User talk:Elisfkc/Archive 3

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

File:Disney's Art of Animation Resort (6989444704).jpg

File:Disney's Art of Animation Resort (6989444704).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!
Afrikaans ∙ Bahasa Indonesia ∙ bosanski ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ dansk ∙ Deutsch ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ ∙ eesti ∙ English ∙ español ∙ Esperanto ∙ français ∙ galego ∙ hrvatski ∙ íslenska ∙ italiano ∙ magyar ∙ Nederlands ∙ norsk bokmål ∙ norsk nynorsk ∙ occitan ∙ Plattdüütsch ∙ polski ∙ português ∙ português do Brasil ∙ română ∙ shqip ∙ sicilianu ∙ slovenčina ∙ slovenščina ∙ suomi ∙ svenska ∙ Tiếng Việt ∙ Türkçe ∙ Zazaki ∙ Ελληνικά ∙ беларуская ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ ∙ български ∙ македонски ∙ русский ∙ српски / srpski ∙ українська ∙ հայերեն ∙ বাংলা ∙ മലയാളം ∙ ပအိုဝ်ႏဘာႏသာႏ ∙ မြန်မာဘာသာ ∙ ไทย ∙ 조선말 ∙ 한국어 ∙ 日本語 ∙ 简体中文‎ ∙ 繁體中文‎ ∙ עברית ∙ العربية ∙ پښتو ∙ فارسی ∙ ދިވެހިބަސް ∙ +/−

TwoWings * to talk or not to talk... 19:21, 16 November 2016 (UTC)

Italy-Egypt 2009

Are you sure that these pictures about the match between Italy and Egypt haven't got the license ? --Captain Awesome (talk) 21:49, 16 November 2016 (UTC)

They are a great example of Flickr washing. Elisfkc (talk) 01:28, 17 November 2016 (UTC)

Image Reviewer right

Did you actually look at the licence on File:St Thomas Of Canterbury Roman Catholic Church, Arbroath.jpg ? It's my own work and should not have been tagged for deletion. This is a careless and negligent misuse of your image reviewer permission, please ensure in future you are more careful with the tagging of images. Nick (talk) 10:49, 21 November 2016 (UTC)

@Nick: I apologize. I saw the image was labeled by FlickreviewR 2 as being cc-by-nc-nd-2.0, which is what I then found on Flickr (I usually ignore the caption, since it does not normally have anything to do with the license). Having had many Flickr washing cases where the uploader tries (and fails) to pass as the Flickr uploader, I felt this was the best course of action, since it would notify you. In the previous Flickr washing cases, none of the Commons uploaders have then argued against this judgement, so the fact that you are doing so proves that this is not one of those cases. In the future, I would recommend tagging your uploads that have a Flickr link with {{license review}}, so Flock does not tag it with a {{flickrreview}} template to be reviewed by the bot, but is instead viewed more carefully, as well as stating where to find the release in the permission field. Once again, I am sorry for tagging your image as unfree. Elisfkc (talk) 21:12, 21 November 2016 (UTC)

Alex Stenzel

Please undelete both images they are owned by Alex Stenzel.

Thanks, --Vonlandsberg (talk) 07:43, 26 November 2016 (UTC)

File:Taylor-swift-SH.jpg

why did the File:Taylor-swift-SH.jpg was deleted? I am sure its from flicker and it is copyright free! --Super ninja2 (talk) 11:02, 26 November 2016 (UTC)

@Super ninja2: Because it wasn't copyright free. It was made to look that way through Flickr washing, but the image was actually from Getty Images. Elisfkc (talk) 16:11, 26 November 2016 (UTC)

Mushroomhead Images

Hi Elisfkc, I received your message over some pics I uploaded because they have watermarks. I personally sent a message to the Flickr user who took this photos and asked him to change the license to "CC BY 2.0" to use them in Wikipedia. As he agreed, I decided to modify those pictures under that license ("Adapt — remix, transform, and build upon the material"), some others I just uploeaded them with original size. So I was wondering if I could edit those pics to delete de watermark. Of course, I will still give Luis Blanco (the owner of this pics) full credit for them as I've done before when I first uploaded them.--Fallengrademan (talk) 19:34, 29 November 2016 (UTC)

@Fallengrademan: do you have proof of this conversation, specifically his agreement to change the license? Elisfkc (talk) 19:35, 29 November 2016 (UTC)
No, I don't. I agreed with him to change the licence in 2013. I've been in and out of Wikipedia for a while and I can't even remember my old e-mail which I used in Flickr. At that time I sent flicmails to a lot of Flickr users because there wasn't even a single pic of Mushroomhead in Wikipedia. I asked Luis Blanco to change the license in order for me to use them and modify them (or at least that's what the "CC-BY 2.0" license allows us to do). He gave me permission and then I upload a couple of them. It's been two years since I worked to improve the Mushroomhead Spanish Wikipedia article in my sandbox and I sincerily I had no problems before with watermarks. I understand modifying pics is a different deal but I thought that if I gave full credit to the owner of the pics and the fact that the CC-BY-2.0 license allows me to modify them then it would cause no problem.--Fallengrademan (talk) 19:55, 29 November 2016 (UTC)
@Fallengrademan: Ok, well it actually looks like Luis Blanco did change them and they did pass review. The note is only saying to please avoid uploading watermarked images. The only image that actually stands to be deleted is File:JMannLive1.png from Nikki Hedrick, since it is CC-BY-NC-2.0. Elisfkc (talk) 20:07, 29 November 2016 (UTC)
I will try to find another picture for JMann. As for the other pics, I was wondering if I should upload new modified versions without the watermarks or keep them as I uploaded them first?--Fallengrademan (talk) 00:34, 30 November 2016 (UTC)

@Fallengrademan: In my opinion, yes. However, other people disagree with me, so really, it's up to you. It's just that, if the watermark is there, {{watermark}} should be on the page and if you remove it {{watermark removed}} should be there. Elisfkc (talk) 01:18, 30 November 2016 (UTC)

OK, thanks a lot Elisfkc!--Fallengrademan (talk) 01:41, 30 November 2016 (UTC)

re: An unfree Flickr license was found on File:Xavier Novell.jpg

Thank you Elisfkc for the clarification; yesterday was the first time I uploaded an image from Flickr...I did not fully understand the rules yesterday but now i think yes, so, again, thanks :) --Pietro Di Fontana 13:33, 3 December 2016 (UTC)

Virgilio Andrade photo

Hello! I just added the source of Virgilio Andrade Martínez.jpg (https://www.flickr.com/photos/presidenciamx/16436209161). As you can see, it is under a CC BY 2.0 license.

