User talk:Túrelio/Archive11

Talkpage archive from 2016

Rotated files in Category:L'Architecture française (Marot) BnF RES-V-371 – Gallica 2013[edit]

I uploaded these images exactly as I obtained them from Gallica as an archive of the original and rotated them in the adjusted versions. Although the bot used to rotate them is supposedly "lossless", I have noticed changes in the file sizes and loss of pixels from some images. Perhaps it would have been better to leave them unaltered. --Robert.Allen (talk) 18:10, 1 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

On second thought, thank you for doing this. The rotations you requested are probably the best available way to do it, and will forestall another editor rotating them incorrectly. Best, --Robert.Allen (talk) 22:23, 1 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

No problem. Anyway, if you feel the bot-performed rotation does indeed a bad job with this kind of images, feel free to rotate them manually from the native version. When I do this for my images, I usually use the lossless rotation-feature of the freeware IrfanView. Have good new year. --Túrelio (talk) 08:22, 2 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Grüße[edit]

Hallo Túrelio,
ich möchte mich bei Dir für die stets hervorragende Zusammenarbeit und Hilfe im letzten Jahr bedanken.
Dir wünsche ich im neuen Jahr 2016 viel Erfolg und im persönlichen Bereich alles erdenklich Gute.
Viele Grüße. Orchi (talk) 21:59, 1 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Gern geschehen. Dir auch alles Gute im neuen Jahr. --Túrelio (talk) 09:16, 2 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

weiterleitungen[edit]

Morgen, würdest Du bitte keine Weiterleitungen löschen von Dateien die schon älter sind. Die werden auch außerhalb der Wikipedia verwendet. Verschieben ist da kein Grund zur Löschung. Danke --2003:4D:2C75:D05D:8DE2:6E0D:5F86:1493 09:09, 2 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Ich habe stets vorher geprüft, ob es Nutzungen auf irgendeinem Wikimedia-Projekt gibt, und nur gelöscht wo dies nicht der Fall war. --Túrelio (talk) 09:15, 2 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Alles richtig. Die Filemover haben die erst gar nicht zur Löschung anzumelden. Da stehen die Regeln. Template:FilemoverWelcome --2003:4D:2C75:D05D:8DE2:6E0D:5F86:1493 09:31, 2 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

File:Issaquah Gunners.gif[edit]

Hi Túrelio. Can you check File:Issaquah Gunners.gif to see if it's the same as File:Ps-gunners-fc-1.jpg which you deleted as a copyvio on August 29, 2015? It was uploaded by the same user not too long after you deleted the other file. Thanks in advance. -- Marchjuly (talk) 07:37, 4 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, it was the same logo (just in a different file format). Thanks for notifying. --Túrelio (talk) 07:40, 4 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for taking a look. -- Marchjuly (talk) 13:19, 4 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

File:Eowyn vs the Nazgul by CarmenSinek.jpg[edit]

Hi, Túrelio.

We are waiting for the author's permission mail, I've indicated the Ticket number (#2016010610007905) on the page file. Thanks !

Best regards. Guise (talk) 09:01, 6 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

O.k. {{OTRS pending}} would have been a better choice as it is more visible. --Túrelio (talk) 09:03, 6 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

File:OE3 DIF 20150626 0850.jpg[edit]

Welche Permission vermisst du bei diesem Bild - in Österreich? --K@rl (talk) 14:30, 6 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Laut Exif-Daten stammt es von www.hans-leitner.com. Johann Leitner ist ein Profifotograf[1], weshalb es etwas unwahrscheinlich ist, dass er seine Werke hier unter dem Namen "Rizeraze" veröffentlicht. Dasselbe hatte ich aber bereits auf der Disku von User:Rizeraze geschrieben. --Túrelio (talk) 14:47, 6 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, verstehe ich, ichhabe ihn über WP noch ein Mail geschrieben, denn ich bin nihct sicher, ob er da rein schaut und Mail ist wahrscheinlich gar nicht aktiviert. --gruß K@rl (talk) 22:35, 6 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Gliese 667 Cc[edit]

Kannst du die Kategorie bitte wiederherstellen. Sie ist jetzt nicht mehr leer. --Ephraim33 (talk) 17:55, 6 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Done. --Túrelio (talk) 20:07, 6 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Please don't suppress the category Wiki Loves Love just because it's not containing anything yet[edit]

It was created to gather photos taken in the context of a contest that will begin in a few days, as specified in the page. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Psychoslave (talk • contribs) 10:07, 08 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Also I would appreciate that you unremove the page, as I don't have access anymore to the content that was stored on it and don't have much time to waste in rewriting it.

Kind regards --Psychoslave (talk) 10:10, 8 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Being empty is a regular reason to delete pages/etc. on Commons. You could have easily avoided that by adding a clear statement to the page. Anyway, I have restored it now. However, the text in Wiki Loves Love 2016 says it's a category. That is not true, Wiki Loves Love 2016 is just a gallery page; categories are Category:something . --Túrelio (talk) 10:48, 8 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Removed photo[edit]

I see you removed Patrik_Kunčar2.jpg which I added to https://cs.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Patrik_Kun%C4%8Dar&action=history. I received a request from Patrik Kunčar to upload this latest photo of him to wikipedia, stating that he owns the copyright to this photo and that he agrees with wikipedia license. He also uploaded this photo to the website of a political party he is a member of (https://cs.wikipedia.org/wiki/K%C5%99es%C5%A5ansk%C3%A1_a_demokratick%C3%A1_unie_%E2%80%93_%C4%8Ceskoslovensk%C3%A1_strana_lidov%C3%A1). And that's where you saw it. I'm not sure what to do now, I can't upload the photo again and I can't find any other way to put it there. — Preceding unsigned comment added by J2ghz (talk • contribs) 19:01, 08 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hi J2ghz,

when you uploaded File:Patrik Kunčar2.jpg, you stated that it's your "own work" and that you are the author. Now, you write that you received it from Patrik Kunčara and that he claims to own the copyright, though he himself is probably not the photographer. If Patrik Kunčara is sure that he owns the full copyright in this photo, then you need to ask him to send a confirmation to permissions-commons@wikimedia.org which should also include the name of the true photographer. --Túrelio (talk) 19:56, 8 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

File:Opuscolo scandalistico del Partito Comunista Britannico sul "Cliveden set".JPG[edit]

I am sorry. I believed that the copyright terms had expired. Please delete it immediately.--Roberto.Amerighi (talk) 20:24, 8 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

It might not be impossible. But this would need evidence. If you want to use it on :en Wikipedia, you may claim it as fair-use. --Túrelio (talk) 20:25, 8 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Curious![edit]

An upset user, Commons:Deletion requests/File:Jorge Recalde.jpg is really going off the handle with me, but I notice on his talk page, you nominated others of his images! I came over here to see what kine of notes he might have left you, only to find out - it's only me! Ellin Beltz (talk) 22:09, 9 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah. But he had removed my deletion-templates from his files. By the way: do you have any exernal hits for File:Jorge Recalde.jpg? --Túrelio (talk) 22:12, 9 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Picture deleted[edit]

Hi Turelio

I posted a pic of Andrew Korda which was deleted by you, and I then asked for a possible explanation and what I should do to have it re-posted in the correct format - I'm not sure what the issue was

The photographer has also tried to post it and it has been deleted

You responded that would get onto it - and posted a response to me on 13 November 2015

Your help would be very appreciated

Regards

Jonathan — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jonno lips (talk • contribs) 01:12, 10 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Jonathan,

the issue was, if I remember correctly, that your claim "own work" wasn't found credible. Half a year later, the image, though in lower resolution, was uploaded by User:KPwestern, who stated "source=Western Sydney University" and "author=Sally Tsoutas". This was already an improvement. However, he/she didn't add a license and didn't provide a permission from the alleged photographer, which is required in such cases. So, if you are in contact with photographer Sally Tsoutas, ask her if she is willing to release this photo under a free license, which would anybody allow to use it. If she agrees, please prepare a permission form by copying the framed template-text from Commons:Email_templates#Declaration_of_consent_for_all_inquiries, entering the image filename (https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Andrew Korda.jpg) and the license of choice (recommended is CC-BY-SA 4.0) and mail Sally the completed permission form. Ask her to read it and, if she is willing, to sign and date it and mail it directly back to permissions-commons@wikimedia.org . --Túrelio (talk) 08:15, 10 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

institution:Rijksmuseum[edit]

Hi Túrelio, could I ask a favour? I would like to rename this template to institution:Rijksmuseum Amsterdam for a long time now, but I'm getting an error message saying that this page is already in use. Could you delete this redirect to enable me to rename the template more successfully? Thank you, Vincent Steenberg (talk) 19:28, 11 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Vincent,

the problem is that the current template is used in >5000 files on Commons. The redir-template is currently used in <2000 files. How would you perform the name-change in those >5000 files? --Túrelio (talk) 21:11, 11 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

For the ime being, institution:Rijksmuseum will function as redirect after name change. Then, in time, all files where either template is used will be using institution:Rijksmuseum Amsterdam. Vincent Steenberg (talk) 21:29, 11 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Done. --Túrelio (talk) 07:38, 12 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

30,000,000 Bilder[edit]

Hallo Túrelio,

weiß du, welches Bild das war? Wäre schön, wenn du das bei COM:Milestones eintragen würdest.

Viele Grüße, Kopiersperre (talk) 14:11, 13 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hi,

nein, ich habe die Info auch nur von Commons:Village_pump#30M_milestone. --Túrelio (talk) 15:18, 13 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Dirceu Guimarães Photos[edit]

Hello Turelio, Those photographs taken in Italy (or in Italian territory) are now in the public domain because the copyright has expired. According Italian laws, photos tooks is Italy are copyright free and public knowledge since the beginning of the calendar year following the completion of the twentieth year of production. Italians Laws [2]] regards — Preceding unsigned comment added by Salernobr (talk • contribs)

I do not doubt that. But you need to add the appropriate license template, wich might be Template:PD-Italy. --Túrelio (talk) 20:02, 16 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Nachnutzung[edit]

Der Herr bekommt eine nette Mail von WM-AT mit der Aufklärung, daß man die Lizenz nennen muß. Solchen Leuten, die sich Mühe geben, müssen wir helfen. --Ralf Roleček 17:56, 20 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Das ist sicher angemessen. Das Fehlen der Lizenz war mir, wie ich zugeben muss, garnicht aufgefallen. --Túrelio (talk) 19:18, 20 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Vielleicht für Katzenliebhaber[edit]

von Interesse: [3]. Gruß, --95.208.166.113 20:42, 24 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Danke, wer immer du bist. Werds mir mal anschauen. --Túrelio (talk) 21:06, 24 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Deletion log[edit]

Not really. I assume that this happened when deleting a larger number of files and that this line from a previous deletion was still in my paste-bin and I didn't realize pasting the wrong rationale into the deletion summary. Anyway, all 3 files (I checked them today) were "empty" pages from book-scans. If I remember correctly I once asked you whether I could delete such files even without already being tagged for deletion by you. --Túrelio (talk) 07:25, 29 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

(Too) fast deleted image?[edit]

Hi! Yesterday you fast-deleted the image File:Sandstrom Camilla 3075 121115 MPN Original.jpg for "obvious copyright violation" reported by User:Sismarinko (copyvio http://www.umu.se/english/research/popular-science/researcher-profiles/camilla-sandstrom). Understandable as Sismarinho found the same image at the Umeå University web page [4]

However, as web editor at Umeå University I can certify that the uploader Mattias Malfoy is identical to the photographer Mattias Pettersson, employed by Umeå University – where we regularly try to offer our images with CC BY-SA 3.0 license to Wikimedia. But if you don't take his word for it, how can I help to certify that this is really true? Is this sufficient? [5] /Mickeno (disk) 2 February 2016 kl. 10.05 (CET)

