User talk:Gyrostat
|
|
Quality Image Promotion[edit]
.jpg) |
Your image has been reviewed and promoted
Congratulations! AirExpo 2015 - Boeing PT-18 (2).jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
|
.jpg) |
Your image has been reviewed and promoted
Congratulations! AirExpo 2015 - Schlepp (1).jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
|
--QICbot (talk) 05:27, 1 January 2016 (UTC)
Bonjour, nous allons utiliser une de vos images pour notre revue trimestrielle "L'Idée Libre" de la Fédération nationale de la Libre Pensée — Preceding unsigned comment was added by 2A01:CB00:18F:B500:8581:9BAC:18F7:19F9 (talk) 18:40, 3 November 2017 (UTC)
Quality Image Promotion[edit]
 |
Your image has been reviewed and promoted
Congratulations! ALK A330 F-WWYF!1689 22dec15 LFBO-1.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
|
.jpg) |
Your image has been reviewed and promoted
Congratulations! AirExpo 2015 - ATR42 (1).jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
|
--QICbot (talk) 05:28, 2 January 2016 (UTC)
J'ai utilisé une de vos images[edit]
Cher Gyrostat....
Un mot pour vous dire que j'ai utilisé une de vos images pour accompagner un texte sur le site internet de la revue Argument
La revue Argument est une revue québécoise indépendante d'idées et de débat.
En vous remerciant
F. Charbonneau — Preceding unsigned comment was added by 173.179.25.126 (talk) 15:09, 06 January 2016 (UTC)
- Ravi qu'une de mes images ait retenu votre attention, merci de m'avoir mis au courant
Gyrostat (talk) 21:39, 6 January 2016 (UTC)
Cher Monsieur, Nous allons utiliser une de vos images pour illustrer un article sur la destruction du Code du Travail dans notre revue trimestrielle l'Idée Libre de la Fédération Nationale de la Libre Pensée. Cette revue est imprimée. Bien cordialement le rédacteur en chef : C. Singer — Preceding unsigned comment was added by 2A01:CB00:18F:B500:8581:9BAC:18F7:19F9 (talk) 18:42, 3 November 2017 (UTC)
Bonjour Gyrostat,
J'ai utilisé votre excellente photo du Stearman F-AZST pour le registre des avions anciens de mon site: https://www.lecharpeblanche.fr/registre/boeing-stearman-n2s-3-na75-2184-f-azst/
Merci de l'avoir partagée !
B. Brown — Preceding unsigned comment added by Gaetanmarie (talk • contribs) 08:56, 3 February 2020 (UTC)
Hi...[edit]
Hi.., I would like to copy your user page announcement on image crediting. I find it is quite handy to address and answer the image usage requests. Merci..! Gunkarta (talk) 19:24, 14 January 2016 (UTC)
- No problem, go ahead! Gyrostat (talk) 20:41, 14 January 2016 (UTC)
File:A380 Routes.png[edit]
Can you update File:A380 Routes.png? I know at least Qantas is operating a Sydney-Dallas route. The official Airbus site has a list of some of the others, as well as Routesonline.com. I would do it myself, except I don't know how you did the original image. Elisfkc (talk) 02:28, 23 January 2016 (UTC)
- I'm afraid I will not have enough time to update the map within a few months. Furthermore, another concern is that some operators received their first A380s since I've made this map, and a lot of new routes have opened, so I'm not sure I would be able to fit all the routes on the map.
- Nevertheless, if you want to have a try, I used this map with the "Paths" tool in GIMP. It is a little time-consuming, but not really difficult. Gyrostat (talk) 17:28, 25 January 2016 (UTC)
Quality Image Promotion[edit]
 |
Your image has been reviewed and promoted
Congratulations! Toulouse contre l'état d'urgence-0395.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
|
--QICbot (talk) 05:20, 3 February 2016 (UTC)
Quality Image Promotion[edit]
 |
Your image has been reviewed and promoted
Congratulations! Toulouse, concert 14 Juillet 2015, Cats on Trees-1515.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
|
 |
Your image has been reviewed and promoted
Congratulations! Toulouse, concert 14 Juillet 2015, Cats on Trees-1668.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
|
 |
Your image has been reviewed and promoted
Congratulations! Toulouse, concert 14 Juillet 2015, Cats on Trees-1749.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
|
--QICbot (talk) 05:10, 21 February 2016 (UTC)
Quality Image Promotion[edit]
 |
Your image has been reviewed and promoted
Congratulations! Toulouse, concert 14 Juillet 2015, Cats on Trees-1859.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
|
--QICbot (talk) 05:12, 22 February 2016 (UTC)
B-2447 is not a Government aircraft[edit]
Hello. You have just reverted 4 of my edits, concerning the B-747 of Air China, registered B-2447.
