User talk:Fma12/Archive 3

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

2 ≤ - Go to archive: - ≥ 4

The English description can live with the Spanish description.

Please do not delete the description in Spanish, especially in an image that covers a topic of Spanish-speaking country.

[1]

Thanks

--Roberto Fiadone (talk) 02:35, 17 September 2014 (UTC)

I expanded the description in English adding data about the monument and its history; As a matter of fact, I didn't realize that I had not translated the description to Spanish when updating the information. It was my mistake, of course; although we should not forget that Commons' primary language is English. Fma12 (talk) 02:55, 17 September 2014 (UTC)
Ok, no problem. I did notice it because that mistake is very common and has made descriptions in other languages ​​were lost. Thanks for the description in English, is welcome, of course. --Roberto Fiadone (talk) 13:00, 17 September 2014 (UTC)

File:Guild logo.png

Pay attention to copyright
File:Guild logo.png has been marked as a possible copyright violation. Wikimedia Commons only accepts free content—that is, images and other media files that can be used by anyone, for any purpose. Traditional copyright law does not grant these freedoms, and unless noted otherwise, everything you find on the web is copyrighted and not permitted here. For details on what is acceptable, please read Commons:Licensing. You may also find Commons:Copyright rules useful, or you can ask questions about Commons policies at the Commons:Help desk. If you are the copyright holder and the creator of the file, please read Commons:But it's my own work! for tips on how to provide evidence of that.

The file you added may soon be deleted. If you have written permission from the copyright holder, please replace the copyvio tag with {{subst:OP}} and have them send us a free license release via COM:VRT. If you disagree that the file is a copyright violation for any other reason, please replace the copyvio tag with a regular deletion request.

Warning: Wikimedia Commons takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing.

Afrikaans ∙ asturianu ∙ azərbaycanca ∙ Bahasa Indonesia ∙ Bahasa Melayu ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ dansk ∙ Deutsch ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ ∙ English ∙ español ∙ euskara ∙ français ∙ galego ∙ hrvatski ∙ italiano ∙ Lëtzebuergesch ∙ magyar ∙ Malti ∙ Nederlands ∙ norsk bokmål ∙ norsk nynorsk ∙ oʻzbekcha / ўзбекча ∙ Plattdüütsch ∙ polski ∙ português ∙ português do Brasil ∙ română ∙ sicilianu ∙ slovenčina ∙ slovenščina ∙ suomi ∙ svenska ∙ Türkçe ∙ Tiếng Việt ∙ Zazaki ∙ Ελληνικά ∙ беларуская ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ ∙ български ∙ македонски ∙ русский ∙ српски / srpski ∙ тоҷикӣ ∙ українська ∙ հայերեն ∙ मराठी ∙ বাংলা ∙ മലയാളം ∙ ပအိုဝ်ႏဘာႏသာႏ ∙ မြန်မာဘာသာ ∙ ไทย ∙ 한국어 ∙ 日本語 ∙ 中文（简体）‎ ∙ 中文（繁體）‎ ∙ עברית ∙ العربية ∙ فارسی ∙ +/−

Fred the Oyster (talk) 02:26, 27 September 2014 (UTC)


File:Guild logo.png

File:Guild logo.png 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 ∙ +/−

Fma12 (talk) 02:42, 27 September 2014 (UTC)

Mensaje

Buenas, he recibido un email informándome de un mensaje emitido desde su cuenta. Agradecería me aclarase el contenido del mismo. Un saludo.

