User talk:Trycatch/Archives/2010

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

TUSC token c85ebf1637317429769c7936b6b35821

I am now proud owner of a TUSC account!

File:Орбакайте Кристина Эдмундовна.jpg

Я нарисовал портрет Орбакайте, а вы его стираете? Извольте объясниться уважаемый. --Schekinov Alexey Victorovich (talk) 06:40, 26 March 2010 (UTC) Честно скажу - я возмущен до глубины души! Я еще и Гвердцетели нарисовал- там вообще три дня потратил. Тоже удалите? А может таки сперва интересоваться начнёте откуда картинка? Вы предупредите пожалуйста сразу -тогда я поищу более корректный ресурс для хранения файлов. Вы понимаете, что я копию не сохранил, ибо незачем-раз передал под свободную лицензию. Понимаете, что я чувствую? Лучшеб продал. --Schekinov Alexey Victorovich (talk) 07:21, 26 March 2010 (UTC)

User en-1

You need to change the {{User en-1}} template on your userpage: what you wrote in the "User:Moisey" section of COM:AN shows that you're at least en-2 :-) Nyttend (talk) 01:49, 28 March 2010 (UTC)

  • Ok, thanks. But I still think that good basic is better than below average intermediate. Trycatch (talk) 10:35, 29 March 2010 (UTC)

File:Omaha Beach wounded soldiers, 1944-06-06 SC 189910-S.jpg

Thank you for finding this even larger version, and for sorting all versions and description texts. Teofilo (talk) 10:13, 9 April 2010 (UTC)

  • Btw there is some more info about this photo on flickr (here and here), but I don't know how reliable it is. Trycatch (talk) 13:32, 9 April 2010 (UTC)

Re: File:Cunha-SP,_Revolução_de_1932.jpg

Ciao! Io non so che cosa ho fatto di sbaglio nell'immagine Cunha-SP,_Revolução_de_1932.jpg. Tu puoi dirmi dove stà lo sbaglio?


--Sônico (talk) 19:51, 10 April 2010 (UTC)

« Adesso so dove ho sbagliato » Now I know where I went wrong.
First of all, I personal apology for my mistakes in grammar or spelling, I do not speak well in English. I'm bilingual, I know speak only Portughese and Italian.
Do not delete the picture, please. Do you help me improve it?
--Sônico (talk) 22:09, 12 April 2010 (UTC)
Regarding your image, ehm... Firstly, I can't delete (or keep) your image, I am not an administrator of Commons. I have tried very hard to find the source of it (and a date of publication, not a date of creation, is critical for {{PD-Brazil-media}}), but I found nothing. Blog doesn't help much -- the blogger don't provide any background to this photo, he collect his images all over the Internet (as he stated here). But even if this photo will be deleted, it's possible to find good, provable free replacement for it. For example, this page contains numerous free photographs published in 1932 "O Mundo Ilustrado", 70 years have passed therefore, all these images are in public domain. Trycatch (talk) 02:33, 13 April 2010 (UTC)
At first I was very worried, now I'm more relaxed. Thanks for your help. I'm always learning something, I try to err less.
I have a special affection for "Vale do Paraiba," because my mother's family originated there. In the city of Cunha there are not many records about the Paulist Revolution (Constitucionalist Revolution of Brazil) of 1932. I've also had seen the website that you advised me. And there's nothing about this city. So I wanted an image that stayed popular in wikipedia, forgive me!
Are there any predictions on when the notice of removal shall be removed or that image be deleted?
Sônico (talk) 19:17, 14 April 2010 (UTC)


Commons-emblem-issue.svg File:Emile_Friant_Ombres_portées_1891.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)‎ | +/−

Blurpeace 03:08, 5 May 2010 (UTC)

Commons:Deletion requests/File:Breast Augmentation 3mo post-op.ogg


I would like to know how you come to accuse me to have reopened this request? As you could see, this was proceeded by this IP. --High Contrast (talk) 16:46, 12 May 2010 (UTC)

  • Of course you haven't reopened this request, but you've asked Bidgee to reopen it. If you want I can delete my misleading (and, honestly, not very helpful) comment. Trycatch (talk) 17:08, 12 May 2010 (UTC)
A little annotation would be well. The reason why I wanted this discussion reopened was not because I didn't agree with the result, but the submitter of the request has the right for a correctly arranged deletion debate with the duration of sevend days. As I stated already I did and do not have an opinion in this case. Regards, High Contrast (talk) 17:31, 12 May 2010 (UTC)

File:Mileseva(1235).jpg (from

Hi! I'm very sorry for the late response, I was busy when I read your message, and afterwards I forgot about it completely.

Those two pictures (File:250px-Mileseva.jpg, File:180px-Stupovi-1-.jpg) are indeed the smaller resolution photos of the deleted sr.wp images. On Serbian Wikipedia, they were tagged as fair use. I don't know their actual copyright status. -- Obradovic Goran (talk) 20:10, 30 May 2010 (UTC)

  • Thank you very much! I've nominated both files for deletion. Trycatch (talk) 22:08, 30 May 2010 (UTC)

Медведев в питере.

