User talk:JuTa/Archive 35

This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

LAURA DE LOS RIOS GINER

Hola, según veo aquí [1], borraste el archivo de Laura de los Ríos Giner. Esta foto se subió a la par que la de su madre, Gloria Giner de los Ríos García [2] y los argumentos para que no se borrasen son los mismos. ¿Se puede volver a editar el archivo?

Gracias --Salud!! Maríajoséblanco (Discusión) (talk) 16:17, 25 August 2016 (UTC)

Hi,the file is back. But you shouldn't put {{OTRS pending}} to the description page in such cases. Otherwise they get deleted sometime. I removed that template now. Btw: The file should be cropped. regads. --Ju Ta 16:40, 25 August 2016 (UTC)

File:ACMAA_barnstar_fin.svg

OTRS is pending on that file as noted on that page. I thought that I was just supposed to wait until I heard back from them. Is there something else I need to do? Regards, TransporterMan (talk) 04:36, 28 August 2016 (UTC) PS: The ticket number is 2016081310001055. — TransporterMan (talk) 04:40, 28 August 2016 (UTC)

Hi, I had the same opinion some time ago, but got convinced otherwise by the discusion on Commons:Village pump/Archive/2015/07#Policy clarification needed for images with OTRS pending but no license. So: If you know the copyright holder sent a mail to the commons support team, you should ask him which free license he choosed ({{Cc-by-sa-4.0}} is recommended) and complete the description page. if not the image will likely get deleted in about one week. regards. --Ju Ta 04:52, 28 August 2016 (UTC)

Added the ({{Cc-by-sa-4.0}}, thanks for the advice (though it seems that should be made clear in the Commons:OTRS#If you are NOT the copyright holder steps, just sayin'). Should I delete the {{No license since|month=August|day=28|year=2016}} template, or will it go away automatically once the copyright template has been noticed? Regards, TransporterMan (talk) 06:00, 28 August 2016 (UTC)

Thx, I removed the problem tag now. --Ju Ta 08:58, 28 August 2016 (UTC)

National Action flag

Hello. The flag of National Action is the official flag of the group, therefore Wikipedia has the right to use it. I just took the flag from their official website (national-action.info) and vectorized it. I hope I didn'tmake any mistakes. --GabrielGGD (talk) 15:10, 31 August 2016 (UTC)

Hi GabrielGGD, every image on commons has to be reuseable for anybody in the world for any purpose. By that reason it needs to be published under a free license (see Commons:Copyright tags for a long list of possibilities) - {{Cc-by-sa-4.0}} is recommanded. On your image such a license template in completly missing. As the flag is imho too complex for i.e. {{PD-simple}} you need to ask the copyright holder if he likes to publish it under a free license of his choice. If he agrees he has to send an email to the commons support team to confirm that - for details see Commons:OTRS. Once you know that mail has been sent, you better put {{OTRS pending}} and the license template of the copyright holders choice to the file description page. Otherwise the file will likely get deleted after about one week. regards. --Ju Ta 15:53, 31 August 2016 (UTC)

@JuTa: Even for flags? I thought we didn't need permission for that. I'm going to contact NA. --GabrielGGD (talk) 16:01, 31 August 2016 (UTC)

Everything is per default "all rights reserved" except otherwise explicity stated or too simple ot too old to be copyrighted. What too simple and too old means in detail vaies from country to country. Regards. --Ju Ta 16:14, 31 August 2016 (UTC)

@JuTa: National Action is not answering. Are you sure we don't have the rights to have this flag on wikimedia? Lots of other political parties have their flags here (i.e. https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Flags_of_political_parties_of_India)

Regards --GabrielGGD (talk) 14:11, 1 September 2016 (UTC)

Hi, you wrote you vectorized it yourself. In this case you could declare it your own work and publish it under a license of your choice - i.e. {{Cc-by-sa-4.0}}. I'm not very happy with that but it seems to be widely accepted here on commons. But be aware, you delcare yourself as copyright holder and allow everybody in the world to use it for any purpose. Worst case a company will print it on their i.e condom-packages with a note copyright holder = User GabrielGGD on commons published under cc-by-sa-4.0. The organiztion will likely not be very happy with that and blame the company (on court) and that company could then blame you, cause you declared it as your work and allowed such a usage. Its your desicion if you wanna get such a risk. If you do so please change the source to {{Own}} the author to your username, add a license template of your choice and remove the problem tag from the file description page. regards. --Ju Ta 14:48, 1 September 2016 (UTC)

Hi,

I'm sorry, I didn't knew what liscence to put. I removed the CC-BY-SA-1.0 liscence and remplaced it by the insignia liscence and removed every claims that I was the author of this content.

Hope this will resolve the problem.

Regards, --GabrielGGD (talk) 18:22, 1 September 2016 (UTC)

Sorry GabrielGGD, but {{Insignia}} is not a license template, so I restored the problem tag. Please do as I adviced above or accept that the image will be deleted for having no license. --Ju Ta 19:04, 1 September 2016 (UTC)

@JuTa: Okay, I put a CC-Zero liscence. I hope I won't have problems with it. --GabrielGGD (talk) 20:00, 1 September 2016 (UTC)

Restoration

Hello!

I would like to ask for your help in bringing back these images because they received licenses OTRS (2016082210016184 's number) :

I was part of the OTRS Institute. Thank you very much! Hungarikusz Firkász (talk) 12:57, 3 September 2016 (UTC)

Hi Hungarikusz Firkász, its done. Now please complete your OTRS task. --Ju Ta 13:37, 3 September 2016 (UTC)

It's done! Thank you! Hungarikusz Firkász (talk) 14:19, 3 September 2016 (UTC)

Suppression de fichier Ignotus SP1887-2.jpg et Joseph-Rousse.jpg

Bonjour, Concernant le fichier Ignotus la gravure d'origine est parue comme indiqué dans l'origine dans un ouvrage de 1887 et réalisée par un dessinateur mort en 1909. Elle est dans le domaine public et j'ai ajouté le bandeau que m'a indiqué un administrateur (domaine public + de 100 ans). Concernant le fichier Joseph Rousse, la photo originale a plus de 100 ans (mort du sujet en 1908) mais j'ignore le nom du photographe, j'attends une réponse de l'administrateur à ce sujet. cordialement --PatBdM (talk) 08:13, 4 September 2016 (UTC)

Hi PatBdM, you use {{Own}} as source of that image. This is obviously not true. Where did you get the image from? Any website: Then use the URL of that website as source. Any old book, magazin on mewspaper: Then use title, author and date of it (and ISBN is available). Anything else: Then please try to describe your source as clearly as possible. Again: {{PD-old-100}} as license and {{Own}} as source are not working together, because you didn't died more than 100 years ago. regards. --Ju Ta 08:22, 4 September 2016 (UTC)

