User talk:Jcb/archive/20

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

A barnstar for you![edit]

The Admin's Barnstar
You are the best. Artix Kreiger (talk) 00:34, 1 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Suffragists and suffragettes[edit]

Re your deletion of the Suffragists category:

  • 23:21, 1 March 2018 Jcb (talk | contribs) deleted page Category:Suffragists ((incorrectly named) duplicate, content moved to Category:Suffragettes)

There is a huge difference between suffragists and suffragettes and the two terms are not synonymous. Suffragists were those who campaigned for the vote for women through constitutional means (lobbying politicians, marching, etc); suffragettes were the militant individuals and organisations who in today's eyes would be referred to as domestic terrorism. They campaigned by the use of arson, violence and breaking the law. As Commons now completely re-writes history to lump all campaigners for women's suffrage as being law breakers, could you reverse your deletion? - SchroCat (talk) 16:19, 2 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Pmau: requested deletion, I just deleted an empty cat. Pmay, SchroCat, could you discuss this with eachother? Of course a category can be undeleted or recreated if that's the outcome. Jcb (talk) 17:37, 2 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
It was only empty because Pmau had gone through and re-categorised the images that were there. Pmau, on what basis did you move the files and request deletion? As you can see from my comment above, these are two different classifications of people (although there is some overlap) and the suffragists pre-date the suffragettes by anything up to 150 years (depending on which thread of the movement you look at). - SchroCat (talk) 11:08, 3 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Hello @SchroCat: , I went to the category as it was uncategorized. I thought it's content was identical to the Suffragettes so I merged the two. Of course, your arguments are perfectly ok to recreate the initial category. In that case, please add some parent categories to it. Pmau (talk) 11:12, 3 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
I have restored the category, so that this can be fixed. Jcb (talk) 12:04, 3 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Many thanks to you both. Cheers - SchroCat (talk) 14:40, 3 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Please restore[edit]

…Category:BSicon/stations and stops, as it is not empty. -- Tuválkin ✉ ✇ 19:48, 2 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

✓ Done - Jcb (talk) 12:01, 3 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Can I add 1400, 1500, 1600, 1700, and 1800 to the mix? Evrik (talk) 17:49, 7 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Evrik: ✓ Done - Jcb (talk) 22:02, 7 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

What about 1492? Evrik (talk) 15:56, 8 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

✓ Done - Jcb (talk) 16:09, 8 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Library of Congress images[edit]

Hi, a few minutes ago you deleted a series of pre-1923 public domain images loaded from the Library of Congress. All had LCCNs in their filenames. Could you undelete these please? I received no notification about any problem with these files, I do not even have a list of them. Obviously the fact that someone tagged them as no license was never something I was going to be able to fix. Thanks --Fæ (talk) 13:36, 3 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

There is something weird with these uploads, the first edit seems to be oversighted?!? I will undelete the files within the next few minutes. About 30 files seem to be involved. Jcb (talk) 13:56, 3 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
I am going to undelete some more files from different uploaders and I posted a message at Commons:Administrators'_noticeboard#Weird_bug_in_uploads. Jcb (talk) 14:06, 3 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
I will reply there, now I can see a file. --Fæ (talk) 14:09, 3 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

File:Lesse-Ootchamp.jpg[edit]

What a strange idea to propose this photo for deletion. I made this photo years ago, and as all photos i make, i give them to wikipedia. We should be careful with proposals for deletion, and prevent from integrism and applying with excessive zeal the rules.— Flamenc (talk) 16:59, 4 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Are you Lucyin Mahin or Franco Pernoli or neither of the two? Your statements are contradicting. Jcb (talk) 17:20, 4 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Sorting out with the involved users[edit]

Did you try it—with respect to https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=File:It%27s_Just_Like_Watching_3D_(22417200813).jpg&action=history&offset=20180227&limit=8 —with Tm (talk · contribs) before blocking him? You make some good job on this site, but just an advice from an old experienced person… don’t strive for prominence nowadays for every pretext possible, if you hold your position in esteem. Incnis Mrsi (talk) 18:03, 4 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I did try and you know. Jcb (talk) 18:04, 4 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Don’t care much about your disputes in 2017. But remember well how you accused me of vandalism—an unambiguous personal attack given all the circumstances and context—and leaving an unspecified “mess” (some irritating red links in daily logs, perhaps?) without ever trying to discuss it. Whereas you react angrily to the verb “to bark”. You are one of the worst candidates to a position of etiquette professor here due to obvious, striking double standard. Proceed with deletion of copyvio further and leave etiquette for people minimally qualified in it. I expect you to ignore my advices and then be upset due to perceived indignities from hands and boots of the Commons community after some months, a year, or two… but these eventual problems are yours, not mine. Incnis Mrsi (talk) 07:41, 5 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
The closure of your abusive topic at AN/U was an admin action, not some etiquette thing. Please be aware that such behaviour will no longer be tolerated. Jcb (talk) 16:46, 5 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

OTRS permission[edit]

Hi! What happened with Commons:Deletion requests/Files in Category:OTRS received as of 4 March 2018? You deleted the files without checking the ticket (and the "received" OTRS tag can be added by no-OTRS users).

Can you please restore them all (I'll confirm the permission afterwards). Thanks --Ruthven (msg) 15:53, 5 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I will restore them, but no, {OTRS received} can not be used by an non OTRS agent. Only a {OTRS pending} tag can be used by anybody. Also most of the files where reuploads of recently deleted files, which is not allowed either. Jcb (talk) 16:49, 5 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, but if they were deleted, and obtained OTRS permission, the re-upload can be understood. I'll change the boilerplate for asking the users to add the {OTRS pending}, it's common practice in certain queues to ask the uploader to add them because it makes the work easier. In any case, thank you; I'm confirming the OTRS permission right away. --Ruthven (msg) 17:20, 5 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Ok, as far as I can see all files have been restored. Jcb (talk) 17:25, 5 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

restore image to Trevor McDougall[edit]

Hi, on the 30th January you removed the image Trevor-McDougall.jpg from the page for Trevor McDougall. I am the owner of this image and I filled in the copyright form which allows the use of the image.

This is a copy of the email I sent to OTRS

I hereby affirm that I, Paul Barker, am the creator and/or sole owner of the exclusive copyright of the media work https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Trevor-McDougall.jpg.

I agree to publish the above-mentioned work under the Creative Commons CC0 1.0 Universal. I acknowledge that by doing so I grant anyone the right to use the work, even in a commercial product or otherwise, and to modify it according to their needs, provided that they abide by the terms of the license and any other applicable laws.

I am aware that this agreement is not limited to Wikipedia or related sites. I acknowledge that I cannot withdraw this agreement, and that the content may or may not be kept permanently on a Wikimedia project.

Paul Barker 2018-01-31

[generated using relgen] — Preceding unsigned comment added by Paul.m.barker (talk • contribs) 04:03, 6 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Please patiently wait until an OTRS agent processes the ticket. Jcb (talk) 15:59, 6 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted photo[edit]

Dear Jcb,

Thank you for helping out on the page of the artists the Tinker Brothers. However, the photo you deleted (File:Tinker Brothers, March 2018.jpg) based on copyright violation is incorrect.

The photo comes from the artists website and Flickr page (the same page where the previous photo was published on) and they licensed it with Attribution 2.0 Generic (CC BY 2.0). The fact the image was used for interviews on their galleries websites such as Singulart and Addicted Art Gallery doesn't make it the galleries intellectual property.

Cheers, Michael — Preceding unsigned comment added by M.Smith73 (talk • contribs) 20:41, 7 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Please ask the photographer to contact OTRS. Jcb (talk) 22:04, 7 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Mix upp[edit]

You deleted File:Antwerpen Centraal kunst 1996 2.jpg but this not an uploader request to delete. Someone put a speedy delete template on file:Antwerpen Centraal kunst 1996 1.jpg. I did not agree and replaced the template to a normal delete template for discussion. (only removing the fast delete template is not done) I also added the template to the similar File:Antwerpen Centraal kunst 1996 2.jpg. The delete discussion concluded with the status kept. Can you undelete the file? And please always if there are similar files.Smiley.toerist (talk) 21:12, 8 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I see. I have restored the file. Jcb (talk) 21:31, 8 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

rafax pictures[edit]

Oh, I was just doing that by hand, (adding "own work" that was missing in my pics) to happily find out that you have just done it before myself. Thank you very much indeed. ̴̴̴̴ — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rafax (talk • contribs) 17:36, 10 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

You are welcome! Jcb (talk) 17:37, 10 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted Photo - Persimmon Blackbridge[edit]

Permission from copyright holder was send to OTRS on 3 March, 2018. No response yet. Possible to revert deletion until May 2018? OTRS backlog is 35 days. See this thread. Seazzy (talk) 21:19, 11 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

No. The file will be undeleted by an OTRS agent if the permission is valid. Jcb (talk) 22:36, 11 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Undelete categories[edit]

I notice you closed Commons:Deletion requests/File:Beatrice (Routenburn, Svithoid) under sail.jpg, after having commented that "it won't be safely out of copyright in the US until 1925+95+restofyear=1 January 2021." I trust you in that, but it means the image should be restored in three years. I now added the DR to Category:Undelete in 2021, but there is no guarantee anybody knowledgeable is around – except the administrator. Thus closing administrators should take care of adding the undelete category.

Have I misunderstood something? Are these categories not known by administrators?

--LPfi (talk) 10:33, 12 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Another image of the safe ship was deleted as "no permission since": File:Bow Of Beatrice (Routenburn, Svithoid) Taken At Sea From Jib Boom End.tif. Should that file also be restored? --LPfi (talk) 10:35, 12 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
The comment in the DR was from another user. And no, it's not the responsibily of closing admins to add undeletion categories. Jcb (talk) 16:22, 12 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

File:Загорська Людмила Михайлівна.jpg[edit]

На фото Загорська Людмила Михайлівна.jpg зображена саме Загорська Людмила Михайлівна і саме для статті у Вікіпедії про Загорську Людмилу Михайлівну То, в чому проблема? Думаю, що першочерговий власник фото, це людина, яка на фото зображена. Чи не так? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Omeland47 (talk • contribs) 14:05, 12 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Normally the photographer is the copyright holder, not the depicted person. The photographer can contact OTRS to provide evidence of permission. Jcb (talk) 16:24, 12 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Restore A banda da Loba photo, please![edit]

Hi Jcb! You've deleted "A_Banda_Da_Loba.JPEG.jpg" last saturday morning. It´s my fault. I'm so sorry because I uploaded that photo before her owner, Xiana Lastra Pernas, sent the authorisation by mail to permissions-es@wikimedia.org. She's done it saturday evening, so could you restore the photo, please? Thank you. --Moniquiña (talk) 16:59, 12 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Please wait patiently until an OTRS agent handles the ticket. Jcb (talk) 17:03, 12 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The PD photos[edit]

Thanks for considering deletion with the files. I uploaded them myself and was ignorant about the issues with PD images on flickr. I sadly don't speak the same language as the uploader so I can't obtain permission. 18:03, 12 March 2018 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 100cellsman (talk • contribs) 18:03, 12 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Ok. 'Public Domain Mark' at Flickr most of the time means that the Flickr uploader has no clue at all about copyright regulations, unfortunately. Jcb (talk) 22:43, 12 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

18:14, 12 March 2018‎ Filedelinkerbot (talk | contribs)‎ . . (4,964 bytes) (-74)‎ . . (Bot: Removing Commons:File:Ossowski.jpg (en). It was deleted on Commons by Jcb (Copyright violation; see Commons:Commons:Licensing).)[edit]

