a blue link on the discussion page of any image, almost all of the time there will be a {{Kept}} box which links to an earlier DR. So, simply checking for a blue-link discussion will solve your need.

Questions? Feel free to ask here, as I will watch this page for at least a week.      Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 15:45, 28 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

File:Ariane Moffatt head.jpg has been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether it should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry.

If you created this file, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with it, such as a copyright issue. Please see Commons:But it's my own work! for a guide on how to address these issues.

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!

66.130.104.160 19:00, 29 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Sherri Saum 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 gallery, 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!

Dodiie (talk) 20:13, 24 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Important message for file movers[edit]

A community discussion has been closed where the consensus was to grant all file movers the suppressredirect user right. This will allow file movers to not leave behind a redirect when moving files and instead automatically have the original file name deleted. Policy never requires you to suppress the redirect, suppression of redirects is entirely optional.

Possible acceptable uses of this ability:

  • To move recently uploaded files with an obvious error in the file name where that error would not be a reasonable redirect. For example: moving "Sheep in a tree.jpg" to "Squirrel in a tree.jpg" when the image does in fact depict a squirrel.
  • To perform file name swaps.
  • When the original file name contains vandalism. (File renaming criterion #5)

Please note, this ability should be used only in certain circumstances and only if you are absolutely sure that it is not going to break the display of the file on any project. Redirects should never be suppressed if the file is in use on any project. When in doubt, leave a redirect. If you forget to suppress the redirect in case of file name vandalism or you are not fully certain if the original file name is actually vandalism, leave a redirect and tag the redirect for speedy deletion per G2.

The malicious or reckless breaking of file links via the suppressredirect user right is considered an abuse of the file mover right and is grounds for immediate revocation of that right. This message serves as both a notice that you have this right and as an official warning. Questions regarding this right should be directed to administrators. --Majora (talk) 21:36, 7 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Notification about possible deletion[edit]

Some contents have been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether they should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at their entry.

If you created these pages, please note that the fact that they have 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 them, such as a copyright issue. Please see Commons:But it's my own work! for a guide on how to address these issues.

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!

Affected:

And also:

Yours sincerely, Rob (talk) 13:57, 31 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

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

If you created this file, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with it, such as a copyright issue. Please see Commons:But it's my own work! for a guide on how to address these issues.

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!

E4024 (talk) 02:57, 4 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

File:Mount Royal College Recreation Receiving.jpg has been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether it should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry.

If you created this file, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with it, such as a copyright issue. Please see Commons:But it's my own work! for a guide on how to address these issues.

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!

Anupmtroyal (talk) 17:55, 31 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Daily Express[edit]

Hello! I'm the author of this upload. Can you, please, review it and keep it, since I has updated the license? --Yeeeep nooope (talk) 09:01, 2 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]