User talk:JuTa/Archive 24

License check

Hello JuTa. I have uploaded two new pictures, and hope that I have done everything right this time. I would like to upload a few more files with the same license, but will wait until I am sure that the new uploads will be approved. If you could take a look at these files (File:Haakon-oevreaas-och-oeyvind-torseter-1.jpg & File:Haakon-oevreaas-och-oeyvind-torseter.jpg), and confirm that everything is in order, I would be grateful. Best regards --Prosit77 (talk) 07:37, 30 October 2014 (UTC)

Hello, they were looking nearly OK. I did some minor fixes. Espeacialy I added {{Licensereview}} templates. Another expierienced user will recheck the license and confirm it valiity. Thats important in case the images on the source woul disappear or the license would be changed. For future uploads: be aware, all other images on that website are not free and wouldn't be OK for commons. regards --JuTa 08:27, 30 October 2014 (UTC)

Commons:Deletion requests/File:Hydrolysis catalysed by pancreatic elastase1.png

The major reason to keep (I agree, per policy) is that it was in-use. I replaced it with one that does not have the chemical mistake I saw (that nobody disagreed with). Now that it's not-in-use and content-disputed, replaceable, can it be deleted? DMacks (talk) 20:35, 1 November 2014 (UTC)

Please reraise a new DR and another admin will decide. --JuTa 23:07, 1 November 2014 (UTC)

Done. DMacks (talk) 02:48, 2 November 2014 (UTC)

Savoie

Hi Juta,

You deleted the page Savoie, but it causes some problems :

• many many pages use this link
• it causes a gap in this template : {{Departments of France}}

So I may say I won't agree with the current situation : whether the page is restored, whether all the similar departement pages must be deleted as well (and I personaly prefer the first one). Greetings, --Floflo (talk) 17:18, 2 November 2014 (UTC)

Hi, please just recreate it with minimum 2 images in it. regards. --JuTa 21:58, 2 November 2014 (UTC)

Why not, but all the historic wil be lost that way, restoring could avoid it. Thanks, --Floflo (talk) 23:11, 2 November 2014 (UTC)

OK, its back. But please add minimum one (better more) other images, otherwise I'll redelete it uring my next chck for small galleries. regards. --JuTa 23:14, 2 November 2014 (UTC)

Thank you very much. I added some more images, taking example from other similar department pages of the template. I admit this page was pretty poor, at least now it is a little bit enhanced, so thanks again. Regards. --Floflo (talk) 23:42, 2 November 2014 (UTC)

Looks fine, thx. --JuTa 23:43, 2 November 2014 (UTC)

Chile

Hi

You have taged for deleting the following files:

• File:Himno-Nacional-Orquestado.ogg
• File:Logo-chile-main.jpg
• File:Chile official logo in grey.jpg
• File:Chile official logo in grey 1.jpg
• File:Chile official logo in red.jpg
• File:Chile official logo in red 1.jpg
• File:Chile official logo in cerulean.jpg
• File:Chile official logo in cerulean 1.jpg
• File:Chile official logo in blue.jpg
• File:Chile official logo in yellow.jpg
• File:Chile official logo in blue 1.jpg
• File:Chile official logo in yellow 1.jpg

All of them are under creativecommons 3.0, as it state in the link (please check here) where the images are posted, in fact they are there specifically so they are shared.

and there is also a book dedicated to this, provided in the same link that give instruction on how to share this logos, imagendechile is a Nation branding public non profit organization (please check here).

Thanks

--Teamdulwich (talk) 12:17, 4 November 2014 (UTC)

Hi, you are right. I've removed the problem tags and added {{Licensereview}}. regards --JuTa 17:32, 4 November 2014 (UTC)

Commons:Deletion requests/File:LogoUniversitätsklinikumFreiburg.jpg

Hallo JuTa, eine Frage zu obigen Löschantrag, der von dir auf "behalten" entschieden wurde: trotz dieser Entscheidung wurde die Datei jetzt gelöscht. Ist das so in Ordnung (und welchen Sinn hat eine Löschdiskussion dann noch)? Danke --тнояsтеn ⇔ 12:16, 4 November 2014 (UTC)

Hi, I kept it for the moment because Commons:OTRS process was (or is?) ongoing. But normaly a period of 30 days is given to complete OTRS. This was deleted much earlier. Perhaps you like to ask User:Ellin Beltz why she deleted it though the {{OTRS pending}}. regards --JuTa 17:37, 4 November 2014 (UTC)

On 16 October the image was found to have no flickr link. The image appeared in images missing permission fifteen days after the last note about its provenance. The prior comment on this discussion was "Kept: for the moment. OTRS seems to be pending. JuTa 19:17, 20 October 2014 (UTC)". It's a very complicated logo and in the interests of protecting the actual creator's copyright, and as I wrote on the summary " 4 November 2014 Ellin Beltz (talk | contribs | block) deleted page File:LogoUniversitätsklinikumFreiburg.jpg (Copyright violation, see Commons:Licensing: If and when OTRS accepts the email, the file can be restored. I am not comfortable leaving this in free license if the OTRS is not accepted.)" And while 30 days is the usual, there are no hard and fast numbers on this. My feeling was due to the complication, the initial lack of flickr license, and etc. that this image was best consigned to obscurity during the time it would take the uploader to try to get permission for it. I have only done this a very few times, so far however 90% of the ones I have deleted "early" have never had an acceptable OTRS form appear. If this is one of the 10% waiting for OTRS will bring solution. Cheers!! Ellin Beltz (talk) 19:23, 4 November 2014 (UTC)

Thanks for your explanation. --тнояsтеn ⇔ 19:30, 4 November 2014 (UTC)

Request for Reinstatement of several such deleted by you of my paintings

Request for Reinstatement of several such deleted by you of my paintings:

1. File:Elżbieta z d. Tarnowska z m. Esterhazy zw. Etusia - akr. na pł..jpg
2. File:Stanisław Tarnowski – na podstawie fotografii Ludwiga Angerera.jpg
3. File:Juliusz Tarnowski † 20 VI 1863 – na podstawie fotografii w pracowni J. Stahl’a we Lwowie – rys. such. akr. na pap. 2014..jpg
4. File:Ppłk. Jan Tarnowski ps. Lelek, Waligora - na podst zdj. wykonanego około r. 1942 - ol. w br. na pł..jpg
5. File:Stanisław Tarnowski - napodst ryc. Juliana Schübelera wg rys.Fr. Tegazzo z r. 1876, (Tyg. IL. 1876) - ol. na pł. - głowa.jpg
6. File:Zdzisław Tarnowski - na podst. zdj. pracowni J. Mien & Sebald w Krakowie - ol. w br. na pł. - popiersie.jpg
7. File:Zdzisław Tarnowski - na podst. zdj. pracowni J. Mien & Sebald w Krakowie - ol. w br. na pł. - całość.jpg