Images from AELG

Hi, I changed some modifications that you did related to categories with AELG. I did that categories because that images are some kind of contribution of the association AELG, and I created that subcategories to tidy up all that photos and add the subcategories to the category of each writer. I understand that "Images of X from AELG" should be a subcategory of writer X because it could appear other photos of that writer, in many cases there are right now, that don't come from AELG. That's the reason that I think that we need Category:Manuel Jacobo González Outes in AELG. Thanks and sorry for my english O:). Cheers, --Elisardojm (talk) 07:29, 5 September 2016 (UTC)

Hi Elisardojm, I beg to differ. All images from AELG are allready categorized in Category:Images from AELG website, which is fine to find and identify them. Categories like Category:Manuel Jacobo González Outes in AELG are doubling that info. Most of them are just "sitting" in Category:Images from AELG. But most of them are peoples categories without any other corresponding or parent cat. So: those people are not or hardly findable through the normal peoples category system. I plan to add Category:People by name, Category:(Wo)men by name, categories for sur- and given names and categories for birth (and death) year where I easily can find them, to all of them. But these cats does not belong to the ... from AELG cats. They belong the the peoples main cat. Therefore I move the ... from AELG cats to the main people cats where this not existing yet. Finaly Category:Images from AELG should be remaned to i.e. Category:Members of AELG if all those people are members of that organization or should be removed complety if not. And Category:Writers in Galician should and will be added by me to all of the people cats at the end. regards --Ju Ta 16:29, 5 September 2016 (UTC)

But "Category:Manuel Jacobo González Outes in AELG", and the others, are useful for tidy up category Category:Images from AELG, if you delete those subcategories, all photos from AELG will be at the same category without order... You can add categories to the main category of the writers (in the example, Manuel Jacobo González Outes, by name, by birth, etc). I don't see the problem...

And right now I have found a problem, Category:Images from AELG website seems a duplicate of Category:Images from AELG, now I'm in a hurry, I will review that later. Cheers, --Elisardojm (talk) 17:16, 5 September 2016 (UTC)

Hi. ...all photos from AELG will be at the same category without order.... They are all named as the person, so there is a good order in that cat. There are mainly no main categories for the writers, so I just move the ...from AELG to that main cat and add the mentioned cats. I dont see any benefit of these ...from AELG cats. I.e. we have a Category:Images from the German Federal Archive like we have a Category:Images from AELG website. But we dont have a Category:Berlin in German Federal Archive or Category:Konrad Adenauer in German Federal Archive as we should not have i.e Category:Nacho Pérez in AELG. I will continue my work on it. If you realy differ, we should perhaps ask on Commons:Village pump or similar for more opnions about it. --Ju Ta 18:11, 5 September 2016 (UTC)

But there is a problem, if a user uploads an image from one of that writers, one that don't came from AELG, and add it to, for example, category "Eulalia Agrelo Costas‎", that photo will be subcategorized in "Images from AELG" and it will be incorrect... Cheers, --Elisardojm (talk) 22:25, 6 September 2016 (UTC)

Category:Images from AELG will be finaly remaned to Category:Members of AELG, and everything is fine again. --Ju Ta 22:27, 6 September 2016 (UTC)

Ah, yes, it works, I understand now. And what about make hidden subcategories to tidy up Category:Members of AELG? Cheers, --Elisardojm (talk) 07:04, 7 September 2016 (UTC)

Hi, I think Category:Members of AELG will be a topical category and does not need to be hidden - compare COM:HIDDENCAT. Cheers. --Ju Ta 07:21, 7 September 2016 (UTC)

Yes, I don't mind that the category "Members oF AELG" will content the subcategories of the writers. Thanks for your work and your patience :)! Cheers, --Elisardojm (talk) 18:16, 7 September 2016 (UTC)

Info: I now finished the work on it and renamed to to Category:Members of the Association of Writers in Galician Language. --Ju Ta 02:12, 8 September 2016 (UTC)

Вікі любить пам'ятки 2016 в Україні

Вітаємо!

Триває міжнародний фотоконкурс «Вікі любить пам'ятки»! До 30 вересня включно Ви можете подавати власні фото пам'яток історико-культурної спадщини України — і змагатися за призи.

Окрім традиційних номінацій за найкращі фото і найбільшу кількість сфотографованих об'єктів, у конкурсі також є спецномінації: «Цивільні споруди доби Гетьманщини» та «Національний заповідник "Софія Київська"».

Приєднуйтеся! Зі списками пам'яток можна ознайомитися тут. Більше інформації про конкурс дивіться у блозі конкурсу. – З повагою, Оргкомітет «Вікі любить пам'ятки», 10:23, 8 September 2016 (UTC)

Hmm, wrong user, wrong language? I'm uk-0 and does not live in Ukraine. --Ju Ta 10:33, 8 September 2016 (UTC)

Lizenzen

Hallo JuTa, Du hast angemerkt, dass bei einer von mir hochgeladenen Datei die Lizenz nicht korrekt angegeben wurde. Ich habe diese Datei hochgeladen und mich dabei an dieser orientiert. Das sind ja von der Sache her identische Dateien. Wie kann ich nun die gleiche Lizenz bekommen bzw. nachtragen? Über eine kleine Hilfestellung wäre ich sehr dankbar. --Klius (talk) 13:24, 12 September 2016 (UTC)

Hallo, Du editierst Die Datei hier und ersetzt das {{Remove this line and insert a license instead|year=2016|month=09|day=07}} durch {{PD-anon-70}}. Dann kannst Du auch gleich oben das {{No license since|month=September|day=11|year=2016}} entfernen. Gruß --Ju Ta 14:12, 12 September 2016 (UTC)

File:Scherer Péter, Mucsi Zoltán and Grunwalsky Ferenc.jpg

Hello!

Please restore the File:Scherer Péter, Mucsi Zoltán and Grunwalsky Ferenc.jpg image. There is a license, but you forgot to expose him permission to OTRS acting manager. I signaled to him (Pallerti) to fill the gap. Thanks for your help! ( Machine translated text). Hungarikusz Firkász (talk) 21:42, 13 September 2016 (UTC)

Hmm, the file has allready been restored in June - see here. --Ju Ta 01:16, 14 September 2016 (UTC)

I'm sorry I have not written later. I did not know when I will restore it, so I visited INeverCry was also on the request and he was reinstated. September 13 th. I thank you for your efforts. And once again I apologize for the restoration is not indicated. (Machine translation) Hungarikusz Firkász (talk) 10:41, 14 September 2016 (UTC)

Files uploaded without sourcing

Hi there, I noticed your warnings on the svg logos I uploaded onto Commons a week ago. Please do not delete them, I just meant to replace png files from the same sources but I do not know how to fill the proper information. Thank you for your understanding. --Gégène (talk) 22:52, 17 September 2016 (UTC)

Hi, its not the source, its the license which is missing. Please have a look at Commons:Licensing and Commons:Copyright tags. In your case {{PD-textlogo}} might be applicable. --Ju Ta 02:26, 18 September 2016 (UTC)

File:Albert-Schweitzer-Stiftung-fuer-unsere-Mitwelt-Logo.jpg

File:Albert-Schweitzer-Stiftung-fuer-unsere-Mitwelt-Logo.jpg has been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether it should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry.