This aircraft is NOT a Government aircraft, but a normal airline aircraft owned and used by Air China, see here. Being used on one occasion for the transport of a government member does not change its role to a government aircraft. Therefore, I have to revert your reverts.
Please consult the many useful websites to check an aircraft's owner and role. Thank you very much. --Uli Elch (talk) 11:32, 5 March 2016 (UTC)
- Hello. This particular 747 of Air China was used and considered as a government aircraft when it visited LFBO in July 2015. Therefore, it has to be categorised in Category:Government aircraft at Toulouse Blagnac International Airport. I will ensure that these files remain in the category. Thank you for your comprehension. Gyrostat (talk) 11:38, 5 March 2016 (UTC)
Quality Image Promotion[edit]
.jpg) |
Your image has been reviewed and promoted
Congratulations! Homme de Fer, Strasbourg (nuit-2016).jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
|
--QICbot (talk) 05:24, 26 April 2016 (UTC)
Round 2 of Picture of the Year 2015 is open![edit]
You are receiving this message because you voted in R1 of the 2015 Picture of the Year contest.
Dear Gyrostat,
Wikimedia Commons is happy to announce that the second round of the 2015 Picture of the Year competition is now open. This year will be the tenth edition of the annual Wikimedia Commons photo competition, which recognizes exceptional contributions by users on Wikimedia Commons. Wikimedia users are invited to vote for their favorite images featured on Commons during the last year (2015) to produce a single Picture of the Year.
Hundreds of images that have been rated Featured Pictures by the international Wikimedia Commons community in the past year were entered in this competition. These images include professional animal and plant shots, breathtaking panoramas and skylines, restorations of historical images, photographs portraying the world's best architecture, impressive human portraits, and so much more.
There are two total rounds of voting. In the first round, you voted for as many images as you liked. In Round 1, there were 1322 candidate images. There are 56 finalists in Round 2, comprised of the top 30 overall as well as the top #1 and #2 from each sub-category. In the final round, you may vote for just one or maximal three image to become the Picture of the Year.
Round 2 will end on 28 May 2016, 23:59:59 UTC.
Thanks,
-- Wikimedia Commons Picture of the Year committee 09:44, 22 May 2016 (UTC)
Valued Image Promotion[edit]
.jpg)
Congratulations! The image you nominated was reviewed and has now been promoted as a valued image. It is considered to be the most valued image on Commons within the scope:
Place Saint-Georges, Paris - viewed from the south.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.
Quality Image Promotion[edit]
.jpg) |
Your image has been reviewed and promoted
Congratulations! AirExpo 2016 - North American T-6G (2).jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
|
--QICbot (talk) 05:29, 4 July 2016 (UTC)
Hey there! Just wondering, how did you find the aircraft number for this picture? Cheers, Rehman 15:57, 23 July 2016 (UTC)
- Hello! The two last letters of the registration are indicated on the nose gear door: OQ. A quick look at Category:Airbus A380 (Emirates) indicates that only one Emirates' A380 is registered with these two last letters: A6-EOQ. And here you have it! Cheers, Gyrostat (talk) 11:16, 25 July 2016 (UTC)
- Genius! Thanks man. Rehman 13:24, 25 July 2016 (UTC)
Valued Image Promotion[edit]
Congratulations! The image you nominated was reviewed and has now been promoted as a valued image. It is considered to be the most valued image on Commons within the scope:
Portrait of Denis Mukwege.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.
