User talk:Jason.nlw

Welcome to Wikimedia Commons, Jason.nlw!

First steps tutorial

Our first steps tour and our frequently asked questions will help you a lot after registration. They explain how to customize the interface (for example the language), how to upload files and our basic licensing policy (Wikimedia Commons only accepts free content).

You don't need technical skills in order to contribute here. Be bold when contributing and assume good faith when interacting with others. This is a wiki.

Getting help

More information is available at the community portal. You may ask questions at the help desk, village pump or on IRC channel #wikimedia-commons (webchat). You can also contact an administrator on their talk page. If you have a specific copyright question, ask at the copyright village pump.

Goodies, tips, and tricks

Put Babel boxes on your user page so others know what languages you can speak and indicate your graphic abilities.
You can find the files you have uploaded in your Uploads.
Please sign your name on Talk pages by typing ~~~~.
To link to an image page without embedding the image, type: [[:File:Foo.jpg]], which produces: File:Foo.jpg.
You may enable gadgets (custom features) for your account.
There are several tools to upload files.
Have you edited Wikipedia before? This guide might be useful.

Made a mistake?

Do you want to have a file renamed or moved? Use the move link and wait for an authorized user to rename it.
Do you want to have your recently uploaded picture removed? Tag it as {{speedy|reason here}}. For more information read the deletion guidelines.

-- Wikimedia Commons Welcome (talk) 15:20, 22 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

User page redirect[edit]

Hey there! Just to let you know: interwiki redirects don't work on Wikimedia wikis, which is why your user page looks a bit odd. You can use {{soft redirect|w:User:Jason.nlw}} instead though. Microchip08 (talk) 13:08, 5 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

That's great, Thanks for the tip!Jason.nlw (talk) 13:36, 5 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Replied[edit]

I've replied: https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Chase_me_ladies,_I%27m_the_Cavalry#Question Chase me ladies, I'm the Cavalry (talk) 21:38, 9 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Deleting a previous version[edit]

Hi. I need some help please. Our organization were given rights on two images by a copyright holder and i uploaded them to commons. However the original copyright holders have requested that we replace the files with a lower resolution version. Out of respect to the copyright holders we wish to comply with the request and have uploaded a lower quality version. However the higher quality image still appears in image history on Commons. Can the previous version be deleted without having to delete the whole image? (which is in use in many articles)? Thanks Jason.nlw (talk) 11:46, 28 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Moved from Commons talk:Deletion policy

Hi, first of all, what files were you talking about? Unless they have been uploaded less than a week earlier than your overwrites, replacing them with a lower-resolution version is considered a license revocation. FDMS 4 20:54, 8 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

FDMS4, thanks for moving this here. I believe this has already been covered by a discussion at Commons:Help desk. Green Giant (talk) 21:29, 8 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

FDMS4Yes, Thank you. this issue has now been resolved.Cheers Jason.nlw (talk) 08:03, 9 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

File:Beaumaris.jpeg and others[edit]

Hi;

Nice that you input many images of works of art but could you limit the categories to the ones relevant and not redundant. For instance in this image I had to remove non existant categories and others that are redundant with (like Wales with Beaumaris). Please use the most significant categories.

Pierre cb (talk) 01:44, 26 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Pierre cb. Thanks for your message. These files are being added use the GLAM Wiki toolset which automatically detects categories from the metadata of the images. Either i have to add these images with no categories or accept that some will be non existent. Once the entire batch (about 5000) has been added there are wiki tools i can use to clean up the categories. Thanks for your help. Jason.nlw (talk) 08:14, 27 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

OK. Pierre cb (talk) 14:26, 27 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I've deleted the Category:Wales on all files, as a more specific cat is preferable eg Category:Aberystwyth Castle. I've also cleaned (cut, contrast and starighten) around a hundred images, mainly watercolours. Llywelyn2000 (talk) 07:24, 1 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

When you do the cleanup, would you also change or remove the categories like Category:1770-1780? When will your upload be done? I know you plan to clean up the categories, but in the meantime other editors are seeing categories that aren't needed and creating them anyway. Thanks. --Auntof6 (talk) 09:58, 1 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks user:Llywelyn2000 and user:Auntof6 The upload is ongoing at the moment. About 2000 out of 5000 have uploaded in the last week, so it could take another week or more, A smaller upload will follow - mainly images which failed the first upload for one reason or another, but Sorting out the categories will be my priority once the upload is finished. Thanks for all the help and patience. This is a great collection of images which will hopefully enrich many Wales related articles in in many languages. Jason.nlw (talk) 16:31, 3 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

A couple of suggestions: 1. '(Wales)' in brackets is not needed unless we need to disambig e.g. 'Category:Aberyswyth Castle' is better than 'Category:Aberyswyth Castle', yet 'Category:Bangor, Wales' is essential 2. 'Category:Wales' is not needed. 3. I think that 'Category:Watercolours from Wales painted 1770-1780' would be very useful - it is in line with similar such as 'Category:Photographs taken on 2002-08-31' or 'Category:Churches in Wales photographed in 2015'. Great to see such valuable images - diolch / thanks Jason! Llywelyn2000 (talk) 16:56, 3 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

That sounds good. The images are very interesting, and I'm sure they'll be useful. One other thing that might help if you can do it: if you include Category:Welsh Landscape Collection, you don't need Category:National Library of Wales, because the first is a subcategory of the second. However, if it's too much trouble to take care of now, it can be done later. I already took Category:National Library of Wales off of some of them using AWB. --Auntof6 (talk) 02:18, 4 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Would it be possible to finetune your robot to give more specific subcategories. You say that it uses the categories in the image but could you make links. For instance when it sees Storms, it gives category:Storms in art or category:Storms for lightning, etc.. since they all work of art? Pierre cb (talk) 19:07, 11 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

File:Interior of Tintern Abbey.jpeg[edit]

File:Interior of Tintern Abbey.jpeg 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 ∙ +/−

Ju Ta 00:09, 5 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

File:Landaff castle, Glamorganshire.jpeg[edit]

File:Landaff castle, Glamorganshire.jpeg 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 ∙ +/−

Ju Ta 00:12, 5 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

File:Lawhaden Castle.jpeg[edit]

File:Lawhaden Castle.jpeg 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 ∙ +/−

Ju Ta 00:15, 5 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

File:Llanffey Court.jpeg[edit]

File:Llanffey Court.jpeg 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 ∙ +/−

Ju Ta 00:18, 5 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

File:Maenor Pyr 1 March 1806.jpeg[edit]

File:Maenor Pyr 1 March 1806.jpeg 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 ∙ +/−

Ju Ta 00:23, 5 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Copyright status: File:Haverford West castle, (with the Priory) Pembrokeshire Octr 1 1824.jpeg[edit]

bahasa melayu ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ dansk ∙ deutsch (Sie-Form) ∙ deutsch ∙ english ∙ español ∙ français ∙ galego ∙ hrvatski ∙ italiano ∙ magyar ∙ nederlands ∙ norsk ∙ norsk bokmål ∙ norsk nynorsk ∙ português ∙ polski ∙ português do Brasil ∙ română ∙ sicilianu ∙ slovenčina ∙ slovenščina ∙ suomi ∙ svenska ∙ türkçe ∙ беларуская ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца) ∙ български ∙ македонски ∙ русский ∙ українська ∙ ಕನ್ನಡ ∙ ತುಳು ∙ മലയാളം ∙ 한국어 ∙ 日本語 ∙ 中文（简体） ∙ 中文（繁體） ∙ עברית ∙ العربيَّة ∙ فارسی ∙ +/−

This media may be deleted.

Thanks for uploading File:Haverford West castle, (with the Priory) Pembrokeshire Octr 1 1824.jpeg. I notice that the file page either doesn't contain enough information about the license or it contains contradictory information about the license, so the copyright status is unclear.

If you created this file yourself, then you must provide a valid copyright tag. For example, you can tag it with {{self|GFDL|cc-by-sa-all}} to release it under the multi-license GFDL plus Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike All-version license or you can tag it with {{PD-self}} to release it into the public domain. (See Commons:Copyright tags for the full list of license tags that you can use.)

If you did not create the file yourself or if it is a derivative of another work that is possibly subject to copyright protection, then you must specify where you found it (e.g. usually a link to the web page where you got it), you must provide proof that it has a license that is acceptable for Commons (e.g. usually a link to the terms of use for content from that page), and you must add an appropriate license tag. If you did not create the file yourself and the specific source and license information is not available on the web, you must obtain permission through the VRT system and follow the procedure described there.

Note that any unsourced or improperly licensed files will be deleted one week after they have been marked as lacking proper information, as described in criteria for deletion. If you have uploaded other files, please confirm that you have provided the proper information for those files, too. If you have any questions about licenses please ask at Commons:Village pump/Copyright or see our help pages. Thank you.

And also:

File:The Conway Tubular Bridge nd Castle.jpeg

No required license templates were detected at this file page. Please correct it, or if you have any questions please check my FAQ or contact me on my talk page. Yours sincerely, Jarekt (talk) 03:51, 16 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

File:Goodwych Pier - near Fishguard, Pembrokeshire- Novr 1 1814.jpeg[edit]

File:Goodwych Pier - near Fishguard, Pembrokeshire- Novr 1 1814.jpeg 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 ∙ +/−

Ju Ta 20:37, 17 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

File:Gwrych - near Abergele, Denbighshire.jpeg[edit]

File:Gwrych - near Abergele, Denbighshire.jpeg 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 ∙ +/−

Ju Ta 18:59, 18 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

File:Pig-sty at Holywell, N.W.jpeg[edit]

File:Pig-sty at Holywell, N.W.jpeg 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 ∙ +/−

Ju Ta 19:13, 18 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Image categorisation[edit]

Hi Jason,

I really love all the images you're uploading, but could I please make one little request: please only add the most specific categories for an item, but not more general categories, if the relationship is already implied by a more specific category that you are adding.

