User talk:Yann

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

/archives 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33

God is busy, may I help you? / Dieu est occupé, puis-je vous aider?

You can leave me a message in English or French, at the bottom. Click here. Yann 22:13, 30 Apr 2005 (UTC)


Hello, Yann,

Thanks for making the controls. I did not intend to violate privacy policies. I'm training on the Wikipedia platform and I'm learning. I'll try to be much more careful with the photos. Thanks for correcting me, and sorry. — Preceding unsigned comment added by SelimDavidMusali (talk • contribs) 19:29, 02 January 2017 (UTC)

Restore photos

All my photos were created by me, and I approve of them being here, please restore them.

And stop this shit. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Elimnator (talk • contribs) 21:01, 9 January 2017 (UTC)

Copyright violations on pictures

Hi Yann,

As i am new to wikipedia, i am still learning about the different copyright rules and exceptions and etc..You guys have a fairly strict and sometimes confusing rules for internet content. I thought mentioning the website and naming the artist would be enough... But I'm learning from my mistakes, i'm seeking for artists authorization now. Anyway, sorry for the the inconvenience.

Sylvia Ines H — Preceding unsigned comment added by SYLVIA INES H (talk • contribs) 18:31, 10 January 2017 (UTC)


hi yann sorry they are my photos of me y can delete them if you want .

i thought tey might help other men like me with Klinefelter syndrome and a micro penis thanks for contacting me — Preceding unsigned comment added by Hardygaza (talk • contribs) 07:21, 30 January 2017 (UTC) yann no one has contacted me just delete them if you want thanks — Preceding unsigned comment added by Hardygaza (talk • contribs) 07:26, 30 January 2017 (UTC)

About "copyright violations warning"

Two recent photos were uploaded with the express permission from the copyright holder. Here it is - , the permission. The very thing was posted on the freaking image description AND sent to the OTRS team - however, the images were still deleted via rapid deletion procedure (originally meant for obvious copyright violoations - e.g. taking some other person's copyrighted work and claiming it as your own) instead of normal deletion process and I have no say about it. I bear absolutely no responsibility for OTRS team failing to react to my e-mail in any way. As of now, copyright enforcement policy here starting to look both inept, stupid and heavy handed. --RussianTrooper (talk) 11:45, 7 February 2017 (UTC)

Hi RussianTrooper,
The permission should be send to OTRS, not uploaded on Commons. Then if the permission is valid, the files will be restored. I checked OTRS for your last 2 deleted files, and there is no permission there. Regards, Yann (talk) 17:10, 7 February 2017 (UTC)
The problem is that I've already sent this to the OTRS. Got no response from the OTRS team. And considering this - wouldn't the permission letter uploaded here directly suffice? --RussianTrooper (talk) 00:11, 18 February 2017 (UTC)
@RussianTrooper: Hi, Please see Commons:OTRS/Noticeboard#Request from RussianTrooper. Regards, Yann (talk) 09:37, 19 February 2017 (UTC)


Hi, could you tell be, who proposed deletion of this page?--Juandev (talk) 23:49, 8 February 2017 (UTC)

Hi Juandev, with {{Badname|Jakubowice, powiat kędzierzyńsko-kozielski}}. IIRC it was empty. Regards, Yann (talk) 10:21, 9 February 2017 (UTC)

dear Yann

Greetings, my friend Apologize to you for my poor English, but the pictures of the community and everywhere! In any case, I will work on what you said to me, i promis you ^^ Thank you so much for connect to me. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rayanx93 (talk • contribs) 01:14, 9 February 2017 (UTC)

Der Buckesfelder

Hello Yann,

You deleted a lot of pictures I nominated to, so that's why I'm asking you directly. I found a user with a lot of pictures uploaded, but I don't know, if they are in scope. May you take a look at them? Greetings, --Der Buckesfelder  Talk  Evaluation  E-Mail  commons 12:11, 9 February 2017 (UTC)

Hi, I nominated them for deletion. Thanks for your help. Regards, Yann (talk) 13:35, 9 February 2017 (UTC)

Help for upload

Dear Yann sir, wikimedia commons tool flickr2commons is availabe for uploading file from flickr . But I'm a google drive user . Now tell me that "how to i upload to wikimedia commons using google drive and other cloud storage"? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ddst40 (talk • contribs) 09:28, 10 February 2017 (UTC)

@Ddst40: Hi,
Just use Special:UploadWizard. Regards, Yann (talk) 10:45, 10 February 2017 (UTC)

Missing licence information...