Quality Image Promotion[edit]
.jpg) |
Your image has been reviewed and promoted
Congratulations! AirExpo 2016 - A350XWB (2).jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
|
--QICbot (talk) 05:22, 26 August 2016 (UTC)
Quality Image Promotion[edit]
.jpg) |
Your image has been reviewed and promoted
Congratulations! AirExpo 2016 - Douglas AD-4N Skyraider (2).jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
|
 |
Your image has been reviewed and promoted
Congratulations! AirExpo 2016 - extra330 Lemordant.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
|
.jpg) |
Your image has been reviewed and promoted
Congratulations! AirExpo 2016 - L-12 Electra Junior (1).jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
|
--QICbot (talk) 05:18, 28 August 2016 (UTC)
Quality Image Promotion[edit]
 |
Your image has been reviewed and promoted
Congratulations! DLH CRJ9 D-ACKC 11sep16 LFBO.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
|
--QICbot (talk) 05:14, 25 September 2016 (UTC)
Quality Image Promotion[edit]
 |
Your image has been reviewed and promoted
Congratulations! Grand Prix Baron d'Ardeuil AOC Buzet 2016 - Toulouse La Cépière, trot attelé 8874.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
|
 |
Your image has been reviewed and promoted
Congratulations! Prix du Comité Régional du Sud-Ouest - Toulouse La Cépière, trot attelé 9041.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
|
--QICbot (talk) 05:20, 28 September 2016 (UTC)
|
File:Turdus merula (AU)-full.webm has been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether it should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry.
If you created this file, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with it, such as a copyright issue. Please see Commons:But it's my own work! for a guide on how to address these issues. |
119.30.45.38 14:37, 8 October 2016 (UTC)
Quality Image Promotion[edit]
.jpg) |
Your image has been reviewed and promoted
Congratulations! AirExpo 2016 - L-12 Electra Junior (2).jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
|
 |
Your image has been reviewed and promoted
Congratulations! CPA A350 F-WZFB!053 27nov16 LFBO-2.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
|
 |
Your image has been reviewed and promoted
Congratulations! RYR 737 EI-ENF 27nov16 LFBO-1.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
|
--QICbot (talk) 05:30, 1 December 2016 (UTC)
[edit]
Hello! The Wikimedia Foundation is asking for your feedback in a survey. We want to know how well we are supporting your work on and off wiki, and how we can change or improve things in the future.[survey 1] The opinions you share will directly affect the current and future work of the Wikimedia Foundation. You have been randomly selected to take this survey as we would like to hear from your Wikimedia community. To say thank you for your time, we are giving away 20 Wikimedia T-shirts to randomly selected people who take the survey.[survey 2] The survey is available in various languages and will take between 20 and 40 minutes.
You can find more information about this project. This survey is hosted by a third-party service and governed by this privacy statement. Please visit our frequently asked questions page to find more information about this survey. If you need additional help, or if you wish to opt-out of future communications about this survey, send an email to surveys@wikimedia.org.
Thank you! --EGalvez (WMF) (talk) 20:09, 13 January 2017 (UTC)
- ↑ This survey is primarily meant to get feedback on the Wikimedia Foundation's current work, not long-term strategy.
- ↑ Legal stuff: No purchase necessary. Must be the age of majority to participate. Sponsored by the Wikimedia Foundation located at 149 New Montgomery, San Francisco, CA, USA, 94105. Ends January 31, 2017. Void where prohibited. Click here for contest rules.
Your feedback matters: Final reminder to take the global Wikimedia survey[edit]
(Sorry to write in Engilsh)
Hello! This is a final reminder that the Wikimedia Foundation survey will close on 28 February, 2017 (23:59 UTC). The survey is available in various languages and will take between 20 and 40 minutes. Take the survey now.
If you already took the survey - thank you! We won't bother you again.
About this survey: You can find more information about this project here or you can read the frequently asked questions. This survey is hosted by a third-party service and governed by this privacy statement. If you need additional help, or if you wish to opt-out of future communications about this survey, send an email through EmailUser function to User:EGalvez (WMF) or surveys@wikimedia.org. About the Wikimedia Foundation: The Wikimedia Foundation supports you by working on the software and technology to keep the sites fast, secure, and accessible, as well as supports Wikimedia programs and initiatives to expand access and support free knowledge globally. Thank you! --EGalvez (WMF) (talk) 07:59, 24 February 2017 (UTC)
 |
File:A3800 F-WWDD LeBourget 2013.ogv 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 has been deleted. If you have written permission from the copyright holder, please have them send us a free license release via COM:VRT. If you believe that the deletion was not in accordance with policy, you may request undeletion. (It is not necessary to request undeletion if using VRT; the file will be automatically restored at the conclusion of the process.)
|
— Racconish ☎ 12:25, 12 January 2018 (UTC)
|
|
File:A3800 F-WWDD LeBourget 2013.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. |
— D Y O L F 77[Talk] 20:00, 12 January 2018 (UTC)
Wiki Loves Monuments France 2019[edit]
Bonjour,
Le concours Wiki Loves Monuments France est de retour et ouvert jusqu'à 31 septembre ! Déjà 8310 photos ont été importés cette année, vous aussi rejoignez le concours !
