User talk:JuTa/Archive 31

@ Museo de Cáceres

Hi, JuTa

I have no doubt about all the images. Uploader sent me this message [1]: "En cuanto al tema de las fotos, he de decirte que, efectivamente, la propiedad de las mismas corresponde al Museo de Cáceres. Ellos me las han enviado y, sabedores de que iban destinadas a editar mi artículo de la Wikipedia, quienes me han pedido que incluya el símbolo de Copyrigt en el pie de cada una de ellas. Como por mi parte, evidentemente, no hay ningún deseo de usurpación ni nada por el estilo de unas imágenes que no son mías...".

There is no doubt: Pictures are property of es:Museo de Cáceres, not of user Miguelperezreviriego, and the museum want to use the copyright symbol in the images.

I had tagged all the images with "no source" like some administrators and users do when source is obviously false. But administrator Nyttend undelete the files because were mis-tagged and threatened me with a block.

There is no tag for this case and I have no proof to start a regular deletion request. Only the message of the uploader. Each administrator has a way to deal with obvious false source. So I give up. Enough for me. I lost too much time. It is better only to upload images. Thank you and sorry. LMLM (talk) 08:32, 4 November 2015 (UTC)

Hi LMLM, then you should start a regular deletion request for them and not just remove the license templates from the description pages. "Visual file exchange" you know, I saw. regards --JuTa 11:17, 4 November 2015 (UTC)

In fact, I don't know what "visual file exchange" is. And, as I said to you, I just will upload my own images from now. I hope no administrator threaten me again with block me for doing that. Thank you and sorry again. Regards. LMLM (talk) 12:17, 4 November 2015 (UTC)

File:Crown Fountain Spouting.jpg

I see that you deleted File:Crown Fountain Spouting.jpg, which waiting to be moved to WP per Commons:Deletion requests/Files in Category:Millennium Park. Can you tell me what name you saved it under at WP.--TonyTheTiger (talk) 20:28, 4 November 2015 (UTC)

Hi TonyTheTiger, I didn't transfered it. I actualy thought it was just a forgotten deleted file. I now temp. undeleted it and you should be able to upload it yourself to en:. Pls. leave me a note when you've done that. Otherwise I'll redelete it in about a week. regards. --JuTa 21:15, 4 November 2015 (UTC)

I am confused on two things now. Looking at Commons:Deletion requests/Files in Category:Millennium Park, how did I even ping you. It now looks like User:Yann deleted this file. The second point of confusion is that the source for this file now seems unclear. I realize that I was the uploader, but the url no longer points to the file that I posted. Do you know what happened?--TonyTheTiger (talk) 05:43, 5 November 2015 (UTC)

You didn't pinged me, why do you think you did? I deleted it while checking old deletion requests. About the different source: No idea. The same souce was used in the first version created by you: here. regards. --JuTa 07:47, 5 November 2015 (UTC)

I have unclosed the deletion review and the discussion is now going on there. Please do not delete the file until we have some resolution there.--TonyTheTiger (talk) 22:17, 5 November 2015 (UTC)

Deleted File

Hello! Please restore File:Sportwiki Logo.png

Site materials are distributed under a free license Creative Commons Attribution (link) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Park sw (talk • contribs) 08:50, 06 November 2015 (UTC)

OK, I've undeleted it. I added a {{Licensereview}} to get another pair of eyes. regards. --JuTa 10:59, 6 November 2015 (UTC)

Ägypten?

Das war ein Duplikat von Blatt 4309?

In dem Ordner bei mir, von dem aus ich hochlade, ist es aber keines - da sieht es dem ähnlicher. Da wäre es sinnvoller gewesen, mich anzusprechen - denn daß 4308 ungleich 4309, dürfte wohl klar sein.

Kannst Du die Seite mal wiederherstellen? Dann lade ich die korrekte Karte drüber. --Elop (talk) 17:59, 6 November 2015 (UTC)

Hi Elop, die waren binär identisch. Ich hab' jetzt auch die Weiterleitungen gelöscht. Nun müsstest Du das korrekte Bild eigentlich wieder hochladen können. Gruß --JuTa 19:03, 6 November 2015 (UTC)

Namt Ju,

jetz isset definitiv Marl. Kannst Du auch die alte Dateibeschreibung wieder einsetzen? --Elop (talk) 19:12, 6 November 2015 (UTC)

 Done. --JuTa 19:16, 6 November 2015 (UTC)

File:Jennifer Hall Lee.jpg

User:Jennifer H. Lee has reuploaded File:Jennifer Hall Lee.jpg from Commons:Deletion requests/File:Jennifer H. Lee, Filmmaker and Writer.jpg. I am not going to delete it because it is of higher resolution than the one found online, and thus unlikely to have been taken from there without permission. If you have any concerns that she doesn't have the rights to release the photograph under a free license, feel free to mark it no permission; I do not have any such concerns personally, as many publicity photographs involve rights transfers. Magog the Ogre (talk) (contribs) 18:15, 7 November 2015 (UTC)

Logos

I see that you have tagged two of my logo images for deletion. I suggest that you review this page about logos. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Logos — Preceding unsigned comment added by Lee317 (talk • contribs) 06:40, 08 November 2015 (UTC)

Thats on Wikipedia, but we are on Commons, where every image needs a valid license template and fair use is not accepted. regards. --JuTa 06:51, 8 November 2015 (UTC)

@Lee317: Logos are allowed on Commons, but only if they don't meet the threshold of originality. Complex logos are not allowed on Commons and are considered copyright violation. Fair use is also not allowed on Commons. So please be careful on uploading logos. Thanks, ★Poké⁹⁵ 07:08, 8 November 2015 (UTC)

Map

I Want to know why you delete this File:خريطة للإمبراطورية الآشورية والبابلية.jpg this picture , this picture is map , and is my work , you should not delete this --Muhib mansour (talk) 09:01, 8 November 2015 (UTC)

It's hard to believe that you completely drawn this map yourself. You might have added the highlightings and descriptions but the underlying map does not look self made. regards. --JuTa 10:26, 8 November 2015 (UTC)

Copyright status: File:Mitchell U-2 Superwing b.jpg

Please DO NOT delete this! This is a photo already on Wiki Commons; but it was very dark. I have reworked it, altering the brightness and the contrast, so it is not just a dark mess. The consents are AS BEFORE!!!! Arrivisto (talk) 17:29, 8 November 2015 (UTC)

