User talk:Infrogmation/Archive 9

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

This is an archive of older talk for User:Infrogmation


Katrina images[edit]

Hi. BotMultichillT (talk · contribs) just completed an upload of about 20,000 images of natural disasters from FEMA, including over 2,000 of Hurricane Katrina in Louisiana. Currently the images only have temporary categories, so I was wondering if you'd like to help find and create appropriate categories for them? Thanks, –Juliancolton | Talk 16:40, 15 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Permission and Attribution[edit]

Infrogmation, Hello. I’m the education curator for the LSU Museum of Art in Baton Rouge. I assembling images of Baton Rouge for an activity in our education gallery. I have found your image of the carousel at the Mall of Louisiana and would really like to use it for this activity. (I feel the need to mention that I realize it was probably taken during Katrina's aftermath and I'm sorry for the losses you've faced.)

The activity is related to an artwork by Charles LaBelle, on exhibit from Nov. 14, ‘09 – Feb. 13, ‘10. LeBelle's artwork is a collage of 1” square photos. It is my hope that museum visitors will create a collage of their own using magnetized pictures of Baton Rouge – all 2” square – in our gallery. Your photograph won’t be altered except for making it square. The images won’t leave the museum. A laminated card adjacent to the activity will acknowledge each photographer for their contribution. May I have your permission to use your photograph in this project? If yes, how would you like your name to read on our credit list?

Thank you for your time and consideration. Lara Gautreau lgaut@lsu.edu

I've already authorized reuse with attribution under Creative Commons. Giving credit along the lines of "Photo by Infrogmation of New Orleans, via Wikimedia Commons" would be great. Cheers, Infrogmation (talk) 19:19, 6 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

User:Janeilarlegui[edit]

Not being a Commons admin myself, I'm just raising a flag on this one rather than wading in. Can I ask you to take a look?

User:Janeilarlegui is clearly a legitimate design professional (http://arlegui.multiply.com/) and, judging by his site, has some sort of connection to the Metropolitan Theatre in Manila. However, his uploads (all of which pertain to this building) seem to be someone else's work (Nicanor G. Tsiongson) from 1978, which he says are in the public domain or he is placing in the public domain. I'm sure his intentions are good, but I don't offhand see why these works would be public domain, or where User:Janeilarlegui would come by the rights to be able to so release them. Still, there might be a story here that I'm not seeing.

I ran across these because they are poorly categorized, in metacategories that should not contain individual images. - Jmabel ! talk 22:34, 5 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Agree the license claim looks at least questionable. I don't see anything at Commons:Licensing#The_Philippines which would indicate these would be in the public domain, and if the original creator/copyright holder is releasing them as PD we need confirmation. If you don't hear back from the uploader, requesting Commons:OTRS verification or listing for proposed deletion seem reasonable. Cheers, Infrogmation (talk) 19:27, 6 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you[edit]

Thanks for your assistance finding a modern comparison shot of that bas relief at Palenque. Have blogged my gratitude.[1] Best regards, Durova (talk) 19:08, 6 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

You're quite welcome. Thanks for the work, and the link to your blog. Cheers, Infrogmation (talk) 19:27, 6 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks[edit]

Hi. Thanks for moving all those pics into the new "Quetzaltenango, Quetzaltenango" category - and for tidying up all those Easter categories... Simon Burchell (talk) 23:38, 6 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I agree with you and thanks for responding[edit]

You are 100% correct, 1st thing I am going to do is change the password. And lastly, all those images that were uploaded by the other individual NEED to be deleted ASAP! Once that is done all with be back to normal and I'll be satisfied. Commons is a very well respected project and the editors are very professional so I know this mishap willl be corrected promptly. Thank you very much Infrogmation!

Jaderocker (talk) 12:47, 15 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Password has just been successfully changed

Jaderocker (talk) 13:10, 15 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Adminship[edit]

Thanks for asking. I am an admin on en-wiki. I'd be glad to be one here, as long as there is no expectation that means I will start to focus primarily on administrative tasks. I particularly don't want to be any more responsible than I am now for admonishing users. Also, I don't have as strong a feel for the "culture" here as on en-wiki, because there is little equivalent here of collaborating on articles, so I've worked far more of my time here in isolation, uploading & describing my own photos and PD images.