All of these files were created by me, in the sense that himself painted these paintings with a brush and paints, as well as himself photographed. Therefore, what I used them all Own work. All of these files were created by me, so in the sense that himself painted these paintings with a brush and paints, as well as himself photographed. Therefore, I have used in their description Own work. It was not my mistake. What I paint brush on canvas, is my business. Descriptions that on the basis of something, do not change anything because every painter is based on a model (or live or photographed). I'm not a good painter, not because I can't paint, but because it costs me so much effort (I doubt that a talented painter worked so hard). And all in bulk thrown out me into the trash. You must really hate me, though even you don't know me.
M.Tarnowski (talk) 14:59, 4 November 2014 (UTC)

Hi, I answered on your talk page. regards. --JuTa 20:01, 4 November 2014 (UTC)

File:Chapelle et château Saint-Didier.png

File:Chapelle et château Saint-Didier.png : effectivement, cette image est d'une licence difficile à établir. Elle servait surtout pour un débat, pour aider à préciser la licence d'autres images. Donc pas d'opposition à sa suppression. K800i (talk) 11:12, 5 November 2014 (UTC)

OK, its deleted. regards --JuTa 15:46, 5 November 2014 (UTC)

Regarding File:Abenaki.png

It's free to use, if you spent your time reading the source I posted for it, you'd know that:

"I, the copyright holder of this work, release this work into the public domain. This applies worldwide.In some countries this may not be legally possible; if so:I grant anyone the right to use this work for any purpose, without any conditions, unless such conditions are required by law."

Please stop posting random stuff on my page, unless you check all the facts, as I consider this laziness on your part and now wasting my time replying to you. You're free to delete whatever, but I have full rights, given by the author, to use the original as I want(I modified it's size, manually).

Hi, then please apply to correct license template to the description file, which should be {{PD-user|Himasaram}} in that case. Its your upload, you should do that. regards. --JuTa 22:05, 6 November 2014 (UTC)

PS: it was not laziness it was itentionaly. So that you hopefully apply correct license templates directly in future. --JuTa 22:07, 6 November 2014 (UTC)

Löschanträge

Hallo, ich habe hier Commons:Deletion requests/User:Hannes 24 zwei LA gestellt. Aus meiner Sicht können die sofort durchgeführt warden. Beide sind "alte" Kategorien, wo es schon aktuellere gibt. (Bin mit den Vorgängen hier nicht so vertraut.) --Hannes 24 (talk) 15:33, 2 November 2014 (UTC)

Gemeint ist: Category:Coat of Arms of Hayden von Dorff und Category:Coats of arms of Moser von Ebreichsdorf zu löschen. Und NICHT meine User-seite (wo die Löschantrag-Kasteln stehen) ;-) --Hannes 24 (talk) 15:41, 2 November 2014 (UTC)

Hi, dann solltest Du auch Löschnaträge auf die Kategorien stellen, und nicht auf Deine Benutzerseite. Diese habe ich jetzt behalten. Und auf leere Kategorien kann Du auch einen Schnelllöschantrag stellen: {{speedy|Begründung}}. Gruß --JuTa 15:47, 2 November 2014 (UTC)

Auf den jeweiligen Seiten hatte ich das Löschung beantragen nicht (bei den Werkzeugen). Daher hab ich blöderweise auf meiner Seite gemacht. --Hannes 24 (talk) 13:25, 4 November 2014 (UTC)

Hab jetzt SLA auf beide Seiten gestellt. --Hannes 24 (talk) 16:05, 8 November 2014 (UTC)

File:SG 1.jpg

Hi, This photo is my own and is in my family archive. It is I who created the digital version. The picture was taken in a photo in Lviv in 1926. - Author unknown. Regards, Radgad

Hi, you didn't shot the image yourself, because of that you are not the copyright holder and cannot release it under CC licenses. It might be {{PD-Polish}} if its created in Poland or {{Anonymous-EU}} if its created in another european country, but that would require that the author intended to stay anonymous an is not just unknown (to you). I'll remove the problem tag an raise a regular deletion request where the possible correct license can be discussed. regards. --JuTa 20:40, 8 November 2014 (UTC)

Ok, thanks, I think so now will be good, because this photo was created on March 1926 in Lviv (Poland) - "This image is in the public domain because, according to Art. 3 of the Act of 29 March 1926. And Art. 2 of the Act of 10 July 1952. Copyright photographs by Polish authors (or photographs, which appeared for the first time in Poland or simultaneously in Poland and abroad) published without a clear copyright claim before the enactment of the Act of 23 May 1994 . on copyright and related rights are not protected - it must be presumed that they are public domain". regards.

Please leave a comment on Commons:Deletion requests/File:SG 1.jpg to make desicion easier for the deciding admin. I will not decide this case, because I raised it. regards. --JuTa 21:01, 8 November 2014 (UTC)

File:Barsukov_Valery_Leonidovich.jpg and two more.

Hi, I've just send a letter with a full template to permissions-commons@wikimedia.org to confirm that I, Georgiy Elizarov (ru: Георгий Елизаров, user’s page https://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/%D0%A3%D1%87%D0%B0%D1%81%D1%82%D0%BD%D0%B8%D0%BA:%D0%93%D0%B5%D0%BE%D1%80%D0%B3%D0%B8%D0%B9_%D0%95%D0%BB%D0%B8%D0%B7%D0%B0%D1%80%D0%BE%D0%B2), am the creator and sole owner of the exclusive copyright of the following three images: 1) https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Barsukov_Valery_Leonidovich.jpg 2) https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Burba_a_a_c1968.jpg 3) https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Florensky_kirill_pavlovich_c1980.jpg

I agree to publish the above-mentioned content under the free license: Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 4.0 International.

