User talk:Túrelio/Archive14

From Wikimedia Commons, the free media repository
Jump to navigation Jump to search

Talkpage archive from 2019

Удалить файл[edit]

BGMY он скопипащенный Панн (talk) 15:02, 1 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Happy New 2019[edit]

Happy New 2019
Pan de jamón and Hallaca are a typical Christmas dish of my country, and I would like to share it with you, wishing you the best year 2019.. I would like to give you this humble recognition. Happy year 2019 dear!!! Photographer 01:44, 3 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Bildreparatur[edit]

Hallo Túrelio,
weißt Du, ob es hier eine Möglichkeit gibt, diese Bilder:
https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/Saxon_Vinkovic vom 19. und 20. Dezember 2018 zu reparieren?
Dank für Deine Mühe und Grüße.
Orchi (talk) 18:49, 3 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Orchi,
"reparieren" kann man das m.E. nicht. Dieses Problem ist an sich altbekannt, kam früher aber sehr selten vor. Seit gefühlt 1-2 Jahren ist es jedoch sehr häufig geworden bei neuen Uploads. Es wurde m.W. auch schon auf Meta bzw. dem techn. Äquivalent thematisiert, anscheinend hat sich aber nichts geändert. Ich habe den Verdacht, dass die Ursache im Upload-Prozess zu suchen ist, denn dass plötzlich so viel mehr Kameras bzw. Smartphones defekt geworden sind, ist eher unwahrscheinlich. Letztlich bleibt derzeit nur der erneute Upload. Ich habe den Hochlader darum gebeten. --Túrelio (talk) 10:15, 5 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
...vielen Dank für Deine erschöpfende Antwort. Beste Grüße. Orchi (talk) 14:49, 5 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Added permission “Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0”[edit]

“Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0”, photo uploaded on December 19, 2017. Your link Feb 24, 2018. --Korgolov (talk) 14:18, 7 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Korgolov, o.k. However, with this instagram date, the date for the image in the description is obviously wrong. Please enter the date, when the image had been shot. --Túrelio (talk) 14:35, 7 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Corrected. I put a template on the page for verification. To the photo is not removed later. Thank. --Korgolov (talk) 14:42, 7 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

1 image[edit]

Dear Turelio,

If you have some time, please help review this image below.

Commons does not have a single image of this species on its system....until this upload. Thank You, --Leoboudv (talk) 06:25, 8 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Borrado de imagen[edit]

Buenas tardes. Recientemente he creado una página informativa de un artista y su imagen ha sido borrada por una supuesta violación de derechos de autor. AL respecto, quiero aclarar que la imagen es otorgada por el propio artista para ser insertada dentro de su página y por lo tanto no se incumple ninguna de las normas de las licencias creative commons. Le agradecería que la imagen siga apareciendo en la página y no se procediese a su eliminación Muchas gracias, un saludo — Preceding unsigned comment added by AgenciaG (talk • contribs) 08:17, 9 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi AgenciaG,
the image in question was clearly labelled as "(C) SERGIO GONZALEZ". So, you need to provide a valid statement of permission to permissions-commons@wikimedia.org . --08:20, 9 January 2019 (UTC)

https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Deletion_requests/File:Сергей_Бурунов.jpg[edit]

скопипащенное фото, удали пожалуйста Панн (talk) 15:16, 9 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Deletion_requests/File:Грицак_в_с.jpg[edit]

тоже видно, что скопировано из интернета. Панн (talk) 15:25, 9 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Notice of copyright violation[edit]

Hello Turelio.

I just received notice that you have deleted File:George Crabtree in his office.jpg as a copyright violation. The reason given was: This file is a copyright violation for the following reason: Photo: Mark Lopez

Both Mark Lopez and I are employees of Argonne National Laboratory who produces the images we want to use on the profile.

How do I appeal this?

Thank you, — Preceding unsigned comment added by Justinhsb (talk • contribs) 16:46, 9 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Justinhsb (talk) 17:21, 9 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Justinhsb,
the best would be if Mark Lopez personally sends an email to permissions-commons@wikimedia.org in which he mentions the filename and states that he is the photographer (if that is true) and that he agrees that you uploaded it under the choosen free license. If you intend to upload more image from the Argonne National Laboratory, you might consider to verify your user account on Commons, see Commons:Email templates/Account verification. --Túrelio (talk) 22:37, 9 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
I'm working on this file File:George Crabtree in his office.jpg with an OTRS Ticket#2019010910007118 and it looks like this is actually a US government employee image. Please undelete so I can deal with it. Thanks Ww2censor (talk) 23:47, 9 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
✓ Done. --Túrelio (talk) 07:35, 10 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks, it is PD-USGov-DOE. Ww2censor (talk) 17:34, 10 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Resolved

Duplikate[edit]

Hallo Túrelio,
"User:Nemo_bis" mit seinem bot "User:AnankeBot" lädt von Flickr viele Bilder hoch, die bereits in Commons sind.
Ich habe beide User.- Seiten mit der Bitte versehen, auf Duplikate zu achten.
Der Zeitaufwand, die Duplikate zu finden und zu kennzeichnen ist erheblich.
Kann man das unterbinden??
Grüße. Orchi (talk) 22:08, 9 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Orchi,
das war die letzten Monate immer wieder Thema, siehe z.B. Commons:Village_pump#How_to_prevent_mass_duplicate_uploads?. Ob man inzwischen eine brauchbare Lösung (1. das überhaupt zu verhindern, 2. für die automatische Erkennung post-factum) gefunden hat, entzieht sich meiner Kenntnis. --Túrelio (talk) 22:31, 9 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Hallo Túrelio,
Danke für Deine Auskunft. User:Nemo will die Duplikate im nachhinein überarbeiten. Ich lege die Duplikate zunächst hier ab: Category:Duplicates by AnankeBot. Dann ist seine Arbeit sicherlich erleichtert. Beste Grüße. Orchi (talk) 15:04, 10 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

2 images[edit]

Dear Turelio,

Please review these images when you can. Thank You for your assistance.

Kind Regards, --Leoboudv (talk) 10:03, 11 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

✓ Done I went I ahead and approved these uploads. De728631 (talk) 13:10, 11 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

File:Галина Коньшина 2016.jpg[edit]

удали файл, так как он скопипащенный!!! С уважением, Панн (talk) 17:59, 11 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Already deleted by my colleague Jim. --Túrelio (talk) 06:50, 1 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Photo[edit]

Dear Túrelio,

Can you delete the Anne Roumanoff's photo or change it please ?

It's will be nice for her branding.

Best regards, Anne Roumanoff team. — Preceding unsigned comment added by GUILLOT (talk • contribs) 10:36, 21 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Which one Category:Anne Roumanoff? --Túrelio (talk) 08:49, 22 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Löschung[edit]

Hallo! Du hast netterweise zwei Bilder aus Category:Tower Barracks (Dülmen) gelöscht. Aus deinem Kommentar lese ich, dass dies bei den verbliebenen dreien wegen der Verwendung nicht möglich ist. Sollte man da nicht die entsprechenden Diskussionsseiten und die Löschanträge wieder löschen/entfernen? Du hast da mehr Erfahrung. --XRay talk 09:43, 22 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Du hast ne Mail. --Túrelio (talk) 14:44, 22 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Löschung von Bilddatei Atsushi Kaga[edit]

Hallo Túrelio,

bin neu bei Wikipedia und habe versucht ein Bild zu einem Artikel hinzuzufügen. Es handelt sich um dieses hier: File:Kaga-Atsushi-pigozzi-collection-197.jpg Ich habe in den Einstellungen und Upload Richtlinien nichts gefunden wie ich vermerken kann, dass wir die schrift. Erlaubnis des Künstlers haben seinen von (uns verfassten) Wikipedia Artikel mit einem Bild von seinem Werk zu bestücken...? Ich möchte es jetzt nicht noch einmal Versuchen, da mit Sperrung des Accounts gedroht wurde...

Bitte um Hilfe und vielleicht Erklärung wie es hochzuladen ist und das in diesem Fall zu vermerken wäre, vielen Dank schon mal! Grüße, Nihongaku Nihongaku (talk) 14:07, 22 January 2019 (UTC)22.01.2019[reply]

Hallo Nihongaku,
das Problem mit diesem Bild ist, dass sich die Genehmigung auf "non-commercial use and educational purpose" beschränkte. Gemäß unseren Lizenz-Richtlinien COM:L dürfen auf Commons nur Bilder hochgeladen werden, die zur beliebigen Verwendung, einschließlich kommerzieller Nutzung, freigegeben sind. Dieses Prinzip ist natürlich oft ein Hindernis, aber leider nicht zu ändern. --Túrelio (talk) 14:47, 22 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Löschung File:BWE EC 43 Berlin Lichterfelde Ost - Zuschnitt.jpg - Lizenzwechsel erfolgt[edit]

Hallo Túrelio, du hast die Datei File:BWE EC 43 Berlin Lichterfelde Ost - Zuschnitt.jpg gelöscht mit der Begründung, dass die Lizenz auf Flickr keine Bearbeitung des Bildes zuließe. Wenn man sich die Flickr-Seite anschaut, scheint das auf den ersten Blick auch zu stimmen. Dennoch ist dem nicht so.
Ich achte beim Hochladen von Flickr-Bildern hierher immer genauestens auf die Lizenz und schaue lieber drei Mal drauf. Daher habe ich versucht zu recherchieren, und Bingo: Für die Orginialdatei File:BWE EC 43 Berlin Lichterfelde Ost.jpg hat der FlickreviewR 2-Bot die Lizenz cc-by-sa-2.0 damals bestätigt gehabt.
Somit hat also der Flickr-User TGr_79 im Nachhinein die Lizenz auf by-nd geändert. Wie wir jedoch wissen, kann die einmal gewährte CC-Lizenz gar nicht zurückgezogen werden. Da ich den Zuschnitt damals extra für eine Artikelbebilderung erstellt hatte, würde ich anregen, die Datei wiederherzustellen und mit der Vorlage Flickr-change-of-license zu versehen. Beste Grüße --Nordlicht8 (talk) 21:43, 22 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Entlöscht. Danke für den Hinweis. --Túrelio (talk) 08:03, 23 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Diskussion löschen[edit]

Hallo! Bist du bitte so nett und löscht die beiden Diskussionsseiten: File talk:Dülmen, Tower Barracks -- 2014 -- 4290.jpg und File talk:Dülmen, Tower Barracks -- 2014 -- 4291.jpg. Zum Hintergrund und Verlauf hatte ich dir mehrere Mails geschickt. Die Info auf den Diskussionsseiten sollte besser weg. Bei der Prüfung musste ich feststellen, dass bei den meisten Quellen dort die Lizenzbedingungen nicht eingehalten wurden. Ich werde zwar nichts unternehmen, möchte aber auch niemanden mit diesen Beispielen verleiten. Danke! --XRay talk 11:54, 23 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

✓ Done. --Túrelio (talk) 13:58, 23 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

File:Lakshya Serial.jpg[edit]

Hi Túrelio. You deleted this file (at least one with the same name) back on December 13, 2018, but it's been reuploaded by another editor (my guess is that it's same editor using a new account). It still has the same issue as before and I think OTRS should verify authorship. -- Marchjuly (talk) 12:23, 24 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

File already deleted by my colleague Racconish. --Túrelio (talk) 13:26, 24 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for letting me know. -- Marchjuly (talk) 23:09, 26 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Mother Teresa Photo[edit]

Thanks for allowing the use of the Mother Teresa photo! We're going to use it in an educational kids show. — Preceding unsigned comment was added by 24.14.187.155 (talk) 07:22, 26 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

You are welcome. --Túrelio (talk) 11:49, 26 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

1 image[edit]

Dear Turelio,

Please review this single image if you can.

Thank You, --Leoboudv (talk) 10:17, 26 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Sure, ✓ Done. Was very busy (RL) for the first weeks of the new year. --Túrelio (talk) 11:49, 26 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Removing my image on Dundee railway station[edit]

Hi there,

I just wanted to let you know that the image you deleted on Dundee railway station infobox was actually a photo I had taken and it wasnt copyrighted material.

I am from Dundee and I often take pictures of the waterfront including the new railway station. I do not understand why you deleted it when it was clearly my own work.

~ KeyKing666 KeyKing666 (talk) 16:35, 26 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi,
I assume that you are talking about File:DundeeRail20180711.png. It had been deleted because the nominator claimed it to be a copy of this image. However, the images are totally different, which I did recognize only now. I've restored the image. Sorry for the hassle. --Túrelio (talk) 19:29, 26 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

image deleted[edit]

Dear Turelio, Please kindly restore my image submission (you deleted this morning). The site authorised me to use their logo on wikipedia. Thank You,

Pol Fyodor (talk) 12:23, 29 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @Pol Fyodor: , you need to forward the said permission to permissions-commons@wikimedia.org . --Túrelio (talk) 20:07, 2 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

WFUNA[edit]

Dear Turelio,

I saw you deleted my image at https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=File:WFUNA70.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1 I was talking to Patrick_Rogel about it here and was saying that other logos were accepted according to the pre 1987 rule. This one is indeed post 1987 but only the number 70 is added. I believe this add on doesn't make it a new logo as the main is still the WFUNA one. Please advise. thank you! --APG1984 (talk) 15:59, 29 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

any advice is welcome:). thx!!--APG1984 (talk) 12:07, 19 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry for my late response. I've now undeleted the file. If there are again objections, the file should go into a regular deletion-request, which allows input from other users. --Túrelio (talk) 13:01, 19 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

THANKS FOR YOUR ADVICE / YOU WERE RIGHT[edit]

Hey i am sorry wast your time about this picture/:SaQi organize a french festival.jpg you were rght i will remember your advice best regard — Preceding unsigned comment added by CLAIREYUAN2010 (talk • contribs) 19:44, 29 January 2019 (UTC)--CLAIREYUAN2010 (talk) 20:49, 29 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

File:MilckeMikolaj.jpg[edit]

Hi,

Could you undelete the file: File:MilckeMikolaj.jpg. An author of the picture sent proper agreement ticket:2019012810022281]. Cheers, Polimerek (talk) 20:54, 29 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @Polimerek: , I've restored the file. --Túrelio (talk) 20:06, 2 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

deletion of image JDD Still1 Bathtub.jpg[edit]

Hello Turelio,

I am writing about the original image from the page Joan Does Dynasty. I am the artist who created this work and the image is mine by copyright. Please advise how I can upload this image again without the risk of deletion.

Thank you very much,

J.B. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Juanitavid (talk • contribs) 20:37, 1 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

File:Gerrymandering_-_représentation_visuelle.svg[edit]

You speedydeleted File:Gerrymandering_-_représentation_visuelle.svg, but a normal deletionrequest would be better, expecially since I don't know any better version. If you undelete the file mentioned above please overwrite it with File:Gerrymandering_reprsentation_visuellepscov0_cs3ss_nsss_s_ppscov0_csbvpss.svg otherwise please also speedydeletete the other file.  — Johannes Kalliauer - Talk | Contributions 19:56, 2 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @JoKalliauer: , I've restored the file. --Túrelio (talk) 20:04, 2 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

File:Alchemilla xanthochlora herbarium (02).jpg[edit]

Dear Admin Turelio,

The uploader of this deleted NC image complained to me that the source license was free. But you and I saw the license and it was NC. Rasbak just made 1 mistake, I'm sure. Can you just copy and type in the original source link below here? Pity I did not file a regular Dr as in this case Thank You, --Leoboudv (talk) 20:14, 3 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Leoboudv,
I was out of country for a week. Here ist the source-entry for the deleted file: https://www.gbif.org/occurrence/1804476721 . --Túrelio (talk) 08:59, 12 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

File:Dr Otto von Bauer, Deutschbalte, Geschäftsführer Fabergé.jpg[edit]

Hello Túrelio, since the DR about https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Dr_Otto_von_Bauer,_Deutschbalte,_Geschäftsführer_Fabergé.jpg is finished, I'd request a closing of the deletion notice. Thank you, Lars barnewitz (talk) 11:45, 7 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hallo @Lars barnewitz: ,
in der Löschdiskussion hast du geschrieben, dass deine Urgroßmutter Veronika Bauer das Foto aufgenommen hat. Dann solltest du im Feld "Urheber" deinen durch ihren Namen ersetzen. Weisst du, in welchem Jahr sie verstorben ist? Das ist wichtig für die korrekte Wahl der Lizenz. --Túrelio (talk) 09:06, 12 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Hallo @Túrelio: ,
Vielen Dank für den Hinweis, das Feld "Urheber" habe ich dann bearbeitet. Veronika Bauer ist im Jahr 2000 verstorben. Das Jahr der Aufnahme selbst ist unbekannt, doch um 1920 herum geschätzt. Welche Lizenz sollte ich nun verwenden? --Lars barnewitz (talk) 10:20, 14 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Sergio Sarra works deleted[edit]

Dear Túrelio,

you marked all the pictures I uploaded of Sergio Sarra's works because of copyright violation. Anyway, I think there is a misunderstanding.

I mentioned as the source of the images the website of Archivio Studio Sarra where there are some of these photos. The website is copyrighted, but the "Archivio Studio Sarra" give me a slightly different copy of each image intended for free Creative Commons use by the owner himself. So the real source of the image is simply "Archivio Studio Sarra".

The images intended for free Creative Commons use by the owner himself are:

  • Sergio Sarra.jpg
  • File:Earvin 'Magic' Johnson, Sergio Sarra, Darnell Valentine.jpg
  • File:Sergio Sarra, two Ipnlogic 5, 2013.jpg
  • File:Sergio Sarra, Relationship, 2006.jpg
  • File:Sergio Sarra Table sculpture.jpg
  • File:Umberto Curi, La forza dello sguardo.jpg
  • File:Sergio Sarra, iceberg 7 - study no.2, 2017.jpg
  • File:1 - Aperto '93, Venice Biennale, installation view.jpg
  • File:Sergio Sarra, Psichedelyc garden 1 - Psichedelyc garden 3, 2008.jpg
  • File:Sergio Sarra, Involuntary commitment, 2010.jpg
  • File:Sergio Sarra, Pettino, planimetria di Contrada Selva, 2011.jpg
  • File:Sergio Sarra in studio.jpg
  • File:Paesaggio, 1993, pittura ad olio su tela, 40 x 53 cm. Aperto '93, XLV Esposizione Internazionale d’Arte di Venezia, La Biennale di Venezia, Corderie dell’Arsenale, 1993. Foto
  • File:Sergio Sarra - Caparsino.jpg
  • File:Sergio Sarra - LSD.jpg
  • File:Sergio Sarra - Elisabetta.jpg
  • File:Sergio Sarra - due Ipnologic.jpg
  • File:Sergio Sarra - Italian garden and fountain.jpg
  • File:Sergio Sarra - Italian garden with child.jpg
  • File:Sergio Sarra - Players in the Mediterranean.jpg
  • File:Sergio Sarra - D. dal vero n. 2.jpg
  • File:Sergio Sarra - Psychedelic garden.jpg
  • File:Sergio Sarra - EWHA Womans University.jpg
  • File:Sergio Sarra - Vetta del Monte.jpg

I would like to understand how to correct the source of images (from sergiosarra.it to Archivio Studio Sarra) and remove the copyright violation tagging for all the pictures mentioned above. Obviously, I can prove that the images I uploaded are the copies intended for free Creative Commons use by the owner himself, the "Archivio Studio Sarra".

Kind regards, Synenvi (talk) 11:57, 11 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @Synenvi: ,
in such cases, the uploader (you) needs to provide written evidence for the claimed free license. In your case it seems to be complicated by the fact that
1) a number of the image files were obviously (per its EXIF data) shot by different photographers, such as MARIO DI PAOLO, Ito Lim, Gino Di Paolo, Elisabetta Sarra, Attilio Di Daniele, etc.
2) in some of your uploads the author-name in the description (by you) is not identical to the one in the camera data. For example in File:Sergio Sarra - due Ipnologic.jpg it's "Franco Sarra" versus "Attilio Di Daniele".
3) a number of your uploads are photographies of works of art, such as drawings/paintings, which have a copyright by their own, usually hold by the artist/painter.
So, first you should ask the Archivio Studio Sarra whether they really have the full copyright/permission from all involved artists and photographers to release these images under a free license, which allows also commercial re-use (see COM:L). (Remember, mere ownership of a print or even of the original work of art does not equal having the copyright. Only the autor/artist can give his/her copyright away.) If that is the case, then you need to correct/complete the description of each of your uploads by clearly writing who is the (mere) photographer and who is the artist/painter/etc.
A template for a permission in Italian, you find here: Commons:Modello_richiesta_di_permesso#Pubblicazione_con_licenza_libera.
--Túrelio (talk) 09:24, 12 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Hi @Túrelio: and thank you for your reply,
today I spoke directly with the artist Sergio Sarra and his wife Elisabetta Sarra (they are Archivio Studio Sarra).
To avoid future problems with photographers and reports as yours, we decided by mutual agreement to remove all the photos except for File:Sergio Sarra.jpg. The photo was taken from Elisabetta Sarra and represents the artist Sergio Sarra walking. The photographer Elisabetta Sarra (and the artist Sergio Sarra) agree to publish the above-mentioned work under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International.
Elisabetta Sarra will send, via the 'official' e-mail address info@sergiosarra.it, the permission in the formula that you kindly linked to me and I upload the description and others info for the file File:Sergio Sarra.jpg.
Is this process enough to remove the tagging for the file above-mentioned or it needs something else? Also, can you tell me how can I proceed to delete all the other photos instantly?
Thank you, Synenvi (talk) 18:01, 12 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Photo in SVG[edit]

https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:Log&page=File%3ATonyBellew.png

"11:33, 25 January 2019 Túrelio (talk | contribs) deleted page File:TonyBellew.png (Exact or scaled-down duplicate: File:TonyBellew.svg) (thank) (global usage; delinker log)"

No photo should ever be in SVG format.. - Alexis Jazz ping plz 00:58, 12 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi,
sure. However, in this case the uploader himself (Mentoss281) had requested the speedy-deletion of File:TonyBellew.png. As it's already some weeks ago, I don't exactly remember my rationale for choosing the duplicate-process; may be that the png still had uses. Its similar with the File:TonyBellew.svg, which I had deleted before the png, as it had been requested for speedy-deletion by the uploader himself due to "Некорректно отображается". --Túrelio (talk) 08:58, 12 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Löschung[edit]

Hallo! Bist du wohl so nett und löscht diese Diskussionsseite wieder: File talk:Dülmen, Kirchspiel, Mini -- 2016 -- 5129-35.jpg. Ich hatte lange überlegt, ob ich das Bild als PoD eintragen soll oder nicht. Da ich etliche andere mit Beschriftung fand, habe ich es dann mit denen, auf denen der BMW Mini zu sehen ist, auch getan. Und prompt kam ein Kommentar, der aber nicht wirklich zielführend ist - was auch immer damit bezweckt werden soll. Er klärt nicht auf und eigentlich stört er nur. Danke! --XRay talk 11:52, 12 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

✓ Done. --Túrelio (talk) 11:19, 13 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Danke! --XRay talk 11:21, 13 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Deletion of File:Wapt.jpg[edit]

Hi Túrelio,

you have recently deleted the image File:Wapt.jpg because of copyright violation (Copyright violation: https://www.wapt.fr/fr/doc/wapt-concept/index.html#diagramme-complet-du-fonctionnement-de-wapt). Simon Fonteneau (wikipedia username Skarpiste) is the author of the image and is the one that has done the upload. Is it ok for you if we re-upload the schema with better explanation of copyright source? Moreover, if Simon can re-upload, he would like to change the name something more specific, since WAPT is also an american TV station (something like "WAPT deployment software - workflow schema.jpg").

Thanks,

Cardondenis (talk) 09:47, 13 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Cardondenis,
it might be better, if you ask Simon Fonteneau to send a confirmation of his authorship (and eventual relation to wapt.fr) to permissions-commons@wikimedia.org (content of email is treated confidentially, will not be published). When he has sent it, you can drop me a notice, so that I can temporarily un-delete File:Wapt.jpg. While the permission is processed by our OTRS volunteers, the file can be renamed and the description be adapted. --Túrelio (talk) 11:18, 13 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Will it be deleted?[edit]

Hello. My two drawings File:Dibujo de John Rawls.jpg and File:Gustavo Bueno Alvaro Marques.jpg recently have been marked as derivative works, which they are, I admit, but, will they be deleted for copyright? There are some art works derivated on wikipedia as well, like Derrida Dibujo.jpg , Derrida-by-Pablo-Secca.jpg and Foucalt.png. But, even still, I hope they wont be erased. Thank you. --Alvaro Marques Hijazo (talk) 01:39, 15 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I will remove the no-source tag, but put them into a regular deletion-request, which allows a discussion and input from other users. It's not my intent to have them deleted, but to be sure they are legal. --Túrelio (talk) 07:35, 15 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Uploading a file for a third party[edit]

Hi,
I have a friend of mine, who's not a computer jedi and who's happy to share his old pictures with WP. But he doesn't want to create an account and start to learn (he's +70) of to use WP.
Is there any possibility (by filling a form for instance) to prove his agreement with the licence?
Thanks for your answer. Davric (talk) 11:24, 17 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @Davric: , sure. He could authorize you to upload his photos, provided they are his own work. The easiest way would be if he would give you all the images, he wants to be uploaded, in one batch. Immediately after uploading them, you should prepare a statement of permission, using this template: Commons:Email_templates#Email_message_template_for_release_of_rights_to_a_file, in which you need to list the file-names of all these uploads and then either send it per email to him or, if he does not have email, you would need to print it out and send him the print. He then needs to date and sign the permission document and either send it per email directly to permissions-commons@wikimedia.org or send the print to you, you need to scan and send it to address mentioned above. --Túrelio (talk) 08:47, 18 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Restore Udo_Dahmen_Foto_Arthur_Bauer.jpg[edit]

Hi Túrelio, you have deleted the File:Udo_Dahmen_Foto_Arthur_Bauer.jpg on Commons. Permission and license has been submitted by Arthur Bauer to "permissions-de@wikimedia.org" Please help restore the photo. Thanks. MKBam (talk) 13:26, 18 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I can restore it conditionally. However, it may be deleted again as there is a huge back-log with OTRS permissions. --Túrelio (talk) 13:39, 18 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks, Túrelio! MKBam (talk) 14:48, 18 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

C3[edit]

Hi. There are more empty cats to delete. Danke. --E4024 (talk) 14:39, 18 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for notifying. --Túrelio (talk) 14:43, 18 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

File recover (File:COAF SMART Center Hayk Babayan.jpg)[edit]

Dear Participants, please recover file named COAF SMART Center Hayk Babayan.jpg as there was an OTRS letter sent on February 13, 2019. You have deleted the file. Could you please recover it based on the letter?

Thank you in advance. — Preceding unsigned comment added by AnukEvo (talk • contribs) 07:51, 21 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi,
I have no access to OTRS. First, an OTRS volunteers needs to give feedback to the mentioned letter or drop me a note. --Túrelio (talk) 08:16, 21 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

File: N.Ermekbayev.jpg[edit]

Добрый день Turelio. Вы удалили изображение N.Ermekbayev.jpg. Указанное изображение является общедоступным без ограничееий авторскиx прав. Прошу восстановить. Спасибо за понимание. — Preceding unsigned comment was added by 2.133.60.158 (talk) 17:30, 24 February 2019 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment was added by 2.133.60.158 (talk) 17:32, 24 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Unknown, the problem is that the source-website[1] says: "2009 – 2019 © Министерство обороны Республики Казахстан Все права защищены", which translates to "... All rights reserved". If you insist, I can undelete it and put it into a regular deletion-request.--Túrelio (talk) 10:19, 25 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Medals[edit]

Good day! This File:Zv 3 sl.jpg=[2]? This file is probably taken from this site as well as other's downloaded by that user. Under no permission to these files, as this 3D objects and bad metadata. Is it better to nominate for delete? What do you think? --Чорний Кіт (talk) 08:44, 25 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi AlexKozur,
I am not sure, as the article on vto-orden.com.ua seems to be from 2018, whereas our upload is from 2017. Anyway, feel free to nominate it for regular deletion, which might attract more inpit from others. --Túrelio (talk) 10:15, 25 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

File recover File:Brief Bevelhebber Nederlandse Strijdkrachten.jpg[edit]

Dear Túrelio,

See here; can you recover this file because it is written in a public function and therefore not depending on the '70 year ago'-death of the author?

Thanks in advance, Encycloon (talk) 09:35, 5 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Ok. However, IMO you should add this information to the author name in the description of the image. --Túrelio (talk) 10:10, 5 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Viquimarató Dones del teixit comercial i empresarial[edit]

Please, can you revert the deletion of Category:Viquimarató Dones del teixit comercial i empresarial? I will upload the images today. --Davidpar 13:17, 9 March 2019 (UTC)

✓ Done, but the cat is still empty. --Túrelio (talk) 19:56, 12 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Wooferendum[edit]

Why did you delete the category? It was neither acccidental, test, or any other sppedy criterion. It contained 69 files, that have been moved to wooferendum march 2019. That move makes sense, if the user wanted to add the sub-category for the october 2018 wooferendum, or the sub-cat for a future wooferendum. As far as I know there exists no content from the october wooferendum, and I don't expect that there will be another wooferendum, a as brexit is abput to happen in march 2019. It still might habe been possible to redirect wooferendum to wooferendum march 2019, but it is not ok to delete the cat as nonsense. --C.Suthorn (talk) 17:02, 12 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

The cat had been tagged as SDG1 by User:B dash and this rationale is automatically taken over into the deletion-log, if there was no manual change by the deleting admin. In addition, when I deleted it, the cat was surely empty, which is in itself a valid deletion-rationale. However, as this is not a question of faith for me, I've now undeleted it. --Túrelio (talk) 19:56, 12 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Bitte um Überprüfung[edit]

Hallo Túrelio,
Könntest Du bitte diese zwei Bilder auf korrektes Hochladen überprüfen:

Die Bilder sind wohl identisch mit diesen Bildern:

bei orchidspecies.com
Beste Grüße und Dank für Deine Mühe. Orchi (talk) 16:27, 14 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Wenn ich die Angaben auf orchidspecies.com richtig deute, sind die beiden Uploads wohl als copyvios einzustufen, falls User:Dracaenaworldwide nicht mit diesem T. Damen identisch ist. --Túrelio (talk) 16:52, 14 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]
...reicht die Aussage auf der Benutzerseite von Dracaenaworldwide? Orchi (talk) 17:29, 14 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Orchi, hmm, eigentlich nicht so ganz, zumal hotmail-Adressen hier kein so hohes Ansehen haben. Vielleicht stehe ich auf dem Schlauch, aber ich bringe dracaenaworldwide@hotmail.com und "T. Damen" nicht unter einen Hut. Ah, jetzt habe ich die Antwort von Dracaenaworldwide auf seiner Disku gesehen. Offenbar hatte ich dich von vornherein mißverstanden. Anyway, ich habe ihm empfohlen, eine Mail an OTRS zu schicken, um solche Probleme in Zukunft zu vermeiden.--Túrelio (talk) 20:20, 14 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]
...danke für Deinen Einsatz zur Lösung meiner Frage. Der User hat begonnen, bei Wikispecies konstruktiv einzusteigen. Grüße. Orchi (talk) 12:28, 15 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Picture removal due to copyright violation[edit]

Hello there. I've noticed that a picture uploaded: file:Lineage 16.0 Screenshot.png on https://vi.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=LineageOS&oldid=50539262 was deleted by you due to copyright violation. I'm quite confused since the picture was taken on my own phone and did not expect your deletion. I case that I need to prove it's my own work, how can I? I am looking forward to hear clarification from you. Regards. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Linein3 (talk • contribs) 13:46, 15 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Linein3,
as already hinted at your talkpage the file File:Lineage 16.0 Screenshot.png has been deleted from Commons due to suspicion of being a copyvio. Though we do not doubt that you performed the screenshot by yourself, creating a screenshot does not automatically give you the copyright of what you made a reproduction of. The deleted image showed a typical smartphone screen-page, which is usually copyrighted. Though en:LineageOS is open-source, this is not necessarily valid for such "design" material, as it usually is not produced by the OS programers, but taken from other sources. So, you need to provide evidence that this screen-page/background image also falls under an open-source license. --Túrelio (talk) 13:59, 15 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

deletion of Rise of bros / Michael jackson[edit]

Dear sir wondering if you remove this page I uploaded it by mistake — Preceding unsigned comment added by Morganstanley1970 (talk • contribs) 14:40, 15 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

File:Bros 1988 article Michael Jackson.jpg now deleted. --Túrelio (talk) 22:43, 15 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Deleting of image: Dietiminsta.jpg[edit]

Hello,

You've deleted an image called: Dietiminsta.jpg

This image has been deleted Without any evidence and has beennrightfully uploaded by the owner of the photo. The image is available on Instagram @dietim_ and is his own property.

Usage of the image has been requested by Tim van Teunenbroek @Dietim_ and hereby requested the undeleting of earlier mentioned image. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Luxurylifenl (talk • contribs)

Hi Luxurylifenl,
the claimed source[5] does not show any evidence of a free license. Merely publishing an image on a website does not mean that is is under a free license, as required for all uploads to Commons. In addition, there is no verifiable evidence that you, Luxurylifenl, are identical to the owner of the mentioned Instagram account.
So, even if you are, you need to send a statement from the said Instagram account address to permissions-commons@wikimedia.org in which you need to state 1) that you are either the original photographer of the uploaded image (or that you have obtained the full copyright from the photographer), 2) that you want to release the image under a free licence (see Commons:Licensing), which allows anybody to use this image, even commercially, provided the license terms are met. --Túrelio (talk) 14:20, 19 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

「折居社・由来の説明看板.JPG」削除の件("Orii-sha(Orii-Shrine),explanation signboard of origin. JPG"matter of deletion)[edit]

Túrelio様へ。
貴方が今回行った「折居社・由来の説明看板.JPG」の削除に憤っております。貴方は自分（BATACHAN）がOTRSに申請した最新の内容を見ていないのですか？
自分が投稿した写真が過去2回にわたって削除されたのは、OTRSの方針から外れた著作権侵害によるものである事はきちんと理解したので、最新の申請に関しては、OTRSの方針に則った許諾を姥神大神宮（現在の宮司による）からきちんと正式なものを頂き、OTRSにメール送信し、それをきちんと行った上で著作権者の名称を表示して投稿していたはずです。
しかも貴方はかなり卑怯とも言える手を使って削除を敢行してしまいました。貴方は自分がどうしても所用で反論意見を述べる暇が取れない状態で有無を言わずに削除を敢行したのです。
貴方の理論は「一度削除が行われたファイルは、たとえOTRSの方針に従ったものであっても絶対に削除する」なのでしょうか？こちらがOTRSの方針に従うべく努力してきた行為を何だと思っているのでしょうか？
自分が当面行える手段として、「該当ファイルの削除撤回」を方針に従って申し出ましたが、貴方の行ってしまった「罪」とも言える行為をどうぞ恥じて下さい。
（以下、Googke翻訳による英文翻訳。ある程度の確認は致しましたが、誤変換が起こり得る事をご了承下さい。）
(Hereafter, the English translation by Google translation. Although we confirmed to some extent, please understand that misconversion may occur.)
For Túrelio.
I am angry for the deletion of "Orii-sha(Orii-Shrine),explanation signboard of origin. JPG（Japanese:折居社・由来の説明看板.JPG）" which you went this time. Did you not see the latest content that you ( BATACHAN) applied to OTRS?
I understand that the photos I have posted have been deleted twice in the past because of copyright infringement that was out of OTRS's policy, so for the latest application, a license based on OTRS's policy was used. You should get something formal from Ubagami-Shrine (by the current priest), send it by e-mail to OTRS, post it properly, and display the name of the copyright holder and post it.
Moreover, you have attempted to delete using a hand that can be said to be quite sloppy. You made the deletion without saying if you could not afford to give a rebuttal opinion in a necessary way.
Your theory is, "A file that has been deleted once is absolutely deleted even if it complies with the OTRS policy"? What do you think of the actions we have been striving to follow OTRS policy?
As a means that I can do for the time being, I offered "deletion deletion of the corresponding file" according to the policy, but please be ashamed of the act that can be said as "sin" that you have done.--BATACHAN (talk) 00:16, 24 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Question regarding file deletion, re-uploading, and proper use[edit]

Hello, I am acting as proxy for the artists and company whose pages I am updating and have been given permission to upload the covers. I have so far successfully re-uploaded one of the files through "Uploading a work that is not free content, under a fair use rationale (cover of a music album or single)" for Thousand-Faced Beast, but cannot link it to the Chinese Wikipedia. Please provide more explanation on how this can be done properly. Thank you.

Hi Longjiangmei,
Commons does not (and legally cannot) allow upload of fair-use material. This must be done locally, provided the local project has an exemption policy. Otherwise, the only way to upload such materials (album covers) is to obtain a valid permission from the rigths holder (usually the record company) and to forward it to permissions-commons@wikimedia.org . --Túrelio (talk) 11:10, 25 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Request un-delete for Sirin Hamsho.jpg[edit]

Dear Turelio,

Last week I tried to upload a couple of pictures for some topics and they have been all deleted. I understand some of them may have copyrights and not free license. However, after further investigation I found that the original source of Sirin Hamsho is not violating any copyrights, and is free to use. therefore, could you please undelete it.

As a side note, if in the future I wanted to upload more pictures and I reached out to their owners for approval. Do I need to submit the proof for their approval in order to protect the photos from deletion? (i.e should written approval needed from owners in order to keep their works/photos on Wikimedia?