Le concours concerne tous les monuments présents dans la base Mérimée (qu'ils soient classés, inscrits ou simplement classés). De l'imposant château aux ruines industrielles, de la chapelle au coin de la rue aux mégalithes en forêt, c'est un impressionnant patrimoine qui attend d'être photographié et documenté. Où que vous soyez il y a des monuments autour de chez vous. Enfin, vous pouvez mettre en ligne autant de photos que vous le souhaitez de ces monuments. Pour information, le règlement est disponible sur le site du concours. Nous attendons vos photos avec impatience !
Les plus belles photos seront sélectionnées par un jury national composé d'amateurs et de professionnels, de contributeurs à Wikimedia Commons et d'acteurs du patrimoine. Un jury international sélectionnera ensuite des meilleures photographies mondiales.
Si vous avez des questions, l'équipe organisatrice se fera un plaisir d'y répondre.
P.S. : vous recevez ce message parce que vous avez participé au concours Wiki Loves Monuments en France les années précédentes. Si vous avez déjà ou si ne pouvez pas participer au concours cette année, faites passer le message autour de vous pour que de nouveaux et nouvelles photographes rejoignent l'aventure !
Bonne journée,
Sarah Krichen WMFr et Nicolas Vigneron, pour l'équipe de Wiki Loves Monuments France, 14:51, 12 September 2019 (UTC)
Red-linked categories[edit]
Hi, I noticed today that you have been categorising images in Category:Aircraft, and I congratulate you on the effort. However, for some images, you have added non-existent categories, ie red-linked categories. That causes the problem that such action can make images invisible to users attempting to find suitable illustrations via the intended purpose of categorisation. See Commons:Categories that says: "The category structure is the primary way to organize and find files on the Commons." Unlike fellow project Wikipedia, red links cannot be seen by users navigating the Commons hierarchical category structure, and unless the filename offers a clue, they cannot easily find images that reference non-existent categories. I hope that you will study this issue further, and then please either create them with suitable content that fits the hierarchy, or replace them with existing relevant categories. MTIA, PeterWD (talk) 18:47, 21 November 2019 (UTC)
- @PeterWD: Hi, I patrol the recent files of the Aviation project on a regular basis to check for copyvios or miss-categoried files, and useful new files to add to WP. My usual workflow is check: a batch of files > add proper categories > create red-link categories if need be. Due to the very large batch of new files to check that particular day, I failed to reach the end of my workflow when interrupted in action by my professional life – I might have bitten off more than I could chew. If not ideal, I tend to think that a red-link category is better than no specific category at all, given that a red-link category allow the file to be findable via the search bar (as evidenced here). If not for the red-link cat, the registration F-WZFT wouldn't be mentionned on the page and the file would not be found with this keyword.
- Of course, the correct way to do that is to finish the job and create the missing categories, which I should have done asap. Hope you understand. Thanks for your awareness. Gyrostat (talk) 15:07, 26 December 2019 (UTC)
Mathieu Romano photos[edit]
Hello Gyrostat, Sorry, I made mistakes on the copyrights, I'm new on Wikipedia and it's hard to understand how to proceed. I made a request at Permission Commons for my own work = Ensemble Aedes picture. [Ticket#: 2020032410003944]. And I have asked the photograph of Mathieu Romano's portrait Sorin Dumitrascu to do the same. I gave me his agreement and is sending it now. Will it be possible to restore both pages ? Thank you for your kind reply. Elia --ELIAGAUDIO (talk) 09:16, 24 March 2020 (UTC)
- Bonjour @ELIAGAUDIO: , j'ai vu vos messages sur Wikipédia donc je vais vous répondre en français, ça sera plus pratique. Voici les problèmes que j'avais avec les photos :
- les premières présentaient un copyright (celui de Sorin Dumitrascu en l'occurrence), mais sans preuve que Sorin Dumitrascu les avait effectivement publié sous licence Creative Commons.
