User talk:Infrogmation/Archive 13

• Current discussion: User talk:Infrogmation
• Older archive: User talk:Infrogmation/Archive 12
• Next more recent archive: User talk:Infrogmation/Archive 14

---

rev del for copyvio versions

Hallo Infrogmation, I think that way is much more transparent to everybody File:ToiletDuck200706251755.jpg#filehistory than to fully delete a file version. For the potential re-user a file with a deleted revision looks version looks not like the author has uploaded the file. What do you think? Or didn't you know this tool?

Thanks for closing the DR anyway. Do you think I just should crop and hide myself in such cases? Cheers --Saibo (Δ) 01:49, 2 January 2012 (UTC)

Category:Trade_cards

Trade cards has been listed at Commons:Categories for discussion so that the community can discuss ways in which it should be changed. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry. If you created this category, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for discussion 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. If the category is up for deletion because it has been superseded, consider the notion that although the category may be deleted, your hard work (which we all greatly appreciate) lives on in the new category. In all cases, please do not take the category discussion personally. It is never intended as such. Thank you!

148.177.129.211 08:22, 6 January 2012 (UTC)

Category:Balboa_High_School

Balboa High School has been listed at Commons:Categories for discussion so that the community can discuss ways in which it should be changed. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry. If you created this category, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for discussion 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. If the category is up for deletion because it has been superseded, consider the notion that although the category may be deleted, your hard work (which we all greatly appreciate) lives on in the new category. In all cases, please do not take the category discussion personally. It is never intended as such. Thank you!

Auntof6 (talk) 03:35, 11 January 2012 (UTC)

Thank you

Thank you for your comment at Commons:Deletion requests/File:Rick Santorum - frothy Caricature.jpg, your analysis is reasoned and astute. Most appreciated. ;) Cheers, -- Cirt (talk) 20:41, 12 January 2012 (UTC)

License of File:Paratype of Paedophryne amauensis (LSUMZ 95004).png

Hi, just saw your edit to File:Paratype of Paedophryne amauensis (LSUMZ 95004).png - could you please also change the license to {{Cc-by-2.5}}, as per this exchange? Thank you! -- Daniel Mietchen - WiR/OS (talk) 02:23, 13 January 2012 (UTC)

Done. Cheers, -- Infrogmation (talk) 02:39, 13 January 2012 (UTC)

Request for help

Hello Infrogmation, I hope you can help clear up some copyright/licensing issues regarding a couple if images that were uploaded to commons years ago. First, can you take a look at File:Robert E Lee Steamboat.jpg and chime in with your opinion? The image was thought to be public domain when uploaded (due to age), but some rights have been retained by the Louisiana State Museum, and the site that currently displays the image (Encyclopedia of Louisiana) states that it is copyrighted. Because of this, I submitted it for speedy deletion, but I'm not sure if that was the most appropriate course of action. Also, please note that another image representing the subject is available on Commons (File:Robert E. Lee (steamboat).jpg).

Second, can you take a look at File:Fort Lachine.jpg? The image was published in 1927 and is public domain in Canada, but I don't know if it was copyrighted in the U.S. Should the image be deleted if it was copyrighted in the U.S. in 1927, or if we are unaware of its U.S. copyright status? Just want to make sure everything is above board with some of the images I submitted to Commons. Thank you very much for your help! Kindest regards, --AlphaEta (talk) 15:20, 13 January 2012 (UTC)

See Commons:Licensing for a good overview. The first, "Robert E Lee Steamboat.jpg" is certainly PD. It is a mechanical reproduction (digital copy in this case) of a painting by an artist who died more than 100 years ago, and qualifies as {{PD-Art}}. Some museums and institutions are in the habit of placing their copyright notice on pages about everything in their collection regardless of whether the work has fallen into the public domain; this does not affect underlying copyright status of the artwork itself.

For the second image: I am less familiar with Canadian than US copyright law, but it looks to me that first publication was in Quebec in 1927 and {{PD-Canada}} seems to apply. I don't think US copyright would be relevant unless the work was also published in the USA at the same time and US copyrights filed and renewed. If there is some serious reason to think the image does not qualify as PD-Canada, I suggest listing it at Commons:Deletion requests for further scrutiny. (I see you've already done so; I've commented there.) Cheers, -- Infrogmation (talk) 16:22, 13 January 2012 (UTC)

Thank you very much for your help with these images! --AlphaEta (talk) 18:39, 13 January 2012 (UTC)

Hello again! ChristianT did some research and discovered that the Fort Lachine image being considered for deletion was first published in Belgium, not Canada. Therefore, wouldn't it fall under European Union copyright laws? That would be life of the author plus 70 years, correct? The author died in 1941, so I'm not sure that it is public domain. Thanks, --AlphaEta (talk) 21:19, 13 January 2012 (UTC)

• Okay, after reading this table (under Works Published Abroad Before 1978) on the Cornell University website, the book from which the Fort Lachine image was taken would fall under the following category: "Solely published abroad, without compliance with US formalities or republication in the US, and not in the public domain in its home country as of 1 January 1996" for material published 1923 through 1977. Therefore, the US copyright would expire 95 years after initial publication. The book was published in 1927, so it is still under copyright in the US until 2022. This is in agreement with Wikipedia:Non-U.S. copyrights and the current Commons tags for Non-US works. In fact, it would most appropriately be tagged as {{Not-PD-US-URAA}} and deleted. (Sorry if I'm pestering you with this. I just want to make sure everything is proper.) Thanks, --AlphaEta (talk) 16:01, 16 January 2012 (UTC)

Thanks; I have that deletion request discussion on my watch list so no need to let me know of further discussion here as well. Seems like a more complex than average case! Perhaps someone with some experience in such cases can comment. Thanks for your work. Cheers, -- Infrogmation (talk) 16:38, 16 January 2012 (UTC)

Category:Buildings_in_Baltimore

Buildings in Baltimore has been listed at Commons:Categories for discussion so that the community can discuss ways in which it should be changed. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry. If you created this category, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for discussion 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. If the category is up for deletion because it has been superseded, consider the notion that although the category may be deleted, your hard work (which we all greatly appreciate) lives on in the new category. In all cases, please do not take the category discussion personally. It is never intended as such. Thank you!