Thanks — Preceding unsigned comment added by HanadiAslan (talk • contribs) 14:08, 25 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi HanadiAslan,
first of all, you should not claim other people's work, even if used with their permission, as your own work; as you did with File:Sirin Hamsho.jpg.
Now, if you want to upload this image on Commons, first you do need to identify who is the creator/photographer. You then need to ask him for a permission, compliant with Commons' requirements, see COM:L. If the copyright-holder is willing to give you such a permission, you may prepare the proper permission-text by using the template at Commons:Email templates. You then need to send this to the copyright-holder and ask him to date/sign it and to send it back to permissions-commons@wikimedia.org . --Túrelio (talk) 14:38, 25 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

File:Gilbert Houngbo.jpg[edit]

Please restore this image for which we have an OTRS ticket 2019032510003721. Thanks in advance. Ww2censor (talk) 17:14, 26 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

✓ Done. --Túrelio (talk) 19:03, 26 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Brook Mullins Photo deleted -- no reason to do so - -pls recheck thanks[edit]

Hi -- could you be so kind to have another look at this image you deleted -- it is not violating any licenses. I have permission in email from festival, photographer (can send), and it is already on public domain on flicker to use https://www.flickr.com/photos/chelseafilmfestival/31681243888/in/album-72157702813100885/ Thanks! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Geordiedave2019 (talk • contribs) 03:27, 27 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Geordiedave2019,
in case you are relating to File:Joanna Pickering and Brock Mullins.jpg, which wasn't uploaded by you, but by User:BB392017, it is NOT public domain, but "All rights resvered" on Flickr[6]. If you have a valid permission from the photographer, then forward it to permissions-commons@wikimedia.org . --Túrelio (talk) 07:31, 27 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

File:André du Bus 2019.jpg[edit]

Hi Tùrelio,

Recently, you deleted the File:André du Bus 2019.jpg that André du Bus would like to see displayed on his page.

Here is the message : This file is a copyright violation for the following reason: own work? https://pbs.twimg.com/profile_images/1065634717985382403/Zbv3I9JS_400x400.jpg Wikimedia Commons takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing.

I don't see what copyright this is violating ?

The file contains his own picture, he is owner of it and use it of course on various sites, firstly on his own website : www.andredubus.be. What else is necessary to make this picture acceptable ?

Xavier

Xdequinze (talk) 11:51, 27 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Xdequinze,
actually, I didn't delete it, but only tagged it as copyvio-suspected. Anyway, you claimed it as own work, but now you suggest it's from the depicted. Being the "owner" of a photo can mean different things, especially if you didn't create it by yourself, which seems unlikely. In addition, uploads to Commons need to be free for everybody to use it, even commercially (not just for a Wikipedia article). So, if this image comes from the depicted person, you need to ask him for a permission under a free license (compliant to our license requirements), which then needs to be sent to permissions-commons@wikimedia.org . --Túrelio (talk) 17:06, 27 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

File:Tomorrow's Star Solo.jpg[edit]

I am representing the company who owns the copyrights to this poster and movie. I have ALREADY filed for OTRS subst:OP and a Release of Rights to Files e-mail has ALREADY been sent by Meimeiwawa Multimedia to Wikimedia Commons before your request. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Longjiangmei (talk • contribs) 08:40, 28 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Ok. Next time add the OTRS template at upload. --Túrelio (talk) 08:51, 28 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Wikilivres[edit]

Hi! I noticed the userbox in your page is pointing to a broken link to Wikilivres. This is the new one: https://wikilivres.org/ ~★ nmaia d 08:50, 28 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

o.k.?[edit]

Hallo Túrelio, ist die Aktivität dieses Users User:LKLNs3if3d ok.? Grüße. Orchi (talk) 16:12, 29 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Orchi, ich kann darin jedenfalls keinen Sinn erkennen und habe die verbliebenen Edits sämtlich zurückgesetzt. --Túrelio (talk) 19:39, 29 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]
...ich danke Dir. Orchi (talk) 21:26, 29 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

File:Elftal van Tsjecho-Slowakije.jpg[edit]

Please restore File:Elftal van Tsjecho-Slowakije.jpg or at least its description, as it was better than in new file.Jklamo (talk) 02:47, 31 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Jklamo,
I've compared the description of the deleted File:Elftal van Tsjecho-Slowakije.jpg with the one of the current version, and found it, at least now, to be identical. --Túrelio (talk) 07:25, 31 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Hi, you are right, I just did not notice another version of multilingual descriptions. So all is OK, sorry to bother you.Jklamo (talk) 12:23, 31 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Fontana La Nave[edit]

Hi there. I'm writing to notice you that all files depicting Fontana La Nave were improperly tagged for speedy deletion. A past deletion request had already clarified that the sculpture – built by the Comune of Pescara in the 1980s – belongs to the Italian public administration whose copyright rights expire after 20 years. As result of the tag, some files were deleted by you (they are File:La Nave di Cascella, Pescara.jpg, File:La Nave di Cascella, Pescara (3).jpg, File:La nave di Cascella - panoramio.jpg, File:La nave di Cascella - panoramio (1).jpg). Is there a way for you to restore them?--Earthh (talk) 23:12, 5 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

✓ Done. However, in order to pervent this misconception in the future, I would recommend you to put some short notice about the special legal status of this sculpture into the description. --Túrelio (talk) 18:55, 6 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Please close deletion request and mark as keep[edit]

Hi Túrelio, I had opened a deletion request on one of my files, but that issue was resolved and is not an issue after all. Please close the deletion request and mark file as keep. I apologize if I am doing this incorrectly, I am a novice at this. Here is the file: File:St_Guinefort.jpg Thank you RClark (talk) 20:34, 6 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, no problem. ✓ Done. --Túrelio (talk) 06:59, 7 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Google Earth images[edit]

Hi Túrelio, I see that The Wikimedia Commons page File:Teror 1-2 (32430145457).jpg has been deleted on 8 April 2019 by you. I assume that clarification has been or will be received from Google Earth overriding the impression given by: https://www.google.com/permissions/geoguidelines/ that with proper attribution the file(s) are free to use and re-publish. Please advise so that I/we know for future applications. Bengt Nyman (talk) 07:42, 8 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Bengt, I've to admit that I've performed this deletion routinely, i.e. without much consideration. However, the content of the above linked Google site seems to confirm our practice of not allowing Google Earth/Maps content on Commons, as it reads to be a non-commercial and non-derivative permission. Correct me if I'm wrong. --Túrelio (talk) 08:10, 8 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Strange alignment[edit]

Hi, Túrelio! Would you look at File:Gentleman Jim sbt.jpg? I've corrected the image misalignment, and uploaded the corrected image? The problem I'm having (after clearing cache) is that the old misaligned image shows up on Staffordshire Bull Terrior in en.Wikipedia. I can't figure out why and was hoping you could help. Atsme✍🏻📧 11:07, 9 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Atsme,
that's likely just a cache problem. The large image on Commons and the image on :en look the same (wrt alignment) as your thumb in the version history (19:22). --Túrelio (talk) 12:00, 9 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion[edit]

Hi there Túrelio. Hope you are fine. I wanted to let you know that this file is actually unused. The page seems to retrieve a cached version instead of an updated one; if you click on any of the links, it will not show this particular image, which was included in creator:Diego Grez Cañete but I removed it, in order to have this file deleted. --küñall (nütramyen) 19:25, 9 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Ok. I've reverted my edits to your last edit and then converted the speedy to a regular deletion-request, as the file does not qualify for speedy. --Túrelio (talk) 19:33, 9 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted page File:Demetrius-Jifunza.jpg[edit]

Hi Túrelio, hope this finds you well. I'm writing to let you know that Everett Dennison, the copyright holder of the image Demetrius-Jifunza.jpg has provided permission to use the image and is providing a well-known licenses in accordance with Commons:

Creative Commons license icons and names CC-Zero-badge.svg Zero Public Domain, "No Rights Reserved" CC-BY icon.svg Attribution CC-BY-SA icon.svg Attribution-ShareAlike

File:Demetrius-Jifunza.jpg From Wikimedia Commons, the free media repository This page has been deleted. The deletion, protection, and move log for the page are provided below for reference.

19:12, 10 April 2019 Túrelio talk contribs deleted page File:Demetrius-Jifunza.jpg (Copyright violation: external source, no license, no permission.) (thank) (global usage; delinker log) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jasonb80 (talk • contribs) 21:13, 10 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Jasonb80,
did you or he forward the said permission to permissions-commons@wikimedia.org ? --Túrelio (talk) 06:53, 11 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Retrait du lien Soothsayer_1986.jpg, supprimé[edit]

Bonjour Turelio, je suis le bassiste du groupe et cette image est notre propriété depuis 1986. le site http://dark-world.ru/bands/Soothsayer.php a tout simplement fait un article sur nous.

SVP bien vouloir accepter à notre demande et rendre disponible notre image Soothsayer_1986.jpg

merci pour votre bon travail. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Soothsayer troopsofhate (talk • contribs) 21:43, 14 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Soothsayer troopsofhate,
we are talking about the (now deleted) image File:Soothsayer 1986.jpg, right?
If you have obtained the full rights from the photographer, you should send a statement of permission from your official band address to permissions-commons@wikimedia.org in which you should mention the filename, the name of the photographer and the free license, under which you want to release the image. --Túrelio (talk) 09:34, 15 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

2 images[edit]

Dear Turelio,

Please review these 2 images when you can.

Thank You, --Leoboudv (talk) 01:12, 15 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

✓ Done. --Túrelio (talk) 09:34, 15 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

User repeatedly claiming copyright for images they do not own[edit]

Hi, apologies if this isn't the correct way to go about this but I'm new to Wikimedia. I run a website and was approached by someone called Al Rose who appears to run a site called TodayTesting. This person claimed that an image I had used on my website was owned by his website and that I was required to link to his site if I wished to use it. As proof he sent me a link to a Wikimedia Commons page in which he'd crudely uploaded the image here and attributed it to his own website with a fake date. The user who uploaded the image was this one (presumably Al Rose under a different name): https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/User_talk:JerryFinley

If you look through his history you can see he has done this on numerous occasions. They all fit the same pattern - taking an image off a website like Pixabay, uploading it to Wikimedia Commons with the correct attribution (to Pixabay, etc.) then later performing a minor edit in which he changes the attribution to TodayTesting. They all also seem to have fake dates - they were uploaded to Wikimedia Commons recently, but have dates listed much longer ago to make it appear that TodayTesting has always owned the copyright. The point in all this is obviously to try and trick website owners like myself into linking back to his website so he can move up Google rankings. He's doing this repeatedly and is still actively doing it as far as I can tell. Personally, I just ignored his request by email but it annoyed me to such an extent that I signed up here to report it.

I added some deletion requests to recent images he's uploaded, but clearly the user should be banned and I'd suggest anything linking to TodayTesting in future is likely not actually owned by this website. Again, apologies if you're not the correct person to send this to - I've reported this to you because I understand you previously dealt with this person in the past here: https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/User_talk:T%C3%BArelio#File:Social_Media_Marketing.jpg_Is_a_CC0_File

Thanks! Hapol928 (talk) 02:21, 16 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

File:Mark Smith MLA AB.JPG[edit]

Please see Commons:Deletion requests/File:Dave Hanson AB MLA.JPG. All the photos, including this one, were released by the political party under the license they were uploaded under. Connormah (talk | contribs) 01:10, 18 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Restored. Thanks for notifying. --Túrelio (talk) 06:31, 18 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

File:音乐剧演员阿云嘎.jpg[edit]

Hello, I am Chinese, my English is not very good. So, let me use Chinese to explain.

File:音乐剧演员阿云嘎.jpg这张照片就是上传者他本人拍摄的，他的微博名称是BONBONNIERE|阿云嘎的糖果盒，遗憾的是，他的那张照片被某些媒体盗用，导致你们误以为那张照片是复制的。我希望你们能够恢复那张照片。--Masdggg (talk) 02:19, 18 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Masdggg,
well, a deletion-request (speedy ) had been made by your compatriot WCAM and I had performed this request. However, as an act of good-will I will undelete the file and put it into a regular (slow) deletion-request, where you can exchange your arguments with other contributors. --Túrelio (talk) 07:23, 18 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

La Gitane d'Henri Matisse[edit]

Hello, it seems to me that the copyright of the file La Gitane d'Henri Matisse have not been violated to the extent that this work of art is published on virtually all encyclopedic content (books, website, and others) and that is the reason why i added this file in Commons and also it seems to me that already more than 70 years after the death of the author, thank you, good regards. Filo gèn' (d) 19:39, 18 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Filo gèn',
if its a work by Henri Matisse, it should be still copyrighted (for 5 more years). Anyway, I've undeleted to file and replaced the speedy by a regular DR to allow for discussion. --Túrelio (talk) 20:59, 18 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

File:Handvermittlungszentrale 4899.jpg[edit]

Hallo Túrelio! Das Bild "Handvermittlungszentrale 4899.jpg" würden wir gerne bei einem Blogbeitrag verwenden. Am 25.April ist Tag des Telefons (in den USA). Wir schreiben einen Beitrag zur Geschichte des Telefons und da würde das Bild perfekt reinpassen. Der Beitrag ist noch nicht online. Wir hätten es so gelöst, dass wir das Bild mit einem Link versehen. Beim Mouseover würde man sehen, dass du der Urheber bist. Beim Klick auf das Bild würde man auf die Seite von Wikimedia kommen. Beste Grüße aus Österreich Dominique — Preceding unsigned comment added by 195.189.198.1 (talk • contribs)

Hi Dominique,
Ok. von meiner Seite. --Túrelio (talk) 15:23, 19 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

File:McLaren Automotive Logo.svg[edit]

Hallo Túrelio, du hast diese Datei gelöscht. Ich sehe da keine Schöpfungshöhe (basierend auf dem thumb im Google-Cache), aber nun gut. Könntest du die Datei mir schicken, damit ich sie dann lokal auf de-WP hochladen kann? Chaddy (talk) 12:53, 22 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Chaddy, bin gerade erst nach Hause gekommen. Dafür müsstest du mir erst mal 1 Email schicken, weil der onWiki-Mailer keine Anhänge zulässt. --Túrelio (talk) 20:23, 22 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Missing bistorical records on file deletion[edit]

For "File:Ynw melly at Miami Florida in 2018 (cropped).jpg", it states your involvement on the deletion, and that "The deletion, protection, and move log for the page are provided below for reference." However, all links that follow are dead, and so there is no available record on why the image was deleted. Could you repair these, so there is a record of your actions? Cheers. 2601:246:C700:2DB2:51DB:35FF:55F8:37CF 13:15, 23 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi IP,
File:Ynw melly at Miami Florida in 2018 (cropped).jpg was a simple crop of File:Ynw melly at Miami Florida in 2018.jpg. As the latter had been deleted due to being copyvio-suspected, as it had been taken from Youtube, the crop had the same problem. The deletion-summary for the crop "See File:Ynw melly at Miami Florida in 2018.jpg" is not really dead, but can be seen only by Admins. --Túrelio (talk) 19:16, 23 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Deletion requests/File:Kaunas Landmarks 20.jpg[edit]

Have just received notification that this and other files recently posted have been tagged for deletion even although the photos are of works in public spaces and are not intended for commercial use.  Appreciate that I am not familiar with Lithuanian licensing laws, but clearly most visitors to Lithuania will not know how long ago a public artwork was created never mind have contact detail for the artist even if the artist is clearly identified.  Such prohibition appears out-dated for a country that wishes to encourage tourism and most western countries manage to achieve this without compromising the natural and legal rights of their artists.  Can the decisions to delete these files be reasonably appealed given that as a ‘foreigner’ I do not have access to background information relating to these specific works photographed and published via Wikimedia? Thank you for your consideration of this request to ‘undelete’ the files you have selected for deletion --SM1 (talk) 16:20, 25 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Scotch Mist,
to be frank: as you aren't a newcomer to Wikimedia projects, I'm a bit astonished about your above presented "rationales". But, anyway:
1) at this moment there is nothing to "undelete", as nothing has been deleted yet.
2) as an "older" user, you should know per COM:L that Wikimedia projects require all material (text and images) to be free also for commercial use. This is nothing new and didn't change from the early beginnings.
3) when you visit a foreign country, you may not need to get acustomed to the local copyright laws, especially the freedom-of-panorama provisions, but when uploading your photos to Commons or Wikipedia, you need to check (and obey) these laws. A very short synopsis for Lithuania is here.
4) you may "appeal" or discuss the requested deletion of your images of outdoor works at Commons:Deletion requests/File:Kaunas Landmarks 20.jpg.
5) for your images of outdoor works, which have been tagged with a speedy-tag due to missing permission, you need to provide the evidence as requested on your talkpage.
--Túrelio (talk) 19:21, 25 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]


Hi Turelio Thank you for your detailed response to my message left on your talk page.

With regard to point ‘1’, you may also be surprised to know that after posting thousands of images over many years I have only previously had two instances where the publishing of images have been questioned on copyright grounds, and there were very specific circumstances relating to those questions.  All of the images I have posted have been ‘free’ under CCA-4 (point ’2’) and have not been posted for my personal “commercial use” (point ‘3’).

More specifically regarding ‘evidence’ (point ‘5’) there already exist images of this outdoor work in category ‘Monuments and memorials in Kaunas’ (one posted over six years ago), seemingly without artist attributed copyright, so it would not appear unreasonable to presume (given that there was no information at the photograph site to suggest otherwise and naturally as a visitor to Lithuania I am not familiar with the history of the work) that further images could not be posted.  This same rationale applies to File:Kaunas Landmarks 18.jpg, as well as (see category ‘Sculptures in Kaunas’) to File:Kaunas Landmarks 15.jpg and File:Kaunas Landmarks 14.jpg, as well as (see category ‘Vilnius University Library’) to File:Vilnius University 06.jpg and File:Vilnius University 07.jpg (File:Vilnius University 22.jpg would appear to be an ancient memorial relief the creator of which is probably long deceased), as well as (see category ‘Adam Mickiewicz Monument in Vilnius’) to File:Adam Mickiewicz Vilnius 08.jpg, File:Adam Mickiewicz Vilnius 09.jpg and File:Adam Mickiewicz Vilnius 13.jpg, as well as (see category ‘Interior of Church of the Assumption of The Holy Virgin Mary, Kaunas’) to File:Kaunas Landmarks 25.jpg.  (With regard to File:Kaunas Landmarks 26.jpg and File:Kaunas Landmarks 27.jpg I am not sure if the creator of these public\church stained glass works, Vytautas Švarlis, is still living but so far I have not yet managed to discover an email address for him, is this something with which you can help?)

File:Kaunas Landmarks 32.jpg and File:Trakai Island 31.jpg provide information for visitors so it would not appear rational to classify these as ‘artworks’ with access restricted by copyright when not only does there not seem to be any likely-hood of third-party commercial advantage here but the purpose of their creation was presumably to publicize the information which they contain. File:Kaunas Landmarks 35.jpg, File:Vilnius Landmarks 34.jpg, File:Ventspils 02.jpg perhaps more generally fall under the same bracket but should concerns remain about the use of these images on Wikimedia then any assistance with identifying\contacting the creators of these public artworks would be appreciated.  

It is interesting to note that when we visited the ‘Adam Mickiewicz Museum in Vilnius’ my family and I were the only visitors to this museum and the only three images on Wikimedia were external (by the way including the entrance profile ‘File:Adam Mickiewicz Vilnius 16.jpg’ in one of those images which has not been tagged for deletion) were of the external property with no images of what was actually contained in the museum – it is perhaps therefore not surprising that there appear to be few people visiting a museum that should be of interest to many tourists.  The museum paintings you have also tagged for deletion in this category (File:Adam Mickiewicz Vilnius 18.jpg and File:Adam Mickiewicz Vilnius 20.jpg) I believe to be old paintings and the artists already deceased, as with the sculptor Ryszard Jan Kozlowski whose work (File:Adam Mickiewicz Vilnius 22.jpg ) was created in 1933. (Note, the sculpture itself appears to be a 'reproduction' of sculpture\painting created around a century earlier, during the life of Mickiewicz, indicating that as a 'derivative work' it should be governed by the copyright of the original artist(s) and licensed here under [PD-old-100]).

It would be a great pity if those interested in the wonderfully diverse artwork of Lithuania were denied the opportunity to gain appreciation of this due to seeing little evidence of this among images posted on Wikimedia. In fact by strictly limiting visibility of their work on Wikimedia, the ‘artists’ themselves, never-mind Lithuania as a whole, may lose out on future commissions perhaps spawned through growing international interest in their work as well as in the country of Lithuania itself.

Please sympathetically review your decision to tag all of the above referenced files and ‘un-tag’ them so that others can begin to appreciate more of the great artwork throughout Lithuania of which the country should be proud!  Thank you … --SM1 (talk) 10:10, 26 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Túrelio: Further to comments above, more specifically, File:Adam Mickiewicz Vilnius 18.jpg is a painting (original circa 1828) of the work of Walenty Wankowicz (1799-1842) and therefore the 'delete tag' should be removed and probably replaced with the [PD-old-100] or [PD-Art] tag. This same rationale applies to File:Adam Mickiewicz Vilnius 20.jpg, a contemporary painting (circa 1827) as evidenced with the work by 19th Century lithographer, Ducarme. Given the limited time available to provide evidence regarding the other images you have tagged, it would be appreciated if these deletion tags could either be removed or compliance period extended while I find the time to address other specific questions that you have raised. Thank you ... --SM1 (talk) 08:18, 29 April 2019 (UTC) @Túrelio: Have not received any response to my message of 29 April and the deletion tags remain on all of the images you tagged even though some of these are clearly permitted under a PD License tag - will you resolve this or advise what action I now need to take to avoid these images being deleted? Thank you ... --SM1 (talk) 09:32, 1 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

RLM1.jpg deleted by you.[edit]

This picture is from my property, it doesn't belong to the digital news papers, I send the picture to the all news papers to use it. I need it back. Thanks — Preceding unsigned comment added by Lpenotti (talk • contribs) 02:25, 26 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Lpenotti,
hmm. Why did you claim it to be from April 2019, when it had been published already in August 2018 ?
Anyway, I would recommend you to request its undeletion at Commons:Undeletion requests. --Túrelio (talk) 08:14, 26 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Yuri Shabanov[edit]

Good day! The deleted photo in the article about Yuri Shabanov Was not copied from a third-party site. This image is provided by Yuri Shibanov himself. In confirmation, I enclose the screenshots of the correspondence. https://yadi.sk/i/woVYMvhP3YyjLg https://yadi.sk/i/UH5idpuDKIHhQg — Preceding unsigned comment added by AL Siemens (talk • contribs) 08:00, 26 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi AL Siemens,
then why did you write "own work"?
Anyway, as the correspondence is in Russian, I would ask you to request undeletion of this file at Commons:Undeletion requests. --Túrelio (talk) 08:07, 26 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

1 image[edit]

Dear Turelio,

Please review this single rare image if you can.

This species does not exist on Commons. Thank You, --Leoboudv (talk) 09:03, 26 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

✓ Done. --Túrelio (talk) 10:20, 26 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

4 images[edit]

Dear Turelio,

If you have some time, please review these 4 quality images below.

Thank You for your time. Best Regards, --Leoboudv (talk) 03:59, 28 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

https://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fichier:Sylvie_lemarchand.jpg[edit]

I'm sick of it. If I kill myself trying to delete this image it's for a specific reason. This image belongs to me entirely and if I decide to put it in fast deletion it is for a good reason. I do not understand why you come to me drag me to cancel my request for quick deletion while this image is not associated with any article and it belongs to me by right. Thank you for respecting my right to be forgotten in accordance with European legislation. It's amazing that you put me in a bad mood for the whole day.

Thibaultbarillet (talk)

Tb. 28/04/2019

@Thibaultbarillet: In 2017 you granted an irrevocable license for anyone to use this file, so a speedy deletion is no longer an option at Commons. All such deletion requests by the original uploader have to go through a proper discussion and need to be approved by the Commons community. Please see Commons:Deletion requests/File:Sylvie lemarchand.jpg where I suggested a solution for you. De728631 (talk) 11:17, 28 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Dilemma[edit]

Hi - I just uploaded File:Report On The Investigation Into Russian Interference In The 2016 Presidential Election Page NoImages.pdf but had redeacted potential copyrighted images on p. 42, 94 and 99. I renumbered pages to 42-1, 94-1 and 99-1 and deleted the original pages with the images. I just now looked at the file and the original images are there. Is there a way we can remove just those pages and substitute them with pages that have the redacted images? Atsme Talk 📧 18:28, 28 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Atsme,
if you have really removed the specified pages from the pdf file and uploaded the correct file, then this might simply be a cache problem, as this document has been uploaded a number of times on recent days. --Túrelio (talk) 18:33, 28 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
It's a different file from the other. I added "NoImages.pdf" to the end of the file name and uploaded it this morning. Atsme Talk 📧 19:10, 28 April 2019 (UTC) You're tho thmart. 😊 19:14, 28 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
I've just downloaded the pdf file. On pages 42, 94 und 99 (pagenumber at bottom of page) I didn't find any image. But I also did no find any pages 42-1, 94-1 or 99-1. ??? --Túrelio (talk) 19:16, 28 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Good - just as it should be. I guess the p.#s on the document vs the p.#s for the upload are different. The .pdf upload must count the actual # of pages uploaded, so it eliminated my #sequence. Finally, something worked right the first time!! Thank you for looking into this and explaining, Túrelio. I just learned something new today. Atsme Talk 📧 19:27, 28 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Shaihulud D. D. overwriting files again[edit]

It seems that since you reverted them, Shaihulud D. D. has overwritten a number of their uploads with a blank PNG again. I've reverted them, but I wonder if it might be worth protecting them against upload for a week or two. The files I reverted were:

If I should take this to COM:AN/B, please let me know. --bjh21 (talk) 15:45, 30 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Bjh21,
thanks for notifying. --Túrelio (talk) 08:10, 1 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]


@All — Preceding unsigned comment added by Shaihulud D. D. (talk • contribs) 08:12, 2 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

You can thank the french moderator's assholes who judge my astronomical images of poor quality while they do not melt the difference between a smiley in the form of saturn and a real image. I put 2 hours to explain to them in a long written message the work of astronomer imager the only answer given by one of the idiots who never responded directly to any of my messages, was to remove my images again for mediocre quality !!!

I asked them to delete all my pictures which have nothing to do on Wikipedia (because the mind sharing is totally pitiful) My answer was that it was not possible!

That French trolls remain between trolls.

Once again you can thank the french assholes because take the people for morons must be a national sport on French Wiki! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Shaihulud D. D. (talk • contribs) 08:11, 2 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Exemple : Galaxy M94 : https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/e/e8/Messier_object_094.jpg

29 avril 2019 à 10:43‎ Kikuyu3 "Image de trop faible qualité et intérêt, par rapport aux nombreuses illustrations de meilleure qualité déjà présente, voir PDD du contributeur My frame : https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/9/9a/Galaxy_M94.jpg

Frankly, pitiful and this person has never answered one of my messages — Preceding unsigned comment added by Shaihulud D. D. (talk • contribs) 08:17, 2 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Please undelete your deletion of the Kent Tate image[edit]

Hello Turelio, I am trying to figure out how to request that the image I posted for Kent Tate be undeleted. Am new to Wikimedia Commons and don't understand your reason for deleting the Kent Tate image that I posted.Tate1956 (talk) 23:45, 30 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Tate1956,
this b/w photo had been uploaded by User:Cheri Brown and been deleted under copyvio-suspicion already twice in 2017. The reason for the deletion of your upload (same size as the second upload by Cheri Brown) had been communicated to you in the notification about the deletion on your talkpage. It's again the suspicion of being a copyvio, as it has been found prepublished at https://vimeo.com/kenttate/about, while you claimed it to be from April 2019.
Now, if you are really the depicted Kent Tate and if you really have obtained enough rights from the photographer (who?) to release this image under a free license, which also allows its commercial re-use, then you need to send a confirmation about these facts from your official/business email address to permissions-commons@wikimedia.org . --Túrelio (talk) 08:09, 1 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Roberto Capovilla foto[edit]

Scusi la foto è di mia proprietà ed è stata concessa ad opera musica. — Preceding unsigned comment was added by 2.44.70.115 (talk) 19:27, 1 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, I have no idea to which file/image you are refering. Please, provide the full name of the file. --Túrelio (talk) 08:11, 4 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

File:AE Backus.jpg[edit]

Please undelete this picture. I have owned the painting in the picture for many years. I purchased it at the AE Backus Museum in Ft. Pierce Florida, USA. I took the picture of my painting and released it into the public domain.

Mr. Backus, the author(painter)of this work died almost 29 years ago. He did not register his paintings for copyright. He sold them. He painted this painting 43 years ago. How can you suspect a copyright violation? --LarryStevens (talk) 04:36, 4 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi LarryStevens,
to answer your last question first: because mere ownership of a work of art does include the copyright; see Commons:Copyright_rules_by_subject_matter#2D_art_(paintings_etc.). In most countries of the world, copyright last at leat until 70 years after the death of the artist; so, 29 years is nothing. However, due to the extreme inconsistency of US copyright law (see File:PD-US table.svg), I'll undelete the file and put into into a regular deletion-request, which allows a discussion and input by other users. --Túrelio (talk) 08:03, 4 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
There your are: Commons:Deletion requests/File:AE Backus.jpg. As the year of creation of the original painting is critical, you need to provide some evidence for that. --Túrelio (talk) 08:09, 4 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Mes demandes de suppression rapide[edit]

File:Chimarrhis cymosa (flowers).jpg

Hello Túrelio, let me explain my approach, when i make a request for quick deletion it's just to import the file again with a valid name, i prefer to do so instead of asking that the file be renamed, i would like you understand this other way of proceeding. Thank you. Cordially. Filo gèn' (talk) 19:18, 4 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi,
ok. I understand. However, I can't delete this file as long as it is in use on :fr. So, you first need to remove it from the article on :fr. --Túrelio (talk) 20:16, 4 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Okay i'll remove it from the article then place a request for quick deletion, thanks.Filo gèn' (talk) 21:08, 4 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
✓ Done. --Túrelio (talk) 08:23, 5 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Deletion[edit]

Hi, sorry for disturbing you, but I've seen you're active just now. Could you please take this request?

I'm the uploader of the files.

Thank you! --Roberto Segnali all'Indiano 19:38, 4 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

✓ Done thanks anyway. :) --Roberto Segnali all'Indiano 20:12, 4 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
I've deleted the redir of File:Guida alle costellazioni 1.2b.pdf. The move was already performed by a colleague. --Túrelio (talk) 20:14, 4 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Removing Show logo thread[edit]

Why should we keep the thread if the coversation is over? -- JATheEditor (talk) 19:00, 5 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Because its content may be useful for similar problems/discussions/questions in the future. --Túrelio (talk) 19:19, 5 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

File:Short URL manage 20190414.png[edit]

It's silly to kill MW screenshot because of an iOS Safari header. Can I just undelete it, and crop the iOS header part? (I know I can just do it but I don't want to make you feel like I just undeleted stuff you did... :P) — regards, Revi 19:11, 5 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I can also argue that small part of the screenshot is COM:De minimis when almost 90-95% of the screenshot itself is {{GPL}}/{{Wikimedia screenshot}}, but what's already done is done and it's bit late to make such complaints. — regards, Revi 19:16, 5 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
@-revi: , Hi, I've undeleted it. --Túrelio (talk) 19:19, 5 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Thx, noticed that and cropped it. Will remove the SD tag. — regards, Revi 19:20, 5 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

2 images[edit]

Dear Turelio,

Please kindly review these 2 images when you can.

Thank You, --Leoboudv (talk) 05:01, 6 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Cadetrain copyvios[edit]

Thanks for deleting the latest copyvio from Cadetrain (talk · contribs). Per their response to my report (which, I'll admit, is hilarious), I don't think they've learned their lesson from their previous block, and should probably get a longer block this time. (I'll report to the blocks and protections admin board if you prefer.) Funcrunch (talk) 19:14, 6 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Funcrunch, yes, better report him on COM:AN/B. --Túrelio (talk) 19:28, 6 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Done, thanks for the reply. Funcrunch (talk) 19:38, 6 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Copy rights issues[edit]

Hi Túrelio, Regarding copyright of the new photos I have recently added, they are all our production house photos, Evini Films. All copyrights are owned by Evini Films. Evinisite is only our Wikipedia account name. Kindly look at the films section link on our site: www.evinifilms.com Thank you — Preceding unsigned comment added by Evinisite (talk • contribs) 07:36, 7 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Evinisite,
please send that confirmation from your official email address to permissions-commons@wikimedia.org . --Túrelio (talk) 15:08, 7 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=File:2004_Putin_inauguration_06.jpg&redirect=no[edit]

заменить редиректом на лучшую версию, старую удалить! --PavelMukhin98 (talk) 17:17, 7 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Подвести итог! --PavelMukhin98 (talk) 12:40, 18 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

✓ Done. --Túrelio (talk) 12:45, 18 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Eine kleine Bitte[edit]

Servus Túrelio!

Kann ich dich also Autor ersuchen, diese beiden Dateien [7] [8] zu löschen?

Ich habe diese Karten vor eineinhalb Jahren für Wikipedia-Artikel erstellt, jedoch habe ich im laufe der letzten Zeit gemerkt, wie diese außerhalb der Wiki-Projekte für Irredentismus und Nationalismus genutzt werden, sodass ich dich bitten würde, die Bilder zu löschen.

Gruß, Koreanovsky (talk) 17:35, 7 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Koreanovsky,
bei der ersten solltest du selbst ein speedy darauf setzen. Bei der zweiten sieht es schlecht aus, weil sie auf mehreren Projekten in Benutzung ist. --Túrelio (talk) 19:41, 13 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Túrelio! Habe bei der ersten Datei einen speedydelete gesetzt. Kannst du diese bitte löschen? Danke! --Koreanovsky (talk) 10:25, 24 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Hat schon ein Kollege erledigt. --Túrelio (talk) 12:11, 24 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Diagrams of fountain and ball pens[edit]

Thanks for deleting this file which is subject to copyright. Kindly take an action regarding the deletion nomination of its derivative; Commons:Deletion requests/File:Fountain pen diagram.svg. Thanks in advance, KCVelaga (talk · mail) 17:55, 7 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Inga guadelupensis : category, page and photos[edit]

hello Túrelio, i would like you to delete the category : Inga guadelupensis ans the page : Inga guadelupensis and photos on this page. In the article Inga martinicensis Section article connexe, the scientific name is written Inga guadelupensis while the real scientific name is Inga guadalupensis. I would like to correct his mistakes by removing these categories and photos: Inga guadelupensis. cordially. Filo gèn' (talk) 19:30, 9 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Undeletion of File:Michelle Obama and Karen Dudley.jpg[edit]

Hi Túrelio

I took this photo on my own camera back in June 2011. Any other versions of it online have been copied from my online posting. There is no reason for the deletion of my picture as I own all of the copyright. My initial post

According to Facebook's Statement of Rights and Responsibilities, any image posted with the Public setting carries the implicit acknowledgment that said photo is available for access and use by anyone -- including entities not on Facebook. [9]

I am not 100% sure if what I have provided is enough evidence to show that the photo belongs to me. Please let me know if there is any more specific evidence needed.

--HeyitsBen (talk) 17:54, 10 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

To you of the prisoner[edit]

(All texts written here mainly use English translated sentences by Google translation. Therefore, there is also the possibility of mistranslation.)
You are forced not to confirm any of the contents of the permission application for images posted under the OTRS policy, with the official permission from the owner / administrator of the explanatory signboard captured in the image. In response to one's remarks that pointed out that I went for deletion, I have not made any remarks even now?
What do you think of the situation that you spent so much and finally spent getting permission? In addition, it is no longer possible to say only "outrage" about having performed this deletion without performing any confirmation work before deletion.
As far as this is said, if you intend to make no remorse or excuse after this, you will be called: "Deaf!"--BATACHAN (talk) 01:47, 12 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Oligodon[edit]

Dear Túrelio;

Photo removed from the Wikipedia page (Oligodon theobaldi). I kindly request speed deletion of https://commons.m.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Oligodon_theobaldi.jpg

Thanks in advance.

Best regards; Henning HenningLar (talk) 20:59, 12 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

✓ Done. --Túrelio (talk) 19:36, 13 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Copyright violations[edit]

Thanks for your message. I just wanted to know if there is a possibility to change the format of the posters into the official ones (not the UK version). Thats the reason why I uploaded the other ones, but I dont want to claim it as my own work. If theres now way, its ok, but it drives me crazy.^^ XRaito (talk) 19:14, 13 May 2019 (UTC)— Preceding unsigned comment added by XRaito (talk • contribs) 19:12, 13 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

The only (legal) way would be to contact the movie company, which holds the rights, for a permission (free license). But it's a bit unlikely they will give one. --Túrelio (talk) 19:14, 13 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Photos from Facebook[edit]

Hi you have deleted all photos. One two photos may violet copy right. But most of the photos are collected from social media clicked by friends. I don't know why can't i upload fb's photos . PerfectingNEI (talk) 08:59, 14 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi PerfectingNEI,
material on Facebook is per se not free enough. More important, as there is little to no upload-control on Facebook, you can never be sure that the poster on Facebook has indeed the rights over the posted material. The same is true for most "social media"; even Flickr is abused for license-laundering. So, if you upload material, which hadn't been created by yourself, you need to provide (-> Commons:OTRS) a credible statement from the original author. --Túrelio (talk) 09:20, 14 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Túrelio, feel free to close the DR. As per above, it seems as if all uploads must be deleted. Thanks --Discasto talk 10:10, 14 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Copyright violation[edit]

Hi there,

Catherine Aliotta 2.jpg — Preceding unsigned comment added by Drarjang (talk • contribs) 08:24, 16 May 2019 (UTC) You asked to delete an image. This image is not for this url: https://zenaveclasophrologie.blogspot.com/2016/06/pratiquer-la-sophrologie-au-quotidien.html, this website just use the image for speak about Mrs Catherine Aliotta. I'am agent of comminucation of Mrs Catherine Aliotta, she is owner of this image. Image original is in this url: https://www.chambre-syndicale-sophrologie.fr/[reply]

Please returne this image to wikipedia.

