User talk:Thuresson

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

Wednesday
22
November
2017
02:28 UTC
Welcome to my talk page.

I always enjoy answering questions or taking part in a debate between users who respect each other. Archives: 1 | 2 | 3 | 4


Deleted images[edit]

I am generating a page for Michelle Holzapfel and have had two images deleted. These images were given to me by the artist herself to use on this wiki. Please re-instate the images. Thank you. User:Jessweitz

Please follow the procedure as outlined here, Commons:Undeletion requests. Thuresson (talk) 04:55, 2 March 2016 (UTC)

Copyright violations[edit]

FYI, when an image is a copyright violation, like File:Glennclosesagawards.jpg is, it's better to tag it with Template:Copyvio than nominate for deletion, since Template:Copyvio puts it in a speedy delete category and is specific for copyright violations. Elisfkc (talk) 21:18, 20 March 2016 (UTC)

IMO, non-obvious copyright violations should be nominated. Thuresson (talk) 23:12, 20 March 2016 (UTC)

Beast of Dean[edit]

You deleted my image, but I drawn it at home with pencils taking inspiration from a pic found on the Internet! It's absoultely not the same image (it is even shorter)! Please revert it.--Carnby (talk) 09:16, 28 March 2016 (UTC)

You have blatantly copied the image from [1] so it will not be undeleted. Thuresson (talk) 09:20, 28 March 2016 (UTC)
It's false. It is similar but not the same, the one I uploaded was completeley drawn by me. I will ask the help desk.--Carnby (talk) 09:23, 28 March 2016 (UTC)

What do you think now? Is it suitable for Commons and Wikipedia pages?

--Carnby (talk) 18:45, 30 March 2016 (UTC)

Very good piece of art. I don't believe anybody at Commons will have anything to mind. Thuresson (talk) 22:52, 30 March 2016 (UTC)

Immagini cancellate[edit]

Caro/a Thuresson,

non capisco perchè non mi permettete di caricare le mie immagini. Riguardo al copyright niente da ridire. Se non fosse che l'unica in cui il contenuto potrebbe essere protetto l'ho reinserita correttamente specificato che era uno screeshot fatto da me, con tutti i diritti riservati alla Gamevil per il gioco, e che si può utilizzare una volta sola in una voce pertinente. Tuttavia per le altre mostro solo azioni scattate dal mio account nel gioco e che non mostrano contenuti che risultino violabili, in quanto i nomi dei giocatori vengono cancellati. Non ho pubblicato foto da terze parti, bensi fatte da me con i miei dati di gioco, specificando la corretta licenza. Ho provato anche con l'upload su flickr specificando le licenze ma non ho avuto esiti positivi. Dove sbaglio? Ho letto le pagine di riferimento ma non vedo nulla che sia violabile. E' il contenuto del mio account, appuratamente censurato, in qualche modo protetto? --GiandoMaggio (talk) 22:39, 30 May 2016 (UTC)GiandoMaggio

All mjukvara från Gamevil skyddas av upphovsrätt. Du har inte rätt att ladda upp några bilder från deras dataprogram. Mer information finns på Commons:Licensing
Tutto il software da Gamevil protetto dal diritto d'autore. Non puoi caricare le immagini da loro programmi per computer. Ulteriori informazioni sono disponibili presso Commons: Licensing. Thuresson (talk) 23:01, 30 May 2016 (UTC)

File:DANNYBOY LOGO.jpg[edit]

Thanks. It's funny how you can miss things. We have that sign on several products at one of the work sites. It never dawned on me that it was a simple adaptation. CambridgeBayWeather Talk 00:36, 31 May 2016 (UTC)

Commons:Deletion requests/File:Temporary regional processing centre in Manus Island (8205490576).jpg[edit]