Regards, P. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Padaguan (talk • contribs) 21:43, 19 July 2016 (UTC)

File:Marcus Paige Last Shot at UNC (25988355950).jpg

File:Marcus Paige Last Shot at UNC (25988355950).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!
Afrikaans ∙ Bahasa Indonesia ∙ bosanski ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ dansk ∙ Deutsch ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ ∙ eesti ∙ English ∙ español ∙ Esperanto ∙ français ∙ galego ∙ hrvatski ∙ íslenska ∙ italiano ∙ magyar ∙ Nederlands ∙ norsk bokmål ∙ norsk nynorsk ∙ occitan ∙ Plattdüütsch ∙ polski ∙ português ∙ português do Brasil ∙ română ∙ shqip ∙ sicilianu ∙ slovenčina ∙ slovenščina ∙ suomi ∙ svenska ∙ Tiếng Việt ∙ Türkçe ∙ Zazaki ∙ Ελληνικά ∙ беларуская ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ ∙ български ∙ македонски ∙ русский ∙ српски / srpski ∙ українська ∙ հայերեն ∙ বাংলা ∙ മലയാളം ∙ ပအိုဝ်ႏဘာႏသာႏ ∙ မြန်မာဘာသာ ∙ ไทย ∙ 조선말 ∙ 한국어 ∙ 日本語 ∙ 简体中文‎ ∙ 繁體中文‎ ∙ עברית ∙ العربية ∙ پښتو ∙ فارسی ∙ ދިވެހިބަސް ∙ +/−

Ytoyoda (talk) 15:48, 6 December 2016 (UTC)

File:Spiro-Portrait.jpg

I was reviewing this image and noticed your comment on the Flickr user's page re freely licensing the image. However, the Flickr user probably does not have any rights to license the image freely because they are the subject of the image and not the photographer unless they bought the copyright as part of a contract. In such circumstance as this, one needs to carefully review all aspects of the image, so before I nominate this for deletion, or discussion, maybe you can determine who owns the copyright. I suspect Jessica Jin is the copyright holder and we would need an OTRS permission directly from her: the subject's permission is not good enough. Thoughts? Ww2censor (talk) 12:33, 6 December 2016 (UTC)

@Ww2censor: good catch, missed that. Nominating now. --Elisfkc (talk) 18:55, 6 December 2016 (UTC)

Hello, I apologize if I am using this forum incorrectly, but in regards to the photograph of Ellen Spiro, if I need to obtain permission from Jessica Jin that she took the photograph, please let me know. I'd really prefer this image not be deleted. Please let me know what else I can do to prevent this from happening, I will work with your guidelines. Thankyou, AJ Alderman — Preceding unsigned comment added by AJ Alderman (talk • contribs) 20:20, 06 December 2016 (UTC)

@AJ Alderman: if you have proof from Jessica Jin that she releases the license under [1], please follow instructions under COM:OTRS#If you are NOT the copyright holder. Unless that permission is received in 7 days, it is likely that the image will be deleted. If this happens and you receive permission afterwards, it's ok. Make sure to still follow the on COM:OTRS#If you are NOT the copyright holder and then submit an undeletion request, mentioning the OTRS number you receive. If the proof you submit is found to be satisfactory, it should be undeleted. Elisfkc (talk) 20:27, 6 December 2016 (UTC)

Hello, Thank you again for your help. Jessica Jin has emailed her clear statement of permission to permissions-commons@wikimedia.org, as per the guidelines that you illustrated, this is all to avoid deletion of the image. Thank you. AJ Alderman.AJ Alderman (talk) 00:02, 7 December 2016 (UTC)

Hello again, I have placed an OTRS tag onto the photo page, I just want to make sure that it was done correctly. I know you are not an admin, but please let me know if I did it right. Thankyou againAJ Alderman (talk) 21:09, 7 December 2016 (UTC)

Looks right to me. I personally have never had a file that required OTRS permission, so I'm not the best person to check with. Elisfkc (talk) 21:22, 7 December 2016 (UTC)

Abul Kalam Azad photo

https://www.flickr.com/photos/abulkalamazad_pattanam/30561785823/in/dateposted-public/ https://www.flickr.com/photos/abulkalamazad_pattanam/31225301012/in/dateposted-public/ sources information FYI thank you TASKLA (talk) 05:57, 8 December 2016 (UTC)

@TAKLA: Yes, but those look to be cases of Flickr washing, which is what Pokéfan95 is also suggesting in the deletion requests. Elisfkc (talk) 16:14, 8 December 2016 (UTC)

File source is not properly indicated: File:KSC-20161209-PH KLS01-0053.jpg

العربية ∙ asturianu ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ ∙ বাংলা ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ dansk ∙ Deutsch ∙ Ελληνικά ∙ English ∙ español ∙ euskara ∙ فارسی ∙ suomi ∙ français ∙ galego ∙ עברית ∙ hrvatski ∙ magyar ∙ italiano ∙ 日本語 ∙ 한국어 ∙ македонски ∙ മലയാളം ∙ norsk bokmål ∙ Plattdüütsch ∙ Nederlands ∙ norsk nynorsk ∙ norsk ∙ polski ∙ português ∙ português do Brasil ∙ русский ∙ sicilianu ∙ slovenčina ∙ slovenščina ∙ svenska ∙ ไทย ∙ Türkçe ∙ українська ∙ Tiếng Việt ∙ 简体中文‎ ∙ 繁體中文‎ ∙ +/−
Warning sign
This media may be deleted.
A file that you have uploaded to Wikimedia Commons, File:KSC-20161209-PH KLS01-0053.jpg, is missing information about where it comes from or who created it, which is needed to verify its copyright status. Please edit the file description and add the missing information, or the file may be deleted.

If you created the content yourself, enter {{Own}} as the source. If you did not add a licensing template, you must add one. You may use, for example, {{self|GFDL|cc-by-sa-all}} or {{Cc-zero}} to release certain rights to your work.

