User talk:SuperJew
 First steps tutorialOur first steps help file and our FAQ will help you a lot after registration. They explain how to customize the interface (for example the language), how to upload files and our basic licensing policy. You don't need technical skills in order to contribute here. Be bold contributing here and assume good faith for the intentions of others. This is a wiki ‒ it is really easy.  Getting helpMore information is available at the Community Portal. You may ask questions at the Help desk, Village Pump or on IRC channel #wikimedia-commons (direct access). You can also contact an administrator on their talk page. If you have a specific copyright question, ask at Commons talk:Licensing. |
 Goodies, tips and tricks
 Made a mistake?
| |
| (P.S. Would you like to provide feedback on this message?) | ||
--SieBot 19:51, 5 April 2008 (UTC)
There seems to be a problem regarding the description and/or licensing of this particular file. It has been found that you've added in the image's description only a Template that's not a license and although it provides useful informations about the image, it's not a valid license. Could you please resolve this problem, adding the license in the image linked above? You can edit the description page and change the text. Uploading a new version of the file does not change the description of the file. This page may give you more hints on which license to choose. Thank you.
This message was added automatically by Filbot, if you need some help about it, ask its master or go to the Commons:Help desk. --Filnik 16:11, 7 April 2008 (UTC)
Sabbath[edit]
One isn't even allowed to write a comment to you on the Sabbath? I wasn't aware that other non-Jews' actions could influence your adherence to the rules of the Sabbath? Diliff (talk) 16:14, 29 August 2008 (UTC)
- It is more appliable to Jews, as one is not allowed to get enjoyment/pleasure or profit from another Jews breaking of shabbat. If a non-Jew does "Melacha" for a Jew, say turns on the light and he does this only for the Jew and gets no profit/enjoyment from it, the Jew isn't meant to use the light. As I'm not sure how Halacha would rule on this case (as there wasn't electricity in the times of our Sages), I would still prefer that people won't write to me on the Sabbath and also because I wouldn't be able to answer it at that time. If it is important for the person to write at that time and it can't wait, I suppose he could decide for himself if to write or not. Thanks, SuperJew (talk) 17:20, 30 August 2008 (UTC)
FP voting[edit]
Please use standard voting (in any language) to oppose or support a picture. We've had long discussions about this years ago. It is not that your vote won't be counted but it is to be impartial. The problem is not as much with the support votes, but with the oppose votes. Soon somebody will start to use things like 'I hate it' or 'awful' and we really want to avoid that kind of unfriendliness. I'm not saying you are doing anything wrong, but better not wake some sleeping dogs, if you catch my drift. Thanks. Lycaon (talk) 17:39, 1 September 2008 (UTC)
Sorry, this is definitely not a Short-toed Eagle! Definitely a Buteo species; very probably Buteo rufinus (native in Israel), but Buteo regalis (if imported from North America) and maybe Buteo hemilasius (Asia) are also possible - MPF (talk) 10:04, 26 August 2009 (UTC)
- And why do you say this? --SuperJew (talk) 13:56, 26 August 2009 (UTC)
- Hi SuperJew - a combination of several features, including structure, plumage colour and eye colour. Short-toed Eagle has a very distinctive shape, with a large head, often appearing crested (compare here or here), and with very bright yellow eyes, and a white or very pale belly with any dark confined to the upper breast (as here). The Jerusalem Zoo bird conversely shows a pale upper breast and dark belly, characteristic of Long-legged Buzzard Buteo rufinus and Ferruginous Hawk B. regalis, as is the dark eye (indicates an adult Buteo) and the relatively smaller head. Hope this helps! - MPF (talk) 17:53, 26 August 2009 (UTC)
- Well, I, on the other hand, took this pic at the zoo and there was one sign for Short toed Eagle and one for Northern Harrier... --> this pic is one of those --> It's not a Bueto Q.E.D --SuperJew (talk) 18:44, 26 August 2009 (UTC)
- I fear, not the first time an incorrect label has been seen at a zoo! The bird shown on the website link you posted is clearly a different bird (see the bright yellow eyes!) and is a Short-toed Eagle. It may just be that they have not yet updated old signs to represent new occupants of the cage. Maybe ask the staff next time you visit there? - MPF (talk) 19:52, 26 August 2009 (UTC)
- I will, though heavens knows when that will be. Thank you for you sharp eyedness (or something like that ;)) --SuperJew (talk) 06:41, 27 August 2009 (UTC)
Haim Watzman[edit]
