User talk:Yann/archives 5

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

Contents

Image:Gandhi_Downing_Street.jpg[edit]

Image deletion warning Image:Gandhi_Downing_Street.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 image, 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.
In all cases, please do not take the deletion request personally. It is never intended as such. Thank you!


Afrikaans | العربية | 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 | Српски / srpski | Svenska | Türkçe | Tiếng Việt | 中文 | 中文(简体)‎ | 中文(繁體)‎ | +/−

76.175.162.28 00:29, 18 August 2008 (UTC)

kghbddd.png[edit]

Simply not a copyright violation.

[edit]

why was this deleted? Did I incorrectly do something? I am the creator of the image logo - I am member of the organization

Image:Shahrukh_Khan.JPG[edit]

Hi there, I uploaded a picture of Shahrukh Khan. The picture was from Flickr, and the license was acceptable on Commons. I would like to know why you have deleted the image, thanks. Moshin (talk) 10:36, 23 August 2008 (UTC)

Violation de copyright???[edit]

Bonjour Yann. Je veux bien que tu t'attaques à mes tentatives desespérées d'illustrer les différentes pages ayant trait aux Beatles. OK. La "rooftopback", par exemple, est une copie d'écran extraite du film let it be, bref une photo qui n'existe pas. Ok, ok. L'image Logo-Vancouver est une photo que j'ai prise avec un Nikon D80... à Vancouver en octobre dernier. Là, je sais pas, c'est bien ma photo, mais c'est un logo très certainement protégé.... Mais que tu croies que la photo de Jackson Richardson, prise de mes mains (toujours avec le D80) début décembre 2007 au Mercure de Courchevel, soit une violation de copyright, c'est une violation... de ma bonne foi. Et si je t'écris, c'est que je suis à Pékin (il est présentement 00h15) où je me suis amusé, en dehors du travail qui m'occupe ici, à prendre plein de photos et à les uploader sur Commons pour la bonne cause. Seulement pour la bonne cause. J'ai maintenant la craine de subir tes foudres sur ces images sorties de l'appareil numérique que j'utilise et je ne sais pas comment prouver ma bonne foi. Check user avec l'IP par exemple? Vous verrez d'où vient cette IP. Que puis-je faire de plus? Merci de me répondre. Cordialement Jmex60 (talk) 16:20, 23 August 2008 (UTC)

Bonjour Yann. Si je n'ai pas uploadé les originaux, c'est à cause de leur poids (dans les parages de 4MB) et de la difficulté à les faire transiter par le grand réseau. je les passe donc dans photoshop, je réduit le poids par 4 ou 5 et cela devient jouable. Je comprends que c'est sans solution, alors je ne t'embête pas plus. Cordialement Jmex60 (talk) 04:41, 24 August 2008 (UTC)

My photos[edit]

Can you deleted my photos, please? I added as experiment ([1], [2], [3]). And this photos is not my creation, but I was uploader [4], [5], [6], [7] --MARIÁN 09:45, 24 August 2008 (UTC)

  • [8], [9], [10], [11] - These photos photed my sister or father. Are you going to delete them or I must add some template? --MARIÁN 09:54, 24 August 2008 (UTC)

No copyright violation made by me : the pictures I uploaded were mine ![edit]

In French : Bonjour Yann, J'ai recu de votre part le message suivant que je ne traduirai pas : You have uploaded several images that are copyright violations and you have done so despite our requests not to do so, and despite our instructions. If you do not stop uploading pictures that are not free,

Les photos que j'ai uploadées m'appartiennent, j'étais accrédité en tant que photographe pour les prendre, et en avait le droit. Je les mets habituellement en ligne sur mon site web de photos, avec un watermark, j'ai décidé ici de le supprimer afin de mettre quelques photos de qualité sur wikipedia, et maintenant vous me dites que j'upload des images protégées et qui ne sont pas libre ? Etant l'auteur, je crois qu'il ne tient qu'à moi de les mettre en libre service sur wikipedia. Pouvez-vous me repondre afon qu nous éclaicissions cette situation.

En outre, j'aurais apprécié qu'en cas de doute sur la provenance de mes photos, vous preniez le temps de me contacter au lieu d'en supprimer.

Hello Yann,

I just received from you several warnings saying : "You have uploaded several images that are copyright violations and you have done so despite our requests not to do so, and despite our instructions. If you do not stop uploading pictures that are not free..."