Thanks --Drarjang (talk) 08:30, 16 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Please do what I wrote you earlier at File talk:Catherine Aliotta 2.jpg. --Túrelio (talk) 08:34, 16 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Deleting Norwich Pictures on Norwich City F.C[edit]

Hi there,

I can understand why you deleted some of the pictures I put up on the Norwich City F.C. page - however, the two of the 2019 championship trophy lift were personal images and i didn't think this would breach copyright?

Thanks,

Tom — Preceding unsigned comment added by Tomhingston (talk • contribs) 09:03, 16 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Tom,
well, I did tag them as copyvios, but they were deleted by my colleague Ymblanter. Anyway, I tagged them as they were published on Instagram (links on your talkpage). What do you mean by "personal images"? --Túrelio (talk) 09:07, 16 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Deleting photo of Ján Bartko[edit]

Dear Túrelio,

today you deleted my photo of PhDr. Ján Bartko due to you thought, that there was a problem with copyright. But it wasn't copyright violation. My real name is Peter Haľko and my DSLR writes it into exif file of every captured photo. The problem is that there on Wikimedia I use nickname. How can I prove my authorship? Thanks for quick answer.

Yours sincerely --Petinoh (talk) 11:46, 16 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Peter,
so, I tried to protect your copyright, but did delete your work. :-)
Ok, the process should be like this: 1) I will undelete the image, but put an OTRS-pending tag on it. 2) You send an email from your "official" email address to permissions-commons@wikimedia.org (=OTRS), just explaining/writing again what you wrote me above (don't forget to mention the filename). 3) An OTRS-volunteer will process your mail (Your email is treated confidentially) and put an OTRS-ticket on your image and that's it. 4) As your File:Peter Kocak.jpg has also been tagged for "no permission" by a colleague, you might add a statement regarding that image also. 5) As you are not obliged to publicly disclose your username/realname association, I can delete our discussion here as soon as you've sent your email. --Túrelio (talk) 12:59, 16 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for the guideline! I've just sent the e-mail.--Petinoh (talk) 17:18, 16 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Remerciements[edit]

Hallo, danke, dass du die Fotos entfernt hast, die ich versehentlich versehentlich bezahlt habe. Ich wünsche Ihnen einen schönen Tag. Mit freundlichen Grüßen. François de Dijon (talk) 09:27, 18 May 2019 (UTC)(Google Übersetzung)[reply]

Bonjour, je vous remercie pour avoir supprimer les photos que j'avais malencontreusement versées par erreur. Je vous souhaite une bonne journée. Cordialement. François de Dijon (talk) 09:27, 18 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

You are welcome. --Túrelio (talk) 10:06, 18 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Check[edit]

Hallo Túrelio,
könntest Du bitte mal überprüfen, ob der User:81.99.162.5 sinnvolle Arbeit hier abliefert.
Sikkims Nationalblume und Indiens Nationaltier sind wohl nicht korrekt.
Grüße. Orchi (talk) 15:41, 18 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
P.S. Indiens Nationalreptil ist wohl o.k.

Da scheint es auch intern Widersprüche zu geben. Category:National flower of Sikkim wird auf Category:Cattleya maxima weitergeleitet, während enwiki behauptet, dass die offizielle Blume Sikkims die Cymbidium goeringii ist. De728631 (talk) 16:11, 18 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry for die späte Antwort. Die IP wurde inzwischen von Taivo für 1 Woche gesperrt.[10] Die IP hat eine Reihe von Flamingo-Fotos in die Category:Junagadh State Bird gesteckt, was natürlich nicht sinnvoll ist. Wenn das denn überhaupt zutrifft, was zumindest aus dem Artikel auf :en leider nicht hervorgeht, würde die Flamingo-Kategorie in diese Kategorie gehören, nicht aber einzelne Fotos. Zudem hat diese IP analoge Kategorien wie z.B. Category:National Flower of Pakistan oder Category:National Sweet of Pakistan ‎angelegt und befüllt. Da die angelegten Kategorien aber auf keinen Artikel verlinken, ist es nicht gerade einfach herauszufinden, ob das denn überhaupt stimmt. Die formalen Kategorisierungsfehler sind dagegen noch harmlos. --Túrelio (talk) 20:36, 20 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
...vielen Dank für Deine Info. Gruß. Orchi (talk) 17:07, 22 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Klaus Littmann, Klagenfurt, Kärnten, "for forest" Kunstprojekt im Wörthersee Stadion[edit]

Hi Túrelio,

.. mein Foto wurde am Rathausplatz in Klagenfurt, wo das Plakat über dem Eingang angebracht ist, aufgenommen. Dieses Kunstprojekt ist in Kärnten in aller Munde und wird beworben. Ich bin davon ausgegangen, dass dieses Plakat sich im öffentlichen Raum befindet. Sollte es Bedenken geben, bitte löschen, da es ohnedies mit dem heute von mir uploaded Foto Maibaum 2019 in Klagenfurt vor dem Rathaus veröffentlicht ist. Die Entscheidung überlasse ich dir. Glg --Naturpuur (talk) 15:41, 20 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Túrelio,

Merci, die Entscheidung liegt bei dir. Glg --217.149.167.226 15:52, 20 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Commons_talk[edit]

LoL – this obviously tried to delete Commons:Deletion policy/als (hist • logs • abuse log), an uneditable page. Incnis Mrsi (talk) 14:27, 21 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I thought the same, as this deletion-request by Aymatth2 was the only edit on this talkpage. --Túrelio (talk) 14:33, 21 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

File:Manual para mujeres detectives M.B. Franz.jpg[edit]

Hi:

This image has been uploaded by two different users, probably the same person under two names, uploading under the same file name with the same exact info and numerous categories. I asked to delete it both times for Copyvio and you did it. I suspect that there could be further attemps to reload it in the future. Is there a way to prevent that?

Pierre cb (talk) 16:32, 21 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi,
as far as I know, there is no automatic way to prevent this. Of course, I could protect the filename against recreating it. But that would only lead them to use a different filename. Now I put the (deleted) filename on my watch-list, so that I get notified when it is recreated. --Túrelio (talk) 18:22, 21 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Good idea. Thanks. Pierre cb (talk) 18:35, 21 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Please undelete File:Roger Chung CUHK.jpg[edit]

My boss who is Roger Chung gave me the permission to upload this file for him and I am going to as well create a English wiki page using the exact same file. Please undelete the image so I can do my job..... — Preceding unsigned comment added by Clhy (talk • contribs) 09:32, 22 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, that's all well and nice, but ...
1) Mr. Chung surely didn't shoot this image by himself.
2) Per your above statement you also aren't the photographer.
3) The latter clearly contradicts your statement in the image-description, where you claimed to be the author.
4) In case the image belongs to sphpc.cuhk, they claim "© All Rights Reserved. The Chinese University of Hong Kong. 2017"
5) In case you didn't know: the copyright of a photography belongs to the photographer. Of course, the photographer can sell/transfer copyright to another person, which usually requires some documentation. So, if Mr. Chung is sure he has obtained enough rights from the photographer to release this image under a free license (COM:L), which permits anybody to use it even commercially, then he needs to send a written confirmation from his official email-address to permissions-commons@wikimedia.org which should include the name of the photographer and an information how the photographer wants to be credited. --Túrelio (talk) 10:38, 22 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

As a reply to what you comment on the copyright. What you said is simply exploiting the meaning of copyright.

Although the photographer may not be Roger Chung himself, which is impossible to take such a photo, it is Roger Chung himself with his face in the photo. It makes no sense that you relate this to violation of copyright of SPHPC CUHK. And what you are implying is a photographer is free to release any of the photos he took even it's a profile/private shooting. This is a violation of privacy instead of copyright. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Clhy (talk • contribs) 04:48, 23 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

As you are obviously not willing to obtain a permission, this discussion makes no sense. Feel free to request undeletion at Commons:Undeletion requests. EOD. --Túrelio (talk) 06:06, 23 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

File:تاريخ قديم جدا.jpg[edit]

Hi Túrelio, could you please reconsider your deletion of this file? I declined the request because the purported source image is quite different from the upload. For example: even ignoring colouration, the horizontal crack at the bottom is quite flat on the Commons version, but slanting up to the left on the "source" (i.e., they are taken from different angles). After my decline, the proposer simply re-added the bogus link, which is out of process. This should, at least, have a normal DR. Эlcobbola talk 16:28, 22 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Restored and put into regular DR Commons:Deletion requests/File:تاريخ قديم جدا.jpg. --Túrelio (talk) 19:17, 22 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

File:Olha Sytnyk.jpg[edit]

hi, the photo i posted is from https://volya.ua/member/4 - that is on the oficial page of olga sytnyk's party, even the text is the same. pls do not delete it — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rakhubka (talk • contribs) 14:50, 23 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Rakhubka,
sure, But, "official page" does not mean that it is under a free license, as is required by Wikipedia and Commons policy, COM:L. You need to obtain a license from her and forward it to permissions-commons@wikimedia.org . --Túrelio (talk) 15:40, 23 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

File:John Burnside.jpg[edit]

Hallo Túrelio, du hast mir heute die Info geschickt, dass das Foto von John Burnside gelöscht werden soll. Kannst du mir bitte sagen, warum das so ist und warum als Autor plötzlich "hpschaefer www.reserv-art.de" in dem Bild auftaucht? Was kann ich tun? LG Heike Huslage-Koch (talk) 09:18, 24 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hallo Heike, es geht mir nicht darum das Foto zu löschen, sondern die nun unklar gewordene Urheber/Copyright-Lage zu klären. Am besten kommentierst du in der Löschdiskussion. --Túrelio (talk) 09:22, 24 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hallo Turelio, sorry, das war ein Fehler meinerseits. Hatte diese Fotografie falsch interpretiert. Meine Aufnahme = burnside john_stadtgkoeln-literar-salon2.jpg — Preceding unsigned comment added by Hpschaefer (talk • contribs)

Ok, dann ist das Problem gelöst. --Túrelio (talk) 20:00, 27 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

File:Fullsizeoutput 1f1c.jpg[edit]

You deleted one of my photos today. I have taken the photo myself. If Elite Prospects uses it they have take it from Commons without attribution. If you don't believe me check the camera version and date time and compare with the other photos I taken. Since you deleted the picture I can't contact Elite prospects about this, I don't even know which player it was. Please restore it or at least give me a link to the Elite Prospects file so I can contact them. /Machatjkala (talk) 14:26, 25 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

✓ Done by colleague. --Túrelio (talk) 15:59, 10 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

CSD G6 (uncontroversial maintenance): Making way for move[edit]

Hello.

It is seemingly an invisible move – such that the target link remains red. Is this new feature documented?

Kidding aside, this is not the first (and AFAIR not second) case when your nick pops in logs, alongside with CAPTAIN RAJU, over some controversial actions. Incnis Mrsi (talk) 19:16, 25 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I don't fully understand the problem. The 1st deleted file was a redir to File:Opinion Polling of Spain General Election 1996.png, the 2nd one to File:Opinion Polling of Spain General Election 2000.png. Both are blue/visible. Before deleting redirects I do always check whether the to-be-deleted filename is in use and, if it is, I either do not delete or replace the old by the new filename on the respective project. --Túrelio (talk) 19:31, 25 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
By the way, I see now that there is a file move war… it seems that requested speedy deletions are its collateral damage. Incnis Mrsi (talk) 19:55, 25 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Deletion of photo Silvia Poloto in her studio[edit]

Hello, a photograph that I took of Silvia Poloto in her studio, "File:Silvia Poloto in her studio.png" was deleted because it has turned up on a Russian website. https://www.livemaster.ru/topic/112770-tvorcheskij-protsess-ch-2 they have clearly lifted the image from Silvias public facing media. What is the process to republish the photo to her wikipedia page. Thank you. Hapleonard (talk) 22:08, 27 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, sorry for replying late. I'll look into that tomorrow. --Túrelio (talk) 19:06, 30 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Flickr pictures[edit]

Hi admin, I'm uploading pictures on Flickr to upload them back here, do you want me to continue or leave it? because if this isn't gonna work there is no point doing so, I will stop it right away, I don't like wasting my time and then having a discussion about it. --SidPedian (talk) 12:15, 28 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi SidPedian,
as I've already written in the deletion discussion, by uploading not-own images to your Flickr-account you are violating Flickr's rules. What you are doing, wether intentionally or not, is license laundering, which is clearly forbidden on Commons. If that is your main intent, then better go away. If you are willing to contribute images, that are really your own work, then you are welcome. --Túrelio (talk) 12:23, 28 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

User:CptViraj[edit]

Hii can you please make my user page autoconfirmed protected? Thanks! CptViraj (Talk) 14:52, 30 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

✓ Done. --Túrelio (talk) 19:05, 30 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks! CptViraj (Talk) 02:44, 31 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Portuguese surnames[edit]

Either you know as well as I do that categories such as this and this one make no sense at all, in which case you should not have reverted my speedy deletion requests, or you have no idea how Portuguese-language surnames work, in which case you should defer to the opinion of those who do, like it is routinely done for pretty much any other subject. If you’re doing this because Wikidata generates those cats, well we both know that’s because their “easy to use” interface is an effing nightmare and that their GIGO approach should not be allowed to contaminate Commons with bogus cats — at least let them be red so that everybody knows there’s something wrong: Anything else is to favor the continued existence of said bogus cats in Commons in order to cover up the failure the whole Wikidata adventure is. -- Tuválkin ✉ ✇ 22:07, 30 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

As I had written in my edit-summaries "as cat wasn't empty" my rationale for reverting your speedy was in both cases that, in fact, they weren't empty. If such kind of cats should be deleted anyway, then next time write only the actual rationale. --Túrelio (talk) 06:24, 31 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

File:Ariet Kozubekova.jpg[edit]

Hii, please close Commons:Deletion requests/File:Ariet Kozubekova.jpg it's been 1.5 months since file was tagged for deletion nomination. Thanks! CptViraj (Talk) 09:02, 2 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

✓ Done. --Túrelio (talk) 11:53, 2 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Check[edit]

Hallo Túrelio,
könntest Du bitte dieses Bild: File:Coeltiomanensis.jpg
mit diesem Link [11] auf copyright prüfen?
Danke und Grüße. Orchi (talk) 11:31, 2 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy. Scheint geschützt zu sein. --Túrelio (talk) 11:54, 2 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
...vielen Dank. Orchi (talk) 18:58, 2 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Commons:Deletion requests/Files uploaded by Kasarvijay[edit]

Please close Commons:Deletion requests/Files uploaded by Kasarvijay Thanks! - CptViraj (Talk) 16:59, 3 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

✓ Done. --Túrelio (talk) 18:37, 3 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

User:Virginmegastoreme[edit]

@Túrelio: Hii, please take a look at this username, meets UP:IU as promotional username. They've also uploaded their logo File:VirginMegastore Logo2019.png. Thanks! CptViraj (Talk) 04:16, 4 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

The file has been deleted now. However, I don't see a problem with the user-name currently. They might actually be the company. When they upload a file that is useful for a Wikipedia article, there's no reason to block them. --Túrelio (talk) 21:34, 8 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Deletion Requests Closer[edit]

Hii, please close following deletion requests: 

• Commons:Deletion requests/Files in Category:Election campaign buses in the United Kingdom
• Commons:Deletion requests/File:1711995421 36ed0b56-27cd-41cc-a75d-3925f9970f5e.png
• Commons:Deletion requests/File:17-VOLEIBOL-logo web-01-2.png

Thanks! --CptViraj (Talk) 08:44, 4 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Wikimedia Commons permissions[edit]

Hi Túrelio, all these images are property of the Government of the island of Menorca - Balearic Islands (Consell Insular de Menorca / Menorcan Insular Council (CIMe)). I am working for the Department of Culture and Heritage of the CIMe and I'm adding new articles and files to the wikipedia in Catalan, Spanish and English.

I talked to my boss and he told me that in a few days we will send you a document with the permission of this institution to permissions-commons@wikimedia.org.

Thank you so much.

Best regards, Martí Carbonell

@Mcarbonellsalom: , that's great. Please add to all images, which will fall under this permission, the following code: {{OTRS pending}} , just like I did with File:Vaset talaiòtic.jpg. --Túrelio (talk) 18:51, 5 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]


Hello Túrelio. I send an email to permissions-commons@wikimedia.org with the permissions of all the images that you said me. I hope this document is correct for you. Please, let me know about that. Thanks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mcarbonellsalom (talk • contribs)

Hi, I am not involved in checking permissions. Actually I have no access to them. This work is done by our OTRS volunteers. You will get a reply ftrom them and eventually been asked, if something is missing. --Túrelio (talk) 15:53, 6 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Suppression d'images[edit]

Hello Túrelio, Can you delete me these images :

I will correct the errors and imported them again thanks.good regards. Filo gèn' (talk) 21:20, 8 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

✓ Done. --Túrelio (talk) 21:35, 8 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Image of "Luisella Costamagna"[edit]

Excuse me, why did you delete the image I put in?

-- ABG 08:47, 9 giu 2019

Hi ABG,
because both images were sourced to "Google". Material, which you find on Google, is not free per se. An image is only free if its creator/author released it under a free license. --Túrelio (talk) 07:57, 9 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Deleting help[edit]

Hi Túrelio. Can you help me delete File:AIZphoto.jpg which is a duplicate of File:AIZ2012.jpg, the latter was already deleted by you as a copyright violation. Thanks 大诺史 (talk) 12:38, 10 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi 大诺史,
I've looked "into" the uploader and can't exclude that he might be the depicted person himself. Therefore, I've contacted the user directly about the rights for this image. Let's see what he's to say. --Túrelio (talk) 15:34, 10 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

File:Imaging for Microsoft Document Management Desktop.jpg[edit]

Hi Túrelio. You previously speedily deleted File:Microsoft-imaging.jpg and this appears to be the same file re-uploaded under a different name a day after you deleted the other file. -- Marchjuly (talk) 13:57, 10 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Indeed. Thanks for notifying. --Túrelio (talk) 15:35, 10 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Why copyright?[edit]

There's no copyright in the file. This is public domain, a single person did this. The work is copyrighted, but the image is not.

Avazord (talk) 23:27, 11 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Avazord,
when you reproduce the copyrighted work of somebody else, you need his permission. Otherwise you violate the original copyright. The image is credited to "Antonio A. da Silva Jr." in http://marte.sid.inpe.br/col/ltid.inpe.br/sbsr/2004/11.19.13.31.09/doc/2819.pdf. --Túrelio (talk) 06:51, 12 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Vandalism tag from recent changes[edit]

From recent changes, which tag is the easiest for spotting vandalism? --VKras (talk) 17:02, 12 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Honestly, after the search mask of "Recent changes" had substantially changed some time ago, I've hardly use it; very unsatisfying. So, I'm not so good with it anymore. --Túrelio (talk) 18:18, 12 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

File:Кондратюк Володимир Андрійович.jpg[edit]

Hi! Small size, no metadata, most probably the uploader is not the author? --Микола Василечко (talk) 17:49, 12 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I had noted this image already, but neither Google_images nor TinEye did provide any hits. --Túrelio (talk) 18:15, 12 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Gilad Shalit[edit]

Hi Túrelio friend!, I've modified and resized his image on the phone, I've removed the disturbing (sorry my English) hand and zoomed in. But can't upload a new file because it says it already exists even with the changes. What can I do? Thanks. --LLcentury (talk) 13:03, 19 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi LLcentury,
which image/file exactly are you referring to, this one File:Flickr - Israel Defense Forces - After 5 Years of Captivity.jpg ? It seems to have worked finally. Yes? --Túrelio (talk) 13:10, 19 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Upps yes, it worked, but not now, the second is the correct, how do I put it back? Sorry for the mess. --LLcentury (talk) 14:02, 19 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

EDIT: Done, sorry please. --LLcentury (talk) 14:06, 19 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

File:Natela .jpg[edit]

Hello! How to get permission? Any examples? Took from the official website. Sorry for the stupid questions. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ermolaev-Nikolay (talk • contribs) 10:28, 24 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Ermolaev-Nikolay,
the website from which you took this image, seems not to show any permission under a free license.
You need to find out who is the photographer or rights-holder for that image. You might find that information on the page where this image is shown or in the "impressum" of the website. He or she then needs to release the image under a free license (not "only for Wikipedia"). For the process see Commons:OTRS and Commons:Email templates for permission-templates. However, there is nothing in Georgian language available. --Túrelio (talk) 10:38, 24 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Which section should contain the license information? --Ermolaev-Nikolay (talk) 12:30, 24 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
I don't read Georgian language. Usually it's bewlow the image itself or in the impressum of the page/site. --Túrelio (talk) 13:04, 24 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

OTRS 2019061310005657[edit]

(Журнал удалений); 08:05 Túrelio обсуждение вклад удалил страницу File:20190126 Alye parusa musical-final.jpg ‎(Copyright violation: Not "Own work". Metadata shows Author and Copyright holder as Andrey Bagryansky) (Журнал удалений); 08:05 Túrelio обсуждение вклад удалил страницу File:20190126 Alye parusa musical-Ivaschenko, Koldun.jpg ‎(Copyright violation: Not "Own work". Metadata shows Author and Copyright holder as Andrey Bagryansky) (Журнал удалений); 08:05 Túrelio обсуждение вклад удалил страницу File:20190126 Alye parusa musical-Ivaschenko.jpg ‎(Copyright violation: Not "Own work". Metadata shows Author and Copyright holder as Andrey Bagryansky) (Журнал удалений); 08:05 Túrelio обсуждение вклад удалил страницу File:20190126 Alye parusa musical-Demchuk, Fanta.jpg ‎(Copyright violation: Not "Own work". Metadata shows Author and Copyright holder as Andrey Bagryansky) (Журнал удалений); 08:05 Túrelio обсуждение вклад удалил страницу File:20190126 Alye parusa musical-Kastor.jpg ‎(Copyright violation: Not "Own work". Metadata shows Author and Copyright holder as Andrey Bagryansky) (Журнал удалений); 08:05 Túrelio обсуждение вклад удалил страницу File:20190126 Alye parusa musical-Shkoldichenko, Fanta.jpg ‎(Copyright violation: Not "Own work". Metadata shows Author and Copyright holder as Andrey Bagryansky) (Журнал удалений); 08:05 Túrelio обсуждение вклад удалил страницу File:20190125 Alye parusa musical-Shkoldichenko.jpg ‎(Copyright violation: Not "Own work". Metadata shows Author and Copyright holder as Andrey Bagryansky) (Журнал удалений); 08:04 Túrelio обсуждение вклад удалил страницу File:20190125 Alye parusa musical-Li, Shemonayeva.jpg ‎(Copyright violation: Not "Own work". Metadata shows Author and Copyright holder as Andrey Bagryansky) (Журнал удалений); 08:04 Túrelio обсуждение вклад удалил страницу File:20190126 Alye parusa musical-Viktorov.jpg ‎(Copyright violation: Not "Own work". Metadata shows Author and Copyright holder as Andrey Bagryansky)


VRT Wikimedia

This work is free and may be used by anyone for any purpose. If you wish to use this content, you do not need to request permission as long as you follow any licensing requirements mentioned on this page.

The Wikimedia Foundation has received an e-mail confirming that the copyright holder has approved publication under the terms mentioned on this page. This correspondence has been reviewed by a Volunteer Response Team (VRT) member and stored in our permission archive. The correspondence is available to trusted volunteers as ticket #2019061310005657.

If you have questions about the archived correspondence, please use the VRT noticeboard. Ticket link: https://ticket.wikimedia.org/otrs/index.pl?Action=AgentTicketZoom&TicketNumber=2019061310005657
Find other files from the same ticket: SDC query (SPARQL)

— Preceding unsigned comment added by Tbonny (talk • contribs)

Hi Tbonny,
I am not in OTRS and have no access to the tickets. So, you should ask an OTRS-volunteer to give his o.k. for undeleting these images. --Túrelio (talk) 13:08, 24 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

File:Yllawithtoucan1950.jpg[edit]

File:Yllawithtoucan1950.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) 14:46, 24 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Lina Hidalgo[edit]

That editor uploaded the same photo again: File:LinaHidalgoPose2.jpg. Muboshgu (talk) 21:08, 24 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for notifying. --Túrelio (talk) 21:13, 24 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

File:Keith Jodoin official image.png[edit]

Hi there! I received a message that a photo was in copyright violation, but the photo in question is of me, by me, and was used on my YouTube avatar because it is me. I am the author and copyright holder. Now I see it has been deleted. What other verification can I provide?

Thanks! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kataan (talk • contribs) 21:28, 24 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, now I know about signatures. Thanks for that!

Kataan (talk) 21:32, 24 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not sure how the Facebook link applies to the photo in question. Can you explain further so I may provide what is necessary? Kataan (talk) 21:36, 24 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

The Facebook link had no relation to your post, it came from another thread above. I've deactivated it. --Túrelio (talk) 10:01, 25 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
On your talkpage you stated that you have sent a permission/confirmation to OTRS, right? --Túrelio (talk) 10:02, 25 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Deletion of My Photo[edit]

https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Deletion_requests/File:John_Morgan_Building_at_the_University_of_Pennsylvania.JPG

Hello. Here you mentioned that I can upload a EXIF cleaned photo to replace my photo if it cannot be deleted. I have the original photo still but I can't figure out how to replace the photo if it can't be deleted. How do I do that? — Preceding unsigned comment was added by 47.223.207.130 (talk) 17:50, 25 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi NS Zakeruga,
you can upload a new version (EXIF stripped) on the same image-page. In the lower half there is a link "Upload new version .."; but you need to be logged-in to do that. In addition, the license requires that there is an author-name to be credited by re-users. It could be "User:NS Zakeruga". --Túrelio (talk) 06:26, 26 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Deletion_requests/File:John_Morgan_Building_at_the_University_of_Pennsylvania.JPG

You can prove my authorship of this photo by emailing me at my email address in the exif photo. 47.223.207.130 17:51, 25 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Was able to login and upload cleaned version. However, the bottom of the page under "Metadata" when you expand it still shows my personal data. NS Zakeruga (talk) 19:45, 1 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi,
I've removed the personal data from the EXIF data of the image and uploaded it as new version. Please check. I'll can either remove or hide the original upload/version, which still contains the data. --Túrelio (talk) 20:34, 1 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Could you remove the old photo? Thank you! After that, the photo can stay. Much appreciated. NS Zakeruga (talk) 17:28, 2 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Deletion of My Photo (File:Nikitin big.jpg)[edit]

Hi. You delete this photo Nikitin_big.jpg. But this picture is my work. I work in this site https://inter.ua/uk/news/2015/12/18/5973. Copyright belongs to me and I want to post a photo here. What to do? Thanks. -- On tv (talk) 08:59, 26 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi On tv,
if this is the case, then send a simple confirmation from your official email address (inter.ua something) to permissions-commons@wikimedia.org while mentioning the exact filename File:Nikitin big.jpg. --Túrelio (talk) 09:28, 26 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Unterarten[edit]

Hi Túrelio! Ich sortiere gerade Bilder in der Kategorie Coluber constrictor und laufe in schnellgelöschte Unterarten. Mit Ausrufezeichen. Das war 2008. Legen wir für Unterarten tatsächlich keine Kategorien an oder ist das veraltet? Danke! --Martina talk 02:19, 27 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Martina,
ich bin nun auch gerade kein Spezialist für Schlangen-Unterarten ;-). Der Benutzer, der damals die Löschung einiger Unterkat. mit "No categories for subspecies" veranlasst hatte, ist seit 2009 nicht mehr aktiv. Insofern hast du das richtige getan und die benötigten Subkat. neu angelegt. Auf der Disku der Haupt-Kat. gibt es auch keinen Hinweis, der dagegen sprechen würde. Falls es nicht der aktuellen biolog. Nomenklatur entspricht, soll sich halt erstmal ein Spezialist dazu melden. --Túrelio (talk) 10:54, 27 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

You've got mail![edit]

Hello, Túrelio. Check your email—you've got mail!
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{YGM}} template. — MCC214#ex umbra in solem 11:58, 28 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Обращение[edit]

Добрый день. Обращаюсь к вам, с просьбой. Так как именно вы выполнили мои запросы по флагам Башкирии и Карелии. Суть такова. Оставьте пожалуйста File:Flag of the Crimean Republic.svg, источник я поставил, это Jaume Ollé [12][13]. Валко (talk) 12:24, 30 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Валко,
sorry, I don't read Russian language and the Google-translation does not make sense to me. Could you ask an ru-speaking admin Commons:Администраторы. --Túrelio (talk) 14:15, 30 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Okay, thanks. Валко (talk) 14:29, 30 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

You've got mail![edit]

Hello, Túrelio. Check your email—you've got mail!
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{YGM}} template. — MCC214#ex umbra in solem 11:40, 3 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

YGM[edit]

Hello, Túrelio. Check your email—you've got mail!
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{YGM}} template.

GMGtalk 18:48, 5 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. I will forward the information (not your mail) to T&S, if that's ok for you. --Túrelio (talk) 22:28, 5 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Doesn't matter either way. The Foundation knows who I am. Figured it would be easier if it were part of an existing email chain. GMGtalk 23:01, 5 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Photo Anatolii Smîșleaev[edit]

Dear Turelio,

I would like to clarity the situation regarding the photo of Anatolii Smîșleaev.

Today I got the following notification: 07:40, July 7 2019 user Túrelio deleted the page File:Anatoli Smîșleaev.png (Copyright violation: Already deleted as File:Anatolii Smîșleaev.png) But I would like to say, that I am the author of this photo and I put it on the page in 2013. I really don't understand why do the people from this site sell it. In addition you can find 2 versions and 2 different authors of the photo, what justifies, that they stole it. There is no Copyright violation from my side. A lot of sites have copied the image for their use, what is normal, but nobody makes money on my picture.

If you need any profs, that I am the owner and the author of this image, not they, I can send you the full version of the photo.

I just would like to put it back on the page, where it has been since 2013.

Looking forward to hearing from you.

Best regards

Azelot (talk) 13:03, 8 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Azelot: , I've temporarily restored the image and put it into a regular DR to allow for discussion. See Commons:Deletion requests/File:Anatolii Smîșleaev.png. --Túrelio (talk) 10:16, 9 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
@Túrelio: Tell me, please, what is the next step, if I want to justify that it is my picture and put it back? Thanks!

2 images[edit]

Hi, mr Túrelio 2 image File:Hani (dm1).jpg, File:Hani (dm2).jpg. I change other web source. Could you accept it? Đông Minh (talk) 10:59, 8 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Đông Minh,
no, as it says "Copyright © www.fmkorea.com All rights reserved." In addition, for the source-entry of not-own-work-uploads you need to provide a link to the page, where the image is shown with license information. --Túrelio (talk) 12:16, 8 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Túrelio I will never find new source for 2 pic, the only source I'm think you can accept but that web link dead, so now help me delete it. So thank you. Đông Minh (talk) 13:36, 11 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
✓ Done. --Túrelio (talk) 09:15, 12 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Thank Túrelio. -Đông Minh (talk) 04:23, 13 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

User:SHINGO154[edit]

SHINGO154 (talk · contribs) has re-uploaded the images you deleted for license laundering. SLBedit (talk) 13:59, 8 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

83.223.243.149 (talk · contribs), 176.78.36.108 (talk · contribs) and 2001:8a0:6a12:3c00:fc50:922c:3b32:e080 (talk · contribs) have tried to remove my reports. SLBedit (talk) 14:17, 8 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

SHINGO154 logged in and tried to remove copyright violation reports. SLBedit (talk) 14:42, 8 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi,
SHINGO154 has already been indef-blocked by Elcobbola and all his uploads deleted. Thanks for notifying. I've blocked the IPs. --Túrelio (talk) 15:27, 8 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

File:Flag of Bolivia (military) (2).svg[edit]

You deleted the File:Flag of Bolivia (military) (2).svg a while back, and what I wanted to do was merge the history of that file with File:Flag of Bolivia (military).svg. Please restore the deleted file and merge the history of the file with the history of the file you originally intended to merge. Thank you. For reference, I have also opened discussions on this. --Tcfc2349 (talk) 14:57, 8 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

add note) Please restore this file and upload File:Flag of Bolivia (state) validated.svg to File:Flag of Bolivia (state).svg. This discussion is also open. Please review it carefully and upload it if appropriate. Thank you. --Tcfc2349 (talk) 15:03, 8 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
I've restored the image. They are not exact duplicates. Different bird and different crest. The image is not going to be merged. They are, again, different files. Please stop asking. --Majora (talk) 20:45, 8 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Amitabh Chaudhry.jpg Deletion enquiry[edit]

Hi,

I have forwarded the mail copyright/mail. I have rights of this image. Please let me know how to make it live again. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Hitesh2617 (talk • contribs) 08:01, 9 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]


Hi, i have rights to use this image. Please make it live or I can provide the copyright. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Hitesh2617 (talk • contribs) 08:02, 9 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi,
if you have forwarded a valid permission to OTRS (permissions-commons@wikimedia.org), they will feedback to you and eventually restore the image; though it may take some time. --Túrelio (talk) 08:05, 9 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I had mailed here - permissions-en@wikimedia.org --Túrelio — Preceding unsigned comment added by Hitesh2617 (talk • contribs) 08:27, 9 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

That should be no problem. --Túrelio (talk) 08:36, 9 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Can you please resolve the following?[edit]

Hi, there. How are you? Can you please resolve or close the following deletion request Commons:Deletion requests/File:Minister Naledi Pandor delivering speech, June 2015 (cropped).jpg I uploaded the image from Flickr. The Flickr account published the image with the caption "Photo courtesy of Marianne Weiss, www.weissphotography.at/", yet the image was published under a free license. You can look at the image. here. There was a dispute over whether the image was under All Rights Reserved, bit, in fact, COM:NOTCOPYVIO, because " © is not a problem nor incompatible with the free license." Even Mr Rogel agreed. The original admin Pi.1415926535 has said "The problem that it is not clear whether the photographer themselves released the images under that license is not solved. Unless you can prove that, I have no choice but to close the discussion as delete". But it already says in the caption that it is photo courtesy of Mrs Marianne Weiss. The Flickr account would not have published it under a free license, if Mrs Weiss didn't consent. I believe Mrs Weiss was, in fact, hired to take the images at the event. I would appreciate if you could respond. I want multiple people's opinions. Thanks in advance. Lefcentreright (talk) 15:36, 10 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted images File:Affiche du film Garrincha (Fr).jpg & File:Affiche du film Médecin de campagne.jpg[edit]

@Túrelio: why have you deleted my two images, when I clearly stated that I was going to provide the necessary authorisations? Can you put them back for a few days, I will provide OTRS with the proper documentation. Regards, Antoine2711 (talk) 15:46, 11 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Antoine2711, as (suspected) copyvios have to be deleted fast and as there was no clear indication of a permission at the time of deletion. I've temp-undeleted them now. --Túrelio (talk) 06:52, 12 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Undelete please[edit]

There is now an OTRS ticket for File:David Orlic.jpg that you deleted. Thanks Ww2censor (talk) 22:19, 11 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

✓ Done. --Túrelio (talk) 06:50, 12 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

File:Плакат "Бабуся і кіт" Максима Голосного.jpg[edit]

Hi! Please comment in File talk:Білборд Максима Голосного "Про бабусю і кота".jpg. --Микола Василечко (talk) 13:45, 12 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

✓ Done. --Túrelio (talk) 08:53, 13 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted image of Muriel Cooper[edit]

Hello. I am Muriel Cooper’s nephew, and was one of her closest relatives. I uploaded an image of Muriel from my own collection of family photos. May I ask why you removed it from her page? I will upload it again - please do not remove it. — Preceding unsigned comment was added by 24.60.252.72 (talk) 02:29, 13 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Unknown,
as you did not log-in and did not specify the filename, I've no idea what you are talking about. --Túrelio (talk) 08:56, 13 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
In case you are relating to File:Muriel Cooper, Graphic Designer.jpg, uploaded and claimed as own work by JonathanJackson1961 (talk · contribs), MIT credits it to Carl Zahn[14]. --Túrelio (talk) 10:28, 13 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Info über neue Bilder und Bilder von Flickr[edit]

Guten Tag Túrelio,
"gibt es schon eine zeitliche Erwartung, wann "https://petscan.wmflabs.org" für Informationen von Neubildern wieder in Funktion gehen wird?"
Diese Frage hatte ich vor einigen Wochen User:Magnus Manske gestellt. Leider habe ich bisher keine Antwort bekommen.
Weiterhin kann ich keine Bilder mehr mit disem Link (https://tools.wmflabs.org/flickr2commons/) von Flickr laden.
Mache ich etwas falsch?, oder gibt es technische Probleme?
Leider kenne ich außer Dir niemanden, der mir bei schwierigen Fragen helfen kann.
Vielen Dank und Grüße. Orchi (talk) 16:21, 13 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Moin Orchi,
ich muss gestehen, dass ich selbst noch nie mit Petscan gearbeitet habe. Deshalb habe ich deine Frage einfach mal im Forum gestellt. Ich weiß dass Magnus Manske heute nur wenig Zeit hat, auch wenn er in der Frühzeit hier viele nützliche Sachen gemacht hat. Im Archiv des Forums habe ich diese kurze Diskussion gefunden. Ich weiß nicht, ob das deinem Problem entspricht. --Túrelio (talk) 08:15, 14 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Hallo Túrelio,
....vielen Dank für Deine Mühe. Ich werde mal versuchen, einen weiteren Experten (User:Steinsplitter?) zu suchen und zu befragen. Beste Grüße. Orchi (talk) 18:29, 14 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Steinsplitter ist dafür sicher eine gute Adresse, weil er sich gut mit Programmierung etc. auskennt. --Túrelio (talk) 19:08, 14 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Túrelio: Guten Abend Túrelio,
mit Freude habe ich heute Abend die beiden angesprochenen Werkzeuge wieder benutzen können. :-). Grüße. Orchi (talk) 21:28, 17 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

3 images[edit]

Dear Turelio,

Please kindly review these 3 images when you can.

