User talk:Christian Ferrer/Archive20
 | This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
|
2013 • feb-jun • jul-aug • sep-oct • nov-dec |
July - August 2016
FP Promotion
 |
★ This image has been promoted to Featured picture! ★
The image File:Salagou Lake, Celles cf01.jpg, that you nominated on Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Salagou Lake, Celles cf01.jpg has been promoted. Thank you for your contribution. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so. |
|
/FPCBot (talk) 05:01, 2 July 2016 (UTC)
Quality Image Promotion
 |
Your image has been reviewed and promoted
Congratulations! Christian cross at Salagou Lake cf01.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
|
 |
Your image has been reviewed and promoted
Congratulations! Barrage du Salagou cf02.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
|
--QICbot (talk) 05:31, 2 July 2016 (UTC)
The image mentioned CC BY NC SA so would not it be a free image. Or is it a fair use media?
acagastya 📷 05:25, 5 July 2016 (UTC)
- Indeed "NC" mean No Commercial, and we don't accept this kind of license here. Christian Ferrer (talk) 11:01, 5 July 2016 (UTC)
FP Promotion
|
★ This image has been promoted to Featured picture! ★
The image File:Christian cross at Salagou Lake cf01.jpg, that you nominated on Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Christian cross at Salagou Lake cf01.jpg has been promoted. Thank you for your contribution. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so. |
|
/FPCBot (talk) 21:02, 5 July 2016 (UTC)
Quality Image Promotion
 |
Your image has been reviewed and promoted
Congratulations! Barrage du Salagou cf03.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
|
 |
Your image has been reviewed and promoted
Congratulations! Christian cross at Salagou Lake cf02.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
|
--QICbot (talk) 05:15, 6 July 2016 (UTC)
FP Promotion
 |
★ This image has been promoted to Featured picture! ★
The image File:Okshornan from Tungeneset, 2015 September - 3.jpg, that you nominated on Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Okshornan from Tungeneset, 2015 September - 3.jpg has been promoted. Thank you for your contribution. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so. |
|
/FPCBot (talk) 21:01, 8 July 2016 (UTC)
Deletion requests
Hello, Christian. I'm concerned about personality rights of File:A child playing with bike, May 2016.jpg. Could you please delete that file? --Laitche (talk) 11:54, 9 July 2016 (UTC)
- Thanks :) --Laitche (talk) 13:44, 9 July 2016 (UTC)
- @Laitche: you were so fast to thanked me, I've not the time to say
Done :) Christian Ferrer (talk) 13:46, 9 July 2016 (UTC)
- Please close that DR too. :) Jee 13:58, 9 July 2016 (UTC)
- Done too Christian Ferrer (talk) 14:11, 9 July 2016 (UTC)
Quality Image Promotion
,_S%C3%A8te_cf02.jpg) |
Your image has been reviewed and promoted
Congratulations! Larus michahellis (juvenile), Sète cf02.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
|
 |
Your image has been reviewed and promoted
Congratulations! Photographe, Escale à Sète 2016 cf01.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
|
--QICbot (talk) 05:26, 10 July 2016 (UTC)
Quality Image Promotion
 |
Your image has been reviewed and promoted
Congratulations! Rocky hill, Clermont-l'Hérault cf01.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
|
 |
Your image has been reviewed and promoted
Congratulations! Barrage du Salagou cf04.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
|
--QICbot (talk) 05:25, 11 July 2016 (UTC)
Signatures
Hi, you've recently nominated File:Grande's signatur.jpg for deletion, shouldn't File:Ariana Grande Signature.png and File:Ariana Grande Signature 2.png be as well then? they too don't have any permission stated. TherasTaneel (talk) 05:59, 12 July 2016 (UTC)
- Hi thanks, I just nominated these files too. The only question is "is this signatur artistic enough to have copyright restrictions for us"? Christian Ferrer (talk) 11:29, 12 July 2016 (UTC)
FP Promotion
|
★ This image has been promoted to Featured picture! ★
The image File:Barrage du Salagou cf02.jpg, that you nominated on Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Barrage du Salagou cf02.jpg has been promoted. Thank you for your contribution. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so. |
|
/FPCBot (talk) 05:01, 14 July 2016 (UTC)
FP Promotion
|
★ This image has been promoted to Featured picture! ★
The image File:Barrage du Salagou cf04.jpg, that you nominated on Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Barrage du Salagou cf04.jpg has been promoted. Thank you for your contribution. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so. |
|
/FPCBot (talk) 05:02, 14 July 2016 (UTC)
Quality Image Promotion
,_S%C3%A8te_cf01.jpg) |
Your image has been reviewed and promoted
Congratulations! Lyre (ship, 1987), Sète cf01.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
|
,_S%C3%A8te_cf01.jpg) |
Your image has been reviewed and promoted
Congratulations! Jusqu'au Bout (ship), Sète cf01.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
|
--QICbot (talk) 05:30, 14 July 2016 (UTC)
Quality Image Promotion
 |
Your image has been reviewed and promoted
Congratulations! Harbour of Sète, March 2016 cf01.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
|
,_S%C3%A8te_cf03.jpg) |
Your image has been reviewed and promoted
Congratulations! Lyre (ship, 1987), Sète cf03.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
|
--QICbot (talk) 05:21, 15 July 2016 (UTC)
Valued Image Promotion
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:
Salagou Dam. Upstream side..
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.
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:
Salagou Dam. Downstream side..
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.
deleted electric car photos
Hello, this is to confirm what I have provided on the undelete request page that Go Ultra Low owns the copyright to the images you have deleted. These are intended to increase the availability of free-use images of modern electric cars so please stop deleting them. I have shared explicit permission with OTRS, even though it says that is unnecessary for images the uploader owns the copyright for. I appreciate your concern for the copyright holder, but in this case it's over-zealous. Confirmation can be found here: https://www.goultralow.com/press-centre/photos-videos/ Regards, Jack - Go Ultra Low Jdodavies (talk)
you deleted photos of my band aphses
hello I want to tell you aphses are my band I have all rights of my band please put back my photos are the history of my band check mail email profile and facebook thanks
email jesusarturo_ze@hotmail.com facebook https://www.facebook.com/jesus.aphses — Preceding unsigned comment added by Hellcat666 (talk • contribs) 22:23, 16 July 2016 (UTC)
- Hello, read first our policies about the licensing and about our project scope. The copyright owner of the deleted images must send a permission to OTRS, and the files will be undeleted as soon as a valid permission will be received and checked. However some of your deleted images are photomontage including wallpapers like this one and there is a significant doubt that you can not get permission to reuse this kind of image under the licensing allowed here. Regards, Christian Ferrer (talk) 05:58, 17 July 2016 (UTC)
Deleteing the rah ahan logo
Hello there,
I hope I can get in contact with you via this platform, as I am very new to Wikipedia. You deleted the rah ahan logo because of a possible copyright violation. I do work for Rah ahan and we do have the copyright for this logo, so I would kindly like to ask you to put it up again.