I uploaded pictures taken by ME, and I had accreditations to take them ! I choose to remove my Watermark and to share some of them on wikipedia, and there you start to tell me that I upload pictures that are not free ? By uploading them without any watermark, I consider that I declare them free !

Hi Yann, You have removed three images that I uploaded. There was an image of Cranford (from 1878), War of the Worlds(1927), Journey to the Center of the Earth (1818). These are all public domain images and were re-published in 2008. The publisher gives permission to use the text freely online. Please restore these images to the commons.

Which images? Can you give me the exact names? Can you also log in and sign please? Thanks, Yann (talk) 22:22, 2 September 2008 (UTC)

Deletion requests[edit]

Rebonjour,

Vous venez de faire une deletion request sur cette image m'appartenant (dont je suis l'auteur), et que j'ai choisi de mettre à disposition sur le wiki. Je n'ai pas eu de réponse de votre part concernant le même problème, qui s'est produit ce matin.

Aussi, pourquoi cette image devrait-elle être supprimée ?

Voici le lien : http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Deletion_requests/Image:Ruud-jolie.jpg


============> Apparament, le problème vient du fait qu'il vous faut les originaux ainsi que les données exif ?

Sur la plupart des photos que je trouve sur le wiki, il n'y a aucune référence aux données exif, ni même un fichier original au format raw. Aussi je ne comprend pas, qu'appelez vous originale ? est-ce simplement un fichier plus gros en dimensions et en poids ? Je ne vois aucun photographe poster d'image au format raw non traitée. En attendant, j'envoie une photo en plus grand format. Dites moi s'il faut faire autre chose, s'il y a des tailles minimales ou je ne sais pas ...

Copyright violations[edit]

None of my work which I have uploaded are copyright violations, first the Shahrukh Khan image - the holder held some rights reserved, but allowed to distributed and make works of the work. The Konnie Huq image - permission was granted by the owner, and I have provided an email to the holder, and the email is currently held at the OTRS, same with the recent image of Syed Ahmed, which I have emailed Commons. There are hundreds of users out there who are uploading copyrighted images and not providing any sources, and claiming it is their work. But I have provided a source, and email of the holders, but hey maybe I went wrong somewhere, please let me know why my upload was wrong, rather than saying you will be blocked? for what exactly? Moshin (talk) 18:24, 25 August 2008 (UTC)

Marian Rivera image[edit]

I think you have committed a grave mistake in having Image:MRiveraPND2007.jpg deleted. It has OTRS and has granted permission by the original author (who is a user in Multiply). The image, however, has been consistently replaced recently by a blatant copyvio image, which I have been requested for deletion. I hope this inconvenience would be resolved. Thanks! (Starczamora on English Wikipedia) 121.97.194.210 19:32, 25 August 2008 (UTC)

Encyclopédie[edit]

Salut, tu as enmettre des images de l'Encyclopédie, mais beaucoup d'y ... but many of them (Encyclopédie_-_Volume_3) disappeared. Would you like to check it out? Kind regards (and thank you for your Enc. scanning, it is very useful to me).--Ziko-C (talk) 12:06, 26 August 2008 (UTC)

My own pictures[edit]

Please have a look on my user talk page. Thanx in anticipation! RX-Guru (talk) 23:49, 27 August 2008 (UTC)

Commons:Deletion requests/Image:Omar Khadr getting battlefield first aid.jpg[edit]

The bot seems to have removed my request to have those images restored so I can fix their copyright, after Mr. Admin ran amok deleting a bunch without discussion -- could you restore them so I can "fix" their "Subject" and references? If there's a legitimate problem with them when I'm done, they can be put up for discussion. Sherurcij (talk) 03:19, 28 August 2008 (UTC)

Fixed the two, will fix the third as soon as you undelete. Much thanks. Sherurcij (talk) 20:28, 28 August 2008 (UTC)

Image:NZhiliaev.JPG[edit]

I'm sorry, but it was my mistake. Real license of this photo cc-by-sa-3.0. I simply choose wrong when was uploading. You can read that all football photos of Mikhail Slain were published under it here (in Russian). Sidik iz PTU (talk) 07:44, 28 August 2008 (UTC)

It's no GFDL as you wrote on my talk. It's CreativeCommons Attribution Share-Alike (CC BY-SA) and it's about all him football photos. Please watch the last comment on the link. What are you see there? Sidik iz PTU (talk) 12:07, 31 August 2008 (UTC)