So, for example, on File:The wonders of the Menai, in its suspension and tubular bridges.jpeg (lovely image),

Category:Welsh Landscape Collection is great, as a source category
Category:Britannia Bridge and Category:Menai Suspension Bridge in art are great, as image content categories;

but

Category:Works of Thomas Telford is redundant, as we already have Category:Menai Suspension Bridge as a sub-category; similarly Category:Bridges in Wales
ditto Category:Rivers of Wales (questionable anyway, but the bridges are already sub-categories of Category:Menai Strait, which in turn is in the category tree of Category:Anglesey

etc

It really helps if we can keep higher-level categories as clear as possible, to make the things that should have new sub-categories created stand out, and to stop these higher-level categories becoming impossibly over-run with items.

I appreciate that this classification strategy is the opposite of the tagging strategy now used by most sane digital systems. Nevertheless, the classification approach is the foundation of the Commons system of human-readable sized categories; so if possible it would be good if some of the redundant super-categories could be removed. All best, Jheald (talk) 15:46, 3 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, Thanks very much for your message, and for your clear and helpful advice on categories. I am aware of problems with categories on the Welsh Landscape Collection in particular, this was caused by the way the categories were mapped from subject fields in the metadata. In hindsight we would have done things differently, and myself and a few others are periodically trying to tidy up categories in this collection. Rest assured lessons have been learned and in future we will trial much smaller batches and spend more time getting the categories right.

Thank you for your help, and your interest in National Library of Wales Collections! Jason.nlw (talk) 16:05, 3 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

It should be possible to write a bot script to detect and (optionally) remove super-categories from a given set of images. It's the kind of thing that User:Fæ could probably knock out in about five minutes! (Even if some of us mere mortals might find it more of a challenge...) Jheald (talk) 21:56, 3 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I figured there must be a way. I will have to ask nicely to see if User:Fæ or some other tech wizard could do this for me. Thanks again Jason.nlw (talk) 08:56, 4 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

National Library of Wales[edit]

~~Hi - what's your reasoning behind the mass removal of images in Category:Images from the collection of the National Library of Wales? An optimist on the run! 06:55, 6 November 2015 (UTC)~~[reply]

Ignore that - I've just realised Category:Photographs by John Thomas is a sub-category. An optimist on the run! 07:48, 6 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Copyright status: File:1868 wanted poster.jpg[edit]

bahasa melayu ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ dansk ∙ deutsch (Sie-Form) ∙ deutsch ∙ english ∙ español ∙ français ∙ galego ∙ hrvatski ∙ italiano ∙ magyar ∙ nederlands ∙ norsk ∙ norsk bokmål ∙ norsk nynorsk ∙ português ∙ polski ∙ português do Brasil ∙ română ∙ sicilianu ∙ slovenčina ∙ slovenščina ∙ suomi ∙ svenska ∙ türkçe ∙ беларуская ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца) ∙ български ∙ македонски ∙ русский ∙ українська ∙ ಕನ್ನಡ ∙ ತುಳು ∙ മലയാളം ∙ 한국어 ∙ 日本語 ∙ 中文（简体） ∙ 中文（繁體） ∙ עברית ∙ العربيَّة ∙ فارسی ∙ +/−

This media may be deleted.

Thanks for uploading File:1868 wanted poster.jpg. I notice that the file page either doesn't contain enough information about the license or it contains contradictory information about the license, so the copyright status is unclear.

If you created this file yourself, then you must provide a valid copyright tag. For example, you can tag it with {{self|GFDL|cc-by-sa-all}} to release it under the multi-license GFDL plus Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike All-version license or you can tag it with {{PD-self}} to release it into the public domain. (See Commons:Copyright tags for the full list of license tags that you can use.)

If you did not create the file yourself or if it is a derivative of another work that is possibly subject to copyright protection, then you must specify where you found it (e.g. usually a link to the web page where you got it), you must provide proof that it has a license that is acceptable for Commons (e.g. usually a link to the terms of use for content from that page), and you must add an appropriate license tag. If you did not create the file yourself and the specific source and license information is not available on the web, you must obtain permission through the VRT system and follow the procedure described there.

Note that any unsourced or improperly licensed files will be deleted one week after they have been marked as lacking proper information, as described in criteria for deletion. If you have uploaded other files, please confirm that you have provided the proper information for those files, too. If you have any questions about licenses please ask at Commons:Village pump/Copyright or see our help pages. Thank you.

Yours sincerely, Magog the Ogre (talk) (contribs) 06:15, 1 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Turner[edit]

Jason, just a note that your pic of Turner's Dolbadarn Castle came out red so I changed it back to the old version. Also, it needs the title to include the words study because that is what it is. See here: http://www.tate.org.uk/art/artworks/turner-dolbadarn-castle-study-for-diploma-picture-tw0005 The final version of the painting, which is twice as large, is here: https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:J.M.W._Turner_Dolbadern_Castle,_1800.jpg Thanks Philafrenzy (talk) 19:34, 29 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Philafrenzy I take your point about the title but i take issue with reverting the image. The version I have uploaded was digitised and colour managed this week from the original painting at the National Library of Wales. It is the most accurate representation of the original available in digital form. Secondly, The National Library has released this high resolution image as part of Europeana 280 project and must be uploaded to Commons. If you insist on your version existing, we are going to end up with two versions with identical information, which is not ideal. Please let me know your thoughts. Best Jason.nlw (talk) 21:26, 29 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I have no problem with a better image at all. It came out bright red (or pink) all over. That was why I reverted it. How does it look to you? Philafrenzy (talk) 22:07, 29 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Philafrenzy: It looks slightly saturated and lacking deep greens of my cheap chromebook (which does present as a pinky film) but ive just checked it on my smart phone it looks great - deep rich colours. It also looks good on my proper high res monitor at work. I will check again at work tomorrow, but i'm confident it will be good. The National Library has state of the art colour management software, so it really should be accurate. Maybe see if you can take a look on another devise? Your version, which was digitized several years ago from a 35mm colour slide is slightly too dark and the reds are not as rich as they should be (I saw the original not long ago). Let me know what you think, so i can either revert or re-upload. Cheers! Jason.nlw (talk) 22:47, 29 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Just tried on Chrome, IE and mobile. All look fine but on Firefox (my version reports that it is up to date) your picture looks bright pink/red like only one channel is being picked up. But all of my other pictures look fine and all of your uploads look fine too. Please try it on Firefox and see if you can replicate. Philafrenzy (talk) 01:04, 1 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Philafrenzy: I've just checked the image on firefox....WOW that is PINK!!!! I now completely understand why you reverted the image - my apologies. It appears that the problem is in the colour profile we used and firefox's inability to read it. We are going to change the profile and re-upload Asap. Hopefully this will resolve the issue. Thanks for your patience. Jason.nlw (talk) 09:38, 1 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Philafrenzy: Ok, it looks like the latest version has fixed the problem. If your happy with this, i will leave this version in place, and we will keep the title as it is. Thanks for your help! Best Jason.nlw (talk) 10:46, 1 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. Looks good now. If only we had as good a picture of the final work at the Royal Academy. One day. Philafrenzy (talk) 12:08, 1 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Valued Image Promotion[edit]

★ 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:
The Hengwrt Chaucer -The Prologue.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

Support I have checked this nomination against the six VI criteria:

1. Is the most valuable illustration of its kind on Wikimedia Commons.

There are no other images relating to the orignal text of Chaucer's Canturbury Tales in Commons.

2. Is nominated as being the most valuable within a suitably generic scope.

The scope is entirely appropriate for a VI nomination.

3. Must illustrate its subject well.

Yes.

4. Is fully described on the image page.

Yes - I have identified the text as being part of the prologue. This could be mentioned in the description, but is not essential.

5. Is geocoded, when relevant.

n/a

6. Is well categorized at an appropriate level.

Category "Geoffrey Chaucer" is redundant as it is a category related to "Canturbury Tales".

I am happy to support this nomination, but suggest that the category "Geoffrey Chauser" be removed from the list of categories.

Martinvl (talk) 15:16, 1 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

~~Oppose~~ Temporary problem. We must connect the scope to the category that contains the image. --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 17:01, 1 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Comment @Archaeodontosaurus: Done. Martinvl (talk) 18:32, 1 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

~~Support~~ Good now --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 19:01, 1 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]
~~Oppose~~, sorry but the scope is way too broad. There are images of older Canterbury Tales manuscripts in Commons - the Ellesmere Chaucer, for example. And there are potentially images of other pages of this manuscript. What about "The Hengwrt Chaucer, opening page" for this single page from the Hengwrt. Better still would be to create a category specifically for all the images of the Hengwrt manuscript and make the scope "The Hengwrt Chaucer, opening page". DeFacto (talk). 19:07, 1 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Comment I am in partial agreement with DeFacto, but not sufficient to withdraw my support. If the scope is to be changed, I would prefer to see "Geoffrey Chaucer's Canterbury Tales - The prologue, mediaeval edition". Martinvl (talk) 19:49, 1 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Comment, I'd rather see room for a scope for images from each manuscript, rather than have them compete against each other in a single age-related scope. DeFacto (talk). 07:13, 2 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Comment I just wanted to point out that the the Ellesmere Chaucer is dated early 15th century, whereas the Hengwrt Chaucer has been dated as late 14th century and the latest research suggests that it was probably written during Chaucer's lifetime by his own scribe Adam Pinkhurst. So it is almost certainly older than the Ellesmere version. This is the first time I have made a valued image nomination so any advice on the wording of the scope would be greatly appreciated.Jason.nlw (talk) 11:41, 2 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Comment, we should certainly create a category for the Hengwrt Chaucer, similar to the Ellesmere Chaucer one. And if we agree that both manuscripts are notable artefacts in their own right, then I believe we should leave room for VIs from both. I'm still thinking along the lines of "The Hengwrt Chaucer - opening page" (or "... - the Prologue" per Martinvl's suggestion). DeFacto (talk). 18:29, 2 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Scope changed from Geoffrey Chaucer's Canterbury Tales to The Hengwrt Chaucer -The Prologue --Martinvl (talk) 11:31, 3 March 2016 (UTC) (pp Jason.nlw)[reply]

Please notify previous voters of this change. Remember: "A support vote that was made before a change of scope is not counted unless it is reconfirmed afterwards; an oppose vote is counted unless it is changed or withdrawn".