- ensuite, il est très fréquent que des internautes prétendent être l'auteur de la photo qu'ils mettent en ligne sans que ce soit le cas. Dans ces cas-là, il s'agit généralement de photo en basse résolution et sans métadonnées. Comme c'était le cas de File:Romano Mathieu.jpg, cela m'a mis la puce à l'oreille.
- Si vous avez transmit les autorisations nécessaires à permissions-commons@wikimedia.org, alors les bénévoles OTRS pourront les vérifier et restaurer les fichiers le cas échéant. Cordialement, Gyrostat (talk) 11:42, 24 March 2020 (UTC)
Merci Gyrostat, c'était tellement compliqué, j'ai abandonné la procédure. La page de Mathieu Romano avait été supprimée pour cause de contenu dupliqué. Je l'ai recréée aujourd'hui en réécrivant une bonne partie de la biographie. J'espère qua ça ira. Pour la photo je vais demander à Mathieu Romano qu'il en prenne une de lui-même et qu'il l'intègre. J'espère que ça passera mieux comme ça ! En effet Sorin Dumitrascu m'avait donné l'autorisation mais je crois qu'il s'est découragé quand je lui ai envoyé la procédure de publication de la photo sous CC... Je vous remercie d'avoir pris le temps de me répondre et, si toutefois je peux abuser un peu de votre temps, n'hésitez pas à em faire vos retours sur l'article de Mathieu Romano si je peux encore l'améliorer. Bien cordialement, --ELIAGAUDIO (talk) 14:12, 8 April 2020 (UTC)
You nominated this file the same day it was kept by User:Jameslwoodward at Commons:Deletion requests/File:Video Shows Damage Done to Notre Dame Cathedral by Fire - Wo.webm. This is disruptive behavior. Please stop. You can't always have it your way. I undid your edits. Multichill (talk) 16:10, 4 May 2020 (UTC)
- I made a point to prove a copyright violation. @Mikani: concurs with me. We are both professional journalists, and trained to identify and authentify footages. We are both administrators and trusted members of french Wikimedia projects. Our claims are in the best interest of the community and should be taken into account, and not dismissed despite all the evidence. I don't want to have it my way, but to keep Commons clear of copyright violation. Gyrostat (talk) 16:15, 4 May 2020 (UTC)
- In total agreement with Gyrostat. --mikani (to talk) 16:18, 4 May 2020 (UTC)
See my comment at Commons:Deletion requests/File:Video Shows Damage Done to Notre Dame Cathedral by Fire - Wo.webm. . Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 18:08, 4 May 2020 (UTC)
Virginie Efira Benedetta.jpg[edit]
Hello, I took this picture two years ago and don't understand why it has been marked as a possible copyright violation ? Thank you. Condor31a (talk) 21:08, 10 May 2020 (UTC)
- Hello. This is a low resolution version with no metadata, this looks suspicious. This picture is accessible on Facebook, so anyone could retrieve it there. If this is really your work, you will need to demonstrate that you indeed are the creator of the picture. Gyrostat (talk) 21:12, 10 May 2020 (UTC)
|
|
File:Manifestation Charlie Hebdo Toulouse, 10jan15-18.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. |
A1Cafel (talk) 15:31, 10 August 2020 (UTC)
Erreur[edit]
Cher Monsieur,
Nous aurions été heureux que vous preniez contact avec nous avant de faire supprimer nos photographies pour un motif lui-même fondé sur une erreur,
En effet, nous aurions pu vous expliquer que ces photos sont les nôtres, qu'elles ont été publiées sur le site du Secrétariat de Sa Majesté le Roi Louis XX, puis reprises par de nombreux médias, et non l'inverse. Merci, donc, de les restaurer.