Auntof6 (talk) 22:51, 15 January 2012 (UTC)

Thank you

Thank you so very much for all of your help sorting those categories !!! -- Cirt (talk) 22:54, 18 January 2012 (UTC)

Anonymous IP DRs

Did you see this DR You commented on another DR by this user. Maybe, the IP user doesn't like expressions of sadness or boredom but they're in scope. These types of DRs really just waste other's time sadly. Regards, --Leoboudv (talk) 06:34, 19 January 2012 (UTC)

Thank you very much

Thank ya very much for your help, happy endweek!

Thank you for the close

Thank you for the wisely worded close at Commons:Deletion requests/File:Rick Santorum - frothy Caricature.jpg. -- Cirt (talk) 14:56, 3 February 2012 (UTC)

File:MickeyTrumpetMG03.jpg

File:MickeyTrumpetMG03.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!

Yann (talk) 19:22, 10 February 2012 (UTC)

Fraternal Order of Elk

I've just finished categorizing some photos of an Elks lodge, and found Category:Fraternal Order of Elk, which you created in 2008.

Is this a separate and distinct organization from the Benevolent and Protective Order of Elks? If not, I suggest that the latter name is probably more correct, as the one used by the organization today (on, for instance, their website); I also see "B.P.O.E." on a lot of older material, which suggest that they've been using that name for some time. I suspect that a number of users have been erroneously putting their Elks files in your F.O. Elk category, since the BPOE category didn't appear in Category:Fraternal organizations in the United States until I moved it there just now. However, I could be completely wrong, particularly if there really is a separate Fraternal Order of Elk. Ammodramus (talk) 21:47, 20 February 2012 (UTC)

Hi. I have no particular knowledge about the Elks, nor do I remember why I entitled that category the way I did years ago. If the name is not correct I probably just made a mistake, sorry. Please feel free to redirect to the proper name. (If I can be of any help in the technical aspect, feel free to ask.) Thanks for your work. Cheers, -- Infrogmation (talk) 22:24, 20 February 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for the quick reply. There isn't too much material in the F.O. of Elk category, so I should be able to move it over pretty quickly. I assume that I should turn it into a redirect to the BPOE category once it's emptied. Ammodramus (talk) 22:52, 20 February 2012 (UTC)

Done. Ammodramus (talk) 23:01, 20 February 2012 (UTC)

Don O'Brien's photos

Just a FYI that I added Category:Photographs by Don O'Brien, since you've uploaded many of his photos from Flickr. Best, Tillman (talk) 22:22, 18 March 2012 (UTC)

Looks good, thanks. -- Infrogmation (talk) 18:38, 19 March 2012 (UTC)

Logos of companies

Would you please help me on this[1], give them their proper licenses. There are both from en.Wikipedia & Logos of companies. Could you please do that? Sir blue (talk) 17:59, 19 March 2012 (UTC)

I replied on the Commons Help desk page. Cheers, -- Infrogmation (talk) 18:38, 19 March 2012 (UTC)

File:The inner harbor of Hoonah.jpg

I don't undestand very well english, and neither why you considerate that this picture is valdalism..... I took it on ca: here and I imported it as I do for the pictures from en: Where is the problem ? Where did I a mistake ? It's very hard to import pictures from one to the other wikipedia project... It's worse when you don't speak english very well... If you think that this is wrong, please delete this picture from the article, but I don't understand where is the vandalism... --Tifoultoute (talk) 09:23, 29 March 2012 (UTC)

I replied on your talk page. Sorry if I was rude. Yes, transferring images can be difficult. Just try to be careful and accurate about who the photographer is and other information. Thanks for your attention. Cheers, -- Infrogmation (talk) 15:22, 29 March 2012 (UTC)

Everything is all right, thank you for your answer, and sorry for my poor english (I can read english quite well, but it's difficult for me to talk...). I'll be very carefull now :) I promise you ! --Tifoultoute (talk) 17:18, 29 March 2012 (UTC)

FYI

You previously participated in a deletion discussion at Commons:Deletion requests/File:Rick Santorum - frothy Caricature.jpg. That image is now up for deletion, again, at Commons:Deletion requests/Santorum images. Cheers, -- Cirt (talk) 15:35, 30 March 2012 (UTC)

Re: New Orleans photos

Hello, oh, yes, now I see you everywhere in my watchlist :) Thank your for your help, it is good to know that there is an Orleans expert among us. All the best, Poco a poco (talk) 15:53, 2 April 2012 (UTC)

File tagging File:Elizabeth Catlett.jpg

This media was probably deleted.

Thanks for uploading File:Elizabeth Catlett.jpg. This media is missing permission information. A source is given, but there is no proof that the author or copyright holder agreed to license the file under the given license. Please provide a link to an appropriate webpage with license information, or ask the author or copyright holder to send an email with copy of a written permission to VRT (permissions-commons@wikimedia.org). You may still be required to go through this procedure even if you are the author yourself; please see Commons:But it's my own work! for more details. After you emailed permission, you may replace the {{No permission since}} tag with {{subst:PP}} on file description page. Alternatively, you may click on "Challenge speedy deletion" below the tag if you wish to provide an argument why evidence of permission is not necessary in this case. Please see this page for more information on how to confirm permission, or if you would like to understand why we ask for permission when uploading work that is not your own, or work which has been previously published (regardless of whether it is your own). The file probably has been deleted. If you sent a permission, try to send it again after 14 days. Do not re-upload. When the VRT-member processes your mail, the file can be undeleted. Additionally you can request undeletion here, providing a link to the File-page on Commons where it was uploaded ([[:File:Elizabeth Catlett.jpg]]) and the above demanded information in your request.

