User talk:Gunnex/Archive 2

From Wikimedia Commons, the free media repository
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Archive 1 Archive 2 Archive 3 Archive 4 Archive 5

Pedido

Olá Gunnex, que tal se juntar à matilha, e poder ajudar aqui sem esse saco todo de ficar esperando que alguém responda de volta? ;) -- Darwin Ahoy! 23:08, 23 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Oi DarwIn! Bom: a situação aqui é parecida com minha atividade atualmente por diversas razões reduzida na ptwiki (na qual já recusei várias vezes o cargo da "matilha" :-) ). Resumindo: Vou ficar aqui também naquela história de um Dom Quixote lutando contra os moinhos... ;-) Alias, considero a minha experiência aqui ainda meio limitada. Em outras palavras: Ainda não conseguiu programar o meu GPS de maneira suficiente para andar seguramente no jângal das licenças... Independentemente disso, me sinto melhor mexer aqui sem maiores responsabilidades e/ou deveres nas costas. Espero que entenda - mesmo assim: muito obrigado.

(...) Now that Fastily is no longer an admin (...)

— INeverCry
Arrg...  :-((. Gunnex (talk) 11:04, 24 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Olá Gunnex, eu entendo o seu receio em aceitar a nomeação, mas acredite que não é esse bicho de 7 cabeças, pelo menos não tanto como o fazem na wiki-pt. Você diz que tem uma actividade reduzida aqui, mas isso não é verdade, pelos padrões médios daqui creio que é até bastante activo. Em relação ao pântano das licenças, é assim mesmo, eu próprio ando metido nele até ao pescoço. Estamos quase todos aqui assim, são muito raros os utilizadores que são gurus de licenciamento, e entre esses nem sei se algum é administrador. Mas é para isso mesmo que existe a documentação, e o fórum de dúvidas sobre copyright.
O facto é que é chato quando você vem aqui fazer qualquer coisa e tem de ficar esperando a burocracia administrativa, quando podia fazer isso você mesmo em 2 segundos. Foi essa mesma a razão principal porque eu me candidatei, porque estava farto de esperar por eliminações de copyvios, renomeações de ficheiros, etc. Não foi certamente para passar a ser "administrador" no lugar de editor, e aliás, eu escrevi isso mesmo na nomeação. Claro que às vezes a gente se empolga e acaba perdendo mais tempo do que se quer nessas funções administrativas, mas isso é escolha pessoal de cada um. Peço-lhe que reconsidere, acredite que não tem nada a perder.-- Darwin Ahoy! 13:58, 24 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Darwin, você está insistindo :-). Olha, para meu trabalho aqui eu não preciso os botões, como também na ptwiki nunca precisava dos botões. Não me importa quantos dias um copyvio identificado por mim fica numa categoria de manutenção. O importante é (e esta é a minha satisfação pessoal): aquela imagem foi revisada. Meu negócio aqui é simples: ajudar um pouco no patrulhamento dos uploads e organizar imagens. Sem mais, sem nada. Alias, estou - como na ptwiki - mais interessado em verificar uploads (edições) históricos, atualmente passando pela Category:All media needing categories as of 2012 (+/- 170.000 files) e pelo TOC em língua ru. De resto, leio muito nos DR, forums, etc. (tudo muito interessante), mas não participo muito. Em outras palavras: Estou me divertindo, partilhando um passatempo, cada imagem (que considero "interessante") é um desafio novo ;-)... é difícil de explicar. Mesmo assim, espero que entenda. --Gunnex (talk) 22:05, 25 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Claro que entendo o receio inicial, mas acredite que não tem aquela pressão absurda da pt-wiki, é mesmo só mais umas ferramentas que você tem ao seu dispor, e que dão bastante jeito. Mas você é que sabe. :) -- Darwin Ahoy! 10:58, 26 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Ahh, e eu já esquecia o mais importante - Se tratar você mesmo da papelada mais corriqueira que você próprio gera aqui, toda a gente lhe agradece. Essa é mesmo uma boa razão para que idealmente qualquer user activo e com bom cadastro seja administrador.-- Darwin Ahoy! 16:29, 26 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Obrigado (atrasei... mas antes tarde do que nunca ;-) ) pelo esforço neste assunto. "(...) mesmo da papelada mais corriqueira que você próprio gera aqui (...)" Isto é um bom argumento... mas melhor gerar papelada do que se sentir desconfortável numa situação não 100 % desejada... --Gunnex (talk) 09:56, 2 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

ALFA ROMEO: sorry for inconvenient

sorry for incovenient (example: [1]) and thank for you work.

now cat: Category:Model of Alfa Romeo Giulietta White 1:24 by Motorama and Category:Model of Alfa Romeo MiTo red 1:24 by Mondo --Pava (talk) 21:59, 2 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, I noticed too our "simultaneous categorization" effort :-). Btw: Nice shots and... nice cars :-) Gunnex (talk) 07:26, 3 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Re:

Hi! Thanks for your message. The reason why I did not exclude those files from upload is that I could not find specific info about FOP in that country but I did realize that the uploader only took pictures when he was allowed to (this is sometimes specified in the description, see here). I realize this might just not be enough so if you think those images do not belong here, please just link the files and I'll delete them per Commons:Derivative works. --Elitre (talk) 12:15, 6 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

OTRS

Como assim não é compatível? A permissão foi aceita 2 vezes. Eu deixei uma mensagem, só faltou colocar a licença {{OTRS-pending}}. Não entendi. Me explique... Me ensine a licenciar certo. Por favor. Desculpe, se eu removi a marcação de "delete" - foi uma tentativa.— Preceding unsigned comment added by Eduardo P (talk • contribs) Gunnex (talk) 06:51, 9 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Oi Eduardo! Apararentemente confundiu o que tentei explicar em Commons:Esplanada#Permissão de uso de fotos: O negócio é enviar toda correspondência = seu E-Mail para a autora pedindo permissão + a resposta por E-Mail da autora com a permissão (inclusive o cabeçalho do E-Mail da autora para melhor verificar a origem da mensagem) para o E-Mail permissions-commons@wikimedia.org (indicando, claro, a origem das fotos no Facebook e os correspondentes uploads no Commons). Esta correspondência será analizado por um voluntário do sistema COM:OTRS que - se não houver problemas - gera um OTRS-ticket confirmando a permissão. Este ticket vai ser depois adicionado aos ficheiros por um voluntário do sistema OTRS.
Pelo que vi, colocou a permissão da autora nos ficheiros :-)) o que não é correto... Bom, presumindo que você mande esta correspondência para o E-Mail indicado acima nos próximos dias, corrigi os ficheiros relacionados (tirando a permissão não válida e trocando {{OTRS pending}} por {{subst:OP}}) Gunnex (talk) 06:51, 9 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Ela não deixa o email dela no facebook. http://www.facebook.com/rosangeladantaslima/photos

Seria interessante ter essas fotos no Commons. Eu licenciei bem as imagens. Não queria testar a paciência dela. Ela disse, digo a verdade, que

A natureza é para todos. kkkkk. Deixo sim, todos nós seres humanos somos sócios. kkkk.