скажите, а ваша (весьма полезная) правка позволяет только посмотреть инфу или можно как-то эти квадратики отдельно размещать в статье? --Schekinov Alexey Victorovich (talk) 19:11, 4 June 2010 (UTC) 2. дайте ссылку-где этому можно научиться... плис. --Schekinov Alexey Victorovich (talk) 19:11, 4 June 2010 (UTC) 3. ответьте пожалуйста на моей странице обсуждения. --Schekinov Alexey Victorovich (talk) 19:11, 4 June 2010 (UTC)

  • Спасибо за ответ. Еще Файл:Putin on KVN.JPG остро нуждается в такой обработке. Сделайте, если будет время. Ок? --Schekinov Alexey Victorovich (talk) 19:49, 5 June 2010 (UTC)
    • Добавил только тех, которые уже были идентифицированы в статьях, никого больше не знаю. Trycatch (talk) 23:49, 5 June 2010 (UTC)


Hi! What kind of software do you use to extract things like File:OctopusTheVerdict1899.jpg? (I suspect it is not free...) /Pieter Kuiper (talk) 13:33, 8 June 2010 (UTC)

  • I've used pdf2html. It's a very old tool and it works only for a fraction of PDFs. A-PDF Image Extractor works much better (notably it works for Google Books pdfs), but it's not free, and the trial version adds a small watermark in a corner of a generated image. Trycatch (talk) 14:36, 8 June 2010 (UTC)
Yes, I had tried extraction programs that leave watermarks, probably that one. But now I downloaded pdf2html for OS X by Christian Hornung. I tried it on the the same pdf and it works great. I now uploaded File:Boss Croker octopus.jpg. Thanks! /Pieter Kuiper (talk) 16:20, 8 June 2010 (UTC)

File:Obama enters the oval office.jpg

Commons-emblem-issue.svg File:Obama enters the oval office.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)‎ | +/−

--     Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 12:44, 11 July 2010 (UTC)

Regarding the File:WangGeon.jpg

Thank you for your effords.

I have just corrected the dead link to an appropriate webpage with license information. [1]

This is the explicit grant of permission that complies with the licensing policy: "사진을 인용하실 분은 출처를 밝혀주시고 원하시는 만큼 활용하십시요." Thanks.Prix (talk) 15:43, 17 July 2010 (UTC)

  • Thank you, I feel this is ok. Could you please translate this? Google Translate generates nonsense: "If you quote a picture as you want, he used light source, please." Trycatch (talk) 15:53, 17 July 2010 (UTC)
    • No problem, "사진을 인용하실 분은 출처를 밝혀주시고 원하시는 만큼 활용하십시요." Following is the translation for the Korean sentence: Anybody who wants to use(인용) a picture, use as you want as long as you provide the source(출처). Thanks. Prix (talk) 16:30, 17 July 2010 (UTC)
      • Thanks, I have added the English translation to the image description. Trycatch (talk) 17:04, 17 July 2010 (UTC)

Thank you

Thank you very much for your support. Geagea (talk) 21:01, 21 July 2010 (UTC)

  • Congratulations & good luck! Trycatch (talk) 11:22, 22 July 2010 (UTC)

Artist name

Thank you :) Bastique ☎ appelez-moi! 18:40, 23 July 2010 (UTC)

Commons:Deletion requests/Files by User:Sefer ibrahim

Impressive detective work and hard donkey work. Geagea (talk) 21:39, 15 August 2010 (UTC)

  • Thanks! yes, it required a quite amount of bot-like work. Trycatch (talk) 09:02, 16 August 2010 (UTC)

Russian copyright

Hi Trycatch, sorry if I was wrong. I saw no evidence of that in any English text accessible to me, and the nominator stated 2020 in his request. I previously asked about this issue here, and while my question remained unanswered, an admin changed the date from 2024 to 2020, which I saw as a confirmation that 2020 would be right. However I see you are a Russian speaker so I will accept your position. On another note, I am concerned about the quick closure of a multitude of single file nominations by a user blocked on the German Wiki, prior to clarification of their complicated copyright status, and despite multiple concerns being raised, like here. In particular de minimis cases cannot be (re)assessed after a file is deleted. --Elekhh (talk) 01:43, 26 August 2010 (UTC)

  • No problem, IMO it doesn't matter to put him in 2020 or in 2024 category -- the law could be changed in 10 years, rules of Commons could be changed, and so on. While I can agree with you that there are too much hurry in the closures, most of the recent DRs were clearcut cases, could have been even speedily deleted, in full compliance with current Commons policies. Trycatch (talk) 08:07, 26 August 2010 (UTC)

Commons:Deletion requests/Files by Conk 9

I saw your comment at Commons:Deletion requests/File:GrantBuildingPittsburgh.jpg, and I have decided to try and clear all of this user's suspect contributions. Please see: Commons:Deletion requests/Files by Conk 9.--GrapedApe (talk) 02:55, 27 August 2010 (UTC)