Couldn't you help with the further procedure? Thank you, Георгий Елизаров (talk) 15:54, 10 November 2014 (UTC)

Hi, sorry, I cant realy help you in that case, because I'm not a member of the OTRS team. You might like to ask on Commons:OTRS noticeboard for your case. regards. --JuTa 16:18, 10 November 2014 (UTC)

navigatrix desktop

Alles ueber navigatrix findest du hier. Was muss geschehen damit das Bild erhalten bleibt? Pimvantend (talk) 17:38, 8 November 2014 (UTC)

Du müsstest die Vorlage {{Free screenshot}} mit der korrekten Lizenz als Parameter versehen. Unter welcher Lizenz steht diese Software? Das ist auch aus deinem oben angegebenen Link für mich nicht ersichtlich. Eine Liste mit vielen möglichen Lizenzen findest du unter Commons:Copyright tags. Gruß --JuTa 18:24, 8 November 2014 (UTC)

Da steht Navigatrix is free to use and copy.. Das sollte doch übereinstimmen mit mindestens einer der vielen möglichen Lizenzen. Pimvantend (talk) 17:17, 11 November 2014 (UTC)

Hmm, das heist nicht zwingend dass man screenshots davon auch für (teuer) Geld verkaufen darf, und das wäre Vorraussetzung für eine Commons kompatible Lizenz. Am besten fragst Du nochmals z.B. aud Commons:Forum oder Commons:Village pump/Copyright ein größeres "Publikum" nach weiteren Meinungen. Gruß --JuTa 20:16, 11 November 2014 (UTC)

File:PRISM - Snowden Interview - Laura Poitras.webm

Hallo JuTa, die Löschdiskussion zu der Datei hast du ja abgeschlossen; könntest du bitte auch noch die Lizenz (license review) bestätigen, da ich die Datei als Motd für die Hauptseite eingetragen habe? Gruß, --Pristurus (talk) 09:10, 11 November 2014 (UTC)

OK,  Done. --JuTa 20:24, 11 November 2014 (UTC)

Besten Dank und Gruß aus Marburg, --Pristurus (talk) 21:44, 11 November 2014 (UTC)

Grey/gray

Sorry about my harsh tone here, but this was the 3rd time in a week someone changed the template’s arguments to something it doesn’t understand. Of course changing the template code to accept "gray" instead of "grey" is trivial, but we’d be going fruitlessly back and forth if a stable terminological agreement (which spans much wider than tram liveries) is not reached first. Please chip in at Commons:Village_pump#Grey_v.s_gray and in the template’s talk page. -- Tuválkin ✉ 00:50, 12 November 2014 (UTC)

I was just working on Category:Non-empty category redirects, where the parent categories were an now appearing again. regards. --JuTa 02:24, 12 November 2014 (UTC)

Launaea fragilis

Hallo JuTa, ich habe mir schon gedacht, dass ich bei der Erstellung der Seite irgend etwas falsch gemacht habe - kannst Du mir bitte erklären, WAS? Ich möchte nämlich gerne aus Fehlern lernen. Herzlichst --Ziegler175 (talk) 08:22, 13 November 2014 (UTC)

Hallo, ich vermute Du wolltest die Category:Launaea fragilis erszellen. Launaea fragilis ist hingegen eine sog. Galerie (entspricht dem Artikelnamenraum auf Wikipedia). Solche Galerien sollten mindestens 2 Bilder beinhalten, deine hatte leider gar keine. Gruß --JuTa 08:38, 13 November 2014 (UTC)

uploading and license

Hey...I wanted to ask you if I could upload images from ISPR.gov.pk...because according to the American embassy in Pakistan [1], the following is "Not copyright infringement in Pakistan":

A fair dealing with a literary, dramatic, musical or artistic work for the purpose of reporting current events:

• - in a newspaper, magazine or similar periodical; or
• - by broadcast or in a cinematograph film or by means of photographs

I just need help with the license part...any help would be appreciated...thanks Saadkhan12345 (talk) 10:15, 15 November 2014 (UTC)

Hi. Sorry, but that sounds like a "fair use" clause, which is not accepted at commons but on some local Wikipedias. Compare Commons:Fair use an i.e. en:Wikipedia:Fair use. You may like to upload those images i.e. to the english wikipedia. regards --JuTa 10:20, 15 November 2014 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Random Acts of Kindness Barnstar
	thanks that really helped Saadkhan12345 (talk) 15:06, 16 November 2014 (UTC)

SandieShoe

Bonjour, Je comprend votre message concernant la possible suppression des deux images que j'ai importer, car je les aient trouvées via internet, cependant, celle de la comparaison des cerveau est disponible sur ce site : http://www.futura-sciences.com/magazines/sante/infos/actu/d/vie-ce-gene-fait-galoper-cerveau-humain-9496/ Que dois-je rajouter pour que l'image reste en place ? C'est important que je le sache rapidement, cette page sera notée (cours universitaire) ce jeudi, et doit contenir des images. Merci

Hi, you cant just copy images out of the internet and uploa them to commons. Every image on commons has to be reuseable by anybody in the world for any purpose, see Commons:Licensing. regards --JuTa 06:26, 17 November 2014 (UTC)

File:Alamid.jpg

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

Josve05a (talk) 19:08, 17 November 2014 (UTC)

"needs history check"

I think that you're a human so, when a script that you run prints the warn needs history check, pretty please, check page history instead of actioning a second script to nominate if for deletion. Trademark isn't the same thing of copyright; maybe there's a reason that {{Trademarked}} don't automatically puts media files to speed deletion... Thanks. Lugusto • ※ 22:33, 22 November 2014 (UTC)

Hi, this edit was itentionaly, because {{Trademarked}} isn't a license template, there is a need to use another valid license template when you use it. And the image wasn't {{Own}} work of the uploader as originally claimed. These are the reasons why I marked it with "no license" although there was one in the original version. The uploader changed the source and added a {{PD-textlogo}} afterwards , which was OK. Although this might be a borderline case for this license because of COM:TOO. I don't understand why you reverted that edit. Anyhow: I now re-reverted now to the last uploaders version and removed the problem tag. regards. --JuTa 09:46, 23 November 2014 (UTC)

Images flagged for deletion

Hi, you flagged two pictures I uploaded for deletion. Both have the permission of the copyright holder to be used on wikipedia as is specified in the correct section below the images. Ruairí Donnelly (talk) 20:57, 23 November 2014 (UTC)

Apologies, your comment was regarding licences. I have updated the images. Ruairí Donnelly (talk) 21:06, 23 November 2014 (UTC)

szia

tőröldmán le a felhasználói lapomat is

Sorry, I don't understand. What you trying to tell me? --JuTa 16:04, 24 November 2014 (UTC)

issue

The map here, [2] , should be deleted. The map which base is being used is not in the public domain. The base map for [3], is [4]. If you take a close look, you will notice that the minicipal grid is different. I notified the original uploader of [5] that he violated copyright with it, or to be precise, I emailed the guy. He totally understood and changed the thing. Hence, we get back to square 1, that [6] should be deleted. Do you have any disagreement here, and if not may I proceed to nominate it for deletion so that it gets deleted like it was the first time? (Lilic (talk) 19:09, 17 November 2014 (UTC)).