You've added a UK PD unknown licence here. As per the licence tag, to be valid under UK law you need to "specify in the image description the research you have carried out to find who the author was". Could you add the details of the research you carried out in order to make it valid? Hchc2009 (talk) 17:40, 10 February 2017 (UTC)

Yann, just a reminder - could you add the details of your research into the image description? Most photographs taken in the UK in 1930 remain under copyright, and without evidence of that research into the identity of the author, the image isn't appropriate for being held on the Commons. Hchc2009 (talk) 07:57, 11 February 2017 (UTC)
No, most UK photographs of that time are anonymous and in the public domain. The exception is when the photographer is known. Regards, Yann (talk) 09:36, 11 February 2017 (UTC)
Yann, the relevant UK copyright law covering anonymous works is here - section 57 of the 1988 act. This act is fully reflected in the wording of the UK anonymous copyright tag you are attempting to use for the image. An anonymous UK photograph published in 1930 can be considered out of copyright, but only if "reasonable inquiry" has been carried out into the identity of the author or photographer. In effect you can't simply say that you don't know who the author of a photograph is (e.g. "I can't see a name on the image"), rather you have to have reasonably demonstrated that the identity was never known (e.g. "I have checked books, the back of the postcard, the publishers, the internet etc. and can find no reference anywhere, to whom took it"). This aspect of UK law is different to that in France, btw. This is particularly important for a UK image from 1930, as many photographers alive in 1930 will still have been alive in 1946, the UK life + 70 cutoff date at the moment. There's some helpful advice on this for those using UK material here; the Intellectual Property Office in the UK has also issued advice on what constitutes a diligent search, published here. Hchc2009 (talk) 12:30, 11 February 2017 (UTC)
Yann, did you have a chance to to look at the wording of the wiki UK-anonymous licence tag, the link to the relevant bits of UK law etc.? If you've identified different UK legal guidance, btw, I'd be very happy to have a look at it in return. Hchc2009 (talk) 08:45, 13 February 2017 (UTC)

Yann - if you're not willing to discuss the case with me, could I suggest a couple of options? We could remove the UK-Anonymous tag, and renominate for deletion. Alternatively, we could seek some third party dispute resolution - possibly seeking the opinion of another admin (I've seen User:Jameslwoodward around on this sort of issue in the past, for example). Hchc2009 (talk) 20:45, 15 February 2017 (UTC)

Although Yann and I often disagree on this issue, which is probably why Hchc2009 picked me, I think Yann is right here. This is a postcard -- either there is author information on it or not. If there were author information on it, the uploader would have said so. The only possibility for finding the photographer under these circumstances is a Google hit, and the only Google hits on this image are Commons, WP, or taken from WP. .     Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 23:47, 15 February 2017 (UTC)
James, the original uploader concerned (Antarchie) doesn't appear to have examined the front of other postcards he uploaded at around the same time; both File:Monmouth Wye Bridge From Air 1920's.jpg and File:Wye Bridge Monmouth Unknown Date.jpg for example, have the publishing house's name (Aerofilms Ltd) clearly displayed on the bottom right, for example, but are listed as author "unknown" and just sourced to "OLD Postcards" (capitals as in the original). File:Monmouth Monnow Mill Before 1923.jpg is listed as author "unknown" and again sourced to "OLD Postcards", but is a well-known postcard by J. Salmon, who put their name prominently on the backs of their work. File:St Thomas' Square and Cross.jpg is another "OLD Postcards" and "unknown" - on the back of it, though, is the publishing house's details (for what it's worth, this is Photo-Precision Ltd, from St Albans, founded after the Second World War in 1946 by two RAF photo reconnaissance officers, Arthur Smith, and Tom English, so most unlikely to be covered by the life+70 claim in the curent licence tag) I therefore don't think there's any particular evidence to suggest that Antarchie carried out the legally required "reasonable inquiry" into the identity of the Monmouth Bridge postcard either - including examining the back of the postcard.
NB: I've done research into postcards for other Commons files, and there is a lot more you can, and must, do than just looking at the back of a postcard - in particular examining books of published photographs from the period, or examining the webpages that list postcard publishers and photographers associated with particular towns, or perhaps posting a query on some of the websites for collectors. It is a pain, I'll agree, but it is also what UK law expects you do to as part of "reasonable inquiry". Hchc2009 (talk) 20:59, 17 February 2017 (UTC)