Hi Mickeno,

thanks for notifying. I've undeleted the image. However, you should speak to Mattias Pettersson whether he really wants this image credited to "Mattias Malfoy". In the visible EXIF data the image is credited to "Mattias Pettersson", which will be a ongoing source of "conflict". Another possibility might be if Mattias Pettersson writes his true name behing the "Mattias Malfoy" entry in the decription, provided he doesn't want to keep that a secret. Also, at source the image is under CC-BY-SA 3.0, whereas on Commons it was put under CC-BY-SA 4.0, which has quite some differences to version 3.0. --Túrelio (talk) 09:15, 2 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Great, thanks for the tip! I've now changed the licence to CC-BY-SA 4.0 in our media bank, and written a short bio on "Malfoy's" page, to get him started (if he wants to keep Malfoy). I should probably also make a webpage explaining our university's decision to share images with CC-licenses, to make thing even clearer with a link. Thanks again! -- Mickeno (disk) 2 February 2016 kl. 11.35 (CET)

Deletion of Betty Harlafti photo[edit]

Hello. You just deleted the photo here: Betty Harlafti. I have asked Mrs Harlafti for let me use it and I have her written permission. I can sent you that permission. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Nonperce (talk • contribs) 17:52, 08 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hi,

you are likely refering to File:Crop top.jpg. Well, you claimed it to be "own work". If Mrs. Harlafti is indeed the rights holder of this image, you may forward her permission to permissions-commons@wikimedia.org . Don't forget to mention the filename in your mail. --Túrelio (talk) 19:51, 8 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Need help with pics[edit]

Dear Túrelio, I went to Flickr, and following your advice, I chose a filter for pics about "Joyuda" with a license containing "Commercial Use Allow" See here And I was happy to find at least few good pics. From them, I selected this one, thinking that all of the pics in this batch were eligible for Wikipedia (since I had chosen a filter for licenses allowing commercial use). I then proceeded to upload it to Commons and include all the information I for the file in Flickr. See here. But what do you think it happened? After a little while, I visited the uploaded file out of curiosity and found that the robot had tagged it with this:

{ { User:FlickreviewR/reviewed-fail-recent|Cryo Mariena|https://flickr.com/photos/87085448@N00/12041319675%7C2016-02-11 06:30:47|cc-by-nd-2.0|}}{{cc-by-2.0 } }

A little upset, I went back and examined the licence more carefully, and lo and behold, it had "no derivatives" plastered on the cc page. What a bummer! But since I had placed the pic already on an article, I went back to Flickr, chose another Joyuda pic, making sure this time it was at least (CC BY 2.0), and upload it to replace the original file.

This same story happened with a second file, here. In other words, the original file was also tagged as non-complaint and I went and found another one in Flickr that was eligible, and replaced the old one with the new. Both pictures were already in use in two articles and I did not want to see them demoted.

But as I tried unsuccessfully to erase the original picture, I came to realize that perhaps I have made it worse by trying to replace it rather than uploading anew. In other words, there are now two files now in each one of these entries. One is ok and the other is not, and I can't delete any of them. What should I do? Thanks for your help. Cheers, --Caballero//Historiador ^☊ 14:13, 11 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Correction: the first file I mentioned was not actually in used; I had the first draft of the article written, and had been holding the send button since. The second was. Cheers. --Caballero//Historiador ^☊ 14:43, 11 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

BTW, I just requested permission from the artist of the first pic. Will do the same with the second in the afternoon. --Caballero//Historiador ^☊ 14:48, 11 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Copyright deletion bullshit[edit]

Re "Welcome to Kayenta" summary deletion. Pretty heavy-handed, in my opinion. Clearly a hand-painted sign in a public place. Take your bullshit copyright activism elsewhere, please. Pete Tillman (talk) 23:42, 12 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Please remain civil. This kind of behaviour isn't tolerated at Wikimedia Commons. Please refrain from asuming bad faith and baseless accusations. Natuur12 (talk) 00:40, 13 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Tillman: For your information, freedom of panorama does not exist in the US except for works of architecture. So a hand-painted sign in Arizona, even if displayed in public, is clearly copyrighted and non-free by default. On the other hand, freedom of panorama violations should always be nominated for a deletion discussion and are not covered by our speedy deletion criteria. De728631 (talk) 21:32, 13 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

131107 Kim Soo-hyun.jpg[edit]

Hello! That blog where this picture was taken from is not the legit source of these photos. The blog owner uploads photos from elsewhere. This particular one is most probably uploaded from here [6], the blog posting date is 2016, the forum posting date is 2013. Teemeah (talk) 08:18, 16 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for notifying. --Túrelio (talk) 08:28, 20 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

AJ Styles WWE[edit]

Hello im Photolover33 and i have this question for you: If this image has a problem can i reupload it as a not my own work but just to publicity please? Awnser when you can please. I'm waiting goodbye Photolover33 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Photolover33 (talk • contribs)

Hi Photolover33,

you are likely talking about File:AJ Styles WWE.jpg, right? Well, no. It is a common misunderstanding that because an image is published on the internet, it is free and anybody can use it. That's wrong. By publishing, a creator does not renounce his copyright. If you are sure that WWE is the original creator and copyright-holder, you may ask them to release it under a free license (such as CC-BY or CC-BY-SA). A "permission for Wikipedia" is not sufficient.

If no freely licensed image of the depicted person is available and if you want to use it only on :en Wikipedia, you may try to upload it locally and claim fair-use (see en:Wikipedia:Non-free use rationale guideline). --Túrelio (talk) 08:34, 20 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

dieklangschale[edit]

Hallo, wie oft muss ich Ihnen noch mitteilen dass Sie mein Foto löschen sollen?! Diese andauernde Verwendung ist inakzeptabel. Ich habe bereits mehrmals das ganze Prozedere zum löschen des Fotos durchgezogen und Sie laden ständig wieder hoch!

SIE HABEN KEIN RECHT MEIN FOTO ZU VERWENDEN!!! — Preceding unsigned comment added by DieKlangschale (talk • contribs)

Hallo DieKlangschale, because you uploaded the image with this license. {{self|cc-by-sa-3.0}}. Einen guten Rat: Erst studieren, dann probieren.

Lotje (talk) 16:35, 20 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hallo DieKlangschale,

ein paar Richtigstellungen zu Ihren vollmundigen Behauptungen:

1) Ihre einzige "Mitteilung" an mich war eine substanzlose Behauptung, unfreundliche Forderung und Drohung mit "Anwalt".[7] Letzteres zieht on-wiki normalerweise die Sperre des Nutzerkontos nach sich. Davon habe ich damals abgesehen und Ihnen stattdessen eine freundliche Frage gestellt[8], die bis heute (seit 16 Monaten) unbeantwortet geblieben ist.

2) Ich verwende Ihr Foto nicht.

3) Sie haben einen Löschantrag Commons:Deletion requests/File:Gefrostete Kristallklangschale by GilaBenz.jpg, der — ohne meine Beteiligung — abschlägig entschieden wurde. Ihr 2. Löschantrag läuft noch.

4) Ich habe das Foto nicht hochgeladen, sondern lediglich Ihren richtlinienwidrigen Überschreib-Vorgang[9] rückgängig gemacht.

5) Wenn Sie tatsächlich die Berufsfotografin D.B. sind, sollte Ihnen klar sein, dass eine von Ihnen für ein eigenes Werk erteilte Lizenz[10] nicht einfach so widerrufen werden kann.

6) Es steht Ihnen frei, sich entweder auf Commons:Administrators' noticeboard an andere zur Löschung berechtigte Freiwillige oder unter legal@wikimedia.org an die Rechtsabteilung des Trägers Wikimedia Foundation zu wenden. --Túrelio (talk) 17:33, 20 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy delete[edit]

Wow. Wish our admins over at en-wiki were that quick to speedy delete (they're pretty busy, so don't blame them). :) Cheers! Chrisw80 (talk) 09:16, 21 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Deleting suspected copyvios is one of the major tasks of Commons admins. How quickly this happens depends on contingencies, for example, who is online right now. --Túrelio (talk) 09:21, 21 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Alles klar, danke für Ihre Arbeit! Chrisw80 (talk) 09:40, 21 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

still needed?[edit]

Hallo, bin gerade beim Aufräumen, wird die von Dir 2014 erstellte Category:Ausstellungseröffnung "Westfalen hilft Köln", Stadtmuseum Münster noch gebraucht? Gruß, --Achim (talk) 20:51, 24 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Nett dass du fragst. War mir nicht mehr bewusst dass ich diese cat erstellt habe. Kann natürlich gelöscht werden. --Túrelio (talk) 21:04, 24 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

gelöschte Diskussion[edit]

Hallo Túrelio, bitte kannst du mir den letzten Diskussionstand von [11] dahin [12] kopieren? Jean11 hatte mich da was gefragt und wir haben diskutiert und jetzt kann ich weder meine eigenen Beiträge nachlesen oder antworten falls da noch was war, weils einfach weg ist. Versteh nicht, warum Löschung, aber ich hätte das jedenfalls gerne wieder. Gruß Holger1959 (talk) 23:58, 26 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Done. --Túrelio (talk) 08:57, 27 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Logo-Beurteilung[edit]

Hallo Túrelio! Ich hätte mal 'ne Frage bzgl. Logo-Schöpfungshöhe: Hältst du dieses Logo für commonsfähig, oder sind das deiner Ansicht nach schon keine einfachen geometrischen Formen mehr? Nach Sichtung der Logos in Category:With trademark bin ich mit nicht sicher. -- Gruß Sir Gawain (talk) 13:44, 28 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

(talk page stalker) Bei Logos aus Großbritannien muss man doppelt vorsichtig sein, da die Schöpfungshöhe in UK extrem niedrig angelegt ist. Nach meiner Erfahrung ist eine solch simple Grafik dort schon schutzwürdig. De728631 (talk) 15:53, 28 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Das wichtigste hat De728631 schon gesagt. Du könntest höchstens versuchen herauszufinden, ob das Symbol in dem Quadrat[13] schon alt ist. --Túrelio (talk) 16:25, 28 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Danke euch beiden für die Rückmeldungen. -- Gruß Sir Gawain (talk) 18:43, 2 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

email[edit]

--Captain Spark (talk) 05:14, 29 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Captain Spark: to answer your concern: your observation was correct. He has specialized on copying potentially useful images from Flickr to Commons. While some see this as controversial, IMO it makes sense, as content on Flickr may disappear at any time. One has also take into account that while Commons was initially created to serve other Wikimedia projects, today we are a general repository for freely-licensed educational media. --Túrelio (talk) 09:03, 29 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I can see that but for weeks he is uploading election related images only. How so many election related pictures of the same political party will be helpful, I don't know. I was not checking his edits. I was checking the edits of the flickrbot. Even one week ago I found flickrbot is reviewing his election pictures most of the time.