File:Jorge Maria Ribero-Meneses.jpg

Hi. Every photo uploaded to indymedia is copyleft. Now, the real problem is to demonstrate if the uploader is the owner of the photo. I can't demonstrate that, but watching at the other photos of that page (they have quite poor quality; they are too bright), I would say that the same person made all of them. I have find that the same guy uploaded the same content on the same day to this web page, but I'm quite sure it's the same person (A.K.A. Esku nabarrak). I have no trace to think it's copyrighted. Do you? --Unai Fdz. de Betoño (talk) 17:15, 6 September 2010 (UTC)

I'd be more suspicious with this one. I think it's a copyvio from here. I will add a {{nopermission}} template.--Unai Fdz. de Betoño (talk) 17:21, 6 September 2010 (UTC)
Ok, I've replaced {{CC-BY-SA-2.0}} template with {{Attribution}} one. What about File:Meneses.jpg, I tend to believe uploader User:Phi, because he/she explicitly stated that photograph was self-created ("tomada por mí durante una conferencia"). Photograph was uploaded in March 2006, so it's possible that it was reused by this site -- earliest revision of this page known to Internet Archive dates to March 2008. Trycatch (talk) 17:59, 6 September 2010 (UTC)
OK. You may be right. I'll delete the template.--Unai Fdz. de Betoño (talk) 18:30, 6 September 2010 (UTC)

The scalp

NICELY done, good find. Perhaps a speedy keep is in store. -- Avi (talk) 02:54, 13 September 2010 (UTC)

files replaced

Hi Trycatch, thank you for warning me about the problems with files Die_hystorie_vanden_grooten_Coninck_Alexander_Delft_1491_05.jpg and Die_hystorie_vanden_grooten_Coninck_Alexander_Delft_1491_06.jpg. I have replaced them with better files that were now available. See category Die hystorie vanden grooten Coninck Alexander. - Aiko (talk) 12:47, 17 September 2010 (UTC)

  • Thanks, great work! Trycatch (talk) 12:50, 17 September 2010 (UTC)

About the deletion requests on pictures from with byline "ARCHIVO"

Thank you for notifying me about this deletion request. I am happy that you did not forget to do it. Maybe you are right about not trusting 20minutos "archivo" photographs. Therefore I am not going to discuss against their deletion. I just want to know if there is any tool so that, in case they are deleted, my image File:Jordi Pujol i Soley.jpg would get replaced by another similar free image (such as File:Jordi Pujol.JPG). --SMP (talk page) 20:54, 18 September 2010 (UTC)

  • Yes, this can be done by any admin using CommonsDelinker. I've added comment about it on the DR page. Trycatch (talk) 22:09, 18 September 2010 (UTC)

UK road traffic signs

While I agree that many countries may have a concept of something not being eligible for copyright, UK roadsigns do not fall into this category. Did you check the link I supplied - it clearly shows that the image is crown copyright and therefore not eligible to be uploaded to Commons. Elen of the Roads (talk) 23:21, 19 September 2010 (UTC)

  • There is DR to discuss things like this, it's not a speedy case. Of course, I've seen the copyright sign, but Commons rarely cares about copyfraud. Trycatch (talk) 23:31, 19 September 2010 (UTC)

Not so free PD-USgov

Hi Trycatch, what do you think about one mass nomination to get rid of all non free images that slipped thru? Multichill (talk) 09:52, 23 September 2010 (UTC)

Good idea, I think. But I have no idea if there is easy way to find these photos. Trycatch (talk) 13:49, 23 September 2010 (UTC)


Thank you very much for your advise. Co-existance of galleries and categories is an ideal solution, also because of the clear 'chapters' you can see on one page. Exploring many different sub-categories with just a few photos in each takes a lot of time. I will start contributing to Commons by creating galleries as soon as I feel experienced enough. Привет из Польши! --Łukasz Łoziński (talk) 19:53, 23 September 2010 (UTC)


You do a lot of good administrative work on Commons -- why not run for Admin so that when you add Category:Undelete in 2016 you can close the discussion at the same time? I'm trying to recruit Admins -- without too much luck so far -- because we can certainly use the help.      Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 13:27, 25 September 2010 (UTC)

  • Yes, I feel that I need tools sometimes, so I'll try to make an RFA attempt. Trycatch (talk) 16:22, 25 September 2010 (UTC)
    • I'd be happy to sponsor you if you think that will help -- just let me know.      Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 14:36, 27 September 2010 (UTC)
      • Thanks for support, I've created an RFA. Trycatch (talk) 12:48, 28 September 2010 (UTC)

Removed copyvio tag

Re this. I never claimed Commons fell under any juristiction of and resent the idea that it does. However, isn't the idea of a copyvio universal across wikimedia projects. This cannot be a de minimis copying case as they have deliberately tried to copy the copyrighted aspects of the "Kappa" logo, the "FC Utrecht logo" and the "Phanos sponser logo". This is not fair use and (doesn't apply at Commons anyway) although the Phanos logo might be made up of basic uncopyrightable symbols (I haven't seen the original so can't tell) the infringement on Kappa and FC Utrecht is, surely, an obvious attempt at violating copyright. Am I missing something? Rambo's Revenge ( 13:17, 27 September 2010 (UTC)