Comment @Archaeodontosaurus, DeFacto, and Jason.nlw: The scope of a VI nomination in which you commented has been changed by the nominator. I have done the relevant paperwork on behalf of the nominator. Martinvl (talk) 11:39, 3 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Support Support confirmed as stated previously. Martinvl (talk) 11:39, 3 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Support, it's good for me now thanks - and best in scope. DeFacto (talk). 18:12, 3 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:10, 4 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Result: 3 support, 0 oppose => promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 07:12, 6 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Valued Image Promotion[edit]

★ 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:
Elizabethan Badminton Estate Map. 1587 survey.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

Valued Image Promotion[edit]

★ 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:
Map of Wales by John Speed.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

File:The church & pool, Tal-y-elin i.e. Tal-y-llyn, north Wales.jpeg[edit]

File:The church & pool, Tal-y-elin i.e. Tal-y-llyn, north Wales.jpeg 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 ∙ +/−

Optimist on the run (talk) 22:25, 5 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

File:Shane Williams - David Griffiths.jpg[edit]

hi, nice upload. it does strain credulity that a 2012 painting is CC-4.0 - you might want to confirm that the artist released his copyright for this work, by email using the com:OTRS system. thanks. Sudowoodoo (talk) 16:22, 20 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks - yes you have reminded me to chase this up. We do have permission, i just need to get it on OTRS. I will try and do this soon. Best Jason.nlw (talk) 16:41, 20 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

File:John Thomas (Photographer).jpg[edit]

Further to my note on your Wikipedia talk page, a have a question about File:John Thomas (Photographer).jpg. You have identified the source of this image as [1], which us the same image as File:A group of walkers (?) NLW3366276.jpg (I have added an {{Extracted from}} tag to indicate this). However, your new image does not appear to be exactly the same as the group image: the man is looking more to the left, and the strap over his chest is partly obscured by the hat of the man in front. Can you check the source of this image? I think it must be from another plate taken on the same occasion. I haven't spotted this second plate in Category:Photographs by John Thomas, has the NLW's entire collection of John Thomas photographs been uploaded? Verbcatcher (talk) 21:37, 2 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

HiVerbcatcher, thanks for looking into this. You clearly have a keen eye! Having looked into this there are indeed two different images. You can see them here and here. It is very possible one didn't upload as it has exactly the same title as the other. Much of this collection was uploaded by volunteers before my time so i cant be sure that all images are on Commons, but most are. I have added the other version to Commons File:A group of walkers. John Thomas.jpg and linked the cropped version to this, the correct image. I hope the clears things up. Best Jason.nlw (talk) 09:21, 3 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

File:Cardiff castle, Glamorganshire (1133761).jpg[edit]

Are you able to rescan File:Cardiff castle, Glamorganshire (1133761).jpg. I suspect that the psychedelic sky effect is caused by an interference pattern between the scanner resolution and the fine pattern of the engraving. Adjusting the scanner settings may resolve this. Alternative versions are here and here. Verbcatcher (talk) 22:14, 2 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Several other scanned engravings show similar artefacts, for example:

I don't want to appear ungrateful, you're doing great work. Verbcatcher (talk) 22:35, 2 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Verbcatcher, this problem is not as easy to fix i'm afraid. If i get time i will try uploading slightly higher quality versions as sometimes file compression can cause this distortion, but i know that there was a problem with some of these images when they were scanned, and as things stand the National Library wouldn't have the resources to go back and re scan. But again, thanks for highlighting the issue, and thank you for taking an interest in our image uploads. Best Jason.nlw (talk) 09:31, 3 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

It appears the the library already has good scans and that rescanning is not required.

Go to File:Cardiff castle, Glamorganshire (1133761).jpg
Click on the link in You can view this image in its original context on the NLW Catalogue
This gets you here
If you zoom in using the + button then the patterning disappears and the fine detail of the engraving appears.

I have looked at a few other images and they all look ok at maximum enlargement.

The problem is with the software used to rescale the image. To avoid this sort of artifact the high-resolution image should be blurred before it is rescaled, to remove high-resolution detail that cannot be rendered at the lower resolution. The technical details are discussed in w:en:Anti-aliasing filter and in w:en:Multidimensional sampling.

The software used by viewer.library.wales has not implemented this correctly; at some zoom levels the website image has the same problem as the Commons image. Wikimedia appears to have implemented rescaling correctly, for example see File:William Hogarth - Gin Lane.jpg where none of the resolutions show this sort of artefact.

What is needed is to upload higher-resolution images. Help:Scanning#Engravings, etchings, and related suggests "somewhere between 300dpi to 800dpi", but ideally the full resolution of the original scans should be uploaded.

I realise that re-uploading all the library's engravings would be a significant task, and probably not a good use of your time. However, it may be possible to crowd-source this effort to Wikimedia editors. To enable this the library would need to give access to high-resolution files and resolve any licensing issues.

For downloading, I have experimented with the "Share" button on the webpage which purports to generate html code to embed an image in another website, but all I get is a black rectangle. The simplest solution for users would be a "download" button (ideally for a PNG or TIFF file). Alternatively, instructions on how to construct a URL that accesses a high-resolution image.

On licensing, some or all the images on viewer.library.wales have a more restrictive license than the corresponding images on Commons. For example, on Commons File:Cardiff castle, Glamorganshire (1133761).jpg has Creative Commons CC0 1.0 Universal Public Domain Dedication, whereas the version on the library's website has "...It may be used for non-commercial purposes while respecting the moral rights of the creators of the digital version.", which may not be acceptable for Commons. Is this difference deliberate, or has the website not caught up with the revised licensing? Is the library seeking to retain rights over full-resolution images for possible commercial exploitation?

Regards, Verbcatcher (talk) 19:02, 3 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Verbcatcher, Thanks for your input. The Library is currently reveiwing its policy around the quality at which it releases openly licensed. Once this has been agreed we may be able to look at releasing full size copies of these images.

As for the discrepancy in licenses i have raised this with the Library web team, so they are aware of the problem. Hopefully it will be resolved soon by updating the licences on the website to reflect the licences used on Wiki Commons. But for now, you can safely reuse the images under the terms of the more open license. Jason.nlw (talk) 10:10, 4 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Sain (Records) Ltd[edit]

I think I added OTRS templates to all your uploads covered by the ticket related to Category:Sain (Records) Ltd. If not than lease let me know. Also Please ping me if you upload more files under this ticket and I will add the OTRS template. --Jarekt (talk) 20:07, 30 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Great! I will let you know if i find any problems. Thanks very much for your help. Jason.nlw (talk) 08:57, 3 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Sain uploads[edit]

Hi, thank you for uploading the audio clips and album covers from Sain. They are a valuable addition, and I have added several of them to Wikipedia articles. Some of the album covers provide pictures that are otherwise difficult to obtain for biographies of living people, I have already added these for w:Trebor Edwards, w:Dafydd Iwan, w:Annette Bryn Parri, w:Dennis O'Neill (tenor) and w:Ryan Davies.

I have a few observations and suggestions.

Many of the audio clip pages do not give the names of all the audible performers, such as the pianist accompanying a singer. For example, in Category:Audio clips of Dennis O'neill the pianist is prominent but is not credited. This would give useful information about the clips, and its omission might be a licensing problem as the licence requires attribution.

It would be good to specify the composers of musical items, or specify when they are "traditional". For example, File:Tami - Mary Hopkin.ogg is a version of Tammy by Jay Livingston and Ray Evans, made famous by Debbie Reynolds.[2] I hope that Sain have sorted out any necessary permissions.

Unfortunately the Sain pages of the albums (e.g. this]) do not specify the performers or the composers. Sometimes they can be found on another website.[3][4]. These details would often be in the notes on the back of the album cover. Is there any chance of these being added, in a resolution sufficient to read the text?

I have identified the singer on File:Yr Hen Glochydd - Nansi Richards.ogg as Emrys Jones and added him and his category to the file page. I have added this clip to Cerdd Dant, which I hope is accurate.

In the following clips the listed performer is not heard at all. This may be because the clip stops before the listed performer starts:

File:Core 'Ngrato - Dennis O'neill.ogg - artist listed as Dennis O'Neill, but we only hear piano music
File:Y Mor enaid - Bryn Terfel.ogg - artist listed as Bryn Terfel, but we only hear piano music
File:Easter Hymn - The Morriston Orpheus Choir.ogg - artist listed as The Morriston Orpheus Choir (male voice), but we only hear a female soloist and organ. I have identified the singer and organist and fixed this.

Some of the dates are suspect. For example, File:Yr Hen Glochydd - Nansi Richards.ogg is listed as "Performance date 2009", but Nansi Richards died in 1979. In this case the date is probably the release date of the compilation album.

The two clips in Category:Audio clips of John Thomas sound like different singers who should not be categorised together.

I have added some categories for performers, linking their album covers and their audio clips, e.g. Category:Robin Huw Bowen.