Hello Thuresson. Just to let you know I have re-opened the above DR to allow a full seven days for discussion. I am notifying you because you participated at COM:UDR when an IP requested the file be undeleted. They are correct that the DR was closed too quickly. Green Giant (talk) 00:30, 4 June 2016 (UTC)

Cabane des Evadés.jpg[edit]

I do not understand why you delete this picture. I made this picture. I can prove it. I have the contact print. I was there in 1998 and made several pictures of the site. What can I do? Sterz (talk) 23:03, 13 June 2016 (UTC)

I did not delete this photo. Thuresson (talk) 05:09, 14 June 2016 (UTC)
Ok, but what does  Not done means in this case?
Your request to have the file undeleted was "not done". Thuresson (talk) 14:46, 14 June 2016 (UTC)
Why did you my request to have the file undeleted "not done"? Sterz (talk) 14:56, 14 June 2016 (UTC)
Because you have had the opportunity to submit your request, explain the circumstances and present any evidence in support of your request. Respondents did not think that you had a case. Thuresson (talk) 16:34, 14 June 2016 (UTC)
You did not even give me the chance; you deleted the discussion quickly before it was ended. Was there an other reason perhaps? Sterz (talk) 16:37, 14 June 2016 (UTC)


Code issues in User:Thuresson/common.js[edit]

Hi Thuresson, I am a bored bot (this is kind of a computer program) that is watching the recent changes and tapping buttons like I did now.

Curious about the reason? Possibly not but I will tell you anyway:

  1. You edited User:Thuresson/common.js. Glad to see you coding in javascript! Have you ever considered becoming a MediaWiki hacker?
  2. Though, that change appears to introduce 6 new jshint issues -- the page's status is now having warnings. Note that invalid or ambiguous code often has unwanted side effects like breaking other tools for you. If you cannot find out how to fix it, I suggest blanking the page for now.
  3. To help you understanding where the issues are, I have aggregated a report here and now. If you have questions, don't hesitate to ask users experienced in javascript writing for help. But do not ask the bot's operators (chronically overwrought) unless you suspect an error of mine. If you prefer not getting spammed by me, you can opt-out reports by adding {{ValidationOptOut|type=all}} to your user page. Good luck at Wikimedia Commons and happy hacking!
  1. ISSUE: line 1 character 1: Expected an identifier and instead saw '<'. - Evidence: <!-- window.importScript('User:Rillke/LicenseReview.js'); -->
  2. ISSUE: line 1 character 2: Expected an operator and instead saw '!'. - Evidence: <!-- window.importScript('User:Rillke/LicenseReview.js'); -->
  3. ISSUE: line 1 character 3: Expected an operator and instead saw '--'. - Evidence: <!-- window.importScript('User:Rillke/LicenseReview.js'); -->
  4. ISSUE: line 1 character 5: Missing semicolon. - Evidence: <!-- window.importScript('User:Rillke/LicenseReview.js'); -->
  5. ISSUE: line 1 character 61: Expected an identifier and instead saw '>'. - Evidence: <!-- window.importScript('User:Rillke/LicenseReview.js'); -->
  6. ISSUE: line 1 character 62: Missing semicolon. - Evidence: <!-- window.importScript('User:Rillke/LicenseReview.js'); -->

Your CommonsMaintenanceBot (talk) at 18:19, 14 June 2016 (UTC).

Keeping an eye?[edit]

You seem to be keeping an eye out on uploiads thgrough MyNewDesk. I'm not good at these things. Where do we find permission from the photographer for this, for example? If there's something to learn, I'd like to learn it. This (längst ned) didn't help me. You can reply in English or Swedish. --SergeWoodzing (talk) 14:26, 8 August 2016 (UTC)

Well, the photo is from here at the Mynewsdesk page for Tjolöholm castle, the license is Creative Commons CC-BY-3.0 and the name of the photographer is Lena Dalgren. Now, Dalgren is not listed as a contact person for Tjolöholm castle but googling show that at least she used to be press spokeswoman for the castle. I presume that Tjolöholm has the right to use the photo and to relicense it. Thuresson (talk) 15:29, 8 August 2016 (UTC)
Thank you! So presuming is enough? --SergeWoodzing (talk) 23:21, 8 August 2016 (UTC)