My contact details are as follows:
Christian Happel
Chief Revenue Officer Rah ahan Yazdan FC ---
Mobile: +98 912 069 1967 Mail: christian.happel@rahahanyazdan.com Web: www.rahahanyazdan.com Telegram: christianhappel Skype: christian.happel
Central office: Yazdan Holding, c/o Christian Happel, Floor 2, No 7, Khodadad alley, Bayandariha st, Akbari blv, Sama sq, Jenah st, Azadi sq, Tehran, Iran
Stadium office: Rah ahan Yazdan FC, Derakhshan complex , Saba Battery factory, Saba Shahr, Iran. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bud1977 (talk • contribs) 20:33, 17 July 2016 (UTC)
- Hello, we do not accept complex logos without an explicit permission from the copyright owner. This permission must be sent to OTRS and the logo will be undeleted as soon as a valid permission will be received and checked. Christian Ferrer (talk) 04:39, 18 July 2016 (UTC)
Reasons to delete File:Oficialniat.png
Hello @ Christian Ferrer. You have deleted this file as copyright infringement. This file is my personal work and does not exist anywhere on the Internet except my personal web site. Even the image it is processed by men. Please he be reinstated as it is my logo and its deletion would violate my copyright. Greeting --Oficialniat (talk) 20:34, 17 July 2016 (UTC)
- Hello, we do not accept complex logos without an explicit permission from the copyright owner. Read first our policy about our project scope, if you're sure that the file meet the criteria to be in scope, then the copyright owner of the logo, likely an official of the web site, must send a permission to OTRS, and the file will be undeleted as soon as a valid permission will be received and checked. Regards, Christian Ferrer (talk) 04:46, 18 July 2016 (UTC)
Hello @ Christian Ferrer. Privacy handed the copyright owner at: permissions-commons@wikimedia.org. Address link on my personal website and who is registered in Wikipedia are identical, and is proof of the ownership on my site and the image of the logo of "Oficialniat". My ticket is # 2016071810020956. Thanks for guidance. --Oficialniat (talk) 15:00, 18 July 2016 (UTC)
- Ok, then when and if the OTRS volunteer accepts your statement, it will be restored. Please note that OTRS, like Commons, is all volunteers, and, also like Commons, is badly understaffed, so it may be several weeks before the image can be restored. Christian Ferrer (talk) 17:41, 18 July 2016 (UTC)
- Thanks for understanding @ Christian Ferrer. I'll wait. --Oficialniat (talk) 17:57, 18 July 2016 (UTC)
Hello
Hello Christian Ferrer. I uploaded other files too: Orange logo.png, Sakamoto logo.png, Date A Live anime logo.png and others. Will be these files deleted? And I want know that why files like this aren't deleted?--White DemΩn (talk) 12:11, 19 July 2016 (UTC)
- Hello @White Demon: I think File:Orange logo.png, File:Date A Live anime logo.png are simple enough to be free of copyright (below TOO), File:Sakamoto logo.png is more questionable because the design seems a bit more complex, but I am not a specialist of the language...the last one is copyrightable because there is a drawing on it therefore it is not ok for us without a permission from the copyright owner, I'm going to delete it. Christian Ferrer (talk) 12:19, 19 July 2016 (UTC)
- Thank you for the response and information about TOO. If so, you must delete this file uploaded by me too, mustn't you?--White DemΩn (talk) 12:48, 19 July 2016 (UTC)
- @White Demon: Yes indeed a complex drawing, which is an artwork, was included in the logo, and it comes from an unfree source, thanks for the notification, I deleted it. Christian Ferrer (talk) 18:13, 19 July 2016 (UTC)
About my contribution
Hi There ! I would want to clarify that this work belongs to us as we took it directly from the photographer of these pictures and nobody else holds the copyright on these pictures. Could you please clarify on how it is copyright violation? Thank you ... --Ch.th (talk) 18:54, 19 July 2016 (UTC)
- Hi, all content that have been previously published somewhere must have a free license, or the permission must be send to us. Almost deleted photos comes, or at least can be found in [1] where they where previously published without a free license to allow us to reuse these photos. - A previous publication without an explicit free license = all right reserved - Also some other photos, as your last uploads, can also be found previously published in several other web sites. If you have a permission from the copyright owners of the photos, then the copyright owner must send the permission to OTRS and if the OTRS volunteer accepts your statement the files will be undeleted. Please note that OTRS, like Commons, is all volunteers, and, also like Commons, is badly understaffed, so it may be several weeks before the image can be restored. Christian Ferrer (talk) 19:12, 19 July 2016 (UTC)
- Well ! The point is understood. Do you mean to say that the OTRS has to be obtained by the owner of the particular Google Plus profile owner? If the respective profile owner sends the email to OTRS in respective template, will that be okay ?? Please let me know. Thanks ! --Ch.th (talk) 19:27, 19 July 2016 (UTC)
- Yes I think it would be ok, to the extent that these images have not been published in other websites (or films, or magazines) before that in the Google Plus profile. And in the extent that the owner of the particular Google Plus profile owner have the legal right (or is the copyright owner) to attribute licenses for the photos. Another point, you said below "Also, neither myself nor the owner wants to use these pictures for commercial usage", be aware that if you publish the photos here on Wikimedia Commons, you give a license that allow commercial reuse and such publication will be irrevocable. Christian Ferrer (talk) 04:48, 20 July 2016 (UTC)
- Thanks for the info. It is fine that anybody else can use it after it is contributed on WikiMedia Commons. Shall get the things done as per your advice. Thanks ! --Ch.th (talk) 05:34, 20 July 2016 (UTC)
- Yes I think it would be ok, to the extent that these images have not been published in other websites (or films, or magazines) before that in the Google Plus profile. And in the extent that the owner of the particular Google Plus profile owner have the legal right (or is the copyright owner) to attribute licenses for the photos. Another point, you said below "Also, neither myself nor the owner wants to use these pictures for commercial usage", be aware that if you publish the photos here on Wikimedia Commons, you give a license that allow commercial reuse and such publication will be irrevocable. Christian Ferrer (talk) 04:48, 20 July 2016 (UTC)
- Well ! The point is understood. Do you mean to say that the OTRS has to be obtained by the owner of the particular Google Plus profile owner? If the respective profile owner sends the email to OTRS in respective template, will that be okay ?? Please let me know. Thanks ! --Ch.th (talk) 19:27, 19 July 2016 (UTC)
- Hello Christian, please note that the email from the above mentioned Google+ account has been sent to the 'permissions-commons' address in the respective template as mentioned. Also, the owner has granted the permission to use the images from their owned other portals/pages/websites too. Request you to do the necessary to undelete the images which were deleted earlier. Thanks ! --Ch.th (talk) 08:49, 29 July 2016 (UTC)
- Hello, I can not do any more and I am not an OTRS volunteer. If the permission have been sent, and if the OTRS volunteer accepts the statement the files will be automatically undeleted. Please note that OTRS, like Commons, is all volunteers, and, also like Commons, is badly understaffed, so it may be several weeks before the image can be restored. Regards, Christian Ferrer (talk) 11:47, 29 July 2016 (UTC)
About my contribution of pictures
Hello There ! Are you just guessing that it must be copyright violation or could you please provide any evidences to state so? I have taken these pictures directly from the owner of these pictures and applied for the copyrights with Commons. Also, neither myself nor the owner wants to use these pictures for commercial usage. We want these pictures be able to freely distributed. If somebody else has applied for the copyrights on these, it is a conspiracy, which we want to dispute.