Hi

Stanislaw Ossowski was my uncle and I'm pretty sure nobody in Poland could have something against, to put Stanislaw picture to his Wikipedia page. Could be possible you recover deleted picture?

thank you

netizentech — Preceding unsigned comment added by Netizentech (talk • contribs) 18:30, 12 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Permission from the photographer will be needed. Jcb (talk) 22:45, 12 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Custom license tag[edit]

I'm highly interested in reading the rule you're referring to. Thanks. --Code (talk) 19:05, 12 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Explaned at your user talk page. Jcb (talk) 22:46, 12 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Re: Copyvio taggings[edit]

I have a doubt. The author of the drawings has been dead for more than 70 years but his work has not been published until 1997. So, all the drawings contained in the book are in the public domain even when the book itself is protected by copyright? Thanks. Durero (talk) 20:29, 12 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The official position taken by the Wikimedia Foundation is that "faithful reproductions of two-dimensional public domain works of art are public domain". If you want to know more background information on this subject, this is an interesting page: Commons:When to use the PD-Art tag. Jcb (talk) 21:31, 12 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Why has my stuff been deleted for no reason?[edit]

@Jcb: Pictures taken of the Madsen M50, LVF flag and CIRA mural where pictures i had personally taken myself. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ulsternorthman (talk • contribs) 23:14, 12 March 2018 (UTC) ~Ulsternorthman[reply]

You own the copyright of the photographs you took. You do not own the copyright of the original murals, so as derivative works, they cannot be hosted on Commons. Rodhullandemu (talk) 23:26, 12 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry, but that is wrong. There is freedom of panorama in the UK, so photos of murals from Northern Ireland don't need any additional permission. Apart from that, FOP issues always require a full deletion discussion and are not eligible for speedy deletion. That said, why was the image of the Madsen gun deleted? I can't find any identical photo online. De728631 (talk) 01:06, 13 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
PS: Actually "graphic works" such as "any painting, drawing, ..." etc. are not covered by FOP in the UK but this should still have been subject of a deletion discussion. De728631 (talk) 01:16, 13 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
FOP in the UK applies only to 3D works, so photos of non-free murals are automatically copyright violations speediable without discussion, and indeed on sight. Happens all the time with, e.g. tourist site information boards. Rodhullandemu (talk) 01:39, 13 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Well, let me cite Jcb himself: "Also FOP issues are not a valid reason for speedy deletion." [1] "FOP issues always need a regular DR. I consider you informed of that from now." [2] De728631 (talk) 02:12, 13 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
That's only when FOP is a moot issue. 2D copyrighted images don't benefit from FOP in the UK. Therefore, they are copyright violations and deletable on sight. End of. Rodhullandemu (talk) 02:25, 13 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Then please update and extend Commons:Criteria for speedy deletion#File No. 3 where it says "This does not include freedom of panorama cases." De728631 (talk) 02:38, 13 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The user uploaded some copyvios and one file the was not necessarily a copyvio. In such cases we normally flush everything as a precaution. After that, uploader reuploaded 3 of the files, which leaded to a warning. Jcb (talk) 15:28, 13 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Leutwein[edit]

Dear Jcb, I would like to ask you a question. You proposed this photograph for deletion. After discussion, the file was kept. After that decision you added a short sentence to the metadata: unknown copyright situation, do not reuse! That is very unusual. I would like to ask you to remove this sentence. If you really think this photograph from about 1900 should be deleted, please file a new request for deletion. Vysotsky (talk) 15:59, 13 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, the best option is that an admin deletes a file is the copyright situation is unclear. Unfortunately sometimes that cannot be reached. Then the second best is to at least take care of our reusers, by warning them about the unknown copyright situation. Jcb (talk) 16:12, 13 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Virtuality Gaming Edit-Please restore[edit]

Hello, In February you deleted images from https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Virtuality_(gaming)&action=history for Copyright Violations. I represent Johnathan Walden the owner of Virtuality and owner of the images and we would like our images restored.

Can you please let me know what we need to do or what info you require to undo these edits and restore our images. Would be greatly appreciated.

Thank you

HMansfield — Preceding unsigned comment added by Hmansfield (talk • contribs) 18:31, 13 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The best thing to do is to contact OTRS. If an OTRS agent concludes that there is a valid permission, the agent will take care of undeletion. Please be aware that OTRS has a backlog. Jcb (talk) 21:13, 13 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

File:Shoulder joint-ar/es.svg[edit]

Accidentally on add {{Inkscape}} I deleted the license. Solved. Thanks. --Jmarchn (talk) 19:11, 13 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

No problem, thanks for fixing. Jcb (talk) 21:13, 13 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Soraya Peerbave[edit]

Hello. Please restore File:Soraya Peerbave - 2016 (DanH-7681) (cropped).jpg because it is a cropped version of File:Soraya_Peerbave_-_2016_(DanH-7681).jpg which has the proper OTRS permission.

Thanks! // sikander { talk } 15:32, 14 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Done. In the future please don't tag such crops with {OTRS pending}, because this tag will lead to deletion if nothing happens. Jcb (talk) 15:38, 14 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

File:Logo Bayerischer Wald-Verein.JPG[edit]

Hi Jcb, not sure why this was a copyvio. It was a photograph of the logo used by the subject of the article - the Bavarian Forest Club. I thought that was always permitted because it is directly relevant to the article. See Coca Cola for example. --Bermicourt (talk) 19:50, 15 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

"always permitted because it is directly relevant to the article" - this sounds like a Fair Use rationale. At Wikimedia Commons we don't allow Fair Use, but some versions of Wikipedia, including English Wikipedia, allow local uploads of Fair Use. Regarding the Coca Cola logo, this is considered to be below the threshold of originality, so that it can be accepted with {{PD-textlogo}}. Jcb (talk) 21:45, 15 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Restore Picture to Wikimedia Commons[edit]

Hello!

The photographer who owns this photo added it to wikipedia commons. why was it deleted? and what does he need to do to restore it?

https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Gabmaster-_La_Bouche_(2).jpg

what does he need to do to keep it in commons. he is the owner of the photograph.

http://www.gabmaster.com/home.aspx

Eurodanceguy (talk) 20:10, 16 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Please ask them to contact OTRS. Jcb (talk) 10:37, 17 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

User:Bruxellensis[edit]

You deleted the subject page without stating a reason. Please restore it, replace it with User:Bruxellensis~commonswiki, or make {{Léon van Dievoet}} for the user.   — Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me 13:08, 17 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

No. They applied an OTRS tag without being an OTRS agent. Another OTRS agent removed this tag, but the user placed it again. Jcb (talk) 23:04, 17 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Read-Only Memory[edit]

Would you please restore the following image sets deleted on 1 March 2018, 22:17 that begin with the following:

  • File:The Bitmap Brothers Universe ...
  • File:Sensible Software ...
  • File:Sega Mega Drive Genesis ...
  • File:Britsoft ...

In each case, the OTRS permissions were already secured in the ticket and linked from each file. I was between uploading the last of the batch and notifying the agent to close. czar 21:44, 17 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Please contact processing OTRS agent for this. In principle processing OTRS agent takes care of undeletion. Jcb (talk) 23:09, 17 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
And if they don't have admin privileges, make them go through the process of asking someone else anyway? Seems silly to put more onus on an already understaffed volunteer base czar 17:54, 18 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
I would have to do a lot of digging, you even did not provide full file names. An OTRS agent who handles the ticket but does not have admin rights, will simply post a request at COM:UDR. The fact that you ask my attention for the second time now for this case is in fact the kind of things that puts an unnecessary workload on the indeed understaffed admin team. Jcb (talk) 21:57, 18 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Extended content
There are dozens of files, hence why I provided the intro and the time when they were deleted. It's a complicated ticket and the files were appropriately tagged with the open ticket number. Would have been nice had they not been nuked so soon (wasn't even 30 days...) czar 02:40, 19 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
You uploaded the files on 3 February with a 29 January timestamp in the OTRS tag, so the "wasn't even 30 days" is your own fault. Processing OTRS agent asked you to write back after upload of the files, which you never did. On top of this user talk page you can read in bold: "For any questions about OTRS permissions, please visit the OTRS/Noticeboard". After your first message I asked you to contact processing OTRS agent. Instead of doing so, you decided to bother me again, with some hypothetical argument about OTRS agents without admin privileges, although in this case processing OTRS agent does have admin privileges. I told you that it's unhelpful to contact me a second time about this case and yet you decided to bother me a third time. Don't be surprised then if people are losing their patience. Jcb (talk) 15:37, 19 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Processing OTRS agent asked you to write back after upload of the files, which you never did.

...as I said, I didn't finish uploading—it's quite obviously a large ticket and I especially didn't expect the files to be deleted so soon, undoing hours of work. And didn't realize I was bothering you by asking for help, so sorry. (not watching, {{Ping}} if needed) czar 01:05, 20 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Alleged copyright infringement regarding some logos of Italian political parties[edit]

Hi, I saw that you proceeded to delete my two following files for alleged copyright infringement: File:Forza Italia simbolo politiche 2018.svg and File:Lega simbolo politiche 2018.svg. Well, since in the following category (Category:Logos of political parties in Italy) there are many other similar examples, I ask that these files be deleted as well. Otherwise I would like to know the differences between my case and other similar cases. Thank you Vajotwo (post) 19:22, 18 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

If you think a file should be deleted, nominate it for deletion using the 'nominate for deletion' link from the left menu. I am not going through 45 million files to look for comparable cases every time I delete a file. Jcb (talk) 22:00, 18 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Missing license[edit]

Hello Jcb, hope you are doing well. I must admit, I'm a bit confused with your edit summary here - how are the files now missing a license due to that edit? The only change was to convert http to the secure https protocol. Thank you. Jon Kolbert (talk) 08:19, 23 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

If I understand correctly the hyperlink (with http) is on the image description page and the template selects the license template based on the hyperlink found at the image description pages. I must say I cannot remember that I have seen this construction before. @Multichill: any thoughts? Jcb (talk) 10:34, 23 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Ah, I think I see. In any case, it should be OK to remain that way. The focus was to get the pages in userspace treated as templates to have HTTPS links to creativecommons.org and gnu.org. The way this userspace template is set up may be odd, but the "visble" links for CC/GNU all seem to be HTTPS. Thanks for your vigilance. Jon Kolbert (talk) 17:15, 23 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
@Jon Kolbert and Jcb: templates like User:Multichill/Europeana (more in Category:Data ingestion layout templates) are supposed to be substituted. I usually upload a bunch of files, tweak the template a bit more and than substitute it. Last step seems to have forgotten here. I'll check and substitute it so it won't be used on files anymore. Multichill (talk) 11:31, 24 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Commons:Deletion requests/Files uploaded by Michedomi[edit]

Two files were not deleted. Please take a look. --EugeneZelenko (talk) 14:11, 23 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the notification! Delreqhandler is a bit wonky at the moment. Deleted. Jcb (talk) 15:21, 23 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Photos deleted from wikipedia commons. why?[edit]

Hello Jcb. I see that you deleted a file on wikipedia commons

File:Gabmaster- La Bouche (2).jpg

File:Lane_McCray_-_Dreamer_-_Gabmaster_Photography.jpg

Why was this file deleted? the photographer who 'owns' the photo uploaded the file into commons and emailed his consent to use the photo to commons.

what was done incorrectly to cause its deletion from commons and what steps must he follow to prevent this from happening again?