 

Magog the Ogre (talk) 03:57, 6 April 2012 (UTC)

If there appears to be a license problem, the original uploader on en:W should be notified rather than me. -- Infrogmation (talk) 14:34, 6 April 2012 (UTC)

File:Charvet invoice Destrehan 1860.jpg

Hi there! I noticed you tagged the file {{PD-old}} instead of CC-BY-SA with credits to the museum. What is your reasoning? Thanks, — Racconish ^Tk 21:09, 8 April 2012 (UTC)

This is a mechanical reproduction of something from 1860, so I believe any copyrights would have expired. Giving credit to the museum or is certainly a good thing to do, but making a mechanical reproduction of copyright expired material does not generate a fresh copyright. See for example Commons:Image_casebook#Public_domain_images, Commons:Licensing. Thanks for asking. Cheers, -- Infrogmation (talk) 21:41, 8 April 2012 (UTC)

Just a quick note to thank you for your insightful advice, which helped resolve the matter. Cheers, — Racconish ^Tk 19:07, 10 April 2012 (UTC)

File:Elizabeth Catlett.jpg

File:Elizabeth Catlett.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!

GRuban (talk) 00:55, 14 April 2012 (UTC)

Incomplete rename request syntax

You had requested renaming of File:Dad and Son.jpg to File:Dad and Son at Wellawatha Beach.jpg. But rename request syntax was incomplete: {{Rename|Dad and Son at Wellawatha Beach.JPG}}. Although I obliged your request assuming it was done based on criteria no. 3, plz use appropriate rename criteria 1-7 when requesting renaming from Commons:RENAME such as {{Rename|Dad and Son at Wellawatha Beach.JPG|#3}} so that there is no ambiguity. Hindustanilanguage (talk) 18:20, 26 April 2012 (UTC).

Thanks. -- Infrogmation (talk) 02:20, 27 April 2012 (UTC)

Sri Lanka

Shouldn't Sri Lanka be categorized as Ceylon until 1972? Sounds much better. J 1982 (talk) 10:52, 27 April 2012 (UTC)

Interesting question. Perhaps we should ask someone from there. I'm fine with whatever preferred local use is. -- Infrogmation (talk) 14:44, 27 April 2012 (UTC)

This is English. Ceylon was used until 1972. J 1982 (talk) 11:22, 28 April 2012 (UTC)

OK by me. -- Infrogmation (talk) 14:47, 28 April 2012 (UTC)

And Vietnam was "Annam" until 1945. J 1982 (talk) 20:28, 1 May 2012 (UTC)

Help, Save Me from MYSELF!!

Hi- I made a dumb mistake a couple of hours ago. I uploaded a photo for Jack Costanzo, to use on his article's infobox in the English Wikipedia. If you check the link I provided to the source in Flickr, the above spelling is correct, but when I uploaded the photo, I mis-named it as Jack Constanzo. I have not used the photo yet. Please, can you change the photo name to the correct spelling? I can't believe I did this!! Then, let me know if I should re-upload the photo, or what I must do. Serves me right for not sleeping last night! Thank you. --Leahtwosaints (talk) 01:15, 30 April 2012 (UTC)

Okay, file is now at File:Jack Costanzo 2003.jpg. I hope that's what you meant for me to do. For future reference, use {{Rename}}, in the format {{rename|new name.jpg|Reason for rename}}; see further details on procedure at Commons:File renaming. Cheers, -- Infrogmation (talk) 01:22, 30 April 2012 (UTC)

ThanksHighlandPark.

I uploaded this because it does have some right reserved.... but it looks like I wasn't correct with the licensing. There's no correct licensing for it? Jhenderson777 (talk) 15:07, 3 May 2012 (UTC)

The Flickr user has licensed it as non-commercial use only, which is not an acceptable free license for Wikimedia Commons; see Commons:Licensing and Commons:Flickr. Sorry, can't be used here. You can always try asking the photographer to change the license to simple Creative Commons or Creative Commons Share Alike, which are acceptable here. Cheers, -- Infrogmation (talk) 15:24, 3 May 2012 (UTC)

Thank you for the information. I was wondering if you ask someone that you can use a image and they say YES. Do they still have the change the license for you. Jhenderson777 (talk) 19:59, 3 May 2012 (UTC)

Becuase I had that happen..but I haven't got to the part of telling him changing licenses or anything. Jhenderson777 (talk) 20:09, 3 May 2012 (UTC)

Yes, usually they would have to change the license of the image on Flickr; that's usually the easiest if they agree to do so. Alternatively, they could email permission to release under a free licence; see Commons:OTRS for details. -- Infrogmation (talk) 15:47, 4 May 2012 (UTC)

New Orleans Public Library

Thank you. It wasn't my intention to replace your photo, just to add a cropped version. The old instructions for creating alternate versions were easier to follow. Sorry I messed it up. BoringHistoryGuy (talk) 18:37, 3 May 2012 (UTC)

Concerned and needing help yet again

Hey, I am so sorry to bug you. I left a note for you on your talk page on the en.Wikipedia, but don't know if you saw it. This is the last time, I swear, I have been working too hard without sleep. I followed your directions, and placed a tag on the upload for the file I mis-spelled again: Rachell Ferrell: [2]. The correct spelling is Rachelle Ferrell. Can you fix this name issue please?