It might be useful to have a category for each album, linking its tracks and album cover. The clips are already listed on the page for the album cover, under File usage on Commons, so there might be a clever way to add these to a category. This would help with categorisation, for example if there were a Category:Caneuon Meirion Williams (SAIN SCD 2013) then this would be in Category:Bryn Terfel, Category:Annette Bryn Parri and Category:Meirion Williams, and we would not need to add these categories to each clip from the album.

Thanks again, Verbcatcher (talk) 04:47, 4 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Verbcatcher, Thanks for taking the time to organise this collection and for starting to make use of these sound clips. The data for the clips was scraped from the SAIN website (with their permission), but the data you see on Commons is all we could access. Even then i had to manually fetch some of the data from other websites such as itunes. I guess if additional data is available on other websites it might be possible to do a scrape and add that additional data to Commons. Unfortunately i dont really have any more time to spend on this project. I'm happy to share the data i have is someone else is willing to give it a go. I am also hoping to find volunteers to created Wikidata items for the bands/albums ect using the scraped data.

With the Album covers, we only had permission to upload the small thumbnails of the front covers, and since this is the first time a record label has done anything like this (to the best of our knowledge) I would be very reluctant to ask for any more from them. It's fantastic that they have agreed to release what we have.

So i'm affraid, all i can say really is that i am happy to share my upload data with others who might want to develop this further, and keep up the good work with your manual improvements to the data - it is much appreciated!

Jason.nlw (talk) 11:00, 8 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Licence query[edit]

Hi Jason, you uploaded File:S.O. Davies portrait 1490010.jpg as CC0, but the source website seems to say cc-by-nc-nd. Has that changed since you uploaded it, and might this affect other uploads? SarahSV ^(talk) 21:09, 4 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hi User:SlimVirgin thanks for flagging this issue. The image has been uploaded legitimately and it is the National Library of Wales Catalog which needs updating. I actually work at NLW and uploaded the image with full permission of management, and NLW hold the copyright for all images in this collection. You can see the OTRS here. We have uploaded around 15k images from NLW collections so far and it is likely that there will be other cases where the licences do not match. This is because data for older digitized material has not always been updated to reflect changes in policy ect. This is something we are aware of and are working on. With future uploads we are working to insure the licence data all matches before upload. In the mean time if you come across any other issues with our collections, please feel free to get in touch and i will do my best to rectify it. Cheers Jason.nlw (talk) 22:07, 4 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Jason, thank you for the speedy reply. Can you or someone else from the library email OTRS confirming that these images are CC0? This has just affected a featured-article nomination on en-wiki (en:Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Aberfan disaster/archive1), where I added the S. O. Davies image but, because someone had earlier noticed the contradictory licences, it had to be removed from the article. There are likely to be other cases where people check the licence on the site and decide not to use the photographs because of the restrictions. SarahSV ^(talk) 22:53, 4 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

No problem. I am back in the office next week and will try and get this sorted asap. Jason.nlw (talk) 12:46, 5 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, Jason. SarahSV ^(talk) 22:52, 5 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Notification about possible deletion[edit]

Some contents have been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether they should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at their entry.

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

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 ∙ +/−

Affected:

File:Dinas Bran Castle near Llangollen.jpeg

And also:

File:The Pier! Llandudno.jpeg

Yours sincerely, CoCoCounty97 (talk) 00:57, 3 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

- @CoCoCounty97: thanks for the heads up. What a strange deletion request!?. Looks like it has been resolved now though. Lots of good reasons to keep these if you ever need another the voice though. Thanks Jason.nlw (talk) 06:16, 3 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Uwchlwythiad bendigedig![edit]

Wel ti wedi bod yn brysur! Mae'r uwchlwythiad diweddaraf (Category:National Library of Wales Portrait Archive) yn fendigedig ac yn ychwanegiad aruthrol i bob Wicipedia dan yr haul! Gwych iawn a diolch!!! Robin Owain (WMUK) (talk) 11:23, 25 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Diolch yn fawr iawn Robin. Fi'n edrych ymlaen i gwneud defnydd o'r gasgliad nawr mewn prosiectau a digwyddiadau. Jason.nlw (talk) 14:25, 25 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Files released by Sain[edit]

In response to the discussion at w:en:Talk:Mary Hopkin#Audio samples, here are details of my concerns about the licensing of the files released by Sain.

My main concern is that several of the clips are of music that is probably under copyright. Has Sain obtained permission from the copyright holders (the composer, the lyricist, and the translator where appropriate) to release these clips under the CC BY-SA 3.0 licence, or is this permission not required? Secondly, this licence requires attribution – should the other copyright holders be attributed alongside Sain?

For American music there is the additional complication that in some periods copyrights had to be registered and subsequently renewed, otherwise the work became public domain. Commons:Hirtle chart gives some details, but it does not directly discuss composer's copyright.

Mary Hopkin

I suspect that all the clips in Category:Audio clips of Mary Hopkin are cover versions of songs that are unlikely to be public domain, or songs composed for Mary Hopkin. For example:

File:Tami - Mary Hopkin.ogg – a translation of 'Tammy' by Jay Livingston and Ray Evans, a hit for Debbie Reynolds.
File:Aderyn Llwyd - Mary Hopkin.ogg – The label on the Cambrian CSP703 single (1969) identifies this as '(Sparrow) Gallagher / Lyle, Welsh Words – Gwyn Davies'.[5]
File:Draw Dros y Moroedd - Mary Hopkin.ogg – This is the tune of 'Guantanamera', which is attributed in its Wikipedia article to Joseíto Fernández (1908–1979). Various websites attribute the Welsh lyrics to Ann Clee.[6]
File:Rhywbeth Syml - Mary Hopkin.ogg – the tune is 'Somethin' Stupid' by C. Carson Parks, a hit for Frank and Nancy Sinatra
File:Tro, tro, tro - Mary Hopkin.ogg – a translation of 'Turn, turn, turn' by Pete Seeger, a hit for The Byrds

John Rutter

John Rutter is a living composer, noted for his choral works. The clips in Category:Audio files of music by John Rutter would probably need his permission.

Performers playing their own music

When a performer is playing music that they have composed then he or she may need to give permission as the composer. This might be covered by the recording contracts. For example, the following the clips are of Catrin Finch playing her own compositions.

Album cover artwork

I assume that Sain have are satisfied there are no problems with copyrights owned by the graphic designers and photographers of album cover artwork. Do they need and have permission from the creators of the underlying works?

File:Man Gwyn, album cover.jpg – This is based on 'Lle Cul, Patagonia' an oil painting by Kyffin Williams (1918–2006). The painting is owned by The National Library of Wales.[7]
File:Adre'n ôl, album cover.jpg – this includes a photograph of John Owen Jones on stage, which I have cut out as File:John Owen-Jones as Jean Valjean.jpg. Have Sain considered the copyright status of this component of the album cover?

Others

These are more or less at random. I am not a Welsh speaker and was led to these by the file names.

File:There but for Fortune - Maralene Powell.ogg - 'There but for Fortune' by Phil Ochs (1940-1976), a hit for Joan Baez
File:Eli Jenkins' Prayer - Bryn Terfel-rhys Meirion.ogg, File:Eli Jenkins Choral Version - Brymbo Male Choir.ogg, File:Eli Jenkins Spoken Version - Brymbo Male Choir.ogg – I don't know who wrote the music, but the words are from 'Under Milk Wood' by Dylan Thomas (1914–1953)
File:Pasadena - Tredegar Town Band.ogg - 'Home in Pasadena' by Harry Warren (1893–1981), a hit for The Temperance Seven
File:Do You Hear the People Sing - Bro Aled Male Voice Choir.ogg – from the musical 'Les Misérables'.
File:Cant Help Falling in Love - Brecon Male Voice Choir.ogg – by by Hugo Peretti, Luigi Creatore, and George David Weiss, a hit for Elvis Presley

All the files listed in the 'File usage on Commons' section of File:Welsh Male Voice Choirs Sing Hits Of The 60S & 70S, album cover.jpg should be checked.

I hope this is helpful. I hope that it is not necessary to delete any of these files and that Sain are not discouraged from releasing more material, but I also want to help maintain the reputation and integrity of Wikimedia Commons.

Regards, Verbcatcher (talk) 18:46, 17 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Verbcatcher, thanks for your time in putting this together. I will pass this on to SAIN and hopefully they can confirm how and why they have the rights to these clips. I also checked in with the OTRS people and they said it's fine to change the license template, so i'll try and get that done today. Best Jason.nlw (talk) 08:10, 19 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Verbcatcher I just wanted to let you know that i am now in contact with the CEO of SAIN, and there will likely be a review of all the clips. It is looking like there is third party copyright in some of the cover songs in particular which will need to be taken down. I will keep you in the loop. Thanks again for bringing this to my attention. Jason.nlw (talk) 09:18, 24 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I have been working on the Sain files again, fixing clips that had been attributed to the wrong performer or linked to the wrong cover artwork. In the course of this I have come across more suspect files, and have been making a list. Please let me know if and when you or Sain want this list. Verbcatcher (talk) 00:34, 26 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks Verbcatcher, i will wait and see what Sain come up with and will be in touch. Best Jason.nlw (talk) 07:39, 26 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

FIY - a large number of SAIN clips have now been nominated for deletion following a full review of the content by SAIN RECORDS. Jason.nlw (talk) 15:16, 27 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I think that Sain are probably being over-cautious in some cases. For example, File:Cwm Rhondda - Cymanfa Tabernacl Treforus, 1989.ogg is Wele'n sefyll rhwng y myrtwydd by Ann Griffiths to the tune Cwm Rhondda, and is clearly public domain music (it does not sound like a modern arrangement). I will cast my eye down the list for titles that look like PD music.