If someone else created the content, or if it is based on someone else's work, the source should be the address to the web page where you found it, the name and ISBN of the book you scanned it from, or similar. You should also name the author, provide verifiable information to show that the content is in the public domain or has been published under a free license by its author, and add an appropriate template identifying the public domain or licensing status, if you have not already done so. Warning: Wikimedia Commons takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing.

Please add the required information for this and other files you have uploaded before adding more files. If you need assistance, please ask at the help desk. Thank you!

MCMLXXXIX 21:04, 10 December 2016 (UTC)

@1989: Whoops. Fixed it. Elisfkc (talk) 21:08, 10 December 2016 (UTC)

Closing your own withdrawn DR

Hi Elisfkc! I hope you are well. I just wanted to let you know that the DR closure rules were recently amended after a discussion at Commons_talk:Deletion_requests#Nominator_closure_of_deletions to disallow self-closures such as this one. Cheers, Storkk (talk) 18:04, 15 December 2016 (UTC)

@Storkk: I did not know that. Thanks for the update, I'll make sure to follow that from now on. Elisfkc (talk) 22:14, 15 December 2016 (UTC)
No worries, I only knew about the change because I commented on the proposal. No reason you should have known a priori. Cheers, Storkk (talk) 09:47, 16 December 2016 (UTC)

File:Brislam.jpg

J'ai ajouté ces données au fichier en espérant que vous trouviez plus facilement la photo sur Flickr: Photo trouvée sur Flickr avec les mots-clés 'brise-lames enfants'. Elle a été prise par Stephane Mignon le 25 mai 2008. Intitulé de la photo: 'Enfants au bout du brise-lames'. Bien à vous, Ibu — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ibu (talk • contribs) 16:21, 17 December 2016 (UTC)

@Ibu: pour permettre aux autres de verifier la license, vous devez marquer le lien qui spécifie la photographe. La prochaine fois que vous téléchargez depuis Flickr, cliquez sur «Partager des images provenant de Flickr» dans l'Assistant d’import, et vous éviterez plusieurs problèmes similaires. Storkk (talk) 16:37, 17 December 2016 (UTC)
D'accord. Merci. Ibu (talk) 21:59, 17 December 2016 (UTC)

Notification about possible deletion

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

If you created these pages, please note that the fact that they have been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with them, 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!
Afrikaans ∙ Bahasa Indonesia ∙ bosanski ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ dansk ∙ Deutsch ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ ∙ eesti ∙ English ∙ español ∙ Esperanto ∙ français ∙ galego ∙ hrvatski ∙ íslenska ∙ italiano ∙ magyar ∙ Nederlands ∙ norsk bokmål ∙ norsk nynorsk ∙ occitan ∙ Plattdüütsch ∙ polski ∙ português ∙ português do Brasil ∙ română ∙ shqip ∙ sicilianu ∙ slovenčina ∙ slovenščina ∙ suomi ∙ svenska ∙ Tiếng Việt ∙ Türkçe ∙ Zazaki ∙ Ελληνικά ∙ беларуская ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ ∙ български ∙ македонски ∙ русский ∙ српски / srpski ∙ українська ∙ հայերեն ∙ বাংলা ∙ മലയാളം ∙ ပအိုဝ်ႏဘာႏသာႏ ∙ မြန်မာဘာသာ ∙ ไทย ∙ 조선말 ∙ 한국어 ∙ 日本語 ∙ 简体中文‎ ∙ 繁體中文‎ ∙ עברית ∙ العربية ∙ پښتو ∙ فارسی ∙ ދިވެހިބަސް ∙ +/−

Affected:

And also:

Yours sincerely, Elisfkc (talk) 18:24, 17 December 2016 (UTC)

Notification about possible deletion

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

If you created these pages, please note that the fact that they have been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with them, 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!
Afrikaans ∙ Bahasa Indonesia ∙ bosanski ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ dansk ∙ Deutsch ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ ∙ eesti ∙ English ∙ español ∙ Esperanto ∙ français ∙ galego ∙ hrvatski ∙ íslenska ∙ italiano ∙ magyar ∙ Nederlands ∙ norsk bokmål ∙ norsk nynorsk ∙ occitan ∙ Plattdüütsch ∙ polski ∙ português ∙ português do Brasil ∙ română ∙ shqip ∙ sicilianu ∙ slovenčina ∙ slovenščina ∙ suomi ∙ svenska ∙ Tiếng Việt ∙ Türkçe ∙ Zazaki ∙ Ελληνικά ∙ беларуская ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ ∙ български ∙ македонски ∙ русский ∙ српски / srpski ∙ українська ∙ հայերեն ∙ বাংলা ∙ മലയാളം ∙ ပအိုဝ်ႏဘာႏသာႏ ∙ မြန်မာဘာသာ ∙ ไทย ∙ 조선말 ∙ 한국어 ∙ 日本語 ∙ 简体中文‎ ∙ 繁體中文‎ ∙ עברית ∙ العربية ∙ پښتو ∙ فارسی ∙ ދިވެހިބަސް ∙ +/−

Affected:

And also:

Yours sincerely, (t) Josve05a (c) 00:15, 28 December 2016 (UTC)

Photos from Fliker

Hello! Sorry for my bad English. I took this photo (Krtsanisi Tsiranavor Holy Mother of God Armenian church. 2016 (2).jpg) from the account of Giorgio Comai (https://www.flickr.com/photos/giocomai/26277236611/in/album-72157664710270783/). He didn't write All Rights Reserved, he wrote Some rights reserved. Why did you delete that photo?--Gardmanahay (talk) 22:29, 6 January 2017 (UTC)

@Gardmanahay:
English: The upload the images with a Creative Commons Non-commerical Share-Alike license, which is not allowed on Commons. See Commons:Creative Commons copyright tags.
Հայերեն: Վերբեռնման պատկերները հետ Creative Commons առեւտրային Share-Alike լիցենզիայի, որը չի թույլատրվում Commons. Տես Commons: Creative Commons հեղինակային իրավունքի թեգերը. Թարգմանվել է Google Translate- ի
Elisfkc (talk) 22:40, 6 January 2017 (UTC)

File:2016-11-24 Weekly Address- Coming Together On Thanksgiving.webm

Hi! I noticed you uploaded this file shortly before I did the same. Admittely the file that you uploaded is of lower file size, however I have been transcoding President Obama's weekly addresses directly from source regularly for a couple of years now, so I think the version I uploaded might of a bit higher quality. There's little point in us hosting the exact same video twice, so do you mind if I just go ahead and delete it? I have contributed subtitles for my version of the file (which is the exact same video anyway), so I don't we would be losing out on too much. Thanks :-) odder (talk) 22:18, 7 January 2017 (UTC)