You'd be better asking a COM:OTRS volunteer: The details of the e-mail and any permission we can work out matters. We will need to work out a free licence, and it will need to have the photographer's permission (or evidence that the rights were granted to him), since English Wikipediia's fair-use policy forbids fair-use images of living people. Only exceptions might be complete recluses, like J. D. Salinger. Adam Cuerden (talk) 02:00, 6 October 2009 (UTC)
Distribution of Boomerangs in Australia[edit]
Hi SuperJew, where from did you get the boomerang related information to create the image depicting the distribution of boomerangs in Australia? The map certainly is interesting, but unfortunately we have no clue where the basic information comes from. Apart from that, I think it would be better to substitute the fancy font you used for the word "legend" with another one (e.g. the one you use for the rest of the legend) to make it more encyclopaedic. --Marsupilami04 (talk) 11:10, 13 April 2010 (UTC)
- I made this map for an assignment at school. The information is from "The Boomerang Information Book" by S. G. King (2001), published by J.B. Books Australia. Feel free to change the font and re-upload it if you wish. --SuperJew (talk) 10:35, 19 April 2010 (UTC)
- Thanks for the information about the book, I added it to the description page. But the quality of the image will suffer if I was to change it because I can't download the map (image layer) and the legend (text layer) separately. Would you be so kind to change that, since you certainly still have the original file? You don't have to do it today... :-) --Marsupilami04 (talk) 12:02, 22 April 2010 (UTC)
Lizard BiblicalZoo.JPG[edit]
The species is Laudakia stellio (old name: Agama stellio). With best regards from Germany --Pristurus (talk) 21:24, 12 May 2010 (UTC)
Saliot[edit]
khoroschoe raboto, kinstler arbeit, good job, bom trabalho,
toda raba Superjew,
all the very best to You
from MadJew
- Thank you, SuperJew (talk) 09:43, 29 July 2010 (UTC)
|
File:טבעת_גופרית_מונוקלינית.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. |
Leyo 07:22, 28 June 2011 (UTC)
 |
File:Aboriginal Flag.JPG has been marked as a possible copyright violation. Wikimedia Commons only accepts free content—that is, images and other media files that can be used by anyone, for any purpose. Traditional copyright law does not grant these freedoms, and unless noted otherwise, everything you find on the web is copyrighted and not permitted here. For details on what is acceptable, please read Commons:Licensing. You may also find Commons:Copyright rules useful, or you can ask questions about Commons policies at the Commons:Help desk. If you are the copyright holder and the creator of the file, please read Commons:But it's my own work! for tips on how to provide evidence of that.
The file you added has been deleted. If you have written permission from the copyright holder, please have them send us a free license release via COM:VRT. If you believe that the deletion was not in accordance with policy, you may request undeletion. (It is not necessary to request undeletion if using VRT; the file will be automatically restored at the conclusion of the process.) Warning: Wikimedia Commons takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing.
|
Yours sincerely cmadler (talk) 13:24, 26 July 2012 (UTC)
- I riff-raffed through the discussions and i have to agree with Fry1989 and Spiridon ([1]) that this is a RIDICULOUS idea.
- Tomorrow maybe I'll go, design a red circle (like in the middle of the Wikimedia commons symbol), copyright and then sue everyone, starting with wikimedia obviously.
- I cannot even begin to comprehend how such a thing could be copyrighted.
- But I'm not gonna argue, because I can see it will be talking to blank walls.
- Sadly and Sincerely, SuperJew (talk) 14:55, 26 July 2012 (UTC)
- I agree that it's idiotic, but when a court has ruled, we are stuck with it. The only change we could make is to eliminate the Commons requirement that a work must be free in both the US and the source country (and lower the requirement to free in the US); you could try to start a discussion on that topic at Commons talk:Licensing, though I wouldn't hold my breath. cmadler (talk) 15:17, 26 July 2012 (UTC)
- I don't think I have enough experience here to start such a discussion. I would be grateful to you if you could do it.
- --SuperJew (talk) 15:42, 26 July 2012 (UTC)
- I'm not going to start that discussion, because I think the current rule is generally good, since it ensures that works on Commons will be free in much of the world (countries that use the rule of the shorter term), although it does result in a few frustrating cases like this. cmadler (talk) 16:40, 26 July 2012 (UTC)
- An Australian friend of mine says this: "It's protected under the copywrite act 1968, in which rather than state it can't be reproduced, it essentially states that any reproduction of it should be handled fairly. It's aim is to ensure the concept of the Aboriginal flag isn't mocked or parodied, rather than never used."
- Is this correct, and if so, can we have it under fair use?