Then you should use the same licenses as the original photo, and link to the original author and image. I corrected that now - see here - next time please try to do that yourself. regards. --JuTa 17:37, 8 November 2015 (UTC)

Bild auf meiner Benutzerseite gelöscht

Ich dachte, kollege JuTa,

dass ich gefragt worden wärebevor meine Benutzerseite um mein Bild geschmälert würde.. Das Bild wurde mir vom Uni-Fotografen zur Verwendung (z.B. auf den Uniseiten) zur Verfügung gestellt. Es ziert meine Seite seit 2005 oder zu Beginn von 06 und sonst nirgendswo. Und 10 Jahre hat keiner gemeckert. Ich dachte, dass ich die Rechte an MEINEM Bild hätte. Hochgeladen hatte das Benutzer Achim Berg (Ausgeschnitten etc) . Bitte wenn möglich, wiederherstellen. Wenn weg, dann bitte auf meiner Uni-Seite Foto Michel wenn möglich auch wieder beschnitten. --G-Michel-Hürth (talk) 21:36, 8 November 2015 (UTC)

Hi, das Bild gehörte zu einer ganzen Reihe von User:Achim Berg hochgeladenen Dateien von verschiedensten Autoren und Rechteinhabern ohne Verifikation via dem sog. Commons:OTRS dass diese dem auch zustimmen. Die meisten Bilder waren wohl schon Jahre alt. Der Mangel wurde aber erst vor gut einer Woche entdeckt un die Bilder entsprechend markiert. Leider rutschen solche Fälle hier immer mal wieder durch und werden erst Jahre später enteckt. Du könntest das Bild selbst nochmls hochladen (eine Kopie hast Du ja). Allerings sieht mir das nicht nach einem "selfie" aus, d.h. der damalige Fotograf besitzt die Urheberrechte an dem Bild. Dieser müsste dann also über ie sog. Commons:OTRS Prozedur bestätigen dass er gewillt ist as Bild unter einer freihen Lizenz zu veröffentlichen. Gruß --JuTa 21:49, 8 November 2015 (UTC)

Ju Ta

Thank you. I'm new to Wikipedia and I'm still learning how to use it correctly. It is likely to provide a little understandable information of the images uploaded to wikicommons. Thanks again. Wirklich Toll (talk) 22:59, 8 November 2015 (UTC)

Hi, please stop uploading images from google facebook and similar. Images on Commons have to be reuseable for anybody in the world for any purpose, which is not the case except explicity stated (on the source page). --JuTa 23:03, 8 November 2015 (UTC)

File:Lumia 950.jpg

I went to the discussion page of that file and asked several questions regarding the deletion. My questions were not answered and the file was deleted. What is the deletion procedure and is it proper to delete without addressing an issue raised in the discussion? Was the file deleted because the shape and visual appearances of the cell phones are copyrightable and considered to be original if so what are the features that make original? Was the file deleted because of the original photograph was copyrighted? Is it considered to be an original if so what is it about it that makes it original? Is originality not an issue in this case? Even if the photograph is not considered copyrightable it would still be illegal to use it without permission? Rybkovich (talk) 01:33, 9 November 2015 (UTC)

Hi, it was simply a copight violation. It was a photo of a 3D object copied without permission from elsewhere in the web. About the originality please see COM:TOO. regards. JuTa 05:39, 9 November 2015 (UTC)

File:DM-Karate-2015.jpg:

Hallo Ju Ta,

wo liegt das Problem bei meiner Datei: File:DM-Karate-2015.jpg? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Claus Michelfelder (talk • contribs) 07:46, 09 November 2015 (UTC)

Da wird keine Lizenzvorlage verwendet - siehe Commons:Licensing und Commons:Copyright tags. Gruß --JuTa 10:51, 9 November 2015 (UTC)

Alessandro Verri

Please undelete Alessandro Verri so I may fix it. Thank you. Evrik (talk) 15:31, 9 November 2015 (UTC)

OK, its back. regards. --JuTa 15:58, 9 November 2015 (UTC)

Deletion of File:Bronzeplatte Paul Wallot in Oppenheim.jpg

Hey JuTa,

please undelete the image File:Bronzeplatte Paul Wallot in Oppenheim.jpg.

I have received a written authorization from the author, Jörg Tauscher, to use the photo on Wikipedia. The author asked my to add "Archive Seibel-Tauscher" to the file.

Please find the original message below: " Sehr geehrter [...],

im Anhang sende ich Ihnen nochmal das Foto von dem Relief von Frau Stahlschmidt. Das Foto ist aus dem Archiv Seibel-Tauscher und ist von meinem Mann, Jörg Tauscher gemacht worden. Wir stellen Ihnen das Foto für Ihre Nutzung zur Verfügung mit der Angabe: Archiv Seibel-Tauscher

Mit freundlichen Grüßen

[...]" — Preceding unsigned comment added by Leshugenottes77 (talk • contribs) 13:22, 10 November 2015 (UTC)

Hallo, das reicht leider nicht. Dateien auf Commons müssen von jedem weltweit für jeden Zweck weiter nutzbar sein, siehe auch Commons:Licensing/de. Nach dem Text oben darfst Du das Bild nutzen aber sonst niemand. Der Urheber müsste eine sog. Freigabeerklärung an das Commons-Support-Team schicken - siehe Commons:OTRS/de und das Bild unter einer freien Lizenz seiner Wahl ({{Cc-by-sa-4.0}} ist empfohlen) veröffentlichen. Gruß --JuTa 15:07, 10 November 2015 (UTC)

Sourced image

While this image has a claimed source it is entirely useless because it is a generic url so it effectively has no source. Ww2censor (talk) 23:56, 12 November 2015 (UTC)

Then please start a regular deletion reques for it. regards. --JuTa 23:59, 12 November 2015 (UTC)

Ok, fine, but the tag clearly states: "missing essential source information". Well in any language I interpret the generic url as that. Ww2censor (talk) 00:03, 13 November 2015 (UTC)

Why did you delete this video "2011_07-Internal_ReinventTheToilet_Animation.webm"?