Hi, I don't see differences in the border lines, but if you think you should raise a 3rd DR to it, do so. regards. --JuTa 21:09, 17 November 2014 (UTC)

I will do so later this week. As for the border lines, take a closer look, they are very different right now. Do please look at them, don't you see the difference? If not I could perhaps zoom in for you and upload a sample section to show you, let me know if I need to do that. (Lilic (talk) 19:03, 18 November 2014 (UTC)).

I only can repeat: If you think you should raise a 3rd DR for this map, please do so. I will not decide the new DR. --JuTa 19:10, 18 November 2014 (UTC)

Sorry for the late reply, I am a bit busy nowadays.

Before I do anything, I am just hoping that you can at least see what I am talking about? I mean, as long as you see that there is some logic in what I said. Maybe I am seeing things? I hope I am not, so I am just hoping that you can work with me for just a little bit so that you can tell me if you feel that what I am saying is at all plausible??? (Lilic (talk) 19:08, 26 November 2014 (UTC)).

No, I don't unerstand what you talking about , sorry. I don't see any border differences minimum to the older versions of File:BiH 1739.png, and I don't understand why you think that File:BiH1991a.png should be deleted. regards --JuTa 19:34, 26 November 2014 (UTC)

File:Vintage Absinthe Label Czech from 1911.jpg

Hello, I am doing this for the first time, so please excuse any errors. You flagged an image for deletion Vintage Absinthe Label Czech from 1911.jpg that is past copyright as it is from 1911. The company has not existed with the company name on the label image for 103 years! I work for gsd.cz, the producer and I own the trademark: Green Tree Absinthe. Please reinstate as historical proof of representation of Czech Absinthe is needed and has been demanded by others in the past hoping that it does not exist. Well we posted and lone behold, our image is deleted from the entry and commons. Please let me know. Thank you - Exporter-Starorezna Prostejov1518 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Exporter-Starorezna Prostejov1518 (talk • contribs) 2014-11-25T22:26:26‎ (UTC)

Hi, you might try to reupload the image using the license template {{PD-old}}. But tryto make it clear in the description when taht label was designed and thet the "owning" company is abandomed since 1911. PS: You cannot just put a {{Cc-by-3.0}} license on works which you don't have created yourself - only the copyright holder can do that. regards. --JuTa 17:36, 26 November 2014 (UTC)

File:Keki-adhikari-1.jpg

Actually the pic is from online nepali newspaper and I don't know what the licence is...But I have given the link and marked as not my own work. I thought that would work. I don't know if there exits any license here in Nepal regarding it . If you can help please these sites abd let me know what license or what conditions are there to use there images, I am trying as well.

1. onlinekhabar
2. setopati

Thanks...and glad to know you are from German :)

Learnerktm (talk) 15:52, 26 November 2014 (UTC)

Hello, every contentin the internet (including images) are per default "all right reserved / not allowed to be copied or used alsewhere". The only chance I see for you, that you try to get contact to the photogapher and/or copyright holder of the image and ask him if he is willing to publish the image under a free license ( see Commons:Licensing - {{Cc-by-sa-4.0}} is recommanded). If he agrees he has to send an email to the commons support team as documented on Commons:OTRS. regards. --JuTa 17:58, 26 November 2014 (UTC)

Help, please

Hi JuTa: Today I received note on my talk page from user upset about File:Avenida Julius Nyerere entre Sommerschield e Xiquelene 1.jpg this image. I see it has an OTRS tag, but it was overdue as of 20 November and to close deletions, I removed the file today with a note that it could be restored when/if the OTRS is received. The user is apparently upset, and had the file restored (restored the file), but removed the history of the deletion. Could you - as last recorded editor on the file - please have a look here and let me know what can be done about this? That the uploader (who is not the creator of the image) is so upset is suggestive to me of a problem. Cheers! Ellin Beltz (talk) 03:44, 2 December 2014 (UTC)

Hi, Ellin. The problem behind might have been that the {{OTRS pending}} "silently" add a "no permission" after 30 days. Files is the corresponding daily category are normaly eligable for deleteion after 7 days. But withing that "no permission" you can read that the uploader should be informed and the file can be deleted 15 days after that. As said the "no permission" part is added the the OTRS pending template silently and automaticly without any edit. So in most cases nobody is informing any uploader, and the files get deleted 7 days after. (I did that too in the past for old OTRS pending cases.) regards --JuTa 17:10, 2 December 2014 (UTC)

Hi JuTa: Thank you for letting me know that. BTW, Jim Woodward fixed it please see my talk page for discussion of what should & shouldn't have happened to this image. Jim summarizes it very succinctly. Ellin Beltz (talk) 17:45, 2 December 2014 (UTC)

Nutzung des Bildes Spätburgunder Rebe

Hallo Juta, ich habe das Bild mit der Rebe auf meiner Webseite untergebracht. Das sieht jetzt so aus:

http://www.rhc-weinkontor.de/Spaetburgunder

Frage: ist meine Lizenzangabe korrekt mit der Autoren-Nennung? Gruß --Holger Casselmann (talk) 10:40, 3 December 2014 (UTC)

Hallo Holger Casselmann, ja das sieht für mich gut aus. Gruß --JuTa 20:35, 3 December 2014 (UTC)

Copyright status: File:AlyshaBrillaJazzRoom20140613.jpg

JuTa thank you for pointing out the issue with my image . I have added the license information for image. The picture is my own property. I hope that I have rectified the issue and that the image will not be deleted.

Thank you.

Brillahead (talk) 03:57, 7 December 2014 (UTC)

Hi, you are wellcome. I did another minor fix now. regards --JuTa 12:12, 7 December 2014 (UTC)

licence of File:Map of Charlottenburg around Charlottenburg.jpg

Want to admit that there`s already another version of this file, but not monochrome. I worked on it. The map ha an age about 250 years and was published, or better an adjuncted map of Wilhelm Gundlach: Geschichte der Stadt Charlottenburg. Springer Verlag Berlin 1905

So in each case itis more than100 years old an the license is PD-old. Thanks --Kalima (talk) 11:11, 7 December 2014 (UTC)

Hi, you are wellcome. I fixed the syntax of the description pages now and removed the problem tag. regards --JuTa 12:13, 7 December 2014 (UTC)

File:Shirvanshah Afridun I.png

Hi, I did something about this image. Please check and say it is enough or not. regards ----Kim Yushin (talk) 13:33, 7 December 2014 (UTC)

Hi, that looks good. I removed the problem tag. --JuTa 22:36, 7 December 2014 (UTC)