- --SuperJew (talk) 17:03, 26 July 2012 (UTC)
- Because "fair use" laws vary from country to country, and are often dependent on context, Commons does not accept "fair-use" files. Many other Wikimedia projects do; [[[:m:Non-free content|here's a list]]. Also, other Wikimedia projects may have different rules about where an image must be free. For example, English Wikipedia only requires a file to be free under US law. So there you will find en:File:Australian Aboriginal Flag.svg listed as a free file (too simple for US copyright), but marked not to be copied to Commons since it would be deleted here. cmadler (talk) 17:34, 26 July 2012 (UTC)
- I'm not going to start that discussion, because I think the current rule is generally good, since it ensures that works on Commons will be free in much of the world (countries that use the rule of the shorter term), although it does result in a few frustrating cases like this. cmadler (talk) 16:40, 26 July 2012 (UTC)
- I agree that it's idiotic, but when a court has ruled, we are stuck with it. The only change we could make is to eliminate the Commons requirement that a work must be free in both the US and the source country (and lower the requirement to free in the US); you could try to start a discussion on that topic at Commons talk:Licensing, though I wouldn't hold my breath. cmadler (talk) 15:17, 26 July 2012 (UTC)
|
|
File:Aboriginal Flag.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. |
84.61.167.13 18:05, 26 July 2012 (UTC)
Autopatrol given[edit]
Hello. I just wanted to let you know that I have granted autopatrol rights to your account; the reason for this is that I believe you are sufficiently trustworthy and experienced to have your contributions automatically marked as "reviewed". This has no effect on your editing, it is simply intended to make it easier for users that are monitoring Recent changes or Recent uploads to find unproductive edits amidst the productive ones like yours. In addition, the Flickr upload feature and an increased number of batch-uploads in UploadWizard, uploading of freely licensed MP3 files, overwriting files uploaded by others and an increased limit for page renames per minute are now available to you. Thank you. INeverCry 22:32, 1 October 2012 (UTC)
- Thank you! SuperJew (talk) 05:41, 2 October 2012 (UTC)
TUSC token 567b00f15f1dbe30e1908b8ec24b1cb9[edit]
I am now proud owner of a TUSC account!
Sorry, but there aren no horses looking like this on the world. It's a mule, whatever the sign there stated. Kersti (talk) 20:11, 8 January 2013 (UTC)
- Tell me one single horse breed which looks like this mule. I looked on all horse breeds we have photos of - and none of them looked that mule-like. Kersti (talk) 03:51, 7 April 2013 (UTC)
Sorry, but don't revert my edits without answering my questions!!!! Please tell me why you believe this animal may be a horse. In sorting the horse pictures of Wikimedia Commons I looked on horses of breeds from all over the world, from the smallest pony or mini-horse to the biggest ones, from heaviest draft horses too arabs, akhal thekes and thoroughbreds, there are no horses, whick are looking this mule-like on the world. So tell me why you believe this is a horse or don't revert my edits! --Kersti (talk) 12:19, 2 January 2014 (UTC)
Quality Image Promotion[edit]
 |
Your image has been reviewed and promoted
Congratulations! Dog Rose Nataf 02.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
|
![[1]](https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Deletion_requests/File:Austr.Aborig.png){kind=link}
 |
Your image has been reviewed and promoted
Congratulations! Persian Buttercup 05.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
|
 |
Your image has been reviewed and promoted
Congratulations! Pink Rock-Rose 01.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
|
 |
Your image has been reviewed and promoted
Congratulations! Pink Rock-Rose 03.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
|
renominating an image for QI[edit]
Sorry I'm a bit slow in replying. Yes, you can renominate images that haven't been assessed, but probably best not to do it straight away as it will probably annoy people, especially if the reason they weren't assessed is because there are so many images waiting. It may also be that the images are marginal (I haven't checked to see) or by-passed for more interesting images - so look critically at your own images and decide if they could be improved. Best of luck :-) --Tony Wills (talk) 05:53, 5 May 2013 (UTC)
FP nomination photo[edit]
Hi- Could you please give me some feedback about what it was about the colors in the Alternate version that "killed" the image for you? Thanks in advance--Godot13 (talk) 21:04, 18 May 2013 (UTC)
- Hi, I replied on the nomination page. --SuperJew (talk) 08:24, 19 May 2013 (UTC)
Quality Image Promotion[edit]
 |
Your image has been reviewed and promoted
Congratulations! Junk Pile Tzeret Street 02.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
|
 |
Your image has been reviewed and promoted
Congratulations! Mediterranean Milk Thistle 02.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
|
 |
Your image has been reviewed and promoted
Congratulations! Pink Rock-Rose 04.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
|
File:Water Wings.jpg[edit]