  • The problem about these kits was previously discussed several times, primarily here, and it was considered that such pictures are ok. I have no personal opinion on this problem -- if it's de minimis or not, but it's obvious for me that it wasn't a speedy case copyvio. It can be de minimis, because de minimis covers not only incidental inclusions. Trycatch (talk) 14:16, 27 September 2010 (UTC)
Hmm, well that discussion seems to go completely off track onto whether kit designs are copyrightable and concludes (rightly, IMO) that they are not. I think that people have wrongly misinterpreted de minimis. Reading around every mention seems to be of photos or motion pictures, not something which has the option (making it not incidental) of impersonating a copyrighted work. I struggle to see how this (for example) is di minimis. It is blatently obvious that it is trying to imitate the red bull logo, similarly other kits which try and copy distinctive logos like the Nike tick. Rambo's Revenge ( 16:02, 27 September 2010 (UTC)
File:Kit body NYRBII2 0910.png IMO is not de minimis, but it's not nearly so obvious in the other cases. See SANDOVAL v. NEW LINE CINEMA CORP -- inclusion of Sandoval's photographs in Seven wasn't incidental, filmmakers were free to use any other PD photo their purposes, but "Sandoval's photographs as used in the movie are not displayed with sufficient detail for the average lay observer to identify even the subject matter of the photographs, much less the style used in creating them." It's the very case of File:Kit body UTR2.png -- I (as an average lay observer) can't even identify the subject matter of the logos on this kit. Logo on the left:
 * ** * 
* *  * *
is clearly uncopyrightable, and I can't recognise anything in the right logo, so for me it falls below "the quantitative threshold of substantial similarity" (see Commons:De minimis#United States). Trycatch (talk) 16:45, 27 September 2010 (UTC)
Bear in mind that the standard for minimum level of originality/creativity varies from country to country, either because the law uses different definitions, or because caselaw is different (eg fonts cannot be copyrighted in US but can in most other countries, text-based logos cannot be copyrighted in US but can in most other countries). Commons cannot accept images if they are copyright in their country of origin. We have had this discussion before, but I do not feel you have previously given this last point (that where PD is claimed, Commons requires an image to be as far as possible universally PD, and certainly PD in its own country) sufficient weight. Commons uploaders are largely not in a position to determine whether an image for which copyright is apparently claimed by the apparent holder actually is copyright - that would be for the appropriate authority to determine, unless this is a case where the Foundation has decided to take a deliberate view on it (as in claims of copyright for slavish reproductions of otherwise PD 2d artworks). Elen of the Roads (talk) 00:14, 30 September 2010 (UTC)
Yes here a vast number (majority?) of kits are European. COM:DM for European countries requires them to be incidental, whereas here logos etc have specifically be copied. Rambo's Revenge ( 11:45, 30 September 2010 (UTC)
@Elen of the Roads. You are right, but Commons users usually deal with difficult country-specific copyright-related issues, and I don't see a reason why threshold of originality/de minimis problems should be treated in a different way. And in fact we haven't much choice. @Rambo's Revenge. Many European countries have a high threshold of originality, and even if the work is protected by copyright, the scope of protection may be thin, so non-verbatim DWs may be ok. It should be evaluated on case-by-case country-by-country basis. That's why speedy deletion is inapplicable in this case. Trycatch (talk) 12:26, 30 September 2010 (UTC)

File:Філософська лірика Івана Франка.jpg

Hello. I know that Ukrainian isn't quite the same as Russian, but can you have a look at File:Філософська лірика Івана Франка.jpg? It seems like something that should probably need permission. I think. Also, File:Tiholoz.jpg. Thanks, Angus McLellan (Talk) 11:46, 4 October 2010 (UTC)

I've asked the user about these photos. If the user is w:uk:Тихолоз Богдан Сергійович, it's highly unlikely that he can't speak English. Trycatch (talk) 12:38, 4 October 2010 (UTC)

Помощь новичку

Уважаемый Trycatch! Спасибо за предостережение. Не судите строго, но я новичок на Викимедиа и еше не совсем разобрался с лицензиями. Не подскажете ли, как именно я должен поступить с загруженными изображениями, чтобы их можно было легитимно разместить на Википедии? Честно говоря, не хотелось бы заниматься волокитой с художниками и фотографами, работа которых была оплачена и, следственно, авторские права были проданы авторам. Есть ли другие пути? Заранее благодарен за ответ. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Filolog (talk • contribs)

  • К сожалению, на Викискладе довольно параноидальное отношение к авторским правам, и авторам редко удается загрузить обложки собственных книг, т.к. права принадлежат либо издательствам, либо художникам, и автор не имеет достаточных прав, чтобы загрузить файл на Викисклад под свободной лицензией. А для загрузки на Викисклад лицензия должна быть очень свободной -- должна существовать возможность для любого использовать загруженные сюда файлы для любых целей (включая коммерческие), создавать производные работы и т.д. Та же ситуация и с фотографиями из фотоателье -- права обычно остаются у фотографа, даже если его работа была оплачена. Легче всего просто махнуть рукой на эти фотографии и загрузить пусть худшие фото, но сделанные вами, без каких-либо проблем с авторским правом. Обложки же можно (в этом я не слишком уверен, лучше спросите у кого-нибудь в украинской Википедии) загрузить локально в Википедию с обоснованием добросовестного использования. Trycatch (talk) 14:50, 4 October 2010 (UTC)
  • Спасибо большое за консультацию. Вероятно, придется смириться:(


