User talk:Yann/archives 8

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


File:Otto Adolf Eichmann0.jpg[edit]

Hi Yann, you kept this as Anonymous-EU. Would you please elaborate why this image is an anonymous work published more than 70 years ago? Thanks and regards, -- ChrisiPK (Talk|Contribs) 20:15, 7 June 2009 (UTC)

Hi Yann, I understand that we have very different opinions on what is needed to assume an image is anonymous and I am usually not one to force my position, but this image is lacking _every_ condition neccessary for such an assumption. {{PD-EU-no author disclosure}} describes the same law as {{Anonymous-EU}}, but sums up what is needed: To use this template, the image must meet both of the following two conditions: (1) published over 70 years ago, and (2) the original author's actual identity was not publicly disclosed in connection with this image within 70 years following its publication. (1) This image is lacking proof of publication more than 70 years ago. I googled the books mentioned as source, the youngest one is from the 1960s and the newest one from 2001. (2) There is an author name next to the image. We don't know the author from any other publications and we don't know whether the author name is from one of these books, but if there is an author name, that means that the author did _not_ want to remain anonymous and this can not be an anonymous work, just because we don't know when the author died. You are right, this is nothing new compared to the last DR, but that one was also closed as keep without any evidence pointing to the fact that this is an anonymous work. I will invite mattbuck to this discussion, if you wish. Regards, -- ChrisiPK (Talk|Contribs) 21:51, 7 June 2009 (UTC)
The main problem that I see is that we cannot be certain that this was Eichmann. He is supposed be be about 10 years old here. I have also looked around a bit now, and to me the facial features look quite different from photos as a young man. /Pieter Kuiper (talk) 22:28, 7 June 2009 (UTC)
Well, that's another issue all together... Yann (talk) 22:29, 7 June 2009 (UTC)
So how can we proceed? I am still thinking that this is completely insufficient. Can we work this out or should I ask for more opinions? Regards, -- ChrisiPK (Talk|Contribs) 14:37, 8 June 2009 (UTC)
My opinion is easy: old orphan works should be accepted on Commons, and the burden of proof should be on the accusation. Do what you conscience feel doing... Yann (talk) 14:42, 8 June 2009 (UTC)
Unfortunately this is not really compatible with COM:L and COM:PRP. The burden of proof is always on the people willing to use an image, that's just what copyright is like. Regards, -- ChrisiPK (Talk|Contribs) 15:27, 8 June 2009 (UTC)
Well, fortunately you are wrong on the legal point of view: on most legal issues, including on copyright matters, the proof is on the accusation. Yes, that are not the rules that Commons uses, but there are what most other people use. Commons is the exception here. Yann (talk) 15:36, 8 June 2009 (UTC)
Proving that an image has been published with an author claim next to it is much easier than proving that the image has _never_ been published with an author's name. Should someone claim copyright, then they have a lot less work to do than we have. Which is exactly why the precautionary principle exists. Regards, -- ChrisiPK (Talk|Contribs) 18:42, 8 June 2009 (UTC)

I feel less and less comfortable with this image. It is much less certain than the Hitler-Wittgengstein school photo. For all we know this could be a British school in the 1960's. I will renominate for deletion. /Pieter Kuiper (talk) 19:01, 8 June 2009 (UTC)

Commons:Deletion requests/File:Gandhi with Lord and Lady Mountbatten.jpg‎[edit]


Could you undelete File:Ecografía 4D - Feto 14semanas C.jpg? As you said in Commons:Deletion_requests/Ultrasound_images_should_be_copyrighted there was «no valid reason for mass deletion».
PD: I'm not english native; sorry for my bad engliesh. --Rizome (talk) 06:55, 8 June 2009 (UTC)

Done. Yann (talk) 07:54, 8 June 2009 (UTC)

edward n jackson photos and rights[edit]