File:Stipe Erceg.png

Hi, JuTa. How could that image be eliminated for copyright issues when it's only a cropped version of Little-paris-12.patte.jpg? Cheers, Gabriel Yuji (talk) 02:57, 8 December 2014 (UTC)

You forgot to use the license template of the source image. Feel free to reuploa it, but next time ensure to use the same license template as the source. regards --JuTa 06:57, 8 December 2014 (UTC)

Well, I've re-uploaded it. I'm not sure I did the right thing. Could you cheack it, please? Gabriel Yuji (talk) 16:31, 8 December 2014 (UTC)

Hi, agood try, but not perfect. I did some fixes - see here. regards. --JuTa 17:12, 8 December 2014 (UTC)

File:Hilmar Hans Werner im gruenen 2007.jpg

you deleted the above mentioned file of myself (you'd be a good german-prussian...) now I finally got a correct (hope so) license from the guy who shot the foto (see below). what am I to do now, to load the photo up again without disturbing the orderly revolution of our planet round the sun??? thank you! please send me an email: mail@berlinertourguide.com

Sehr geehrter Herr Werner,

Hiermit räume ich Ihnen, Herrn Hilmar Werner, dem auf dem Foto Dargestellten (mit grünem Hemd vor Buschwerk), unbeschränkt alle Nutzungsrechte an dem von mir erstellten Foto ein.

mit herzlichen Grüßen, Björn Awe -- Humboldt Tours Berlin GmbH Björn Awe Boxhagenerstr. 16 10245 Berlin

Phone: +49 (0)xxx-xxxxxxx E-Mail: xxx@humboldttoursberlin.com URL: www.humboldttoursberlin.com

Steuernummer: xxxxxxxx - Amtsgericht Lichtenberg --HilmarHansWerner (talk) 20:33, 8 December 2014 (UTC)

Hallo HilmarHansWerner, leite diese mail zusammen mit einer Lizenzerklärung deiner Wahl an das Commons-Support-Team weiter. Beschrieben wir das ganze auf Commons:OTRS/de. Einen Beispieltext für solch eine mail findest Du hier. Welche Lizenz? Du kannst Dir eine von Commons:Copyright tags aussuchen. Empfohlen ist {{Cc-by-sa-4.0}}. Gruß --JuTa 20:43, 8 December 2014 (UTC)

Glofish images

File:Glofish-galactic-purple-danios.jpg

Ciao Juta, thanks for your messagges about Glofish images. I found these pictures in the official page of Glofish society [7], with this text "If you would like high resolution images for media use, please click here". I thought it was a use permit but I don't know what's the type of copyright and permission. Can you help me? If you believe that there are no conditions, clears well the images. Thanks a lot. Matt --Marrabbio2 (talk) 11:57, 9 December 2014 (UTC)

Yes, but on the botton of the same page you can read: "Copyright © 2014 Yorktown Technologies, L.P. | All Rights Reserved". An "If you would like high resolution images for media use, please click here" is not a clear license. Its unclear if i.e. commercial reusage is allowed or not like printing the images to t-shirts an sell them or on boxes of fish food. That must be persmitted according commons rules. regards. --JuTa 19:07, 9 December 2014 (UTC)

nur so

Irgendwann wird es fad: [8]. Soll ich meine BEO abschalten und ert wieder einschalten wenn ihr euch einig seid? - Bwag (talk) 21:45, 9 December 2014 (UTC)

Ich hatte da "nur" Category:Non-empty category redirects abgearbeitet und erst nach einigen Kategorien den Streit dahinter bemerkt. Daraufhin hab' ich diese Aktivität bei die Wiener Straßen eingestellt. --JuTa 08:35, 10 December 2014 (UTC)

Fehlende Lizent

Warum geht denn die Lizenz verloren, wenn das Skript die Datei nicht unmittelbar hochlädt (weil zu dem Zeitpunkt ein identisches aber non-stable Bild vorlag)? Das ist ja blöd! --Matthiasb (talk) 15:16, 7 December 2014 (UTC)

Hi, ich hab' leider keine Ahnung was für ein Skript Du verwendest, noch was genau "non-stable" hier genau sein soll. Ich suche hier nur von Zeit zu Zeit Bilder ohne Lizenz-Vorlage und gebe den Hochladern bescheid. Gruß --JuTa 22:40, 7 December 2014 (UTC)

Die hundsgewöhnlichen Hochladefunktion "Bisherige "Hochladeart". Ich erhielt da eine Warnung, weil das Bild zu dem Zeitpunkt identisch unter File:JTWC wp2214.gif existierte; inzwischen ist das eine neuere Version, weil diese Karte während eines Taifuns so drei bis viermal am Tag aktualisiert wird, während im Wikinewsartikel ja genau die besagte Version "20" benötigt wurde, also File:JTWC WP2214-20.gif als (vorübergehendes) Duplikat erwünscht war. Danach bleiben alle Daten, die man eingegeben hat erhalten, mit Ausnahme der Lizenzvorlage. Die Warnung "frißt" quasi die Lizenz. Grüße --Matthiasb (talk) 00:14, 11 December 2014 (UTC)

File:IndenturedVietnameseNewHebrides.png

I took note of your message regarding the absence of licensing on this picture. I uploaded this picture in continuation of a discussion on the French village pump regarding the status of this type of files. There is quite a few people there that are well versed on copyright issues, but none was able to give a rationale on the status of this picture. What I am looking for is someone telling me if this type of picture is copyrighted or not. I guess that only someone that is knowledgeable on French laws and on the French administrative system will be able to give me a straight answer. So please, don't delete this picture just because there is no license tag. Best regards.--Kimdime (talk) 17:05, 10 December 2014 (UTC)

Hi, well you have a week starting from yesterday before the file gets eligable for speedy deletion. --JuTa 17:09, 10 December 2014 (UTC)

/* Vienna categories */

After of an action of moving files without discussion, there're many redirected categories, which are not empty. I'd noticed that you cleared some of them, but there're still a lot of them in redirected categories. Can you clean them, too? I don't want to do it again. Wieralee (talk) 01:38, 11 December 2014 (UTC)

Hi, its true, I worked on the non-empty category redirects. But after proccessing several of the Vienna streets I noticed that there is a longer discussion about that and there was sth. like a editwar for these cases. So I stopped that activity and will not touch it again until the discussion is finished and decided. regards. --JuTa 18:54, 12 December 2014 (UTC)

Commons:Deletion requests/File:Demo PC BlackMaiden Interceptor.jpg

Doesn't the file require OTRS permission? And isn't it bad form to close your own deletion discussion? czar ♔ 15:41, 11 December 2014 (UTC)

Hmm, thats a borderline case. Feel free to raise a new DR. --JuTa 18:57, 12 December 2014 (UTC)

John Henry Patterson Stamp and text - help

Need help how to respond to having been given permission by the creator of the files, the Israel Philatelic Service. DK who to write to with the email permission received? Also, earlier deletion of uploaded images that came from historic programs that I did and are my personal work to release to wikicommons. Again, I do not know how or to who to write to give permission to uses my images?