Thanks ! --Ch.th (talk) 19:01, 19 July 2016 (UTC)
FP Promotion
_--_2015_--_4668-70.jpg) |
★ This image has been promoted to Featured picture! ★
The image File:Lüdinghausen, Berenbrock, Dortmund-Ems-Kanal (an der Kreisstraße 23) -- 2015 -- 4668-70.jpg, that you nominated on Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Lüdinghausen, Berenbrock, Dortmund-Ems-Kanal (an der Kreisstraße 23) -- 2015 -- 4668-70.jpg has been promoted. Thank you for your contribution. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so. |
|
_--_2015_--_4668-70.jpg){kind=link}
/FPCBot (talk) 21:03, 19 July 2016 (UTC)
Motoalbaida01
Los carteles son propiedad del Mc. Ciutat d'Albaida. El Mc. esta autorizado como organizador de la prueba a la utilización del cartel del Campeonato de Mundo para la promoción del Motoclub, del Circuito y del Campeonato en cualquier medio de difusión. Un saludo — Preceding unsigned comment added by Motoalbaida (talk • contribs) 11:39, 20 July 2016 (UTC)
- El moto club de Ciutat d'Albaida must send the permission to OTRS and if the OTRS volunteer accepts the statement the files will be undeleted. Please note that OTRS, like Commons, is all volunteers, and, also like Commons, is badly understaffed, so it may be several weeks before the image can be restored. Regards, Christian Ferrer (talk) 11:46, 20 July 2016 (UTC)
GSI Mariner
Thank you for the critique. I will take a look at the raw file again ... I see what might be really subtle dust spots, but I'm not sure if those were in fact where I got rid of some worse ones (I should really sit down and take one of those dust-off ref photos; every summer I have this problem. But on the other hand, if I didn't contribute to FPC so much I probably wouldn't even have learned to notice them. Daniel Case (talk) 20:09, 21 July 2016 (UTC)
Hey Recently I uploaded a image named webedict as it got deleted but it was a logo of that company. How can I upload that image without violating copyright — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bhumil777 (talk • contribs) 20:37, 22 July 2016 (UTC)
- The deleted file include a simple text (no copyright) and in its background this image, which can be found previously in the web without an evidence it can be uploaded here under a compatible license. You must have the permission from the copyright owner of the image, ask him to send the permission to OTRS, after that if the OTRS volunteer accepts your statement and if the image fall inside our project scope then the file will be undeleted. Christian Ferrer (talk) 20:50, 22 July 2016 (UTC)
FP Promotion
 |
★ This image has been promoted to Featured picture! ★
The image File:Hamburg, Speicherstadt, Wasserschloss -- 2016 -- 3265-71.jpg, that you nominated on Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Hamburg, Speicherstadt, Wasserschloss -- 2016 -- 3265-71.jpg has been promoted. Thank you for your contribution. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so. |
|
/FPCBot (talk) 21:01, 22 July 2016 (UTC)
Quality Image Promotion
,_S%C3%A8te_cf01.jpg) |
Your image has been reviewed and promoted
Congratulations! Jolie Biche (ship, 1956), Sète cf01.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
|
 |
Your image has been reviewed and promoted
Congratulations! Ships of Catalonia, Sète cf01.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
|
--QICbot (talk) 05:28, 23 July 2016 (UTC)
Quality Image Promotion
 |
Your image has been reviewed and promoted
Congratulations! Canal de Sète cf01.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
|
,_S%C3%A8te_cf02.jpg) |
Your image has been reviewed and promoted
Congratulations! Jolie Biche (ship, 1956), Sète cf02.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
|
--QICbot (talk) 05:22, 25 July 2016 (UTC)
copyrightbreach
Why copyrightbreach? There is no copyrightbreach. I have the copyright of this files (LesArt Logo mit Schrift klein.jpg, Wikland Plakat.jpg, Der-rote-elefant allgemein.jpg). I don't understand, what the problem is. I designed the logo, i designed the poster, I designed the cover. And my employer is intrested in publishing the things to document the work. --Kinderbuchfreund (talk) 12:08, 26 July 2016 (UTC)
- For a publication under the licenses allowed here, all artworks above TOO need an evidence the first publication was/is free, or the permission from the copyright owner must be send to OTRS. As exemple for the logo, an officer of this web site can give the permission. If you have a permission from the copyright owners (or even if you are the copyright owner) of the artworks, then the copyright owner must send the permission to OTRS and if the OTRS volunteer accepts your statement the files will be undeleted. Please note that OTRS, like Commons, is all volunteers, and, also like Commons, is badly understaffed, so it may be several weeks before the image can be restored.
You have re-uploaded 4 four times the same deleted logo, the next time you take the risk of being blocked of editing. Christian Ferrer (talk) 17:39, 26 July 2016 (UTC)
RE:
Thank you for your job!!, I am continuing taking photos, so I am trying to get the best as possible Ezarateesteban 22:40, 26 July 2016 (UTC)
Quality Image Promotion
 |
Your image has been reviewed and promoted
Congratulations! Quai de la République, Sète, Hérault 03.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
|
,_S%C3%A8te_cf03.jpg) |
Your image has been reviewed and promoted
Congratulations! Marité (ship, 1923), Sète cf03.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
|
 |
Your image has been reviewed and promoted
Congratulations! Salagou Lake, Celles cf02.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
|
--QICbot (talk) 05:31, 27 July 2016 (UTC)
Deleted content
Hello Christian Ferrer, you deleted content (artwork) on wiki page https://cs.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alexandr_Skalick%C3%BD_st. This content was provided by author himself and it was described in columns during uploading. First time when the content was deleted, author himself sent email to info-cs@wikimedia.org (Thursday, July 7, 2016 8:14 AM from email skalicky@a-skalicky.cz ) with permission to every single file:
"souhlasím s tím, aby tato moje fotografie byla zveřejněna prostřednictvím Wikimedia Commons (https://cs.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alexandr_Skalick%C3%BD_st.#/media/File:Alexandr_Skalick%C3%BD_st.1986.jpg) pod licencí Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International (zkrácené české znění: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/deed.cs; plné znění: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/legalcode). Beru na vědomí, že toto dílo může být libovolně upravováno a přebíráno dalšími stranami k jakémukoli účelu včetně komerčních."