I just saw this note: Removing "File:2011_07-Internal_ReinventTheToilet_Animation.webm", it has been deleted from Commons by JuTa because: No permission since 3 November 2015. I don't understand why the file was deleted. It took me and User:Doc_James many weeks to get permission from the video owner (the BMGF) for this video and we finally got it. The e-mail was forwarded to permissions and today I see that the video was deleted! That is very frustrating. EvMsmile (talk) 11:25, 11 November 2015 (UTC)

@EvMsmile: Did you send the permission to permissions-commons@wikimedia.org? If you did, it will take days for the OTRS volunteers to process (or verify) the permission. Please be patient, as when the permission is verified to be true, your file will be restored. Regards, ★ Poké⁹⁵ 11:38, 11 November 2015 (UTC)

Thanks, Poké. It was sent by User:Doc_James on 3 November to permissions-commons@wikimedia.org. That's 8 days ago. I realise the system is run by volunteers but could one not have the benefit of the doubt (and leave the file undeleted) until it's been checked by permissions, rather than doing it the other way around? This creates double work and frustrations. I don't have the OTR number because Doc_James is the one who sent it. EvMsmile (talk) 12:14, 11 November 2015 (UTC)

Hi EvMsmile, normaly when OTRS pending the template {{OTRS pending}} should be added to the description page. This prevents deletion of the file by permission reasons for some months or until the case will be decided as valid or invalid by OTRS stuff. This template was missing here, so I had no chance to indicate an email has been sent. The OTRS release process can take weeks or even months - see Category:OTRS pending. regards --JuTa 16:01, 11 November 2015 (UTC)

It was posted on the talk page that OTRS was pending per [2]. Anyway EvM you can upload stuff locally on WP and there I will be able to "protect" it. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 21:28, 11 November 2015 (UTC)

So if User:Doc_James had already indicated that it was pending then why was it deleted? Anyhow, how can the file be quickly undeleted and its appearance on the three pages restored, and that {{OTRS pending}} be added (where exactly?), can you help with this Ju? - as I don't want to take weeks or months before the permissions volunteers get around to it, before I can use this video which has taken me already months to obtain the permission for from the video's owner, the Gates Foundation!1.132.97.103 08:40, 12 November 2015 (UTC)

OK the file is back, and now correctly marked as OTRS pending. I also undid the delinkerBot edits. regards. --JuTa 11:18, 12 November 2015 (UTC)

Thanks Ju! What do I need to do differently next time to ensure it doesn't happen like this again? Is the key to put {{OTRS pending}} in the description of the file?EvMsmile (talk) 13:18, 12 November 2015 (UTC)

We put the OTRS pending on the talk page rather than the image file page. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 14:49, 12 November 2015 (UTC)

EvMsmile: yes.

Doc James: Who is we? On Commons its the file description page - see i.e. Category:OTRS pending and subcats. --JuTa 23:26, 12 November 2015 (UTC)

I asked EvM the ticket number of OTRS and put that ticket number of the talk page. Yes will do it as you describe going forwards. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 19:14, 13 November 2015 (UTC)

Fine, thx :) --JuTa 19:24, 13 November 2015 (UTC)

Figura 1111.jpg Media deleted and information

Hello JuTa

I'm trying to upload, images that i found on the internet and in a specific book, cause i've to attach it into the page Liga de titânio, these pictures will complete my work explain some important points.

I saw that you deleted these pictures, so have a different way to attach pictures on the wikipedia, cause that pictures are free and i can't upload it.

thanks — Preceding unsigned comment added by ClaudiaSasaki (talk • contribs) 17:28, 13 November 2015 (UTC)

Hi, why do you think these images are free? Everything is per default "all rights reserved" except otherwise explicity stated. According the description they were created 1988. In most countries copyight lasts until 70 years past the death of the author. So even the author DONACHIE, M. J. died the same year, the images will be copyrighted until the end of 2058. If portuguese wikipeia accepts the so called fair use clause you could try to upload them localy to pt: - see pt:Wikipédia:Conteúdo restrito (I dont understand an portuguese - so I dont know if its allowed). Or you could try to draw similar diagrams yourself and upload that to commons i.e. under the license {{Cc-by-sa-4.0}}. regards. --JuTa 19:21, 13 November 2015 (UTC)

File:John Schwarz (Australia 1988).jpg

Hi JuTa, I uploaded this file from the English Wiki. I am not familiar with the complex license requirements. You can check the license information there. If it is not sufficient, you can go ahead and delete this file. Best regards.--老陳 (talk) 00:09, 14 November 2015 (UTC)

Hi, I deleted the file on commons now. On en:File:John Schwarz (Australia 1988).jpg it had been copied from a webpage, which makes it normaly a copyright violation. An IP added that he owns te negative later, an tells that she isn't very happy with that copy. But that is inverfiable, anybody can write anything to the decription page. To me its still a copyright violation. regards --JuTa 02:47, 14 November 2015 (UTC)

Copyright status: File:Point Hope from plane.jpg

Hello JuTa, for the file Point Hope from plane.jpg I sent an email to the author of the picture (Zachariah Hughes), and got his consent to the publication. I have two mail: my request, and his positive response, but now I do not know what to do. Can you help me? Thank you in advance. --Mario1952 (talk) 10:14, 14 November 2015 (UTC)

Hi, please forward the mails to permissions-commons@wikimedia.org as documented on Commons:OTRS. But be aware: A sentence like "Yes you can use the image" or similar is not enough. Everybody on earth has to be allowed to use the image for any purpose including commercial ones and derivate works. Once you forwarded the mails you should put the template {{OTRS pending}} to the description page. And even more urgent: you should put the corresponding license to the description page. Under which license does the author likes to publish the image? {{Cc-by-sa-4.0}} is one of the recommanded. See Commons:Copyright tags or a long list of others. regards. --JuTa 11:44, 14 November 2015 (UTC)

Thanks. I have sent a mails containing the correspondence with the photo author to permissions-commons@wikimedia.org. I hope it's enough. Greetings --Mario1952 (talk) 14:17, 14 November 2015 (UTC)

File:StEtienne1905.png

Hello,

Please check the modifications I've made of the license.

It's a extract of a map that has been made by a public administration for public use in 1905, so its publication or use is legal in France. That's the point that is important for me... honestly... "US Copyright", "70 years", "1923" I don't know what it is, I don't want to know, I'm french in France dealing with public goods... the rest I don't give a f***!

If there is any problem left, would you please contact me before deleting anything. Tschüss.

--KidA42 (talk) 19:47, 14 November 2015 (UTC)

Hi, that looks acceptable now. I removed the problem tag. --JuTa 19:52, 14 November 2015 (UTC)

Danke --KidA42 (talk) 20:09, 14 November 2015 (UTC)

File:Zardonic_Mask_2015.jpg

Hello.