Ela escreveu isso no facebook, e apagou as mensagens. Permitiu o uso.

Foi exatamente isso que ela disse.

Não sei se eu conseguiria o email dela. Eduardo P (talk) 17:27, 9 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Oi Eduardo! Se não conseguir uma permissão dela por email ou facebook, então manda toda sua argumentação acima para o E-Mail permissions-commons@wikimedia.org. Duvido que a permissão neste "formato" seja aceita mas vale uma tentativa... :-). Não esquece de indicar para os ficheiros aqui no Commons e para a fonte no facebook. Gunnex (talk) 06:48, 10 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

All those files

ups! They are my own files at http://pt.wikipedia.org/wiki/Usu%C3%A1rio%28a%29:Nini00. I did a copy of my own user page... and I have forgotten to delete those links ! I'm so sorry. Those commons are my own commons at prtuguese wiki, photos I did at my work. I'm new at Wiki, sorry for the big confusion, I'm really very sorry --84.90.120.125 12:53, 25 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Responded here. Gunnex (talk) 17:12, 25 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Maria do Rosário Bago d'Uva is my best friend since our childhood, we work together at Wikisource, is the reason that photo was in my files. We use my computer.

I'm Maria de Lurdes Cerol who did that site, I used my photos. See the email from register.com: "Thank you for choosing Register.com as your web services provider. Below is confirmation of your order: Date (MM/DD/YYYY): 08/26/2012 Name: maria de lurdes cerol Company: maria de lurdes cerol Address 1: rua victor costa e silva 30 b Address 2: City: lagos Country: PT State: Postal code: 8600764 Services Billing Cycle Status Price Basic Hosting Safe Renewal 1 year FULFILLED $149.00 SubTotal: $149.00 VAT: $34.27 Total: $183.27 ____________________________ Dear maria de lurdes cerol, Thank you for choosing Register.com as your web services provider. Below is confirmation of your order: Date (MM/DD/YYYY): 02/24/2012 Name: maria de lurdes cerol Company: maria de lurdes cerol Address 1: rua victor costa e silva 30 b Address 2: City: lagos Country: PT Sorry again for that confusion. Best regards Nini00 (talk) 14:52, 27 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I'm new editor and I used my own photos on my editions. I have forgotten that my site http://www.varizinforma.com/ is protected by copyright... sorry. I sent today an email giving permission and the prove that is my site with those 2 documents of Register.com - Basic Hosting Safe Renewal and Private Domain Safe Renewal

Sorry for my error, Best regards Maria de Lurdes Cerol Nini00 (talk) 10:27, 28 October 2012 (UTC)

Your opinion please

Hi Gunnex. Can you please take a look at the uploads of User:Massyasr22 and tell me what you think of them? I had a question about these on my talk. They look a bit suspicious, considering the small sizes, lack of EXIF, etc, but I haven't found any matches searching google images. Thanks for your time. INeverCry 18:18, 28 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I´ll check them later... Gunnex (talk) 21:03, 31 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hi again. Here's another tough one that was posted to my talk this morning: [2]. Google image search shows no earlier publishing of any of these, and there don't seem to be larger versions. These are widely used, so I wouldn't want to see them get wrongly deleted. Thanks again for any time you can spare too look at these. INeverCry 18:30, 28 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hi INeverCry! Sorry for my late answer... (real life busy). I ignored all uploads with exif DSC-HX7V (which seems to be his preferred digicam) and concentrated myself on the uploads without exif. I found (except this copyvio) no indication or evidence of copyvios in his uploads and he may cropped most of these private images due to personal reasons (hiding the fan embracing the football player - I don´t know if doing a crop locally the original exif-information will disappear...). Summarizing: Assuming good faith - and looking at users wikiwide profil (+/- 5200 contribuition) and local talk page at trwiki (where he in the past also discussed several copyright issues of images and was oriented about some aspects of Commons´s licensy politics) - I would say: most likely trustworthy. On the other hand we both know: There a millions of football fanatics out there, publishing millions of photos at all media :-). I checked also some Facebook & Twitter accounts of related players but without "resounding success" (Commons:Deletion requests/File:İzmir Atatürk Panaroma.jpg). The predominant part of the uploads seems okay but... well, I contacted Ultraslansi at his trwiki talk page to clarify the situation of these suspicious files. We will see how he reacts and is able to explain in a plausible manner the status quo of the relevant files. Hope this helps ;-) Gunnex (talk) 21:03, 31 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for your work on this. I'm certainly in no hurry. I trust your judgement completely, so if you think they should or shouldn't be tagged, please do as you see fit. I'm already up to my eyeballs with deletions, as you probably know. ;) INeverCry 21:39, 31 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Those Photos

Thank you. Those Photos are Mine i have their original version but i Dont wantto Show my Face :) -Ultraslansi— Preceding unsigned comment added by Ultraslansi (talk • contribs)

Hi Ultraslansi! Thx for your response. I comprehend your issue to anonymize your face in these images but this involves 2 further questions:
  1. If you are shown at these images how could you take these pictures :-)?
  2. Did you know? en:Pixelization --> take a look at the image on the right... :-)
I am sorry to say but "those photos are mine" is an argument which - eventually - won´t convince the nominator of the deletion requests and the administrator who will delete the relevant files. Uploading the (pixelated) original version would really help to identify the origin of these images. So you have to respond to each deletion request (which are listed at your talk page, including this one) to avoid eventual deletion. If no further action is taken I doubt these files will survive at Commons... Gunnex (talk) 00:04, 1 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