@Odder: Yep. I moved the categories and tagged mine as a duplicate. Elisfkc (talk) 03:15, 8 January 2017 (UTC)

About photoes

You wan't to delete these photos (https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Gardmanahay#Notification_about_possible_deletion). What's the problem? I took that photos from the archive of ՛՛Research on Armenian Architecture՛՛. They allow everyone to use their photos.--Gardmanahay (talk) 22:33, 6 January 2017 (UTC)

@Gardmanahay:
English: We need more proof than just their name. If you could provide a source url for each image, which states that they release the image under the license you stated, that should be enough.
Հայերեն: Մենք պետք է ավելի շատ ապացույցներ, քան պարզապես իրենց անունով: Եթե դուք կարող եք տրամադրել մի աղբյուր URL յուրաքանչյուր պատկերով, որում նշվում է, որ նրանք ազատ արձակել, որ պատկերը լիցենզիայով Դուք հայտարարեցիք, որ պետք է լինի բավարար. Թարգմանվել է Google Tranlate
Elisfkc (talk) 22:40, 6 January 2017 (UTC)
Please, give me some days for that work. and don't delete photos until it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Gardmanahay (talk • contribs) 22:45, 6 January 2017 (UTC)
@Gardmanahay:
English: That's part of the reason that I made it a deletion request instead of using Template:No source since.
Հայերեն: Որ մասն է պատճառը, որ ես արել, որ մի ջնջում խնդրանքը փոխարեն օգտագործելով Կաղապար: Ոչ աղբյուր, քանի որ. Թարգմանվել է Google Translate- ի
Elisfkc (talk) 22:48, 6 January 2017 (UTC)
All that photos I took from http://www.armeniaca.am/armeniaca/pages/en/genhome/genhome.html For example, is this enough? File:Krtsanisi Tsiranavor Holy Mother of God Armenian church. Tbilisi (7).jpg - http://www.armeniaca.am/armeniaca/thumb_repo0/25463/19796/thumbs/vb030212_med.jpg --Gardmanahay (talk) 22:51, 6 January 2017 (UTC)
@Gardmanahay:
English: That's a start. You need to put each image's source on that image's individual page. We also need proof of the CC Public Domain license that you specified.
Հայերեն: Որ դա սկիզբն է: Դուք պետք է տեղադրել յուրաքանչյուր պատկերի աղբյուրը, որ պատկերը անհատական էջում: Մենք պետք է նաեւ ապացույց է ՍԴ-ն Հանրային Դոմեն լիցենզիայի, որ դուք նշված. Թարգմանվել է Google Translate- ի
Elisfkc (talk) 23:05, 6 January 2017 (UTC)
If these photos are licensed, then it will be mentioned on the site. But there is nothing written on the license. So the photoes are free.--Gardmanahay (talk) 23:10, 6 January 2017 (UTC)

@Gardmanahay:

English: No, it is the other way around. Unless the license is explicitly stated, all rights are reserved and the file is not available for upload to Commons.
Հայերեն: Ոչ, դա է այլ ճանապարհ շուրջ. Քանի դեռ Լիցենզիան բացահայտորեն հայտարարել է, բոլոր իրավունքները պաշտպանված են, եւ ֆայլը հասանելի չէ վերբեռնել Commons.

Elisfkc (talk) 23:20, 6 January 2017 (UTC)

I wrote a letter to the director of the archive and asked for permission to use their photos. What is needed, as proof that they are willing to use their photos in Wikipedia?--Gardmanahay (talk) 23:38, 6 January 2017 (UTC)
@Gardmanahay: see Commons:OTRS. Elisfkc (talk) 23:55, 6 January 2017 (UTC)
The director of RAA said that we can use any photo of their archive free, if we will mention the source. He said that there is no problem. I will ask him to send you a letter such as here is... (https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:OTRS).--Gardmanahay (talk) 14:28, 7 January 2017 (UTC)
The director of RAA archive said that he will send a message ((https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:OTRS)). Please, don't delete these photos.--Gardmanahay (talk) 20:35, 9 January 2017 (UTC)
@Gardmanahay: they might get deleted, but they can be undeleted once the email is received and processed. I am not an administrator, so I am actually not the one who would delete them. Elisfkc (talk) 20:37, 9 January 2017 (UTC)

File:Richard Rycroft.jpg

File:Richard Rycroft.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!
Afrikaans ∙ Bahasa Indonesia ∙ bosanski ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ dansk ∙ Deutsch ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ ∙ eesti ∙ English ∙ español ∙ Esperanto ∙ français ∙ galego ∙ hrvatski ∙ íslenska ∙ italiano ∙ magyar ∙ Nederlands ∙ norsk bokmål ∙ norsk nynorsk ∙ occitan ∙ Plattdüütsch ∙ polski ∙ português ∙ português do Brasil ∙ română ∙ shqip ∙ sicilianu ∙ slovenčina ∙ slovenščina ∙ suomi ∙ svenska ∙ Tiếng Việt ∙ Türkçe ∙ Zazaki ∙ Ελληνικά ∙ беларуская ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ ∙ български ∙ македонски ∙ русский ∙ српски / srpski ∙ українська ∙ հայերեն ∙ বাংলা ∙ മലയാളം ∙ ပအိုဝ်ႏဘာႏသာႏ ∙ မြန်မာဘာသာ ∙ ไทย ∙ 조선말 ∙ 한국어 ∙ 日本語 ∙ 简体中文‎ ∙ 繁體中文‎ ∙ עברית ∙ العربية ∙ پښتو ∙ فارسی ∙ ދިވެހިބަސް ∙ +/−

Leoboudv (talk) 07:07, 17 January 2017 (UTC)

Commons:Deletion requests/Files uploaded by Efa Goz

Hello There,

I was wondering what the status was for this ticket/matter: https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Deletion_requests/Files_uploaded_by_Efa_Goz

I would like to know the status for these photos, as they are still flagged in spite of the signed permission sent to you by the copyright holder. Thank you in advance for enlightening me on other wikipedia rules regarding photos, as I am not sure I understand the issue with facebook, as long as the images came from an online source.