Even right now at this moment the process is same.

https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/FlickreviewR_2

I hope I am able to explain. --Captain Spark (talk) 09:14, 29 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

File:Represa de Cachoeira Grande-Manaus-City.jpg)[edit]

Represa de Cachoeira Grande Manaus City.jpg
Esta imagem está sob domínio publico em países onde ocorre a liberação depois de 70 anos, por favor me consulte antes de qualquer equivoco.
Grato Reviewer of articles. (talk) 17:21, 1 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This image it is under public domain in countries where the right authorial is after 70 years, please say me the real reason before any mistake.
Grateful Reviewer of articles. (talk) 17:21, 1 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I have no idea what you man by "real reason". You did not provide an authour, you did not provide a source. You claim the image is from 2013 and you claim it is in the public domain. All this doesn't fit together. How can the author of an image from 2013 be dead for >70 years? --Túrelio (talk) 19:19, 1 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The image was loaded with the information of your last restoration, done in september 2013 by a appropriate software, loading was done using the Wikimedia UploadWizard that uploaded automatically their information in the choose of the option that the image was not of my own authorship, The information are contained in the METADATA her.Reviewer of articles. (talk) 01:22, 2 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I beg you won't delete my wikipedia project page[edit]

Hello, Túrelio, Today I edit two project pages called Lu Ning(宁露) and Interstellar group. I do it with a Neutral Point Of View and give source notation. I really dont know the reason you delete them. It cost me a whole day to complete them. Hope you can pass the two pages. Thanks a lot! If you have any suggestions please feel free to let me know. Have a good night! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 宁露全球粉丝后援团团长 (talk • contribs)

Hi 宁露全球粉丝后援团团长,

you are likely refering to a Wikipedia-page, which you edited. I did not interfer with that. However, the image File:Luning.jpg, which you had uploaded, was sourced to interstellargroup.net. Material on that page is not free, but "© 2015 Interstellar Group Corporation, Interstellar Media, LLC. Interstellar Real Estate, LLC. All Rights Reserved." So, you cannot copy the portrait and upload it to Commons. If you want to use that image in your article, you need to obtain a permission from the photographer or the rightsholder, which is likely the company. However, a "permission for Wikipedia" is not enough, it need to be released under a free license (see COM:L). --Túrelio (talk) 08:08, 2 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

File:Corey-teenwolf.jpg[edit]

Zur Info: genau dieses Bild hatte ich vorhin schon als URV schnellgelöscht, aber unter einem anderen Namen. Ich habe es dementsprechend trotz deines {{npd}} jetzt auch wieder entfernt, weil es einfach wieder neu hochgeladen wurde. De728631 (talk) 21:56, 2 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

No Problem. --Túrelio (talk) 21:58, 2 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Non-free Flickr files[edit]

FYI, it is better to tag non-free Flickr files with Template:Unfree Flickr file than with Template:copyvio. Elisfkc (talk) 19:57, 5 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, you are right. Though, File:G-Unit.jpg is actually a copyvio, as it's ARR on Flickr. --Túrelio (talk) 20:04, 5 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

File:Screenshot_Soap_Melanie_Martinez.png[edit]

Hi, I've just seen your post on my talk page. The file is a screenshot that I've personally taken from an official music video, so where's the copyright violation? Thank you and please excuse me for my English! Ermione99 (talk) 20:09, 5 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Ermione99,

creating a screenshot or capture from an existing video is not really a creative act. Therefore, it would not earn you an own copyright. More importantly, for doing this, you need the permission of the creator of the original video or you need evidence that the video was released under a free licences (COM:L). --Túrelio (talk) 20:15, 5 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, so there's nothing I can do to make the use of the screenshot legal, right? Ermione99 (talk) 21:09, 5 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

At least no magic bullet. You might try to ask the original author of the video, if he/she is willing to release this shot/capture under a free license (such as CC-BY or CC-BY-SA). --Túrelio (talk) 21:12, 5 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, thank you so much! Ermione99 (talk) 21:17, 5 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

stamp of Bosnia and Herzegovina[edit]

Hi, Sure, stamps of Bosnia and Herzegovina are copyrighted but what about Republic of Bosnia and Herzegovina? Two separate entities. Please when deleting images be specific between the two. TY BiHVolim (talk) 08:51, 7 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Sure. However, it's the duty of the uploader to provide evidence for his/her copyright claims. Commons:Stamps/Public domain has no information about "Republic of Bosnia and Herzegovina". That means, for now we have to assume the default, which is stamps (which have copyrightable content) are copyrighted. If you have other information, put it on the talkpage of Commons:Stamps/Public domain. --Túrelio (talk) 08:57, 7 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy delete requests - Thank you![edit]

Good Morning. Thank you very much for the rapid clearing of yesterday's Speedy delete requests! Best regards --Uli Elch (talk) 09:20, 9 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Gern geschehen. --Túrelio (talk) 09:24, 9 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

File:Bram Moszkowicz in commercial.jpg[edit]

Hi,

I just wanted to let you know that I undeleted this file after you deleted it. As per Commons:Deletion requests/File:Bram Moszkowicz in commercial (cropped).jpg there was a license mentioned at the source. License at vimeo are well hidden I am afraid and this isn't the first and will certainly not be the last time that someone overlooks a license at vimeo ;). Natuur12 (talk) 11:21, 9 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

No problem. Thanks. --Túrelio (talk) 19:32, 9 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

About Photo[edit]

Hey, wish you are in good health and sorry for late in replay, today I saw your question here about what I mean, the meaning that I upload this photo from source mention that it is for a 3 Palestinian prisoner in Israel prison, and when you search about this photo in google you found that most websites mention it the same, but after time I found this the same photo but the source there mention that this is photo for 3 Syrian prisoner during Great Syrian Revolt, and after this I started my wide search about the photo, and I sent an email to some people -who have a experince in the photos - to help me, after all of this the told me that this photo absolutely for 3 Syrian prisoner. all respect for you Ala'a Najjar (talk) 15:15, 9 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the explaination. --Túrelio (talk) 19:34, 9 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

File:Riverhounds_vs._Wigan_Ticket.jpg[edit]

I was wondering why you deleted the image I uploaded (Riverhounds_vs._Wigan_Ticket.jpg) I took the picture myself and released it as my own work. Is it because the actual ticket was copyrighted? Sorry for not understanding more fully. Thanks. --Gri3720 (talk) 20:22, 9 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

You are already on the right track. The ticket (collection) contained the likely copyrighted Riverhounds logo and a background photo (upper left) which is also copyrightable. A ticket containing merely text would not be a problem. --Túrelio (talk) 20:28, 9 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hilfe[edit]

...ich hab mit Regina Commons geübt. Wir wollten ne Category anlegen

1. Versuch Categorie:Files by Rehgina - kann weg (SLA - bitte)
2. Versuch Category:Files by Rehgina - kann auch weg, weil wir hatten ja schon früher Category:Files by Regina Weinkauf erstellt...

sorry wir haben geübt und Fehler gemacht die weg können.

Danke und liebe Grüße --1971markus ^{⇒ Laberkasten ...} 22:23, 12 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Done und schönen Sonntag. --Túrelio (talk) 22:26, 12 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Paula Sánchez León[edit]

{{destruir|Debido a que no se como utilizar y se me hace muy difícil al querer aportar algo}} — Preceding unsigned comment added by Paula Sánchez León (talk • contribs)

You should not claim as "own work", which is not own work, but was simplied copied by you from somewhere. That would be a good start. --Túrelio (talk) 21:34, 13 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

File:Encounter (18507582846).jpg[edit]

Hi, this seems to have been deleted as an un-notified speedy rather than via a DR or similar. It's a work as part of a homoerotic LGBT artwork series by well published artist/photographer Sasha Kargaltsev. Could you convert to a DR if you still believe it's out of scope? Thanks --Fæ (talk)

Done. I hadn't seen that the nominator didn't notify. --Túrelio (talk) 07:34, 14 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Review[edit]

Please review this file. File taken on flickr. thanks. Siska_Yuniati_at_Taman_Eden_2_Villa,_2009-06-25.jpg 114.121.232.242 03:31, 15 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I've commented at the DR. --Túrelio (talk) 11:03, 16 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Ballantine's[edit]

Hello. I just add photo of new actual bottle. If you want you can sdd your photo of bottle. But good if it be to new. — Preceding unsigned comment added by BTR Moscow (talk • contribs)

Hi BTR Moscow,

I am not sure I understand you. Regarding the proposed deletion, feel free to comment at Commons:Deletion requests/File:Ballantine's Stay True.jpg. --Túrelio (talk) 10:57, 16 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thai Government House[edit]

Hello, I would like to discuss your deletion of multiple Government House of Thailand photos, should I file undeletion requests for each file or all at once? --Horus (talk) 11:21, 16 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, well, in case of reasonable requests I will informally undelete by myself. However, are you aware of the deletion-rationale of your uploads? User:ZenithZealotry, to whom you had credited these image, had written in all these cases: "I don't have upload photo files in this set by myself to commons, but User:Horus uploaded them by claim falsely me". --Túrelio (talk) 11:34, 16 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, I am aware. Let me explain to you: initially these files were uploaded to Thai Wikipedia, all released under public domain, and for his private reasons he wanted them deleted because he didn't want them to be used on Thai Wikipedia (specifically). When this didn't work for him, he started taking out all pictures by himself. And I bother uploaded them to Commons. All I'm trying to say is I did not falsely claim him, since he himself uploaded it on public domain, and his attempt to have them deleted can be considered revoking his own declaration. So I think if this principle is still true on Commons, there should be no reason for him to have them deleted. --Horus (talk) 11:41, 16 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Horus, wow. I would then recommend to file an (1) undeletion-request including all affected files. --Túrelio (talk) 13:11, 16 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your response. I suppose the principle is true then, I will start filing a request next. --Horus (talk) 14:21, 16 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Dear Túrelio, sorry to raise the same issue again, but User ZenithZealotry accused me of theft and I found it very disturbing. Is there anyway to address the problem? --Horus (talk) 18:31, 19 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I think when situation coming to this moment, he's satisfied which can win over me, although you don't do any with me follow his request, but it's much enough for me to QUIT OUT of here and all projects of Wikimedia with CURSE, I HATE YOU ALL, Forever BYE!! -- ZenithZealotry (talk) 18:31, 24 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Copyright ownership issue[edit]

Dear Túrelio, thankvs for your messages and requests for a valid copyright documentation. I have just a question concerning the template I found, which states: "[..] I affirm that I am the creator and/or SOLE OWNER of the exclusive copyright of [...]". Here, we are talking about etchings, which are usually printed in several copies and sold. I do own a copy of the uploaded etchings, so I guess I am entitled to grant the permissions, but I am surely not the ONLY owner, as others may own a copy of the same print as well. What should I do? How should I reframe the request? Thank you and best regards, AleSpinelli (talk) 10:09, 17 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hi AleSpinelli,

well, mere ownership of a work of art, which has been originally created by someone else, does not include copyright. Also, creating a true reproduction of a work of art does not come with an own copyright. When I tagged your uploads with no-permission (instead of performing the requested speedy deletion), I assumed that you are the original artist. I understand from your comment that you are not the original artist. That means, if the original artist is not dead since 1946, you need his (or his heirs) permission. --Túrelio (talk) 10:14, 17 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Túrelio, thanks for the prompt answer. I assume you are correct, I didn't realize that ownership could imply not owning also the right to reproduce an object of art or that that may be dependent upon the many different legislations. Anyway, I am very well acquainted with the (still living) artist and I will have him sign the document or - giving that he is almost 80 - a representation letter. Thanks again AleSpinelli (talk) 11:14, 17 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Great. As you may know (or not), we have prefabricated permission-templates in several languages, see Commons:Email templates. However, in such cases the wording might need to be amended, as it is NOT the original work, that needs to be released under a free license, but only a reproduction of it. --Túrelio (talk)

File:Karen McCrimmon offical portrait.jpg[edit]

This is the official portrait of a Canadian Member of Parliament, provided to me by the member herself. This portrait also appears on her official website. The EXIF metadata shows that the copyright is CdC-Hoc (House of Commons). I assume, but will endeavour to confirm, that this means that this photo is in the public domain. Kelsey.chris (talk) 21:53, 19 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Well, no such assumption can be made as Canada is not the U.S. Please provide a link to the page, from where you took this image. --Túrelio (talk) 21:56, 19 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed. It appears that I will have to wait until Monday to solve this legal puzzle. The image was provided to me via email, however it also appears on her official parliamentary page. Kelsey.chris (talk) 22:17, 19 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

O.k. This website claims full copyright: http://www.parl.gc.ca/ImportantNotices.aspx?Language=E. However, if she herself commissioned the image, she may release under any license, depending on her contract with her photographer. --Túrelio (talk) 22:20, 19 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This seems to be the photographer: http://www.goc411.ca/Employees/Details/84025 . --Túrelio (talk) 22:23, 19 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Found on the Parliament of Canada web site here:

The photographic images belonging to the Library of Parliament are subject to copyright. They may be downloaded and reused without permission in any format for personal or non-commercial use, subject to the following conditions:
The copyright of the photographs must be acknowledged in the following form: © Library of Parliament.
Users must not adapt, alter or manipulate any of the images.
Users must not use the images so as to bring Parliament into disrepute or use them in a deliberately misleading or defamatory context.
This permission is not transferable. Users cannot authorize others to re-use the images.
Photographs must not be used for commercial gain or in connection with advertising or marketing or to imply any association or endorsement by Parliament.
Photographs must not be used for partisan or political purposes.

