User talk:INeverCry/Archive 26

From Wikimedia Commons, the free media repository
Jump to navigation Jump to search
← Archive 25 Archive 26 Archive 27 →

Valued Image Promotion

★ Your nomination has been reviewed and promoted ★
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:
Leonid Kovalchuk, standing portrait, in his full official dress as rector of Ternopil State Medical University.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.
review

Sanlorenzo S.p.a. images

Hi INeverCry,

I sent an email for release of rights to a file for the following images 2 weeks ago, but they have been deleted nontheless, could you please restore them?

File:460EXP vessel.jpg File:Sanlorenzo expansion rendering.jpg File:SSY.jpg File:Sanlorenzo Viareggio.jpg

Thanks for the help! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Federico Carozzo (talk • contribs) 09:28, 14 November 2016 (UTC)

I'm not an OTRS member, so I can't restore them. If you sent the permission email two weeks ago, they should be pretty close to processing it. They have a big backlog though. Once they've processed the permission email, they'll restore the images automatically. You can ask about progress at COM:OTRS/N. lNeverCry 09:36, 14 November 2016 (UTC)

Please review

I tried to fix this "brought over from en:wiki" picture, but I'd like a review to be sure what I did was ok. Please check File:Sphinx partially excavated2.jpg. I don't see with the last possible photographer dead in 1929 why it couldn't be brought to Commons. Cheers! Ellin Beltz (talk) 15:20, 14 November 2016 (UTC)

Looks good to me. You'll have to either remove or update the featured picture tags (that should be fun... ). lNeverCry 23:47, 14 November 2016 (UTC)

Pic deleted

Dear INever cry,

I'm relatively new to Wikipedia and I found that a pic uploaded to the biography of Dr. Elena Gallego Andrada was deleted.

Could you give a hint of why so I don't make the same mistake again?

How do I upload the photo of the person in the biography?

Regards

SaraG 

SaraGuevara (talk) 15:31, 14 November 2016 (UTC)
Hi Sara. These were deleted per Commons:Deletion requests/Files uploaded by SaraGuevara. In this situation, where the images have been previously published on the internet, we need OTRS permission from the photographer/copyright holder, or you could upload high-resolution originals of the two images with COM:EXIF metadata intact. lNeverCry 23:49, 14 November 2016 (UTC)

Deleted Files

Hello INeverCry you recently had a file of mines (File:Urban5.jpg) deleted and I'm not sure the reason. I'm fairly new to the commons so I would like to know what the problem is for future reference. Also I am the complete and sole owner of the file that was deleted if that happens to be a concern. Any how any feed back will be appreciated so I can fix the problem.

Thanks for your time

The image/s reference http://www.urbanmonstermusic.com/photos, so we would likely need OTRS permission from the copyright holders of the image. Another concern is COM:ADVERT. Musicians should usually have an article about them on Wikipedia before uploading images that may constitute self-promotion. lNeverCry 23:54, 14 November 2016 (UTC)

@INeverCry Similar issue with me too. File:Karl Markgraf and the Armenian Group.jpg and File:VT120792 201614840004Cropped (1).jpg belong to my office and I own those. So next time I re-upload them I hope there won't be a problem. --Narek75 (talk) 18:48, 14 November 2016 (UTC)

These were previously published on the internet before being uploaded here. If you're the copyright holder, please send a permission email to OTRS. lNeverCry 23:55, 14 November 2016 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

The Copyright Watcher Barnstar
I would like to award you The Copyright Watcher Barnstar because you helped to keep Wikimedia Commons clean from copyright violations. Davidng913 (talk) 03:36, 17 November 2016 (UTC)
Thanks. That's nice of you. I appreciate it. lNeverCry 03:54, 17 November 2016 (UTC)

File:Kazan 2015 - Fu Yuanhui.jpg

Can you move it back to File:Kazan 2015 - Liu Xiang.jpg? I think I was wrong after all. Timmyshin (talk) 06:03, 18 November 2016 (UTC)

✓ Done I've redirected the original (File:Kazan 2015 - Liu Xiang.JPG to File:Kazan 2015 - Liu Xiang.jpg since the software won't allow moves to .JPG, but automatically goes to .jpg. lNeverCry 06:14, 18 November 2016 (UTC)

Stamp deletion

In reviewing an auto archive I happened to notice a French stamp was deleted per Commons:Deletion requests/File:Cezanne-france1961-CardPlayers.jpg but was not aware of the nomination. I had a talk page discussion about this stamp a year earlier and pointed out that I did not think it was in copyright. Other stamps have been nominated and kept for the same reasons that no new copyright was created. See my archived discussion User talk:Ww2censor/Archive3#French Stamp file to delete where Seuil d'originalité is particularly pertinent which would be the same points I would make in an undelete request if you stand by your original deletion. Thanks for your consideration to undelete. Ww2censor (talk) 11:06, 18 November 2016 (UTC)

@Ww2censor: I've restored it. You may want to add a note/link about the above details to the talk page of the image. lNeverCry 19:30, 18 November 2016 (UTC)
Comments and links added as suggested. Thanks. Ww2censor (talk) 22:01, 18 November 2016 (UTC)

100 years of solitude family tree

/// copied from the page on the link - my comment is below ///

File:100 let samote-rodovnik.JPG

No permission Jcb (talk) 13:47, 6 November 2016 (UTC)

Deleted: per nomination/COM:PRP. --lNeverCry 00:49, 13 November 2016 (UTC)

 Info Yes, I am / was:) an author of the deleted diagram. I have read the book many times and along the reading, I made a genealogy tree, since it is quite difficult to comprehend all the Buendias described in the book. I shared that with wikipedia - I am not sure, who put it to commons / or to spanish wikipedia (not me). I find that the description of the book (in a manner of a famaily tree) could not be problematic within Marquez authorship - or is it? Apparently. Since I am no admin here, I cannot check the Commons history of the deleted file / or add the suitable licence (nobody left a notice for me to do it). I think a genealogy chart is a welcome data for a reader, and it would be a waste not to have it there. Best from Žiga (talk) 20:02, 14 November 2016 (UTC)

PS sorry to write this here, but since I haven't found more suitalbe place, it is going to stay here, until you move it somewhere else. Žiga (talk) 20:08, 14 November 2016 (UTC)

Aha, and, no, Marquez never wrote or published a diagram in such a manner. He just wrote a complex book. A reader must figure it out by himself. I have never heard, that a synopsis of the work (susch as this fam.tree is) would be violation of rights. I am not the author of the book, but the author of synopsis, made as a chart. Any objections? Žiga (talk) 20:12, 14 November 2016 (UTC)

Looks like a mistake on my part. I didn't look at it closely enough. I've restored it and marked it as own work. Take a look and make sure everything is cleaned up as regards description, author, source, etc. lNeverCry 00:08, 15 November 2016 (UTC)

I see there is some Slovenian text there (I made it for the purpose of wiki-sl at the time, not having a global usage in mind) - so it is not really usable unless being reverted to this one. info {{}}I copied this text to Commons:Deletion_requests/File:100_let_samote-rodovnik.JPG too, so there was a minor debate there. Well it is over anyhow. I think an article about 100 years would need a fam. tree in any way, so someone else will do it one day with the template (copy from my chart or do it by reading again. Bye, Žiga (talk) 02:28, 15 November 2016 (UTC)

Žiga (talk) 02:28, 15 November 2016 (UTC)

One more thing, I see the license is obsolete or not working probably. What do you suggest (I'm not really in for some heavy licensing for this image; just a standard CC) ? Žiga (talk) 02:39, 15 November 2016 (UTC)
I've cleaned up the file. If you want to change the license, just remove {{GFDL|migration=relicense}} and replace it with {{CC-BY-4.0}} or {{CC-BY-SA-4.0}}. lNeverCry 02:53, 15 November 2016 (UTC)

Help requested

Hi INeverCry, could you have a look at this page to see if you can help to resolve a few files with unknown copyright situation? Jcb (talk) 16:40, 16 November 2016 (UTC)

I'll try to get around to that. I've got a backlog of my own it would seem, and I've spent a good part of the day neck-deep in some drama. lNeverCry 03:53, 17 November 2016 (UTC)

Deleted per nomination.