Čeština | Deutsch | Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ | English | Español | فارسی | Suomi | Français | Magyar | Հայերեն | Italiano | 日本語 | 한국어 | Македонски | മലയാളം | Plattdüütsch | Nederlands | Português | Português do Brasil | Русский | Sicilianu | Slovenčina | Svenska | +/−

Подарок нашему новому администратору от товарищей…

Поздравляем, дорогой Trycatch/Archives! Теперь у Вас есть права администратора Викисклада. Перед тем, как приступить к удалению и защите страниц, блокировке учётных записей или редактированию защищённых страниц — найдите, пожалуйста, время, чтобы изучить страницу Commons:Administrators и страницы, за которыми желательно следить (в частности, Commons:Administrators' noticeboard и Commons:Deletion requests). Большинство действий администраторов могут быть отменены другими администраторами, за исключением объединения истории, к которому по этой причине необходимо относиться с особой осторожностью.

Пожалуйста, не стесняйтесь присоединиться к нам на IRC: #wikimedia-commons @ Есть также отдельный канал для администраторов Викисклада — #wikimedia-commons-admin.

EugeneZelenko (talk) 14:45, 5 October 2010 (UTC)

Congratulations! Geagea (talk) 19:59, 5 October 2010 (UTC)
Поздравляю ! Rubin16 (talk) 21:11, 5 October 2010 (UTC)
Спасибо! Trycatch (talk) 21:18, 5 October 2010 (UTC)

Deletion of files

Hey Trycatch,

You have deleted some of the files that I have uploaded. I do not really mind. Except of course for the reason.

You claim they are copyright viloations and you point to specific locations. Have you ever considered that it may be the other way round? That people use images from Wikipedia to embellish their own sites?

My photograph of my own skate was deleted for a copyright violation, you point to a website in Australia. Will you also point out to K2 that in future they should include a copyright warning with all their skates, warning that no photograph is to be taken and used for Wikipedia as it is considered a copyright violation?

You will notice that I am a skating fan. And hey, Caroline Lejeune is a skater. Coincidence? I have alerted Caroline Lejeune (through the website you have mentioned) that these pictures were to be included. She did not mind. Nor did the person who organized the photoshoot because he is credited.

Never mind, you probably get messages like this everyday.

Do not worry, I will upload no more. Time to say goodbye to this project.

Goodbye. — Preceding unsigned comment added by JHvW (talk • contribs)

  • "Have you ever considered that it may be the other way round?" Of course, I have considered this possibility, and this possibility was more than unlikely. The photograph of K2 Velocity has a quite low resolution and no EXIF, looks promotional, and it was published on some external sites long before upload to Commons. If you are really the author it will be very easy to you to upload original high resolution version of this picture with metadata. What about the photos of Caroline Lejeune, if you have the permission, it should be sent to COM:OTRS. You have uploaded these photos under the false own work claim, of course they have been deleted on sight. Trycatch (talk) 16:11, 6 October 2010 (UTC)

Speedy deletion request

As indicated, this image was obtained from Gallica on 17 August at this URL: This URL now (13 October) shows the message: "The digital document could not be retrieved. Please try again later." On the other hand I see that other images of Tibor Harsányi are still currently retrievable at this URL: I also see that the links to other PD images I have uploaded from Gallica seem to be working fine. With regard to this particular image I have no idea what the problem might be. Perhaps we could wait for a few days to see if it is simply a momentary one or not. — Mu (talk) 22:50, 13 October 2010 (UTC)

I have just discovered I was replying on your talk page rather than on the image discussion page as I intended. Sorry for the confusion. (I also intended to leave you a message.) Regards, Mu (talk) 22:56, 13 October 2010 (UTC)

Russian speaker needed

Hai Trycatch,

Can you help with this. Geagea (talk) 00:12, 31 October 2010 (UTC)

  • Thanks for the notice, I'll try to deal with it. Trycatch (talk) 17:06, 31 October 2010 (UTC)
  • Thx to you for your help. Geagea (talk) 00:41, 1 November 2010 (UTC)

Commons:Deletion requests/File:Erin Esco

Thanks for the rapid response. The uploader has been indef-blocked on en:wiki. Rodhullandemu (talk) 00:12, 8 November 2010 (UTC)


Sorry for that mistake, I put the temples on these files when I patrolled serval BLP violation article at zh_WP. Unfortunately, the link that the user put in the articles seem doesn't fit this file :p.-Mys 721tx (talk) 06:35, 8 November 2010 (UTC)


Good idea here, although, of course, I hate to lose them. I took the liberty of blowing away the IP user's query and your comment, feeling that it was better to just clean it out of this discussion which is likely to get enough irrational inclusionists, without irrational IPs as well. Feel free to put it back if you think we should.      Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 23:48, 10 November 2010 (UTC)