[edit]

The uploaded company logo of the company-wikipage has been deleted. No issues of copyright are involved. How to get it reinstated? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Madhav.wr (talk • contribs) 10:46, 09 August 2016 (UTC)

pinging[edit]

I linked to Storkk's user page in my article. On en.wikipedia this would notify him. Does that not work here? I'm just asking for future reference since you pinged him. MjolnirPants (talk) 01:29, 10 August 2016 (UTC)

File:Icecat1-300x300.svg[edit]

Pay attention to licensing Wikimedia Commons only accepts free content: images and other media files that can be used by anyone, for any purpose.

File:Icecat1-300x300.svg seems to be free (or it would be proposed for deletion), but it was identified as having a wrong license. Usually, it is because a public domain image is tagged with a free license, or because the stated source or other information is not sufficient to prove the selected tag is correct. Please verify that you applied the correct license tag for this file.

If you believe this file has the correct license, please explain why on the file description page.


Deutsch | English | español | français | polski | português | svenska | +/−


The reason given by the user who added this tag is: Per source, this file is triple-licensed and we should keep it as such.

I've fixed the license. There's also a possibility of it being under MPL2 per IceCat and GNUzilla distribution, but I didn't tag it as such. Note that the file is most likely a traced derivative work, as the one in source URL is actually more detailed. 80.221.159.67 09:58, 5 September 2016 (UTC)

Happy New Year, Thuresson![edit]

Notification about possible deletion[edit]

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


Afrikaans | العربية | Български | বাংলা | Беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ | Català | Čeština | Dansk | Deutsch | Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ | Zazaki | Ελληνικά | English | Esperanto | Español | Eesti | فارسی | Suomi | Français | Galego | עברית | Magyar | Bahasa Indonesia | Íslenska | Italiano | 日本語 | 한국어 | Македонски | മലയാളം | Plattdüütsch | Nederlands | Norsk nynorsk | Norsk bokmål | Occitan | Polski | Português | Português do Brasil | Română | Русский | Slovenčina | Slovenščina | Shqip | Српски / srpski | Svenska | Türkçe | українська | Tiếng Việt | 中文 | 中文(简体)‎ | 中文(繁體)‎ | +/−

Affected:


Yours sincerely, Hedwig in Washington (mail?) 01:51, 3 January 2017 (UTC)

File:Hasse Ekman 1953.jpg[edit]

Commons-emblem-issue.svg File:Hasse Ekman 1953.jpg has been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether it should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry.

If you created this file, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with it, such as a copyright issue.
Please remember to respond to and – if appropriate – contradict the arguments supporting deletion. Arguments which focus on the nominator will not affect the result of the nomination. Thank you!


Afrikaans | العربية | Български | বাংলা | Беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ | Català | Čeština | Dansk | Deutsch | Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ | Zazaki | Ελληνικά | English | Esperanto | Español | Eesti | فارسی | Suomi | Français | Galego | עברית | Magyar | Bahasa Indonesia | Íslenska | Italiano | 日本語 | 한국어 | Македонски | മലയാളം | Plattdüütsch | Nederlands | Norsk nynorsk | Norsk bokmål | Occitan | Polski | Português | Português do Brasil | Română | Русский | Slovenčina | Slovenščina | Shqip | Српски / srpski | Svenska | Türkçe | українська | Tiếng Việt | 中文 | 中文(简体)‎ | 中文(繁體)‎ | +/−

Stigfinnare (talk) 21:30, 29 January 2017 (UTC)

Commons:Undeletion requests § File:Touch artwork.jpg[edit]

“Unlike English Wikipedia and a few other Wikimedia projects, Commons does not accept non-free content with reference to fair use provisions. If a deleted file meets the fair use requirements §of another Wikimedia project, users can request temporary undeletion in order to transfer the file there. These requests can usually be handled speedily (without discussion). Files temporarily undeleted for transfer purposes will be deleted again after two days. When requesting temporary undeletion, please state which project you intend to transfer the file to and link to the project's fair use statement.”