Dancemusicfan (talk) 17:15, 23 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

If permission was sent to OTRS, patiently wait until an OTRS agent processes the ticket. Don't reupload the files. Jcb (talk) 17:18, 23 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
I will ask the phtogorapher to send a 'consent' email in the proper format again with the photos attached. once he does this..how will he know when he receives a 'ticket' to track things?Dancemusicfan (talk) 18:14, 23 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
The system normally sends an autoconfirmation of receival. Jcb (talk) 22:41, 23 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The licence issue of File:Military service mark of the United States Army.svg[edit]

Hello, Jcb. I knew from the licence issue of File:Military service mark of the United States Army.svg. Now it's author Josedar as it own wor put a licence. Now it can be removed the licence issue tag?--173.228.198.166 01:12, 24 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, but now I started a normal DR. We don't need hobby creations of CoA's if we have also the official version. Jcb (talk) 21:51, 24 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Images for Violet Ann Bland[edit]

Hi, I appreciate you're doing a good job policing the site, but I'm a newbie here and I thought I was doing everything I should. So help and guidance would be appreciated although I realise that's not your job.

Still, I was sent these files by the family member who owns the objects and who sent them with the express purpose of putting them on the site. I can't see how, other than me saying that, I can prove it. The images are not anywhere on the Internet, so I can't give a link to them. I copied the permissions info for another image on Bland's page. That image is still there, but mine aren't?

Could you kindly restore them or help me understand what I need to do? I've been to the help page and it's all gobbledegook. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Wikiwrangler (talk • contribs) 09:49, 25 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Evidence of permission can be provided via OTRS. Don't reupload the files yourself. Jcb (talk) 10:06, 25 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, that's the one. Completely meaningless gibberish. Click on the help link and get an empty page. :-( — Preceding unsigned comment added by Wikiwrangler (talk • contribs) 11:08, 25 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Half werk?[edit]

Hallo Jcb, ik zag je edit en liep me af te vragen: heeft de auteur zich bij jou gemeld m.b.t. deze afbeelding of kende je hem/haar voorheen? Mocht hij/zij zich bij jou hebben gemeld na mijn bewerking, bevestigt dit namelijk mijn stelling dat de beste mogelijkheid om een en ander te bewegen is en blijft: morrelen aan het geheel en dan beweegt er (somsuiteindelijk) wel iéts. :) Thank you for your time. Lotje (talk) 04:00, 26 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Nee, dat 'morrelen' van jou zadelt anderen met onnodig werk op. De informatie stond gewoon op de pagina, maar jij vergat die netjes over te nemen in de juiste velden. Hierdoor kwamen deze afbeeldingen terecht in Category:Images without source. Dit is een probleem-category waar ik al een hele tijd mee bezig ben, maar dat is dweilen met de kraan open als er mensen op deze manier gaan 'morrelen'. Moraal van dit verhaal: Doe het goed of blijf er vanaf. Jcb (talk) 14:40, 26 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Nee, ik vergat niet het over te nemen, ik was alleen niet zeker of de informatie wel correct was. Conclusie: zelfs wanneer ik twijfel aan de correctheid, toch de inhoud neerpoten waar ik meen dat ze hoort? Capice!
Heb je misschien tijd en zin hier eens te kijken? :) Lotje (talk) 12:09, 27 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Als de gegevens er staan, dan horen die gewoon in het sjabloon. Als de gegevens er niet staan, of onwaarschijnlijk lijken, nomineer het bestand dan voor verwijdering. Jcb (talk) 14:30, 27 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

/* Oui, j'ai l'autorisation de la photographie officielle de Annelise Théodoloz sous le nom de photographe LP1_4127_by_Lucie_Poirier et dont Wikimedia Commons a reçu en mail l'autorisation signée et daté du 20 mars 2018 de Mme Poirier et qui a été envoyée à Mme Annelise Théodoloz qui me l'a remise */[edit]

Bonjour,

Je suis Naam144 et je vous ai envoyé une autorisation de la photographe Lucie Poirier qui a photographié Madame Annelise Théodoloz, Cantatrice, ma cliente et cette dernière a demandé à Madame Poirier une attention de publication en licence libre qui a été accordée et signée par la photographe en date du 20 mars 2018.

La photographie qui avait initialement était importée et téléversée sous le nom de Annelise Théodoloz.jpg a été nouvellement importée et téléversée sous son nom officiel de LP1_4127_by_Lucie_Poirier qui est toujours la même photographie mais avec son nom officiel.

J'ai fait le nécessaire aujourd'hui 26 mars 2018 pour modifier le brouillon:Naam144, avant publication, afin de la remettre. Le processus n'a pu aboutir, je vous saurais gré de bien vouloir avoir l'amabilité extrême de me laisser la publié et ce, étant donné que tout a été fait dans les règles de l'art et conformément à toutes les indications demandées par Wikipédia et Wikimedia Commons.

Merci d'avance pour libérer la publication de ladite photographie.

Avec mes salutations empressées,

--Naam144 (talk) 17:20, 26 March 2018 (UTC)Naam144[reply]

If you have sent permission to OTRS, please patiently wait until an OTRS agent handles the ticket. Jcb (talk) 20:34, 26 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Bonjour Jcb, Entendu, je patiente. Cela fait déjà une semaine que j'ai envoyé, est-ce habituel comme délai ou ai-je à réitérer auprès de OTRS ? Merci Bonne soirée,

--Naam144 (talk) 14:01, 27 March 2018 (UTC)Naam144[reply]

Oui, un ou deux mois est normal. Jcb (talk) 14:27, 27 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Merci de cette précision. Bonne soirée

--Naam144 (talk) 17:28, 28 March 2018 (UTC)Naam144[reply]

Please restore[edit]

Hi! Please, restore it! See the page. Thanks.--Nickispeaki (talk) 21:37, 26 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Contact OTRS as you have been told. Jcb (talk) 21:38, 26 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
I don't undestand. Author must to write a letter? Is it correct?--Nickispeaki (talk) 21:42, 26 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, the author will have to send permission to OTRS. Jcb (talk) 21:43, 26 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
What about other pics? I'm not shure about easy way to contact by email with Lytvynenko... --Nickispeaki (talk) 21:45, 26 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Click on the word OTRS and read the instructions. Jcb (talk) 21:46, 26 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Ok, but Lyvynenko is 91 years old and he didn't have even PC... Ok I told Iryna about OTRS.--Nickispeaki (talk) 13:28, 30 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

inappropriate comments on an image[edit]

Hi, following a dispute over dimensions on https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:MTA_NYC_Bus_B32_bus_turning_onto_21st_St.jpg . i was changing the dimensions to 800 by 600 for a site where other images are like that but got some rather inappropriate comments given in the change summary when i reverted numerous times. Please take dicplinary action to prevent this type of language from occurring in Commons in the future. Olsen24 (talk) 22:18, 27 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

(talk page stalker) @Olsen24: This rude comment was uncalled for, but you on the other hand are shortly before getting blocked for edit warring. I have reverted your version of the image and left an explanation there. De728631 (talk) 22:29, 27 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
FYI, I have also redacted the inappropriate summaries and warned Mtattrain not to make any such comments. De728631 (talk) 22:37, 27 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Olsen24, I fail to see what I have to do with this file. Also you are indeed wrong by overwriting the file with a lower resolution version. Don't do that. Jcb (talk) 15:06, 28 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
You are an administrator and i was informing you of an issue which involved inappropriate language on the site. Also it has occurred again at the file below.
https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:MTA_NYC_Bus_M42_bus_at_5th_Ave_%26_42nd_St.jpg Olsen24 (talk) 19:36, 1 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
This is my personal user talk page, not the Administrators' noticeboard. Jcb (talk) 19:37, 1 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Polish 1946 banknotes[edit]

Hi, As the deleting admin, could you please give your opinion? Commons:Undeletion requests/Current requests#Polish 1946 banknotes. Should we restore these if PD in Poland, but URAA applies? Thanks, Yann (talk) 13:30, 1 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

✓ Done, thanks for the notification. Jcb (talk) 14:08, 1 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Notification of suspension[edit]

For overuse of deletions, you have made admin policy useful. Your access to administrator tools have been suspended for the 1st of April.

Best regards, Artix Kreiger (talk) 14:42, 1 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Would like to submit additional images and information[edit]

Hello, Thank you for your help with the Virtuality gaming article. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Virtuality_(gaming)

We have additional info and images that we would like to submit to be added to the article. These are our images and we release them under Creative Commons, and all information is accurate as we are also the owners of Virtuality.

frame|The Head4Head VR flight game was a fully networked interactive jump jet simulator. The consoles allowed outsiders to watch the action from a third person perspective and for users to re-play their game afterward. The system was sold for $100,000 to theme parks and dedicated game centers.

frame|The Virtuality Data Glove, 1990, allowed users to directly interact with virtual models. It used strain sensors molded overtop fingers allowing real time interaction

frame|Legend Quest, a dungeons and dragons game, winner of the CyberEdge Journal VR product of the year award 1993, was a multi-player interactive Role Play Game and drew a strong “club” following at the Location Based Entertainment center in Nottingham England – home of Robin Hood.

frame|The Stand Up (SU 2000) Virtuality system was the strongest selling VR system. Launched in 1996 it surpassed its predecessor the SU 1000 and provided many improvements especially lowered cost. However, to cut costs, the system did not have stereo vision which was a floored product decision, especially for games like Dactyl Nightmare, as users could no longer see their body parts in 3D – part of the magic driving the immersive VR user experience

thumb|Key Software and Design Animation team members Adrian Sheppard and Graham Patten, later went on to build distinguished careers, Graham founding a successful VR marketing agency and Adrian at Nvidia computer graphics chip company, in Silicon Valley

If there are issues or you need additional information please feel free to contact me.

Please contact OTRS to provided evidence of permission. For now the only thing I could do is deletion for 'copyright violation', becaused the files have been published before on the web without a free license. Jcb (talk) 21:31, 2 April 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:


Yours sincerely, CoCoCounty97 (talk) 00:59, 3 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]


This could be INeverCry? Empty account activates for visual file change. Nomiates things for deletion.Artix Kreiger (talk) 01:02, 3 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Reinstating image - permissions now available[edit]

JCB, permission is available for https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=File:On_the_ground-_Cora_(prototype)_in_California._Photo_by_Thomas_Heinser..jpg&action=edit&redlink=1

Please advise whether image needs to be reloaded/recreated in Wikicommons, or provide a link so permission can be submitted.

