User talk:Ytoyoda

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

Welcome to Wikimedia Commons, Ytoyoda!


Hello Ytoyoda. You left a message on my talk page regarding a photo I uploaded. Your message is at the bottom of my talk page. This file was uploaded by the owner to Flickr under public domain. I didn't really understand the message you sent above. Can you please help me figure out what is needed in this case? HRShami (talk)

Uploads by AlterĒvolvere tagged No permission[edit]

Hi, I noticed you used the tag {{No permission since}} on several images by AlterĒvolvere, like File:Cäsar Jacobson's Portrait.jpg. I notice this user uploaded another image (File:Cäsar Jacobson.jpg) that *looks* like it came from the same source, described as "Own Work", unlike the others. So, I was wandering if the {{No permission since}} is appropriate in that case as well, or if it can't be used when the user claims to have made the image themself. I would happily tag the image myself, but I don't know how it should be handled. I tried asking the user a question (here and on Wikipedia) and offered help, and haven't heard back. --Rob (talk) 01:44, 30 April 2020 (UTC)

@Thivierr: I think you're right, "F. Aviva Canon" is *probably* the same person as AlterĒvolvere. I don't really have any other good reason for tagging the image, so I'll remove it. Ytoyoda (talk) 14:23, 30 April 2020 (UTC)
I just noticed, one of the images you tagged, File:Casar Jacobson at United Nations 2017-03-08.jpg, actually should have been deleted after all, since it's just a copy of a non-free CC FlickR image, but a person with an entirely different name ("UN Women/Ryan Brown"). They used the same "F. Aviva" author here, as they did in other photos. Unfortunately, with the uploader not communicating, its impossible to know the status of any image. I'm not sure how any of these images should be tagged, or considered for deletion. --Rob (talk) 14:33, 3 May 2020 (UTC)

Regarding missing permission information[edit]

Hey, this is about File:Temuco, Araucania.jpg, File:Diego de Almagro, Chile.jpg, File:Mejillones.jpg, File:Camiña.jpg, File:Visviri.jpg, File:Isluga.jpg.

This files were originally created by the Government of Chile and as far as my understanding of law goes they all fall within Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0 Chile (CC BY-SA 3.0 CL). is the official website of the government of the city of Temuco is a website operated by the National Service of Turism (Servicio Nacional de Turismo; abbreviated as SERNATUR) which is part of the Ministry of Economy, Development and Tourism.

www.municipalidaddecamiñ is the official website of the government of the town of Camiña is the official website of the Arica-La Paz Railway (Ferrocarril Arica–La Paz) which is operated by EFE (Empresa de los Ferrocarriles del Estado) which is owned by the government of Chile. is the official website of the Government of the Region of Tarapaca.

That is my understanding of Chilean copyright law, if I'm mistaken then I apologize for wasting your time and won't do anything to contest your final decision regarding the matter.

Best regards, AtomsRavelAz (talk) 16:21, 3 May 2020 (UTC)

@AtomsRavelAz: Thanks for your message. I don't doubt that you're correct about Chilean government copyright, but my issue was that there was no link for me to visit and verify the license. Would you mind adding the URL to the pages where those pictures appear? Ytoyoda (talk) 13:35, 4 May 2020 (UTC)
@Ytoyoda: I added the links (Temuco, Araucania.jpg; Diego de Almagro, Chile.jpg; Mejillones.jpg; Camiña.jpg; Isluga.jpg; Visviri.jpg). The Chilean government was not the original creator of Mejillones.jpg, the website of the national service of turism that hosted the picture was taken down, the original image does have a Editorial Use Only license, so I'd really appreciate if you could take a look at it and determine whether the copyright is correct and if the picture should be deleted or not. Also Diego de Almagro, Chile.jpg appears on a slideshow in the website provided, thought I'd mention it in case you couldn't find the picture. Best Regards AtomsRavelAz (talk) 18:25, 4 May 2020 (UTC)
@AtomsRavelAz: Thanks. In general, please add links to the pages where you find your images, not just the website (like this). That makes it so much easier for other users to verify that the license is correct. Though a question - the {{CC-GobCL}} applies to the works of Chile's national government, it's not clear to me if it also applies to the works of city governments or the EFE, a company that's funded and operated by the government, but not the government itself. Ytoyoda (talk) 14:09, 11 May 2020 (UTC)
@Ytoyoda: Thanks for replying. I'll start adding links the way you suggested. Regarding {{CC-GobCL}}, I read ordinance 112/14 (Link in Spanish) issued by the Ministry General Secretariat of Government regarding this matter. On item II (p.1) it states that the ordinance applies to "informative websites of the administration of the state(i.e the country), dependant or related to the central government". City governments in Chile are part of the administration of the state and are dependant and related to the central government, EFE is dependant of the central governemnt. Best regards, AtomsRavelAz (talk) 15:42, 11 May 2020 (UTC)

File:Para SF personnel at Kashmir.jpg[edit]

Lastly you had placed a copyright deletion on this photo I had upload, but I would request you to please take back the deletion request as mentioned earlier I had provided viewers with the actual Author of the photo as well as the site I had collected from. And in the site Getty Image it is mentioned that the photo is free for use except any advertisement purpose. So I would request you to please take back the deletion request because it's a free to use image Swastik Mridha (talk) 13:51, 5 May 2020 (UTC)