This permission is according to "help page", license tag was chosen as the most suitable from "help page".
Despite of this authors permission, files were deleted. (I don´t even know why his email was not accepted.) So I uploaded files again and explicitly wrote that it is from author himself and he will send email with permission (files has different name, thus another permission email) - deleted again. Author did not have even a chance to send his second permission email.
This is not copyright violation, this is misunderstanding, apparently. Could you help me with this, please? Abakusus — Preceding unsigned comment added by Abakusus (talk • contribs) 06:49, 27 July 2016 (UTC)
- Hello @Abakusus: , I already noticed you said to have permissions for the files however it remains copyright violations until that the permissions have not been officially accepted. You said "author himself sent email to info-cs@wikimedia.org", I'm not sure the author send the permission to the right place. You must read OTRS and follow the instructions. You (or the author) can provide too the names of the deleted files in the mail and if the OTRS volunteer accepts your statement the files will be undeleted. Please note that OTRS, like Commons, is all volunteers, and, also like Commons, is badly understaffed, so it may be several weeks before the image can be restored. Regards, Christian Ferrer (talk) 11:47, 27 July 2016 (UTC)
Quality Image Promotion
 |
Your image has been reviewed and promoted
Congratulations! Wagon à Escale à Sète cf01.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
|
--QICbot (talk) 05:22, 28 July 2016 (UTC)
Deletion
Please delete this file File:Noptile de Sanziene 1934.jpg I uploaded in the wrong place. Thanks. --Haptokar (talk) 04:39, 29 July 2016 (UTC)
- Would you help me? --Haptokar (talk) 04:54, 29 July 2016 (UTC)
- Done in Commons:Deletion requests/File:Noptile de Sanziene 1934.jpg Christian Ferrer (talk) 11:40, 29 July 2016 (UTC)
FP Promotion
 |
★ This image has been promoted to Featured picture! ★
The image File:Agra 03-2016 14 Agra Fort.jpg, that you nominated on Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Agra 03-2016 14 Agra Fort.jpg has been promoted. Thank you for your contribution. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so. |
|
/FPCBot (talk) 05:01, 29 July 2016 (UTC)
Quality Image Promotion
 |
Your image has been reviewed and promoted
Congratulations! Liausson, Hérault cf01.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
|
--QICbot (talk) 05:14, 29 July 2016 (UTC)
Deletion Soudage orbital photos
Hello Christian Ferrer. You deleted these files because of copyright infringement. These pictures belong to us and we hold the copyright of them. Could you please explain what we need to to in order to ensure that these pictures are reinstated? Many thanks — Preceding unsigned comment added by Polysoude Nantes (talk • contribs) 09:29, 29 July 2016 (UTC)
- Hello, your uploads have been deleted because they can be found previously on the web. In order to restore them, the copyright owner must send a permission at OTRS, and if the OTRS volunteer accepts your statement the files will be undeleted. Please note that OTRS, like Commons, is all volunteers, and, also like Commons, is badly understaffed, so it may be several weeks before the image can be restored. Regards, Christian Ferrer (talk) 11:38, 29 July 2016 (UTC)
Hello, I am fully aware of the limitations and in light of those I included the explanation for the use, the source, and that I have written consent for it. I will be writing articles about the publisher NGO at two ecnyclopedias, English and Serbian. Because of it I thought Commons is the right place to publish. And there will be some more material about the activities of the NGO.
I would appreciate that you tell me exactly what else to include in the explanation of the file's license for the tag to be gone?
Is it necessary that I forward my mail (conversation in Serbian language) to the OTRS system? I ask because, as I understand it, the procedure is due only when the source of the file is unknown. This one is openly accessible on the web page of the organization, and I attached the link. Or I can get a letter of consent in English, if needed, but where to send it? Thank You in advance. /Jozefsu (talk) 18:37, 30 July 2016 (UTC)
- Hello @Jozefsu: I noticed the link however the web site show "© Sva prava zadržana 2009", you must follow Commons:OTRS#If you are NOT the copyright holder Christian Ferrer (talk) 18:51, 30 July 2016 (UTC)
Thank You for the prompt answer, I am writing to the organization with the explanation given, and will submit to OTRS-Jozefsu (talk) 19:00, 30 July 2016 (UTC)
Hi Christian, I read your message about the image I uploaded. I took that photograph of my own personal copy of the book. How should I upload the photo in order to not be deleted? I'm preparing an article about this book. Thanks in advance. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bclavellina (talk • contribs) 20:48, 01 August 2016 (UTC)
- Bclavellina, we required that the copyright owner permission being send to us. Read OTRS and more particularly the section "If you are NOT the copyright holder". Usually, in a case of a book cover, I think the rights belong to the book editor. Another option for you is to upload the book cover for "fair use" directly in the local Wikipedia in which to write the article, in that case the best is to read help sections in this Wikipedia, or to ask some help there. "Fair use" is not allowed here. Regards, Christian Ferrer (talk) 04:43, 2 August 2016 (UTC)
Hey
I do not appreciate the fact that you have taken down my pictures. The pictures that i have uploaded are collages that i made on my own and so they are not copyright infringements. Your actions have cost me as this work was a part of my university assignment. — Preceding unsigned comment added by BboyGJD (talk • contribs) 15:47, 03 August 2016 (UTC)
- @BboyGJD: Please read Commons:Collages. A collage is a derivative work of the included materials, and so they must be freely licensed (or public domain) and attributed correctly. Reventtalk 23:46, 3 August 2016 (UTC)
Did you want an apology...
You left an angry sounding warning. After I referred to you by your last name. Did you really want an apology for this? Okay, I apologize, I was trying to avoid using a gender-based pronoun, not to be offensive.
Your note was written as if this was merely the last final warning, in a series. But, fwiw, I have no recollection of us ever interacting before.
Cheers! Geo Swan (talk) 21:08, 3 August 2016 (UTC)
- No need to apologize, do not do it again, that's all. Regards, Christian Ferrer (talk) 04:48, 4 August 2016 (UTC)
Quality Image Promotion
,_S%C3%A8te_cf02.jpg) |
Your image has been reviewed and promoted
Congratulations! Santa Maria Manuela (ship, 1937), Sète cf02.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
|
--QICbot (talk) 05:17, 4 August 2016 (UTC)
Could you please be more careful...
In the discussion fora on WMF projects we use indentation so readers can tell who is responding to what. There are three characters we use for indentation, that each work a bit differently, requiring care, when they are used together.
In this edit you placed your comment in the middle of an existing discussion, rather than at the end -- the conventional place.
In addition, since you used a different indentation prefix, it mashed up the indentation on the comments that followed -- making it look like it was those commenters who didn't know how to leave comments.
I moved your comment to its conventional place.
Could you please be more careful to follow the conventions, in future?