Thanks Nanosecond — Preceding unsigned comment added by Nanosecond (talk • contribs) 22:10, 3 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Reinstating another image - permission was provided[edit]

Permission was provided for this image - see below (but using a different title for the image) https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=File:Flying-_Cora_(prototype)_in_New_Zealand._Photo_by_Richard_Lord.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1

Can this image please be reinstated using the file name above. Or advise what further action is required. Thomas Heinser 2018-03-19 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Nanosecond (talk • contribs) 22:24, 3 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Do not reupload the file. Patiently wait until an OTRS agent handles the ticket. Jcb (talk) 14:41, 4 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Image review request[edit]

A few weeks ago you deleted several images based on this deletion request. They recently uploaded File:Vivek_Verma.png, same name as a file on that request. Is that the same file? Thanks! Ravensfire (talk) 15:44, 4 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Not the same file, but apparent copyvio as well. Deleted. Jcb (talk) 15:48, 4 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
I'm shocked, shocked! to hear that. Thank you. Ravensfire (talk) 15:52, 4 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Tilopa image deletion[edit]

At first glance this seemed rather petty. Are you using a copyvio algo to find these? Is there no scope for querying the copyright holder to request special permission? And could you perhaps address such questions briefly on the Talk page when you do these deletions? Many thanks. Cliffewiki (talk) 22:27, 5 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

In case of grabbed from the web files we delete as 'copyvio' without further formalities. We are flooded with hundreds of copyright violations everyday and many files slip through because we have not enough people dealing with them. It's not reasonable to request that we try to get permission for all those files. That's simply undoable. Jcb (talk) 22:46, 5 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Can you please restore[edit]

Hi. Can you please restore the files You deleted:

  • File:Moshe Amirav - Western Wall 1967.jpg
  • File:Moshe amirav - Temple Mount 1967.jpg

I've already sent the licenses. Meanwhile I can add {{OTRS pending}}. Thanks. יאיר צפורי (talk) 18:48, 6 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

No, please patiently wait until an OTRS agent handles the ticket. Jcb (talk) 19:03, 6 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Rollback[edit]

Sorry, this was me dozing off. I have coffee now. -- Tuválkin ✉ ✇ 19:12, 6 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

No problem. I was already in the assumption that this was not your intention. Jcb (talk) 19:14, 6 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Image deleted - https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Asker_Ali_Abiyev.jpg[edit]

Please let me know how I can restore (or replace) the image. I was requested to provide "a photo of Asker Aliyev [Ali Abiyev] for wikipedia usage", along with "a suitable license and description". I wasn't able to figure out what license or description would consist of. I can ask Dr. Abiyev to send a professional photo of himself (I'm in regular contact with him), but I'm not sure how one would provide any sort of license for something of that nature. Thank you & appreciate the feedback Yusif

PS I can be reached at yusifalizada@gmail.com — Preceding unsigned comment added by Yusifalizada (talk • contribs) 19:25, 8 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

For our licensing rules, see here. If you have a good picture, please ask the photographer to contact OTRS. Jcb (talk) 19:52, 8 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. Once I have the picture, how can I request to replace it? Also, is there a way to know where this picture URL (https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Asker_Ali_Abiyev.jpg) was used? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Yusifalizada (talk • contribs) 19:51, 22 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Undeletion can be requested here. Information about former usage is in the delinker log. Jcb (talk) 20:18, 22 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Copyright issues[edit]

Hi Johan, hope my message finds you well. Could you please tell me what copyright issues surfaced recently regarding G.D.'s self-portrait? I'am writing cause I planned to clean-upload a normal size jpeg file with a suitable descriptive name instead of all these little gifs and you kinda spooked me. Thanks, --Taterian (talk) 19:41, 9 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The problem with the deleted version was that it not only contained the portrait itself (which is Public Domain), but also the 3D frame around it. Such a picture creates separate copyright for the photographer, so that permission from the photographer is needed. This permission was missing. Jcb (talk) 21:46, 9 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
I say! --Taterian (talk) 18:04, 10 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Please restore[edit]

I have added a link to the permission for the File:Alarashi Salah FlagUp.jpg which was released by Aden news agency in 1990-05-22 - Under Yemeni law, all files released by media that are over 10 years old, automatically fall under the Creative Common license (هذه الصورة إنتجت في اليمن وهي الآن ملكية عامة حيث أن حقوق النشر الخاصة بها قد انتهت حسب القانون اليمني - بث إذاعي صحفي أنتج منذ أكثر من عامين)

A declaration of consent has been sent to permissions-commons@wikimedia.org for the file AbdulKarim Abdullah Al-Arashi.jpg

Thank you very much for understanding. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Aceat (talk • contribs) 00:26, 10 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Patiently wait until an OTRS agent handles the ticket. Jcb (talk) 14:28, 10 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Rimozione foto Nunziata Monumento[edit]

Gentile Ronhjones, volevo avvisarti che hai eliminato una fotografia, scannerizzazione di una antica cartolina, contenente a sua volta due foto di pubblico dominio raffiguranti un Monumento e una strada. La cartolina è ugualmente di pubblico dominio e le foto in essa contenute furono pubblicate più di 80 anni fa, nel 1930. Essendo materiale di promozione locale sono di libera circolazione e comunque, secondo la legislazione italiana, trattasi di materiale libero da licenze e di libera fruizione. Pregasi di ripristinare la foto e di correggerla eventualmente come è opportuno. Io avevo inserito la dicitura Free license images e Free cultural works. Qual è quella giusta? Il fotografo è anonimo , essendo antico materiale di promozione, contenente fotografie storiche, e comunque non esiste nessun copyright sul materiale, proprio perchè materiale storico. Consiglio di consultare il codice dei beni culturali italiano, pubblicato nel 2004. Inoltre essendo un Monumento della Prima Guerra Mondiale non esiste alcun diritto creativo legato allo scultore.

Can you help me to add this and restore original photo? Thanks {{PD-Italy}} {{PD-1996}}. SicilianCulturalHeritage (talk) 18:59, 10 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I am not Ronhjones and this is not the undeletion request page. Jcb (talk) 21:11, 10 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

No, sorry, I've got mixed up...but you really eliminate the file Nunziata monumento.jpg . This file respect Italian law on copyright and Cultural Heritage. See http://www.interlex.it/testi/l41_633.htm#70 .Articolo 70. Only limits are a low resolution (on internet)and prohibition of commercial use. Only didactic or scientific use. Can you help to restore image? SicilianCulturalHeritage (talk) 15:46, 11 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

These restrictions are not compatible with our licensing rules. I cannot restore the file, it's not free. Jcb (talk) 15:57, 11 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Image talk page[edit]

Hi Jcb, What do we do about this page? File talk:ABOUT-BILTU-KATHAK.jpg Ww2censor (talk) 21:36, 10 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

We flush it. Jcb (talk) 21:47, 10 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Please restore image[edit]

Hello,

You recently took down the image File:Le Trefle a Quatre Feuilles, Ou La Clef Du Bonheur.png, although I believe this image's copyright tags are completely sound. Please restore this image! Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by HCordray (talk • contribs) 23:49, 10 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Mariette Lydis died in 1970. Her work will not be PD before 1 January 2041. Jcb (talk) 14:37, 11 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Bonnenberg[edit]

Du hast am 28. Februar "Johann Heinrich Bonnenberg.jpg" gelöscht. Bonnenberg schreibt mir, dass er damals eine Lizenz des Fotografen vom Deutsch-Russichen Forum beigebracht habe. Ist dem so?--Mehlauge (talk) 16:48, 13 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Bonnenberg claimed to be the author himself, while it's obvious from the picture that this cannot be true. The real photographer is not even mentioned. Jcb (talk) 21:21, 13 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted files from Pongratz.[edit]

Hi Jcb, after the message from User:Gerfried Pongratz Peter Krasser should sent the mail at 2. february to OTRS. See here --regards K@rl (talk) 06:54, 14 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

If that permission would be valid, an OTRS agent will restore the files. Jcb (talk) 09:15, 14 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted files from FranXBSC[edit]

Hi Jcb, por favor restaura las imágenes subidas por mi usuario, estaban usadas en varias páginas de fútbol ecuatoriano, todas fueron creación mía en adobe ilustrator, el usuario que solicitó el borrado "brgesto" lo hizo por discrepancias o por otros motivos al editar la página "Copa Latina", no existen los "derechos" en esas banderas mucho menos en equipos que ya no existen, yo se de casos similares de banderas en otros países, te pido de favor las restaures, se hizo un consenso y todos los usuarios estaban muy a favor de la creación de las banderas sobre todo para una mayor experiencia del lector y mejorar wikipedia. saludos ---FranXBSC (User talk:FranXBSC) 15:09 14 abr 2018 (UTC-5)

Lo que pasa es que estas banderas no son trabajos propios, pero trabajos derivados. Así sí violan los derechos de autor de las banderas originales. Véase también: Commons:Trabajos derivados. Jcb (talk) 20:24, 14 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Y ¿qué me recomiendas para poder evitar todo este mal rato? yo veo que los escudos en sí sin banderas ni nada son usados en muchos medios de información de mi país y nadie pide derechos, no se por que aquí se borran si son aportes, yo no busco lucrarme ni nada por el estilo. ---FranXBSC (User talk:FranXBSC) 19:42 14 abr 2018 (UTC-5)

Lo recomendable es dejar de subir esos archivos. No son compatible con nuestras reglas. Jcb (talk) 20:41, 21 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Media without a source as of 4 November 2017[edit]

Hello.Since you are deleting Category:Media without a source as of 4 November 2017, There are here more than two million files its source can not be seen from that day.What's the solution?Thank you --ديفيد عادل وهبة خليل 2 (talk) 11:01, 19 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Panoramio is a separate project with separate maintenance categories. I am not involved in that project. Jcb (talk) 20:43, 21 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

사형집행 목록 파일 왜 삭제했죠?[edit]

pdf파일 한국어 파일로 된 것을 삭제한 것으로 보아 한국어 사용자 같아서 한국어로 말합니다. 저작권침해 아닙니다. 설사 내용을 변경하여 유포한다고 해도 문제될 것이 없습니다 피고인 이름이 적시된게 아니니까?Backtothe (talk) 00:51, 20 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

If you think the file should be undeleted, please request so at COM:UDR, so that a KO speaker can have a look. Jcb (talk) 20:45, 21 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Even if that file is PD (I do not think it is) that is better preserved in wikitext (well... wikitable) rather than PDF scan, imo. — regards, Revi 07:32, 23 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
PDF파일로 올렸다고 해서 저작권 침해가 되지는 않습니다. 내용이 너무 많아서 일일이 타이핑할 수 없어 부득이하게 원문을 올렸습니다 더군다나 이런 파일은 가급적 법무부로부터 받았던 공식 원본 파일을 올리는 것이 신뢰성 측면에서 적합하지 않겠습니까? 물론 텍스트 파일로 올린다고 신뢰할 수 없는 것이 되지는 않겠지만 그렇다고 해서 PDF파일로 올릴 수 없다는 것을 의미하지는 않는 것이 아닙니까?Backtothe (talk)
It seams copyvio. If you think it isn't, a KO speaker should look into it. So go to COM:UDR instead. Jcb (talk) 05:25, 27 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

file:KDNVG_project_LujinikiStation.jpg[edit]

I'm not an uploader of the file, but I used as an RS, a sort of. Would it be possible that you clarify the reasons for the file being deleted? Just for myself to avoid a similar mistake --Vаdiм (talk) 14:46, 22 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

No permission from the author of the depicted poster, which covers over 80% of the picture. Jcb (talk) 16:16, 22 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
I'm complete ignorant in these matters, but... It isn't a work of art, isn't it? It's an information notice required by the local legislation for every construction site. Is there any regulation on the Commons for this kind of images? --Vаdiм (talk) 17:51, 22 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, we have a page on this: COM:DW. Jcb (talk) 20:16, 22 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
I still don't understand something. Is every notice found on a street is considered as copyrighted? So, this one should be deleted as well File:Noto station notice.jpg? And this cannot be uploaded here? --Vаdiм (talk) 19:39, 23 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Thats correct. Only if the depicted notice is below the threshold of originality, no permission would be needed. E.g. File:Berm.jpg is fine. Jcb (talk) 19:47, 23 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
No problem, just answer my question at Commons:Deletion requests/File:Noto station notice.jpg --Vаdiм (talk) 20:36, 23 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

About St Côme et St Damien[edit]

I hope the needed informations for File:Saint Côme & Saint Damien Grandes Heures Anne de Bretagne XVIe.jpg have been provided now. Cheers.