Hi SuperJew - just to explain my edit: categories are to help people find images. If someone wants to find a photo of a flying Black-headed Gull Chroicocephalus ridibundus to illustrate a wikipedia article, they'll go first to Category:Chroicocephalus ridibundus and from there to Category:Chroicocephalus ridibundus in flight. But they won't want an incomplete, blurred image that does not show the subject well and is clearly not the main subject of the image. So all that File:Water Wings.jpg does is clutter up that category without being useful in it, slowing down searches. Therefore, I consider it is best not to include it in that category. Of the brackets, they are not normally used in ornithological or other scientific literature, so are superfluous. I have frequently removed surplus brackets like these (I don't specifically hunt out to remove them, but do remove them when editing pages for any other reasons); this is the first time anyone has queried their removal. Hope this helps! - MPF (talk) 00:01, 5 August 2013 (UTC)
- I may understand your point about categories, not 100% sure i agree with it, but I moved the photo to broader cat. about the brackets, they help read the description, and it is IMO very weird and unclear to read a description "Coots Fulica atra" instead of "Coots (Fulica atra)". --SuperJew (talk) 11:17, 5 August 2013 (UTC)
- MPF, I was just looking at this again, and I want to point out to you about the brackets that the Wikipedia pages of animals have the same format I used (with the brackets). see for example W:Eurasian Coot or W:Black-headed Gull. --SuperJew (talk) 07:49, 10 January 2014 (UTC)
Quality Image Promotion[edit]
 |
Your image has been reviewed and promoted
Congratulations! Persian Buttercup 01.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
|
 |
Your image has been reviewed and promoted
Congratulations! Bristly Hollyhock 01.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
|
Dome of the Rock and Chain[edit]
Hi SuperJew- I nominated this image for FP in May, when I had just started using new software. You accurately commented on the coloring problem. I was going to re-nominate it since I have (I think) fixed the issue. Is this more appropriate? Thanks.-Godot13 (talk) 18:14, 19 October 2013 (UTC)
- Much better. Cheers! --SuperJew (talk) 18:21, 19 October 2013 (UTC)
- Thanks!-Godot13 (talk) 22:03, 19 October 2013 (UTC)
Why do you think, this is a female? The stripes at the head are too prominent for this and the beak is more reddish than in the females. --Kersti (talk) 11:21, 2 January 2014 (UTC)
- I in the summary that the bill has a black-tinge, meaning it's female. look up some images of it on google. --SuperJew (talk) 12:21, 2 January 2014 (UTC)
Thanks, now I understand your edit here.
Please answer my above question concerning the horse/mule - there are some a bit horse-like looking mules and there are some a bit mule-like-looking horses - but theses are mules which are not in the range where one couldn't be shure.
It is much more difficult to explain than in the birds, its something about the form of the head, the length of the ears and the mane, the form ob breast and legs, but it is the general impression, that is clearly out of the range a horse may look like and if you don't know exactly mother and father of the animal or it is clearly stated that this individual (not only all the animals in this stable) is a horse, which looks accidently like a mule, I would be shure, that it is a mule. --Kersti (talk) 12:23, 2 January 2014 (UTC)
Your photograph of the cross in Jerusalem[edit]
Dear SuperJew,
Your photograph of the cross on top of Notre-Dame de Sion in Jerusalem has been included in the app Jesus Art available on Google Play and Amazon Appstore for Android. Within the app, it is under the category Crucifixion. Thank you for your contribution!
--MrFrosty2 (talk) 22:41, 9 January 2014 (UTC)
- Thanks for letting me know. Cheers! --SuperJew (talk) 07:47, 10 January 2014 (UTC)
Picture of the Year 2013 R2 Announcement[edit]
Round 2 of Picture of the Year 2013 is open![edit]
- ⧼Wikibase-terms/SuperJew⧽: Deutsch, Ελληνικά, English, français, magyar, italiano, македонски, 日本語, русский, svenska
Dear Wikimedians,
Wikimedia Commons is happy to announce that the second round of the 2013 Picture of the Year competition is now open. This year will be the eighth edition of the annual Wikimedia Commons photo competition, which recognizes exceptional contributions by users on Wikimedia Commons. Wikimedia users are invited to vote for their favorite images featured on Commons during the last year (2013) to produce a single Picture of the Year.
Hundreds of images that have been rated Featured Pictures by the international Wikimedia Commons community in the past year were entered in this competition. These images include professional animal and plant shots, breathtaking panoramas and skylines, restorations of historical images, photographs portraying the world's best architecture, impressive human portraits, and so much more.
There are two total rounds of voting. In the first round, you voted for as many images as you liked. The top 30 overall and the most popular image in each category have continued to the final. In the final round, you may vote for just one image to become the Picture of the Year.