Image in the dark[edit]

Hello Yann, I have seen [12] but it had been used here. Imho it was perfect for that entry, :( --birdy geimfyglið (:> )=| 11:54, 28 August 2008 (UTC)

Image:Med57th July 22002 Citation team.jpg[edit]

I noticed you restored this image, but used a deletion request from another image. Anyways, this photograph was printed by another organization and there is no proof that it was originally from the US Army, thus its deletion. User:Zscout370 (Return fire) 23:34, 28 August 2008 (UTC)

Please stop trying to advance your RL agenda in favour of deleting all images related to w:Omar Khadr in this fashion; it is transparent at best, vandalism at worst. The image is clearly PD and clearly a work of the 57th Medical Detachment; the file even specified the steps that were taken (and can be retaken) to affirm its PD nature. If you really believe this image would not pass Commons' inclusion criteria, you would create a nomination for its deletion, rather than just deleting it on-sight every time it comes before your eyes. Please use the system, rather than your own, patently flawed, judgment. Sherurcij (talk) 00:46, 29 August 2008 (UTC)
Sorry Yann, could I get the image undeleted for now; and then if ZScout wishes to create a proper request for deletion I'll defend it there? I'm not seeing a lot of effort other than clicking "delete" to reason why it should be deleted - so I'd rather give it the benefit of the doubt unless there are serious concerns - which can be raised in a request for deletion. Sherurcij (talk) 06:27, 31 August 2008 (UTC)

My Uploads[edit]

Thanks for the concern Yann, I Assure you that my other uploads well license. Thanks WRCurtis (talk) 01:03, 29 August 2008 (UTC)

a deletion which might not need to have happened[edit]

I requested a deletion of an image. It had been uploaded from Flickr, I did not see in its edit history where it had been approved (although in my enthusiasm I thought I had seen this). There is now some evidence that the original license was one that is allowed here and changed at Flickr which is legally wrong yet software enabled. (I have questions about re-licensing to a less restrictive version but that is a different discussion for another time.)

The image is Image:LA County Museum CA1.jpg and I will point the interested participant in this ongoing saga of this image to this discussion to provide more details about it. Thanks and sorry for what might turn out to be me wasting your time, I try not to do that. -- carol (talk) 09:09, 30 August 2008 (UTC)

  • Hello there. I was the interested participant who thought that image was illegal. But as Admin Nilfanion has told me on his talk page here, images which failed flickr review but still remain on Commons would have first been uploaded by FlickLickr under a free license. So, the aforementioned image was uploaded 'correctly.' Later when Flickr Review conducted a review of its flickr license, the license had been changed by the flickr owner and it failed the review...but the image would have been originally uploaded correctly with a free license. This may be grounds for having that image restored...but I leave it up to you. Thank You, --Leoboudv (talk) 02:40, 31 August 2008 (UTC)

Please delete these 2 files[edit]

Hello Yann. Could you delete Image:Mangalore City Corporation.jpg which is a duplicate of Image:Mangalore City Corporation (Commons).jpg. Also could you delete Image:NITK.jpg which is a duplicate of Image:NITK mangalore.jpg. I had accidentally uploaded them. The names on Commons and Wikipedia were clashing. Thanks, Kensplanet (talk) 09:39, 30 August 2008 (UTC)

Image:Kaart-haarlem.JPG and Image:Het-geheim-van-holland.JPG[edit]

I am not sure, since it was someone else in the deletion log, but you delinked the images from the Haarlem page. I don't think these file should be deleted, neither do I feel that I have infringed on a copyright violation, because the pictures I took are in the public space, attached to the side of a shower building for watersporters. Pedestrian traffic passes the building. I can upload a larger image which shows the building in its entirety, but the maps I found interesting as they show some major touristic attractions relating to Haarlem. In principle all works communicated to the public by or on behalf of the public authorities (government) are not copyright protected in the Netherlands, unless the copyright has been reserved explicitly, either in a general manner by law, decree or ordinance, or in a specific case by a notice on the work itself or at the communication to the public. I am also surprised that the files have been deleted without nomination. - Jane023 (talk) 10:16, 31 August 2008 (UTC)

Hi Yann, thanks for your comments on my talk page, but what exactly are the next steps? I would like to get these files undeleted obviously, and relinked to where they were. Also, I would like to know how to prevent this in future by specifying exactly why public signboards are legal in Holland, so this doesn't happen again. I suspect that some automatic feed picked these pictures up.Jane023 (talk) 15:17, 31 August 2008 (UTC)