Also, there's another issue here that stunned me. How can this image not be considered a copyright violation here in Commons?!!-- this one: [3]. An Album Cover?! We have to damn near sell our souls to upload a non-free image just to Wikipedia. If for some reason I'm wrong, and such a thing as uploading album covers made and most likely created and owned by a corporation without any reason to give permission for use, please, let me know. Either way, thank you a million times for all the assistance you have given me! --Leahtwosaints (talk) 05:03, 4 May 2012 (UTC)

I gave a pointer renaming files above. Note that you need to put the actual name you want the file changed to (eg, "Rachelle Ferrelle 2011.jpg") in the template rather than just the text "new name". I fixed this one for you.

As to the album cover, certainly those would ALMOST always not be free licensed -- but it appears that the copyright holder has indeed shared this one under a free license; see the talk page, and if you have further questions about this particular image ask the admin who is listed as having reviewed the license on the image page. (I applaud your being on the lookout for copyright violations. See Commons:Deletion policy for dealing with them. But also be sure to check talk pages for images, as sometimes things are not as simple as they may appear from a quick glance.) Cheers, -- Infrogmation (talk) 15:36, 4 May 2012 (UTC)

File:Wilkes County, Georgia Courthouse in 1969.jpg

Fire destroyed the clock tower, this is a picture without the clock tower. Why put it back in a category that has the clock tower category associated with it? --Mjrmtg (talk) 09:58, 21 May 2012 (UTC)

I restored the photo to Category:Wilkes County, Georgia Courthouse, which is exactly what the photo shows. I did not add the "clock towers" category to the courthouse cat. I note only 3 of the 7 photos in the Courthouse cat show a clock tower. If the presence or lack of a visible clock tower is what concerns you, perhaps you should address it on that end and/or bring up the issue with the user who created the category. Cheers, -- Infrogmation (talk) 22:19, 21 May 2012 (UTC)

File:Second Bill of Rights Speech.ogv

Newsreels? By "broadcast" I was referring to the Internet. FDR intended the footage to be webcast. Incidentally, this file is of tremendous historical importance. Do you think it would pass WP:FPC (on Wikipedia) ? Lionelt (talk) 04:53, 24 May 2012 (UTC)

Yes, that footage is historically important. I don't deal with WP:FPC, so no opinion from me on that.

From the first part of your reply, I'm wondering how aware you are of the differences in 1944 US technology and today. Speeches by FDR would certainly be broadcast -- audio only over radio. (While television broadcasting existed, it didn't become of significance in the US until after the war - see en:History_of_television#United_States.) In 1944 Americans got their news from 3 sources - radio, newspapers, and newsreels. Americans commonly went to the movies at least once a week. The "newsreels" were shown before each show (and especially during the war, in many places there were separate theaters showing ONLY newsreels over and over for people wanting to watch the news). I'm not sure what you mean by "FDR intended the footage to be webcast"; en:Webcast didn't even exist as a concept until more than 40 years after FDR died. -- Infrogmation (talk) 13:39, 24 May 2012 (UTC)

Music

I see you're working on years in music categories. I know we need to be more people supporting this, but shouldn't we change so "Music in 1969" becomes "1969 in music". It's like a standard for such topics (sports, literature, radio). J 1982 (talk) 17:50, 26 May 2012 (UTC)

Maybe. I lean towards leaving it, because: It is well established, there are many interwiki links coming in, and in this case the "(subject) in (year)" format seems more grammatically correct to me. I suggest getting feedback from others. I won't object to changing the cats if others think it is a good idea, and they're willing to put in the work of fixing all the incoming links in Wikipedias in multiple languages. -- Infrogmation (talk) 18:00, 26 May 2012 (UTC)

Well-established? It's just music that uses it among the topics. It's up to the bots to change in different languages. J 1982 (talk) 18:08, 26 May 2012 (UTC)

By "Well established" I mean it's been used a lot for some time. As to bots fixing links, I'd say make certain not to delete any redirects until they're all fixed, or else the links will just be removed as broken, and all the incoming links will be lost and many Wikipedias won't be able to know the info on Commons exists. Another thought: Rather than "Musiccat" perhaps the new version should be "Musicyear"? That seems more standard now. Cheers, -- Infrogmation (talk) 18:13, 26 May 2012 (UTC)

File:Poster35.jpg

The top note of Commons:Deletion requests/File:Poster35.jpg says that deletion debate is closed. Therefore I requested speedy deletion, failing to notice that in fact there is a second round (in fikipedia a separate page is used in such cases). Anyway, an obvious copyright violation. In wikipedia such things are deleted immediately, and I am baffled why here is not so. AFAIK image policies in wikimedia are more restrictive than in wikipedia: no "fair use" murky waters. I understand chances are low that wikimedia will be sued for this image, but still I see no reason to let the backlog grow. Altenmann (talk) 05:41, 29 May 2012 (UTC)

The "Closed" is from an old deletion listing from 2011. The current one is open. Cheers, -- Infrogmation (talk) 11:45, 29 May 2012 (UTC)

Josey Greenwell images

I notice that you deleted File:DNAJOSEY.jpg with the comment "per del req". Since I pointed out these violations on Wikipedia a couple of weeks ago, I'm curious to know who made the request. And you missed a couple. Delicious carbuncle (talk) 22:48, 30 May 2012 (UTC)

Thanks. "Per del req" is short for "per deletion request" at Commons:Deletion requests. If you spot an copyright violation image here on Commons via Wikipedia, it's helpful to tag it here on Commons. Thanks again. Cheers, -- Infrogmation (talk) 23:47, 30 May 2012 (UTC)

A couple of the Commons admins were keeping a close eye on my WP contributions, but maybe they only act if I mention sexually-related images. Delicious carbuncle (talk) 02:13, 31 May 2012 (UTC)

The request was by User:Chesdovi. If you have specific info on where others are copyvios from, let me know. Infrogmation (talk) 23:55, 30 May 2012 (UTC)

In regard to File:Joseynashville.jpg, see here. I know things are done differently on Commons, but three copyvios should be enough to convince you that the rest of this user's uploads are not to be trusted. Delicious carbuncle (talk) 02:13, 31 May 2012 (UTC)

Thanks. I tend to stick with policy; what I think a likely copyviol will be tagged and go thru procedure/uploader given a chance to respond. A clearly demonstrated proven copyright violation, on the other hand, will be speedy deleted. Thanks for putting that from the first category into the second. Cheers, -- Infrogmation (talk) 02:56, 31 May 2012 (UTC)

Commons:Deletion requests/File:Podebrady pramen Milada 1913.jpg

Hello!