Thanks! Geo Swan (talk) 15:54, 4 August 2016 (UTC)
Logo of Ako Bicol
Why did you delete the logo of Ako Bicol? Please explain. Clearly the org has allowed its use by using the logo itself in said arfticle.Ringer (talk) 05:42, 5 August 2016 (UTC)
- This is a complex logo, then it is copyrightable. There was no evidence the owner have agreed to a publication under the licenses allowed here. Please read and follow the instruction at OTRS in case you need to upload copyrightable content you are not the owner. Christian Ferrer (talk) 11:24, 5 August 2016 (UTC)
Some of the pictures by Cherkes Ive posted can be deleted
Hi Christian, Thank You to let me know about my mistakes I might be making while creating my page about a very talented painter - Cherkes Daniil. The point is I`m awfully stupid about writing such articles via Wikipedia though it is a widely used and an extremely successful project. As for the pictures I posted, they are the reproduction from paintings by Cherkes. He died in 1971. And of course speaking about the artist one can`t help telling about and at the same time showing his works. Those pictures were put in the book about Cherkess - I just made scans from them. but while putting them at my page I could not post them without saying "They belong to me" - since there is the only form to post them at Wikipedi. Certainly, I didn`t draw them myself (If did I would be famous, I guess). I just took pictures of them - to be more precise - scans of them. To tell the truth I`d be really thankful if the Wikiaudience showed understanding - a page about an artist is impossible without his works. And I would be very thankful for some advice from You as an expert in the field - what is the way to place scan of the painter`s works at the page if the pictures of them had been published before and of course I make reference to each either quotation or picture I make use of in my article. I am always very much respectful to authurs whose rights I would never like to violate.
Faithfully Yours --StepanStepanStepan (talk) 21:16, 5 August 2016 (UTC)
- Hi StepanStepanStepan, if the artist is died in 1971, then the painting are not yet in public domain, usually it's 70 year after the artist death. The only way for you to upload the files here is to have the permission(s) from the current copyrigh owner(s) of the paintings and to ask them they send the permission to OTRS, generally these are his heirs if he has. Regards,
Similar cases
Thanks for closing this deletion request. I've found some other cases which needs intervention of admins like you. There are three Emblem in this category. They are correctly nominated for deletion by User:INeverCry. However, as you see this file is apparently that of ISIL and this one has used the former as the source of inspiration. So, both of the are that of ISIL. Finally, this Emblem, which is closely similar to the two other, is dubiously alleged to be created by Monotheist. Please address them. --Mhhossein (talk) 05:40, 8 August 2016 (UTC)
Emblem of FC Germanea.png
Hello Christian.
I just noticed that you deleted image Emblem_OF_FC_Germanea.png and gave me a last warning not to upload such files. However, I do see numerous football club emblems in Wikipedia Commons that have been uploaded in the same manner and have not been deleted. I am not questioning the copyright of this image as it is obvious that it belongs to the club, but that image was meant to depict the logo of the very same club that holds the copyright. Isn't that allowed? Apparently, it is judging by the other logos on the site.
Instead of just deleting the image, which is only meant to raise the profile of the page, could you tell me how such images should be uploaded and why so many other club logos are present in Commons and have not been deleted? --Footballer99 (talk) 19:13, 8 August 2016 (UTC)
- Hello @Footballer99: , there are indeed a lot copyright violations uploaded every days on Wikimedia Commons without permission, some are quickly deleted some less quickly. Logos are indeed protected by copyright. To be uploaded here under the licenses allowed, the logo (or other copyrighted content):
- must be under threshold of originality in his country of origin.
- or must be freely licensed by the copyright owner at it's source, e.g. the football club website
- or must be in public domain for some reason
- or the copyright owner, e.g. the football club, send a permission to OTRS
- another solution is to upload the logo, or the non free content directly, to your local Wikipedia under fair use, I'm not a specialist in these questions and you will have to ask people there, or read the relevant policies.
Christian Ferrer (talk) 19:41, 8 August 2016 (UTC)
Thank you for the detailed explanation, Christian. I could indeed upload the logo to my local Wikipedia, but I will not be able to use it in future pages in other languages. Will it be acceptable to have it in the Commons based on a low threshold of originality? After all, it is a rather simple logo with vector graphics and text. If that is OK, I will go ahead with a request to undelete, but will wait for your response first. --Footballer99 (talk) 19:58, 8 August 2016 (UTC)
- I think it is above threshold of originality, and it is why I deleted it, there are some kind of drawings that seems enough complex to be copyrightable. I did not delete File:FC Sofia Emblem.png because it is more simple and I think it is below threshold of originality. Fell free to ask for an undeletion request if you think I made a mistake. Christian Ferrer (talk) 20:07, 8 August 2016 (UTC)
Very well. In that case will go ahead with an undelete request. If it is not approved, I will have no choice but to upload it to the local Wikipedia, if it still allows it. Doesn't look like it does though. Thanks again.
--Footballer99 (talk) 20:46, 8 August 2016 (UTC)
Hey @Christian Ferrer: . Do you think you can help me with my un-delete request? They closed the discussion rather quickly, before I had a chance to respond, even though there are numerous similar images on Commons below the threshold. Plus our local Wikipedia no longer allows images to be uploaded to pages. If you are willing to make a comment not opposing the deletion, it could be of help. Link is below.
https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Undeletion_requests#File:Emblem_Of_FC_Germanea.png
--Footballer99 (talk) 15:41, 9 August 2016 (UTC)
- @Footballer99: At this time, they have just said their opinion and the undeletion request is not yet closed. By opening a request there you asked for the opinion(s) of other administrator(s), and now you have it : they confirmed my opinion. Furthermore they are both experimented administrators. Sadly I can not do more, your exemple File:Nikken Logo.jpg is in my opinion more simple than the logo of the football club. Christian Ferrer (talk) 17:56, 9 August 2016 (UTC)
Thank you anyway @Christian Ferrer: . They already closed the discussion. That's too bad, because Germanea is an up-and-coming club and having its logo on its page would have raised its profile. --Footballer99 (talk) 20:23, 11 August 2016 (UTC)
After your warning yesterday, he continued on with bullshit like this: Commons:Deletion requests/Files uploaded by Kishanbhowmik1988. I don't want to see him bully Ellin off Commons, so I've blocked him indefinitely. He's a net-negative for Commons if you ask me. A nuisance we don't need. I'm sure there'll be fireworks over this block, but Ellin doesn't deserve to be downright stalked by this individual. INeverCry 20:25, 8 August 2016 (UTC)
FP Promotion
 |
★ This image has been promoted to Featured picture! ★
The image File:Haut-Languedoc, Rosis cf03.jpg, that you nominated on Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Haut-Languedoc, Rosis cf03.jpg has been promoted. Thank you for your contribution. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so. |
|
/FPCBot (talk) 21:01, 8 August 2016 (UTC)
FP Promotion
 |
★ This image has been promoted to Featured picture! ★
The image File:Passerelle du Moulin de l'Evêque, Montpellier cf01.jpg, that you nominated on Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Passerelle du Moulin de l'Evêque, Montpellier cf01.jpg has been promoted. Thank you for your contribution. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so. |
|
/FPCBot (talk) 21:02, 8 August 2016 (UTC)
Incendies
Salut,
Je vois que de graves incendies ravagent non seulement la région marseillaise, mais aussi l'Hérault, même si ça semble se calmer par chez toi à l'heure où je t'écris. J'espère juste que tu vas bien, et que les beaux paysages que tu nous offres si souvent n'auront pas été trop abimés !