Yes i think they probably are. If you want to have a look through the list and remove any obvious PD songs from the deletion request then please feel free. Sadly i dont have the time to go through them at the moment and SAIN ar obviously keen for offending clips to come down asap. Cheers! Jason.nlw (talk) 19:40, 27 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Did Sain respond about File:Man Gwyn, album cover.jpg, which looks like a clear smoking gun (see above)? Perhaps the National Library has released Kyffin's painting under a free licence, but I doubt it. Verbcatcher (talk) 16:20, 27 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I think we are ok with the Album covers. SAIN seemed pretty sure about those, plus they are only low quality...and they were uploaded by me as a National Library of Wales employee. Jason.nlw (talk) 19:40, 27 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, but you are open to a challenge by Kyffin Williams' heirs. The library owns the physical painting, but it is unlikely to be able to licence the reproduction rights to third parties. The current licence allows anyone to reuse the image for any purpose. Verbcatcher (talk) 21:29, 27 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The National Library of Wales owns the copyright to Kyffins entire collection, so we should be ok Jason.nlw (talk) 21:32, 27 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

That is good news. The license on the Commons file should probably require attribution to the library as well as to Sain. Can the library release a nice image for use in the Wikipedia articles in Kyffin? Verbcatcher (talk) 22:33, 27 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks Verbcatcher. I keep meaning to ask the Library if they will release a couple of Kyffins for use in articles. I will see what i can do. Jason.nlw (talk) 15:30, 1 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I have inspected about a quarter of the files in Commons:Deletion requests/SAIN audio files and have posted my findings there. Please let me know if you have any suggestions. Regards, Verbcatcher (talk) 19:28, 1 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Expiry of GWToolset user group memberships[edit]

There is a proposal on the Bureaucrat's noticeboard to automatically expire GWT memberships after one year unless the user requests an extension. Please add your views and suggestions to the discussion. The reasonably informal process for getting access to GWT access will remain as is.

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) on behalf of Revi. 15:42, 31 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

File:Katyusha - Colin Jones Singers.ogg[edit]

File:Katyusha - Colin Jones Singers.ogg 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 ∙ +/−

—SpanishSnake (talk | contribs) 02:45, 6 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

File:(2) Катюша.ogv[edit]

File:(2) Катюша.ogv has been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether it should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry.

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

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 ∙ +/−

—SpanishSnake (talk | contribs) 02:52, 6 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

File:NLW South Readig Room.jpg[edit]

File:NLW South Readig Room.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 ∙ +/−

4nn1l2 (talk) 22:33, 28 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

For your info[edit]

https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=&type=revision&diff=355224789&oldid=355222268, https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=&type=revision&diff=355224702&oldid=355220198, https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=&type=revision&diff=355224663&oldid=355218738. . --Arnd (talk) 09:39, 18 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

License for artworks in the public domain[edit]

Hey Jason, some nice paintings you uploaded. For photos of public domain paintings we use {{PD-art}}. In your case you get something like {{PD-Art|PD-old-100-1923}} (example edit). You probably want to use that for any future imports. Multichill (talk) 17:02, 25 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Great, thanks for the tip. Ive changed the license template on these now and will make sure i use the same in the future. I'm also planning to improve some of the artworks we have on Wikidata with missing statements like 'Inventory Number' as soon as i get a chance. Jason.nlw (talk) 08:21, 26 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Excellent. I have some improvements for the Wikidata items too. I'll leave them on your talk page over there. Multichill (talk) 09:19, 29 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

different items with the same accession number[edit]

Jason, I am a bit puzzled by many of your uploads from National Library of Wales with the same accession number. The files I am looking at are:

List of Images

"CN3295"
"CN3295"
"P10104/1, P10104/2"
"P10104/1, P10104/2"
"P10136/1, P10136/2"
"P10136/1, P10136/2"
"P10161/1, P10161/2"
"P10161/1, P10161/2"
"P10205/1, P10205/2"
"P10205/1, P10205/2"
"P10286/1, P10286/2"
"P10286/1, P10286/2"
"P1522, P1522/1"
"P1522, P1522/1"
"P1556, P939"
"P1556, P939"
"P1573/1, P1573/2"
"P1573/1, P1573/2"
"P1581, P1581/1"
"P1581, P1581/1"
"P6841/1, P6841/2"
"P6841/1, P6841/2"
"P7704"
"P7704"
"P7707/1, P7707/2"
"P7707/1, P7707/2"
"P8672/1, P8672/2"
"P8672/1, P8672/2"
"P9732/1, P9732/2"
"P9732/1, P9732/2"
"P9836/1, P9836/2"
"P9836/1, P9836/2"
"P9953, P9953/1"
"P9953, P9953/1"
"P9965, P9965/1"
"P9965, P9965/1"
"P9990, P9990/1"
"P9990, P9990/1"
"PA7481/1, PA7481/2"
"PA7481/1, PA7481/2"
"PB01026"
"PB01026"
"PB07208"
"PB07208"
"PB07208"
"PB07208"
"PB07208"
"PB07208"
"PB07208"
"PB2379, PB2379/2"
"PB2379, PB2379/2"
"PB5109/1, PB5109/2"
"PB5109/1, PB5109/2"
"PB5273"
"PB5273"
"PB6055"
"PB6055"
"PB6055"
"PB6055"
"PB6055"
"PB7174"
"PB7174"
"PB7302"
"PB7302"
"PB7302"
"PB7302"
"PB7302"
"PB7302"
"PB7302"
"PB7302"
"PB7302"
"PB7302"
"PB7302"
"PB7302"
"PB7302"
"PB7302"
"PB7302"
"PB7302"
"PB7302"
"PB7302/2"
"PB7302/2"
"PB7465/2"
"PB7465/2"
"PB8013"
"PB8013"
"PB8013"
"PB8013"
"PB8013"
"PB8013"
"PB8013"
"PB8013"
"PB8013"
"PB8013"
"PB8013"
"PB8013"
"PB8013"
"PB8013/2"
"PB8013/2"
"PB8337"
"PB8337"
"PB8695/1"
"PB8695/1"
"PB9040"
"PB9040"
"PB9040"
"PB9040"
"PB9040"
"PB9040/1"
"PB9040/1"
"PB9040/2"
"PB9040/2"
"PB9040/2"
"PB9040/2"
"PD01155, PD08310"
"PD01155, PD08310"
"PD06955"
"PD06955"
"PD100"
"PD100"
"PD1071"
"PD1071"
"PD1130, PD8253"
"PD1130, PD8253"
"PD1543, POR02421"
"PD1543, POR02421"
"PD6229/1, PD6229/2"
"PD6229/1, PD6229/2"
"PD6263, PD6263/1"
"PD6263, PD6263/1"
"PD6288, PD6288/1"
"PD6288, PD6288/1"
"PD6314, PD6314/1"
"PD6314, PD6314/1"
"PD6376, PZ6412"
"PD6376, PZ6412"
"PD7381/1, POR11912"
"PD7381/1, POR11912"
"PD7388, POR02426"
"PD7388, POR02426"
"PD8160, PD8160/2"
"PD8160, PD8160/2"
"PD8168"
"PD8168"
"PD8235, PD8235/1"
"PD8235, PD8235/1"
"PD8259, PD8259/1"
"PD8259, PD8259/1"
"PD8339/1, PD8339/2"
"PD8339/1, PD8339/2"
"PD8344, PD6358"
"PD8344, PD6358"
"PD8354/1, PD8354/2"
"PD8354/1, PD8354/2"
"PD8530, PD8530/1"
"PD8530, PD8530/1"
"PD8537, PD8537/1"
"PD8537, PD8537/1"
"PD8542, PD8542/1"
"PD8542, PD8542/1"
"PD8558/1, PD8558/2"
"PD8558/1, PD8558/2"
"PD89"
"PD89"
"PD923/1, PD923/2"
"PD923/1, PD923/2"
"PD925/1, PD925/2"
"PD925/1, PD925/2"
"PD93"
"PD93"
"PD9435"
"PD9435"
"PE385/1-3"
"PE385/1-3"
"PE385/1-3"
"POR02407, PE00049"
"POR02407, PE00049"
"POR12332"
"POR12332"
"PZ5437, PZ5436"
"PZ5437, PZ5436"
"PZ6310, PD06261"
"PZ6310, PD06261"
"PZ6313, PD06365"
"PZ6313, PD06365"
"PZ6316, PD06291"
"PZ6316, PD06291"
"PZ6394"
"PZ6394"
"PZ6426"
"PZ6426"
"PZ7049, PD08557"
"PZ7049, PD08557"

Lately I was transferring many accession numbers from Commons to Wikidata, and those file got cough by one of my checks. In cases like that I would usually try to go to source website and verify, but could not find any accession numbers there. each one of the files has a separate Wikidata item and for a given institutions each work should have unique inventory number. I suspect that in case of ids with comma, like "PD8558/1, PD8558/2" one of the items is "PD8558/1" and the other PD8558/2", but I can not explain 6 items with "PB7302" id. Can you check and possibly fix? --Jarekt (talk) 13:09, 16 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hey Jarekt thanks for bringing this to my attention. I will try and take a closer look over the next couple of days, and get any issues sorted out. I'll be in touch soon to let you know whats what. Thanks again Jason.nlw (talk) 13:21, 16 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Jarekt. Ive looked into this now and these Accession numbers are definitely problematic. Firstly, as you suspected, the ones with comma's are multiple copies of the same image - but they seem to have just one catalogue entry/digital record for the set. Secondly, i have no idea why other completely different images have the same number. The data was extracted from our catalog by our IT team for the upload and i didn't think to check up on these numbers thoroughly. And now it seems that our catalogue doesn't even make these numbers public any more, so it is not easy for me to check that Commons matches our records. These days the main identifiers we use for images are the Persistent Handle ID and the catalogue number (MMS ID) - both of which have Wikidata properties. So if you agree, i would like to remove the accession numbers from the data for this collection, and discuss with our archivists which ID's should be applied and how they should be used. Would that be acceptable do you think? Thanks again Jason.nlw (talk) 09:58, 17 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Jason That sounds good. We like for the information to be verifiable so hidden from public IDs which are not unique and no longer used are a problem. I see on Parch Thos. Phillips D. D (Q55023107) wikidata page ( a random one) that there is Handle ID (P1184) property, but the link does not work. I also see National Library of Wales Catalogue ID (P6786), although not on images. If you delete the accession numbers from images on commons than we should probably also delete them from wikidata, and remove edits like this one. --Jarekt (talk) 01:13, 18 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Jason I eager to bring down the backlog in Category:Artworks with Wikidata item: quick statements with files that have some metadata on Commons which can be moved to Wikidata. Majority of the files there are files with Accession numbers from NLW. If we are going to delete those accession numbers than I can do it quickly with my bot. Any last thoughts? --Jarekt (talk) 02:41, 19 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