Cordialement vôtre,
FC2 (Secrétariat de Louis de Bourbon, Duc d'Anjou) (talk)
- Bonjour, vous pouvez faire une demande de restauration sur cette page, avec l'identité du photographe et la source qui atteste que ces photos sont bien disponibles sous licence libre. Cordialement, Gyrostat (talk) 22:03, 27 September 2020 (UTC)
File:Antoine Schneck.jpg[edit]
Bonjour C., j’ai contacté Antoine Schneck ce jour, et lui ai indiqué la procédure à suivre. il devrait envoyer un courriel à OTRS dans les prochaine heures. Cordialement, --Claude Truong-Ngoc (talk) 12:43, 2 December 2020 (UTC)
Use of video[edit]
Hello! I'm just letting you know that I used a portion of the video at https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:QTR_A380_A7-APD_23dec14_LFBO-3.webm in my video at https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=otR0HNos71Y (to be publicly available on April 27th). When the excerpt from your video is on screen, I credit you by name and I also link both to the image's source on Commons as well as to the Creative Commons license in the video's credits and in its description. If you're curious, my primary purpose for my channel is as a teaching resource for my students (I am a college history teacher). Thank you for making the video freely available! Sincerely, --History and Headlines (talk) 16:30, 26 April 2021 (UTC)
Plus que quelques jours pour participer à Wiki Loves Monuments France ![edit]
Bonjour,
Le concours Wiki Loves Monuments France est ouvert pour une semaine encore, jusqu'au 30 septembre. Déjà plus de 6 000 photos ont été importées cette année alors vous aussi rejoignez le concours ! Cette campagne de contribution concerne tous les monuments et objets mobiliers présents dans la base Mérimée et dans la base Palissy. De l'imposant château aux ruines industrielles, de la verrière décorative au reliquaire, c'est un impressionnant patrimoine qui attend d'être photographié et documenté. Vous pouvez dès à présent mettre en ligne autant de photos que vous le souhaitez de ces monuments et objets du patrimoine français. Nous attendons vos photos avec impatience !
Les plus belles photos seront sélectionnées par un jury national composé d'amateurs et de professionnels, de contributeurs à Wikimedia Commons et d'acteurs du patrimoine. Un jury international constituera ensuite une sélection des meilleures photographies mondiales.
Si vous avez des questions, l'équipe organisatrice se fera un plaisir d'y répondre.
P.S. : vous recevez ce message parce que vous avez participé au concours Wiki Loves Monuments en France
MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 12:26, 26 September 2021 (UTC)
Salut Gyrostat,
pourquoi as-tu demandé la suppression de cette photo ? La photo a été prise par la personne qui l'a téléchargée. Pour les œuvres qu'on a soi-même créées, il n'est pas nécessaire d'envoyer une autorisation au support. – Amitiés, --Mussklprozz (talk) 19:49, 19 January 2022 (UTC)
- Salut, j'ai des gros doutes quand à cette affirmation : basse résolution, pas de métadonnées. D'autant qu'il s'agit de la photo de profil FB avec exactement la même résolution. Si l'uploader est bien l'auteur, je suppose qu'il dispose d'une version non recadré, non downsizée et avec les métadonnées de l'appareil ? Gyrostat (talk) 20:21, 19 January 2022 (UTC)
- @Mussklprozz: Has the uploader substantiated his claim via OTRS ? Because I can also
right click > Save Picture As, upload it to Commons and swear that I took it without any proof to back it up. The uploader the subject's assistant, which would explain that he took pictures of him. But we also see on a regular basis assitants uploading image that are copyrigthed and that they have no right to publish under a Creative Commons licence. I want to be certain that we're not in such a situation. - If the uploader has indeed taken the picture himself, I'm sure he doesn't need to download the image from Facebook and he can upload on Commons a version with the metadata. That would be more than enough to me to assume good faith on his part. Gyrostat (talk) 15:09, 20 January 2022 (UTC)
- Yes, the uploader has written his claim to OTRS. But thanks, I now see your point. I had not seen that the photo had been published on facebook before. I will take back the permission badge and write to the client to provide the original photo including metadata. --Mussklprozz (talk) 16:15, 20 January 2022 (UTC)
- @Mussklprozz: Has the uploader substantiated his claim via OTRS ? Because I can also
Access to original files and copyvio[edit]
Re File:François Piquemal.jpg: If the uploader is part of the campaign team and has access to the original files, then it is not a "clear copyright violation" as required by COM:CSD#F1. Note that the requirement for speedy deletion has been recently strengthened from "no good evidence of Commons-compatible licensing being issued by the copyright holder" to "evidence that no Commons-compatible licensing has been issued by the copyright holder". In practice, this generally means prior publication at equal or higher quality at an earlier date on a another website without a free license.