Hi INeverCry,

First let me thank you for the amazing amount of work and the loads of deletion requests (by me) with a nice and clean decision from your side. But now to the real talking point. I noticed that this morning/night you deleted 21 files where I transfered a no-source template to a deletion request with the standard "deleted per nomination". However in the nomination I argue to keep these files, for some of them it seems quite obvious that they can be kept as they are clearly PD-simple and their sources had been fixed by me. Can you please expand a bit on these files, what was the reason to delete them? I've listed the relevant files below, the question is mainly for the German supermarket logos, I also included the other, related, images with a similar no-source contested nomination and a "deleted per nomination"

German supermarket logos (@Hedwig in Washington: as initial nominator for no source)
These are different, and I feel less strong about them necessarily requiring a keep

Greetings and many thanks for your time and work. Basvb (talk) 19:38, 14 November 2016 (UTC)

The question is: Do we need a source for textlogos? IMHO yes, no exeption. The source requirement is already softening up like ice cream in the sun. We either require a source or not. If you make exceptions for one thing, another one will follow and suddenly all the ©-work we do is for naught. My 2¢. --Hedwig in Washington (mail?) 22:58, 14 November 2016 (UTC)
Hedwig in Washington, we need a source, but simple mention "from Company X" should be enough as a source. My 2 Rs. Regards, Yann (talk) 23:33, 14 November 2016 (UTC)
Not sure what 2Rs are worth tho. 3:D So, I make up a logo and call it Microsoft logo 1988-1991. Not sure I'm too happy with that in general. Same with fantasy companies. We already have/get soooo much junk here. I am not sure what the right course of action should be. I surely think we should keep whatever we can, on the other hand we need some leverage against junk'n spam. --Hedwig in Washington (mail?) 23:38, 14 November 2016 (UTC)
Hedwig with this argument for sources your aim is to get a source for the correctness of what is showed in the images and not necessarily to show that there is valid permission? Imo (but a wider discussion on this in a suitable venue would be useful) sources are required to show that licenses are correct. In other cases sources are welcomed (that sounds to mild) of course but when something is clearly PD we can keep it, even without perfect sourcing. We also have some maps which are contested to be wrong, however if our reusers decide to use these maps IMO they should be kept (possibly with warnings). In these examples some of the images did get proper sources in the end. Basvb (talk) 10:29, 15 November 2016 (UTC)
Hedwig in Washington, if someone draws a company logo, there are several potential issues, but the source is not really one of them. If the logo is complex, then it is a derivative work, and there is a copyright issue, source or no source. If the logo is simple and accurate, then fine. In that case, a simple mention is sufficient if a link can't be provided. If it is not accurate, then it is out of scope, whatever is the source. There may also be trademark issues, but again the source is not really an issue. 2 Indian rupees are worth around 0.03 US$, my advises are cheap. ;) Regards, Yann (talk) 14:38, 15 November 2016 (UTC)
  • @Basvb: I do a lot of deletions, so sometimes I may delete a few that could be kept. When I see text logos in the CSD backlog, I just remove the CSD tag, source the company, and tag them with the PD-Textlogo and trademark tags. I would recommend this instead of deletion requests unless you're really unsure of the COM:TOO of a particular logo or if it's in COM:SCOPE. Feel free to revert my closes above and tag the images (the usages can be reverted with Commons Delinquent), or I'll get to them as soon as I can and take a 2nd look. lNeverCry 00:03, 15 November 2016 (UTC)
    Thank you for your reaction. In the cases of no-source tags I always prefer to use a deletion request in cases where either more arguments are needed or the files should be kept. Often the user adding the no-source template does not agree (fully) with the argumentation and a valid discussion arises. I prefer not to keep close any of these files myself (consider myself to involved as keep-nominator) and as there is no hurry I would welcome your offer to have a 2nd look when you have the time available. Basvb (talk) 10:29, 15 November 2016 (UTC)
All valid points. The problem is, how one can distinguish between a valid logo and fantasy when we just keep all textlogos which source = company name. *scratch head* need more coffee to think about that. :-) --Hedwig in Washington (mail?) 01:49, 16 November 2016 (UTC)

INeverCry, would you prefer if I raise this on Com:Undel? Seeing as some days have passed now. Basvb (talk) 19:32, 18 November 2016 (UTC)

That might be the best way to go. I'm working on Commons:Deletion requests/Files in Category:PD US FDA, which is huge, and I have other daily deletion work. lNeverCry 22:06, 18 November 2016 (UTC)
Yup I understood you were quite busy, I'll raise it there then. Basvb (talk) 22:32, 18 November 2016 (UTC)

Without information

Man! If you decided to delete my images, at least inform me at my talkpage! Pff... --Norden1990 (talk) 22:54, 17 November 2016 (UTC)

This was tagged for speedy deletion by Fauvirt. I figured he would've notified you or that he would've used the automated speedy tagging process. As an admin, I do 100s of deletions each day, so I can't check to see if everyone is notified. That's the responsibility of the person tagging the file for speedy deletion. When I do deletion tagging I use the automated tool, so uploaders are always notified. This is the best way to tag files for deletion. lNeverCry 23:11, 17 November 2016 (UTC)

Redirect cleanup

I just wanted to let you know I am done with the list of those unneeded redirects. I just submitted the last 30 or so. Thanks again for the help. Reguyla (talk) 14:35, 19 November 2016 (UTC)

Are these within our scope?

Hey, I don't know if these pics fall within our scope and we can keep them. --Mhhossein talk 11:50, 18 November 2016 (UTC)

Not my kind of thing either, but yes, they're in scope. Sexual/erotic images, especially high-quality posed images, are useful for illustrating the topics of LGBT, love, relationships, sex, beauty, etc. lNeverCry 19:36, 18 November 2016 (UTC)
Thanks, and do we keep any of them if they're left unused? --Mhhossein talk 05:42, 19 November 2016 (UTC)
Yes. COM:EDUSE is what you use to judge an image or video or audio file. Is there a reasonable educational use? Is the quality good enough (unless we have only one file for a certain subject - in that case just about anything is OK). A file has to be usable for an educational purpose but not necessarily in use. Don't worry though - whenever I sort through uncategorized images, I always find files that have no educational value (promotional material, unused low-quality personal images, personal drawings, artworks by non-notable artists, etc. We have over 1 million files that're uncategorized, and many more that have meaningless categories or categories they don't belong in. We also have 10s of thousands of copyright violations floating around. And we get at least 10,000+ new uploads each day. So we'll never run out of material that requires sorting and possibly deletion. lNeverCry 07:10, 19 November 2016 (UTC)
Thanks for the comprehensive explanation. I've got another question; How do we treat files like this considering our guideline regarding Commons:Photographs of identifiable people? Thanks. --Mhhossein talk 12:00, 19 November 2016 (UTC)
That isn't an area I've ever worked in much. I have limited familiarity with COM:IDENT. You may want to ask at COM:VP. lNeverCry 19:53, 19 November 2016 (UTC)
I'll update you with the feedback. --Mhhossein talk 05:34, 20 November 2016 (UTC)

Creative Commons, Wikipedia and ensuring the correct copyright

Hi INeverCry,

I recently had a couple of images deleted for potential copyright infringement from a page I'm updating for the subject of the page and one of the photographs - Andrew Whiston.jpg.