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

Please remember to respond to and – if appropriate – contradict the arguments supporting deletion. Arguments which focus on the nominator will not affect the result of the nomination. Thank you!

Afrikaans ∙ Bahasa Indonesia ∙ bosanski ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ dansk ∙ Deutsch ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ ∙ eesti ∙ English ∙ español ∙ Esperanto ∙ français ∙ galego ∙ hrvatski ∙ íslenska ∙ italiano ∙ magyar ∙ Nederlands ∙ norsk bokmål ∙ norsk nynorsk ∙ occitan ∙ Plattdüütsch ∙ polski ∙ português ∙ português do Brasil ∙ română ∙ shqip ∙ sicilianu ∙ slovenčina ∙ slovenščina ∙ suomi ∙ svenska ∙ Tiếng Việt ∙ Türkçe ∙ Zazaki ∙ Ελληνικά ∙ беларуская ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ ∙ български ∙ македонски ∙ русский ∙ српски / srpski ∙ українська ∙ հայերեն ∙ বাংলা ∙ മലയാളം ∙ ပအိုဝ်ႏဘာႏသာႏ ∙ မြန်မာဘာသာ ∙ ไทย ∙ 조선말 ∙ 한국어 ∙ 日本語 ∙ 简体中文‎ ∙ 繁體中文‎ ∙ עברית ∙ العربية ∙ پښتو ∙ فارسی ∙ ދިވެހިބަސް ∙ +/−

217.250.172.139 08:55, 20 September 2016 (UTC)

About Copyright status: File:Acta constitución LIADA.jpg

Hi, I not sure of what license is the right one, maybe you can help with that, I marked on the file that I dont know the right licence.

It's an scan from an institution fundation paper from 1958 of a non-profit astronomy organization. I dont think that such a document has any copyrights today and probably is in public domain.

What do you think?

Regards. --JoRgE-1987 (talk) 13:40, 18 September 2016 (UTC)

Hi, in most countries copyright lasts untill 70 years past the death of the author(s). For a 1958 document the author cannot be dead for more than 70 years. And I dont think the text is simple enough for i.e. {{PD-text}}. So: No, I dont think its in the public domain. --Ju Ta 16:55, 18 September 2016 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) The text is a record of the first convention of this organisation. It consists only of lists of names and one or two non-creative summaries, so I for one think it is PD-simple. De728631 (talk) 17:17, 18 September 2016 (UTC)

Isn't this something like Threshold of originality? I changed the license to PD-simple. --JoRgE-1987 (talk) 13:04, 21 September 2016 (UTC)

Thou I am not realy happy with that license, I removed the problem tag now. --Ju Ta 18:11, 21 September 2016 (UTC)

Trust me that me either. I'm not a legal expert so my knowledge about the status of such specific documents that they are not creative work is pretty limited. That's why I understand your concerns perfectly. Thanks. --JoRgE-1987 (talk) 18:31, 21 September 2016 (UTC)

Categorías redundantes

Hola JuTa:

Las categorías "People by name", "Men by name" y "Women by name" son redundantes cuando están insertadas las categorías: "Women of Spain by name" y "Men of Spain by name". Por favor, no hagas trabajo innecesario. Un cordial saludo:--Raimundo Pastor (talk) 21:03, 24 September 2016 (UTC)

Hi Raimundo Pastor, as we have a dispute here and none of us will likely convince the other, I asked for more opinion at Commons:Village pump#Category:People by name et al. as flat list?. Feel free to post your arguments there. regards. --Ju Ta 21:16, 24 September 2016 (UTC)

About This file

Thank you for alarm

Appropriate license mode done — Abdou7878 * Talk — 25 September 2016 – 10:34 ^(UTC)

You are wellcome :)--Ju Ta 11:32, 25 September 2016 (UTC)

Undelete request

Hello, I noticed that Category:Parque Ecológico de Campinas was deleted by you a couple of days ago. Could you please undelete it? I think it will be useful to have it as a category redirect to Category:Parque Ecológico Monsenhor Emílio José Salim, but preserving the page history. The former title is the one by which the park is most popularly known. Thank you, Capmo (talk) 13:38, 26 September 2016 (UTC)

OK

Done. regards --Ju Ta 16:27, 26 September 2016 (UTC)

Thanks!! Capmo (talk) 16:30, 26 September 2016 (UTC)

Fragen zu Urheberrecht und Löschprüfung

Hallo JuTa, ich wende mich an Dich, weil ich gerne den Rat eines erfahrenen Commons-Admins hätte und es für mich auf Deutsch einfacher geht.
Mein Problem:
Vor über einem Jahr habe ich einen Screenshoot für den Artikel de:WikiWand erstellt, der auch VI war und bereits einen Löschantrag überstanden hatte.
Gestern wurde dieser Screenshoot wegen angeblicher Urheberrechtsverletzung schnellgelöscht,
Begründung: Bildschirmfoto enthält geschütztes Material von Google (Maps). Auf dem Screenshoot ist ein kleiner Kartenausschnitt zu (ohne irgendwelche Google-Logos) zu sehen.
Meine Fragen:

Ist ein solcher Kartenausschnitt mit seiner geringen Schöpfungshöhe überhaupt eine Urheberrechtsverletzung?

Nach Lektüre von Derivative_works#Maps habe ich daran meine Zweifel.

Um das Problem zu umgehen, würde ich gerne einen aktuelles Bildschirmfoto vom WikiWand hochladen, dass keinen Kartenausschnitt mehr enthält.

Dies habe ich auf seiner Diskussionsseite dem löschenden Admin auch geschrieben, mit der Bitte um Wiederherstellung meines Uploades.
Habe ich Deiner Meinung nach eine Chance auf Wiederherstellung?
Sollte ich weiter mit Natuur12 diskutieren oder besser eine Löschprüfung beantragen?
Ich hoffe bald von Dir zu hören, schon jetzt herzlichen Dank für Deine Mühen. Gruß --J. Lunau (talk) 12:24, 27 September 2016 (UTC)

Hi, ich würd' sagen. Lade erst einmal die neue Version ohne google maps hoch, und gib mir anschließend bescheid. Danach kann ich die alten Versionen der Beschreibungsseite wiederherstellen. Gruß --Ju Ta 18:10, 27 September 2016 (UTC)

Vielen Dank - habe die neue Version eben hochgeladen (Screenshot_wikiwand.jpg). Gruß --J. Lunau (talk) 19:17, 27 September 2016 (UTC)