Hola, no tendría ningún problema en hacerlo si ud. firmara su mensaje, así puedo saber quién me ha escrito, dado que he editado varias páginas de usuarios en el día de hoy. Aguardo su respuesta.
Ups. Tiene razón :) Guyweisz
El tema al que hice referencia es que Commons no permite logos (como el que ud subió de Anarma) ya que están sujetos a copyright, a menos que sean de un diseño extremadamente simple (donde se tiene en cuenta su poca originalidad al realizarlo). Le recomiendo leer: Com:Logos y Com:TOO que abundan en estas cuestiones. Saludos, ;) Fma12 (talk) 17:24, 2 October 2014 (UTC)
Ok, lo entiendo. El logo en cuestión fue creación mía, en su día yo era miembro de la junta directiva de dicha asociación y me encargué entre otras cosas de crear el escudo que según entiendo sigue sirviendo de logo en la actualidad. Puesto que ya no formo parte de esa organización y no estoy al tanto de su trayectoria actual (ni quiero estarlo), cualquier decisión me parece correcta mientras se tenga en cuenta que yo jamás haya subido una imagen a la que no tuviera derecho, ni haya infrijido derechos de autor en absoluto. Pues no sólo que soy yo el autor de dicha imagen sino que como parte de mis deberes era difundirla y publicarla en los medios de comunicación. Dicho esto, esa imagen es propiedad de la asociación con la que en la actualidad no tengo nada que ver. Agredecería tuvieran lo dicho en cuenta y no me consideren un "copyright infringer". Gracias.

I received a message stating that our theatre logo was in question of copyright. We bought the logo graphic more than 10 years ago and have been using it on our publicity, etc., for that length of time or more.

Hi, I recommend you to take a look at Com:OTRS, which states Commons' policies for cases like this. Regards, Fma12 (talk) 17:19, 2 October 2014 (UTC)

Logo Comafi

Hola. Quería comentarte que el logo del Banco COmafi habría que reemplazarlo ya que no es el que corresponde. Desde ya, muchas gracias.--Hergallego (talk) 14:05, 3 October 2014 (UTC)

Hola, ¿a qué te referís con "no es el que corresponde"? Según tengo entendido, el logo sigue siendo el mismo, según acabo de ver en la (web del banco). Si podés editar el existente y mejorarlo, desde ya sentite libre de hacerlo, aunque no parezca es un logo algo complicado en la zona de gradientes y el tono de color tan particular. Cualquier consulta o aclaración no dejes de hacérmela. Saludos, Fma12 (talk) 14:18, 3 October 2014 (UTC)

Hola! El correcto logo del Banco Comafi es donde está incluido Banco Comafi + Si te va bien, nos va bien, habría que reemplazarlo ya que no es el que corresponde (web del banco) Yo intente incluirlo al articulo correspondiente, pero no comprendo la manera para no infringir los derechos de autor. Fma12 , si vos comprendés como modificarlo, por favor realizado o indicame como debería solucionarlo. Muchas Gracias!

Te comento, es algo complicado el tema con el Comafi, de hecho yo mismo podría subirlo como PNG (fondo transparente), pero el problema es que es un logo que tiene una cierta complejidad (diseño, degradados, efectos de luz) y por eso podrían nominarlo para eliminar. No estoy seguro que la licencia {{PD-textlogo}} sea adecuada para este logo, por eso de mi parte prefiero no incluírlo. El logo que yo mismo había hecho en Corel ya fue eliminado por ese motivo. Saludos, Fma12 (talk) 13:49, 19 November 2014 (UTC)

File:Indexventures logo.png

Please remember to upload images at their full resolution. Magog the Ogre (talk) (contribs) 18:55, 4 October 2014 (UTC)

Right, but you should remember not to overwrite new files with old versions, too. Fma12 (talk) 20:16, 4 October 2014 (UTC)

Hi Fma12, I'm a relatively new editor, but I was just looking at the license for the AIG logo, and noticed it was classified as public domain. Any chance you can look up in the Wikimedia Commons OTRS queue and take a look at how the logo was submitted? When you find the original submission, could you help me understand how and who decides to re-assign a particular CC license to public domain? I'd appreciate any help you can give me. Thanks! --FacultiesIntact (talk) 19:40, 18 November 2014 (UTC)

Hi, FacultiesIntact, the logo was tagged as "public domain" because this emblem is considered to be below the threshold of originality due to its simple design with no complex elements or effects. The same license applies to other simple logos such as Sony, Minnesota Vikings, or images that are of common use with no original authorship, p.e. this simple icon.
That's the reason because the AIG logo was uploaded under a PD license so an OTRS ticket is no needed for cases like this. In addition, I suggest you to take a look at Copyright tags page, which will surely be very useful for a better comprehension of the topic. In case you need some help, please don't hesitate to contact me. Regards ! Fma12 (talk) 22:05, 18 November 2014 (UTC)

File:Whistl post logo.png

File:Whistl post logo.png 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 ∙ +/−

Magog the Ogre (talk) (contribs) 23:34, 18 November 2014 (UTC)

File:Chile foot assoc logo.png

File:Chile foot assoc logo.png 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 ∙ +/−

//  Gikü  said  done  Thursday, 27 November 2014 20:43 (UTC) 20:43, 27 November 2014 (UTC)

New level {{User VG-4}}

Hi ; new level 4 for you ?