My documentation

Hi, I already gave permission to use all photos that are at my site varizinforma.com by email to COM:OTRS. I did those photos on my patients. I sent documents from register.com that prove that I'm the owner of that site.
( See the email from register.com: "Thank you for choosing Register.com as your web services provider. Below is confirmation of your order: Date (MM/DD/YYYY): 08/26/2012 Name: maria de lurdes cerol Company: maria de lurdes cerol Address 1: rua victor costa e silva 30 b Address 2: City: lagos Country: PT State: Postal code: 8600764 Services Billing Cycle Status Price Basic Hosting Safe Renewal 1 year FULFILLED $149.00 SubTotal: $149.00 VAT: $34.27 Total: $183.27 ____________________________ Dear maria de lurdes cerol, Thank you for choosing Register.com as your web services provider. Below is confirmation of your order: Date (MM/DD/YYYY): 02/24/2012 Name: maria de lurdes cerol Company: maria de lurdes cerol Address 1: rua victor costa e silva 30 b Address 2: City: lagos Country: PT)
this is the best I can do. The photo of Maria do Rosário, lots of friends like me have it: We took it the day she launched one of her books. Cerol, Cristiano is my cousin he used her photo without her consentement on his blog to create her biography. She worked with me (her computer crashed) to create her page at Wikipedia Pt. (obviously I can't prove it). Anyway is no more important... 11 sources were not enough and that page has been deleted. I just want to have my documentation for my medical pages. I have uploaded more and sent links to OTRS. If you delete them I'll have no more work to illustrate what I write and I will try to find another way to pass my free time. Thank you. Nini00 (talk) 15:01, 3 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

please restore my deleted files: File:O ecodoppler.jpg File:Shunt I.jpg File:Necroses post escleroterapia.jpg File:Antes de injectar.jpg File:Após injecção.jpg File:Recidiva post-stripping.jpg Thank you Nini00 (talk) 15:07, 3 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Nini00! Thx for your efforts in this case. The COM:OTRS-team will check your E-Mail and decide about the future of these files. In the meantime the files were deleted but can be restored (without reuploading) easily. The undeletion is done normally by the OTRS-team after checking your information you provided. So, if you received an "Okay" from OTRS and need further help in restoring the files, let me know about it. Without OTRS-permission a restore is not possible. Gunnex (talk) 15:21, 3 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Hi I received this email the 30th october
"Please respond to this email, providing a link to the image based on the location
you have uploaded to at Wikimedia Commons. If you have not yet uploaded the image,
please follow the steps as outlined below:
To upload a picture:
1. Login (or create a username if you don't have one)
2. Click on "upload file" in the sidebar
(https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Upload)
3. Select the file from your computer that you want to upload
4. Select a descriptive name for the image
5. Select the appropriate license for the file
You might also find our editing instructions
(<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Help:Editing>) and tutorial on using images
(<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Picture_tutorial>) helpful.
Yours sincerely,

I have uploaded some other pictures and I sent the link. But I don't know if it's correct, this is a bit complicate for me. I would like to restore my old pictures. I have very good pictures in my computer, pictures I took doing patient examination by echodoppler but now I'm a bit afraid to edit them at commons and create confusion. My english is not excellent to understand fine details... how can I give a license for a picture I have taken and that is on my PC??? I can only say that is mine... Thank you Nini00 (talk) 09:39, 4 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Nini00! Please answer to that E-Mail of OTRS indicating that the OTRS-ticket is valid for (in the meantime deleted files):
AND for the living files, previously published at varizinforma.com (I already tagged these files with OTRS pending):
If all is okay, the OTRS-team will restore the deleted files and configure these and your new files with your permission and further details. Obs. In the meantime, please avoid to upload new material from varizinforma.com, not before the OTRS-team has issued the permission-ticket.
To facilitate the communication you can also put this link into your answer to OTRS. Gunnex (talk) 12:05, 4 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Finaly I think that everything is ok can you see please http://www.varizinforma.com/aboutus.htm ... it was so easy! just put your email and give permission on your site! Best regards Maria Nini00 (talk) 18:32, 5 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Maria, Mariiiiiaaaaa! :-)) Olha, vou mudar para o português já que acima a problemática está bem explicada para aqueles que não entendam português (por isto, prefiro escrever em inglês para que outros usuários possam conferir a conversa). Bom, você está ajudando e complicando ao mesmo tempo, Maria :-)), mas tudo bem: Juntos vamos resolver isto.
Primeiro:
Substitue
por
Código: <font size="1">Todo o conteúdo deste site está publicado sob a <a href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/br/">Licença Creative Commons Atribuição 3.0 Brasil</a>.</font>
Seu texto não revela qual das licença disponíveis no Commons deve ser usada, portanto é importante especificar a licença. A licença "Creative Commons Atribuição 3.0 Brasil" é livre em termos do Commons mas é necessãrio dar atribuição (quer dizer: citar a fonte = varizinforma.com). É a licença livre mais comum, portanto sugiro isto.
Segundo:
Se você (ou um outro usuário) carrega imagens hosteados em varizinforma.com para o Commons você deve:
  1. Citar a fonte (source) = link para a página .htm aonde a imagem consta (exemplo: http://www.varizinforma.com/Telangiectasias.htm)
  2. . Citar a permissão = http://www.varizinforma.com/aboutus.htm
    1. Como alternativa você também pode usar a permissão {{PermissionOTRS|id=2012102810002529}} que é o ticket gerada pelo pessoal do COM:OTRS --> ver como exemplo este ficheiro: File:Recidiva poststripping.jpg
  3. Escolher a licença {{Cc-by-sa-3.0-br}} = {{Cc-by-sa-3.0-br}}
Terceiro:
Considera (aos poucos) modificar toda página htm de varizinforma.com com o texto acima, já que nelas ainda consta "Copyright)2004-2006varizinforma.com tem todos os direito reservados. Proibida a cópia" nesta páginas (o que pode gerar confusões).
Gunnex (talk) 19:11, 5 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Obrigada. Li tudo com atenção e vou fazer tudo como está aqui escrito. O site tem que ser todo reestruturado também. Está com um aspecto horrível! mas o tempo falta e vai ficando para trás. Finalmente recebi o email confirmativo: " Recebemos a permissão para a(s) imagem(s) e realizamos as modificações necessárias na(s) página(s) de descrição da(s) mesma(s). Obrigado por providenciar esta permissão e pela sua contribuição para o Wikimedia Commons. Estou a resolver o assunto sobre as imagens eliminadas. Atenciosamente"
Obrigada mais uma vez isto é realmente complicado! mas está resolvido Nini00 (talk) 20:17, 5 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Oi Maria! Uma última dúvida à resolver. Com "Todo o conteúdo deste site está publicado sob a Licença Creative Commons Atribuição 3.0 Brasil." você libera não só as imagens mas também os textos que constam em http://www.varizinforma.com para uso livre. Isto é correto? Acho perdi este aspecto pela longa conversa que tivemos :-)). Sorry. Se você não quer isto, é só modificar o trecho com "Todas as imagens deste site estão publicadas sob a Licença Creative Commons Atribuição 3.0 Brasil.". Gunnex (talk) 06:41, 6 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
olá boa tarde. Sim o texto também. Não há nada de especial que não esteja na Wiki. Até está mais completo do que no site. Eu estou a pôr tudo sobre varizes e hemodinâmica venosa etc., na Wikimedia. É muito mais útil aqui do que num site que nem todos consultam. Nini00 (talk) 18:10, 6 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Re

Obrigado pelo trabalho. Boas.+PrinceWilly 16:02, 6 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Re: File:Praça e Escola de Gameleira (Mogeiro).jpg

Oi Gunnex! Acho melhor em português.