Round 2 will end on 7 March 2014. https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Special:MyLanguage/Commons:Picture_of_the_Year/2013/Introduction/en Click here to learn more and vote »]
Thanks,
the Wikimedia Commons Picture of the Year committee
You are receiving this message because you voted in the 2013 Picture of the Year contest.
This Picture of the Year vote notification was delivered by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 19:22, 22 February 2014 (UTC)
Picture of the Year 2013 Results Announcement[edit]
Picture of the Year 2013 Results[edit]
- In other languages: Deutsch, español, français, 日本語, Nederlands, русский, svenska, Türkçe, українська
Dear SuperJew,
The 2013 Picture of the Year competition has ended and we are pleased to announce the results: We shattered participation records this year — more people voted in Picture of the Year 2013 than ever before. In both rounds, 4070 different people voted for their favorite images. Additionally, there were more image candidates (featured pictures) in the contest than ever before (962 images total).
- In the first round, 2852 people voted for all 962 files
- In the second round, 2919 people voted for the 50 finalists (the top 30 overall and top 2 in each category)
We congratulate the winners of the contest and thank them for creating these beautiful images and sharing them as freely licensed content:
- 157 people voted for the winner, an image of a lightbulb with the tungsten filament smoking and burning.
- In second place, 155 people voted for an image of "Sviati Hory" (Holy Mountains) National Park in Donetsk Oblast, Ukraine.
- In third place, 131 people voted for an image of a swallow flying and drinking.
Click here to view the top images »
We also sincerely thank to all 4070 voters for participating and we hope you will return for next year's contest in early 2015. We invite you to continue to participate in the Commons community by sharing your work.
Thanks,
the Picture of the Year committee
You are receiving this message because you voted in the 2013 Picture of the Year contest.
Delivered by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:59, 26 March 2014 (UTC)
Peacock locations[edit]
Hi Super Jew - your Peacocks are not here, so they are of necessity of captive origin ;-) Hope this helps! - MPF (talk) 19:50, 1 July 2014 (UTC)
Hello SuperJew,
the reason why your picture File:Roses 02.jpg was now twice removed from Category:Unidentified Rosa is that it's impossible to identify dried roses (I'm not sure it's possible to identify a rose cultivar from a picture, but if it is a good picture of flowers, it could be possible - hips, leaves or dried roses without additional information can't be enough). To me, it doesn't make sense to have unidentifiable pictures of roses which are also categorised into other Rosa-categories in 'Unidentified Rosa', even though of course the category isn't wrong and you can therefore leave it there if that's your wish.
But as the photographer of that picture I'd like to ask if you know why the leaves on the left have a really strange structure - to me it looks if as if at least those leaves are artificially made (the wilted one on the other hand looks natural).
Best wishes,
Anna reg (talk) 09:29, 2 October 2014 (UTC)
- I don't really know. It's certainly a possibility. I was just passing through a coffee shop with my family and those roses were on the table. --SuperJew (talk) 05:06, 3 October 2014 (UTC)
Quality Image Promotion[edit]
 |
Your image has been reviewed and promoted
Congratulations! Bristly Hollyhock 05.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
|
May panoramas challenge[edit]
Hi, just saw your images for the May challenge. The requirement is for them to be an aspect ratio of 2:1 or wider. Your first image is not actually panoramic at all so I guess you might want to remove it. Diliff (talk) 15:04, 12 May 2015 (UTC)
I've removed File:Elias Sourasky Archeological Garden.jpg from the challenge, as Diliff notes. Hope you can find another image or challenge to take part. -- Colin (talk) 20:08, 21 May 2015 (UTC)
Finepix S4530[edit]
The reason I added S4530 to Category:Taken with Fujifilm FinePix S4500 is that the S4530 model seems to be just another name for S4500, and has identical specs. There didn't seem to be much point in making a separate category for it. --ghouston (talk) 01:00, 29 August 2015 (UTC)
- Ok. I am not that familiar with the specs of the different Fujifilm FinePix cameras, so I will believe you and revert it. Thank you. --SuperJew (talk) 18:40, 29 August 2015 (UTC)
|
|
File:Aboriginal Flag 02.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. |