You should documentate on the image's page that this file was once discussed on a DR. Regards, High Contrast (talk) 20:55, 31 May 2012 (UTC)

That isn't done by bot automatically? Didn't it used to be? -- Infrogmation (talk) 20:58, 31 May 2012 (UTC)

It should, but the bot didn't. --High Contrast (talk) 21:23, 31 May 2012 (UTC)

Thank you. Cheers, -- Infrogmation (talk) 21:24, 31 May 2012 (UTC)

Dong Phuong

I started an article on this bakery and used your photos. Thanks! Candleabracadabra (talk) 19:34, 7 June 2012 (UTC)

Commons:Deletion requests/File:Bread truck GAZ 3302 2006 G1.jpg

Hello Infrogmation!

I appreciate your decission with this DR. But you forgot to give a valid rationale for keeping it. Because this image has been discussed for the second time, a clear rationale is helping to prevent a third nomination. Thank you in advance. Regards, High Contrast (talk) 11:18, 11 June 2012 (UTC)

Can you please specify your rationale? "Kept per above" is quite vague. Which comment is meant exactly? Regards, High Contrast (talk) 15:56, 11 June 2012 (UTC)

Done. Sorry if I was vague. I tend not to deal with non-obvious non-US copyright cases. In this one I was closing a request inactive for a month and a half in accordance with existing discussion. If there are counter arguments to the views expressed by the 3 "keep" voters here that will be expressed in the future, I don't rule out that further discussion might be appropriate. Sorry if this isn't as definitive a ruling as you might wish. Perhaps someone more familiar with details of Ukraine copyright law and practices could give you better feedback. Thanks, -- Infrogmation (talk) 17:24, 11 June 2012 (UTC)

Jelly Roll House Pic

My name is Steven Kennedy and I am publishing a book of New Orleans music arranged for marimba band (I am actually a music teacher in Broadmoor) and wanted to get permission, if possible, of your Jelly Roll House photo. I wrote a piece in the style of Jelly Roll and think the pic would really complement the book. Let me know if that's a possibility and what I need to do to get things rolling. ThanksDiscobungle (talk) 22:13, 16 June 2012 (UTC)

Probably! A link to which photo you're talking about would help towards any details. I presume it's one of those in Category:Jelly Roll Morton House, Frenchmen Street? Cheers, -- Infrogmation (talk) 00:44, 17 June 2012 (UTC)

Category:Southern_Pacific_Railroad

Southern Pacific Railroad has been listed at Commons:Categories for discussion so that the community can discuss ways in which it should be changed. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry. If you created this category, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for discussion 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. If the category is up for deletion because it has been superseded, consider the notion that although the category may be deleted, your hard work (which we all greatly appreciate) lives on in the new category. In all cases, please do not take the category discussion personally. It is never intended as such. Thank you!

Mackensen (talk) 17:33, 17 June 2012 (UTC)

Twitter logo

Not being one of the regulars on Commons, I'm unfamiliar with all of the rules on logos. What matters is that the Wikipedia article w:Twitter has the logo in it, because it needs to be there. Can you suggest a tag for this image that will keep the copyright enthusiasts at bay, and would it be OK to upload the image at Wikipedia instead?--Ianmacm (talk) 05:48, 18 June 2012 (UTC)

Hi. Commons is for free licensed or out-of-copyright images only. The Twitter Bird design is deemed copyrightable. Limited use of non-free copyrighted material is allowed in specific contexts on English language Wikipedia. See en:Wikipedia:Non-free content and en:Wikipedia:Logos. It would need a "fair use rationale" as detailed at en:Wikipedia:Non-free use rationale guideline; you might look what is done in similar cases (for example, the Cadillac logo en:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Caddynew.png) for an example of how to phrase it. Cheers, -- Infrogmation (talk) 15:24, 18 June 2012 (UTC)

"Miami"

First of all, thank you most sincerely for all the wonderful work you do on categories!

I have reverted and corrected you in a few instances today, because Miami Beach and Miami are different cities with very different characteristics and I always feel it is wrong to categorize Miami Beack images as if they were Miamian. They're not. Cordially, --SergeWoodzing (talk) 18:43, 19 June 2012 (UTC)

Sorry, thanks for the pointer. Cheers, -- Infrogmation (talk) 20:03, 19 June 2012 (UTC)

Fred Luter

Infrogmation, can you help us with the objection raised at http://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Richard_David_Ramsey&diff=cur#File:2007_Norman_Francis.2C_George_W._Bush.2C_Leah_Chase.2C_Fred_Luter.jpg ? Maybe you can download the brightened file and then upload it the way you did the earlier (darker) file. Richard David Ramsey (talk) 23:35, 26 June 2012 (UTC)

Commons:Deletion requests/File:Mercedes-Benz OC 1214.jpg

Hello!