HI Jarekt. Sorry for not having deleted the accession numbers yet. It is on my to do list but it may be quicker to do it with a bot - and i am happy for you to gop ahead and do that. Many thanks Jason.nlw (talk) 06:04, 19 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Done I removed all the accession numbers from files in Category:National Library of Wales Portrait Archive. I will also remove them from Wikidata. Let me know if I missed anything. --Jarekt (talk) 13:15, 20 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Jason, I am removing inventory number (P217) which I added which start with letter "P". Can you look through other inventory number (P217) to see if they still make sense, some of them have a reference with URL. Please use query below to see them. --Jarekt (talk) 15:57, 20 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

SELECT ?item  ?id ?image WHERE {
  ?item p:P217 ?statement .
  ?statement pq:P195 wd:Q666063 .
  ?statement ps:P217 ?id .
  optional {?item wdt:P18 ?image } .
}

Try it!

Thanks Jarekt. Ive been through the list, and all the other inventory numbers look good apart from a small collection of images which are part of Q21731178. These use the same old accession numbers, which should probably be removed. Thanks again for helping tidy things up. Jason.nlw (talk) 18:32, 20 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for contributing to Wiki Loves Monuments UK 2019![edit]

Hi

Thank you so much for contributing to the UK section of this year's Wiki Loves Monuments contest, which finished yesterday. We really do appreciate the time and effort you've put in to record the UK's built cultural heritage for future generations.

Your contribution has been been added to our collections here on Wikimedia Commons, and is already available for editors to make use of on Wikipedia and elsewhere. It has also been entered into this year's contest. If you'd like to see your own images, just click on the uploads link at the top right of this page (if you don't see it, click on the Log in option first).

We've received over 10,000 UK entries this year, and it will take a few weeks for our volunteers and professional judges to decide on the final top 10. The winners will be announced by the end of this month, both here on Wikimedia Commons and also on the competition website.

The top 10 UK images will go forward to the international section where they will compete against winners from some 50 other countries. The international winners should be announced here in December.

Don't forget, by the way, that if you're hoping to win a prize in the contest it's essential that you have enabled email in your Wikimedia preferences. If you haven't, you're not eligible to win. If you're unsure, please check here.

Once again, many thanks for your help! MichaelMaggs (talk) 15:58, 2 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for participating in Wiki Loves Monuments 2019! Please help with this survey.[edit]

Wiki Loves Monuments logo

Dear Jason.nlw,

Thank you for contributing to Wiki Loves Monuments 2019, and for sharing your pictures with the whole world! We would like to ask again a few minutes of your time. Thanks to the participation of people like you, the contest gathered more than 210K+ pictures of cultural heritage objects from more than 40 countries around the world.

You can find all your pictures in your upload log, and are of course very welcome to keep uploading images and help develop Wikimedia Commons, even though you will not be able to win more prizes (just yet). If you'd like to start editing relevant Wikipedia articles and share your knowledge with other people, please go to the Wikipedia Welcome page for more information, guidance, and help.

To make future contests even more successful than this year, we would like to invite you to share your experiences with us in a short survey. Please fill in this short survey, and help us learn what you liked and didn't like about Wiki Loves Monuments 2019.

Kind regards,
the Wiki Loves Monuments team MediaWiki message delivery 12:31, 3 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Invitation to participate in Wiki Loves Monuments 2019 Participant Survey (Reminder)[edit]

Wiki Loves Monuments logo

Dear Jason.nlw,

Thank you for contributing to Wiki Loves Monuments 2019, and for sharing your pictures with the whole world! We would like to ask again a few minutes of your time. Thanks to the participation of people like you, the contest gathered more than 210K+ pictures of cultural heritage objects from more than 40 countries around the world.

You can find all your pictures in your upload log, and are of course very welcome to keep uploading images and help develop Wikimedia Commons, even though you will not be able to win more prizes (just yet). If you'd like to start editing relevant Wikipedia articles and share your knowledge with other people, please go to the Wikipedia Welcome page for more information, guidance, and help.

To make future contests even more successful than this year, we would like to invite you to share your experiences with us in a short survey. Please fill in this short survey, and help us learn what you liked and didn't like about Wiki Loves Monuments 2019.

Kind regards,
the Wiki Loves Monuments team MediaWiki message delivery 03:20, 23 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

MOTD Notification[edit]

⭐ A file you uploaded is on the main page! ⭐

File:Ver Hot aza Yingele - Eurocantica.ogg, that you uploaded, is on the main page today. Thank you for your contributions to this project.

//EatchaBot (talk) 00:01, 30 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

MOTD Notification[edit]

⭐ A file you uploaded is on the main page! ⭐

File:Regendl - Eurocantica.ogg, that you uploaded, is on the main page today. Thank you for your contributions to this project.

//EatchaBot (talk) 00:02, 30 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for participating in Wiki Loves Monuments 2020! Please help with this survey[edit]

Wiki Loves Monuments logo

Dear Jason.nlw,

Thank you for contributing to Wiki Loves Monuments 2020, and for sharing your pictures with the whole world! We would like to ask again for a few minutes of your time. Thanks to the participation of people like you, the contest gathered more than 200K+ pictures of cultural heritage objects from more than 50 countries around the world.

You can find all your pictures in your upload log, and are of course very welcome to keep uploading images and help develop Wikimedia Commons, even though you will not be able to win more prizes (just yet). To make future contests even more successful than this year, we would like to invite you to share your experiences with us in a short survey.

Please fill in this short survey, and help us learn what you liked and didn't like about Wiki Loves Monuments 2020.

Kind regards,
the Wiki Loves Monuments team, 08:24, 14 November 2020 (UTC)

MOTD Notification[edit]

⭐ A file you uploaded is on the main page! ⭐

File:Der Fodem - Eurocantica.ogg, that you uploaded, is on the main page today. Thank you for your contributions to this project.

//EatchaBot (talk) 00:00, 30 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Alexander Lindsay[edit]

So I put my reasoning at File talk:Portrait of Alexander H. Lindsay (4674513).jpg. Charles Matthews (talk) 13:52, 4 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Pics etc[edit]

Your recent uploads have been amazing, I feel like I'm walking those cold streets with you! I've been trying to pick off the last unphotographed listed ones in Cardiff. It really helps though if we can add the Cadw number like this for grouping listed photos together. Do you have any stats on what percentage of listed buildings we've collectively done on Commons? Keep up the incredible work. I'll start adding the Wicipics tag from now on. Should I add it retrospectively? No Swan So Fine (talk) 12:21, 4 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hi No Swan So Fine, Thanks! Ive been thrilled with the engagment with this project and we have had some great contributions - yourself included. Ive based the project around adding images through WikiShootMe which creates the Commons data automaticly. Unfourtunately this means the Cadw template is not added. However, once the campeign finishes at the end of the month i will be doing some batch edits to add Welsh descriptions to the items on Commons and i should be able to add the Cadw templates at the same time. I'm not sure what the percentage is, but i will try and work it out once we are finished. Whislt WLM generally get more images, i think we have probably captured a lot more indevidual buildings with Wicipics. I am currently going through your uploads over Christmas and adding the Wicipics Category. I'm also improving some of the descriptions and linking items to Wikidata in the description as this will be really useful when i come to harvesting the data (Example) - I hope thats ok, but do let me know if you have any suggestions or spot any problems. So no need to retrospectively add the Wicipics cat, but moving forward that would be great! Thanks for all your contributions! - i'm feeling the urge to blitz another couple of towns, myself before we finish! (lock-downs permitting) Best Jason.nlw (talk) 12:46, 4 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I've been using the old WLM site, it's useful for Wikidata as well. Abergavenny and Newport are my other hotspots! Yes many thanks for your mass edits, I've guilty of uploading then never getting round to renaming them...I've been trying to pick a format for Grade II listings in Cardiff to put on our main page, there are too many templates though to choose from. You might be amused to meet the delightful Sarah Thomas who I was introduced to while wandering around Ty Gwyn and Vaendre Hall in the dusty archives. All the best. No Swan So Fine (talk) 12:57, 4 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Great! - Love that Sarah Thomas story. The quote "indulged in the fragrant weed with the zest of a person half her years" is just brilliant! Thanks again for all the great photos of Wales you contribute, and i will defintely try and get those Cadw templates added during February. We are aproaching 1500 images so far for the project so sorting them all out is keeping me busy! Jason.nlw (talk) 14:13, 4 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Quality Image Promotion[edit]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Llyn Llygad Rheidol.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates.

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments Lovely, good quality. -- Ikan Kekek 21:30, 3 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! North View from Cader Idris (JE01).jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates.