Hi, leider hast Du einen anderen Dateinamen gewählt. File:Screenshot_wikiwand.jpg (neu) und File:Screenshot_wikiwand.JPG (alt). Leider kann auch ich als Admin nicht von Klein- auf Großschreibung verschieben. Bitte lade es doch nochmals mit großen JPG am Ende hoch. Sonst bekomm ich die alten Versionen nicht mit dem neuen Bild zusammen. Gruß--Ju Ta 19:25, 27 September 2016 (UTC)

Sorry, habe ich nicht bemerkt. Kannst Du meinen Upload von eben bitte löschen, sonst kann ich keine Datei mit selbem Namen hochladen. Beim Überschreiben der eben hochgeladenen Datei kann ich den Dateinamen nicht auf Screenshot_wikiwand.JPG ändern. Gruß --J. Lunau (talk) 19:35, 27 September 2016 (UTC)

gemacht. --Ju Ta 19:36, 27 September 2016 (UTC)

danke - irgendwas habe ich aber schon wieder falsch gemacht: die Datei auf meinem PC heißt "Screenshot wikiwand.JPG", diesmal konnte ich keinen Dateinamen angeben und nach dem Upload heißt die Datei ohne mein Zutun wieder "Screenshot wikiwand.jpg". - bitte noch mal löschen - ich versuche es noch einmal.

Warte, ich versuchs noch mit einem Dreiecks-Tausch. --Ju Ta 19:49, 27 September 2016 (UTC)

Es ist vollbracht :) War ein ziemliches Gefrickel. Ich vermute das man (neuerdings) gar nichts mehr mit großen JPG hochladen kann, und das immer gegen jpg ersetzt wird. --Ju Ta 19:58, 27 September 2016 (UTC)

Jetzt musst Du "nur" noch die Dateieinbindungen wiederherstellen - siehe [[3]] - und auch dort auf groß/klein JPG achten. Gruß --Ju Ta 20:01, 27 September 2016 (UTC)

Vielen, vielen Dank, vor allem auch für Deine Geduld! Und jetzt sitze ich wieder lächelnd vor meinem Bildschirm. Diese (meiner meiner Meinung nach) völlig unnötige Schnelllöschung hat mich echt angenervt. Herzliche Grüße --J. Lunau (talk) 20:06, 27 September 2016 (UTC)

Nunja, google maps sind nunmal eindeutig nicht commons kompatibel. --Ju Ta 20:08, 27 September 2016 (UTC)

Dann sollte es ja jetzt keine Problem mehr geben. Hätte man mir mit einer "normalen" Löschdiskussion genug Zeit gelassen, wäre der Austausch einfacher gewesen. Mir sind die Maps im Screenshoot übrigens wirklich nie aufgefallen. --J. Lunau (talk) 20:12, 27 September 2016 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Admin's Barnstar
	Danke für Deine nette und geduldige Unterstützung! Thank you very much for the great support! J. Lunau (talk) 20:09, 27 September 2016 (UTC)

Edit request

Hi JuTa, ich benötige die Hilfe eines Admin: Nach einer Reihe von Anpassungen ist die neue Version zu aktivieren;

kopiere bitte den gesamten Inhalt (as-it-is) von {{Image generation/sandbox}} nach {{Image generation}}. Ist natürlich alles gut getestet. Danke -- sarang♥사랑 08:56, 3 October 2016 (UTC)

Hi, ich sehe leider nicht was Du da geändert hast, noch dass dies auf der Diskussionsseite besprochen wurde. Und nach dem dort Zuspruch bzw. einige Tage kein Wiederspruch kam, kannst Du gerne wiederkommen, bzw. dort einfach einen {{Edit request}} verwenden. Gruß --Ju Ta 09:03, 3 October 2016 (UTC)

File:MiaoGanJie (缪淦杰) dans une position typique du Baji Quan (1936).jpg

Hi,

I am a contributor to Wikipedia, on the topic of chinese martial arts and I am lost with copyright issues concerning illustrations. I have uoploaded the file : "File:MiaoGanJie (缪淦杰) dans une position typique du Baji Quan (1936).jpg", and it has been deleted. The pictures of Mr Miao GanJie was published in 1936 in a booklet issued by the "ShangHai Litterary Publising House - 上海文业书局). The publishing company has been closed before 1940, and since copyright is only valid in china for 50 years, this file should be in public domain now. Beside, there are many pictures on Wikipedia of martial arts masters (Su LuTang, Yang ChenFu) taken at the same era, they are all ackonwledged as public domain. How could this file be different ?

I have the same problem with another file that I have uploaded : "File:Wu HuiWing et ses disciples (TianJin, 1936).jpg". The picture was taken in 1936, Mr Wu HuiQing passed away in 1958, and the file is currently used on the Chinese Wiki ： http://www.baike.com/wiki/%E5%90%B4%E4%BC%9A%E6%B8%85&prd=so_1_doc How could there be any copyright on this file ?

I thank you in advance for any help you can provide me ... — Preceding unsigned comment added by KaimenBaji (talk • contribs) 11:21, 03 October 2016 (UTC)

Hi KaimenBaji, the problem is that you uploaded the images completly without a license template, but every image on commons needs a valid license template on it description page - see Commons:Licensing. In your case this will be likely {{PD-China}} if the images were taken and first published in China. This means for the sill existing image: Edit the desciption page and replace the {{Remove this line and insert a license instead}} line with {{PD-China}}. For the deleted ones: Please try to reupload them with that license template. regards. --Ju Ta 13:45, 3 October 2016 (UTC)

Many thanks for your help ! KaimenBaji (talk) 16:43, 3 October 2016 (UTC)

Help request

Hi there. Can you give me a hand in Category:Tayfun Tasdemir to change the 43 files to "ş" with Hotcat or whatever instrument you've got? Thanks a lot. --E4024 (talk) 14:56, 5 October 2016 (UTC)

Hi,

Done. Btw: The tool you are looking for is Help:Gadget-Cat-a-lot, it should be available for you as well. regards. --Ju Ta 16:06, 5 October 2016 (UTC)

Thank you very much. I'm really too clumsy about information technology. For example in one of the two WPs I edit regularly (Turkish) I have got and use the Twinkle and in the other I don't have access to it. Got no idea why, or how to get it... Take care. --E4024 (talk) 06:49, 6 October 2016 (UTC)

Hi, I don't use Twinkle. I dont even know what it does. Could it be that you didn't activated a gaget in the other project? Otherwise I cannot help you here, sorry? --Ju Ta 09:15, 6 October 2016 (UTC)

Request

Hello, can you delete this file, please? --Alaa Najjar :)..! 15:50, 7 October 2016 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by علاء (talk • contribs) 15:50, 07 October 2016 (UTC)

Hi, no need to hurry. A regular deletion request is running. Please be patient until that will get decided. regards--Ju Ta 15:53, 7 October 2016 (UTC)

Delete 2 files that used for kowiki vandalism.