It is not made clear whether or not this extends to images claiming House of Commons copyright. I will contact the photographer through internal e-mail on Monday to clarify and confirm. In the meantime I will amend the copyright statement on the image to reflect the policy above. Please advise if you would prefer that I remove the image in the interim. Kelsey.chris (talk) 01:41, 20 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

After further reading, it appears that the copyright statements above cannot be reconciled with any of the CC licenses. Please delete the offending image.
Thank you very much for alerting me to this issue. You have saved me some potential embarrassment. Kelsey.chris (talk) 11:52, 20 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Done. --Túrelio (talk) 13:11, 20 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Category:CSA shunter №23074[edit]

Please next time you delete an empty category, see its historial first, as this category was emptied and nominated for deletion by "vandalism" by an IP. So readded the missing categories, as i`ve already recreated the category. Tm (talk) 14:16, 20 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

You been very active since i wrote the first message so i repeat agian, would you add the missing categories, lost in your accidental deletion of Category:CSA shunter №23074, mainly the categories related to Category:Trams in Sintra. Tm (talk) 05:20, 21 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hi,

from your first posting, I wasn't sure what you expected from me (and neither why [14] needs to be vandalism). Now, if I understand your 2nd posting correctly, you want to have the content for the formerly deleted CSA cat to be added to the recreated cat, right? --Túrelio (talk) 09:26, 21 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, i woul like to have content of the deleted CSA category added to the recreated category. Also, sorry for my first post as the language is not very clear in what i pretended. Thanks in advance. Tm (talk) 14:25, 21 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Done already. --Túrelio (talk) 14:28, 21 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Message from Op4ev[edit]

Hello, you just selected the file I have uploaded from Flickr for speedy deletion, but the original uploader stated clearly that he gave permission to use the image. That one is the only usable Ian Bostridge picture I could find, and since the author of the picture stated that I think it's possible to use it. If not I apologise, I am new to this and there are many things I may not know. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Op4ev (talk • contribs)

Hi Op4ev,

where did the uploader "give permission"? The image was found by our Flickr-Review-Bot to be under a cc-by-nc-nd license. Both NC (no commercial use) and ND (no derivatives) are not allowed on Commons (see COM:L). --Túrelio (talk) 09:56, 21 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

CC-BY-NC icon at CC-BY-SA licensed images[edit]

The images I publish at Wikimedia Commons are free for educational and informational purposes. Everyone may copy, share, modify them and print them for personal use. Everyone may use them in informational and educational publications that are not sold for money. However they must not be used in commercial media like books, calendars, postcards, magazines, videos without a contract between the author and the publisher. Because I could not find the template for CC-BY-SA-NC, I added the -NC icon below the main licence template. (User talk:Abrimaal)

Replied on your talkpage. --Túrelio (talk) 13:07, 21 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Dear Túrelio[edit]

The authorization for File talk:Portrait of Spanish artist Blas Gallego.jpg was sent by the copyright owner and automatically answered by Wikipedia. So if you guys could please restore the pic. Thanks! --ExperiencedArticleFixer (talk) 20:58, 21 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Done. --Túrelio (talk) 21:38, 21 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

E-mail[edit]

I just sent you an e-mail.--The Devil's Advocate (talk) 21:38, 21 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Forwarded to Legal and notified some 'crats. Thanks. --Túrelio (talk) 22:05, 21 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion of files transferred from Flickr[edit]

Could you explain why you speedied this and this broken files rather than attemping to transfer again from Flickr? Who tagged them for Speedy and why? --Amitie 10g (talk) 21:42, 21 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I'll look into that tomorrow, too late now. --Túrelio (talk) 22:13, 21 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I requested its restoration at the UDEL. Please answer there. --Amitie 10g (talk) 14:21, 22 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Files now re-uploaded. Had been speedy-tagged by User:Elisfkc. --Túrelio (talk) 14:42, 22 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I already noticied that the same user added them to other files.

Thanks for restoring, reuploading and left warning to the user. Please be more careful. --Amitie 10g (talk) 14:52, 22 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

restoration of Aphrodite_Ping_Pong.jpg[edit]

Dear Túrelio,

You have deleted the File Aphrodite_Ping_Pong.jpg, which was uploaded to Wikimedia Commons and released under CC-BY-SA yesterday by the copyright owner herself, Silvie Defraoui. Having the picture deleted 12 hours later on copyright reasons is sending a bad message to this 78-years old first time Wikipedia contributor. Can you please restore the pic? Thanks! --1904.CC (talk) 11:53, 22 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

PS, perhaps you can help me out: this article is using an existing Wikimedia Commons image in the artist Infobox, but the image isn't showing. Any idea why it's not working? --1904.CC (talk) 13:42, 22 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I have replied at the undeletion-discussion. --Túrelio (talk) 20:57, 22 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Comment[edit]

All are copyvio. Two of them where deleted and uploaded again. Thanks.--Fixertool (talk) 08:32, 23 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for notifying. --Túrelio (talk) 08:22, 25 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Joha1908 (talk · contribs)[edit]

Hello,

these pictures are from the producer of this machines. I have the permission to use them for the wikipedia article.

Regards Joha1908

Hi Joha1908,

well, then why did you put your name in the author-entry for File:Dixi SLK.png?

Anyway, you need to provide this permission to permissions-commons@wikimedia.org and the permission needs to be really a free license (such as CC-BY or CC-BY-SA), not "for Wikipedia". --Túrelio (talk) 08:21, 25 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Turelio,

sorry, I am a beginner in Wikipedia. These pictures also can be downloaded here: www.ballenpresse.tv . I get the pictures from the company, I am working there. Best regards — Preceding unsigned comment added by Joha1908 (talk • contribs)

O.k., dann können wir ja deutsch sprechen.

Ich sehe auf www.ballenpresse.tv nirgends einen Hinweis auf eine freie Lizenz. Es ist ein häufiges Mißverständnis anzunehmen, dass etwas frei lizenziert sei, nur weil es auf einer Website gezeigt oder sogar runterladbar ist. Wenn du bei dem Laden arbeitest, sollte es ja ein leichtes sein, von eurer Rechtsabteilung (oder wer immer das bearbeitet), eine ordentliche Genehmigung zu erhalten. Eine geeignete Vorlage findet du hier: Commons:E-Mail-Vorlagen#Einverständniserklärung (Rechte-Inhaber). In der Genehmigung sollten alle betroffenen Dateien aufgelistet sein. --Túrelio (talk) 17:37, 25 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Eine weitere Bilddatei mit vermutlicher Copyright-Verletzung: File:60S Volumenreduzierung.jpg auch von User:Joha1908 hochgeladen. --Archie02 (talk) 18:02, 25 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, danke für die Info. Ich bin für die Veröffentlichung der Bilder verantwortlich. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Joha1908 (talk • contribs)

Please don't delete the Raleigh Chopper Images[edit]

They are my own scans from hard copies I have bought, they are 40 years old bits of memorabilia Thehotone1970 (talk) 10:00, 25 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Thehotone1970,

I am sorry, but physical ownership in (a copy of) a work of art does not mean, you have also the copyright of it. The advertisements were from the 1960s, if I remember correctly. So, they can hardly be out of copyright. If you want to "fight" for it, I recommend to request undeletion at COM:UR. --Túrelio (talk) 10:07, 25 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Album covers[edit]

Hello,

please delete two following pictures:

JB Different Shades of Blue album.jpg JB_Blues_Of_Desperation.jpg

I was not aware that I cannot use them in this way. I will check how to upload covers of the albums, to not make such mistakes. Thank you in advance! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Piotr Samek (talk • contribs)

Done. Thanks for notifying. --Túrelio (talk) 08:22, 26 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Your warning[edit]

Hi Túrelio: Xiang0325 seems to be right back to uploading non-stop copyvios despite your best efforts and warnings. Cheers! Ellin Beltz (talk) 22:18, 25 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Blocked for 1 week. Thanks for notifying. --Túrelio (talk) 08:24, 26 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Statues of Moqi Xie and Zhang Jun (Hangzhou)[edit]

Hi Túrelio, thank you for your works everyday. I am sorry for inform to you, but you removed the Category:Statues of Moqi Xie and Zhang Jun (Hangzhou) with reason "(incorrectly named) duplicate, content moved to Category:Statues_of_Qin_Hui_and_Lady_Wang_(Hangzhou)". I don't know who requested this deletion, but, the reason may be incorrect. The temple has 4 kneeling statues (Qin_Hui and Lady Wang {these 2 statues are very famous}, and Moqi Xie and Zhang Jun {less famous}). It can be confirmed with plates (inscribed in Chinese characters) in background of the statues. Then, I think the couples of statues should be separated and did so. Currently, 4 statues are mixed in a category. Therefore, I would like to ask you to revert the deletion of the category. The deletion request should have been discussed because there was a option to rename the category if the category name is incorrect (the names may have been incorrect), and a "speedy deletion" should not have been done without a discussion. Thank you for your understanding.--Morio (talk) 08:11, 27 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Morio,

I've undeleted the cat. Feel free to check the edit-history and change it back to the correct version. --Túrelio (talk) 08:14, 27 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks a lot for your very speedy response!--Morio (talk) 08:17, 27 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Bitte um Hilfe[edit]

Hallo! Heute kam diese Mail an Spinelli zurück, an den ich geschrieben habe, weil mir Wikimedia Commons zuvor mitgeteilt hatte: "Túrelio has been changed by AleSpinelli":

Hi,

I guess you picked the wrong user: I am not in any way involved with these things. You should send this email to an administrator.

Regards,

AS

2016-03-17 11:59 GMT+01:00 Agnostizi <wewel@t-online.de>: Hallo! Leider hat es gestern beim ersten Versuch, mein Video "Wolkenwandel" hochzuladen, nicht geklappt, weil mit ogg nur Audio geladen wurde. Deshalb mein zweiter Versuch mit webm, der in Ordnung zu sein scheint. Bitte löschen Sie den ersten Versuch.

Der Pianist Michael Leuschner, hat mir in einer Mail erklärt: "Ich bin damit einverstanden, dass unsere beiden Videos "Wolken" und "Welke Blätter" in Wikimedia Commons unter der Lizenz CC BY-SA-4.0 veröffentlicht werden."

Soll ich diese E-Mail an Sie weiterleiten? Bitte geben Sie mir dann dafür eine E-Mail-Adresse an. Das in der Einverständniserklärung noch genannte Video "Welke Blätter" will ich in den nächsten Tagen eingeben, wenn mit dem Video "Wolkenwandel" alles in Ordnung ist.

Leider verfüge ich kaum über Englischkenntnisse, was sie mir bitte nachsehen wollen, werde ich doch demnächst 85.

Für Ihre Hilfe vielen Dank und freundliche Grüße

Meinolf Wewel

-- This email was sent by Agnostizi to AleSpinelli by the "Email this user" function at Wikimedia Commons.