Thanks! Jcb (talk) 16:17, 22 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Renault kent.svg[edit]

Hi there! Thank you for deleting the File:Renault kent.svg without any warning nor discussion... Could you please explain how are all these logos allowed and not the one I drew myself, and which obviously doesn't reach the threshold of originality. Please restore the file and launch a deletion request if you think it does reach the treshold. Thank you. Triton (talk) 21:47, 22 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The logo is obviously not below TOO. If it's real, it's copyvio (which is a reason for speedy rather than for regular DR). If it's fake, it doesn't belong to a Wikipedia article. Jcb (talk) 22:12, 22 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
The "chrome" effect is just there for the style. If you see the history of the picture, you can see that the first version was basically this : <> . Please explain how these symbols could be somewhat original. By the way this doesn't answer my other question: why this whole category is still there and full then? Triton (talk) 22:20, 22 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
There is a long standing consensus that such a "chrome effect" is not below TOO. About your 'other stuff exists' argument, I am not even taking a look. Please don't ask such a thing for a project with over 46M files online. Jcb (talk) 22:26, 22 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Very well oh great all-mighty administrator. Don't bother helping/answering other contributors who are only here to help the community and the commons. You couldn't be further from the Wiki original philosophy, but I suppose having some power must have that effect. Anyway I'm gonna upload the file on a specific wp, shouldn't have any problem there. Triton (talk) 10:31, 23 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

How do you verify photo permission?[edit]

If I have received a photo FROM the individual in question, what is needed to verify permission to use? Thanks! — Preceding unsigned comment added by ResearcherRobyn (talk • contribs) 17:11, 23 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

First the copyright holder in principle is the photographer, not the depicted person. Permission has to come from the photographers. Please ask those photographers to contact OTRS. Jcb (talk) 17:14, 23 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

File:Jean-Paul II et Bruno Bartoloni.png & Belluno_Maffeo_Ducoli.jpg,[edit]

Hello , Bruno Bartoloni himself has made a request via ORTS for this picture ? why is it deleted? best ..--Nicoleon (talk) 17:14, 24 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

We responded to the ticket 19 March, but we never heard anything back. Basically permission has to come from the author, not from the depicted person. Jcb (talk) 21:02, 24 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
the author is his wife who is also his assistant...--Nicoleon (talk) 05:57, 25 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
and look , one of the pictures served to his book [3] how can you imagine that it does not have permissions, thanks --Nicoleon (talk) 06:35, 26 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
The fact that a picture is published somewhere, does not mean that it has a license compatible with COM:L. Anyway, there is an OTRS ticket, so it does not make sense to discuss the file here as well. Jcb (talk) 15:00, 26 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Uploading copy-right images even after multiple warnings.[edit]

Hi Jcb, Sagnickacharya (talk · contribs) has again uploaded images which have a Copy-right violations. This was after your warning on their talk page. I have already marked their uploads with the appropriate tag for deletion. Maybe another warning or a short term block is warranted. Thanks. Adamgerber80 (talk) 18:53, 25 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I blocked them for a week. Jcb (talk) 20:55, 25 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Portrait photo of Herman Daly[edit]

Hello, Administrator Jcb. I'm concerned that you deleted the portrait photo of Herman Daly on 22 April. For your information, the source of the file is this page, and the file is licensed by the Center for the Advancement of the Steady State Economy under a Creative Commons Attribution License. I'd like to have this file restored, please. Kind regards, Gaeanautes (talk) 09:12, 26 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

You are wrong for two reasons: 1) it's unlikely that that website owns the copyright to this picture and 2) the license of that website is not free enough for Commons. We do not accept NC and ND restrictions, see here. Jcb (talk) 15:02, 26 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

File:Antica Incisione raffigurante i Fuochi di San Giuseppe a Itri.jpeg[edit]

Can you explain your revert? Your edit summary is not explainatory at all. Why on earth should {{Transferred from}}, {{Original uploader}} and {{Original upload date}} be removed? They are automatically placed there by Commons Helper which is a widely used tool. And these three templates are used in every file which gets moved from one wiki to Commons. You should explain why this particular file is different from all others. --Una giornata uggiosa '94 · So, what do you want to talk about? 21:40, 26 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The bot of Magog the Ogre removes those placeholders on all transfers, I don't see why this file should be different. The project of first upload is of course not adequat source information and it's obvious that the original uploader is not the author. If you transfer a file to Commons, it's your responsibility to add real source and authorship information. If this is not available, so that the copyright situation cannot be determined, don't transfer the file. Jcb (talk) 22:30, 26 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
In fairness to UGU94, this is a really common concern, even with me putting it in the FAQ. While I think we should handle the issue with grace, obviously I do agree with Jcb's point. Magog the Ogre (talk) (contribs) 23:31, 26 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
I didn't realize there was a FAQ page. Even so, I still don't believe this is a widely approved Commons policy. If it was, I would have heard it in 10 years of contribution, and {{Transferred from}} would have been deleted a long time ago, or at least marked with {{Deprecated}}, and Commons Helper wouldn't put it in every upload. It seems to me that it is still a minority practice. However if that was how the bot was meant to act, go on, I'm not interested in questioning this matter. --Una giornata uggiosa '94 · So, what do you want to talk about? 19:41, 27 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
@Una giornata uggiosa '94: Are you going to fill in the information template properly? If you don't want to do proper aftercare, you must stop doing file transfers. Jcb (talk) 20:16, 27 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
@Jcb: This topic is about an explanation you owed to me, and it is closed. You already indulged to unrequired and unpolite remarks. Do not continue, please, you're being rather importunate. I just replied to you in the right place to discuss that. And I don't know what file transfers are you referring at, since I didn't do any after this. --Una giornata uggiosa '94 · So, what do you want to talk about? 20:31, 27 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Not yet, but if you do any more file transfer and refuse to do the proper after care, this may result in a block. Be warned. Jcb (talk) 20:36, 27 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Readers may be interested to know that here there was a reply from mine, but Jcb decided to remove it (as if COM:TALK didn't exist...) --Una giornata uggiosa '94 · So, what do you want to talk about? 11:12, 28 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Blacklist of 'Le presque Yes Mouvement'[edit]

I've noticed you added the Flickr account Le presque Yes Mouvement to the blacklist. I would urge you to reconsider, this account is operated by credible photographer Miguel Discart and has been a leading resource for professional wrestling photos for many years. The ownership of the account and photos is clearly explained in the account description and the license information provided for the photos is credible and accurate. For avoidance of doubt, the account is linked on Discart's twitter and instagram pages. Dannys-777 (talk) 22:16, 27 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The Twitter and Instagram account link to the personal Flickr account of Miguel Discart, but as far as I can see none of these accounts link to the "Shared Account" Flickr user. Do I overlook something? Jcb (talk) 23:50, 27 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, the second link in Miguel's Instagram bio (the one that says "all the picture with wrestling") links to the Shared Account, and if you look at the content of his Twitter feed you will see he links to numerous albums from that account. Dannys-777 (talk) 02:20, 28 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Ok, I see. Jcb (talk) 06:31, 28 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Your recent deletions[edit]

Hi. You recently deleted both File:HHH & Steph McMahon WM34.jpg and File:HHH & Steph McMahon WM34 crop.jpg as "Copyright violation; see Commons:Licensing". I transferred the first from flickr (with a valid license) and the second was a crop of the first. The original file can be found at [4] and the user was at the event, and uploaded a few thousand photos from the event (several of which I have uploaded with no problems). I received no notification/talk page message regarding them being tagged as copyright violations, and was wondering from where they are allegedly copied. I was was hoping you wouldn't mind reviewing this, and restoring the photos as necessary. Thanks, NiciVampireHeart 22:21, 27 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

First, do not reupload a deleted file yourself. This will almost always lead to immediate redeletion. Then the file came from a Flickr account that I could not trace back to the stated photographer. Neither their personal Flickr account nor their Twitter or Instagram account link to that user named "Shared Account" as far as I can see. So now the first thing to do is to find out weather this Flickr account really belongs to this photographer. Jcb (talk) 23:57, 27 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
The EXIF at Flickr credits Miguel Discart as the author of the photograph. This matches the statement at the Shared Account Info: "... if the picture name ends by : No suffix : The autor is Miguel Discart". De728631 (talk) 00:19, 28 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, but that does not give any verification that Miguel Discart released this picture into the stated free license, because that license is not in the EXIF and we have no verification that the account is operated by Miguel Discart. Jcb (talk) 00:27, 28 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

THEN DELETE THE PHOTO[edit]

It is locked or I would do it myself. --Don (talk) 21:41, 29 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

You cannot revoke your contribution. Jcb (talk) 21:42, 29 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
I will request its removal, this is why I no longer deal with this site, it requires dealing with idiots and I have 2 now stalking my photo. Undo your change to my photo or remove it. The CC license used was Attribution Required and I herein notice you and this site that it is in violation of the license by NOT using a attribution. Show me the legal foundation that says you can not modify a license. --Don (talk) 21:49, 29 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Have a look at creativecommons.org for the details. You have time enough to do this, now you will be unable to edit Wikimedia Commons for a week. Jcb (talk) 21:59, 29 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
@Jcb: This is an unnecessary rude remark against a valuable contributor, who has donated more than a thousand images to Wikimedia Commons. Among these images are several valuable and featured pictures. All he is asking for is some credit for his work. OK, he could have done that in a more administratively correct way, but your last remark was really unnecessary and unworthy of an administrator. Vysotsky (talk) 22:13, 29 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

File:S.M. Il re sventola il tricolore dal Quirinale.png[edit]

hi Mr. Jcb

I am writing to ask you if you could see this following file, concerning a colored cover made by

Achille Beltrame  (1871–1945)  wikidata:Q3604346
 
Achille Beltrame
Description Italian painter and illustrator
that worked mainly for Domenica del Corriere, weekly magazine of Corriere della Sera
Date of birth/death 18 March 1871 Edit this at Wikidata 19 February 1945 Edit this at Wikidata
Location of birth/death Arzignano Milan
Work location
Milan Edit this at Wikidata
Authority file
creator QS:P170,Q3604346

, seeing the license the copyright of the following file in question has expired for more than 70 years, then a license (PD- Italy)--Manwe12 (talk) 21:46, 29 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Please go to COM:UDR instead, I don't feel like passing the regular procedures for this file. @Krd: - Jcb (talk) 21:49, 29 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
unfortunately I'm not allowed to make the request, because there would be the user Jeff who would do anything to boycott--Manwe12 (talk) 09:55, 30 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Picture deleted[edit]

You deleted a picture I uploaded. I received permission from the photographer. Why have you done this? TheNoelster (talk) 03:36, 30 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Please ask the photographer to contact OTRS. Permission by third party photographers always has to be verified by OTRS. Jcb (talk) 15:19, 30 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Deletion of redirects[edit]

I noticed you deleted the redirect page Alphonse de Gisors. You may not realize that you broke three links that utilized this redirect:

If you are going to delete such a redirect, I think you should be required to fix all of the links that will be broken first. --Robert.Allen (talk) 02:54, 1 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think so. The cross namespace redirect should not have been created in the first place. If a Gallery page does not exist, the link should be red, that's normal. Jcb (talk) 14:58, 1 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for the explanation. I did not realize cross-namespace redirects were not allowed when I made these. I think I saw some other examples at the time and followed suit. I don't understand why it is necessary to avoid these. They seem to work without any problem. --Robert.Allen (talk) 19:04, 1 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Actually here [5] it says: "a gallery title can be redirected to a corresponding category (a cross-namespace redirect).". So cross-namespace redirects seem to be explicitly allowed. Why do you think they are not? --Robert.Allen (talk) 19:13, 1 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
That's a discrepancy then with the deletion policy. 'Cross namespace redirect' is an official reason for speedy deletion. The comment seems to be a leftover from what was regular practice in the previous decade. A log has changed at Commons over the years. Jcb (talk) 21:12, 1 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
You made these changes without discussion and did not provide a link showing the consensus for your change. Perhaps it should be removed from the Speedy deletion criteria. Maybe this policy should be revived for discussion again. I still do not understand the rationale for it. --Robert.Allen (talk) 21:19, 1 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
The deletion policy is an official policy, the gallery page a guideline. Policies go above guidelines. Please be aware that the long standig practice is among many admins to speedy delete cross namespace redirects. So the official policy is in line with regular practice, while the guideline was not. Jcb (talk) 21:24, 1 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