George Ho (talk) 17:59, 14 November 2015 (UTC)
|
|
File:Aboriginal Flag 01.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. |
George Ho (talk) 00:13, 4 December 2015 (UTC)
Aboriginal flag[edit]
Please don't misunderstand my closure. I think protecting the flag itself is rather dumb, but the Australian Supreme Court has done so, and your images reproduce a work copyrighted in the country of origin. If FOP in Israel actually applied to such an object, so that the reproduction was actually 'sanctioned' as not infringing, I would have gladly kept both, but a flag is not 'applied art'. It's not, really, a matter of 'legality', in that the flag is clearly not above the TOO in either Israel or the US, but of Commons policy... that a work must be free in the country of origin. The photos are obviously not a copyright violation in either Israel or the US.... it's only Australia that is a problem, and the court there has treated the flag as an object eligible for copyright protection. I honestly spent quite a while looking at this, but could not find a way to justify keeping the images. I think it's a rather dumb result, but... there are many far more stupid things that come up in copyright law. As I commented elsewhere, I would willing use my own close here as an example of flaws in Commons policy, but... I can't just impose my opinion. Revent (talk) 23:46, 17 February 2016 (UTC)
- Thank you for the further explanation Revent, much appreciated. I honestly though think the protection of the flag outside Australia, where Australian copyright laws don't apply is silly. --SuperJew (talk) 10:29, 18 February 2016 (UTC)
|
Created with PhotoStitch has been listed at Commons:Categories for discussion so that the community can discuss ways in which it should be changed. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry. If you created this category, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for discussion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with it. If the category is up for deletion because it has been superseded, consider the notion that although the category may be deleted, your hard work (which we all greatly appreciate) lives on in the new category. In all cases, please do not take the category discussion personally. It is never intended as such. Thank you! |
AbdealiJK (talk) 07:57, 12 June 2016 (UTC)
Created by (Canon) PhotoStitch template[edit]
As per Commons:Categories for discussion/2016/06/Category:Created with PhotoStitch, I've moved Category:Created with PhotoStitch to Category:Created with Canon PhotoStitch, but I can't figure out how to update your {{Created with PhotoStitch}} template accordingly so that it puts images in the new category. Would you mind doing it? Thanks. - Themightyquill (talk) 09:02, 30 June 2016 (UTC)
- I edited it. I think it should be okay now. Let me know if you have problems! --SuperJew (talk) 09:34, 30 June 2016 (UTC)
Welcome, Dear Filemover![edit]
Hi SuperJew, you're now a filemover. When moving files please respect the following advice:
- Use the CommonsDelinker link in the {{Rename}} template to order a bot to replace all ocurrences of the old title with the new one. Or, if there was no rename-request, please use the Move & Replace-tab.
- Please leave a redirect behind unless you have a valid reason not to do so. Other projects, including those using InstantCommons, might be using the file even though they don't show up in the global usage. Deleting the redirects would break their file references. Please see this section of the file rename guideline for more information.
- Please know and follow the file rename guidelines.
INeverCry (talk) 21:08, 5 October 2016 (UTC)
- Thank you INeverCry! --SuperJew (talk) 21:12, 5 October 2016 (UTC)
Quality Image Promotion[edit]
 |
Your image has been reviewed and promoted
Congratulations! Asian Elephant 11.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
|
 |
Your image has been reviewed and promoted
Congratulations! Asian Elephant 10.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
|
@SuperJew: isn't that A. D. Gordon depicted on the book cover? 
Lotje (talk) 14:22, 9 February 2017 (UTC)
- Gosh, I just saw your userpage, didn't know the image was there. Please don't feel offended. I did not mean any harm.
Lotje (talk) 14:24, 9 February 2017 (UTC)
- @Lotje: no harm done. It's actually The Giver, an excellent book, I highly recommend reading it. --SuperJew (talk) 14:34, 9 February 2017 (UTC)
- Thanks, I added the the book to my watching list (to rememberà in case I come accross it. Lotje (talk) 14:39, 9 February 2017 (UTC)
- @Lotje: no harm done. It's actually The Giver, an excellent book, I highly recommend reading it.