Image:In-the-dark.svg[edit]

You listed Image:In-the-dark.svg as having been deleted by yourself yet it has not been. Wikiwoohoo (talk) 12:33, 1 September 2008 (UTC)

Image:Philip Alexius de Laszlo-Princess Elizabeth of York, Currently Queen Elizabeth II of England,1933.jpg[edit]

Was this file kept because you believed it to be in the public domain in the US, or because it doesn't matter for some reason?--Prosfilaes (talk) 05:38, 3 September 2008 (UTC)

Image:Konigstein81.jpg, false accusations, and other assumptions[edit]

Hello Yann. I rolled back Rama's reverting of your closure of discussion on the image. I was originally going to debate him in that same area, but opted to do it on his talk page instead. Please read the comment there. I have come to realize that the image is not the problem. It is a deeper one. Throwing templates on each others' talk pages and rolling back each others' actions is not going to solve that deeper problem. I hope that Rama understands and agrees, and I hope you do, too. As I mentioned on his talk page, I do respect your ability to read the consensus and ignore a vocal minority and act according to Commons' policies, at least as I understand them. --Willscrlt (Talk) 00:23, 4 September 2008 (UTC)

Image:Lyalya_Bezhetskaya_Diamond_Show.jpg[edit]

Dear Yann, I was surprised to see that you decided to delete image called Lyalya_Bezhetskaya_Diamond_Show.jpg. /it's me in this picture and I created it and I uploaded it. I hope this is just a misunderstanding. Thank you!

Image:Dark tower template.png[edit]

Hi Yann! Please, explain me, why this image was deleted? You mark it as derivative work. Excuse me, if I made a mistake. Thank you. -- Rino ap Codkelden (talk) 18:44, 10 September 2008 (UTC)

How I made it - I take a wiki puzzle from Commons, then draw on it a tower... Why derivative? However, now I start making an a SVG version of this image. Thank you, -- Rino ap Codkelden (talk) 19:26, 10 September 2008 (UTC)
Just now I uploaded a *.png version of this stub image. A SVG verdion is very big, more than 450 Kb. Please take a look. -- Rino ap Codkelden (talk) 08:32, 11 September 2008 (UTC)
Hello,
I know that 450 Kb is not big quantity of data... but in my country, and in many others countries of ex-USSR for some users 1Mb of data costs more than $1. In this reason, I think PNG format more cheap. But I can upload to Commons these files in both PNG and SVG formats. -- Rino ap Codkelden (talk) 10:11, 11 September 2008 (UTC)

Image:Kit_of_the_Avai_2008-2.png[edit]

Why logo have a problem in this image?Eversonrachadel (talk) 13:29, 15 September 2008 (UTC)

image de gabriel arout[edit]

bonjour deja ne pas verifier ses sources concernant la confusion gabriel arout /EUGENE aroutcheff/georges aroutcheff

il vous aurait ete facile de telephoner a la sacd pour constater qu il y a deux comptes distincts

mais ensuite enlever la photo qui est au passage une photo personnelle faite par une personne de la famille aroutcheff et mis en ligne par moi meme petit gendre de gabriel arout donc je la remet en ligne cordialement Cyan17 (talk · contribs)


bon soyons clair vous avez modifié la page donc c'est a vous de prouver votre source cite des ouvrages au nom d eugene aroutcheff et de gabriel

eugene est le frere (george au passage est aussi eugene) gabriel l aide sur certaines traduction

c'est une source insuffisante

en tant qu ayant droit de gabriel je demande a ce que la page reste sur son ancienne version jusqu a ce que l etat civil des deux freres me parviennent d ici 5 jours

si cela n est pas appliqué je ferai une demande officiel afin que la page soit protégée cordialement


ok pour l image et je la upload avec plus d info

cheers ok je m en occupe

Commons:Deletion requests/Image:Ultima Tower 2.jpg[edit]

Image still awaiting deletion. --MichaelMaggs (talk) 17:06, 17 September 2008 (UTC)

I deleted it a second time. Yann (talk) 17:08, 17 September 2008 (UTC)

Image:Publix small.JPG[edit]

I was given permission directly from the photographer, Lisa Sylvera who took the photo my filmmaker husband about my film. Not only do I have permission, but I have given permission via email to Wikipedia following guidelines. This has been a published article with Public Magazine. So before you start deleting away, get some facts. TG4M (talk · contribs)

Here is the email:

I, producer Bobbi Miller-Moro have permission to use this photo. Taken by Lisa Silvera from Public Magazine in Miami, Fl. This is a published article/photo that was directly given to me from the author & photographer to redistribute and use as I see fit after it was published.