If that is OK, feel free to nominate me. - Jmabel ! talk 19:27, 17 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Sounds good to me, I have nominated you. -- Infrogmation (talk) 20:04, 17 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Request to reevaluate image use as non-free[edit]

Last week, [File:Jonas_Salk1.jpg] was removed from the Commons. However, I think it would be worth the time to consider whether using the image as non-free would be OK. Note that the estate spokesperson gave their OK, in the discussion, to use it, but not as a Commons PD. They simply wanted attribution, which obviously helps everyone, including the copyright owners. I also just came across this notice on acurator.com:

"We were able to locate this image of Jonas Salk. The client originally requesting it had found it on Wikipedia, regrettably marked as being in the public domain. Wikipedia decided to take the image down even though I would have liked them to just make sure it was properly attributed and keep it on the Jonas Salk page. One of Dr. Salk's sons got in touch; also a doctor, even he felt the injection shot was a little discomfiting. Dr. Jonas Salk, 1956 © Yousuf Karsh" [2]

--Wikiwatcher1 (talk) 21:50, 17 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

  • There are various points. 1)Commons is for free licensed images only. En:Wikipedia makes limited "fair use" of non-free media. 2) "Fair use" on en:W is usually only done if there was no known free licensed images of the subject, but it looks like there seem to be free image(s) of Salk. 3)If you're in touch with people who might have copyright control of some historic images (as opposed to just copies of historic images the rights to which are owned by someone else), how about enquiring if they have something they'd be willing to share under an attribution / Creative Comons license? Cheers, -- Infrogmation (talk) 23:46, 17 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
As CC "permits free use, including commercial use" and permits "any derivative creator or redistributor," that won't do. The copyright holder said they would allow it to be used on the Jonas Salk article and with attribution. It seems odd that the owner can't do that when it's a win-win opportunity. --Wikiwatcher1 (talk) 00:57, 18 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmation from you[edit]

Martin H. told me these image files would be deleted in about 7 days. They were submitted on November 14th. Is 7 days about right? These image files MUST be deleted due to the malicious way they were uploaded. I look forward to this matter being resolved. Commons is an extremely professional project with the highest level of integrity among its editors and staff.

Martin H. (talk)

Commons:Deletion requests/2009/11/14

Commons:Deletion requests/Images of Category John Quinlan (wrestler)

Thank You For Your Valuable Time,

Jaderocker (talk) 02:11, 18 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

PD-Look[edit]

Hi, I noticed the discussion was archived. I made some changes in the text of the template. I hope you agree. Jan Arkesteijn (talk) 10:14, 20 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Re: Livery Stable[edit]

Hi! Hmm, I see you're right (how did I miss that?). Thanks for the correction. Jafeluv (talk) 06:20, 23 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Jurists[edit]

Category discussion notification Category:Jurists 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!

čeština ∙ Deutsch ∙ English ∙ español ∙ français ∙ italiano ∙ magyar ∙ Nederlands ∙ português ∙ polski ∙ sicilianu ∙ slovenščina ∙ Tiếng Việt ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца) ∙ македонски ∙ русский ∙ українська ∙ ತುಳು ∙ ಕನ್ನಡ ∙ ไทย ∙ עברית ∙ 日本語 ∙ 中文 ∙ +/−

— Cheers, JackLee –talk– 13:09, 24 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Dr. Salk[edit]

Hello, why is the photo, "Thank you, Dr. Salk," scheduled for deletion? ThanksMalke 2010 (talk) 16:02, 29 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. I presume you're talking about File:Salk Thank You.jpg? It is not "scheduled for deletion", but it does have an open discussion about whether it should be deleted at Commons:Deletion requests/File:Salk Thank You.jpg. I listed it there since the uploader claimed it was an official work by the U.S. Federal Government and was created by the March of Dimes. Since the March of Dimes is not a branch of the U.S. Federal Government, that seemed contradictory and I listed the image. The uploader has since changed the license claim; I personally don't know if that resolves things or not. If you have any additional information to add, please do so at the deletion request discussion, thanks. -- Infrogmation (talk) 16:18, 29 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I need a little help[edit]

Hi Infrogmation. I need a little help to place this undeletion request http://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Commons:Undeletion_requests/Current_requests&diff=next&oldid=32729707 What about you? :-) Regards Mutter Erde 78.55.203.253 13:07, 5 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Infrogmation, which confidental informations about Mutter Erde you have got from Kanonkas? Must be hard stuff, or? :-). See also this offer. Regards. Mutter Erde 92.226.252.15 09:17, 6 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
PS: I am so curious, forgive me. Mutter Erde :-) 78.50.130.70 00:38, 8 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I was only told that you were indef blocked, which is already obvious from User:Mutter Erde. Infrogmation (talk) 03:36, 8 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, he could add, that he (with 2 buddies) has started that, but even this would be nothing new :-). So it remains strange.
Hey Infrogmation, I still need a little help for my undeletion request. I have asked also Jimbo, but he seems to be not really interested (or he is not reading the history of his talk page). Regards Mutter Erde 78.55.11.113 20:51, 15 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Help[edit]

If I do a crop focusing on 1 the 2 Emmy awards (1959 & 1961) in this picture for Burr's wiki article, is it considered a copyright violation here on Commons since it is modern 3D art?