Sobre o licenciamento da imagem creio que esteja correto, pois o autor (Luis Melo) divulga fotos desse múnicipio, e como a imagem é de um lugar público certamente ela pode ser compartilhada. A data correta e o nome do autor é o que está faltando. Geovani.s (talk) 13:15, 6 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Oi Geovani! Você está confundindo diversas coisas. Você não tirou a foto. Então é necessária a permissão do autor da fotografia para publicar esta aqui sob licença livre, já que em mogeironoticias.blogspot.com.br nada disto consta. Para obter a permissão veja File:Praça e Escola de Gameleira (Mogeiro).jpg e COM:OTRS. Gunnex (talk) 19:13, 6 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Eu acho que ainda não aprendi todas as políticas do commons, Gunnex. Desculpe-me pelo incomodo. Geovani.s (talk) 15:23, 8 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

File:Mili avital.png

You can delete the file, talked with some people and it has copyrights. Gusta100 (talk) 18:37, 15 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

✓ Done. Gunnex (talk) 18:53, 15 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Adminship

Hello Gunnex, I'm about to nominate you for adminship, please tell me whether you agree or not. Thank you--Morning ☼ (talk) 15:42, 19 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Morning! Well, I refused similar indications already in 07.2012 and 10.2012... The pro argument is that with my work here I am causing paperwork for others which could be eventually avoided with admin-status. The contra argument is that my business here is mainly focused on identifying (ptwiki-related) copyvios, questioning the origin of files via DRs and organizing contents (cats etc.) for which I do not need necessarily admin tools. As I tried to explain to Hysterixin German my main preference is to work here in the background taking holidays from a temporarily frustration of ptwiki (my home wiki) ;-) ... so, resuming: I do not agree, sorry, but thank you! Gunnex (talk) 17:06, 19 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
BTW: Feel free to grant filemover & rollback rights to me, if you like :-) That would reduce a little of the "paperwork" that I am causing (I am already a rollbacker in ptwiki). Scanning ptwiki-related files I avoided mostly to use {{Rename}} knowing the bureaucratic issues... Gunnex (talk) 22:12, 19 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
OK thank you for your explanation. BTW, I have granted the permission upon your request with an extra patroller right. Thank you for your good work here--Morning ☼ (talk) 15:22, 20 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Thx. Gunnex (talk) 17:33, 20 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Preciso de ajuda

Gostaria de fazer o upload da fotografia "oficial" do Professor Cid dos Santos falecido em 1975. Porém a foto que eu tenho é a que é publicada em todas as revistas médicas que falam dele desde há cerca de 30 anos e em todos os artigos presentes na Web. Assim não existe a quem pedir autorização. Não cumpre os critérios de domínio público creio mas está [aqui] e [aqui] e [aqui] e [aqui] que faço? obrigada pela ajuda Nini00 (talk) 18:41, 21 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

"que faço?" Por favor, nada de espontâneo. Sem maiores informações sobre a origem do ficheiro (autor, ano etc.) não há base legal para um carregamento. Ver também Commons:Copyright rules by territory - full#Portugal = "Works are protected 70 years after the death of the author or last surviving author (...)". O original da imagem me parece esta (pela qualidade e alta resolução). Você pode tentar obter uma permissão via COM:OTRS da Sociedade das Ciências Médicas de Lisboa... Gunnex (talk) 19:42, 21 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Oi! File:Oscilomanómetro de Von Recklinghausen com braçadeira de adulto e infantil.JPG --> interessante :-), mas o que é um "Oscilomanómetro" = 2 hits. É algo relacionado com pt:Esfigmomanômetro = Category:Sphygmomanometers? Gunnex (talk) 20:19, 21 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Olá boa noite. No que respeita a fotografia do Professor João Cid dos Santos, eu entreguei o problema a um dos nossos administradores. Claro que não ia carregar a imagem sem saber se podia... já tive suficientes angústia antes.Clin O problema foi resolvido. Parece estar ao abrigo da política de conteúdo restrito.
Quanto ao Oscilomanómetro está relacionado com os esfigmomanómetros mas não encontrei bibliografia na Web o que é estranho. Tenho o aparelho aqui, foi o primeiro aparelho que comprei para medir a pressão arterial, por volta do ano 1975, tinha que o aferir periodicamente por um manómetro de mercúrio. Mas o manómetro de mercúrio era um perigo para transportar pois o reservatório de mercúrio era de vidro! É interessante Obrigada por ter descoberto fontes!. Nini00 (talk) 03:20, 22 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Administração

Oi, Gunnex. Sei que na Wikipédia você não aceita ser administrador, mas aqui aceita? Érico Wouters msg 03:08, 27 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Oi Érico Wouters! Também não, ver acima. Obrigado. Gunnex (talk) 07:16, 27 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
De qualquer modo, parabéns por seus serviços prestados. São muito úteis. Érico Wouters msg 02:50, 29 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Mudar a foto para a daqui? Não entendi muito bem. Érico Wouters msg 20:20, 3 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

A licença {{Attribution-PresidenciaBr}} usada no ficheiro não é mais válida para uploads a partir de 4 de julho de 2011. Gunnex (talk) 20:23, 3 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Hum... não sabia dessa. Sabe o que pode ser feito? Érico Wouters msg 21:07, 3 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Bom, duas alternativas: 1. apagar o ficheiro ou 2. tentar obter permissão via COM:OTRS (não sei se vale a pena o esforço: O portal deve ter tido razões suficientes para mudar o licenciamento, excluíndo o uso comercial do conteúdo...). Gunnex (talk) 21:12, 3 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Ok, exclui, obrigado pelo aviso. Érico Wouters msg 00:05, 4 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Evidence of permission

Hello Gunnex, write permission with the appropriated license for

  1. image
  2. image and
  3. image

was sent to permissions-commons@wikimedia.org, but until now the images are still tagged as if evidence of permission were missing. Could you please check on that before the images are removed from commons? Cheers, Pdellani (talk) 13:37, 5 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

All files with OTRS-tickets now = ✓ Done by User:Morning Sunshine. Gunnex (talk) 17:38, 5 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Esplanada

Te respondi na Esplanada. Eduardo P (talk) 20:39, 11 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Explanation needed

1

Could you please explain why that file didn't fit in the PD-1996 license?