Please leave the Jackson photos alone. I have all "rights" to use them in the jackson listing and to list them in Commons. I am writing a book about Jackson and the photos are in my posession from family archives. I believe I stated this in the Commons listings of these historic photos (all of them). Niteflyer Niteflyer (talk) 16:39, 8 June 2009 (UTC)

Deletion request[edit]

Can you please delete

They are my uploads but are named incorrectly. Versions with correct names are also uploaded. I do not want them cause any more inconvenience (they are not used globally at the moment). Thanks. İyivikiler... ho? ni! 22:02, 9 June 2009 (UTC)

Image:BGN.jpg and other[edit]

All photographs are property of the General Library of Navarre and I am the person in charge of their use.

— Preceding unsigned comment added by Mlga76 (talk • contribs)



Est-ce que tu es sûr de la violation de droit d'auteur pour cette image ? Et si oui, pourquoi avoir laissé les autres images de la catégorie, et si non, pourquoi avoir supprimé (du moins dans DR) ? Est-ce que la mention du copyright (du film ?) s'applique au trailer, malgré les explications de Petrusbarbygere ? --Coyau (talk) 14:55, 11 June 2009 (UTC)

La mention © Copyright est en plein milieu de l'image ! J'ai pas vu la catégorie, mais ça doit être supprimé aussi, à mon avis. Mais je vais faire une requête de suppression. Yann (talk) 18:33, 11 June 2009 (UTC)
Merci. --Coyau (talk) 18:55, 11 June 2009 (UTC)

Your keeping of copyright violations...[edit]

In Commons:Deletion requests/File:PikiWiki Israel 1127 Art of Israel חג המחולות בקיבוץ דליה.jpg even Deror agreed with me. I do not know what political game is being played here, but it does not have to do with copyright, and it stinks. /Pieter Kuiper (talk) 16:10, 12 June 2009 (UTC)

I took the photo you seem to believe I did not take.[edit]

File Tagging File:CindyDyerByPhilKonstantin.jpg

What part of "I personally took this photo" do you not understand? What part of my releasing it into the public domain do you not understand?

I have posted over 200 photos on Wikipedia that I personally took. I at a reporter at a TV station in San Diego, California, USA. We have lots of famous (or Wikipedia-mentioned) people who come through on a regular basis. I take my camera, point it at them, push the shutter button, and my Olympus E-Volt 300 DSLR camera takes a picture. In this particular case, Cindy Dyer was sitting on the set waiting for the interview to begin. I pointed my camera at her. She saw me & smiled. I then took the photo.

Please be specific. What is it about my photo that makes you think I did not take it?

Did you visit my website to see the over 200 people whose visits to my TV station have been documented? I suggest you do that before you ARBITRARILY decide I am not the author of the photos I have taken.

Phil Konstantin Philkon (talk) 15:22, 13 June 2009 (UTC)

Here is the e-mail I sent to in order to have to deal with your lack of research before accusing me of doing something wrong.

"I have no idea what this person is talking about. I took the photo & checked the appropriate box releasing it into the public domain. I have contributed over 200 such photos I have taken of famous people to Wikipedia. How can I provide you with "written" proof I took this photo. Unfortunately, I did not had someone take a photo of me while I was taking the photo of Cindy Dyer in order to prove I took the photo.

All of the other photos (the ones I am not releasing into the public domain through Wikipedia) I took of Cindy Dyer are posted on my website at:

Anyone, including the vigilante who has make many such apparently unfounded complaints about other people (according to all of the complaints listed on their talk page), can visit visit my website in order to see my MASSIVE collection of photos I have taken of people visiting the TV station where I work.

It is very frustrating when you have to deal with people such as "Yann" who accuse people of plagiarizing something, and yet, they make no apparent effort to research the matter before they take action.