It's my impression admins carry out policies, but these are decided by all editors who take part in the discussion. Is that correct? Can you please provide a link to the official policy and the discussion that led to its adoption? I'd like to gain a better understanding of how and why it was decided on. --Robert.Allen (talk) 21:35, 1 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

No, I am not going to research the history of the deletion policy for you just because you don't like a part of it. Please be aware that it's quite counterproductive to start discussions on all aspects of our long standing practices. Jcb (talk) 21:39, 1 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Columbus[edit]

Wasn't this a DAB page so single image or empty doesn't apply. Crouch, Swale (talk) 06:18, 2 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

In Commons, DAB belongs to category namespace. Jcb (talk) 15:10, 2 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
DAB pages can be created in the gallery namespace as well, otherwise you just get taken to the category DAB page, I though it would be self evident that single image or empty doesn't apply to DAB pages. Crouch, Swale (talk) 09:45, 4 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
That it's technically possible to create a DAB in gallery namespace (or user/commons/whatever namespace) does not make that they belong there. Navigation at Commons goes via the category system. Jcb (talk) 09:49, 4 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

File:KLIMKOWKA DWOR 8.jpg[edit]

Please, help with this. I try to delete sign put,-like your example,-but there signed I did some mistake. - - --Globetrotter19 (talk) 09:34, 2 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

To nominate a file for deletion, press 'nominate for deletion' from the left menu and enter a reason. The scripts will do the rest. Jcb (talk) 15:13, 2 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Copyright problem[edit]

You've posted to my talk page about inadequate licensing for File:Europa_Island_simplified_land_cover_map-en.svg .

I created the image from File:Europa_Island_simplified_land_cover_map-fr.svg . When I uploaded it, I copied all the copyright information from the Commons page of that image. I don't want to claim any rights in it myself. I don't know what else I can do - if that's not enough you'd better just delete it. (As you can see from my talk page here, I've had this problem before.) Maproom (talk) 17:32, 3 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

You did not add a valid license template. Please add a license to the file description page. You should use one of the licenses of the original file, e.g. {{Cc-by-sa-2.5,2.0,1.0}}. Jcb (talk) 18:06, 3 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
I've tried to add one. Is the result acceptable? Maproom (talk) 07:15, 4 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, this is what I meant. Thanks! Jcb (talk) 08:10, 4 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Question[edit]

Hello,

Have You ever noticed that the photo File:Menopause_and_before.jpg has been once subjected to the DR procedure and has been retained on the Wikimedia Commons? Regards Stan old (talk) 11:16, 4 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Files that are kept in a DR may be renominated if somebody has doubts about the outcome (not endless of course) and the outcome may be different. Jcb (talk) 11:29, 4 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
OK, if in your opinion one vote, btw. not exactly objective, is enough to delete photo i haven't more questions. Have a nice day Stan old (talk) 11:36, 4 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]


Request[edit]

Please, can you refrain from activities related to my content? If it is possible, please let another administrator decide to delete photos. Anyway, do not you think that your decisions are now too fast and hasty? Regards Stan old (talk) 11:43, 4 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

No and no. Jcb (talk) 11:48, 4 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Lack of the third "no" means that you admit that you are not completely objective. The NPOV Wiki idea is beautiful, but probably not entirely real.Stan old (talk) 11:56, 4 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
You asked two questions. Jcb (talk) 11:57, 4 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Exactly were: question/request/question. Summarizing three but your answer contains only two "no". I suppose for the first two... Stan old (talk) 12:06, 4 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Congratulations for getting Davey2010's praise. If I believed in conspiracy theories, I would say: "in-crowd". Regards Stan old (talk) 20:28, 4 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Be careful, the illuminati are watching you. Jcb (talk) 20:50, 4 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Good irony, but mine was a little better. Stan old (talk) 13:16, 5 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

A barnstar for you![edit]

The Admin's Barnstar
For all of your contributions to this site, Your contributions effort and hard work never go unnoticed and IMHO you go above and beyond what's expected of an admin - Thank you for your all of your contributions and hard work here :), Take care, –Davey2010Talk 13:28, 4 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks! Jcb (talk) 14:35, 4 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Coa_Hungary_Clan_Gutkeled.svg[edit]

Hi, Why you want do delete it? I have made it about a medieval description. No copyright, nobody knows who made it in the XIII. century. Please remove the deletion tag! Madboy74 (talk) 13:09, 5 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

It has currently: conflicting licenses, a false 'own work' claim (see DW for more information) and missing source information (empty source field). So if you want the file to be kept, fix the description page and explain the situation in the DR. Jcb (talk) 13:15, 5 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
The DW is too difficult for my English. So there is a medieval picture or description. I redraw it so somewhere it is my work. This image needed about 30 hour... I will put a source and I thing it's enough. Madboy74 (talk) 13:21, 5 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
More or less. I have done a few minor adjustments and I think it's alright now. Jcb (talk) 20:31, 5 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Do it please because I don't know what can I do. It's your play-field mine is the drawing.Madboy74 (talk) 20:34, 5 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
I have done it already and I have closed the deletion nomination. You can see my adjustments here. Don't worry, the file is no longer listed for deletion. Jcb (talk) 20:39, 5 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you! Can I remove the deletion flag? Madboy74 (talk) 20:49, 5 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
The deletion flag is already removed 20 minutes ago. Jcb (talk) 20:50, 5 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
OK. I have seen the page from a cached tab. Madboy74 (talk) 20:55, 5 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Philatelic deletions[edit]

I did not see this deletion nomination so have no idea what they were. Maybe you can tell me a bit more and I may be able to rescue them. They sound like postal stationery from some country but obviously I would need to know which one before asking for undeletion, even if temporary, to check their status. Thanks Ww2censor (talk) 17:53, 6 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Postal stamps from I think Germany, at least the language is German. Jcb (talk) 17:59, 6 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Well, if they were German, they are likely still a problem per Commons:WikiProject Public Domain/German stamps review. This issue has never been resolved or progressed for several years. Thanks anyway. Ww2censor (talk) 20:51, 6 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Re:[edit]

Sorry, I'm not quite familiar with policies here. Does it mean that there's no way to delete my own work just out of my will after 7 days, even if it is currently not used in any article? Thanks,-- Hal 02:01, 7 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

That's correct. Contributions to Wikimedia Commons are in principle not revocable, but deletion on author request within a week after upload is normally accepted as a courtesy. Jcb (talk) 15:41, 7 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Oops. Thanks anyway, -- Hal 01:38, 8 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Copyright status: File:Arkitsa lighthouse (2018).jpeg[edit]

Hi, there!

Thank you for your message on my Discussion page about not licensing a lighthouse photo. It is my own work (I took the photo) and I think I have now released it into the public domain by adding {{PD-self}} on the file's page. File:Arkitsa lighthouse (2018).jpeg

Did it work? I am not really an experienced Wikimedia Commons user. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Άργος (talk • contribs) 16:36, 11 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Yes. If it's your own work, please add {{Own}} to the source field, see here. Jcb (talk) 21:12, 12 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

OK, I saw the change. I 'll keep in mind that I should always add {{Own}} to the source field if it's my own work. Thanks. --Άργος (talk) 19:44, 16 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Message from Bazraa032[edit]

Hi jsb why is deleted capri everitt photo this photo is only capri's photo Bazraa032 (talk) 13:41, 12 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Please tell me the file name of the involved file? Jcb (talk) 21:13, 12 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Régataïades de Nantes 2018[edit]

Bonsoir, j'étais en train d'importer les photos pour illustrer cette page que vous avez supprimé parce qu'elle était vide... Tant pis je la créerais à nouveau une prochaine fois. François de Dijon (talk) 23:30, 12 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Next time please first have the files online and then create a gallery. Jcb (talk) 23:47, 12 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Prosthechea glauca[edit]

Request: Rebuilding of Prosthechea glauca. Pictures are available. Orchi (talk) 18:05, 13 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Orchi: ✓ Done - Jcb (talk) 18:07, 13 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
...thanks. Orchi (talk) 18:10, 13 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Alice in Wonderland[edit]

Alice in Wonderland (Alice in Wonderland) is most certainly a used, plausible, and much-needed redirect for the page "category:Alice in Wonderland". Nicole Sharp (talk) 19:20, 13 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Gallery pages cannot redirect to a category. Jcb (talk) 20:44, 13 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Is there any written policy for this? I actually requested in March 2017 for the mass creation of redirect pages for category names that don't have mainspace pages, to prevent broken hyperlinks to content on Wikimedia Commons (e.g. https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Alice_in_Wonderland should not go to a 404 error, since Wikimedia Commons does have content about Alice in Wonderland). The Wikimedia Commons consensus at the time was to create the redirect pages individually on a case-by-case basis as needed: https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Commons:Village_pump&diff=236670643&oldid=236664328. Nicole Sharp (talk) 06:58, 14 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Note that I am not the only person who thinks that these redirects are necessary. There are a number of such redirects already on Wikimedia Commons to assist in navigation in order to find content as easily as possible (especially since category pages are often difficult to find in search). If you think that they should all be deleted, then you will need either a bot or a lot of free time. This is probably something that should be discussed as a sitewide policy though outside of a usertalkpage. Nicole Sharp (talk) 13:58, 14 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
We have a policy on this, 'cross namespace redirect' is an official reason for speedy deletion. And yes, it's a bit frustrating that all the time some people start creating these pointless redirects. If you want a Wikipedia article to link to a category, do just that: link it to the category. Jcb (talk) 15:06, 14 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

File Deletion[edit]

Hi Jcb, I am not 100% sure how I should proceed here, I hope this is the right way to contact you. :) It is about those files that you did delete - https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Elisaveta_P.#Notification_about_possible_deletion Since I am working in the field of art history I sometimes upload pictures I took myself, i.e. those are pictures that I created myself - mostly of archived materials (in those particular cases many of them themselves older than 70 years) or from exibitions, where picture taking is allowed. This information is also mentioned in the description when I upload the files. It takes me a lot of time to do that and what a surprise - someone (EugeneZelenko) decides to open a deletion debate on them. I was not online the last couple of days to see that, but now, when I am opening Wikipedia to contribute again with pictures that are my own property and I want to share with the community - surprise, surprise, someone has deleted quite a lot of my work.I will be honest with you - my motivation to share with the community in cases like this near zero. Please, advice...I am really very very upset...:( KR, Elisaevat — Preceding unsigned comment added by Elisaveta P. (talk • contribs) 10:50, 14 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Your pictures are not 'own work', but derivative work. When uploading such pictures, you should provide information on the author of the depicted work, so that we can determine the copyright situation. In many countries copyright lasts 70 years after the death of the author, so that we need to know when the author died. Jcb (talk) 15:09, 14 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you, I thought it was about the pictures themselves - that is why I write "own work" because I made them. So...should I upload them one by one again and write the information in the correct way or you can bring them back and I can edit them. I am aware of the 70 years copyrights since I am art history researcher and upload only pictures of older works. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Elisaveta P. (talk • contribs) 19:26, 19 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Once you have collected the authorship information of the original authors, please file an undeletion request here. Jcb (talk) 19:33, 19 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

My images[edit]

Why did you delete all my images? Some of them I know were unlicensed but some of them were from Flickr. PedroAlves (talk) 20:57, 14 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

If a file e.g. is marked as 'all rights reserved' at Flickr, you can't take it here. Please read our licensing rules. Jcb (talk) 21:00, 14 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Even the logo? PedroAlves (talk) 21:29, 17 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