I've been trying to read through the mass of information on uploading images into commons, but still find it a bit obscure and legalistic. Can you help me with a synopsis of 'How I should add an image' - i.e. What you can do and rather what you can't. Specifically, not stated in the documentation is the need for some sort of copyright approval for an image:

  1. How is that obtained if I, or the person I'm working for, owns the image?
  2. If I possess an image, but am uncertain of its copyright, how do I set about applying a commons license to it (or verifying if it already has one)?

Clearly there's a process to assigning copyright here (even if that's free access), it's just not clear what that process is and other than the original photographer/graphic artist, what organisations to approach for the determination of an images ownership. Is some form of documentation required to determine the veracity of my assertion as to ownership of the copyright?

Thanks in advance.

Jon. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jonmojo (talk • contribs) 18:15, 18 November 2016 (UTC)

The basic rule of copyright deals with creation/ownership of images. If you took an image with your camera, you are the copyright holder. You can license the image however you want. If someone else created an image (took the photograph with their camera), they own the copyright, and OTRS permission from them would be needed. The same is true of images owned by a company or organization. OTRS permission from the company or organization would be needed to host the image here on Commons. lNeverCry 19:43, 18 November 2016 (UTC)

Valued Image Promotion

★ Your nomination has been reviewed and promoted ★
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:
Arsen Pavlov, portrait, close-up, full combat dress.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.
review
★ Your nomination has been reviewed and promoted ★
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:
Mikhail Tolstykh, still portrait.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.
review
★ Your nomination has been reviewed and promoted ★
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:
Igor Besler, still portrait.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.
review
★ Your nomination has been reviewed and promoted ★
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:
Alexander Zakharchenko, close-up.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.
review
★ Your nomination has been reviewed and promoted ★
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:
Ihor Plotnytskiy, still portrait.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.
review

User:Campeones 2008

Hello INeverCry, I've just closed Commons:Deletion requests/File:Cristina Pedroche 2013.jpg. User Campeones 2008 was right reverting, as you can see in that DR. The only fault the user has committed is to use rude language. Regards. Anna (Cookie) (talk) 03:06, 20 November 2016 (UTC)

@Cookie: If you want, you can unblock him, but can you leave him a note in Spanish not to use that kind of language toward other editors again? lNeverCry 04:41, 20 November 2016 (UTC)
Done. Thank you. Anna (Cookie) (talk) 03:07, 21 November 2016 (UTC)

Unsourced, original map

Hello.

In August you deleted this capital punishment map on the ground that it was unsourced, a move I can only approve.

There is another map on the same topic which is in the same situation, a completely original research.

I respectfully suggest you to delete it also.

Thank you.

Urutine32 (talk) 13:03, 20 November 2016 (UTC)

✓ Done lNeverCry 20:22, 20 November 2016 (UTC)

Valued Image Promotion

★ Your nomination has been reviewed and promoted ★
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:
Dmytro Yarosh.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.
review
★ Your nomination has been reviewed and promoted ★
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:
Ihor Kolomoyskyi.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.
review

Thank you

 Thank you. very much for giving me the rights --ديفيد عادل وهبة خليل 2 (talk) 07:09, 23 November 2016 (UTC)

I'm happy to help. One of my general goals here is to make sure that productive Commons editors have the tools they need to do the work they've chosen to take part in. lNeverCry 07:16, 23 November 2016 (UTC)

Question...

Should this file be deleted per this nomination? I guarantee you KCTV 5 did not produce the picture. It's used on this website, this website, and the list goes on... Corkythehornetfan 06:17, 23 November 2016 (UTC)

✓ Done Deleted along with another COM:NETCOPYVIO from the same uploader. lNeverCry 06:25, 23 November 2016 (UTC)

User:1989

Could you protect my user page? Thanks. MCMLXXXIX 01:06, 23 November 2016 (UTC)

✓ Done lNeverCry 01:39, 23 November 2016 (UTC)

User talk:Ian Limerick

Please block this user for re-uploading copyvios, and nuke their uploads. I already reported them for speedy deletion. MCMLXXXIX 22:30, 22 November 2016 (UTC)

✓ Done lNeverCry 22:33, 22 November 2016 (UTC)

User talk:NN da SF

User keeps uploading copyright violations after instructed not to. MCMLXXXIX 20:35, 22 November 2016 (UTC)

✓ Done Uploads nuked, user blocked. lNeverCry 21:12, 22 November 2016 (UTC)

Generosity Crowdfunding Campaign for User:The Photographer

Please excuse me spamming you. As a regular on Feature Picture Candidatess you will recognise User:The Photographer, who has 86 Featured Pictures. His contributions cover the architecture and culture of Brazil and Venezuela. He has basic photographic equipment: an old D300 camera and 35mm lens, and lives in a poor country where photographic equipment is expensive. The Photographer has recently taken several images using the technique where multiple frames are stitched together to create a high-resolution panorama. However, many times frustrated with the stitching errors that result from trying to take such photos without a proper panoramic head for his tripod. This special equipment permits the camera to be rotated around the entrance pupil of the lens, and eliminates such errors. Having a panoramic head would greatly increase the potential for The Photographer to create sharp high-resolution images for Commons. In addition, the purchase of a fisheye lens would enable 180 × 360° panoramas to be taken, which are a great way to explore a scene as though one is really there.

Please see the discussion about the Crowd-funding campaign on User talk:The Photographer#Generosity Crowdfunding Campaign and visit the Generosity Crowd-funding Campaign page to consider donating. Even a modest donation will make a difference if many people contribute. Thanks. -- Colin (talk) 13:31, 22 November 2016 (UTC)

I'll have to see if I can scrape something together. I'm on disability, so my income is quite modest. lNeverCry 21:36, 22 November 2016 (UTC)

Special:Contributions/ALNOOR NEWS TV

They have two files that are self-promotion. I nominated them for deletion, you can close them now if you'd like. MCMLXXXIX 17:53, 21 November 2016 (UTC)

✓ Done lNeverCry 19:42, 21 November 2016 (UTC)
Hello, INeverCry. Check your email—you've got mail!
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{YGM}} template.

MCMLXXXIX 02:09, 22 November 2016 (UTC)

I've responded. Sorry for the wait, but I edit Commons primarily with Chrome. I use Firefox for email because my email client works more quickly. lNeverCry 02:59, 22 November 2016 (UTC)

Bad deletion

Sorry INC, but you've screwed up at File:St Thomas Of Canterbury Roman Catholic Church, Arbroath.jpg - it's my own work and I can release it under any mixture of Creative Commons and GFDL licences I choose (though if Flickr would enter the modern world and offer the CC4 licences, this wouldn't be an issue). Can I also ask, are you this careless deleting other users work ? Nick (talk) 10:52, 21 November 2016 (UTC)

This failed license review by a highly experienced editor [1] and so was tagged for deletion. I trust that editor's judgement, and have deleted many of the files he's failed at LR. This is the first mistake that I can remember. In the end, of course, it's on me not him. As for the rest of it, I'm never careless. I always do my best. But, as you say, I do screw up now and then. I try my best to keep that to a minimum. lNeverCry 19:37, 21 November 2016 (UTC)

Commons:Deletions

Hello, you have deleted the following files because they were missing permissions:

I have provided OTRS with with required permission (https://ticket.wikimedia.org/otrs/index.pl?Action=AgentTicketZoom&TicketNumber=2016111810013616) and kindly ask you to restore the above mentioned files.