Phil Konstantin"

Delete please[edit]

Please delete File:SeniorGayCouple50Years.gif. Thanks. - ALLSTRecho wuz here @ 16:06, 13 June 2009 (UTC)

Links to DRs[edit]

Please leave correct links to DRs on talk pages when you close them. See for example File talk:H1N1 Argentina Map .png - it links to the file. See here how it should be done. Thanks. /Pieter Kuiper (talk) 21:19, 13 June 2009 (UTC)

Well, I didn't close this one, but I corrected the link. Yann (talk) 21:22, 13 June 2009 (UTC)


Hi, I saw you deleted File:Josh-holloway-2b.jpg as a copyvio. Could you perhaps give a quick browse to other uploads of User:Ninostar. Basically everything uploaded after 26 May look like copyvio's. And I'm not too sure about earlier uploads either. Garion96 (talk) 23:13, 14 June 2009 (UTC)

Why did you remove it?[edit]

Carlos Thiebaut's photo has been removed. Why? I take it from Thiebaut's curriculum with his permission.

Sorry for my English.


Hello, You need to send a copy of the permission to See COM:OTRS for details. Anyway could you please specify which image, and log in and sign. Thanks, Yann (talk) 12:09, 15 June 2009 (UTC)

Additional French translations[edit]

Hi! I posted some additional French translation requests at the Bistro: Commons:Bistro#Additional_translations_requested - Thanks WhisperToMe (talk) 07:48, 16 June 2009 (UTC)

  • Thank you for the two AF 447 translations! :) This AF 447 pic: File:Balanço dos dez dias de operações.jpg is now ready to be translated - Also the requested Swissair 111 pics and categories haven't received French translations yet. EDIT: I also found two maps that need French descriptions. WhisperToMe (talk) 17:48, 16 June 2009 (UTC)



désolé de vous déranger encore mais je ne connais pas grand monde ici.

Il y a potentiellement un problème de droit avec File:Padre.boxe.jpg qui semble venir de cette page avec une mention "Photo : André Dupeyroux".

Merci, ILJR (talk) 10:52, 16 June 2009 (UTC)

Ne vous embêtez pas, j'ai finalement posé directement la question au contributeur concerné. ILJR (talk) 11:08, 16 June 2009 (UTC)
Le contributeur nous indique être le fils de la personne présente sur la photo (décédé très récemment), la question de droit est en cours de résolution. C'est la dernière fois que je vous dérange. ILJR (talk) 18:24, 16 June 2009 (UTC)

User:Zscout370 is not active any more as an admin[edit]

It seems to me that User:Zscout370 is not active any more as an admin. (He deleted his user page with the commen "bye".) Could you please remove his admin rights and remove him from the list of admins? --ALE! ¿…? 08:31, 28 May 2009 (UTC)

Hello, Could you please add a request on meta? Thanks, Yann (talk) 14:50, 28 May 2009 (UTC)
Where exactly? --ALE! ¿…? 11:51, 15 June 2009 (UTC)
According to the admin policy, we have to wait a little longer. Se also that page where to put a request for a removal of access: m:Requests for permissions#Removal of access. Regards, Yann (talk) 13:28, 16 June 2009 (UTC)

Question regarding Wiki administration[edit]

Hello Yann, I'm a new Wikimedia contributor and I was hoping you could give me a little advice on a community matter. I noticed that you had made changes to the Abdominoplasty page on Wikipedia because of an image that did not meet Wikipedia's licensing requirements. Well, the owner/contributor of the image you removed has been removing images that are legitimately related and descriptive towards the article (of course, that's all relative ... but in my opinion ...), and even going to the extent of contacting me via telephone with the explanation that he was "there first" and that I should not be modifying/adding any content. This user has a history of warring with other users on the aforementioned page (and other pages), and is also using more than one account (Emilymiller123, Sarahjjohnson123, and the "anonymous" to maintain his anonymity. Of course, it's not too difficult to conclude that his name is Dr. Otto Placik in Arlington Heights, IL, USA. But his antics are beginning to degrade the quality and reputability of the articles, and I am hoping to find counsel from someone who is definitely well-experienced in the function of this virtual community. Much thanks for any help/advice you might be willing to offer. Paravis (talk) 18:03, 18 June 2009 (UTC)