Bien cordialement, --Jebulon (talk) 21:40, 10 August 2016 (UTC)
- @Jebulon: merci je vais bien, j'ai appris la nouvelle des incendies au nord de Béziers et des pompiers blessés ce matin en me levant à la radio. A Sète et ses alentours direct nous n'avons pas été touchés par de graves incendies, bien qu'il y a eu quelque champs brulés mais vite maitrisés. Merci beaucoup pour ce message. Christian Ferrer (talk) 04:53, 11 August 2016 (UTC)
- My pleasure ! Je pense que faire un petit coucou aux copains quant on sait qu'ils peuvent avoir un souci (tant mieux si ça n'est pas le cas!), ça ne coûte pas grand chose et ça fait en général plaisir... C'est la troisième partie de notre devise nationale, et c'est la plus difficile à mettre en oeuvre, car elle suppose l'action de chacun. La Liberté se conquiert contre l'arbitraire, tout comme l'Égalité, qui est un combat contre la tyrannie. Mais la Fraternité, c'est aux hommes, libres et égaux, de la mettre en œuvre entre eux ! On en manque un peu, ces temps-ci, je trouve...--Jebulon (talk) 09:53, 11 August 2016 (UTC)
- Bien sur, la fraternité est une question d'honneur, ou ça devrait l'être! Christian Ferrer (talk) 11:23, 11 August 2016 (UTC)
Tarzan and the Comics of Idaho Covers
Hi Christian. I uploaded some covers for the comic books produced by Idaho Comics Group on it's Wikipedia page. I think that they were mistakenly taken down. I own the covers so they are fine to use on Wikipedia. Is there something else that I need to do in order to get them placed back on the page? Please let me know. Thanks! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Catpoptv (talk • contribs) 21:28, 12 August 2016 (UTC)
- Hi @Catpoptv: , to own physically a Comics book don't make you the copyright owner on any part of this book. Only "Idaho Comics Group" have the right to chose a license for a work belonging to them. The only ways to can upload these files here on Wikimedia Commons is to show an evidence that "Idaho Comics Group" have published themselves these works under a license compatible for us. Or they must follow the instructions written at com:OTRS. Regards, Christian Ferrer (talk) 10:03, 13 August 2016 (UTC)
Hi Christian. Although I do physically own copies of these comic books, I actually own the rights to the artwork as well. I am the publisher at Idaho Comics Group. So, how can we get these images back on the page? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Catpoptv (talk • contribs) 13:54, 13 August 2016 (UTC)
- If you're the rights owner of the artworks you must send a permission by e-mail, more precisely follow the instructions you can read at "Licensing images: when do I contact OTRS?", please include in your mail a link to your talk page to help the OTRS volunteer to find the pictures in question. And if the OTRS volunteer accepts your statement the files will be restored. Please note that OTRS, like Commons, is all volunteers, and, also like Commons, is badly understaffed, so it may be several weeks before the image can be restored. Christian Ferrer (talk) 14:32, 13 August 2016 (UTC)
demandes de suppression
Bonjour
Je viens de demander la suppression de plusieurs images.
Ces images proviennent du blog (non-officiel) de Radio Courtoisie, où elles sont mises au statut "licence libre", sans indication du nom du photographe. Cela ne me semble pas garantir que ce blog respecte le droit des auteurs.
Pour information, cordialement
--Droit de retrait 03 (talk) 14:49, 15 August 2016 (UTC)
deletion of pictures
Hello Christian, You just deleted the following image files I had uploaded: Just Listen Cover.jpg, Just Listen Inside1.jpg, Just Listen Inside3.jpg, Just Listen Song List.jpg, Just Listen Thank You.jpg
All 5 above images are the actual cover art and enclosures for the Album Just Listen by Reza Sadeghi. I am in the process of creating the page for this album in the Farsi language and uploaded the files so that I could work with them in the edit page before I finalize the article for review.
This is the article I am working on creating: https://fa.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=فقط_گوش_کن&action=edit&redlink=1
I need to use The entire cover: because the image is cover art, a form of product packaging, the entire image is needed to identify the product, properly convey the meaning and branding intended, and avoid tarnishing or misrepresenting the image.
The images will be used in the main inbox and additional photos that show song credits and Artist notes. The image is used for identification in the context of critical commentary of the work for which it serves as cover art. It makes a significant contribution to the user's understanding of the article, which could not practically be conveyed by words alone. The image is placed in the infobox at the top of the article discussing the work, to show the primary visual image associated with the work, and to help the user quickly identify the work and know they have found what they are looking for. Use for this purpose does not compete with the purposes of the original artwork, namely the artist's providing graphic design services to music concerns and in turn marketing music to the public.
As musical cover art, the image is not replaceable by free content; any other image that shows the packaging of the music would also be copyrighted, and any version that is not true to the original would be inadequate for identification or commentary.
I believe Use of the cover art in the article complies with Wikipedia non-free content policy and fair use under United States copyright law as described above.
I appreciate your help in undeleting these images so that I can complete my article.