Can you advise?

Hi, the copyright holder has to send an email to the commons support team as documented at Commons:OTRS, which is permissions-commons@wikimedia.org. regards --JuTa 20:38, 13 December 2014 (UTC)

File:Cheryl Strayed and Monster on PCT.jpg

Dear JuTA,

I have found that the file was removed but I have added information that I have confirmation from Cheryl Strayed that it can be used. No, I can't even upload it again. Could you please advice what can I do to restore the file?

Hi, the copyright holder, according your info Cheryl Strayed, has to send an email to the commons support team as documented on Commons:OTRS. If everything checks out OK the image will get restored, regards. --JuTa 18:59, 12 December 2014 (UTC)

Hi, Can I forward our correspondence for that?

Yes, i think so. --JuTa 08:48, 15 December 2014 (UTC)

File:Bismarckdenkmal worms.jpg‎

Hallo JuTa, wieso hast du meine Bearbeitung wieder rückgängig gemacht? Der Lizenzbaustein ist absolut falsch. Der Uploader gibt das Bild als seins aus und stellt es unter eine CC-Lizenz. Dazu ist er gar nicht berechtigt. --Schängel (talk) 14:41, 14 December 2014 (UTC)

Hi Schängel, am besten stellst Du in solch einem Fall einen regulären Löschantrag, denn diese Begründung ging aus dem {{No permission since}} nicht hervor. Dieser Baustein benötigt übrigens noch year= month= und day= parameter. Ich hatte das Bild in Category:Media missing permission as of unknown date gefunden und konnte mir nicht recht erklären was denn nun falsch dran sein soll (Es gibt ja auch ältere Fotografen, die ihre alte Bilder einscannen und hier hochladen.) PS: Wenn Du in Deinen Einstellungen "Quick Delete" und/oder "AjaxQuickDelete" (unter Wartungshelferlein) aktivierst werden alle notwendigen Schritte bei (Schnell)löschanträgen automatisch un richtig urchgeführt. Gruß --JuTa 14:50, 14 December 2014 (UTC)

Dann muss der Uploader aber schon was älter sein :-) Der Bild ist sicher um das Jahr 1900 entstanden. Das sieht man an der Kleidung der Kinder. Eigentlich ein Fall für den Baustein Gemeinfreiheit, aber das soll der Uploader richtig einsetzen und auch das Datum. Es ist sicher nicht 2014 aufgenommen worden. Deswegen ist es für mich kein Fall von Löschen sondern von richtigem Lizenz-Baustein einsetzen. --Schängel (talk) 14:56, 14 December 2014 (UTC)

Years

Would you please restore: 1947, 1942 and 1935, I'd like to take a shot at expanding them. Thanks. Evrik (talk) 16:02, 3 December 2014 (UTC)

Hi Evrik, OK they are back. But please try to put some images into them. Otherwise I'll redelete them uring my next "routine check" for short galleries. regards. --JuTa 20:46, 3 December 2014 (UTC)

I added a few more images. Thanks! Evrik (talk) 05:54, 4 December 2014 (UTC)

Could you please restore 1963? Evrik (talk) 16:36, 4 December 2014 (UTC)

OK, its back too. --JuTa 20:04, 4 December 2014 (UTC)

I'm finding more, how about 1975, 1989, 2007, 1960, 1926, 1944 and 1950? Those are some others I've stumbled upon. Evrik (talk) 20:45, 4 December 2014 (UTC)

Those are back now too. --JuTa 20:53, 4 December 2014 (UTC)

1936, please. Evrik (talk) 16:35, 18 December 2014 (UTC)

Another year gallery without any images. Its back. Please fill it up.... --JuTa 16:43, 18 December 2014 (UTC)

• Done. Thanks. Evrik (talk) 16:58, 18 December 2014 (UTC)

Help for copyright

Hallo, this file "Map of comunità montana Agordina (province of Belluno, region Veneto, Italy).svg" has an incorrect copyright status. It should be similar to "Map of comunità montana Feltrina (province of Belluno, region Veneto, Italy).svg". I used a .svg file existing on commons "Map of comune of Agordo (province of Belluno, region Veneto, Italy).svg" and i modified it with inkscape. It probably has to be published with cc 3.0. Could you suuggest me the more correct tag, and how to correct the status on file?. Thanks. --Ciaurlec (talk) 11:38, 18 December 2014 (UTC)

Hi, I fixed it according the source page(s). But that is public-domain, not cc 3.0. If you think your modifications have enough COM:TOO and you don't like to publish under public-domain please change it to {{Cc-by-3.0}} or {{Cc-by-sa-3.0}}. regards. --JuTa 16:51, 18 December 2014 (UTC)

"Duplicate of itself?", File:Фрагмент панно мемориала строителям.jpg

Hallo JuTa, es sind von einem Foto (Фрагмент панно мемориала строителям.jpg) zwei identische Exemplare (duplicate) vorhanden. Ich bitte Sie das ältere Foto davon zu löschen. Vielen Dank im Voraus Safstep (talk) 12:24, 18 December 2014 (UTC)

Hallo, dazu besteht an sich keine Notwendigkeit. Es gibt hier viele Bilder mit mehreren, und teils auch identischen Versionen. Das ist nichts schlimmes. Gruß --JuTa 16:54, 18 December 2014 (UTC)

Missing licence

Hi. Why did you tag File:Gcc screenshot debian.png and File:Gcc screenshot sl win2k.png with no licence, {{Free screenshot}} is not enough? --Sporti (talk) 06:50, 21 December 2014 (UTC)

No, thats not enough. You have to use the license under which the software was released i.e. {{free screenshot|GPL}}. regards. --JuTa 10:24, 21 December 2014 (UTC)

OK, thanks. --Sporti (talk) 15:21, 21 December 2014 (UTC)

Discuss, please

Instead of edit warring with snide edit summaries, how about acting as an admin should and explaining why both redirects are not necessary, because my experience is that without both, HotCat doesn't work correctly. Beyond My Ken (talk) 03:16, 22 December 2014 (UTC)

Then you should start a discusion on i.e Category talk:Category redirects to define a new standard. All I've seen up to now is without the #redirect. regards. --JuTa 04:25, 22 December 2014 (UTC)