°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°

Inzwischen habe ich auch das Video Welke Blätter« hochgeladen-

Für einen kurzen Bescheid, ob jetzt alles in Ordnung ist, wäre ich Ihnen sehr dankbar. Freundliche Grüße--Agnostizi (talk) 13:33, 18 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Copyrighted images[edit]

Hi, just wanted to let you know that all of the images I uploaded are completely my content, I took them in real life and I did not steal them from any webpage Trump20016 (talk) 13:38, 22 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy tag for logos[edit]

Túrelio, (again) please be careul when tagging and deleting logos, specially for Mexican ones, where {{PD-Coa-Mexico}} apply (football clubs logos are also included). --Amitie 10g (talk) 03:38, 25 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, are you sure that this applies to soccer/sport clubs? "This file depicts the coat of arms, banner, or emblem of Mexico, one of its states, municipalities, or any other political subdivision, or a similar distinctive symbol belonging to an international or "recognized" organization, or NGO, operating in or outside of Mexico." --Túrelio (talk) 08:30, 25 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, it says similar distinctive symbol belonging to an international or "recognized" organization. As many previous DR resolved as kept, footbaal clubs are considered as a recognized organization, therefore, the license apply. The Ley Federal de Derecho de autor of Mexico is more specific:

Artículo 14.- No son objeto de la protección como derecho de autor a que se refiere esta Ley:
(...)
VIII. Las reproducciones o imitaciones, sin autorización, de escudos, banderas o emblemas de cualquier país,
      estado, municipio o división política equivalente, ni las denominaciones, siglas, símbolos o emblemas
      de organizaciones internacionales gubernamentales, no gubernamentales, o de cualquier otra organización
      reconocida oficialmente, así como la designación verbal de los mismos;

Notice that between no gubernamentales and o de cualquier otra organización is a comma (,), that indicates that no gubernamentales and o de cualquier otra organización are separaetd items, therefore, the recognized organizations (like football clubs) are part of the Art. 14 of the Federal Law; in other words, any logo of recognized organizations are not protected (and there is a precendet with other DRs resolved as kept). So, you should consider the actual law (and worldwide laws) and its correct interpretation, rather than an unofficial translation. --Amitie 10g (talk) 14:47, 27 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Löschanträge Moorleichen von Exloërmond und Zweeloo[edit]

Hallo Túrelio Ich komme zurück auf Deine Löschungen von File:Mannelijk veenlijk uit Exloërmond, Drents Museum, 1914 V1.jpg und File:Vrouw van Zweeloo, Dents Museum, 1951 XII13.jpg wegen einer angeblichen Lizenzverletzung. Laut http://museaindrenthe.nl/collectie/indeling/detail/start/6?f_strings_object_name[0]=veenlijk und http://museaindrenthe.nl/collectie/indeling/detail/start/2?f_strings_object_name[0]=veenlijk sind die Bilder CC:BY lizensiert, weswegen ich die Löschung für ungerechtfertigt halte. Ich bitte noch mal um Prüfung. Vielen Dank! Viele Grüße --Bullenwächter (talk) 12:45, 25 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hallo Bullenwächter, ich habe kein Problem damit, die Dateien zu entlöschen, würde damit aber gerne den Ausgang der LD für die Moorleiche abwarten. O.k.? --Túrelio (talk) 17:38, 25 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

OK - User:Christoph Braun hat grad eine Anfrage an das Drents-Museum für eine Lizenzbestätigung für das OTRS-Team gestellt. Ich hoffe, die Freigabe kommt in Kürze. --Bullenwächter (talk) 22:23, 25 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Prima. Dann gib mir bitte Bescheid. --Túrelio (talk) 08:25, 26 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Moin Túrelio, museaindrenthe hat in der Zwischenzeit den Disclaimer auf ihrer Seite geändert, um den Status der jeweiligen CC Lizenzen noch mal zu verdeutlichen (vgl. http://museaindrenthe.nl/disclaimer ). http://museaindrenthe.nl/collectie/indeling/detail/start/6?f_strings_object_name[0]=veenlijk und http://museaindrenthe.nl/collectie/indeling/detail/start/2?f_strings_object_name[0]=veenlijk sind nun eineindeutig als CC BY 3.0 ausgewiesen. Scheinbar wurden auch in Europeana deren Inhalte komplett als CC BY NC 3.0 ausgewiesen, was demnächst auch richtiggestellt werden soll. Commons:Deletion requests/File:Meisje van Yde, Drents Museum, N1897 VI1.jpg ist bereits behalten. Bitte kümmere dich um die Wiederherstellung der von dir gelöschten Dateien. Danke. Regards, Christoph Braun (talk) 05:36, 8 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Done. --Túrelio (talk) 09:15, 8 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Carnymike permissions note[edit]

You might be interested in this category page, as they left a note for us to read that goes over permissions for the images. Kevin Rutherford (talk) 23:43, 25 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

O.k. I'll look into it tomorrow. --Túrelio (talk) 08:27, 26 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Copyvio[edit]

Most of them. Thanks in advance. --Fixertool (talk) 04:07, 27 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for notifying. --Túrelio (talk) 08:13, 27 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

File:Portrait 2015 okt 3 rgb.jpg[edit]

"Urheber dieses Bildes ist Karsten Meißner mit dem Einverständnis zur Nutzung von Katerina Belkina." That means, AFAIK, that the person who made the photo is Karsten Meißner. Now perhaps that's the same person as Luiboy77, but don't we usually require some evidence of that? Apart from "own work", I don't see any claim (and certainly no verifiable claim) that Luiboy77 is Karsten Meißner. If you think that's sufficient evidence, I have a nice bridge for sale that you might be interested in... :-) --Randykitty (talk) 10:00, 28 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

As I am not a native en-speaker, I don't understand your likely figure of speech "nice bridge for sale". Anyway, you are correct that a confirmation might be appropriate in this situation. However, the overall situation in this case makes the claim rather likely. The typical :de-user would hardly disclose his/her realname on-wiki. An online-search for this image did not yield any hits. --Túrelio (talk) 10:46, 28 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The typical en user doesn't disclose their real identity that easily either (I for one...) I realize that creates a conflict here, but I don't think we can accept the claim from an anonymous user that they have the copyright and can give it away. If they had only said "own work", it would perhaps have been different, but they give the name of the photographer and that is different from the user name, so I think more proof is needed, which they can submit to permissions-commons@wikimedia.org. As for the bridge, that refers to a classical scam where some crook would try to sell a public bridge to some gullible immigrant to the US. It's used when you think someone is being naive in accepting someone's claim :-) Just google "selling someone a bridge" and look at some of those examples. Happy editing! --Randykitty (talk) 11:05, 28 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The case has developped, in that the artist has sent a permission-statement to OTRS (or actually to the WMF) and has put dropbox-link on her/his talkpage. As I read it from that document, artist and photographer are (sort of) married, as they share the same lastname. --Túrelio (talk) 20:48, 28 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Looks like everything's solved then. Cheers! --Randykitty (talk) 21:46, 28 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted image KK Gorstak[edit]

Hello. I found a picture KK Gorstak on google, and you have deleted it. Why? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Vux33 (talk • contribs)

Hi Vux33,

because the source, from which you obtained it, says "Copyright (c) 2014. PortalAnalitika.me. All rights reserved." Only media, which are under a free license (see COM:L), can be uploaded to Commons. --Túrelio (talk) 20:36, 28 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Request[edit]

Could you check this request: Commons:Administrators'_noticeboard#Request_to_provide_deleted_copies_of_PDF_copies? --Tito Dutta (talk) 12:56, 29 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion of old photos[edit]

Why you speedy deleted this, this and this files without a valid rationale rather than the copyvio tag by Krdbot, considerong that other pictures of Blanche Selva at Commons are tagged with {{PD-old-70}}? --Amitie 10g (talk) 15:01, 29 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion of my photos[edit]

Hi! First of all, the author of the photos and me, is one and only person :) Secondly, it's not only that photo, but almost all of the photos I've uploaded for competition purposes only. These photos, since last week, are used for commercial reasons in a photography page, so I guess it's not allowed to have them here for free anymore. That way or another, they went unnoticed, so they won't be missed really ;) If anyone used them/downloaded them in between with the previous CC license, there is no problem by me. If there is any other question/objection, feel free to tell me. Christos Doudoulakis (talk) 23:01, 29 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Perhaps you could have a look[edit]

Túrelio,

Thank you for your report at Commons:Administrators' noticeboard/User problems of account NeoTheNazi (talk · contribs). I've blocked the account, and deleted the file in question.

Perhaps you could take a look at the report Commons:Administrators'_noticeboard/User_problems#Civility_and_tone regarding what's going on at this deletion discussion and copyright investigation ?

I've taken zero admin actions there myself, merely commenting.

Unfortunately, it seems the tenor and demeanor of certain respondents to the debate has severely degraded in civility, with ad hominems spread liberally around a bit.

Most of the summary of the DIFFs have been helpfully supplied by Winkelvi, who reported the major problems at Commons:Administrators'_noticeboard/User_problems#Civility_and_tone.

Maybe you could have a look, and take action if you think it's necessary ?

I'll defer to your judgement in this case.

Thank you,

-- Cirt (talk) 20:42, 31 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hell, couldn't you have offered me something easier, such as collecting 1,000 wild ants or alike. The linked DR-discussion contains nearly 24,000 characters. I'll try. --Túrelio (talk) 21:09, 31 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

ROFLMAO. And I just watched the latest Arrow television episode where they get attacked by a swarm of robotic bees ! Thank you, and good luck, -- Cirt (talk) 21:36, 31 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I've commented at the DR discussion. AN/U will have to wait for tomorrow, as I've to go to sleep now. --Túrelio (talk) 21:37, 31 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Sounds good, thank you, sweet dreams ! -- Cirt (talk) 21:41, 31 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I don't know how to do it?[edit]

I do not know how to do it? How could upload a photo of Peter Sagan , for example , without picking directly from the Internet? I tried to run it through programs word, but I preferred not raise it until you know your response — Preceding unsigned comment added by Saul2002 (talk • contribs) 21:59, 31 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Saul2002,

the problem is not that you got it via the internet, but that you took images, which are not under a free license, claimed them as your own work and put them under a free license. --Túrelio (talk) 07:36, 6 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

size_not_found[edit]

Hi, I see you are actively uploading failed uploads. I'm happy that you are taking care of these, but if you find it annoying to do, it may be more efficient if we let a backlog build up and then get a bot task to sort them out. As Flickr or WMF server failures may underpin these failures, they are not going away soon, but it would help if the need were large enough to raise Phabricator tasks for it, or at least become a priority for my volunteer time to set something up with Faebot.

Note that size_not_found would be an easy fix, but partly uploaded failures are more problematic as SHA1 values are not supplied by the Flickr API. This would mean human detection, say by adding failures to a category for re-upload. Anyway, ponder it, there no hurry as if I do need to look at it, it would not be overnight. --Fæ (talk) 11:30, 1 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Fae,

I don't consider it a bothersome burden to check for a empty scans and for failed uploads, as I do this when not feeling prepared to do more sophisticated work. ;-) Anyway, to catch the failed uploads in-time might prevent some of them to get tagged for deletion. --Túrelio (talk) 10:13, 3 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Image Albertine Zullo[edit]

Hi,

Albertine Zullo gave me this photograph and her husband, Germano Zullo took it. i Have explained to her that I needed an official statement from him, and also I have explained how he could import the photo himself.