I am flabbergasted at the way things are handled here. Every time I upload a picture that I own, as it was taken as work for hire, it gets removed. To avoid this situation in the future, I took a picture of the mask with my mobile phone and uploaded it, believing that it would be clear that such a picture would be my own.

Please undelete my picture. I have permission to upload pictures that I take from my own phone. The mask is mine. I paid for it. I paid for the phone that takes the picture. I don't know what more proof you need to stop sabotaging my hard work.

--Gorepriestwikimedia (talk) 20:07, 14 November 2015 (UTC)

Hi, but the mask itself is likely a copyighted object. To own (a copy?) of it does not mean that you own the copyright of the mask as well. This normaly stays at the designer of the mask. regards. --JuTa 20:13, 14 November 2015 (UTC)

File:Auto-klein-tmp-26.jpg

File:Auto-klein-tmp-26.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!

Revent (talk) 05:40, 15 November 2015 (UTC)

Province of Jaén

Borrando la redirección Province of Jaén has dejado muchas páginas sin el enlace a donde apuntaba (Deleting redirection Province of Jaén has left many pages without the link to where pointed).--JT Curses (talk) 21:09, 15 November 2015 (UTC)

It was a redirect to itseld Province of Jaén --> Province of Jaén. You fixed it now, which is good. --JuTa 21:12, 15 November 2015 (UTC)

File:Burse in Tübingen Gouache 1820 Inv1502 (TAM23).jpg

Hallo JuTa,
immer wieder empfiehlt es sich, die fragliche Datei inhaltlich zu überprüfen, bevor man einen Löschantrag stellet. Ein Versehen kann ja jedem passiern. So eine Vorgehensweise würde viel schneller zum Ziel führen als das gedankenlose Stellen eines Löschantrag.
Grüße --Mewa767 (talk) 22:20, 16 November 2015 (UTC)

Im Prinzip richtig, ja. Leider kommen hier täglich hunderte Bilder ohne Lizenz an, da greift man auf halbautomatische tools zu um diese zu finden un zu markieren. Außerdem: Wenn der Fehler berichtigt wird, ist ja anschließend alles gut und wenn nicht wir nach gut einer Woche gelöscht. Versteh das also nicht als Angriff sondern als Erinnerung, dass da was nicht stimmt. Gruß --JuTa 22:33, 16 November 2015 (UTC)

Natürlich habe ich dies nicht als einen Angriff aufgefasst. Das Bild sieht doch aber schon auf den ersten Blick alt aus, und ich habe doch auch das Entstehungsjahr angegeben, dann sieht doch jemand wie du sofort, dass die Lizenz frei sein muss und es wäre doch einfacher, sie selbst zu ergänzen. Gerade, wenn es sehr viele Bilder gibt, die überprüft/nachgearbeitet werden müssen, so eine Lösung scheint mir sinnvoller zu sein. Grüße --Mewa767

Das verstehe ich schon, nur müsste man dazu alle Bildbeschreibungsseiten einzeln aurufen, was bei den von mir genutzten Tools nicht der Fall ist. --JuTa 06:56, 17 November 2015 (UTC)

Copyright status: File:Father Thomas Carroll.JPG

Hi, I'm very new to editing on wiki. this is my first picture. the copyright holder has stated that they'd make it public domain. best regards RobSVA (talk) 19:08, 14 November 2015 (UTC)

Hi RobSVA, if you can tell me under which license - see Commons:Copyright tags - the copyright holder released the image through Commons:OTRS I could restore the image and tag it correctly. regards. --JuTa 19:49, 14 November 2015 (UTC)

Hi JuTa, Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0. The permissions were emailed by the copyright holder earlier today. I re-uploaded it today too. Please let me know if I filled out the form correctly. The copyright holder is currently researching the date of the photo. thanks. RobSVA (talk) 15:29, 16 November 2015 (UTC)

I fixed the description page - see here. regards. --JuTa 16:46, 16 November 2015 (UTC)

I did some clean-up as well.Evrik (talk) 15:09, 18 November 2015 (UTC)

Jan Kulczyk (2015)

Hi JuTa, Could you help me to choose the right license? I would like to change Jan Kulczyk's photo, because current photo is no longer exist on Kulczyk Investments website: http://kulczykinvestments.com/gallery/4. I've tried to copy the description from here: https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Jan_Kulczyk2009.jpg, but as you see without success. Thanks for your help. Snowbll

Hi, you and me cannot choose a license or the image File:Jan Kulczyk (2015).JPG. Only the copyright holder can, which is normaly the photogapher. You should try to contact him an ask if he likes to pulblish this image under a free license ({{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. Once you know the mail has been sent you should put {{OTRS pending}} to the description page and you should put the corresponing license template of the copyright holders choice - see Commons:Copyright tags for long list of possibilities. regards --JuTa 09:16, 18 November 2015 (UTC)

Hi, could you delete image Jan Kulczyk (2015)? Copyright holder wants to use another image, but the company doesn't have an account. Could they send email with attached image and support team will change photo? --Snowbll (talk) 08:57, 19 November 2015 (UTC)Snowbll

OK  Done. --JuTa 08:58, 19 November 2015 (UTC)

File:Mesdjeru.png

Hallo, Du hast meinem Upload einen Babel, von wegen Copyright-Problem verpasst. Nephiliskoss, der Zeichner des Bildes - hat mich gebeten, das Bild hochzuladen, da er es aus irgendwelchen technischen Gruenden nicht kann. Ich hatte gehofft, dass das auch aus meinen Daten hervorging. Offensichtlich aber nicht! Kannst Du mit ein paar Kunstgriffen das in Ordnung bringen? lg -- Udimu (talk) 12:10, 18 November 2015 (UTC)

Das Hauptproblem bei der Datei ist dass dort gar keine Lizenzvorlage verwendet wird. Idealerweise bearbeitet Nephiliskos die Bildbeschreibungsseite selbst und fügt die freie Lizenzvorlage seiner Wahl hinzu. {{Cc-by-sa-4.0}} ist empfohlen. Es gibt aber noch viel mehr Möglichkeiten - siehe Commons:Copyright tags. Zur Not könntest auch Du diese Vorlage ergänzen. Dies birgt aber das Risiko dass die Datei dann später irgendwann einmal einen Löschantrag bekommt weil eine Freigabe nicht dokumentiert ist. Dann sollte Nephiliskos besser eine sog. Freigabemail an das Commons-Support-Team schicken. Siehe Commons:OTRS. Sobald Du weisst diese Mail wurde verschickt, packst Du besser die Vorlage {{OTRS pending}} (zusammen mit der Lizenzvorlage) auf die Bildbeschreibungsseite. Das Support-Team prüft dann die Mail und bestätigt die Freigabe falls OK. Gruß --JuTa 17:30, 18 November 2015 (UTC)

vielen Dank!!! -- Udimu (talk) 10:29, 19 November 2015 (UTC)