Thank You, --Leoboudv (talk) 05:32, 14 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

✓ Done. --Túrelio (talk) 08:15, 14 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Deleting User:Angelgreat[edit]

Can you please delete User:Angelgreat because this is a indefinitely blocked user. --VKras (talk) 17:04, 14 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

✓ Done. --Túrelio (talk) 19:06, 14 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

What do you think about adminship?[edit]

Hi. I've been doing a lot of "pre-uploads", and thought that having adminship might make things a little easier (ex, so I could briefly undelete deleted files to add more information to captions in the infoboxes then redelete instead of going through a lengthy process with a long backlog, and in addition I could delete my pre-uploads even faster, etc) Is it permitted to become an admin just for a niche purpose like this, or would I be expected to do more stuff too? I just wanted to get your opinion on the matter before I applied.--PlanespotterA320 (talk) 17:13, 14 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi PlanespotterA320,
as you already suspected, in RfAs it is usually expected that the "candidate" is willing to perform all sorts of admin-tasks and also has demonstrated some interest (by performing or participating) and some knowledge in deciding deletion (regular/speedy) requests. Some voter may even present a "test case". Nevertheless, in everyday admin life most of us have some main focus and less to no activity in other areas.
So, you can either try to fulfil this expectation or, if that doesn't make sense to you, try to succeed with an expressedly declared "niche role" RfA, even though there might by some opposition. Every helping hand is welcome. --Túrelio (talk) 19:04, 14 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
I filed a request for adminship, can you support it? Commons:Administrators/Requests/PlanespotterA320--PlanespotterA320 (talk) 14:17, 15 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
I would recommend you to put a babel-template on your Commons userpage, which lists the languages you understand. --Túrelio (talk) 15:20, 15 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks, but I think you overestimate my language abilities. I can read Russian and Uzbek for understanding, but when it comes to writing I tend to butcher the syntax.--PlanespotterA320 (talk) 15:25, 15 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

4 images[edit]

Dear Turelio,

When you have the time, please review these 4 images.

Your help is always appreciated. Kind Regards from Metro Vancouver, --Leoboudv (talk) 03:01, 17 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

✓ Done. You are welcome. --Túrelio (talk) 06:35, 17 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

BAN evasion[edit]

You recently gave BAN to Special:Contributions/Rypinianin, but he now vandalizes pages and evaded BAN using sock under Special:Contributions/Cavalcantti name. PL-wiki checkuser confirmed it, see w:pl:user:Cavalcantti, so it deserves BAN too here. — Preceding unsigned comment was added by 2001:985:D5D4:1:A00:27FF:FEA6:A2E7 (talk) 17:22, 17 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for notifying. While I was offline, Yann has already taken care of that case. --Túrelio (talk) 07:14, 18 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Quarantetrois[edit]

Hi, Please inform the uploader when you delete files. Thanks, Yann (talk) 07:39, 18 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Image deletion[edit]

Hi Túrelio, please see my message for you over at my talk page, thanks. WookieInHeat (talk) 15:18, 18 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, thanks for notifying. WRT the DR for your 4 images: assuming that you legitimately uploaded these images in 2010, there is no compelling reason to delete them. As you are a long-term user (at least on :en), I don't need to tell you the thing about non-revokable CC licenses etc. 3 of the 4 nominated images are in use on project-pages, which is a binding obstacle even for a courtesy-deletion per our policy. BTW, the 4th image, File:Muskoka Sail.jpg, is re-used externally, in 1 case without crediting you, see File talk:Muskoka Sail.jpg. Apart from all that, all 4 images are nice and useful. Couldn't you eventually reconsider your deletion-wish? --Túrelio (talk) 08:35, 19 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
My desire to delete these images relates to my use of this username across multiple websites. They could potentially be used to identify the location of a property owned by my family, and I have received threats elsewhere. WookieInHeat (talk) 16:25, 27 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Ok. As I don't expect the DR to be delete-closed, the only solution I see this moment, would be to "anonymize or pseudonymize" these images. I am not sure we have an established procedure, though that is done every now and then. You need to think about an appropriate pseudonym, which allows no association at all with your real identy or location. You should send an email to OTRS, stating that you wish your author-name for the 3 or 4 images to be changed to that pseudonym. (I think we need a (restricted) record of the true authorship for legal reasons.) Then either an OTRS volunteer (I am not one) or any admin could change the author-entry and remove all traces of your username from the file history. Of course, the initial data (with your username) will remain for some time in the internet, though might disappear over time. --Túrelio (talk) 18:49, 27 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

A duplicate to delete[edit]

Ursula von der Leyen presents her vision to MEPs (48298862026).jpg is ready to leave us... but Jcb (talk · contribs) thinks that I am doing something wrong. Am I? All the best, --Edelseider (talk) 07:33, 19 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Well, yes, sort of. When tagging a file for dupe-processing, it's better to leave the original description etc. completely intact, as this allows the dupe-processing admin to compare both descriptions and eventually copy information from the to-be-deleted version to the remaining version. --Túrelio (talk) 08:19, 19 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Catherine Laurence[edit]

She abused rollback privilege on me: https://meta.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk%3ASteward_requests%2FGlobal&type=revision&diff=19217730&oldid=19217728 — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2001:985:d5d4:1:a00:27ff:fea6:a2e7 (talk • contribs)

Already reverted. I've added your signature. Now it remains since yesterday. --Túrelio (talk) 07:26, 20 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Free image[edit]

Hello, both of my images were free since they came from a video licensed under CC-BY in YouTube, regards.--A4exocet (talk) 22:22, 19 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi,
no. File:Agusticasanova.jpg and File:Lucilarada.jpg were both from YT video not under a CC license. --Túrelio (talk) 07:22, 20 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

A request to see deleted edits of files[edit]

  1. User talk:Shizhao/Mahjong
  2. File:IP-ban.zh.png
  3. File:7days-ban.zh.png
  4. File:UpRising-zh.png
  5. File:Ban1.zh.png
  6. File:WP-CXT.png
  7. File:Meta-ban2.png
  8. File:GoodPoster.png
  9. File:Zh-not-working.png

I need to temporarily undeleted the above listed pages before I extracted the required data,thanks.--MCC214#ex umbra in solem 08:10, 21 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@MCC214: , ✓ Done, except the 1st one (content was simply: peculiar category there.Allthingsgo (talk)Allthingsgo).
--Túrelio (talk) 10:22, 22 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
✓ Done,you can speedy delete them.--MCC214#ex umbra in solem 08:46, 23 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
✓ Done. --Túrelio (talk) 09:23, 23 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

File:Cross 3.jpg[edit]

Exists on enwiki as fair use image : en:File:Survey of India logo.jpg. -- CptViraj (📧) 11:49, 22 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Ok. Mentioned it in Commons:Deletion requests/File:Cross 3.jpg. --Túrelio (talk) 12:44, 22 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks, Regards! -- CptViraj (📧) 12:48, 22 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Offiziele Anfrage[edit]

Sie sind deutschsprachiger Administrator der Commons. Hiermit richte ich an Sie auf deutsch einige Fragen. Seit ca 6 Jahren bei der Kategorie East Prussia passieren seltsame Dinge. Urspuenglich sollten dort nur alte Karten, alte Wappen und alte Fahnen vorhanden sein, inzwischen sieht dass aber ganz anders aus:

  • East Prussia existiert seit 1945 nicht mehr, hoffe dass ich richtig informiert bin ?
  • Alle Immobilien (Bahnhoefe, Palaeste, Haueser, Schulen, Tuerme usw.) die es mal dort gab, befinden sich seit 1945 in Polen oder in Russland ?
  • Versuchen etwa deutschsprachige User innerhalb der Kategorie irgendeine alternative geschichtlich–politische Linie durchzusetzen die mit der Wirklichkeit un Commons Regeln nicht zu tun hat ?
  • Jetzt folgen einige Beispiele:
    • Innerhalb der Kategorie haben die deutchsprachigen User die ueblichen bei Commons Umkehrungen der ehem. deutschen Namen einiger Staedte umgegangen und neue Kategorien geschafft zB. fuer Olsztyn (siehe cat. Allenstein) und andere innerhalb cat. Cities in East Prussia
    • Ploetzlich landen ganze kategorien (hauptaechlich mit Bildern nach 2000) bei der Kategorie East Prussia, ohne jegliche Abschprache mit polnischen Usern
    • Man hat angefangen polnische Kategorien umzuschreiben (siehe Former prussian Barracks in ... hier polnischer Name als Beispiel) – ins deutsch obwohl dieser Gebaeude seit 1918 bzw 1945 sich in Polen befinden und von polnischen Institutionen benutzt werden
    • Es entstehen Kategorien mit Gebaeuden die im weiterem Verlauf diversen Kategorien in Germany zugeordnet werden
    • Seit ca mai 2019 werden polnische Eisenbahnhaltepunkte (siehe zB Braniewo train station) der Kategorie East Prussia zugeornet ... obwohl alle Medien innerhalb der Kategorie nach 2000 entstanden sind
    • Alle dieser Massnahmen der deutschsprachigen User finden ohne jeglichen Abprache mit den polnischen Usern, es sieht fast genauso aus wie damals als man sich fuers Herrenvolk hielt, es sind auch schon polnichsprachiger Administratoren eingeschaltet (Odder) aber trotzdem haben die deutschsprachigen Usern es immer wieder revertiert.
    • Es gibt noch viel mehr was ich erwaehnen kann, nach Wunsch suche ich die entsprechenden Links
    • All dies ist kein Zufall, da versuchen Einige etwas durchzusetzen was den Regeln nich entspricht. Commons ist ein internattionales Projekt und ganz bestimmt kein ostpreussisches. Es ist mir egal ob einer nazi, neonazi, altnazi, stalinist, ewiggestriger, deutschnationaler, revanschist usw ist (waehlen Sie was passt) Hauptsache dass man sich an die Regel haelt ...
    • Ich werde noch eine Version in polnisch verfassen und an die polnichsprachigen Administratoren schicken und eine Anfrage an die Commons wikipedia Fundatin auf einem anderm Wegschicken schicken.
    • Ich endschuldige mich fuer mein Deutsch, vielen dank fuer die evtl. Hilfe. mfG 5.173.8.61 18:10, 22 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Deletion of image - Martha Hart[edit]

Hi Túrelio, I was wondering why you have deleted this image of Martha Hart from the Wikimedia commons. (File:Picture of Dr. Martha Hart.jpg) In the note you said it was a Copyright violation. Could you please explain to me how it is a copyright violation? The owner of the picture, who is Martha Hart, has sent an email to permissions-commons@wikimedia.org previously before, allowing it to be freely used. I also noticed you linked a google search of the photo and where it appears on other websites, does this have anything to do with the copyright violation? Thank you. Kgywu (talk) 18:30, 22 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Kgywu,
are you referring to the file File:Picture of Dr. Martha Hart.jpg uploaded by User:LubnaAnis? It was claimed as "own work" by the uploader and there was no note about any permission/email in the description. But may be you are referring to a different file. --Túrelio (talk) 19:18, 22 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Túrelio, yes I am referring to that file, you are correct! I see I did not know it was uploaded by Lubna Anis. I e-mailed Martha Hart again and she said Lubna Anis took the picture of her, and that Lubna has given Martha Hart the permission to have this picture used freely. Should I re-upload the photo with note of the permission? Or would I need Martha and Lubna both to send the letter of permission first, before uploading the photo again? Sorry for all the questions, I am fairly new to the uploading of photos. Thank you for your help. Kgywu (talk) 20:28, 24 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Túrelio, I have reuploaded the photo since I have not received a reply yet. I mentioned a permission email that was sent in the description. I hope this clears things up. Thank you Kgywu (talk) 21:42, 31 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Kgywu,
I've added the OTRS template, which should prevent any early deletion-request. Though, it may take quite some time until the sent-in permission in processed, as the OTRS-volunteers are totally overworked. --Túrelio (talk) 06:54, 1 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

A barnstar for you![edit]

The Defender of the Wiki Barnstar
For your efforts in keeping Commons clean from copyright violations. Thank you. Ahmadtalk 20:56, 22 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Problems with Sacrilege (Heavy Rock) page[edit]

Hi Túrelio , I'm Valeria Campagnale, Sacrilege (Heavy Rock) band manager. I've created the Sacrilege (Heavy Rock)page and I don't understand wich kind of problem you found has as the message says the page will be delete.

This new page for UK based band Sacrilege (Heavy Rock), born in NWOBHM years, is created by me, with the bio written by Bill Beadle, fromer, vocalist and guitarist of the band, All rights reserved to Bill Beadle, Sacrilege (Heavy Rock) and Pure Steel Records, and photographers who contributed to Sacrilege' website and Facebook official page and already mentioned in each photo uploaded. Pure Steel Records has already buy years ago licenses for band album artworks "Ashes To Ashes" and "Six6six", John Martin' paints and already written in the note of each photo uploaded, as for "The Court Of The Insane" artwork of a different author and already mentioned in the photo uploaded. As every copyright and licence have been described also with the title of the works, I would like to understand why the page would be deleted if every copiright are the exclusive property of the band and the record label that bought ALL the licenses, and of course all the photographers have been cited for their rights and that ahno given of their own free will their works to the Sacrilege band: Bill Beadle, Paul Macnamara, Jeff Rolland and Neil Turnbull and I am authorized by the band itself to use photos, artwork and anything that belongs and is related to Sacrilege.

I thank you in advance and I await a reply.

Valeria Campagnale — Preceding unsigned comment added by ValeriaC1970 (talk • contribs)

Close file delete discussion[edit]

Hi there again Túrelio. Please close the Commons:Deletion requests/File:Apostate.png if you don't think any issue will arise. I had nominated hte file for deletion because it was duplicate of an SVG file, now I realize that a PNG file will better serve the purpose as people don't need a special software to open it after downloading. No one has responded and it wouldn't be okay if it gets deleted. Thank you. MonsterHunter32 (talk) 06:53, 24 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

✓ Done. --Túrelio (talk) 08:26, 24 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
I didn't mean for it to be deleted, I wanted it to be kept because I realized it would be useful. Id there any way you can restore it? If not, then please replace the links on the Wikipedia articles it was used for. MonsterHunter32 (talk) 08:34, 24 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Ok. Restored. Of course, I had already replaced the one use of it on :en before the deletion. --Túrelio (talk) 09:06, 24 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Removal of user rights for Slowking4[edit]

Please remove all user rights from them because they are blocked indefinitely. They don't have talk page or email access. --VKras (talk) 19:20, 24 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

File:Jan Asselijn - De bedreigde zwaan; later opgevat als allegorie op Johan de Witt - Google Art Project.jpg[edit]

As far as I can tell, if this was a duplicate, it's only a duplicate because the image you redirected to had a copy of the Google image uploaded over a image from the Rijksmuseum we ought to keep, and the image directed to should instead be reverted to the previous file, because at the moment, we're saying that the redirected source is a Google Art Project file that was not gotten from the Google Art Project, because the source of the file redirected to is certainly NOT the Google Art Project. Could you please undo the deletion, and either revert the Rijksmuseum copy to the appropriate one from the Rijksmuseum source, or whatever seems appropriate once both copies are viewable. Adam Cuerden (talk) 12:48, 25 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

File:Jan Asselijn - De bedreigde zwaan; later opgevat als allegorie op Johan de Witt - Google Art Project.jpg there you are. --Túrelio (talk) 13:44, 25 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

o use your image of Bl. Mother Teresa File:MotherTeresa 090.jpg[edit]

I would like to use the image in a powerpoint to use with groups, and also in an e-newsletter for the charity I work for. Our work is to inspire people to use banks and financial service providers with a better ethical standing and avoid those with a more negative standing. Bl. Mother Teresa is someone who noticed something wrong and acted to help people, and inspired others to do the same. We ask people to notice the ethical standing of their bank and act because negative acts by financial institutions can hurt people, animals and the climate/planet/. We are a not for profit UK registered charity. Our work is outlined at www.eccr.org.uk - and yes we hope to update that page.

I hope you agree to our request under Creative Commons attrib: as per your specific request © 1986 Túrelio (via Wikimedia-Commons), 1986 / Lizenz: Creative Commons CC-BY-SA-2.0 de [» please add this credit below or near the image] — Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.232.146.39 (talk • contribs)

Hi Unknown,
sure. Thanks for notifying. --Túrelio (talk) 08:59, 26 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Can you please take a look at these?[edit]

Commons:Deletion requests/File:Mariya Bayda.jpg Commons:Deletion requests/File:BaydaMK Ukaz Vyrezka.jpg Commons:Deletion requests/File:Raising a flag over the Reichstag (original).jpg

Thanks.--PlanespotterA320 (talk) 16:47, 28 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

✓ Done. --Túrelio (talk) 06:49, 1 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

File:Тимофей Тимофеевич Хрюкин.jpg[edit]

Can you edit it? I originally said it could be undeleted in 2074 because of 1978 publication, but I found much earlier publication (1961), so it can be undeleted in 2057. The publication: Бирюзов С.С. Когда гремели пушки. - М.: Воениздат, 1961. Can you edit the source section and leave a deletion summary noting that earlier publication was found? Thanks.--PlanespotterA320 (talk) 19:59, 28 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

So, I've replaced part of the former source-entry "Кояндер Е. В. Я — 'Рубин», приказываю... — М.: Воениздат, 1978." by "Бирюзов С.С. Когда гремели пушки. - М.: Воениздат, 1961." Right? --Túrelio (talk) 08:01, 29 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

File:Galina Petrova.jpg[edit]

Can you edit the page number in the source information? The photo was on page 513 of the book, not 427.--PlanespotterA320 (talk) 00:49, 29 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

✓ Done. --Túrelio (talk) 07:57, 29 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Deletion of photo of Paul Pisasale[edit]

https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=File:Disgraced_former_Lord_Mayor_of_Ipswich,_Paul_Pisasale.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1

Hi, you recently deleted a photo of Paul Pisasale that I uploaded because you claim it didn't have the correct licence. However the source link I provided shows that it does in fact have a suitable licence (Attribution 2.0 Generic (CC BY 2.0)): https://www.flickr.com/photos/61651654@N07/5840600582

This is the original source of this image from the charity that organised the event.

Could you please restore the image or help me to understand why it wasn't suitable?

Thanks!

Sparticusmaximus (talk) 08:24, 29 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi
that's a mismatch.
File:Disgraced_former_Lord_Mayor_of_Ipswich,_Paul_Pisasale.jpg was indeed the image shown here. The image associated with your Flickr-link is File:Ipswich Mayor Paul Pisasale enjoying breaky.jpg. --Túrelio (talk) 08:36, 29 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Oh... you deleted the Ipswich library photo that I uploaded previously! Yes, I got that licence wrong for that one. Thanks for clearing that up. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sparticusmaximus (talk • contribs)

Cordone-Tanz Photo[edit]

Hello Turelio, I see that a photo I uploaded, 'Cordone Tanz', was deleted. Do you have any recommendations what information I should add to this photograph's page so that it fulfills the Wikipedia copyright requirements? Thank you in advance, Anna Lea --80.139.231.147 20:07, 29 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Ana Lea,
as Alexis told you already, you need to ask said photographer Roberto Cordone, whether he would be willing to release this image under a free license (see COM:L), such as this one. If he agrees, you need to send him an appropriate permission-text, see Commons:Email_templates#Email_message_template_for_release_of_rights_to_a_file, and ask him to sign und date it and to send it to permissions-commons@wikimedia.org . --Túrelio (talk) 20:22, 29 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

File:Nikitin anton vl.png[edit]

Hello! You have deleted a photo. Look at this site https://inter.ua/uk/news/2015/12/18/5973

there is a line: Photo: Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 4.0 International


This is not enough? -- On tv (talk) 12:12, 30 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi,
no, the file was deleted by my colleague 4nn1l2. --Túrelio (talk) 14:42, 30 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry to bother you again[edit]

Can you briefly undelete File:Надежда Терентьевна Волкова.jpg to change the original publication in source from the 1987 book to "Abramova, M.; Levashov, A. (1969). Toropov, L. (ed.). Героини: очерки о женщинах — Героях Советского Союза [Heroines: Essays about Women - Heroes of the Soviet Union] (in Russian). Moscow: Politizdat. OCLC 948194007." since the 1969 publication date means it can be undeleted quite a few years sooner (2065 instead of 2087)? Thanks.--PlanespotterA320 (talk) 18:44, 30 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

✓ Done. --Túrelio (talk) 14:24, 31 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Copyvio deletion - Class 720 at Old Dalby test track.jpg[edit]

Hi, as you deleted the image in question, could you close the deletion request entry at all? The request is here. Thanks. Nightfury (talk) 14:30, 31 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

✓ Done. --Túrelio (talk) 14:32, 31 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

2 images[edit]

Dear Turelio,

If you have a little time, please kindly review these 2 images.

Thank You for your time. Best, --Leoboudv (talk) 05:30, 1 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

✓ Done. --Túrelio (talk) 06:49, 1 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Jasprit Bumrah[edit]

Hi Túrelio. Yesterday, you (twice) deleted an image of cricketer Jasprit Bumrah which I tagged as a copyright violation. A different user has uploaded the same image today and is repeatedly deleting the speedy deletion tag on it. I have added a topic on this to Commons:Administrators' noticeboard/User problems#Copyright violation File:Jasprit Bumrah.png. I was hoping you could add your opinion there. Many thanks, Railfan23 (talk) 06:13, 2 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. My colleague 4nn1l2 has already taken care of. --Túrelio (talk) 13:23, 2 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

File:Boris Grigoriev 25.jpg[edit]

Hi, you've deleted it so quickly, I even didn't know what it was. If it was such thing[15] -- it is your mistake. Victor Arnautoff is the model, it does no matter when he died. Author is Boris Grigoriev (1886–1939). Please restore the file if it so. --Shakko (talk) 11:48, 3 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, the author-entry had been changed to "creator:Victor Arnautov" already in 2011. As you had 5 edits thereafter, you should have noticed that. Anyway, I've restored the file now. --Túrelio (talk) 12:28, 3 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
no, I didn't notice this sabotage :( thank you for redeletion, I've changed the authorship back right: Arnautoff is with mustache[16], Grigoriev without. --Shakko (talk) 13:22, 3 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Löschen der Wikipedia-Seite über mich Cathy Clement[edit]

Hallo, ich komme mit dem Computer nicht gut klar und würde gerne alle Wikipedia Einträge von mir löschen. Diese sind auf einer Seite, die meinen Namen trägt. Ich hatte sie ergänzt wegen meiner Schriftstellerei aber möchte nun nichts mehr auf Wikipedia haben. Diese Datenschutzrichtlinien verunsichern mich sehr, deshalb möchte ich das nicht. Danke für Deine Hilfe. Cathynka (talk) 19:22, 5 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hallo Cathynka,
meintest du damit den Artikel auf der luxemburgischen Wikipedia ([17])? Falls ja, müsstest du dort einen Löschantrag stellen, siehe lb:Wikipedia:Läschen. --Túrelio (talk) 10:35, 6 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

File:Transmac D32 22-05-2019.jpg[edit]

Regarding File:Transmac D32 22-05-2019.jpg, I have tried multiple times to refresh the page, only found that the file can never be loaded. When I clicked into the file, it shows the following message:

Hi, this would surely be a SD criteria, if existant. I've accessed the file without any problem, even using a low-bandwidth access. Try to clear your browse-cache. --Túrelio (talk) 09:13, 7 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Received permission to use 2 jetphotos.net photos here on Commons[edit]

Hello I have received permission to use 2 jetphotos.net photos here on Commons.

What do I do that I have permission to use their work here? --VKras (talk) 14:49, 17 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi VKras,
if you got a permission that complies with our license terms, you can upload the images and add {{OTRS pending}} to the description, and you should, if you didn't do it already, forward said permission to permissions-commons@wikimedia.org and mention the associated filenames (on Commons). --Túrelio (talk) 15:08, 20 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Image from old journal[edit]

Hi Túrelio.
I would like, please, to know whether copyright violation, if I'm using portrait of a man from a 1918 journal?
Directly from here: Heinemann OkeH Record now ready for the trade. The Talking Machine World (1918-05-15).
It's about cropped picture, not the whole page.
Thanks for taking the time. --SaltVisor (talk) 15:40, 23 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @SaltVisor,
sorry for replying late, but I was on holidays. So, it's about the portrait of Otto Heinemann, right? If this journal is from the U.S., the image should be in the PD per File:PD-US table.svg. --Túrelio (talk) 10:42, 28 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Túrelio,
Journal of 1918. Decision can wait, no rush))
Yes, it's about the portrait of Heinemann, but not only, there's a lot of interesting things.
It's public domain, if I understand this correctly.
Thanks for your help and your time. --SaltVisor (talk) 18:56, 28 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Circle jerk 3D illustration.jpg[edit]

Regarding the I'm assuming speedy deletion of File:Circle jerk 3D illustration.jpg, I'm struggling to find exactly where your rational for deletion is derived from. You deletion notes Daz 3d is "under Personal & Non-Commercial license" but give no link or actual quote. Below is an the relevant section of the EULA for Daz3d. There is not a personal or non-commercial clause, in fact is expressly allows sales and distribution of 2d works created with the software, provided the user doesn't attempt to sell any part of the 3d model that is incorporated with the software package or purchased afterwards.

I've included the section in question as well as a link to the full agreement so you can see I haven't manipulated the quote in any way. I look forward to further discussion on the matter when you are able to take the time to review this message and supplementary material.


link to full EULA

End User License Agreement: Terms of Use

Terms of Use. Two Dimensional Works. Subject to the terms and conditions of this Agreement, User may (i) access, use, copy and modify the Content in the creation and presentation of two-dimensional animations and renderings, (ii) incorporate two dimensional images (including two dimensional images that simulate motion of three dimensional objects) derived by User from the Content in User’s other works, and (iii) publish, market, distribute, transfer, sell or sublicense User’s two-dimensional animations, renderings and other works; provided that User may not in any case publish, market, distribute, transfer, sell or sublicense any renderings, animations, software applications, data or any other product from which any Content, or any part thereof, or any substantially similar version of the Content can be separately exported, extracted or de-compiled into any re-distributable form or for any particular use of objects, names, trademarks, service marks or works of authorship.


Respectfully yours Nicoli Maege (talk) 03:07, 26 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

(talk page stalker) From my point of view, Túrelio acted correctly. The Terms of Use state: "... provided that User may not in any case publish, market, distribute, transfer, sell or sublicense any renderings, animations, software applications, data or any other product from which any Content, or any part thereof, or any substantially similar version of the Content can be separately exported, extracted or de-compiled into any re-distributable form or for any particular use of objects, names, trademarks, service marks or works of authorship." This is caveat that is not acceptable at Commons. Uploads here need to be free for anyone to use for any kind of purpose. De728631 (talk) 22:52, 27 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Hi De728631, first off I'm not sure if you took the time to read the deletion notice, but it noted as I restated above that the license was "Personal & Non-Commercial license" which doesn't appear in the EULA in fact rights of the user to sell and use in commercial outlet are expressly given. More specifically to your response, the EULA here is referring to any person downloading or buying models or content and in any way selling that 3D file, as if it is their own. This also applies to releasing it in such a way that another person could decompile or derive the 3D model or content without paying thereby violating the copyright. A 2d render in my opinion in no way violated this caveat, and being that users are the sole copyright holder of their renders it doesn't in my opinion violate any Commons policy. Nicoli Maege (talk) 10:49, 28 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Nicoli Maege,
the deletion-notice ("Author claims to have used Daz Studio. Daz Studio's 3D models are under a Personal & Non-Commercial license|source=https://www.daz3d.com/eula"), as posted to your talkpage and as automatically also used for the deletion log-entry, came from the nominator User:TZYX. As I found it plausible on first view, I didn't change the wording and performed the deletion. --Túrelio (talk) 10:59, 28 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Túrelio, thanks for getting back to me. I understand you're simply the deleting admin, and that you didn't initiate the nomination, I would simply like to discuss the validity of the deletion with you before initiating a request to restore. Thanks again for your time Nicoli Maege (talk) 12:51, 28 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Nicoli Maege, I did actually read the original deletion notice. In my opion, the problematic part of the EULA is in fact the one that prohibits releasing one's creation "in such a way that another person could decompile or derive the 3D model or content". Commons requires exactly this, namely that re-users are able to decompose a work into its original components and use these bits and pieces separately to their liking. Essentially "Content" as defined by the EULA is not free to use for anyone, but only for "User" – hence my agreement to the deletion rationale that this is a personal and non-commercial licence in the sense of Commons. De728631 (talk) 18:09, 28 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
De728631 I'm really trying to understand your point of view here, if there is a policy that says rendered 3d art must be accompanied by an editable 3d model then please point me to it. An if so then aren't all the files in the Category:3D rendering in violation? please don't take this as derogatory because it isn't meant that way. I think perhaps you may be uninformed about 3d art vs 2d art. a two dimensional work can be "decomposed" or I would put it, create derivate works by means of an image editor and in this way any part of the work can be used, this isn't prohibited by the EULA, as it expressly allows and gives users the right to sell, publish etc. Furthermore, most 2d works as this and other 3d rendered art can't be decompiled into it's working "bits" as you put it, in order to extract the 3d model. There are formats and file types that this can be done with and those would of course violate the EULA. However, to the portion you deem problematic, I feel you're assigning meaning that isn't stated by a simple misunderstanding of terminology pertaining to a very specified field, i.e. decompile vs derive. Once again no disrespect is meant and apologies if I've come across that way. Nicoli Maege (talk) 21:25, 28 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
No offence taken. Of course there is no policy at Commons that any 3d art has to come along with an editable 3d model. But if anyone ever wanted to upload an editable 3d model from DAZ 3D, they would not be allowed to do so under these EULA. Decompiling is also not the issue here. Neither is the obvious permission for User to sell their creations. My problem with your excerpt from the EULA though is this phrase "... User may not in any case publish, ... from which any Content, or any part thereof, or any substantially similar version of the Content can be separately exported, extracted". It means that you cannot make any derivatives from User's creation once they have been published. Not to forget some other terms: "Content License. DAZ grants to User and User hereby accepts, subject to the limitations and obligations of this Agreement, a personal, non-exclusive, non-transferable license to use the Content, duly obtained by payment of all applicable license fees, as provided in this Agreement. ... Restrictions on Copying. The Content is provided for User's exclusive use. User does not have the right to provide the Content to others in any form or on any media except as set forth in this Agreement. The Content may be copied in whole or in part for User’s exclusive use. ... The creation of three-dimensional physical representations (3D-print, molded copy, CNC-routed copy, and the like) of Content or any three-dimensional art derived from the Content is permitted only for personal, non-commercial use by the User." I.e. wherever Content from DAZ 3D is included in a work, it may not be used by third parties. Or put the other way 'round: The sale to and the use by third parties of works created with DAZ 3D software is only possible if User does everything by himself without accessing DAZ Content.
So the question arises: How did you create all the nude dudes in a circle for this image? If you downloaded the bodies as a template from DAZ3D or if they came along with the Studio software, I'm afraid I don't see how you could possibly be allowed to relicense this file. De728631 (talk) 22:19, 28 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Two quick side notes, 1) I wanted to say I really appreciate you as an editor and I think the project is stronger because of you. We may not agree on this issue but I respect your desire to protect the commons from copyvio uploads. 2) sorry for my lack of response as I've recently had a hurricane come thru and had other more pressing matters to attend to.
Now to reply, first let me point out your statement "[...]obvious permission for User to sell their creations." this short statement by you supports my position that the user owns the copyright to their render, if they did not own the copyright to renders/2 dimensional images created with the software they would have no right to sell these renders. Secondly, and I will again point you to the above block quote, the EULA expressly gives permission to create derivative works, provided the 3 dimensional works cannot be obtained from the render or 2 dimensional work. The whole second section of your first paragraph is correct but you are erroneously applying it to 2d rather than 3d files and therein lies the issue. As to your question of a. implying that users only own copyright if they've created the 3d works from scratch and b. subsequently calling my render into question. I created this illustration with one of the default male models, but this simply doesn't violate the EULA. Daz3d is a poser software, not 3d modelling software, the same company offers a program for such but Daz3d and its licenses are set up for the provided (default) content and the content available for purchase online in their marketplace to be used in commercial work, thus the stipulation that 2d works are the copyright property of the user so long as the user doesn't sell or otherwise provide the 3d work to their customers, giving no such stipulation anywhere that the works must not employ any pre-made content. Nicoli Maege (talk) 20:21, 7 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I am the rights-owner.[edit]

You have deleted DeLaRimnu.jpg, that I had uploaded a couple of hours ago. It is my book, and its cover was made with a public domain image. You should not have deleted it, but written me instead. - Waelsch (talk) 10:33, 28 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

You had been notified beforehand: User_talk:Waelsch#File:DeLaRimnu1.jpg. If the animal-shot on the cover-image File:DeLaRimnu1.jpg is in the public domain, you need to provide evidence for that. If all the 18 images on the backcover File:DeLaRimnu4.jpg are in the public domain, you need to provide evidence for that. --Túrelio (talk) 10:37, 28 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Err, what, two hours afterwards? How am I supposed (who have a real job in a real world) to provide the info in less than two hours? Waelsch (talk) 08:33, 29 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Well, you should have done this work before the upload. Claiming all these images on the cover-pages as own work was simply not true, even if not intentional. So, do it now and we'll see if the files can be undeleted. --Túrelio (talk) 08:39, 29 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
For the cover 1 of the book: https://pixabay.com/sk/photos/koza-zoo-kozel-rohy-741386/ &

https://snappygoat.com/b/3ee4d869a9b61a1ffdef3b1f46dbb0a6a19746ee

For the cover 4: I am not the author of all the images, but they have free licences on Flickr: Bură: Duc Ly (Flickr); Albastru: Paul (Flickr)

Apă: Luke Peterson (Flickr); Baleg: Leo-setä (Flickr); Bară: Hernán Piñera (Flickr); Blidŭ: vintage19_something (Flickr); Brâncă: MGantz (Flickr) Bugĭorŭ: Catsie_7 (Flickr); Clopŭ: Nicolas Staelens; Clopotŭ: Henri Bergius (Flickr); Cuçu: kitty.green66 (Flickr); Curcă: Jean Christophe Blanquart (Flickr); Curcubeu: Maxwell Hamilton (Flickr); Łińe: Nicolas Staelens; Luţĕrnă: Andreas Rockstein (Flickr); Mânḑŭ: Tim Green (Flickr); Melcŭ: Jason Hollinger (Flickr); photo of the author (myself). Note than Nicolas Staelens is my husband. All the sources are quoted in the book on the bibliographical page. Waelsch (talk) 09:05, 29 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I've restored File:DeLaRimnu1.jpg already. In order to restore the backcover file, it would heplp if you could provide the links to the Flickr-pages. --Túrelio (talk) 09:14, 29 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you. Now here are the image sources for the 4th cover:

https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Framboises.JPG & https://www.flickr.com/photos/lukepeterson/5210463195 & https://sverigesradio.se/sida/artikel.aspx?programid=3130&artikel=5562691 & https://prosalus.es/es/noticias/la-humanidad-necesita-agua & https://www.flickr.com/photos/vintage19_something/6172875407/ & https://www.flickr.com/photos/52473842@N02/5890369023/ & https://www.flickr.com/photos/corin_life/41309599965/ & https://www.flickr.com/photos/bergie/309776485 & https://www.flickr.com/photos/53887959@N07/4984818141 & https://www.flickr.com/photos/mualphachi/5147338398/in/album-72157621840836707/ & https://www.flickr.com/photos/74738817@N07/with/28894472665/ & https://www.flickr.com/photos/atoach/14696546576/ & https://www.flickr.com/photos/7147684@N03/1037533775 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Waelsch (talk • contribs) 10:49, 29 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Ok. I've added the source-links and author-names (in the order of images, starting at the top left.) of those images which I could identify. However, there remain some which I couldn't identify. Please check for yourself and add the appropriate source-link and author-name. --Túrelio (talk) 08:04, 31 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks, I'll do it. Waelsch (talk) 22:11, 1 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Wiki Loves Monuments 2019[edit]


Hallo Túrelio,

bald ist es soweit: Vom 1. bis zum 30. September 2019 findet zum neunten Mal der internationale Wettbewerb Wiki Loves Monuments statt. Dabei können Bau- und Kulturdenkmale fotografiert und die Fotos hochgeladen werden. Du hast an einem der vergangenen Fotowettbewerbe teilgenommen. Deshalb laden wir dich ein, dieses Jahr wieder mitzumachen. Wir freuen uns auf deine Fotos!

Es sind viele spannende Motive überall in Deutschland zu fotografieren. Neben beeindruckenden märchenhaften Schlössern, Burgen und Kirchen können auch andere Kulturdenkmale wie Brücken, Industrieruinen, Bauernhöfe oder Parks fotografiert werden, um sie unter anderem in der Wikipedia zu dokumentieren. In den letzten Jahren sind zahlreiche neue Denkmallisten entstanden, die sich über Fotos freuen. Für die Suche nach Motiven gibt es bei Wikipedia zahlreiche Listen und Karten. Als Einstieg hilft diese Übersichtsseite. Weitere Informationen erhältst du auf der Mitmach-Seite.

Du bist interessiert, am Wettbewerb mitzuwirken, dir fehlt aber die richtige Technik? Dann wirf doch mal einen Blick in den Technikpool und das Technikleihportal von Wikimedia Deutschland! Dort findest du Kameras, Objektive und Zubehör verschiedenster Art. Sollte noch Technik fehlen, die aber in Zukunft unbedingt benötigt wird, dann freut sich Wikimedia Deutschland über dein Feedback zum Technikpool.