Christian Michelides (talk)

I can't undelete these because I'm not an OTRS member, and so I can't see the permission you reference. Usually OTRS will restore files once permission is confirmed. You can ask about the ticket at COM:OTRS/N, but OTRS is very badly backlogged, so the restorations could take a while. lNeverCry 19:51, 21 November 2016 (UTC)

Commons:Deletion requests/File:Rev. Wojciech Wysopal.jpg

It was mistake, this photo was not taken from Facebook. He is my friend, nothing extraordinary. This deletion was a kind of officiousness. Leszek Jańczuk (talk) 00:30, 20 November 2016 (UTC)

You indicated |source=facebook when you uploaded the file. lNeverCry 00:46, 20 November 2016 (UTC)
I do not remember, but if memory serves for me, this image was edited by user Wysopal3k. Is it not enough? Leszek Jańczuk (talk) 18:10, 20 November 2016 (UTC)
OTRS permission from Wojciech Wysopal is needed, as he's credited as the author. lNeverCry 20:24, 20 November 2016 (UTC)

Commons:Deletion requests/File:Yagorodon Statue Osumi 2008.jpg

(Written in Japanese) Commons:Deletion requests/File:Yagorodon Statue Osumi 2008.jpgの件です。被写体となっている「弥五郎どん」は元々、数百年前から続く伝統行事に登場する「人形」です。それをそのまま模倣した「銅像」に対して著作性は生じないと考えますが、どのように判断して「生じる」としたのか、日本語での説明をお願いします。--Sanjo (talk) 13:37, 19 November 2016 (UTC)

Talk to Yasu. If he tells me the deletion was wrong, I'll restore it. If he wants to restore it, I wouldn't object to that either. lNeverCry 19:44, 19 November 2016 (UTC)

File:Mizukage3rd.png

You might need to delete this again. While the image is gone, the profile is still there, unless it's a bug? MCMLXXXIX 21:22, 22 November 2016 (UTC)

✓ Done We do have a couple of deletion-related bugs. The most common one is a "failure to acquire lock" that makes it so I have to wait 15 minutes or so and then try the deletion again, and then it deletes. But these bugs are normal. In my 4+ years as an admin, we've always has some deletion bug or other. lNeverCry 21:41, 22 November 2016 (UTC)

File:AM Logo.jpg

This image has been re-uploaded, and it has been originally deleted in Commons:Deletion requests/Files uploaded by Alba Moda. MCMLXXXIX 17:46, 22 November 2016 (UTC)

The original upload was a different logo. The original uploader's username was Alba Moda (looks like a non-notable company) and that's what the original logo is for. This newer version is a different company logo. I don't know how notable the company is. You may want to check that. lNeverCry 21:01, 22 November 2016 (UTC)

Valued Image Promotion

★ Your nomination has been reviewed and promoted ★
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:
Lev Anninsky, close-up portrait.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.
review
★ Your nomination has been reviewed and promoted ★
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:
Mikhail Artsybashev, close-up portrait.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.
review
★ Your nomination has been reviewed and promoted ★
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:
Pavel Bazhov, close-up portrait.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.
review
★ Your nomination has been reviewed and promoted ★
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:
Andrei Bely, sitting portrait.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.
review

Question

Was there a policy-based reason why the page User:1989 was fully protected immediately after it was created? My understanding is that full protection is generally put in place due to rampant vandalism or something similar, but you protected it 36 minutes after it was created, at the request of the user, when nothing had been done to the page. It's certainly within your discretionary power as an admin to do that, but would you mind explaining what the community-beneficial reason behind it was? Beyond My Ken (talk) 02:32, 24 November 2016 (UTC)

There's a difference between semi and full protection, and "full" was not the case. Perhaps you would like to read the Protection Policy again to know what it means? MCMLXXXIX 02:35, 24 November 2016 (UTC)
The question still stands, as your comment answers nothing, merely corrects an error on my part. Why did your page need to be semi-protected immediately after it had been created and there was no history of any kind that indicated that semi-protection was required? Beyond My Ken (talk) 03:07, 24 November 2016 (UTC)
Incidentally, your page was also move-protected, so it was not simply semi-protected. Beyond My Ken (talk) 03:08, 24 November 2016 (UTC)
I'm curious as to why does this even concerns you, and why it had to be now? You've watched my pages (for no reason), my page has been protected in the past, and now you got something to say about it? It seems like you have nothing better to do but to cause drama. MCMLXXXIX 03:14, 24 November 2016 (UTC)
I see no history of the page "User:1989" having been protected in the past. I see it being created on 20:02, 22 November 2016‎ and being protected on 20:38, 22 November 2016‎. [2] I've been around for almost 12 years, and that's highly unusual, and I am asking the admin who did the protecting under what policy the protection was placed. (And, yes, all I do is create drama. My tens of thousands of edits and thousands of original uploads, are all just cover.) Now, if you don't mind, I am asking a question of an admin about their action, which is a perfectly legitimate thing to do. If you wanted to talk to me, you shouldn't have thrown me off your talk page after I attempted to stand up for you. Beyond My Ken (talk) 03:47, 24 November 2016 (UTC)
I see. In order to see protection logs, just click History on my userpage, and it'll show you. Your edit and upload count means nothing to what you are causing. By the way, telling me to stop editing on Commons is not standing up for me. MCMLXXXIX 03:59, 24 November 2016 (UTC)
Does the word "sarcasm" mean anything to you? It's when you say "X", while really meaning "not X", and this is conveyed to the reader by the words used and the way they are used. As for the history of your user page, the link above is to the history of your userpage, so I obviously have read it - in fact, I even quoted the dates from it. There are three entries in the history of your user page, and they look like this:
    (cur | prev) 14:23, 23 November 2016‎ 1989 (talk | contribs)‎ . . (847 bytes) (0)‎ . . (/) (rollback: 1 edit | undo | )
    (cur | prev) 20:38, 22 November 2016‎ INeverCry (talk | contribs)‎ m . . (847 bytes) (0)‎ . . (Protected "User:1989": User request ([Edit=Allow only autoconfirmed users] (indefinite) [Move=Allow only administrators] (indefinite))) (undo | )
    (cur | prev) 20:02, 22 November 2016‎ 1989 (talk | contribs)‎ . . (847 bytes) (+847)‎ . . (+) ()
So there is no indication that the page "User:1989" has ever been protected before, and I'm asking the admin who placed the protection at your request why they did so, since there doesn't seem to be any justification for it. Beyond My Ken (talk) 04:13, 24 November 2016 (UTC)
Well, the "sarcasm" you used was inappropriate and offensive. For the 12 years you being here, it seems your quite inexperienced. MCMLXXXIX 04:23, 24 November 2016 (UTC)
  • @Beyond My Ken: The page was semi-protected per user request (moving has to be fully protected because autoconfirmed users can move semi-protected pages, making semi move protection useless). There's been talk of changing the way pages are protected to get rid of semi protection for both move and upload, since the semi-protection wouldn't stop autoconfirmed users from moving a page, and autoconfirmed users can overwrite files, making semi-upload protection useless as well. As for the reasoning behind the protection of 1989's userpage, he's highly active with tagging copyvios for speedy deletion and with working in the area of COM:DR, and he reports a lot of socks and vandals to the admin noticeboard. This often attracts enemies and trolls, and so i don't mind fulfilling a request for protection, if that will make a user who's active in CSD/DR/vandal & sock fighting feel more comfortable and secure. 1989's userpage has 40 deleted edits that you can't see, but several admins have protected the page in the past for the same reason of "user request".