Regards, — Preceding unsigned comment added by Efa Goz (talk • contribs) 13:48, 18 January 2017 (UTC)

@Efa Goz: A: I don't have access to OTRS, so if what you sent is enough permission, someone else will have to decide. B: I am not an admin, so I cannot close the discussion in this case. Elisfkc (talk) 20:12, 18 January 2017 (UTC)

Seriously?

Seriously now? Don't be overzealous, don't be imbecile, don't ruin an article about Athens' architecture. The law isn't even clear. Dimboukas (talk) 19:53, 20 January 2017 (UTC)

@Dimboukas: I am not being overzealous. Each one of these images show a building that was designed after 1947, according to the caption, or the architect died in the last 70 years. I am following the rules stated on FOP#Greece. Elisfkc (talk) 19:56, 20 January 2017 (UTC)
I have more for you then, from all over Greece? Why be so hesitating?
File:Thessaloniki Music Hall buildings.png, [2], [3], [4], [5], [6], [7], [8], [9], [10], [11] etc. All architects of these buildings died after 1947. Why not these too then? Dimboukas (talk) 20:02, 20 January 2017 (UTC)
@Dimboukas: Because I did not see them. They are not allowed on Commons, but you could upload locally to English Wikipedia with Template:FoP-USonly ({{FoP-USonly|Greece}}) with the correct licensing tag. Elisfkc (talk) 20:05, 20 January 2017 (UTC)
Ok, at least you found me a solution! Thanks. Dimboukas (talk) 20:06, 20 January 2017 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) Elisfkc, based on some of your edits I think you are sometimes a bit overzealous. In this instance some of the buildings are very simple box-like structures that do not contravene FoP. I've previously nominated some such French buildings and they have been kept because the design is too simple. I don't think a blanket FoP restriction applies to all cases in a country as appears to be your view. Ww2censor (talk) 10:57, 21 January 2017 (UTC)

@Ww2censor: I figure that it is better to nominate the images and have them kept because they are too simple than to have images that violate it kept. Elisfkc (talk) 18:38, 21 January 2017 (UTC)

Re: "Portland Women's March"

The event was actually called "Women's March on Portland". Can the images be moved to Category:Women's March on Portland? This may be inconsistent with other categories, but this was the actual name of the event and I think the category should reflect this to be more accurate and consistent with Women's March on Portland. -Another Believer (talk) 22:53, 22 January 2017 (UTC)

@Another Believer: Personally, I believe it is best this way. I would suggest posting on Commons:Village pump or somewhere else to see what others think. I have added the link to the category on the Wikidata entry (which I suggest you fill out, so it is easier for others to find the common threads between the Wikiprojects, etc). Elisfkc (talk) 22:57, 22 January 2017 (UTC)

Email

Please send me an email to the email listed on my user page, and I will forward the email from the Indiana AG office to you. Gage (talk) 02:43, 28 January 2017 (UTC)

Prescott image

Hi Eliskfc, I reverted your change to the Prescott Granite Dells Banner as I had originally cropped it for use as a Wikivoyage banner, which requires specific dimensions. The existing creative commons license clearly allows modifications.

Best, StellarD (talk) 10:18, 31 January 2017 (UTC)

@StellarD: I had uploaded another version originally for File:Prescott Granite Dells Banner.jpg because it helps it pass Flickr review and it is a much larger resolution of the image. I understand the Wikivoyage banner part, but I would suggest using the larger version I uploaded, and then Commons:CropTool to get it to fit correctly. That way, the version that you use will be a larger resolution. Here's my attempt to do it for you. Elisfkc (talk) 17:35, 31 January 2017 (UTC)

Small question

Hi Elisfkc, what purpose does it serve here? "More bluishness?" Best, --Jocian (talk) 08:42, 1 February 2017 (UTC)

@Jocian: I was hoping that it would pass the automated Flickr Review then, which it did. Elisfkc (talk) 20:14, 1 February 2017 (UTC)

File:Behind the Scenes- President Obama & Disney's Hall of Presidents (subtitles).ogg

File:Behind the Scenes- President Obama & Disney's Hall of Presidents (subtitles).ogg 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!
Afrikaans ∙ Bahasa Indonesia ∙ bosanski ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ dansk ∙ Deutsch ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ ∙ eesti ∙ English ∙ español ∙ Esperanto ∙ français ∙ galego ∙ hrvatski ∙ íslenska ∙ italiano ∙ magyar ∙ Nederlands ∙ norsk bokmål ∙ norsk nynorsk ∙ occitan ∙ Plattdüütsch ∙ polski ∙ português ∙ português do Brasil ∙ română ∙ shqip ∙ sicilianu ∙ slovenčina ∙ slovenščina ∙ suomi ∙ svenska ∙ Tiếng Việt ∙ Türkçe ∙ Zazaki ∙ Ελληνικά ∙ беларуская ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ ∙ български ∙ македонски ∙ русский ∙ српски / srpski ∙ українська ∙ հայերեն ∙ বাংলা ∙ മലയാളം ∙ ပအိုဝ်ႏဘာႏသာႏ ∙ မြန်မာဘာသာ ∙ ไทย ∙ 조선말 ∙ 한국어 ∙ 日本語 ∙ 简体中文‎ ∙ 繁體中文‎ ∙ עברית ∙ العربية ∙ پښتو ∙ فارسی ∙ ދިވެހިބަސް ∙ +/−

 — billinghurst sDrewth 22:35, 1 February 2017 (UTC)

RE: File:Ambassador Allan J. Katz Giving A Speech At The 4th July Party in Lisbon 2012-07-03.png

Thanks for pointing it out! I left an appeal in the image talk page, as I don't think I was incurring in a copyright violation. Cheers. -- RickMorais (talk) 03:16, 2 February 2017 (UTC)

Questionable FOP-related deletions

For my country, the Philippines, FOP is somewhat very vague and deletions of an image of architecture (except when design is generic or very old) or artwork (except for very old PD works) continue raising concerns on hosting Philippine architecture and art photos at Commons. I undeleted the Rizal Park statue photo, that you deleted at Commons:Deletion requests/Files uploaded by TheCoffee for no FOP in the Philippines, but have to undelete others that are photos of very old architecture and artwork, as they are PD (unless they are PD only after the URAA, where US copyright is restored, disallowing hosting on Commons), and I raised concerns about the deletions. And also a note before starting a FOP-related deletion request: carefully check the file in a case-by-case basis, not just limited to FOP. TagaSanPedroAkoTalk -> 11:27, 2 February 2017 (UTC)