I have several objections to User:Paravis in this regard. He repeatedly post images (check out his image contributions) with a direct hyperlink to a commercial website. Instead, if he were to remain inpartial, he would list the source as the physician's name without the link to remove the tainted quality and promotional aspect of the images which he posts. What is the purpose of the link other than to drive traffic in an unobstructed fashion to a commercial website. I find that he doth protest too much and should really no be throwing stones. I have nothing to hide. What is his relationship to Dr. Schwartz? Can you offer him some advice on removing the links (as I most willingly did on all my images contributions as soon as I understood the implications)?Otto Placik (talk) 01:37, 8 July 2009 (UTC)

Images marked with no source[edit]

Hello Yann! You marked File:Bucharest Citaro bus 4551.jpg and some other files with no source. The image uses {{PD-STFP}} that states: "This image of a Romanian public transport vehicle is in the public domain because it is from the public transport database".

It seems to me that it looks like a source and if noone tells the uploader what more is needes he/she probably can't do it better. Maybe you could tell the uploader what more you would like (a direct link to the specific image?). --MGA73 (talk) 11:45, 19 June 2009 (UTC)

Well we usually require more than a general link to the frontpage of a web site, i.e. a deep link to the image. Yann (talk) 11:48, 19 June 2009 (UTC)
And that is a god idea otherwise it is hard to verify that the images really is from that web. My point was that maybe it would be a good idea to tell the uploader, that he/she should add a deep link to the image. --MGA73 (talk) 13:15, 19 June 2009 (UTC)
I have now told the uploader and added a deep link to the image (I hope). If you need more please let me know. --MGA73 (talk) 13:34, 19 June 2009 (UTC)
OK, I removed the warning and added {{information}}. Yann (talk) 16:12, 19 June 2009 (UTC)

Why is my image that I created been removed[edit]

Good day, I see that my image has been deleted and the reason being of copyright infringement. How is that possible when I am the one who created the image by myself. File referring to was named File:Bandwidthfirstissuecover.jpg Please recover it. Thank you. --Arthur7lee (talk) 18:37, 20 June 2009 (UTC)

I can't seem to understand this. I created the image from scratch. The images inside it, the artwork layout, everything. Am I missing something here? Do I need to do something in order for my image be put up on wikipedia? Please enlighten me. Thank you.--Arthur7lee (talk) 19:14, 20 June 2009 (UTC)


Hi Yann, I usually edit the article Belo Horizonte and i've realized that you have deleted the image File:Savassi2.jpg. I'm not he uploader of this file and I didn't know it was in a process of deletion here in Commons. I was looking for its log but I haven't got it. Please, if you could, I want to know why it was deleted. If possible, I'll try to solve its irregularities. Thanks, Talk2lurch (talk) 19:49, 22 June 2009 (UTC)


Why do you say it's "out of project scope"? It's freely licensed picture of the most famous Brazilian pornstar: pt:Bruna_Ferraz. Undelete it. --Damiens.rf 20:29, 22 June 2009 (UTC)


Hi Yann! I am Marián from Slovak wikipedia. I do not english very good. Can you delete this four photos (below standard): [1], [2], [3] and [4]. Thank you very much. See you next time :) --MARIÁN 21:20, 24 June 2009 (UTC)


I must say that I have the rights of Grupo Salinas' Logo, so the only who can make a call for a Copyright violation, considering the international corporate law, is just the Enterprise... I hope your excuses or your argues about this incident.