    Protection policy doesn't expressly prohibit proactive preventative user-requested protections like this, though I've only rarely been asked to do such protections. "User request" is one of the drop-down reasons available to me as part of the admin tools.

    Another reason for userpage protection that I could think of is to prevent a possible personal attack being made on an editor's userpage, and not being noticed long enough so that it shows up on mirror sites. If you feel that userpage protection should have more strict or clear guidelines, an RFC would be the way to go. As it is, if you were to ask me to protect your own userpage, I would do the protection. My main interest in cases like this is making sure experienced and trusted editors feel comfortable editing on Commons. I figure a semi-protection of a user page toward that end isn't a big deal. If policy was changed to require strict rationales for userpage protection, I would of course change my own approach to conform with whatever policy/guidelines were put in place by the community. lNeverCry 05:01, 24 November 2016 (UTC)

  • INC: Thanks very much for the response, I appreciate it, and I understand your reasoning, although I have to say that I disagree with it in part. I really think there should be some problematic editing on a page, even a user page, before any kind of protection is applied, but that after the problematic editing occurs, protection should be granted readily, much in the manner you describe. The granting of protection is (obviously) part of any admin's discretionary powers, and I'm glad you have seriously thought through your own personal standards, although I think you might want to reconsider them at some point, as granting of protection in the way you describe actually makes it automatic (on your part) and therefore not really discretionary at all. What I mean is, if every admin held to the same policy as you do, then we might as well have the system semi-protect all user pages automatically, as no judgment would be going into any request put towards any admin. But, as they say, to each his own.
In any case, I'm afraid that the discussion above has put much more emphasis on this issue than I intended. I was merely curious about how it had come about and what your reasoning was -- which you have answered to my satisfaction -- and didn't post the question for the purpose of making "drama" or causing a stink of some sort. Clearly there has been miscommunication here (perhaps on both sides) and I, for one, am happy to drop the matter. Best, Beyond My Ken (talk) 05:40, 24 November 2016 (UTC)

File:SportColonialEscudoNuevo.jpg

Hola INeverCry, este archivo File:SportColonialEscudoNuevo.jpg no podría ser restituido? Ya que cumple también con el formato de {{PD-textlogo}} Saludos! Robslpy (talk) 22:15, 23 November 2016 (UTC)

✓ Done I've restored it, put it in the proper category, and re-added it to the team's article. lNeverCry 22:35, 23 November 2016 (UTC)

File:Liberty City Map (Grand Theft Auto IV).gif

Hey again, I wondered if could have an opinion of yours for File:Liberty City Map (Grand Theft Auto IV).gif. Generally, it makes sense to have such a map, however, it does not look right: Charge Island, Happiness Island and the third island I don't remember the name of, are missing, as well as some driveways, and genreally broken outlines of the main islands. In my opinion, it should be redirected to File:Detailed Map of Liberty City (GTA IV).png, which is accurate and looks good. If you agree, could you do the redirecting and replacing stuff? Thanks! Lordtobi (✉) 12:32, 23 November 2016 (UTC)

✓ Done lNeverCry 20:17, 23 November 2016 (UTC)
Oh no, you did it the wrong way around! Please re-read my message, I asked you to redirect Liberty City Map (Grand Theft Auto IV).gif TO Detailed Map of Liberty City (GTA IV).png, please restore the latter and redirect the other one! Lordtobi (✉) 20:25, 23 November 2016 (UTC)
Should be good to go now (I hope). lNeverCry 21:28, 23 November 2016 (UTC)

Admin nominations

You keep finding people to nominate that I had just assumed were already admins! Good going, and take care :) Storkk (talk) 10:41, 23 November 2016 (UTC)

You should see the people who told me no... lNeverCry 20:18, 23 November 2016 (UTC)

Nominating for deletion

Hi INC- I'm very new to nominating files for deletion (and just discovered the mass deletion request after making a slew of nominations). Regarding currency- if a coin or banknote image clearly is in violation of the country's PD laws (in addition to the national banking regulations), should that be nominated via the regular route or is that grounds for a speedy deletion request? For example, #1.16 - #1.61 here. Many thanks in advance for your advice.--Godot13 (talk) 07:24, 23 November 2016 (UTC)

We usually go with deletion requests for currency, FoP, and other files that have copyright problems but were usually uploaded in good faith by people who didn't know they were running afoul of policies that a lot of people are unaware of. We save the speedy tagging for COM:NETCOPYVIOs for the most part. lNeverCry 09:09, 23 November 2016 (UTC)

Two permissions arrived in OTRS

Hi, we have permissions for the following files that you deleted:

Have been they published elsewhere? What kind of work they represent? Thanks --Ruthven (msg) 16:39, 22 November 2016 (UTC)

The top one says it's from a personal archive. The second one says its from the same personal archive and has also been used on the internet. This info is given by the uploader in the source field of the images. lNeverCry 20:53, 22 November 2016 (UTC)

Another one

...for the files uploaded by Leukòs (ex: File:100 5839bismod.jpg, but there are many). Can you give me some hints? (I should convince myself to request for adminship one of these days, so I stop bothering you!). Cheers --Ruthven (msg) 16:53, 22 November 2016 (UTC)

This has two watermarks, one on top one on bottom. The top looks like a description, while the bottom one looks to be a credit to an author. The watermarks are black and are in Italian. The author watermark is in some underbrush in the bottom left corner of the photo and I can't read it clearly. It's a full name though, so doesn't match up with the user's username. lNeverCry 20:53, 22 November 2016 (UTC)
  • As regards you becoming an admin, if you're interested, I'd be happy to nominate you whenever you're ready. I've got a good record in RFAs: I think I'm about 15/3. lNeverCry 20:53, 22 November 2016 (UTC)
If you think that these files can be legit, I'll fill up an undeletion request; actually, these are Italian speaker users, so it's reasonable to suppose that they are the uploader's work, from what you are saying about the watermarks. Let me know.
For the adminship, I start to know pretty well how do things work on Commons, but I reckon that I'll need someone to eventually show me the ropes the very first days. Besides that, the augmented volume of OTRS requests for files on Commons, push me to work here more often, as you experienced, so I'm up to it if you think that it can be useful. Thanks a lot! --Ruthven (msg) 21:17, 22 November 2016 (UTC)
The top case is iffy. We have to see what personal archive means. Are they by family members and other people, and does the uploader need to show permission for publishing them here? The other one may very well be the uploader's own watermark. It would be helpful to have an Italian-speaking admin or OTRS member check these out. As for the RFA, let me get it together and I'll post it on your talkpage for you to accept. It shouldn't take very long. lNeverCry 21:48, 22 November 2016 (UTC)

I withdrew the 2 that were failing

I just wanted to let you know I withdrew the 2 that were failing. With every nomination I learn a little more. I hadn't noticed the 2 active noms at a time rule till you said that. I'll resubmit it at some point in the future. Reguyla (talk)