File:슉슉이님.png

File:슉슉이님의영광.png

These files are made for vandalism in korean wikipedia. It looks like that licences also abused and must put {{No licence}}. Please delete these 2 files. Thank you.--Jerrykim306 (talk) 05:34, 8 October 2016 (UTC)

Done. --Ju Ta 08:54, 8 October 2016 (UTC)

File:Brandl Portrait.jpg

Hallo JuTa, Ende August hast Du obiges Bild mit der "Begründung" gelöscht, es läge keine keine Freigabe-Mail beim OTRS-Team vor. Das ist natürlich ganz großer Kokolores: Bereits Anfang April (!!!) hatte der Fotograf Herr Reinhard Rohner eine entsprechende Freigabe-E-Mail an das deutschsprachige OTRS-Team geschickt, worauf erst mal nüscht geschehen ist. Daraufhin habe ich das Bild dann selbst hochgeladen und am 23. Mai nochmals freundlich nachgehakt. Geschehen ist... nüscht! Und dann kam die Löschung Ende August, über die ich als Einsteller vorsichtshalber natürlich nicht informiert worden bin (warum auch?). Erst jetzt bin ich auf das fehlende Foto hingewiesen worden. Daher habe ich das Bild nun restauriert und erneut eine Mail ans OTRS-Team gesendet in der Hoffnung, dass es nun Beachtung findet. Da ich nicht der Überzeugung bin, dass wir hier bei Wikimedia Commons gern mal in unserer Freizeit Kafkas Türhüterparabel (Vor dem Gesetz) nachspielen, möchte ich zugleich aber auch bei Dir noch einmal nachhaken, was Dich zu der Löschaktion bewogen hat. Nach außen hin ist das nämlich alles nur sehr schwer bis gar nicht vermittelbar. Aber wundern wir uns bei Wikipedia/Wikimedia Commons da wirklich noch, dass es uns immer schwerer fällt, neue Mitstreiter zu gewinnen (von begeistern möchte ich gar nicht sprechen)? Aber vielleicht hast Du ja eine plausible Erklärung zur Hand!? Gruß --J.-H. Janßen (talk) 21:30, 5 October 2016 (UTC)

Hi, im OTRS gibt es immer einen ziemlichen Rückstau. Aktuell sind es 77 Tage - siehe Category:OTRS pending. Nach dieser Zeit "fallen" die Bilder automatisch in eine Tageskatgorie von Category:Media missing permission und werden dann eine Woche später gelöscht. Warum in diesem Fall nichts geschehen ist oder evtl. auch Rückfragen vom OTRS nicht oder nicht zufriedenstellend beantwortet wurden, kann ich nicht beurteilen, da ich kein "Mitglied" von OTRS-Team bin und ich die Mails nicht einsehen kann. Ich hatte damals enfach nur die entsprechende Tageskategorie abgearbeitet (mit durchnittlich ca. 100 Bildern pro Tag, da fehlt die Zeit zur aufwändigeren Einzelfallprüfungen). Am besten fragst Du jetzt auf Commons:OTRS noticeboard nach, was denn mit Denem Fall ist. Wenn Du eine (oder auch zwei) Ticket-Nummern dort nennen kannst, umso besser. Gruß --Ju Ta 21:41, 5 October 2016 (UTC)

Ah, verstehe... Ich liebe diese Wiki-Bürokratie! Die ist so richtig kafkaesk. Nun, meine jüngste E-Mail mit allen nötigen Freigaben liegt ja aktuell vor, das muss reichen. Aber sicherheitshalber werde ich mir jetzt natürlich umgehend noch den Passierschein A 38 besorgen... Man weiß ja nie! Mit wahnsinnigen Grüßen --J.-H. Janßen (talk) 19:18, 9 October 2016 (UTC)

Nun, diesmal wurde die Freigabe ja nur gut 1 Stunde nach dem Hochladen von OTRS-stuff bestätigt. Keine Notwendigkeit also für Passierschein A 38 mehr. --Ju Ta 21:40, 9 October 2016 (UTC)

thanks dude

I'm getting sloppy, so I'm going to take a break. Thanks for getting the red out of my categorizations. Have a nice morning (here)/afternoon (there, where you are, I guess).2607:FEA8:23A0:5A0:B982:6F50:82B8:FA27 12:14, 15 October 2016 (UTC)

You are very wellcome :) --Ju Ta 13:50, 15 October 2016 (UTC)

Ilgar Jafarov's photos of 2016 Olympics

Hi JuTa. You have asked for the copyright status of Ilgar Jafarov's photos of 2016 Olympics that I have uploaded here. Please be informed that I have already sent an e-mail to OTRS users (subject name is [Ticket#2015031710017141]) with the link to the categories, where these photos are located. User Emha have already provide the ticket number for some of them (e.g [4]). Could you please contact with him or other OTRS user to do such for others? Danke, --Interfase (talk) 08:50, 16 October 2016 (UTC)

Hi Interfase, you should always, even with {{OTRS pending}}, upload images with a valid license template. If not, a bot will take them into Category:New uploads without a license‎, and people checking this cat will mark them as "no license" (like me). According the allready confirmed example above this should likely be {{Cc-by-sa-4.0}} in these cases. If it is the same please add that template to the license description pages. You can remove the problem tag as well then. If you are not sure which license the copyright holder likes for those images, please ask him and apply the corresponding template, because otherwise the images will likely get deleted in about one week. regards. --Ju Ta 08:59, 16 October 2016 (UTC)

Thanks. I know which license copyright holder (i.e. Ilgar Jafarov) likes for his images. Because I helped him to write appropriate letter to OTRS. It is {{Cc-by-sa-4.0}}. Then I will provide all these images with that lisence. --Interfase (talk) 09:04, 16 October 2016 (UTC)

Excellent :) thx. PS: You should use {{subst:OP}} instead on {{OTRS pending}}. This is adding the actual date as paramaters to the OTRS tag. That becomes important if the images dont get confirmed for a longer time to determine a kind of timeout for them. Thx. --Ju Ta 09:06, 16 October 2016 (UTC)

OK. Thanks, JuTa. By the way, licenses were added for all these images. --Interfase (talk) 12:18, 16 October 2016 (UTC)

Bojtos-laszlo-georgianna.jpg

file:Bojtos-laszlo-georgianna.jpg Hi, Thank You for your warning.

The license question is progress. Thank You for your understand.