Yes, it's a very sad thing. Many sculptures don't exist anymore, so it's not possible to photograph them again. But there is nothing we can do. By the way, it's interesting that these files eligible for speedy deletion, with obviously sloppy copyright tags lived on Commons so long. And they were not unnoticed -- there was big discussion about Wikipedia Saves Public Art project both on en-wiki & here something about half year ago, where all these problems have been brought to light. What about removing the IP comment, surely you are right. Trycatch (talk) 00:36, 11 November 2010 (UTC)

Commons:Deletion requests/File:Arzo village church 2.jpg

I have responded your question at Commons:Deletion requests/File:Arzo village church 2.jpg Tobyc75 (talk) 07:43, 12 November 2010 (UTC)


Я заблокировал этого пользователя и удалил загруженные им изображения. На всех картинках сверху имелся логотип и рекламый текст крупным шрифтом: адрес компании и адрес сайта. Изображения могли использоваться только для рекламы и не имели образовательного значения. Считаю, что решение принял правильно.
С уважением, Георгий George Chernilevsky talk 07:55, 22 November 2010 (UTC)


Since you kept File:KaDeWe newspaper advertisement 1936.jpg could you add a license tag indicating the copyright status in the U.S.? That's still required by Commons. Thanks Hekerui (talk) 12:13, 23 November 2010 (UTC)

✓ Done. If you want to enforce URAA-compliance, you are free to nominate this file again. Trycatch (talk) 12:55, 23 November 2010 (UTC)

Deletion request closure

Hi there. Could you look in to this again? It's been updated with the required tags - Amog |Talk 10:10, 26 November 2010 (UTC)

I've deleted the completely different photo, this is a new one. From what I see, everything fine with this new picture, but anyway it's better to wait standard 7 days before closure of the DR. Good watermark removal, but note that when you modify a picture it's a good practice to list the changes in the description, and when you remove a watermark with attribution data, it's a good practice to add {{Attribution metadata from licensed image}} & description of the removed watermark to the image description. Trycatch (talk) 11:26, 26 November 2010 (UTC)
Ah. I had no idea I was supposed to note it in the picture description. I saw this before editing that picture, and nothing really has been noted on those pictures. But thanks for the tip. Will modify this in a bit.
Also, am I missing something here? It appears 16 days have gone by since the picture was PROD'ed. Could you clarify this? Cheers! - Amog |Talk 15:40, 26 November 2010 (UTC)
Ough, my bad, that time I was more stupid than usual. I've closed the request. What about watermarks I think such actions are recommended in {{Watermark}} and maybe somewhere else. It's a result of requirements of attribution licenses. For example, CC-BY 3.0 license says that you must 1) "keep intact all copyright notices" 2) "in the case of an Adaptation, a credit identifying the use of the Work in the Adaptation (e.g., "French translation of the Work by Original Author," or "Screenplay based on original Work by Original Author")". Trycatch (talk) 16:46, 27 November 2010 (UTC)
Haha, thank you :) Perhaps the modifier of those images should be notified of this? It looks like he isn't aware of it! - Amog |Talk 17:17, 27 November 2010 (UTC)


Hi, could you have a look at this? I'm not able to read Russian. Thanks in advance! Jcb (talk) 19:26, 5 December 2010 (UTC)

  • I've commented it, but I have been involved in this case from the start, so I hardly can be neutral. Trycatch (talk) 23:05, 5 December 2010 (UTC)


Thank you for your comment about my sources. Since you are an admin and can barely read Cyrillic- could you advice a solution - mentioned source -[2] linked to [3] [4] does not mentioned any OUN-M flags.

The same author here [5] does not suggest the existance (nor images) of the unified uniform of the UPA appeared as [6] [7] [8] [9] [10] [11] [12] [13] [14] [15].

I've try to contact the author of the images and uploader - [16] - but seems to me he is not interesting in responde. The issue actually in fact that in several Wiki - such images used as actually existed things -which they are not. I hope you advice a solution. ThanksJo0doe (talk) 07:37, 6 December 2010 (UTC)