Vista aérea da Barreira do Inferno-01.jpg

It was probably first published by "Agência Nacional", which is the predecessor of the current "Agência Brasil", which on it's turn have a specific Wikimedia license.

I need to know: firstly if I did something wrong, and secondly what to do for fixing the image status.

Regards.

--Marcric (talk) 20:34, 17 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

2

Could you please explain why that file didn't fit in the PD-1996 license?

CNAE--janio-gagarin.jpg

It is a compound work, and was probably first published by "Agência Nacional", which is the predecessor of the current "Agência Brasil", which on it's turn have a specific Wikimedia license.

I need to know: firstly if I did something wrong, and secondly what to do for fixing the image status.

Regards.

--Marcric (talk) 20:43, 17 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Marcric! You did not explain why these images are in PD in Brazil in 1996. You simply used {{PD-1996}} as license but you have to present a reason why it was in the public domain in its home country on the URAA date (January 1, 1996 for most countries, including Brazil). {{Agência Brasil}} would be a fail because this agency licensed their work only since +/- 2004 as CC BY 2.5 BR / CC BY 3.0 BR and we don´t know about the license policy of the predecessor Agência Nacional. BTW, you sourced these 2 images with "Órgãos de imprensa do Brasil - autor desconhecido" which could be every media (governmental/private) in Brazil. So we have 2 options: These images were published by a Brazilian government (federal, state, or municipal) authority prior to 1983 (= {{PD-BrazilGov}} + {{PD-1996}}) OR via {{PD-Brazil-media}} + {{PD-1996}} = (Brazil) +70 years from the first of January of the year following that of their disclosure (which fails, considering the date of the images = > 70 years). In any cases more information about the authorship is needed. Gunnex (talk) 21:21, 17 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Ok, I'm pretty sure no one will ask for authoring over those pictures, the original publishers probably doesn't exists anymore and the original photographers are probably dead but if that is the case. I will remove it from my articles. Regards. --Marcric (talk) 23:29, 17 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Campylocentrum photos

Yes, indeed. They are circulating on internet. I was not aware that once one of my photos are on internet already I could not upload them here anymore. A careful checking of the two examples you quote will show: in one, the credit to the photographer (me) is given and in another, well, that's my own website hence no credit is given. Cheers Dalton (talk) 20:07, 3 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Dear Gunnex I have many photos uploaded on internet and I really don't care when anyone uses them, so I don't keep track of them. It's been more than 20 years I take photos of orchids and I have more than 20 thousand of them. I used to upload the photos to my website at http://www.orchidstudium.com/Estrangeiras/fotos.html .Some are on internet during almost 15 years already and I guess probably have been copied many times. Nevertheless it is always anoying when someone "steals" the photo or try to take the credit as his/hers. Another example of the elimination photo on internet can be seen here:

and here:

Both are there for more than 10 years, so much earlier than this Flickrs bandit says has taken it. Cheers Dalton (talk) 20:43, 3 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hi! I removed my copyvio mark. Thx for the clarification and your nice work. Gunnex (talk) 20:53, 3 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Aiai, em português ia ter sido bem mais fácil né. Só agora notei... Já reclamei lá na página do cara no Flickr e pedi que ele retirasse a foto. Abraço e obrigado pela vigilância. Dalton (talk) 20:56, 3 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

GLP's purported copyvios

Hello, concerning the copyvio warnings you put on these photos: The matter here is not one of copyright violations, but rather of an occasional user who happens to be a professional photographer offering Wikimedia Commons a few items of his work being, instead of shown the ropes on about OTRS or Flickr validation, shot down on transparently bogus copyright violations, as made by you. Let’s see:

  • File:NélsonÉvora@17m.jpg‎: Do you think this professional sports photography shot of a Portuguese athlete at an international competition, apparently taken from the press pit, was not taken by the Portuguese professional sports photographer whose Portuguese Wikipedia bio page it was uploaded to illustrate, but was rather stolen from some random “funny pics” website?! Really?
  • File:Prémio Visão BES 2008.jpg‎: Do you really think that it constitutes a malicious copyright violation when someone takes an awarded shot from a professional press photographer Flickr stream and uploads it to illustrates the said professional press photographer’s Wikipedia bio page? Isn’t it more reasonable to assume that this is the same professional press photographer Glp (talk · contribs) (or someone on his behalf) at work trying to doll up the bio page, and thus what he needs is to be trained about the pitfalls of self promotion in Wikipedia (which I am doing) and in Commons to be explained about OTRS, EXIF, hi-res, and all that jazz? Is this assuming good faith, or that is only for obvious trolls?

…Entretanto notei q vc fala português e q algumas destas imagens foram apagadas. Sugiro que trabalhe para as repor o mais rápido possível. -- Tuválkin ✉ 14:04, 11 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Tuvalkin! Even speaking Portuguese I prefer to respond in English to make the whole issue transparent for non-portuguese speakers. First of all there are really some idiots around here ;-). Well, usually I try to figure out the "history" of an image previously published in the internet and later uploaded in Commons by a "similar" user (see this example from today). As I am treating mostly uploads from Brazilian or Portuguese users I gained - how should I say - some experience points and I know if they are super-fascinated by something (their home city, their preferred actors, their preferred sportspeople etc., usually visible in a long history of editions of a related article in ptwiki) they present here at Commons... ehmmm... an exagerate reality vision declaring works as own works which they aren´t :-). The "Glp-case" above (I know: Glp could be Gonçalo Lobo Pinheiro but who knows it? Maybe it´s also User:GLP79) is similar: Starting with low res, no exif-uploads of images of a "professional press photographer", images previously published in the internet with unknown copyright issues (is he a freelancer or an employed photographer?), who is able to take long-distance photographs from himself and some other aspects (as e.g. here: apparently the uploader Glp (talk · contributions · Statistics) is not the photographer himself --> he seems to be "only" a webmaster of a related site) gave me enough reasons to quickly doubt the uploads. BTW, "(...) but was rather stolen from some random “funny pics” website" <-- this was only an example: see official facebook (10.2012). Anyway, I will go through the related files and start DRs/no-permissions-marks on the contested/restored files (Ill have to do the DRs individually as VisualFileChange.js apparently has problems with restored files) to gain time for the uploader to comment/justify his upload. Gunnex (talk) 17:16, 11 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
✓ Done Gunnex (talk) 17:58, 11 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
O.k., I've temporarily undeleted File:Prémio Visão BES 2008.jpg. However, this image needs OTRS-permission. I expect that you take care of this. --Túrelio (talk) 15:21, 11 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
✓ Done Gunnex (talk) 17:58, 11 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks, but my request was actually directed at Tuvalkin. --Túrelio (talk) 19:39, 11 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