Best Regards, --Pinyoo (talk) 19:24, 16 October 2016 (UTC)

Hi, do you allready know Commons:OTRS? You should follow the instructions from there. Especially you should add a valid license template within a week, otherwise the image will likely get deleted. regards. --Ju Ta 20:47, 16 October 2016 (UTC)

Please Help Clarify

Last night I uploaded 3 images:

File:Lionel Nation screengrab from 'Lionel on Radio New Zealand Diagnosing Hillary Clinton' (2016-10-05) YouTube videoID-QhHJXVSNHzM @5m50s 1280x720.png
Professor Richard D. Wolff screengrab from Democracy At Work's 'Global Capitalism, A Looming Crisis (October 2016)' (2016-10-12) YouTube videoID-5hYKgyUU024 @6m52s cropped 500x500.png
Democracy At Work (Unofficial Fan Remuxed) Logo.png

The first was a screengrab only. The second was a screengrab that was cropped. The third was a screengrab that had basic editing and cropping to rearrange it to be vertically more central rather than wide and horizontal. The first was deleted, the other two remain. I have a couple questions:

Did you delete it? If not, how can I find out who/what/how/why? (Not to blame, but to follow up and learn more.)
Why was it deleted? When using the wizard it said I'd have 7 days. I emailed Lionel to find out his copyright ideas on the matter and intended to update it.
What is the best way to properly use, credit, and copyright screengrabs? (Shortest version possible please.)

Am I missing anything? I want to occasionally contribute the right way, but not if it's too complicated. ~ JasonCarswell (talk) 19:49, 16 October 2016 (UTC)

Hi, the images has been deleted by an other admin as copyright violations. Perhaps you read first Help:Upload. Every Image on Cmmons needs a valid license template - see Commons:Licensing - which was completely missing in your case. Sreenshots from other websites are generally not allowed here, because they normaly are copyright protected by other people. If you like to upload such images you have to follow the procedure as documented on Commons:OTRS. regards. --Ju Ta 20:53, 16 October 2016 (UTC)

Update: They're all gone now. The licenses were missing because I didn't know and they didn't offer a good choice. The OTRS in a nutshell was perfect. Thanks. ~ JasonCarswell (talk) 21:02, 16 October 2016 (UTC)

Deletion requests

Hi. I refer to your edit here, where you reinstated the deletion request, although it does not give any reasons for the deletion. Is this allowed? Can any uninfomed vandal, therefore, clamp a 'Deletion Request' on an image without giving reasons? Surely this is wrong? The user in question stated 'This image is wrong'. No reasons were given by him/her. Surely, I shouldn't now have to waste 35 minutes of my life now trying to defend my image without knowing what the accusations against it are? Llywelyn2000 (talk) 06:04, 18 October 2016 (UTC)

Hi, yes that is OK. Deletion requests are decided by admins and not the uploaders of the images in question. I saw you allready argumented at Commons:Deletion requests/File:1024px Earth lighting equinox CY.svg, which is good. Now you should watch that page for any changes and wait likely until the 20th, when an admin will decide the request. The result will likely be Keep, but as I completed that prior incomplete request I will not do that. We have to wait for another admin. Please be patient. --Ju Ta 06:11, 18 October 2016 (UTC)

Many thanks for your answer. But there is more in my question other than this image - the question whether any person can clamp a DR on any image without giving reasons. That is wrong, in my opinion. Or am I mistaken? Thanks. Llywelyn2000 (talk) 07:29, 18 October 2016 (UTC)

Yes, anybody can start deletion request for any images because of any reason. If someone raises deletion requests too often for invalid reason, he/she get warned and perhaps blocked. And here is a reason, but its (IMHO) not a valid reason to delete it in this case. --Ju Ta 07:34, 18 October 2016 (UTC)

Parliament Street

Hallo , das Bild hier: https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Parliament_Street_Exeter_Summer_2016.jpg habe ich gemacht und hier hatte ich es hochgeladen https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Category:Parliament_Street?uselang=de Da ist es aber nicht zu sehen, sondern nur hier: https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Category:Parliament_Street,_Exeter Die Seite wurde wohl gelöscht: https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Category:Parliament_Street&action=edit&uselang=de Warum? Was habe ich wieder falsch gemacht? :) lg Qwertzu111111 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Qwertzu111111 (talk • contribs) 16:59, 18 October 2016 (UTC)

Hallo Qwertzu111111, Du hattest versucht die Category:Parliament Street wie eine Galerie zu benutzen. Befüllt werden Kategorien nicht durch editieren der Kategorie-Seite, sondern durch editieren der Bilder die in diese Kategorie gehören. Man fügt dann [[Category:XXX]] zu der Bildbeschreibungsseite hinzu. Siehe dazu auch Commons:Kategorien und Commons:Galerien. Außerdem hattest Du da Bild beim hochladen schon selbst in Category:Parliament Street, Exeter eingeordnet, was auch OK ist, denn dort gehört es ja auch rein. Gruß --Ju Ta 18:59, 18 October 2016 (UTC)

... und was heißt das jetzt... :)??? --Qwertzu111111 (talk) 19:15, 18 October 2016 (UTC)

Was ist Deine Frage? Ich wüsste nicht wie ich dies anders oder ausführlicher erklären könnte. Lies Dir doch erstmal die verlinkten Hilfe-Seiten durch. Hier nochmals: Commons:Kategorien und Commons:Galerien. Gruß --Ju Ta 19:21, 18 October 2016 (UTC)

File:Salomon Window Chatres.jpg

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

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

Please remember to respond to and – if appropriate – contradict the arguments supporting deletion. Arguments which focus on the nominator will not affect the result of the nomination. Thank you!

Afrikaans ∙ Bahasa Indonesia ∙ bosanski ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ dansk ∙ Deutsch ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ ∙ eesti ∙ English ∙ español ∙ Esperanto ∙ français ∙ galego ∙ hrvatski ∙ íslenska ∙ italiano ∙ magyar ∙ Nederlands ∙ norsk bokmål ∙ norsk nynorsk ∙ occitan ∙ Plattdüütsch ∙ polski ∙ português ∙ português do Brasil ∙ română ∙ shqip ∙ sicilianu ∙ slovenčina ∙ slovenščina ∙ suomi ∙ svenska ∙ Tiếng Việt ∙ Türkçe ∙ Zazaki ∙ Ελληνικά ∙ беларуская ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ ∙ български ∙ македонски ∙ русский ∙ српски / srpski ∙ українська ∙ հայերեն ∙ বাংলা ∙ മലയാളം ∙ ပအိုဝ်ႏဘာႏသာႏ ∙ မြန်မာဘာသာ ∙ ไทย ∙ 조선말 ∙ 한국어 ∙ 日本語 ∙ 简体中文‎ ∙ 繁體中文‎ ∙ עברית ∙ العربية ∙ پښتو ∙ فارسی ∙ ދިވެހިބަސް ∙ +/−

Jcb (talk) 11:43, 20 October 2016 (UTC)

Norton's Pumpbrunnen

Hallo JuTa, im Polytechnisches Journal habe ich eine Abbildung (Zeichnung) von einem "Nortons's Pumpbrunnen" gefunden die ich für einen Beitrag in der niederländische Wikipedia sehr gut gebrauchen könnte (http://dingler.culture.hu-berlin.de/article/pj191/ar191004). Es stammt aus dem württembergischen Gewerbeblatt, 1868, Nr. 48. Die Lizenz der Bilddigitalisierung steht unter Creative Commons by-nc-nd 3.0. Darf ich die Zeichnung bei Wikimedia Commons hochladen? Die Qualität ist allerdings nicht sehr gut aber es gibt nichts besseres. Danke im Voraus. --Wilrooij (talk) 22:15, 20 October 2016 (UTC)