Can you please give a more detailed rationale for your keep-reason of this DR, please? "per above" is misleading because there was no consensus reached and PD-AR-Anonymous can be considered to be a speculative idea. Thank you in advance. Regards, High Contrast (talk) 12:14, 4 July 2012 (UTC)

Ooops, thanks for having me take a second look at this. From every indication this is an Argentina print ad, so Argentina law should apply. (No reason has been given to suspect it is derivative of something from some other country.) However {{PD-AR-Anonymous}} requires 50 years after publication, which has not yet passed for this. (I was aware that Argentina had some unusually short copyright laws for some works, I was at first thinking of {{PD-AR-Photo}} which is only 25 years, but as this is a print ad that wouldn't apply.) Thanks. Cheers, -- Infrogmation (talk) 12:29, 4 July 2012 (UTC)

Re: !!!! Why would a website reusing the image AFTER it was posted here be criteria for speedy deletion? Nominate for del if you wish, not speedy

If one looks closely one will find that the Commons file is a cropped version of one linked to. The original uploader also has a long history of uploading copyvios. I thought this was obvious enough to warrant a speedy, and would like to avoid going through a full deletion request, which is hopelessly backlogged right now. Since you disputed, though, I'll follow your advice and file a full DR. Please restore the speedy tag if you change your mind. --Paul_012 (talk) 05:08, 7 July 2012 (UTC)

Please pardon the tone of my edit summary. Nothing personal; I just need to learn not to edit once I get in a cranky mood. Thank you for your good work here. Cheers, Infrogmation (talk) 14:30, 7 July 2012 (UTC)

File:ALABAMA_(BAND).jpg

Is there any way I can get File:ALABAMA (BAND).jpg un-deleted and moved to Wikipedia? The image may not be suitable for Commons, but I think that it qualifies as a non-free historic image for Wikipedia use. TenPoundHammer (talk) 22:54, 7 July 2012 (UTC)

The Flickr source is still up online: [4] Cheers, -- Infrogmation (talk) 22:58, 7 July 2012 (UTC)

First colored senator and reps

Uploaded a png with a higher resolution than the jpg. But the thumb is crashed. If you have a moment could you look at it? Thanks!!!!! Lionelt (talk) 03:33, 8 July 2012 (UTC)

I've encountered something similar with large pngs. I'm not sure what the problem is; it seems systemic. I've had instances a simple edit (like a border crop) and reupload will take care of that. I'll try taking a more detailed look later (though not sure I'll be able to tell you anything more helpful). Cheers, -- 03:50, 8 July 2012 (UTC)

Thanks! Reuploaded the png--no joy. You know, before I spend too much time on this, do you know if the jpg big enough for WP:FP? An IP over there suggested we get the tiff, which is much larger [5]. Lionelt (talk) 04:46, 8 July 2012 (UTC)

Incidentally I uploaded the tiff File:17564u.tiff and it doesn't work either! Lionelt (talk) 04:50, 8 July 2012 (UTC)

Sorry, I don't have any tips, beyond noting that you're not the only one having trouble with the large TIFs and PNGs. I don't work with en:W:FP. Cheers, -- Infrogmation (talk) 14:51, 8 July 2012 (UTC)

Did you see that thread at WP:FP? Hilarious! Maybe I should stay away from WP:FP, too, lol. Thanks for all your help. Lionelt (talk) 20:59, 8 July 2012 (UTC)

Commons:Deletion requests/File:Korean Soldiers.jpg

Hello!

Your rationale is an absolute disgrace. I have clearly checked the flickr user's stream - surely with more intensity as you aver did. I want you to rework your deletion rationale without your personal attack. --High Contrast (talk) 13:37, 9 July 2012 (UTC)

I am unaware of anything that could be labeled a "disgrace" or "personal attack" in what I wrote. Perhaps whatever is in dispute should be brought to the attention of some third person or some forum here? -- Infrogmation (talk) 14:29, 9 July 2012 (UTC)

About Category:Hurricane Katrina merchandising

Hey Infrogmation, how are you doing? I was browsing around our Merchandise category and saw your photos. While they're fine work, do you know the copyright status of the graphics on the t-shirts? I wanted to point this out to you before jumping head first with a deletion request. Best, Blurpeace 20:41, 10 July 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for the note. Looks like I wasn't as aware of COM:DW as I should have been when the city first reopened after the disaster! Looks like the majority would be a potential DW problem; I'll delete them myself -- though a couple might qualify for de minimis or simple text; I'll take a more detailed look in a minute. Thanks for pointing this out. Cheers, -- Infrogmation (talk) 21:21, 10 July 2012 (UTC)

I've deleted most of them. One that was in use to illustrate "t-shirt" I cropped to remove the shirt with artwork and keep the shirt with simple text. I'm guessing the 3 remaining would be OK (outline map and the "Hurricane" weather symbol not being copyrightable); if you disagree let me know &/or list them for discussion. Thanks again for alerting me to this. -- Infrogmation (talk) 21:37, 10 July 2012 (UTC)

Sorry for getting back late. Currently at Wikimania, so I've been on and off. The only problem I might have is with the graphic tee in the middle, File:TShirtForgetIraq.jpg. I'm not sure whether the image would qualify for copyright protection. The wave lines in addition to the simple shape hurricane seem like they could pass the threshold of originality. Of course, no problem about contacting you. I'm happy you were so congenial about it—a lot of admins have trouble when it comes to their own uploads. Best, Blurpeace 18:05, 12 July 2012 (UTC)

Notification about possible deletion

Some contents have been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether they should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at their entry. If you created these pages, please note that the fact that they have been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with them, such as a copyright issue. Please see Commons:But it's my own work! for a guide on how to address these issues. Please remember to respond to and – if appropriate – contradict the arguments supporting deletion. Arguments which focus on the nominator will not affect the result of the nomination. Thank you!