@Reguyla: FPC takes some getting used to, and the bar is of course quite high. You've got people like Colin voting, and his knowledge of digital photography always amazes me, just like with Diliff and several other photographers who're active at FPC. I got my one FP and decided to quit while I was ahead! I would suggest you look into COM:VIC as well. Valued images is a good program for helping users of Commons find the best available images of people and subjects. The process isn't quite so tough as FPC tends to be. I started with VIC a month or so ago, and I've already got 5 of my own VIs, with a 6th coming through now, and 20+ successful nominations of uploads by other editors. lNeverCry 21:34, 22 November 2016 (UTC)
Yeah I didn't expect to get every one to pass. I did think a couple of those images were better than they were though I guess but its no biggie. I'll check out that other venue and maybe submit some that way. Cheers! Reguyla (talk) 21:48, 22 November 2016 (UTC)
@Reguyla: VIC is often overlooked (many FPCs would easily pass at VIC too) because FPC is more glamorous. VIC is really a valuable part of Commons though. If you're writing an educative article on the web or in a magazine, VIC can help you find the best image of that subject from an EV standpoint, rather than something artistic that may be over the top for a teacher or journalist. The other big difference is that there are thousands of images here just waiting for VIC nominations, while worthy FPCs are much more scarce. lNeverCry 09:17, 23 November 2016 (UTC)

Valued Image Promotion

★ Your nomination has been reviewed and promoted ★
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:
Valery Bryusov, portrait by Sergey Malyutin.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.
review
★ Your nomination has been reviewed and promoted ★
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:
Yury Buida, portrait, close-up.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.
review

Dashni Morad

Hey You have deleted all of my images uploaded for our page at Dashni Morad. We own all of the images, and need them put back please. This is not a fan page, I am contacting as Dashni Morad. Please help asap. — Preceding unsigned comment added by DashniMorad (talk • contribs) 12:27, 21 November 2016 (UTC)

These were deleted via Commons:Deletion requests/Files uploaded by DashniMorad. The files are photos of Dashni Morad, and so we need OTRS permission from the copyright holder/s, which is usually the photographer who took the pictures. lNeverCry 19:40, 21 November 2016 (UTC)

Dashni owns all the photos, and her own photographer has taken each and everyone of them. These photos have been uploaded by Dashni's team, not a random fan. How do we send you proof of this?

Follow the instructions laid out at OTRS. It shouldn't be too difficult. The only bad thing is that OTRS has a pretty big backlog. But once OTRS permission is processed and confirmed, you're licensing/copyright issues will usually be at a sure end. lNeverCry 09:23, 23 November 2016 (UTC)

Question about deleted images and OTRS

Hi, A series of images were recently updated in Enterprise Architect (software). These were removed by you on 10th November. I have sent in an email to permissions-commons@wikimedia.org in from the source company, to have these set as having legitimate permissions. See the issue number in the reply below. unfortunately these were recently deleted and I have not had any update on the email. What are the steps needed to follow this up?


Email reply:

Thank you for your email. This is an automatically generated response to inform you that your message has been received. Because all emails are handled by volunteers, it may take some time for us to reply. We kindly ask for your patience and understanding as we try our best to reply as quickly as possible. If your article or file has been deleted in the mean time, please don't worry. Any administrator can restore these later.

If you want to send more emails about the same subject, please add the following to the subject bar of the email: [Ticket#: 2016110310005439].

Thank you. Leggattst (talk) 04:41, 22 November 2016 (UTC)

OTRS has a heavy backlog, so it could take up to 120 days to process an OTRS permission email. You can check progress by posting at The OTRS Noticeboard. In the end though, it's a matter of waiting for the permission to be processed. Once that happens, the images will automatically be restored. lNeverCry 06:14, 22 November 2016 (UTC)

deletion of my photo

dear INeverCry — Preceding unsigned comment added by Cksaad (talk • contribs) 12:53, 22 November 2016 (UTC)

did you request a deletion of one my photo qartaba from top is there any reason for that? if not ignore this message.

regards paul saad user: cksaad — Preceding unsigned comment added by Cksaad (talk • contribs) 12:52, 22 November 2016 (UTC)

Yes, I deleted the image from this deletion request: Commons:Deletion requests/File:Kartaba Fom Top.jpg. The reason for the deletion was that in the author field of the image you put: "Paul Saad © All rights reserved". Per COM:L, Commons can't accept images that are under an all rights reserved license. lNeverCry 20:39, 22 November 2016 (UTC)

Question

I need a second third opinion. Was my rename for this file wrong? If so, I will revert my mistake. Thanks. MCMLXXXIX 22:33, 23 November 2016 (UTC)

You did the move in good faith, so I wouldn't call it "wrong". People searching for the painting by title would be just as well served by an accurate description that gives the proper title, which I take to be Multichill's point. It's a valid point, but you're probably fine just moving on and being a bit stricter about doing renames in future. lNeverCry 23:01, 23 November 2016 (UTC)

request

hi can you please delete this photo, members of my family appears in the photo and they don't agree to be on the internet, i took the photo from my father phone without his permission, i was child when i posted it on wikimedia--Hisham.oamr (talk) 12:09, 24 November 2016 (UTC)

You've seen my vote in the deletion request. I don't think this file should be deleted. lNeverCry 23:19, 24 November 2016 (UTC)

Deleted images

Hi. On november 7 you deleted 3 images I upload to Commons. On november 9I sent an e-mail to permissions-commons@wikimedia.org with thw authorization form. I received the answer with Ticket#: 2016110910019637. Images are: 

-Reconstruccion del Estandarte de la Misericordia.png

-Es-Dr-02.png -Es-Fr-01.png Please review the deletion as those images are relevant to the article Estandarte de la Misericordia. Thanks M.andruet — Preceding unsigned comment added by M.andruet (talk • contribs) 13:58, 24 November 2016 (UTC)

I'm not an OTRS member, so there's nothing I can do. Once an OTRS member processes the email you've sent, they can restore the images or request restoration. lNeverCry 23:21, 24 November 2016 (UTC)

File:CPBM logo.svg

Hi INeverCry. This appears to be the same as File:Communist Party of Bohemia and Moravia logo.svg which was deleted per Commons:Deletion requests/File:Communist Party of Bohemia and Moravia logo.svg. Does a new COM:DR need to be made in this case or does there exist some kind of speedy deletion criteria on Commons for file previously deleted as the result of a deletion discussion like Wikipedia's en:WP:G4?

Also, the same editor uploaded File:CPBM cherries logo.svg and COM:VP/C#File:Dawn - National Coalition logo.svg, the latter might be the same as another file under the same name deleted as a copyvio. -- Marchjuly (talk) 01:04, 25 November 2016 (UTC)

✓ Done Yeah, same cherries with leaves. I've deleted both files. lNeverCry 01:21, 25 November 2016 (UTC)
Thanks for checking INeverCry. What about File:Dawn - National Coalition logo.svg? Looks to be too complcated for {{Textlogo}} and might be a re-upload of File:Úsvit - new logo.png. -- Marchjuly (talk) 04:40, 25 November 2016 (UTC)
✓ Done The deleted logo contains the same lion's head graphic but also has some text. I've deleted File:Dawn - National Coalition logo.svg and left the uploader a note pertaining to COM:TOO and logos. lNeverCry 06:01, 25 November 2016 (UTC)
Thanks for checking on this. -- Marchjuly (talk) 08:28, 25 November 2016 (UTC)

File:Chiesa al Guaricano-3.JPG

File:Chiesa al Guaricano-3.JPG has been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether it should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry.

If you created this file, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with it, such as a copyright issue. Please see Commons:But it's my own work! for a guide on how to address these issues.

