User talk:InTheRevolution2

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


Welcome to Wikimedia Commons, InTheRevolution2!

-- 04:52, 19 November 2011 (UTC)

Unless you're Sealand or the Hutt River Principality, or have achieved a similar level of quasi-mainstream prominence, then a micronation's flag is pretty much by definition a "special or fictional flag", as far as Wikimedia Commons is concerned. If your flag consisted of a winged unicorn flying over a rainbow, or something like that, then there might be no need to add the "fictitious flag" tag -- but since it in fact consists of elements from Communist and Arab Nationalist symbolism combined to form a quasi-realistic looking whole, it needs to be made clear that it's not a non-special/non-fictional flag... AnonMoos (talk) 02:45, 16 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Just because we aren't mainstream and have communist/Arab nationalist symbolism doesn't mean we don't exist. InTheRevolution2 (talk) 02:47, 16 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
That's nice -- I really don't want to debate metaphysics or the philosophy of politics with you, and I actually don't have any desire to stigmatize the flag image as such. However, you chose to have the flag be rather "official"-looking, but it's not in fact "official" according to the pragmatic Wikimedia Commons de facto definitions, and the price to be paid for this discrepancy is the presence of the template... AnonMoos (talk) 02:53, 16 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
File:Flag-map of the British Empire.png has been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether it should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry.

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

Please remember to respond to and – if appropriate – contradict the arguments supporting deletion. Arguments which focus on the nominator will not affect the result of the nomination. Thank you!

Fry1989 eh? 01:28, 17 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

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


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

This message was added automatically by Nikbot, if you need some help about it please read the text above again and follow the links in it, if you still need help ask at the ? Commons:Help desk in any language you like to use. --Nikbot 04:55, 7 June 2012 (UTC)


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


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

This message was added automatically by Nikbot, if you need some help about it please read the text above again and follow the links in it, if you still need help ask at the ? Commons:Help desk in any language you like to use. --Nikbot 22:55, 23 June 2012 (UTC)

Parliament diagram tool new version

[edit]

Hi there,

At Wikimania, I ported my parliament diagram tool to Wikimedia's servers, fixed the bug that made the dots invisible above a certain number, and gave it a new, easier interface. Please let me know if it works for you - I need some testers. The source code is now also hosted on github, so you can either file bug reports directly there, or drop me a note on Wikipedia.

A point about copyright: you don't have to worry about the copyright status of the program: you own the copyright to the diagram once you've created it, so you can release it under any license you see fit (although, by their nature, they're probably too simple to be eligible for copyright, I think).

Thanks! --Slashme (talk) 23:00, 14 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

File:Flag of Burkland.svg 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!

GPinkerton (talk) 08:07, 6 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]