— Preceding unsigned comment added by Tezcatlipoca21 (talk • contribs)


Can you explain this edit? My understanding was rollback is only used for blatant vandalism. Further, no reason was given why other than "reverted edits" --Drogonov (talk) 20:28, 25 June 2009 (UTC)

This file is used. There is no reason for a speedy deletion. Rollback can be used for any revert. It is just a convenient way to revert an edit. Yann (talk) 21:02, 25 June 2009 (UTC)

:: I don't think the file is used. This is what I see:

"File links
There are no pages that link to this file. "
--Drogonov (talk) 09:05, 26 June 2009 (UTC)

My mistake. --Drogonov (talk) 11:02, 26 June 2009 (UTC)

Please read the VIC rules[edit]

I shall quote the relevant part for you: " Undecided VICs and VISCs can be renominated as is..." 15:26, 26 June 2009 (UTC)

VI closure : note au passage[edit]

Pas besoin de subster {{vicl}}, je ne pense pas que ça apporte grand-chose. --Eusebius (talk) 15:49, 26 June 2009 (UTC)

Ok, noté. J'avais simplement copié une closure faire par quelqu'un d'autre. Yann (talk) 15:59, 26 June 2009 (UTC)

Out of scope[edit]

I saw that you made serious mistakes with deletions with reason Out of project scope. Nominate these images for deletion but do not delete it without community consensus in deletion request. Thank you. --Dezidor (talk) 14:11, 27 June 2009 (UTC)

Well, that's what you think. Yann (talk) 18:39, 28 June 2009 (UTC)
Dezidor is not alone in this. /Pieter Kuiper (talk) 19:19, 28 June 2009 (UTC)


Regarding Mont Blanc comment[edit]

Hi Yann, I've commented on your Mont Blanc submission for QI review. Maybe it's not clear what I mean. I've created a modified version of your image, I hope you don't mind. (I'll remove the modification immediately after your review.) --Iotatau (talk) 13:38, 1 July 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for allowing the modifications. I have uploaded the new version. Since I am now involved in the image, too, I think it's better if I don't promote it myself and hope that someone else likes it, too. Good luck. --Iotatau (talk) 14:11, 1 July 2009 (UTC)
Thanks for offering the PNG file. But the real RAW file would be better. You can send me a private mail through my Wikimedia Commons profile with instructions where to download the file. --Iotatau (talk) 20:00, 3 July 2009 (UTC)
Glad I had access to the RAW file. I love the latest version, what a view. --Iotatau (talk) 22:50, 3 July 2009 (UTC)

File:Soyuz TMA-11 Patch.gif[edit]

Hi Yann, I have started an undeletion request for the file Soyuz TMA-11 Patch.gif. I beleive it was mistakenly tagged {{no license}} while a valid license was already present. I ask that you please participate in the undeletion request's discussion in order to clarify whether there was a valid reason for the tag that I don't see or if it was mistakenly added. Thanks! --Stux (talk) 17:50, 3 July 2009 (UTC)

PD upload from WP[edit]

The file has bee properly indicated now, I had supplied the URL and original WP author to being with however, just in the wrong field I guess. It is a public domain image. Will use the other PD tag next time. I thought PD was PD was PD, and there weren't classes of public domain, it either is or isn't public domain. I had removed PD self, but I hadn't added PD author, just left it as PD, will use PD author next time. The WP to commons uploader option doesn't work very well it just hangs up.SriMesh | talk 22:53, 4 July 2009 (UTC)

File:Tiger Moth D-EBKT.jpg[edit]

Hello, Yann! You marked this picture with {{no_permission}}. At first sight it looks like it was taken from a website without permission. But if you have a look at the userpage of user:J.Klank, you can see that he is one of the authors of - seems like he is a plane-spotter who is so kind to share some of his pics with us. The user J.Klank seems to be identical to the owner of the site, Jens Klank. If there's any doubt left you can find his email here. He uploaded some very nice pictures, which I would regret to be lost, so if I can help somehow (speaking german) please contact me. Regards, El Grafo (talk) 11:13, 6 July 2009 (UTC)

Thank You very much![edit]

Thank You very much for Your help with VI formatting! It is my first nomination on VI.