Bobbi Miller-Moro Producer

Oops[edit]

Oops, sorry about that. RlevseTalk 20:31, 17 September 2008 (UTC)

Old postcards[edit]

Commons:Deletion requests/Image:Konigstein81.jpg is very interesting, and it would be nice if we could extract from it some useful policy or at least guidance as to how old postcards should be handled. I have hundreds which I could upload, but many will raise the same issues as this, and I don't want to have to go through the same old arguments every time. Even better would be to work out some rules on anonymous images generally, but I suspect from past discussions that that will be much harder. I am thinking of working up a policy page on postcards, at least. If you have any thoughts on the general principles that should apply, could you leave me a note on my talk page? --MichaelMaggs (talk) 16:47, 18 September 2008 (UTC)

Image:Map-Hispanophone World.png[edit]

Hi. Can you tell me about the copyright violation in that image? Since it is needed for many articles, I'd like create a new [free] map, but I'm confused about copyright status in the deleted one. Thanks. Lin linao ¿dime? 23:46, 19 September 2008 (UTC)

Hi Yann. I have the same question. This image was one of the most important maps in my Spanish language article in Hungarian Wikipedia, and now there is an empty space. --El Mexicano (talk) 08:01, 20 September 2008 (UTC)

When you delete and restore a high usage image, please check where CommonsDelinker has delinked it. I undid seven delinks on pt.wiki and there are certainly more around. Thanks, Patrícia msg 20:13, 25 September 2008 (UTC)

Albert Lebrun an possibility to upload images[edit]

Dear Yann

Today I've tried to upload an image of Albert Lebrun an an Anonymous-EU ( with every dates for). As I see anyone have changed ( in fact blocked ) possibility ( by technical way) to upload images contrary to German legal policy towards copyright.( In Germany there is no PD at all). Just try to upload , and react if my voice is reasonable.

All the best:

Andros64 (talk) 11:34, 20 September 2008 (UTC)

File:Institutos Cervantes en el Mundo.PNG[edit]

Hello Yann, it says the deletion was because of copyright violation, may I know which copyright? I say so because I know the spanish user who made the map (at least that's what he told me). Maybe it was the pattern if the map? Regards, Gons (¿Digame?) 01:33, 22 September 2008 (UTC).

OK, thanks, Gons (¿Digame?) 19:15, 22 September 2008 (UTC).

Hello Hottie[edit]

I noticed you added a <br/> in wikisource's (sorry, I don't know how to interwiki. could you please teach me?) Template_talk:PD-1923 here. Could you please remove it?24.70.95.204 01:05, 29 September 2008 (UTC)

Hello[edit]

hi, you deleted this image : Commons:Deletion requests/Image:Benito pc.jpg, but it was recreated. Lilyu (talk) 00:06, 2 October 2008 (UTC)

Image:Claudio Rodríguez Fer.JPG[edit]

Hi, you nominated this file for deletion but there's no copyright violation, the author let me upload the file, the photo is really my own work and it has been used many times before. Edeneden

File:Carmen Blanco.JPG[edit]

Hello again, you deleted this other file and there's no copyright violation because I know the writer in the image and she let me upload the file and link it to her article in Wikipedia Carmen Blanco. So please undo the deletion or tell me the reasons why the photo can't be in Commons. Thank you. Edeneden

Hi[edit]

Hi Yann, thank you for undelete the image. I added at the description of the 2 photos The writer lets me upload the file and it is really my own work, which is true. I don't want my images be asked for deletion again, do you think it will be enough? 13:01, 3 October 2008 (UTC) http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Edeneden

Commons:Deletion requests/Image:Bulgarian Embassy Moscow.jpg[edit]

Hello, if "industrial design" is not subject to FOP restrictions, would you mind undoing the deletion at Commons:Deletion requests/Image:Bulgarian Embassy Moscow.jpg? Thanks, Angus McLellan (Talk) 11:14, 3 October 2008 (UTC)

You can't both be right. Angus McLellan (Talk) 23:22, 5 October 2008 (UTC)
I found deletion review. So I've opened a request here. Thanks, Angus McLellan (Talk) 23:58, 5 October 2008 (UTC)