  • 1) Те файлы, которые не используются в википедиях, в случаях орисса можно попробовать номинировать на удаление. С использующимися изображениями сложнее, если они используются, то их не удалят даже в случае полной фэнтезийности -- Викисклад не может вмешиваться в редакционную политику других проектов Фонда. Для удаления таких файлов их нужно сначала отключать из проектов. Обычно легче просто исправить описание и/или повесить предупреждающий шаблон {{Fact disputed}}. 2) Вы можете объяснить, в чем, по вашему мнению, проблема с униформой? Изображения вполне точно основаны на источнике. Trycatch (talk) 09:00, 6 December 2010 (UTC)
Can you check [17] -? The wording - Щодо одягу, то одностайного умундировання зробити було неможливо, а відділи все ж були умундировані однаково своїми засобами чи то в німецькі, чи совєтські уніформи, які змогли здобути"."Сотня не мала однорідних уніформ. Були тут однострої різних армій та звичайні селянські одяги. На шапках носили тризубці власного виробу." "Однострої українських повстанців є мішаниною цивільних та військових одягів. Краска також різна. В початках партизанки більша частина повстанців мала цивільний одяг, пізніше, коли здобули на ворогові, траплялися відділи цілковито одягнені в німецькі, мадярські або большевицькі однострої. Це було причиною нещасливих випадків та непотрібних алярмів. " Також шапки не мають якогось усталеного кольору, можна зустріти повстанців у мазепинках, фуражках, лещетарках, кубанках, петлюрівках. " Сьогодні не можна з упевненістю твердити, що була втілена в життя хоч якась частина представленого проекту... I hope you can comprehend Ukrainian a little . Here is issue with historical fake - [18] - the way in which project reliability is degraded. ThanksJo0doe (talk) 11:35, 6 December 2010 (UTC)
I hope you note a difference between "uniform" and "insignia". ThanksJo0doe (talk) 11:38, 6 December 2010 (UTC)
  • And file [19] - is also faked - see actual 1926 figures [20] Thanks . If you does not have the time to clarify the issue - could you advice a place were I can place a notice about fakes which spoiled project reliability. Thank youJo0doe (talk)
If there a trouble to read 1927 image - check [21] - claims at mapping about 90-75% 75-50% - is false. Thank youJo0doe (talk) 09:35, 7 December 2010 (UTC)
  • Ошибки в локальных википедиях -- это их проблемы, Викисклад не может вмешиваться в их внутренние дела. Изображения униформы Alex Tora основаны на источнике, а использовалась ли эта униформа реально или осталась лишь проектом -- это не столь важно для Викисклада. Хотя это можно кратко отразить в описаниях. Что касается карты данных по переписи, то я не вижу противоречия. Все ваши отсканированные данные есть на, это статистика по округам, для карты же были использованы более точные данные -- по отдельным районам. Насколько я вижу, они соответствуют действительности. Зачем вы разговариваете со мной по-английски? Trycatch (talk) 10:45, 7 December 2010 (UTC)
Thank you, but "insignia" is not "uniform" - and text of source is quite clear about mixed wear and there no "uniform" as suggested. "rayons" appeared after 1928 - there was an "okrugi" - it's easy to check - there no such share of cossaks -"Ukrainains" there [22] - check [23] - 45% vs 75%.ThanksJo0doe (talk) 11:52, 7 December 2010 (UTC)
Районы Кубанского округа были образованы в 1924 году, см. w:ru:Кубанский округ. И вы опять приводите статистику по всему Черноморскому округу, в то время как карта основана на данных по отдельным районам. По поводу униформы -- насколько я вижу, основным предметом схематических иллюстраций являются как раз знаки различия, так в описаниях и указано -- «Відзнаки на одностроях УПА». Trycatch (talk) 12:27, 7 December 2010 (UTC)
Thank you for your replay - I'm sorry - but it's not "by rayons"- check actual 1926 Census mapping[24], I hope you also note about srange name Новоросійське П`ятигорське (hint Novorossiysk and Pyatigorsk). «Відзнаки на одностроях УПА» - I guess "Insignia at the uniform of UIA" - source suggest about no actual "uniform" were exist. At last - 1926 Census materials does not suggest ethnicity lower then "ocruga" level. ThanksJo0doe (talk) 13:05, 7 December 2010 (UTC)
Так вы утверждаете, что в данных изданиях информации о национальном составе населения по отдельным районам нет? Вы держали в руках эти книги или ориентируетесь на какие-то косвенные свидетельства? Так или иначе, но некоторые данные переписи 1926 года по национальностям по отдельным районам Северо-Кавказского края в сети найти можно (например, [25]). Т.е. когда-то они были опубликованы, когда и где -- не столь важно. И в целом эти данные соответствуют карте. «I guess "Insignia at the uniform of UIA" - source suggest about no actual "uniform" were exist.» -- в чем, по вашему мнению, нужно административное вмешательство? Если проблемы с этими изображениями и есть, то они решаются правкой описания. Администратор тут не нужен. Trycatch (talk) 20:43, 7 December 2010 (UTC)
No, I try to say "rayon" in contemporary meaning (which appeared after 1928) and "rayon" in 1926 meaning is not the same . If you can check Таблица VI and Таблица X from Крымская АССР. Северо- Кавказский край. Дагестанская АССР: Отдел народность, родной язык, возраст, грамотность; Т.5 Всесоюзная перепись населения 1926 года = Recensement de la population de L'U.R.S.S. 1926 / Центральное статистическое управление СССР; Отд. переписи СССР 1928 - the map is does not match 1926 data nor given at volume administrative map. I just ask how to deal with such incorrect images per Wp:Commons policy? Thank youJo0doe (talk) 15:15, 8 December 2010 (UTC)
Вы можете указать конкретные ошибки, конкретные расхождения с данными переписи? Что касается того, что делать в ситуации, когда файл ошибочен, то 1) если ошибка явная и бесспорная, то можно загрузить поверх исправленный вариант 2) если ошибка, собственно, ошибкой не является, а является одной из точек зрения (возможно, ненейтральной), то лучше загрузить другое изображение, представляющее иную точку зрения, под новым именем, возможно, исправив описание первого файла 3) если изображение полностью бессмысленно с образовательной точки зрения и представляет собой только личную фантазию его автора, то можно попробовать номинировать его на удаление, предварительно исключив из статей, т.к. никто не удалит используемый файл. Наилучший вариант всегда конструктивный -- загрузить исправленную карту, соответствующую вашим источникам. Trycatch (talk) 12:42, 9 December 2010 (UTC)
  • Thank you for your valuable advice - yes I can upload a map like [26] - but it's not fit the