Please remember to respond to and – if appropriate – contradict the arguments supporting deletion. Arguments which focus on the nominator will not affect the result of the nomination. Thank you!
Afrikaans ∙ Bahasa Indonesia ∙ bosanski ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ dansk ∙ Deutsch ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ ∙ eesti ∙ English ∙ español ∙ Esperanto ∙ français ∙ galego ∙ hrvatski ∙ íslenska ∙ italiano ∙ magyar ∙ Nederlands ∙ norsk bokmål ∙ norsk nynorsk ∙ occitan ∙ Plattdüütsch ∙ polski ∙ português ∙ português do Brasil ∙ română ∙ shqip ∙ sicilianu ∙ slovenčina ∙ slovenščina ∙ suomi ∙ svenska ∙ Tiếng Việt ∙ Türkçe ∙ Zazaki ∙ Ελληνικά ∙ беларуская ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ ∙ български ∙ македонски ∙ русский ∙ српски / srpski ∙ українська ∙ հայերեն ∙ বাংলা ∙ മലയാളം ∙ ပအိုဝ်ႏဘာႏသာႏ ∙ မြန်မာဘာသာ ∙ ไทย ∙ 조선말 ∙ 한국어 ∙ 日本語 ∙ 简体中文‎ ∙ 繁體中文‎ ∙ עברית ∙ العربية ∙ پښتو ∙ فارسی ∙ ދިވެހިބަސް ∙ +/−

Jos1950 (talk) 22:38, 27 November 2016 (UTC)

Heraldry

@INeverCry: I note your deletion of the arms of Cardinal Beaufort which I recently uploaded in replacement of a Wiki-template-created version of his arms, which were totally misleading. I am currently undertaking a review of Wiki's guidance as to the display of coats of arms in relation to the latest copyright law. The overarching point here is that coats of arms by their very nature exist as a symbol/emblem of their bearer. It is likely, but I am awaiting legal advice on this, that it is unlawful for people who reproduce others' arms to claim copyright thereof. Best L'honorable (talk) 20:51, 26 November 2016 (UTC)
PS. in the case of images, heraldic or otherwise, created under copyright without appropriation to a lawful bearer of said arms Wiki's guidelines are spot on...

COA is an area of Commons I tend to avoid, mostly due to the frequent fights over how they should look, and the fact that I don't know enough about them to speak or discuss about them intelligently. lNeverCry 21:22, 26 November 2016 (UTC)
@INeverCry: no probs & I too do not wish to become embroiled in any fights! Who are the best Admins to liaise with because the Heraldry guidelines could do with tightening up. I should much like to liaise with those interested in order to help Wiki. Many thanks. Best L'honorable (talk) 21:59, 26 November 2016 (UTC)
For a full discussion about copyright, COM:VP/C would be the best pace to go. As for individual editors who are very knowledgeable, you might want to talk to Perhelion or Fry1989. lNeverCry 22:17, 26 November 2016 (UTC)
Many thanks indeed - much appreciated. I am acquainted with Fry1989 who has been most helpful I should hope also to liaise with Perhelion. Best L'honorable (talk) 07:11, 27 November 2016 (UTC)

File:Turkic_PeoplesLangs_lg.png

Hi INeverCry!

Can you undelete the above file for a brief period so that I can import it to Wikiversity for fair use? Thank you in advance for your kind consideration! --Marshallsumter (talk) 23:43, 26 November 2016 (UTC)

@Marshallsumter: I've restored it. Let me know when you've completed the transfer. lNeverCry 23:46, 26 November 2016 (UTC)
@INeverCry: Transfer process complete! Thank you! --Marshallsumter (talk) 02:15, 27 November 2016 (UTC)
@Marshallsumter: Thanks, I'm happy to help. If you have any other temporary undeletions you need done, feel free to post further requests here. lNeverCry 02:45, 27 November 2016 (UTC)

File:Abeam.svg

Hallo. Why did you delete this multilingual file? There was no normal request on the description page. A speedydelete was not ok, because a copyright violation is impossible, when a user creates a copy of annother Commons-image, because the licenses here allow to copy files. Antonsusi (talk) 11:07, 27 November 2016 (UTC)

I deleted it because the statement that it was a copyright at Commons:Deletion requests/File:Querab de.svg was uncontested. I've restored it. If the person who called it a copyvio wants to they can tag it separately. lNeverCry 11:51, 27 November 2016 (UTC)
Thank you. What do you think about this problem:
  1. User:Ixitixel has created the image, especially the graphical part.
  2. User:Baba66 has edited the file and created two versions, one with German text and one with English text.
  3. I've edited one of the images to the multilingual version and uploaded as File:Abeam.svg to use an english name. This file contains all data of the two others (the graphical part, German text English text) and in addition, several other languages.
User:Baba66 writes, that there is a copyvio when creating new versions, but I think, the licences here allow edits and copies from any here uploaded file, when the first creator's name (here: User Ixitixel) is on the description page.
Antonsusi (talk) 12:17, 27 November 2016 (UTC)
As long as everything is attributed properly according to the licenses of the original files, you should be fine. lNeverCry 12:24, 27 November 2016 (UTC)

Szm

Hello. Again this guy is persistent, please block this sock. Thanks. --サンティ [talk] 00:39, 27 November 2016 (UTC).

I recommend the use of simply nuke, I'm not sure that VisualFileChange can delete false categories created by this vandal. --サンティ [talk] 01:39, 27 November 2016 (UTC).
✓ Done That was the first time in years I've used Special:Nuke! lNeverCry 03:01, 27 November 2016 (UTC)
Thanks! Now, using this sock, he created again File:Flag of Cape Town.png, and has been deleted in multiple times. Can you protect this file to avoid the against re-creation of this vandal? --サンティ [talk] 16:52, 27 November 2016 (UTC).
✓ Done lNeverCry 01:18, 28 November 2016 (UTC)

File:Vainglory-cropped.jpg

Hi INeverCry, i'm wondering if you read my [note] on this "no-permission marking". The other file, File:Vainglory - Koshka attacking a jungle monster.jpg, has on OTRS tag. On my opinion File:Vainglory-cropped.jpg was marked by mistake as "no permission". What do you think? --Wdwd (talk) 12:54, 27 November 2016 (UTC)

Strange that you didn't get a response. Leyo must've been really busy. Anyways, I've restored it per the OTRS ticket. lNeverCry 22:14, 27 November 2016 (UTC)

Image deleted but the OTRS is pending

Hi. I have licenses and consents pending for the photos that were deleted. I was advised by Marchjuly and Diannaa to contact the administrator that deleted the photos and ask for an undelete. Your name is on the log as having deleting them.

This is my request to undelete one file only, which is: File:William-Tunberg.jpg
Marchjuly asked me to go to the file's page and add: {{OTRS pending}} in the |permission= parameter of c:Template:Information. I don't know where the OTRS pending template goes. At first I thought it should be placed on the image page, but when I put the image address in my address bar, I don't get a page that's clickable where I can insert a template. Please help me fill out the template and place it properly. This is my first time. Thank you.Cstwct (talk) 02:24, 28 November 2016 (UTC)
✓ Done I've restored File:William-Tunberg.jpg and properly tagged it with {{OTRS pending}}. This should give time to get things taken care of. lNeverCry 02:31, 28 November 2016 (UTC)
Thank you. But I don't see it on the page. Should I reinsert it myself?Cstwct (talk) 02:51, 28 November 2016 (UTC)
@Cstwct: It's there. Try purging your cache, refreshing the page, or looking at it in a different browser. lNeverCry 03:14, 28 November 2016 (UTC)
Many thanks.Cstwct (talk) 15:29, 28 November 2016 (UTC)

Re: Block

Hello, thanks for notifying me. I was about to ask you about how do you deal with this sort of user. In this case, he has been blocked many times before, for the same reason (insults to other users), so a longer block is to be expected when these things happen on Wikipedia (because he hasn't learnt anything from former blocks/issues with the community). What are the guidelines here? --Ruthven (msg) 12:54, 27 November 2016 (UTC)