Hallo Wilrooij, eine gute und eine schlechte Nachricht. Die schlechte zuerst: Creative Commons by-nc-nd 3.0 ist hier nicht verwendbar, da alles auf allen Mediawiki Projeketen auch veränderbar und kommerziell nutzbar sein muss. Aber wenn dass Bild von 1868 stammt ist es mit sehr hoher Wahrscheinlichkeit bereits gemeinfrei. Gemeinfrei werden Werke dessen Urheber länger als 70 Jahre Tod sind, d.h. vor 1946 gestorben. Von 1868 bis 1946 sind es 88 Jahre. Und wenn der Urheber, sagen wir mindestens 20 war als der die Zeichnung erstellte, müsste es Ende 1945 mindestens 108 Jahre alt gewesen sein. Man kann also annehmen dass er vorher gestorben ist, und Du kannst das Bild hier mit {{PD-old}} hochladen. Gruß --Ju Ta 01:37, 21 October 2016 (UTC)

Danke! --Wilrooij (talk) 08:25, 21 October 2016 (UTC)

Undeletion

Could you please undelete 1400? Thanks! Evrik (talk) 15:18, 26 October 2016 (UTC)

It was just a redirect to Category:1400. Please create it new with contents. Thx. --Ju Ta 16:46, 26 October 2016 (UTC)

Unhelpful edits

Hello! Edits like this are not helpful. These women belonged to royalty. They had no surnames. Please do not assign surnames to royalty, and, above all, please do not create categories that are not based on anything factual! --SergeWoodzing (talk) 11:24, 21 October 2016 (UTC)

Well, my goal is that any people are finaly findable through Category:Surnames and Category:Given names. I left the DEFAULTSORT value, but readded the surname cats. Thx for understanding. --Ju Ta 11:43, 21 October 2016 (UTC)

Again: Please stop this! You are adding falsehoods and screwing things up. If you don't stop pretending that "Sweden" is a surname, and adding categories and changing defaultsorts as if it were, I will have to report you to administrators here. All royalty is sorted by their royal first names. --SergeWoodzing (talk) 12:56, 27 October 2016 (UTC)

Hi SergeWoodzing I'm busy with this task since months and you are the first complaining about it. Could it be a compromize to name it Category:Sweden (royalty) instead of Category:Sweden (surname)? And in the given name cat they were now sorted under * (for no surname), whats bad with it? regards --Ju Ta 18:36, 27 October 2016 (UTC)

That could have been an idea, but we already have Category:Royalty of Sweden, so it would be a duplication and Commons:Overcat. My most serious complaint is your changing several defaultsorts to "Sweden" when policy always has been to sort them under threir official first names, not under a fictitious surname. All encyclopaedias and such do that. Commons should not be an exception. --SergeWoodzing (talk) 20:13, 27 October 2016 (UTC)

Please

Hello JuTa,
Could you please undelete Category:Anarthriaceae ?
In biology we keep the Category redirects for taxa:

to avoid the contributors to recreate it.
to explain why the category should not be filled
to keep the history on those category

We have specific templates:

They all contain {{Empty category}} to ask admin not to delete them ;-) Best regards Liné1 (talk) 13:03, 28 October 2016 (UTC)

Hi Liné1, none of those template were used in the cat. Anyhow: Its back, please fix it accordingly. Thx. --Ju Ta 15:46, 28 October 2016 (UTC)

Thanks a lot. I will modify accordingly. Best regards 16:18, 28 October 2016 (UTC)

Eva Rovers klein

Ciao JuTa,

On my TP you wrote that you want to delete File:Eva_Rovers_klein.jpg. This photograph is since few days OTRS-pending. This is supposed to stay like this 30 days to give the photographer time to release this picture under a CC-by-SA license of his choice, This is asked by Eva Rovers herself.

He did send his mail already on 27 October Hopefully to the right address. I talked about it with Edo

Oct 28 On Oct 28, Eva Rovers said the following:

Ha Klaas,

Goed nieuws! Koen heeft gisteren die mail gestuurd en zijn toestemming gegeven voor de licentie die jij aanraadde. Zou dus goed moeten komen!

Hartelijke groeten! Eva

Greetings & salutations, Klaas `Z4␟` V: 09:47, 30 October 2016 (UTC)

Hi Klaas, every image on commons needs a valid license templae used on its description page. This includes "OTRS-pending-images", otherwise they get marked as "no license" and deleted one week after. Whoch license did you ecommended for her? Please add the corresponding license template (see Commons:Copyright tags) to the image description page. You can remove the problem tag the same time. Thx and regards. --Ju Ta 11:48, 30 October 2016 (UTC)

undeletion request

Hallo JuTa, kannst du bitte Category:Natural monuments in Landkreis Anhalt-Bitterfeld wiederherstellen? Holger1959 (talk) 13:33, 30 October 2016 (UTC)

OK,

Done. --Ju Ta 17:32, 30 October 2016 (UTC)

Kategorielöschung

Hallo JuTa, ich habe gerade gesehen, dass Du eine von mir angelegte Kategorie Category:Lebuh Pantai Fire and Rescue Station gelöscht hast. Das ganze geht auf den User:Chongkiang zurück, der sich gerade damit befleissigt, Kategorien aufzulösen. Grundsätzlich gilt doch in Commons, dass die Kategorien so genau wie möglich sein sollen. Insbesondere bei Gebäuden oder anderen Entitäten, die einen eigenen Namen oder Bezeichnung haben, ist dies mehr als wünschenswert, so auch bei File:Penang Malaysia Fire-Station-Lebuh-Pantai-01.jpg. Meine Befürchtung ist, dass das munter so weitergeht und das von mir für Malaysia angelegte, präzise Kategoriengerüst auseinandergezerrt wird. Das kann's doch nicht sein! Gruß, --CEphoto, Uwe Aranas (talk) 19:18, 30 October 2016 (UTC) Was mich besonders ärgert, ist, das so eine Aktion mal eben so in zwei Tagen gemacht wird, ohne dem betroffenen Autor Gelegenheit zu geben, sich zu äußern. Ehrlich, ich bin verstimmt. --CEphoto, Uwe Aranas (talk) 19:19, 30 October 2016 (UTC)

Hmm, ob 1 Datei Kategorien sinvoll sind, sei mal dahingestellt. Ich hab' jetzt jedenfalls die Cat wiederhergestellt und das Bild dort wieder einkategorisiert. Den Rest musst Du mit User:Chongkian ausmachen. --Ju Ta 21:15, 30 October 2016 (UTC)