@TagaSanPedroAko: I am following the guide on Commons:Freedom of panorama#Philippines. If you believe that is incorrect, I would suggest bringing it up on Commons:Village pump/Copyright. Elisfkc (talk) 15:57, 2 February 2017 (UTC)

Re: File:Spiaggia di Santa Marinella.jpg

Hi, I left a request in the original uploader's talk for some help; since he's a very serious senior user (so I have no doubt about the correctness of the upload), please allow a few days to wait for his answer, since he's currently offline. Shall we say if I don't hear from him we can delete it on next Sunday? --g (talk) 14:32, 5 February 2017 (UTC)

@Gianfranco: that's when the tag says to wait until. Elisfkc (talk) 19:18, 5 February 2017 (UTC)

Category deletion

Hi! Why do you think Category:Germany photographs taken on 2017-02-05 should be deleted? There are hundreds of categories like this. Please don't start a edit war. And please undo your edits. I just removed your deletion request. Sorry, but there is no reason for deletion. If you think this kind of category is not useful, please start a public discussion. --XRay talk 07:20, 14 February 2017 (UTC)

@XRay: After discussing it on a user's talk page, I have started a discussion (see Emptying "Category:{{Country}} photographs taken on {{date}}" categories into "Category:Photographs taken on {{date}}"). Elisfkc (talk) 17:06, 14 February 2017 (UTC)
IMO a lot of users are involved. Please see my thread on Commons:Forum (in german). You can't delete hundreds of categories without a public discussion. --XRay talk 17:16, 14 February 2017 (UTC)
I've added a comment. You can make a proposal and you may have good arguments, but you should have to wait more than a couple of days. And you should ping all the users categorizing images in the country categories. A consensual solution is the better solution. --XRay talk 17:44, 14 February 2017 (UTC)

Hi

Albert Camus dead in 1960. can you help me for uploading a good portrait of him? according to france or algeria copyright. --Sonia Sevilla (talk) 20:28, 14 February 2017 (UTC)

@Sonia Sevilla: See Category:Albert Camus. Elisfkc (talk) 21:25, 14 February 2017 (UTC)
thank you. but i meant some good pictures. better quality, in a nice figure. --Sonia Sevilla (talk) 21:26, 14 February 2017 (UTC)
@Sonia Sevilla: Did you check the portraits subcategory? Elisfkc (talk) 21:28, 14 February 2017 (UTC)
sure. i need a picture like flicker file that is not free. --Sonia Sevilla (talk) 21:33, 14 February 2017 (UTC)
@Sonia Sevilla: I don't think there are any. Sorry Elisfkc (talk) 21:36, 14 February 2017 (UTC)
anyway, if i failed to upload a free file, i appreciate you. --Sonia Sevilla (talk) 21:40, 14 February 2017 (UTC)

File tagging File:We’re here because we’re here - Somme 100 4746 (28126491335).jpg

العربية ∙ беларуская ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца) ∙ ပအိုဝ်ႏဘာႏသာႏ ∙ বাংলা ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ dansk ∙ Deutsch ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form) ∙ Ελληνικά ∙ English ∙ español ∙ euskara ∙ فارسی ∙ suomi ∙ français ∙ galego ∙ עברית ∙ hrvatski ∙ magyar ∙ հայերեն ∙ italiano ∙ 日本語 ∙ ಕನ್ನಡ ∙ 한국어 ∙ lietuvių ∙ latviešu ∙ македонски ∙ മലയാളം ∙ मराठी ∙ မြန်မာဘာသာ ∙ norsk bokmål ∙ Plattdüütsch ∙ Nederlands ∙ norsk ∙ polski ∙ português ∙ română ∙ русский ∙ sicilianu ∙ slovenčina ∙ slovenščina ∙ српски / srpski ∙ svenska ∙ ไทย ∙ Türkçe ∙ українська ∙ اردو ∙ Tiếng Việt ∙ 中文（简体） ∙ 中文（繁體） ∙ +/−
Warning sign
This media was probably deleted.
Thanks for uploading File:We’re here because we’re here - Somme 100 4746 (28126491335).jpg. This media is missing permission information. A source is given, but there is no proof that the author or copyright holder agreed to license the file under the given license. Please provide a link to an appropriate webpage with license information, or ask the author or copyright holder to send an email with copy of a written permission to VRT (permissions-commons@wikimedia.org). You may still be required to go through this procedure even if you are the author yourself; please see Commons:But it's my own work! for more details. After you emailed permission, you may replace the {{No permission since}} tag with {{subst:PP}} on file description page. Alternatively, you may click on "Challenge speedy deletion" below the tag if you wish to provide an argument why evidence of permission is not necessary in this case.

Please see this page for more information on how to confirm permission, or if you would like to understand why we ask for permission when uploading work that is not your own, or work which has been previously published (regardless of whether it is your own).

The file probably has been deleted. If you sent a permission, try to send it again after 14 days. Do not re-upload. When the VRT-member processes your mail, the file can be undeleted. Additionally you can request undeletion here, providing a link to the File-page on Commons where it was uploaded ([[:File:We’re here because we’re here - Somme 100 4746 (28126491335).jpg]]) and the above demanded information in your request.

De728631 (talk) 16:42, 15 February 2017 (UTC)

Ottawaorrell

Hi! First, thank you for all the work you have done on the images I've been adding to Commons. I'm still new, so I am trying to learn from my mistakes by tracking the history of my contributions :) I am trying to make better category tags, but was wondering if there is a wiki article or something that you would recommend? I am used to using a clear set of subject headings (I'm an archivist), and we are always cautioned less is more - the opposite of here! lol! I'd appreciate any tips you can give a newbie. :) Thanks Elisfkc --Ottawaorrell (talk) 18:21, 16 February 2017 (UTC)

@Ottawaorrell: Yes, there is, Commons:Categories. Elisfkc (talk) 18:23, 16 February 2017 (UTC)
Perfect! Thanks! I'll take a break and read it now. :) --Ottawaorrell (talk) 18:28, 16 February 2017 (UTC)
@Ottawaorrell: Also, I'd suggest using Commons:Flickr2Commons instead of Upload Wizard. Elisfkc (talk) 18:48, 16 February 2017 (UTC)
Thanks! I'll give it a try.--Ottawaorrell (talk) 12:33, 17 February 2017 (UTC)

Photo of Martin Schultz

I was looking for photos with Creative Commons license, so I think that I could at most, make a mistake in matching licence during uploading. Kubaj98 (talk) 19:07, 17 February 2017 (UTC)

@Kubaj98: Try this one. Elisfkc (talk) 19:08, 17 February 2017 (UTC)

Confusing categorization?