VG-4
This user is able to contribute with an expert level on vector graphics.

--Medium69 You wanted talk to me? 14:43, 11 December 2014 (UTC)

Hi, thanks for considering me. "Practice makes me better". Thanks again ;) Fma12 (talk) 17:38, 11 December 2014 (UTC)


Color change

Hello. Could you possibly change the color for the File:UCLA bruins textlogo.svg file? UCLA updated their colors a couple of years ago and it looks like the school is now using #347bad as the text hex code for the web [2]. I don't have the tools to do vectorized files and I don't want to get them, so that is why I am asking you. Thanks, Corkythehornetfan (Talk) 05:02, 28 February 2015 (UTC)

Hi, there is no problem to change that colors so I have the accurate software to do it. I'll modify the image and then I'll upload it as a new file to keep the old version. Thanks for your message, regards. Fma12 (talk) 17:06, 28 February 2015 (UTC)
Thanks! Corkythehornetfan (Talk) 19:05, 28 February 2015 (UTC)

File:Ferrobaires logo.png

File:Ferrobaires logo.png 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 ∙ +/−

Mega-buses (talk) 19:30, 2 March 2015 (UTC)

Logotipo America TV

Buenas. He visto tus excelentes trabajos realizando logotipos de diferentes cosas. Me gustaria -si es posible- si pudieras realizar el logotipo de America Tv [3]. He tenido inconvientes para con la imagen que subi[4] porque sobrepasa el umbral de originalidad. Desde ya agradezco tu atencion. Muchas Gracias. --Ellibriano3015 (talk) 23:06, 20 March 2015 (UTC)

Hola. Muchas gracias por tus elogios a mis trabajos. Te comento, no puedo realizar el logo de América para subirlo aqúí a Commons porque hacerlo tal cual es, sobrepasaría el umbral de originalidad y me lo borrarían, por lo cual sería perder el tiempo. De hecho, hay una versión más simple subida aquí en formato curvas SVG, que sí califica para {{PD-textlogo}}. Saludos, Fma12 (talk) 03:41, 22 March 2015 (UTC)

I saw that you created File:UCLA bruins textlogo.svg in 2004. It looks like the color scheme has since updated. Would you be able to update this file from http://legacy.asucla.ucla.edu/licensing/index.asp Unfortuantely, I'm not that skilled at graphics processing. Thanks in advance Bagumba (talk) 00:00, 22 March 2015 (UTC)

Apparently a duplicate request from #Color_change above.Bagumba (talk) 06:01, 22 March 2015 (UTC)


File:LosAngeles Lakers logo.svg

Pay attention to copyright
Wikimedia Commons does not accept fair use content.

We do this because Commons is a shared media repository. Downstream wikis have different policies based on local laws. Uses that are acceptable under US law, for example, may not be acceptable in many other countries with more restrictive rules.

In addition, fair use is not compatible with our aim as a collection of freely distributable media files.

Therefore, Commons cannot legally rely on fair use provisions.

Non-free content that may be used with reference to fair use may be uploaded locally if your project allows this.

العربية ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ ∙ বাংলা ∙ čeština ∙ dansk ∙ Deutsch ∙ English ∙ español ∙ فارسی ∙ suomi ∙ français ∙ עברית ∙ hrvatski ∙ magyar ∙ 日本語 ∙ 한국어 ∙ македонски ∙ മലയാളം ∙ မြန်မာဘာသာ ∙ Nederlands ∙ Plattdüütsch ∙ polski ∙ português ∙ português do Brasil ∙ svenska ∙ Türkçe ∙ Tiếng Việt ∙ русский ∙ 中文 ∙ 中文（简体）‎ ∙ 中文（繁體）‎ ∙ বাংলা  ∙ +/−

George Ho (talk) 20:51, 23 March 2015 (UTC)

File tagging File:Dep guaymallen logo.png

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 may be deleted.
Thanks for uploading File:Dep guaymallen logo.png. 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).