Außerdem laden wir Dich ein, ab Mitte September 2019 an der Vorjury teilzunehmen. Diese bewertet die hochgeladenen Bilder und ermittelt so gemeinsam mit der Jury, die im Oktober tagt, die Sieger von Wiki Loves Monuments 2019 in Deutschland. Das Vorjurytool ist hier bald freigeschaltet. Du benötigst dafür nur deinen Benutzernamen und das Passwort.

Für Fragen steht das Organisationsteam gerne auf der Support-Seite zur Verfügung.

Viel Spaß und Erfolg bei größten Fotowettbewerb wünscht dir im Namen des Organisationsteams --Z thomas 14:28, 28 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

File:Lydia Hamilton Updated Headshot.jpg[edit]

Hi Túrelio,

As a FYI. I undeleted this file because off Commons:Deletion requests/Files uploaded by LHamilton (WMF). The uploader was advised to ask the photographer to upload the files him/herself and so the photographer did. Patrick Rogel responded in this discussion and yet he flagged the file uploaded by the photographer for speedy deletion without providing all the relevant context. There is no real doubt that the photographer himself uploaded the files. I hope you don't mind the undeletion. Natuur12 (talk) 22:00, 28 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

First @Natuur12: please notify me when you're talking about me, second please do not remove deletion requests. All the relevant context has been provided since image is a copyvio of a Linkedin image, which appears to be a recreation of a previously deleted content with no EXIFs. Besides what evidence have you that image has been uploaded by the photographer? As OTRS Team member have you received a permission from Lydia Hamilton or the photographer, as requested? Where's the Ticket number? --Patrick Rogel (talk) 22:13, 28 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
a) you confirmed for the original high res file with exif uploaded by the photographer is sufficient. Such a file is provided. b) The linkedin version is smaller and obviously not placed by the photographer. c) That the uploader is a professional photographer is mentioned at Krlamar. Natuur12 (talk) 22:20, 28 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
First @Natuur12: please notify me when you're talking about me. You must have misreaded because I confirm nothing at all; I've requested either Lydia Hamilton to provide an OTRS permission with the transfer of ownership from photographer to her enclosed OR photographer to provide a high-re photography "with intact EXIF files with the photographer's name enclosed". None of them has been provided (or you haven't added on file the OTRS permission number you have received); instead Krlamar has provided exactly the same resolution image (with complete EXIFs missing) that has been deleted -which is funny- by you. --Patrick Rogel (talk) 22:30, 28 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
@Patrick Rogel: let's continue this discussion at your talk page. Discussing this is a bit pointless when you ignore the content of my message at your talk page. Besides, we don't want to spam Túrelio with notifications. Natuur12 (talk) 22:37, 28 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
@Natuur12, sure, no problem, For me, this was just a duplicate-deletion. --Túrelio (talk) 07:45, 29 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Valeriana supina & Valeriana saliunca[edit]

Dear Túrelio,

According to the Catalogue of Life in which Valeriana supina DC. is put as synonym of Valeriana saliunca All., MILEPRI has put the category Valeriana supina, which was put without author name, as synonym of the category Valeriana saliunca.

Valeriana saliunca All. is an erect species with small leaves, which is a rare and endangered, endemic plant of acidic grounds, mainly found in the Western Alps. See Weidenblättriger Baldrian for a detailed description.
Valeriana supina Ard. is a dwarf and supine species with much broader leaves, which is widespread on lime grounds of the Eastern Alps. See Zwerg-Baldrian for a detailed description.

Herewith a picture of Valeriana saliunca All., which I have photographed in the French Alps (the only picture of this true species currently on Commons), and a picture of Valeriana supina Ard. by another user. (I have encountered it in the Dolomites, but my own pictures of it are not of very high quality.)

  • Valeriana saliunca All.
    Valeriana saliunca All.
  • Valeriana supina Ard.
    Valeriana supina Ard.

According to their very different habitus and the places where they are living, I cannot believe that Valeriana supina Ard. and Valeriana saliunca All. could be considered as the same species.

So far I did understand from the exchange I had with MILEPRI (I do not understand Spanish very well), Valeriana supina Ard. is not recorded in the Catalogue of Life.

Please resolve the issue. Many thanks in advance, --Réginald alias Meneerke bloem (To reply) 13:19, 29 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Réginald, I'll look into this tomorrow. --Túrelio (talk) 08:15, 31 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Dear Túrelio, do not worry, After discussion with MILEPRI and Andyboorman the issue has been solved in the meantime.
Discussion: Valeriana supina DC., Fl. Franc. ed. 3. 4: 237 (1805) and Valeriana supina Ard., Animadv. Bot. Spec. Alt. 13 (1764) are two different taxa, as can be seen from the protologues. In addition De Candolle indicates that Valeriana supina DC. and Valeriana saliunca All., Fl. Pedem. i. 3. t. 70. f. 1. (1785) are one and the same. Under ICBN Valeriana saliunca All. has precedence. Therefore COL is correct with their synonymy, but in error in leaving out Valeriana supina Ard. from their list.
Result: MILEPRI has restored the category Valeriana supina, with Ard. as author's name.
Best regards, --Réginald alias Meneerke bloem (To reply) 07:12, 2 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Deletion 2[edit]

Hi. You deleted File:Kd v1.svg. No contact. No discussion what so ever? Why? I'm sorry if I sound angry. But did you check the difference between the files and the descriptions? It was neither exact, nor scaled duplicate. I made it myself. Please undo the deletion. – GeMet [talk] 14:27, 30 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @GeMet,
the duplicate-processing, as requested by User:Jonteemil, does not require a discussion, if the nomination is formally correct. Before deleting your file, I did visually compare both images, as happens per default in the dupe-process. I found them looking identical then and now, when I repeated the visual comparison. Anyway, as dupe-deletion is not legally mandatory, I've courtesy-restored your file. Now, you can see by yourself that both images look the same. --Túrelio (talk) 08:14, 31 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
I can see a visual difference. Here (1, 2) you can see the two different blue colors. But I'll show you the difference in source code below.
File:Kd v1.svg:
<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<svg xmlns="http://www.w3.org/2000/svg" width="512" height="474">
<path style="fill:#145fa6" d="M 0 0 H 512 V 474 H 0 Z"/>
<path style="fill:#ffffff" d="M 35.5 35.5 L 35.5 438.5 L 476.5 438.5 L 476.5 35.5 L 35.5 35.5 z M 42 42 L 470 42 L 470 432 L 42 432 L 42 42 z M 220.12695 103 L 220.12695 193 L 238.125 193 L 238.125 157.75586 L 262.04297 193 L 284.32227 193 L 252.60547 147.43164 L 281.80664 103 L 260.7832 103 L 238.125 138.875 L 238.125 103 L 220.12695 103 z M 220.11914 229 L 220.11914 319 L 246.92969 319 C 306.84728 319 306.84728 229 246.92969 229 L 220.11914 229 z M 238.11719 247 L 246.92969 247 C 281.92346 247 281.92346 301.00195 246.92969 301.00195 L 238.11719 301.00195 L 238.11719 247 z M 196.5 355 L 196.5 361 L 315.5 361 L 315.5 355 L 196.5 355 z"/>
</svg>
File:Christian Democrats Sweden logo 2017.svg:
<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>
<!-- Generator: Adobe Illustrator 20.1.0, SVG Export Plug-In . SVG Version: 6.00 Build 0)  -->
<!DOCTYPE svg PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD SVG 1.1//EN" "http://www.w3.org/Graphics/SVG/1.1/DTD/svg11.dtd">
<svg version="1.1" id="Lager_1" xmlns="http://www.w3.org/2000/svg" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" x="0px" y="0px"
	 viewBox="0 0 181 167.6" enable-background="new 0 0 181 167.6" xml:space="preserve" preserveAspectRatio="none">
<rect fill-rule="evenodd" clip-rule="evenodd" fill="#005ea1" width="181" height="167.6"/>
<g>
	<g>
		<path fill="#FFFFFF" d="M77.9,37.2h6.3c0,4.2,0,8.4,0,12.6l7.9-12.6h7.4L89.3,52.8l11.1,16h-7.8l-8.4-12.4c0,4.1,0,8.3,0,12.4
			h-6.3V37.2z"/>
		<path fill="#FFFFFF" d="M87.3,112.9h-9.4V81.4h9.4C108.3,81.4,108.3,112.9,87.3,112.9z M84.2,87.7v18.9h3.1
			c12.3,0,12.3-18.9,0-18.9H84.2z"/>
	</g>
</g>
<rect x="89.4" y="105.6" transform="matrix(-1.836970e-16 1 -1 -1.836970e-16 217.0907 36.1338)" fill="#FFFFFF" width="2.1" height="42"/>
<path fill="#FFFFFF" d="M168.3,152.8V14.7v-2.1h-2.1H14.7h-2.1v2.1v138.1v2.1h2.1h151.5h2.1h0L168.3,152.8L168.3,152.8z M14.7,152.8
	V14.7h151.5v138.1H14.7z"/>
</svg>
There are a lot of unnecessary code in the second one. If you think it only should be one file, I could overwrite File:Christian Democrats Sweden logo 2017.svg with the "clean-code version". Although I'm not sure that I'm allowed to put the license I'd like to. – GeMet [talk] 12:52, 31 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Wiki Loves Monuments in the United States – Back for 2019![edit]

This user participated in Wiki Loves Monuments 2019.

Want to show your participation in Wiki Loves Monuments 2019? Add {{User Wiki Loves Monuments 2019}} to your userpage!

Hello! Last year you contributed to Wiki Loves Monuments 2018 in the United States. Thanks to people like you it was a great success, with over 1,900 people contributing over 10,000 photos of cultural and historic sites from all over the country. Hundreds of these photos now help illustrate Wikipedia articles, improving our open knowledge about United States history, culture, and heritage. If you haven't seen the winners yet, be sure to check them out here.

I'm pleased to say that we're back this year with Wiki Loves Monuments 2019 in the United States, and I'd like to welcome you to participate once again in the event. Check out our updated event page for more information. Just like last year, you'll be able to upload your photos of any registered historical site in the United States through the end of September (even if the photos were taken before this month).

If you've traveled and taken photos of monuments in non-US countries, you can see if those countries are also participating here.

Once again, thank you for participating in Wiki Loves Monuments 2018, and we hope to see you again in this year's event! If you'd like to respond to this message directly, please do so on on my talk page. ~Kevin Payravi (talk) 05:15, 1 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Removal of a photo for https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/A.D._Hopkins (File:A.D. high rez.jpg)[edit]

The photo of A.D. Hopkins from this page https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/A.D._Hopkins should be reversed. The photo is owned by publisher of his book and the license followed the Wikipedia Commons licensing rules. The citation on the history indicated that the removal was due to "copyright violation" because this photo was also found on this site https://manybooks.net/featured-authors/ad-hopkins-mystery-coming-of-age-story-set-in-1959. Permission was granted to use that photo to manybooks.net by the publisher as part of a book promotion for A.D. Hopkins's book. That same photo is on dozens of sites as part of A.D. Hopkins's book tour. But the original photo is owned 100% by the publisher and was provided for use on this Wikipedia page.

So, please restore the photo of Mr. Hopkins to this article: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/A.D._Hopkins

Thanks, — Preceding unsigned comment added by CharlesSquid (talk • contribs) 01:02, 2 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi CharlesSquid,
most of your statements about the copyright-status of this image might be true. However, no evidence has been provided, which is required per Commons procedures. User:Hbrennah claims 1) to represent "Imbrifex Books" and 2) "Imbrifex Books" to be the author/photographer of this image, as he/she claims for his/her other uploads, which are currently also disputed. As per your wording you seem to be in contact with either Hbrennah or the publisher, you should aks him/her to confirm 1) that the user-account User:Hbrennah indeed legally represents Imbrifex Books[18], and 2) that Imbrifex Books really has full copyright over the disputed image (File:A.D. high rez.jpg) and 3) that Imbrifex Books wants to release this image under the choosen cc-by-sa-4.0 license.
For the permission-wording you could use Commons:Email_templates#Email_message_template_for_release_of_rights_to_a_file as a template. This confirmation then needs to be sent from their official email address to permissions-commons@wikimedia.org. (Content of their email will not be made public, but can only be seen by the processing OTRS-volunteers.) --Túrelio (talk) 06:30, 2 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Metroid Federation Force wasn't Fair use[edit]

Metroid Federation Force wasn't Fair use, it was PD and I tagged as such. You should undone your deletion. --Jakeukalane (talk) 03:04, 2 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Jakeukalane: Restored and put into a regular DR to allow for discussion. --Túrelio (talk) 06:12, 2 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Deleting Hallowen II Movie Poster[edit]

Excuse me, sir. Why are you deleting my Movie Poster about Halloween II Movie? A English Wikipedia about Halloween II are actually using Movie Poster and didn't get banned WilderSpring (talk) 11:09, 2 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi,
well, 1) it's not your "own work" or "my" Movie Poster, as opposed to your claim. 2) did you actually read the English Wikipedia, containing this image? When you do it, you will realize that it's a non-free image, that is allowed on :en only per its fair-use exemption policy. On Commons (and on most Wikipedias) fair-use material is not allowed. So, if your Wikipedia has a fair-use exemption policy, such as :en, you need to upload this image locally (on your Wikipedia). Otherwise, you need a permission from the copyright-holder.--Túrelio (talk) 12:43, 2 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

answer the question[edit]

here https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/User_talk:DragonSpace#An_unfree_Flickr_license_was_found_on_File%3ACambridge_Dictionary_screenshot.jpg file was deleted. but on flickr foto marker is: Attribution — You must give appropriate credit, provide a link to the license, and indicate if changes were made. You may do so in any reasonable manner, but not in any way that suggests the licensor endorses you or your use. what is wrong? — Preceding unsigned comment added by DragonSpace (talk • contribs) 18:36, 2 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

This image was under a Commons-non-compliant license: "https://flickr.com/photos/120386744@N07/37211958642 is licensed under cc-by-nc-nd-2.0". Neither ND nor NC is allowed as the only license; only CC-BY, CC-BY-SA and CC-Zero are allowed. --Túrelio (talk) 18:40, 2 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
very strange, and it is very hard to understand for beginners. okay, i will not upload that license anymore. mb u know, can i transfer that image to russian wiki? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Cambridge_Advanced_Learner%27s_Dictionary_3rd.jpeg --DragonSpace (talk) 19:02, 2 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
As I am not active on :ru wikipedia, I don't know. You might ask one of my :ru-speaking colleagues, such as User:A.Savin, User:Ahonc, User:Butko or User:EugeneZelenko. --Túrelio (talk) 19:58, 2 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Смотрите w:ru:Википедия:Критерии добросовестного использования. --EugeneZelenko (talk) 14:20, 3 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
спасибо всем, написал савину, он дал эти ссылки, вроде понял принцип и получилось загрузить https://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/%D0%A4%D0%B0%D0%B9%D0%BB:Cambridge_Advanced_Learner%27s_Dictionary_3rd.jpeg --DragonSpace (talk) 14:54, 3 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

File:ElzbietaLukacijewska.jpg[edit]

Hi,

Please undelete the file: File:ElzbietaLukacijewska.jpg. The proper agreement has been sent to OTRS: ticket:2019090410005838. Cheers,

Polimerek (talk) 23:54, 4 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

✓ Done. --Túrelio (talk) 06:50, 5 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Mal ein kleines Dankeschön, ...[edit]

dass du meine Lapsus meist zeitnah in den Abfalleimer beförderst. Gruß Bwag (talk) 12:51, 6 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

File deleted Wrongly.[edit]

I hereby affirm that I INGEK, the creator and/or sole owner of the exclusive copyright of my picture "INGEK" as shown here: (https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:INGEK.jpg) and have legal authority in my capacity to release the copyright of that work. Since this is me on the picture, and its from a private photo session with Dilson Ferreira, which i paid full price for the photos and the right to use them as my wish.

You guys keep deleting it wrongly, since i got all the rights of that picture and all of them with me on it. I can prove it with any way you want it, just name it.

[Sérgio Malta, also known as INGEK] [Brazilian DJ] [Friday, September 06th, 2019] — Preceding unsigned comment added by INGEK1 (talk • contribs) 17:05, 6 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi INGEK1,
this may all be true. However, you need to provide the evidence. And, obviously, you haven't. It seems you sent something to OTRS (permissions-commons@wikimedia.org), but the OTRS-volunteers found it insufficient and one of them, Tiven2240, expressedly tagged the file for speedy deletion with the rationale "OTRS Failed". I simply performed the requested deletion. So, you need to discuss it with OTRS, not with me. --Túrelio (talk) 21:26, 7 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

File:Calabanga Church during procession of saint of calabanga.jpg[edit]

Why did it says that it is a copyright?? Thats my entry in wikiloves monument 2018... It has been deleted March 12 2019.. please retrieve it.. thank you --ShiminUfesoj (talk) 14:22, 8 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

(talk page stalker) Apparently the metadata of the file contained some copyright notes, "Author: Artist-freed" and "Copyright, Spreadtrum,2011". So people thought you were actually not the original photographer. I'd like to note though that Spreadtrum is a manufacturer of cell phone processors, so it seems like this company somehow puts their information into the metadata set whenever you use your phone's camera. From my point of view, the file should be restored. De728631 (talk) 14:47, 8 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
@ShiminUfesoj, restored. Next time you should not wait full six months after being notified. --Túrelio (talk) 15:49, 8 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

File:Olga Shariy 2019.jpg[edit]

Copyright violation: COM:CSD#F4, License review NOT passed: Came via Facebook; their Terms of Use are incompatible with publishing here.

Which term exactly is incompatible with publishing here? Does it mean that all pictures published on Facebook under free license should be deleted? In case, if you missed something, photo has been published under free license. And yes, its not the first photo of her that has been deleted by you, and then retrieved --Алый Король (talk) 15:25, 9 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Most images on Facebook are NOT under a free license compliant to our COM:L. If they are, as in your case, it's an exception. I am sorry that I obviously overlooked the license remark and deleted the file erroneously.
In addition, we can't even be sure that the owner of a Facebook page has the copyright of an image on his page. So Commons:Project scope/Precautionary principle applies. --Túrelio (talk) 07:37, 10 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

And yep, one more time, it has been retrieved by another admin. So what is the problem with you, Túrelio, you are not qualified enough for admin work? --Алый Король (talk) 00:34, 10 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

That is rather normal (I've done the same), as 1) I am not free of errors (how should I?), and 2) as my admin colleagues may have another opinion of a case or may have additional information. If my error-rate in the 300,000+ deletions, I've performed over the years, is below 1 percent, I am satisfied. Any (mistakenly) deleted file can easily be undeleted. On the other hand, a re-user who gets sued for copyright-infringement by the true rightsholder of an allegedly free image hosted on Commons, will have to pay.
"qualified": If you think I am not, feel free to open a de-admin process against me. --Túrelio (talk) 07:37, 10 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

File:BlankMap-World.png[edit]

Are you sure about redirecting this to a SVG as a duplicate? PNG and SVG are quite different. Also there are thousands of references to this particlar PNG file. I think it'd be better to restore the PNG for the sake of clarity, so that everyone can see what exactly is being referred. Pikne 13:52, 10 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi,
usually the png version is generated from the svg. As the deletion/redirect was done already in February, would undoing it make sense even now, 7 months later? --Túrelio (talk) 13:59, 10 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Well, all the references to this PNG are still there. Eventhough country outlines are generally understood to be non-creative, there are still a few users who demand that it has be made very clear what source data each map uses. So the exact base map gone may result in copyright status of many maps contested unnecessarily. So I think that undoing makes sense. Pikne 14:13, 10 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
✓ Done. --Túrelio (talk) 14:32, 10 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

About old photos[edit]

«Mukhtar Auezov.jpg»

The terms of use States that «all materials copyrighted by Caravan may be reproduced in any media, on Internet servers or on any other media» - https://www.caravan.kz/info/soglashenie-ob-ispolzovanii-376773;

«Akhmet Baitursynov.jpg»

I don't think this old photograph belongs to anyone. The website does not prohibit the use of its materials - https://rus.azattyq.org/p/6891.html. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kica3101 (talk • contribs) 10:11, 11 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

„File:Woche der Brüderlichkeit 2016 Festakt im Theater am Aegi, Hannover Micha Brumlik 9-Ab.jpg“[edit]

10:49, 10. Sep. 2019 Túrelio Diskussion Beiträge löschte Seite File:Woche der Brüderlichkeit 2016 Festakt im Theater am Aegi, Hannover Micha Brumlik 9-Ab.jpg (F4 - failed license review. This image is not the one linked to on Flickr, so cannot determine the license) Markierung: PHP7 (danken) (global usage; delinker log)

Hallo Turelio, habe am 15. August das o.g. Bild als Ausschnittvergrößerung dieses Originals [19] hochgeladen und verstehe daher nicht worin mein Fehler bestehen soll und weswegen das Bild jetzt von dir gelöscht wurde. Kannst du mich darüber bitte aufklären? Danke dontworry (talk) 14:55, 11 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @Dontworry,
ja, ich erinnere mich. Ich hatte auf Flickr sogar ein bißchen rumgesucht, weil es irgendwie unpausibel wirkte. Aber, da ich nichts finden konnte, hab ich schließlich gelöscht. Hab mir die History mal angeschaut: Das Problem war, dass die Quelle nicht richtig angegeben war.[20] Deshalb lief der FR, den mein Kollege laufen ließ, ins Leere. Habs jetzt wiederhergestellt. Warum hast du CC-BY 2.0 als Lizenz genommen, wenn das Ursprungsbild cc-by-sa-4.0 ist? Warum hast du überhaupt Flickr als Quelle angegeben, wenn das Ursprungsbilddoch ein Direktupload ist? Auch die Autorangabe müsste noch korrigiert werden (Ilse Paul in Hannover statt Böllstiftung). --Túrelio (talk) 15:05, 11 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Vermutlich haben mich die Angebote bzw. Forderungen der Maske etwas verwirrt, weil missverständlich oder nicht angeboten. Ich kann, da ich es nicht täglich verwende, nicht mehr rekapitulieren, sorry. --dontworry (talk) 15:38, 11 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

File:Dumitru Bascu self-portrait pencil on paper.jpg[edit]

Would you please make this a regular deletion request? The copyright holder (artist's heir) has uploaded all the files onto Flickr and is submitting a COM:OTRS ticket which will take a few days to go through. Thanks! --EctopicOnSchedule (talk) 09:57, 13 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

There you go: Commons:Deletion requests/File:Dumitru Bascu.jpg. --Túrelio (talk) 10:10, 13 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Further help with ORTS for image uploaded from jetphotos.net[edit]

I uploaded File:Air New South Wales F28-1000 at Maroochydore.jpg which is my first upload from jetphots.net, then after uploading I added {{OTRS pending}}. After doing these things, I then used Use the Interactive Release Generator. Trying to correctly submit all details, what do I do next or what is missing? --VKras (talk) 09:43, 14 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @VKras,
sorry for the late reply. I assume you also contacted photographer Wal Nelowkin and asked him for a permission (free license), to be sent to permissions-commons@wikimedia.org, right? If not, just do it. If yes, you have to wait for his reply. If it takes too long, the image might be deleted after some weeks (but can be restored, once the permission has been received and validated by OTRS). --Túrelio (talk) 09:32, 16 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Some speedies[edit]

  1. File:Réserve naturelle Marais Lavours Aignoz Ceyzérieu 100.jpg
  2. File:Réserve naturelle Marais Lavours Aignoz Ceyzérieu 101.jpg
  3. File:Réserve naturelle Marais Lavours Aignoz Ceyzérieu 102.jpg
  4. File:Réserve naturelle Marais Lavours Aignoz Ceyzérieu 103.jpg
  5. File:Réserve naturelle Marais Lavours Aignoz Ceyzérieu 104.jpg
  6. File:Réserve naturelle Marais Lavours Aignoz Ceyzérieu 105.jpg
  7. File:Réserve naturelle Marais Lavours Aignoz Ceyzérieu 106.jpg
  8. File:Réserve naturelle Marais Lavours Aignoz Ceyzérieu 83.jpg
  9. File:Réserve naturelle Marais Lavours Aignoz Ceyzérieu 84.jpg
  10. File:Réserve naturelle Marais Lavours Aignoz Ceyzérieu 85.jpg
  11. File:Réserve naturelle Marais Lavours Aignoz Ceyzérieu 86.jpg
  12. File:Réserve naturelle Marais Lavours Aignoz Ceyzérieu 87.jpg
  13. File:Réserve naturelle Marais Lavours Aignoz Ceyzérieu 89.jpg
  14. File:Réserve naturelle Marais Lavours Aignoz Ceyzérieu 90.jpg
  15. File:Réserve naturelle Marais Lavours Aignoz Ceyzérieu 91.jpg
  16. File:Réserve naturelle Marais Lavours Aignoz Ceyzérieu 92.jpg
  17. File:Réserve naturelle Marais Lavours Aignoz Ceyzérieu 93.jpg
  18. File:Réserve naturelle Marais Lavours Aignoz Ceyzérieu 94.jpg
  19. File:Réserve naturelle Marais Lavours Aignoz Ceyzérieu 95.jpg
  20. File:Réserve naturelle Marais Lavours Aignoz Ceyzérieu 96.jpg
  21. File:Réserve naturelle Marais Lavours Aignoz Ceyzérieu 97.jpg
  22. File:Réserve naturelle Marais Lavours Aignoz Ceyzérieu 98.jpg
  23. File:Réserve naturelle Marais Lavours Aignoz Ceyzérieu 99.jpg

--Estopedist1 (talk) 09:16, 16 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

✓ Done. --Túrelio (talk) 09:32, 16 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Christopher Bucklow/Kasei2016[edit]

Dear Turelio, Please note the three image files I uploaded today are for use on my wiki entry. I created the files myself, I am the sole owner of the copyright and they have not been published before. The works themselves were created by myself. Many thanks, Chris Bucklow — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kasei2016 (talk • contribs) 18:27, 16 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Chris,
I anticipated this situation. Nevertheless, our policy in such a case is that you should send a confirmation from your official/business email address to permissions-commons@wikimedia.org in which you confirm 1) that you are the artist Chris Bucklow, 2) that you also created the reproductions of your paintings (or, if not, have the permission of the photographer), and 3) that you want to release these reproductions (not the original paintings) under the choosen free license. (The content of your mail is not made public and I will have no access to it, only our OTRS volunteers.) After doing this either put {{OTRS pending}} on each of the image-files or drop me a note. --Túrelio (talk) 20:04, 16 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

COIMBRE.JPG[edit]

Hello how are you? my COIMBRE.jpg image was recently deleted, however I took the photo with my cell phone myself, as I can upload a photo from the disk without being deleted. The photo is my own take it in my armchair. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dacosta 3 (talk • contribs) 19:37, 16 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Dacosta 3,
I do not doubt that you took the photo by yourself. However, it is the artwork on an album-cover, which is copyrighted, either by Jorge Pardo or his record company. By reproducing an existing artwork you do not earn own copyright, but instead you violate the copyright of the original artist. That's the problem. See Commons:Copyright_rules_by_subject_matter#Album_covers. --Túrelio (talk) 19:58, 16 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Death by Design poster[edit]

I created an account and uploaded an image I created, "Death by Design Poster.jpg" at the request of the author who wants to use it on his bio page. The image was flagged as being "fair use content" and removed by you. I am not familiar with Wikimedia's rules and honestly don't care to really figure it out as I did this as a favor, but this judgment seems incorrect to me.

Bottom line, I created this image, which incorporates imagery from the public domain but is otherwise original. I uploaded it and released it with a Creative Commons license. The flagging and deletion seems to be a mistake, so I would like an explanation or for the content to be restored. Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rpfagan1 (talk • contribs) 13:16, 17 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Per your own description it was designed by "Rob Urbinati". So, you need to provide a confirmation from him (to be sent to permissions-commons@wikimedia.org) that this is his own work and that he wants to release it under the choosen license. --Túrelio (talk) 13:20, 17 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Urbinati is the author of the play for which the poster was created. Rpfagan1 is the author/designer/creator of the poster/image (as he says in his first sentence)--148.75.165.78 14:51, 17 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Ok. Then the real designer, who might be behind Rpfagan1, needs to send the above mentioned confirmation from his official/business email address. --Túrelio (talk) 15:37, 17 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
My understanding is that is what he did. Then you deleted it. What does he have to do that's different from what he did previously?--148.75.165.78 16:01, 17 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
If you are User:Rpfagan1, then why don't you log-in? In your last comment, you talk as being a different person. Just read again my 2 previous comments, they contain all required information. --Túrelio (talk) 16:05, 17 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
I talk as if I am a different person because I am not User:Rpfagan1. I read your comments several times through and as best I can tell he did precisely what you are asking him to do but you deleted it. Why can't you say why if he performs the same exact actions again the outcome will be any different?--148.75.165.78 16:37, 17 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

This is Ryan Fagan again, also known as Rpfagan1. I created an original poster to promote a production of the play "Death by Design", which was written by Rob Urbinati. Please explain what I need to put in the email to permissions-commons@wikimedia.org. I didn't see anything during the upload process that indicated I needed to send an email or do anything else to affirm that I created the image or that I want to release it under the chosen license. Some guidance would be helpful as I have never done this before and I don't know what to do especially since my upload has been deleted. Thank you. Rpfagan1 (talk) 19:52, 17 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi,
as already explained above, upload of such commercial/promotional material requires a confirmation to OTRS. Just take the boxed template text from Commons:Email_templates#Email_message_template_for_release_of_rights_to_a_file, enter the filename of the currently deleted image, File:Death by Design Poster.jpg, date, name, etc. and send that from your official/business email address to permissions-commons@wikimedia.org . The content of your mail will not be made public; only our OTRS-volunteers have access to it. They will either send you a confirmation or ask for more information. If all goes well, they will notify me to restore the currently deleted file. --Túrelio (talk) 20:25, 17 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Now that's a proper explanation. Why didn't you start with that answer. In spite of what you think, you did not answer previously, you inferred what to do giving minimal detail. Snarky answers where you question peoples identity and assume they have greater knowledge of the ways of Wiki than they do are not helpful--148.75.165.78 20:42, 17 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for explaining the process to me. I'll take care of that tonight. Rpfagan1 (talk) 20:57, 17 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

DENUNCIA DE TU PERFIL POR BORRAR FOTO CON Copyright[edit]

TURLELIO, HE DENUNCIADO QUE BORRASTE UNA FOTO DE MI PERFIL PÚBLICO, SOY LA PERSONA DEL PERFIL Y SOLO LOS CANALES DE TV, MEDIOS PARA LOS QUE TRABAJÉ Y MI MANAGER PUEDEN HACER CAMBIOS DE ESTE TIPO, BORRASTE UNA FOTO DE MI AUTORIA CONMIGO EN ELLA, ASI QUE TE HE DENUNCIADO POR ABUSO Y ADEMAS DE PONER QUE LA BORRASTE POR (Copyright violation), BAJO NINGÚN PUNTO DE VISTA AUTORIZO A QUE PERSONAS SIN ESCRUPULOS Y CON DECISIONES ARBITRARIAS MODIFIQUEN O BORREN INFORMACIÓN CONFIDENCIAL DE ESTE ARTÍCULO CREADO POR UN CANAL DE TV EN SU MOMENTO. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Augusta2019 (talk • contribs) 15:43, 17 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi,
I have no idea who you are and what you are talking about, as you have and had no uploads on Commons. --Túrelio (talk) 15:59, 17 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Persistent block evasion[edit]

I must inform you that Nxlo03qda (talk · contribs) (the user you just blocked) is a sock of blocked user SHINGO154 (talk · contribs), and also is Nzol12 (talk · contribs). These socks have been trying hard to add copyright-infringing pictures of João Félix to his Wikipedia article, leading it to be protected. SLBedit (talk) 15:37, 18 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

deletion of photo[edit]

The file photo of Lallah Miles Perry that you deleted because you found it on her Geni page. I manage that page, too. Is it not allowed to use the same photo there and here? I don't believe that I gave copyrights to Geni. https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=File:Lallah_miles_perry_2007.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1 https://www.geni.com/people/Lallah-Miles-Perry/6000000027670174287

Thanks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dcroberts (talk • contribs) 16:07, 18 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Dcroberts,
ok. However, above you did not state clearly whether you are really the photographer of File:Lallah miles perry 2007.jpg. But anyway, in such a case a confirmation to OTRS in required. So, you should send an email from your official/business email address to permissions-commons@wikimedia.org, in which you need 1) to state whether you are really the photographer or, if not, whether you or Mrs. Perry obtained enough rights from him/her, and 2) that you want to release this image under the choosen free license. (Your email will not be published and can only be accessed by our OTRS volunteers (I am none)). --Túrelio (talk) 09:33, 19 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Copyright photo violation[edit]

This is my photo with no copyright violation -> Ruderi della Chiesa di San Rocco - Alteta di Montegiorgio.jpg This is a news aggregator that point to my blog with no copyright violation -> https://it.geosnews.com/p/it/marche/un-giro-ad-alteta-di-montegiorgio_25510148 This is my photo on my flickr site with no copyright violation -> Pole dance Performance.jpg ‎(Copyright violation: https://www.flickr.com/photos/michelepaoletti/45379851922/in/album-72157672505763897/) This is my photo on my blog with no copyright violation (seremailragno.com) -> Civitanova Marche Faro.jpg ‎(Copyright violation: https://seremailragno.com/2017/12/10/le-palme-falliche-di-civitanova-marche-un-caso-studio-di-sentimental-marketing/) Please remove copyright violation, are all my photo, my name is Michele Paoletti and Wikipedia username monteuranoupdate — Preceding unsigned comment added by Monteuranoupdate (talk • contribs) 09:10, 20 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Special:Log/Alpenmaus[edit]

Hello.
Deletion of these uploads is a blatant misuse of speedy. You had to make a regular deletion request instead. Moreover, who cares that Alpenmaus is identical to certain other account not even existent on Commons? Incnis Mrsi (talk) 12:23, 21 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi,
I was offline til late evening. See my reply on your talkpage and Commons:Deletion requests/File:Intuitive precession.png. --Túrelio (talk) 07:51, 22 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

COM:AN/U[edit]

Deutsch ∙ English ∙ español ∙ français ∙ italiano ∙ magyar ∙ Nederlands ∙ português ∙ sicilianu ∙ slovenščina ∙ svenska ∙ Tagalog ∙ Tiếng Việt ∙ Türkçe ∙ македонски ∙ русский ∙ मराठी ∙ বাংলা ∙ മലയാളം ∙ 日本語 ∙ 中文（简体） ∙ 中文（繁體） ∙ العربية ∙ +/−

Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion at Commons:Administrators' noticeboard/User problems#Incnis Mrsi has been indefblocked by 1989. - Alexis Jazz ping plz 17:51, 21 September 2019 (UTC).[reply]

Duplicates[edit]

Hello, Túrelio. Thank you for removing duplicates, but I want to ask you to please take care and remove the most recent uploads, not the older ones, like you did with the photographs in Category:2019-09-21 Kassel kohlefrei — CO2-Würfel (a category I created too). [Edit to add:] Same for the pictures in Category:Global Climate Strike in San Rafael on 20 September 2019. Not a really big problem, because in the end it's the pictures that count, but it feels somehow unfair. Greetings, Eissink (talk) 11:21, 23 September 2019 (UTC).[reply]

Hi, o.k. As these were all bit-identical duplicates, I did indeed not check for that, but trusted the requester. --Túrelio (talk) 08:47, 24 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Can you please remove this?[edit]

https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=File:Australia_flag_with_clouds.jpg&oldid=367898068 It contains personal info. UPDATE: Never mind. SpinnerLaserz (talk) 20:50, 23 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

File:White Appointment.jpg[edit]

Turelio, Please reverse the deletion of my photograph White Appointment.jpg. I own this photograph and have the master copy on my computer. I have placed it in the Commons for free use. It does not violate copyright laws. — Preceding unsigned comment added by TheQuest4248 (talk • contribs) 02:34, 25 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @TheQuest4248,
mere ownership does not automatically equal having the copyright. Per your above wording I conclude that you were not the photographer by yourself. Anyway, as this image has a lot of earlier hits on the web, you need to send a confirmation of your claimed copyright-holdership to permissions-commons@wikimedia.org (OTRS). In your email (which will be treated confidentially by our OTRS-volunteers) you can also clarify who is the true author and, in case it's another person, what kind of credit had been agreed on. After you've send your mail, drop me a note, so that I can temporarily restore the image, until the permission is finally validated by OTRS. --Túrelio (talk) 07:01, 25 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Image[edit]

Hi Túrelio, Could you kindly undelete File:AirAsia NewLogo.svg please?,
Not sure if you've seen the DR but basically over at en:AirAsia various IPs and socks kept changing the image size (making it huge) and page protection was becoming not only ineffective but tiresome,
This way had worked as it meant regardless of image size change (in the infobox) the image would remain the same,
Many thanks, –Davey2010Talk 07:19, 25 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

✓ Done. --Túrelio (talk) 07:22, 25 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Many thanks Túrelio I greatly appreciate that, Enjoy the rest of your evening (or day) :), Many thanks again :), –Davey2010Talk 18:52, 25 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

"exaktes Duplikat"[edit]

Die Dateien File:13-04-05-Skoda Museum Mladá Boleslav by RalfR-233.jpg und File:13-04-05-Skoda Museum Mladá Boleslav by RalfR-233.jpg sind keine exakten Duplikate, wie man an File:13-04-05-Skoda Museum Mladá Boleslav by RalfR-233.png sieht. Das ist jetzt nicht irgendwie kritisch aber scheinbare Duplikate sind nicht immer wirklich welche. Und der .PNG fehlt nun die .JPG-Quelle. --Ralf Roletschek 21:32, 25 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Ralf,
ich kann die gerne wiederherstellen; nur welche genau? --Túrelio (talk) 07:13, 26 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Wie gesagt, es ist nicht kritisch abedr manch Krümelkacker könnte sich dran stören... Warum wird denn sowas gelöscht? Es wird doch kein Speicherpülatz frei, im Gegenteil. --Ralf Roletschek 11:33, 26 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

File:Entetsu logo w.svg[edit]

Basic White background color Where to use
(Wikipedia-ja: Template)
ja:Template:泉北高速鉄道の車両
ja:Template:西日本鉄道の鉄道車両
ja:Template:遠州鉄道の車両

Hi Túrelio. My name is ButuCC.