GunnexTúrelio, thank you that you «expect» me to «to take care of that». Two days ago, I started doing it — i.e. coaching this user on how to make his pet page a reasonable enciclopedia article instead of someone’s professional resume online, and on how to effectivly contribute images to Commons (original image with maximum resolution and EXIF info, and an OTRS clearence). I was doing this before your hamfisted approach compromised that goal; please restore all the files uploaded by Glp (talk · contribs) (missing still: File:Cândido Barbosa.jpg and File:Gonçalo Lobo Pinheiro.jpg); only after that I’ll be able to procede. -- Tuválkin ✉ 10:24, 12 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

(Meanwhile he uploaded these two images with slightly differing filenames (.jpeg), not a smart move.) -- Tuválkin ✉ 11:19, 12 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I envision either of three possible outcomes:

  1. User Glp (talk · contribs), being actually either someone working for Gonçalo Lobo Pinheiro of the man himself, is successfully enlighted what is Wikipedia and Commons and finds it all so neat and great that we gain an enthusiastic fellow editor with lots to offer;
  2. User Glp (talk · contribs), being actually either someone working for Gonçalo Lobo Pinheiro of the man himself, finds out that Wikipedia and Commons are not what he thought — not really the sought tool to reach a wider audience for self promotion and for upload of lowres thumbnails from his work under stringent licensing; (As a test I used his photos of pt:Nélson Évora and pt:Simone de Oliveira in the respective articles — if he objects, we know he’s not a keeper.)
  3. User Glp (talk · contribs) is exposed as a fraud upon confirmative contact with the real Gonçalo Lobo Pinheiro; his account is suspended, his uploads erased, and his BPV work severely scrutinized. (I must say I don’t think this is likely, although stranger things happen in the past; anyhow I’d say for now that the real GLP is not that much of a hot celebrity to attract suck an industrious stalker.)

I should say that never before I took any of my Wikipedia time to coach another user, quite the contrary. Don’t make me think it is a mistake. -- Tuválkin ✉ 23:27, 11 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Just for clarification. Though it should have been evident from the signature already, it was me, Túrelio, who voiced this expectation. And I stand to it, because per your own statement "Uploader is author"[3] and its wording you had clearly shown to either have background-knowledge about User:Glp or to have taken care of this user. If you have done so already, the better. --Túrelio (talk) 10:00, 12 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
(Oops, sorry about the misattribution!) No, I don’t have any background knowledge, apart from the brief contact so far which can be seen in the involved talk and user pages. I guess you can say I’m «taking care» of the user. My statement that «Uploader is author» is gut feeling and a bit of assumption of good faith. In that regard, I find very unlikely option 3 above to be true. But that's where my “responsability” ends. -- Tuválkin ✉ 10:24, 12 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Hi! Well, generally I don't care if an uploader is pushing his own biography or is employed to push another's biography or is fascinated by someone that leads him (the uploader) to save files on Commons for use in other wikiprojects. It is task of (in this case) ptwiki to differentiate the appropriate use of images in the related article. If a fresh elected mayor of a Brazilian municipality would upload hundreds of pictures of his "hand-shakes" and "jubilation/I am the best"-scenes and if he would integrate these hundreds of pictures in a gallery in the related ptwiki-artcile --> for me at Commons it doesn´t matter. I care about copyright issues in Commons and I had my reasons to doubt the uploads of Glp: formally and contextually, as I tried to explain above. As we both are speculating about the real background of Glp (talk · contribs) he should use COM:UNDEL for the files mentioned by you above, providing a reasonable justification. Gunnex (talk) 00:43, 12 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Imagens eliminadas indevidamente

Gostaria de saber porque as fotos que coloquei na Wikimedia de trabalhos do pintor Rui Preto pacheco foram eliminadas quando estas fotos foram tiradas por mim e em casa do filho do pintor ????

isto é simplesmente incrivel !— Preceding unsigned comment added by Jack LondonPT (talk • contribs)

See your talk page and COM:DW. Gunnex (talk) 00:43, 12 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Admin?

Hi Gunnex. I see much good work of you with tagging copyvios for speedy deletion. Have you ever though about requesting admin rights? Regards, Trijnsteltalk 16:48, 13 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Trijnstel! Not really :-) My work here is mainly focused on legal & organizational issues of ptwiki-related uploads for which admin-status is not necessary. See also User talk:Gunnex/Archive 2#Adminship. Anyway, thank you for the thought. Gunnex (talk) 19:32, 13 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

RodrigoScarpaVesgo.jpg

Olá Gunnex, qual o motivo da imagem ter sido enviado para eliminação. Existem fontes, e o Portal relata que "TODO O CONTEÚDO DESTE SITE ESTÁ LICENCIADO SOB A CC-ATTRIBUTION SHARE ALIKE 3.0 BRAZIL" no rodapé da página. PauloHenrique (talk) 13:13, 14 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Não, o rodapé completo diz: Todo o conteúdo deste site está licenciado sob a CC-Attribution Share Alike 3.0 Brazil, exceto quando especificado em contrário e nos conteúdos replicados . Na fonte temos "Foto: Vinícius de Melo/Band", foto feito por um fotógrafo/empregado da Rede Bandeirantes (portanto não do pessoal do jangadeiroonline.com.br). Gunnex (talk) 13:20, 14 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Violação de direitos autorais

Esta foto File:Shopping pelotas.jpg tambem parece ter sido copiada da pagina da prefeitura aqui [4]. Existe o nome do fotógrafo e não tem licença descrita.--Paulo rsmenezes (talk) 22:01, 15 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

http://www.pelotas.rs.gov.br/noticias/detalhe.php?controle=MjAxMi0wOC0xNQ==&codnoticia=31826 = http://www.pelotas.com.br/noticia/imagem_noticia/b5a181d7f3acb44dbe01d9c7c13f24b5.jpg (last modified: 08.2012) é de 08.2012 enquanto File:Shopping pelotas.jpg foi carregado no Commons em 2011 com resolução maior. Considerando a "qualidade" da foto me parece obra do uploader Lu(4spereiirra (talk · contribs) ... Btw: Isto foi um acidente ou está mesmo tentando mover a categoria existente? Gunnex (talk) 22:20, 15 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Ok. Quanto a categoria, deve ter sido um acidente pois estava organizando a categoria de Protestant churches in Rio de Janeiro (state) e não percebi que alguem havia criado uma categ sem "()". Agora olhando melhor vi que existem varias formas de escrita, sem padrão, umas com colchetes, outras sem e até sem o state. Normalmente eu sigo a nomenclatura da categ principal, no caso Rio de Janeiro (State).Como meu interesse principal é o Rio Grande do Sul, não teria tempo para redirecionar todas as sub categorias, então deixe como vc achar melhor.
Tem razão, as categorias relacionados com o estado de Rio de Janeiro estão meio confusas. Prefiro a versão (...) (state) da categoria principal Category:Rio de Janeiro (state)...Gunnex (talk) 23:45, 15 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Antônio MacCaskill?

