User talk:FunkMonk/Archives/2019

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

File:Education For Death.ogv

File:Education For Death.ogv 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 ∙ +/−

46.189.171.22 16:18, 16 January 2019 (UTC)

Log in problem

Hi am User:Ramblersen. I was logged out and am now unable to log back in. I am not sure if it is because I wrote the password incorrectly too many times or because I tried to change it and it was sent to a wrong e-mail. Either way, how do I get back into my account? (sorry for the inconvenience if this is not the write way to inquire about it). User:Ramblersen — Preceding unsigned comment was added by 89.23.235.183 (talk) 18:31, 20 January 2019 (UTC)

Hi, I think the best place to ask about this is Commons:Help desk. FunkMonk (talk) 21:33, 20 January 2019 (UTC)

File:Cookiecutter shark skull.png

File:Cookiecutter shark skull.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 ∙ +/−

76.187.211.251 07:24, 17 February 2019 (UTC)

Image without license

File:Moros intrepidus.png

dansk ∙ italiano ∙ sicilianu ∙ Deutsch ∙ català ∙ magyar ∙ čeština ∙ português do Brasil ∙ Esperanto ∙ español ∙ português ∙ English ∙ hrvatski ∙ français ∙ Nederlands ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ ∙ norsk nynorsk ∙ polski ∙ galego ∙ íslenska ∙ slovenščina ∙ suomi ∙ svenska ∙ Türkçe ∙ Ελληνικά ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ ∙ български ∙ македонски ∙ русский ∙ українська ∙ മലയാളം ∙ 日本語 ∙ 中文（简体）‎ ∙ 中文（繁體）‎ ∙ فارسی ∙ +/−

There seems to be a problem regarding the description and/or licensing of this particular file. It has been found that you've added in the image's description only a Template that's not a license and although it provides useful information about the image, it's not a valid license. Could you please resolve this problem, adding the license in the image linked above? You can edit the description page and change the text. Uploading a new version of the file does not change the description of the file. This page may give you more hints on which license to choose. Thank you.

This message was added automatically by MifterBot (Talk • Contribs • Owner), if you need some help about it please read the text above again and follow the links in it, if you still need help ask at the ? → Commons:Help desk in any language you like to use. --MifterBot (Talk • Contribs • Owner) 07:33, 22 February 2019 (UTC)

User:76.187.211.251

Just a head's up about this user, who is making a nuisance of himself generally, and continuing to make specious deletion requests --Epipelagic (talk) 23:31, 9 March 2019 (UTC)

Ah yes, I think a block would be in order, but I might be too involved, because he also DRed some of my uploads... FunkMonk (talk) 10:32, 10 March 2019 (UTC)

The Tendaguru diplodocids

Hi FunkMonk, I wouldn't upload images if they are not free, see the link provided. I may have selected CC-BY-4.0 instead of 3.0, but the work of the journal Fossil Record is released under the CC-BY license. Tisquesusa (talk) 15:16, 3 April 2019 (UTC)

Ok, better to use that link instead of the PDF then, otherwise it's impossible to verify. The PDF just says the publisher owns the copyright. FunkMonk (talk) 15:18, 3 April 2019 (UTC)
Files like this[1] have the same problem. FunkMonk (talk) 15:20, 3 April 2019 (UTC)

File:Zzzolomao.jpg

File:Zzzolomao.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 ∙ +/−

Soldier of Wasteland (talk) 14:37, 25 April 2019 (UTC)

“Strange rationale”

Good point: why should an object that is not in focus be considered in the categorization of the file? What exactly is the benefit in such a practice? To be honest, this is one of the strangest things I observe on Commons: Photographs are categorized because of things that are somewhere in the background, hardly recognizable, or make up a small to tiny portion of the photograph. This is ridiculous IMHO... --Gretarsson (talk) 18:56, 12 May 2019 (UTC)

If people for example look for images that depict various kinds of pterosaurs together, or in this case, Brazilian pterosaurs, or pterosaurs from the Romualdo Formation. There are more reasons for the category than not. FunkMonk (talk) 20:49, 12 May 2019 (UTC)
Nonsense. No one searches a particular category in order to find a blurry thing in the background. It’s just stupid to think so... --Gretarsson (talk) 22:19, 12 May 2019 (UTC)
And sorry, that’s not it. Imagine you are looking for a particular skeletal mount and you are guided via the categories to a photograph in which the object you are looking for is a blurry thing in the background. Wouldn’t you feel screwed? --Gretarsson (talk) 00:16, 13 May 2019 (UTC)
Not sure why you're so aggressive about this, it is a trivial issue, so the tone of this discussion is nonsense in itself. Yes, it is very likely someone would look for images that show multiple taxa from the same countries or formations, since I have just done so myself. It also serves to identify the subjects of the photos if they aren't in the description. FunkMonk (talk) 04:46, 13 May 2019 (UTC)
In don’t think that this is trivial, but that this is something very elementary. Don’t you think it would make more sense to mention details like the things appearing in the background in the description than to categorize the file correspondingly? I often notice that users here on commons apparently believe that the file name and the categories are the elements that should be used to describe (sic!) the content of the file/photograph, whereas the actual file description contains almost nothing. Isn’t that strange? Many files are almost useless because of improper file description. Especially your files often give a “good” example for improper file descriptions, so I wonder what “informations” are you actually talking about. The description of the file in question contains the words “Thalassodromeus - 01”, and that’s it. The file name says “Thalassodromeus in Japan”. How should anyone know that Thalassodromeus is a taxon from of Brazil, not from Japan, an that it occurs together with Anhanguera in the Santana Group without wildly clicking through the categories (which could be wrong btw)? If I am looking for reliable informations on fossil taxa, I surely don’t do it at Commons, for several reasons. And regarding the “multiple taxa” thing: If these taxa are all in focus, multiple categorization would be fine (but would also depend on degree of information detail and number -- some of those figures should rather be treated as representation of the diversity of the group than as representations of individual taxa, e.g. this one), but if only one is in focus and all other are blurry somewhere in the background it would not... --Gretarsson (talk) 11:30, 13 May 2019 (UTC)
We are going in circles, and I simply disagree. But for example, I mention in the Thalassodromeus taxobox caption what other genus is shown in the background, which helps the reader distinguish the two. If it is helpful there, it is certainly helpful here. FunkMonk (talk) 11:01, 23 May 2019 (UTC)