Logo deleted despite gaining proper permissions


Noticed that the logo File:Wraith Logo Square.png was deleted despite gaining proper permission from the copyright holder. This had happened before but was reversed as it should be again. I've gone ahead and re-uploaded it, but again, I feel I need to point out that the copyright holder has provided proper permission. Sirkidd2003 (talk)

Hi Sirkidd2003,
Do not recreate deleted images. You have to provide a formal written permission via COM:OTRS, and then eventually ask for undeletion on COM:UDR. Regards, Yann (talk) 12:42, 12 February 2017 (UTC)
I had already received and submitted formal written permission via COM:OTRS when I had uploaded the file in the first place. I should not NEED to ask for undeletion, since, by all accounts, you shouldn't have deleted it in the first place. May I ask why you did? Sirkidd2003 (talk)
Your file doesn't contain a permission. If the permission you sent is valid, it will be processed by the OTRS volunteers. It may take some time, as there is always a backlog. Regards, Yann (talk) 17:49, 12 February 2017 (UTC)
4 month certainly is a significant backlog (the permission request was received by the content creator in October) and the content creator recieved conformation by one "Alfred Neumann" in December. It looks like I will have to investigate this further. Sirkidd2003 (talk)
OK, I restored it. I don't what happened. Regards, Yann (talk) 18:03, 12 February 2017 (UTC)
Oh! Awesome! Thank you very much! Cheers, mate! Would it now be safe for me to put it back on its associated article? Sirkidd2003 (talk) 18:21, 12 February 2017 (UTC)
Yes, sure. Yann (talk) 18:26, 12 February 2017 (UTC)

This photo

Do you know about the DR on this photo? Best, --Leoboudv (talk) 07:10, 14 February 2017 (UTC)

  • Its OK. Admin Taivo has blocked the account temporarily. Kind Regards, --Leoboudv (talk) 07:13, 14 February 2017 (UTC)

File deletion - AFC_logo_small

Hi, I saw you recently deleted File:AFC_logo_small.jpg. An email has been send to to release it under CC BY-SA 4.0. I see you're an OTRS member - would you mind checking? Also for File:NSF_logo.jpg as well. I've never known a backlog like this, just can't get a response from Wikimedia. Thanks. HOgilvy (talk) 11:14, 15 February 2017 (UTC)

✓ Done I don't see a permission for the second logo, but it is too simple to have a copyright anyway. There is indeed a long backlog in the OTRS permission queue, as we always have a shortage of experienced volunteers willing to do this (boring) task. Regards, Yann (talk) 11:30, 15 February 2017 (UTC)
Many thanks - definitely no permission for the NSF logo? I was told they'd sent it. Re copyright, in that case am I able just to add it to its page without any licence? Thanks. HOgilvy (talk) 11:49, 15 February 2017 (UTC)
There is {{PD-Trademark-Text-Logo}}, which is sufficient here. And yes, you can use it in a Wikipedia article. Regards, Yann (talk) 15:49, 15 February 2017 (UTC)
Great, thank you. HOgilvy (talk) 11:15, 18 February 2017 (UTC)

File:Bernd Wolfgang Lindemann.jpg

Hi, you deleted File:Bernd Wolfgang Lindemann.jpg. An email has been send to from the photographer to release it under CC BY-SA 4.0. I know this, because I've been involved in the process. Could you pleas check this with OTRS and restore the file? Thanks in advance, --ThT (talk) 21:07, 15 February 2017 (UTC)

Hi, It seems ticket:2016091210003777 is related to this file. But as I don't read German, I will let another volunteer taking care of it. Sorry. Regards, Yann (talk) 21:18, 15 February 2017 (UTC)
Thanks, no problem. Yes, that's the ticket. I just wonder, how this could happen, because the link to the ticket was already on the description page and I got an confirmation e-mail from a German speaking volunteer on Nov. 13th, 2016. Best, --ThT (talk) 16:02, 16 February 2017 (UTC)
Because the article is without the picture for a while now and the deletion seems to be a misapprehension, I'll upload the picture again and link it with the ticket:2016091210003777. I hope, that's ok. Best, --ThT (talk) 15:18, 23 February 2017 (UTC)
ThT, only OTRS volunteers are allowed to add permission. Please wait that the permission is processed. Thanks, Yann (talk) 17:08, 23 February 2017 (UTC)

Image restore request

Hi Yann, First off, thank you for all the huge contributions you make to this community. Following up with you on a deletion that you made for my image: This image belongs to me and I've gone ahead and followed the steps you requested by sending an email confirming that the image belongs to me. Feel free to check for that email to come through, and, kindly could you restore the image? OR should I re-upload it? Thank you!