Simply having unclear authorship and/or copyright status is not a valid reason for speedy deletion; if there is a real possibility that the situation can be resolved amicably via COM:VRT, we give them a grace period of a week to send over the necessary permissions. {{No permission since}} is absolutely the standard thing to do when the named creator or copyright holder does not appear to match the uploader, but there is no evidence that image is stolen from the Internet. Some people do not know that they need to tag such an image with {{subst:PP}} (which actually gives it an even longer grace period of a month). King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 17:29, 22 June 2022 (UTC)
- (Edit conflict) I understand what you say, and that's what I've been doing for the past few days while patrolling French politicians pages. But I do not share your conclusion: the uploader claimed this image to be is own work, which we know isn't true thanks to the metadata. Also, we have no indication that he may have obtained a permission (which is sometimes the case when they indicate it as own work, if they don't know the proper way to do it). It seems to me that the situation of this file is quite clear: the author is identified and doesn't match the uploader's authorship claim + no permission = copyright violation. Gyrostat (talk) 19:01, 22 June 2022 (UTC)
- "Note that the requirement for speedy deletion has been recently strengthened" Ah, I wasn't aware of that. I'll try to get used to this new requirement then. Thanks for the explanation. Gyrostat (talk) 19:32, 22 June 2022 (UTC)
Bertrand Bouyx.jpg[edit]
First, calm youself. "WTF" is not acceptable as a comment.
Second, if it is a campaign photograph, please provide us a link to verify. Ruthven (msg) 16:31, 29 July 2022 (UTC)
- Well reverting without any comment or explanation isn't exactly ok either, so let's say we got off on the wrong foot.
- I couldn't find the original file despite my best effort, but there are many red flags on this file. First of all, this person has been clipped in front of this background. The lighting and the white balance of the two scenes are different. Second of all, the metadata make no sense. The date is off but that can happen. The apperture at f/9 doesn't make sense with this depht of field between the subject and the background. The focal lenght doesn't make sense either for the subject and the background. So this file has been edited.
- Finally, this MP's website display a very very similar image on its homepage, with the subject dressed/combed similarly and the same yellow field.
Right-clic + save imagewill show you the same anomalies in the metadata, with the same camera model. So it's not unreasonable to assume that those two files have the same creator. Own work is an easy claim for a single-purpose account, but this look like its coming from a campaign material or official photos stock, and the author should be appropriately indicated so we can check its copyright status. It looks like it's not the first time this MP or his staff tried to upload his portrait on Commons, also failing to clearly ID the author (this image was used on his fr.wp entry before deletion ; based on the file name, it was an official portait by the Assemblée nationale, which is not compatible with Creative Commons licences). Gyrostat (talk) 17:03, 29 July 2022 (UTC)
Copyvio Romain Daubié[edit]
Salut,
Je voudrais savoir la source indiquant que Sandrine Sarrio est l'autrice de ce cliché. En fait le compte à l'origine de l'upload m'a assuré/confirmé par email que la personne derrière ce compte est bien l'autrice de cette photo (je viens de lui envoyer la question par email). Elle est par ailleurs l'une des assistantes parlementaires de RD (comme indiqué sur sa PU wpfr).
Merci, --Benoît (d) 17:41, 1 December 2022 (UTC)
- Je viens de voir les métadonnées. C'est suffisant pour confirmer le doute. Je supprime la photo. Merci de ta vigilance. ----Benoît (d) 17:44, 1 December 2022 (UTC)
- Voilà, tout simplement
Gyrostat (talk) 18:01, 1 December 2022 (UTC)
- Voilà, tout simplement
.jpg){kind=link}
Portrait TAITE Jean-Pierre.jpg [edit]
Bonjour. Ce fichier semble devoir être supprimé pour infraction aux droits d'auteur (vous aviez posé un bandeau d'avertissement). Je ne sais pas comment faire pour demander une telle suppression. Cordialement. --DocMuséo 22:10, 18 December 2022 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by DocMuséo (talk • contribs) 22:10, 18 December 2022 (UTC)
- Bonjour, effectivement en l'absence de réaction du téléverseur, la photo aurait due être supprimé depuis quelques mois déjà. J'ai ajouté un bandeau plus pressant au fichier, merci pour le rappel. Gyrostat (talk) 22:32, 18 December 2022 (UTC)
Notification about possible deletion[edit]
|
|
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. |
Affected:
Yours sincerely, --Minorax«¦talk¦» 11:28, 19 March 2023 (UTC)
Thank you for identifying all these copyright violations[edit]
I suspect there are many more hidden here. I have written the uploader and asked to tag them himself. --Polarlys (talk) 20:47, 19 March 2023 (UTC)
Round 1 of Picture of the Year 2022 voting is open![edit]
Read this message in your language
Dear Wikimedian,
Wikimedia Commons is happy to announce that the 2022 Picture of the Year competition is now open. This year will be the seventeenth edition of the annual Wikimedia Commons photo competition, which recognizes exceptional contributions by users on Wikimedia Commons. Wikimedia users are invited to vote for their favorite images featured on Commons during the last year (2022) to produce a single Picture of the Year.