Warning: unless the permission information is given, the file may be deleted after seven days. Thank you.

shizhao (talk) 12:40, 25 March 2015 (UTC)

Nuevos FA

Hola Fma12. Gracias por el arreglo File:Nuevos FA (svg).svg. Los gráficos vectoriales son un misterio para mí. Saludos. --· Favalli ⟡ 00:44, 31 March 2015 (UTC)

Hola Favalli, me alegra que te haya gustado, me debía hacer el SVG de FA, lo tenía en mente hace rato y hoy contaba con el tiempo y quedé conforme con el resultado. Si necesitás vectorizar algo, hacémelo saber. Saludos Fma12 (talk) 02:26, 31 March 2015 (UTC)


peter m. wolf image

Hi Timtrent,

I am in the process of gaining permission from Jade Albert for use of this photo. I am also having trouble downloading the image in a controlled fashion (putting it at the top of the info box). Can you help direct me as to how to do this?


Fuentes de planos de lineas ferroviarias

¿Como te va? Estoy haciendo un trabajo sobre el sistema ferroviario argentino, y me gustaría conocer las fuentes que tomaste para elaborar los planos que subiste de las distintas líneas, ya que me son de gran utilidad, pero necesito referenciarlos.

¡Muchas gracias!

Leandro

Hola Leandro, te comento, las fuentes que tomé en su mayoría fueron los mismos artículos de Wiki sobre ffcc, donde detallaban los recorridos de cada línea, y yo iba trazando en los mapas en base a esos datos. En otros casos, tomaba los mapas comunes (cualquier mapa político de cada provincia) y los utilizaba como referencia para calcarlos en Corel (el soft donde armé todos los mapas.)

Fue un trabajo realmente artesanal.

Cualquier otra duda que tengas, no dudes contactarme, saludos !
Fernando

Template:PD-AR-Gov

Hi! My Spanish is not the best but I tried to check above template created by you (see also http://www.wipo.int/wipolex/en/details.jsp?id=7088). As you did not cited paragraphs and/or articles of law 11.723 could you explain why Argentine national, provincial or municipal symbols are in PD (including Government agencies and security forces official symbols or emblems)? Thy in advance. Gunnex (talk) 21:43, 31 May 2015 (UTC)