We'll see how things go. In the past when I've put in place long blocks, people say it's overkill. So this time I've put in place a short block and if the community wants to make it longer they can. I just hope the community will focus on protecting its members from empty accusations of racism. lNeverCry 22:07, 27 November 2016 (UTC)

File:Wrestlemania22SetDesign.jpg

May I inquire in to why you closed Commons:Deletion requests/File:Wrestlemania22SetDesign.jpg as delete in spite of low input, and the input that was there were keep !votes? TrueCRaysball | #RaysUp 04:42, 28 November 2016 (UTC)

I agreed with FDMS4 that parts of the image, especially the stage and ceiling screens, are COM:DW. Votes are significant in a DR only as much as they agree or disagree with relevant policy. lNeverCry 04:57, 28 November 2016 (UTC)
Okay. You agreed. But that seems like you cast a supervote then. I disagreed with his interpretation of COM:DW. TrueCRaysball | #RaysUp 05:02, 28 November 2016 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by TrueCRaysball (talk • contribs) 05:02, 28 November 2016 (UTC)
As an admin, I'm entrusted with making decisions like this. In cases like this I do my best to interpret policy. If you disagree with my conclusion, you have the option of taking the case to COM:UDEL, where other admins can review my decision. I would encourage you to do so. My interest here isn't in being right myself, it's in getting things right according to policy, so if my fellow admins find that I was too strict on the COM:DW angle, and the image is restored, then I would be happy that the right outcome was reached. lNeverCry 05:34, 28 November 2016 (UTC)

File:Navneet Aditya Waiba.jpg

Hi,

Kindly do explain the reason why you deleted the picture Navneet Aditya Waiba.jpg for future action as I am new to Wiki edits. Thanks. I had put the following in 'discussion' for the picture:

Hi, I received a message saying the picture'File:Navneet Aditya Waiba.jpg has been marked as a possible copyright violation'. I have used this picture in https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Navneet_Aditya_Waiba I have used the said picture in Google, Facebook, YouTube and other websites. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Satya adt (talk • contribs) 00:42, 29 November 2016 (UTC) This picture is solely owned by me and I would like to challenge the claimant otherwise. Regards. Satya adt (talk) 00:39, 29 November 2016 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Satya adt (talk • contribs) 00:58, 29 November 2016 (UTC)

Since this has been published on other sites before being uploaded to Commons, we will need you to send a permission email to OTRS, confirming that you're the copyright holder and have released the file under a free license. If you plan on uploading more similar images, make clear to the OTRS member/s you deal with that this will be the case. lNeverCry 01:33, 29 November 2016 (UTC)

I always cry

Hi. A DR, similar to that of File:Asli safak.jpg, that you kindly saved, is going around the pictures of a respected female physician and academic. I am intending to make an article for her too, but why should I hurry to do that "right now" to save the pics? I want to make the article in my own preferred timing and need to be sure no-one will delete her pictures. Please help me. Thanks. Note: This is not like WP deletion discussions, so I am not after friends to defend my case. I simply ask the admin to stop an unnecessary move. Thank you very much. --E4024 (talk) 07:55, 29 November 2016 (UTC)

"I always cry"? I thought you were another Jhony jhony ha ji sock for a minute. Just a suggestion, but if you're going to ask someone for help, fucking with their username isn't much of a start.

The fact that Prof. Dr. Zehra Neşe Kavak is up for deletion on Turkish Wikipedia isn't good. If you can stop that from getting deleted, you'd be free and clear. My advice to you would be to create a draft page for her in your userspace at tr.wiki, and use the images that way. Use in a draft for a Turkish female professor should be enough to satisfy COM:INUSE at least temporarily. At some point of course you'll have to get that article live and legit. But a userspace draft would gain you some time. You might even try drawing one up for en.wiki too. lNeverCry 09:39, 29 November 2016 (UTC)

Hey, I'm not fucking with your name, at all. And I'm not the sock of anybody. I'm a good person; you made me autosomething, remember? I always cry, really, not only when I remember the beloved ones that passed away, but also while watching movies. (For example there are a series of Turkish films, where Münir Özkul plays the father, and Adile Naşit the mother, of a poor and proud family, they are my favourite films to cry while watching. I even cry when I see the late Kemal Sunal acting as a street sweeper, at "Çöpçüler Kralı", a comedy film! I also cry occasionally, watching Love Story, Doctor Zhivago, The Godfather or The Pianist, but not as much as I do with the Turkish films.) After this short introduction, I made a draft as you suggested and also began an article on Dra. Zehra Neşe Kavak. All good? Thanks for your time. --E4024 (talk) 12:09, 29 November 2016 (UTC)
It's alright. I've been dealing with this guy for quite a while, and he's very bothersome. Just please be careful when what you say could be taken the wrong way. As for your drafts, that should take care if it for a month or two and keep the images safe. But you will need something stable and long-term eventually. A real article you can be proud of. lNeverCry 12:44, 29 November 2016 (UTC)

hey

Why do you deleted my photo? Yanlinnnaung (talk) 09:08, 29 November 2016 (UTC)

What photo are you referring to? Please give me the exact name of the file. Thanks. lNeverCry 09:42, 29 November 2016 (UTC)

Claim of interaction

You have made a claim that "You do the same thing when you respond to Colin." Please provide a link to where I last responded to that account. As far as I am aware the last time was on 15 May 2016 and I intend it to be the very last time I ever do so. Thanks --Fæ (talk) 14:22, 29 November 2016 (UTC)

I don't care when you last interacted with Colin, and I doubt it's all that memorable for him either. I still can't believe the absolute pile of shit you dumped on my head at AN. Blocking you as a sock of Russavia was very stupid, and it got me blocked and desysopped, but I've never made any direct personal attack on you at all. I think you do a great service for Commons with all the work you do, and I've told you that several times. I defended you when they tried to get your photograph deleted and when Badmachine attacked you on your talk. I've even supported you for admin several times. I was really hoping that you and I could patch things up at some point and that I could make up for my bad block of you. But I was fooling myself. I will avoid you when possible and I hope you'll do the same. The responsibility for the block of Tuvalkin is no longer on me, so I'm going to leave that to the community and get back to regular work before I say something stupid and get myself in trouble.I wish you well. lNeverCry 07:23, 30 November 2016 (UTC)
You are misreading my words. As I said on AN, I have not called your action an attack on me, I was not even referring to your block. I am puzzled by your personal comments and bad faith. I am disappointed that you have ignored the request of my email. Thanks --Fæ (talk) 07:57, 30 November 2016 (UTC)
I did misread your words, and I look like a dumbass. Well, it's not the first time! One of these days I'm going to learn my lesson and just stick to my deletion work and stay far away from the notice boards, except to block socks and other trolls. I just got your email and will respond to that. lNeverCry 08:29, 30 November 2016 (UTC)

Deleted photos.

Hi,

You have deleted several of my photographs in my article here. Why have you done that?

I hold the copyright of the photographs and the paintings are my own.

Can you please upload the photographs again? I need them in the article.

Ross. — Preceding unsigned comment was added by 84.208.59.98 (talk) 10:17, 29 November 2016 (UTC)

Hi Ross. I'd like to help, but you're not giving me anything to work with. You've edited here logged out with an IP, and you've given me no image names at all. I need your account name, a link to a deletion request, or the names of specific files. All 3 of those things would be especially good. lNeverCry 10:22, 29 November 2016 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:INeverCry/Archive_26&oldid=256546668"