Hi there,

I noticed that on several files you performed a series of category changes along the lines of this one: File:Natchez, MS Balloon Festival 2011 (6295198754).jpg starting with replacing Category:Images from the United States Fish and Wildlife Service with Category:Holding for Elisfkc, and winding up with just a removal of the former.

In this other example it was replacing Category:Images from the United States Fish and Wildlife Service with Category:Files from the United States Fish and Wildlife Service Mountain-Prairie Region Flickr stream, which is perfectly sensible. Is that what was intended for the first case?

I think I'm leaving this message rather than assuming you missed one because these edits currently occupy the entirety of my watchlist, so I can't check them all, and I'm thrown off by the unusual "Holding for Elisfkc". Would you mind reassuring me that these will wind up with an FWS category, etc.? :) — Rhododendrites talk |  23:46, 17 February 2017 (UTC)

Hmmm actually I think the source of my confusion may just be that the first image I linked was erroneously tagged as being from USFWS when it was not, in fact. Nevermind then. Thanks for fixing. :) — Rhododendrites talk |  23:48, 17 February 2017 (UTC)
(Edit conflict) @Rhododendrites: They all did end up in a FWS category (with a few tiny exceptions, mentioned below). There were a lot of images in Category:Images from the United States Fish and Wildlife Service that should have been in one of the flickr subcategories (around 7,000). The category Category:Holding for Elisfkc was a way for me to separate all of those images out, and move them into their correct categories. In some cases, similar to File:Natchez, MS Balloon Festival 2011 (6295198754).jpg, they were already in their correct categories and were in fact overcategorized, so I ended up removing the Holding category. However, in the case of File:Natchez, MS Balloon Festival 2011 (6295198754).jpg, the image isn't actually from FWS, so I ended up keeping it out of the FWS related categories. Elisfkc (talk) 23:53, 17 February 2017 (UTC)
No problem Elisfkc (talk) 23:53, 17 February 2017 (UTC)

KSC Press Site

Hi there Elisfkc. Today you removed a large number of images from Category:Kennedy Space Center press site, saying they were "not the actual press site". All of these images were photographed in and around the press site grounds including the NASA News Center. I think you were perhaps confusing the press site as specifically being the large field in front of the countdown clock, when the site specifically includes the fiend and clock, as well as the NASA News Center and associated buildings and press shacks. Of even more concern, though, is that you removed the category and did not replace it with anything, often leaving an image in only a 'by date' or 'by camera' category. Regardless, I've reverted these changes as they all indeed took place around the KSC press site. — Huntster (t @ c) 04:35, 20 February 2017 (UTC)

@Huntster: Yep, that was the case. Sorry about that. Elisfkc (talk) 04:52, 20 February 2017 (UTC)

File:Klaus Brantzen.jpg

Hallo Elisfkc,

ich weiß nicht, was ich noch alles anstellen soll, damit die Datei im Artikel bleibt. Zuerst habe ich vor zwei Jahren die Mail eingefügt, die mir der Autor zur Weiterverbreitung 4.0 zugesandt hat. Nach deinem Löschantrag von vorgestern habe ich mit dem Autor telefoniert, der meinte, er habe keine Lust auf WiKi-Streitereien, ich solle einfach 'eigene Arbeit angeben'. (War zugegebener Maßen ein Fehler von mir, obwohl ich das Bild bearbeitete/ Bin aber in dem ganzen IT-Wesen altersbedingt etwas "unterbelichtet"). Wie kann ich es bewerkstelligen, dass der Autor, der mir das Bild zugemailt hat (es steht also nicht in Flickr) nachprüfbar verzeichnet wird ? Also: Deine Hilfe gefragt statt Löschen !

If you dont't speak German, here an automatically translation:

Hello Elisfkc, I do not know what else I should do to keep the file in the article. First I have inserted two years ago the mail, which the author has sent me to the further spreading 4.0. After your cancellation application from the previous day, I phoned with the author, who said that he did not feel like I was wiping out his own work. (Was admittedly a mistake of me, although I edited the picture / I'm in the whole IT-essence "under-exposed", in fact of my age). How can I do it, that the author, which has sent me the picture (it is not in Flickr) verifiably listed? So: your help asked instead of delete! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Van.ike (talk • contribs) 11:24, 22 February 2017 (UTC)

Gruß van.ike --Van.ike (talk) 11:36, 22 February 2017 (UTC)

@Van.ike: Look at Commons:OTRS. Elisfkc (talk) 19:24, 22 February 2017 (UTC)

An unfree Flickr license has been found on File:Erik Gundersen & Lars Løkke Rasmussen.jpg

Sorry i don't understand it is creative commons under flickr and said i could share it if non-commercial and credited??? You've put it says all rights reserved but it's not it's some rights reserved --Rcclh (talk) 17:32, 24 February 2017 (UTC)

@Rcclh: No, the template says "This image, which was originally posted to Flickr, was reviewed by the administrator or reviewer Elisfkc under the license NonCommercial-NoDerivatives". That is not compatible with Wikimedia Commons. Here is a guide to which creative commons tags are allowed. Elisfkc (talk) 17:36, 24 February 2017 (UTC)

Sorry I need a degree in jargon to understand that. Can we debate the Plain English description? If you go to the photo on flickr it says "Some Rights Reserved" and You are free to 

   Share — copy and redistribute the material in any medium or format

   The licensor cannot revoke these freedoms as long as you follow the license terms.

Under the following terms: 

   Attribution — You must give appropriate credit, provide a link to the license, and indicate if changes were made. You may do so in any reasonable manner, but not in any way that suggests the licensor endorses you or your use.

   NonCommercial — You may not use the material for commercial purposes.

   NoDerivatives — If you remix, transform, or build upon the material, you may not distribute the modified material.