Hi, Gunnex! thanks for your contact. First of all, Law 11.723 only refers to copyright over artistic works (anonymous - art 8, 28); photos and movies (art. 34); paintings, sculptures, drawings (art. 5), omitting national symbols completely.
In fact, national and provincial symbols were not mentioned until 1981 when promulgation of Law 22.362 stated (art 3, section f): "Can't be registered... symbols used by the Nation, provinces, municipalities and religious organization" (translated from Spanish), which makes them free of copyright.
Referring to national symbols specifically, the {{PD-AR-Gov}} mentions Decree Nº 10.302/944 (at bottom), which states: "All persons are free to use the Argentine National symbols with due respect and honour" (art. 1°). Moreover, in Argentina national, provincial or municipal symbols are allways promulgated by a Law of their respectives legislatures, subsquently published on the Official Bulletin and Congress of Argentina.
Nevertheless, not all government agencies symbols are free; some of them (above the TOO) were uploaded here under {{CC-AR-Presidency}} license; p.e. the Telam (official news agency) logo. In the case of security forces (p.e. police) some of them are attributed {{CC-AR-GCBA}} for the Policía Metropolitana emblem; or anonymous works (Province of BA Police). In fact, I myself have nominated some of those symbols for deletion because they are not PD for the reasons explained above.
If you need further assist on this issue, please let me know. Thanks. - Fma12 (talk) 22:48, 31 May 2015 (UTC)
Hi! Thx for your response. " Law 11.723 (...) omitting national symbols completely (...)" Yup, that confirms my check. Well, Law Nº 22.362 is about trademarks (and not copyright) = (22.362/3.f) "No pueden ser registrados (...) símbolos, que usen o deban usar la Nación, las provincias, las municipalidades, las organizaciones religiosas y sanitarias". And this confusion between copyright & trademark law reminds of the discussion we had already concerning {{PD-BrazilGov}} (= Commons:Deletion requests/Template:PD-BrazilGov 2, btw: the law situation and text Brazil <--> Argentina is quite similar). In short: trademark law does not care about copyright. In long: e.g. File:Coca-Cola logo.svg --> the logo is in public domain but if someone else than Coca Cola Corp. would start today producing similar soft drinks and selling them with a packaging carrying the Coca-Cola logo... yes, your guess is correct: the new producer will be forced to quit immediately, suffering juridical claims from Coca Cola Corp. for (economic/trademarks related) damages, because the specific "Coca-Cola" lettering is protected by trademark law and both producers are disputing the same market. And to avoid similar confusions the Argentine (and Brazilian) legislator made it clear from the beginning: offical symbols can't be registered as trademark.
Summarizing: official federal, state, or municipal symbols of Argentina may be in PD due to it's age (or by other means) but are not IMHO in PD by a generalized {{PD-AR-Gov}}-license. Consequently, all (+/-) 450 files licensed with this template should be analyzed case-by-case (eventually PD by other means)... but most of them will have to go. Gunnex (talk) 00:42, 1 June 2015 (UTC)
Gunnex, as Law 11.723 does not mention national symbols, I used TM Law 22.362 as reference (which does mention national symbols excempting them from registration, but I could not cite it as a reference due to it refers to trademark while Commons is about copyright). But Law 11.723 is also valid because it is not including the national symbols as subjects of copyright, limiting only to artistic works as I said before.
Argentine and Brazilian cases are quite similar, and I agree with you in the point of analyzing case by case, but only in the examples not included in the Law (specifically, armed forces and provincial polices, which are more questionable IMO) or most recently created emblems whose authors are known and/or still alive so {{PD-old}} or {{PD-AR-Anonymous}} (+50) can't be applied, p.e. File:Bandera de la Provincia de Tierra del Fuego.svg. - Fma12 (talk) 03:54, 1 June 2015 (UTC)


Hello, Fma12. You have new messages at Canopus49's talk page.
You may remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

asturianu ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца) ∙ български ∙ বাংলা ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ Deutsch ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form) ∙ English ∙ español ∙ suomi ∙ français ∙ galego ∙ हिन्दी ∙ hrvatski ∙ magyar ∙ italiano ∙ 日本語 ∙ ქართული ∙ македонски ∙ മലയാളം ∙ Plattdüütsch ∙ Nederlands ∙ português ∙ română ∙ русский ∙ sicilianu ∙ slovenščina ∙ svenska ∙ Tagalog ∙ Türkçe ∙ 简体中文 ∙ 繁體中文 ∙ +/−

File:Grandcentral terminal ny.jpg

I noticed you transferred File:Grandcentral terminal ny.jpg from en.wp but changed the authorship to Reed and Stem. The local file was always understood as the work of Simon Fieldhouse, who contributed other line drawings, and I haven't seen evidence to the contrary. Could you please explain further? Best, Mackensen (talk) 01:28, 13 June 2015 (UTC)