Commons:Deletion requests/Image:BLIMPS AKRON.JPG[edit]

Hi, why did you delete this image?? The Flickruser is also active at commons now, it takes me much time in instructions, many flickrmails and so on, see escapedtowisconsin and User:Escapedtowisconsin, he now contributes the image under "own work" and not longer per "its from Flickr" in the uploadform because this leads to all the trouble. You deleted a 1,382×1,996 px image, this resolution is not aviable at Flickr... I was waiting for someone closing this request with kept and not deleting an image the author itself contributes to commons with the comment copyvio. Please undelete the image and look at the uploader, the flickr source and turn your request to "kept" or just ignor the open deletion request. Thank you, --Martin H. (talk) 18:24, 7 October 2008 (UTC)

Thx :) --Martin H. (talk) 08:26, 8 October 2008 (UTC)

Commons:When to use the PD-signature tag[edit]

Could you look at this proposal and comment please? --MichaelMaggs (talk) 20:21, 7 October 2008 (UTC)

Image:T-shirt Faucheur volontaire OGM.jpg[edit]

Image deletion warning Image:T-shirt Faucheur volontaire OGM.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 image, 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.
In all cases, please do not take the deletion request personally. It is never intended as such. Thank you!


Afrikaans | العربية | 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 | Српски / srpski | Svenska | Türkçe | Tiếng Việt | 中文 | 中文(简体)‎ | 中文(繁體)‎ | +/−

This is an automated message from DRBot. (Stop bugging me!) 18:46, 10 October 2008 (UTC)

Image:Rolla, North Dakota Tornado.jpg[edit]

You deleted this file citing a copyright violation. I'm not sure what it was, but it appeared on the English Wikipedia page w:Tornadoes of 2008, and I'm trying to find a free replacement. Did the image cite a source? If so, could you please post the link on my talk page so I could use that link to search for an alternative image. Thank you for your help. -Runningonbrains (talk) 00:02, 18 October 2008 (UTC)

Image:Masturbacja.jpg[edit]

I see that you have speedily deleted this image for being out of project scope and possibly used for vandalism. I do not believe either of these are legitimate reasons for speedy deletion. At the time of deletion the image was in use on the wikipedia page en:Handjob. if this was vandalizing this page, we might have been given the opportunity to remove it. As it is it has had to be removed as no longer available on the Commons. The appropriateness of images is heavily debated on Wikipedia's sex related pages and it is not OK for admins to shortcut this by totally removing the image and with it the editors' ability to even see what has been removed. Please restore the image to the Wikimedia Commons and submit it for a normal deletion debate. --Simonxag (talk) 12:11, 12 November 2008 (UTC)

I am aware of the surfeit of simple pictures of male genitalia. Nevertheless, the deletion of pictures that include genitals is still debated and the decision can go either way (depending on circumstances). The principle that we do not need more "dick shots" is not a reason for deleting an image in use on the Wikipedia. Please restore the image and submit it for deletion in the normal way. --Simonxag (talk) 21:28, 12 November 2008 (UTC)

Modèle proposé à la suppression : Template:PD-EU-no author disclosure[edit]

Bonjour,

Comme ton nom apparait dans l'historique du modèle, je t'invite au débat ouvert sur Commons:Deletion requests/Template:PD-EU-no author disclosure. Teofilo (talk) 16:19, 12 November 2008 (UTC)


Image:Charles_Dickens_Ami_commun_tome_2.djvu[edit]

Image deletion warning Image:Charles_Dickens_Ami_commun_tome_2.djvu 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 image, 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.
In all cases, please do not take the deletion request personally. It is never intended as such. Thank you!


Afrikaans | العربية | 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 | Српски / srpski | Svenska | Türkçe | Tiếng Việt | 中文 | 中文(简体)‎ | 中文(繁體)‎ | +/−

Zyephyrus (talk) 08:01, 14 November 2008 (UTC)

Undeletion requests (Einstein and gossip)[edit]

Hi, I noticed that you are an admin with a sensible attitude to copyright. May I ask you to have a look at Commons:Undeletion requests/Current requests#Image:Max-Planck-und-Albert-Einstein.jpg? Also the undeletion request for Hush-hush seems to be deserving. /Pieter Kuiper (talk) 08:16, 3 December 2008 (UTC)

Image:Conf99-99 jul.jpeg[edit]