Thank You Niloufar sab (talk) 07:30, 18 August 2016 (UTC)
- Hello @Niloufar sab: to be uploaded here, all medias previously published, in this case images of covers or of enclosures of albums, need evidence the first publication was under a license allowed for us; or the copyright owner of the album, likely the publisher, must send a permission by mail to OTRS where you can read the instructions on how to do this. Otherwise uploading these images here, on Commons, will be a copyright violation. It's true you can upload this kind of content in English Wikipedia or maybe in your local Wikipedia for fair use. In summary if the copyright owner of the album send the permission, then the files will be undeleted. Hope this help. Regards, Christian Ferrer (talk) 11:56, 18 August 2016 (UTC)
-Christan Thank you for all your efforts in making wikipedia a copy right free environment. As a new contributor I am working to understand my way around the site and it's rules and am doing my due diligence to create an article that will be effective. Please look at this article for Jennifer Lopez's album Como Ama Una Mujer https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Como_Ama_una_Mujer The image used here has the same issue as the images for the cover of the album I want to use. please see the image details at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Como_Ama_una_Mujer.png There is no proof provided that the image was owned by Epic Records, it is mentioned as the source. this is the same case for Mariah Caryey's Album "Me I am Maria" cover art: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Me._I_Am_Mariah..._The_Elusive_Chanteuse and the picture info at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Mariah_Carey_-_Me_I_Am_Mariah_(Official_Album_Cover).png If you could please look at this page on Beeptunes which is the authorized digital distributor for the purchase of the Just Listen album you will see that the publisher has provided all 5 pictures of the cover and insides of the album http://beeptunes.com/album/249451036 I understand that the original upload of the 5 images did not have all the rationale that was necessary to show proof for the copy rights but if you would undelete the pictures then I can add the explanations just like they did for the Jennifer Lopez & Mariah Carey album covers. Please advise as to how I can have the 5 images undeleted so that I can create the article for Reza Sadeghi's Just Listen (فقط گوش کن) Album Niloufar sab (talk) 18:54, 18 August 2016 (UTC)
.png){kind=link}
- [2] and [3] are uploaded on Wikipedia but not in Wikimedia Commons, for some cases Wikipedia allow fair use of Non-free media but not Wikimedia Commons, those files uploaded here will be deleted as well. If your files are relevant for the Wikipedia project you can try to upload these files on Wikipedia for fair use, though I'm not a specialist nor about Wikipedia policies neither about the Non-free_use_rationale. I suggest you read fist their Non-free_use_rationale_guideline or to ask informations to an experimented user on Wikipedia. But on Wikimedia Commons the only way to undelete your file is the right owner send a permission. Christian Ferrer (talk) 04:58, 19 August 2016 (UTC)
Copyright violation problem
I uploaded few of book covers images to commons. but that files deleted by notifying as Copyright violation problem. how can i upload that files without Copyright violation problem. please help me. ---Suroiranga (talk) 08:03, 18 August 2016 (UTC)
- The only way is the copyright owner(s) of the books send permission(s) to OTRS. Christian Ferrer (talk) 11:59, 18 August 2016 (UTC)
Estibaliz Garcia (egargo):
Dear Christian, Why are you deleting my images ? where is your proof to delete them ?
Best wishes,
E. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Egargo (talk • contribs) 13:42, 18 August 2016 (UTC)
- The images were deleted after being nominated for deletion in this request, the rationale was "Books and promo photos. No evidence of permission(s).". As I agreed then I deleted the images. Books or parts of books are owned by their creators, or more likely by the editors, it is the responsibility of the uploader to provide evidences such files can be freely licensed. Regards, Christian Ferrer (talk) 18:57, 18 August 2016 (UTC)
FP Promotion
 |
★ This image has been promoted to Featured picture! ★
The image File:Building of the Salins de Frontignan 22.jpg, that you nominated on Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Building of the Salins de Frontignan 22.jpg has been promoted. Thank you for your contribution. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so. |
|
/FPCBot (talk) 21:01, 18 August 2016 (UTC)
FP Promotion
 |
★ This image has been promoted to Featured picture! ★
The image File:Sympetrum fonscolombii, female, Sète cf04.jpg, that you nominated on Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Sympetrum fonscolombii, female, Sète cf04.jpg has been promoted. Thank you for your contribution. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so. |
|
/FPCBot (talk) 05:06, 21 August 2016 (UTC)
your pictures
your pictures are really very good and impressive — Preceding unsigned comment added by Aishwarya nikalajy (talk • contribs)
- well...thank you, I'm glad :) Christian Ferrer (talk) 13:35, 22 August 2016 (UTC)
Per your reasoning here, I RDed a file apparently authored by ISIL and pinged you. But, the file was kept by Jcb maintaining that there was no valid deletion reason. I'm writing this to conclude a criteria based on which we can act for other similar files. Thanks. --Mhhossein talk 14:38, 22 August 2016 (UTC)
- The first time(s) I speedy deleted the files and this was, though entirely assumed, a bit arbitrary to do this without to let the request opened during seven days. I want to remain neutral and not to give the impression of abuse of my administrative rights, rights which are a duty in my point of view. This is why I did not answer when you pinged me. I decided to let the request opened, and to let the things go to their normal way, I mean opened 7 days, and honestly I had forgotten this request. Administrators may have different point of views, and maybe I would have closed this request in another way indeed. I am a volunteer, I like to do "what I want to do and to do so when I want", and I will appreciate that nobody ask me nor ping me to act in a specific way. Though I precise I don't doubt about your good faith. You're right on the fact that if it was me who closed the request, I would have deleted the file, both legally because of a copyright status in my opinion very unclear and of course on my personal point of view about this topic.....I hope I do not disappoint you too much by remaining indented. Best regards, Christian Ferrer (talk) 15:14, 22 August 2016 (UTC)
- Thanks for your response. I do understand what you said regarding the "arbitrary" things you do, administrative affairs as duties, and letting you do what you like to do. However, so what? What should we do for files authored by rebel/terrorist groups such as ISIL? --Mhhossein talk 06:54, 23 August 2016 (UTC)
- If it was only me, I will not keep this content on Commons, however we are a community and one can think it is a good idea to keep this kind of image, I mean one can think they have some educational and encyclopedic value, as informative medias. The extreme defenders of the neutral point of view can also have a word to say e.g. "who can decide what is legitimate or not?", maybe the solution is an open discussion at the village pump or even at the village pump/copyright to have the opinion(s) of law specialist(s), or to have a consensus in a way or in another. Christian Ferrer (talk) 11:48, 23 August 2016 (UTC)
- I took my voice to village pump/copyright. You can contribute, if you'd like. --Mhhossein talk 06:36, 24 August 2016 (UTC)
Query about a deletion of a picture
Hie Christian, you deleted a picture which i uploaded, ? I am new on wikipedia? can you give me some idea about how should i upload a image which copyright of producer of film, but if i am making a wiki page for that film, how will i use it.? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bbcaus (talk • contribs) 14:02, 23 August 2016 (UTC)
- Hi @Bbcaus: There is 2 ways to upload and use the file for the article. The first way is the copyright owner of the film, likely the editor, send a permission following the instructions written at OTRS. The second way is you upload directly the file on Wikipedia for fair use, as you can read there. Hope this help. Christian Ferrer (talk) 19:03, 23 August 2016 (UTC)
Quality Image Promotion
 |
Your image has been reviewed and promoted
Congratulations! Plage, Île Saint-Martin, Gruissan cf02.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
|
--QICbot (talk) 05:15, 24 August 2016 (UTC)
Hi
Hi Christian, I got your message. I am Nina Prommer the person that took the photo and owner of the image, could you please remove your violation of copyright? I gave wikipedia right to publish the image. Thank you! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Photographernina (talk • contribs) 05:29, 24 August 2016 (UTC)
- Hi, the photo have been previously published there with a clear statement at bottom "ALL RIGHTS RESERVED", therefore to upload it here without a proper permission or without a free source is a copyright violation. Christian Ferrer (talk) 11:17, 24 August 2016 (UTC)
deletion of Philippine State College of Aeronautics Logo.png
Hi Christian, you just have deleted the image that i've uploaded: Philippine State College of Aeronautics Logo.png
It is the official seal of the college and is used for this wikiedia page: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Philippine_State_College_of_Aeronautics
I am a student of that college and was given permission by the college admin to publish the revised seal of the college.