If a logo is really too simple for copyright protection, {{PD-textlogo}} may apply. Jcb (talk) 21:32, 17 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I reupload the imagem and add the permission. Could you please rename the file? I made a mistake including the file format. PedroAlves (talk) 22:10, 17 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Don't reupload deleted files. And this file is not simple enough for PD-textlogo. Jcb (talk) 22:12, 17 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy[edit]

Hi there. I tried to fix Commons:Deletion requests/File:Pomo Camino.jpg, in vain. As it's requested by the uploader within the same day, I guess you can delete the file speedily. Danke u. --E4024 (talk) 15:33, 16 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

✓ Done - Jcb (talk) 15:36, 16 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Message from SamDumcum[edit]

Hi Jcb on April 12, you deleted a logo for Active.Ai stating copyright violation. To the best of my knowledge I followed the proper procedure including contacting the company, and used the licencing they recommended. This was my first Wikimedia image so I may have done it incorrectly. Guidance and/or reinstatement appreciated. SamDumcum (talk) 03:25, 17 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Please ask them to send permission to OTRS. Jcb (talk) 14:47, 17 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Copyright status: File:Rosalie Caron - Mathilde et Malek-Adhel surpris dans le tombeau de Montmorency par l’archevêque de Tyr.jpg[edit]

Hello, You left this message on my talk page, but I had put the appropriate license template when I uploaded the file. It got lost when User:BeatrixBelibaste did replace Information by Artwork a few days ago and failed to keep the permission part. So what am I supposed to do? Just put it back? And what about the banner you added? Can I remove it afterwards? Thanks --Nono314 (talk) 21:32, 17 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, when you put the license back you may remove the {no license since} tag. Jcb (talk) 21:34, 17 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Hi, Nono314, I just put back the license that I had removed by mistake. Sorry for the inconvenience! --BeatrixBelibaste (talk) 23:12, 17 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you User:BeatrixBelibaste! --Nono314 (talk) 06:31, 18 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Message from Harshaw61[edit]

Hi Jcb, the original author of this photo wrote in with the correct license agreement last week, but today the photo was still deleted (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:The_Americans_band,_Lawrence_KS_2016-06-24_by_Ann_Dean.jpg). Can you please advise what the correct move is from here? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Harshaw61 (talk • contribs) 01:26, 18 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Please provide evidence of permission to OTRS. Jcb (talk) 01:29, 18 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Category deletions[edit]

Why were Category:Rearing mules and Category:Bucking mules deleted? I created and populated both of those categories, and it appears someone de-populated them without explanation. (Some of the images were moved to the more generic Category:Rearing animals and Category:Bucking animals for no apparent reason.) I've re-populated the categories; can you please restore them? Mindmatrix 16:17, 19 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Ruff tuff cream puff: Can you explain this? Jcb (talk) 16:52, 19 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Yes, it is overcategorization. Animal categories in general are being sliced into too many subcategories, and it is getting obnoxious. In this particular case, Category:Mules is a small category (for such a common animal) and we can continue to divide it into nitpicky subcategories, making it harder for someone to find the mule photo they need. Meanwhile, Category:Bucking animals and Category:Rearing animals each have one file. If you have an image of a bucking mule, can you not just put it in Category:Mules and Category:Bucking animals, making it easier to find? Also, I wouldn't say I "depopulated" a category that had a single file in it. I just placed that file into two somewhat less specific but still totally useful categories. That is my explanation as requested, however, I am really not invested in this situation, so if someone else wants the categories re-created, please feel free. Thanks, have fun, Ruff tuff cream puff (talk) 21:30, 19 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

14:16, 20 May 2018 Jcb (talk | contribs | block) deleted page File:Константинов Тихон.tif (Uploader requested deletion of a recently uploaded unused file -)[edit]

But it was used.--Anatoliy (talk) 11:44, 20 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Ahonc: I have restored the file and sent it to regular DR. I think the result will be deletion though. Jcb (talk) 16:42, 20 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Why are you doing this?[edit]

You seem to be dead set on making sure no one can contact me for commercial use of my work. Other photographers have a link to there respective contact e mail, etc. What is the problem or are you just doing this to be obnoxious? --Don (talk) 19:47, 21 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

A category page is not the right place for such a thing. At the file description pages of all your uploads there is a link to your user page. Jcb (talk) 20:13, 21 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Then why do most the other photographers have a e mail on there cat pages? IMHO your intentionally trying to cause harm to me and my work. You have cited no "policy" that supports your claim this is incorrect. Are you making this up as you go? Please post a link to the policy page that disables my ability to have my contact information on my Cat. --Don (talk) 20:16, 21 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Most photographers did not even create a photographer cat. The category system is for finding images, not for spamming your contact information. Jcb (talk) 20:21, 21 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
So you are unable to provide a link to this policy as it does not exist. --Don (talk) 20:25, 21 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Here you can see which things belong to a category page. Jcb (talk) 20:37, 21 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I think it is normal practice (and quite useful) to add some extra information under Category:Name photographer, in order to give people the opportunity to dive deeper into the collections of these photographers. To categories of dead Dutch photographers I regularly add links to their RKD profile or/and their former organizational photo agency (examples: Co Zeylemaker & Willem van de Poll) To categories of living Dutch photographers I add links to their RKD profile (if available), their website, photo agency or GLAM organisation (examples: Thea van den Heuvel & Ivar Pel. These links are also useful to Wikidata and help people to look for more information and/or easy access to further contact. Vysotsky (talk) 20:34, 21 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

In this case the user is basically spamming their email address everywhere and suggesting that they would have to be contacted for commercial reuse, which is incompatible with the license. Jcb (talk) 20:37, 21 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Spamming everywhere? I had it on the Cat and Credits page. How on earth is that spamming? You clearly are using your admin "powers" to create a mountain out of a molehill. This is nothing more then Bullying as your unable to provide a like to the policy you "claim" is just cause for your retaliatory actions. --Don (talk) 20:51, 21 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
The CC 4.0 license requires attribution and "share and share alike" this in itself is a restriction for commercial use. Other retired editors, (David Illif comes to mind) have there e mail address ON EVERY PICTURE EVER UPLOADED! --Don (talk) 20:53, 21 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
I did provide a link to the policy page here, at 20:37. The file description page is indeed a place where you could leave some information. Some uploaders have their own template for this. See e.g. here for an example. Jcb (talk) 20:58, 21 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

File:Survivants du naufrage du SS Hilda (1905).jpg[edit]

Hello, I do not understand why the file was deleted. I have provided a complete source for this file (it was taken by a photographer from St Malo in 1905, the copyright has probably ended nowadays - source [in French]). If you need to know where the postcard is from, it is in a book with many postcards of Britanny from a private (family) collection. Thanks in advance ! Skimel (talk) 10:00, 22 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Copyright expires 70 years after the death of the author. If we don't know when the author died, we use 120 years after creation as a safe age. Jcb (talk) 15:05, 22 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for the answer. Is 120 years an official policy or is it just an estimate ? I've read somewhere else on Wikimedia 140 years (eg. the photographer took the picture at 20 and died at 90 = 70+70). Anyway I understand why the image has been deleted. Skimel (talk) 21:42, 22 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
The Commons community has voted about this and has chosen to use 120 years. We created a license template for this situation: {{PD-old-assumed}}. Jcb (talk) 21:45, 22 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

False Crystal 128 icons[edit]

Hi,

I presume for this, you affirm these files are Crystal 128 icons, aren't they? Thomas Linard (talk) 21:36, 22 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

No, that's the other way round. I reverted your changes, because you added fake own work claims. That does not make me responsible for the original content. Jcb (talk) 21:37, 22 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Red Bridge[edit]

Can you explain what was wrong with Red Bridge? -- Geagea (talk) 22:48, 22 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

It was a gallery page without a gallery. Jcb (talk) 14:44, 23 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Deletion of images from Draft:Derek Williams (musician)[edit]

Please refer to deleted images below:

Auckland_University_Festival_Choir_at_Lincoln_Center_Philharmonic_Hall.jpg 

I am advised by Dr Derek Williams, my subject who is pictured in the photograph, taken with his Asahi Pentax 35mm SLR camera in 1972, that he was assisted by a family friend who was in her late 60's at the time, childless, and now deceased, with no means of ever contacting her.  It is the sole photograph of the Auckland University Festival Choir performing at the Lincoln Center in existence, taken under Williams' express and specific direction.  Clearly there was no thought at the time of getting her to sign a release, in view of the fact that neither Wikipedia nor indeed the internet itself existed then.  There is no chance of anyone claiming ownership of this apart from Dr Williams himself, and he has surrendered it on Flickr for Creative Commons Share-Alike attribution.  Dr Williams set up the camera and the aspect and all the friend did was press down the shutter on a camera sitting on a tripod.  Since Williams framed the shot, and gave specific instructions for the timing of the shot, she cannot in any sense be said to be "the photographer", especially not from her grave.  I therefore believe that non-free use under Wikipedia:Non-free content criteria should be granted.  Please provide advice on how to set this appeal in motion.

Derek_Williams_addressing_the_Royal_Geographical_Society_book_launch.2.png 

I am informed by Dr Williams that this photograph was taken by his cousin, using his iPhone. His cousin has agreed to provide permission for this photography to be used.  Please advise how to set this in motion.

Derek_Williams_conducting_East_Lothian_Festival_Orchestra's_performance_of_The_Snowman.jpg 

This image was taken using Dr Williams' iPhone by a friend of his, who has agreed to release "her" image (which she was very surprised to learn she owned!).  Please advise how to proceed in getting her to release this image.

Chrisdevelop (talk) 21:11, 23 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

In all cases the (legal heirs of the) photographer should contact OTRS. About your arguments on the first one, please be aware that we discussed a proposal containing such claims a while ago and it failed for being blatantly in conflict with copyright regulations. Please be aware that the person taking the picture should be considered the photographer. Jcb (talk) 21:21, 23 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
@Jcb: Thank you for your quick response. In relation to the 1972 image of the University Festival Choir at the Lincoln Center, as explained, this was taken by a friend of Dr Williams (pictured in another deleted photo, standing next to him), who is now deceased with no descendants, since she was childless. There are therefore no legal heirs. Clearly she would have had no thought to claiming a copyright, nor any idea of bequeathing this to anybody, since such notions were completely unheard of in the day. By handing the camera back to Dr Williams, she ipso facto donated her photograph to him. If you could clarify whose copyright is being breached, I'll see what I can do. Chrisdevelop (talk) 21:35, 23 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Not only your own children can be your legal heirs. Also e.g. brothers, sisters, parents can be heirs if there are no children. Handing over a camera does not contitute a transfer of copyright, this can only be done by means of a written document. So for the first picture it's probably impossible to establish a valid permission. Jcb (talk) 21:56, 23 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
@Jcb: I'll look into this further, as the implications seem far greater to me in that photographs of historical interest cannot be used in an encyclopedia because those taking them 40 or more years ago weren't prescient enough to have signed a contract with the person they handed their camera to to take a photo. Meanwhile, the Infobox image of my subject, Derek Williams Portrait (cropped).jpg has also been removed. Permission was granted through Wikimedia commons by its author, Lucas Kao, so this should not be deleted, moreover, there is no record in the page History of this deletion. Please advise how to have this reinstated, as it has now sunk without trace. The image of Dr Williams with Michael Palin has also been deleted, and again there is no sign of this in the page history, however the name of the person who took the photograph with Dr Williams iPhone is known to him, and has agreed to grant permission. Please advise how to have these images reinstated. Chrisdevelop (talk) 01:43, 24 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Deletion of images from Sibelius (scorewriter)[edit]

c:File:Change.org Sell Sibelius petition with 11,590 signatories.jpg
c:File:Derek Williams delivers the Sell Sibelius petition.jpg