Affected:

• File:Banksy Hip Hop Rat.jpg

And also:

• File:BANKSY LONDON.jpg
• File:Banksy Pressure Washing Away Art.jpg

Regards Psychonaut (talk) 16:18, 11 July 2012 (UTC)

Notification about possible deletion

Some contents have been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether they should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at their entry. If you created these pages, please note that the fact that they have been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with them, such as a copyright issue. Please see Commons:But it's my own work! for a guide on how to address these issues. Please remember to respond to and – if appropriate – contradict the arguments supporting deletion. Arguments which focus on the nominator will not affect the result of the nomination. Thank you!

Affected:

• File:ArrowFenceTremeBanksy.jpg

And also:

• File:Banksy Broom Rat New Orleans.jpg
• File:Banksy Corner Grey Ghost B Clio.jpg
• File:Banksy Fridge Kite.jpg
• File:Banksy Grey Ghost A.jpg
• File:Banksy Grey Ghost D.jpg
• File:Banksy Homelss Lincoln New Orleans 2010.jpg
• File:Banksy Lincoln New Orleans.jpg
• File:Banksy Looters New Orleans.jpg
• File:Banksy NOLA SimpsonsA.jpg
• File:Banksy Raingirl Corner.jpg
• File:Banksy Rat Plaster Treme.jpg
• File:Banksy Ratgirl Artwork.jpg
• File:Banksy Ratsteps Cone.jpg
• File:Banksy Rocker Close New Orleans.jpg
• File:Banksy Swinger Building Claiborne.jpg
• File:Banksy Umbrella Industrial Canal.jpg
• File:BanksyTrumpetFrontDoorNOLA.jpg
• File:BanksyTrumpetHouseCornerNOLA.jpg
• File:BanksyTrumpetHouseNOLA.jpg
• File:CarondoletClio2Oct2008.jpg
• File:DecaturElysianBanksy28Aug08.jpg
• File:DropInCenterGustav.jpg
• File:Homeless Lincoln + Hope.jpg
• File:L9W27Aug2008NoLoiteringFriedIce.jpg
• File:LibertyHardwareSept08A.jpg
• File:PhotographingBanksyAug2008DropIn.jpg
• File:StClaudeBanksyKite28Aug08.jpg
• File:TremeCarriagehouseBanksyRatgirlBuildingC.jpg
• File:TremeRain15Sept2008.jpg

Regards, Psychonaut (talk) 16:36, 11 July 2012 (UTC)

File:Erect penis uncircumcised.jpg

This file was kept at DR previously, so speedy deletion was not appropriate. I have DRed it. -mattbuck (Talk) 17:18, 31 July 2012 (UTC)

You're right; my mistake in not noticing that. Thanks for converting to DR. Cheers, -- Infrogmation (talk) 17:23, 31 July 2012 (UTC)

File:SteveOda-2008-05-05-Toronto.jpg

Are you really sure that your closure at Commons:Deletion requests/File:SteveOda-2008-05-05-Toronto.jpg was correct? The whole problem which initiated the deletion request is that Flickr isn't the original source, so a licence claim on Flickr isn't enough in my opinion. Also, one of the versions in the file history has a higher resolution than the maximum resolution on Flickr. We don't have any evidence of permission for the high-resolution version. --Stefan4 (talk) 09:03, 4 August 2012 (UTC)

Unexplained removal of date for a photograph

Hello! You removed the date for a photograph here without explaining why in your edit comment. The metadata for the file reveals the creation date. --Bensin (talk) 08:06, 9 August 2012 (UTC)

Axel Törneman, described as the artist who created this image, died in 1925, so this clearly isn't from 2012. Metadata had not yet been invented during his lifetime (any metadata on the image would be related to something like a scan, not the date of the original). (Alternatively, if this image actually is from 2012, it cannot be by Axel Törneman who died in 1925 .) -- Infrogmation (talk) 14:03, 9 August 2012 (UTC)

Galleries for deletion

Hello!
This is with reference to Commons:Deletion requests/Jacqueline Fernandez. I will start redirecting such galleries from now onwards. However i have already nominated three more of these. Shahrukh Khan, Javed Akhtar and Shabana Azmi. Would you please do the honours of closing them? §§AnimeshKulkarni (talk) 17:57, 9 August 2012 (UTC)

Hurricane Rita evacuation image

You removed the tag on File:RitaHoustonEvacuation.jpg, but it turns out it is actually a copyvio as a complainant asserted. Please see en:Wikipedia:Media copyright questions#Hurricane Rita evacuation image (now on Commons). I posted a comment directing to the discussion on Wikipedia on the Discussion page; you could check discussions or ask about reasoning before removing tags like that. Trusting the Wikipedia uploader as being the original source can lead to license laundering. Fences and windows (talk) 23:23, 18 August 2012 (UTC)

Thanks. I removed the "No source" tag after checking the earlier en:W upload log -- the problem was not a lack of source, and there has been no indication on the image page about some different potential copyright problem. Thanks for showing the en:W upload was a false license; I have deleted the image and blocked the uploader on en:W, as looking over their history there seem to be other similar violations. -- Infrogmation (talk) 00:25, 19 August 2012 (UTC)

File:Dansk tissemand.jpg

I have restored this image on the basis that it had survived a DR on scope grounds previously - see Commons:Deletion requests/File:Dansk tissemand.jpg. -mattbuck (Talk) 18:54, 27 August 2012 (UTC)

Thanks. (I usually would have noticed the file talk page, but was stumbling with a different browser -- my mistake.) Cheers, -- Infrogmation (talk) 12:14, 28 August 2012 (UTC)

Category:Music in (year)

I was thinking that these categories ought to be renamed as Category:(year) in music to be standard with most other year categories. -mattbuck (Talk) 17:02, 29 August 2012 (UTC)

Category:Migrant_Mother_by_Dorothea_Lange

Migrant Mother by Dorothea Lange has been listed at Commons:Categories for discussion so that the community can discuss ways in which it should be changed. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry. If you created this category, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for discussion 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. If the category is up for deletion because it has been superseded, consider the notion that although the category may be deleted, your hard work (which we all greatly appreciate) lives on in the new category. In all cases, please do not take the category discussion personally. It is never intended as such. Thank you!