I appreciate your help in undeleting these images. Thanks! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Lawrence.ex (talk • contribs) 14:56, 24 August 2016 (UTC)
- If you have the permission then you must read and follow the instructions written in this section and the file will be undeleted. Regards, Christian Ferrer (talk) 17:26, 24 August 2016 (UTC)
Universitet Metro Station entrance, Kiev, Ukraine.jpg
Bonjour, je suis d'accord pour le retrait sur le critère des zones brûlées, j'aurai du m'en préoccuper dans le post-traitement. En revanche je ne suis pas d'accord en ce qui concerne une zone floue sur la gauche. Ceci est dû à l'usage d'un objectif grand-angle très ancien, mais je ne crois pas que cela impacte la qualité de la photo, en tout cas pour ce qu'elle montre. Cordialement, Albert. --Albert Bergonzo (talk) 19:10, 24 August 2016 (UTC)
- Bonjour, c'est vrai que la qualité des bordures d'une image prise avec un grand angle a toujours tendance à diminuer, meme avec les grand angle plus moderne, je te l'accorde. En revanche lorsque des zones ont été surexposées et "brulées" lors de la prise de la photo, l'appareil n'a pas enregistré de détails et aucun post-traitement ne saurait créer les détails qui n'ont pas été enregistrés par l'appareil. J'ai souvent tendance à être pointilleux, (peut-etre un peu trop?), et si tu estime que j'ai fais une erreur d'appréciation, tu peux envoyer l'image dans la section "Consensual Review", en changeant mon Decline" par "Discuss". Cordialement, Christian Ferrer (talk) 04:39, 25 August 2016 (UTC)
J'ai pensé à envoyer l'image pour discussion, mais comme j'ai trois temps d'exposition différents pour ce cliché, je vais d'abord voir si j'en ai un meilleur et poster une nouvelle version. Merci du conseil.--Albert Bergonzo (talk) 06:58, 25 August 2016 (UTC)
Quality Image Promotion
 |
Your image has been reviewed and promoted
Congratulations! Canal de La Peyrade, Sète cf01.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
|
 |
Your image has been reviewed and promoted
Congratulations! Scolymus hispanicus, Clermont-l'Hérault cf02.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
|
 |
Your image has been reviewed and promoted
Congratulations! Sympetrum fonscolombii, female, Sète cf01.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
|
--QICbot (talk) 05:18, 25 August 2016 (UTC)
Valued Image Promotion
,_S%C3%A8te_cf01.jpg){kind=small}
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:
,_S%C3%A8te_cf01.jpg){kind=link}
Abeille Flandre (tugboat, 1978).
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.
,_S%C3%A8te_cf01.jpg){kind=small}
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:
,_S%C3%A8te_cf01.jpg){kind=link}
Barhom II (ship, 1977).
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.
Triddana photos
All images and other media files, regarding the band Triddana, which are uploaded by me belong to the band Triddana which I am part of. The copyright license belongs to Triddana and their Members the images are used for free content.
Therefore there is no copyright violation taking place, please undelete this image and let me know if you need any further information.
Best regards --M.I.A. (talk) 12:41, 26 August 2016 (UTC)
- If you're a member of the group then you or an other official representative of the group must send a permission to OTRS, where you can read the instruction on how to do this. And if the OTRS volunteer accepts your statement the file will be restored. Please note that OTRS, like Commons, is all volunteers, and, also like Commons, is badly understaffed, so it may be several weeks before the image can be restored. Regards, Christian Ferrer (talk) 16:22, 26 August 2016 (UTC)
FP Promotion
 |
★ This image has been promoted to Featured picture! ★
The image File:Sympetrum fonscolombii, female, Sète cf06.jpg, that you nominated on Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Sympetrum fonscolombii, female, Sète cf06.jpg has been promoted. Thank you for your contribution. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so. |
|
/FPCBot (talk) 21:02, 26 August 2016 (UTC)
Quality Image Promotion
 |
Your image has been reviewed and promoted
Congratulations! Quai Louis Pasteur, Sète cf01.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
|
 |
Your image has been reviewed and promoted
Congratulations! Scolymus hispanicus, Clermont-l'Hérault cf01.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
|
 |
Your image has been reviewed and promoted
Congratulations! Sympetrum fonscolombii, female, Sète cf03.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
|
--QICbot (talk) 05:33, 27 August 2016 (UTC)
Image request
Hi, you deleted File:Library funnies (13878795085).jpg (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) earlier today, could you email me a copy? It's not visible on Flickr any more and I don't recall what it was about. Thanks --Fæ (talk) 10:28, 27 August 2016 (UTC)
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=history){kind=link}
.jpg&limit=999){kind=link}
.jpg&action=watch){kind=link}
Quality Image Promotion
 |
Your image has been reviewed and promoted
Congratulations! Douch, Rosis cf01.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
|
|
Your image has been reviewed and promoted
Congratulations! Sympetrum fonscolombii, female, Sète cf04.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
|
|
Your image has been reviewed and promoted
Congratulations! Abeille Flandre (tugboat, 1978), Sète cf01.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
|
--QICbot (talk) 05:16, 28 August 2016 (UTC)
Quality Image Promotion
|
Your image has been reviewed and promoted
Congratulations! Sympetrum fonscolombii, female, Sète cf06.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
|
 |
Your image has been reviewed and promoted
Congratulations! Boats in Canal de Sète cf01.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
|
--QICbot (talk) 05:25, 29 August 2016 (UTC)
Quality Image Promotion
 |
Your image has been reviewed and promoted
Congratulations! Sympetrum fonscolombii, female, Sète cf05.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
|
 |
Your image has been reviewed and promoted
Congratulations! Boats in Canal de Sète cf02.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
|
|
Your image has been reviewed and promoted
Congratulations! BARHOM II (ship, 1977), Sète cf01.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
|
--QICbot (talk) 05:10, 30 August 2016 (UTC)
deletion of pictures
Hi Christian You deleted my pictures of wiki commons.i added images in Wikipedia articles. Kindly tell which pictures i can use. These picture i received as free and can anyone use it.Please guide how can i use images for Wikipedia articles. Kambojharsangeet (talk) 17:17, 31 August 2016 (UTC)
- Hi Kambojharsangeet, to be uploaded here an image must be free licensed by its copyright owner, usualy it's the photographer who is the copyright owner. If an image found on the Web is not freely licensed then the copyright owner must send a permission to OTRS. How to know if an image is free, that's simple, it's explicitely written otherwise it is not free and can not be uploaded here. Christian Ferrer (talk) 19:37, 31 August 2016 (UTC)