No, you, an admin, should explain to me, an editor, the meaning of your edit summary and why both redirects are not necessary. If you in fact don't actually know that to be the case, then please stop reverting my edit, as it is my practical understanding that it is necessary to have both so that Hot Cat and Cat-a-Lot will work properly. If you know this to be untrue, it is incumbent on you to give me the information required to revise my behavior, not just to edit war with snide remarks. Beyond My Ken (talk) 06:10, 22 December 2014 (UTC)

The main reason why it shouldn't be is that if such a cat is added to an image and a reader klicks on it he will be redirected to the destination cat and will wonder why the image he just came from is not included in that cat. That is the reason, as far as i know, why the whole {{Category redirect}} template was created. btw: we were both edit warring and I stopped it. regards. --JuTa 08:20, 22 December 2014 (UTC)

PS: If you look into Template talk:Category redirect there are some reasons stated (and some opposit opinions). --JuTa 08:28, 22 December 2014 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Original Barnstar
	Thanks for having completed the procedure, I'm not so used to commons and I was in a hurry Shivanarayana (talk) 22:15, 22 December 2014 (UTC)

Big Joe 1 images

• File:Big Joe 1 on Launch Complex 14 at Cape Canaveral.jpg
• File:Big Joe 1 on Launch Complex 14 at Cape Canaveral (2).jpg

@Soerfm: I had changed the licensing to not mention NASA on those images because they are not NASA images. They are, from searching, not in the NASA archives. The source of the image is https://www.floridamemory.com/items/show/58053 with a credit line of 'State Archives of Florida, Florida Memory' and no photographers name listed. This is part of the 'Department of Commerce Collection', described here. To describe them as {{PD-NASA}} is incorrect, this is apparently a publicity photo taken by the 'Florida Development Commission'. Revent (talk) 09:26, 21 December 2014 (UTC)

Hi, unfortunaltey you left those images completely without a license template. I found the images in Category:Media without a license: needs history check. If the NASA license is wrong, please change it to a correct one (you might like to search within Commons:Copyright tags) worst case use {{PD-because}}. regards. --JuTa 10:28, 21 December 2014 (UTC)

Fair enough, I thought it was a matter of 'arguing' about it, not just maintenance because of the lack of an actual template. The licensing is described in 'text' form in {{Image from the Florida Photographic Collection}}.. I guess we could edit that template to use {{PD-because}}, or maybe {{PD-FLGov}} (though I think the latter possibly be incorrect, since I don't really know if all the images in 'Florida Memory' are actually works of the state government, their statement doesn't make that explicit.) Really, IMO, that 'images from' template isn't very well written. Revent (talk) 10:51, 21 December 2014 (UTC)

Just an update, in the course of looking for something else I located {{Attribution-FLGov-PhotoColl}} (horrible name), which covers these... sometime in the next few days I'll try to take time to go through the 70 or so images using the 'image from' and clean them up to use this, and make sure they have the right {{Credit line}} per the source. Revent (talk) 19:59, 23 December 2014 (UTC)

Season's Greetings

Season's Greetings and Good Wishes

Best wishes for the season and the New Year. Ellin Beltz (talk) 05:04, 25 December 2014 (UTC) |}

File:Chilenische Araukarie Detail.jpg

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

MPF (talk) 00:27, 27 December 2014 (UTC)

File:50FrankenBelgien1966.jpg

File:50FrankenBelgien1966.jpg has been marked as a possible copyright violation. Wikimedia Commons only accepts free content—that is, images and other media files that can be used by anyone, for any purpose. Traditional copyright law does not grant these freedoms, and unless noted otherwise, everything you find on the web is copyrighted and not permitted here. For details on what is acceptable, please read Commons:Licensing. You may also find Commons:Copyright rules useful, or you can ask questions about Commons policies at the Commons:Help desk. If you are the copyright holder and the creator of the file, please read Commons:But it's my own work! for tips on how to provide evidence of that. The file you added has been deleted. If you have written permission from the copyright holder, please have them send us a free license release via COM:VRT. If you believe that the deletion was not in accordance with policy, you may request undeletion. (It is not necessary to request undeletion if using VRT; the file will be automatically restored at the conclusion of the process.) Warning: Wikimedia Commons takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing.

 

Well-Informed Optimist (talk) 13:21, 30 December 2014 (UTC)

Images from Nepal meetings - did you receive note from photo owner?

Hello, I received a note from you about two pictures (NLG Encoding 3.jpg and NLG Encoding 4.jpg) on my reports page (https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Grants:PEG/Anderson/Script_encoding_proposal_for_Nepal/Report).

I asked the person who owns the pictures, Sonika Manandhar, to write to permissions-commons@wikimedia.org with the necessary information, allowing them to be posted.

She seems to be very reliable and sent me a note on 22 December confirming that she wrote to the permissions email address, identifying herself as the owner and releasing them under the license https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/.

I see the picts were removed by Fastily on 18 December "because: No permission since 20 December 2014:"

Did you (or someone else at the permissions email) receive them? Is there more information that is required? Do let me know how to fix this.

With many thanks, Dwanders14

Hi, I am not a member of the so called OTRS-Team an cannot see those mails. You should ask on Commons:OTRS/Noticeboard. if everything checks out OK they will restore the image(s). regards. --JuTa 09:00, 31 December 2014 (UTC)

Thank you. I will follow up there. - Dwanders14

Missing licence

In regards to your remarks on https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Flag_of_the_United_States_%2850_stars%29.svg ...

Yes, I did create the svg file of the US flag in Adobe Illustrator from scratch, but the design of the US flag is already in public domain. So, I am a bit confused how to go about this copyright issue. I have made the changes as per your instructions, so please check out the page now, and let me know if all is a ok.