Is there a different procedure for transferring files to enwiki? Jc86035 (talk) Use {{re|Jc86035}}
to reply to me
14:49, 2 February 2017 (UTC)

Is there any reason why OP do not have access to a file uploaded 18 hours ago? Thuresson (talk) 14:52, 2 February 2017 (UTC)

File:Constantin Hansen 1837 - Et selskab af danske kunstnere i Rom.jpg[edit]

Commons-emblem-issue.svg File:Constantin Hansen 1837 - Et selskab af danske kunstnere i Rom.jpg has been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether it should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry.

If you created this file, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with it, such as a copyright issue.
Please remember to respond to and – if appropriate – contradict the arguments supporting deletion. Arguments which focus on the nominator will not affect the result of the nomination. Thank you!


Afrikaans | العربية | Български | বাংলা | Беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ | Català | Čeština | Dansk | Deutsch | Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ | Zazaki | Ελληνικά | English | Esperanto | Español | Eesti | فارسی | Suomi | Français | Galego | עברית | Magyar | Bahasa Indonesia | Íslenska | Italiano | 日本語 | 한국어 | Македонски | മലയാളം | Plattdüütsch | Nederlands | Norsk nynorsk | Norsk bokmål | Occitan | Polski | Português | Português do Brasil | Română | Русский | Slovenčina | Slovenščina | Shqip | Српски / srpski | Svenska | Türkçe | українська | Tiếng Việt | 中文 | 中文(简体)‎ | 中文(繁體)‎ | +/−

A.S. Hillersborg (talk) 13:01, 6 February 2017 (UTC)

Commons:Deletion requests/Files uploaded by Pedro 1293[edit]

Hola, escribo en español, ya que se trata de mi lengua materna. Creo esta sección con la finalidad de expresarles mi preocupación por la posible eliminación de las imagines que he subido. Soy colaborador de es.wikipedia.org/, y desde que me hice miembro me he enfocado sobe todo en lo referente a mi pueblo de origen, Queniquea, del cuál se consigue muy poca información en internet, y la mayoría de las imágenes que se consiguen son libres, o no tienen ninguna referencia de sus autores ó encargados. Otras son de mi propio trabajo. Pero siempre he tenido problema al momento de subirlas ya que la información sobre las licencias en solo en inglés, y no todos lo los usuarios los manejamos.

Sinceramente mi intensión no ha sido el plagio, ni el robo de información; como ya les comente es bastante complicado encontrar información a las imágenes listadas. Quisiera que alguien me pudiera asesorar, para no ver mi trabajo como un fracaso, ya que ha sido arduo si buscan mi historial. Y me única intensión al igual que la de todos es entregar información veraz y a la mano de todos.

De antemano pido su colaboración, y que en la discusión tomen en cuenta todo lo que les he comentado aquí. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Pedro 1293 (talk • contribs) 18:13, 13 February 2017 (UTC)

@Pedro 1293: Hej, vilket språk är detta? Jag har ingen aning om vad detta betyder. Thuresson (talk) 19:07, 13 February 2017 (UTC)
@Thuresson: spanska --Pedro 1293 (talk) 20:34, 13 February 2017 (UTC)

James Mayhew[edit]

Hi Thuresson,

My user name is booksaremybag, but my real name is James Mayhew. I'm a children's author and illustrator. Yesterday I deleted two older images from the Wikepedia page for "James Mayhew", as they were uploaded without my permission and they have been there for years and are also a bit dated. In their place I uploaded four of my own images; two of myself, two of my own book covers, in which I hold copyright. All images are absolutely mine. However, you deleted all four.