Kind regards,

Natacha — Preceding unsigned comment added by Nattes à chat (talk • contribs)

Hi Natacha,

if you get a signal from the Zullos that they send a permission-statement, you can add {{OTRS pending}} to the image-page. --Túrelio (talk) 15:01, 4 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Etoilewiki (talk · contribs)[edit]

Hallo Túrelio,

Du, ich glaube, dass dieser Nutzer (oder, dem Namen nach, Nutzerin), wohl ausschließlich URVen hochgeladen hat... Die Beitragsliste sieht zumindest so aus. Was meinst Du? LG Grand-Duc (talk) 20:52, 5 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Danke für den Hinweis. Momentan hat er aufgehört. Beim nächsten copyvio-Upload gibt es eine Sperre. --Túrelio (talk) 07:34, 6 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

One deleted but many similar posters...[edit]

Hello.

A few days ago you've deleted this image (Copyright violation: This photo is a photo of a poster, so no proff for the licence of the poster. Aked by Olivier LPB). Uploaded from the same Flikr account, similar files are in this cat:

Thanks a lot for your help. Have a nice week. --LW² \m/ ^{(Lie 2 me ...)} 22:52, 5 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

question[edit]

Which copyright rule to i select for the image of the Dark Disciple cover?Thursby16 (talk) 20:24, 6 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

You mean, how to legitimately upload it to Commons? Only after obtaining a general permission by the creator or rights holder of the cover artwork. The fact that you own a copy of this book and shot the reproduction by yourself, is irrelevant in such cases. --Túrelio (talk) 20:27, 6 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

User:Deskpoll[edit]

Hey, feel free to nuke and block these users on sight. These FB groups are known to abuse Commons with massive copyvios --Zhuyifei1999 (talk) 15:36, 7 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. --Túrelio (talk) 09:16, 8 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Delete my page?[edit]

Hey, would you mind deleting User:IagoQnsi/Gadget-QuickDelete-custom.js for me? I don't know how to request a speedy deletion on a JavaScript page, since I can't use {{Speedydelete}}. Thanks, IagoQnsi (talk) 20:13, 7 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Done. --Túrelio (talk) 20:14, 7 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

WWU STC[edit]

We are new to Wikimedia Commons- but noticed that our page was moved for deletion? We are the Student Tech Center on WWU's campus and trying to put our documentation up for use in conference (such as on coming up in two days http://www.buildingbridgeswatech.com) as well as share our docs with other institution who might be getting started in 3D curriculum. — Preceding unsigned comment added by WWU STC (talk • contribs)

Hi WWU STC,

as you had only 1 upload at the time when your userpage was created (and also when it was deleted by me), the nominator and I had to assume that it was put up only for promotional purposes, which contradicts our mission and our rules for userpage, see Commons:User pages. In addition, it seems that your uploads are also out of our scope. So, I would recommend, after you upload some files that are really in scope of Commons (and are usable for other people), recreate your userpage, but take care to avoid a promotional wording. --Túrelio (talk) 18:22, 11 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

hilfst du mir bitte...[edit]

Hallo Túrelio,

ich bin in der de:Wikipedia über die Artikel Ludovik Kendi und CantoSonor gestolpert wo mehrere Accounts in der Versionsgeschichte diverse Bilder hochgelden und eingefügt haben. Es ist hierbei ziemlich sicher, dass es sich um Jemanden handelt der die original-Dateien besitzt aber nicht selbst der Fotograf ist... Bitte hilf mir diesen Accounts den rechten Weg zu zeigen um die Bilder in den Artikeln zu belassen bzw. die gelöschten Bilder wiederherzustellen...

Ich habe mittlerweile etwas den Überblick verlohren, aber hier ein paar Accounts die in der de.Wikipedia und auf Commons editiert haben

User:LudovikKendi siehe auch Diskussion
User:Opera060670 siehe auch Diskussion und File-Disk
User:Shoegal siehe auch Diskussion

Und auch:

Benutzer:Opera70

ich bin etwas rat- und hilflos...

LG --1971markus ^{⇒ Laberkasten ...} 00:27, 15 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hallo Markus ich werds versuchen. Den ersten habe ich mal angeschrieben und Category:Ludovik Kendi angelegt. --Túrelio (talk) 06:55, 15 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Danke für deine Mühen, dass Problem liegt aber an den wechselnden Accounts...

Es ist hierbei ziemlich sicher, dass es sich hierbei um Jemanden handelt der die original-Dateien besitzt aber nicht selbst der Fotograf ist... u.a. wurden in den EXIF-Daten unterschiedliche Fotografen angegeben... Und wie vermag man diesem Uploader zu erklären die Urheberrechte zu beachten?

LG --1971markus ^{⇒ Laberkasten ...} 23:16, 16 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

File:Žebřík v plamenech.jpg[edit]

You can see any reasonable content there? --Gampe (talk) 14:56, 15 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Well, yes. It's a photo of a wood fire, such as is File:Plameny.jpg. Not every image which is uploaded to Commons needs immediately to be used on a (Wikimedia) project. My image File:FunkenflugGrill 9647b.jpg has few on-wiki uses, but many external re-uses. Anyway, feel free to nominate it for regular deletion, but it wasn't a speedy-case. --Túrelio (talk) 15:34, 15 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hello: thank you for message: picture ref: PM_024032_B_Ronse: I have been verifying the picture on higher and saw a text left under: signed: Fotolog.com; MataonoIf you download you can look at information on the metadata, can actually be completed. Pol — Preceding unsigned comment added by PMRMaeyaert (talk • contribs)

TimedText files[edit]

Hello, thank you for the following deletions:

(Deletion log); 06:31 . . Túrelio (A) (talk | contribs) deleted page TimedText talk:Tip and Ty again.ogg.en.srt ‎(Empty)
(Deletion log); 06:31 . . Túrelio (A) (talk | contribs) deleted page TimedText talk:Test ogg mp3 48kbps.wav.en.srt ‎(Empty)
(Deletion log); 06:31 . . Túrelio (A) (talk | contribs) deleted page TimedText talk:Print Wikipedia by Michael Mandiberg.webm.pl.srt ‎(Empty)
(Deletion log); 06:31 . . Túrelio (A) (talk | contribs) deleted page TimedText talk:Print Wikipedia by Michael Mandiberg.webm.en.srt ‎(Empty)
(Deletion log); 06:31 . . Túrelio (A) (talk | contribs) deleted page TimedText talk:Play fight of polar bears edit 1.avi.OGG.es.srt ‎(Empty)
(Deletion log); 06:31 . . Túrelio (A) (talk | contribs) deleted page TimedText talk:Open-mid front unrounded vowel.ogg.en.srt ‎(Empty)
(Deletion log); 06:31 . . Túrelio (A) (talk | contribs) deleted page TimedText talk:Open-mid front rounded vowel.ogg.de.srt ‎(Empty)
(Deletion log); 06:31 . . Túrelio (A) (talk | contribs) deleted page TimedText talk:Open Letter for Free Access to Wikipedia (EN subtitles).webm.bg.srt ‎(Empty;subtitles built in)
(Deletion log); 06:31 . . Túrelio (A) (talk | contribs) deleted page TimedText talk:National anthem of East Timor.ogg.en.srt ‎(Empty)
(Deletion log); 06:31 . . Túrelio (A) (talk | contribs) deleted page TimedText talk:Inno di Mameli instrumental.ogg.es.srt ‎(Empty)
(Deletion log); 06:28 . . Túrelio (A) (talk | contribs) deleted page TimedText talk:HardDisk1.ogg.en.srt ‎(Empty)
(Deletion log); 06:28 . . Túrelio (A) (talk | contribs) deleted page TimedText talk:Geografía argentina.ogg.en.srt ‎(Empty)
(Deletion log); 06:27 . . Túrelio (A) (talk | contribs) deleted page TimedText talk:Ellis Island video.ogg.en.srt ‎(Empty)

My deletion reasoning may not have been clear enough, but the target for deletion was not just the TimedText talk page but also the TimedText page. As shown by the TimedText pages, these contain no text and need to be deleted. The reasoning for the speedy deletion template being on the talk page is because TimedTalk pages cannot utilize templates. Riley Huntley (talk) 23:17, 18 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

18:53, 19 April 2016 Túrelio (A) (talk | contribs) deleted page TimedText talk:National anthem of East Timor.ogg.en.srt (Per File:National anthem of East Timor.ogg)
Once again, you have deleted the talk page of a page that needs the main page deleted. Please either handle these deletions properly, or do not handle TimedText speedy deletion requests at all. Riley Huntley (talk) 03:44, 20 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

In none of the deleted talkpage-versions from the above list, which I've rechecked now, you had requested the deletion of the TT page itself. Instead you expect that I read your mind. I've deleted quite a number of TT pages before. They themselves had been clearly tagged for speedy deletion. Though they didn't show the regular template-message, they were included in the speedy-deletion-cat and contained some deletion-rationale. As I hadn't tagged them by myself, I don't know how the tagging had been achieved. Nevertheless, it was clear and didn't require mindreading of the nominator. Eventually you, @Riley Huntley: , should consider to be a bit more careful before unfriendly accusing your colleagues of unproper handling. --Túrelio (talk) 21:56, 10 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

So basically... you thought I created 15 pages with the only content being {{speedy|Empty}} just to have them deleted? I'm not a just-for-the-hell-of-it editor. I was not looking for you to read my mind, I was expecting common sense. I'd expect that any admin would review the history of the talk, realize that it was created for the purpose of tagging for deletion, and then review the main page. Or, if the admin did not understand, they should contact the nominator. My accusing of improper handling was only after you deleted one of the talk pages for the second time, after I had left you a message regarding your deletions. I do not wish to be rude, and I apologize for "accusing" but let's use some common sense.. ~riley (talk) 23:17, 10 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Bitte um Prüfung[edit]

Hallo Túrelio, kannst Du bitte überprüfen, ob hier eine Copyright-Verletzung vorliegt:
File:Odontoglossum Povedanum.jpg - Quelle offensichtlich hier: [15]
Dank und Gruß. Orchi (talk) 10:55, 23 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Orchi, hat wegen Wikipause etwas gedauert. Nun als Copyvio markiert. Danke für den Hinweis. --Túrelio (talk) 20:17, 10 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hallo Túrelio, viele Dank. Gruß. Orchi (talk) 20:20, 10 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Template NoUploads on Category:Thijs Trompert[edit]

Dear Turelio,

In 2013 you put the template {{NoUploads}} on this category of Dutch scuptures in Dutch settings, warning for use. But according to the Dutch copyright law Auteurswet 1912 article 18, artworks intended for public spaces, can freely be photographed in their public locality without copyright protection for the artist. In the US apparently the same rule applies, compare for example Category:Cloud_Gate, the mirror egg in Chicago. As an exception, this "freedom of panorama" does not hold in Belgium, if i'm right.

So can the warning on Category:Thijs Trompert be removed?

Thank you, best regards, Hansmuller (talk) 11:29, 26 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @Hansmuller: ,

due to a Wikipause my reply comes late. Hmm, the template (at least the German translation) does actually mention the freedom-of-panorama exception. This template should be used in every category for artists, whose works are still in copyright. The idea is to motivate uploaders to think, can this image be uploaded or not, is there a valid exception? For example, if a work of the said artist is installed in Belgium, there would be no freedom-of-panorama exception. However, if there is no "warning" and there are already other images of such works, a new uploader might be mislead to think, everything is fine and I can upload it. --Túrelio (talk) 20:23, 10 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Dear Turelio, @WeeJeeVee

Thanks for your reply. Now i am late. As Thijs Trompert is a Dutch artist and his sculptures are in Dutch public space, i still would like to have this stern warning {{NoUploads}} - it really is in the Dutch version and is perceived to be so - removed, because it bothers people in Amersfoort, Trompert's home town with many of his sculptures in public space. The situation according to copyright law is just the other way around: we are in general free to upload images of art in public space so it should read OkUploads. This warning is unusual on Commons. We are not in Belgium, which is an exception not mentioned in the Dutch version (it appears these weeks a law will be passed in Belgium to give Belgium freedom of panorama). So this intimidating warning really does not belong there. I give you the phrasing in bad Dutch, which you hopefully will be able to understand as standard German is an Eastern Dutch dialect ;-)

Deze werken of werken van deze auteur kunnen mogelijk zich niet in het publiek domein bevinden, omdat de auteur nog niet 70 jaar dood is. Upload geen foto's of scans van werken van deze auteur, tenzij ze voldoen aan een van de volgende uitzonderingen:

    Het werk werd eerst gepubliceerd in de Verenigde Staten en een van de publiek domein-tags van de Verenigde Staten is hier van toepassing;
    Het werk is toegestaan door een wettelijke uitzondering zoals vrijheid van panorama of de minimis;
    Het werk werd door de auteur of diens erfgenamen vrijgegeven door middel van per e-mail bevestigde autorisatie;
    Het werk bevindt zich in het publiek domein vanwege een andere heldere reden.