Outro assunto. Esta foto File:Antônio Fialho de Vargas (Esquerda Superior).jpg provavelmente foi copiada deste site [5], depois disso foi adultera, inserindo um rosto de adulto sobre o menino deitado a esquerda. Já havia alertado na esplanada mas como minha msg foi retirada sem resposta te passo o caso.--Paulo rsmenezes (talk) 22:46, 15 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

✓ Done. Gunnex (talk) 23:45, 15 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Ops! acho que te enganou, manteve a mesma foto adulterada. Se leres o site que te indiquei, veras que essas pessoas nunca estiveram no brasil. Toda a informação do uploader é falsa. Pesquisei sobre a fundação de lageado e não tem nada a ver com as informações desta foto.--Paulo rsmenezes (talk) 00:41, 16 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Gunnex, desculpa “invadir”-te a página. Fiz uns ajustes na descrição dessa imagem, e renomeei-a para File:MacAskills@1913.jpg. Mas que estória bizarra! -- Tuválkin ✉ 02:23, 16 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Valeu + obrigado :-) Gunnex (talk) 08:25, 16 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Upload

Gunnex, a Beria apagou o arquivo. E não consigo enviar o arquivo de novo. Se quiser envio o arquivo, no seu email. Seria bom falar isso com a equipe da Wikimedia Foundation. Eduardo P (talk) 01:58, 16 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, pode enviar o arquivo no meu email e tentarei carregar. Gunnex (talk) 09:35, 16 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Qual é o seu email? Vou enviar por anexo. Eduardo P (talk) 16:54, 16 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Ver a minha resposta no seu email ligado com a sua conta do Commons. Gunnex (talk) 16:58, 16 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Recebi o arquivo. É correto que o arquivo só trata da introdução do artigo pt:O Porriño? Gunnex (talk) 19:56, 16 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Sim, isso. Eduardo P (talk) 22:15, 16 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

✓ Done --> File:O Porriño introdução (pt).ogg: Aparentemente só funciona com o velho assistente de upload (http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Upload) já que o novo assistente (http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Special:UploadWizard) não reconheceu o arquivo por razões desconhecidas. Mudei o título por razões técnicas. Se não concordar com este, me avise sugerindo um novo título. Gunnex (talk) 23:00, 16 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Obrigado, valeu mesmo. Eduardo P (talk) 02:37, 17 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Categoria dupla

Da uma olhada nestas categorias. Category:Hills in Brazil e Category:Hills of Brazil, vinha usando a segunda como guia quando me deparei com esta outra.--Paulo rsmenezes (talk) 22:36, 20 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

✓ Done, Category:Hills in Brazil = ER. Gunnex (talk) 22:43, 20 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted Images

Hi there Gunnex.

I have permissions to use the images that you proposed to elimination. The Files are 31 da Armada.jpg, Rodrigo Moita de Deus.jpg (already deleted) and Pedro Pinto.jpg. As a new user in Wikipedia, images are a problem for me. Can you help me dealing with this? What should i do keep the images on Wikimedia? Regards, --Bcferreira84 (talk) 10:41, 21 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I already responded here. Same procedure for File:31 da Armada.jpg and File:Rodrigo Moita de Deus.jpg. We need written permissions from the authors... Gunnex (talk) 10:56, 21 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Obrigado

Obrigado Gunnex por ter avisado o usuário Joycesebert (talk · contributions · Statistics) que ele (ela?) foi bloqueado. Eu havia me esquecido e quando lembrei vi que avisou. Abraços, Érico Wouters msg 02:31, 23 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Mi Mensaje

Solamente deseo que Wikipedia sea una página donde todas las personas puedan ver a su ídolo favorito con un bonita foto. Solamente eso. ¿Es mucho pedir? Todas las imagenes que he subido estan abiertas al público para cualquier uso que deseen, no entiendo porque me las borran.— Preceding unsigned comment added by Las señoras x (talk • contribs)

Please read Commons:Sobre las licencias --> "!Wikimedia Commons sólo acepta contenido libre". Gunnex (talk) 23:46, 23 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
¿Podrías por favor darme una respuesta más completa que eso?— Preceding unsigned comment added by Las señoras x (talk • contribs)
Did you really read Commons:Sobre las licencias? --> COM:CB#Internet images. Gunnex (talk) 00:04, 24 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Si, si lo leí, pero quiero una respuesta tuya ¿Para eso eres administrador, no?Las señoras x (talk) 00:17, 24 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Por favor respóndeme. Sé cortés— Preceding unsigned comment added by Las señoras x (talk • contribs)
I am not an administrator. If you did not understand the content (which is quite clear) behind the links I mentioned above go to Commons:Café to get help in your language (or read Commons:Primeros pasos). In the meantime please avoid uploading material to Commons. Btw, thx for finally signing almost all of your your messages :-) Gunnex (talk) 00:37, 24 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
¿Por qué en vez de cobardemente borrar las fotos no eres valiente y das la cara? Amablemente te pido que des una respuesta decente y completa a mis mensajes.— Preceding unsigned comment added by Las señoras x (talk • contribs)
Troll. Ignoring and reverting further messages. Case ceased. Gunnex (talk) 00:46, 24 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I'm not a Troll, you can't treat me like that. You don't know nothing about me, you don't know how do i look and you can't insult me. I thought that this page doesn't allowed intolerance and humilliating people. ¿That's how you treat people here in Wikimedia? Shame on you.Las señoras x (talk) 01:09, 24 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Cópia de PU.