Hi, you fixed the license and this problem was solved. But inbetween another user raised a regular deletion request because the file seems to be a duplicate of another one. --JuTa 19:44, 3 January 2015 (UTC)

I already explained it to him saying this "No, it's not a duplicate. I created a new SVG file, because the original SVG file has spacing issues when you click on it. The stars are not spaced out correctly, especially near the right edge. My SVG file corrects that issue. You can check out both SVG files, and you will notice the difference.My-wiki-photos

File:Eisengießerei 1813 (Gleiwitz).jpg

Hallo JuTa. Ich möchte Dich um Hilfeb bitten. Leider blick ich bei den Lizenzen nicht so ganz durch. Es geht um das Foto (https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Eisengie%C3%9Ferei_1813_%28Gleiwitz%29.jpg). Welche Lizenz soll ich dort angeben? Die Zeitung stammt aus dem Jahre 1938. Das Foto ist mein Eigentum und ich habe es eingescannt. Für Deine Hilfe wäre ich dankbar. Gruß--Gliwi (talk) 07:11, 4 January 2015 (UTC)

Nun, da käme es darauf an, wann der Fotograf, Herr Scherl, verstorben ist. Ist dies vor 1945 wäre die richtige Lizenz <code>{{PD-scan|PD-old-70}}</code>. Ist dies nicht der Fall müsste er oder seine Erben eine sog. Freigabeerklärung an das Commons-Support-Team schicken. Einzelheiten dazu siehe: Commons:OTRS. Gruß --JuTa 07:17, 4 January 2015 (UTC)

Template:Delete

Hi, thanks for fixing the missing DR date on File:Esclavismo.jpg, but why on earth is this a manual procedure here? I'm used to the idea of adding (example) {{Fact}} without date, and a bot (after waiting for a minute for further modifications) later adds the date. There is a variant of {{Delete}}, some {{subst:thingy|reason}}, but so far I didn't bother to learn its name: 6 characters "delete" vs. 6 characters "subst:" leaves 0 for a user-friendly name of "thingy". –Be..anyone (talk) 10:16, 4 January 2015 (UTC)

Hi, if you activate Quick Delete and/or AjaxQuickDelete within your preferences ou will get some extra menupoint on the sitebar. If ou then press "reuqest deletion" (or similar) it will be done automaticly including creating the DR-subpage, listing it on the daily DR-page and informing the uploader. regards. --JuTa 12:49, 4 January 2015 (UTC)

File tagging File:Cinéaste One Logo.jpg

Hi, I've not heard back from you, I just wanted to inform you that Cineaste One has given us full consent to use anything from their Facebook page, twitter or website. It is all promotional content anyways. They forwarded me the mail yesterday.--Cube b3 (talk) 09:59, 6 January 2015 (UTC)

Hi Cube b3 , then you should forward that mail to the commons supportteam as documented on Commons:OTRS. Otherwise the file will get deleted soon. When you've done that please add {{subst:OP}} to the description page, which will prevent deletion for a about 30 days or until the case will be decided as valid or invalid. regards. --JuTa 10:08, 6 January 2015 (UTC)

LOREA CANALES.jpg

I just sent a mail to OTRS to connect ticket number #2014120310026516 to this image. Hope it doesnt get deleted! Thelmadatter (talk) 19:08, 6 January 2015 (UTC)

Hi, please ask on Commons:OTRS/Noticeboard for this case. I'm not a member of the so called OTRS support group, and cannot check those mails and tickets. regards --JuTa 20:08, 6 January 2015 (UTC)

File:Santa Croce 4.jpg and co

I'm sure to have sent the email with the autorisation of File:Santa Croce 1.jpg, File:Santa Croce 2.jpg, File:Santa Croce 3.jpg and File:Santa Croce 1.jpg (I think ticket:2014112610018243). By the way I have resent another mail some minutes ago. --Lkcl it (talk) 19:56, 6 January 2015 (UTC)

Hi, please ask on Commons:OTRS/Noticeboard for this case. I'm not a member of the so called OTRS support group, and cannot check those mails and tickets. regards --JuTa 20:11, 6 January 2015 (UTC)

Thanks for your reply ... I'm sorry, I saw that you edited the pages so I thought you can check the OTRS. I'll write on the noticeboard. Thanks --Lkcl it (talk) 21:59, 6 January 2015 (UTC)

Category:Photographs_taken_on_1981-07

Photographs taken on 1981-07 has been listed at Commons:Categories for discussion so that the community can discuss ways in which it should be changed. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry. If you created this category, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for discussion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with it. If the category is up for deletion because it has been superseded, consider the notion that although the category may be deleted, your hard work (which we all greatly appreciate) lives on in the new category. In all cases, please do not take the category discussion personally. It is never intended as such. Thank you!

Carnby (talk) 11:40, 7 January 2015 (UTC)

File:GalleriaInCorso.tif

l'immagine della galleria in costruzione è stata data dalla famiglia di Cittadini Berardo, così come tutte le altre di 'Berardo Cittadini', non è possibile conoscerne la fonte,essendo documenti datati primo '900, sono tanti in mano alla famiglia, avevo scelto queste come le più esplicativa,e rappresentative, mi sono state consegnate e autorizzate dai nipoti in particolare Gianfranco Gambarelli, docente all'Università di Bergamo e in matematica di Brescia.io spero davvero mi possano essere accettate e sinceramente ringrazio, non contesto dovesse essere spostata la categoria, ricordo che io son in wikipedia da meno di un mese, e penso d'esser capita nella mia reale difficoltà(non prendo nulla sul personale, ci mancherebbe, qui ognuno fa del proprio meglio,ne son certa) --Nazasca (talk) 07:01, 11 January 2015 (UTC)

Hi, I copied your comments here to the deletion request page - see here. I also left another comment there. regards. --JuTa 11:14, 11 January 2015 (UTC)

File:Wikisource-logo.svg

Hi, apparently File:Wikisource-logo.svg has no chance to get out of its cascading protection. I don't get the idea, only the image needs protection, not its page, but at the end I can't simply update {{ValidSVG}} by a better {{igen|I|v|+}} for a proper "valid InkScape" blurb. I also can't undo your last update. –Be..anyone (talk) 10:27, 17 January 2015 (UTC)

Hi, I am currently looking through old indef blocked pages and unblocking a lot of them. This image has a cascading block through i.e. Commons:Auto-protected files/wikipedia/de. So an indiviual block is not neccessary here. But the effect is that only admins can edit/move/reupload this image. I now changed the {{ValidSVG}} as recommended by you. regards. --JuTa 10:33, 17 January 2015 (UTC)

Thanks, actually it should be |other fields={{igen|I|v|+}} within {{Information}}, otherwise the + could cause havoc (on really unprotected pages), and IMO its - variant outside of {{Information}} is ugly. –Be..anyone (talk) 10:39, 17 January 2015 (UTC)

OK,  Done. --JuTa 10:41, 17 January 2015 (UTC)

Could as well get |date=2006 and |source={{User:Rei-artur/by}} to get rid of the bogus "no source" note within {{Information}} and the odd {{User:Rei-artur/by}} abocve {{Information}}. These nits deserve a bug report, this should not require admin rights incl. admin time, but so far I refused to tackle phab: beyond its login procedure. –Be..anyone (talk) 10:55, 17 January 2015 (UTC)

OK,  Done. --JuTa 12:54, 17 January 2015 (UTC)