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments
Support Good quality. --Remontees 22:58, 3 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

--QICbot (talk) 05:26, 6 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Wici'r Holl ddaear a ballu[edit]

Haia - gret gweld cymaint o luniau'n dod fewn. A gwych gweld bod dau o dy luniau wedi cael QI. Newydd greu hwn, os tisio fo ar dy dudalen defnyddiwr: {{User Wales}} (heb sortio'r autotranslate arno fo eto). Hefyd, wyt ti'n gwybod am declyn all ffindio lluniau mewn categori sydd heb gyfesurynau? Yn ola, mae un llun gwych gen ti - o'r fuwch Albanaidd o dan 2MB (gan ei fod mewn du a gwyn). Sgin ti ffeil mwy (efallai du a gwyn mewn lliw! ;-) ) Cofion cynnes... Llywelyn2000 (talk) 07:29, 6 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Gwych. Diolch yn fawr Llywelyn2000. Jason.nlw (talk) 12:34, 6 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Helo... Dw i di dreu categori newydd i betha amheus, lle da ni di gadal neges am chwanag o wybodaeth: Category:Images from Wiki Loves Earth 2021 in Wales/Awaiting location details. Monsyn (talk) 06:36, 7 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Gwych, Diolch Monsyn! Jason.nlw (talk) 08:06, 7 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Pages using Artwork template with incorrect parameter[edit]

Hi Jason, most of the files in that maintenance category were uploaded by you. Could you please take care of them? --Leyo 14:35, 18 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Leyo. Thank you for drawing my attention to these, and sorry for all the issues with this upload. Hopefully everything is sorted now. I also fixed the other images in that category. Many thanks! Jason.nlw (talk) 17:44, 18 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you! --Leyo 20:10, 18 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Wicipics crowd project[edit]

You seem to be involved with the project surounding Category:Wicipics crowd project. All the uncategorised files I am currently finding with a cadw id seem to be in that (hidden) category. Maybe you could alert the organisers to see if there is another round to find a way of educating the uploaders to use more categories. It be a shame to have the pictures and not be using them. Agathoclea (talk) 08:52, 23 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

File:20th Century collage.jpg[edit]

File:20th Century collage.jpg has been marked as a possible copyright violation. Wikimedia Commons only accepts free content—that is, images and other media files that can be used by anyone, for any purpose. Traditional copyright law does not grant these freedoms, and unless noted otherwise, everything you find on the web is copyrighted and not permitted here. For details on what is acceptable, please read Commons:Licensing. You may also find Commons:Copyright rules useful, or you can ask questions about Commons policies at the Commons:Help desk. If you are the copyright holder and the creator of the file, please read Commons:But it's my own work! for tips on how to provide evidence of that.

The file you added has been deleted. If you have written permission from the copyright holder, please have them send us a free license release via COM:VRT. If you believe that the deletion was not in accordance with policy, you may request undeletion. (It is not necessary to request undeletion if using VRT; the file will be automatically restored at the conclusion of the process.)

This file is a copyright violation for the following reason: Includes File:Meitu MK150.JPG

Warning: Wikimedia Commons takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing.

Afrikaans ∙ asturianu ∙ azərbaycanca ∙ Bahasa Indonesia ∙ Bahasa Melayu ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ dansk ∙ Deutsch ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ ∙ English ∙ español ∙ euskara ∙ français ∙ galego ∙ hrvatski ∙ italiano ∙ Lëtzebuergesch ∙ magyar ∙ Malti ∙ Nederlands ∙ norsk bokmål ∙ norsk nynorsk ∙ oʻzbekcha / ўзбекча ∙ Plattdüütsch ∙ polski ∙ português ∙ português do Brasil ∙ română ∙ sicilianu ∙ slovenčina ∙ slovenščina ∙ suomi ∙ svenska ∙ Türkçe ∙ Tiếng Việt ∙ Zazaki ∙ Ελληνικά ∙ беларуская ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ ∙ български ∙ македонски ∙ русский ∙ српски / srpski ∙ тоҷикӣ ∙ українська ∙ հայերեն ∙ मराठी ∙ বাংলা ∙ മലയാളം ∙ ပအိုဝ်ႏဘာႏသာႏ ∙ မြန်မာဘာသာ ∙ ไทย ∙ 한국어 ∙ 日本語 ∙ 中文（简体）‎ ∙ 中文（繁體）‎ ∙ עברית ∙ العربية ∙ فارسی ∙ +/−

– Finnusertop (talk ⋅ contribs) 23:22, 6 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Helo, a oes bosib / Hello, is there a possibility[edit]

Hi Jason, thank you for all of the work you do here on wiki, I wondered if there was a possibility of uploading this image (cropped) please?, I discovered that this person is Rhys Evans (also known as 'Arise Evans')who was recorded as a pretender, so it'd be good to put a face to his article, diolch. Hogyncymru (talk) 02:22, 6 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Hogyncymru. Happy to share a cropped version of this for you. You can find it here. Diolch! Jason.nlw (talk) 09:16, 6 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Diolch o galon!, Thank you so much! Hogyncymru (talk) 19:15, 6 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for participating in Wiki Loves Monuments 2022! Please help with this survey[edit]

Wiki Loves Monuments logo

Dear Jason.nlw,

Thank you for contributing to Wiki Loves Monuments 2022, and for sharing your pictures with the whole world! We would like to ask again for a few minutes of your time. Thanks to the participation of people like you, the contest gathered more than 150K+ pictures of cultural heritage objects from more than 35 countries around the world.

You can find all your pictures in your upload log, and are of course very welcome to keep uploading images and help develop Wikimedia Commons, even though you will not be able to win more prizes (just yet). To make future contests even more successful than this year, we would like to invite you to share your experiences with us in a short survey.

Please fill in this short survey and help us learn what you liked and didn't like about Wiki Loves Monuments 2022.

Kind regards, Wiki Loves Monuments team, 09:38, 10 January 2023 (UTC)

An unfree Flickr license was found on File:Vertical Orchard (1111).jpg[edit]

Deutsch ∙ English ∙ español ∙ فارسی ∙ français ∙ hrvatski ∙ italiano ∙ 日本語 ∙ മലയാളം ∙ Nederlands ∙ sicilianu ∙ Tiếng Việt ∙ +/−

A file that you uploaded to Wikimedia Commons from Flickr, File:Vertical Orchard (1111).jpg, was found available on Flickr by an administrator or reviewer under the license Noncommercial (

), No derivative works (

), which isn't compatible with Wikimedia Commons, per the licensing policy. The file has been deleted. Commons:Flickr files/Appeal for license change has information about sending the Flickr user an appeal asking for the license to be changed. Only Flickr images tagged as

(CC BY),

(CC BY-SA),

(CC0) and

(PDM) are allowed on Wikimedia Commons. If the Flickr user has changed the license of the Flickr image, feel free to ask an administrator to restore the file, or start an undeletion request.

Wdwd (talk) 12:11, 28 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @Wdwd, My apologies for this oversite. Ive recently uploaded a batch, mostly from flickr, and thought i'd checked/mapped the licences correctly, but this one must have slipped through the net. Jason.nlw (talk) 14:19, 28 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

File:Earthship building (1066).jpg[edit]

File:Earthship building (1066).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 ∙ +/−

Abzeronow (talk) 16:56, 30 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

File:Aerial view, a torrent of water, flooding in Colorado (1592).jpg[edit]

File:Aerial view, a torrent of water, flooding in Colorado (1592).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 ∙ +/−

Abzeronow (talk) 17:00, 2 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

File:California wildfires (1097).jpg[edit]

File:California wildfires (1097).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 ∙ +/−

Abzeronow (talk) 18:07, 4 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I manually added File:Super Typhoon Haiyan damage in Tacloban city, two young people on a river bank (1595).jpg and File:Road littered with debris in Tacloban city (1594).jpg to the DR. Thanks for bringing them to my attention. Abzeronow (talk) 20:55, 5 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

File:Honda Columbia after heavy rains and flooding, boat transport (1652).jpg[edit]

File:Honda Columbia after heavy rains and flooding, boat transport (1652).jpg has been marked as a possible copyright violation. Wikimedia Commons only accepts free content—that is, images and other media files that can be used by anyone, for any purpose. Traditional copyright law does not grant these freedoms, and unless noted otherwise, everything you find on the web is copyrighted and not permitted here. For details on what is acceptable, please read Commons:Licensing. You may also find Commons:Copyright rules useful, or you can ask questions about Commons policies at the Commons:Help desk. If you are the copyright holder and the creator of the file, please read Commons:But it's my own work! for tips on how to provide evidence of that.

The file you added has been deleted. If you have written permission from the copyright holder, please have them send us a free license release via COM:VRT. If you believe that the deletion was not in accordance with policy, you may request undeletion. (It is not necessary to request undeletion if using VRT; the file will be automatically restored at the conclusion of the process.)

This file is a copyright violation for the following reason: Per EXIF and credit info "William Fernando Martinez / AP Photo" - source Flickr account does not own the rights to this photo

Warning: Wikimedia Commons takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing.