It's the first time I have uploaded images; clearly I got something wrong. I wonder if you can help me rectify the situation. Lots of school children research my work and I would like any images to be up to date. Although there are now NO images at all after your deletions. I appreciate you are following rules, so I completely respect what you have done. But I'd appreciate any assistance in getting it right in the future, as I find the information confusing!

Thank you,

James Mayhew — Preceding unsigned comment added by Booksaremybag (talk • contribs) 21:07, 16 February 2017 (UTC)

@Booksaremybag: Your contributions are of course welcome. Please see the information at Commons:OTRS, specifically the section "Licensing images: when do I contact OTRS?" regarding how you can verify your license of these photos/images. Your uploads have been temporarily undeleted. In the event that you do not verify the license the images can be deleted again. Thuresson (talk) 21:29, 16 February 2017 (UTC)


This is very helpful information, and I'm grateful. Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Booksaremybag (talk • contribs) 14:02, 17 February 2017 (UTC)

K Ranju[edit]

Hey, that image wasn't copyrighted, it was a profile picture on social media. I'd appreciate it if you would put it back up. Thank you, Greasemann (talk) 17:23, 29 March 2017 (UTC)Greasemann

If it is not copyrighted, why do you claim that you are the copyright owner and that it is licensed under a Creative Commons license? Thuresson (talk) 17:39, 29 March 2017 (UTC)
Because if i'd said it was freely licensed it would be taken down. I just didn't want to deal with the copyright, but I'll be more careful next time. Can it be undeleted? :)
Thanks,
Greasemann (talk) 19:33, 29 March 2017 (UTC)Greasemann
I would like a clear answer, are you in fact the copyright owner? Thuresson (talk) 19:48, 29 March 2017 (UTC)

COM:UDR[edit]

Hi, Your closure here is wrong. Please read Commons:Own work/Bystander selfie and the lengthy discussion here with favorable opinions by copyright experts, notably Carl Lindberg, with court cases examples. Could you please reconsider your closure? Thanks, Yann (talk) 23:29, 6 April 2017 (UTC)

"Wrong" is a strong word when you do not have a Commons policy to support you. Thuresson (talk) 12:45, 7 April 2017 (UTC)
There is no policy either to delete this. You can't just invent copyright rules. Regards, Yann (talk) 13:12, 7 April 2017 (UTC)

File:Systems Theory 5- Efficiency.webm[edit]

I wondered whether you had reviewed the description of the file following your undeletion. Looked very spammy to me, so I have replaced that text.  — billinghurst sDrewth 23:15, 21 April 2017 (UTC)

In fact their whole series of uploads Special:LinkSearch/*.complexityacademy.io looks promotional with little to make them useful and findable.  — billinghurst sDrewth 23:32, 21 April 2017 (UTC)

Que gracia.[edit]

¿Se puede saber por qué estoy infringiendo dichos derechos? ¿Y me puedes explicar también por qué no están infringiendo los derechos los usuarios que han subido los escudos del Real Mallorca y Rayo Vallecano? Y otra duda más, ¿Es obligatorio mantener lo que he borrado y tú has recuperado?

--Almju (talk) 22:59, 27 May 2017 (UTC)