Years

Please undelete 1932, 1932, and 1937. Thanks! Evrik (talk) 15:26, 12 November 2015 (UTC)

 Done, but 1932 only once. --JuTa 23:29, 12 November 2015 (UTC)

I meant 1930. Evrik (talk)

 Done --JuTa 15:31, 13 November 2015 (UTC)

Please undelete 1931, 1933, 1938, and 1939. Thank you. Evrik (talk) 14:33, 16 November 2015 (UTC)

 Done --JuTa 16:53, 16 November 2015 (UTC)

Please undelete 1923, 1924, 1925, 1927, and 1929. Evrik (talk) 15:07, 18 November 2015 (UTC)

 Done --JuTa 17:35, 18 November 2015 (UTC)

Well, that completes the 21st and 20th centuries. Do me a favor. If you see questionable pages relating to the dates, months, years, etc. Give me a heads up before you delete them. Thanks! Evrik (talk) 15:18, 19 November 2015 (UTC)

Could you help me?

Hi, greetings, Could you help me changing the copyright tags of this file File:Bhagavad_Geeta_Audio.ogg ? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ozonesn (talk • contribs) 14:34, 19 November 2015 (UTC)

Who recorded it? Evrik (talk) 15:25, 19 November 2015 (UTC)

Hi, that seems to be a likely complicated case. There is music and text. Who wrote the music and who wrote the text? If they both died (normaly) more tham 70 years ago the work is likely in the public domain because of its age ({{PD-old}}). But there might be other rights efected. The rights of the interpret(s) an the recorder. So: I cannot give you a good answer. Perhaps you ask on Commons:Village pump/Copyright for this case. regards. --JuTa 23:00, 19 November 2015 (UTC)

Photo deleted

"File:A_C.P.R._rail_line_crossing_the_open_plains.jpg" on the Montmartre, Saskatchewan entry - This photo is a Saskatchewan Archives Board collection photo, which is in the public domain, as long as SAB is credited, which it was in this case.

My students are working on this page, and perhaps in this case missed a step for signifying public domain images. I am working with them on this. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Patricia W. Elliott (talk • contribs) 19:17, 19 November 2015 (UTC)

Hi, the was missing any (valid) license template. If you can find a fitting template on Commons:Copyright tags feel free to reupload it using that template. regards. --JuTa 22:41, 19 November 2015 (UTC)

Patricia W.Elliott Don't worry! Concerning to the experience I have no photo is deleted from the English Wikipedia, but all are deleted from the Spanish Wikipedia. You're lucky for editing on the English Wikipedia. I wonder if Spain and Latin America should also have their own kind of alternative wikipedia, in order to restore some justice. Salmunete (talk) 01:26, 20 November 2015 (UTC)

File:Pinhazev-es.gif

Hello! I consulted the license of the file Pinheiro_de_Azevedo.jpg, I copied it to this file, and by what I understood, there's nothing preventing its use on the Spanish Wikipedia. Thanks for reading! Salmunete (talk) 09:46, 16 November 2015 (UTC)

Hi, why do you think the file is free according russian laws? On the correspondig website I cant find anything about it. Everything is per default "all rights reserved" except explicity otherwise stated. I cannot find a File:Pinheiro_de_Azevedo.jpg or ru:File:Pinheiro_de_Azevedo.jpg either. Perhaps you find a fitting license template under Commons:Copyright tags#Russia and former Soviet Union, but I wonder why russian law is relevant for a portuguese person. regards --JuTa 11:27, 16 November 2015 (UTC)

Hi! I didn't mention Russia, so why you looked there? I'm Portuguese and I edit on Portuguese and Spanish Wikipedias. The file I mentioned is on the English Wikipedia. Salmunete (talk) 15:41, 16 November 2015 (UTC)

Because on the license section you writing: Free according to Russian copyright laws, So I guessed it was copied from russian wikipedia. The file en:file:Pinheiro_de_Azevedo.jpg is uploaded under the so called fair use clause, which is accepted there but not on commons. Compare en:Wikipedia:Fair use and Commons:Fair use. regards. --JuTa 16:49, 16 November 2015 (UTC)

In that case, who may eventually inform me about Portuguese, Spanish, Argentinian... copyright laws, and since I'm a Portuguese editing this on Spanish Wikipedia, which law shall be valid? Salmunete (talk) 16:55, 18 November 2015 (UTC)

That depends on where the photo was made by whom. If it was made by a portuguese person in Portugal portuguese law applies, which is 70 years protected after the death of the author. And for the 1st question see en:List of countries' copyright lengths and Commons:Copyright tags. regards --JuTa 17:23, 18 November 2015 (UTC)

Certainly the author hasn't been dead for 70 years, since this photo was taken around the Carnation Revolution, which was 41 years ago. But, being that the case, why would the photo be allowed on the English Wikipedia and not on the Spanish Wikipedia? I believe both or none, no? It makes sense. Salmunete (talk) 01:15, 20 November 2015 (UTC)

If there's a problem, then I'd be glad if you'd also remove the photo from the English Wikipedia. Thanks! Salmunete (talk) 01:16, 20 November 2015 (UTC)

That depents on the law of the local countries. US law allowes so called en:Wikipedia:Fair use, Spanish or Latin-American not (I assume). On Commons its not accepted because we have to respect any law in the world, see commons:Fair use. regards. --JuTa 08:21, 20 November 2015 (UTC)

Isenburger Logo

File:KG Die Isenburger Logo.jpg Guten Tag JuTa. Dies ist jetzt der Beginn meines dritten Versuches, die obige Datei in meinem Artikel de:KG „Die Isenburger“ unterzubringen. Gestern hast Du sie gelöscht. Ich verstehe das nicht. Es liegt doch eine richtige Lizenz vom Autor Christian Plötze vor. Herr Plötze hat dazu die [Ticket#2015110910021199] erhalten. Bitte sage mir, was ich machen kann. Schon vor Tagen hat mir Yann geschrieben, er würde sich in dieser Sache um einen Deutschsprechenden kümmern. Danke im voraus. Gruß--Homofaber.max (talk) 14:11, 19 November 2015 (UTC)