Hi, SuperJew, only me again! I was wondering if this is Sephardi Hebrew. There is no image on the wikipedia page and maybe you could help. Thank you for your time. Lotje (talk) 14:33, 9 February 2017 (UTC)
- @Lotje: It seems to be The Book of Psalms, translated into Spanish (or perhaps Ladino), but transliterated in Rashi script. Sephardi Hebrew refers to a pronunciation of Hebrew (usually contrasted with Ashkenazi Hebrew or Yemenite Hebrew). --SuperJew (talk) 14:42, 9 February 2017 (UTC)
- Thanks, so this file is not suitable for the Sephardi Hebrew article because it would be confusing. btw, what does לה"ו stand for? Lotje (talk) 15:23, 9 February 2017 (UTC)
- It's an acronym of LaHashem Ha'aretz U'mlo'a, which would translate roughly to "The Earth and all in it belongs to God". --SuperJew (talk) 15:49, 9 February 2017 (UTC)
- Very nice indeed. Lotje (talk) 16:09, 9 February 2017 (UTC)
- It's an acronym of LaHashem Ha'aretz U'mlo'a, which would translate roughly to "The Earth and all in it belongs to God". --SuperJew (talk) 15:49, 9 February 2017 (UTC)
- Thanks, so this file is not suitable for the Sephardi Hebrew article because it would be confusing. btw, what does לה"ו stand for? Lotje (talk) 15:23, 9 February 2017 (UTC)
@SuperJew: , can you help me on that one? It feels a bit strange the sky above the is a {{Heritage site in Israel|11-0456-100}}. Do you think I can remove it without offending someone? Thank you for your time. Lotje 16:01, 10 February 2017 (UTC)
- Yeah, it doesn't look like a heritage site. It just looks like sky :) --SuperJew (talk) 16:20, 11 February 2017 (UTC)
Hi SuperJew, is the depicted sculpture "situated, otherwise than temporarily, in a public place, or in premises open to the public"? (otherwise we cannot claim "freedom of panorama exception".) Could you also add the name of the sculptor. --Túrelio (talk) 09:39, 27 August 2017 (UTC)
- @Túrelio: yeah, it's at the Shrine of Remembrance (as is stated on the file page), which is open to the public. --SuperJew (talk) 09:45, 27 August 2017 (UTC)
- @Túrelio: which files need the fop tag? I just uploaded a bunch from the Shrine, and have a couple left to upload. --SuperJew (talk) 09:56, 27 August 2017 (UTC)
Quality Image Promotion[edit]
 |
Your image has been reviewed and promoted
Congratulations! Street Art in Hosier Lane 01.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
|
 |
Your image has been reviewed and promoted
Congratulations! Street Art in Hosier Lane 08.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
|
--QICbot (talk) 05:14, 1 September 2017 (UTC)
 |
Your image has been reviewed and promoted
Congratulations! Short-toed Eagle 14.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
|
 |
Your image has been reviewed and promoted
Congratulations! Short-toed Eagle 15.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
|
--QICbot (talk) 05:23, 11 October 2017 (UTC)
Updates by Maphobbyist[edit]
Update for the File:Some Middle East and North African Countries Time Zones.png[edit]
Hello.
Could you update the File:Some Middle East and North African Countries Time Zones.png by coloring Libya and Sudan in yellow because Libya already uses UTC+2 and Sudan switched to UTC+2 in 2017, and could you remove South Sudan from the map, which became independent in 2012 and still appears as part of Sudan, because this new country is not an Arab country and nor part of the Arab World? I requested this because I don't know how to update this map with the latest changes without messing it up.
Thank you.
Maphobbyist (talk) 14:58, 24 December 2017 (UTC)
Update for the File:Ashkelon-Beer Sheva Rail EN.png[edit]
Hello.
Could you update the File:Ashkelon-Beer Sheva Rail EN.png (because the entire track and all the stations have been opened and are fully operational since December 2015)? I requested this because I don't know how to update this map with the latest changes without messing it up.
Thank you.
Maphobbyist (talk) 15:37, 24 December 2017 (UTC)
- @Maphobbyist: I don't reckon I know how to do these updates any better than you. Any reason you came to me? --SuperJew (talk) 22:08, 24 December 2017 (UTC)
- I understand. I requested this because I am not tech savvy in editing complicated maps and labels, and also because it is in Hebrew, and I assumed that you might and could change it. For the other map, the reason I requested it because Arab Wikimedia Commons users might still incorrectly include South Sudan as part of North Africa and the Arab World. Thank you anyway for your reply.
|
|
File:Open Tikkun.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. |
דגש חזק (talk) 10:41, 24 May 2018 (UTC)
Quality Image Promotion[edit]
 |
Your image has been reviewed and promoted
Congratulations! Pink Rock-Rose 08.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
|
--QICbot (talk) 05:22, 19 October 2018 (UTC)
Ryann Torrero[edit]
Hi, i responded your request in the Ryann Torrero page, bye.Pincheira22 (talk) 00:59, 26 May 2019 (UTC)
- Thank you :) --SuperJew (talk) 04:50, 26 May 2019 (UTC)
Misidentified image[edit]
.jpg)
.