   No additional restrictions — You may not apply legal terms or technological measures that legally restrict others from doing anything the license permits.


so which rule is broken? I credited the author, it's not commercial and i haven't modified it ???? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rcclh (talk • contribs) 20:41, 24 February 2017 (UTC)

@Rcclh: Commons requires it to be released for commercial use. That's the issue. Elisfkc (talk) 20:44, 24 February 2017 (UTC)

oh ok i would never have thought wikipedia was a commercial website but if that's the rule i'll delete it, cheers. --Rcclh (talk) 22:41, 24 February 2017 (UTC)

ok i can't seem to delete it so i'll leave it for someone else to delete, sorry for the inconvenience caused --Rcclh (talk) 22:48, 24 February 2017 (UTC)

Delete File:Time Warner (Square).svg

Hello, i wish you delete this image: , because it's unofficial, Thanks Ragilnih 22:18, 24 February 2017 (UTC)

@Ragilnih: I'm not an admin, so I can't really help you. Elisfkc (talk) 03:21, 25 February 2017 (UTC)

Notification about possible deletion

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

If you created these pages, please note that the fact that they have been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with them, 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!
Afrikaans ∙ Bahasa Indonesia ∙ bosanski ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ dansk ∙ Deutsch ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ ∙ eesti ∙ English ∙ español ∙ Esperanto ∙ français ∙ galego ∙ hrvatski ∙ íslenska ∙ italiano ∙ magyar ∙ Nederlands ∙ norsk bokmål ∙ norsk nynorsk ∙ occitan ∙ Plattdüütsch ∙ polski ∙ português ∙ português do Brasil ∙ română ∙ shqip ∙ sicilianu ∙ slovenčina ∙ slovenščina ∙ suomi ∙ svenska ∙ Tiếng Việt ∙ Türkçe ∙ Zazaki ∙ Ελληνικά ∙ беларуская ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ ∙ български ∙ македонски ∙ русский ∙ српски / srpski ∙ українська ∙ հայերեն ∙ বাংলা ∙ മലയാളം ∙ ပအိုဝ်ႏဘာႏသာႏ ∙ မြန်မာဘာသာ ∙ ไทย ∙ 조선말 ∙ 한국어 ∙ 日本語 ∙ 简体中文‎ ∙ 繁體中文‎ ∙ עברית ∙ العربية ∙ پښتو ∙ فارسی ∙ ދިވެހިބަސް ∙ +/−

Affected:

And also:

Yours sincerely, Munjoola (talk) 11:23, 1 March 2017 (UTC)

Leandra Medine photos

Hey! I just received your notice and I added the source URL for these two photos: File:Leandra_Medine_cropped.jpg and File:Leandra_Medine_headshot.jpg. Please let me know if there's anything more I need to do.

Thank you! Werónika (talk) 06:55, 3 March 2017 (UTC)

@Werónika: Yes, please categorize the images. Elisfkc (talk) 17:27, 3 March 2017 (UTC)

File:Anna van Hannoverstraat 8, The Hague. Img.nr. 05 and 10

My mistake, the author apparently used different licenses for the same photoshoot. I should have looked closer. Please delete them. File:Anna van Hannoverstraat 8, The Hague. Img.nr. 05.jpg and File:Anna van Hannoverstraat 13, The Hague. Img.nr. 10.jpg
Regards, --oSeveno (talk) 17:35, 13 March 2017 (UTC)

File:SpaceX Launches Tenth Cargo Mission to the International Space Station.webm

File:SpaceX Launches Tenth Cargo Mission to the International Space Station.webm 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!
Afrikaans ∙ Bahasa Indonesia ∙ bosanski ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ dansk ∙ Deutsch ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ ∙ eesti ∙ English ∙ español ∙ Esperanto ∙ français ∙ galego ∙ hrvatski ∙ íslenska ∙ italiano ∙ magyar ∙ Nederlands ∙ norsk bokmål ∙ norsk nynorsk ∙ occitan ∙ Plattdüütsch ∙ polski ∙ português ∙ português do Brasil ∙ română ∙ shqip ∙ sicilianu ∙ slovenčina ∙ slovenščina ∙ suomi ∙ svenska ∙ Tiếng Việt ∙ Türkçe ∙ Zazaki ∙ Ελληνικά ∙ беларуская ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ ∙ български ∙ македонски ∙ русский ∙ српски / srpski ∙ українська ∙ հայերեն ∙ বাংলা ∙ മലയാളം ∙ ပအိုဝ်ႏဘာႏသာႏ ∙ မြန်မာဘာသာ ∙ ไทย ∙ 조선말 ∙ 한국어 ∙ 日本語 ∙ 简体中文‎ ∙ 繁體中文‎ ∙ עברית ∙ العربية ∙ پښتو ∙ فارسی ∙ ދިވެހިބަސް ∙ +/−

Msaynevirta (talk) 20:26, 13 March 2017 (UTC)

An unfree Flickr license has been found on File:Craig Cook.jpg

oh no what was wrong this time?, i checked it said it could be shared and be used for commercial use? i haven't modified it--Rcclh (talk) 17:27, 13 March 2017 (UTC)

@Rcclh: No derivatives are allowed (cropping, color balance, etc). Commons requires that (basically for Flickr, you are looking for CC-By, CC-By-SA, CC0, or US Government license tags). Elisfkc (talk) 17:29, 13 March 2017 (UTC)

I didn't crop it or make any adjustments, i just uploaded it directly? --Rcclh (talk) 22:12, 13 March 2017 (UTC)

@Rcclh: right, but we need the permission to do so/ Elisfkc (talk) 22:20, 13 March 2017 (UTC)

permission to make adjustments or upload it? it says i can share it if i don't adjust it - i shared it and i didn't adjust it? i give up, sorry for the inconvenience caused. --Rcclh (talk) 16:59, 14 March 2017 (UTC)

@Rcclh: Both. We need permission to make derivatives/adjustments on images. For example, on images with people, we need the ability to crop the image down for infoboxes on Wikipedia or to make slight color adjustments. The ND tag on a Creative Commons license does not give us that ability. Elisfkc (talk) 17:58, 14 March 2017 (UTC)

Flickr photos

Hi. Sorry, the images are public now, they had restricted for public, because a myself error before. Thanks for advising. Danny toons — Preceding unsigned comment added by Danny toons (talk • contribs) 00:59, 4 February 2017 (UTC)

Retrieved from "https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Elisfkc/Archive_3&oldid=238171414"