I'll ping @Yann: , Evrik (talk) 15:25, 19 November 2015 (UTC)

Hallo, ich hab' die Datei wiederhergestellt und die Beschreibungsseite entsprechend korregiert - siehe hier. Ein OTRS-Mitarbeiter (ich bin keiner) wird die endgültige Bestatigung einarbeiten, wenn er das Ticket bearbeitet. Gruß --JuTa 22:50, 19 November 2015 (UTC)

Ganz herzlichen Dank. Kann ich das Logo jetzt nutzen oder soll ich besser noch weitere 9 Tage warten??--Homofaber.max (talk) 09:27, 20 November 2015 (UTC)

Hi, Du kannst das Bild verwenden, aber noch ohne endgültige Garantie dass das Bild auch wirklich bleibt. Und wieso 9 Tage, das kann schneller gehen oder auch deutlich länger dauern, siehe Category:OTRS pending. Gruß --JuTa 22:34, 20 November 2015 (UTC)

60 deleted images

I just discovered that 60 photos by John L. Beck, who lives in historic Ellicott City, were deleted. Can we get those restored?

RichardTE Nov 2015

Hi, that were all photos not made by you but by John L. Beck. Mr. Beck has to send an email to the commons support team as documented on Commons:OTRS releasing the images under a free license of his choice. If everything checks out OK the images will get undeleted. The list of filenames affected you find here (the red links). regards. --JuTa 22:42, 20 November 2015 (UTC)

Commons:Deletion requests/File:Isharat Analytics logo.png

Commons:Deletion requests/File:Isharat Analytics logo.png 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 project page, 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. 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!

81.156.208.63 19:18, 20 November 2015 (UTC)

 Info ignore it, I fixed that malformed DR. --Achim (talk) 21:25, 20 November 2015 (UTC)

OK :) --JuTa 22:56, 20 November 2015 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Tireless Contributor Barnstar
	Thank you so much for all of your tireless deletion of empty categories, especially all those empty "media needing categories" categories. Your hard work has not gone unnoticed! Please accept this barnstar as a small token of my appreciation. Thanks again! Michael Barera (talk) 04:13, 22 November 2015 (UTC)

Smile, I'm indeed getting a bit tired. --JuTa 04:16, 22 November 2015 (UTC)

Thanks again, JuTa. You're the best! Michael Barera (talk) 04:58, 22 November 2015 (UTC)

Template:Cultural Heritage Russia

[3] Why did you remove the cat? We are using the "red cats" to find all images of the same document and use them as a means to actually categorize monuments.--Ymblanter (talk) 18:39, 21 November 2015 (UTC)

Because of i.e. User:YiFeiBot/WantedCategories. I checked the discusion page of the template and found nothing about those non-existend cats. So I assumed a "try" of a single user not "thought to the end". If its only temporäry feel free to reapply. If it should be permanently ou should think about either create all those cats or find another solution because thats wasting up the Wanted Categories, which shouldnt be permanently. regards. --JuTa 18:48, 21 November 2015 (UTC)

Thanks, let me think a bit. We were looking for a different solution, and so far did not find any.--Ymblanter (talk) 18:51, 21 November 2015 (UTC)

Well, this feature is clearly very important for WLM organizers and for everyone who wants to find images of a given Russian monument. It is a feature that eventually helps people to categorize photos. I don't see how these red links disturb anyone because they can be easily filtered out from the list of wanted categories. This is by far the easiest solution to the problem you mentioned.

Another solution is to create all these categories, but their names will not be in line with the existing policies. This goes back to the problem that Commons categories have no unique IDs, which makes them essentially useless for any automatic processing. We are formally not allowed to name categories WLM/XXXXXXXXXX, although in fact these names are far better than what Commons policies prescribe.

Finally, the ultimate solution is to move all WLM/WLE related images from Commons because Commons does not provide the necessary functionality.

I personally can accept any solution, but there must be one, and the earlier we agree on that, the better. --Alexander (talk) 23:07, 21 November 2015 (UTC)

JuTa, I re-stored the numbered categories because they are very important for the ongoing work on heritage monuments, and several users have complained that the categories are no longer available. You are still welcome to comment on my post above, but the working solution should be found before any further action is taken. --Alexander (talk) 18:07, 22 November 2015 (UTC)

Speedy deletion tags placed by IP editor

Guten abend, JuTa. Eine anonyme Herausgeber (176.194.1.64, 77.35.185.243, 213.87.138.13 ) hat rasche Löschung Tags auf viele leere (oder Vandalismus gefüllten) Diskussionsseiten platziert. Ich habe versucht, in den Editor zu kommunizieren und ihn bitten, einfach leere Seiten, aber er reagiert nicht. Ich bemerkte, dass sie zumindest zwei der Seiten gelöscht. Können Sie bitte diese Diskussionsseiten nicht löschen? Danke! (Mein Deutsch is schlecht, so bin ich mit Google Translate gesprachen). — hike395 (talk) 03:23, 23 November 2015 (UTC)

But why? They were ust test or vandalism edits and should be deleted. --JuTa 07:17, 23 November 2015 (UTC)

If you delete a Talk page, and another editor wants to start a discussion, then they see a big red warning that they are recreating a deleted page. This may stop them from posting a comment. If we blank vandalism and leave empty Talk pages, then legitimate editors can easily use those pages.

There is another way of saying it. Pages like Talk:Sierra Nevada and Talk:Waterfall, even if empty, are within scope of the project. They serve as placeholders for discussions about the corresponding legitimate pages.

