User talk:Brigade Piron

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

Autopatrol given[edit]

Hello. I just wanted to let you know that I have granted autopatrol rights to your account; the reason for this is that I believe you are sufficiently trustworthy and experienced to have your contributions automatically marked as "reviewed". This has no effect on your editing, it is simply intended to make it easier for users that are monitoring Recent changes or Recent uploads to find unproductive edits amidst the productive ones like yours. In addition, the Flickr upload feature and an increased number of batch-uploads in UploadWizard, uploading of freely licensed MP3 files, overwriting files uploaded by others and an increased limit for page renames per minute are now available to you. Thank you. INeverCry 20:55, 24 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

File:Vandalised election poster.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 see Commons:But it's my own work! for a guide on how to address these issues.

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!

Stromare (talk) 19:38, 24 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

File:You defend Belgium....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 see Commons:But it's my own work! for a guide on how to address these issues.

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!

83.61.169.17 19:40, 24 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]


Hi Brigade Piron, we need to know the sculptor and his life-dates (years), as there is no freedom-of-panorama exemption for public works in Belgium. --Túrelio (talk) 13:33, 18 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I have no idea I'm afraid. The work appears to be unsigned, though must date to the 1920s... Brigade Piron (talk) 08:57, 20 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Brigade Piron, who is the sculptor and when was this bust installed or created? --Túrelio (talk) 13:58, 18 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

No idea, sorryBrigade Piron (talk) 08:58, 20 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
File:Belgium bringing civilisation to the Congo by A. Matton.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 see Commons:But it's my own work! for a guide on how to address these issues.

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!

Túrelio (talk) 13:40, 18 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

==File:Mexican War Montage.jpg== Hi, please add the file-links for all images in this collage to the description. --Túrelio (talk) 16:33, 19 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Done. Brigade Piron (talk) 09:04, 20 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Round 2 of Picture of the Year 2015 is open![edit]

You are receiving this message because you voted in R1 of the 2015 Picture of the Year contest.

Dear Brigade Piron,

Wikimedia Commons is happy to announce that the second round of the 2015 Picture of the Year competition is now open. This year will be the tenth edition of the annual Wikimedia Commons photo competition, which recognizes exceptional contributions by users on Wikimedia Commons. Wikimedia users are invited to vote for their favorite images featured on Commons during the last year (2015) to produce a single Picture of the Year.

Hundreds of images that have been rated Featured Pictures by the international Wikimedia Commons community in the past year were entered in this competition. These images include professional animal and plant shots, breathtaking panoramas and skylines, restorations of historical images, photographs portraying the world's best architecture, impressive human portraits, and so much more.

There are two total rounds of voting. In the first round, you voted for as many images as you liked. In Round 1, there were 1322 candidate images. There are 56 finalists in Round 2, comprised of the top 30 overall as well as the top #1 and #2 from each sub-category. In the final round, you may vote for just one or maximal three image to become the Picture of the Year.

Round 2 will end on 28 May 2016, 23:59:59 UTC.

Click here to vote »

Thanks,
-- Wikimedia Commons Picture of the Year committee 09:42, 22 May 2016 (UTC)

South Kasai stamps[edit]

Seeing as you used {{PD-Democratic Republic of the Congo}} on File:South Kasai overprint stamps.jpg then surely the stamps that were removed by an IP editor from the article w:Postage stamps and postal history of the Democratic Republic of the Congo, i.e., w:File:South Kasai stamps.jpg, should also use the same licence. If so, then the non-free rationale, etc, should be replaced and it moved here to the commons. Your thoughts. Ww2censor (talk) 21:35, 11 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

That's probably true. It seems reasonable that stamps made for the Congolese Government should be subject to Congolese law. If that is so, then stamps would seem to fit into Art 7 ("official acts of authorities") in Ordinance-Law No. 86-033 of 5 April 1986, mentioned in the template. Whether, in real life, the Congo has functioning intellectual property law, however, is different... Brigade Piron (talk) 07:46, 12 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]
According to the law you mention, WIPO has this listed as the current intellectual property law and the statement in Art 7 fully states "Official acts of the authority shall not give rise to any copyright. Any other literary, artistic or scientific publications produced by the authorities shall generate copyright for the authorities." I would not call stamps an "act of authority" because they are not laws, which is what acts usually refers to, but an "artistic" work so suggest they are copyright for 50 years from publication which ties in with the first claus of the template. I'll refine the details of the stamps w:File:South Kasai stamps.jpg. Thanks Ww2censor (talk) 13:44, 12 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]
I've refined the details and also found a much better quality image on eBay so it just needs to be moved to the commons. Ww2censor (talk) 14:10, 12 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]
I think it is quite arguable. In the original French, the term is actes officiels de l’autorité (i.e. "official acts done by the authorities"). Given that (a) the Congolese postal system is state-run, and (b) a stamp serves an official function of denoting payment for services, I think it fits pretty neatly into that definition. It is true that, where the same term occurs in modern Belgian law, it refers to instruments that produce legal effects (i.e. texts of laws, court judgements etc.) But this interpretative help is not available for the Congo. I think describing a stamp as a "artistic [...] publication" is more of a stretch, and that is the only way in which copyright can be imposed here? Brigade Piron (talk) 14:16, 12 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]
I'm a bit at odds with you on this but it really only makes a difference when referring to less than 50 year old stamps. Most countries that use the sort of term "forms of payment" are usually mentioned in their laws. If a stamp is not an artistic publication, being a work designed by an artist I would call that artistic. Ww2censor (talk) 14:52, 12 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Round 2 of Picture of the Year 2018 is open![edit]

Dear Brigade Piron,

You are receiving this message because we noticed that you voted in R1 of the 2018 Picture of the Year contest, but not yet in the second round. Wikimedia users are invited to vote for their favorite images featured on Commons during the last year (2018) to produce a single Picture of the Year.

Hundreds of images that have been rated Featured Pictures by the international Wikimedia Commons community in the past year were entered in this competition. These images include professional animal and plant shots, breathtaking panoramas and skylines, restorations of historical images, photographs portraying the world's best architecture, impressive human portraits, and so much more.

There are two total rounds of voting. In the first round, you voted for as many images as you liked.

In the final (and current) round, you may vote for a maximum of three images. The image with the most votes will become the Picture of the Year 2018.

Round 2 will end 17 March 2019, 23:59:59.

Click here to vote now!

Thanks,
the Wikimedia Commons Picture of the Year committee 18:04, 16 March 2019 (UTC)

File:Dhanis Expedition.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 see Commons:But it's my own work! for a guide on how to address these issues.

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!

Tomaatje12 (talk) 13:03, 6 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]