Hundreds of images that have been rated Featured Pictures by the international Wikimedia Commons community in the past year are all entered in this competition. These images include professional animal and plant shots, breathtaking panoramas and skylines, restorations of historical images, photographs portraying the world's best architecture, impressive human portraits, and so much more.
For your convenience, we have sorted the images into topical categories. Two rounds of voting will be held: In the first round, you may vote for as many images as you like. The top 30 overall and the two most popular images in each category will continue to the final. In the final round, you may vote for just three images to become the Picture of the Year.
Round 1 will end on UTC.
Thanks,
the Wikimedia Commons Picture of the Year committee
You are receiving this message because you voted in the 2021 Picture of the Year contest.
Delivered by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 09:15, 20 April 2023 (UTC)
Round 2 of Picture of the Year 2022 voting is open![edit]
Read this message in your language
Dear Wikimedian,
You are receiving this message because we noticed that you voted in Round 1 of the 2022 Picture of the Year contest, but not yet in the second round. Wikimedia users are invited to vote for their favorite images featured on Commons during the last year (2022) to produce a single Picture of the Year.
Hundreds of images that have been rated Featured Pictures by the international Wikimedia Commons community in the past year were entered in this competition. These images include professional animal and plant shots, breathtaking panoramas and skylines, restorations of historical images, photographs portraying the world's best architecture, impressive human portraits, and so much more.
In this second and final round, you may vote for a maximum of three images. The image with the most votes will become the Picture of the Year 2022.
Round 2 will end at UTC.
Thanks,
the Wikimedia Commons Picture of the Year committee
Delivered by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 07:45, 5 May 2023 (UTC)
Utilisation d’une de vos images[edit]
Bonjour !
J’ai utilisé une de vos images comme illustration d’une pétition en ligne. Je vous ai bien sûr crédité.
Merci de permettre la réutilisation de vos photos !
Bonne journée,
Jd-dev (talk) 14:42, 29 May 2023 (UTC)
Evidence of copyvio tagging[edit]
Please note that per COM:CSD#F1, clear evidence of copyvio is required; if you have mere suspicion, you are free to use COM:DR or "no permission". In particular, you must link to an external copy that is not freely licensed and of equal or higher quality. For File:Andréa.Kotarac.jpg, your Twitter link is clearly of inferior quality and lacks EXIF, meaning that the Commons photo could not have been stolen from Twitter. If you look at the uploader's other uploads, almost all of them have Nikon D7500 in the EXIF, suggesting that they were all taken by one person who is likely the uploader. For File:Natacha Bouchart.jpg, note that the username, FredC62100, appears to match the real name of the author, Fred COLLIER, and since this is high-res with EXIF and there is no evidence of prior publication, we can assume good faith that the uploader is the photographer. Even if the author in the EXIF does not match the uploader, that is not a reason for speedy deletion; "no permission" should be used in that case. As for File:Horizons DB EP.webp, being ".webp" is obviously not a valid reason for speedy deletion. It may increase the level of suspicion, so "no permission" is justified, but for speedy deletion we must be quite sure it is a copyvio. -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 05:09, 8 November 2023 (UTC)
Bonjour, j'ai substitué le fichier qui posait un problème de droits d'auteurs. Cordialement, — Racconish 💬 08:29, 13 November 2023 (UTC)
Idem. Cordialement, — Racconish 💬 06:56, 20 November 2023 (UTC)
Idem encore ! — Racconish 💬 07:19, 20 November 2023 (UTC)
- T'as bien fait, merci ! J'ai mis à jour les légendes en français. Gyrostat (talk) 15:18, 26 November 2023 (UTC)
Excuse[edit]
Excusez-moi pour la photo de Bellingham, je voulais seulement actualiser l'image, mes plus sincères excuses. CharlemagneGOAT (talk) 12:03, 18 December 2023 (UTC)