I hope you agree. There is no need at this point to recreate the deleted pages. I am just hoping to prevent more Talk pages from being deleted. Viele dank! — hike395 (talk) 14:08, 23 November 2015 (UTC)

Sorry, I don't agree. Whats the harm of the red warnings? I'm not searching for such talk pages, but when I'm working on Category:Other speedy deletions I'll delete those listed there. regards. --JuTa 16:56, 23 November 2015 (UTC)

Wrong file name

Dear JuTa! Please be so kind as to take a moment to view the following problem, if you have a little time: [4] I would be grateful for any help. Solymári (talk) 18:19, 23 November 2015 (UTC)

Hi Solymári, you can request a rename of the file using the template {{Rename}} on the file description page. Please update the description (the depicted person) as well. regards. --JuTa 19:18, 23 November 2015 (UTC)

File:Hanging Garden Villa, Kuwait.jpg

Hi, we now have OTRS permission for this file (Template:OTRS ticket). Can you please restore? Thanks! And please ping me if you have any concerns. KDS4444 (talk) 21:19, 20 November 2015 (UTC)

Also under the same ticket: File:Arab Nouveau Villa, Kuwait.jpg, File:Seaside Chalet, Kuwait.jpg, File:Qasir Ghumdan Hotel, Yemen.jpg, File:Palm Banqueting Suite.jpg, as well as

> - File:Palm Suite Fireplace by Dr. Basil Al Bayati.jpg > - File:The school building at Madinat Qaboos in Oman.jpg > - File:Dr. Basil Al Bayati.jpg > - File:Great Mosque of Edinburgh, designed by Dr. Basil Al Bayati.jpg > - File:Church Island House in the Thames, Staines.jpg > - File:Gul Baba Turbe Precinct, Budapest by Dr. Basil Al Bayati.jpg > - File:The Palm Mosque at King Saud University, Riyadh by Dr. Basil Al Bayati.jpg > - File:Gourmet Speciality.jpg > - File:Kings Saud University Entrance Gate, Riyadh.jpg

Wshew! KDS4444 (talk) 21:31, 20 November 2015 (UTC)

Hi, they are back. Now please complete your OTRS task. regards. --JuTa 23:08, 20 November 2015 (UTC)

@KDS4444, did you saw my answer? --JuTa 16:58, 23 November 2015 (UTC)

Sorry for the delay, yes I did "see" your answer and have now processed all the images mentioned by assigning them the appropriate OTRS ticket number. Thanks! KDS4444 (talk) 06:17, 25 November 2015 (UTC)

Gelöschte Datei

Hallo JuTa, eben sah ich, dass File:Oliver Kienle, Knut Elstermann, MFG-Star Baden-Baden 2010, IMGP5117.JPG vom Dateientlinkerbot aus einem Artikel entfernt wurde, nachdem du es wegen "fehlender Genehmigung" gelöscht hast. Wenn ich mich recht erinnere, war das ein Bild von mir. Für andere Bilder habe ich auch schon die OTRS-Genehmigung geschickt (siehe ganz oben auf meiner Benutzerdisk.), müsste als Fotograf demnach bekannt sein. Im aktuellen Fall erhielt ich allerdings keine Benachrichtigung. Kannst du mir genaueres dazu sagen? Wer hat die Genehmigung verlangt? Warum erhielt ich keine Benachrichtigung? Warum löschst du wegen angeblich fehlender Genehmigung Bilder von Fotografen, die hier seit Jahren bekannt sind? Gruß, --Sitacuisses (talk) 05:33, 25 November 2015 (UTC)

Hallo Sitacuisses, das wurde von User:Jean11 als "no permission" markiert; ich vermute wegen der geringen Auflösung. Er hätte Dich eigentlich auch darüber benachrichtigen sollen. Es werden täglich duzende oder hunderte Bilder so markiert - siehe Category:Media missing permission, da fehlt dann häufig die Zeit für eine Einzelfallprüfung. Wie dem auch sei: Ich habe die Datei wiederhergestellt und in einen regulären Löschantrag verwandelt, da ich auch keine externe Quelle für die Datei finden konnte, halte ich Deine Aussage "own work" zunächst mal als glaubwürdig.

PS: Der Delinker-Log gibt leider nichts aus. Du kannst den Bildlink in entsprechenden Artikel sicher auch selbst wiederherstellen. Gruß --JuTa 17:46, 25 November 2015 (UTC)

Danke fürs Wiederherstellen. Als Grund vermute ich eher, dass ich ihm vor kurzem in dieser Diskussion widersprochen habe. Dass er meine Benachrichtigung vermied, sehe ich als weiteres Anzeichen dafür, dass sein Antrag purer und absichlich gegen mich gerichteter Vandalismus war. Gruß, --Sitacuisses (talk) 19:15, 25 November 2015 (UTC)

Why have you removed my graphical file?

Hi JuTa,

Can you tell me why do I happen to see the following warning message on this Russian wikipedia page ["https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=File:%D0%90_%D0%90_%D0%9B%D0%B0%D0%BF%D0%B8%D0%BD.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1"] that states that you removed the file "А А Лапин.jpg" on November 25, 2015:

   04:39, 25 ноября 2015 JuTa (обсуждение | вклад) удалил страницу File:А А Лапин.jpg (No permission since 17 November 2015) (global usage; delinker log)

I will appreciate your comment on this event.

Thank you, Sngag (talk) 16:35, 27 November 2015 (UTC)

Because you are very likely not the photographer of this (historical) photo as you claimed on the description page. We would need to know who is the real photographer and when did he die? Normaly such photos are protected by copyright until 70 years after the death of the author. regards. --JuTa 17:03, 27 November 2015 (UTC)

It is my own photo that nobody else has. It is ridiculous that you have made your judgment based solely on formal criteria just by comparing two dates - the date of the death and the date I specified as a date of the photograph. I could specify any date I wanted, but FYI -- I specified the date I made the last photo correction on to make this old photo look more qualitative. I am the creator and owner of this photo, it is in my possession and is kept in my personal photo archive. You neither know me nor you know anything about this person and the history behind our relationship, but nevertheless you consider yourself as having the right to disturb the article you have nothing to do with and waste mine (and yours) time for absolutely no reason. After all, it is unethical (if not just rude) to make changes in the artifact that does not belong to you without even prior notification and/or asking questions about your potential suspicion. Don't you really have something more useful and positive to do in this life?

Sngag (talk) 23:25, 28 November 2015 (UTC)

Hi, you got informed of the problem tag on 17. Nov. by User:Sealle who marked the image as "no permission". I am still not convinced that this image was shot by yourself, but anyhow I restored it for now and raised a reguler deletion request for it - see Commons:Deletion requests/File:А А Лапин.jpg. Feel free to leave some comments on that request page. I recommand a bit more neutral speech than here. --JuTa 23:44, 28 November 2015 (UTC)

'@Sngag: I specified the date I made the last photo correction on to make this old photo look more qualitative. You must not specify only the date of the last photo correction, you should also include the date when it is originally taken. Can you also upload a photo that is similar to your photo but not edited? ★ Poké⁹⁵ 23:57, 28 November 2015 (UTC)

File:Zarate fcgu.jpg

As you've requested, I've split the file history of File:Zarate fcgu.jpg. The newer content remains at File:Zarate fcgu.jpg. The older content is now at File:Zarate fcgu 2.jpg. If you can, please update the summary and categories of the two files to match the depicted content. You may wish to rename the new file. —RP88 (talk) 12:23, 28 November 2015 (UTC)

Thx. I dont think any other action is required now. --JuTa 15:18, 28 November 2015 (UTC)

???