EurekAlert

Hi, instead of spamming templates on my talk page, could you participate in this discussion? --Paranaja (talk) 21:12, 29 June 2019 (UTC)

Already did. And they all need to be deleted, EurekaAlert did not create those images, so what they say there is irrelevant. FunkMonk (talk) 21:13, 29 June 2019 (UTC)

here

ulemasaurus, he has shown the creative commons now--Bubblesorg (talk) 19:56, 7 July 2019 (UTC)

Ok, but you should say that in the DR where others can see it, not here. FunkMonk (talk) 20:25, 7 July 2019 (UTC)

okay--Bubblesorg (talk) 22:37, 10 July 2019 (UTC)

Im requesting a move

https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Troodon_skeletal.jpg--Bubblesorg (talk) 15:38, 28 August 2019 (UTC)

File:Assassins2-alamut.jpg

File:Assassins2-alamut.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 ∙ +/−

Hanooz 17:56, 15 September 2019 (UTC)

File:Equus hemionus hemippus.jpg

File:Equus hemionus hemippus.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 ∙ +/−

JuTa 11:39, 6 October 2019 (UTC)

Q

Hi FunkMonk! Could you please have a look at the move request @ Category:Members of the Danish Folketing for Enhedslisten? I'm not fluent in DA-politics. C(_) Cheers! --Hedwig in Washington (mail?) 01:13, 7 November 2019 (UTC)

Hi, hmmm, it's a bit of a weird mix of English and Danish. "Members of the Danish Folketing for Enhedslisten" uses the Danish names for both the Danish parliament and the party, yet "Members of the Danish Folketing for The Red–Green Alliance (Denmark)" uses the Danish name for the parliament but English name for the party. Not sure what policies are, but I'd think consistency was best? FunkMonk (talk) 08:54, 7 November 2019 (UTC)
Yes, I think it should be either EN or DA. Not some weird mischmasch. --Hedwig in Washington (mail?) 07:25, 9 November 2019 (UTC)
So I guess it's a matter of precedence. What the other related categories are called. FunkMonk (talk) 17:57, 11 November 2019 (UTC)
Here it goes:

Category:Members of the Danish Folketing by political party

  • Members of the Danish Folketing for Alternativet
  • Members of the Danish Folketing for Dansk Folkeparti
  • Members of the Danish Folketing for Enhedslisten
  • Members of the Danish Folketing for Højre
  • Members of the Danish Folketing for Det Konservative Folkeparti
  • Members of the Danish Folketing for Liberal Alliance
  • Members of the Danish Folketing for Radikale Venstre
  • Members of the Danish Folketing for the Socialdemocrats
  • Members of the Danish Folketing for Socialistisk Folkeparti
  • Members of the Danish Folketing for Venstre

Category:Enhedslisten

  • Lars Dohn
  • Morten Kabell
  • Rosa Lund
  • Members of the Danish Folketing for Enhedslisten
  • Søren Søndergaard
What do you think? --Hedwig in Washington (mail?) 08:26, 12 November 2019 (UTC)
Clearly the others use Danish terms for both the parliament and parties. So I think the move request is a bad idea for consistency. FunkMonk (talk) 11:14, 12 November 2019 (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, .     Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 15:17, 8 November 2019 (UTC)

Painting on commission

Dear FunkMonk, can you please give me the paragraph saying that paintings made on commission of the US-Government can be in Wikimedia commons? I assume a certain artist will look it up, if paintings have been deleted or not. Then we should be able to give him a reasoning. Sciencia58 (talk) 09:26, 19 November 2019 (UTC)

It is the licence used on the images in question, can be seen here:[2] FunkMonk (talk) 09:35, 19 November 2019 (UTC)
This one is Smithsonian specific:[3] FunkMonk (talk) 09:42, 19 November 2019 (UTC)

File:Parasaurolophus walkeri.jpg

Hi, what do you mean that you can't change perspective of a 3D object, only a 2D object? This is not a 3D pic. In its current shape is very much distorted and I've corrected this acute barell distortion. I would be grateful for your comments. Thank you! --Jacek Halicki (talk) 17:04, 18 December 2019 (UTC)

Hi. The object in the photo is three dimensional. If you take a photo of my face from a low angle, you can't "correct" the angle to show it more from the direct front, because the photo simply doesn't have the required information for it. You will never be able to show the top of my nose or the top of my forehead, etc. It is the same with any 3D object. But looking at your edit again, it doesn't seem like you've actually changed the perspective, but rather just cropped and tilted it differently? In which case it should be fine. FunkMonk (talk) 00:49, 19 December 2019 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:FunkMonk/Archives/2019&oldid=419483914"