If you are the photographer, please send a formal written permission for a free license via COM:OTRS. Yann (talk) 22:41, 16 February 2017 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Gluckson (talk • contribs) 05:35, 17 February 2017 (UTC)

@Gluckson: Hi,
The image would be restored by an OTRS volunteer when the permission is processed. There is quite a backlog, so it can take some time. Regards, Yann (talk) 10:48, 17 February 2017 (UTC)

deletion of two files

Hi Yann, It appears you deleted the following two files, citing copyright issues:

The copyright owner, British Council Germany, has granted copyright via email to on 16FEB2017. Ticket:2017021310019902 The fact that copyright has been granted was also noted in the file notes.

Therefore, can you please double-check and restore the files.

Thank you!

Lonla — Preceding unsigned comment added by UKLonWikiLa (talk • contribs) 14:57, 19 February 2017 (UTC)

✓ Done Yann (talk) 15:01, 19 February 2017 (UTC)

Hi Yann, thanks for restoring these two files! A note was appended to both files, indicating that "the message was not sufficient to confirm permission for this file". But the email sent by the copyright owner followed the template provided by Wikemedia. So it's unclear, what, exactly the issue might be. Can you help out and spell out what's missing -- if anything. Thanks UKLonWikiLa (talk) 06:51, 23 February 2017 (UTC)

@UKLonWikiLa: Hi, The permission is not validated yet. Regards, Yann (talk) 17:06, 23 February 2017 (UTC)

I see -- thanks for clarifying! UKLonWikiLa (talk) 17:41, 23 February 2017 (UTC)

Fichier Logo HistoTUB

Bonjour. Je me permet de vous écrire concernant la suppression du fichier File:Logo HistoTUB.jpg.

Je fais partis de l'association HistoTUB et je suis également l'un des créateurs de ce logo. Il n'y a donc aucune violation du Copyright.

Cordialement, Kev22 (talk) 16:12, 19 February 2017 (UTC)

Bonjour Kev22,
Comme pour tout document publié ailleurs auparavant, une autorisation écrite formelle est nécessaire. Voyez COM:OTRS/fr pour la procédure. De plus, si votre association n'est pas suffisamment notable pour avoir un article sur Wikipédia, votre logo n'est pas admissible sur Commons. Cordialement, Yann (talk) 16:14, 19 February 2017 (UTC)

Re: Tagging copyvios

I normally leave a message on uploader's page, but I missed out this time. I was aware of the gadget for normal deletion, but I wasn't aware about the gadget for speedy deletion. Thanks for pointing it out, I'll use it going forward. Coderzombie (talk) 16:23, 19 February 2017 (UTC)


I have permission use all pictures I uploaded by the author and in the link I show you, you can see the licence.

Hi, I have received a warning about the photos that I uploaded but I was allowed to use them. They have CC-BY-SA 3.0 license. Watch this link: Marjotsy (talk) 00:15, 20 February 2017 (UTC)

Hi Marjotsy,
There are all sorts of images there, including some which are not made by this person. Please ask the copyright owner to forward the permission via COM:OTRS. Regards, Yann (talk) 00:39, 20 February 2017 (UTC)

About your warning and message

All pictures in that link belong Antonio Miguel Pérez and they went taked his camera. Some pictures are of Olga Vicari, photographer who work for this singer and she is contributor of that album like me. If you can see at the begin he wrote: Antonio Miguel Pérez (propietary), Olga Vicari and Margarita Otero Solloso Actualizado hace 4 horas These pictures are licenced under CC-BY-SA 3.0

I need use some of these pictures for an article I am preparing about this famous singer and astrophotographer --Marjotsy (talk) 00:52, 20 February 2017 (UTC)


Merci de bloquer de nouveau cet utilisateur User talk:Harpal1909 qui charge en masse des images persos.--Macassar (talk) 12:36, 20 February 2017 (UTC)

✓ Done Yann (talk) 13:10, 20 February 2017 (UTC)

About your warning Copyright violation. Help me please

Hi Yann, I'm trying to do things right and follow the instructions when working on wikipedia but it's really frustrating that despite following them I receive warnings like yours. It paralyzes me and I do not even dare upload any related photos. I showed you the link with the photos that its owner has published on Facebook for the media and even added me to his album as a collaborator to make it appear that he is happy with my use of them. Although my nickname is Marjotsy, my name is as there put on that album Margarita Otero Solloso. Can I upload any of those photos to wikimedia commons or not? What can I do if not? Two years ago I had a similar problem and I obtained the authorization of two children of the actor, they sent emails to wikipedia and to me authorizing the use (photos of Manuel Arvide, actor, of which I created in the article). In spite of it somebody erased them and my article continues without photos. They were mere familiar photographs and they did not know the author. I did not know how to solve it. Now I would like to learn. Thank you for your help and understanding. --Marjotsy (talk) 16:52, 20 February 2017 (UTC)