If its rather a non-free fair use photo, I don't know the exact non-free tag. Can you kindly let me know? Thank You, --Leoboudv (talk) 18:20, 11 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I think the photo of a photo is a derivative work, and the Flickr photographer is not the copyright holder of theh original photo visible, so it wouldn't be appropriate for Commons. Cheers, Infrogmation (talk) 23:06, 15 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Barbara Haws[edit]

Re: User_talk:Андрей_Романенко#File_Tagging_File:Bernstein_with_TV_Camera.jpg, en:User:Barbara Haws (who uploaded the image on en-wiki) is the archivist and historian of the New York Philharmonic. If she granted rights on an image of Leonard Bernstein, she almost certainly had the right to do so. If you've got doubts, I suggest you leave her a note or drop her an email, since I doubt Andrei can do anything to further clarify the matter. - Jmabel ! talk 22:11, 17 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the note. No attribution as required by license, so deleted as copyright violation, and re-uploaded with info from en:W. --Infrogmation (talk) 00:11, 18 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Your nonsense edit[edit]

What's that supposed to mean? Aren't admins supposed to be above such childish things? Hekerui (talk) 15:00, 20 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

  • I seen no nonsense in my edit you linked. It corrected misinformation and added a category I thought of potential use. If you think something was wrong with the edit, could you please explain? Thank you. -- Infrogmation (talk) 16:58, 20 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
"Original upload log" to "Transwiki trivia"?
"The original description page ..." to "A derivative unoriginal Wikipedia description page ..."? I was just sayin' Hekerui (talk) 18:48, 20 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Katedrála sv. Víta[edit]

Can you undelete the category now that it has works back in it? Thanks and happy new year! -Nard the Bard 06:37, 1 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

renaming[edit]

Hi! Please rename Turkot drezdeńki.JPG. The proper name is Turkot drezdeński.JPG. Thx! Mat86 (talk) 18:52, 1 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]


Commons:Deletion requests/File:JKEY Event.jpg[edit]

(1) My principal argument for the request was that it seems to be a personal image (single image of uploader and no use in wikipedia). Should I persist in requesting deletion? (2)I named the logo, because of the history of File:Bomenpark Meijhorst, Nijmegen (Gld, NL).jpg. Should "de minimus" have been applicable for the logos on that image oldest version? --Havang(nl) (talk) 17:08, 6 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

  • I commented rather than voted, as I have no strong opinion about keeping or deleting the image. I was mainly commenting to note that I thought the logo was de minimus and not a reason for deletion. Beyond that narrow point, I am fine with whatever is decided about this one. I hope others will express their opinion. Cheers, -- Infrogmation (talk) 17:42, 6 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Redirection Category:Transport fluvial to Category:Riverboats[edit]

OK for File:RiverboatNatchez.jpg, but in other cases i think this redirection is not helpfull for non-english writers and boats localisation. It's usefull having same categories un french wikipedia an wikimedia commons (Category:Transport fluvial is used also for infrastrutures or jobs, for ex http://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Canal_(voie_navigable) )


Category:Franklin Delano Roosevelt[edit]

Category discussion notification Category:Franklin Delano Roosevelt 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!

čeština ∙ Deutsch ∙ English ∙ español ∙ français ∙ italiano ∙ magyar ∙ Nederlands ∙ português ∙ polski ∙ sicilianu ∙ slovenščina ∙ Tiếng Việt ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца) ∙ македонски ∙ русский ∙ українська ∙ ತುಳು ∙ ಕನ್ನಡ ∙ ไทย ∙ עברית ∙ 日本語 ∙ 中文 ∙ +/−

-- -- User:Docu at 14:33, 10 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]


If you have a moment, would you have a look at my comment? -- User:Docu at 13:13, 21 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I saw it, I don't really have anything to add. Either title seems fine by me. I lean to leaving it where it is, but if mutiple other people users think it should be moved I wouldn't stand in the way. Cheers, Infrogmation (talk) 14:58, 21 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]


Rollback[edit]

Hi, I wanted to ask whether you would grant me rollback permission, in case I encounter vandalism, because it's so convenient. (I'm a "trusted user" here and have the rollback feature on the English Wikipedia.) Hekerui (talk) 13:58, 27 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]


Retrieved from "https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Infrogmation/Archive_9&oldid=43633533"