"Кубань" - it will be for North-Caucasus Krai instead. The main issues:1)"Kuban" at picture included territories which not belonged to historical Kuban's "borders" - [27] - namely Chernomorskaya okruga, Donskaya okruga, Terskaya okruga etc. 2) Borders for shares completely does not match nor "rayons" no "ocruga" borders - check for instance [28] [29], nor actual ukrainian population share in general. Also, as far as I know, after 1926 - a company of Ukrainization started - not Russification as claimed English description of file. Unfortunatelly I have not digitazed maps for mentioned time and place - so creation an alternative and statistically reliable map is impossible. Exist a kind of [30] low detailed map - but it's also has a lot of mistakes/generalization. Better would be delete and replace with avialable tables - not so "stricken" - but a reliable - at leastJo0doe (talk) 13:20, 9 December 2010 (UTC)

  • 1) Я согласен с тем, что название карты и ее описание несколько запутывают. Возможно, имеет смысл переименовать ее и/или исправить описание. 2) Я не смог разглядеть никаких районов по первой вашей ссылке, деление по районам по данным второй ссылки в общем соответствует карте File:Kuban 1926.png (см. приблизительное наложение). 3) См. w:ru:Русификация Украины. Trycatch (talk) 09:29, 13 December 2010 (UTC)
Thanks - so were can be placed notice for deletion? How to deal with group of files? Second link - it's "Terskiy" area not "Kuban" and it's easy to see that 16 out of 16 "rayons" borders given incorrect, no 75-50% of ethnic Ukrainians share at Styepnovskiy+Prochladnenskiy+Mozdokskiy territories. re:3 В декабре 1928 г. Северо-Кавказский крайком утвердил трёхлетний план украинизации [31]. Thank youJo0doe (talk) 11:11, 13 December 2010 (UTC)P.S. Borders [32] noted with line "_._". ThanksJo0doe (talk) 11:16, 13 December 2010 (UTC)
Повторюсь, что вы не сможете удалить файл File:Kuban 1926.png, т.к. он используется в статьях. Для вынесения на удаление нажмите кнопку "Nominate for deletion" / "Номинировать на удаление" в левой панели инструментов, там все полностью автоматизировано. Множество файлов одновременно пока что нужно выносить вручную при помощи процесса, указанного в COM:MASSDEL. Trycatch (talk) 11:48, 13 December 2010 (UTC)

Very, very strange maps

[33], [34], [35] [36] [37] [38] At least they have zero scholar value – at worst – they mislead readers or represent a fringe territorial claimsJo0doe (talk) 13:55, 7 December 2010 (UTC)

  • Не вижу, в чем проблема, и не вижу, для чего здесь нужна помощь администратора, если проблема все-таки есть. Если эти карты в чем-то неверны, то загрузите лучшие, более правильные карты. Хотя то, что не указан источник «чистой» карты -- это нехорошо, хотя и типично для Викисклада, к сожалению. Trycatch (talk) 20:43, 7 December 2010 (UTC)
Unfortunately no similar historical map for mentioned historical state "Ukraine-Little_Rus" known, nor about "Ukraine-Kuban" or "Ukraine-Bessarabia". Thank you P.S. I've a doubt in existance of state with such names at mentioned time at allJo0doe (talk) 15:15, 8 December 2010 (UTC)

Controversial drunken man image

Thanks for noticing, wider discussion on this image will hopefully help resolve further controversies of similar type.

Regards, A.J. (talk) 17:02, 9 December 2010 (UTC)

  • Thanks! I respect your opinion on the DR, but I really think that we need some wider discussion on it. Trycatch (talk) 09:31, 13 December 2010 (UTC)

User:Олег Максименко

Hello Trycatch,

The user User:Олег Максименко keep uploading copyvio images of modren artist and keep uploading them after deletion. Maybe explenation in Russian can help her. see if you have the time to try explain to him. Thanks. Geagea (talk) 21:39, 11 December 2010 (UTC)

  • Thanks for the notice. I'll try to deal with this problem. Trycatch (talk) 09:33, 13 December 2010 (UTC)

User Ankacat

All images uploaded by this user is a copyvio. Dmitry89 (talk) 16:42, 20 December 2010 (UTC)

Думаю, что все файлы, загруженные им, является нарушением авторских прав. Dmitry89 (talk) 16:42, 20 December 2010 (UTC)

  • Спасибо, что обратили внимание. Да, очевидный случай. Удалил. Trycatch (talk) 12:09, 21 December 2010 (UTC)


А вот еще один... Явно не для викисклада. Dmitry89 (talk) 16:27, 21 December 2010 (UTC)