With best regards, --George Chernilevsky (talk) 11:14, 6 July 2009 (UTC)

rationale for deletion[edit]

in reviewing your record of deletions, it concerns me that you are abusing the "out of scope" rationale to delete images without proper debate, based on personal preferences.

Lx 121 (talk) 02:09, 10 July 2009 (UTC)


Hi Yann, danke für Deine Hilfe beim Bild Amselmänchen (thank you). --L.Kenzel (talk) 18:45, 11 July 2009 (UTC)

Hinweis Bildkategorien[edit]

Merci Yann pour ton soutien sur mes images que tu as catalogué le 13 juillet 2009. --R.Zumbühl

Deletion request for NPG images protected by the URAA[edit]

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

If you created these pages, please note that the fact that they have been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with them.

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

Afrikaans | العربية | беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ | български | বাংলা | català | čeština | dansk | Deutsch | Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ | Zazaki | Ελληνικά | English | Esperanto | español | eesti | فارسی | suomi | français | galego | עברית | hrvatski | magyar | Հայերեն | Bahasa Indonesia | íslenska | italiano | 日本語 | 한국어 | 한국어 (조선) | македонски | മലയാളം | Plattdüütsch | Nederlands | norsk nynorsk | norsk | occitan | polski | پښتو | português | português do Brasil | română | русский | sicilianu | slovenčina | slovenščina | shqip | српски / srpski | svenska | Türkçe | українська | Tiếng Việt | 中文 | 中文(简体)‎ | 中文(繁體)‎ | +/−


See: Distorsion en barillet. Lycaon (talk) 23:33, 12 July 2009 (UTC)

Own page deletion[edit]

Thanks for deleting the page I requested, User talk:Newportm/Archive index. I also nominated User talk:Newportm/Archive template for deletion, but for some reason I don't understand, the second deletion request did not show up the same as the first on [5]. Furthermore, another page requested deleted does not show up on the list. Would you be kind enough take a look at this diff? Newportm (talk) 18:36, 13 July 2009 (UTC)

File:Fort l'Écluse, inférieur-retouché brightened.jpg[edit]

Salut Yann. Qu'en penses-tu? Lycaon (talk) 19:05, 13 July 2009 (UTC)

Effectivement, on ne peut plus dire « trop foncé », mais j'ai peur que certains disent « trop clair »... (overexposed). Yann (talk) 19:09, 13 July 2009 (UTC)
Yes probably, for me the original was fine anyway. Nothing was white (RGB 255 255 255), but in reality I guess the walls are grey. Thanks for correcting my French BTW ;-). Lycaon (talk) 19:14, 13 July 2009 (UTC)
Thanks a lot anyway. Yann (talk) 20:33, 13 July 2009 (UTC)

Could you help, please[edit]

Hi Yann, may I please ask you to do me a favor? Could you please rename File:Famale gorrila with 2 months old baby boy gorrila in SF zoo.jpg to File:Female gorilla with 2 months old baby boy gorilla in SF zoo.jpg.
Thank you for your time.--Mbz1 (talk) 15:40, 15 July 2009 (UTC)

✓  Done Yann (talk) 15:42, 15 July 2009 (UTC)
Thank you, but I meant not just adding template, but actually moving the file to a different name. I will change all the pages the file is used at myself. If it is impossible I will upload the same file with the correct name. Thank you.--Mbz1 (talk) 15:59, 15 July 2009 (UTC)
The move-a-file feature is disabled for now. :'( But the bot already renamed it. Yann (talk) 14:16, 16 July 2009 (UTC)

User talk:Dcoetzee/NPG legal threat/Coverage[edit]

Sorry about that, thought you deleted the page listing the coverage, not the talk page. -mattbuck (Talk) 19:50, 16 July 2009 (UTC)

Commons:Valued image candidates/sea turtle nests SE FL change of scope[edit]

I have changed the scope to protection of sea turtle nests per general agreement and this conversation. Regards. Lycaon (talk) 21:09, 16 July 2009 (UTC)

VIC Gripen scope[edit]