Danke! Ich werde ihn ansprechen. Auch eine Kategorie mit einem Bild kann der Ausgangspunkt für weitere Bilder sein. Ich habe oft mehrere Bilder von einem Motiv, bearbeite aber oft erst mal eines oder wenige. Danke nochmal. ---CEphoto, Uwe Aranas (talk) 21:43, 30 October 2016 (UTC)

OTRS

I see that you added the OTRS pending to File:El Granizazo.ogg and others. While the OTRS permission statement was not the standard wording I thought it was sufficient. Can you tell me if you see it differently?--Sphilbrick (talk) 17:18, 1 November 2016 (UTC)

Hi Sphilbrick, I'm not a member of the OTRS team, so I cannot see the mails and have no clue if the releases are sufficient or not. I'm just looking after i.e. Category:OTRS received - No timestamp given and similar and fix the timestamps of the templates. cheers. --Ju Ta 17:27, 1 November 2016 (UTC)

Okay, now I get it. I guess I needed to look a little bit closer, but with many hundreds in the backlog I was trying to move a little quickly. I saw that you with the first editor after the original uploador, so thought you were the one that added the OTRS pending. It is unusual for the original upload or to do so but it does make some sense in this case. Talking mainly to myself, it occurs to me that we have a template which is mostly used indicate that there has been an OTRS email but it is not sufficient, but it can also be used to indicate that an OTRS email has been sent and there is no opinion about its adequacy. Perhaps we ought to think about separating them into two different templates. I thought the permission looked adequate, even though it was not quite standard and while I don't know you well I've seen your name enough that I just assumed you are an OTRS agent and had determined that it wasn't sufficient. I will now go back and process the permission.--Sphilbrick (talk) 13:52, 2 November 2016 (UTC)

Portuguese surnames

If so, then «all other» are wrong and need fixing. -- Tuválkin ✉ ✇ 21:12, 2 November 2016 (UTC)

Hi Tuválkin, why is that wrong in your eyes? --Ju Ta 21:13, 2 November 2016 (UTC)

I corrected your mistaken curation of Portuguese surnames in Category:Maria Amália Vaz de Carvalho and you reverted my edits, reisntating the previous incorrect state of the affected filepages and categories. I’m ready to work on the matter, but do you trust me to curate Portuguese surnames, based on my experience and specific knowledge — or not? -- Tuválkin ✉ ✇ 21:18, 2 November 2016 (UTC)

Not realy, as long as you dont give me a reason why the other way arround should be wrong. regards --Ju Ta 21:19, 2 November 2016 (UTC)

(Edit conflict) See this. -- Tuválkin ✉ ✇ 21:21, 2 November 2016 (UTC)

I think we should ask a greater audiance in this matter. I will open a thread on Commons:Village pump shortly. You'll get a ping. --Ju Ta 21:25, 2 November 2016 (UTC)

Knock yourself out. I wonder what you expect from that greater audience. Maybe that am not Portuguese afterall and don’t know how Portuguese surnames work? -- Tuválkin ✉ ✇ 21:30, 2 November 2016 (UTC)

(Edit conflict) Not really?! You mean you do not really trust my knowledge of the surname customs of my own culture, unless I spoon feed you info and ask for your “permission” to do correct curation? That’s cute, but I pass. I’ll let you make a mess of it, and in a few months time when you’re chasing a different shiny object, I’ll come back to fix it properly. Or maybe another Portuguese speaking user will notice it sooner and will do the fixing, no problem, it’s a wiki. Meanwhile, of course, non-Portuguese speaking vistors of Commons will be mislead and Portuguese speaking vistors of Commons will be unimpressed by our lack of accuracy, all because you think you need to score points against me for I dared to easily (re-)populate cats (about unrelated matters) you had just deleted as empty. -- Tuválkin ✉ ✇ 21:30, 2 November 2016 (UTC)

Please see now Commons:Village pump#Organization of Category:Surnames, Category:Female names and Category:Male names. If you like you can bring your arguments there. --Ju Ta 21:53, 2 November 2016 (UTC)

NC Baptist Church file

Hi JuTa-- Thanks for noticing that, I thought I had put enough copyright information into the system. Next time i'm in the area, I'll take a picture myself and add that instead.

  --Fisch1234 (talk) 13:05, 3 November 2016 (UTC)

Rename request

Hello JuTa, I'm contacting you because I would like to be renamed. I read only bureaucrats can rename the users. The reason is because I would like the attribution related to my works properly quoted and spelled, here and outside Commons. Now my name is just "Basilemorin" and I would like to be called "Basile Morin" with a space after my first name and a capital letter with my name. Could you help ? Thanks !--Basile Morin (talk) 03:36, 5 November 2016 (UTC)

Hi, its better that you get renamed in all projects, not only commons. Please raise your request at meta:Steward requests/Username changes. regards. --Ju Ta 05:06, 5 November 2016 (UTC)

Ayuda con la licencia del archivo File:Camino Santiago Vieira.svg

Buenos días:

Tengo un problema sobre la licencia de este archivo ya que no la puse correctamente en su creación y me llega un aviso tuyo para que lo subsane. No lo sé hacer, ruego que alguien me ayude para solucionarlo.

Es un archivo de mi creación en base al dibujo aprobado por la Xunta de Galicia por ORDEN de 5 de noviembre de 2015 por la que se modifica el Manual de señalización turística de Galicia aprobado por el Decreto 85/2012, de 16 de febrero, y se regula la imagen y señalética del Camino de Santiago.

--Manuelfb55

Hi, every image on commons needs a valid license(template) on its description page - see Commons:Licensing. In this case you might try {{PD-simple}} or similar - see the long list in Commons:Copyright tags. But thats a borderline case. Someone might disagree with that and raise a regular Commons:Deletion request for it. --Ju Ta 08:20, 7 November 2016 (UTC)

You’re treading on thin ice

Here: (Deletion log); 03:28:44 . . JuTa (B/A) (talk | contribs) deleted page Category:Cinema of Mozambique ‎(Empty category: content was: "Mozambique Category:Culture of Mozambique", and the only contributor was "Tuvalkin" (talk)) -- Tuválkin ✉ ✇ 22:37, 9 November 2016 (UTC)

whats the problem with it? --Ju Ta 22:38, 9 November 2016 (UTC)

Categories "Maria (.*)"

Thanks a lot for creating some of the missing categories about Maria Gentile/Mosciska/Pia Pagliarini. :) I would've created them myself between today and tomorrow (many other are missing...) because we're organising an editathon here in Italy, and I'm still uploading materials and preparing the field for tomorrow's event. Can I include also your name in the final report about what has been created in relation to the editathon? Thank you again! --Sannita (ICCU) (talk) 12:28, 10 November 2016 (UTC)

Yes, you can :) Please leave a link to thge report's page. PS: There are still categories for the Marias missing. I'm only setting given-, surname, people by name, [wo]men by name and where possible birth and deathyear categories. The real subject cats like Category:Sculptors from Italy or similar are still missing and should be added through your editathon. regards --Ju Ta 17:56, 10 November 2016 (UTC)