Frank Gosebruch (talk) 15:30, 28 September 2012 (UTC)

Category:Pedal boats

Pedal boats has been listed at Commons:Categories for discussion so that the community can discuss ways in which it should be changed. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry. If you created this category, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for discussion 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. If the category is up for deletion because it has been superseded, consider the notion that although the category may be deleted, your hard work (which we all greatly appreciate) lives on in the new category. In all cases, please do not take the category discussion personally. It is never intended as such. Thank you!

-- Robert Weemeyer (talk) 11:36, 1 October 2012 (UTC)

New Orleans neighborhoods and divisions

Hi there. I noticed that you reverted me on Category:New Orleans neighborhoods and divisions [6]. While it's indeed a long-standing category it doesn't mesh with any naming conventions. I don't see this being a disruptive change either. Best, Mackensen (talk) 21:02, 18 October 2012 (UTC)

Edit: I see now the deletion and restoration. I'm not an administrator so I didn't delete anything; I list the category for renaming a few days ago. I did tag it with a redirect notice at the time: [7]. Mackensen (talk) 21:06, 18 October 2012 (UTC)

Category:Pennsylvania Station (New York City)

Hi. You've added Category:Demolished train stations in the United States to Category:Pennsylvania Station (New York City). The latter category also has photos of the current underground station. Is it standard practice to keep the photos of demolished and current stations together in one category? Over at Category:Grand Central Terminal, the predecessor building is in subcategory Category:Grand Central Depot. A similar subcategory could be created for Penn Station, e.g., "Category:Pennsylvania Station (New York City, 1910-1963)." Caseyjonz (talk) 21:55, 29 October 2012 (UTC)

Thanks. I think you're correct, the different buildings should be separated into sub categories. Cheers, -- Infrogmation (talk) 12:54, 30 October 2012 (UTC)

I notice the current category description states "English: Pennsylvania Station — The original Beaux-Arts style building in New York City by McKim, Mead & White was completed in 1910 and demolished in 1963." Perhaps it should be modified to note that there is a current building of the same name as well, and the date of completion of the current building stated. The categories for when it was built and destroyed also refer only to the old building only. Infrogmation (talk) 13:00, 30 October 2012 (UTC)

Thank you ...

... for your understanding and help on this. It was not my intention to replace your photo, only to add a cropped version of it that focused on the statue. You corrected it beautifully, for which I am grateful. -- BoringHistoryGuy (talk) 17:51, 2 November 2012 (UTC)

Category:Catherine_yronwode

Catherine yronwode has been listed at Commons:Categories for discussion so that the community can discuss ways in which it should be changed. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry. If you created this category, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for discussion 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. If the category is up for deletion because it has been superseded, consider the notion that although the category may be deleted, your hard work (which we all greatly appreciate) lives on in the new category. In all cases, please do not take the category discussion personally. It is never intended as such. Thank you!

Mercurywoodrose (talk) 03:26, 3 November 2012 (UTC)

User:Flagowy11

Could you take a look at this user contribution. He was blocked by you in July for uploading unfree files, however he is still doing it.--Oleola (talk) 21:51, 6 November 2012 (UTC)

Thanks, reblocked indef. -- Infrogmation (talk) 22:38, 6 November 2012 (UTC)

File:HalloweenNOLA2009VaginaCostume.jpg

File:HalloweenNOLA2009VaginaCostume.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!

Sreejith K (talk) 11:38, 14 November 2012 (UTC)

Not sure what to do here-

I appreciate your support of keeping the Eric Clapton photo someone marked for deletion recently. Even if I wished to break a rule and endanger the Wikipedias, I wouldn't even know how. What concerns me most, though is that the photographer, Chris Haakens has allowed us multiple photographs of a variety of musicians. Each he switched from copyright to Creative Commons CC-BY-SA. After noticing him reverting the Clapton photo back to copyright, I looked at some others in his sets of photos on Flickr, and discovered the same issue. What can be done? What legal rules exist? --Leahtwosaints (talk) 19:38, 22 November 2012 (UTC)

I assume you mean File:Eric Clapton June 23 1978.jpg. Confirmed verified Creative Commons licenses are considered non-revokable. In case of where the photographer later changed the license from free to unfree, see {{Flickr-change-of-license}}. Does that answer your question? -- Infrogmation (talk) 00:23, 23 November 2012 (UTC)

Category:Male_toplessness_in_photography

Male toplessness in photography has been listed at Commons:Categories for discussion so that the community can discuss ways in which it should be changed. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry. If you created this category, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for discussion 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. If the category is up for deletion because it has been superseded, consider the notion that although the category may be deleted, your hard work (which we all greatly appreciate) lives on in the new category. In all cases, please do not take the category discussion personally. It is never intended as such. Thank you!

Delicious carbuncle (talk) 17:21, 29 November 2012 (UTC)

Category:Spago,_Los_Angeles

Category:Spago,_Los_Angeles has been listed at Commons:Categories for discussion so that the community can discuss ways in which it should be changed. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry. If you created this category, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for discussion 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. If the category is up for deletion because it has been superseded, consider the notion that although the category may be deleted, your hard work (which we all greatly appreciate) lives on in the new category. In all cases, please do not take the category discussion personally. It is never intended as such. Thank you!

Closeapple (talk) 09:15, 25 December 2012 (UTC)

---

• Current discussion: User talk:Infrogmation
• Older archive: User talk:Infrogmation/Archive 12
• Next newer archive: User talk:Infrogmation/Archive 14