Is there documentation for the assertion that the copyright for Image:Conf99-99 jul.jpeg was not renewed? --Orlady (talk) 21:00, 6 December 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for edifying me! --Orlady (talk) 23:34, 6 December 2008 (UTC)

Image:Three Dead Navy SEALs in Operation Redwing.PNG[edit]

Why did you restore this image without consulting me nor notifying me of the thread where my deletion was discussed? Maxim(talk) 20:18, 11 December 2008 (UTC)

image du Royal Rumble[edit]

bonjour et bonne année

pourquoi avoir enlever les images du Royal Rumble logos

cordialemnt W200 (CET) 2 janvier 2009 16:03

Commons:Deletion requests/File:Three Dead Navy SEALs in Operation Redwing.PNG[edit]

Seems an unreasonable reason to close (even ignoring the fact it had 90% Keep votes), since the photos do not show any aspect of "private or family life", but rather show death in service of their country. It seems to me identical in scope to w:Federico Borrell García for example, in that it is an identifiable photograph of war-dead. An endless cycle of deletion reviews seems like a waste of everybody's time, but I'm not going to see a Public Domain photograph removed just because somebody says the subject was a "hero" and it "hurts" to see them dead. Can you imagine the project if we're allowed to say certain photographs "offend" us? We'd have no photographs of Muhammad, for starters - because it "pains" a certain group and does "harm" to them. Having trouble seeing how it's any different from File:Zarqawi dead us govt photo.jpg - seems like a terrible double-standard. From the same war, we can show photos of one side's war-dead, but not the other side? Sherurcij (talk) 02:17, 10 January 2009 (UTC)

I agree, this is not "family life", this was death on a government mission. /Pieter Kuiper (talk) 10:03, 10 January 2009 (UTC)
I also found your deletion based on Commons:Photographs of identifiable people#Moral issues surprising -- shocking in fact. When individuals are dead images of them can hardly "intrude into the subject's private or family life." Geo Swan (talk) 04:44, 12 January 2009 (UTC)
It surely intrudes on the subject's family right of privacy. The policy applies to living or recently deceased persons. Yann (talk) 11:56, 12 January 2009 (UTC)
I agree with the deletion. I think in the long run we will have more images contributed if we are known as an organization that is respectful of the people and honor reasonable requests for deletion. FloNight♥♥♥ 00:31, 13 January 2009 (UTC)
I find myself having to agree with Yann's deletion here. While the licensing of the image is not an issue - we all know the rules around that - I think that from an ethical perspective, this was the correct approach. As Jimmy Wales said, to paraphrase, "Wikipedia is not here to hurt people", and in this instance Wikipedia and indeed Commons, should take the kinder approach. At the very least, this will win us the goodwill of others and enhance the respectability of the project amongst the public as well as amongst the families of the deceased. It's just the right thing to to here and I certainly endorse this deletion - Alison 00:40, 13 January 2009 (UTC)
As a U.S. servicemember, I agree with the deletion. Nobody's family should be forced to endure that; and that's ignoring the separate issue of identifying U.S. special operations forces in action. The deletion is the right decision. Swatjester (talk) 04:28, 13 January 2009 (UTC)
  • Sometimes doing the right thing is more important then following the polices and guidelines. Deletion was the humane thing to do. 163.166.135.44 13:06, 13 January 2009 (UTC)

Image: Processos e Componentes PRINCE2.png[edit]

Please, don't delete this image. We are from Elumini - IT and Business Consulting, a Accredited Training, Certification and Consultancy of ILX Group, hence my Company is authorized to use all official educational material. We are working to spread the PRINCE2 Methodology in Brazil. Fernando Santucci

Image of Élodie Ouédraogo[edit]

Dear Yann, AmandaPirato placed an image on wikimedia commons which she defined as Belgian athlete 'Élodie Ouédraogo' (File:Elodie ouedraogo.jpg), taken from an original picture with Belgian colleague Hanna Mariën (File:Hanna Marien op het podium op de KBC Indoor 2008.JPG) on it. However, in reality this picture doesn't show Élodie Ouédraogo, but French athlete Thélia Sigère. On January 6th of this year I pointed this out to her and asked her to take steps to correct this mistake. Up to now she has not shown any reaction. Therefore I ask you to mediate in this matter and to remove this image from wikimedia commons. Thanks in advance.--Piet.Wijker (talk) 16:11, 3 February 2009 (UTC)