"File:Entetsu logo w.svg"と"File:Entetsu logo.svg"は同じ画像ではありません。右の表のように、背景色が異なります。この画像は表の背景色と画像の色が似ている時に使うために作成しました。"File:Entetsu logo.svg"から背景色を無くすと右の表のように、赤紫色が見にくくなります。どうか背景色のある "File:Entetsu logo w.svg"を元に戻してくれませんか。

(Machine translation results)

"File:Entetsu logo w.svg" and "File:Entetsu logo.svg" are not the same image. As shown in the table on the right, it was an image with a different background color. This image was created for use when the background color of the table is similar to the color of the image. When the background color of "File:Entetsu logo.svg" disappears, it becomes difficult to see magenta as shown on the right. Could you please restore the white background color version of "File: Entetsu logo w.svg" ?--ButuCC (talk) 16:00, 26 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

✓ Done. --Túrelio (talk) 16:10, 26 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
英語が下手ですみません…。再アップロードしていただきどうもありがとうございました。 / Thank you for re-uploading! Sorry for my poor English...--ButuCC (talk) 16:17, 26 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Question[edit]

Hi, Túrelio - one of our en.WP admins uploaded an image and used the wrong pd template, so we've fixed it for her, but when I removed the speedy delete template it auto-created an AfD: Commons:Deletion requests/File:Nadia Malacrida at marriage, 1922.jpg - will you close it so we can get on with editing the article's infobox, etc.? Thank you in advance...Atsme Talk 📧 19:55, 26 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

✓ Done. --Túrelio (talk) 20:00, 26 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

evil[edit]

Deleting my hardwork for the album art cover for Japanese pop singer Tomomi Itano's SWAG and Get Ready. How dare you not talk to me about that. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Lolamartinez123 (talk • contribs) 21:40, 26 September 2019‎ (UTC)[reply]

1) Your hardwork? File:Tomomigetready.jpg[21] and File:TomomiSWAG.jpg[22]: citing your description: "The cover art copyright is believed to belong to the label". That might have been a fair-use rationale for :en (useless on Commons); but clearly not own work.
2) You had been notified before the deletion: User talk:Lolamartinez123. --Túrelio (talk) 06:29, 27 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Contest deletion[edit]

I wanted to contest / ask about the deletion you made of File:Isla San Lorenzo and Isla Las Animas.jpg, claiming that the png version is superior. The original image is a jpg and (if you actually compare the two) much higher quality. Could you please restore the original image? Primefac (talk) 17:41, 27 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

✓ Done. The dupe-deletion had been requested by the uploader[23]. --Túrelio (talk) 18:16, 27 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Greta Thunberg[edit]

Hallo, dürfen wir bitte einen Beweis haben, dass Fotos vom Boot Malizia II tatsächlich unter Urheberrecht stehen? Die Anhänger von Greta wünschen sich, dass sie immer mehr in der Welt bekannt wird, also kommt es mir komisch vor, dass solche Fotos copyrightmäßig geschützt sind. Außerdem haben wir in letzter Zeit auf Zeitungen und Webseiten aller Welt Fotos von dem Boot gesehen. --Luensu1959 (talk) 20:25, 27 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Wär nett gewesen, wenn du die Datei verlinkt hättest, dann hätte ich sie jetzt nicht erstmal suchen müssen. File:MALIZIA II 03.jpg
Selbst der Hochlader Xriss hatte als Quelle "Andreas Lindlahr" genannt, wenngleich er sich selbst als Autor eingetragen hat, was natürlich Unsinn ist. In den EXIF-Daten steht explizit: "Copyright - No publishing without permission of Copyright Holder".
Der Fotograf ist vermutlich dieser professionelle Fotograf, der seine Fotos natürlich nicht aus Vergnügen schiesst. Du kannst ihn aber gerne fragen, ob er sie unter einer freien Lizenz (z.B. CC-BY-SA) zur Verfügung stellt (nicht "für Wikipedia"!). Das muss dann gegenüber OTRS (permissions-commons-de@wikimedia.org) dokumentiert werden.--Túrelio (talk) 20:37, 27 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

File:Kodak DC240i Zoom (Blueberry).jpg[edit]

Hi Túrelio!

My file, https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Kodak_DC240i_Zoom_(Blueberry).jpg is my own work, and I also run the Y2K Aesthetic Institute where I originally posted the image on Twitter.

Postvespertine (talk) 21:32, 27 September 2019 (UTC) Froyo Tam (09.27.2019)[reply]

Hi Postvespertine,
o.k. Then you should send a simple confirmation from the Y2K Aesthetic Institute site's email address (twitter/tumbl/whatever) to permissions-commons@wikimedia.org that you also publish your images there (as others were also found there). Don't forget to list the filenames (on Commons) of the concerned images. --Túrelio (talk) 21:38, 27 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Kirchenfenster in Keldenich[edit]

Hallo Túrelio,

entschuldige bitte, dass ich alle möglichen Anfängerfehler mache. Die Decke wurde 1900 von Josef Röttchen aus Bonn ausgemalt, d.h. er lebt nicht mehr. Ich konnte nichts Weiteres über ihn in Erfahrung bringen. Die Glasfenster wurden 1948 von Karl Jörres ausgeführt, den Künstler konnte ich leider nicht ermitteln. Du bist auch der erste, dem ich schreibe. Die Kommunikationswege haben sich mir auch noch nicht richtig erschlossen.

Vielen Dank für jeden Rat! Thomas Hummel (censored) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Thomas Hummel (talk • contribs) 22:42, 27 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Moin Thomas,
alles klar; kein Problem. Am praktischsten ist es, direkt unter der ursprünglichen Nachricht zu antworten, d.h., auf deiner Disku. Deine Emailadresse oben habe ich entfernt, dakmit sie nicht von Spam-Bots abgegriffen wird. Wenn dich hier jemand via Email kontaktieren will, was i.a. eher unüblich ist, dann gibt es dazu ja das Email-Link auf deiner Benutzerseite (links unten). Bzgl. der Kirchenfenster: kannst du herausfinden, wann Jörres gestorben ist (event. im Pfarrbüro nachfragen?). Heutzutage sind alle Kunstwerke bis 70 Jahre nach dem Tod des Künstlers geschützt. --Túrelio (talk) 07:20, 28 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
1980 scheint Karl Jörres noch gelebt zu haben.[24] --Túrelio (talk) 08:54, 29 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Rábold Gusztáv[edit]

Saját készítésű képet miért jelöl szerzői jog megsértésével. Nagyapám Rábold Gusztáv fordításának a képe. Szerzői jogutódként miként lehetek szerzői jogsértő ebben az estben. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rábold Gusztáv (talk • contribs)

As you did not say it, I assume that you are referring to images File:A keresztyén vallás rendszere.jpg and File:Rábold Gusztáv fordítása.jpg. Though both images show an old book, which in itself might be out of copyright, they are eligible for copyright per European and U.S. law. In addition, they have been found prepublished on Facebook pages. As we have no means to ensure 1) that the Facebook user is the photographer, and 2) that this is your Facebook account, your copyright-ownership claim is unproven and the images had to be deleted per COM:PRP. If 1) and 2) is true, then please send an email from the email address associated with this Facebook account to permissions-commons@wikimedia.org in which you should mention the filenames of the images and confirm that you did indeed create these photographies. Thereafter, the images can be restored. --Túrelio (talk) 18:48, 28 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

a facebook oldal amiről a kép át lett véve a fiókom. Nevetséges, hogy saját általam készített kép, ami nagyapám mművérők készült és a facebookon és a wikipédián is leellenőrízhető , egyszer csak jön valaki és törli. Nem csinálok semmit. Vagy visszakerül a kép vagy nem érdekel tovább. Megoldom máshol, máshogy — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rábold Gusztáv (talk • contribs) 19:11, 28 September 2019 (UTC) Egyébként a könyv tartalma szerző jogvédett, de a könyv fotója nem.[reply]

Rábold Gusztáv[edit]

Saját kép. Nagyapám Rábold Gusztáv Kálvin fordításának képe. Szerzői jogutód vagyok. Legyen körültekintő és segítsen ha básan lépten, ne blokkoljon — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rábold Gusztáv (talk • contribs) 19:27, 28 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, as I've already said what I had to say and will be offline soon, you might take your case to Commons:Undeletion requests. --Túrelio (talk) 19:59, 28 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Wiki Loves Monuments in the United States 2019 – Last day to enter![edit]

This user participated in Wiki Loves Monuments 2019.
Want to show your participation in Wiki Loves Monuments 2019? Add {{User Wiki Loves Monuments 2019}} to your userpage!

September 30th is the last day to upload photos for Wiki Loves Monuments! We're thrilled that the United States has almost reached 4,000 contributions so far this year. Of these images, ~370 (~9%) have already been used to help illustrate Wikipedia articles and pages on other wiki projects, which is fantastic.

If you've already made a photo contribution this year, thanks so much! If you have any last-minute photos of U.S. historical sites to upload and enter into the contest, today's the day to do it. Check out the United States event page for more information. Judging will take place throughout the month of October, after which the top-ten national finalists will be announced in early November.

If you've traveled and taken photos of monuments in non-US countries, you can see if those countries are also participating here.

As always, thank you for participating in Wiki Loves Monuments! If you'd like to respond to this message directly, please do so on on my talk page. ~Kevin Payravi (talk) 05:49, 30 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Don't be complicit in A1Cafel's wrong tagging, please[edit]

Túrelio, please know that you just deleted some older files (f.i. this one in favor of new uploads by A1Cafel, who tagged [just minutes ago!] the much older files as duplicates of his doublures. As you might well know, since you were tagged, A1Cafel is less than a week ago warned over tagging older uploads of other users. I hope next time you will be aware that A1Cafel's tagging is problematic. His tagging showed up in my Watchlist again and I am getting a bit sick of it. Please don't encourage his behavior. Greetings, — Preceding unsigned comment added by Eissink (talk • contribs)

Oops, sorry, I wasn't really aware about that, as I was offline for nearly 1 full week til today. --Túrelio (talk) 19:59, 4 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]


St Laurence's Marker[edit]

It has taken over a year for them reply, but St Laurence's has given me permission to use the picture I took of marker with my ancestor on. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Didymus Ridgeland (talk • contribs) 13:47, 5 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Didymus Ridgeland,
I assume you are talking about File:St Lawrence Church Ludlow Thomas marker.jpg, right? Did you forward said permission to OTRS (permissions-commons@wikimedia.org)? If yes, ask the volunteers, who evaluates the permission, to drop me a note for restoring the image please. --Túrelio (talk) 19:23, 5 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Street photography?[edit]

Hi, I was hoping if you could tell me what am I doing wrong here?
acagastya 14:49, 8 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi acagastya,
it's this: as "Category:Street photography in India" is already in "Category:Street photography", putting a file into both would be Commons:Categories#Over-categorization. --Túrelio (talk) 14:55, 8 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Looks like a lot of files are not properly categorised. Something I might try to do later this week.
acagastya 23:29, 8 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Apparent mistaken AfD[edit]

Commons:Deletion requests/File:Divya Dwivedi.jpg - everything has cleared OTRS (WMF also involved) see Ticket#2019091110007902. I look to you for help again, Túrelio. Thank you. Atsme Talk 📧 20:59, 8 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

As I am not an OTRS volunteer, I have no access to OTRS material. So, defend against this DR, it would be helpful to know what the depicted lady exactly said about the copyright-ownership. --Túrelio (talk) 21:22, 8 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]
For some reason, I thought all admins had OTRS access, and could see the ticket info. Atsme Talk 📧 22:45, 8 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

File:Berthe Bertsch.jpg[edit]

Hallo !

I had not finished my uploading and did not really know how to arrange it... There is no copyright on this picture. It has been given to me by a relative, also close to the other pastor on the picture. A (dead) member of the family took this private picture. Name unknown. See [25].

Regards,

Ji-Elle (talk) 09:06, 9 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi,
I fully understand that it's a historically important image. Nevertheless, we must try to get its copyright state correct. With the photographer dead, but unknown, it's not easy. Any information when the photographer had died? As copyright law of France might prevail here, it might be better if you discuss this with one of my French colleagues User:Christian Ferrer or User:Yann. --Túrelio (talk) 09:14, 9 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Hello, this is a very very valuable image. Worthy to be published in an history book. She is the first woman so ordained a pastor in France, and if I well understood the photo was taken at the day when this happened the 23 mars 1930. wow great. Sadly a copyright there is, always, and the only question is: has the copyright expired? given the infos that we have: the photo was never published and the author is unknow, the relevant Public Domain tag should maybe be {{PD-US-unpublished}}, however we have an issue, 1930 is not enough old. And sadly, if the author is unknow his heirs are not identifiable and can not send us permission... 2051 is the year where the photo will be undoubtedly out of copyright. But I'm not a lawer or a copyright specialist, and I may be wrong. Regards Christian Ferrer (talk) 16:26, 9 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • {{PD-heirs}} might apply here. — Racconish 💬 16:29, 9 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Who says "heirs" says "copyright holder", sadly the last being unknow, the first are so too. Note that if the image is deleted, and if there is no additional infos. In the worst case we can quote the file in Category:Undelete in 2051, we do not take any risk with copyright. Because it would be really a shame to lose this very valuable image forever. Christian Ferrer (talk) 09:53, 10 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Not sure the photographer is unknown. — Racconish 💬 11:51, 10 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]
The uploader said just above "A (dead) member of the family (...). Name unknown." Note also that there is a kind mismatch between the fact to claim " a dead member of the family" and "name unknown". Indeed if the photographer is unknown, how is it possible to say that they are a familly member... that is one or the other... Christian Ferrer (talk) 12:20, 10 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]
@Christian Ferrer: I am discussing with the uploader to help resolve this. See their talk page on the French project. — Racconish 💬 19:43, 10 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Oh, very fine, thanks you, as you said it well there, if necessary a formal DR is possible before the 16 october. And You're right that Ji-Elle's idea to let delete the file be deleted in order to make a new clear upload is not a good idea at all, as the issue will only moved from a file to another, and the problem will only be more complex. Christian Ferrer (talk) 20:09, 10 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Jessica De Gouw[edit]

Hi,

I am new to Wikipedia and I would like to upload a Image of Jessica De Gouw, I see you deleted the Image I had uploaded earlier, how do I get a Image which is copyright or license free ?

AnandMalwade (talk) 03:28, 10 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi,
well, the best option would be to shoot the photo by yourself. The second-best option would be to look at Flickr for images of the subject, which need to be under a CC-BY or CC-BY-SA license; CC licensed images with an NC (no commercial use) or ND (no derivatives) restriction are not allowed on Commons (COM:L). --Túrelio (talk) 06:51, 10 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Undelete File:Roy Wang at brand event.jpg[edit]

Hi, this image is a photograph I took at a public event, hence there were several photographers. If you look closely, you will find that my photograph and the one you found on idol001.com were taken from different angles. My photograph does not contain a watermark as well. I have not uploaded this photograph onto any other sites. Please keep my image. Thanks. Zurichgrape (talk) 14:15, 11 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi,
it seems you are correct. Your image and the alleged external hit look a bit different. Restored. --Túrelio (talk) 14:23, 11 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Duplikat[edit]

Hallo Túrelio, ich habe einen Antrag auf die Löschung eines Duplikats gestellt. Der Fairness halber muss ich aber hinzufügen, dass die bessere Fassung nicht größer, sondern kleiner als die Schlechtere ist. Sonst ist es ja umgekehrt. Der qualitative Unterschied ist dennoch immens, wie du sehen kannst:

  • unscharf, aber mehr KB
    unscharf, aber mehr KB
  • scharf, aber weniger KB
    scharf, aber weniger KB

Also hoffe ich, dass auch in diesem Fall die Vernunft siegt. Herzlich, Edelseider (talk) 20:16, 11 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

✓ Done. Es wäre nicht schlecht, wenn du eine Beschreibung auf deutsch hinzufügen könntest. Ich habe die ausführlichere franz. Beschreibung von der nun gelöschten Version rüberkopiert. --Túrelio (talk) 20:26, 11 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Can you please check if I messed up?[edit]

Hi. I uploaded six files from Librivox, which are under Public Domain in the US. However, they use the Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication license. Could you please go through the files, and let me know if I did something I wasn't supposed to. Or if I didn't do something I was supposed to? The files are:

Hi acagastya,
the copyright-state of such works is rather complicated to evaluate. Of course, the original work is in the PD; but the translation ? (may depend from national legislations) The audio-recording per se seems to be o.k., per the declaration on the source-page. Anyway, as recordings from Librivox have been accepted on Commons since years, it seems to be o.k. per our policy.
However, you might complement the description entries for author and date, as I have done now for File:The Metamorphosis Chapter 1 Part 1.mp3. --Túrelio (talk) 06:19, 14 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah, one thing to note: the translation used for the audio is the same translation available on Wikisource, so I know that is something not to worry about. Regarding dates, which one should I add: the date recorded as in recordings, or the date published, as mentioned on website (when it was added to catalogue)?
acagastya 11:20, 14 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Wikisource claims the translation is under Public Domain, archived link provided on talk page.
acagastya 11:24, 14 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

pictures added[edit]

Dear Turelio,

I have got a message with the request of any written author's permission for publishing the images. I have this paper, however i can not understand where to send it, and how to bind it in accordance with certain images.

Thank you for your help. Kind regards, Alisa — Preceding unsigned comment added by Алиса Л. (talk • contribs) 09:53, 14 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Alisa,
you might scan this paper and send it by email to permissions-commons@wikimedia.org while mentioning the filenames of all involved images. Our OTRS volunteers will then evaluate this permission and eventually ask for more information, if necessary. --Túrelio (talk) 10:31, 14 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Korean_Wikipedia_meetups[edit]

It is not C3 that it was historically used Special:Diff/367451613 and thus not unuseful -- I believe it should be {{Category redirect}}. (The reason I ignored Garam was that he was asking me on why I used specific edit summaries, not about the deletion itself.) — regards, Revi 00:51, 15 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi -revi,
I somehow overlooked the history and your previous undeletion. Now restored. --Túrelio (talk) 06:39, 15 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks! While we are here... File:위키백과의 문제점3.jpg is {{Wikipedia screenshot}} and the nonfree software portion is De minimis IMO. Any opinion? (This file is useful on kowiki for sockpuppet investigation purposes) — regards, Revi 04:26, 17 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Restored. --Túrelio (talk) 06:41, 17 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Normani photo File:Normani, sweetener tour, meet and greet.jpeg[edit]

Hi you deleted my photo last night of Normani. Which makes no sense. How can you just assume I’m not the copyright holder because it’s a photo that’s all over Twitter. I didn’t add twitter when they asked if the picture is posted anywhere else because I thought they meant like an official site. It’s literally my photo 🙃 Kanyfug (talk) 10:57, 15 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

It's not only on Twitter, it's also at https://weheartit.com/entry/332194289 in an uncropped form, whereas your upload here was cropped. So, the available circumstancial evidence is against your claim. Nevertheless, you can try to convince my colleagues, by claiming undeletion at COM:UDR. --Túrelio (talk) 12:11, 15 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Vista parcial Santana do Paraíso MG.JPG[edit]

Hi. I left an answer in this deletion request, proving copyright. As there was no opposition, I believe that elimination can now happen. --HVL talk 13:35, 15 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi HVL,
ok. However, the image is still in use on :ro. Could you first replace this use by some similar image (already on Commons)? --Túrelio (talk) 06:52, 17 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]
This was a cached version because of wikidata, but ✓ Done. I add a other image locally and now the file appears as unused. --HVL talk 23:30, 17 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

File:Lois Ellen Frank-272.jpg[edit]

Hi, Túrelio! This file was not a copyvio, it was uploaded by the copyright holder. You can see in the article you linked to that the copyright holder's name is the same as the username of the uploader, and she at the same time uploaded two other photos apparently taken the same day of the same subject. --Valereee (talk) 16:43, 17 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @Valereee: , are you sure that the uploading user is indeed Mrs. Daphne Hougard? You know, anybody can open an account here under nearly any name. Do you know the uploader or have been in contact? --Túrelio (talk) 16:49, 17 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

File:SteveMann keynoting AR-in Action at MIT dsc429c.jpg[edit]

This is a picture I took myself, while I was giving the keynote address at the conference. I had my SONY A7 Rii setup on a tripod, and actuated it remotely by stepping on a foot switch. It is a selfie. The picture is a picture I took of myself, in the sense that I composed the shot and actuated the camera with a foot switch so I was also the one pressing the button to take the picture. The apparatus in the picture is also something I built myself, and I'm also the patent holder of the invention that is depicted in the picture.

I also wrote the Instructable showing how to build the device shown.

Therefore I am puzzled as to how it could possibly be a violation of any copyright.

Please explain. Glogger (talk) 03:11, 18 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Glogger,
it's a great shot.
The trigger for our assumption of copyvio was that it had been published >1 year ago here (though in form of a video). That's a default scenario for copyvio. As a not so busy uploader, you may not know that around 5 percent of all uploads to Commons are indeed copyvios, many blatant ones out of disregard, others less blatant out of copyright-ignorance. That's the scenario we are facing at last-uploads-patrol every day. In doubt we err on the side of caution, though our false-positive rate isn't that high. Anyway, after screening your earlier uploads, your claim is credible and I've restored the image. However, to avoid such complications in the future and as your realname isn't your account-name (which is not necessary), I would recommend you to send an email from your business/official email address to permissions-commons@wikimedia.org confirming authorizazion and eventually your realname identity. Your email will not be made public (I will never be able to see it), but can only be accessed by our OTRS volunteers. One of them would then add an OTRS ticket to your uploads, which demonstrates to all patrolers that they have been evaluated as o.k. That's not a requirement, just a recommendation. --Túrelio (talk) 07:00, 18 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

File:射蒸爐.jpg[edit]

Hi. It's the IP guy. I removed the upi template you added to the file as the user who uploaded it created the account in less than 2 weeks ago (which, needless to say, shouldn't be considered an active contributor). Also, you might want to take a look at the user page the file is being used in, which I believe meets CSD. Also, this user keeps adding the same YouTube link x-wiki, which have previously been added by another two users/accounts and removed from the affected pages (done by local admins and swmt members, thanks!). 116.49.86.79 10:55, 19 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

✓ Done. --Túrelio (talk) 12:41, 19 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Special:diff/370612072[edit]

Hello. It is different between "Wikimedia meetups in South Korea" and "Korean Wikipedia meetups", and meetups of Korean Wikipedia is not only in South Korea. (ex - in Tokyo, Japan, in Toronto, Canada etc). Thanks. --Garam talk 12:36, 19 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, please see above thread User_talk:Túrelio#Category:Korean_Wikipedia_meetups and try to get a consensus with -revi. --Túrelio (talk) 12:41, 19 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]
I already asked to revi, but he/she did not answer me about it. So, I added C3 again. Thanks. --Garam talk 07:10, 25 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Deletion of Beth Hart June 2019 was questionable[edit]

Hello,

I am a non-involved editor, which is to say I did not take the photo or post the original, although I did re-size it. However I did have a talk page discussion with the person who posted File:Beth Hart June 2019.jpg, and I told that editor to post a photo they had taken. The user has stated in the discussion with me and on the Beth Hart Wikipedia article edit summary page that the user, Rocky228, works for Beth Hart. Therefore, I have to ask if the fact that the picture is available on Beth Hart's Instagram page is cause for automatic deletion, or for further investigation. Is it certain that all pictures on an Instagram page are the property of the owner of the page, or could employees post pictures there, and if so, who owns the posted pictures, the photographer or the page posting the picture? I am pretty certain that a photographer is the legal copyright holder and has the right to do what they want with the picture, but maybe as an employee, there might be different rules of photo ownership. I did review the picture's posting information and the editor Rocky228 claimed that it was that editor's picture, so I think there should have been a presumption of good faith rather than a speedy deletion, so that a deletion discussion should be opened, allowing the original poster to respond, rather than keep seeing the photo disappear into the ether.

Please tell me under what circumstances can an employees picture be donated to Wikimedia Commons to be used as a Wikipedia picture? Is there additional proof of ownership required? Mburrell (talk) 03:21, 22 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Mburrell,
I assume you are relating to File:Beth Hart June 2019.jpg.
In general: On Commons we have not the man/woman-power to subject each suspicious upload to a detailed investigation, as might be required in a lawsuit. Of the many thousands uploads per day at least 5 percent violate copyright, either blatantly or less blatant. The recent-upload-patrolers as well as the admins working on the speedy-deletion/copyvio-deletion queues, like me, cannot afford a thorough lenghty investigation. So, we go by our experience and patterns of recognition. This way we cannot avoid a number of false-positives, though IMO the rate is rather low.
Specific: if the uploader, the mentioned user Rocky228, works for the depicted person Beth Hart, it shouldn't be a problem for him to send an email from her Instagram's account-email address to permissions-commons@wikimedia.org (OTRS), in which he/she confirms 1) that he/she is the photographer (or legal copyright-holder) of said image (mention the filename on Commons), and 2) that he/she wants to release said image under the choosen free license. --Túrelio (talk) 12:14, 22 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Undelete photo[edit]

Hello, I need publish photo of a famous person (Dmitry and Igor Bukhman). How Can I undelete this files? 

https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:%D0%98%D0%B3%D0%BE%D1%80%D1%8C_%D0%91%D1%83%D1%85%D0%BC%D0%B0%D0%BD.png
https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:%D0%94%D0%BC%D0%B8%D1%82%D1%80%D0%B8%D0%B9_%D0%91%D1%83%D1%85%D0%BC%D0%B0%D0%BD.png — Preceding unsigned comment was added by 176.65.113.48 (talk) 06:03, 22 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Hi,
these 2 images are obviously not your own work. Only the photographer can release his/her images under a free license. So, you either need to shoots an image by yourself or try to find one under a legitimate free license, on Flickr or alike. --Túrelio (talk) 10:34, 22 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Hi,
Can I use a Facebook profile photo? — Preceding unsigned comment was added by 176.65.113.48 (talk) 07:16, 23 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Hi,
not without confirmation, as posting an image to Facebook does not mean it's under a free license or even from the Facebook account-owner. So, both needs to be confirmed by an email directly from the Facebook account-owner to permissions-commons@wikimedia.org . --Túrelio (talk) 08:17, 24 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Hi,
Is there another way post this photo with link to facebook? I need this photo for them pages in wikipedia. if I provide a link to authorship facebook page?
Thank you! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 176.65.120.77 (talk • contribs)
Hi, no, as for any image uploaded to Commons, we need to be sure (verifiably) that it is under a free license. --Túrelio (talk) 07:44, 29 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note[edit]

tadanokiuchifun is my acc.--tadanokiuchifun (talk) 10:19, 22 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, but material on Instagram is not free per se. So, a permission needs to be send by the photographer to permissions-commons@wikimedia.org (OTRS) which confirms authorship and release under the choosen free license. However, as the images seems to show your boyfriend, if I understand the tags on Instagram correctly, they are likely out of scope of Commons. Commons is for educationally useful images, not for merely personal images, such as Instagram or Facebook. --Túrelio (talk) 10:32, 22 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]
That hashtag is mischievous. My photo.--tadanokiuchifun (talk) 10:38, 22 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]
I del the photo at instagram.--tadanokiuchifun (talk) 11:37, 22 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]
That's not necessary. You could just send the above mentioned confirmation from your Instagram-address to OTRS to solve the copyright-issue.
However, the mentioned question of scope still remains. --Túrelio (talk) 12:01, 22 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

File:Sandra Mims Rowe Mugshot1.jpg[edit]

Hello,

I added this photo to Sandra Mims Rowe's Wikipedia page and you deleted it. I receive notice asking for a letting about rights only a week or so ago. You really need to give people more time before deleting files. As I indicated when I uploaded this file, it was given to me by Sandra Mims Rowe. She tried to send the email in today and saw the file was already deleted. It shouldn't be this difficult to add content to these pages. Please restore that photo so she can complete the process granting rights to use it.

Thanks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by NaviGATR (talk • contribs) 19:24, 22 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Well, for sending an email to OTRS (permissions-commons@wikimedia.org) an image doesn't need to be online. But o.k., let's make an exception.
BTW #1: as you wrote "specifically for use on her Wikipedia page", I hope you did not ask a permission for Wikipedia from her, as this would not be accepted. It needs to be a free license, not necessarily CC-Zero (which I would NOT recommend for a portrait of a living person)., CC-BY-SA is o.k.
BTW #2: why did you choose a filename containing the pejorative term "Mugshot"? It's not a mugshot. --Túrelio (talk) 20:07, 22 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I am not a Wikipedia power user. I barely understand what is being asked for. It's not something someone can pick up right away. I'm not an expert on rights and those pages read like War and Peace in a different language, so just the fact that I've gotten this far is a victory. I honestly don't know what the next steps are. I thought we just needed to send an email in using the template provided. How do I prove CC-By-SA???

I also posted a photo for Amanda Bennett that was removed as well.

As for using "mugshot" that's a term used by photographers for pictures of people from the shoulders up. It wasn't meant to be literal. — Preceding unsigned comment added by NaviGATR (talk • contribs) 18:41, 23 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi NaviGATR,
probably you should ask on your Wikipedia for a mentor to explain and guide you through the basics.
As of today every photography is copyrighted per se and this copyright is with the photographer. Another person (for example the depicted of a portrait) can obtain (usually buy) copyright to some degree from the photographer; be it for use as a passport-print, on an own website, on social-media, print in a book or more. Usually the amount to pay to the photographer depends on the extent of copyrighted granted. Releasing an image under a free license, which nullifies the photographer's chances to obtain income from this photo, requires of course an expressed permission from the photographer.
So, your Mrs. Sandra Mims Rowe should reflect whether she really has enough rights from the photographer for this image. If not, she should either try to obtain them or abstain from granting such a permission. Otherwise she risks to be later sued by the photographer. If she has enough rights, then she should send an email from her business address to permissions-commons@wikimedia.org comfirming that she has enough rights and intends to release the image under the choosen free license. She should also mention on what kind of credit the photographer agreed upon. --Túrelio (talk) 08:32, 24 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

The photo was taken by a friend of hers "a million years ago." There is no photographer who can claim copyright. It's her photo. I'm sure this would be easier if there was a photographer who could grant rights, but there isn't. You just have her word. She will send the email in and hopefully that will be enough. I'm having the same issue with File:Amanda Bennett Mugshot1.jpg which was created around the same time. It is also a photo taken by a friend. There are no rights involved. How do I get that photo back? She will send an email as well. Thanks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by NaviGATR (talk • contribs) 01:26, 25 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

As already explained in detail in my last posting, every recently shot image is copyrighted (and that copyright last until 70 years after the death of the photographer). This does neither require to be "a (professional) photographer" nor to officially claim copyright, as was requried per U.S. copyright-law formerly. So, the legal responsibility is with the person issuing a permission, in your case Mrs. Sandra Mims Rowe. Further discussion should be made with our OTRS staff. --Túrelio (talk) 07:53, 26 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

File:FWCC General Secretary Gretchen Castle meeting Pope Francis.jpg[edit]

Please see the discussion page for the deleted file. Thank you. Lard Almighty (talk) 13:00, 24 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

See my reply: File talk:FWCC General Secretary Gretchen Castle meeting Pope Francis.jpg. --Túrelio (talk) 15:28, 24 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Why was File:NSYSU campus day02.JPG deleted?[edit]

File:NSYSU campus day02.JPG was deleted with a link to https://photos.google.com/u/1/share/AF1QipMGdJciK9dla4fI6UiJzg04IL04ygskFKUuKBhUaYc7yHmt6VeKF9CVZpRBJo3v7Q?key=NWYyYm9LUkl5MDNjY2hsUWk5SHdGYlExM1NDYXpB , which lists posting dates as Nov 13, 2008–Dec 20, 2013. Commons:Deletion_requests/Several_photos_of_PK1913 shows that it was here Sep 2009, and that the author was trying to get them deleted at that point. I see no evidence that this is more than the uploader getting the image deleted after a courtesy deletion failed.--Prosfilaes (talk) 21:39, 25 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi,
before deleting it, I went actually to the above linked Google-page and looked at the image. Clicking on details gives a date of 23. Feb. 2009, which is still earlier than the earliest upload-date on Commons for that image (18. Apr. 2009). Of course, I don't know whether the Google-page was tagged as "not authorized for free" from early on. I concede that I didn't investigate the edit-history of the deleted file. Anyway, if you insist I can put it into a regular DR to allow for broader discussion. --Túrelio (talk) 07:48, 26 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Deletion of my image of Zion Lights[edit]

Hello. you just deleted my image of Zion Lights. I can prove it is mine - I have the original RAW file, the camera it was shot on - and it was originally published on my site. Indeed, you can see another image from the same event on that very page. How can I get this reversed? After all, I am the copyright holder. The quoted original source was the subject of the photo, whom I gave permission to use it at her request. Adders (talk) 19:13, 26 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

See my reply at Commons:Undeletion_requests/Current_requests#File:Zion_Lights.jpg. --Túrelio (talk) 20:42, 26 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

User:Queenuniverse[edit]

Hi Túrelio. Would you mind trying to explain COM:L to this user in your capacity as a Commons administrator? They seem to mean well, but also seem to have a serious misunderstanding of not only Commons policy, but of copyright in general. I'm afraid that if they don't slow down, an administrator is going to have no choice but to block their account for repeated copyvios. -- Marchjuly (talk) 20:55, 26 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

✓ Done. --Túrelio (talk) 10:37, 27 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you. -- Marchjuly (talk) 12:20, 27 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Copyright[edit]

Hi there. If you have a moment could you comment at [26]. You deleted the first upload of this file, and probably have more experience with copyright than I do. Thank you! Magnolia677 (talk) 10:24, 27 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi,
I've checked the mentioned history and your statement and found it correct and complete. Let's hope it gets home. --Túrelio (talk) 10:29, 27 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you. Cheers. Magnolia677 (talk) 12:21, 27 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

numan.tokyo[edit]

Please restore File:太田将熙さん撮り下ろしコメント動画【numan】沼落ち5秒前！－俳優編第25回－.webm. The DR is still open, and the files should be kept anyway. - Alexis Jazz ping plz 10:54, 28 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

✓ Done. --Túrelio (talk) 11:31, 28 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Elia Dagani[edit]

Hello, Turelio. I'm admin of swiss fencer Elia Dagani, i put foto from his website eliadagani.ch to Wikipedia. Tell me please why you deleted foto?

Thank you in advance. — Preceding unsigned comment added by A.varfolomeeva.v (talk • contribs) 13:49, 28 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi A.varfolomeeva.v,
are you talking about File:Elia Dagani - Swiss Fencer.jpg? (That's the only one I deleted)
You had sourced it to "eliadagani.ch", a website which claims "Elia Dagani © 2018 - All rights reserved". So, there was no evidence of a permission.
As you had credited it to "AMAG_TOM", whatever that means, you need to provide a permission (confirming author- or rightsholdership and the choosen license) from this AMAG_TOM to permissions-commons@wikimedia.org . --Túrelio (talk) 14:06, 28 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Copyright Violation[edit]

I am writing for the uploads I made. In addition I saw you deleted my user page.

First Issue:

[File:Gizem Sözeri.jpg] File:Gizem_Sözeri.jpg

[File:Batuhan Civelek.jpg] File:Batuhan_Civelek.jpg

I could not find any time to write about these photographs. Now I have and I am writing to you but they were deleted already. I uploaded them yesterday, and the violation was the copyright. However you added the link from the web, one of the links were from the website I created and I edit. The website is http://www.agso.com.tr/

Also the Twitter Account that I am also in charge of. I can send you, if necessary, associated screenshots that shows I am in control of the website and the Twitter account.

For both photographs, you can find them in the musician profile pages in our website:

http://www.agso.com.tr/gizem-sozeri/

http://www.agso.com.tr/batuhan-civelek/

I created the profile pages for our musicians and I also have all possible permissions to use them. They deleted because the claim was I violated the copyrights of the photographs. I want to add the social media link that we use to inform our audience about our soloists:

For Gizem Sözeri: https://www.instagram.com/p/Bw1zoi2hj-u/

https://www.facebook.com/AnkaraGenclikSenfoniOrkestrasiResmiSayfasi/photos/a.336660193394368/775258289534554/

For Batuhan Civelek: https://www.instagram.com/p/BqfovEihW8k/

https://www.facebook.com/AnkaraGenclikSenfoniOrkestrasiResmiSayfasi/photos/a.336660193394368/687146135012437/

I can also send you a screenshot that I have the control of the website https://www.agso.com.tr/


- Second Issue:

For the photographs, that

File:Ömer Berk Taraklı.jpg

File:Batuhan Civelek.jpg

There is a issue and these issues effect my other uploads. They are:

File:Ömer Berk Taraklı Weber AGSO Artwork.jpg

File:Batuhan Civelek Lebrun Oboe Concerto AGSO Artwork.jpg

It says that they contain image within image. It is true but they are the album artwork of I release and the image within image is my original content. I want to add our albums’ Spotify links.