@Swastik Mridha: Where does it say it's a free for use image? It literally says "rights managed", meaning there are restrictions and price scales based on how it's used. It's very much not free. And an image that's "free for use except any advertisement purpose" is not allowed on Commons because that's not a free license.
Anyway, it looks like you misunderstood the "for editorial use" restriction. It means that editorial outlets (i.e. news websites) can use the image by paying the licensing fee. Non-editorial users (like advertisers) can use the image with certain restrictions and permissions. It is not a free-to-use image. Ytoyoda (talk) 14:01, 5 May 2020 (UTC)
Okay, I apologise for the error I did due to my misinterpretation of the copyright claim criteria as per provided by Getty Image. I take back my proposal for Undeletion. Please do forgive me due to the unwanted situation created for my wrong interruption.
Thank you and have a nice day Swastik Mridha (talk) 14:11, 5 May 2020 (UTC)
@Swastik Mridha: No worries. Thank you for understanding. In the future, unless you actually see a Creative Commons license or a notice that says "public domain", then please assume that a photo is copyrighted. Ytoyoda (talk) 14:14, 5 May 2020 (UTC)


Idk what to do, the image is literally public domain, and don't know what license it needs to be changed since its public domain and the guy made mass deletion nomination to the images. MoralesKapitan (talk) 09:23, 11 May 2020 (UTC)

Martin Maes images[edit]

Hello, both photos were given to me by "Delhaye Luc", a friend of mine, in order to feed the Wikipedia artcile with a few photos. Sorry, I'm a boring beginner ;-) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Andywiki24 (talk • contribs) 11:14, May 13, 2020‎ (UTC)

@Andywiki24: Hi, thanks for leaving the message here. If your friend is okay with their photographs being republished with a free license, please ask them to submit a statement at COM:OTRS (the steps are described in the link — your friend just has to send in an email showing that they are the owner of the photographs and they agree to a free license that allows commercial use and modification). Ytoyoda (talk) 16:22, 13 May 2020 (UTC)
Hello Ytoyoda, some feedback. The process is ongoing, here is the reference of the Ticket#2020051510007543. They approuved but asked now the original files with metadata. So it should be resolved in a few days.— Preceding unsigned comment added by Andywiki24 (talk • contribs) 06:59, May 17, 2020‎ (UTC)
Hello @Ytoyoda, despite the fact that the ticket 2020051510007543 is resolved, one of the 2 files is still showing a nomination for deletation??! Can you help on that? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Andywiki24 (talk • contribs) 09:51, May 21, 2020‎ (UTC)
@Andywiki24: You (or I) don't have to do anything. Since there's an OTRS ticket now, an admin will close the deletion requests as "keep". Ytoyoda (talk) 14:56, 21 May 2020 (UTC)

File:Teatro 'Sofocos Plus' en Auditorio Roquetas de Mar.jpg[edit]

Hello I`ve taken the image from [1] where it is stated that it is in public domain. The other image is a cropped version of that one.--Pacostein (talk) 21:59, 15 May 2020 (UTC)

Unfortunately, the Flickr public domain mark isn’t accepted at Commons, as it’s not an actual license - it’s a way for Flickr users to claim that an image is in the public domain for another reason, such as work whose copyright has expired. The public domain mark alone isn’t enough to show that it’s in the public domain. Ytoyoda (talk) 04:46, 16 May 2020 (UTC)

Personal page of Farnaz Esmaeilzadeh[edit]


This is to let you know that you are meddling without any good motivation or reason.

This is Esmaeilzadeh's personal wikipedia page:

You have no right or clue as to what is accurate and not, so you should NOT be editing this page.

All the material, links and photos are her own contents.

If you keep editing that page, we are going to report you asap.

Thanks! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rock bike read (talk • contribs) 02:09, 23 May 2020 (UTC)

@Rock bike read: A few things:
  1. I didn’t edit the page. Not sure what gave you the impression.
  2. Even if I did, there’s nothing wrong - no one owns Wikipedia content. It doesn’t belong to the subject or any particular editor.
  3. Remember to assume good faith. Even if you disagree with something, please don’t question other editors' intent.
  4. What I did do was point out copyright issues with photographs you’ve uploaded. Copyright for photographs generally belongs to the photographers, not the person in the photographs. You’ll need written permission from the photographers to keep them here.
Hope this all helps and makes sense. Ytoyoda (talk) 02:45, 23 May 2020 (UTC)

My images[edit]

Hi Ytoyoda, I want to know why do you want to delete the images I posted. They are all my own work, and all are taken in France in the late 1990s. I just want to help, and I give them to you only for that purpose, but if you don't believe me you can do whatever you want with them. Wikipedia has very few pictures of Djorkaeff, especially of his playing career. Allez Les Bleus 80 (talk) 19:59, 29 May 2020 (UTC)

Are you sure? File:Djorkaeff Les Bleus 2002.jpg is a crop of this Getty Images photo. All the other ones are screenshots. Ytoyoda (talk) 20:37, 29 May 2020 (UTC)

@Ytoyoda: Oh man, If I wanted to make screenshots, I would make them with much better quality. Today, everything is on YouTube. I am a former journalist photographer, I worked for a newspaper in France for 20 years and I give you these pictures that were not used because they were of poor quality, for this other one I did not know it was published, now I see it for the first time. Maybe I gave it to someone I don't remember. In journalism, photos are often exchanged with colleagues. But as you wish, I will not explain anymore, in the end I certainly have none of this. Allez Les Bleus 80 (talk) 22:13, 29 May 2020 (UTC)