Google translated: Can you tell why I am infringing those rights? And can you also explain to me why the users who have uploaded the shields of Real Mallorca and Rayo Vallecano are not infringing the rights? And another doubt, Is it mandatory to keep what I have deleted and you have recovered?
(talk page stalker) @Almju: Translado por Google: File:Escudo ud almeria.png era una copia de en:File:This is a logo owned by UD Almería for UD Almería. Further details, this is the emblem for football club UD Almería.png, que es un logotipo con derechos de autor de http://www.udalmeriasad.com/ ("© Unión Deportiva Almería"). Del mismo modo, File:Evolución escudo ud almeria.png y File:Almeríalogo.png fueron copias de contenido similar de ese sitio web. El club UD Almería fue fundado en 1989. 'En España el "copyright" es conocido como "propiedad intelectual". En general, según la legislación española, Real Acta 1/1996, de 12 de abril, de Propiedad Intelectual ( El copyright expira 70 años después de la muerte del autor (artículo 27), a partir del primero de enero del año siguiente a su muerte (artículo 30). Si la "propiedad intelectual" de la obra no es propiedad de nadie, o se trata de una obra colectiva donde los autores individuales no son identificables, esta obra sería de dominio público después de 70 años desde la publicación (artículo 27.1), a partir del Primer de enero del año siguiente a la publicación.' per Commons:Copyright rules by territory#Spain, por lo que los derechos de autor no podían expirar antes del 1 de enero de 2060. También, "Fair use" no está permitido en Commons. ¿Cuáles son los nombres de la media de los escudos de Real Mallorca y Rayo Vallecano?   — Jeff G. ツ 01:53, 28 May 2017 (UTC)
(talk page stalker) @Almju: File:Escudo ud almeria.png was a copy of en:File:This is a logo owned by UD Almería for UD Almería. Further details, this is the emblem for football club UD Almería.png, which is a copyrighted logo from http://www.udalmeriasad.com/ ("© Unión Deportiva Almería"). Similarly, File:Evolución escudo ud almeria.png and File:Almeríalogo.png were copies of similar content from that website. The club UD Almería was founded in 1989. 'In Spain the "copyright" is known as "intellectual property". Generally, according to Spanish law, Royal Act 1/1996, on April 12, about Intellectual Property (Spanish PDF), the copyright expires 70 years after the death of the author (art. 27), as from the first of January of the year following his/her death (art. 30). If the "intellectual property" of the work is not owned by anybody, or it is a collective work where individual authors are not identifiable, this work would be on public domain after 70 years since the publication (art. 27.1), as from the first of January of the year following publication.' per Commons:Copyright rules by territory#Spain, so the copyright could not expire before 1 January 2060. Also, Commons:Fair use "Fair use" is not allowed on Commons. What are the filenames of the shields of Real Mallorca and Rayo Vallecano?   — Jeff G. ツ 01:53, 28 May 2017 (UTC)
Jeff G, thank you for your assistance! Thuresson (talk) 05:59, 28 May 2017 (UTC)

Notification about possible deletion[edit]

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


Afrikaans | العربية | Български | বাংলা | Беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ | Català | Čeština | Dansk | Deutsch | Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ | Zazaki | Ελληνικά | English | Esperanto | Español | Eesti | فارسی | Suomi | Français | Galego | עברית | Magyar | Bahasa Indonesia | Íslenska | Italiano | 日本語 | 한국어 | Македонски | മലയാളം | Plattdüütsch | Nederlands | Norsk nynorsk | Norsk bokmål | Occitan | Polski | Português | Português do Brasil | Română | Русский | Slovenčina | Slovenščina | Shqip | Српски / srpski | Svenska | Türkçe | українська | Tiếng Việt | 中文 | 中文(简体)‎ | 中文(繁體)‎ | +/−

Affected:


Yours sincerely, ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 17:36, 7 June 2017 (UTC)

This is not Wikipedia, "for-Wikipedia-only" licenses are not acceptable.[edit]

Dear Thuresson,

In the argument for the deletion of File:NeaSNOM from neaspec GmbH.png you wrote that "this is not Wikipedia, "for-Wikipedia-only" licenses are not acceptable" ( https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Undeletion_requests/Archive/2017-10 ). I am confused now. I thought that the only way to include an image in a wiki page is to use wiki commons. Am I wrong? Is there another way that allows placing the image to a wikipedia page without releasing the copyrights? I would appreciate if you could clarify this to me for future.