Hi Mackensen; Indeed, I could not find the image on the website cited by the uploader as source, therefore I credited both architects as the original designers of the project (the fact of which is indisputable). Besides, if you have enough proof that Fieldhouse made the GCT rendition, go ahead and give credit to him. Best regards, Fma12 (talk) 03:05, 13 June 2015 (UTC)
I'm not following you. The image was explicitly credited to him as a self-upload on en.wp before you changed it. Although the user is no longer active, there doesn't seem to have been much question that he was who he claimed to be, and in any event a color detail version of the drawing is available on his website via the Wayback Machine. Unless this drawing was made by Reed and Stern then I can see no basis for crediting them, nor for changing the copyright status. The resulting image here on Commons is deeply misleading: crediting a different author and a different copyright claim (PD-old vice PD-author), without the upload history from en.wp which breaks attribution (not necessary with PD, but good to have in principle). I'm sorry to be difficult but this really isn't ok and I'm going to restore the original credit. Mackensen (talk) 03:53, 13 June 2015 (UTC)
Don't worry, Mackensen, Wheter the image was credited to Fieldhouse or its original designers Reed & Stem, I uploaded it to Commons with the convincement it met the criteria to be uploaded here. And this is what really matters to me.
I'm not thinking you're following me (although it may seems the contrary, considering the circumstances) and I don't take it as something personal. But ..... if you overwrite the image that I've uploaded (which is exactly the same than the original, with only a slight rotation so the en.wiki version was a bit skewed), I may think you want to enter into an unncessary and disrupting dispute. Is really necessary to be rude like that? Please don't start an non-sense edit warring. I'm not a rookie here, take a look at my user page and list of contributions. I have always been collaborative, I'm asking you the same.
Sorry but mentioning both architects as the original designers of the building (what I have just done) is also a good-faith edit to add more information to the image. If I know who were them, why to omit it? I think they deserve to be credited as well. That won't change the license status, of course. I think this debate is concluded. Thanks. - Fma12 (talk) 16:19, 13 June 2015 (UTC)
To be clear, when I said I wasn't "following" I meant that I didn't understand why you did what you did (I still don't). I'm an administrator on the English Wikipedia and I regularly patrol Category:Wikipedia files with a different name on Wikimedia Commons which is how I came upon this image. Transferring an image between wikis requires transferring the actual image, and the upload history. By changing the attribution and rotating the image when you uploaded it here (without uploading the original first) you did neither. I was unable to delete the image on the English Wikipedia until I'd restored the original, correct authorship and uploaded the original image. Furthermore, you didn't add more information to the image, you deliberately erased the original author and substituted a different one on no evidence. The effect of those edits was to transform a sketch from the 2000s into an architectural drawing from the 1900s. That's not the correct outcome, and I cannot fathom why you're accusing me of "rudeness" or "disruption" for complying with the basic requirements of the project and faithfully transferring the image. As you say, we're done here, but I hope that you'll be more careful in the future. Best, Mackensen (talk) 20:45, 13 June 2015 (UTC)
Rotating the image is a constructive edit so if I had to do it again, not only on this image but in any image in order to improve its quality, be sure I'll do it. And I think that who "should be more careful" is no other tan you, p.e., when deliberately erasing architects names as you did previously. Have a good day. - Fma12 (talk) 21:17, 13 June 2015 (UTC)
I apologize but I can't let this go. I think it's fascinating that you still think it's no big deal to take an image created by an identified person in the 2000s, backdate it a hundred years, arbitrarily assign ownership to a different author with no evidence, and then yell at the bewildered person who came round for an explanation. Wikipedia:Moving files to the Commons is specific about how to transwiki an image. If you don't feel comfortable following those steps then maybe you shouldn't do it. The outcome of your actions would have been an outright copyright violation if the image hadn't released into the public domain. As it stood it was an act of historical falsification (hoax) which might well have misled people from years to come. That you still don't see the problem concerns me greatly and I'm considering next steps. Mackensen (talk) 03:14, 14 June 2015 (UTC)
Sorry but I really think you are making of this a bigger thing that it really is. And considering the situation, I feel the need to clear some points to you: 1) I have never moved a copyrighted image from Wiki to Commons. If I uploaded the GCT here was because of the "copy to wikimedia commons" tag put above the file and with the convincement it was suitable enough to be placed on Commons. 2) I did not assign ownership "arbitrarily" as you state, so the article itself gaves credit to both architects as designers of the building (Based on sources such as NY Times although the Wiki article does not cite any of them). Well, my mistake was not having searched on Wayback machine for a previous version of the page showing the GCT rendition by Fieldhouse. Do you think it represents an act of bad faith from my part? Have I commited a copyright infringement? I don't think so.
Summarizing, you came here requesting for an explanation, I gave you my reasons (not "yelling" as you said but being as polite as I could), then you changed the license tag, I considered this discussion over, so.... what are you 'still' concern about?
It's hard to understand why a simple move from a project to another can cause this kind a controversy. I don't want to sound rude or unpolite to you, but so long discussion about a simple action takes away the willingness of collaborating here, at least to me, seriously. - Fma12 (talk) 03:50, 14 June 2015 (UTC)
My concern is simply that you don't seem to see a distinction between the author of an image, and the designer of a building. The image you uploaded was (as far as we know, and there is no evidence to the contrary) drawn by Simon Fieldhouse (who happens to be notable). Grand Central Terminal was designed by Reed and Stem. What I do not understand, and continue to not understand, is why you decided that they, and not Fieldhouse, were the author of the image. That's what seems arbitrary. Commons is a curated collection of free media. Data integrity is important. Presenting a modern image such as this as an early-20th century drawing by the original architects is deeply misleading, bordering on a hoax--surely you can see that. If you're going to be working with other people's images on Commons then you need a strong understanding of copyright. I can't reconcile your actions here with your excellent statement on your userpage about respecting original authorship. This is a long discussion because, from my perspective, you still don't see the fundamental problem with how you carried out this transfer. Mackensen (talk) 04:17, 14 June 2015 (UTC)