Thank you for your comment. Could you please express your opinion on the preferred soultion now, after my explanation (which is clear, I hope). Airwolf (talk) 11:16, 24 July 2009 (UTC)

Gabriel Arout (Aroutcheff) his relatives[edit]

Hi Yann it was a big surprise to me to find here fotos and documents of Gabriel Arout (Aroutcheff). My name is Helen Arrut I live in Spain with my family. Gabriel is my uncle. My father Sergey Aroutchian is cousen of Gabriel Arout. Gabriel was married with Rene and they had one sun. I have been looking for my relatives very long time. Plese Yann, as you have documents of my uncle, I supose you know where are his relatives now. I would be very grateful to you for giving me this information.


Helen Arrut

— Preceding unsigned comment added by Areg (talk • contribs)

Same file?[edit]

Could you please have a look at Commons:Deletion requests/Image:SanchezWithCoulter-w.jpg from February 2008 and see if the image is the same image uploaded yesterday at File:Sanchez coulter.jpg by the same user? If so, it is a copyvio from Radar Magazine as explained at the Feb. 2008 deletion discussion and should be deleted again. - ALLSTRecho wuz here @ 08:15, 25 July 2009 (UTC)


Hi Yann, Muntuwandi and Wapondaponda are both my accounts, though I will now be using Muntuwandi predominantly. Muntuwandi (talk) 12:53, 25 July 2009 (UTC)

Fusion of cats[edit]

Category:Eisenburg (Adelsgeschlecht) and Category:Herrschaft Eisenburg have (almost?) all files identical. Can they be fused into one category? --Havang(nl) (talk) 20:17, 25 July 2009 (UTC)


File:Cybershot_r1.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 | беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ | български | বাংলা | català | čeština | dansk | Deutsch | Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ | Zazaki | Ελληνικά | English | Esperanto | español | eesti | فارسی | suomi | français | galego | עברית | hrvatski | magyar | Հայերեն | Bahasa Indonesia | íslenska | italiano | 日本語 | 한국어 | 한국어 (조선) | македонски | മലയാളം | Plattdüütsch | Nederlands | norsk nynorsk | norsk | occitan | polski | پښتو | português | português do Brasil | română | русский | sicilianu | slovenčina | slovenščina | shqip | српски / srpski | svenska | Türkçe | українська | Tiếng Việt | 中文 | 中文(简体)‎ | 中文(繁體)‎ | +/−

Peripitus (talk) 00:39, 26 July 2009 (UTC)

This account[edit]

  • Pictogram voting comment.svg  Comment : This account may have to be blocked as the user removed your suspected sockpuppet message: [6]

Thank You, --Leoboudv (talk) 04:43, 26 July 2009 (UTC)

Porque ?[edit]

Porque você decidiu eliminar o ficheiro Kit body santos09t.png?

Você acha que é quem para eliminar imagens dessa maneira ? É da minha autoria e está sendo utilizado, não vejo necessidade para acontecer isso. Pare de fazer maluquice e respeite toda a história, a torcida e tudo que representa o Santos Futebol Clube.

Tudo bem, mas saiba que não há problema autoral nenhum com o ficheiro, eu mesmo criei, por favor tenta avisar. Obrigado pela paciência e me perdoe pela falta de ética.

Obrigado, eu entendi o que você escreveu.Bruno-ban (talk) 15:51, 27 July 2009 (UTC)

Conseil technique[edit]

Salut, quand tu clos une DR comme celle-là, tu devrais, pour chaque fichier listé, utiliser le lien "keep" ou "delete". Ca permet d'avoir un lien vers la DR dans le résumé de suppression et dans la page de discussion des fichiers conservés. Je crois qu'il faut le gadget "DelReqHandler" (dans la dernière section, "outils pour administrateurs"'). --Eusebius (talk) 18:26, 29 July 2009 (UTC)

  • ✓  Done Yann (talk) 18:29, 29 July 2009 (UTC)