JuTa : le fichier Vigne de Louis Pasteur a été trouvé sur Wikipedia et je l'ai indiqué ! L'auteur demande que son nom soit mentionné et je l'ai fait ! --Anglo-norman (talk) 08:27, 29 November 2015 (UTC)

Sorry, which image are ou talking about? --JuTa 12:14, 29 November 2015 (UTC)

Appears to be File:Vigne de Louis Pasteur.jpg which was deleted by Hedwig. De728631 (talk) 12:47, 29 November 2015 (UTC)

Ah, I see. Well, the license template wasn't linked, thats fixable. But you gave only "wikipedia" for the source. Can you please link the exact source page here. Then I will see if I can undelete it. regards. --JuTa 12:50, 29 November 2015 (UTC)

I've dug a bit into this and found it was actually a duplicate of File:Vigne Pasteur Arbois 001.JPG. No need to restore the file. Anglo-norman, before you transfer files from a Wikipedia please be sure to check if they are really only present locally, or if they are already transcluded from Wikimedia Commons. De728631 (talk) 13:28, 29 November 2015 (UTC)

File tagging File:Alvesse.jpg

This media was probably deleted.

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

 

Wdwd (talk) 14:30, 29 November 2015 (UTC)

Commons:Deletion requests/Files uploaded by Красный Партизан

Hi! You deleted following files, uploaded by my fellow wikimedian buy reasoning that: "Possess a family album does not make you the copyright owner, it's the person who took the photo". Ergo, he is the only inheritor of them and his grandfather bequeathed him this family album? Is it possible to recover photos by writing to permission-ru and cancelling the bock of Красный Партизан? --Ochilov (diskuto) 16:24, 30 November 2015 (UTC)

Only if his grandpa realy took those photos and not only owned the album. You are an OTRS-Agent. If you accept such a release and raise an Commons:Undeletion request afterwards I see no problem to undelete them, except another OTRS-agent complaints by what ever reason. regards. --JuTa 17:53, 30 November 2015 (UTC)

File:Raven-Matrices a11.jpg

File:Raven-Matrices a11.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!

McGeddon (talk) 14:28, 3 December 2015 (UTC)

Hello

Would you please the categories and redirects on User:Fry1989/Redirects? I've cleaned them all up. Thank you. Fry1989 ^eh? 21:49, 4 December 2015 (UTC)

what are you asking me to do with it? --JuTa 23:35, 4 December 2015 (UTC)

Sorry bad typing, I meant to ask you delete them. Fry1989 ^eh? 21:37, 5 December 2015 (UTC)

OK for most of the categories but no for the file redirects. They are old uploads, recently moved. There might be extermal usage/links to them. --JuTa 00:34, 6 December 2015 (UTC)

File:Andrzej Ballo.jpg

You just marked this image as required permission and one is received in OTRS. However, I have doubts concerning copyright of the image, so I am asking you for more information: why, in your opinion, a permission is required to handle the OTRS ticket accordingly.

Note, this image seems to be a screenshot from a video monitoring system. And as such a system has not a direct operator, I doubt if the image is even covered by copyright. But, if you think, it is covered, who is the copyright owner? :

• the monitoring system owner/operator (unlikely)
• the person shown (as he and only he can decide about the viewed content)
• the person who has choosen a screenshot from the whole stream (IMO, the situation here is similar to this picture status).

I know, that there is a (C) mark here but IMO it may only be related to 25-year first publication right in EU (valid also for non-copyrighted media), which is a separate, EU-limited restriction and not covered AFAIK by the Berne convention. (But, personally, I also doubt it can be valid here as this restriction applies only to "works".) Ankry (talk) 16:24, 5 December 2015 (UTC)

It was the simple fact that the name in the author field is completly different to the name of the uploading user. regards --JuTa 18:32, 5 December 2015 (UTC)

Photo Roger Piel

Bonjour JuTa. J'ai reçu l'accord de Catherine Renard, Directrice Générale Déléguée/ CEO, Studio Harcourt Paris, 10, rue Jean Goujon, 75008 Paris concernant la permission de diffusion de la photo de Roger Piel https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Roger_Piel_cycliste.jpg#.7B.7Bint:license-header.7D.7D. J'ai également transférer le email de Harcourt à permissions-commons-fr@wikimedia.org. Bon weekend --Blankenfeld (talk) 14:09, 6 December 2015 (UTC)

Hi, I replaced the problem tag now with {{OTRS pending}}. --JuTa 16:58, 6 December 2015 (UTC)

Your help is needed

JuTa, I've got your feedback in regards to the images I posted. Could you please advise, how to correct those license errors? Many thanks in advance.

Kabota 13 (talk) 18:34, 6 December 2015 (UTC)

I just can not understand, what's wrong there... Kabota 13 (talk) 18:35, 6 December 2015 (UTC)

Hi, there are valid license templates missing. These images using just no license template, but any image needs a valid one. As I guess they come from Russia you may find valid templates at Commons:Copyright_tags#Russia and former Soviet Union. regards. --JuTa 18:40, 6 December 2015 (UTC)

Commons:Deletion requests/File:Letters of Amulo and Agobard.JPEG

Hi could you please explain why licensing is needed on a public domain image? Thank you. Rybkovich (talk) 22:09, 6 December 2015 (UTC)

A valid License template is required for every image. --JuTa 00:21, 7 December 2015 (UTC)

Yes except when it is not copyrightable. Did I misunderstand our rules? If so please explain. Here a discussion is going on about retaining some photographs even though a consent from the publisher will not be obtained. If files are retain it will be because the drawings, photographs were made before 1923 and are in the public domain https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Deletion_requests/Files_in_Category:Images_from_FlightGlobal_Archive Rybkovich (talk) 16:00, 8 December 2015 (UTC)

When they are not copyrighted then they need a corresponding template out of Commons:Copyright tags why they are not copyrighted. regards. --JuTa 17:42, 8 December 2015 (UTC)