Olá Gunnex, a quanto tempo né? Fiz uma quase cópia da sua arquitetura da sua página de usuário, lógico se não importar. kk Saudações. Pablodiego15 (talk) 06:34, 28 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Teresa Sousa

Boa tarde,

Uma vez que percebe português, venho informar que, relativamente às imagens de obras que carreguei no Commons, e que propôs para eliminação são fotografias de obras da minha mãe. As gravuras são minhas, e estão na minha posse e a pintura pertence ao espólio, que está na posse da família. Tais obras são origianais da autora

Por favor veja o email que lhe enviei através do Commons, e consulte as referências aí mencionadas, ou então pesquise por Teresa Sousa no catálogo geral da Biblioteca de Arte da Fundação Calouste Gulbenkian (Lisboa): http://www.biblartepac.gulbenkian.pt/

Cumprimentos,

João Sousa Carvalho (talk) 13:25, 20 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hi João Sousa Carvalho (and thx for your email). Responding in English for transparency reasons: In Portugal (and EU) works are coyrighted life of the author plus 70 years. So we need a written permission from the copyright holder, in this case from the heir(s). This is done in Commons via the Open-source Ticket Request System = COM:OTRS. Please send an email to permissions-commons@wikimedia.org using this template and refer to your uploads here at Commons. If you want to upload more works of your mother, copyrighted by your family, specify this in your email. Thx.Gunnex (talk) 14:13, 20 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Gunnex, I sent an email with the permissions to permissions-commons@wikimedia.org and I have no feedback about. What can I do next? Best regards,João Sousa Carvalho (talk) 19:22, 28 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hi João Sousa Carvalho! When did you sent the email? And: Did you make a reference (links) to the files already uploaded by you in Commons? Generally it takes a time to verify your permission... In the meantime I marked all your uploads related to with Teresa Sousa {{OTRS pending}} to avoid deletion. So I suggest to a wait another few days for a response. If no reaction occurs till... hmm... next friday, I´ll use the OTRS/Noticeboard to get more info about the status of your "case" :-), okay? Gunnex (talk) 19:41, 28 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Good evening Gunnex, I sent the email on the 22nd January. I have not yet links to the pictures on the internet, as I have not yet available my mother's internet page. The photos I uploaded on Commons are photos of works I own. The email I sent stated the permission of myself, my brother and my father as the owners of the works photographed. I will wait until next friday. Thank you for your help. Best regards, João Sousa Carvalho (talk) 22:34, 28 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Re:File:Tragédia da boate Kiss, Santa Maria, Rio Grande do Sul (3).jpg

Oi, Gunnex! Eu realmente não sabia quais são os fotógrafos da Agência Brasil e por isso não pude perceber se foi cópia de outro lugar. Me parece que está correto e acho que devemos proceder com a eliminação. O que acha? Érico Wouters msg 16:31, 28 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Pelo que vi: Fotos (de fotógrafos) da Agência Brasil são identificados por Nome/ABr (exemplo recente) - fotos de terceiros pela fonte (exemplo recente). Aparentemente o portal da Agência Brasil começou a publicar também obras de terceiros e por isto o portal mudou o licenciamento em 2012/começo de 2013, acrescentando exceto quando especificado em contrário e nos conteúdos replicados de outras fontes. Considerando isto, devemos sim duvidar do status "livre" deste e dos outros ficheiros relacionados com "divulgação Deivid Dutra / A Razão" (ver sua página de discussão). A questão é: via DR ou como? Se for via DR, quem faz? Você? Eu? Gunnex (talk) 18:46, 28 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Eu não sabia dessa mudança... e eu acho que DR seria o mais adequado. Prefere que eu abra ou você? Por mim tanto faz, estou com a sua opinião. Érico Wouters msg 22:25, 28 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Oi! Abri um DR relacionado e... grmpff... por coincidência o Denniss também questionou alguns ficheiros relacionados ao mesmo tempo o que virou enchente na sua página de discussão :-) Desculpe o incômodo. Gunnex (talk) 23:56, 28 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Obrigado! Desculpe por isso, eu realmente não sabia que a Agência Brasil carregava imagens que não fossem de fotógrafos dela, pretendo prestar mais atenção da próxima vez. Abraços. Érico Wouters msg 00:00, 29 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Eliminação

Porque minhas fotos estão para eliminação?— Preceding unsigned comment added by Will7 (talk • contribs)

Porque...
  1. declarou algumas fotos como "obra própria" o que é mentira. Exemplo: File:Teatro municipal uberlandia1.jpg. Você roubou esta imagem de http://mas.lne.es/centro-niemeyer/fotos/construccion/31/ultimos-retoques-niemeyer/893.html, violando assim direitos autoriais.
  2. carregou fotos protegidos por direitos autoriais que já foram publicados numa conta Panoramio de um usuário willmoreira3. Para ter certeza que User:Will7 = "willmoreira3" é necessária um permissão por escrito de "willmoreira3" via COM:OTRS para liberar o uso embaixo da licença indicada. Alerto que esta conta Panoramio por si está violando direitos autoriais em diversos casos...
Gunnex (talk) 08:53, 3 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Realmente...
  1. Essa do Teatro Municipal não é de minha autoria, mas também, não peguei desse site que você citou, peguei do G1 Triãngulo Mineiro, onde também, eles estão violando.
  2. E essa conta do Panoramio, willmoreira3, é minha, quanto essa, quanto eu Will7 aqui no Wikipédia, já editei alguns ficheiros de fotos que eu mesmo tirei, aqui no Wikipédia, e coloquei a fonte, no ficheiro, e como autor coloquei William Moreira, que no caso sou eu (Will7 - Wiki e willmoreira3 - Panoramio). Pra provar que sou eu no Panoramio e aqui, eu mudei meu nome lá no Panoramio para will7.
  3. Nesse caso, vocês retiram a eliminação?
Will7 01:01, 4 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Esplanada

Mas, Gunnex eu não queria 2 duplicatas. 2 imagens iguais, já deu trabalho ter que enviar as imagens. Queria tanto apagar essas imagens. Eu não acho isso justo. Não quero ter 2 imagens iguais, se na minha área de trabalho posso apagá-las... Eduardo P (talk) 15:10, 5 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Discussão

Ver páginas de discussão: File talk:Casa na Rua Conde de Baependi.jpg e File talk:MegaMatte - Catete.jpg. Eduardo P (talk) 15:24, 5 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Oi! Realmente não vejo seu problema: As imagens não são idênticas --> {{Duplicate}} não se aplica. E é sempre interessante ter imagens de um objeto de diferentes ângulos etc. Portanto, considerando Commons:Deletion policy#Redundant/bad quality, é necessária uma justificativa individual apresentada num Commons:Deletion requests para que sejam (eventualmente) apagadas... E, aparentemente, já está fazendo isto = Commons:Deletion requests/File:MegaMatte - Catete.jpg + Commons:Deletion requests/File:Casa na Rua Conde de Baependi.jpg... Gunnex (talk) 15:44, 5 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Gunnex/Archive_2&oldid=358730703"