Hi Marjotsy,
If you have a permission for a free license via email, could you please send it to Unfortunately we can't accept recent photos without a permission. Even if people forgot who took them, they are still under a copyright. Otherwise, you could ask the Facebook account to transfer a formal written permission from the copyright owner to COM:OTRS. Regards, Yann (talk) 17:19, 20 February 2017 (UTC)

I did two years ago with my other article and they receive the question "Who are the photographers?. They don't knew... It were their family pictures of their father!!! they were children!!. They gave me permission and they sended this permission to Wikipedia. I can't understand so problems with copyright. If somebody person reclame to wikipedia, then you can delete them (I think this don't will happen because are their pictures and they are their children) and in this case, if the pictures in the page of facebook of the singer are under licence CC-BY-SA.3.0 and if He affirm that there, which is the problem then??? If he create an account in wikipedia and he uploads the pictures himself will be better or more quickly? He is very busy person and I don't want disturb him more, but I want resolve this problem before finish and publish the article and I don't want to have problems with my account. I am a very busy person too. I am nurse and I am mother of five children, but I like colaborate when I can. Wikipedia helped me innumerable times... --Marjotsy (talk) 19:00, 20 February 2017 (UTC)

Or tell him to upload them to Flickr? What is faster and safer? I know you will receive many inquiries and you will be tired, but please tell me what you would do to avoid turning and bureaucracies and that I can use any of those photographs. Thank you and Regards. Sorry for my English. I hope you can understand me. --Marjotsy (talk) 19:10, 20 February 2017 (UTC)

Hi Marjotsy,
You can try with Flickr, although I am not sure it will work. Regards, Yann (talk) 20:47, 20 February 2017 (UTC)

Alleged copyright violation: SA Rugby magazine covers

I have permission to use those three cover images that were removed from SA Rugby magazine's Wikipedia page, from the publishers Highbury Media. I emailed through a letter from the managing director, on a company letterhead, stating this, to on 17 February. I can email it to you too, if you wish? – — Preceding unsigned comment added by SimonBorchardt (talk • contribs)

@SimonBorchardt: Hi,
The images would be restored once the permission is processed by OTRS volunteers. There is quite a backlog, so it can take some time. Regards, Yann (talk) 11:14, 22 February 2017 (UTC)

File:Scene bataille chevaux.jpg

Could you please ask the uploader about the original painter of this image? While it seems to be inspired by medieval illuminations, it looks quite modern and copyrighted. So we would require a permission from the painter to have this derivative photo. De728631 (talk) 16:22, 22 February 2017 (UTC)

✓ Done Yann (talk) 17:11, 22 February 2017 (UTC)

FP Promotion

IAEA Experts at Fukushima (02813336).jpg
This image has been promoted to Featured picture!

The image File:IAEA Experts at Fukushima (02813336).jpg, that you nominated on Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:IAEA Experts at Fukushima (02813336).jpg has been promoted. Thank you for your contribution. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so.


/FPCBot (talk) 05:01, 23 February 2017 (UTC)

Разрешение на загрузку фото

Добрый день. Не знаю куда мне писать в "обсуждениях", чтобы мне позволили вернуть фото на страницу Гюли Камбарова

Я не опытный пользователь, но стараюсь выполнять указанный правила. Подскажите пожалуйста, если я загружаю фото из своего компьютера с разрешения автора, как ещё я могу доказать, что у меня есть это разрешение? Речь идёт о нескольких документах, подтверждающих информацию и о фотографии для самой статьи. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Анна Барсукова (talk • contribs)

Valued Image Promotion

Remise du Prix Sakharov à Aung San Suu Kyi Strasbourg 22 octobre 2013-18.jpg
Your nomination has been reviewed and promoted
Congratulations! The image you nominated was reviewed and has now been promoted as a valued image. It is considered to be the most valued image on Commons within the scope:
Aung San Suu Kyi, portrait photograph.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.
Theresa May 2015.jpg
Your nomination has been reviewed and promoted
Congratulations! The image you nominated was reviewed and has now been promoted as a valued image. It is considered to be the most valued image on Commons within the scope:
Theresa May, portrait photograph.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.