Hi - I was just looking through some of the gar images for a shortnose gar and came across your image of an alligator gar misidentified as a shortnose gar. The pages where the image is included need to be corrected, and the image file moved to the proper name. I am pinging FunkMonk so he can review this issue and perform the move. Atsme Talk 📧 13:44, 22 August 2019 (UTC)
- Any requests for what the new file names should be? FunkMonk (talk) 14:12, 22 August 2019 (UTC)
- @Atsme: I don't understand why the image is misidentified. I went off what was on the sign at the zoo (it could be wrong of course). But looking at the images (I added one to the gallery of an alligator gar), my image looks more like the shortnose gar than the alligator gar - look at the pattern of the body: both my picture and the shortnose there is a pattern of black square/blotches on the lighter gray background while the alligator gar doesn't have them and it's a uniform gray. --SuperJew (talk) 14:16, 22 August 2019 (UTC)
- @FunkMonk: Are you an expert on fish identification or were you pinged only as an admin who can make the move? --SuperJew (talk) 14:16, 22 August 2019 (UTC)
- I am no expert, but I can move files. Anyone can request moves/renamings, though, see Commons:file renaming. FunkMonk (talk) 15:17, 22 August 2019 (UTC)
- @FunkMonk: I just want to make clear I meant no disrespect. I was just confused why you were pinged when I can move files myself, which I did after I was convinced of the truth in the matter. I agree that anyone can request moves/renaming, but I think it is up to the mover to validate that the move is correct. --SuperJew (talk) 15:40, 22 August 2019 (UTC)
- I am no expert, but I can move files. Anyone can request moves/renamings, though, see Commons:file renaming. FunkMonk (talk) 15:17, 22 August 2019 (UTC)
- I can assure you as an expert on alligator gar that the species in the image is an alligator gar. Look at this image of the different head shapes of the gar family published by the Kentucky Department of Fish & Wildlife. Also, there is a PBS documentary about Alligator gar on YouTube (I already cued it to the segment) that shows the individual gar species in an aquarium. Your gar image has a much broader snout and the coloring is that of an alligator gar. Atsme Talk 📧 14:40, 22 August 2019 (UTC)
- Adding - just did a search in commons and there are quite a few misidentified gar species - see "How to Identify Alligator Gar". Atsme Talk 📧 14:50, 22 August 2019 (UTC)
- Just found this video which is close enough to being the exact same fish species in your image. Atsme Talk 📧 15:06, 22 August 2019 (UTC)
- Ok, this link especially really helped, and that the "shortnose gar" was actually misidentified. I'm moving the image and the second pic too, as well as the misidentified spotted gar. --SuperJew (talk) 15:29, 22 August 2019 (UTC)
- My first suggestion is Alligator gar (Jerusalem Biblical Zoo). SuperJew may have a better suggestion. Atsme Talk 📧 15:21, 22 August 2019 (UTC)
- Ok, seems above that SuperJew is able to do it also. FunkMonk (talk) 16:19, 22 August 2019 (UTC)
Important message for file movers[edit]
A community discussion has been closed where the consensus was to grant all file movers the suppressredirect user right. This will allow file movers to not leave behind a redirect when moving files and instead automatically have the original file name deleted. Policy never requires you to suppress the redirect, suppression of redirects is entirely optional.
Possible acceptable uses of this ability:
- To move recently uploaded files with an obvious error in the file name where that error would not be a reasonable redirect. For example: moving "Sheep in a tree.jpg" to "Squirrel in a tree.jpg" when the image does in fact depict a squirrel.
- To perform file name swaps.
- When the original file name contains vandalism. (File renaming criterion #5)
Please note, this ability should be used only in certain circumstances and only if you are absolutely sure that it is not going to break the display of the file on any project. Redirects should never be suppressed if the file is in use on any project. When in doubt, leave a redirect. If you forget to suppress the redirect in case of file name vandalism or you are not fully certain if the original file name is actually vandalism, leave a redirect and tag the redirect for speedy deletion per G2.
The malicious or reckless breaking of file links via the suppressredirect user right is considered an abuse of the file mover right and is grounds for immediate revocation of that right. This message serves as both a notice that you have this right and as an official warning. Questions regarding this right should be directed to administrators. --Majora (talk) 21:36, 7 November 2019 (UTC)
|
|
Category:FP_by_SuperJew has been listed at Commons:Categories for discussion so that the community can discuss ways in which it should be changed. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry. If you created this category, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for discussion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with it. If the category is up for deletion because it has been superseded, consider the notion that although the category may be deleted, your hard work (which we all greatly appreciate) lives on in the new category. In all cases, please do not take the category discussion personally. It is never intended as such. Thank you! |
Mike Peel (talk) 20:22, 30 April 2022 (UTC)
Pesach 2023 and Melbourne Zoo images[edit]
Hope you had a great Pesach this year.
Wanted to say I love your Melbourne Zoo images so much.
Especially the:
- tortoise
- fur seal
- Asian elephants
- orangutan
--58.108.122.0 06:12, 15 April 2023 (UTC).
- Thank you very much! Glad you liked them :) --SuperJew (talk) 20:23, 15 April 2023 (UTC)
- dont forget zingaro ale (aussies : lebanon 10 : 0) forza superjew 🙌 93.138.254.35 03:57, 7 March 2024 (UTC)