Voor meer informatie, zie Commons:Licensing en Commons:Derivative works (afgeleide werken).

Can you remove the warning template? Thanks, Hansmuller (talk) 08:04, 20 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Simon Donnelly[edit]

Hi, would you mind restoring Category:Simon Donnelly, as it is now populated? Thanks, Mattythewhite (talk) 21:44, 1 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Done. --Túrelio (talk) 20:25, 10 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Video[edit]

Hallo, ich habe ein Video, das ich gerne hochladen würde. Kannst Du mir sagen, wie ich das konvertieren kann, damit das klappt? --Nicola (talk) 10:56, 9 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hallo Nicola, vielleicht hilft dir der Any Video Converter for free weiter. Und evtl. Free Video Flip and Rotate wenn ein Video mal hochkant aufgenommen wurde... LG --1971markus ^{⇒ Laberkasten ...} 22:13, 9 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Das probiere ich mal aus. Danke für den Tipp! --Nicola (talk) 05:18, 10 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hat geklappt [16]! --Nicola (talk) 06:09, 10 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry. Ich war seit 19.4. in Wikipause. Dank an Markus und schön dass es geklappt hat. --Túrelio (talk) 20:29, 10 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Wie sagt man in Köln so schön: „Man kennt sich, man hilft sich“ LG --1971markus ^{⇒ Laberkasten ...} 20:59, 10 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

VFC for deletions[edit]

I'm concerned that recent deletions have not left transclusions in a good state. For example File:Air Line bridge (NYPL b11707669-G90F061 008F).tiff has a gallery with a blank thumbnail where the reverse of the stereogram used to be. Note that adverts, unusual franks and descriptions are relevant to keep for the stereograms, which are all archived at the NYPL with both sides scanned for this reason. Thanks --Fæ (talk) 13:55, 11 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hmm, if File:Air Line bridge (NYPL b11707669-G90F061 008B).tiff should not have been deleted, then why had it been put into Category:NYPL (mostly blank)? Anyway, I've undeleted it now and removed the category. --Túrelio (talk) 18:50, 11 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I was not complaining about the deletion (and Choess added it to the mostly blank category, keep in mind that mostly blank does not mean automatic deletion), but pointing out that transclusions should be fixed if there are deletions. Not being an admin, I have no idea if there are processes that can handle that better, I've not investigated. --Fæ (talk) 19:19, 11 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Anyway, if specific of these (nearly) "blank" files are in this special kind of use (and should remain so), the easiest solution to avoid problems would be to remove them from or not put them into that category. Do you know if there are more such cases among my batch-deletions from yesterday? --Túrelio (talk) 20:03, 11 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I don't know, been focused on other stuff. --Fæ (talk) 20:10, 11 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Use of RechtschreibreformBeiStrassenname[edit]

Hi there we would like to use your image RechtschreibreformBeiStrassenname.jpg in an educational website for the BBC. We will of course credit the work to you. The context is spelling reforms of the German language under the topic of GCSE German.

If that is ok please let us know of how you would like to credited. You can contact me at greg.davies@bbc.co.uk

Many thanks. — Preceding unsigned comment was added by 132.185.160.126 (talk) 10:09, 12 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Done. --Túrelio (talk) 18:26, 16 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Deletion of photo[edit]

You deleted a photo that had the CC licensing imbedded in the metadata. This photo was made for CC use and the user would like it restored. Can you restore it? Please help me understand what must be done to assure that it is restored and not deleted. thanks

06:20, 12 April 2016 Túrelio (talk | contribs) deleted page File:Bob wise 01.png (copyrighted image, see http://all4ed.org/people/bob-wise/. It has a copyright notice and no indication of free license.) (global usage; delinker log) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bratcliff (talk • contribs)

Hi,

this was more than 1 month ago! Anyway, the image File:Bob wise 01.png had been sourced by the uploader to http://all4ed.org/people/bob-wise/. However, this site/article is licensed under a a CC-BY-NC-ND license, which is not allowed on Commons. Our policy COM:L requires uploads to be free for commercial use and the creation of derivatives. Both is forbidden under this license. What did you mean by "imbedded in the metadata"? AFAIF, png-files don't have metadata. --Túrelio (talk) 18:25, 16 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Leela Dube / Shehla Rashid Shora[edit]

The photos I have uploaded of Leela Dube and Shehla Rashid Shora are my own work. What is this talk of "possible copyright violation"?

Mukul Dube / payasam

Undeletion request of File:Silsilah-e-Alia Toheedia.png[edit]

Hi, I am copy right holder of this image and uploaded it for free use on wikicommons. Please undelete this file and let me know if i need to do anything more in this regard. Rahmatgee (talk) 15:03, 23 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Speedydeletion ??[edit]

Hello Túrelio. I am the uploader of this file, File:Papavero rosso San Francesco.jpg and I requedted assistence, and already Taivo administrator fixed all the bugs, so all is fine! Many thanks AmicidelleCoseSemplici (talk) 12:04, 1 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

A kitten for you![edit]

Fayen a momo ana walid

Walid boulifa (talk) 23:52, 18 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

File:Rooye Jaabe copy.jpg[edit]

File:Rooye Jaabe copy.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.

Afrikaans ∙ asturianu ∙ azərbaycanca ∙ Bahasa Indonesia ∙ Bahasa Melayu ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ dansk ∙ Deutsch ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ ∙ English ∙ español ∙ euskara ∙ français ∙ galego ∙ hrvatski ∙ italiano ∙ Lëtzebuergesch ∙ magyar ∙ Malti ∙ Nederlands ∙ norsk bokmål ∙ norsk nynorsk ∙ oʻzbekcha / ўзбекча ∙ Plattdüütsch ∙ polski ∙ português ∙ português do Brasil ∙ română ∙ sicilianu ∙ slovenčina ∙ slovenščina ∙ suomi ∙ svenska ∙ Türkçe ∙ Tiếng Việt ∙ Zazaki ∙ Ελληνικά ∙ беларуская ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ ∙ български ∙ македонски ∙ русский ∙ српски / srpski ∙ тоҷикӣ ∙ українська ∙ հայերեն ∙ मराठी ∙ বাংলা ∙ മലയാളം ∙ ပအိုဝ်ႏဘာႏသာႏ ∙ မြန်မာဘာသာ ∙ ไทย ∙ 한국어 ∙ 日本語 ∙ 中文（简体）‎ ∙ 中文（繁體）‎ ∙ עברית ∙ العربية ∙ فارسی ∙ +/−

Josve05a (talk) 00:29, 15 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Undeletion[edit]

Hi Turelio! You already helped me with another issue with an user, so I am asking if you could finalize, as an admin, this undeletion request I made. Two files of mine were cancelled as duplicate, even if they were not duplicates. There is already a positive feedback to the request. It looks like it only miss an admin to finalize the request, otherwise it will be archived soon. Thank you. --Sailko (talk) 15:35, 15 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Somebody else made it. Thank you! --Sailko (talk) 06:42, 16 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Undeletion - Reconsider: Belgium now also has FOP[edit]

Hallo,

You have deleted quite a few of my photographs in the past, because Belgium had no FOP exception. It now has (since July 15). Would it be possible to undelete all those files ? Or should I try to re-upload them ? Funkyxian (talk) 11:30, 20 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

File:Le Centre de Ressources Multimedia en 1980.jpg[edit]

File:Le Centre de Ressources Multimedia en 1980.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 ∙ +/−

Ellin Beltz (talk) 18:12, 17 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

inquiry[edit]

Hello. I noticed this just today: [17] . A similar file is here: [18]. Here is the issue - the data on there is for 1961, not 1953. Hence, I would highly appreciate if you can return the 1961 file as that is the true file. I do not have data to make such a map for 1953 at this time (and who knows if I ever will have such data). (Lilic (talk) 01:11, 21 July 2016 (UTC))[reply]

Hello? (Lilic (talk) 05:27, 7 September 2016 (UTC))[reply]

Template:Fondazione Mansutti[edit]

Hi, you deleted this template on March 2. Template:Fondazione Mansutti/i18n still exists though. As I see, it was all intended to be used on file pages in . I'd rather suggest undeleting the template and puting it on the files (such templates are usual practice after all). What do you think? --Ата ^(talk) 11:27, 8 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Using St. Helena Head Reliquary Image in Social Media[edit]

Greetings Túrelio - The Index of Christian Art at is pleased to add your picture of the Head Reliquary of St. Helena to their program of images for #MedievalMartyrMonday. Credit: Wikimedia-Commons User Túrelio (in comments) view at https://twitter.com/icaprinceton. Many thanks. — Preceding unsigned comment was added by 128.112.225.43 (talk) 13:42, 15 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

St. Helena image[edit]

Thank you, Túrelio. All best. — Preceding unsigned comment was added by 128.112.225.43 (talk) 13:47, 15 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Ask for permission of using photo of Image:MotherTeresa 090.jpg[edit]

Hello Turelio, I'm from Polish Television and I would like to use your photo of Mother Teresa on our fanpage. That would be your photo and a quote. Greeting from Poland!

Jakub Odelski — Preceding unsigned comment was added by 195.245.213.8 (talk) 13:42, 29 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

ULL.87.22.11.55.jpg[edit]

guess you would like to mark this one for deletion

--Dd1495 (talk) 13:51, 31 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Túrelio,

I would like to use your photo of Mother Teresa in a church newsletter St Michael's News for and article on sainthood.

Kind regards,

Julian

Editor St Michael's News — Preceding unsigned comment was added by 2.26.223.244 (talk) 14:09, 07 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Use of Mother Teresa picture[edit]

Hi Túrelio,

I just wanted to let you know we're using your picture of Mother Teresa in a newspaper article about her sainthood. We will of course credit you accordingly.

Many thanks — Preceding unsigned comment added by SS BFP (talk • contribs) 16:30, 10 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

File:C9 Impact (Jung Eon-yeong) profile image.jpg[edit]

Hi, you deleted the file for the reason of possible copyright violation. However, the image was from the gamepedia.com, where all contents including images are available under CC-BY-SA 3.0. See and check again please:

original source link
At the bottom of the page, u can read "Content is available under CC BY-SA 3.0 unless otherwise noted."

--Raynor999 (talk) 10:36, 4 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Previously blocked vandal is back at it[edit]

A user you previously blocked for vandalism [19] has uploaded a doctored copyvio image, removing nominations for its deletion and repeatedly inserting it into multiple articles on WP:[20], [21], [22]. Eperoton (talk) 03:05, 11 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

tout les articles sont des articles de presse qui parlent de moi avec ma photo — Preceding unsigned comment added by Yves Moshe Ayache (talk • contribs) 07:40, 11 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Information: https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Trompe-l%E2%80%99%C5%93il_Garagentor_Ehrenfeld_Tur5707.jpg[edit]

Hello Túrelio, we like to inform you that we will present the a. m. photo in a blog article about garage doors at http://www.rekers-beton.de/garagen-news.php.