Afrikaans ∙ asturianu ∙ azərbaycanca ∙ Bahasa Indonesia ∙ Bahasa Melayu ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ dansk ∙ Deutsch ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ ∙ English ∙ español ∙ euskara ∙ français ∙ galego ∙ hrvatski ∙ italiano ∙ Lëtzebuergesch ∙ magyar ∙ Malti ∙ Nederlands ∙ norsk bokmål ∙ norsk nynorsk ∙ oʻzbekcha / ўзбекча ∙ Plattdüütsch ∙ polski ∙ português ∙ português do Brasil ∙ română ∙ sicilianu ∙ slovenčina ∙ slovenščina ∙ suomi ∙ svenska ∙ Türkçe ∙ Tiếng Việt ∙ Zazaki ∙ Ελληνικά ∙ беларуская ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ ∙ български ∙ македонски ∙ русский ∙ српски / srpski ∙ тоҷикӣ ∙ українська ∙ հայերեն ∙ मराठी ∙ বাংলা ∙ മലയാളം ∙ ပအိုဝ်ႏဘာႏသာႏ ∙ မြန်မာဘာသာ ∙ ไทย ∙ 한국어 ∙ 日本語 ∙ 中文（简体）‎ ∙ 中文（繁體）‎ ∙ עברית ∙ العربية ∙ فارسی ∙ +/−

Whpq (talk) 02:30, 22 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Wiki Loves Wales[edit]

Hi, just wondering when the wiki loves Wales winners will be announced? The page says you're on the organising team. Sorry if this is the wrong place to ask, am usually just a lurker on here. StormCoffeeCat (talk) 23:36, 25 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @StormCoffeeCat. We are hopping to make an announcment next week at the latest about this, however the top ten images have been chossen by our judges and have been submitted to the local winners list on Commons, as the deadline for this is the end of August. Many thanks! Jason.nlw (talk) 08:44, 29 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

File:Low water levels in Lake Mead (9247).jpg[edit]

File:Low water levels in Lake Mead (9247).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 ∙ +/−

Abzeronow (talk) 19:21, 10 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

File:Unidentified house (4601531906).jpg[edit]

File:Unidentified house (4601531906).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 ∙ +/−

Dogfennydd (talk) 10:51, 1 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

File:Marshall Islands (1017).jpg[edit]

File:Marshall Islands (1017).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 ∙ +/−

Abzeronow (talk) 18:05, 3 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Capeli Abertyleri gan Martin Ridley[edit]

Shwmae Jason,

Mae’r ddau ffeil yma:

yn portreadu yr un capel, ond yn cyfeirio at ddau enw gwahanol. Dwi’n credu taw Ebenezer yw hi (gweler y drafodaeth yma am dystiolaeth o fideo mwy modern), ac mai hwn yw’r capel Fethodistaidd. Os ydych chi’n cytuno, a fyddai modd anfon cywiriad i’r eitem ddigidol yng nghasgliadau LlGC?

Diolch, Dogfennydd (talk) 12:53, 13 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:Mature woman seated in her home, submerged in deep water, smoking a cigarette,in flood conditions (1835).jpg[edit]

File:Mature woman seated in her home, submerged in deep water, smoking a cigarette,in flood conditions (1835).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 ∙ +/−

Günther Frager (talk) 22:16, 15 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:Rhianva - the marine residence of Sir John Hey Williams Bart.jpeg[edit]

There appears to be an error in File:Rhianva - the marine residence of Sir John Hey Williams Bart.jpeg: the 'circa 1820' looks wrong. I assume that you copied it from the NLW.

The image shows Plas Rhianfa which was completed in 1851 (although it could be an architect's proposal).
The architect of the building was Charles Reed (1814-1859), who took the name Charles Verelst. This name is shown in the engraving. The architect would have been six years old in 1820.
The engraver is shown as 'Eng. by Newman & Co, 48 Watling Street, London." The British Museum gives the company's dates as 1843-1871 (active).[8]

I estimate the date as between 1851 and 1859, because Sir John Hay Williams is named in the engraving and he died in 1859 (Wikipedia). The dubious date is still shown in the NLW and in the People's Collection Wales.[9][10] Can you alert the relevant expert at the library? Thanks, Verbcatcher (talk) 23:19, 11 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hey @Verbcatcher. Thanks for flagging this. I agree, the date doesnt look right. I will flag this with our art curator and hopefully we canb get our metadata update. Once I hear back i'll make sure the Commons data is updated too. Best Jason.nlw (talk) 17:19, 14 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File source is not properly indicated: File:Wolf Creek Research Basin (9316).jpg[edit]

العربية ∙ asturianu ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ ∙ বাংলা ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ dansk ∙ Deutsch ∙ Ελληνικά ∙ English ∙ español ∙ euskara ∙ فارسی ∙ suomi ∙ français ∙ galego ∙ עברית ∙ hrvatski ∙ magyar ∙ italiano ∙ 日本語 ∙ 한국어 ∙ македонски ∙ മലയാളം ∙ norsk bokmål ∙ Plattdüütsch ∙ Nederlands ∙ norsk nynorsk ∙ norsk ∙ polski ∙ português ∙ português do Brasil ∙ русский ∙ sicilianu ∙ slovenčina ∙ slovenščina ∙ svenska ∙ ไทย ∙ Türkçe ∙ українська ∙ Tiếng Việt ∙ 简体中文‎ ∙ 繁體中文‎ ∙ +/−

This media may be deleted.

A file that you have uploaded to Wikimedia Commons, File:Wolf Creek Research Basin (9316).jpg, is missing information about where it comes from or who created it, which is needed to verify its copyright status. Please edit the file description and add the missing information, or the file may be deleted.

If you created the content yourself, enter {{Own}} as the source. If you did not add a licensing template, you must add one. You may use, for example, {{self|GFDL|cc-by-sa-all}} or {{Cc-zero}} to release certain rights to your work.

If someone else created the content, or if it is based on someone else's work, the source should be the address to the web page where you found it, the name and ISBN of the book you scanned it from, or similar. You should also name the author, provide verifiable information to show that the content is in the public domain or has been published under a free license by its author, and add an appropriate template identifying the public domain or licensing status, if you have not already done so. Warning: Wikimedia Commons takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing.

Please add the required information for this and other files you have uploaded before adding more files. If you need assistance, please ask at the help desk. Thank you!

Leoboudv (talk) 22:16, 1 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @Leoboudv. Thank you for flagging this. I presume the issue with this image was the the flickr link pointed to the wrong image? Ive corrected the flickr link in the Source field. The name of the photographer is clearly stated in the template and the Exif so hopefully the image is ok now, but let me know if there is still a problem with this. Many thanks! Jason.nlw (talk) 08:49, 2 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: I have removed the no source found template and reviewed the image now. Best, --Leoboudv (talk) 08:52, 2 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Great. Thanks very much! Jason.nlw (talk) 08:57, 2 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

User talk:Jason.nlw

User page redirect[edit]

Replied[edit]

Deleting a previous version[edit]

File:Beaumaris.jpeg and others[edit]

File:Interior of Tintern Abbey.jpeg[edit]

File:Landaff castle, Glamorganshire.jpeg[edit]

File:Lawhaden Castle.jpeg[edit]

File:Llanffey Court.jpeg[edit]

File:Maenor Pyr 1 March 1806.jpeg[edit]

Copyright status: File:Haverford West castle, (with the Priory) Pembrokeshire Octr 1 1824.jpeg[edit]

File:Goodwych Pier - near Fishguard, Pembrokeshire- Novr 1 1814.jpeg[edit]

File:Gwrych - near Abergele, Denbighshire.jpeg[edit]

File:Pig-sty at Holywell, N.W.jpeg[edit]

Image categorisation[edit]

National Library of Wales[edit]

Copyright status: File:1868 wanted poster.jpg[edit]

Turner[edit]

Valued Image Promotion[edit]

Valued Image Promotion[edit]

Valued Image Promotion[edit]

File:The church & pool, Tal-y-elin i.e. Tal-y-llyn, north Wales.jpeg[edit]

File:Shane Williams - David Griffiths.jpg[edit]

File:John Thomas (Photographer).jpg[edit]

File:Cardiff castle, Glamorganshire (1133761).jpg[edit]

Category:Sain (Records) Ltd[edit]

Sain uploads[edit]

Licence query[edit]

Notification about possible deletion[edit]

Uwchlwythiad bendigedig![edit]

Files released by Sain[edit]

Expiry of GWToolset user group memberships[edit]

File:Katyusha - Colin Jones Singers.ogg[edit]

File:(2) Катюша.ogv[edit]

File:NLW South Readig Room.jpg[edit]

For your info[edit]

License for artworks in the public domain[edit]

different items with the same accession number[edit]

Thank you for contributing to Wiki Loves Monuments UK 2019![edit]

Thank you for participating in Wiki Loves Monuments 2019! Please help with this survey.[edit]

Invitation to participate in Wiki Loves Monuments 2019 Participant Survey (Reminder)[edit]

MOTD Notification[edit]

MOTD Notification[edit]

Thank you for participating in Wiki Loves Monuments 2020! Please help with this survey[edit]

MOTD Notification[edit]

Alexander Lindsay[edit]

Pics etc[edit]

Quality Image Promotion[edit]

Wici'r Holl ddaear a ballu[edit]

Category:Pages using Artwork template with incorrect parameter[edit]

Category:Wicipics crowd project[edit]

File:20th Century collage.jpg[edit]

Helo, a oes bosib / Hello, is there a possibility[edit]

Thank you for participating in Wiki Loves Monuments 2022! Please help with this survey[edit]

An unfree Flickr license was found on File:Vertical Orchard (1111).jpg[edit]

File:Earthship building (1066).jpg[edit]

File:Aerial view, a torrent of water, flooding in Colorado (1592).jpg[edit]

File:California wildfires (1097).jpg[edit]

File:Honda Columbia after heavy rains and flooding, boat transport (1652).jpg[edit]

Wiki Loves Wales[edit]

File:Low water levels in Lake Mead (9247).jpg[edit]

File:Unidentified house (4601531906).jpg[edit]

File:Marshall Islands (1017).jpg[edit]

Capeli Abertyleri gan Martin Ridley[edit]

File:Mature woman seated in her home, submerged in deep water, smoking a cigarette,in flood conditions (1835).jpg[edit]

File:Rhianva - the marine residence of Sir John Hey Williams Bart.jpeg[edit]

File source is not properly indicated: File:Wolf Creek Research Basin (9316).jpg[edit]

Navigation menu

Search