Thankfully, --Clearscience (talk) 10:41, 16 October 2017 (UTC)

file of user: Lûgnûg[edit]

Good Evening User Thuresson I write in response to her message published in the Undeletion requests / Current requests bulletin board, where she refused the request to restore Lûgnûg's files, and I tell her that instead the sources are included in the same description of files, so I ask you to be able to reconsider my request, because some descriptions of paintings and portraits have been used templates where descriptions are more detailed and author names appear. anyway thank you for the immediate response and good evening.

file of user: Lûgnûg[edit]

Good Evening User Thuresson I write in response to her message published in the Undeletion requests / Current requests bulletin board, where she refused the request to restore Lûgnûg's files, and I tell her that instead the sources are included in the same description of files, so I ask you to be able to reconsider my request, because some descriptions of paintings and portraits have been used templates where descriptions are more detailed and author names appear. anyway thank you for the immediate response and good evening. --87.8.134.133 17:54, 19 October 2017 (UTC)

File:Södermanlands läns vapen.png[edit]

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

If you created this file, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with it, such as a copyright issue.
Please remember to respond to and – if appropriate – contradict the arguments supporting deletion. Arguments which focus on the nominator will not affect the result of the nomination. Thank you!


Afrikaans | العربية | Български | বাংলা | Беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ | Català | Čeština | Dansk | Deutsch | Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ | Zazaki | Ελληνικά | English | Esperanto | Español | Eesti | فارسی | Suomi | Français | Galego | עברית | Magyar | Bahasa Indonesia | Íslenska | Italiano | 日本語 | 한국어 | Македонски | മലയാളം | Plattdüütsch | Nederlands | Norsk nynorsk | Norsk bokmål | Occitan | Polski | Português | Português do Brasil | Română | Русский | Slovenčina | Slovenščina | Shqip | Српски / srpski | Svenska | Türkçe | українська | Tiếng Việt | 中文 | 中文(简体)‎ | 中文(繁體)‎ | +/−

Jcb (talk) 17:54, 30 October 2017 (UTC)

Commons:Deletion requests/File:1916 - Retragerea din Dobrogea - Detaliu.png[edit]

Hi, please add an applicable license for the country of origin. Now it only has a US license, which is insufficient, because the US is not the country of origin. Jcb (talk) 15:57, 2 November 2017 (UTC)

The copyright status has been fully investigated and this information is also available on the image description page. Nobody refuted the arguments to keep the image between September 20 and November 2. Also, this was the second unsuccessful nomination to delete this image. Thuresson (talk) 06:10, 4 November 2017 (UTC)
I already had the strong impression that you didn't read the discussion. Thanks for confirming this. Both of your arguments (no responses to the DR for a certain period of time, being the second DR) are of course not valid grounds to close a DR. COM:L is not a suggestion, it's a hard policy, which you must follow. This policy demands that all files have a valid license for their country of origin. At this moment this file does not have a license at all for the country of origin, which makes it eligible for speedy deletion after 7 days if you would tag it with {no license since}. Please fix your closure or reopen the DR if you cannot. Jcb (talk) 11:12, 4 November 2017 (UTC)

Commons:Deletion requests/Image:Box c500BC.jpg[edit]

I am concerned that you have acted on this contested deletion with simlpy the summary "deleted". Now this is being used for sophistry surrounding "2D works". It seems that many people are unable to understand what "2D" means: In our universe, every object is three dimensional. The idea of a "2d work" is not that the object itself is "two dimensional", but that it only encodes a single view of the object being depicted. This is very clearly the case in a cave painting just as much as with every other kind of painting (as opposed to a sculpture, which contains 3d information of the object being depicted). People now just go around and claim this or that 2d scenery is "3d" simply because the material of its carrier happens to exist in the tree-dimensional universe. --Dbachmann (talk) 13:08, 5 November 2017 (UTC)

And why exactly are you now contacting me? Thuresson (talk) 16:56, 5 November 2017 (UTC)