@Jcb: The first image (of the petition) was taken by Dr Derek Williams using his iPhone and uploaded to Flickr with Creative Commons Share-alike attribution. The second image (of Williams handing the petition over to Mr Lombardi at BASCA) was taken by a member of BASCA staff. Please advise the correct procedure to have these images reinstated. Chrisdevelop (talk) 01:30, 24 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

As said, via OTRS. Jcb (talk) 15:22, 24 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Wait wait wait[edit]

Not all of these that I'm nominating are to delete the whole thing. Stuff like File:Discovery Trail in Albany Pine Bush Preserve, New York (35011007072).jpg was just to delete the previous version of the image. Sorry for the trouble, but I'm trying to crop out all the useful bits that we can use and retain them. GMGtalk 16:32, 24 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not use a speedy tag if only one version has to be deleted. This will be overlooked easily. A regular nomination is better for such cases. I have undeleted the above mentioned file. Please tell me if there is more to undelete. Jcb (talk) 16:35, 24 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Sigh..well I've made a mess. Yeah, there's quite a few, probably about half of them were outright deletions, and about half were crops that needed previous versions deleted. I couldn't tell you which ones without access to my own deleted uploads. Basically everything that I've uploaded over the past five hours has been cropping out the bad bits of these photos to leave the useful in-scope bits. But a lot of them won't show up in my uploads because they were uploading a new version of the same file.
So...I should send all of these to DR? ...I mean...there's probably a hundred or more that still need fixed. Isn't that just gonna muck up DR for today? GMGtalk 16:38, 24 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
For new cases please start a DR. No worries about the number of DRs, we will manage. Regarding the files already deleted, I will see what I can do later this evening. Jcb (talk) 16:41, 24 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Well I'll tell you what, this is the last freaking time I use Flickr2Commons to upload more than a few dozen images at a time. I'll probably be two more days before I get everything totally cleaned up. Anyway, it looks like the logged upload is still visible on my watchlist even though they've been deleted. This is what I've cropped so far today that's redlinked. GMGtalk 16:55, 24 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Extended content
  1. File:Railroad history and a gnome in the Capital District of NY (35163856116).jpg
  2. File:Discovery Trail in Albany Pine Bush Preserve, New York (35045310121).jpg
  3. File:Discovery Trail in Albany Pine Bush Preserve, New York (35135959966).jpg
  4. File:A giant tree and a small gnome (34330882794).jpg
  5. File:Lupines and gnomes help butterflies (34330888634).jpg
  6. File:Washington Park open spaces (35160948515).jpg
  7. File:Swingset remains from a Victorian-era (35160946195).jpg
  8. File:Bad bugs in Washington Park, Albany, NY (34995740652).jpg
  9. File:Power Canal Park (34315373584).jpg
  10. File:20170427 114614 resized (34299601774).jpg
  11. File:Albany Institute of History & Art (35075857276).jpg
  12. File:Albany Institute of History & Art (34950938672).jpg
  13. File:Albany Institute of History & Art (34950946942).jpg
  14. File:Albany Institute of History & Art (34950953442).jpg
  15. File:Albany Institute of History & Art (34728975090).jpg
  16. File:Capital District Gnome smells the tulips (34259069343).jpg
  17. File:Capital District Tourism Gnome reads about the tulips & muscari (35029948856).jpg
  18. File:Normans Kill, Albany, New York (34240501593).jpg
  19. File:Corner of Lark, Madison, & Delaware (35050537775).jpg
  20. File:Capital District Tourism Gnome at Dana Park, Albany NY (34886185082).jpg
  21. File:Lafayette Park looking towards Academy (34885590452).jpg
  22. File:Joseph Henry sign (35049932045).jpg
  23. File:Property marker, Lafayette Park (35049935755).jpg
  24. File:Vietnam Memorial, Albany, New York (34239256383).jpg
  25. File:May peace prevail on Earth (34902524841).jpg
  26. File:A relazing fountain and the NYS Court of Appeals (34646787360).jpg
  27. File:Truth, Justice, Hope (34646785120).jpg
  28. File:Nipper and Henry Albany's two mascots meet (34190557164).jpg
  29. File:Albany County Hall of Records (34646266830).jpg
  30. File:Tricentennial Marker on Academy Park; Albany, NY (34902513951).jpg
  31. File:Law establishing Albany County, New York (34190099754).jpg
  32. File:The Albany, NY Dongan Charter (34646267490).jpg
  33. File:A long hallway of records at the Albany County Hall of Records (34646268270).jpg
  34. File:Maps galore at the Albany County Hall of Records (34190103864).jpg
  35. File:Roosevelt elected. Albany County Hall of Records confirms vote. (34869787932).jpg
  36. File:Pearl & State streets in Albany, New York early 1900s (34646264490).jpg
  37. File:National Upholstery, postcards, & a gnome (34879790541).jpg
  38. File:Capital District Tourism Gnome visits National Upholstery (34879788951).jpg
  39. File:Top 100 songs in 1948 (and a gnome) (34948945386).jpg
  40. File:Pint Sized; Lark Street Albany, NY (34928080186).jpg
  41. File:Pint Sized; Coffee on Lark Street, Albany, NY (34804868402).jpg
  42. File:Pint Sized on Lark Street and the Albany, NY gnome (34158182503).jpg
  43. File:Capital District tourism gnome buys beer at Pint Sized (34804852382).jpg
  44. File:Capital District tourism gnome buys beer at Pint Sized on Lark St (34158180073).jpg
  45. File:Gnomes love vegetables (34135188873).jpg
  46. File:Herbal tea and a gnome (34558477400).jpg
  47. File:Frozen can be healthy too (34558477550).jpg
  48. File:Purses at Elissa Halloran Designs (34558185040).jpg
  49. File:Elissa Halloran Designs jewelry (34905122806).jpg
  50. File:Globe, a gnome, and Albany, NY (34558195720).jpg
  51. File:Frame styles at Alacrity Frame (34945184885).jpg
  52. File:Gnome tries to use observation deck (34557438900).jpg
  53. File:New York has amazing wildlife (34115274803).jpg
  54. File:Capital District Tourism Gnome and a moose (34115264943).jpg
  55. File:Gnomes and garden work gloves (34082500874).jpg
  56. File:Native Americans at the New York State Museum (34885433496).jpg
Thanks for the list, I have restored the files. Jcb (talk) 21:14, 24 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Much appreciated. Sorry again for the mess. Not sure which one I regret more, that someone else has to touch every one of these, or that I have to spend two or three times as much time as they do nominating and fixing them. Not gonna lie that I have a current GAN, FAC nom review, and soon-to-be GAN nom that I'm neglecting to clean all this up. Feelsbadman. GMGtalk 21:39, 24 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Tessa Hill photo[edit]

Hello JCB;

The file photo for Hill was deleted from Commons (and from my sandbox) for lack of source info. I added that info after receiving an alert from Commons. I'm afraid I don't understand what is missing.

I explained that the photo is owned by Hill and she gave me permission to upload to Commons without restrictions.

How should I explain the source if that is not adequate?

Thanks; --BrucePL (talk) 17:36, 25 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The information is clearly false. Hill is not the photographer and unlikely to be the copyright holder. This is not a selfie. Jcb (talk) 15:56, 26 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Rachel K Collier Press Image 2.jpg[edit]

Hi JCB;

I reinstated this image as the profile image for Rachel K Collier on her Wikipedia page, after a new image I added was removed (incorrectly -I've emailed permissions about it). This image has been her profile image for years, but was deleted siting 'no permission since 28 March 2018' ? Can you explain why it was removed please? She now has no image at all on her page.

Thanks, --Tigerpunsh

Permission from the photographer was missing. Jcb (talk) 16:04, 26 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
ok... that image has been up there for nearly four years without issue and has been the main press image in use, across the BBC, everywhere, the whole time. If there was any leagl issue with the image, it's completely reasonable to assume a claim would have been made within that period? Can you not reinstate it please?

thanks, --Tigerpunsh

No, unfortunately the time a file has gone unnoticed has no legal meaning. Jcb (talk) 15:13, 30 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

File:Cornell Armory.jpg[edit]

How is this an obvious copyright violation? Magog the Ogre (talk) (contribs) 23:49, 27 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

No authorship information and a watermark. Part of a careless MTC! transfer batch. The MTC! abuser spent one click to move the file here and didn't care at all about their transfers. I don't see why we should spend more time on this. The file is still at EN wiki, somebody with more care can try to establish a compatible copyright situation before thinking about moving it here. Jcb (talk) 15:07, 28 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Page SVG[edit]

Do you think it useful to delete a page which is linked so many thousands times? Without previous notice? -- sarang♥사랑 05:44, 28 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Gallery page without gallery, which is a valid reason for speedy deletion. The page did not contain any information about SVG files, so all the links were pretty useless. Jcb (talk) 15:09, 28 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Cancellazione errata[edit]

La foto “File:Sfera Ebbasta.png” che hai rimosso è stata scattata da me personalmente con tanto di liberatoria firmata. Sono io il detentore del copyright e non vedo per quale motivo tu abbia dovuto rimuoverla. Marco Del Torchio 95 (talk) 08:52, 28 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The picture is all over the internet. Please contact OTRS if you are the author. Jcb (talk) 15:28, 28 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

File:Alles ausser Schwaebisch.jpg[edit]

Please undo this deletion. The file does not reach threshold of originality and is therefore not copyrightable. Chaddy (talk) 15:03, 29 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

You are mistaken. Please read COM:TOO. Jcb (talk) 15:10, 29 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
We already had this discussion with File:IT Venezia COA.svg. I only can repeat what I told you then... Sometimes even admins are mistaken. It would be a sign of greatness if you would recognise that you were wrong both times. Chaddy (talk) 15:22, 29 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
You are pretty inexperienced at Wikimedia Commons. That's not a problem per se, but please be aware of it. Jcb (talk) 15:25, 29 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
And you are pretty inexperienced at copyright law. That's not a problem per se, but maybe you should not decide deletion requests. Chaddy (talk) 13:42, 30 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
I will keep an eye on you. Please make sure you don't remove taggings, like you did with various files last week (all were deleted in the meantime), or you will find yourself blocked. Jcb (talk) 15:15, 30 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
To monitor other users and to express threats is not the wrong style to administrate a community project. For your information: Commons:Administrators' noticeboard/User problems#User:Jcb. Chaddy (talk) 17:51, 30 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Please close[edit]

As nominator, I can't close this DN by myself, but the images are clearly COM:COPYVIOs. Thanks! Ellin Beltz (talk) 17:22, 31 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

✓ Done - Jcb (talk) 20:46, 31 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

File:David Baszucki, CEO of Roblox Corporation.png[edit]

Hello,

I submitted my ticket to OTRS about this file on May 10, but I haven't heard back and the photo has been deleted without clearing the ticket. Can you please restore this image? — Preceding unsigned comment added by CriticalSass (talk • contribs) 19:20, 31 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Unfortunately OTRS has a backlog. It may take some more time. If an OTRS agent processes a valid permission, the file will be restored. Jcb (talk) 20:50, 31 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Deletion of File:Katherine Taylor at I Tonya Screening in Los Angeles 2017 Ticket 2018051510014683.jpg[edit]

This file had permissions emailed before it was uploaded - ticket number 2018051510014683 as included in name and description. Please restore the photo immediately. Amandadoyle543 (talk) 22:35, 31 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

An OTRS agent will restore the file if a valid permission is established. Jcb (talk) 05:50, 1 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Jcb/archive/20&oldid=305089266"