Best regards Thomas — Preceding unsigned comment added by Tcanali (talk • contribs) 15:10, 11 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for notifying. --Túrelio (talk) 14:24, 16 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thinking...[edit]

Mr. Túrelio, think twice (or better three times) before doing anything. ByeRomek88 (talk) 13:29, 16 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Funny thing to say by someone who had 18 of his 19 uploads deleted for missing permission. Did you ever read this advise? --Túrelio (talk) 14:23, 16 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Italy MIBAC disclaimer[edit]

Hallo Tureliò, [[User_talk:Túrelio/Archive9#Category:San Zeno (Verona) italienischer Disclaimer]]
User_talk:Túrelio/Archive9#Italy MIBAC copyright disclaimer
Lange her hatte ich Dich darauf angesprochen, jetzt bin ich wieder drauf gekommen. Kannst Du mir den aktuellenn Ansprechpartner hierfür nennen, Danke--Oursana (talk) 19:21, 16 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hallo Oursana,

puh, das ist aber lange her. Ich muss gestehen, dass ich seitdem mit dem Thema eigentlich keine Berührung mehr hatte. Gerade habe ich entdeckt, dass es noch einen 2. Hinweisbaustein gibt, siehe in Category:Villa Marioni Pullè, wobei mir unklar ist, ob die nicht redundant sind. Andererseits sagt der 2./untere Baustein relativ klar, das er sich letztlich nur an italienische Nutzer richtet. Insofern ähnelt er der Einschränkung, die du damals hinzugefügt hattest. Du könntest ggf. mal auf Commons:Bar italiano nachfragen, wie die ital. Nutzer das einschätzen. Ansonsten stehe ich weiterhin zu meiner damaligen "Mahnung" zur Vorsicht mit juristischen Aussagen, wegen eines zumindest denkbaren Haftungsrisikos im worst case. Nicht nur die deutsche community war bislang ja davon überzeugt, es gebe kein "Recht am Bild der eigenen Sache". Durch das jüngste Urteil des LG Stuttgart wurden wir nun schmerzhaft eines anderen belehrt.https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Urheberrechtsfragen#Neue_Gerichtsentscheidung_zum_deutschen_Recht_am_Bild_der_eigenen_Sache],[23] --Túrelio (talk) 19:44, 17 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

paintings by Renato Guttuso[edit]

Hi Turelio, the museum specifically authorized for WLM "the works of art" to be photographed, so as long as ALL the painters there are modern, it will be under their responsibility. I personally saw the authorization, including the modern paintings. You can ask for a copy at the WLM organizers. Something similar already applied for the modern collection of the bank Cariplo, where 99% images of modern italian painters on wikipedia come from. Ciao --Sailko (talk) 10:25, 18 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, Sailko. I'll leave it at that, though I'm still astonished. In Germany, we currently have just the "opposite" problem, as a museum successfully took a wikipedian to court, who had photographed old (out-of-copyright) exponates and uploaded the images to Commons. --Túrelio (talk) 10:29, 18 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Really? So have I to be in trouble for uploading images form the museums in Berlin? :-/ (btw, the category for Cariplo is Category:Artgate Fondazione Cariplo, if you want to have a look) --Sailko (talk) 10:41, 18 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Regrettably, yes. See [24], de:Reiss-Engelhorn-Museen#Fotos_durch_Besucher and File:Landgericht Stuttgart, Urteil vom 27. September 2016, Az. 17 O 690-15 (anonymisiert).pdf. They did object mainly against the permission for commercial use. So far, it was only one group of museums in Mannheim. Nevertheless, if the court-decision is not repealed, other museums may take the same path. This may change a lot for our photographing habits in Germany. --Túrelio (talk) 10:48, 18 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

File:Winterville Aerial View HRoe 2016.jpg[edit]

I saw you were able to fix the Holly Bluff file. Mind doing the same to this one? After several attempts to reupload, I tried a different file. Ended up with the same results. Still not sure what is happening. Thanks for the help though, much appreciated Heironymous Rowe (talk) 21:45, 18 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Done. The "magic" was simply that I downloaded your upload, then opened it in the graphics freeware IrfanView[25], used its JPEG optimizing function and uploaded the file to Commons. --Túrelio (talk) 06:50, 19 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, I appreciate the help. ;-) Heironymous Rowe (talk) 12:59, 19 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Photo: Bendor Grosvenor2.jpg[edit]

Hi, further to your message, this photo is my copyright, Bendor Grosvenor. I use the photo on my own website, www.arthistorynews.com Thanks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rodney Trotter27 (talk • contribs) 21:48, 19 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Rodney, but even on arthistorynews.com it is marked "(C) BBC". --Túrelio (talk) 06:22, 20 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Uploading a Photo with permission[edit]

I tried uploading a photo of Jim Labb and was told that I did not have permission. I emailed his representation asking for an updated photo and they emailed me back the photo. How can I prove this?

Warmly, Watermelonfree

Hi,

you need to forward the mail to permissions-commons@wikimedia.org . However, the permission needs to contain a clear statement 1) about the authorship and 2) needs to mention the choosen license. If it currently doesn't, you may request a "correct" permission from them by using this template: Commons:Email_templates#E-mail_template_for_release_of_rights_to_a_file. --Túrelio (talk) 20:38, 27 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Request for undeletion[edit]

Hello, I'd like to request for file undeletion for file you have deleted: File:Richard S. Jaffe.jpg. The permission email has been sent to OTRS yesterday by the author. It would be great if you could undelete it. Thanks for your time. ··· 👦 Rachmat04 · 💬 02:39, 3 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Done. --Túrelio (talk) 07:09, 3 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted pictures from politycznyislam.info[edit]

Hi Turelio you have deleted my photos from politycznyislam.info because of possible breach of law, but we run this page (we are CSPI Int. members), we have created them. Could you undelete them then? All the best Cubiacus — Preceding unsigned comment added by Cubiacus (talk • contribs) 13:22, 06 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Cubiacus,

in that case you need to send an email from your official politycznyislam.info address to permissions-commons@wikimedia.org in which you confirm your authorship or rightsholdership in the deleted images and your intent to license them under the choosen free license. Drop me a note, when you have sent that permission. --Túrelio (talk) 13:28, 6 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I have done it almost 2 months ago, as appointed representative of Bill Warner, the president of the whole organization Center for the Study of Political Islam - so we have his permission also - but without any effect for the moment. Is that enough? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Cubiacus (talk • contribs) 16:42, 08 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

File:Massimilianoirrati.png[edit]

Why, you deleted This file? It wasn't copyviol, butit was my creation. --Jhonny Bullo (talk) 10:55, 8 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I didn't delete it, but I tagged it as suspicious of copyvio. You declared it by yourself as "screenshottata da un video". Making a screenshot from a video, which has been made by somebody else, does not give you any own copyright. In addition, I found a lot of hits in the internet for this image. --Túrelio (talk) 14:14, 8 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

A picture of the Egyptian superstar Ruby[edit]

Hello, The picture you deleted was not a subject of copyright; as it belongs to a public figure and was taken from her own public website! What you have done is not the proper procedure in dealing with such a matter; you should have nominated it for deletion first before you deleted it. --Summerstar1 (talk) 13:24, 8 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hi,

I did not delete it, but only tagged it as "permission missing". You claimed it was from lagamagazine.com, but there is no such site. However, there is lahamag.com, which states "All rights reserved. © 2015 lahamag.com". --Túrelio (talk) 14:17, 8 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

File:Rafaela Pator Feminario 2016.jpg and File:Rafaela Pastor Feminario2016.jpg[edit]

Gracias! he cortado las fotos eliminando los carteles. ¿Puedes ayudarme informándome de que debo hacer cuando me equivoco en el nombre de la foto subida? El nombre es lo único que no puede editarse y modificarse, no?--mboix (talk) 16:45, 12 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I've moved the file to File:Rafaela Pastor Feminario 2016.jpg. --Túrelio (talk) 21:09, 12 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

File:Kalona Iowa School.jpg[edit]

Can you take a look at undeleting this? The license on Flickr is now okay. --Fæ (talk) 19:36, 12 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Done. --Túrelio (talk) 21:07, 12 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Ark[edit]

Hallo Túrelio, kannst du mal die Geschichte gelöschter Versionen von dieser Datei anschauen? Da hat irgendjemand 2014 etwas unter diesem Namen hochgeladen, jemand anderes hat es dann nach File:Ark and Torah in the library of Congregation B’nai Tikvah (Deerfield, Illinois).jpg verschoben, und seither ist es eine Weiterleitung. Eingebunden ist es in zahlreichen Artikeln der russischen Wikipedia, z.B. ru:Арк (Бухара), da geht es aber um ein ganz anderes Ark, nämlich die Zitadelle von Buchara. Das Bild war da schon in der Artikelversion von 2006 enthalten. Ich vermute, dass das Originalbild irgendwie beim Überschreiben/Verschieben verlorengegangen ist. Kannst du das mal nachprüfen? Grüße --Bjs (talk) 17:01, 17 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hallo Bjs,

das ursprünglich als Ark.jpg im Jahre 2006 hochgeladene Foto war wohl eine Album cover und wurde wegen URV-Verdacht (und weil es ungenutzt war) gelöscht. Du kannst es in dieser Googlesuche sehen. Das ist jedenfalls nicht die von dir erwähnte Zitadelle. In der Versionsgeschichte von Ark.jpg sehe ich nur diese eine Version. Die heutige Bildversion (diese Bibliothek) wurde erst 2014 als Ark.jpg von User:JenJ17 hochgeladen. --Túrelio (talk) 19:52, 17 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Äußerst seltsam, dass es dann schon 2006 mit der Beschreibung "Der vordere Eingang zur Zitadelle ..." im russischen Artikel eingebunden war. Ich hab es dort jetzt einfach gelöscht, ein richtiges Bild ist eh schon drin. --Bjs (talk) 20:23, 25 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

wilting rose image[edit]

Hi Turelio I like your work. Can I use your image of the wilting rose in my website www.wrestlingwiththeangel which is about people dealing with difficult illnesses. Your flower would be an image for not feeling too good!

Good Wishes River King 18 Nov 1016 — Preceding unsigned comment was added by 51.7.49.145 (talk) 22:01, 18 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hi River King,

sure. Just credit me somewhere near the image. --Túrelio (talk) 22:06, 18 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

File:Mur peint Bruxelles 2.jpg[edit]

Thanks for the restoration of File:Mur peint Bruxelles 2.jpg and to have informed of it. TCY (talk) 15:53, 21 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

File:Bxl, Eglise St-Augustin 1.JPG[edit]

Thanks for restoring the image. You did well. --Grentidez (talk) 16:57, 14 December 2016 (UTC)--Grentidez (talk) 16:57, 14 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Grüße[edit]

Hallo Túrelio,
ich wünsche Dir ein frohes und friedvolles Weihnachtsfest und hoffe,
dass Dir das neue Jahr 2017 viel Freude und viel Gutes bringt. Beste Grüße. Orchi (talk) 22:41, 23 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Happy holidays! 2017! ;)[edit]

		*** * * * * * * Happy Holidays 2017 ! * * * * * * ***
		* Merry Christmas! Happy New Year! * Joyeux Noël ! Bonne année! * Frohes Weihnachten! Frohes Neues Jahr! * Счастливого Рождества! С Новым годом! * ¡Feliz Navidad y próspero año nuevo! * Щасливого Різдва! З Новим роком! -- George Chernilevsky ^talk 18:14, 24 December 2016 (UTC) [reply]

Happy New Year, Túrelio![edit]

Happy New Year!

Túrelio, a new year is like a blank book, the pen is in your hands. It is your chance to write a beautiful story for yourself! Happy New Year 2017. Hedwig in Washington ^(mail?) 18:41, 31 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]