For Ömer Berk Taraklı: https://open.spotify.com/album/3Z9UizpwSYjFmp8sdaJxrF?si=PZTvt-Z2RKSCUAMx3V_7lw

For Batuhan Civelek: https://open.spotify.com/album/5FzbrVFPenCrOH4IKRC8G3?si=HkeqW0nIRjaiUnxHc0iSiw


- Third Issue:

Lastly, I have another issue about another recording’s artwork. This time there is no soloist, and I am the conductor. However I do not want to take the credit, I want to give the credit to my orchestra. That’s why I did not use my photograph in the artwork. (I give the credit to the soloists If there is any. For example, File:Ömer Berk Taraklı Weber AGSO Artwork.jpg , File:Batuhan Civelek Lebrun Oboe Concerto AGSO Artwork.jpg ). I added the photograph of the orchestra. I have every possible right to use it because it is the product of my team. I also use the photograph in our website. The link is: https://www.agso.com.tr/hakkimizda/ you can see this photograph in the background of the first visual you in the page.

The artwork I am talking about is this: File:Barış Demirezer Beethoven AGSO Artwork.jpg


This is the Spotify link of our album:

https://open.spotify.com/album/1VZnxx3t3RQeXut9E735iL?si=PO2waSIkSwSKrv6_YU1zgQ


I am really thankful for your efforts. I am really aware of the community rules and I deeply respect them. I can image how many situations you face that violate the community rules. I also deeply respect you for your volunteer efforts for making this community dependable.

Sincerely,

Barış Demirezer (talk) 14:58, 28 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Barış Demirezer,
these are a lot of questions. I don't have enough time today for that. So, you will need a bit of patience.
Regarding File:Barış Demirezer Beethoven AGSO Artwork.jpg: here are possibly 2 copyrights to consider: 1) the photographer of the orchestra-shot and 2) the designer of the cover-composition. You should provide a permission to permissions-commons@wikimedia.org (OTRS) which includes boths aspects. If you designed the cover as such, you only need to obtain the photographers permission. If the cover-rights are with the record company, you need their permission. The permission should ideally come directly from the photographer and should mention the filename on Commons. --Túrelio (talk)
Dear Túrelio,
Thank you for your time. If any other thing is necessary please inform me. I can immediately supply what you need. Thank you again for your time and effort!
Barış Demirezer (talk) 18:05, 28 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Dear Túrelio,
I sent an e-mail for all of the documents I uploaded and OTRS made necessary changes. The situation is the same with the photos deleted. Is it possible to undelete the photos and allow me to give necessary permissions? File:Gizem Sözeri.jpg and File:Batuhan Civelek.jpg are the photographs I am talking about and ask you to undelete them. I do not want to re-upload them before learning your approach to this situations. I do not want to act without your consent. In addition you deleted my user profile. Is it possible to undo it? Thank you for your time
Barış Demirezer (talk) 08:16, 30 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Farm Stall[edit]

Hallo Túrelio, danke für das Löschen der Category:Farm Stall !! Ich wusste nicht wie das geht ;-) Liebe Grüße --Olga Ernst (talk) 20:01, 28 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Gern geschehen. Löschen können nur Admins. Bei cats u.ä. einfach {{Speedydelete|<Begründung>}} hineinsetzen. --Túrelio (talk) 20:13, 28 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Super, vielen Dank Túrelio !! Grüße --Olga Ernst (talk) 08:20, 29 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

File:Rolf P. Knierim headshot.jpg[edit]

Greetings. Posting this here as well and requesting your prompt assistance with this. It looks like the deletion of this image was completed by you. I am the one who uploaded it.I am writing to request undeletion of this file, Rolf P. Knierim headshot.jpg as soon as possible. A representative of the copyright holder has now submitted the license using the Wikimedia OTRS release generator, which I hope you can see in the system so that the image can be undeleted. Please see that has been transmitted and then undelete. I'm hoping the file can be returned to the Commons as soon as possible so that it can be used for the relevant Wikipedia page. I was at the copyright holder location with the representative when I uploaded the scan and was given prior agreement that they provide the necessary Creative Commons license. They have now submitted it through the OTRS release generator today. Thank you in advance for your prompt attention in this matter. --Bmamk (talk) 00:57, 29 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Bmamk,
I have no access to anything sent to OTRS; only OTRS-volunteers have access to that. They will evaluate the material/permission and finally approve (or not) the ticket. As an act of good will I can temporarily undelete the image. However, whether it can remain on Commons depends from OTRS' judgement. In addition, you should not write your name in the author entry, as producing a mere reproduction doesn't make one the author. Instead, the original photographer's name should be entered here. --Túrelio (talk) 08:03, 29 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Question about the redirection of File:北門慶典.jpg[edit]

Hello. I'm the organizer of Wiki Loves Monuments 2019 in Taiwan. Before the review meeting, we found that there are two same files uploaded by different users. When I want to make sure which one is the real photographer, I found that you have redirected 北門慶典.jpg to 北門風貌.jpg.(The history) Thanks for your help, but I'd like to know how do you decide to redirect 北門慶典.jpg to File:北門風貌.jpg instead of the opposite? Do you have any information to make sure the two accounts are not controlled by one person? It's important for me because we don't want to give a wrong prize. I would be very grateful if you can reply to my message.--Reke (talk) 03:08, 29 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Reke,
1) as I did not request the duplicate-deletion by myself (instead User:Solomon203 did), I've just compared both images visually and performed the deletion/process. In this case, the remaining version is the one, which was uploaded earlier (though only 2 days difference).
2) well, that would finally be a question for COM:CU. From my superficial view, it's strange that both accounts were created and became active on September 28th, 2019 and both use (not so cheap) professional Canon cameras 5D Mark II and 5D Mark III. That's indeed quite suggestive of your suspicion. So, you might ask them directly for clarification (as it likely violates the WLM terms) or request a CU. --Túrelio (talk) 07:55, 29 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you so much. The information is useful for us. I'll have some conversation with these two users later.--Reke (talk) 11:28, 29 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

File:VA-official-Photo.jpg‎[edit]

Hello Túrelio, based on some off-wiki links the uploader (Dhwalin) works for the subject of this image and there are fair chances that this web page was created only to claim the ownership of this image. Looking at this, another image of the same person at the same event I believe the original copyright holder is H.S. Manjunath a photojournalist, not Vivek Agnihotri or his organisation. Also, the image has no metadata, making it further suspect as a copyright infringement. GSS (talk) 11:47, 29 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Ok. However, when the uploader works for the depicted person, shouldn't it be easy to have access to a properly licensed shot of him? Anyway, I will put the image into a regular DR to allow a discussion. See Commons:Deletion requests/File:VA-official-Photo.jpg. --Túrelio (talk) 14:03, 29 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]
No idea, but this kind of tricks are very common by paid editors like Flickr washing. Thanks for taking it to DR. GSS (talk) 15:18, 29 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Dhwalin has been blocked on en-wiki for undisclosed paid editing and advertising. GSS (talk) 15:20, 29 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

deletion of File:Photo Bruno Ducourant.jpg[edit]

Hello, the authorisation for this File is under treatment : [Ticket#: 2019103110005918]. Can you please wait before deletion, as we are trying once again to have it in wikimedia ? Thanks --Le Glaouch (talk) 15:11, 31 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Ok. I've temp-restored it. --Túrelio (talk) 15:33, 31 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Can I make the Categoryː20th-century churches in the Netherlands?[edit]

I would like to make the Categoryː20th-century churches in the Netherlands, but I get a warning that I am making a page that has been removed in the past. Because your name is mentioned, I ask this question to you.
It seems that you have removed the page Category:20th-century churches in the Netherlands (incorrectly named / duplicate) on 24 feb 2013 21:08. You moved the content to Category:Modern movement churches in the Netherlands.
My commentː

  1. Modern movement churches in the Netherlands is just one of the many styles of churches built in the Netherlands in the 20th century. How can I group all those other churches built in the 20st century in the Netherlands in one category?
  2. Many other countries have a Category:20th-century churches, see Category:20th-century churches by country, so why not one for the Netherlands?

So, in the end, my question isː Can I make the Categoryː20th-century churches in the Netherlands? JopkeB (talk) 15:27, 31 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, really, the fact that I deleted this cat 6 years (!) ago, should not hinder you at all to create it again, if it makes sense to you. Cats are not copyvios or alike. --Túrelio (talk) 15:36, 31 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Thanksǃ JopkeB (talk) 15:54, 31 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

File:Dheeraj in instanbul.jpg[edit]

I just got this restored at COM:UNDEL because we have an OTRS ticket from the copyright holder for it and I have not had time to review it. Please restore and apply the OTRS pending template, so it does not get deleted again prematurely. Thanks Ww2censor (talk) 13:30, 2 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

✓ Done. --Túrelio (talk) 14:44, 2 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

a strange deletion request[edit]

Hi again. I have gotten a rather strange deletion request for a file that I meticulously researched to ensure it met PD-Russia-1996 rules (I found a 1945 publication of it with no author attribution, and an archivist selling it at an auction gave no indication of who the author was, and author remains unknown). The initial deletion template was rather vague, saying "It looks like an mistaken license.". I thought I was being trolled at first since I was not mistaken with the licence and provided publication information, but apparently it's an experienced user. As requested I provided a link to the publication directly, which I did, but then he went on about how the person at the auction might secretly know the name of the author, (even though the back of the photo card had just a number on it, no photographer name at all) etc. What do you make of this? I've gotten a few similar nominations like this in the past that have turned out to be "keep". I have to say I am a bit annoyed by all the unusual "what-ifs" and goalpost-moving. I mean, if the auctioneer knows/knew the photographer name but kept it secret from the public, one would think it would be considered anonymous still? After all, if a samizdat work was written by a few authors who knew each other but kept their identities secret, it is considered anonymous since the public doesn't know.--PlanespotterA320 (talk) 20:18, 3 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Question[edit]

Hi, Could you please let me know what was the reason for this Revision?! I couldn't find any difference even crop or trim in these pictures. kind regards Déjà vu • ✉ 10:34, 3 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi,
you need to include my edit-summary and my following edit for the full picture. The uploader's account-name is identical to the website's name. So, either he is a very blatant impostor or a representative of the group "Soulful Music". As I found the latter more probable in this case, I've tagged as no-perm, as a permission/confirmation is what we would request if uploader was definitively a group/company/alike. Sure, if he doesn't react, the image will be deleted in 1 week anyway. --Túrelio (talk) 11:29, 3 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for explanation Déjà vu • ✉ 18:15, 3 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

John Witherspoon[edit]

HEY!!!! The John Witherspoon screenshot WAS under a creative commons license. The video came from the OFFICIAL Sister Circle TV Youtube Channel, and if you look at the description of the video upload (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Fs5XR1IllwY), it says on the bottom, "License: Creative Commons Attribution license (reuse allowed)." NEVER delete a photo under a false rationale EVER AGAIN!!!!! EditorE (talk) 18:50, 3 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, you are right. I had relied on the information provided by the nominator, who seem to have erred. Sorry. --Túrelio (talk) 19:44, 3 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Category deletion[edit]

Hello! May I ask you the reason of the deletion of Category:San Martino (Noriglio, Rovereto); it says "(incorrectly named) duplicate, content moved to Category:Noriglio", but that doesn't seem to be correct: "San Martino" is the name of the church (actually "chiesa di San Martino" = "St Martin's church"), which is located in the town of Noriglio (hence Category:San Martino (Noriglio, Rovereto) is the category of the church, and Category:Noriglio is the category of the town). -- Syrio posso aiutare? 11:55, 4 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, sure. The reason for the change was a request by another user; the rationale for me was that the cat had only 1 image in it. So, if more images were available, the deleted cat could easily be restored. --Túrelio (talk) 16:23, 4 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Uh, is there a policy about how many files are needed to create a category? -- Syrio posso aiutare? 19:27, 4 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Hi, not sure if it's a written policy, however, it's common practise. On the other hand, this is not to be regarded as an absolute ban for a 1-file-category. --Túrelio (talk) 19:54, 4 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Ok, because as of now every single church in the archdiocese of Trento has its own category (cfr Category:Churches in the Roman Catholic Archdiocese of Trento), regardless of the number of photos, and they're categorized by municipality and by patron saint, and sorted by name. This one is now the only exception, so I'd like to recreate it, if you're not opposed. -- Syrio posso aiutare? 12:03, 5 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
No problem with that. Consistency of the category-structure is more important. --Túrelio (talk) 12:20, 5 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Ok, done, thanks! -- Syrio posso aiutare? 17:15, 5 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

p.van de ven[edit]

Hi, a few years ago I uploaded a black&white portrait of Pauline van de Ven (category Dutch writer, painter) with CC0 public domain permission. I am the copyright owner. The image was somehow edited and of low quality. I replaced it with a HR color image a few days ago. You removed it for copyright reason. I am owner of the copyright, the image is CC0. Could you please restore the last image with correct (owner) copyright mentioned or explain me how to do it? Removing both pictures is fine with me as well. Thanks. — Preceding unsigned comment was added by 143.176.197.38 (talk) 13:32, 6 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

(talk page stalker) @Vandevenp: You should have uploaded the photo as a new file, not overwrite and existing file. - Alexis Jazz ping plz 14:06, 6 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Also, Túrelio didn't revdel File:Pauline van de Ven (2015).jpg. I reverted it. I'm not sure what Túrelio has to do with this.. - Alexis Jazz ping plz 14:10, 6 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
In case the IP is User:Vandevenp, they may have contacted me because I once asked for permission for File:Ceci est un oeuf.jpg. However, I am not aware of any involvement with File:Pauline van de Ven (2015).jpg. --Túrelio (talk) 16:51, 6 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
@IP, if you are User:Vandevenp, your mistake with File:Pauline van de Ven (2015).jpg was that you did overwrite an existing image. Because this is not allowed, Alexis Jazz restored the original image. This is our policy, independant of copyright. A new image/image-version should be uploaded under a different filename.
If your main intend was to get the older b/w image replaced, you should - after uploading the new image under different filename - propose the replacement on the talkpage(s) of the project(s) where it is used. --Túrelio (talk) 16:51, 6 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Your deletion of 4_TH_WORLD_DEAF_FUTSAL_CHAMPIONSHIPS[edit]

"Shouting" is not a valid criteria for deletion per COM:CSD. I see that you just used the existing and invalid reason left by VKras. I am starting to suspect that he doesn't really know our criteria for speedy deletion. You should have chosen better deletion log summary. GA1 or G1 would be appropriate. Masum Reza📞 11:35, 8 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, but the page was empty anyway. --Túrelio (talk) 11:38, 8 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
It wasn't empty before. It was emptied by VKras. Though I know the contents were eligible for speedy deletion per GA1 and G1 as I saw the previous revisions. @VKras: Please do admins and us patrollers a favor and read COM:CSD and COM:Deletion policy before making any further tagging for SD. We are not supposed to clean up an autopatrolled editor's edits. And you definitely did not need to blank the page. Masum Reza📞 11:44, 8 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@ Túrelio and Masumrezarock100 I requested speedy with blanking because I thought and counted the text on page as shouting. Shouting is inappropriate. The capital letter in every speeling of every word in considered shouting. --VKras (talk) 15:36, 8 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, sure, that was clear. However, in general you don't need to blank a page, if you request it for speedy — with the exception if the content is per se problematic (insulting or disclosing etc.). --Túrelio (talk) 15:54, 8 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

File:নুনেতে ভাতেতে ৩.jpg[edit]

File:নুনেতে ভাতেতে ৩.jpg আমি মনে করি না এটা কপিরাইট লঙ্ঘন করে। কোন যুক্তিতে কপিরাইট লঙ্ঘন ঘটল আমার বুঝে আসছে না। ধন্যবাদ Nakul Chandra Barman (talk) 10:25, 9 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

As explained to you already on the talkpage of Patrick, works of others (whether text or images) are automatically copyrighted. When you reproduce it, as you did, then you violate their copyright. --Túrelio (talk) 10:42, 9 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

File:Official portrait of Grahame Morris.jpg[edit]

Would it be possible to undelete File:Official portrait of Grahame Morris.jpg? I think this will have been part of the photo release in Category:Official United Kingdom Parliamentary photographs 2017, and so not a copyvio (I can't confirm without seeing it, but Chris McAndrew was the photographer for these and the date looks right). The whole set were released CC-BY (details), though this one seems to have been uploaded seperately from the others so presumably didn't have as clear a copyright statement. Thanks, Andrew Gray (talk) 19:10, 11 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Andrew,
this image was the only upload of its uploader. The EXIF data for the image contain the statement "© Chris McAndrew / All Moral Rights Asserted 2017". Uploader mentioned UK Parliament as source and Chris McAndrew as author. A seach at https://members.parliament.uk/members/lords didn't yield the name of the depicted. Shot-date was Sept. 18th 2017. Photographer seems to be this: http://www.mcandrewphoto.co.uk/photo-shoots/mp-portraits-project/ . Is there still the slightest chance that it belongs to "your" source/project? --Túrelio (talk) 20:14, 11 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
The Parliament page is a little confusingly set up - because the election began last week, there are technically no MPs, so it defaults to only showing members of the upper house. The page for Morris is here, and the full copy of the image is here, with license data - does that look like the same photo?
Shot date is interesting. The batch we had were from July, but I know they were anticipating a second batch, as some people were missed out the first time around. I guess this must have been one of them. Andrew Gray (talk) 20:22, 12 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Hi, regrettably it's not the same image. Assuming you are still online, I can undelete it for 10 minutes, to allow you to look for yourself. --Túrelio (talk) 20:26, 12 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Interesting! Must have been another from the same batch but I agree it's probably not covered by the license. I'll upload the properly-licensed one later. Thanks for checking. Andrew Gray (talk) 20:32, 12 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Deletion of wrong image[edit]

File:Michael Bruse (2018).png was the original and had a higher resolution

File:Bildschirmfoto 2019-11-09 um 13.33.45.png is a copyvio and was/is nominated for deletion.

Please correct you mistake soonest. --Bahnmoeller (talk) 20:45, 11 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Beide sind vom selben Hochlader User:Ana.albaa. Wenn das eine ne copyvio ist, dann auch das andere. Zudem hat der User noch ein 3. hochgeladen, das mit dem momentan gelöschten praktisch identisch ist: File:Wikipedia Bruse.png. --Túrelio (talk) 21:11, 11 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

deleted photo[edit]

Hello,

you deleted my upload photo. I uploaded it again, because the author didn't send permission in time. He will do it. If he send permission, photo will be uploaded again? Benow8 (talk) 17:11, 13 November 2019 (UTC) Benow8[reply]

Hi, are you talking about File:Neumann Adam.jpg? When the volunteers, who work on permissions, have evaluated the permission, they will either undelete it by themself or notify me to undelete it. --Túrelio (talk) 20:18, 13 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Speedydeletes[edit]

Hallo, Turelio! Wollte mich nur mal kurz bedanken für die Abarbeitung meiner Speedydeletes in den letzten Tagen. Tut mir leid, dass ich da gerade so viel Arbeit für euch Administratoren produziert habe, jetzt ist mal wieder ein bisschen Ruhe ;-) Liebe Grüße --Reinhard Müller (talk) 15:18, 14 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Commons:Deletion requests/File:Church in Krakow, Poland; 07.10.19.jpg[edit]

Can you delete this page, its not necessary IMO. --VKras (talk) 16:43, 14 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

That was just a mis-click of mine. Already deleted. --Túrelio (talk) 16:44, 14 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Can I put place speedy tag on Commons:Deletion requests/File:Church in Krakow, Poland; 07.10.19.jpg? --VKras (talk) 16:47, 14 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

But the file is already deleted. --Túrelio (talk) 21:34, 14 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

SD template[edit]

Hi, Could you please let me know what was the reason that you took this picture's SD template off ?! Warm regards Déjà vu • ✉ 21:59, 14 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, sure, as the image is currently in use on a project (article). If a Wikimedia project decides to use an image/file, it is automatically in scope. --Túrelio (talk) 22:14, 14 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you so much for your explanation. Regards Déjà vu • ✉ 23:28, 14 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:We%C3%A1s_Rancias_Compilation_Vol._14_-_Cover.jpg[edit]

Hola Turelio,

recientente he subido varias caratulas pertenecientes al "Weás Rancias Compilation" del Ministerio de Cesantía, donde yo tengo la autorización expresa del dueño de este sitio web de poder publicar aquellas imágenes sin ningún problema tal cual me lo adjunta a continuación en un correo. La cual si es necesaria puedo mandartela de manera interna

Eso, muchísimas gracias — Preceding unsigned comment added by Cesantereposter (talk • contribs) 20:27, 16 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Cesantereposter,
problem is that all those cover-images, which I had checked and tagged, had in its EXIF-data the explicit statement "All rights reserved". So, if you really have the permission by the rights-holder, you need to forward said permission to permissions-commons@wikimedia.org . The permission needs to mention the choosen license and each of the uploaded (currently deleted) images. (It can be in english or spanish) --Túrelio (talk) 20:43, 16 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Derivatives of a copyright violation[edit]

Hi Túrelio,

could you have a look at the following files?

They seem to have been derived from File:20190925 NDPCampaignTour2019 BTS-1737.jpg, which you had deleted as a likely copyright violation. Thank you very much!

Best regards
~ ToBeFree (talk) 20:47, 18 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Deletion of a book cover photo File:La Cuna de Ricardo Palma - Salvador Herrera Pinto, OFM.jpg[edit]

Hi, It seems to me that a photo of a cover of a book, make by me, can´t affect in any way the copyright which, in the case of books, is more related with the moral aspect of the intellectual property (authorship) and not with the commercial one of the picture. Many libraries have in their on line catalogs, pictures of the cover of the book. The same happens with Amazon or any other online store. So, I don´t think my picture of the cover of the book is affecting the copyright. I would appreciate if you keep the picture in order to inform best to the Wikipedia users. Thanks. — Preceding unsigned comment was added by 190.43.114.11 (talk) 22:11, 19 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Who are you? If you are Carloshg333, why don't you log-in? In addition, your comment belongs to Commons:Deletion requests/File:La Cuna de Ricardo Palma - Salvador Herrera Pinto, OFM.jpg. Finally, you seem not to have understood my action. This image was tagged for speedy-deletion by somebody else. I've changed that to a regular deletion discussion, as the photo on the cover might be old enough to be in the PD. Your arguments are not relevant, as neither Amazon not libraries claim these images to be under a free license (at best, they claim fair use), whereas you put it under a free license for commercial use. --Túrelio (talk) 22:15, 19 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Schloss Alt Königsborn, Category:Schloss Neu Königsborn, Category:Neu Königsborn[edit]

Das gehört nach Meinung von Kollege Adnon in Kat Category:Schloss Königsborn

,

.. und das in Category:Gutshof Königsborn. Wohl noch Nicht das Gelbe vom Ei ..

Hi Turelio. Du sla-test vorhin die Kats. Das ist enttäuschend, da ich doch jeweils Widerspruch eingelegt hatte; sahst Du den nicht ? Zum Inhaltlichen siehe bitte hier, vor allem den Absatz mit den gefetteten Teilen. Die Behauptung, dass es keine Lage Alt und Neu Königsborn gäbe ist schlicht falsch. Wistula (talk) 09:45, 20 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Wistula: Hab ich wohl übersehen. Tue aber bitte etwas in die Kats. hinein; sonst werden sie wieder wegen Leere gelöscht. --Túrelio (talk) 09:47, 20 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Die Kats waren ja befüllt, hatte Adnon vorher geleert. Ich kann meine Einsprüche übrigens nicht mehr in meiner Beitragsliste finden - werden die mit der Kat dort rausgelöscht ? Kannst Du noch die Versionsgeschichte der Kat sehen, hat Adnon vielleicht meinen Einspruch überschrieben ? Wenn ich jetzt wieder herstelle, wird Adnon revertieren; und da es einige Arbeit bedeutet, bin ich eigentlich auch der Meinung, er solle das selbst machen. Wie kann man weiter vorgehen ? Gruss Wistula (talk) 10:03, 20 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Inzwischen sind 2 der entlöschten Kats wieder weg. Ich denke, ihr beiden müsstest erstmal versuchen eine Einigung in der/n zugrundeliegen Sachfrage/n über diesen Ort bzw. das "Schloss" zu erreichen. Das sollte aber besser auf :de erfolgen; ggf. unter Hinzuholung einer 3. Meinung. Danach könnte man das dann hier auf Commons umsetzen. --Túrelio (talk) 10:39, 20 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

This DR[edit]

Dear Admin Turelio,

Could you please show in the DR above when the source flickr account was blacklisted and, if possible, the reason why? I appreciate any help which you can give here. Thank You, --Leoboudv (talk) 10:12, 20 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Leoboudv,
please see the first paragraph of Commons:Deletion requests/File:SPD-Kandidaten für Köln- Martin Dörrmann, Elfi Scho-Antwerpes, Dr. Rolf Mützenich und Prof. Dr. Karl Lauterbach (37388077235).jpg. --Túrelio (talk) 10:32, 20 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Francoisliétout.jpg - copyright[edit]

Hello,

I see that your deleted the picture francoisliétout.jpg. I hereby confirm that I do own the rights for this picture, and kindly ask you not to delete it again in the future.

Thank you,

AL — Preceding unsigned comment added by Antoinelietout (talk • contribs) 11:21, 20 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi AL,
problem is that this image was found to be published already elsewhere. Therefore, you need to send a formal declaration of permission to permissions-commons@wikimedia.org (can be in French). --Túrelio (talk) 11:31, 20 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Copyvio confusion on kimono parts.png[edit]

Hi,

I noticed you removed the copyvio strike I'd placed on the file kimono parts.png - I'm a little confused, and was hoping we could clear things up. See, I searched for the image, and the oldest uploads I could find on the web were these (at the bottom). Google says they were posted on the 8th of April 2004, but the file itself has '2011' in the title - so while I see exactly why you undid my edit, I'm now just confused about which date is accurate.

I am genuinely thinking of simply re-doing the diagram - it could be more specific and I think one label might be wrong. But I'd like your input, if everything's alright. Cheers --Ineffablebookkeeper (talk) 16:06, 20 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi,
I actually went to this russian page and found the image-posting date to be 2011, per its path https://i1.wp.com/animeonline.su/uploads/posts/2011-02/1298382634_12.jpg. So, it may well be that the image was added later to the article or that the Google-date is simply wrong. The article-page itself is undated. Also, the images in that article seem to come from different sources (per their watermarks), which suggests that the article-author is not necessarily the image-author. So, overall my judgement was that it's unlikely that we found the "true" source of the image. Of course, I may be wrong. --Túrelio (talk) 17:43, 20 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Lizenzfrage[edit]

Hallo Túrelio,
User:Badlydrawnboy22 fragt mich, ob die Lizensierung und Quellenangabe dieses Bildes File:Schoenorchis-tixieri-type-drawing.jpg korrekt ist und als Muster für weitere Upload zu verwenden ist.
Dank für Deine Mühe und Grüße. Orchi (talk) 17:58, 20 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hallo Orchi,
ich habe den Eintrag im Author-Feld etwas ergänzt, damit klar ist, von wem was kommt. Das sollte er bei analog komponierten Bildern ebenso machen. Die Lizenz konnte ja erfreulicherweise direkt von der Quelle übernommen werden. --Túrelio (talk) 19:53, 20 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Hallo Túrelio,
vielen Dank für Deine Überprüfung, Hilfe und Deinen Vorschlag. Ich werde User:Badlydrawnboy22 auf diese Seite verweisen. Beste Grüße. Orchi (talk) 20:28, 20 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Hey Orchi. Sorry for removing your comments. I accidentally clicked the rollback from the mobile watchlist page. Masum Reza📞 20:37, 20 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Masumrezarock100 ....no problem. Greetings. Orchi (talk) 20:42, 20 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Imágenes[edit]

Esas imágenes están en uso porque el mismo usuario que las subió las añadió a artículos creados por él, pero no sirven para identificar los supuestos insectos y hasta es posible que dichos insectos no existan (tengo que verificar si realmente existen esos insectos o no). Gracias Jcfidy (talk) 05:46, 21 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Ok.
Now, File:Bombus kashmirensis.jpeg, File:Bombus funerarius.jpg and File:Bombus braccatus.jpg are no longer in use. What did you mean by "y posible bulo", wrong species or copyvio? --Túrelio (talk) 07:32, 21 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
No, con bulo me refería a que podía ser falso (un trolleo), pero he buscado los taxones en internet y existen no es bulo pero las imágenes no representan a los insectos de los artículos (son malísimas como ilustraciones) es preferible que los artículos carezcan de imagen a tener esas. Tienes razón, quizás no sean para borrado rápido (speedydelete). Pd.- me enteré de casualidad de que habías respondido porque no me mencionastes en la respuesta. Un saludo y gracias Jcfidy (talk) 01:43, 22 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Suppression de File:Peertube03.png[edit]

Bonjour,

Vous avez supprimé l'image File:Peertube03.png alors qu'il s'agit d'une capture d'écran du logiciel Peertube, un logiciel libre sous licence AGPL. De plus la capture a été réalisée sur l'instance de Blender, qui stipule dans son "A propos" : All videos: Creative Commons Attribution - free to share, free to use, free to copy.

Pourriez-vous m'expliquer plus dans le détail la raison de cette suppression ?

Merci d'avance !

--

Hello,

You have deleted the image File:Peertube03.png while it is a screenshot of Peertube, licensed under the free license AGPL. In addition, the capture was made on Blender's instance, which states in his "About" page : All videos: Creative Commons Attribution - free to share, free to use, free to copy.

Could you elaborate on the reason for this deletion?

Thank you in advance! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rlemetayer (talk • contribs) 08:19, 22 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Rlemetayer,
seems you are correct. However, uploader User:Acryline had claimed it as own work and put it under a CC license, whereas Peertube is under GNU-GPL 3.0[27]. So, I will restore the file, but would ask you to correct the author/license entries. --Túrelio (talk) 08:52, 22 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks ! I think User:Acryline must have used the Upload Wizard, which only give the choice of Creative Commons. Just to be precise, in case it is relevant, PeerTube is under "GNU AFFERO GENERAL PUBLIC LICENSE 3.0" [[28]](AGPL) not GNU-GPL. Do i have to also give credit (license ?) for Blender ? I will correct both author and license once the file is restored, no worry. --Rlemetayer (talk) 07:59, 27 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Hi ! I'm very sorry but it appears that the file was deleted again by another administrator before i had a chance to edit it... --Rlemetayer (talk) 12:53, 29 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Hi @Rlemetayer: , I'll try to undelete it again. --Túrelio (talk) 13:38, 29 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Duplicate category[edit]

Hi, Turelio - I've somehow managed to create 2 categories - one with the wrong case: Category:Photographs by user:Atsme which needs to be deleted. I attempted to delete tag it but categories require extra steps that I find confusing. Can you please delete it? Thanks in advance!! Atsme Talk 📧 13:51, 22 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi,
✓ Done. --Túrelio (talk) 15:12, 22 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you! One more question - is there a way to recover File:Ibrahim_Shahda.jpg ?? We actually have the proper license and release from the photographer. Thanks in advance! Atsme Talk 📧 22:44, 22 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Hi, I've conditionally undeleted the file. Did you mean by "proper license and release" that a confirmation has been sent to OTRS? --Túrelio (talk) 08:56, 23 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

File:Wwnull.jpg.jpg[edit]

Hallo Túrelio, ich habe einen Eintrag für die Zeitschrift "Wechselwirkung" geschrieben. Sie haben bemängelt, das das Urheberrecht für das eingestellte Titelbild der Nullnummer Februar 1979 nicht korrekt angegeben wurde. Das ist auch kein Wunder, denn es gibt es nicht! Die Redaktion der "Wechselwirkung" hat ehrenamtlich gearbeitet; lediglich habe ab 1981 800 DM bekommen als Verleger, Herausgeber, Chefredakteur, Buchhalter, Abonnementsverwalter, Produktionsleiter, Versandleiter. Das Titelbild der Nulnummer war ein kollektives Ergebnis. Wir erinnern uns: Der Winter 1978/79 war der schneereichste seit Menschengedenken; in Norddeutschland steckten Bergepanzer der Bundeswehr beim Versuch, Autobahnen vom Schnee zu räumen, fest; Bundesbahnzüge wurden an der Fahrt durch Schneewehen gehindert. In der Firma, die die Nullnummer der "Wechselwirkung" setzen sollte, herrschte eine Raumtemperatur von unter null Grad Celsius. Der Entwickler erreichte damit nicht seine notwendige Betriebstemperatur; die belichteten Filme waren nur schwarz; mithin unbrauchbar. heizöl war in Westerlin nicht zu bekommen. Wir mussten den geplanten Start der Zeitschrift von Januar 79 auf Februar 79 verschieben. Es gab also reichlich Stress. Und ein Titelbild musste noch erstellt werden. In gemeinsamer Diskussion kam die Idee einer Zeichnung eines digitalisierten Kopfes aus. Natürlich hat dann einer eine Reinzeichnung erstellt. Aber wer war es? Wer hatte die Idee? keine Ahnung. Ich war aber Inhaber des Verlages Reinhard Behnisch, somit auch der presserechtlich Verantwortliche. Nach dreißig Jahren nehme ich mir also das Recht am Titelbild heraus. Gaänzlich unerträglich halte ich jedoch, dass jemand, der damals nicht anwesend war, die Umstände gar nicht kennen kann, sich einfach anmaßt, etwas zu löschen, ohne eine An- oder Nachfrage. Das ist kein Stil, zumal alles auch noch anonym geschieht. Ergo: Nie wieder einen Eintrag für Wikipedia verfassen! Bitte stellen Sie das Titelbild wieder her! Mit freundlichen Grüßen Reinhard Behnisch — Preceding unsigned comment added by Behnisch (talk • contribs) 13:05, 23 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Reinhard,
ich habe die Datei jetzt erst einmal wiederhergestellt und in einem Löschantrag zur Diskussion gestellt. Der LA dient nicht der Löschung, sondern bietet eine etablierte Diskussionplattform. Du findest ihn hier: Commons:Deletion requests/File:Wwnull.jpg.jpg. Du kannst dort notfalls auch auf deutsch schreiben; fass dich aber kurz und kommt direkt zum Punkt (z.B. dass das copyright bei dir liegen sollte). Urheberrechtlich relevant ist m.E. nur der "digitalisierte Kopf".
Zu deinem letzten Satz: es mag zwar erst einmal ärgerlich sein, wenn ein eigener Upload gelöscht wird. In deinem Wording solltest du dich aber doch etwas mäßigen. Die unbezahlten Admins auf diesem Projekt müssen täglich hunderte von URVs erkennen, bewerten und - gemäß unserer policy Commons:Projektumfang/Vorbeugendes Prinzip - im Zweifelsfall löschen, damit Nachnutzer, die sich auf die angegebene freie Lizenz verlassen, nicht vom tatsächlichen Copyright-Inhaber auf Schadensersatz in Anspruch genommen werden, was dennoch immer wieder mal vorkommt. Aufgrund der Unmenge täglicher Uploads bleiben nur Sekunden für jede Datei. Da jede gelöschte Datei mit 1 Klick wiederhergestellt werden kann, wiegt bei der Erstbewertung die Gefahrenabwehr im Zweifelsfall höher. --Túrelio (talk) 17:21, 23 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion of image[edit]

Hi, and thank you for your recent attention concerning my request for speedy deletion of an image. I am the uploader, but this image does not belong to me, nor did I have permission to upload it, nor is it in the public domain. Being that I want to abide by Wikipedia's policy, I would like it (and this other image that I also uploaded without permission) deleted. Can you please help? Thanks in advance! WikiEditorial101 (talk) 22:56, 23 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Me again[edit]

Hi, I just left a message on your talk page (above) from my main account, WikiEditorial101. I have the same issue with this image that I uploaded to this (alternate) account that I retired years ago (as, of course, I was unable to actually delete it), and I signed back in a few days ago just to amend my mistake in having uploaded yet another image that I don't own, was never permitted to upload, and is not in the public domain. Can you please help with this image too? Thank you! Musicus Historia (talk) 23:21, 23 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi,
thanks for your honesty. However, that's a bit serious, as both images were uploaded in 2015. So, they may have found external re-users, which might be sued by the real coypright-holder. If I understand you correctly, there is no chance to get a-posteriori-permission from the rightsholder, right? I would ask you to check both images (File:Canaan Casino du Liban Speech.jpg and File:Canaan Global Sorority Documentary Interview.jpg) for external uses and, if they exist, to notify the respective website-owners to take in down. I will then delete them. --Túrelio (talk) 23:27, 23 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Hello, and thank you for your prompt response concerning this matter. I could not determine who the rights-holders are (which is why I could not obtain permission), yet the images are not in the public domain, either. Having said that, shouldn't these images have been removed when they were initially uploaded, as I never provided proof of permission when various editors requested it? And shouldn't they be deleted now regardless, seeing as though proof of permission has still not been provided? And remember, it's not just the two images you mention above (File:Canaan Casino du Liban Speech.jpg and File:Canaan Global Sorority Documentary Interview.jpg), but also this one (File:Lydia_Canaan_in_Concert.jpg). Then, there is the additional matter of these two images (File:Lydia_Canaan,_Early_Life_on_Mt._Lebanon.jpg and https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/6/6a/Canaan_with_President_Lahoud.jpg) that I also uploaded from two other old accounts that I've long since been locked out of, as I don't remember the passwords and never associated them with an email address); none of these images are in the public domain, and were all uploaded without permission. And being that I'm clearly a WikiNovice, can you please clarify for me why—if all of the above mentioned images that were uploaded without permission can remain—WikiMedia has a copyright policy to begin with if it's not consistently, unbiasedly enforced? Because I thought that only images with permissions or those within the p.d. were allowed, and that otherwise they must be deleted, regardless of any other factors? Again, thank you for your time and consideration. WikiEditorial101 (talk) 01:24, 24 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Hi,
I don't understand your last elaboration. 1) you confessed that several of the images, you uploaded years ago claiming them to be under a free license, are indeed not under a free license. 2) I responded that we will delete them, but that first you have to identify external uses of your wrongly-claimed-as-free images and warn these re-users, in order to protect them from litigation for which you would be morally responsible. (Identifying re-uses is far easier when image is still online.) 3) Now you add even more images to your list of wrongly-claimed-as-free images (why didn't you do that from the beginning?), but Isee no response with regard to the job I asked you to do in 2). 4) your upload en:File:Canaan with President Lahoud.jpg is on :en Wikipedia, not on Commons. You need to notify :en people/admins for that. --Túrelio (talk) 08:11, 24 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
I hate to presume anything, but by the tone of your response I presume that you thought I was being sassy or rebelling against your advice and guidance. I wasn't. My question was sincere, and, I thought, a logical one. I was simply trying to understand why any of the Wiki sites would allow the hosting of images without proof of permission—for any reason or for any amount of time. I only asked this because there were other images I uploaded to Commons back then that were promptly deleted when I failed to provide proof. I can see how in this particular context (and due to the things that can easily get lost in written communications) that my intent/attitude could be easily misunderstood, but please have good faith that there has been a misunderstanding. There is also more to this situation than I feel comfortable discussing via a public forum, so perhaps a private email is in order (I, too, am busy in real life, and apologize that I have thus far not been able to give this issue the full attention it deserves). Also, I only mentioned the images from the other accounts as an afterthought due to me initially not knowing what could be done about them without me being able to log in, in order to prove that they belong(ed) to me, figuring that it made sense to at least start with the images whose corresponding accounts I have access to. And, lastly, I should have made it clear that I very much don't want any harm to come to anyone due to their use of these images, and therefore I'm not just happy to help right my wrongs, but also grateful for the opportunity. And I truly, personally appreciate your integrity in wanting to limit any potential damage I've done. But, again, there are other issues related to this whole mess that might add clarity to this situation and better help you help me help us all. If it's ok, I'd like to email you. Thank you again for taking your time to help me sort out this tangled web. WikiEditorial101 (talk) 21:34, 24 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I've looked around as best I know how, and I can't find a single instance of any of these images using Wikipedia as a source; the originating source is Canaan's social media, as none of these are professional photographs, per se, and also most of them were casual photos taken by Canaan's manager and posted on her social media.