Bots


You are receiving this message because a technical change may affect a bot, gadget, or user script you have been using. The breaking change involves API calls. This change has been planned for two years. The WMF will start making this change on 30 June 2015. A partial list of affected bots can be seen here: https://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikitech-l/2015-June/081931.html This includes all bots that are using pywikibot compat. Some of these bots have already been fixed. However, if you write user scripts or operate a bot that uses the API, then you should check your code, to make sure that it will not break.

What, exactly, is breaking? The "default continuation mode" for action=query requests to api.php will be changing to be easier for new coders to use correctly. To find out whether your script or bot may be affected, then search the source code (including any frameworks or libraries) for the string "query-continue". If that is not present, then the script or bot is not affected. In a few cases, the code will be present but not used. In that case, the script or bot will continue working.

This change will be part of 1.26wmf12. It will be deployed to test wikis (including mediawiki.org) on 30 June, to non-Wikipedias (such as Wiktionary) on 1 July, and to all Wikipedias on 2 July 2015.

If your bot or script is receiving the warning about this upcoming change (as seen at https://www.mediawiki.org/w/api.php?action=query&list=allpages ), it's time to fix your code!

Either of the above solutions may be tested immediately, you'll know it works because you stop seeing the warning.

Do you need help with your own bot or script? Ask questions in e-mail on the mediawiki-api or wikitech-l mailing lists. Volunteers at m:Tech or w:en:WP:Village pump (technical) or w:en:Wikipedia:Bot owners' noticeboard may also be able to help you.

Are you using someone else's gadgets or user scripts? Most scripts are not affected. To find out if a script you use needs to be updated, then post a note at the discussion page for the gadget or the talk page of the user who originally made the script. Whatamidoing (WMF) (talk) 19:03, 17 June 2015 (UTC)

Moebius film poster

Hi! I tried to upload a poster for the film Moebius (set in the Subte) a while back, but it got deleted. I assume a film poster constitutes fair use as long as it is only used in that specific Wikipedia page, but I don't really know what kind of tags to use so it doesn't get deleted. this is one example of the poster, but there are others. What do you suggest? SegataSanshiro1 (talk) 22:33, 18 June 2015 (UTC)

Hi, SegataSanshiro1. I must tell you that all the fair use images should be uploaded to Wikipedia and not here because Commons does not accept fair use, that's the reason because the poster was deleted. For example, X-Men film poster uses the tag {{Non-free poster}}, only available on Wiki.
If you don't mind, I could upload the poster so you can see the process and then going on with other similar images for yourself. But to do that, I need you provide me the exact name of the article so that is a mandatory paramether in the upload form. Otherwise, the system won't allow you to upload file and the upload will be cancelled.
I'll be awaiting for your reply, thanks ! Fma12 (talk) 23:18, 18 June 2015 (UTC)

Rosas

I'm asking you to stop into using lightning to change the visual of the two Rosas pictures. That way they are now is how they look in person. If you want to add your version, then upload them into a new file. --Lecen (talk) 20:32, 22 June 2015 (UTC)

User talk:Lecen In fact, you're the person who don't seem to understand that the versions you uploaded are too dark. I only applied some filters to improve the files. I'm who request you not to revert the files again. Uploading duplicate files has no sense - Fma12 (talk) 20:49, 22 June 2015 (UTC)
I'll be archiving this so I've just lost enough time with you. Fma12 (talk) 17:37, 23 June 2015 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Fma12/Archive_3&oldid=738120278"