So since your reason for not deleting them upon my initial request was because you were concerned that people were borrowing them from Commons under the pretense that they were in the public domain and that they could possibly face legal trouble if they were deleted from here, and apparently that's not an issue, can you please delete them now? WikiEditorial101 (talk) 03:29, 28 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

File:Square Headshot Elisabeth Bik.png[edit]

As per [29] and [30] the subject and rightsholder of File:Square Headshot Elisabeth Bik.png has requested undeletion and restoration at [31] please? EllenCT (talk) 21:48, 24 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @EllenCT: ,
o.k. So, she is indeed not the author, contrary to her claim at upload. If her husband shot the photo, it's likely not a copyvio. I can restore the file conditionally, but our policy requires they she or her husband sends an informal confirmation to permissions-commons@wikimedia.org which should mention the filename and contain a statement about authorship (as in her tweet) and agreement of the copyright-owner to the choosen free license (cc-by-sa-4.0). @EllenCT, as you may be in contact with her, please be so kind to notify her that this confirmation is required. --Túrelio (talk) 07:12, 25 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you very much for your help. I asked her to ask her husband to send the email. EllenCT (talk) 22:11, 25 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Copyrights violation[edit]

Bonjour, Hello I have been notified that you have delete a photo on a page I created for the artist Rens Lipsius. The notification was that it was a copyrights violation because the photo is on the facebook page of the artist. here is the message I received :

Retrait du lien Ideal_Artist_House_n°2.jpg, supprimé sur Commons par Túrelio ; motif : Copyright violation: copie page facebook (https://www.facebook.com/RensLipsiusStudio/p

The photo is indeed on his facebook page and was taken by himself. He personally gave me the right to use it and I did explain it when I answered questions about the photo. Now, could you be kind enough to tell me how I can get the photo back on the page?

thank you , — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mademoisellekim (talk • contribs) 16:35, 25 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Mademoisellekim,
I looked at the Facebook-page, but did not find any comment or communication of yours. So, this seems to have happened in private mails.
What we need from Rens Lipsius is an informal confirmation of his authorship and of the release of the photo under a free license (recommended: CC-BY-SA 4.0[32]), to be sent to permissions-commons@wikimedia.org (mention the filename: File:Ideal Artist House n°2.jpg). A permission "just for Wikipedia" is not acceptable. --Túrelio (talk) 19:34, 25 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Restoring a deleted file[edit]

Hi Túrelio - quick question: is it possible to restore File:Cetatile Radesei entrance 01.jpg, or is it too old? All of that author's images have been approved by OTRS per Ticket#2018072810002221. Thx in advance Atsme Talk 📧 17:42, 25 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

What do you mean by "too old"? If all images of this user have been approved, I will tem-restore it and tag it OTRS-pending. As I am not on OTRS, an OTRS-volunteer needs to confirm/approve it then. --Túrelio (talk) 19:26, 25 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
I wasn't sure if there was a time limit for us keeping deleted files accessible. Thank you for restoring it - I am OTRS and will follow through. Atsme Talk 📧 20:45, 25 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

File:ߖߌ߲߬ߖߌ߬ߓߊ߯ߙߌ߬ ߖߏ߲߬ߖߏ߲.png[edit]

N'Abend, Túrelio. Ich habe gerade eine ähnliche Schnelllöschung mit dem Argument abgelehnt, dass PNG und SVG eben keine exakten Duplikate sind. Die Dateiformate sind technisch verschieden und haben beide ihre Vor- und Nachteile. De728631 (talk) 20:07, 25 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@De728631: , oh, Mist, und ich hab gerade mind. 10 Stück dupe-bearbeitet, also gelöscht. Reicht es nicht, dass bei den SVG-Dateien ja das PNG-Format inkludiert ist? Ich kann sie natürlich wiederherstellen. --Túrelio (talk) 20:10, 25 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Das inkludierte Format bezieht sich ja nur auf die paar fest eingestellten Vorschaubilder und wird von der Wikimedia-Software aus dem SVG umgerechnet. Das Original-PNG, das du gezappt hast, hatte evtl. sogar ganz andere Farbwerte. Also wäre es m. M. nach sinnvoll, die Datei wieder herzustellen. De728631 (talk) 20:24, 25 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Ok. Mach ich. --Túrelio (talk) 20:26, 25 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Danke. De728631 (talk) 20:37, 25 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

irademehri.jpg[edit]

Why you deleted my photos? I am the producer of this singer and we only have original photos and files, we ourselves are the authors. this wof.az and another sites , all pirat sites. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bakhshizada (talk • contribs) 21:52, 25 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @Bakhshizada: ,
how should we know that? Anyway, please send a confirmation from your official/business email address to permissions-commons@wikimedia.org in which you should mention the filenames (on Commons), your authorship or rightsholdership and the intend to release these images under the choosen free license. --Túrelio (talk) 22:15, 25 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

File talk:A boy with Down syndrome using cordless drill to assemble a book case.jpg[edit]

I think you wanted to delete File_talk:Drill.jpg. I am guessing you deleted the new talk page by mistake. Masum Reza📞 10:48, 26 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah. Obviously 1 click too far from a redir. Thanks for notifying. --Túrelio (talk) 10:52, 26 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I thought "Fair use" allowed on some Wikipedia projects?[edit]

I was working on a Wikipedia article for a 1985 Hong Kong movie called "For Your Heart Only", I uploaded 6 fair use images (mostly movie posters) for this article. I noticed all of them got marked as a possible copyright violation, I hope you can help me with this problem, thanks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by RobbieIDK (talk • contribs) 09:02, 27 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi,
no. For legal reasons Commons is not allowed to host fair-use material, see COM:FU. Fair-use material needs to be uploaded locally at the projects, which allow such material, as :en for example (see en:Wikipedia:Non-free use rationale guideline).. --Túrelio (talk) 09:06, 27 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Túrelio, I made a template a while ago to inform users about fair use including all relevant links: {{Nofu}}. In case you'd want to save yourself some typing. I just posted it to RobbieIDK's talk page. - Alexis Jazz ping plz 09:16, 27 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks. --Túrelio (talk) 09:17, 27 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

意见[edit]

This photo File:一人·一张 NO.146 高以翔.jpg has been speedy deleted by yourself, and your reason is no CC license. Please open the source url [33], the license of this photo CC BY 2.5 is obvious. Screen shot: [34]. Please restore this photo. --Masdggg (talk) 23:33, 27 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, you are correct, image restored. However, the icon is so small that it can be easily overlooked. Far more prominent are the other notes on the same page: "Copyright Ⓒ 2019 xTom GmbH. All rights reserved." and "© 吕海强". --Túrelio (talk) 07:43, 28 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Ok, thank you. --Masdggg (talk) 08:16, 28 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Help[edit]

Hi Mr Túrelio, I report a problem. In this: https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Category:Threesomes_involving_women&diff=prev&oldid=333176393 That's not my edited, I do not know why it happend, never mine, and I never use HotCat. My wiki account have a strong passwords and now still use it. I really worry about this Đông Minh (talk) 00:37, 28 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Đông Minh,
if that is the only unexplained edit, you have noticed, you don't need to be worried. The edit, though unjustified, is not a crime. Besides, it was >10 months ago. In my experience it can happen every now and than that one clicks inadvertently on something, when doing something totally different. So, don't worry; except if that would happen frequently. --Túrelio (talk) 07:36, 28 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you, now I understand. Đông Minh (talk) 14:16, 1 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Please consider undeleting my bio picture[edit]

It is to be used as an identifier in Wikidata.

It is Eric Leo Blais.jpg

It is used by publishers:

https://broadcastdialogue.com/eric-blais-rethinking-media-its-all-about-the-experience/

It would be much appreciated.

Sincerely,

Eric

Eric Leo Blais (talk) November 30, 2019 = 7:25 am EST

Hi Eric Leo Blais,
it's about File:Eric Leo Blais Bio.jpg, right? I see that you were not notified on your talkpage, which should have happened; sorry.
As this image looks rather professionally-made and is prepublished, our policy requires that you confirm to be have enough copyright to release it under the choosen free license. I assume that you did not take it by yourself. Likely you have acquired copyright from the photographer. If that is not the case, you should first negotiate with the photographer to prevent later legal problems. If you have the copyright, please send an email from your official/business email address to permissions-commons@wikimedia.org in which you should declare 1) that you have the copyright, 2) which credit (name/artist-name/whatever) the photographer asked you for, and 3) that you want to release the image (cite the filename) under the choosen free license. Your email will not be published and can only be accessed by our OTRS volunteers (I am none). They will evaluate your declaration and eventually ask for more information or validate the permission. Then the image can easily be undeleted. --Túrelio (talk) 14:11, 30 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

EXIF data[edit]

Muchas gracias! La verdad es que me olvidé apagar el GPS del teléfono móvil, con lo cual se guardaron los datos de la ubicación. Tendré más cuidado la próxima vez. Saludos! MiguelAlanCS (talk) 21:06, 1 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

File:Andrew Hastie - March 9 2019 - 1.jpg[edit]

Thank you for your note about missing permission information.

I have written to OTRS giving permission.

Ta!

Matt — Preceding unsigned comment added by Erasmus Sydney (talk • contribs)

Hi,
for the mentioned image only or also for File:Andrew Hastie, Member for Canning.jpg? --Túrelio (talk) 10:43, 2 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

This DR and this DR[edit]

Dear Admin Turelio,

Please examine these 2 cases and consider whether the images are flickrwashes and can be deleted. And 2. whether the flickr account can be added to a blacklisted. its disturbing that the flickrbot passes such low resolution images with no camera EXIF. If you prefer to wait 1 week, that is OK too. Thank You, --Leoboudv (talk) 10:11, 5 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I've added the Flickr-account to the black list. --Túrelio (talk) 10:27, 5 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Metadata author and template author mismatch[edit]

Hello. Regarding the file File:Zara Kay 2018.jpg, I noticed the author name in the metadata is different from the one specified in the file template. Furthermore, it has received OTRS clearance. Could you please check the ticket, who was mentioned as the author of the photo, after all, the current information specifies the subject is the author. Thank you.
acagastya 00:23, 6 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I can't do this by myself, as I have no access to the permission in OTRS. However, I've notified the OTRS volunteer, who worked on this ticket. --Túrelio (talk) 07:38, 6 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Okay. Thank you.
acagastya 17:01, 6 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Wiki Science Competition 2019[edit]

Logo for Wiki Science Competition
Logo for Wiki Science Competition

Dear uploader of European Science Photo Competition 2015 and Wiki Science Competition 2017, we would like to remind you that Wiki Science Competition 2019 has started in the whole world. It is now completed in Russia (active in May), Ukraine and France (active during November), but it's still open in all the other countries.

If you want to take part where WSC2019 is still open, please consult this page. Only some national categories are associated to competitions with local prizes.

If you are an expert user, please consider that images uploaded within the deadline can be included in any case in their national category even if not uploaded with the main interface.

Please keep in mind that there is a new category this year, i.e. "nature and wildlife".

If you already took part in a country that has completed its upload phase, please consider improving the description in English of your files (click on the edit button), since such description is what the international jury will use to evaluate them. World finalists will be finalized after March 2020.

Sorry for bothering you and have a nice wiki.

Message discussed here. If you do not want to receive these messages in the future, please unsuscribe from this list

Social media: Science&Wiki Science&Wiki Wiki Science Competition
Hashtag: #WSC2019 #WikiScience #WikiScience2019

Alexmar983 (promotion team and academic committee) using MediaWiki message delivery--01:23, 6 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Gelöschte Bilder[edit]

Hallo Túrelio,

Du hast zwei Bilder gelöscht, die eigentlich kein copyright Problem sind, aber so aussehen, weil EXIF Datan nich richtig überprüft worden waren, bevor mir diese Bilder freigegeben wurden. Hier die zwei Bilder, um die es geht: https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Caeptnb

Die Sache ist die, dass die Bilder von der EU Institution selbst kommen, also ©EU sind, das ist etwa das gleiche wie CC BY. Der Photograph, der diese Bilder gemacht hat, hatte seinen Namen als Credit drin gelassen, aber vergessen ©EU reinzusetzen.

Hier die Originalquellen https://www.eesc.europa.eu/en/avdb/photo/luca-jahier-eesc-president https://www.eesc.europa.eu/en/avdb/galleries/gianluca-brunetti-secretary-general-eesc

Ich werde die EXIF Daten überarbeiten und die Bilder wieder hochladen und keine Wiederherstelllung der entfernten Bilder beantragen, denn sonst wären wieder die unvollständigen EXIF Daten drin. Ok?

Und vielen Dank für deine Aufmerksamkeit auf jeden Fall :-) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Caeptnb (talk • contribs)

Hi @Caeptnb: ,
eigentlich wäre es besser, den Status der hochgeladenen und momentan gelöschten Bilder zu klären/berichtigen, zumal du beim Upload von einmal als Copyvio gelöschten Dateien Probleme bekommen kannst. Danach könnte man die ursprüngliche Dateiversion einfach überschreiben.
Auf der von dir angegebenen Website finde ich zwar "©EU", aber nirgendwo erklärt, was das heißen soll, also der Inhalt der Lizenz, sofern es eine ist. D.h., derzeit würde ich, ganz unabhängig von der Angabe in den EXIF-Daten, diese Fotos als typische Pressefotos einstufen, und solche werden hier als nicht ausreichend frei betrachtet. --Túrelio (talk) 10:50, 6 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

ok[edit]

so what do I need to do about this: https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk%3AVlad&type=revision&diff=379241649&oldid=19228755 Thank you! --Vlad (talk) 16:22, 6 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, you need to ask Arnaud Denis if his photographer Bruno Perroud would agree to release this image under a free license, such as CC-BY-SA[35]. If he agrees, everybody could use the image for nearly any purpose (except for direct promotional purposes, such as advertisements, as this would violate the personality rights of the depicted person). If the photographer hesitates, Arnaud Denis could propose to release only a version of reduced resolution (at minimum it should be 1 MPixels). If the photographer finally agrees, you should copy the permission-text from Commons:Email_templates#Email_message_template_for_release_of_rights_to_a_file, add the URL of the image-file on Commons, send it either to Arnaud Denis or directly to the photographer and ask him to sign and date it and email it back to permissions-commons@wikimedia.org (OTRS). Thereafter an OTRS-volunteer will evaluate the permission, eventually ask for more information and ideally approve the permission and put a "ticket" # on the image-page. --Túrelio (talk) 20:29, 6 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

File:Flag of Athens.svg[edit]

Greetings, the file "Flag of Athens.svg" was deleted due to copyright violations but the file in question is not a direct copy of the officer, it's a creation of mine based on the description of the flag. If compare the deleted version and the official one will see that neither the bust of Athena nor the laurel wreath are copies.

I understand that these cases do not infringe copyrights, as happens with the coats of arms that are created versions for Wikimedia according to the blazon. That being the case, I ask that the deletion be reversed although in case of being wrong I will accept that it remains deleted.

Kind Regards -AlbBurguete (talk) 16:57, 6 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @AlbBurguete: , o.k. I've undeleted the file and put it iimmediately into a regular DR Commons:Deletion requests/File:Flag of Athens.svg where you can discuss it. --Túrelio (talk) 11:17, 7 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Copyright valuation Elia Dagani[edit]

Hi, what's wrong with the foto which i took from the site as an administator of Elia Dagani? — Preceding unsigned comment added by A.varfolomeeva.v (talk • contribs)

Hi, as you are likely talking about File:Elia Dagani.jpg: you wrote by yourself "source=Elia Dagani © 2018 - All rights reserved". How can you at the same time claim the image to be under a free CC-license? --Túrelio (talk) 13:08, 8 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Osteraufkirche[edit]

Re: https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Osteraufkirche#/media/Datei:Osteraufkirche_Infotafel.jpg

Diese Infotafel befindet neben dem Eingang der Kirche.

Narendur, 08-12-2019

Hi, also draußen. --Túrelio (talk) 17:23, 8 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

OTRS Question[edit]

Hi I would like to email the owner of a photo you removed to get his permission to use it. However the photo has been deleted and the template asks for the photo from the wikipedia link. Should I reupload it or are there other options?FriendlyContributions (talk) 05:17, 10 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi FriendlyContributions,
no, you shouldn't re-upload. For our permission-folks it's enough that you provide the filename of the currently deleted file, i.e. . If the licensor requests to see the file on Commons, drop me a note and I could temporarily restore the image for a short time. Remember, the permission needs to be general, i.e. a free license (such as CC-BY-SA), not just "for Wikipedia". --Túrelio (talk) 07:23, 10 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Bürckel, Hess, von Schirach.[edit]

Hallo Túrelio, Ik zag dat je meteen een auteursrechtenstatus bij de foto had geplaatst, zonder dat ik al klaar was? Misschien een beetje te snel? Vr.gr.--Maddriver371 (talk) 10:20, 10 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Maddriver371,
sorry, I don't speak Dutch. May be I was fast, but that's normal for patroling recent uploads. Also, if one uploads similar images from the same source, why not making the description complete at time of upload? Anyway, not a big problem.
Other question: couldn't you provide a link to the image at the source? That's relevant because these images are rather surely not work of the source/archive. So, we need to confirm their claim. --Túrelio (talk) 10:31, 10 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted foto[edit]

Hello. I ask you to restore this photo. I am an OTRS agent and am ready to apply for permission ( Ticket#2019121010007498 ) -- НоуФрост (talk) 08:31, 11 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

✓ Done. --Túrelio (talk) 08:34, 11 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Artigo enviado[edit]

Ola! Me chamo Michele de Oliveira Carvalho e enviei um artigo hoje sobre o Parque das Castanheiras. Algumas imagens tem a marca d"água do blog Dreamcasa porque escrevo para esse blog e o artigo foi publicado primeiramente lá. Por favor não marque meu artigo ou perfil como spam, pois o artigo é 100% autoral, salvo algumas imagens dos pontos turísticos na região. Caso queira confirmar minha identidade pode me contatar via michele2808@yahoo.com.br ou em conteudo@dreamcasa.com.br

Atenciosamente, Michele Carvalho — Preceding unsigned comment added by Michele de Oliveira Carvalho (talk • contribs)

Hi Michele,
I can't write in Portuguese. The problem with your uploads and account is not so much a doubt about authorship (except of the 3 already deleted images), but that you might use Wikimedia-Commons to promote your Real Estate blog. This blog has nothing to do with the aims of Commons and therefore the link on your userpage doesn't belong there. In addition, all your remaining uploads carry a prominent visible watermark, which diminishes the value of your uploads (despite being nice photos) to Zero, as no re-user wants to publish an advertisement for your blog. Wikimedia-Commons is not Facebook. Anyway, the discussion should not continue here, but possibly at Commons:Administrators'_noticeboard/User_problems#spam_account?. --Túrelio (talk) 15:40, 11 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Kommentare auf speedy deletion requests[edit]

Moin, ich habe gesehen, dass du bei ein paar speedy deletion requests einen Kommentar darunter gesetzt hast, dass es evtl. nicht speedy wäre. (Hier zum Beispiel.) Warum hast du die Anträge nicht einfach in reguläre umgewandelt? "Obvious" copyvios sind es ja sowieso nicht, also nicht speedy-fähig. Ich habe deine Kommentare jetzt mal auf die DR-Seiten übernommen und von Dateiseiten entfernt. Sebari – aka Srittau (talk) 10:08, 12 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, hast ja recht. Ich war etwas in Eile. --Túrelio (talk) 15:29, 12 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Ah ok, ich hatte mich nur gefragt, ob ich etwas übersehen hatte. Sebari – aka Srittau (talk) 10:13, 13 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Copyvio images[edit]

Hi, since you're online, could you please check the remaining files here? Those are likely all copyright violation to promote this actor. Thank you very much. :-) --Phyrexian ɸ 13:22, 12 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, how sure are you about being copyvios? At least neither Google nor TinEye found any relevant hits. --Túrelio (talk) 15:29, 12 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Manoppello and Turin shroud[edit]

Hallo,

ich habe vor einigen Tagen um die Löschung folgender Datei gebeten: File:Manoppello and Turin shroud.jpg Auf der Löschdiskussion passiert nichts. Also auch kein Einwand. Wie wird jetzt weiter verfahren? Gruß Mr. bobby (talk) 09:31, 13 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Das wundert mich nicht, ganz abgesehen davon dass reguläre LAs frühestens nach 7 Tagen entschieden werden sollen. Du hast da viel zu viele ganz unterschiedliche Argumente angeführt, von denen eine Reihe für die Löschung eher irrelevant sind. Dass die Korrektheit einer Darstellung(sweise) kritisiert wird, ist nicht notwendigerweise ein Löschgrund, es sei denn dadurch würden die Persönlichkeitsrechte einer lebenden Person verletzt, was hier aber nicht der Fall ist. Hinzu kommt, dass das Bild seit 2006 auf Commons liegt, was gegen Eile spricht. Ich würde an deiner Stelle, den LA komplett auf urheberrechtliche Argumente beschränken; alles andere ist hier eher irrelevant (Commons ist nicht Wikipedia). Außerdem könntest du den Hochlader ja einfach mal direkt ansprechen bzw. nach der erwähnten Genehmigung fragen. --Túrelio (talk) 10:26, 13 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Danke für deine Antwort. Auf einer Wikipediaseite war der Hinweis zu lesen, daß das Bild bereits einmal gelöscht war. Wenn eine Übereinanderlagerung darsgestellt wird, müssen nach m. M. die Bildrechte für beide Publikationen vorliegen. Liege ich da richtig? Außerdem fehlt die Info dazu, wer das wie hergstellt hat, also eine vernüntige Quellenangabe zur Herkunft des Bildes. Ich halte das für einen wichtigen Löschgrund. Ist das so? Mr. bobby (talk) 10:49, 13 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Das ist kompliziert, weil es ja nicht einfach wie eine Kollage o.ä. ist, bei der verschiedene Werke unverändert nebeneinander abgebildet werden. Obwohl der benutzte Begriff "Übereinanderlagerung" einen rein technischen Vorgang suggeriert, ist das Ergebnis urheberrechtlich möglicherweise wie das Werk eines Künstlers zu bewerten, der Werke anderer Künstler benutzt hat, aber doch etwas eigenes geschaffen hat, also ein sog. abgeleitetes Werk, siehe auch Commons:Bearbeitungen. Ich tue mich generell eher schwer damit, solche Werke zu bewerten.
Im konkreten Fall müsste m.E. zunächst einmal auseinanderklamüsert werden, welche Ausgangswerke denn (vermutlich) benutzt wurden, siehe Category:Shroud of Turin und Category:Veil of Veronica. Dann könnte man an die urheberrechtliche Bewertung gehen. Beide Kategorien enthalten ja durchaus frei lizensierte Bilder, die dem fraglichen Werk nicht völlig unähnlich sind.
Zu deiner Frage bzgl. früherer Löschung: die aktuelle Datei wurde tatsächlich schon einmal gelöscht, aber im Rahmen einer UDR wieder hergestellt. --Túrelio (talk) 11:09, 14 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Vielen Dank für deine Mühe und deine Recherche. Ja, das klingt kompliziert. Mein eigentliches Problem ist, daß hier etwas als "Beweis" für die Ähnlichkeit zweier Bilder verwendet wird, das auf zweifelhafte Weise zustande gekommen ist. Weil nichts über die Übereinanderlagerung bekannt ist, belegt das Photo gar nichts, wird aber als Beleg verwendet. Ob das ein Problem der Wikimedia Commons ist, weiß ich nicht. Ich lasse den Löschantrag mal bestehen. Wahrscheinlich wird sich da nichts tun. Mr. bobby (talk) 12:19, 14 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Duplikate[edit]

@Túrelio:
Hallo Túrelio,
was kann man machen, um diese 985 Bilder Category:Orchids to move nicht in Kategorien auftauchen zu lassen. Soweit ich das übersehe, sind es alles Duplikate, die bereits schon von Flickr in den entsprechenden Kategorien und Artikel einsortiert sind. Grüße. Orchi (talk) 21:17, 13 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

P.S ...ich habe User:Ser_Amantio_di_Nicolao hier: [36] informiert und gebeten, vorerst keine weiteren Sortierungen der Bilder vorzunehmen.

Hi @Orchi: , soll ich sie alle löschen? Bei 100%-Duplikaten wird das ja automatisch auf der jeweiligen Bildseite angezeigt. --Túrelio (talk) 11:12, 14 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Hallo @Túrelio: ,
alle 1427 Bilder in der Kategorie Category:Orchids to move können gelöscht werden. Gestern habe ich alle Duplikate (zum Glück waren sie anders benannt als die bereits vorhandenen Bilder) aus den Art-Kategorien entfernt. Heute habe ich die Bilder nochmals Kontrolliert und einige wenige Nicht-Duplikate bearbeitet und aus der "Category:Orchids to move" entfernt.
Ich hoffe, Du hast ein passendes Werkzeug, das Dich vom Aufwand und der Zeit nicht allzusehr belastet.
Könntest Du bitte User:Ser_Amantio_di_Nicolao informieren. Ich glaube, er war etwas erschrocken und ratlos.
Ich dachte, bei Hochladen von Flickr würden Duplikate erkannt und ein zusätzliches Einbringen bei Commons würde verhindert.
Nebenbei gesagt halte ich nichts von den automatischen Werkzeugen, die im Minutentakt Commons mit hunderten oder tausenden Bilder überschwemmen. Leider habe ich generell den Eindruck, dass der Weg hier zu immer mehr Masse aber weniger Klasse führt.
Danke und beste Grüße. Orchi (talk)
@Orchi: , ich habe nun 1200+ der Bilder aus Category:Orchids to move dupe-processed und zwar die, bei denen das Duplikat automatisch angezeigt wurde. Bei den verbliebenen 204 Dateien wird kein Duplikat angezeigt, was daran liegen könnte, dass die Duplikat-Datei minimal abweicht. Kann ich davon ausgehen, dass die verbliebenen Dateien trotzdem Duplikate sind, und sie "blind" löschen? --Túrelio (talk) 16:37, 15 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Hallo @Túrelio: ,
Vielen Dank für Deine enorme Fleißarbeit!!! Ich werde die restlichen 204 Dateien auf Duplikate prüfen und Dir über das Ergebnis Bescheid geben.
Weitere Frage: SteinsplitterBot hat heute zwischen 16.50 Uhr bis 16.53 Uhr """hier""" die Bilder als "uncategorized" gekennzeichnet, obwohl wohl alle einer Art-Kategorie zugeordnet sind. Kann ich das ändern, oder soll ich User:Steinsplitter anschreiben? Beste Grüße. Orchi (talk) 20:34, 15 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]
@Orchi: Die Kat. Orchids to move ist ja hidden und wird vermutlich deswegen vom Bot ignoriert. Für den Löschvorgang ist das aber eh egal. --Túrelio (talk) 21:10, 15 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]
"""hier""" der Hinweis: [37] Grüße. PicTrans (talk) 20:37, 15 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]
@PicTrans, das Link führt bei mir ins Leere bzw. lediglich zu meiner eigenen Beobachtungsliste. --Túrelio (talk) 21:10, 15 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]
....ich bekomme die Seite auch nicht unter meiner Adresse sichtbar gemacht. (ich möchte fluchen!) Orchi (talk) 21:22, 15 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Hallo @Túrelio: ,
...ich habe die "Nicht-Kategorie-Kennzeichnung" löschen können über Umbuchung auf Category:Orchids to move 2. Grüße. Orchi (talk) 21:45, 15 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hallo @Túrelio: ,
ich habe alle Dateien im Ordner Category:Orchids to move durchgeschaut. Etliche Bilder waren keine Duplikate, einige Bilder Category:Unidentified Bulbophyllum duplicates werde ich später bearbeiten und alle Dateien im Ordner Category:Orchids to move 2 können als Duplikate gelöscht werden. Wenn beide "Move-Ordner" leer sind, könntest Du sie vielleicht löschen. Dank für Deine gute Arbeit hier. Gute Nacht und Grüße. Orchi (talk) 00:10, 16 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

File:Nikita kovalchuk.jpg[edit]

Just a head-ups, a file was reuploaded immediately after you deleted it --Ìch heiss Nat ùn ìch redd e wenig Elsässisch!Talk to me in EN, FR, PL, GSW-FR(ALS). 15:06, 14 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted. Thanks. --Túrelio (talk) 17:20, 14 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Untagged images[edit]

Just wanted to check with you; don't personality rights tags also belong on these images: image 1, image 2, image 3, image 4, image 5, image 6? SUM1 (talk) 18:16, 14 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi,
sure, feel free to add the template. --Túrelio (talk) 18:58, 14 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

?[edit]

nač mazat, komu to vadí???--Martin wolf (talk) 20:47, 14 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, please see the problem-note and other user's comment on your talkpage. --Túrelio (talk) 21:08, 14 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Gothic Touch Of Eternity.jpg[edit]

Hello, why do you delete every time this photo? I have permission from the band Gothic România for upload this photo. Why? PitaNG76 (talk) 17:30, 15 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I really need this photo for album’s page PitaNG76 (talk) 17:38, 15 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, where is the permission? You never said in the description that you have permission. Anyway, permission needs first to be send to permissions-commons@wikimedia.org . Remember, a "permission for Wikipedia" is not enough. --Túrelio (talk) 17:41, 15 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

And what is enough for get a permission for wikipedia? PitaNG76 (talk) 17:42, 15 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

You seem not to understand. If you want to upload such an image to Commons, it needs to be under a defined free license, as specified in COM:L. Material under "fair use" or "permission für Wikipedia" is not accepted on Commons and will be deleted. Different Wikipedias have slightly different rules. :en-Wikipedia allows a limited extent of fair-use, other Wikipedias have other rules; you need to ask them. --Túrelio (talk) 17:47, 15 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

You Delete all my photo, Gothic Touch Of Eternity, Except The Worst and Demons. All three is made by Csaba Talpai, de bass man of the band, and I put at the author name, his name: “Csaba Talpai” PitaNG76 (talk) 17:45, 15 December 2019


Paul Atherton at Cleopatra's Needle - photograph taken by Darren_Fletcher[edit]

Hi @Túrelio: , I was given image by photogrpaher to use as I please, as article about me didn't run. How do I correct? https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Paul_Atherton_at_Cleopatra%27s_Needle_-_photograph_taken_by_Darren_Fletcher.jpg Paul Atherton (talk) 09:51, 16 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Paul Atherton,
that's the typical friction between everyday-life and copyright-law. The problem is that Wikimedia-Commons and most Wikipedias allow only uploads, which have been verifiably released under a free license by its creator (or are in the public domain per law). Commons and likely most Wikipedias do no allow any material that has only "a permission for use in Wikipedia" (which is far easier to obtain than a regular free license). It's also not that I wouldn't believe you what you wrote above. But a re-user of this image, who might be sued in some years by The Sun, needs a solid proof that the image was indeed released under a free license by its author.
Therefore, what you need to do now, if you want, is to ask Darren Fletcher if he would be willing to release his image under a free license, such as the recommended CC BY-SA 4.0 license (terms), that allows others to use this image freely, provided they credit him properly. If you get a positive signal from him, please go to Commons:Email_templates#Email_message_template_for_release_of_rights_to_a_file, copy the framed text, enter the name of the currently deleted file (File:Paul Atherton at Cleopatra's Needle - photograph taken by Darren Fletcher.jpg), mail it to Darren Fletcher and ask him to date and sign it and to send it back to permissions-commons@wikimedia.org . His reply-mail will not be published, but only stored and processed by our OTRS-volunteers. --Túrelio (talk) 11:01, 16 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Hi @Túrelio: Thanks. Paul Atherton (talk) 15:54, 17 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Commons:Undeletion_requests/Current_requests#File:Wasp,_closeup_.jpg[edit]

Would you please take a look at this? -- as I explain there, I don't understand why you deleted it. Thanks, .     Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 23:19, 16 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I've commented now at UR. Deletion was just for being duplicates. --Túrelio (talk) 07:40, 17 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Birgitta of Hohenzollern‎[edit]

Excuse me, but do you really feel it is helpful to delete as "incorrectly named" a category like this (and a few others too) which perfectly correctly has her with her married name? --SergeWoodzing (talk) 10:25, 18 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi SergeWoodzing, that was/is simply the automatically resulting text-message from the template, which the nominator (not me) had choosen. The relevant reason was that it was a duplicate of Category:Princess Birgitta of Sweden. --Túrelio (talk) 14:11, 18 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]
It should be a redirect from a valid alternate (married) name, not deleted. Come on! You know that. --SergeWoodzing (talk) 12:51, 19 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]
There you are: Category:Birgitta of Hohenzollern. --Túrelio (talk) 13:57, 19 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Thx. --SergeWoodzing (talk) 13:13, 21 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Too many images deleted[edit]

Hi. The 1:st of december you deleted 5 of my images of a swedish river in the article https://sv.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stálojåhkå using Copyright violation as the cause. The "violation" occurred in Kvikkjokk till staloluokta via Sarek, an article I wrote myself containing some of my own images. I understand you can´t keep track of who has taken what pictures, BUT you also deleted images that WERE NOT in the referenced external article. Did you just assume that since one or two of the images in my wikipedia article also has been published on the external site, that the other 3 or 4 images also was some copyright violation? The images photographed by me - that are NOT on the external site - I will upload again, as I do not see any grounds for copyright violation for those images. That must be OK I asssume?--SiberianJay (talk) 06:43, 19 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi,
no, do not simply upload them again, as that could cause problems for you. I will look into your complaint and then eventually restore them. --Túrelio (talk) 07:24, 19 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Ok.--SiberianJay (talk) 03:24, 20 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Restored and mail sent to you. --Túrelio (talk) 16:30, 20 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

4 images[edit]

Dear Turelio,

Please kindly review these 4 images when you can.

Thank You for your time. Best, --Leoboudv (talk) 08:32, 21 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

✓ Done. Merry Christmas. --Túrelio (talk) 08:42, 21 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

File:Statue-Augustus transparent background.png[edit]

Hello Túrelio.

I have a question about File:Statue-Augustus transparent background.png, which [38] was included in its delete summary. As far as I can see, all the images in the said page are published under a suitable license. I personally think it should be a derivative work based on File:Statue-Augustus.jpg with a transparent background. Can you please double check it? Thank you. Ahmadtalk 16:04, 21 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @Ahmad252: , you are right. I've restored the file. Could you "correct" the source-entry? --Túrelio (talk) 17:12, 21 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you. ✓ Done. Ahmadtalk 19:50, 21 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Merry Christmas[edit]

Merry Christmas Túrelio

Hi Túrelio, I wish you and your family a very Merry Christmas
and a very happy and prosperous New Year,
Thanks for all your contributions to the 'pedia this past year,
   –Davey2010talk 18:45, 22 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Happy holidays 2020![edit]

  * Happy Holidays 2020, Túrelio! *  
  • 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 14:42, 23 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

recent relation of faulty shower image[edit]

Hi I was wondering why the image was deleted as this image is a free image and was taken myself and has no copyright .kind regards Craig noble — Preceding unsigned comment added by "craignoble666" (talk • contribs) 16:50, 23 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Grüße[edit]

Hallo @Túrelio: ,
Für die kommenden Weihnachtstage wünsche ich Dir alles Gute.
Möge uns das neue Jahr 2020 hier und überall ein friedliches Miteinander und eine erfolgreiche Zeit bringen.
Ganz herzlich möchte ich mich bei Dir für Deine stete Hilfe bedanken, wenn ich hier nicht mehr weiter weiß oder meine Nerven etwas blank liegen.
Danke und beste Grüße. Orchi (talk) 20:55, 23 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Túrelio/Archive14&oldid=634698853"